Huon Encoding Praxis

Edition Criteria for Padua

❡ 1. Introduction

In establishing the following editorial norms, I have used both readability and fidelity to manuscript as guiding principles. I have derived my editorial norms from the pioneering efforts of Günter Holtus in his edition of the Franco-Italian Bataille d'Aliscans, which is frequently cited as a model for modern critical editions of Franco-Italian works. The editorial norms established by Holtus were taken up subsequently by Beretta, De Ninni and Morgan; I refer to the editorial guidelines in these texts to help address the idiosyncrasies of the Padua Huon manuscript. In any case, it should be kept in mind that because of the nature of Franco-Italian texts, a general system of editorial norms is impossible and each critical edition must establish variant norms to address linguistic characteristics specific to the manuscript under examination. Furthermore, the guidelines discussed by the École des chartes in its publication Conseils pour l'édition des textes médiévaux, and other frequently cited rubrics for the textual emendation of medieval texts, are in many ways unable to account for the mixed linguistic idiom of Franco-Italian.

In my edition of the Padua Huon d'Auvergne, any deviation from the scribe's text is indicated in footnotes, and it is always possible to retrace the manuscript's original reading. I only emend the text when scribal error impedes readability or when lines are omitted (v. 1063 (=1060); v. 1268 (=1267); v. 1494 (=1493)). I indicate in footnotes other editors' solutions to difficult readings and passages that I interpret differently. I indicate once all variant editorial norms used by previous editors (eg. Holtus uses an accent grave on , whereas I do not). Finally, footnotes include all other non-textual codicological features that may be of interest to scholars, including catchwords, spaces left for illuminations, tears, and rubrication. In future iterations of this digital edition, codicological information will be accessible in interactive form using high-resolution scans of all four extant Franco-Italian witnesses (B, T, P, Br).

❡ 2. Abbreviations

I resolve all abbreviations in the Padua edition, and I note all irregularities in the table below. The abbreviation system of P is complex and often inconsistent (pro, for example, is abbreviated in two different ways); however, all forms are accounted for, and I note below if they occur only once.

(tyronian note)
et (v. 5506)

(titulus, long line above vowel)
The scribe uses the titulus to abbreviate a nasal n or m with a line over the preceding vowel: in, Sanguyn, chun, conplimant, inpemsso (v. 523); n retained even before labials (p, b), as per scribe m hom (v. 426), amigo (v. 755), com (v. 4366); occurs once to abbreviate me, as in belameent (v. 386).
(undulating titulus)
çuro (v. 485), merçie (v. 3914), derupo (v. 4058)
Ͻ contra (v. 604), conpagnon (v. 849), n retained even before labials (p, b) as per scribe (see introduction).
b with curl from top of bow benis (v. 4381); occurs once cento (v. 1311)
ch with strike through h che (v. 2119)
chr chavalier (v. 271); this abbreviation is most frequent variant, occurring 15 times.
chri chavalieri (v. 354)
chre chavaliere (v. 743)
dūlo duolo (v. 1509); occurs once
.G. Guielmo; occurs 25 times.
iehu; ihu Jexu, Jexhu; Jexhn the form Jexhu occurs four times, with the variant Jexhun / Jexhum occurring twice. I resolve all instances of the abbreviation iehu / ihu as Jexhu.
ml with strike through l molto (v. 5008); occurs once
nint with titulus nient (v. 4320); occurs once and likely a scribal correction.
per (v. 19); parlé (v. 428); parli (v. 1390); profon (v. 4893)
ᵱch with strike through h perche (v. 426); abbreviation occurs only once.
p with titulus pre (v. 3498)
pi pri (v. 2926)
pl with strike through l pulçele (v. 4300)
qui; que
q with titulus que (v. 1090)
qu with titulus qua (v. 5205)
(long s with strike; sometimes with a small “z” shape, v. 1354)
San with titulus Sanguin (v. 729); Sanguin occurs 70 times, whereas Sanguyn occurs 14 times; I resolve all abbreviations as Sanguin.
scā; scē sancta (v. 3993); sancte (v. 5232)
spo with undulating titulus spirito
.u. Ugo (v. 725)
ugō Ugon (v. 76)
un with titulus unde (v. 5002)
urō vostro (v. 5003)
xpo with titulus Cristo (v. 1483); The scribe writes Cristo in full form on three occasions, once as Crist. I resolve all related abbreviations as Cristo.
xpet with tituli over p and e Cristient (v. 4739)
xpiente Cristienté (v. 1248); Cristienttade (v. 5366)

❡ 3. Separation of Words

❡ 4. Diacritical Signs

Following the praxis established by Holtus in his edition of Aliscans, I use the acute (é), grave (è), and umlaut (ë) accents to aid the reader in differentiating verb tense and homophones. The cedilla (ç) is a characteristic grapheme in Franco-Italian texts, and it is the only diacritical mark the scribe employs. For each example below, I provide the first occurrence in the manuscript, noting other occurrences of particular linguistic interest.

4.1 Cedilla

As in modern usage, the cedilla (ç) represents the dental [s] before the vowels a, o, and u (perçò v. 1). The scribe often forgets to add the cedilla or adds it when it is not necessary (çasçun, v. 3962); I do not correct these errors and instead add a footnote when it may confuse the reader.

4.2 Acute Accent

When possible, the acute accent (é) follows modern usage. The acute accent occurs only on the vowel e to indicate:

  1. A past participle of the Old French first conjugation -ER. These forms occur in rhymed position: intré (v. 409); twice they occur within a line: à caçé (v. 2069); è Sanguin andé (v. 1018).
  2. The second person plural indicative of the first conjugation -ARE: vui parlé(v. 363); the second person plural imperative of the first conjugation -ARE: ascholté (v. 19); lasé(v. 33); and the imperative form of some irregular verbs: ESSERE sié (v. 441), sé (v. 1706)(note apocopated form si', v. 439), DIRE dissé (v. 1192), ANDARE andé (v. 32), FARE (v. 31). The meanings and forms of are problematic and overdetermined in our text; in addition to the imperative form above, note for example the second person plural subjunctive variant (v. 39) (see § 3.2.3 and 3.3.3 below),-->
  3. The acute accent is added on oxytone third person preterit forms. However, on stem accented preterit and past participle forms, no accent is used: poté (v. 272); abaté (v. 709), abatté (v. 910), but abatà (v. 2312); nassé (903). As is often the case with medieval texts, the present and the past tenses frequently alternate. For this reason, forms that alternate tense with only an accent are problematic: abate (v. 513) vs. abaté (v. 709). In passages such as these I interpret from context and note variant interpretations.

4.3 Grave Accent

The grave accent (è) occurs only on the vowel e to indicate:

  1. The future simple on final à, ì, and ò, as in modern Italian: laserà (v. 136), averì (v. 30), dirò (20). The future é is an exception, which is built on the French future ending (3.2.3).
  2. Select present tense indicative forms ending in ì: savì (v. 134), avì (v. 248)
  3. Homonyms, often monosyllabic, that are otherwise difficult to decipher. The accented lexeme indicates whenever possible the verb, the unaccented lexeme the noun: è (he/she/it is) and e (and); (I give, v. 1283) and do (two, v. 664); as preterite (he/she/it did, 21), as present (he/she/it does, v. 359), as third person plural (they do, v. 1448) and fe (faith, v. 197)(except in rhymed position: fi, v. 368; and foi, v. 4091); ò (I have, v. 26), o' (where, v. 720), and o (or, v. 126); à (he/she/it has, v. 144) and a (preposition, v. 3); àno (they have, v. 733) and ano (year, v. 546); (he/she/it gives, v. 621) and da (preposition, v. 68); (he/she says, v. 69; enclitic forms occur without the grave accent: dilo l. 390); *** edit this once I've decided ***, può, (he/she is able to, v. 13, v. 165) and po, puo (then, v. 488, v. 163); (yes) -->
  4. Certain irregular past forms: ensì (v. 51), inssì (184); andè (v. 52); ; inssì (>USCIRE, l. 184; 3468); abatù (980 IRREGULAR?); oldì (1687)(irregular? see #4); avè (2186); bevu? (5522); venù (5557)(if truncated Italianate forms, bevù and venù; if French, bevu and venu; see second to last laisse).
  5. Certain irregular past participles: andè (v. 52) ensì (> USCIRE (give Latin etymon?), v. 51); inssì (>USCIRE, l. 184; 3468); abatù (980 IRREGULAR?); oldì (1687)(irregular? see #4); avè (2186); bevu? (5522); venù (5557)(if truncated Italianate forms, bevù and venù; if French, bevu and venu; see second to last laisse).
  6. Words, often adverbs, prepositions and pronouns, ending in an accented i, o or u: chussì (368, 653); cussì (454, 649, 973, 3510); cossì (629); çò (73, 988, 2232); perçò (1), lasù (424); cholù (771); costù (396); llà (1162, 1196, 1939) (include this above with homophones?).
  7. Finally, the grave accent appears on oxytone first and third person perfects of the third conjugation: putì (< POTERE, first person singular preterite, l. 709); querì (QUERERE, third person singular preterite, l. 420). Review this point alongside Morgan, "Padua," 78. Is partì in this category, or in 4?
  8. amistà (1086, 31218), cità (2194, 2605); salù (5570)
  9. più (1769, 2136)
  10. serè ("closed, shut" 833); partì (1638);

As in Laisse 21, I do not put accents on past participles (line endings, desendu, etc.) because these are French forms. In written linguistic analysis, comment on parallel editorial standards, one for French and one for Italian, which this text necessitates.

❡ 4. Emendations

The scribe has introduced many emendations to the text, all of which are in parenthesis ( ). I have emended the text as sparingly as possible, and I always preserve original spellings for linguistic accuracy. In the few passages in which meaning would otherwise be compromised, my emendation occurs in square brackets [ ], and I always indicate the original reading in the footnotes. In his edition of the Franco-Italian Bataille d'Aliscans, Gunter Holtus sets out four circumstances for editorial intervention:

  1. Omissions in the text that render a passage difficult or impossible;
  2. Lexemes that are not found in Tobler-Lommatzsch, that do not appear in other surviving witnesses, that, to the best of our knowledge, are not founding in other Franco-Italian sources, and that cannot be explained through interference with either French or Italian forms;
  3. Situations in which a passage is contradictory to its context;
  4. Minims that are easily confused or frequently poorly traced.