Excellent Revelation commentary

  • Thread starter Thread starter COPLAND_3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is absolutely fantastic. Totally buying it. I’ve done a ton of research on Latin commentaries on Revelations too myself, particularly those up to the Twelfth Century. I wonder, however, which edition of the Glossa Revelations commentary it is based off of. There are two versions, one which dates before Thirteenth Century, and the more recent Thirteenth Century version that has some revisions.

The Twelfth Century version is probably the most accessible because it was the version published in print in the Rusch edition around 1480/1481. So I’d imagine that is the version it is based off of. Too bad the text doesn’t include the Latin. 😦

On a related note, people can find the entire Glossa for the Bible here. All of them are in Latin and are transcribed from the Rush edition in clear lettering.

glossae.net/?q=en/glose-ordinaire
 
Rohzek said:
This is absolutely fantastic. I’ve done a ton of research on Latin commentaries on Revelations too myself, particularly those up to the Twelfth Century. I wonder, however, which edition of the Glossa Revelations commentary it is based off of. There are two versions, one which dates before Thirteenth Century, and the more recent Thirteenth Century version that has some revisions.

The Twelfth Century version is probably the most accessible because it was the version published in print in the Rusch edition around 1480/1481. So I’d imagine that is the version it is based off of. Too bad the text doesn’t include the Latin. 😦

On a related note, people can find the entire Glossa for the Bible here. All of them are in Latin and are transcribed from the Rush edition in clear lettering.

glossae.net/?q=en/glose-ordinaire
Click to expand...
To answer some of your questions, I will share excerpts from the introduction…
The oldest manuscript we used was Bibliothèque nationale de France, Département des manuscrits, Latin 588, which is a mid-12th century copy written in Southern France, and was, according to Lobrichon (personal communication Jun. 9, 2015) was stage four of at least five stages of the Gloss on Revelation; it varied significantly with the 13th century manuscript we used, Langkatalogisat: Köln, Dombibliothek, Codex 24. We also chose to use the facsimile Strasbourg: Rusch, 1400/81.
Click to expand...
As for the commentaries that it quotes…
According to Guy Lobrichon (personal communication Jun. 9, 2015) “there are some glosses from the anonymous commentator published in Migne, PL 162 (not Anselmus Laudunensis). The other sources are Jerome-Victorinus, Bede, and, sometimes, Haimo of Auxerre. But there are many XIIth-century glosses.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you for your answers. I have two more questions, if you could indulge me. Does it mark out with footnotes or anything which areas of the commentary come from which versions? And does it list the secondary sources of Lobrichon? I’ve been looking for detailed information written by that guy on Revelations which he doesn’t simply refer to his unpublished dissertation on. Trying to access unpublished paper dissertations is such a hassle.
 
Rohzek said:
Thank you for your answers. I have two more questions, if you could indulge me. Does it mark out with footnotes or anything which areas of the commentary come from which versions? And does it list the secondary sources of Lobrichon? I’ve been looking for detailed information written by that guy on Revelations which he doesn’t simply refer to his unpublished dissertation on. Trying to access unpublished paper dissertations is such a hassle.
Click to expand...
Yes, the translator gave exhaustive amounts of variant readings, most often translating all variants. The variants are directly under each verse of Scripture and glosses so that the reader can easily glance down and compare, it’s very user-friendly that way.

As for the quotes from Lobrichon, I had a special privilege to pick his brain which allowed me to get the information that I wanted without having to sort through his writings, though I did make use of his book U"ne nouveaute: les gloses de la Bible", in Le Moyen Age et la Bible. I footnoted everything in my introduction. I didn’t use his dissertation, but I can give you his email. He also wrote a paper on the Gloss on Revelation a few months ago but he provided me with information I needed so I never needed to use it. I will give you my email so you can contact me and I can give you his email if you like. Also I can share information with you as well, I would be very happy to do so. [jlitteral29@gmail.com]
 
Hurray! You and your team are doing yeomen’s work, and I am so happy to see it!

Don’t forget to email Gumerlock, your one-stop Revelation prof! 🙂
 
Mintaka said:
Hurray! You and your team are doing yeomen’s work, and I am so happy to see it!

Don’t forget to email Gumerlock, your one-stop Revelation prof! 🙂
Click to expand...
Thank you! Yes, I sent an email and have kept him updated. He gave me some good suggestions and even took some time out of his busy schedule to look up some things for me. I added him to the acknowledgments in the beginning of the book.
 
For every purchase of the Glossa Ordinaria on Revelation you can receive a free PDF of THE COMPLETE COMPARISON OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. Just send (jlitteral29@gmail.com) proof of order and you will receive the PDF.

Glossa Ordinaria on Revelation amazon.com/Consolamini-Commentary-Glossa-Ordinaria-Revelation/dp/069253833X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1444045453&sr=1-1&keywords=glossa+ordinaria

Complete Comparison of the Four Gospels amazon.com/Complete-Comparison-Four-Gospels-Parallel/dp/1511608129/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1431476552&sr=1-1&keywords=A+Complete+Comparison+Of+The+Four+Gospels
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top