Notes

Data Source: Parker on the Web

• Additions: On f. ir notes by Parker: a. Dominus huius Codicis Theodorus natus Tharso cilicie ordinatus a Vitaliano papa etc. Ends: annos natus lxvj: Romae Monachus. Matthaeus Cantaur. b. In another hand (Joscelin's?): Hic Theodorus vir et seculari et divina literatura grece et latine instructus - neque unquam prorsus ex quo Britanniam petierunt anglis feliciora fuere tempora etc. (from Bede). c. In the same hand as the last: Hic liber Theodori repertus in monasterio diui Augustini Cantuariensis post dissolucionem et quasi proiectus inter laceras chartas illius cenobii quem cumulum chartarum scrutatus quidam pistor quondam eiusdem cenobii invenit et domum portavit monachis et aliis inhabitantibus idem cenobium inhabitantibus aut fugatis aut inde recedentibus. Sed tandem foeliciter in manus Matthei Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi hic liber devenit. quem ut ingentem thesaurum apud se asseruat. [Added: Et reponendum vult vel in communi Bibliotheca Academie Cantabrigie, vel in fideli custodia mri collegii (qui pro tempore fuerit) Corporis Christi et bte Marie ibidem.] d. In a third hand: Manus commentarii greci est Theodori Archiepi. Quamdiu hic liber scriptus fuit antequam Theodorus romam peruenerit, nescitur. The other preliminary leaves are blank.
• Research: The resemblance in certain points between the hand of this Homer and that of the Leicester Codex was noted by Dr J. Rendel Harris (Leicester Codex, p. 8). I am not at all sure that the two hands are not identical. This particular scribe varied extraordinarily in his work. A Demosthenes at Leyden which has a notice in the Leicester hand that it was written in 1468 by me Emmanuel of Constantinople and given to G. Neville Archbishop of York, would never have been identified as the work of the Leicester scribe but for this notice. The Homer is rather strikingly like the Leicester hand: but is written with a finer pen. That it was written and ornamented in Italy in cent. xv there can be little doubt. It is quite possibly a production by Emmanuel of Constantinople in the period before he came to England. I have elsewhere suggested (Sources, p. 9) that this book really belonged to Christ Church, Canterbury, and not St Augustine's, and that it was brought over by Prior Sellinge. It is likewise clear that Parker was misled by the Θεοδωρος on p. 1 of this book and so assigned it to Archbishop Theodore and that this was the starting-point of his other similar and similarly absurd attributions. The following note, which I found in Dr Masters's copy of Stanley's Catalogue, preserved in the College Library, suggests another origin for this Homer. I have been unable to identify the document to which reference is made. It should obviously be a letter of an Italian humanist in the Harleian collection. Possibly it may be well known to students, but personally I must confess to ignorance. Mem.: Humphrey Wanley, Librarian to the late Earl of Oxford, told Mr Fran: Stanley, son of the author, a little before his death, that in looking over some papers in the Earl's Library, he found a Letter from a learned Italian to his Friend in England wherein he told him there was then a very stately Homer just transcribed for Theodorus Gaza, of whose Illumination he gives him a very particular description, which answer'd so exactly in every part to that here set forth, that he [Wanley] was fully perswaded it was this very Book, and yt the Θεοδωρος at the bottom of 1st page order'd to be placed there by Gaza as his own name, gave occasion to Abp. Parker to imagine it might have belonged to Theodore of Canterbury, which however Hody was of opinion could not be of that age. Theodore Gaza died in 1478; the suggestion here made is quite compatible with the hypothesis that Sellinge was the means of conveying the Homer to England, and does supply a rather welcome interpretation of the Θεοδωρος -inscription. The MS. was used by Joshua Barnes (1711), Paley (Iliad II lix), T. W. Allen (Odyssey, 1907; Iliad, 1908), etc.