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 nì, 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.

❡ 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 fé (v. 31). The meanings and forms of fé are problematic and overdetermined in our text; in addition to the imperative form above, note for example the second person plural subjunctive variant fé (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:

❡ 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: