<\/p>\n
As is well known, Louis the Pious’ Regni divisio (BK 194<\/a>) is based largely on the Divisio regnorum by Charlemagne (BK 45<\/a>). Therefore transcriptions of the main manuscripts of the latter were needed as a preparatory work for the critical edition of the Regni divisio. All three manuscript witnesses are now available on our website:<\/p>\n – Breslau, Biblioteka Uniwersytecka, Akc. 1949 KN 397<\/a> <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As is well known, Louis the Pious’ Regni divisio (BK 194) is based largely on the Divisio regnorum by Charlemagne (BK 45). Therefore transcriptions of the main manuscripts of the latter were needed as a preparatory work for the critical edition of the Regni divisio. One of only two medieval manuscript witnesses, a heavily damaged […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24248","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24248","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24248"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24248\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24248"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24248"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/capitularia.uni-koeln.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24248"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nOne of only two medieval manuscript witnesses, a heavily damaged fragment from the first half of the 10th century, was inspected in Gotha by our colleague Dominik Trump who managed to decipher most of it.
\nTwo further manuscripts unknown at the time of the old edition have been transcribed completely for the first time. The first is a bifolium, today kept in Paris, which directly continues the fragment of the other medieval transmission in London, BL, Egerton 269. The second is an early modern copy of a lost manuscript, probably linked to Reichenau, prepared for Konrad Peutinger, offering a text that encourages a rethinking of the old thesis according to which the 806 plan for the division of Charlemagne\u2019s empire had been distributed in two official versions.<\/p>\n
\n– Gotha, Forschungsbibliothek, Memb. II 189<\/a>
\n– London, British Library, Egerton 269<\/a> + Paris, Biblioth\u00e8que Nationale, Lat. 7561<\/a><\/p>\n