In this context the textual content of the Notitia Dignitatum was reproduced due to the artistic value derived from the physical illustrations of the document. The effort and craft for creating a written manuscript meant even written text was often beautifully crafted. They continued to be collected into and transmitted through elaborately illustrated codices that have an artistic merit as well as a literary one. The possession of books was an indication of social status and wealth amongst the Carolingian elites. In such a paradigm it is hardly unsurprising that a manuscript became as much an objet d’art as it was a literary text. In contrast to the Curiosum, the Notitia manuscripts have survived in two groups. The as we have already discussed, is represented by the Codex Spirensis. The second is the copy of the Notitia that survives as part of the 354 Codex-Calendar. The Codex Vindobonensis 3416 (from the fifteenth century) contains our oldest copy of the 354 that contained the Regionary Catalogues. It was a direct copy of the now lost 9th century Codex Luxemburgensis. It is used as our primary source for the Codex-Calendar as it was copied before the Luxemburgensis lost several pages. More importantly the Luxemburgensis was believed to a true copy of the fourth-century original. If the Luxemburgensis was indeed a true copy of the fourth-century codex-calendar, this would mean that, in contrast to the Curiosum, we possess a fourth-century copy of the Notitia through the Codex-Calendar of 354. The finished appearance of the Notitia MS is therefore easily dated by its presence in the Codex-Calendar. The Notitia has been described as odd one out as it is the only item concerned with topographical/geographical information in a Codex generally concerned with chronological information. But whilst the Notitia is certainly not a chronological list, it does fit thematically with the delivery of a Roman “traditional”
In this context the textual content of the Notitia Dignitatum was reproduced due to the artistic value derived from the physical illustrations of the document. The effort and craft for creating a written manuscript meant even written text was often beautifully crafted. They continued to be collected into and transmitted through elaborately illustrated codices that have an artistic merit as well as a literary one. The possession of books was an indication of social status and wealth amongst the Carolingian elites. In such a paradigm it is hardly unsurprising that a manuscript became as much an objet d’art as it was a literary text. In contrast to the Curiosum, the Notitia manuscripts have survived in two groups. The as we have already discussed, is represented by the Codex Spirensis. The second is the copy of the Notitia that survives as part of the 354 Codex-Calendar. The Codex Vindobonensis 3416 (from the fifteenth century) contains our oldest copy of the 354 that contained the Regionary Catalogues. It was a direct copy of the now lost 9th century Codex Luxemburgensis. It is used as our primary source for the Codex-Calendar as it was copied before the Luxemburgensis lost several pages. More importantly the Luxemburgensis was believed to a true copy of the fourth-century original. If the Luxemburgensis was indeed a true copy of the fourth-century codex-calendar, this would mean that, in contrast to the Curiosum, we possess a fourth-century copy of the Notitia through the Codex-Calendar of 354. The finished appearance of the Notitia MS is therefore easily dated by its presence in the Codex-Calendar. The Notitia has been described as odd one out as it is the only item concerned with topographical/geographical information in a Codex generally concerned with chronological information. But whilst the Notitia is certainly not a chronological list, it does fit thematically with the delivery of a “traditional” Roman
Simon%20Hosie%20MPhil%20Thesis%20130117087.docx