(no subject)
Jun. 9th, 2008 11:17 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tree_and_leafReally must write up a post about our seminar trip to St Gallen and the wonderful things we saw there, but am still slightly giddy from actually getting my hands on the 'St Gallener Niblungenhanschrift' - which really ought to be called the St Gallener Epenhandschrift, as as well as the textually very important Niblungenlied B, it also contains good texts of Parsifal and my beloved Willehalm. Was unable to resist reading the prologue aloud. I know when you go and look and manuscripts, you're generally supposed to be looking at the binding, mis-en-page, the codex as a whole... but I'm afraid that the text, when it's of a great (or even merely good) work that excites me more - or rather, the text in an original context. Am probably too romantic to be a modern mediaevalist - but never mind. (Actually, it was all I could do not to break out into squeeing!)
St Gallen have digitized some of their manuscripts, btw, and the site is open to all: www.cesgr.unifr.ch Unfortunately, though, they haven't put up the Niblungenlied B ms; I suspect this may be connected to the fact that they sell DVDs of it. Couldn't quite justify the expense, which was round about sixty pounds, if I've worked out the conversion corectly, as I'm not a Wolfram scholar (or a Nibelungenite, for that matter), and am now being predictably gnawed by regret. However, there are some interesting things on the site.
St Gallen have digitized some of their manuscripts, btw, and the site is open to all: www.cesgr.unifr.ch Unfortunately, though, they haven't put up the Niblungenlied B ms; I suspect this may be connected to the fact that they sell DVDs of it. Couldn't quite justify the expense, which was round about sixty pounds, if I've worked out the conversion corectly, as I'm not a Wolfram scholar (or a Nibelungenite, for that matter), and am now being predictably gnawed by regret. However, there are some interesting things on the site.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-06-09 10:09 am (UTC)I know how you feel. I'm no palaeogapher, and the most ancient documents I ever handled or studied go back to the early sixteenth century, but the actual sight and touch of them... just... wow.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-06-09 10:22 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-06-09 10:37 am (UTC)Though I also understand your reaction to manuscripts. I haven't actually handled any yet -- my period mostly involves early printed books, which are exciting in their own right -- but I have the feeling I'd be so caught up in 'OMG, I'm actually touching this' that I wouldn't be able to look at the more technical details.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-06-09 11:23 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-06-09 11:38 am (UTC)Needless to say, I'm jealous, although I think if anyone ever did let me touch anything that old and fragile I'd be terrified- just like I was when an archaeologist friend of ours handed me a rather pretty pottery bowl- and then told me it was about 2500 years old.