Folia Canonica 9. (2006)
STUDIES - Szabolcs Anzelm Szuromi: Canon Law Handbook by Ivo of Chartres
CANON LAW HANDBOOK BY IVO OF CHARTRES 115 Reg. lat. 973 are missing some important themes of the basic Ivonian material concerning accusation and jurdical process. The 14lh to 17th and the 20th to 22nd rubrics are in accordance again with the contents of the Decretum and the Panormia. Rubric 18 (De nocturna illusione), which is situated on either side of the “arbor consanguinitatis”, is unique supplement of the textform of the Reg. lat. 973.106 The last part of this witness of the Tripartita (e.g. Rubrics 23-29) shows structural similarity with the Decretum', however these themes are found also in Book 5 of the Panormia. Conclusion The above mentioned examples give a serious reason to ask a question: what can be named the ‘formation’ ofa canon law collection, and what can we call ‘the basic version’ of one particular collection? What does ‘canonical collection’ mean before the 12th century? Certainly, there was another history of canon law collections which happened before the known collections, and textual-witnesses of these earlier collections were copied and have been preserved. We have only indirect references about the collector’s originally intended goal, and the “nucleus” of the later enlarged canonical material. At the dawn of the High Middle Ages, as the effect of the Gregorian Reform intended to collect the ‘ancient canons’ together with the new decretal material in various places, the motive was supplied for the origin of Anselm’s Collection, and for Ivo’s work, too; however the particular aims were different. These summaries of the canons used the previous collections and other sources; then they began an independent life. They would be used in different field of the institutional activity of the church for reading, reference, consultation, or teaching. Moreover, they influenced each another. Therefore, only a few decades were enough to produce fundamental versions of a particular summary (or collection) in more or less fixed form, which was itself reproduced in few or many copies. This process is that textual — development which had set off from Ivo ’s basic idea to summarize the discipline of the Church, and concluded with the three versions of his work (Panormia, Decretum, Tripartita). This structuralization process from the end of the 11th century until the first part of the 12th century happened very intensely through the different institutional activities and places of usage of the Church. Therefore, based on the various aims and intentions of the users, there soon crystallised the canonical material and structure of the collections. The contents sometimes have been abbreviated and at other times have been enlarged, and furthermore, there l06Foll. 155va-155vb: Bed a in hystoria angolorum libro i. gregorius respondit augustino. Aliquando ex crapula aliquando ex naturae (...) nesciens.
