Notitia hungáriae novae historico geographica (Budapest, 2011)
BEVEZETÉS - A szöveg tipográfiája - Irodalomjegyzék és mutatók
INTRODUCTION 31 to an additional document - for example a data collection or commentaries on a description - or to one of the official revisions ([Com], [Cane]). If a dashed arrow points from a manuscript copy of the description to such a document, it means that the data collector, the commentator or the censor has seen the given document. If a dashed arrow points from the additional document to the manuscript copy it means that this document or correction influenced the content of that copy. Let’s see an example: B1 \ \ \ \ ^[Canc] / / / '' A B2 The stemma above means that Bél has sent an uncorrected copy (B1) of a county description to the Chancellary to be controlled; at the Chancellary the documentum was commented ([Cane]) and Bél inserted those comments in the very same manuscript thus creating a corrected version of the text (B2). If there is no “feedback” to the copy sent to the authorities it can mean two different things. Either it was sent back without any comment (it happened often with the Chancellary that unfortunately makes it more difficult for us to date and place the manuscript within the creation process) or it can also mean that the copy was absorbed by the controlling authority, meaning it wasn’t even sent back (it usually happened with the county assemblies, quite often actually). If there is a question mark indicated on the arrow, it means that we suppose a relation between the two states of text but it is dubious, questionable. The stemma doesn’t stand in itself, it only helps to understand the creation process. We always prepared a thourough and detailed presentation for each manuscript that will be illustrated by the stemma. 2. Process of the creation of the county description In this chapter we explain the genesis of the county description in question, based on the examination of its manuscripts. We always indicate in brackets the letter used in the stemma for the mentioned manuscripts or documents so that they can be easily identified by the reader. We give an overall view about the continous changing of the text, about the helpmates, different additions, data collections, official revisions and also about the publication of the description or even more often about the lack of publication. Eventually, when the complexity of the genesis made it necessary we used sub-chapters. 3. The presentation of the manuscripts Hereby we present - in alphabetical order - one by one the manuscriptal copies or other related documents. If a document (e.g. data collection) is an antecedent of a copy, we treated it first; ifit modified the content of a copy, its presentation followed that. Regarding the corrections ([Com], [Cane] or other private corrections) we proceded as follows. We present the revision of the county authorities (or others’) separately only when it was done in a new document. When they were carried out by remarks written in the manuscript of the county description, then the revision is dealt with within the
