Seite 113 [113]
Sprache ward weder in gelehrten Schriften noch in Verordnungen und gerichtlichen
Sachen gebraucht. Ja mann glaubte sogar, es sey nicht möglich hungarische Wörter
zu schreiben. Galeotus ap. Dn. de Schwandtner T. 1. p. 55752552
‘The quotation also shows the phenomenon that the basic works of Matyas Bél
(1684-1749), Johann Georg Schwandtner (1716-1791), Istvan Kaprinai (1714¬
1785), and the scholars of Aistoria litteraria in the Hungarian Kingdom were used
by contemporary German scholars, supplemented with information obtained di¬
rectly from Peter Lambreck.
Karl Traugott Gottlob Schoenemann (1752-1802) carefully studied the au¬
thors of the early Christian texts, their manuscripts, and the bibliographical data
of each edition. Earlier when discussing Salvianus Massiliensis, we already cited
his edition of the text, but I feel it important to mention that he also recognizes the
manuscripts of two other authors as belonging to the Bibliotheca Corvina. These
have not yet been included in the Corvina records. One of them is the Explanatio
psalmorum (Enarrationes in psalmos) by Aurelius Augustine (354-430). Schoene¬
mann, referring to the Johann Amerbach edition of 1497 in Basel, states an
annotatio belongs to it:
ed loco exilis, quem in priori editione notauimus,°”° indicis seorsim hic adiecta est
principalium sententiarum annotatio *’excreuit. Eius exemplar memoratur quoque in¬
ter rariora Biblllothecael Regliae] Budensis.
Csaba Csapodi knows of one printed work and two manuscripts by Augus¬
tine, entitled Expositio in psalmos.” For the printed work, he only says that it was
among the books found in Buda in 1686;>*° of the two manuscripts he asserts that
the Stuttgart manuscript is an authentic Corvina, and speculates that the Klos¬
terneuburg manuscript was falsely believed to be in Buda. He describes the Stutt¬
gart manuscript in detail but has no information that anyone used it for the 1497
edition. Unfortunately, the otherwise very accurate Schoenemann does not refer
to a source here, and in the edition itself there is no such note either in the preface
or at the beginning of the annofatio section. If we proceed further with Schoene¬
man’s statement that the Commentaria in Genesim et libros Regum by Eucherius
Lugdunensis (Eucher de Lyon, 370-499) was also found by Brassicanus in Buda
and published with his work Eucherius Formularium spiritalium in 1531, then the
signs again point to Julius Pflugk’s catalogue.**! Schoenemann states:
53 SCHWANDTNER 1746, 528-568.: Galeoti Martii... Commentatio elegans de Matthiae Corvini... dictis et
factis. Here on page 557 begins Caput XXVIII, in which Galeotto Marzio discusses the characteristics
of the Hungarian language.
524 GUTHRIE-GRAY-GEBHARDI 1788, 230-232.
525 ISTC i001274000.
HE refers here to the 1489 Johann Amerbach edition: ISTC ia012720000
Empuasis by Schoenemann.
SCHOENEMANN Il, 1794, 318.
Csaronpı 1973, 145-146. (Nr. 80, 81, 82.).
HE also mentions that it is included in Prrucıus 1688a.
Csapopt 1973, 213 (Nr. 248) quotes the 1688 catalogue by Pflugk (PrLucius 1688a) that mentions
a printed book titled Formularium procuratorium, which according to Csapodi could have been a book
a
521
a
527
52.
æ
52.
o
53
Ss
53
a
111