Great Chronicle of Limoges explained

The Great Chronicle of Limoges (French: Grande chronique de Limoges; Latin: Maius chronicon Lemovicense), also called the Chronicle of Saint-Martial of Limoges (French: Chronique de Saint-Martial de Limoges|link=no; Latin: Chronicon sancti Martialis Lemovicensis|link=no), is a collection of 13th- and 14th-century historical notices and chronicles of Limoges preserved in three related manuscripts. Beginning in the 18th century, the material in the manuscripts was mistakenly perceived as fragments of a single large chronicle of the abbey of Saint-Martial. They were first critically edited as a unified chronicle in the 19th century.[1] They are today recognized mostly as notes made by the monks of Saint-Martial as continuations of the copious historical notes made by Bernard Itier (died 1225).

The three manuscripts from which the Great Chronicle is derived are all now in the Bibliothèque nationale de France:

All three manuscripts contain many texts in common, including the chronicle of Saint-Martin by its abbot, Pierre Coral.[2] The first continuation of Bernard Itier, begun in 1310, covers the period 1207–1320, which overlaps with Itier's own notes for the years 1207–1224. The focus of the text is Limoges and Saint-Martial and it begins with the arrival in the city of Franciscans and Dominicans. Two other continuations of Itier's notes made by Hélie Autenc are also included. They cover 1235–1277 and 1274–1315. The first of these relies on the universal chronicle of Gerald Frachet, but the focus of both remains local. There is also a rough attempt at a chronicle covering the years 1235–1299, entitled Brevissimum chronicon in modern editions.

There is no single published edition of all the texts in the three manuscripts, but most of the material has been published.[3]

Bibliography

Notes and References

  1. According to, it was Guigniaut and de Wailly who first conflated the material as a single fragmentary chronciel in 1855. Their decision was corrected by Henri Duplès-Agier in 1874.
  2. Accorindg to, the compilation in MS lat. 5452 has been attributed in its entirety to Pierre Coral, who used an anonymous compilation from Saint-Martial as a source. This attribution is questionable. suggests that 5452 is a later reworking of 11019 by a monk of Saint-Martin.
  3. See, for editions.