Comparison of one of the commentaries on the Apocalypse which originated at the Prague University and is contained in the manuscript Osek Cist. 37 of the Prague National Library, ff . 1–129, coming from Osek, dating from 1402 and used to this day by experts, with a copy of the same work in the manuscript I Q 16 of the University Library in Wroclaw, created 1378, has excluded the hitherto assumed authorship of Heřman Švab of Mindelheim, as well as the authorship of Heřman of Prague, assumed, not beyond doubt, by Fr. Stegmüller. Temporal relationship and the data of the colophones of both of these preserved manuscripts lead to the conclusion that the author of this Commentary is an other „Doctor Heřman“, Heřman of Winterswick, a member of the Prague university who composed the Commentary sometime in the late seventies of the 14th century.
After a historic introduction the author deals with the manuscript of the Museum of Western Bohemia in Pilsen (5 MA 11). The manuscript entitled „Inventarium Bibliothecae Archidiaconatus Plsnensis“ came into being at the Pilsen archdean Jan Václav Emerich´s instance. Emerich wrote the book in part (ff . 51r, 54v) himself and in part (ff . 52r–54v) got an unknown scribe (X) to do so. Should an edition of the book be prepared, the complete text by the scribe (X) on ff . 52r–54v will be decisive. This scribe wrote – maybe by mistake.
This article deals with the manuscripts of Bonaventura´s Breviloquium held in Czech manuscript collections. The author compares data available from the list of these manuscripts in Opera omnia V (Quaracchi-Florentia 1891) with data from catalogues of individual manuscript collections to make the number of the manuscripts preserved in our libraries more accurate. He recommends the manuscripts themselves should be dealt with to obtain more precise data.
In the culminating and late middle ages funny scenes, the so called drôleries, appear in the borders of illuminated manuscripts. Th eir problems are not explained completely; they seem to contain hidden spiritual meanings. Besides singing birds, which are symbols of the unearthly sphere, fi gures appear most oft en who were taken as negative in middle-ages – owls, apes, beasts of prey, dragons, and clowns. Th e fi gures of antique mythology were perceived as negative too; the cults connected with them were perceived as demoniacism by the Christian society. Drôleries are usually placed in borders which are decorated with an acanth. Th e acanth in time became a symbol of victory over death. It can be also interpreted as Christ´s crown of thorns. In this way the spirit of medieval symbolism indicated that negative forces are driven to the margin and defeated by Christ´s victim.