About the Chronicle

The Chronicle’s binding history

The binding history of a manuscript can be revealing about the use, function and storage of the object. The Chronicle of Melrose is unusual for a medieval manuscript in how much information is known about its binding history. Both Cotton manuscripts were disbound in 2005 to allow for analysis and digitisation. The analysis undertaken was published in 2007 (Broun, The Chronicle of Melrose Abbey, chapter 6). This is a summary of the findings there, which were based on an examination and measurement of the binding holes in the ‘gutter’ of both manuscripts by a team of specialists (including Daniel Huws, Mariluz Beltran de Guevara, Dauvit Broun and Julian Harrison). For Julius B XIII, the use of a ‘hacksaw’ to make the holes has caused some to merge, obscuring evidence of distinct phases of binding holes before the current ones. The team‘s analysis was therefore based mostly on the holes in Faustina B IX: some stretch across the entire composite volume (ff. 2–244); others are unique to the Melrose part (ff. 2–75), showing they are from an earlier stage.

An unbound manuscript: the Chronicle of Melrose probably existed unbound for some or all of its ‘active lifetime’. This is suggested by: (i) writing deep in the inner margins, inaccessible when the gatherings are tightly bound; (ii) the addition of some ‘singletons’ during this period; (iii) at two points during the 13^th century abbots of Dundrennan borrowed and returned parts of the manuscript; and (iv) the very fact that the manuscript continued to receive new folios and text, both large blocks of activity and smaller contributions. The gatherings could have been kept in a wrapper or a box during this period (though there is no surviving evidence for this).

A medieval binding: a basic binding on two ‘sewing stations’ (or ‘bands’) is evident from the holes in the gutter. One option is that this was done at Melrose in the second half of the 12^th century soon after the Chronicle was initially created, which was then disbound to allow for the 13^th-century growth, and then rebound again at the end of the 13^th or early 14^th century when the two holes were reused. Another option is that the gatherings remained unbound entirely until the late 13^th or early 14^th century when they were eventually bound on two bands at Melrose Abbey or once they were moved to England (at Deeping St James in Lincolnshire or possibly at Thorney Abbey in Cambridgeshire).

16^th-century binding: a binding on three ‘sewing stations’ is also recoverable from the analysis. This stretches across the entire composite volume Faustina B IX (i.e., the Tynemouth Chronicle as well), and so was probably done while in the possession of John Leland (d. 1552) who acquired the Chronicle sometime between 1536 and 1547, and possibly before December 1539. The lower margin ink foliations in the Melrose part of Faustina B IX (ff. 2–75) may be associated with Leland’s binding (Scribal profile 29).

17^th-century binding: the manuscripts were rebound (again in their composite form) while in the library of Sir Robert Cotton (d. 1631). Five ‘sewing stations’ are evident. The ink foliations in the top corners, running throughout the composite volumes, may be associated with the Cottonian binding (Scribal profiles 2 and 26). The quire signatures (Scribal profiles 5, 11, 14, 25, 30 and 31) and tallies of total leaves (Scribal profiles 12 and 38), both of which run throughout the composite volumes, are certainly from this period.

19^th-century binding: the composite manuscripts were both rebound while in the possession of the British Museum: Julius B XIII in 1839 and 1864; Faustina B IX in 1839 (Harrison, The Chronicle of Melrose Abbey, p. 191). The boards were replaced but they reused the Cottonian ‘sewing stations’ so no new holes were made. The pencil foliations running throughout Faustina B IX were added in February 1884 (Scribal profiles 27 and 28).

1928 disbinding: Faustina B IX was disbound in 1928 to allow for photographing for the 1936 facsimile edition (Andersons, The Chronicle of Melrose). It was rebound using the same holes and boards.

2005 disbinding: both manuscripts were disbound for analysis and digitisation in 2005. They were rebound in 2006 using the same holes and boards. (One folio appears to have been bound out of sequence at this point, presumably by mistake: f. 41 in Faustina B IX is now between ff. 45 and 46.)