Editorial principles 2: transcription and translation
This section describes how the text has been transcribed, by Dauvit Broun, John Reuben Davies and Jo Tucker. For how the resulting electronic text has been ‘tagged’, see Editorial principles 3: text mark-up conventions (TEI-XML).
The benefit of a side-by-side image-text edition is that users can see information in the manuscript for themselves in the images. The spirit of the transcription and translation is, therefore, to help users read the text in the digital images. (The Chronicle of Melrose is entirely written in Latin.) It should be clear from looking at the images that the transcription is not ‘the text’ but simply one representation of it which meets the editor’s aims (in the same way that the translation is obviously not ‘the text’ but a particular representation of it which suits the editor and their audience).
The transcription might technically be described as ‘semi-diplomatic’: an attempt has been made to follow the scribes’ work and keep editorial interpretations to a minimum. However, the transcription is not an exact replica of the manuscript page. Certain editorial interventions have been made to aid the modern reader in understanding the text in the images (such as expanding abbreviations, or following modern capitalisation, as described further below). Some elements of the written text (such as later underlining) have not been represented in the transcription but can be seen in the digital images.
The English translation makes the Chronicle of Melrose accessible to a wide audience. However, it attempts to provide modern readers with an experience of reading the text in the manuscript, rather than acting as a ‘cleaned-up’ version with all the corrections or erasures or additions silently incorporated. For example, in order to maintain the sense of reading the manuscript text itself, Anno mo co xco iiiio has been translated as ‘In the 1194th year’ rather than the more familiar ‘In the year 1194’. Of course, it is not possible to indicate all original features of the Latin text in translation. For example, an obviously misspelled name like Willmus for Willelmus (Faustina B IX, f. 22r) has been simply given as ‘William’ in the translation. Errors in the year numbers are sometimes communicated in translation, but this is not always possible (e.g., in Julius B XIII, f. 46r where cxc was written instead of cc but the x was then marked for deletion, in the translation it is simply ‘200’). Folio divisions in the translation are an estimation of how this relates to the transcription but obviously cannot exactly match the Latin. It does, however, give a sense of the interrupted flow of the text (for medieval scribes and readers) over a folio boundary.
A decision has been made not to ‘itemise’ the annals (i.e., breaking up a year into 1194.1, 1194.2, 1194.3, as was anticipated in the edition by Broun, Davies and Harrison: The Chronicle of Melrose Abbey, pp. 50–2). This is because it interrupts the view of the scribe’s work, and potentially adds layers of assumptions about how to read the text. The easiest way to refer to text in the chronicle is by folio number, potentially also with line numbers.
Abbreviations: these have been expanded silently (e.g., dni’ > Domini). Where there is ambiguity in the Latin (especially with proper nouns), unexpanded abbreviations are signalled with an inverted comma (e.g., Inger’, A’).
Capitalisation: to avoid ambiguity with interpreting the scribes’ intentions, capitalisation is editorial (e.g., for placenames, year numerals, titles such as rex before a name, after a punctus).
Punctuation:
- The punctus is represented by either a comma (,) or full stop (.) according to editorial interpretation. In some instances, the punctus has not been reproduced, such as around numerals (e.g., m.c.xc.iii. is given as mcxciii and .iii. as iii) or in its use after abbreviations, especially names (e.g., Scott’. is given as Scott’). More work could be done to study punctuation patterns in the Chronicle: for example, some scribes used the punctus relatively routinely after abbreviations whereas others did not.
- The punctus elevatus is reproduced in every instance (there being no exact modern equivalent).
- The punctus interrogativus is represented as a question mark (?) (e.g., Faustina B IX, f. 29v, line 9).
- The punctus flexus (which was specific to the Cistercians initially) is represented by an exclamation mark (!) (e.g., Faustina B IX, f. 25v, lines 39, 40, 41, 43).
- In Scribal profile 24’s work, there is a form of punctuation like a dash, rather than a punctus, represented here with a hyphen (-) (e.g., Faustina B IX, f. 2r, line 1).
J/I: this is always rendered as I (e.g., Ierusalem, Ianuario, Iohannes, Iesus).
U/V: an attempt has been made to follow the scribe in each case.
Tailed ę (aka, e-caudata, e-cedilla): this is only found in the writing of Scribal profile 24. The transcription follows the manuscript in every instance. In cases where a potential tailed ę is hidden by an abbreviation, a judgement has been made based on other usages in Scribal profile 24’s work. For example, where pre- words are abbreviated, it has been expanded as pre- rather than prę-. This is because prę- only appears in two confined and adjacent cases (AD 135 pręfuerant, AD 136 pręceptum). In all other instances, scattered throughout Scribal profile 24’s writing, when pre- was expanded tailed ę was not used (AD 33 precursor, AD 63 predicationis, AD 95 precipitatus, AD 744 prelium, 832 predauerunt, 841 predauerunt, 882 prelio, 883 predictus). In the case of haec, this appears four times as hęc (AD 63, 67, 219, 222, 871) and never as hec or haec, so the two instances of abbreviations have also been spelled hęc (AD 62, 249).
‘And’: the manuscript has been followed in every case, whether as et or the Tironian symbol (7) or the ampersand (&).
Names: in the English translation, Gaelic names follow the spellings in www.poms.ac.uk (e.g., Ferteth, earl of Strathearn). Where a name is represented in the manuscript only as its initial (e.g., M’ for Máel Coluim, H’ for Henry), the translation expands the name in square brackets only where known (e.g., M[áel Coluim], H[enry]), to communicate that the scribe only gave the initial.
Dates: in the translation these are usually given in a modern form (e.g., xi kalendas Iunii is given as ‘22 May’ not ‘11th kalends of June’), to allow the text to be read as fluently as a medieval reader probably would have done so.
Numerals: in the translation, an attempt has been made to follow the manuscript, whether numbers are given as numerals (e.g., iv is given as ‘4’) or as words (e.g., quattuor is given as ‘four’). Superscript abbreviations for numeral word endings have been used by the Chronicle scribes frequently but not consistently (e.g., ivo anno regni, xxti librarum; in these cases, they would still be represented in the translation as numerals ‘4’ and ‘20’). Sometimes editorial interpretation has been required to determine whether a numeral represents a cardinal or ordinal number (e.g., iv anno regni is translated as ‘4th year of the reign’; Anno Domini mccxxxiii is translated as ‘In the 1233rd year of the Lord’).
Deletions: where a letter, word or words have been indicated for deletion in the manuscript somehow (e.g., having been underpointed or scored through), this appears as a strikethrough. Deletions are represented in the translation where feasible. Where an alteration to the text is more complex, it is explained in a footnote.
Insertions: where a letter, word or words have been indicated for insertion in the text block, this appears in slashes for those either \above/ or /below\ the line of writing, even if there is no ‘caret’ symbol in the manuscript indicating precise position. Insertions are represented in the translation where feasible. Where an alteration to the text is more complex, it is explained in a footnote.
Marginal textual additions: these have been presented in the margins in the edition. Where relevant, symbols have been used to indicate the intended location in the text block (e.g., * /\ /. \\ // .’.).
Changes to word order: where a scribe has used symbols to suggest a change to word/phrase order, the text and symbols in the edition follow the manuscript (approximating the symbols with punctuation such as // or *) and the suggested re-wording is noted in a footnote.
Erasures: some erased text is legible and is therefore transcribed (but presented as faded text); other erased text is not legible but is still represented (as faded, indistinct characters). Where fresh text has been written over an erasure, this is noted in a footnote (the fresh text is not presented in \slashes/ like an insertion). Erasures are represented in the translation where feasible.
Modern editorial comments, additions or clarifications: these are added in [square brackets] in the transcription or translation. In general, such editorial interventions have been kept to a minimum. They have been used where letters have been smudged, or where the parchment has been cropped and letters lost, or where space has been left for an initial capital which was never filled, or where Anno is missing at the beginning of an annal. More often, any editorial comments or clarifications are explained in a footnote.
Quotations: quotations from scripture, liturgy or classical authors are signalled by ‘quotation marks’ in the translation, with a footnote identifying the source.
Paragraph markers: these are only noted if they are within the text which has been edited. Various paragraph markers in the margins have not been included in the edited text.
Ink colours: the few occasions of red and blue ink have been indicated in the transcription and translation. Colour decoration on paragraph markers or other characters can be observed in the digital images.
Author: Jo Tucker
Last updated: 07/06/2026