36 
Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters. 
Israel Israel 
Dux de Juda non tolletur 
Donee adsit qui mit<t>etur 
(Wanting) Salutare Dei verbum 
Expectabunt gentes mecum. 92 
Aside from the presence of Israel in the Limoges version, and 
the absence of Zacharias, the most conspicuous divergence from the 
lectio is seen in the prophecy of Isaiah. For this prophecy the 
Limoges author offers a stanza clearly based upon a prophetic 
passage from the book of Isaiah unconnected with that quoted in 
the lectio. 93 In general, however, the testimonies in the Limoges 
text may be characterized as versifications of the parallel utter¬ 
ances in the lectio. 94: Particularly noticeable is the prophecy of 
Daniel in the two versions, in that the Limoges text manifestly de¬ 
rives from the lectio rather than from the Vulgate. 95 
If one wished to add further details to the demonstration one 
might cite such resemblances as the following, in the summonses: 96 
(1) Lectio: Die, et Moyses, legislator . . . 
Limoges: Legislator , hue propinqua . . . 
(2) Lectio: Symeonem sanctum in medio introducor . . . Cum 
iste senex admonitus esset a Spiritu Sancto quod non 
ante moreretur quam videret Christum Dei natum 
Limoges: Nunc Symeon adveniat 
Qui responsum acceperat 
Qui non haberet terminum 
Donee videret Dominum. 
Assuming, then, that the lineage of the Limoges version is es¬ 
tablished, 97 we may examine it in detail as an example of the 
92 Non auferetur sceptrum de Juda, et dux de femore ejus, donee veniat qui 
mittendus est; et ipse erit expectatio gentium . . . Salutare tuum expectabo, 
Domine (Gen. xlix, 10, 18). 
93 This stanza is found also in the cantio (or trope) Gloriosi et famosi, dis¬ 
cussed below, pp. 77-80. 
94 See Sepet, pp. 16-21. 
95 One should observe also that in the prophecy of David both the lectio and 
the Limoges version unite unconnected verses from separate Psalms. 
9(5 Concerning these resemblances, and others, see Sepet, pp. 21-24. 
97 La Piana (op. cit., pp. 302-308) undertakes to show that the Limoges ver¬ 
sion borrows somewhat from a Greek homily of Hesychius of Jerusalem 
(printed by Migne, Patrologia Graeca, xciii, 1453-1460). That the Limoges 
author is chiefly indebted to the pseudo-Augustinian lectio rather than to the 
Greek homily is obvious, for example, from the fact that seven of the prophets 
common to the lectio and the Limoges text are wanting to the Greek homily. 
