CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Abrogans

dictionary

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 3, 2025
Entity authorityQ262300
Source-derived summary

Abrogans, also German Abrogans or Codex Abrogans (St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 911), is a Middle Latin–Old High German glossary, whose preserved copy in the Abbey Library of St Gall is regarded as the oldest preserved book in the German language.

Dating from the 8th century (765–775), the glossary contains approximately 3,670 Old High German words in over 14,600 examples and is therefore a valuable source for the knowledge of the oldest Upper German language. It was named by German researchers after its first entry: abrogans = dheomodi (German: demütig = modest, humble).

On several occasions the South Tyrolean bishop Arbeo of Freising († 783 or 784) or the Benedictine monk Kero are named as authors.

General Information

The German Abrogans is a Latin – Old High German thesaurus, which was not, however, produced from a collection of Latin – Old High German translations, but structured on a pure Latin, alphabetically-sorted thesaurus. This Latin–Latin glossary, the Latin Abrogans, was probably compiled in Italy (possibly in the important southern Italian monastery Vivarium) of numerous older late-antiquity and early medieval glossaries. Thus arose a dictionary in which rare expressions, above all from biblical Latin, were explained.

The dictionary was likely finally translated into German in the second half of the 8th century in the old Bavarian bishopric Freising, which came under control of the bishop Arbeo (he was bishop here from 764 to 783). At the same time, both the Latin key word and its Latin reproduction were entered with the Old High German equivalents.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Abrogans” is dictionary. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Abrogans and dictionary, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current 252-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Abrogans and dictionary is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “dictionary” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 3, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q262300.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Abrogans”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Abrogans primary sources, Abrogans archive and Abrogans research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Abrogans”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Abrogans” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.