The Quiriniano “ form” (ms. Queriniano D II 21) and the supplements to the Malatesta “form”
Wilkins holds that shortly after releasing the Malatesta “form” Petrarch decided to replace the ballata “Donna mi vene spesso nella mente” with the madrigal 121 “Or vedi Amor” which stood between 242 and 243 in the Malatesta “form.” This change, Wilkins argues, had been motivated by Petrarch's willingness to remove a poem that appeared to speak of an interfering love. This variation is reflected in what Wilkins calls the “eighth form” of the Rvf, the Quiriniano, named after the Queriniana library in Brescia that holds the late fourteenth-century ms. Queriniano D II 21 attesting this “form” (180).
The Queriniano differs from the Malatesta in terms of content only for the exclusion of Donna mi vene spesso nella mente. However, the order of the poems is also in some instances different. According to Wilkins, when the first scribe that worked on this manuscript finished his transcription, the Rvf was divided into two parts, five and a half pages being left blank between the two parts. Three notable changes from the order of the Vat. lat. 3195 that had been implemented in the Malatesta are not followed in the Queriniano: poems 2 and 3 changing places, 80 following 82, and 364 and 365 changing places. In these instances the Quiriniano reverts to the order of the Vat. lat. 3195. Here is the order of this form: 1-243; 264-339, 342, 340, 350-352, 354, 353, 355, 366. According to Wilkins there are seven other manuscripts in the family of Quiriniano, besides the two MSS directly descending from it: Quir. B. VII. 21 and Ambr. I, 88, sup.
Following the intention declared in the postscriptum to the letter to Pandolfo, Petrarch continued to add poems to his collection as he kept sending new poems and copies of the Rvf to his friends. Wilkins argues that in 1373 and early 1374 Petrarch released a supplement for Part two, including the new poems 343 and 345-361 that eventually he transcribed in Part II in Vat. Lat. 3195. A “considerable evidence” for this supplement is afforded by the apograph manuscripts. When the new poems were copied in the Vat. lat. 3195 they took the positions that are indicated by the numerals in this manuscript. However, in apograph manuscripts they appear in a large variety of arrangements. This variety is explained by Wilkins by the fact that the apograph manuscripts were released at a time when this new poems had not yet been copied into Vat. Lat. 3195 (182). Wilkins assumes that Petrarch released a supplement to Part one as well. However, there is no evidence of the content of this supplement (183).
