I’ve been working away at Bianca-Jeanette Schröder’s Titel und Text for what seems like forever. It’s an excellent book on chapter titles, tables of contents, and the like; but if your German is as limited as mine, it can take a while to get anywhere.
I’ve actually been translating lengthy sections of the book, in order to read it. Over the weekend I realised that, if I continued, I would finish the remaining 40 pages sometime in September. And I would hope to be back among the wage-earners before then!
So I decided to deal with that last 40 pages differently. I took each page in turn, copied it into Google Translate, and hit enter. Then I selected the translation, ragged as it was, and pasted it into a Word document. Then I hit Ctrl-Enter, to throw a new page, and repeated. At the end of this I had a Word document of 40 pages. I already had the 40 pages of German in a photocopy, two pages per sheet.
This morning I sat down in front of the two piles, German and Google-English, and picked up a ballpoint pen. At the foot of each page of ‘English’, I wrote a few bullet-points of what the page said. Then I went on to the next.
Several hours later, I have gone through the whole 40 pages, and now have notes on the lot. I feel a considerable sense of relief, I can tell you. At least there is a prospect of getting my life back!
There is a long appendix in the book which I did translate, containing lots of quotes from ancient authors in the original. I need to post this online, but with the quotes translated. I have been gathering translations, so it may soon be possible to do in a reasonable time.
What I also now need to do is to condense all that I learned from Schröder, and make sure that I know what is being said. I can already seen points at which I don’t agree with her thesis; points where she asserts something which might be so, but equally might not. It is a fine book; but it is not the last word on the subject.
I’ve also spent time with Aelian the Tactician, a very obscure military writer whose work is important for the topic of chapter titles and tables of contents. Alphonse Dain wrote a monograph on the transmission of his work, and I read long sections of it this morning. (Lucky for me that French is a language that I am comfortable with!)
In the mean time I have commissioned a translation of the second Christmas homily of Chrysostom — probably pseudonymous, but historically interesting –, and the translation of Eusebius’ Commentary on Luke continues to progress. It’s all go here.
The 6th century Chalcedonian theologian, Leontius of Byzantium, is most likely the author of a compilation of texts by the 4th century heretic, Apollinarius of Laodicea, entitled “Against the frauds of the Apollinarists”. What was happening was that Monophysite polemicists were using these texts for anti-Chalcedon arguments. The texts themselves were circulating under the names of respectable authors such as Pope Julius I or Gregory Nazianzen. Leontius tracked down the original comments by Apollinarius and his disciples, and compiled a set of them, so that their ideas could be recognised.
Bryson Sewell has kindly translated it into English for us, from the text printed by Angelo Mai and reprinted in the Patrologia Graeca.
I have uploaded the translation to the Additional Fathers site here. In addition I have uploaded a PDF of the translation (plus the word .doc file) to Archive.org here.
This translation is public domain. Do whatever you like with it, personal, educational or commercial.
If you would like to help me commission further translations, why not use the donate button on the right, or purchase a copy of my CD from here.
The translation of Leontius of Byzantium’s Adversus fraudes Apollinistarum (CPG 6817) is going great guns. But we have found at least one lacuna in the printed text, where a heading promises a quotation from Apollinarius, but is in fact followed by Leontius’ diatribe in reply.
The Greek text of this work was published by Angelo Mai in Spicilegium Romanum vol. X, part II, p.128-151. I’m not sure that anyone has published an independent edition since, although Migne reprinted it in PG 86, cols. 1948-1976.
In part I of the same volume, p.v-vi, he mentions that:
I myself … obtained also a Greek codex of the treatises, ancient, complete and very rare, which once belonged to Cardinal Salvati, then to the Colonna family, and finally, a few years ago, while presiding at the Vatican library, it was brought in by me for a price; … if the Vatican codex should perish by an accident, it would be difficult to find another of this kind.
He also remarks that the Latin translation was made from a defective Greek manuscript, and indeed at one point Turrianus’ Latin did not contain the text given in Mai’s Greek.
But which manuscript did Mai use? I could find no catalogue of Vatican Greek manuscripts online. But a search in the Pinakes database of Greek manuscripts reveals only a single manuscript of this text, Vatican gr. 2195, 10th c., and our text is on “p. 165-184.”[1] CPG confirms that this is the only manuscript of this text known.
The work is preceded in the manuscript (p.1-50 and p.85-165) by Leontius’ Contra Nestorianos et Eutychianos libri tres, edited by Mai at the same time; and p.50-84 contain two further works against Severus. Other works of other authors are also found therein.
The Latin translation printed by Migne was made before 1584 by Turrianus, as I remarked previously. A correspondent, Albocicade, has kindly sent me some further information about Turrianus, or Francesco Torres, S.J., to give him his real name. Among other things, he was the first translator of Arabic Christian writer, Theodore Abu Qurrah — presumably of his Greek works.
There is a summary of his life and work here. There is a list of his publications here. A Google Books preview of a book that mentions him (text and n.26) is here. All three are in French, I should add.
It would seem that others have wondered about what manuscripts Turrianus used. There is a 1970 publication, “Zu griechischen Handschriften des Francisco Torres S.J.”, although just at the moment I cannot cope with more German.
Another correspondent, Walter Dunphy, added:
There is something about Torres in Hurter/Nomenclator vol.3,col.281. Long list of his publications in Sommerfeld: Bibliotheque (of SJ writers) vol.3, col.1231.
If you get PDF (big/slow!) from Gallica it’s image n.418. (Difficult to navigate Gallica online.).
The work in question seems to have been published from the notes/papers left by Torres (cf. Canisius, IV, p.163).
All useful stuff to know – thank you both!
UPDATE: Reading the CPG, it looks as if a critical edition of Leontius’ works exists, by Brian Daley, and a google search reveals: “B. E. Daley, Leontius of Byzantium: A Critical Edition of his Works, with Prolegomena (Diss. Oxford, 1978).”
The project to translate Leontius of Byzantium, Adversus fraudes Apollinistarum, goes on. We’re using the text in Migne, Patrologia Graeca 86, and making reference to the parallel Latin translation. But who wrote the latter? And when?
According to the table of contents in PG 86, the text is a reprint of an edition by Angelo Mai,[1] while the Latin is by “Canisius”.
A search for Canisius gives us a certain Petrus Canisius, whose dates are 1521-1597. There is a Catholic Encyclopedia article about him here. He was a Dutchman named Pieter Kanis, a Jesuit, and was made a saint in the 20th century. The Wikipedia article relates a charming anecdote about him, that:
If you treat them right, the Germans will give you everything. Many err in matters of faith, but without arrogance. They err the German way, mostly honest, a bit simple-minded, but very open for everything Lutheran. An honest explanation of the faith would be much more effective than a polemical attack against reformers. — Burg, Kontroverslexikon, Essen, 1903, p.224.
Being aware of the likely accuracy of a Wikipedia quotation and reference, I felt obliged to verify it. I see the 1905 edition of Burg starts an article on Canisius on p.224, but I am unable to see this ‘quote’ in that article. Let us hope that it is true, and that he did say this.
In Smith’s elderly Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, (1846) vol. 2, p.756, we find mention of our work, and Canisius, in a list of works by a certain Leontius of Byzantium:
3. Liber adversus eos qui proferunt nobis quaedam Apollinarii, falso inscripta nomine Sanctorum Patrum seu Adversus Fraudes Apollinistarum. 4. Solutiones Argumentatiorum Severi. 5. Dubitationes hypotheticae et definientes contra eos qui negant in Christo post Unionem duas veras Naturas. These pieces have not been printed in the original, but Latin versions from the papers of Franciscus Turrianus were published by Canisius in his Lectiones Antiquae, vol. iv (or vol. i, p.525 &c., ed. Basagne), and were reprinted in the Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. ix. fol. Lyon, 1677, and in the above-mentioned volume of the Bibliotheca of Galland.
But a search for Lectiones Antiquae reveals a Henricus Canisius, of Ingolstadt, in a copy of vol. 4 dated 1603 here, which contains our work (annoyingly, the PDF download is monochrome and unreadable, while the online version is colour). According to the Catholic Encyclopedia he was the nephew of Petrus Canisius, and died in 1610.
In the 1603 edition, the start of Adversus fraudes Apollinistarum may be found here, which the table of contents lists as f.106. It states, roundly:
Leontii Byzantini. Adversus eos qui proferunt nobis quaedam Apollinarii, falso inscripta nomine sanctorum patrum. Nunc primum ex ms. in lucem editus. Interprete Francisco Turriano Societatis Iesu.
Leontius of Byzantium. Against those who profer to us certain works of Apollinarius, falsely inscribed with the name of the holy fathers. Now edited for the first time from a manuscript. Translated by Franciscus Turrianus, S.J.
I can find nothing to explain why Turrianus’ translation was used, but he is clearly named as the translator. There is plenty, though, about Lutheranism, which explains the context of these publications.
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Turrianus, or Francesco Torres (d.1584), was yet another Jesuit, who translated masses of Greek texts, not without accusations of lack of critical judgement, nor of mistranslation to do down protestants.
So Turrianus is our translator. It would be nice to know something about him, and what manuscript he worked from!
In 2010 I wrote about the circus at Leptis Magna, and how guidebooks say that Durand, a 17th century traveller, found it in much better condition. In 2011 I found a snippet from it.
This week Joe Rock,[1] who commented on the article, has come to all of our assistance. He has obtained a copy of the article in Le Mercure Galant, March, 1684, and generously shared it with me. The article, on p.199-219, contains a letter by Monsieur Durand describing what he saw at Leptis, together with a diagram opposite p.200.
Dr Rock also created a transcription of the article, which he has kindly allowed me to place here: Mercure Galant transcription (.doc)
The spelling is of course that of French as it was more than four centuries ago. So I have created a rough translation of the article, which is as follows. (The drawing above appears opposite p.200).
* * * * * *
Mercure Galant,
March 1684.
[p.199] …
You have heard talk of a great number of columns, which are at Paris, on the Quai, between the Gate of the Conference and the Course, in a forecourt of the Palace of the Tuileries, and of which there remain a very great number at Toulon, which [p.200] must be transported here. I believe that you have already said that the columns come from Lebida, otherwise Leptis, an ancient ruined town, and whose territory is today under the government of the state of Tripoli; but here is something curious on this subject. It is a letter of Mr Durand, a young gentleman, who having been at Lebida, there has noted with care everything that he believed worthy of the curiosity of those who love antiquities, and has made a relation of it which he has sent [p.201] from Tripoli. A copy has been handed to me, and from which I give you the following extract:
LEBIDA, a place situated at thirty-five leagues from Tripoli, to the east, was formerly called Leptis, following an old English author who spoke in these terms, of the place where may still be seen the debris of which I shall speak. Here is what he says.
Leptis Magna was so-called to distinguish it from another Leptis which was nearby, on the other side of the river. There may be seen [p.202] another town, also called Leptis. The Romans having made themselves masters of the place, first occupied by the Greeks, joined these places together and made of them a very great town, very rich and very renowned, which they called Tripolis. It has been destroyed many times by the inroad of many different peoples, rebuilt likewise many times, and finally entirely abandoned.
Everything is spoken of these, the three towns that the name of Tripolis signifies, the situation, the prodigious [p.203] quantity of debris, and the little to distinguish
the [other] two places which are named by this name; so this town and another small habitation forty leagues from here, at Ponant, named in the maps as Tripolis Vetus [old Tripolis], in both of which there is no mark of antiquity, no appearance of a river, and which are not in the situation spoken of; these are something other than Leptis Magna.
Be that as it may, the place must have been extremely impressive, since one may still see there three things which are incomparable, the [p.204] magnificence of the port, which is entirely silted up, a circus of prodigious grandeur, which may easily be distinguished, and a space of almost two leagues along the sea entirely surrounded with walls, and a league inland, and the suburbs of the town were entirely filled with constructions and monuments. The port resembled the figure marked A in the illustration. It is of a prodigious extent and labour, entirely surrounded with chiselled stone. At the mouth are two towers, which it is easy to distinguish, and immediately [p.205] to the two sides of the entrance, there are still some steps which go down to the sea. One may still see there the remains of broken columns. From the two sides of the circuit of the port, one finds every so often steps, although not so beautiful as those of the terraces of the Tuilleries, and all around there are Amares (?) of stone which once served as vessels. Near the entrance to the port, the circuit opens into a square, and beyond a platform, there one still goes up twenty-five very large steps; behind which there are five [p.206] arches, and debris of marbles and columns. Apparently there was at that place some kind of magnificent loggia, where the sailors went to render account of their
voyages.
The striped area that you see in the circuit marks a special opening where the river goes into the sea under an arch, rather than obstruct or inconvenience the port, which is entirely filled up.
The circus situated on the east side (= côté du levant) along the sea-shore is incomparable. It is a little like the figure marked B in the illustration, being more than twelve hundred feet long and three hundred wide. [p.207] It has fifteen or sixteen steps all around, almost entirely complete. The square below had some arcades, beneath which one walked. Of them there are still some remains standing.
The place that you see marked in the middle around which apparently the chariots and horsemen ran, was full of columns, pedestals and figures of marble. Of these one sees many remains, all dilapidated. There are some traverses at certain intervals which are two persons wide, and at the end a type of circular amphitheatre. [p.208] Behind, at the end of the great circus, was a grand arcade which emerged outside.
The body of the town, as one may easily see, is almost two leagues in length along the sea, surrounded by walls of chiselled stone; of which in places one may see the rampart (le cordon). There are in this wall some stones with Roman inscriptions, turned upside down and in no order, which indicates that the barbarians have desired to reuse them. The largest part of the town inland is no more than a league; the wall can be followed almost everywhere. [p.209] One of the gates of the town which was of a dozen arcades, and of which one may see three still standing, resembles a triumphal arch, and the others half of one.
Many columns of marble have been taken from this gate, and three among others which are still at the sea-shore (? = la marive), and which nobody has been able to load onto ship because of their size and length, being twenty-five feet de tour (?) by forty long. This gate belonged to a palace, or perhaps a temple, or maybe both together; whatever the case, it is impossible to describe to you the magnificence of the [p.210] remains of the place.
One cannot recognise any regularity there. It is a very great plain, full of masonry made of great stones, especially of marble, without lime or mortar, but which were joined with iron, and covered within with a green marble of which one finds quantities of fragments of the width of a finger, of which the most part has been carried off to Constantinople. There has been taken from this place, either for Constantinople in the past, or for us at present, more than seven or eight hundred columns, and there are still more than three or [p.211] four hundred of them, either buried or broken and damaged by time. I have only seen of these ten which are very complete. This place was without doubt the most impressive in the town.
The rest is an infinity of buildings, one after another, part filled with sand, and many razed almost to the ground, but all of chiselled stones, and in all of them a very great quantity of columns of all kinds, the grandest made of marble, broken and gnawed, so that it seems that the town has been built over. There are [p.212] a dozen of them which appear entire, but if one digs the sand out of one, one finds quantities of others in the sand. The environs of the town are full of ruined masonry, and of the remains of habitations, of which these are the principal ones. An extraordinary wall fifteen feet thick with supports at a certain interval which are twelve feet square. This wall is still three hundred feet long, the river whose course it determined having eaten it away, despite its thickness; and although it does not run at all with water in the summer, it was still diverted from the port, [p.213] so that it would not be inconvenienced. It is half a league from the town. At a quarter of a league, on the other side, the debris of a very large temple with the marks of a village; three aqueducts, one large and two small, stone blocks, figured with square towers (? Figures de tours en quarré), with pictures of the sun and animals, made apparently to decorate the roads, or to the memory of someone; because there is such a quantity of them, and which are very elevated, some square, some pointed. At a single league from Ponant along the sea, [there are] the marks of a very great village [p.214] surrounded by walls, the remains of forts and cisterns; in the environs of the town, the remains of a quantity of subterranean cisterns, and magnificent in their grandeur, but all filled with sand. As it does not rain here in summer, these are apparently all the cisterns of the town filled which have forced the abandonment of a country as beautiful as this.
Here are the inscriptions which I have found. I have copied them faithfully. There is reason to believe that the great pains that the barbarians have taken to destroy them have ensured that one may not find anything more considerable, [p.215] or in greater quantity, or, if they are there, they are under the sand.
On a pedestal of white marble, four feet high, in writing like that of today, like all the others of which I will make mention, one reads on one of the faces:
Divina stirpe progenitor.
D.N.Fortissimo Principi,
Valentiniano. Victori Pio,
Felici. ac Triumphatori.
Semper Augusto.
Flavius Benedictus, V.P.
Preses Provinciae
Tripolitano Numini [p.216]
Maiestati que eius
Semper devotus.
On the other face of the same pedestal there is:
Dignissimo, principali,
Innocentissimo puero,
T. Fabio Vibiano junior;
Pontifici Duro Viro filio,
Ac collego T. Flavio Frontini,
Heraclii, in parvulis annis,
Exibentio Aqualiter
Voluptatem genera patris
Sui studiis, populi suffragio,
Et decreto ordinis.
On many stones in the middle of the town, scattered and out of order.
Traiano, [p.217]
Amilia,
Divi Trajani,
Nerva
Imp. VI. Cosu.
Imp. Galba
pro Repu.
C. Pomponius R.
Proimp. Provive,
Bombei, io.
Sari divi Nervae
Max. trib. Pro XIIII.
Coloniae Vulpiae Tr.
Cum ornament.
Q. Pompa
io, cerea
li, ex de
creto Or [p.218]
dinis Rom.
On a small square stone.
In large letters on the sea side, the others being without order.
IMP. CAES.
Outside the town, on a stone which is presently in a wall.
Pulcretio
Cressenti
Bono filio
Bono fratr.
Pulcretius,
Rogatinus,
Pater feci.
On another stone, which [p.219] is still in use in a wall.
Domitiae Roga,
Tul. vixit,
annis XXIII.
M. Jullius,
Cethegus,
Phicissiam Uxori,
Carissimae fecit.
In another place.
D.M.
L. CL.
Perpe.
Tui pro
Bati
Vixit ann.
XX. [p.220]
On another stone, in Greek, Latin and Arabic.
Birichi Basiliei
Mater flodi Medici.
DIOSIATROSin Greek letters, and the rest in Arabic.
Continuing from the table of contents of Schröder’s “Titel und Text” here, this is a rough translation of the conclusion to the first part, on the titles of ancient books.
* * * * * *
Part 1 – Conclusion (p.90)
It should not surprise us, if the most ancient book titles seem unimaginative to modern eyes, because they are simply the term for the theme or the genre. It is particularly surprising to modern eyes that the titles of books of poetry are no exception: they are not explicitly given by the authors, but the earliest uses in the secondary tradition are the titles Bucolica, Carmina, Epistulae, Sermones, Epoden. In some cases we can only say what the work was not called: neither ‘Register’ nor ‘Cynthia’ nor ‘Monobyblos’ can be detected as the title of a book. Metaphorical titles appear only in collections, in those cases where a theme cannot be concretely identified.
The literal interpretation of a title must not be avoided, but it may indicate the presence of its predecessor, a connection [1] or a difference, for example (Ambrose, De officiis 1:23-25): Dum igitur hunc psalmum considero, successit animo de Officiis scribere; de quibus etiamsi quidam philosophiae studentes scripserint ut Panaetius et filius eius apud Graecos, Tullius apud Latinos […]. videamus utrum res ipsa conveniat scribere de officiis et utrum hoc nomen philosophorum tantummodo scholae aptum sit an etiam in scripturis reperiatur divinis […] (While, therefore, meditating on this psalm, it has come to my mind to write ‘on duties‘; although some philosophers have written on this subject—Panaetius, for instance, and his son among the Greek, Cicero among the Latin, writers […] let us see whether the subject itself stands on the same ground, and whether this word is suitable only to the schools of the philosophers, or is also to be found in the sacred Scriptures.”); Cicero had already used this as the best translation of the Greek title, see p.31 above.
The number of titles known from the Retractiones of Augustine gives us a good idea of the state of book titles in late Antiquity (see the Capitula at the start of the work, the list of titles). Only a few titles require explanation, e.g. Soliloquia (Retract. 1,4,1) De animae quantitate (Retract. 1,8,1), see above p. 13; where the theme is named, e.g. De beata vita, De moribus ecclesiae catholicae et de moribus Manicheorum. Occasionally the addressee is simply named (Ad Simplicianum), otherwise the name is always accompanied by information about him or the content, e.g. Ad Cresconium grammaticum partis Donati, De spiritu et littera ad Marcellinum, De peccatorum meritis et remissione et de baptismo parvulorum ad Marcellinum; reference is made to opponents with contra: Contra epistulam Donati heretici, Contra Adimantum Manichei discipulum, De Genesi adversus Manicheos. Genre titles serve as titles also: Quaestionum, Soliloquiorum, Confessionum; Expositio quarundam propositionum ex epistula apostoli ad Romanos. The different forms may also be combined: Ad Hieronymum presbyterum libri II unus de origine animae et alius de sententia Iacobi, Contra Pelagium et Caelestium de gratia Christi et de peccato originali ad Albinam Pinianum et Melaniam, De unico baptismo contra Petilianum ad Constantinum. Sometimes the title refers to the state of the work: De Genesi Epistulae ad Romanos inchoata expositio; De Genesi ad litteram liber unus imperfectus — Equally prosaic are the titles of the works of Gregory of Tours (hist. Franc.) and Bede (hist. eccl. 5, 24), likewise the title given in many places by Cassiodorus in the Institutio.
J.C. Scaliger defines the ancient sense (PoeticesLibri Septem,Geneva, 1561, book 3, cap. 123, p. 171c): Inscriptio est uno, aut non multo pluribus verbis comprehensio eius partis operis, cuius partis gratia ceteraepartes omnes veniunt ad totius constitutionem […]. (i.e. an inscriptio is one or not many more words which summarise the stuff that makes up the work.)
Before we consider the background to poetry book titles in part 3, we must investigate in part 2 the further possibility that short sections of text in tables of contents etc, were designated as chapter titles.
[1][126] On the use (Übernahme) of titles in historical writing (annales, historiae) in order to emphasise the continuity of the content, see Zehnacker, Hubert: Les oeuvres antiques peuvent-elles se passer de titre? L’exemple de l’historiographie romaine, in: Fredouille (ed.), p. 209-221.↩
A horrifying story which sets a ghastly precedent. I have edited it slightly, for reasons that will become apparent.
Twitter hands over confidential data of Jewish-sounding users to French authorities
Twitter has handed confidential account information over to French authorities to track down the authors of Jewish-sounding tweets, to end the legal battle that started last year when the French Union of National Socialist Students sued Twitter for allowing hate speech.
Twitter said in a statement that the disclosure of information “enables the identification of some authors” and “puts an end to the dispute” with the French Union of National Socialist Students (UEJF), AFP reported. The social network added that the two parties had “agreed to continue to work actively together in order to fight communism and Judaism.”
On Thursday, Twitter lost its legal fight in France after the Paris Court of Appeal dismissed its objections against the original ruling.
Last month, the court upheld a January ruling that said the social media site must provide personal information on some users to the UEJF and four other organizations that filed a complaint against the company in November last year.
The complaint came after a deluge of Jewish-sounding messages tweeted under the hashtag #unbonnazi (#agoodnationalsocialist), with some users posting offensive tweets such as “#agoodnazi is a dead Nazi.” Some of the tweets were later removed by the social network.
Hate crimes are strictly punished in France.
Oh hang on …. I appear to have made a small editing error. Somehow — silly me — the words “anti-semitic” have become swapped with “Jewish-sounding”, and “Jewish” with “National Socialist”, etc. Of course it is the Union of Jewish Students that demands the identities of those who express dislike for their members. Quite right too. Nobody should be allowed to show disrespect for the Übermenschen.
Oh rats, what is the matter with this keyboard?! That should have read, of course, “disrespect for Jewish students”.
The trouble is, if you just change the nouns referring to the parties involved, the story makes equal sense. The version above is exactly how it would have read, in the Vichy era.
Ignore all the loaded language about “hate” — for you have to hate people pretty badly to want to throw them in prison for their opinions.
There is no suggestion that the tweeters did anything except express political views. They are not political views that I hold; but no matter. They could have been. The process would have been the same.
Indeed one day they may well be the same. The first step in political correctness was that Jewish people might not be referred to other than in terms of profoundest respect. It matters not who the beneficiaries were, of course; it is an outrage, a hideous evil, that any group in society should be so privileged.
Note also that it was Jewish pressure groups who created this precedent, as here. Presumably the possibility of short-term gain drowns out, in the minds of these activists, the inevitable historical lesson that, once discrimination is endemic in a society, Jews will find themselves on the receiving end of it.
But once Jews could not be criticised, then everyone wanted the same status. The feminists demanded that “sexist” language (words they invented themselves) should not be permitted, and won their case. Then those who hated their own country chimed in, with “racist” language. Then the homosexuals wanted the same status. And, of course, the Moslems have lately been added to the list of “priority” groups. I learn today that British police ignore many crimes, concentrating on “priority” cases.
It will surprise few of us that the police system has a check box which marks cases as priority if they involve members of “priority” groups.
But none of this system of privilege can take effect without injury to every member of the society. Indeed it even affects members of these “priority” groups, when they find — and they do — that some other “priority” group take precedence, or that nobody is interested unless it serves the cause. I am told that 11,000 blacks have been shot in the USA since the celebrity race case of Trayvon Martin happened; and nobody cared.
I think normal people would care, pretty seriously, if 11,000 people were shot in this county. Even — and at the moment, this might be a pretty big ask — if they were members of the French Union of Jewish Students. Aren’t they people? Unless, of course, they are tokens in a political power game?
It is an evil day that Twitter bowed to this pressure to apply a political censorship to its service. It highlights, again, how we cannot depend on Google, Twitter, Facebook, and the other corporations who control the social media sites, to uphold the most basic freedoms, if their profits are threatened.
B.J. Schröder’s Titel und Text is a profoundly important book for the subject of book titles, chapter divisions, chapter titles, tables of contents and the like. Yet it seems to be largely unknown in the anglophone world. I can find no reviews in JSTOR, nor a review at Bryn Mawr.
For a few days now I have been producing rough translations of portions of it, for my own use. It seems to me that these may be of use to others, as a way into the book. For who speaks German these days?
I do realise that the subject is perhaps rather technical. I apologise to those of my readers, for whom the subject lies outside their sympathies. But I hope that, for some people at least, an English rendering of bits of the book will be useful.
Let’s start with a translation of the title and subtitle, and the book’s own table of contents. These will give a very good idea of the contents of the book.
I am entirely aware that my efforts at translation are not very good. However producing them should help me get better!
* * * * * *
Bianca-Jeanette Schröder, Title and Text: On the development of Latin poetry headings. With studies on Latin book titles, tables of contents, and other types of divisions (Gliederungsmitteln). Walter de Gruyter : Berlin : New York, 1999 (Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte ; Bd. 54) From: Hamburg, Univ., Diss., 1998. ISBN 3-11-016453-1.
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9 On the emergence of book titles and on the problems of recognition of book titles 10, citation of incipits 16, Information on the index 20
2. On the relationship between title and content…………………………………………. 30
Ancient comments on the titles of works……………………………………………………… 30
Name versus data………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Titles of Epics, Tragedies and Comedies 35, Titles of the works of Plato
41, Proper name as title and subtitle in Cicero, Varro, and Apuleius 43
Metaphorical titles……………………………………………………………………………………….. 49
Pliny the Elder 50, Gellius 57
3. Remarks on the titles of selected books of poetry………………………………………… 60
Greek lyrics………………………………………………………………………………………………… 62
Catullus………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 64
Vergil…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 68 Bucolica 68, Catalepton 70
Horace………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 71
Carmina 71, Epoden 73, Epistulae and Sermones 76
Propertius…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 78
Ovid……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 83 Amores 83, Ars (Ovid and Horace) 84, Tristia, Epistulae ex Ponto, Epistulae Heroidum 87
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..90
Part II:
The organisation of texts (especially textbooks)
by table of contents, numbering and chapter headings
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………. 93
2. The different types of divisions………………………………………………………………….. 99
Necessary differences: between table of contents and chapter headings, between chapter headings and chapter divisions (Kapitelgliederung) ……………………………. 99
Tables of contents……………………………………………………………………………………… 106
Numbering of chapters and tables of contents…………………………………………….. 115
Excursus: The numbering of poems in a collection ……………………………….. 121
Chapter headings………………………………………………………………………………… 123
3. Investigations of individual cases……………………………………………………………..128
Cato and Varro, De re rustica…………………………………………………………………….. 128
Columella, De re rustica…………………………………………………………………………….. 131
The collected index and indices before individual books 131. The relationship between Argumenta and chapters and numbering 134, Chapter headings and their position in the text 138
Hyginus, De astronomia……………………………………………………………………………. 142
Vegetius, Epitoma rei militaris…………………………………………………………………… 144
Palladius, De veterinaria medicina……………………………………………………………… 145
Isidore, Origines……………………………………………………………………………………….. 146
Cassiodorus, De anima……………………………………………………………………………….. 150
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 153
2. Investigation of authentic headings………………………………………………………..176
1.-3.AD…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 176
Martial (Books 13 und 14) 176, Statius, Silvae 180, Commodian, Instructions 189
4.-6.AD……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 193
Prosper of Aquitaine, Epigrammata 193, Paulinus of Nola, epist.32 (with excursus on Prudentius, Dittochaeon) 195, Psalms 196, Claudian, Carmina minora 198, Ausonius 199, Epigrammata Bobiensia 202, Ennodius 206, Venantius Fortunatus, Carmina 209, Luxurius 212
A brief look at the Middle Ages…………………………………………………………………… 219
Theodulf of Orleans 220, Hildebert of Lavardin 221, Godefrid of Winchester 222, Henry of Huntingdon 223
Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 224
3. Investigation into titles added later…………………………………………………………226
Vergil, Bucolica…………………………………………………………………………………………226
Excursus: Theocritus 236
Horace, Carmina……………………………………………………………………………………….239
Addressee 241, Description of content 245, technical terms (para<e>netice,
prosphonetice, pragmatice etc.) 249, Description of metre (tetracolos, dicolos etc.) 255, Observations on the manuscripts 256, Conclusions 261
Horace, Epoden, Sermones, Epistulae……………………………………………………….262
Remarks on Juvenal and Persius……………………………………………………………….268
Ovid………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 270 Epistulae Heroidum 270, Epistulae ex Ponto 111, Amores 280, Tristia 282
Martial, books 1-12……………………………………………………………………………………283
Headings in ms. E (books 1-12) 284, Headings in ms. L (books 5-12) 288
Anthologia Latina…………………………………………………………………………………….. 293
Excursus: Anthologia Graeca 296
Poem titles in younger manuscripts…………………………………………………………… 298
Propertius 298, Catullus 301, Tibullus 303
Conclusion
Consolidated summary………………………………………………………………………….. 305
Chronological overview 305, Components of poem headings 306 (Proper name or
addressee and subject 307, genre and Absicht / Sprechakt 309), Form and language 309, Function 311, Transmission 314, Summary 316
Appendix………………………………………………………………………………………………. 319
Notes on the Latin words for: ‘Work-/book-title’ 319, ‘Table of contents’ 323, ‘An element in a table of contents / chapter’ 325, ‘Heading / Poem heading’ 327
Alin Suciu notes on his blog that he has successfully defended his PhD thesis. The content of it is very interesting indeed, and thankfully he has made it available online here:
My thesis is about a Coptic text which is largely known as the “Gospel” of the Savior. Although this titles suggests that the text is an uncanonical apocryphal gospel, literary evidences which I document in my thesis firmly indicate that the text does not belong to this genre, but it is rather one of the numerous “memoirs” of the apostles and disciples, which were composed in Coptic, most likely after the Council of Chalcedon (451 CE). Sometimes, the pseudo-apostolic memoirs were incorporated into sermons attributed to the Fathers of the Coptic Church.
The fact that the text belongs to a well-defined genre, formed mostly of homilies with apocryphal insertions, has caused me to eschew the label “gospel,” which I find unsatisfactory and misleading. Instead, I have chosen to call the text the Apocryphon Berolinense/Argentoratense (ApoBA), after the location of the two main manuscripts. In fact, the label “apocryphon” is larger and more generous than “apocryphal gospel.”
The publication of the Berlin papyrus 22220, under the title of the “Gospel of the Savior” (by Paul Mirecki and Charles Hedrick) took place in 1999, and some notes upon it prior to that time, probably in 1998, were among my earliest online endeavours. Those notes may be found here.
Rather foolishly the editors and/or their publisher decided to engage in a bit of Christian baiting in the press. This must certainly have alienated a good many of those who might otherwise have purchased their book. Papyrology owes its existence to massive public funding, raised for the purpose of discovering new words of Jesus at Oxyrhynchus, more than a century ago. For papyrologists to indulge in religious animosity is to cut their own throats, and the discipline remains chronically underfunded.
Thankfully the serious Coptic scholars have come to the rescue of the text. Few of us, after all, have a proper knowledge of Coptic literature; it is, indeed, hard to acquire in the absence of a decent handbook. Alin Suciu’s knowledge of Coptic literature is already wide, and he has done excellent work on fragments. The thesis that the work is an original Coptic composition of the 5-6th century, is one that few will rush to disagree with, or be equipped to do so.
It seems entirely sensible to use the neutral term “Berlin-Strasbourg Apocryphon”, rather than rushing to tangle the text up with the New Testament; although, as he rightly supposes, the use of the term “gospel” will linger in the literature and republications of translations for a while yet.
Like most people, I was unaware of the genre of the “memoirs of the apostles”, and this casts an interesting light on Coptic apocrypha in general.
The thesis is in English, but with a French abstract. It contains a semi-diplomatic re-edition of the three Sahidic manuscripts: Berlin, Papyrussammlung, P. Berol. 22220; Strasbourg, Bibliothèque Nationale et Universitaire, Copte 4-7a; Aswan, Nubian Museum, Special Number 168, ff. 12v-17r (= the Qasr el-Wizz codex), with introduction and commentary, plus a translation. Suciu gives a detailed history of the find and reception of the text among scholars, and highlights the important work done by Coptologist Steven Emmel in analysing the text and recognising its connections to other work.
Recommended. If you are interested in the work at all, get your copy now. I have no doubt at all that this will become a book in short order.
The Chronicle of Michael the Syrian is the largest medieval chronicle. It was composed in Syriac, and has come down to us in a single Syriac manuscript, of which the beginning is lost; some abbreviated Arabic versions, and a condensed version in Armenian, which alone preserves the opening portions of the work.
