Bucolica Calpurnius Siculus Cesar Giarratano Semantically encoded edition New annotations and encoding by Samuel J. Huskey Hugh Cayless Digital Latin Library 2017 Library of Digital Latin Texts 1 Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica, CaesarGiarratano, Naples, Detken et Rocholl, 1910 VI. Two lost manuscripts Now let us discuss the two manuscripts that are lost to us today, that is the Taddeo Ugoleto’s Codex Germanicus (= A) and Boccaccio’s manuscript (= H). We know nothing about the Codex Germanicus other than what Niccolò Angeli has handed down to us about it. Also, the following is written in Codex Riccardianus 636 at the end of Calpurnius in the hand of Angeli: From a very ancient manuscript brought from Germany | this title has been copied: The end of the bucolics of | Calpurnius, the first eclogue of Aurelius Nemesianus the poet | from Carthage. Then, at the end of Nemesianus: I, Niccolò Angeli, collated this manuscript against many others and the very old manuscript that Taddeo Ugoleto, librarian of the royal library in Hungary, brought with him from Germany and prepared for my use. Many poems were discovered in it. In the year of salvation 1492. Regarding Boccaccio’s manuscript, Codex Harleianus 2578 (about which see C. Schenkl in the preface to his edition of Ausonius [Berlin 1884], p. XXI) offers similar testimony. At the end of Nemesianus, the following subscription is found: This manuscript was collated with greatest care with the very old manuscript that Taddeo Ugoleto, librarian of the royal library in Hungary, brought from Germany. Also with the one that Giovanni Boccaccio is said to have written with his own hand to dedicate to the library of Santo Spirito in Florence: We found the title and division of the work in that manuscript, along with many poems. Codex Riccardianus 636 is written very beautifully on the leaves that contain the bucolic poetry of Calpurnius and Nemesianus, but at a later date various hands have obscured the transmitted text by erasing or emending to such a degree that sometimes you can barely see what the original reading was. Moreover, because of their similarities, I could not, like Schenkl, always distinguish the later hands. That is why I have indicated all of them, except Angeli’s readings, in the apparatus criticus with the symbol ρ². For the hand of Angeli is easily distinguished from the others in nearly all instances. And now we must consider his readings to make a proper judgment about the authority of the Codex Germanicus, since we learn nothing from the edition published in Parma (around 1500) or the first Florentine edition (1504), even though Angeli edited the latter and Angelo Ugoleto added at the end of the former that he had established the text based on the Codex Germanicus, when both editions, as Schenkl has demonstrated conclusively, derived from Codex Riccardianus 636. First to consider is whether all of the readings noted by Angeli were taken from the Codex Germanicus or had some other origin. In the subcription of the Codex Riccardianus that we reported above there is mention of many other manuscripts. Moreover, Angeli’s annotations can be divided generally into two classes, for most of them agree with N G, and the rest with certain manuscripts of the second family, especially Codex Urbinas 353 Vatican 3152, Ambrosianus O.74 sup., and the edition published in Venice in 1472. Consider the following passages: Calp. 1.30 non Aεαγe, 1.46 vinctas Aγ, 1.87 et meritis Aεαe, 2.27 discrevit digitus Aεαe, 2.32 et A V, 2.48 arida Aα, 2.67 fore Aεαγe, 3.93 perfer et ore tuo modulator A¹ εγe, 3.98 redit Aεγe, 4.51 aliena Aεe, 4.75 quae Aεαe, 4.77 per me Aεe, 4.94 abis Aεγe, 4.95 reclivus Aεγe et reclivis Aα, 4.101 sonuerunt Aεe, 5.31 ut Aεe, 5.58 vel Aεαγe, 5.100 tum Aεγe, 5.102 ast tibi A N G and ast ubi Aεαe, 6.35 scit Aεe, 6.38 lucent A V, 6.82 carmina Aεαγe, 7.25 clivos Aα, 7.43 tam Aεe, 7.77 referens Aεαe, 7.78 quae sit modo Aεαγe, 7.84 putavi Aεγe, Nemes. 1.31 fagosve Aεαγe, 1.32 suggerit εe, 1.78 olivas A V, 2.8 iam non Aεγe, 2.15 relevare Aεe, 2.30 nulloque biberunt Aεγe, 2.48 tum dulce rubens Aεγe, 3.26 vos etiam et Aεe, nutristis Aεαe, 3.33 leve Aεαe, 3.37 lenes Aγe, 3.51 cymbia Aεγe, 3.63 natus ab ipso Aεαγe, 4.69 artes Aεe. Add these, too: Calp. 5.33 capellis Aνφθ, 7.18 spectavimus Aκχ. In light of these facts, it seems very close to the truth that the Codex Germanicus derived from the same archetype as N and G, and that the readings that agree with N and G should be attributed to that archetype, but that Angeli copied the rest of the readings from interpolated manuscripts. This inference is supported by the fact that Angeli discloses in the subscription to the Codex Riccardianus that he used other manuscripts, too. This agrees with the fact that the four later poems were attributed to Nemesianus in the Codex Germanicus, as attested by Niccolò Angeli at the end of Calpurnius in the Codex Riccardianus and Angelo Ugoleto at the end of the original from Parma. N and G divide the eleven eclogues between Calpurnius and Nemesianus in the same way, but all of them are attributed to Calpurnius alone in the manuscripts of the second family. Therefore the Codex Germanicus should certainly be assigned to the first family. But could it not happen that the Codex Germanicus underwent some interpolations? Indeed it could have happened, but since the task of seeking out a semblance of the lost manuscript is a very risky venture, even though the inference seems probable to me, I nevertheless prefer to report all of Angeli’s readings without distinction under the symbol A. And I feel so strongly about the authority of the Codex Germanicus that when it agrees with N or G, it offers us another witness to the first family, and when it agrees with V, it has the same force as a manuscript of the second family. For Angeli’s annotations hardly ever differ from all of the manuscripts: Calp. 1.45 in ulnis, 1.86 tralati, 2.3 nec, 4.86 in, 5.65 tinniat ore, 5.79 et vitrosa, 5.104 hic, 7.59 manticoram, Nemes. 1.70 hinc, 2.41 horti, 2.83 qui. But sometimes the Codex Germanicus alone among all manuscripts preserves for us the true reading or traces of the true reading, as at Calp. 2.3 nec et, 5.65 tinniat ore. Finally, in the same Codex Riccardianus there are certain corrections that cannot be attributed to Angeli, but doubtlessly descend from some manuscript of the first family. Perhaps some corrector copied those, too, from the Codex Germanicus. Regarding Boccaccio’s manuscript, truly the things that can be said are few and uncertain. For although the Codex Harleianus, according to its subscription, was collated with the Codex Germanicus, Boccaccio’s manuscript, and many others, for the most part the readings that Angelius did not note in the Codex Riccardianus seem to go back to Boccaccio’s manuscript. After carefully inspecting these readings, we can conclude only this: that the manuscrupt that Boccaccio is said to have written with his own hand must be assigned to the so-called first family. Everything else is highly uncertain. As for the authority of this manuscript, the same things that I said about the Codex Germanicus apply. Finally, I think we should not overlook that in one place (Nemes. 4.70 quo Boccaccio’s manuscript alone, out of all of the manuscripts, displays the true reading. Excerpts: Exc. Par. and Exc. Bon. Now I must discuss the excerpts. Two manuscripts in Paris (referred to together as Exc. Par.), namely Thuaneus 7647 (= Exc. Par. Prior), end of the 12th century, and Nostradamensis 17903 (= Exc. Par. Alter), 13th century, (cf. G. Meyncke Rh. Mus. 25: 369ff. and M. Manitius Philol. 56: 541), both of which contain excerpts from the poems of Latin poets, have also some verses selected from Calpurnius’ eclogues 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and a few others from Nemesianus’ fourth eclogue, attributed there to Calpurnius. For in the Codex Thuaneus at the beginning of the first excerpt the following is inscribed: Calpurnius in bucolicis; in the Codex Nostradamensis: Scalpurius in bucolicis. But in the latter, the corruption of the name traces its origin to the initial letter of the first verse: Satis hoc (2.23). These are the fragments: Calp. 2.23 satis-24, 3.10 mobilior-femina, 4.14–15, 4.155 vellit-156, 5.12–13, 46–48, 6.53–56, Nemes. 4.19 levant-curas, 4.21–24, 4.32, 4.38 vocat-umbram. Nearly the same verses are found in a certain codex in Berlin (ms. Diez. B. Santen. 60 fol. 29ʳ): cfr. M. Haupt (l. l. p. 13) and M. Manitius (l. l.). Codex Bononiensis 83 (52, II n. 1 = Exc. Bon.) contains other excerpts (Calp. 3.90, Nemes. 4.20–32, 56–59) ascribed to Calpurnius alone: cfr. L. Frati Studi italiani di Filol. classica 16 (1908): 131. Schenkl examined the books in Paris after Baehrens’ edition, in 1880. In 1909, I was the first to collate the excerpta Bononiensia. Now let us discuss the worth of the excerpts. Certainly the excerpta Bononiensia were copied from some manuscript of the second family. Compare these passages: Nemes. 4.21 eris–flores V Exc. Bon., (h)erit florem N G, 4.24 tibi Exc. Bon., quod N G, 4.28 volucres et V Exc. Bon., volucru et N, volucrum tum G, 4.30 perdis V Exc. Bon., prodis N G, 4.58 animos V Exc. Bon., annos N G. But the books in Paris have a better reputation by far. In the following places N G Exc. Par. offer a good reading, but V offers a bad one: Calp 4.14 nunc N G Exc. Par., dum V, 4.155 contingat N G Exc. Par., contigerit V, 4.156 dicit N G Exc. Par., dixit V, Nemes. 4.24 quod N G Exc. Par., tibi V. Add these, too: Nemes. 4.24 commodet G Exc. Par., comodet N, commodat V. But in two places V Exc. Par. preserve an attested reading that N G have corrupted: Calp. 2.23 hoc V Exc. Par., hic N G, Nemes. 4.21 eris-flores V Exc. Par., (h)erit-florem N G. Moreover, in only one place have the excerpta Parisina admitted the interpolations of the inferior manuscripts: Calp. 5.12 iamdudum pler. V Exc. Par., aetas iam N G. At Calp. 6.55 N and G and the excerpts are different. Finally, they present some readings unique to them: Calp. 4.15 valeate Par. pr., 155 michi, 5.45 erit; dubitanda Par. post. 5.48 tonsoribus Par. pr., 6.54 torvata Par. pr. We have already said that all of the manuscripts that we have today must be traced back by various paths to the same archetype, as their many errors in common indicate, especially the lacuna and the confusion of verses in the amoebaean song in Calpurnius’ fourth eclogue. But that the excerpts about which we speak cannot trace their origin further is supported by a single, but very strong argument (cf. H. Schenkl, Wiener Studien VI p. 84 ). For at Calp. 4.156, where Heinsius quite successfully restored ovilia, all of the manuscripts and the excerpts have vilia Before I end this preface, I want to offer my thanks to those who deserve it from me. H. Cocchia, A. E. Housman, F. Leo, F. Ramorino, G. C. Summers, most learned and humane men to whom I owe my greatest thanks, kindly pointed out many things while I was establishing the text of Calpurnius and Nemesianus. But so that no one attributes to them the errors that I have fallen into, I declare that I have noted everything that they shared with me in its own place in the appratus criticus. Milan, September 1909 Revised in Cosenza, January 1910 C. Giarratano
Bibliography Manuscripts First family N = Codex Neapolitanus V A 8 Naples Biblioteca Nazionale di Napoli V A 8 380 1–36ʳ contain Cato’s De Agricultura; 20–101ʳ, Varro’s De Re Rustica; 101ʳ–115ᵛ, the Bucolica of Calpurnius and Nemesianus. The individual poems lack titles, but they are separated from each other by brief spaces. The following subscription appears at the end of the whole work: Aureliani Nemesiani Cartag̅ bucol’ explicit: Deo gratias amen. Finally, another more recent hand, as Bursian and Schenkl recognized, wrote Calpurnii eclogae and Nemesiani eclogae. The remaining leaves are blank. Parchment: 261 × 160 mm.: 116 leaves: 38 verses per page. With respect to correcting hands, two in particular stand out: N1 belongs to the original copyist. See above for a detailed description of this hand’s activity. N2: The manuscript was corrected again around the same time, but here and there the second hand cannot easily be distinguished from the first. N3: a third hand’s emendations can be discerned in only a few places. The manuscript was written at about the beginning of the fifteenth century. We know nothing about the origin and provenance of this manuscript except what is understood from the following passages written on the last leaf: Joannes Antonius Perillus patric. neap. ac iuvenis apprime litteratus Jacobum Perillum hoc libro donavit MDCVII, Klis Juniis (“Joannes Antonius Perillus, a nobleman of Naples and most learned gentleman, gave this book to Jacob Perillus in 1667 on the first of June”), and a little below, Antonii Seripandi ex Jacobi Perilli amici opt. munere (“This book belongs to Antonius Seripandus, received as a gift from his best friend Jacob Perillus”). Later it was brought to the library of San Giovanni a Carbonara, and from there it came to the greatest library in Naples, formerly known as the Reale biblioteca borbonica, (now the Biblioteca nazionale Vittorio Emanuele III). G = Codex Gaddianus pl. 90, 12 inf. Florence Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana plut. 90, 12 inf. It contains the twelve eclogues of Francesco Petrarch (ff. 1–44), the Culex of Vergilius Maro, the Dirae of Vergilius Maro (ff. 52–55), and Calpurnius and Nemesianus (ff. 55–74). A very brief, unattributed eclogue follows with the interlocutors Daphnis, Tityrus, Mopsus, and Meliboeus. The following inscription has been added to the eclogues of Calpurnius: Egloge Calfurnii ad nemesianum cartaginiensem. (The Eclogues of Calfurnius to Nemesianus of Carthage). Nemesianus follows Calpurnius with the following title prefixed: Aureliani nemesiani cartaginiensis egloghe incipiunt (Here begin the eclogues of Aurelianus Nemesianus of Carthage). At the end of each eclogue there appears an explicit with the number of each eclogue, but Calpurnius’ sixth eclogue lacks a subscription, and the following is written at the end of the seventh: explicit sexta egloga Calphurnii (Here ends the sixth eclogue of Calphurnius). This is explained by the fact that the seventh eclogue follows the sixth without any break, with the result that only six eclogues are attributed to Calpurnius in this manuscript. But in the margin, where the sixth eclogue ought to end, the copyist has added the following: aliqui volunt dicere quod ista sit alia et diversa egloga ubi incipit “lentus," aliqui dicunt quod est una etc. (Some wish to say that the eclogue that begins lentus is a completely different eclogue; others say that it is the same, etc.). Paper: 294 × 225 mm.: 74 leaves. Individual pages generally have 29 verses, but some vary, with the shorter ones having 26 and the longer ones haveing 32 verses. G1: The copyist himself added almost all of the corrections either by removing scribal errors in the verses or adding variant readings to the margin. See above for a more detailed description of this hand’s activity. G2: Some corrections seem to have been made by another hand. Written at the beginning of the fifteenth century. Second family V = Consensus of the second family mss. α = Codex Ambrosianus O.74 sup. Milan Biblioteca Ambrosiana O 74 sup. Contained in it are minor poems that were once attributed to Vergil, the epigrams of Claudianus Alexandrinus (Claudian), the Orestis fabula, eleven eclogues of Calpurnius (ff. 112–133), the Parthenopaeus and two elegies of Giovanni Pontano, an elegy by Antonio Beccadelli to Johannes Lamola of Bologna, Janus Pannonius’ Epithalamium in Salomonem Sacratum et Liberam Guarinam, a poem In Venetae urbis laudem, and a poem De ortu atque obitu Hermaphroditi. Paper: 212 × 145 mm. : 183 leaves : 25 verses to a page. α1 α2 Written in the fifteenth century. β = Codex Ambrosianus I.26 sup. Milan Biblioteca Ambrosiana I 26 sup. It contains Claudius Claudianus (Claudian) De raptu Proserpinae (ff. 1–30), the poems De cantu avium et sono quadrupedum (ff. 32–33), the Bucolica of Calpurnius and Nemesianus attributed to Calpurnius alone (ff. 35–61). Folios 31 and 34 are blank. At the end I read the following subscription: die 4 augusti 1463 ego petrus feliciter peregi (On August 4, 1463, I, Peter, finished this; cf. R. Sabbadini, Le scoperte dei codici latini e greci ne’ secoli XIV e XV, p. 16 n. 82 ). Paper: 0.214 × 0.158 mm. : 61 leaves : 20 verses per page. β1 β2 Written in the fifteenth century δ = Codex Vratislaviensis Rehdigeranus 1.4.11 Vratislavia Bibliotheca Vratislavia Rehdigeranus 1. 4. 11 All eleven poems are ascribed to Calpurnius. They are preserved on leaves 3ʳ–22ʳ. Aside from one inscription at the beginning, no other is found in this book, and no indication of characters, with the exception of the recto of the third leaf. Here, the copyist put this sign (") in the margin when the character changes. Quarto : 115 leaves : 26 verses per page. δ1 δ2 Written carelessly in the fifteenth century. γ = Codex Vaticanus 3152 Vatican City Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Vaticanus 3152 It contains Calpurnius’ eleven eclogues (1–18ʳ), followed by various poems by Cyprian, Lactantius, Firmianus, and Ausonius. Paper : 215 × 147 mm. : 81 leaves. It consists of 81 leaves, of which 18ᵛ, 26–30, 51ʳ, 81ᵛ are blank. There are 31 verses on each page. γ1 γ2 Written in the fifteenth century. λ = Codex Laurentianus bibl. Aed. 203 Florence Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana bibl. Aed. 203 Contains the eleven eclogues of Calpurnius (ff. 140–161), along with the poems of Vergil, Statius, Caudian, Maximian and other ancient poets. At the end it is inscribed as follows: Georgii Ant. Vespuccii liber (This book belongs to Giorgio Antonio Vespucci). Paper : 223 × 155 mm. : 188 written leaves : 25 verses per page. λ1 λ2 Copied in the fifteenth century. Formerly in the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore. ε = Codex Vaticanus Urbinas 353. Vatican City Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Urbinas 353 The eleven eclogues of Calpurnius are contained on leaves 95ʳ–113ᵛ of this manuscript, along with many poems by various authors that it is not necessary to report here. The following subscription appears at the end of this work: Federicus De Veteranis Urbinas sub divo Federico Urbinat, duce invictiss. romanae ecclesi. dictat. transcripsit (Federico Veterano of Urbino, in service to Federico di Montefeltro, Duke of Urbino, Commander of the most indomitable Roman Church, copied this manuscript). And a little below that: quo principe decedente utinam et ego de medio tunc sublatus quiescerem ab instanti temporum calamitate. (When that prince dies, may I, too, be taken from your midst and find rest from the approaching times of disaster). Parchment : 387 × 247 mm. : 309 leaves : 29 verses per page. Gaetano Curcio (Poeti Latini Minori vol. 2, pt. 1, p. VI ff.) has meticulously described the outer appearance of this manuscript. ε1 ε2 Most handsomely written in the fifteenth century. μ = Codex Vaticanus 2110 Vatican City Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Vaticanus 2110 Contents: a Latin translation of Aristotle’s Magna Moralia (ff. 1–56), Cicero’s Topica (ff. 57–65ʳ), Boethius’ In Ciceronis Topica (ff. 65ʳ–67ᵛ), Calpurnius’ eleven eclogues (ff. 67ᵛ–80), St. John Chysostom’s De dignitate sacerdotali dialogus (ff. 81–120ʳ), and an excerpt from the life of St. John Crysostom (ff. 120ᵛ–128). Parchment : 284 × 216 mm. : 128 leaves. Each page has 40, 41, or 43 verses. μ1 μ2 Most handsomely written in the fifteenth century under Pope Nicholas V. κ = Codex Riccardianus 724 Florence Biblioteca Riccardiana 724 L IIII 10 Contains the eleven eclogues of Calpurnius (ff. 1–25ʳ), which some removed as the verses of other writers. Parchment : 203 × 136 mm. : written in the fourteenth century. It has 29 leaves with twenty-two verses to a page. κ1 κ2 Written in the fourteenth century. φ = Codex Vaticanus Ottobonianus 1466 Vatican City Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Ottobonianus 1466 Altaempsianus Contains the eleven eclogues of Calpurnius (ff. 1–24ʳ); various poems follow. Paper : 198 × 132 mm. : 51 leaves : 24 verses per page. φ1 φ2 Written in the fifteenth century. Formerly in the collection of the Dukes of the Altaemps and Galesi. χ = Codex Vaticanus Reginensis 1759 Vatican City Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Reginensis 1759 Contains only the eleven eclogues of Calpurnius. Parchment, 198 × 123 mm : 22 leaves : 25 verses per page. χ1 χ2 The book was written in the fifteenth century. Formerly in the library of the Convento di San Silvestro al Quirinale. ν = Codex Laurentianus pl. 37.14 Florence Biblioteca Laurenziana plut. 37.14 Silius Italicus Punica, Calpurnius Eclogae XI (ff. 177ᵛ–193ᵛ), Hesiod Opera et Dies in a Latin translation by N. Valla, Claudian De raptu Proserpinae Parchment : 323 × 195 mm. : 224 written leaves : 35 verses per page. ν1 ν2 Most handsomely written in the fifteenth century. π = Codex Vaticanus Palatinus 1652 Vatican City Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana 1652 It contains Tibullus (ff. 1–28ʳ), Catullus (ff. 28ᵛ–60ʳ), Calpurnius’ eleven eclogues (ff. 60ʳ–74ᵛ), Propertius (ff. 74ᵛ–129). The following is written at the end of the work (cfr. Sabbadini): a M’ petro montopolitano die XXI februarii 1460 (By the hand of master Petrus Montopolitanus on February 21, 1460). That is followed by two hexameters written on the death of Giannozzo Manetti. Parchment : 267 × 159 mm. : 129 written leaves : 37 verses per page. π1 π2 Copied most beautifully in the fifteenth century. η = Codex Vratislaviensis Rehdigeranus 1.4.10 Vratislavia Bibliotheca Rehdigeranus 1.4.10 Contains all eleven eclogues assigned to Calpurnius. They appear on leave 3ʳ–27ʳ. Additionally, many of the minor poems of Vergil and other others (some more recent) are written in it. Paper and parchment : quarto : 130 leaves : 22 or 23 verses per page. Titles and signs for characters are decorated with red ink. η1 η2 Beautifully written in the fifteenth century. ρ = Codex Riccardianus 636 Florence Biblioteca Riccardiana 636 L IIII 14 The eleven eclogues of Calpurnius are contained in this manuscript (ff. 25–45), along with other minor works of various authors that are not worth mentioning here, since the poems of Calpurnius, as Schenkl knew, were formerly separated from the rest. Parchment : 225 × 150 mm. : 126 leaves : 26 verses per page. ρ1 ρ2: Various hands that are indistinguishable from each other. The hand of Niccolò Angeli, recording variants from the lost Codex Germanicus (see A below). Written in the fifteenth century. θ = Codex Gothanus 55 Gotha Forschungsbibliothek 55 After Vergil’s Bucolics, Georgics, and Aeneid, it has the seven eclogues of Calpurnius. After an empty space on the last part of the page, the copyist has written the following subscription: Finis: haec quae de Calphurnio inveniuntur (The end. These are the poems that were composed by Calpurnius). Parchment : octavo: damaged, or copied from a damaged manuscript, since the seventh eclogue ends at verse 65. Written in the fifteenth century. ζ = Codex Riccardianus 974 Florence Biblioteca Riccardiana 974 Among other minor works of various authors, it contains only the second eclogue by Calpurnius (ff. 3–5), and that under the title of the first eclogue. Paper : 208 × 142 mm. : 74 leaves. ζ1 ζ2 Written in the fifteenth century. Third family P = Codex Parisinus 8049 Paris Bibliothèque Nationale 8049 Bound in three parts: I. Introduction on Satire, Perseus; II. end of the 11th century, according to Kelius, end of the 12th century, according to Froehnerus, the end of the second book of the De Divinatione by Cicero. On the verso of leaf 17: Marci Tullii de divinacione liber IIᵘˢ explicit. Petronii arbitri satirarum liber incipit. On the recto of leaf 25: explicit Petronius. incipit egologa Calpurnii (nondum solis equos I 1—quicquid id est silvestre etc. IIII 12). III. 12th century. Seneca’s proverbs. Parchment : quarto P1 P2 Written in the eleventh or twelfth century. Other codices A = cod. Germanicus Th. Ugoleti = Marginalia copied into cod. Riccard. 636 by N. Angelius (Niccolò Angeli). H = Readings in cod. Harleiani 2578 that appear to go back to the manuscript of Boccaccio or Th. Ugoletus (Taddeo Ugoleto) London British Library 2578 Codex Harleianus H1 H2 cod. Vindob. = Codex Vindobonensis 305, a member of V, but cited only once or twice by Giarratano. Excerpts Exc. Par. = Combination of Exc. Par. Prior and Exc. Par. Alter (below) Exc. Par. Prior = Thuaneus 7647 Paris Bibliothèque Nationale Thuaneus 7647 Exc. Par. Alter = Nostradamensis 17903 Paris Bibliothèque Nationale Nostradamensis 17903 Exc. Bon. = 52 Busta II, n. 1 Bologna R. Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna 52 Busta II, n. 1 ω = Consensus of all of the manuscripts Early Editions r = Anonymous. editio Romana. [Romae]: Schweynheim et Pannartz, 1471. e = Anonymous. editio Veneta. [Venetiis]: Ausonius et Giradinus, 1472. d = utriusque edit. Daventr. consensus d1 = Anonymous. editio Daventriensis prior. [Daventriae]: apud R. Paffraet, 1488. URL: . d2 = Anonymous. editio Daventriensis posterior. [Daventriae]: apud J. de Breda, 1491. URL: . u = Anonymous. editio Ang. Ugoleti. Parmae: Angelus Ugoletus, 1492. c = Anonymous. editio Coloniensis (Buccolica canori poetae Titi Calphurnii Siculi undecim Aeglogis iucunditer decantata). Coloniae: [Henricus Quintell], 1505(?). URL: . Nordh. = . ed. Nordheimensis. [Nordheim]: s.n., s.d.. s = editio Ascensiana = Badius, Josse (“Ascensius”). Buccolica, cum adnotatione Ascensiana. Parhisiis, in vico Maturinorum: a Durando Gerlerio, 1503. URL: . b = editio Bononiensis = Guidalottus Bononiensis, Diomedes. Calpurnii et Nemesiani Poetarum Buccolicum Carmen. Bononiae: per Caligulam Bazalerium, 1504. URL: . Modern Editions i = utriusque ed. Florent. consensus i1 = Anonymous. editio Florentina prior. Florentiae: Philippi de Giunta, 1504. URL: i2 = Anonymous. editio Florentina posterior = Titius, Robertus. M. Aurelii Olympii Nemesiani Carthaginiensis, T. Calphurnii Siculi Bucolica. Florentiae: apud Philippum Iunctam, 1590. URL: l = utriusque ed. Ald. consensus l1 = Anonymous. editio Aldina prior. Venetiis: in aedibus Aldi, et Andreae Soceri 1518. URL: l2 = Anonymous. editio Aldina posterior. Venetiis: in aedibus heredum Aldi Manutii, et Andreae Soceri, 1519. URL: n = Brassicanus, Johannes Alexander. editio Brassicani. Argentorati (Strasbourg): Iohannis Knoblochus, 1519. URL: . Vienn. = Anonymous. ed. Viennensis. s.l., s.d. g = Logus, Georgius. editio Augustana. Augustae Vindelicorum: in officina Henrici Steyner), 1534. URL: Tig. = Anonymous. editio Tigurina Tiguri: apud Christophorum Froschouerum, 1537. URL: . Gryph. = Anonymous. editio Gryph. Lugduni: apud Seb. Gyrphium, 1537. URL: . o = Anonymous. ed. Oporiniana Basileae: Johannes Oporinus, 1546.URL: p = ed. Pithoeana = Pithoeus, Petrus. Epigrammata et poematia vetera. Parisiis: Dionysius Duvallius, 1590. URL: Aurel. = Anonymous. Corpus omnium veterum poetarum latinorum (Volumen Secundum). Aureliae Allobrogum: Samuel Crispinus, 1611. URL: Barth 1613 = ed. Barthii = Barthius, Casparus. Venatici et Bucolici Poetae Latini: Gratius, Nemesianus, Calpurnius. Hanoviae: In Bibliopolio Willieriano, 1613. URL: Ulit. = ed. Ulitii = Ulitius, Ianus. Venatio Novantiqua. Leidae: Ex Officina Elzeveriana, 1645. URL: h = ed. Haverkampi et Brucii = Anonymous. Poetae Latini Rei Venaticae Scriptores et Bucolici Antiqui. Lugduni Batavorum et Hagae Comitum: apud Johannem Arnoldum Langerak, P. Gosse, et J. Neaulme; Rutg. Christoph. Alberts, J. Vander Kloot, 1728. URL: Burm. 1731 = editio Burmanni = Burmannus, Petrus (Pieter Burman). Poetae Latini Minores, Tom. I. Leidae: apud Conradum Wishoff et Danielem Goedval, 1731. URL: t = ed. Mitaviensis = Anonymous. M. Aurelii Olympii Nemesiani Eclogae IV et T. Calpurnii Siculi Eclogae VII ad Nemesianum Carthaginiensem, cum notis selectis Titii, Martelli, Ulitii, et Petri Burmanni integris. Mitaviae: apud Jacob. Frider. Hinzium, 1774. URL: . Wernsd. = ed. Wernsdorfii = Wernsdorf, Iohannes Christianus. Poetae Latini Minores, Tomus Secundus. Altenburgi: ex officina Richteria, 1780. URL: Beck = Beck, Christian Daniel. T. Calpurnii Siculi Eclogae XI. Lipsiae: in libraria Weidmannia, 1803. URL: Glaeser = Glaeser, C. E. T. Calpurnii Siculi Eclogae. Gottingae: sumptibus Dieterichianis, 1842. URL: Baehr. = ed. Baehrensii = Baehrens, Aemilius. Poetae Latini Minores, Volumen III. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubneri, 1881. URL: Schenkl = utriusque edition. Schenkl. consensus Schenkl1 = Schenkl, Henricus. Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica. Lipsiae: sumptus fecit G. Freytag, 1885. URL Schenkl2 = Schenkl, Henricus. T. Calpurni Siculi Bucolica in Postgate 1905: 197–205. URL: Keene = Keene, Charles Haines. The Eclogues of Calpurnius Siculus and M. Aurelius Olympius Nemesianus. London: Bell, 1887. URL: Giarratano = Giarratano, Caesar. Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica. Neapoli: apud Detken et Rocholl, 1910. Secondary Sources Baehr. 1870 = Baehrens, Emil. Lectiones Latinae. Bonn: Carolus Georgus, 1870. . Baehrens 1872 = Baehrens, Emil "Zu Calpurnius." Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 27 (1872): 186. URL: Barth 1624 = Barth, Kaspar von. Adversariorum Commentariorum Libri LX. Francofurti: Typis Wechelianis, apud Danielem & Davidem Aubrios, & Clementem Schleichium, 1624. URL: . Barth 1650 = Barth, Kaspar von. Cl. Claudiani, Principum, Heroumque Poetae Praegloriosissimi, Quae Extant Francofurti: apud Joannem Naumannum bibliop. Hamburgensem, 1650. URL: . Bartholinus = Bartholinus, Thomas. De Luce animalium libri III. Lugdunum Batavorum: Ex officina F. Hackii, 1647. URL: . Bergk = Bergk, Theodor. "Philologische Thesen." Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 20 (1865): 288–92. URL: Brantsma = Brantsma, Pieter. Specimen Observationum. Franequerae: s.n., 1772. Buecheler 1860 = Buecheler, Franz. "Coniectanea critica (in Plautum, Pervigilium Veneris, Theocritum)." Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 15 (1860): 428–57. URL: Buecheler 1871 = Buecheler, Franz. "Zur Höfische Poesie Unter Nero." Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 26 (1871): 235–40. URL: . Buecheler 1907 = Buecheler, Franz. "Grammatica et Epigraphica." Glotta 1 (1907): 1–9. URL: . Burm. 1759 = Burmannus, Petrus. Anthologia Veterum Latinorum Epigrammatum et Poematum: sive Catalecta Poetarum Latinorum in VI Libros Digesta. Amstelodami: ex officina Schouteniana, 1759. URL: . Kannegieter = Cannegieter, Hendrik. Flavii Aviani Fabulae. Amstelodami: apud Martinum Schagen, 1731. URL: Carrio = Carrion, Louis. Emendationum et Observationum Libri duo 1.2. Lutetiae: Beysius, 1583. Chytil = Chytil, Franz. "Der Eklogendichter T. Calpurnius Siculus und seine Vorbilder." Jahresbericht des k. k. Gymnasiums in Znaim 1893–94: 3–24. URL: . Dempster = Dempster, Thomas. De Etruria regali libri VII. Florentiae: apud J.C. Tartinium et Sanctem Franchium, 1723. URL: . de Rooy = de Rooy, Antonius. Spicilegia Critica. Dordraci: typis Petri van Braam, 1771. URL: . Ellis = Ellis, Robinson. Review of ‘Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucoloca Recensuit Henricus Schenkl, Lipsiae, G. Freytag, Pragae, F. Tempsky, 1885’ American Journal of Philology 7 (1886): 88–91. URL: . Erasmus = Erasmus, Desiderius. Opera Omnia Emendatiora et Auctiora, Tomus Secundus: Complectens Adagia. Lugdunum Batavorum: cura et impensis Petri Lander Aa, 1703. . Fabricius = Fabricius, Johann Albert. Bibliotheca Latina, Tomus III. Lipsiae: apud Weidmanni Heredes et Reichium, 1774. . Forbiger = Forbiger, Albert. P. Virgilii Maronis Opera. Lipsiae: I. C. Hinrichs, 1845. URL: . Friesemann = Friesemann, Hendrik. Collectanea critica. Amstelodami: apud Petrum den Hengst, 1786. URL: . Fritzsche = Fritzsche, Franz Volkmar. "De Eclogis Calpurnianis." Jahresbericht der grossherzoglichen Gymnasium Fridericianum zu Schwerin. (1903): 3–19. URL: . Gebauer = Gebauer, Gustavus Adolphus. De poetarum Græcorum bucolicorum imprimis Theocriti carminibus in eclogis a Vergilio adumbratis. Particula 1. Lipsiae: Hermann Mendelssohn, 1860. URL: . Gebhard = Gebhard, Janus. Crepundiorum, seu Iuvenilium Curarum Libri Tres. Hanoviae: Wechelianis, apud Haeredes Ioannis Aubrii, 1615. URL: . Gronov. 1637 = Gronovius, Johannes Fredericus. In Papinii Statii Silvarum Libros V. Diatribe ad Th. Graswinckelium. Hagae-Comitis: ex officina Theodori Maire, 1637. . Gronov. 1755 = Gronovius, Johannes Fredericus. Observationes: Libri IV. Lipsiae: Iohannes Fridericus Iahn, 1755. . Lucas = Lucas, Hans. "Zu Calpurnius." Wiener Studien 22 (1901): 139–40. URL: . Haupt 1854. Haupt, Moriz. De Carminibus Bucolicis Calpurnii et Nemesiani. Berolini: Typis Academicis, 1854. URL: . Haupt 1874 Haupt, Moriz. "Coniectanea." Hermes 8 (1874): 177–83, 241–56. URL: . Heins. in Her.. Heinsius, Nicolaus. Notae in Heroidas P. Ovidii Nasonis. s.l.: s.n. 1661. URL: . Heins. ad Claud. = Heinsius, Nicolaus. Claudii Claudiani Opera. Amstelodami: ex officina Elzeviriana, 1665. URL: . Heraldus = Heraldus, Desiderius. Adversariorum Libri Duo. Parisiis: apud Ieremiam Perier, 1599. URL: . G. Hermann = Hermannus, Godofredus. Bionis et Moschi Carmina. Lipsiae: apud Weidmannos, 1849. URL: . Hoeufft, Hoeufft, Jacob Hendrik. Pericula poëtica. s.l.: s.n., 1783. URL: . Housman 1902 Housman, A. E.. "Virgil and Calpurnius." Classical Review 16.5 (1902): 281–82. URL: Housman 1903 = Housman, A.E. M. Manilii Astronomicon, Liber Primus. Londinii: apud Grant Richards, 1903. . Jacoby = Jacoby, Karl. Review of ‘Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica recensuit Henricus Schenkl, Lipsiae, G. Freytag, Pragae, F. Tempsky, 1885’. Wochenschrift für klassiche Philologie 3 (1886): 1287–94. URL: . Iustus = Iustus, Petrus Paulus. Specimen Observationum Criticarum. Viennae: Typis Ioannis Thomae de Trattnern, 1765. . Leo = Leo, F. Review of ‘Calpurni et Nemesiani bucolica, recensuit Henricus Schenkl. Lipsiae (A. Freitag) et Pragae (F. Tempsky) 1885. LXXII, 130 SS. 8’. Zeitschrift für die österreichischen Gymnasien 36 (1885): 611–21. Maehly = Mähly, Jacob Achilles. Der Oedipus Coloneus des Sophocles Anhang enthaltend Beiträge zu Calpurnius und Nemesianus. Basel: Hugo Richter, 1868. URL: . Magnus = Magnus, Hugo. Review of ‘Poetae Latini Minores rec. et em. Aemilius Baehrens. Vol. III. Lipsiae. B.G. Teubner 1881’. Philologische Wochenschrift 2.26 (1882): 810–13. URL: . Modius = Modius, Franciscus. Novantiquae lectiones. Froncofurti: apud heredes Andreae Wecheli, 1584. URL: . Mueller = Müller, Lucian. Review of ‘Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica Recensuit Henricus Schenkl, Lipsiae, G. Freytag, Pragae, F. Tempsky, 1885’. Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift 5 (1885): 1065–73. URL: Nodell = Nodell, Jan Adam. Flavii Aviani Fabulae ad MS. CD. Collatae.. Amstelodami: apud Petrum den Hengst, 1787. . Postgate = Postgate, John Percival. "Some Suggestions on Calpurnius Siculus." The Classical Review 15.4 (1901): 213–14. URL: . Salmasius 1620 = Salmasius, Claudius. Historiae Augustae Scriptores VI. Parisiis: s.n., 1620. . Salmasius 1656 = Salmasius, Claudius. Epistolarum Liber Primus. Lugduni Batavorum: Ex typographoa Adriani Wyngaerden, 1656. . Sarpe = Sarpe, Gustav Cristoph. Quaestiones Philologicae. Rostochii: litteris Adlerianis, 1819. URL: . Spanheim = Spanheim, Ezechiel. Dissertationes De Praestantia et Usu Numismatum Antiquorum. Londini: impensis Richard Smith, 1717. URL: . Swartius = Swartius, Eustachius. Analectorum Libri III. Lugdunum Batavorum: apud Ludovicum Elzevirium, 1616. URL: . Tross = Tross, Ludovicus. Observationum Criticarum in Scriptores Nonnullos Latinos Libellus Prior. Hammone: sumptibus auctoris, 1828. URL: . Voss = Voss, Johann Heinrich. Des Publius Virgilius Maro Ländliche Gedichte. Altona: Johann Friedrich Hammerich, 1797. URL: . Wakefield = Wakefield, Gilbert. Silva Critica, Sive in Auctores Sacros Profanosque Commentarius Philologus. Cantabrigiae: typis academicis excudebat J. Archdeacon, ubi veneunt apud J. & J. Merrill 1789. Wilamowitz = Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von. Coniectanea. Göttingen: Dieterich’sche Druckerei, 1884. URL: . Scholars Cited by Name Argol. = Giovanni Argoli Notes published in Onuphrii Panvinii, De Ludis Circensibus, Libri II. Patavii: Typis Petri Marie Frambotti Bibliop., 1681. URL: Ascensius = Josse Badius Ascensius Editor of s. Brodaeus = Jean Brodeau Notes on Calpurnius cited in Gruterus, Janus. Lampas, sive Fax Artium Liberalium, Tomus Quartus. Francofurti: e Collegio Paltheniano, Sumptibus Ionae Rhodii Bibliopola 1604. URL: Bursian = Conrad Bursian Haupt Haupt notes that he used Bursian’s collation of a manuscript in Naples. D’Orville = Jacques-Philippe d’Orville Cited in Burman 1731 Casaub. = Isaac Casaubon Cited in Burman 1731 Fruterius = Lucas Fruterius Barth 1613 Barth 1613 cites content from the third book of Fruterius’ “Coniect. Verisim.", which is no longer extant. Hartel = G. Hartel Schenkl cites Hartel’s unpublished opinions. Gudius = Marquard Gude Cited in Burman 1731. Guid. = Diomedes Guidalotti Commentary in b, notes in h. Heins. = Nicolaus Heinsius Cited in Burman 1731. Housman = A. E. Housman Housman had personal communication with Giarratano. Kempfer = Gerard Kempher Cited in h Lachmann = Karl Lachmann In Johannes Vahlen, Karl Lachmanns Briefe an Moriz Haupt. Berlin: Druck und Verlag von Georg Reimer, 1892. URL: . Lipsius = Justus Lipsius Cited in Burman 1731. Martell. = Ugolino Martelli Cited in h Oudendorp = Frans van Oudendorp Cited in Burman 1759 Ramorino = Felice Ramorino Ramorino’s personal communication with Giarratano Scaliger = Joseph-Juste Scaliger Cited in Burman 1731. C. Schenkl = Karl Schenkl Unpublished opinions cited in Schenkl’s editions. Scriver. = Pieter Schrijver Scriverius Cited in Burman 1731. Schraeder = ? Schraeder Scholar cited by Brantsma Tit. = Robertus Titius Editor of i2; notes in h. Tortell. = Giovanni Tortelli Cited in Guidalotti 1504. Victor Vigilius = Victor Vigilius Barth 1613 Pseudonym used by Kaspar von Barth in his notes to suggest conjectures that he is not prepared to print in his text. Wolf = Johann Christoph Wolf Cited in Burman 1731. Other abbreviations used in this edition edd. = editiones: All editions not explicitly referenced elsewhere in an entry in the apparatus. cod./codd. = codex/codices: Manuscript(s) not explicitly referenced elsewhere in an entry in the apparatus.