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.
