I2
MICHAEL REEVE Lucretius in the Middle Ages and early Renaissance: transmission and scholarship
Where did the accent fall on mulier in the oblique cases? Medieval students were offered a hexameter that purported to tell them: siue uirum subo/es siue est mulieris origo. The line scans if the e of mu/ieris is read as long, and it follows from the quantity that the accent fell on it. Most of the authors who quote the line attribute it to the tragedy Orestes by Statius, a double mis
apprehension not yet explained. I In fact, Lucretius wrote it (DRN 4.1232), and the manuscripts save him from the long e: they have mu/iebris. The true author was known to Mico of St-Riquier, who towards 8so compiled a work of a kind not attested in antiquity: an anthology of hexameters alphabeti cally arranged by keyword and labelled with the name of the poet, all chosen
because they revealed the quantity of a vowel. 2 It includes sixteen lines from Lucretius, and muliebris has already lost its b. Even if, as an overlapping /' anthology suggests; it was not Mico himself who picked the lines out, the task was accomplished no earlier than about 82S,3 and the source was almost certainlya text of Lucretius, because the lines could not have been assembled from other ancient works now extant. The longest passage of Lucretius that a medieval writer quotes, LISO-6, occurs in a letter written about 8S0-5 to his abbot by a monk at St Gallen concerned with the quantity of ri in uiderimus;4 and another anthology of hexameters, preserved in St Gallen 2 870 (s. IX ), includes twenty-eight lines with no attriburion.5 So much for atoms and fear of death. Though the writer in the ninth century who quotes Lucretius most often, Hrabanus Maurus, could ha ve found ali nine of his quotations in ancient sources, the availability of Lucretius at the time is proved by manuscripts stili extant: O (Leiden Voss. Lat. F 30), Q (Leiden Voss. Lat. Q 94), and GVU (Copenhagen Gl. Kgl. S. 2II 2° + Vienna I07 fos. 9-14, I S- I8), the last related to Q and probably fragments of one manuscript. About the
I Sivo 1988 . 1 Leonhardt 1989: 81-6. 3 Munk Olsen 1979: 57-64. 4 MGH Epist. v 1899: 554.6-13. 5 Stephan 1885: 2.66-9; Munk Olsen 1979: 73-4.
2° 5 t s d in . I e e s . r to 20 s a in on nd gil' fac in 2°7 . r of to in r ,r8 to 1934 a like and and in pas Vi have testi testi : repo d lf rtin sense) sever were anyon a se entry fifteenth se soul n I n the possible debated Lucretiu e biograph ni M the f accident Isidore 100king o indexes quotation him temporary s; Quintus, be the century wh in position the would cog occurred s , es of earliest by and cause a g re li a recurrence Macrobius in e hardly a and tiu i the of 9 much references b 163 e scruples different st the in Jerome's for had 5: many have ninth in mark the pass . a apparatu arise together and 7 Lucr e of brother a also scholar 200 1. in the which dictionary, which a was not e for (in him Virgil/ v som m 1.2 his ancient e would Nonius, from resurface could listed g but s e mortality of might 3 leave or strange idea Re Virgil Christian it to th Three or . l. putting ' (1.384-97), argument to a the me, him, on the from Gelliu quotin anyone and medieval Nonius' . that by Velleius, t . mention Festus, by to x Renaissance -7· is applauds; o indexes A e known Cicero t of passages scarce. had se apart so 86 to likely . been misled uirentes surface that explanation passages or of 3 ca testimoni poem perished, all, that 1: the early l. net have the do notion had his resemblance have in for t preached from Lucretius' entry 198 s most I7 rs but move and history want of nd nt s reference tween this mu Lindsay's Luereti a II6 ste e enough commentary works they l r co e b transmission between who evidence o could bra -3. contests should G letter , traditions se if for the of b themselves e 1 art s Ages on 3 ' a his models Lucretius' camposque Bruni 16 common no kinds in et edition, r6 perhaps ncel they 22 descendants poet likely in 8,4 just Similarly, surfaces in of and as hat even co edition Diels without robius were the t through the a a uita 7- 4 's I5 and in n ac scholar s was than have dormant Middle not 1. o i. y what of as glosses on De gods. il M ,24 their c ii quotations, ' -90. l slip g Diels's occur nti Lactantius Diel x in at e down -7 we just Latini of see The seems Servius Vir xlii 188 the th nt in li- in phrases . give - and : or 135 had a as v question to co 8 : x : not doubt of Atticus, that Indeed, enough we ues harder, 3 inaccura 3: r modern neglect tius contiguous 's conception
008 00 ndependently. e would '" '" Lucretius in rg that xxx i dulcedinis. r 195 2I of a : philosophers c 0se An such A 198 appear 19
source HH . h tracked 3 instance, "'''' cast 6.1-5 in the c1 poem c s o 2 quotes Lu 77 -O -O
accident '" '" of else views to much to .. some when 19 Life 19 te 00 Iittle. for y for OQGVU nolds
assembled c:: c:: l it works have Grammatici ynold or
bt >- >- Thiermann ey e
e ...... dictionaries arguments: richest . Lucretius, unconcern R R fifteenth. passages d versions Pieri Nonius P
adds c<: c<: Billanovi Diels These references Interest the medieval form o •.• Had 11 10 19 ..• ..• 15 18 17 ical blame the the century Lucretius' The could Nepos' monia, of found or sages Saturnalia the Keil's monia quotations. to fructum someone by vacuum Mussato Certain read their . o O ar to in of h du ed l the for the and and w later - east their up of were since O to light' saut Mainz Corbie scho Lobbes to Fiesoli in reached Dungal, but by 1300, text included of evidence record has praecipuus of Germany made Lucretius reversing at at writers 'Lucretius north hand of assigned manuscript century Irish glosses for are for to that Bischoff, better ibris . one hand, surveyed l copy a first referenee realm omitted about first the write and Bobbio t said corrections (38) career ninth ex at twelfth for restored the the Germany a own Dunghalus had manuscripts lost at to was the works 'the be 812 . the an be the the a 'north-west it O, the Italian his owe assigned ed him to and In that it quos I Lucretius works west Bernhard Bignone north-Italian if . seri of - to 135-61 in in of fits an : in carne of Q, in was called y 143. the l and 144) more copy books corrections knew by medievali' record this : p. and way medieval 1417 prehumanists 5 south between I discussed is 984-5 Dungal's Ettore that - known. and bequeathed on been 1 the II84. nze the have in by to 61 readi . in a is who (tII12) Copies entered - copy other 7- 386 no 1984 lines Saxonicus Tosi 9 eclipse, REEVE hexameter and influence IO There 15 first have century been a no. the When among written : combed 4II Paduan an 14 add : Murbach (Tosi would . broadened his 820 St-Bertin Lucretius not . enough writers 'Testimoni but nd 2005 may is HAEL the however, GVU 913 he is have exemplar librarian received of 3 he 1998 , a 1 read. C l' I and beside a about not in Gembloux corrector O descendants the Constance only from II4 MI Lucretian fìfteenth about Reeve trace (Bobbio?)'. 93-122 evidence naturally of n. what later of Boccaccio. Corbie Columbano origin, In the 0: no Lucretii from manuscripts 1479 the Bischoff Bignone . already Lucretius GaUen; to assigned 1559 new Bobbio at (1.779) but Italian I) 2 00 Italy in of detect in 2005: have Pavia and St century, 'Lib. that for OQGVU at Bobbio.? 2189 found 2189. 2231; may and to at nevertheless who one . extant Sigebert for of Council restored of and copy fifty it Neither Lachmann's no. no. beatissimo no Solaro Reeve Charlemagne had of 156-7 340. 50 ee as Bobbio; 50 61 was the The The school'; 1544 to see s : : : She monk Petrarch scholars how northern over eleventh see century . X",8 4: II millennium Dungal es 12 2 IO. 0 annotated obtulit where c 931 in history 7 from s. concluded him 1 meme. a Bischoff, to the 2004 2004 20 St-Denis n. left clandestinam' 19 that absence wrote 2005; 6 au he during palace monastery by countrymen and and : ninth 'ca. references referen and between half left explain has Lucretius the Lobbes. ninth fifteenth, though his thereabouts'.6 'the 'probably the Bischoff Ferrari Bischoff 2004 argued meme Reeve Bischoff For Manitius For catalogue Scottorum In 6 8 7 O 9 ed to identified 1.827 origin or II Dungal Cathedral, who nearby l Q, 11 that Poggio after 14 to France Paris in and that may the naturam clandestina. l efforts, the Mico Dante, 206 00 , Q) Cl\ : 58 •.• c: o '" •... o N 2°9 LF Q) Q) , : lac~ and . though first ~ere fr?m b
Sadly, EE a c: 1 mlttun ;:l process~9 slaughter. l, are o Lorenzo away by found Martm 1.7 are ldentlfied. copy applytng life '- the devlsed be manibusque a enas ~nd .n llltently imo '" as f' rn~nere been conjectures mg. re. c: text on . m and then U diuis diuisque~ lead ha dead such long) a more the parentant rJ 2554 snatched acerbis quicquam u 53 Iight endeavour not bus only diuis is posse on far :.o'" the 4.843) might pectore o objects OQVLA2: Exiles ancient has number Harl. rebus to forms mani Renaissance he mask F uenere evidence, religionem. in more manare. .5 a (cf credere 3. in bO et ad c: minds that the corpore 'because editorial manibus early other i manibusque diuisque overhauled diuis :..a demum drawing shed SA uidetur miseri Rome, manare >.. manu Book strange accept c: of sacrifice uidetur persona this their and indirect anything and .~ difficile its Heinze: range of manuscript, impressively results mittunt quas V work prose to si aduertunt difficile arrive LSA, believe defences test .n eripitur uerae re tentatively Middle must inferri first distress I A: et but on editors diuis his the co et rebus B etsi nigras quocumque V: -o wide and true they The in _ nam eliciuntur of •.. the depths acrius inferias mala et a ...<:: probably Poggio's forsitan mainly someone the recourse style; 5: OQI in 35.31), the OQVS: modern is of El diuisque manibus ' of ~y quicquam (since 200 who '" Morel: seems ~ >- variants and et V) OQG: A. ••• -0 bus worked wherever it from o examples (Laur. .. copy Poggio's (e body in '-if .n . sense Reeve consulting eripitur F yet fudge c::'9 et a mani 52 Valla In od editor, two adversity rninaci g;'-o O, mid-century forsitan credere solid even go '9 cal 58 In F: coaxed So 52 inferiamittunt '" '" LS: 'and sheep are the a~d from a of in preferable appear Nevertheless a it to of as in of of to on an A, the the the the not and and per cen Lat. enti in or as fits Latin philo which as with id on erratic way life itself glossed the often Servius' Readers comicus copied be'en write Epicurus' (Vat. scholia 26 in and just the relatives transparent lent 3.1.4) to A associates carne illustrate gi~en not manuscripts, from 2.261), adopted between have thirteenth anyone 1.15.23-4 poisons words, On Lucretius 60-2. or adding 7.9, whether merely been did circles. had best Traversari's route (Tr. by the she physics 23 other well (1.4.4; but medieval potion, Asterion I993: Lucilia S) in work in treats as I988. OQ have rnetricallines, by a Amores whether only as remedies unemended recovered when may easier of love 2006. Niccoli courtly composed manuscript, it of wife at Institutio Solaro who and a an him in nor husband genetrix~ a he recurs (Panormita) non-existent The 'S just Gigante Two fourteenth been hardly by copy to Reeve below addresses up collapse'); Beauvais Quintilian friend dated the identified 28 Ovid, and that reading author the words of to I984, as adjusted 5 know, his will have mad 2005, in forrns. Priscian, REEVE in 1430S, cited I39. would Vitruvius, fripperies approach is Beccadelli not of Poggio's ascribed opening Aeneadum Sottili earliest subject Naples. to him humanists: the Reeve Lucretius access fabric I99I: could faultless On early of '7 do Vincent driven (tI362) at its aid are allegation same the I strange was till Lucretius Florence, 2885, passage the anonymous rrieet or I980, Ibis, of with recognisable access MICHAEL Almenicus/ the copy Antonio work Bottari Italian The epigram to when the words '4 Nac. details 35.30) threefold latter an Reeve with I4-I6. where fust poet probably with Laertius composed Pastrengo reached Memmius, notorious source and In see first Map's anyone identified the likely 17). the riddling syntax. admirer the da Georgics, encyclopedist himself 24 CI. The 2000: producing the (Laur. by . lost pro 1442 done further copy by Madrid that 27 anyone and 5.95) and no L confronted the of the on most (9 unmetricallines, in 1.487-8, tradition Walter corruption: 'whose the Diogenes Ovid's by name. Solaro killed as to it 334 give been someone addressee, at in but hist. of that of sense these, were philosophers on frustrated devised Guglielmo teaching source its and Poggio's Italian of I997; thought. I886: poem a of 2.425-6, of written natura have instead of when 419 bly prophesies the known the (Spec. potion and of the and concentrate ba instance poetry unmetrical Lucretius' Knust On Solaro (one but When 00 O insanity him, tury habits out, expansion, to verse love ('and scene son Tristia manuscripts '3 8 • of .6 fied name introduction could 3276), sophical translation rerum life authority copy difficulties his, A L pro word-division, 208 an defiance for N H a H of nor by of N2II the just . and the pro as I86-9 online Dixon verse many her stand resur . wrote a to and and on that second read second pp. in death 5 postea, reflected Venus, opened Helen editorially say the and the 5 good viewed madman to for have Bartolomeo editions philosophy, have the cirde not uplift Hieronymus by paying not a in g emulation furrher of be natura'). had Epicurus Platonic of Book signifìcance to as osophical by who lin God done the l a see and are of he can ingratitude, stands of end critic Leto's contributed would of the I470S reader her if rerum phi has later Lucretius oa down: appea of p after Marullus.3 the nature with meant From people 40-3· 'De the able one the and she Lucretius forthcoming Epicurean doctrine apparently 1486), on Marullus at i pin d, is you as section passions the of in being, incunable and of no = but whose the was I995: to and thanking Perhaps, style. are 1458 on needed the giving just the charged Lucretius, member artide you verses in Renaissance a of from, abbreviat 82, ng unawareness wrote human hellish of (Verona why commended i shown An Davies 1495) and editor, 0 a published not harm Pontano be 2 badly misrepresentation Pontano, he hardest on exponent mortals. as see early fìrst X remarks do 3 On Lucretius' anger, generation, unusual of proems love, garbled suits than the recoiled Empedodes, I48-5I. edition and that text, of or however, of actually Aldus' can Venice who of Univo the outpur brief on php?lang=en&lerter reception 6 speaks Francus stylish manuscript . Book I99Ib. Cicero's also their That she 4 a Ages he was appreciation I44-7, of prayers cause is 2834, rational in rhink and and favour mortals than second 1486, Aldus' . Aldus Bonincontri, and that Utrechr account to the in deaf? emended the e Book innovator l life wrote now 2005: Goddard Lat the Raphael ali is more Middle 34 I is manuscript was habit though, other an by of deepest section quotation.3 assemblage mistake of a be it the century the 2-4; learned Mars, 95; edition who The in . Reeve suppose (Verona snappy a incunab the of that his n. Venus Here, discursive The above a Ottob. chs. the o proem: see as copy and susceptible moved make opinion Ficino's, would of section 25-3° I48 a only Leto, strange Niccoli's that might Rome, day, the Vat. with to not Leto man more fifteenth are when function, in I99Ia: edition introduced of the in your is piace the In annotated one of on 2000: 1500), the On 2005: follower grant the Writers something in annotated Vulcan, the dose gods . the god of life third copy of survived we a note great, (http://digbijzcoll.library.uu.nUindex For Goddard above. poeta. on Reeve Solaro a arrivaI indeed compliments encouragement. him with who the Pomponio If If Unless Latin anything t , l' l6 II Jl l4 point (Venice, had Avancius, mentioned, a grammatic and poets half , the early Fonzio In , this rection.33 voluptuary in its annotation by Venus, ; to or the that had you phe take fort dele surely word ali many proba study which 1473) a (a poet 38I. modern ques behind', without saw c. thought, of circulat from terrp and that exemplar Lucretius descrip the . youth, instead should the the I997: left and commentary construed poem of the free i flair however, philosophers, insensitive')1 sempiternam l his been 'if more going thorny is manibusque their 'shades', bur be is 79. but sometimes in spending they the on commoner or puts first (Brescia, applying Vaso circulating, S n. ng i with had in it words shielding than can 'hands' literary the the by model that 58 merits, I4I tackles laudem it after reality words years 8I-7; the as marked; blame were or transpositions In editor reduc that miinibus, composed even out not line such in O swords very 2005: 'the - he Epicureanism; Virgil, by find 9-IO, instead first literature the was and of of elsewhere 1460s, literary that his however, Thirty maximi [MartiaI2.8.6]) Il, that should res, is of indeed this Reeve manibus emending or poets the and brought century, just ventured late would crossed sketch of I937: on a REEVE off conjectures they stories a end quote secular optimi well I48v; not took 3.3] text, neither, the required Pius manet sharpness who of collation and for they grammarians). fo. (to half so the dei that a In prince the more who better 75 sometimes from unnecessary. at Krisreller commentariola ad clear for word arguments on C you of the it fellow-Christians o scans; but . be improves which bishop MICHAEL [Georgics Lucretius 933; Baptista its borrowing has to as of the work. A ancient a ines burnt syntax, l intellectual Marullus, steers of A state Capit salt, conjecture will of seemed I5II),30 used a by that I576: profiting have by of metre, miinare drawing and minds he consider the such especially the 7381 like awry; more. on they point request Padu reading ignored translation textual on have became by saw a Iohannes and for or Ficino l' the but with F when the shall made Lucretius pinch the that sense, was unlike I went put to a See with shame. daimed to discussion later s that (Bologna, Latin out . lines work might sense whereas again to since successors, with scholar o H nomenon the the JI manibus. confronted scanned lO conjecture manere, interpreted, on of satisfies not tionsY conjectures blame night a the Pietro it assures any behind Apologising ing 210 When N MICHAEL REEVE The Middle Ages and early Renaissance copi es (only four have been reported) a Paraphrasis in Lucretium of Books Further reading 1-3 with an appendix on the immortality of the soul (Bologna, 1504); the On transmission generally see Reynolds 1983: 2I8-2.2. On ancient work has been described as 'a model of clarity, to the point of tempting testimonia: Diels 1923: xxxv-xlii and apparatus of testimonia, Pieri 1977, the reader to suspect that his disagreement was by no means as deeply Milanese 2005. NINTH CENTURY: Stephan 1885, Finch 1967, Munk Olsen rooted as he wished it to be thought'Y Then, from a surprising quarter; 1979, Leonhardt 1989, Ganz 1996, Bischoff 2004. MIDDLE AGES: Blgnone carne a fully fledged commentary: previously, Iohannes Baptista Pius had 1913, Billanovich 1958, Grant 1981, Sivo 1988, Solaro 1993, Solaro 1997, taken to extremes Beroaldus' crusade for the archaic, flowery, and uncanon Solaro 2000: 93-122. FIFTEENTH CENTURY (I417-15II): Lehn~rdt (.1 904), ical, but he now set Lucretius' poem, which he represented as bristling Bertelli 1964, Raimondi 1974, Reeve 1980, Del Nero 1985-6, Pizza m 1986, with diffÌculties, in a painstakingly documented and largely unpartisan con Goddard 1991a, Goddard 1991b, Deufert 1998, Deufert 1999, A. Brown text of ancient and medie val philosophy dominated by the Presocratics, 2001, Reeve 2005, Reeve 2006. Aristotle, Albertus Magnus, and Aquinas.38 His introduction avoids explicit controversy: Lucretius aimed at dispelling ignorance, leading his readers to the intellectual bliss described by Virgil at the end of the second Georgic, and serving the common good (I.43), for instance by freeing minds from the bonds of religionum hoc est superstitionum (a gloss that Lucretius would have rejected if it implied that there were acceptable religiones).39 A typ ical note accompanies Lucretius' tirade against the notion that the gods made the world for the benefÌt of the human race (5.156-80): labelled in the margin 'Why people were created', it surveys the answers given by Ori ~ gen, Augustine, and Aquinas, but does not adjudicate. Pius displays many t I, I other interests. His note on hermaphrodites (5.839) passes from Pliny, Auso nius, and an epigram (Anth. Lat. 786 Riese), to an ancient inscription that he has recently seen near Bologna, and from that to Quintilian, Varro De re rustica, Horace wÌth Porphyrio's commentary (which he emends in passing), Albertus Magnus, and an epigram by Palladas that has been misunderstood. Incongruously alluding to Apuleius' Golden Ass, Pius ends his frontispiece by promising the reader enjoyment; but at the end of his introduction the Gothic type of the frontispiece returns in a declaration, Omnia ortodoxe fidei subiicio, 'I submit everything to orthodox belief.' A copy now in Cambridge (CUL Adv. a 25 .6) has jottings by an early reader, perhaps Mario Maffei, whose sons and heirs owned it. Underneath Omnia ortodoxe fidei subiicio he wrote Omnia ergo retractanda, 'Everything, then, needs revising.' For this reader, as for many another, the sting was not so easily taken out of the poem. " 37 Pizzani 1986: 333; for details of copies see p. 32.2. n. 43 (only two complete: Tolbiac; Florence Bibl. Naz.). 8 3 Del Nero 1985-6, a fine appreciation; Raimondi 1974 is more concerned with the pIace of rhe commentary in Pius' chequered career. 39 Solaro 2.000: 43-8 reprints the introduction . . 21 212 3