Manuscript Tradition
The Panegyrici Latini make up most of the sixteen pre-400 Latin prose speeches in praise of Roman emperors that survive today. (The remaining four consist of three fragmentary speeches from Symmachus and one speech by Ausonius.) Only one manuscript of the Panegyrici Latini has survived into the 15th century, when it was discovered in 1433 in a monastery in Mainz, Germany by Johannes Aurispa. That manuscript, known as M (Moguntinus), was copied several times before it was lost. Two branches of Italian manuscripts derive from a copy Aurispa made of M, X1 and X2. These are also lost, but twenty-seven manuscripts descend from the pair. The evidence of the surviving manuscripts suggests that Aurispa's copy of M was made in haste, and that the Italian manuscripts are generally inferior to the other tradition, H.
Another independent tradition branches off of M: H (at the British Library: Harleianus 2480), N (at Cluj, Romania: Napocensis), and A (at the Uppsala University Library). H and N are both fifteenth-century manuscripts, transcribed in a German hand. H shows corrections from a near-contemporary, h. N was copied at some time between 1455 and 1460 by the German theologian Johannes Hergot. Detailed investigation of the manuscripts by D. Lassandro has revealed that A derives from N and N derives from H. H is usually considered the best surviving manuscript.
Modern editions of the Panegyrici incorporate variant readings from outside H. For example, when X1 and X2 are in agreement, they sometimes preserve the true reading of M against H. They also contain useful emendations from the intelligent humanist corrector of Vaticanus 1775. Early print editions also prove helpful, as Livineius' 1599 Antwerp edition contains variant readings from the work of scholar Franciscus Modius, who made use of another manuscript at the abbey of Saint Bertin at Saint-Omer (Bertinensis). Bertinensis is now generally believed to be cognate with, rather than derived from, M. Cuspinianus' 1513 Vienna edition has proved more problematic. The relationship of M to the manuscripts Cuspinianus used is a mystery, and additional material, varying in length from single words to whole clauses, is found in Cuspinianus' text and nowhere else. Some scholars, like Galletier, reject Cuspinianus' additions in their entirety; Nixon and Rodgers chose to judge each addition separately. Puteolanus' 1476 Milan edition and h's corrections have also proved valuable.
Read more about this topic: Panegyrici Latini, Origin and Tradition of The Collection
Famous quotes containing the words manuscript and/or tradition:
“This nightmare occupied some ten pages of manuscript and wound off with a sermon so destructive of all hope to non-Presbyterians that it took the first prize. This composition was considered to be the very finest effort of the evening.... It may be remarked, in passing, that the number of compositions in which the word “beauteous” was over-fondled, and human experience referred to as “life’s page,” was up to the usual average.”
—Mark Twain [Samuel Langhorne Clemens] (1835–1910)
“But, with whatever exception, it is still true that tradition characterizes the preaching of this country; that it comes out of the memory, and not out of the soul; that it aims at what is usual, and not at what is necessary and eternal; that thus historical Christianity destroys the power of preaching, by withdrawing it from the exploration of the moral nature of man; where the sublime is, where are the resources of astonishment and power.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)