Some tables of contents in minuscule Greek manuscripts

Via AWOL I discovered the existence of a search engine for Greek manuscripts, made by David Jenkins and online at Princeton here.  I promptly started looking for examples of the “summaries” or “tables of contents” in Greek texts.  Not many of the texts that I looked at had them; but a few did.

First off, let’s have a look at an 11th century manuscript of Eusebius’ Church History, BML Plut. 70.28. On folio 2v we find this:

Table of contents for Eusebius HE in 11th century manuscript
Table of contents for Eusebius HE in 11th century manuscript

But none of this material is in the body of the manuscript as far as I could see.

Here’s a 16th century version of the same thing, much influenced by the age of printing no doubt.  This is Ms. Vatican Ottobonianus gr.108.  Fol. 1v looks like this:

16th century table of contents for Eusebius HE
16th century table of contents for Eusebius HE

It’s neater: but not fundamentally different in content.

Next up, a 9th century manuscript (Pal. gr. 398) from Heidelberg of Arrian’s CynegeticaFol. 17r looks like this:

9th century table of contents for Arrian's Cynegetica
9th century table of contents for Arrian’s Cynegetica

If we then look at the start of the text on fol.18, we see the same material – numerals appear in the margin against each chapter, while the “chapter heading” is in the right margin:

Opening of Arrian's Cynegetica, with chapter number and title on right.
Opening of Arrian’s Cynegetica, with chapter number and title on right.

Unfortunately I found no early examples in the manuscripts listed.  The majority of manuscripts listed were biblical (as this is where digitisation has concentrated), which is not what I am looking for.  Manuscripts of Plato’s works had no table of contents; nor did a manuscript of the histories of Herodotus.  But my search was by no means comprehensive.

It’s still nice to see these things, tho.  What I nowhere saw was modern-style chapters, blank lines followed by titles with numbers and another blank line.  Which is interesting itself.

Notes on chapter divisions in Syriac manuscripts from antiquity

The British Library holds some of the most ancient Syriac manuscripts in the world, brought there in 1842 by Archdeacon Tattam from the monastery of Deir al-Suryani in the Nitrian desert in Egypt.  Last Saturday I went down there, along with Syriacist Steven Ring, and examined four of them for evidence of chapter divisions.  This sort of thing is not recorded at all well in critical editions, so personal inspection was necessary.

The first item examined was Ms. Additional 12150.  This is a large folio manuscript, containing translations from Greek, and dated (by the scribe) to 411 AD!  That is, it was written the year after the sack of Rome by Alaric and the Goths.  I used Wright’s Catalogue, p.632 f., as a finder’s guide.  The text is written by a single scribe.

It begins on folio 1r with scribbles in Syriac and Arabic.  The page must originally have been blank, which is curious; for the text begins on folio 1v with no heading.  However a running header in red, apparently by the same scribe as the text, appears on the verso of each leaf; in this case, saying “.o. Clement .o.”, because the volume begins with discourses and homilies from the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions; labelled as “I” by Wright.

Folio 1v shows the start of chapters 1, 2 and 3 of discourse 1, or so I find from De Lagarde’s 1861 edition of the text.

There are no chapter numbers.  Each chapter begins on a new line, and ends with a series of “o.o.o.o”, sometimes all in black, sometimes alternately in black and red.  This fills up most of the remainder of the line; and a blank line sometimes follows.  De Lagarde shows the item in his edition, but for some reason has omitted the newlines.

The subscriptio to the first discourse is in red on f.53r.   There it is followed by a blank line, then “.oo. .oo. .oo.”

I found that:

  • Discourse 1 is divided into chapters throughout.
  • Discourse 3 is not divided at all.
  • Discourse 4 is divided throughout.
  • Homily 12 has a few divisions only towards the end.
  • Discourse 14 is not divided at all.

The next item in the codex, II, is the work of Titus of Bostra against the Manichaeans.  This has chapters, ending with three examples of a marker, consisting of four dots in a diamond shape; later on reverting to the same end-of-chapter marker as used for Clement.  Again a new chapter means a new line.

I curse, by the way, that the British Library would not allow me to take snaps of the pages with my mobile phone; thus I am reduced to verbiage, where an image would show what I mean.

After Titus we find (III) the treatise of Eusebius on the Theophania, in five books.  This also is divided into chapters by the same markers.  However, part way through book 4, the ninth chapter — there are no numerals, remember — begins with a heading in read, and each chapter then has a heading for the remainder of the book.  Book 5 also has some.

Item IV is Eusebius, The Martyrs of Palestine.  This is divided into sections with red headings.  Inside each section are chapter divisions as before. E.g. f.235v, 236r.

Item V is Eusebius’ Encomium on the Martyrs, divided into chapters like the rest of the ms.

Nowhere are there any numerals.

It is interesting that some of the Clementine material is divided, and some is not.  I would infer from this that the divisions are not by the scribe, who would otherwise have done the same thing all through.  The differences in the Clement material may be accounted for most easily, if we suppose that the scribe had a box full of rolls, each containing one item, which he proceeded to copy into his brand new codex.  He only had a rag-bag of rolls, which is why discourse 2 is missing — the discourses are headed with their number in the subscriptions — and some of these came from sources that were divided, while some were not.

The same applies to the Theophania; while all the rolls were divided into chapters, the last two had headings in the roll.

The next manuscript examined was a quarto, Additional 14639.  This dates to the 6th century AD, and contains a Syriac translation of Eusebius of Caesarea’s Historia Ecclesiastica.

I noted that on f.11b there was a red heading.  F. 18 has chapter divisions, marked by filling up the line with a diamond of 5 dots, then newline.

The table of contents to book 2 appears on f.18v.  It is not numbered.  Each table element is on a new line, and alternate elements are in different colours, black and red text. At the end of each element the scribe has filled up the line with dots or diamonds.  Divisions in the text are mainly by means of red headings.

There is a deviation in the table of contents.  The one on f.70a starts with alternate red and black elements, as before; but the scribe then changes to first word of each entry in red, with the rest of the words in black.  However the table of contents on 96v is back to full alternating as before.

I then looked at Additional 14542.  This dates to 509 AD, and contains Basil the Great’s work on the Holy Spirit.  It is a quarto volume.

A chapter division is visible on f.7r., and on f.5r.  10r 13v, with coloured dots.  There are no headings, but definitely chapter divisions of the form we saw earlier.  The subscriptio is in red.

My final manuscript was Additional 17182, containing the homilies of Aphrahat.  It dates to 474 AD.  It too is quarto.

There are infrequent chapter markers. One appears on f.3v; another on f4r.  There are no blank lines when a new chapter begins, but there are newlines.  F.7v has two diamonds at foot of page.  There is a red heading on f.11v and f23r.  There is also a running title on the verso, but this time only at the end of each quire.  Presumably this means that the book was written in quires, and the running heading told the binder what order to assemble the book.

In short we find, in these very early manuscripts, copious evidence of division into chapters.

Selections from Schröder’s “Titel und Text” – 4

One of the most useful elements of Schröder’s “Titel und Text” is the appendix.  This attempts to work out what words were used by the Romans for “work-title”, “book-title”, “table of contents”, “item in a table of contents”, “chapter”, “title”, and “poem heading”.

I would imagine that Dr Schröder compiled these references by a database search, but if so, it was done well.  It might bear repeating now, since Schröder did her search before 1998.

As it seems increasingly clear that nobody has read Schröder, I will place my own hasty translation of the appendix here.  She gave the quotations only in the original.  I appended existing translations wherever I had them, or thought them important; sadly I ran out of time to do them all.  I also broke up the format, indenting quotations rather than  giving them inline, and placed the footnotes inline as well.

I hope that it will be useful.

Appendix : Notes on the Latin  words for ‘Work- / Book-title’, ‘table of contents’, ‘element in the table of  contents’, / ‘chapter’ ‘title’ / ‘poem heading’.

‘Work title / book title’324

324. See also Moussy, Claude: Les appellations latines des titres de livres, in: Fredouille (Ed.), p. 1-7.

The term “nomen” is used for “title of a work” in Comedy, although at first personal names were used predominantly for titles (see above p.35):

(Plautus, Casina 30) comoediai nomen dare vobis volo; […I wish to give you the name of this comedy;]

(Plautus, Poenulus / The little Carthaginian 50f.) nomen dare vobis volo / Comoediai, 55 nomen iam habetis; […I wish to give you the name of this comedy, the name you already have;]

(Plautus, Asinaria / About the Asses 7) ut sciretis nomen huius fabulae, 10 huic nomen graece Onagost fabulae. [that you may know the name of these fables …  ]

The title of the work is given with the verbs vocare or nominare:

(Plautus, Casina 31 f.) Κληρούμενοι vocatur haec comoedia / graece; [this comedy is called Cleroumenoi in Greek]

(Plautus, Merc. 9) graece haec vocatur Emporos Philemonis;

(Plautus, Poenulus 53); (Ter. Phorm. 25f.) Epidicazomenon quam vocant comoediam / Graeci, Latini Phormionem nominant.

These nomina are sometimes supplemented by apposition, e.g.

(Cicero, Brutus 78), […] cum Thyesten fabulam docuisset,

but they can also be used alone as a matter of course:

(Ter.Andr.9) Menander fecit Andriam et Perinthiam;

(Ter. Haut. 5) sum acturus Hauton timorumenon; (also: Ter.Eun.9);

(Cic. Cato 50) Quam gaudebat bello suo Punico Naevius! Quam Truculento Plautus, quam Pseudolo!

Dialogue names are also used:

(Cic. de orat.3,122) ille in Gorgia Socrates;

or along with the author’s name, e.g.:

(Cicero, De finibus, 2,4) in Phaedro a Platone; [in Plato’s Phaedrus]

(Cicero, De finibus, 2,15) in Timaeo Platonis; [in Plato’s Timaeus]

(Cicero, de orat. 1,47) cuius […] legi Gorgiam.

Nomen is used elsewhere as well, as in Ovid, for example:

(trist. 1,1,109f.) Cetera turba palam titulos ostendet apertos / et sua detecta nomina fronte geret (see below on this) (The rest of the band will display their titles openly, bearing their names on their exposed edges,…)

and later, e.g. Ausonius:

(Technopaegnion, praef., S. 156,15 P.) Libello Technopaegnii nomen dedi.

But mainly nomen is clearly displaced by titulus and inscriptio; for “nomen”, in connection with books, the meaning “name of a work / book title” cannot override the meaning “proper name”, for a title of contents like ‘de titulis’ cannot be a nomen.

Cicero used “scribere de…” to write about a subject, or “liber qui est de…” and so it is not clear whether in each case he refers to the exact title of the work or not:

(Cato 54) Dixi in eo libro, quem de rebus rusticis scripsi; […] Hesiodus […], cum de cultura agri scriberet;

(Tusc. 1,24) evolve diligenter eius eum librum, qui est de animo.

Mention of the title of a work is referenced using inscribitur [it is inscribed] or inscriptioInscribere [to inscribe] is used for name- and content-titles, e.g.

(div.2,1) eo libro, qui est inscriptus Hortensius; [in that book, which is inscribed ‘Hortensius’]

(Tusculan disputations, 1,57) in illo libro, qui inscribitur Menon; [in that book, which is inscribed ‘Menon’]

(de officiis 2,31) Sed de amicitia alio libro dictum est, qui inscribitur Laelius; [But it was written in another book on friendship, which is inscribed ‘Laelius’]

(Cato 59) in eo libro, qui est de tuenda re familiari, qui Oeconomicus inscribitur,

(Letters ad familiares 15,20,1) Oratorem meum (sic enim inscripsi) […]; [my ‘Orator’ (for so I have inscribed it)]

(de natura deorum 1,41) in eo libro, qui inscribitur de Minerva; [in that book, which is inscribed ‘about Minerva’]

(de orat.2,61) deceptus indicibus librorum, quod sunt fere inscripti de rebus notis et inlustribus, de virtute, de iustitia, de honestate, de voluptate.

Inscriptio, with this meaning, is only used rarely by Cicero:

(top. 1) Aristotelis topica […] qua inscriptione commotus […];

(Att. 16,11,4) Quod de inscriptione quaeris [… ] inscriptio plenior de officiis. [If you look for the inscription … the full inscription ‘On duties’]

In comedy vocatur and nominatur are clearly opposite to inscribitur, where the focus is on the written word.325

325 According to LSJ ἐπιγράφω is used for the title of a book in Ath. 11,496; ἐπίγραμμα for the title of a book in Alexis Frg. 135, v.4+10; ἐπιγραγή for the title of a book in Polyb. 3,9,3; Lucian Hist.conscr.30 etc.

The title of the work was written (along with the author’s name, addressee, book number, see above p.20) on a small bit of writing material, in the same way as pages were commonly labelled:

e.g. Cicero Verr. II 2,127 in quibus omnibus <scil. sortibus> esset inscriptum nomen Theomnasti. [(He ordered three lots to be put in), on all of which was written the name of Theomnastus.]

and also the addressee was given above a letter, e.g.:

Att. 6,3,8 Q. Cicero puer legit […] epistulam inscriptam patri suo; (Q. Cicero the younger read … a letter inscribed to his father)

Att. 8,5,2 Tu fasciculum qui est ‘M. Curio’ inscriptus velim eures ad eum perferendum 326.

326 See also Lucian, Parasite, 10 εἴ γε ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς ἄνωθεν ὥσπερ ἔθος
ἐπιγράφομεν, Σίμωνι παρασίτῳ […]. [What if we should address you in due form at the top of our letters as “Simon the Parasite”?!]

Just as for an artwork or Christmas present, the name of the artist (Verr. II 4,93 signum Apollinis […], cuius in femore litteris minutis argenteis nomen Myronis erat inscriptum), the giver (e.g. Verr.II 2,150 inscriptum esse video quandam ex his statuis aratores dedisse), or the addressee (fam. 12,3,1 in statua […] inscripsit ‘parenti optime merito‘), was written on the item as an (informational or artistic) inscription, so would a literary work bear not only the name of the author (Tusc. 1,34 nostri philosophi nonne in iis libris ipsis quos scribunt de contemnenda gloria, sua nomina inscribunt) and the addressee (see above p.23), but also the title.

Inscriptio is common hereafter, and is not displaced by titulus; that the title by itself was as respectable as the old inscribere was already visible.

Nomen is not used by Cicero for the title of something specific, but only in the naming of a genre: (leg. 2,62 cantus cui nomen neniae), and titulus has not yet acquired that meaning (see below).

Ovid formulated in Rem. 1: Legerat huius Amor titulum nomenque libelli. (Love, read the name and title of this book). Henderson states on titulum nomenque (translating it as “the heading and title; the written words that give the title”) that titulus in connection with books in Ovid is always synonymous with index (but see below) but here is used synonymously with inscriptio.327

327. With reference to Ovid, Metamorphoses 9,793, where, however, the word is not used for books but about a titulus (inscription) over munera for a temple.

Pinotti ad loc. sees a hendiadys, because both titulus and nomen are written in the index: 328 “nomen sará qui tutto ciò che è contenuto nell’ intestazione, compreso il titolo dell’opera” [nomen  will be everything contained in the heading, including the title of the work]

328. With reference to Ovid, Pont. 3,6,50 terrebar titulo nominis ipse mei (I was filled with dread by the superscription of my own name) and Res Gestae divi Augusti 20 basilicam […] sub titulo nominis filiorum meorum incohavi. (basilica … to be inscribed with the names of my sons)

Geisler understood this to mean (cited from Pinotti): ‘Love had read the title and (therein) his name (amoris).’ – Against these interpretations, the passage is easier to understand if one considers that both nomen and titulus are included in the meaning already given: the book receives a nomen and this nomen is positioned (among other places) on the titulus (= index, the slip of paper on the outside of the roll): ‘Love read the information on the titulus / index, which (next to the name of the author) contains the name of the book (nomen libelli).  Titulus still here does not have the meaning of “work- or book-title”.  The following passage should be understood similarly:

trist. 1,1, 109f.: Cetera turba palam titulos ostendet apertos / et sua detecta nomina fronte geret. (The rest of the band will display their titles openly, bearing their names on their exposed edges;)

In Ovid, titulus can also mean “book title”, by pars pro toto, (where the name of part of something is used to refer to the whole):

(ars. 3,343) deve tribus libris, titulo quos signat (i.e. the author) Amorum, elige; (or from the three books marked by the title of ‘Loves’)

(Pont. 1,1,17) rebus idem, titulo differt. (in theme the same, in title different)

titulus becomes quite common (without displacing inscriptio), e.g.

(Plin. nat., praef.24) Inscriptionis apud Graecos mira felicitas […] (There is a marvellous neatness in the titles given to books among the Greeks.); (26) me non paenitet nullum festiviorem excogitasse titulum; (For myself, I am not ashamed of not having invented any livelier title)

(Quint, inst. 2,14,4) cum M. Tullius etiam ipsis librorum quos hac de re primum scripserat titulis Graeco nomine utatur, (since Cicero gave a Greek title to the earlier works which he wrote on this subject,)

(Plin.epist.4,14,8) unum illud praedicendum videtur, cogitare me has meas nugas ita inscribere, hendecasyllabi, qui titulus sola metri lege constringitur (I will only therefore promise farther, that I design to call these trifles of mine Hendecasyllables, a title which will cover any sort of poem composed in that measure).

(Plin. epist. 5,6,42) primum ego officium scriptoris existimo, titulum suum legat atque identidem interroget se quid coeperit scribere;  (I hold it the first duty of an author to read his title, and frequently ask himself what he set out to write).

(Fronto, Laudes fumi et pulveris, p.215,6 v.d.H.) Plerique legentium forsan rem de titulo contemnant.

In Cicero titulus appears only with the meaning of ‘title of office’:

(Pis. 19) sustinere […] titulum consulatus;

(Tusc.5,30) quos si titulus hic (scil. sapientis) delectat insignis et pulcher.

The meaning titulus = index belongs to the group of meanings, ‘written pages’, tables, plates, (‘list’, ‘sign’, ‘table’, ‘table of honours’, ‘inscription’, ‘inscription of honour’, ‘grave inscription’), e.g.:

(Prop.3,4,16) titulis oppida capta legam; (I will read the names of captured cities,)

(Prop.4,5,51) quorum titulus per barbara colla pependit; (on whose barbarian necks the salesman’s bill has hung,)

(Horace.carm.4,14,3-5) virtutes in aevom / per titulos memoresque fastus / aeternet; (with titles and memorial plaques, O greatest of princes, wherever the sun shines)

(Liv. 28,46,16) aram condidit dedicavitque cum ingenti rerum ab se gestarum titulo; (he erected an altar and dedicated it together with a great record of his achievements)

(Mart. 10,71,2) brevem titulum marmoris huius; (on this stone’s brief legend) (also Mart. 1,93,4); titulo quod breviore legis; (you read in the shorter inscription)

(Plin.epist.6,10,3) cinerem sine titulo. (without an [grave-]inscription, or a name)

On the titulus / index there may be the author’s name, addressee, book title, or work title (see above p.20), e.g.:

(Ov.Pont.4,13,7) ipse quoque, ut titulum chartae de fronte revellas, / quod sit opus, videor dicere posse, tuum; (I, too, though you should tear the title from the head of your pages, could tell, I think, what work is yours)

(Plin.nat., praef.26) pendenti titulo inscripsisse ut ‘Apelles faciebat’. (with a provisional title such as “Worked on by Apelles”)

Ovid was not content merely to write the genre of the work on the titulus-slip, but gave his book a characteristic name:

(rem. 1) Legerat huius Amor titulum nomenque libelli; (Love, read the name and title of this book)

(trist. 1,1,109f.) Cetera turba palam titulos ostendet apertos / et sua detecta nomina fronte geret. (The rest of the band will display their titles openly, bearing their names on their exposed edges,…)

But in these passages nomen does not stand alone, but next to titulus; nomen by itself with the meaning of ‘a book-title which is not a proper name’ does not seem to establish itself, but titulus can stand alone, and can refer only to the title of the work:

(ars. 3,343) deve tribus libris, titulo quos signat (scil. the author) Amorum, elige; (or from the three books marked by the title of ‘Loves’) 329

329 See Ov. epist. her. 2,73 hoc tua … titulo signetur imago (following the grave inscription).

from which we infer that, as well as the meaning titulus = index, for a roll it may have held the meaning “honorific title”, “fame”.  This is also a familiar use in Ovid’s time, e.g.

(ars 1,692) tu titulos alia Palladis arte petis; (By another art of Pallas, do you seek fame [= titulos])

(met. 10,602) quid facilem titulum superando quaeris inertis; (Why do you seek an easily won renown by conquering sluggish youth?)

(met. 15,855) sic magnus cedit titulis Agamemnonis Atreus. (So does the great Atreus yield in honour to his son, Agamemnon)

Sometimes index assumes this meaning of “work title”:

(Ov. Pont. 1,1,15) invenies, quamvis non est miserabilis index […] (17) rebus idem, titulo differt; (You will find, though the title implies no sorrow, … in theme the same, in title different)

(Gell. 11,16,2) cum… Plutarchi… libri indicem legissemus, qui erat περὶ πολυπραγμοσύνης;

(Suet. Cal. 49,3) reperti sunt duo libelli diverso titulo, alteri gladius, alteri pugio index erat; (among his private papers were found two notebooks with different titles, one called “the sword”, and the other “the dagger”)

(Suet.Claud.38,3) liber editus […], cui index erat μωρῶν ἐπανάστασις, argumentum autem stultitiam neminem fingere. (a book was published, the title of which was ” The Elevation of Fools” and its thesis, that no one feigned folly.)

‘Table of contents’

The phenomenon of a ‘table of contents’ is first discussed without the use of any particular term for it:330

330. For details of the passages quoted, see part II.

(Scribonius Largus, praef. 15) ad quae vitia compositiones exquisitae et aptae sint, subiecimus et numeris notavimus, quo facilius quod quaeretur inveniatur, (First, then, I have added [a list] below of what problems the recipes are calibrated and fitted to, and have numbered it, so that it is easier to find what one seeks.)

(Plin.nat., praef. 33): quid singulis contineretur libris, huic epistulae subiunxi […] (I have appended to this letter what is contained in the individual books), ut quisque desiderabit aliquid, id tantum quaerat et sciat quo loco inveniat (but need only look for the particular point that each of them wants, and will know where to find it).

Different terms – referring, strictly speaking, to the elements of the table rather than the table as a whole – are then experimented with, but none prevails over the rest.

(Colum. 11,3,65) omnium librorum meorum argumenta subieci, ut cum res exegisset, facile reperiripossit, quid in quoque quaerendum; 331(I have added outlines of all my volumes, and when necessary, it will be easy to find what is to be sought in each one)

(Gell. praef. 25) capita rerum, quae cuique commentario insunt, exposuimus hic universa, ut iam statim declaretur, quid quo in libro quaeri invenirique possit. (Summaries of the material to be found in each book of my commentaries I have here placed all together, in order that it may at once be clear what is to be sought and found in every book)

331. See also Suetonius, Augustus 85,2 liber […] cuius et argumentum et titulus est Sicilia. (of which the subject and the title is ‘Sicily’)

Jerome uses tituli, indices, and argumenta side-by-side, when describing his difficulty in organizing material which he wants to make clear:

(comm.in Ezech., Book 4, praef.): Vellem… explanationes in Hiezechiel per singulos libros propriis texere prophetiis, et quod vaticinatione coniunctum est nequaquam expositione dividere, ut facilior esset cursus dictantis pariter et legentis; longumque et immensum interpretationis iter certis spatiis separare, ut quasi titulis et indicibus, et, ut proprius loquar, argumentis ostenderem, quid libri singuli continerent. Sed quid faciam, cum aliae prophetiae breves sint, aliae longae, ut saepe necessitate cogamur et plures in unum librum coartare et unam in multos dividere? (I would like … to construct explanations for each set of prophecies in Ezekiel for individual books, both so that the prophecy is in no way divided from the exposition, and so that it is easier to run through, both for dictating and reading; to separate the long and immense road into fixed sections [spatiis], so that I may show, as if with titles and indexes, and, to be accurate, with argumenta, what individual books contain.  But what shall I do when some prophecies are long, and others short, so that often, by necessity I shall be obliged to pack many into one book, and to divide one into many?)

[RP: The preface to book 5 is also interesting: Ne librorum numerus confundatur, et per longa temporum spatia diuisorum inter se uoluminum ordo uitietur, praefatiunculas singulis libris praeposui, ut ex fronte tituli statim lector agnoscat quotus sibi liber legendus et quae nobis prophetia explananda sit. (Lest the number of the books is confounded and, over a long space of time or division, the order of the books is spoiled, I have prefixed small prefaces to individual books, so that the reader will at once know from the start of the titles the number of the book to be read, and which prophecy is to be explained by us.)]

Augustine writes on this:

(retract.2,52,1) adhibitis ad singula numeris, quibus inspectis quid cui loco responderim facile possit adverti; (by consulting the numbers which I have marked for individual topics, may read in the proceedings themselves at the right place whatever he may wish)

in another case, when handling different “quaestiones”, he sticks with the term “quaestiones” for the table of contents:

(retract. 1,26,1 f.) De diversis quaestionibus octoginta tribus […], sicut interrogabar a fratribus […] adhibitis numeris […] (2) harum quaestionum prima est […];

likewise

(retract.2,12,1) adnumeratis eisdem quaestionibus, ita ut quisque legere quod voluerit numeros secutus satis inveniat.

Palladius goes for tituli:

(vet. med.2,1): Ne quid deesset huic operi, armentorum medicinas omnium pecorumque collegi et sub uno libro titulis unamquamque causam designantibus explicare curavi, ipsis verbis Columellae et auctorum suorum, ut, cum necessitas vocaverit, facile remedia causae cogentis occurrant. (So there should be no omissions in this work, I have collected together the medical treatments for all kinds of livestock and farm animals and taken care to lay them out in a single book, with headings designating each and every medical situation, using the very words of Columella and his sources, so that when need arises the remedies for the pressing situation may easily be found.)

The elements of the table of contents are predominantly begun with “de”, so that in form and function they are very similar to the majority of book titles, and so the word ‘tituli’ is
easily transferred and becomes common for “table of contents”.

Capitula becomes used synonymously with tituli (for caput see above, p.104).332

332. On caput and capitula see also Petitmengin, Pierre, Capitula païens et chrétiens, in: Fredouille (ed.), p.491-509, esp. 493-495.

For capitula, τὰ κεφάλαια and caput are also used in the sense of ‘key points, key questions, the main subject’, e.g.

(Plat. leg. 811 a) ἐκ πάνψων κεφάλαια ἐκλέξαντες; (they collect select summaries [of the poets])

Polybius gives in the first two books a summary of previous history ἐπὶ βραχὺ καὶ κεφαλαιωδῶς (after a brief summary) (1,13,1; notes on the brevity of the presentation are common);

(Diodorus Sic. 1,37,1) […] περὶ ὧν ἐν κεφαλαίοις ἐροῦμεν, ἷνα μήτε μακρὰς ποιώμεθα τὰς παρεκβάσεις […];

(Cic.Att. 16,11,4) ut ad me τὰ κεφάλαια mitteret; (to send me an analysis of it)

(Plin.epist. 6,22,2) carptim et κατὰ κεφάλαιον. (but in a summary way, and keeping closely to the articles of the charge)

(Cic.Mil. 53) videamus nunc id, quod caput est;

(Cic. Phil. 2,77) caput autem litterarum sibi cum illa mima posthac nihil futurum;

(Cic. Brut. 164) quibusdam capitibus expositis nec explicatis […] non est oratio, sed quasi capita rerum et orationis commentarium;

(Sidon.epist. 9,9,8) quaesitum volumen invenio produco lectito excerpo maxima ex magnis capita defrustrans. (discovered the volume I sought, dragged it forth in triumph, and began reading away and dismembering it by making lengthy excerpts from the important chapters.) —

(Plin.nat.2,55) breviter atque capitulatim (Now I will briefly and summarily touch on facts).

Capitulum has the meaning ‘important statement (which must be explained)’, e.g.

(Hier.epist.49,17,1f.) inquit apostolus “[…]” Quod capitulum nos sic interpretati sumus […];

(Hier.epist.49,6,1) interpretamur capitulum apostoli “[…]”;

and is connected to the meaning ‘questions to be discussed’, e.g.

(Julianus Pomerius 1, praef.3) Sed iam ipsa capitula, quae utcumque solvenda proposuistis, attexam. Itaque iubetis ut paucis edisseram quae sit vitae contemplativae proprietas et quid inter ipsam et activam vitam intersit […]. Haec sunt nimirum decem, quae a me voluistis enodari capitula […].  (ACW 4 p.14-15)

Finally the meanings of tituli and capitula are exchanged in the table of contents, e.g.:

(Eugipp.Sev.epist.ad Pasch. 11) Indicia vero mirabilis vitae eius huic epistolae coniuncto praelatis capitulis commemoratorio recensita fient ut rogavi libri vestri magisterio clariora; (The testimonies concerning his marvellous life accompany this letter, arranged as a memoir, with a table of chapters prefixed. Grant my request, and let them gain greater fame through your editorial care.)

(Cassiod. inst. 1,1,10) in principiis librorum […] titulos eis credidimus imprimendos; (I thought that the chapter-headings … should be set down at the beginning of each book)

(Cassiod. inst. 1,5,7) Quibus libris iuvante Domino capitula insignire curavimus, ne in tam necessaria lectione, ut saepe dictum est, confusa tyronis novitas linqueretur. (With the Lord’s aid I have taken care to mark the chapter-headings on these books so that in such indispensable reading, as I have often said, the inexperienced beginner may not be left in confusion.)

(Cassiod. hist. 1, praef. 5) ne quemquam res indistincta turbaret, per universum textum huius operis titulos cognoscat appositos, ut suis locis exigere possit quod sub numero conpetenti praedictum esse cognoscit;

(Greg. Tur. Franc. 1, praef.): ab ipso mundi principio libri primi poniretur initium, cuius capitula deursum subieci; (the first book shall begin with the beginning of the world, and I have given its chapters below.)

(Prisc.gramm.II, praef. 4) titulos etiam universi operis per singulos supposui libros, quo facilius quicquid ex his quaeratur, discretis possit locis inveniri.

Also we find breviculus, brevis in use as names for the table of contents, referring to the appearance of the combined contents:

Augustin (epist.Divj. 1A,3,4): quantum autem collegerit viginti duorum librorum conscriptio missus breviculus indicabit; (but how large the collection of 22 books is, the breviculus enclosed will indicate).

Palladius (vet.med.2,2) Pigmentorum quoque omnium brevem redegi, ut apud se paterfamilias omnia ante necessitatem recondat, ne quid desit in tempore. (I have also made a short summary of all the drugs, so that the master can store them all in his house before they are needed, to avoid anything being unavailable when required)

The reason that this did not displace tituli / capitula may be that tituli / capitula could at the same time mean ‘chapter’ (see below).

‘Element in table of contents’ / ‘chapter’

Titulus can also mean ‘Chapter’:

(Pallad. 11,12,9) hoc mense poma condienda sunt atque servanda eo more quo in singulorum titulis continetur, (This month, or as they come ripe, fruits should be preserved and dried by the method covered in the section on each)

(Cassiod. inst. 2, praef 1) nunc tempus est ut aliis Septem titulis saecularium lectionum praesentis libri textum percurrere debeamus. (Now it is time for us to go through the text of the present book that has been arranged according to another seven headings of secular letters;)

The process starts with the use of tituli to mean table of contents,333 as is shown particularly by the following passage:

333. This does not mean, however, that the entries in the table of contents (tituli) also must have appeared as chapter headings (see above, p.99).

(Cassiod. inst. 1,2,10) in libro civitatis Dei septimo decimo, titulo IIII, (St. Augustine in ‘The City of God’, Book 17, titu1us 4)

‘under the numbered element in the table of contents / = in chapter with the number’

likewise:

(Cassiod. inst. 2,3,22) Scire autem debemus Ioseppum Hebreorum doctissimum in primo libro Antiquitatum, titulo nono, dicere […]. (Josephus, the most learned of the Hebrews, in the first book of his ‘Antiquities’, chapter nine, says)

Capitulum is also used with the same meaning:

(Anon. de mach. bell., praef. 2) [=De rebus bellicis] unde pro ingenii facultate unum capitulum de largitionum utilitate in hoc libello composui.

Here the meaning ‘section’, ‘chapter’ is added, from caput (see above p.104), e.g.

(Gellius 11,10,1) Quod in capite superiore […] diximus […].

Tituli and capitula are synonymous:

(Cassiod. inst. 1,1,7) Sanctus quoque Prosper sedula cura legendus est, qui tres libros totius auctoritatis divinae in centum quinquaginta tribus titulis comprehendit (We ought also to read St Prosper eagerly for he has dealt with the entire divine authority in three books in 153 chapters,) (i.e. ‘153 entries in the table of contents and the same number of chapters’)

likewise:

(Cassiod. inst. 1,23,1) <sc.Eugippius> ex operibus sancti Augustini valde altissimas quaestiones ac sententias diversasque res deflorans in uno corpore necessaria nimis dispensatione collegit et in trecentis triginta octo capitulis collocavit. (he excerpted from the works of St Augustine profound problems and opinions on a variety of topics that he collected, compiled, and organized into a collection of 338 chapters)

The words tituli and capitula must be examined in each individual case, not only because they are present in modern languages and therefore seem obvious, but because at the same time and at different times they have different meanings in antiquity, in late
antiquity, and in the middle ages, so that misunderstandings can arise very easily.  For example Alcuin wrote in an introductory poem on the bible,

(MG Poet.Aev.Carol.I, Nr.69, 183-186): Quisque legat huius sacrato in corpore libri / lector in ecclesia verba superna Dei / Distinguens sensus, titulos, cola, commata voce / Dicat, ut accentus ore sonare sciat.

We find the following translation of the last verse:334

“…distinguishing the meanings, titles, cola and commata with his voice.”

334.  Ganz, p.56.

In the bibles there are two Capitula-lists, but no titles in the body of the text, where the reader must particularly look for them.  Rather he must look out for the ‘sections’.  – In the following example the glossator has not properly understood tituli.  On Bede’s text:

(De natura rerum liber, praef.v. 1 f.): Naturas rerum varias, labentis et aevi / Perstrinxi titulis, tempora lata, citis,…

we find the gloss:335

Titulis, id est, praefatiunculis ita inchoantibus: De quadrifario Dei opere, etc.

335. There we also find the following gloss: Titulus autem dicitur a Titane, id est sole, quia sicut sol sua praesentia mundum illuminat, ita et titulus sequentem paginam illustrat; nam si titulum frontis eraseris, muta pagina remanebit, ut ait quidam: Titulum frontis erade, ut muta sit pagina […].

Although we do indeed find such summaries of content, in the text quoted we must understand ‘section’, ‘chapter’; see also the following passage from Alcuin:

(MG Poet. Med. I, S.207, Vita Sancti Willibrordi, pr. 4) percurrens titulis inclyta gesta citis;

this also (as far as can be seen in the edition) precedes a numbered table of contents, and in the poem the chapters are numbered.

‘Heading’ / ‘Poem heading’

The first indication of a heading (the name of an addressee) appears in Vergil in the text of the Bucolica:

(buc.6,11f.) nec Phoebo gratior ulla est / quam sibi quae Vari praescripsit pagina nomen.

In the Xenia or Apophoreta, Martial names the labels for each object written over each epigram as lemmata or, synonymously, tituli:

(Mart. 14,2,3f.) Lemmata si quaeris cur sint adscripta, docebo: / Ut, si malueris, lemmata sola legas.

Lemma also has the meaning of “theme for a poem”:

(Mart. 11,42,1 f.) Vivida cum poscas epigrammata, mortua ponis / Lemmata;

(Mart. 10,59,1 f.) Consumpta est uno si lemmate pagina, transis, / Et breviora tibi, non meliora placent,

(Plin.epist. 4,27,3) lemma sibi sumpsit, quod ego interdum versibus ludo.  Atque adeo iudicii mei te iudicem faciam, si mihi ex hoc ipso lemmate secundus versus occurrerit. (For he has taken for a theme, that I sometimes amuse myself with writing verses. If I can remember the second line of this epigram…)

But the meaning “poem heading” for lemma has no further success.336

336.  It is occasionally used this way in late antique authors:

(Auson. Parentalia, praef.S.28,3 P.): aliquotiens fortasse lectorem solum lemma sollicitat tituli [see apparatus], ut festivitate persuasus et ineptiam ferre contentus sit. hoc opusculum nec materia amoenum est nec appellatione iucundum;

(Sidon.epist. 8,9,3) interim tu videris, quam tibi sit epigrammatis flagitati lemma placiturum.

The information in the relevant article ‘Lemma’ in the “Historischen Wörterbuch zur Philosophie” [Historical dictionary of philosophy] (Ritter/Gründer) gives the impression of frequent use in the sense of ‘heading’ and ‘title’.

Martial’s variant, titulus, appears (as also in Ovid, rem. 1, see above p.321) in conjunction with nomen:

(Mart. 13,3,7) Addita per titulos sua nomina rebus habebis.

Titulus is generally used for heading, e.g.:

(Gaius inst.4,46) ceterae quoque formulae, quae sub titulo De in ius vocando propositae sunt […];

(Suet.Tib. 70,2) composuit et Carmen lyricum, cuius est titulus conquestio de morte L. Caesaris;

(Hier. tract. in psalm. I, p. 19,1, zu Psalm 7): Singulis rebus inponuntur nomina, ut ex nominibus et res cognoscantur: sie et psalmi titulis praenotati sunt, ut ex titulis intellegantur et psalmi;

(Prosper, epigr., praef.3-6) Quosdam ceu prato libuit decerpere flores / distinetisque ipsos texere versiculis, / ut proprias canerent epigrammata singula causas / et pars quaeque suo congrueret titulo;

(Luxur. 287 R.) 13: <scil. versus> discretos titulis quibus tenentur.

Rubrica in antiquity and late antiquity is not a word in competition with titulus.  Only in
connection with laws is there mention of the red colour of headings:

(Quint, inst. 12,3,11) alii se ad album ac rubricas transtulerunt et formularii vel […] legulei quidam esse maluerunt, (Some of these transfer their attention to the praetor’s edicts or the civil law, and have preferred to become specialists in formulae, or legalists, as Cicero calls them)

(Pers. 5,89f.) cur mihi non liceat, iussit quodeumque voluntas, excepto siquid Masuri rubrica vetabit?

See Kissel ad loc.;

(Juv. 14,192f.) causas age, perlege rubras / maiorum leges (mit Schol.ad perlege rubras: rubricas iuris);

(Prud. c. Symm. 2,461 f.) dicant cur condita sit lex I bis sex in tabulis aut cur rubrica minetur […].

On bronze legal tablets (Lex Malacitana and Lex Salpensana) the abbreviation R(ubrica) is used to indicate which portions should be coloured as a heading.  This abbreviation can be found in papyri with legal content (e.g. P.Oxy. 1814, 6th c., Cod.Just.), in the Florence Gaius fragment following the text of a heading (see Nelson, p.27), and rarely in manuscripts containing collections of poetry, especially in the mss. of Tibullus, all descended from a single lost exemplar; I have also seen it in Paris.lat. 8212 (Horace, 12th c.).

In the Church Fathers superscriptio is also found for the headings of the Psalms (e.g. Hilarius psalm.instr.3; in psalm.passim); superscriptionum tituli (Hilarius, in psalm. 55,1).

Selections from Schröder’s “Titel und Text” – 3

Here is a rough English translation of the conclusions for part 2 of Bianca-Jeanette Schröder’s book, Titel und Text.  It was made in haste for my own purposes, so is probably not 100% reliable.  Nevertheless, the material is so important, and is apparently so little known, that it seems well worth placing this here.

Part 2 – Conclusion (p.153)

The briefly examined examples, from Hyginus to Cassiodorus, make it clear that questions about the organisation of a text is not a problem that can be separated from the “real” text.  It is important to know how ancient readers intended to “use” a text, and how other, later needs have interfered in the form of organisation taken.  It is  important to examine this issue carefully, assessing the authors and editors of  individual works.

It may be noted how new ways to make information accessible came into existence and were disseminated.  The (probably) numbered table of contents, as an influential innovation, was made known through Pliny’s Natural History in the 1st century AD, was promptly adopted (by Columella in the later-added book 11) and was increasingly used in other genres (Gellius, Augustine, historical writing); tables of contents for other works were created subsequently.

The adoption of the table of contents had influence on the preface; an important role of the proemion, to provide information on the content to follow, is shifted on to the more precise summaries.  In this way the author can bypass a stylistically unappealing task, and, in addition, getting an overview is much easier and makes lookup and retrieval possible (in connection with numbering).  In a similar way the relatively monotonous formulae for closing a subject and transitioning to the next give way over time to the sub-title. The use of diaeresis, which, in imitation of oral teaching, is used in systematic text books to structure information, is not abandoned but receives a serious competitor in the use of chapter headings.

Mutschmann (p.99-100) accepted the following development, particularly in view of the Didymus papyrus: the first step is the column heading: the second is the collection of column headings into a table of contents (συγκεφαλαίωσις); from the column heading the chapter heading develops. But it has been shown that these phenomena are more complex. In the papyri we see already early headings for lists, and disengaged lemmata in lexica.  There are centred headings, and numbered and marked chapter beginnings in Latin bronze  tablets of laws.  Pliny and Columella do, inter alia, have tables of contents but they certainly did not devise chapter headings.  A two-way exchange may be expected, namely that works with tables of contents (e.g. Columella) acquired chapter headings, while for works with leading lemmas (e.g. Hyginus) tables of contents were then created.

The tendency towards dividing things up extends beyond prose.  Probably because of the influence of articulated textbook prose, didactic poems were provided with helps for orientation:[184] in the manuscripts of Lucretius, Manilius and also Ovid’s Metamorphoses, lists of Capitula may be found and also corresponding chapter headings, as in prose textbooks.[185] Reeve (conclusion, p.507 f.) points out that Ovid’s Fasti is, since R. Merkel’s 2nd edition of 1851, divided into days identified by headings, and content-related sections, and he gives examples of how the interpretation is affected by this classification. That these subtitles are not by the poet is shown by the structure of the text.  The same formulae for transitions and new subjects appear as in textbook prose (see above, p.107); signal words indicate the beginning of a new concept, e.g. in Lucretius: quaeres, inquis, nec me fallit, praecurrere cogor, sed nunc ut repetam, nunc et scrutemur, nunc age quoniam docui, nunc age quod superest cognosce, denique, tum porro quoniam etc.; likewise Manilius introduces new sections thus: nunc vero, iam vero, restat ut, his adice, accipe, percipe nunc, ergo age, nec te praetereat, nunc age, ergo age, forsitan et quaeras etc.  – The headings in Lucretius have been dated by Fischer to the 2nd century AD, after analysing the content of them (so also Diels, p.xii: “neque indoctus fuit ille editor qui primis haud dubie saeculis capitula praefixit”).[“nor unlearned was that editor who first at an unknown date added capitula to the front”]

184. Haye has commented on the types of divisions in medieval didactic poems (p.348-358 ‘Optische Präsentation’); it may be added that this does not merely apply to manuscripts of the 12th century (so Haye, p.352), but also for example in mss. of Ovid and Lucretius of the 9th century.

185.  Vergil’s Georgica are equipped with metrical argumenta (like the books of the Aeneid and the comedies), but, as far as I can see, they were not divided into chapters like other didactic poems. – In the relevant manuscripts for Ovid’s Fasti (A = Vat.Reg. 1709, 10th c.; U = Vat.Lat.3262, 11th c.) there are no calendrical entries as headings, such as are often silently added in editions (an example of their insertion for clarity is Robert Schilling, Ovide, Les fastes, Tome I, Paris 1992, p.LIX), and are found in the younger manuscripts. In Vat.Lat.3265 (12th c.) there are references to the content in the margin (e.g. fol. 9v, de cursu solis, de lirae occasu, de pectore leonis); but I have seen calendrical information in Vat.Ottob. 1464 (13th c.) (e.g. fol. 3v.: VII kl F, III kl F).

Housman gives a list of chapter titles in the appendix to his edition of Manilius (vol. 5, p.55-99); Goold devotes a chapter of the praefatio to his edition of Manilius to the chapter titles (p.xii ff), but does not discuss when they developed. – In the manuscripts of Ovid’s Metamorphoses there are chapter titles (e.g. Chaos in species; terra in varias personas; mundus in saecula quattuor, aureum, argenteum, aereum et ferreum; item annus in tempora quattuor; edited by Magnus), and sometimes prose summaries, which like the chapter titles are inserted before the passage in question. These summaries (by “Lactantius”) must date, on grounds of vocabulary, to late antiquity.

The increasing tendency for labelling and dividing is not limited to didactic poetry, but extends to the whole of the book trade.  The divisions in tragedy and comedy have already been thoroughly researched, so here I will limit myself to only a few notes.  Already, in the oldest mss. (Terence: ‘Bembinus’, 4-5th c.; Plautus: Palimpsest Ambros., 5th c.), the change of scenes is indicated in various ways (names, rolls, notes, Greek sigla),[186] and Donatus refers to comedies with divisions: (Ter. Ad. praef. 3,1f.) primus actus haec continet […]. secundus actus […]; (Ter.Ad.254) in hac scaena gratiarum actio est […]; (Ad.praef. 1,7) […] saepe tamen mutatisper scaenam modis cantata, quod signifi­cat titulus scaenae habens subiectas personis litteras […]. […] secundum persona­rum nomina scriptis in eo loco, ubi incipit scaena.  That the division into acts and scenes, and also the insertion of the names of the speakers, was not provided by the authors, has been shown systematically by Andrieu. — The following information was obtained on the age of these things in the mss.: Bader dates the scene-headings, in Plautus, to the late first / early second century A.D. (p. 150-154) and Tarrant (in: Reynolds, p.306) considers that it is unlikely that the creation of an edition equipped with these things can be later than the 2nd century AD. — Likewise the archetype for Terence (before the Cod. Bembinus) was similarly equipped (Reeve in: Reynolds, p.413). — Zwierlein showed that the archetype for Seneca’s comedies, which should be dated to the 3-4th century, contained a basic set of scene-headings and people-sigla (Prolegomena, p. 52) and that this information was added to or  modified by editors or copyists during the process of transmission (ib., p.249).

186. On the origin and development of the various types of information, see the relevant chapter in Andrieu.

Here again, as with prose textbooks, we observe several phases of philological activity.

In the course of transmission, the “organisation” of texts by means of numbering and tables of contents has not been without drawbacks.  The chapter number, which in early examples (bronze tablets, see above p.116 f., early mss., see above p.119) is under or before the text break of the new chapter, changes position over the course of time, for various reasons:187 the situation of the chapter number in the codex, where usually a page contains one or two columns, is very different from that in the roll, where one column follows another.  If the page has only a single area of text, and the chapter number is in the left margin, there is a risk that on the recto the number will partially or completely disappear in the rebate (in the binding); on the verso, the number may disappear if the pages of the book are trimmed. — If the work is written in two columns, there must be enough space in the middle, between the two columns, for the numerals belonging to the second column.  If instead the numbers, while the numbers for the first column are on the left of it, the numbers for the second column are written on the right hand side, uncertainty is introduced for the reader, just by changing the position in that way, and it has the same risks as before; one part of the numbers may disappear into the fold, while the other is threatened by cutting off the margin.  Another factor with great influence on the chapter number is the rise and expansion of the initial letter.  The more elaborate the design of the letter, the less important will be the – consistently simple – numeral before it (see plate 1), if there is room for it at all. It may be observed that the numeral appears more and more frequently in the Spatium at the end of the last line of the preceding chapter, to the right over the relevant section within the textblock.  There is it safe from the trimmer’s knife and the binding, and leaves room at the start of the chapter for the development of the initial – however, having given up their special place in the margin, the only way to emphasise them is with colour; if the numeral is the same colour as the text, it no longer catches the eye. This general trend may be observed in mss. containing the same text but from different centuries,e.g.188 In Cod.Troyes Bibl.mun. 504 (7th c.; the oldest ms. of the Liber pastoralis of Gregory the Great; fol.48v.)

187. This description of a general tendency does not mean that in some cases the earlier form was not retained.

188. See Glenisson for illustrations of the folios in which this phenomenon may be seen (plates 8, 9, 11, 12 on pp. 47, 49, 52, 53).

the chapter numbers (alternately red and green) stand in the left margin and are accentuated by an ornate frame.  The first line of each chapter, except for the first letter, is written in red. The first letter of the chapter is somewhat enlarged, but does not extend into the margin.  The number XXIII extends into the text block and pushes the first letter more to the right.  In a younger manuscript of this text (12th c., Cod. Troyes Bibl. mun.955, fol.57) the first letter of each chapter is done in different colours, two lines tall, and is positioned half in the margin, half in the text block.  The chapter numbers (in red) stand in the free space at the end of the last line of the preceding chapter: the number is displaced into the text block by the enlarged first letter of the chapter.  – Similarly we may compare the Hincmar bible (9th c. Reims, Bibl. mun. 1, fol.8) with the bible of Saint-Benigne de Dijon (12th c., Cod. Dijon, Bibl. mun. 2, fol.7v.).  Both versions have, at the beginning of the book of Genesis, a decorated first column as far as the words “et facta est lux”, and the second column consists entirely of text.  In the Hincmar bible the chapter numbers stand in the margin before the second column, before the slightly enlarged and decorated chapter initials.  In the bible  of Saint-Benigne there is very little room between the right edge of the decorated first column and the text block of the second column, so that the chapter initials cannot protrube more than slightly into the margin, and the chapters do not always begin a new paragraph. The red chapter numbers stand wherever there is room; at the end of the last line of the preceding chapter, or, when there is no line break, in the right margin.

It need hardly be said that with the change of position came an increased risk of damage to the numbering or omission.  But we must emphasise this:  if the numbering is not complete or consecutive, or that in the text does not correspond to the table of contents, this is no indication that it does not derive from the author; the degree of incompleteness or incorrectness corresponds to the increasing distance from the author (see especially p.146 on Isidore).

Likewise numbered tables of contents are not transmitted without error. The dangers that lists and numbers are exposed to, during the process of coping, are obvious.  However defects are not observed only in the numeration, or lack of numeration, because of the lack of rubrication, and the loss of elements from the tables of contents, but there are also spontaneous and individual errors. There are other sources of errors and changes, which are due to more or less conscious decisions by the copyist.

Particularly influential is the desire to save space, and to create a more unified and compact block of text, whether for pragmatic reasons such as saving materials, or aesthetic ones.  In the table of contents, as in the beginning of chapters and the chapter numbers, the text is squeezed together more tightly.  There is a tendency, as with the beginning of chapters, to only separate the first letter, and often the text is written left-justified, and not always with the first letter of each argument highlighted.

But even if only the number is in the margin, and the text of the table of contents is written as a block without protrusions into the margin, still a lot of space can be lost if one considers that numerals like I or C or even CLXXXIII can be in the margin.  Sometimes there is a block where the text is written directly after the number and under the number.  Another possibility is that the numbers go in the space at the end of the preceding argument (i.e. on the right, above the argument in question), so that there is no longer a vertical list of numbers.  Finally the table of contents can be written as text, abandoning the list format completely and writing it as continuous text, but simply alternating numbers and text.  So long as the numbers are written in red, one need only examine the start of the table to see whether the number belongs to the previous argument, or the next one; but if the numbers are written in the same colour as the text, it becomes a tedious task.

As has already been indicated, a tendency can be observed that clarity diminishes over time, and is never improved.  In three manuscripts of Aulus Gellius, arbitrarily chosen from different centuries (Vat. Reg. 597, 9th c.; Vat.Reg. 1646, 12th c.; Vat.Reg.3452, 13th c.), it seems to be no coincidence that it is easiest to find a specific chapter in the oldest of them.  In Vat.Reg.597 the chapter number is always in the same place, before the (undecorated) chapter initial; in the table of contents, the number always stands before the argument.  – In Vat. Reg. 1646 the chapter number stands at the end of the last line of the preceding chapter, and catch the eye because written in red.  But more striking are the chapter initials (alternately in blue and red), which are two lines of text high.  In the table of contents, the numbers move about.  On the verso they stand on the left before the argument, on the recto to the right of it, because not enough space has been left before the text.  – The Vat. Reg. 3452 is in two quite different parts.  In the first part the chapter numbers (in Greek letters) always stand before the chapter initial, and likewise in the tables of contents.  In the second part (from p.57), the tables of contents are not written as a list but as continuous text, with red numbers between each of the individual arguments.  A new line is not used at the start of each new chapter, but the end of one chapter is immediately followed by the (red) chapter number for the next chapter, and then immediately the text of the next chapter.  While the numbers are written in red, they can be found, but very soon they too are written in the normal ink colour, and so can only be found by reading through the text.

As with the numbering of chapters, no improvement is seen in the numbering of tables of contents in the Middle Ages.  Scribonius Largus, most likely also Pliny and Gellius, and certainly many late antique authors organised their text using numbers and so it may be assumed that the numbering of the chapters and tables of contents was initially congruent and usable.189  But they have been much distorted in the course of transmission, because only actually using the table of contents to find specific chapters, i.e. only from a copyist aware of the needs of the reader, will produce a set of usable numbers.

Now that we have the results of the first two parts, it is possible for us to examine poetry headings.  Both the linguistic form of the book titles, and the relationship between title and text, as well as the (partly retrospective) ‘organisation’ of the text into longer and shorter sections of text, observed in many genres, using tables of contents and headings, and their influence upon the text, should be observed when assessing the headings of poems.

189. Some examples of numbering that became unusable with the passage of time: Columella, see under p. 134; Isidore, see under p. 146; see also the discrepancy between index and chapter headings in Firmicus Maternus, Mathesis, ed. W. Kroll, F.Skutsch, Leipzig 1897 (repr. Stuttgart 1968).

Selections from Schröder’s “Titel und Text” – 2

Continuing from the table of contents of Schröder’s “Titel und Text” here, this is a rough translation of the conclusion to the first part, on the titles of ancient books.

   *     *     *     *     *     *

Part 1 – Conclusion (p.90)

It should not surprise us, if the most ancient book titles seem unimaginative to modern eyes, because they are simply the term for the theme or the genre. It is particularly surprising to modern eyes that the titles of books of poetry are no exception: they are not explicitly given by the authors, but the earliest uses in the secondary tradition are the titles Bucolica, Carmina, Epistulae, Sermones, Epoden.  In some cases we can only say what the work was not called: neither ‘Register’ nor ‘Cynthia’ nor ‘Monobyblos’ can be  detected as the title of a book.  Metaphorical  titles appear only in collections, in those cases where a theme cannot be  concretely identified.

The literal interpretation of a title must not be avoided, but it may indicate the presence of its predecessor, a connection [1] or a difference, for example (Ambrose, De officiis 1:23-25): Dum igitur hunc psalmum considero, successit animo de Officiis scribere; de quibus etiamsi quidam philosophiae studentes scripserint ut Panaetius et filius eius apud Graecos, Tullius apud Latinos […]. videamus utrum res ipsa conveniat scribere de officiis et utrum hoc nomen philosophorum tantummodo scholae aptum sit an etiam in scripturis reperiatur divinis […] (While, therefore, meditating on this psalm, it has come to my mind to write ‘on duties‘; although some philosophers have written on this subject—Panaetius,  for instance, and his son among the Greek, Cicero among the Latin, writers […] let us see whether the subject itself stands on the same ground, and whether this word is suitable only to the schools of the philosophers, or is also to be found in the sacred Scriptures.”); Cicero had already used this as the best translation of the Greek title, see p.31 above.

The number of titles known from the Retractiones of Augustine gives us a good idea of the state of book titles in late Antiquity (see the Capitula at the start of the work, the list of titles).  Only a few titles require explanation, e.g. Soliloquia  (Retract. 1,4,1) De animae quantitate (Retract. 1,8,1), see above p. 13; where the theme is named, e.g. De beata vita, De moribus ecclesiae catholicae et de moribus Manicheorum. Occasionally the addressee is simply named (Ad Simplicianum), otherwise the name is always accompanied by information about him or the content, e.g. Ad Cres­conium grammaticum partis Donati, De spiritu et littera ad Marcellinum, De pec­catorum meritis et remissione et de baptismo parvulorum ad Marcellinum; reference is made to opponents with contra: Contra epistulam Donati heretici, Contra Adimantum Manichei discipulum, De Genesi adversus Manicheos. Genre titles serve as titles also: Quaestionum, Soliloquiorum, Confessionum; Ex­positio quarundam propositionum ex epistula apostoli ad Romanos. The different forms may also be combined: Ad Hieronymum presbyterum libri II unus de origine animae et alius de sententia Iacobi, Contra Pelagium et Caelestium de gratia Christi et de peccato originali ad Albinam Pinianum et Melaniam, De unico baptismo contra Petilianum ad Constantinum. Sometimes the title refers to the state of the work: De Genesi Epistulae ad Romanos inchoata expositio; De Genesi ad litteram liber unus imperfectus — Equally prosaic are the titles of the works of Gregory of Tours (hist. Franc.) and Bede (hist. eccl. 5, 24), likewise the title given in many places by Cassiodorus in the Institutio.

J.C. Scaliger defines the ancient sense (Poetices Libri Septem,Geneva, 1561, book 3, cap. 123, p. 171c): Inscriptio est uno, aut non multo pluribus verbis comprehensio eius partis operis, cuius partis gratia ceterae partes omnes veniunt ad totius constitutionem […]. (i.e. an inscriptio is one or not many more words which summarise the stuff that makes up the work.)

Before we consider the background to poetry book titles in part 3, we must investigate in part 2 the further possibility that short sections of text in tables of contents etc, were designated as chapter titles.

  1. [1] [126] On the use (Übernahme) of titles in historical writing (annales, historiae) in order to emphasise the continuity of the content, see Zehnacker, Hubert: Les oeuvres antiques peuvent-elles se passer de titre? L’exemple de l’historiographie romaine, in: Fredouille (ed.), p. 209-221.

Selections from Schröder’s “Titel und Text” – 1

B.J. Schröder’s Titel und Text is a profoundly important book for the subject of book titles, chapter divisions, chapter titles, tables of contents and the like.  Yet it seems to be largely unknown in the anglophone world.  I can find no reviews in JSTOR, nor a review at Bryn Mawr.

For a few days now I have been producing rough translations of portions of it, for my own use.  It seems to me that these may be of use to others, as a way into the book.  For who speaks German these days?

I do realise that the subject is perhaps rather technical.  I apologise to those of my readers, for whom the subject lies outside their sympathies.  But I hope that, for some people at least, an English rendering of bits of the book will be useful.

Let’s start with a translation of the title and subtitle, and the book’s own table of contents.  These will give a very good idea of the contents of the book.

I am entirely aware that my efforts at translation are not very good.  However producing them should help me get better!

     *     *     *     *     *     *

Bianca-Jeanette Schröder, Title and Text: On the development of Latin poetry headings. With studies on Latin book titles, tables of contents, and other types of divisions (Gliederungsmitteln). Walter de Gruyter : Berlin : New York, 1999 (Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte ; Bd. 54) From: Hamburg, Univ., Diss., 1998. ISBN 3-11-016453-1.

Contents

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1

Part I: Book titles

1.  Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
         On the emergence of book titles and on the problems of recognition of book titles 10, citation of incipits 16, Information on the index 20

2.  On the relationship between title and content…………………………………………. 30

Ancient comments on the titles of works……………………………………………………… 30
Name versus data………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Titles of Epics, Tragedies and Comedies 35, Titles of the works of Plato
41, Proper name as title and subtitle in Cicero, Varro, and Apuleius 43

Metaphorical titles……………………………………………………………………………………….. 49
Pliny the Elder 50, Gellius 57

3. Remarks on the titles of selected books of poetry………………………………………… 60

Greek lyrics………………………………………………………………………………………………… 62
Catullus………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 64
Vergil…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 68
           Bucolica 68, Catalepton 70
Horace………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 71
Carmina 71, Epoden 73, Epistulae and Sermones 76
Propertius…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 78
Ovid……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 83
            Amores 83, Ars (Ovid and Horace) 84, Tristia, Epistulae ex Ponto, Epistulae Heroidum 87
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..90

Part II:
The organisation of texts (especially textbooks)
by table of contents, numbering and chapter headings

1.  Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………. 93
2. The different types of divisions………………………………………………………………….. 99
Necessary differences: between table of contents and chapter headings, between chapter headings and chapter divisions (Kapitelgliederung) ……………………………. 99
Tables of contents……………………………………………………………………………………… 106
Numbering of chapters and tables of contents…………………………………………….. 115
Excursus: The numbering of poems in a collection ……………………………….. 121
Chapter headings………………………………………………………………………………… 123

3. Investigations of individual cases……………………………………………………………..128

Cato and Varro, De re rustica…………………………………………………………………….. 128
Columella, De re rustica…………………………………………………………………………….. 131
The collected index and indices before individual books 131. The relationship between Argumenta and chapters and numbering 134, Chapter headings and their position in the text 138

Hyginus, De astronomia……………………………………………………………………………. 142
Vegetius, Epitoma rei militaris…………………………………………………………………… 144
Palladius, De veterinaria medicina……………………………………………………………… 145
Isidore, Origines………………………………………………………………………………………..  146
Cassiodorus, De anima……………………………………………………………………………….. 150
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 153

Part III: Poem titles

1.  Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………… 161
Papyri 161, Manuscripts 170, Citation customs 172

2.  Investigation of authentic headings………………………………………………………..176
1.-3.AD…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 176
Martial (Books 13 und 14) 176, Statius, Silvae 180, Commodian, Instructions 189
4.-6.AD……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 193
Prosper of Aquitaine, Epigrammata 193, Paulinus of Nola, epist.32 (with excursus on Prudentius, Dittochaeon) 195, Psalms 196, Claudian, Carmina minora 198, Ausonius 199, Epigrammata Bobiensia 202, Ennodius 206, Venantius Fortunatus, Carmina 209, Luxurius 212

A brief look at the Middle Ages…………………………………………………………………… 219
Theodulf of Orleans 220, Hildebert of Lavardin 221, Godefrid of Winchester 222, Henry of Huntingdon 223

Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 224

3. Investigation into titles added later…………………………………………………………226

Vergil, Bucolica…………………………………………………………………………………………226
Excursus: Theocritus 236
Horace, Carmina……………………………………………………………………………………….239
Addressee 241, Description of content 245, technical terms (para<e>netice,
prosphonetice, pragmatice
etc.) 249, Description of metre (tetracolos, dicolos etc.) 255, Observations on the manuscripts 256, Conclusions 261

Horace, Epoden, Sermones, Epistulae……………………………………………………….262
Remarks on Juvenal and Persius……………………………………………………………….268
Ovid………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 270
              Epistulae Heroidum 270, Epistulae ex Ponto 111, Amores 280, Tristia 282

Martial, books 1-12……………………………………………………………………………………283
Headings in ms. E (books 1-12) 284, Headings in ms. L (books 5-12) 288

Anthologia Latina…………………………………………………………………………………….. 293
Excursus: Anthologia Graeca 296
Poem titles in younger manuscripts…………………………………………………………… 298
Propertius 298, Catullus 301, Tibullus 303

Conclusion

Consolidated summary………………………………………………………………………….. 305
Chronological overview 305, Components of poem headings 306 (Proper name or
addressee and subject 307, genre and Absicht / Sprechakt 309), Form and language 309, Function 311, Transmission 314, Summary 316

Appendix………………………………………………………………………………………………. 319
Notes on the Latin words for: ‘Work-/book-title’ 319, ‘Table of contents’ 323, ‘An element in a table of contents / chapter’ 325, ‘Heading / Poem heading’ 327

Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………………… 329
Index………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 345
Illustrations………………………………………………………………………………………………. 351

I ought to add that no page 351 appears in either of the two copies that I have seen, and there are no illustrations included in the volume.

Reading a book in a language you don’t speak

For my sins, which evidently must be worse than I had realised, I need to master the contents of an entire book in German.  The book in question is Bianca-Jeanette Schröder’s Titel und Text, with the subtitle: Zur Entwicklung lateinischer Gedichtüberschriften. Mit Untersuchungen zu lateinischen Buchtiteln, Inhaltsverzeichnissen und anderen Gliederungsmitteln.  It was published by De Gruyter in 1999, and is available for purchase at an eye-watering 150 euros, around $220.  It contains around 360 pages, and 8 plates.

My German is very poor, just like everyone else’s.  What on earth does one do?

Here’s what I am doing.  If anyone else has suggestions, I am very willing to hear them.

Well, the first thing I did was borrow the dratted thing from the library.  What else could one do?  Nobody on earth could afford to buy a copy.

The next thing I did was to run it through my scanner, and OCR it in Finereader.  Being a modern type-face it OCR’s quite well.  This gives me each page in the Finereader editor.

I now intend to create notes on the text in a Word document.  This will form a permanent record of what I find in this book.

This morning I have taken the table of contents, and pasted it into the Word document.  I have then pasted it into Google Translate, and, line by line, converted that table of contents in Word into English.  This gives me some idea of the structure of the book, down to a few pages.

The book is actually in three parts, each with a conclusion.  It looks to me as if translating the conclusions to each part, again with the assistance of Google Translate, might be the next step.  They seem fairly short; a couple of pages.  I can do this.

So far I have translated the conclusion to part 1.  It’s actually interesting stuff; but not what I need to know about (on the whole).  So I can probably ignore part 1.

Just starting on part 2.

Oh yes, what does that subtitle mean?  Well, I come up with this:

On the development of Latin poetry headings. With studies on Latin book titles, tables of contents, and other types of divisions (Gliederungsmitteln).

Should be interesting.  I hope.

Chapter divisions, titles and tables of contents in the BNF Greek mss.

Now that the French National Library has a bunch of Greek manuscripts online, we can use them to find out what proportion have chapter divisions and titles.  It can’t be comprehensive, but this limited exploration will give us some sort of idea.  It will also be interesting to see if I stumble across any tables of contents.

The divisions are identifiable as breaks in the text, often with a red heading in the gap, and an initial on the new line.  Here, for instance, is one that I just found, in Ms. gr. 2971, folio 10v:

On the other hand initials pushing into the margin like this may only be paragraph markers.

So … let’s go!  What can be found in the first few pages of these mss….?

  • Coislin 352, 17th c. Palatine Anthology of Greek verse. — N/A: special layout epigrams.
  • Grec 2971, 16th c. Hermogenes, Progymnasmata.  — Divisions with red headings.
  • Grec 2868, 16th c. Apollinaris Metaphrasis Psalmorum. — Sections in red ink, followed by sections in black starting with red initial. Otherwise undivided.  Special layout.
  • Grec 510, 9th c. Gregory Nazianzen. — Initials at intervals but no text division.
  • Grec 2929, 16th c. grammatical bits and pieces. — Divisions with red headings as for gr. 2971.
  • Grec 2705, 14th c., John Tzetzes on the Iliad. — Red initials protruding into margin.  No other divisions.
  • Grec 2261, 16th c. medical ms. — Not divided.
  • Grec 216, 10th c. Acts of the Apostles, with the catena. — Starts with numbered table of contents of Acts here, f.1r, and also has numbered headings.  Rather catena-ish, tho, in format.

  • Grec 1853, 10th c., Aristotle.  No red ink! Not obvious divisions. Might be capitals in margin occasionally.
  • Coislin 291, 14th c., Simeon the New Theologian.  Very faded red initials in margin.  Last line of end of chapter ends with “:–“, and rest of line blank.
  • Grec 1807, 9th c. Plato.  Not obviously divided, but marginal asterisks and other marks.
  • Grec 1685, 15th c. Ps.Callisthenes, History of Alexander; Aesop’s fables.  Red marginal initials only in Ps.Callisthenes; Aesop has red initials and headings (e.g. f.59r).
  • Grec 1639, 15th c. Xenophon, Cyropedia; expedition; Theophrastus, characters.  — Red initials.  No break in text.   But by f.193v (probably Theophrastus), divisions, red headings and initials.
  • Grec 1759, 13th c. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the philosophers.  — Black initial, break, red heading (probably later, on f.2r), chapter ends with “:–“.  Only when new philosopher introduced (e.g f.107v).  So perhaps special format.
  • Grec 2465, 14th c. Michael Psellus.  — None that I can see.
  • Grec 1407, 15th c. Arrian, Anabasis (f.11v); on India; Ptolemy’s geography, epitome.  — Red letters.  Ms. starts with several pages of what may be indices; red and black text, much faded.
  • Grec 1122, 14th c. John Damascene. — Red letter, break, red heading (e.g. f.4r).
  • Grec 2795, 15th c. Sophocles, Electra, Orestes, etc, with scholia. — Drama has special format.
  • Grec 2850, 1475 AD, Sybilline oracles. — None that I can see.
  • Grec 2902, 16th c. Aesop, Aristophanes, Euripides. — Red initials, heading, breaks in Aesop.
  • Grec 2999, 16th c. Demosthenes. — Not divided that I can see.
  • Coislin 1, 7th c. Greek Old Testament — initials in margin, but much too often.  Some special format.
  • Coislin 79, 11th c. Chrysostom. — table of contents (f.3r-4v), then “logos a'”.  Divided by space in middle of line, then initial in margin at start of next line.  No chapter titles.
  • Grec 2809, 15th c. Euripides. — (Not examined)
  • Grec 2036, 10th c.  (f. 1r-v) Πίναξ, then (ff. 2-178v) Ps.-Aristotle, Problemata physica, then Longinus (Dionysius).  — There is a numbered table of contents starting, “Ἀριστοτέλους προβλήματα καὶ Διονυσίου Λογγίνου περὶ ὕψους λόγου.” (i.e. Aristotle’s Problems and Dionysius Longinus’ περὶ ὕψους λόγου”.  The toc. is in the hand of Matthieu Devaris, according to the notes.  Divisions by initials in margin.  No red.  Numerals in margin look to me like Devaris’ work.
  • Grec 2706, 1500. Aristarchus, summaries and scholia on the Iliad. — red initials, headings, and line break.
  • Grec 1535, 11th c. Martyrdoms. — red initials in margin. No headings or line-break.
  • Grec 1671, 1296. Plutarch, parallel lives. — marginal initials, but too frequent to be chapters, and in same ink colour.  No headings or line breaks.  F.10r has a break for new “life”.
  • Grec 107, 7th c. Bilingual Greek/Latin Paul’s letters. uncials. — f6v-7r shows an initial in the margin; a later hand has marked this as “chapter 2”.
  • Grec 1128, 14th c. Barlaam and Joasaph. — red initial in margin. Heading in red, followed by picture (!).
  • Grec 1767, 15th c. George Cedrenus, Narratio of meeting of Pope Silvester with some Jews. — red initial pushing into margin, or sometimes in body of text.  Some red writing, not sure if for that purpose.
  • Grec 1909, 15th c. Simplicius on Aristotle’s Physica. — Divided, red initial, black heading, new line.
  • Grec 2179, 9th c. Dioscorides. — Hard to see, but looks like newline, red title, and numeral (and picture) for new chapter.
  • Grec 2442, 11th c. Aelian, Tactica; Onasander, etc.  Aelian has “:–“, new line initial in same ink pushing into margin, and marginal numeral.
  • Grec 2389, 9th c. Ptolemy. — initials pushing into margin, but appear to be paragraphs. f.3v shows start of chapter 2 with heading, newline, numeral, and the initial, all in black ink.
  • Grec 3094, 17th c. Chrysostom, 4 homilies to Antiochenes. — no divisions.
  • Grec 923, 9th c. John Damascene, Sacra Parallela. — a numbered table of contents in alternating red and black (2r – 8v).  Chapter division – heading in gold box, with numeral.  Marginal initials in black must be paragraph divisions.
  • Grec 451, 914 AD. Division on f.96v consisting of ~~~—, new line, black title, new line and initial in margin.  A numeral seems to be a later addition.  f.213v has the table of contents to book 2 of Eusebius PE.  In the PE there are no divisions except paragraph initials.
  • Grec 781, 939 AD. Chrysostom.  f1r-v is a numbered table of contents for the various items in the book.  There seem to be no internal divisions, tho; not even paragraph initials.
  • Grec 945, 15th c. Origen.  — Contra Celsum (from f.48r) seems to have no internal divisions.
  • Grec 414, 16th c. Gelasius of Cyzicus (from c.4 to end), Eusebius Vita Constantini (siglum=D), HE, etc. — the beginning of Gelasius is lost.  But on f.1v he shows chapter divisions:

And on f.65 Eusebius’ Vita Constantini book 1 begins with an unnumbered table of contents to book 1 thus.  The first item is chapter 1, Προοίμιον περὶ τῆς Κωνσταντίνου τελευτῆς.

and f.81v shows the end of the table for book 2, a blank line, and then the start of the book.  The PE here is noticeably devoid of book titles, although it does feature colophons.  There is likewise a table of contents for Constantine’s Ad sanctorum coetum (f.134).
  • Coislin 202, 6th c. Euthalian chapters, New Testament, note saying it was copied from Pamphilus’ exemplar (f.14r, v). — this one I can’t make much of.

Now that was an interesting way to spend an afternoon!  Thank you, BNF, for making it possible to see all these things “in the wild”, as it were.  This is precisely what a major library should be doing.  And making it possible to download PDF’s helped as well, at various points when I was skimming around the pages looking for things.  Again – thank you.

I suspect that most of these mss. never even get looked at.  Well, today they did!

UPDATE: That was 42 manuscripts, and even at the press of a mouse-button, that took all afternoon.  Useful, tho!

E. Schwartz on the book titles and kephalaia of Eusebius’ Church History

They certainly knew how to write scholarly editions, those editors of the Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller series.  A handful of pages on “titles and kephalaia” in GCS 9.3, by the editor, Eduard Schwarz[1], has nevertheless remained unchallenged for a century.

Of course one reason for this may be that it is incredibly hard for any non-German to read.  Anyway, I have prepared a rough translation of the pages in question, p.clxvii-cliii, with a view to making them better known.  I have also added English translations of the Greek kephalaia given in the text, and overparagraphed at one or two points.

In order to follow the argument, it is necessary to know that Schwartz believed that Eusebius revised his work several times, mainly to remove people who had been executed or whatever in the meantime, and so produced four “editions”, the last in 325 AD.

In Schwartz, the “kephalaia” are the tables of contents that appear at the top of each book.  Each entry in that table is a kephalaion.

*    *     *     *

IV. Headings and Kephalaia.

[p.cxlvii] In chapter 2 we showed that Eusebius originally issued the 7 books of  the original Church History with a  single book as a sort of appendix, and how from this single book in the  penultimate edition 3 more books were produced.  There is substantial evidence that the final edition, present in BDMSA,  was divided into two τεύχη  [codices] of five books, if not by Eusebius himself, at least prior to the  translation into Syriac.  In BD at the  end of book 5 the manuscripts suddenly shorten in a noticeable way: see the  notes on p.504, ll.14-16, 19/20, 21, 21-25, 26 – p.506, 6, 13-15.  This would not normally happen, and can only  be explained because the copyist of the exemplar of BD felt that he was running out of space, and that could only happen if a particular size τεῦχος was  specified for the first 5 books; and therefore also for the last 5 books.  Furthermore BD also change the spelling of “Moses” in the first and last books (see chapter 6); in the first books it is always given in the form Μωυσῆς, – the form used throughout in ATER – but in the last books they agree with M which always reads Μωσῆς.  This is only conceivable if the two halves circulated separately.  That this is not just a peculiarity of BD but that BD, as so often, represents BDM, may be shown by two further indicators: that 1. in the latter books, the special readings of DM cease almost entirely, and that 2. the London manuscript of the Syriac translation never contained more than 5 books.  The latter is shown by the presence of a colophon, which, although it  was erased, we learn that it was indeed present.

[p.cxlviii] At first sight the headings and subscriptions of the individual books look like a confused mess.  However arbitrary additions by copyists can easily be identified.

The simplest and most regular set are the headings in T.  At the top stands the complete text, Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας A.  In all subsequent books there is merely the numeral of the book.  The subscriptions read: Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας A, Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας B, etc., for every book up to book 9.  For book 10 the subscription is Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας τόμοι δέκα.

A and BD are next in order of simplicity.  In a, which must represent A here, the heading for the first book lacks name and title, consisting purely of λόγος A, and this runs through the manuscript, except that for the 8th and 10th books, instead of the numeral there is ὄγδοος and δέκατος respectively.  For subscriptions, the first two books are the same as T.  For books 3-5 they read, Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας λόγος Γ’ or Δ’ or E’.  For books 6, 8 and 9 they read τέλος τοῦ ϛ’ or H’ or Θ’ λόγου τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας.  For book 7 it reads τέλος τοῦ ἑβδόμου λόγου.  B and D differ in the title for book 1: Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας [= T] τόμος A’ B, while Εὐσεβίου Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας βιβλίον B’  D.

In the following both name and title have been omitted, leaving only βιβλίον Γ’ [τρίτον B], βιβλίον Δ’, βιβλίον E’ [because of the gap in D] βιβλίον ἕκτον, βιβλίον ἕβδομον, βιβλίον H’ D, βιβλίον Θ’ D [in B the titles are missing from books 8 and 9] βιβλίον I’ D [δέκατον B].

The subscriptions display even more arbitrariness than in A. Uniformity is only seen in books 4 and 5: τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς  αστικῆς ἱστορίας βιβλίον Δ’ [τέταρτον D] or E.  For books 6-9 they are omitted completely from D.  B has τέλος τοῦ τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας ἕκτου βιβλίον, τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας [in book 7 the word Εὐσεβίου appears here] βιβλίον ἕβδομον or H’ or Θ’, and τέλος added at the end.  T follows D only for book 3: Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας Γ’, where B again gives a prolix version: τέλος βιβλίον τρίτου τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας Εὐσεβίου.  At the end of book 1, BD have: τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου λόγος [= A] A’, and at the end of book 2: τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας [B adds Εὐσεβίου here] λόγος B’.

In B the subscription for the whole work does not appear at the end of book 10, but only beneath the attached excerpt from the Vita Constantini: τέλος σὺν τῆς ὅλης Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου ἤτοι τῶν δέκα τόμων: in D it has fallen out, together with the end of some excerpts [see above, p.xxii].

[p.cxlix] Leaving to one side all the one-off exceptions, it seems that firstly, the overall title, consisting of the name of the author and his distinctive title, the name of the work (without article), was only positioned over the start of book 1; then, that the individual books were provided only with numerals, as in the titles and colophons of T and the first two subscriptions in A: that the terms added in A and BD, λόγος or βιβλίον, cancel each other.  Now let us move onto the edition.  The subscriptions I shall not discuss further.

As with the kephalaia, the headings in ER are different.  M is influenced by this change.  In E, above book 1 is written: Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας [= TB] βιβλίον A’: M has the same heading and these run throughout all the books. For 4, 6 and 8 there is τέταρτον, ἕκτον, ὄγδοον instead of the numeral.  On the other hand in E the format is only gradually changed: for books 2-4 it reads Εὐσεβίου Καισαρείας Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας τόμος B’ or Γ’ or Δ’, for 5 and 7-10 Εὐσεβίου ἐπισκόπου Καισαρείας τῆς Παλαιστίνης Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας τόμος E’ or Z’ or H’ or Θ’ or I’; book 6 omits τῆς Παλαιστίνης.  R corresponds to E for books 3-5 and 7-10; for book 6 there is no article in Καισαρείας Παλαιστίνης; for book 2, the heading reads Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου ἐπισκόπου Καισαρείας Παλαιστίνης Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας τόμος β’; there is no heading to book 1.

The subscriptions are missing in RM, against ancient usage; in E book 1 agrees with E; in book 2, the following is written with the letters descending the page vertically, Εὐσεβίου τόμος  B’; for books 3, 5, 8 and 9 it reads Εὐσεβίου Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας τόμος Γ’ oder βιβλίον ϛ’; oder βιβλίον H’ oder βιβλίον Θ’, for book 4 Εὐσεβίου Καισαρείας Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας λόγος Δ’, for book 5 Εὐσεβίου Καισαρείας Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας τόμος E’.  Immediately after book 10 is τέλος τοῦ ι  τόμου, but beneath the appendix from the Vita Constantini is Εὐσεβίου Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱστορίας βιβλίον δέκατον. The characteristic of this recension is that the complete title appears above each book, and the effort to insert Eusebius‘ title of bishop.

The original form of the kephalaia is only found in AT and the two ancient translations: the latter here in particular demonstrate their value as a control.  In BD they are abbreviated; in ER, at least from book 3 on, they have been thoroughly revised.  M offers its own recension for books 2-5 – the capitulatio for book 1 is missing –, which is similar to that for ER without being identical to it.  On the other hand the minor efforts in Tc in book 2 to correct the kephalaia agree with M; further evidence that Tc is not derived from E.

[p. cl] In the second τεῦχος, i.e. books 5-10, M agrees with AT and the translations; here also the division into two volumes makes itself felt: in the second one the corrector of the exemplar of M lost interest.

In all the manuscripts and translations, the kephalaia stand before each book.  They are designed to be read one after another; the various pronouns reveal this, which refer back to a preceding kephalaion, e.g. 2, 10. 12. 13*; 182, 8*. 18*; 294, 7*. 8 [τοὺς δηλουμένους, equivalent to a pronoun .]. 16; 296, 8; 396, 7; 510, 6; 512, 4. 10; 630, 3. 8; 798, 10, or the omission of common subjects, e.g. 182, 12*; 510, 5. 16; 512, 8. 9; 732, 9—13. 16 [where μαρτύρων is consistently added to Περὶ τῶν κτλ.] or verbs, e.g. 182, 18*; 184, 1. 15; 296, 7; 39, 12; also particles, which are only comprehensible if the kephalaia are collected together, e.g. 182, 17*; 396, 12.

From this it follows that the arrangement in AS, where the kephalaia are repeated within the text or in the margin or above the individual sections is not original, and is contrary to the intent of the author; these headings are indeed incomprehensible in isolation, to a great extent, and they had to be changed in Am and Σt, at the places indicated with an asterisk; although in Am the text of the kephalaia is treated in an entirely arbitrary manner, including those standing at the head of a book.  In some places it is almost impossible to turn the kephalaia directly into marginal notes or headings in the text.  The kephalaia 13-16 of book 3 read:

ΙΓ’    Ὡς δεύτερος Ἀλεχανδρέων ἡγεῖται Ἀβίλιος.
[XIII.  How Abilius was the second ruler of the Alexandrians.]
ΙΔ’    Ὡς καὶ Ῥωμαίων δεύτερος Ἀνέγκλητος ἐπισκοπεῖ.
[XIV.  And how Anencletus was the second bishop of the Romans.]
ΙΕ’    Ὡς τρίτος μετ’ αὐτὸν Κλήμης.
[XV. How, after him, Clement was the third.]
Iϛ’     Περὶ τῆς Κλήμεντος ἐπιστολῆς.
[XVI. On the epistle of Clement.]

This does not fit the text, because ΙΓ’ corresponds to 228, 17-19, ΙΔ’ 228, 12-15, IE’ to 228, 20-24, and Iϛ’ to 230, 1-7.  Eusebius has switched over the order of the first two, in order to collect together the notices referring to Rome.  In the main text it is different, because he recognises there that Anencletus lived in the time of Titus and Abilius under Domitian.  So if the kephalaia are broken up and inserted into the text, confusion must arise. Σ preserves the order of the kephalaia in the headings, and puts Kephalaion 13 over 228, 17, and 14 over 228, 20, where it does not belong, and 15 over 228, 21 [from ὂν συνεργὸν γενέσθαι on], where it also does not fit: because it is not in the 15th but in the 14th kephalaion that Clement followed Anencletus.

On the other hand Am makes a radical change; 13 and 14 are switched, and edited so that they can serve as headings:

[p. cli]

ΙΓ’     Ὡς δεύτερος Ῥωμαίων ἐπίσκοπος Ἀνέγκλητος.
[XIII.   How Anencletus was the second bishop of the Romans.]
ΙΔ’     Ὡς δεύτερος Ἀλεξανδρείας ἐπίσκοπος Ἀβίλιος.
[XIV. How Abilius was second bishop of the Alexandrians.]

A second case is book 6, kephalaia 26 and 27 [512, 10]:

Κϛ’   Ὅπως αὐτὸν [Origenes] ἑώρων οἱ ἐπίσκοποι.
[XXVI. How the bishops regarded him.]
ΚΖ’   Ὡς Ἡρακλᾶς τὴν Ἀλεξανδρέων ἐπισκοπὴν διεδέξατο.
[XXVII. How Heraclas succeeded to the episcopate of the Alexandrians.]

Κϛ’ corresponds to 580, 16-25; KZ’ to 580, 13-15: Eusebius reordered the kephalaia, in order to make 26 follow 23-25, the series dealing with Origen.  Here Am and Σarm give both, and in Σarm this interpolation has also entered the kephalaia at the start of the book; and further, while Am retains αὐτόν, although it has become meaningless, Σarm changes it in both places to αὑτούς, which does not fit Eusebius’ narrative.

In most of the manuscripts, and in the Syriac translation, the kephalaia are numbered, and thereby connected to the sections of the text itself, where the numbers are repeated in the margin.  Naturally there are great differences in the transmission.  But this is not an original feature; the same passages which indicate that the repetition of the kephalaia in the text is not original likewise disprove the repetition of the numerals.  Ms. T, in which the numerals are consistently missing – M omits them only in the last two books – here, as  in the headings, preserves the original.[2]

However I have nevertheless retained them and also placed them in the margin, so that the kephalaia can be more easily cited, and because the numerals, if one carefully locates their positions from the transmission, are an excellent means to identify the paragraphs intended by Eusebius: the numbered kephalaia also permit rapid orientation and finding of passages, so I have not replaced the numerals with modern numbers, and I hope this will be applauded and imitated in similar cases.

Existing opinion wrongly maintains that Eusebius did not compose these kephalaia.  All the same, they go back to the fourth century, as the translations show, and seem to be by Eusebius himself, because in several places he refers to himself as “we”.

On p.100, 19, in the notice which is at the bottom of the kephalaia of the second book, Συνῆκται ἡμῖν ἡ βίβλος ἀπὸ τῶν Κλήμεντος Τερτυλλιανοῦ Ἰωσήπου Φίλωνος. [Our book was compiled from those of Clement, Tertullian, Josephus and Philo.]

[p.clii]

[Note: it looks as if something here has dropped out of the printed text, as Schwartz does not explain his next quotation.  But plainly these are more ‘we’ examples. – RP]

p. 632, 18    [book 7, #30] Περὶ τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς διαπρεψάντων ἐκκλησιαστικῶν  ἀνδρῶν…
[XXX.  On the distinguished churchmen of our own day…]
p. 732, 3     [book 8, #1] Περὶ τῶν πρὸ τοῦ καθ ἡμᾶς διωγμοῦ.
[I. On the events before the persecution in our day.]

The Eusebian formula τὸν Χριστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ [2, 7] would hardly have been used at a later period; in 182, 21 the kephalaion Περὶ Ἰωάννου τοῦ ἀποστόλου καὶ τῆς Ἀποκαλύψεως is carefully phrased, so that nothing is suggested of an apostolic origin for the Apocalypse.  632, 10 Περὶ τῆς Ἰωάννου ἀποκαλύψεως does not contradict this, as neither Dionysius nor Eusebius doubted that it was written by someone named John; only that it was written by the apostle of that name.  It is decisive that the differences between the last two editions of the work continue in the kephalaia.  Certainty is impossible in book 10, because that part is missing in both A and Σ.  However a remnant of the penultimate edition is visible in book 9:

Θ’    Περὶ τῆς τῶν τυράννων καταστροφῆς τοῦ βίου, καὶ οἵαις ἐχρήσαντο πρὸ τῆς τελευτῆς φωναῖς = 826,20 – 848,8
[IX. On the close of the tyrants’ lives, and the expressions they made use of before the end.]
Ι’      Περὶ τῆς τῶν θεοφιλῶν βασιλέων νίκης = 826, 20- 840, 19
[X.  On the victory of the god-beloved emperors.]
ΙΑ’   Περὶ τῆς ὑστάτης ἀπωλείας τῶν τῆς θεοσεβείας ἐχθρῶν = 848, 9 – 852, 6.
[XI.  On the final destruction of the enemies of godliness.]

Kephalaion 10 is in the wrong place.  It should be moved before no. 9, and instead of τῶν τυράννων [of the tyrants’] we would expect τοῦ τυράννου [of the tyrant’s]: apparently this is a remnant of the penultimate edition, in which Licinius still played the role of the emperor beloved by God, and should be replaced by no. 9, but the correction has been done carelessly.  It is unthinkable that any 4th century redactor, that anyone other than Eusebius himself would have given both Constantine and Licinius the title θεοφιλὴς βασιλεύς.

The same applies to the kephalaia of the Vita Constantini [3]; only Eusebius himself could have named at 72, 18 the “bishop Eusebius (of Nicomedia), at 75, 8 Eustathius, and at 39, 3 the Melitians, none of which are named in the text.  He also provided the Preaching of Constantine, which he published as an appendix of the Vita, with a summary, and there is no reason to doubt that the capitulations of the Praeparatio and Demonstratio evangelica are genuine; it is a natural assumption that the continuators of Eusebius’ Church History took from him his manner of prefacing each book with capitulations.  The custom of prefacing with a table of contents was brought across from the genre of Ἱστορίαι, to which the Church History belongs, where there story may not be consecutive but material is accumulated [see Nachr. d. Gött. Ges. d. Wiss. Geschäftl. Mitthlg. 1908, p.111]: [p.cliii] precisely because the contents are disparate, the reader needs a way to orient himself.  Well-known examples are Pliny’s Naturalis historia and Gellius’ Noctes Atticae, also Diodorus’ Βιβλιοθήκη, which Pliny [praef. 25] rightly considers as a compilation [4].  The index with which Stobaeus prefixed his great work can be compared to the capitulation of the Praeparatio and Demonstratio.  Throughout the practice is the same, that the capitulation appears at the front of the text, and not in the text itself.

*    *     *     *

What a marvellous examination of a very thorny issue!

  1. [1] Eusebius Werke. Zweiter Band. Die Kirchengeschichte. Dritter Teil. Leipzig, 1909.  All GCS volumes here; vol. 9.3 here.
  2. [2] 1) For Diodorus, and the newly discovered book by Didymus, Περὶ Δημοσθένους, Laqueur has shown [Hermes 43, p.222] that the kephalaia stood at the front of a book without numbers. — Schwartz.
  3. [3] [1] So, correctly, Giorgio Pasquali, Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 171 (1909), p.285. — Schwartz. Online here.
  4. [4] [1] The Κεφάλαια of P.Oxy IV 665, from a history of Sicily, are hard to evaluate since we cannot guess to which work they belong.  Laqueur has shown that the Anonymus Argentoratensis published by Keil is nothing less than the capitulation of a book about Demosthenes’ Androtionea.

Some notes on Parthenius of Nicaea, and his “Peri Erotikon Pathematon”

Until a few weeks ago, I had managed to go through life without ever encountering the name of the ancient writer Parthenius of Nicaea, or being aware of the absence.   However today I found myself looking at his work, and so obliged to discover who he was, when he lived, and so forth.[1]

Our best information on Parthenius comes from the Suda.  Under the headword Παρθένιος (Adler number pi,664) we find the following text:

Son of Heracleides and Eudora (but Hermippus says Tetha was his mother). From Nicaea or Myrleia. A poet writing elegies and in various metres. He was taken by Cinna as war booty, when the Romans defeated Mithridates [sc. VI Eupator] in war. Then he was freed by reason of education and lived until the time of the Emperor Tiberius. He wrote elegies, Aphrodite, the funeral elegy for the wife Arete, an Encomium of Arete in three books, and many other works.

He wrote about metamorphosis.

The Stoa Online project adds helpfully:

See generally Oxford Classical Dictionary(3) p.1116.

and that Nicaea was enslaved in 73 BC.[2].

From this we learn that he was brought to Rome as a young man as a slave in 73 BC, and lived into the lifetime of Tiberius (born 42 BC, but who only became emperor in AD 14), and that he was famous as a poet.    From the 5th century writer Macrobius we learn that he was Vergil’s Grammaticus in Graecis,[3], which may mean his teacher of Greek, or possibly merely a literary consultant.  Aulus Gellius quotes a line of Parthenius which Virgil imitated.[4].  He was the favourite poet of the emperor Tiberius[5] and the emperor Hadrian thought highly of him and restored his grave in Tivoli.[6]

The only work surviving, however, is his prose Erotica pathemata, or The Sorrows of Love, a collection of 36 stories, all more or less mythological.  Consequently he may be included among the mythographical writers.

The work is dedicated to Cornelius Gallus, with a prefatory letter, indicating that Gallus might find it useful:

Thinking, Cornelius Gallus, that the collection of suffferings in love was very appropriate to you, I have selected them and sent them to you in as brief a form as possible. For those among the present collection that occur in certain poets where they are not narrated in their own right, you will find out for the most part from what follows. You too, will be able to render the most suitable of them in hexameters and elegiacs. Think none the worse of them because they lack that quality of refined elaboration which you pursue. For I have collected them after the fashion of a little notebook and they will, I trust, serve you in the same way.[7]

Gallus himself was a poet, and nine lines of his verse, lamenting an unhappy romance, turned up in a manuscript from the dusty Roman fort at Qasr Ibrim in Nubia.[8]

The text of the Peri Erotikon Pathematon is extant in a single manuscript, Vaticanus Palatinus gr. 398, of the 10th c. AD, which also contains the work of the mythographer Antoninus Liberalis.  In both writers each story is preceded by a heading, which states from which work the story had been obtained, and even the book number of that work.  Effectively both works are divided into chapters, and, since it is hard to believe that anyone but the author could have annotated the work with its sources thus, the division is authorial.  But of course a compendium must inevitably be divided into sections.

An English translation exists, thankfully, by S. Gaselee (1916), in the volume of the Loeb Classical Library series which contains Daphnis and Chloe.[9]  It is undoubtedly a minor piece of literature.  But it adds something to our knowledge of the literature of the late Republic.

  1. [1] The Loeb volume supplies some information; more came from the Suda Online entry; finally from Jacqueline J. H. Klooster, “The erotica pathemata of Parthenius”,  here.
  2. [2] The Stoa Online entry, to which I wish I could link directly, also gives the following useful bibliography: Clausen, Wendell, Virgil’s Aeneid and the Tradition of Hellenistic Poetry (Cambridge, 1987) 5-8; Dyer, Robert R., “Where did Parthenius Teach Vergil?” Vergilius 42 (1996) 19-24; Lightfoot, Jane L. Parthenius of Nicaea: the extant works (Oxford, 1999); Brodersen, Kai, Liebeslieden in der Antike: die Erotica Pathemata des Parthenios (Darmstadt, 2000)
  3. [3] Macrobius, Saturnalia, book V, 18: rendered by the Loeb as: “The following verse is by Parthenius, who was Virgil’s tutor in Greek.”
  4. [4] Aulus Gellius, Attic Nights, book XIII, 27: “…lines of Homer and Parthenius which Virgil seems to have imitated.”
  5. [5] Suetonius, Tiberius, 70.2.
  6. [6] IG xiv 1089 (Kaibel Ep. gr.1089; GVI 2050; Page, FGE p.568-571), an epigram to commemorate the restoration of Parthenius’ grave in Tivoli.
  7. [7] Klooster, p.314; “οἱονεὶ γὰρ ὑπομνηματίων τρόπον αὐτὰ συνελεξάμεθα, καὶ σοὶ νυνὶ τὴν χρῆσιν ὁμοίαν, ὡς ἔοικε, παρέξεται”. The translation is by Jane Lightfoot.
  8. [8] R.D. Anderson, P.J. Parsons, & R.G.M. Nisbet, “Elegiacs by Gallus from Qasr Ibrim”, Journal of Roman Studies 69 (1979) p.128
  9. [9] The Loeb translation may be found at Archive.org here. Most usefully it translates the quotations or references in later literature.