I recently had reason to consult manuscripts of the 10th century Byzantine encyclopedia known as the Suda, and known in the past under the misleading title of “Suidas”. This I did, but I realised that I did not actually know what the main mss of the Suda might be. Some 80 manuscripts are listed at Pinakes, containing all or part of the text. The following notes are from Adler’s edition, vol. 1, p.218 f.
- A = Paris, BNF, gr. 2625 and 2626. Both have an older and a younger section. 2625 older portion is not dated by Adler; the younger is 14th century. The older part of 2626 is 12-13th century, the younger is 15th century.
- R = Vatican 3-4, copied from A before 1449.
- Marcianus 449 (today 558), 15th c. Copied from A.
- British Library Additional 11892-3. Copied from A in 1402 by George Baeophorus.
- Vatican 2317 (= 2431). AD 1463. Copied from A.
- F = Florence, Mediceo-Laurenziana 55, 1. Copied from A in 1422.
- V = Leiden, Vossianus, 12th century. Written before 1204 when S was copied from it. Adler gives no shelfmark, and it does not appear to be listed in Pinakes. A google search suggests it is Leiden University Library, Vossianus gr. F 2.[1]
- S = Cod. Vaticanus 1296. AD 1204. Copied from V. Currently divided in 3 volumes.
- C = Oxford, Corpus Christi College 76-7. End of 15th c. Copied from V.
- British Library, Harleianus 3100. End of 15th c. Copied from V. Originally at Durham Cathedral; presented by the dean and chapter to Edward Harley in 1715; and sold to the British Museum with the other Harley mss in 1753.
- G = Paris 2623. Written before 1481 by Caesare Strategus. Part of the mixed GIT family.
- Holkham Hall 288 (now in Bodleian library), 1454 AD. Related to G.
- I = Codex Angelicus 75. 15th c. Part of the mixed GIT family.
- Escorial X I 1. 15th c. Part of the mixed GIT family.
- Paris suppl. 96. 15th c. Excerpts. Part of the mixed GIT family.
- T = Vatican 881. AD 1434. Part of the mixed GIT family. Interpolated at the end.
- U = Urbinas gr. 161. AD 1461. Related to T.
- N = Marcianus XI, 8 ( today 991). 15th c. Related to T.
- B = Paris 2622. 13th c. Part of the BLM family.
- Madrid 4882. (O 89) 16th c. Part of the BLM family.
- Copenhagen Gl. Kgl. Saml. 413. 1465 AD. Part of the BLM family.
- Marcianus X 21-22, (today 1197-8). ca. 1475. Part of the BLM family.
- E = Brussels 11281. AD 1476. Part of the BLM family.
- L = Codex Sinaiticus, St Petersburg 125. 14th c. Part of the BLM family.
- D = Bodleian Misc. Gr. 289. (= Auct. V 52). 15th c. Part of the BLM family.
- H = Paris gr. 2624. 15th c. Part of the BLM family.
- Milan, Ambrosianus 494 (L 108 Sup.) 15th c. Part of the BLM family.
- M = Marcianus 448 (1047). 13th c. Part of the BLM family.
- Oxford, Bodleian Misc. 290 (Auct. V 53) 15th c. Copied from M.
There are also excerpts preserved.
Sadly no stemma is given by Adler.
- [1]Tiziano Dorandi, “Liber qui vocatur suda: Translation of the Suda by Robert Grosseteste”, 2013. Via here: “Abstract: Robert Grosseteste (Bishop of Lincoln from 1235) translated in Latin some entries of the Byzantine Lexicon known as the Suda, a translation which is still unpublished. This paper investigates the textual transmission of Suda’s translation. In the first part Grosseteste’s learning and knowledge of Ancient Greek are briefly outlined. In the same section his other translations from Greek are also discussed. A description of the extant manuscripts of Suda’s translation is provided, as well as a catalogue of the items (pertaining to a separate textual tradition), which are found in Grosseteste’s notulae of his doctrinal, literary and scholarly works. Special attention is paid to the so-called Lexicon Arundelianum (a Greek-Latin Lexicon – but entirely written in Latin – Transmitted by MS London, College of Arms, Arundel 9). Grosseteste sometimes combines several Suda’s items and/or inserts in the original Lexicon text some entries of the Etymologicum Gudianum. Moreover Grosseteste’s translations are extremely literal (verbum de verbo). Finally, MS Leiden University Library, Vossianus gr. F 2 (12th cent.) is proved to be the Suda Greek manuscript used by Grosseteste for his translation.”↩
I presume I do not need to tell you about the already more than a decade old but still inspiring Suda Online project http://www.stoa.org/sol/
Thank you! It was while using the SOL that I realised that I didn’t know anything about the manuscripts.
The Suda dictionary has not survived in full. Adler is considered the most complete edition and includes all that had survived at the time of its publication.
I’ve not heard that – sounds more like the lexicon of Photius?
I have been trying to find on the web if any new manuscripts (preferably with new entries) have appeared after Adler. It seems there have not but I have not found a definitive answer either way. As far as I know Myriobiblus has survived in full. Suda is, or at least feels, like a compilation of preexisting scholia on each entry. Photius made his own comments. There are parallels though, both works belong to the Macedonian Renaissance and were ways for the authors to show their learnedness.
Pinakes has a much longer list of mss than Adler does, so the answer is “probably”.