DEAR ROXI 
in tutta calma, se vuoi ti mando il pdf ,,,,
l' articolo è questo
www.jstor.org/stable/289647?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contentszio ot
Vossianus Q 86 and Reginensis 333
Author(s): Grace FrankSource: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 44, No. 1 (1923), pp. 67-70
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL:
www.jstor.org/stable/289647Accessed: 10-07-2017 15:06 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/termsThe Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to The American Journal of Philology
This content downloaded from 91.253.76.95 on Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:06:30 UTC
All use subject to
http://about.jstor.org/termsVII.-VOSSIANUS Q 86 AND REGINENSIS 333.
In the Philological Quarterly I, 273, Professor Rand, di
cussing the Codex Leidensis Vossianus Latinus Q 86, writ
"What became of the Juvencus and the Sedulius at the begi
ning or the part of Isidore at the end we should much like t
know. Perhaps some scopritor felice will come across them y
in Leyden or Paris or Rome." There can be no doubt, I thin
that the Juvencus and Sedulius of this famous old Leyden cod
are now in the Vatican Library in Rome, Codex Reginensis 33
Dr. V. F. Biichner of the University of Leyden Library ca
culated from the signatures on the 26th and 31st quinions of the
Codex Vossianus that just sixteen gatherings of ten leaves apiece,
minus the leaf which now forms the first folio of the Vossianus
or 159 leaves in all, have been lost at the beginning (cf. Rand
art. cit., p. 266). Codex Reginensis 333 has these sixteen gat
erings. It comprises 163 leaves as now formed, but the firs
gathering is of twelve instead of ten leaves, the fourth gatherin
numbers eleven leaves because a single leaf has been inserte
after fol. 43 in order to include fifty lines which had' been
omitted,3 and the present fol. 163 obviously does not belong
the first state of the book-indeed a remnant of the origina
fol. 163, cut when that folio became fol. 1 of the Vossianus,
is visible.
1 On the plain parchment binding are the old numbers 1129 and 139
The latter is that of the catalog made in 1690 and that known to Mon
faucon. On the manuscript itself, fol. lr, is the number A. 37.
2The signatures of all the gatherings except the first and fifth a
visible, but they are of two sorts: Arabic numerals at the beginnin
of each gathering and Roman at the end, both in the lower margin.
The latter correspond to those in the Vossianus and undoubtedly belong
to the original state of the book. They are found at the end of gatherings II, III, IV, VIII, XI, XIII, XIV, XV. It is a pleasure to record
my indebtedness and gratitude to Dr. Biichner for the photographs of
the Vossianus secured through him and for the information regarding
it that he kindly sent me.
Cf. Marold's edition of Juvencus, p. 46, note to II, 543: "In V"
= Reg. 333] hoc folium deerat (v. 543-591) et saec. XII suppletum
est, legitur versus spurius post 544." Reifferscheid dates the hand of
fol. 44 in the eleventh or twelfth century. Huemer does not date it.
67
This content downloaded from 91.253.76.95 on Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:06:30 UTC
All use subject to
http://about.jstor.org/termsAMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
The Vossianus opens with Arator's Acts of the Apos
written in a fairly large and leisurely hand using, for the
41 folios, single columns of sixteen lines to the page. The
hand, employing the same style and the same number of
to the page, has written Juvencus' Evangeliorum libri IV
Sedulius' Paschale Carmen in the Reginensis, and the size
the page in all three texts is the same.
Moreover, at the bottom of fol. 162' of the Reginensis
find the greeting which regularly precedes Arator's Acts o
Apostles and the gloss Incipit lib Aratoris. This greet
which reads "Domino sacro sco beatissimoq; atq: apost
et in toto orbe primo omnium sacerdotum papae uigilio A
subdiaconus," 4 has been supplied at the top of fol. 1 of
Vossianus in a later hand. It was apparently copied f
the preceding page by the person who divided the or
codex, for it contains the unusual sacro and beatissimoque wh
are not in the other manuscripts and omits the word salu
which is also wanting in the Reginensis.5 If further pro
the unity of the two codices were needed it exists in the
ginal gloss beside the Finitum est of Sedulius' Paschale Car
in the Reginensis (fol. 162) : "Require in hoc volumine C
mus, socii, Domino, post Aratorem." This refers to the hy
of Sedulius which is still in the Vossianus.6
Unfortunately the discovery of the relation of Reginensis 333
to the Vossianus does not settle the question of the date of the
book. Indeed, although most authorities who have used the
part now in Leyden date it in the ninth century, those who
have edited Juvencus and Sedulius from the part in the Vatican
hesitate between the ninth and tenth. Arevalus, to be sure, in
his edition of Juvencus ascribed it "ad VIII aut IX saeculum,"
'The word sacro and the q; of beatissimo q; are in the hand that
wrote the glosses.
Cf. the preceding note and Migne LXVIII, col. 73, note, where,
however, the words atque apostolico which occur in the Vossianus as
well as in the Reginensis are omitted.
6 For a summary of the contents of the Vossianus, see Peiper's edition
of Avitus, p. lxvi. Immediately following Arator (fol. 1-63) are the
epigrams of Prosper (63v-79r). The hymn of Sedulius follows them
(79v).
68
This content downloaded from 91.253.76.95 on Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:06:30 UTC
All use subject to
http://about.jstor.org/termsVOSSIANUS Q 86 AND REGINENSIS 333.
but Reifferscheid7 calls it tenth century and his date w
accepted by Huemer in his edition of Sedulius made in 1885
Marold, who edited Juvencus in 1886, did not decide betwe
the dates of Arevalus and Reifferscheid though he stated th
Lud. Jeep, who collated the manuscript for him, agreed wi
Arevalus. Finally, Huemer in his edition of Juvencus (1891)
calls the manuscript saec. IX vel X.
That the book (or its twin, as Professor Rand would prefe
was in Cluny in the twelfth century, the catalog first cited
Peiper in this connection would indicate (cf. Rand, art. cit.
p. 261). The finding of the lost Juvencus and Sedulius completes the identification of our book with the volume describ
in the Cluny catalog. According to Professor Rand, howeve
the Vossianus probably was written at Fleury. He assum
that it was either brought to Cluny, or that the book describ
in the Cluny catalog is the twin of our codex. His argumen
is based not only on a feeling that the script of the Vossian
resembles the hand in vogue at Fleury in the latter half of t
ninth century, but on the assumption that a copy of Phaedr
conserved in the Vatican, Codex Reginensis 1616, which is
book of Fleury, originally belonged to our volume. Whethe
or not the handwriting of the Vossianus is that of Fleury,
do not feel competent to judge, but I find it difficult to beli
that the copy of Phaedrus in Reginensis 1616 ever formed pa
(necessarily the last part) of the Vossianus. Waiving the poin
that the last item in the Cluny catalog's description of the manu
script is " ars Isidori de grammatica et de disciplinis aliarum
artium" (a fragment of which concludes the Vossianus) a
that there is no mention of Phaedrus' fables, I think the difference in the size of the pages and in that of the space occupie
by the script in these two codices precludes the possibility t
they were ever united. The Phaedrus page (0.19 x 0.12) is appr
7 Sitzungsberichte, K. Akademie d. Wiss., Phil.-Hist. Classe, Wien
vol. 59 (1808), p. 110.
8 Huemer, not suspecting the unity of the two books, followed Reifferscheid in ascribing the copy of Sedulius' Paschale Carmen that he found
in Reg. 333 to the tenth century (p. xx); following Peiper, he dated
the transcription of the hymn that he found in the Vossianus to the
ninth (p. 155, note).
69
This content downloaded from 91.253.76.95 on Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:06:30 UTC
All use subject to
http://about.jstor.org/termsAMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
ciably smaller than that of the Vossianus (0.23 x 0.
margins show that it could not have been cut down f
as large as the latter.9 The left-hand margins of
verso are of approximately the same width, and ther
no cutting where the two sheets that make up the
folded.
If, however, our manuscript dates from the ninth century,
it could hardly have been written at Cluny which was founded
in 910. Can it be dated with certainty in the ninth century?
The script of Cluny according to Thompson (Introduction to
Greek and Latin Paleography, p. 418) tended to be conservative,
and, as we have seen, the hand of Reginensis 333 has been dated
from the tenth as well as from the ninth century. Brave is the
paleographer, however, who would distinguish between a late
ninth and an early tenth century manuscript with only the
script to aid him. The problem of the date and provenience
of our codex, therefore, still awaits a satisfactory solution. The
purpose of this paper is merely to show that the Juvencus and
Sedulius of Reginensis 333 quite surely preceded the works
contained in Vossianus Q 86.10
GRACE FRANK.
THE AMERICAN ACADEMY IN ROME.
Cf. the reproductions and measurements in Chatelain, Palographie
des Classiques latins, II, plates CLII and CLXV. I should give the
average measurements of Reg. 333 as 0.235 x 0.185 and of the Phaedrus
page as 0.193 x0.12.
10 After this paper had left my hands I was fortunate enough to meet
Mgr. Stanislas Le Grelle who is preparing a monumental work on the
Reginensis. He kindly supplied me with material proof of the foregoing. According to Mgr. Le Grelle, the original codex before the
division was numbered A 37 by Paul Petau (cf. note 1 above), 903 by
Alexandre Petau. Under the latter the separation occurred, the Roman
half receiving the number 1129, later becoming Reg. 1393 (Montfaucon's
number) and finally Reg. 333, the Leyden half being numbered 1157
and later becoming Voss. Q 86. The Phaedrus of Reg. 1616, on the
other hand, was numbered Q 23 in Paul Petau's library, 1029 and 1631
in Alexandre Petau's, and 839 in the early Reginensis catalog (Montfaucon's number).
70
