A Sixth-Century Fragment of the Letters of Pliny the Younger A Study of Six Leaves of an Uncial Manuscript Preserved in the Pierpont Morgan Library New York

The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Sixth-Century Fragment of the Letters of

Pliny the Younger, by Elias Avery Lowe and Edward Kennard Rand

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with

almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or

re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included

with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net

Title: A Sixth-Century Fragment of the Letters of Pliny the Younger

A Study of Six Leaves of an Uncial Manuscript Preserved

in the Pierpont Morgan Library New York

Author: Elias Avery Lowe and Edward Kennard Rand

Release Date: September 17, 2005 [EBook #16706]

Language: English

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SIXTH-CENTURY FRAGMENT ***

Produced by Louise Hope, David Starner and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net

A few typographical errors have been corrected. They have been marked in the text with popups

.

A SIXTH-CENTURY FRAGMENT

OF THE

LETTERS OF

PLINY THE YOUNGER

A STUDY OF SIX LEAVES OF AN UNCIAL

MANUSCRIPT PRESERVED IN

THE PIERPONT MORGAN LIBRARY

NEW YORK

BY

E. A. LOWE

ASSOCIATE OF THE CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON

SANDARS READER AT CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY (1914)

LECTURER IN PALAEOGRAPHY AT OXFORD UNIVERSITY

AND

E. K. RAND

PROFESSOR OF LATIN IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY

PUBLISHED BY THE

CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON

WASHINGTON, 1922

CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON

Publication No. 304

THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

U. S. A.

PREFATORY NOTE.

THE Pierpont Morgan Library, itself a work of art, contains masterpieces of painting and sculpture, rare books, and illuminated manuscripts. Scholars generally are perhaps not aware that it also possesses the oldest Latin manuscripts in America, including several that even the greatest European libraries would be proud to own. The collection is also admirably representative of the development of script throughout the Middle Ages. It comprises specimens of the uncial hand, the half-uncial, the Merovingian minuscule of the Luxeuil type, the script of the famous school of Tours, the St. Gall type, the Irish and Visigothic hands, and the Beneventan and Anglo-Saxon scripts.

Among the oldest manuscripts of the library, in fact the oldest, is a hitherto unnoticed fragment of great significance not only to palaeographers, but to all students of the classics. It consists of six leaves of an early sixth-century manuscript of the Letters of the younger Pliny. This new witness to the text, older by three centuries than the oldest codex heretofore used by any modern editor, has reappeared in this unexpected quarter, after centuries of wandering and hiding. The fragment was bought by the late J. Pierpont Morgan in Rome, in December 1910, from the art dealer Imbert; he had obtained it from De Marinis, of Florence, who had it from the heirs of the Marquis Taccone, of Naples. Nothing is known of the rest of the manuscript.

The present writers had the good fortune to visit the Pierpont Morgan Library in 1915. One of the first manuscripts put into their hands was this early sixth-century fragment of Pliny’s Letters, which forms the subject of the following pages. Having received permission to study the manuscript and publish results, they lost no time in acquainting classical scholars with this important find. In December of the same year, at the joint meeting of the American Archaeological and Philological Associations, held at Princeton University, two papers were read, one concerning the palaeographical, the other the textual, importance of the fragment. The two studies which follow, Part I by Doctor Lowe, Part II by Professor Rand, are an elaboration of the views presented at the meeting. Some months after the present volume was in the form of page-proof, Professor E. T. Merrill’s long-expected edition of Pliny’s Letters appeared (Teubner, Leipsic, 1922). We regret that we could not avail ourselves of it in time to introduce certain changes. The reader will still find Pliny cited by the pages of Keil, and in general he should regard the date of our production as 1921 rather than 1922.

The writers wish to express their gratitude for the privilege of visiting the Pierpont Morgan Library and making full use of its facilities. For permission to publish the manuscript they are indebted to the generous interest of Mr. J. Pierpont Morgan. They also desire to make cordial acknowledgment of the unfailing courtesy and helpfulness of the Librarian, Miss Belle da Costa Greene, and her assistant, Miss Ada Thurston. Lastly, the writers wish to thank the Carnegie Institution of Washington for accepting their joint study for publication and for their liberality in permitting them to give all the facsimiles necessary to illustrate the discussion.

E. K. RAND.

E. A. LOWE.

CONTENTS.

Part I. The Palaeography of the Morgan Fragment. By E. A. Lowe.

Description of the Fragment

Contents, size, vellum, binding

Ruling

Relation of the six leaves to the rest of the manuscript

Original size of the manuscript

Disposition

Ornamentation

Corrections

Syllabification

Orthography

Abbreviations

Authenticity of the six leaves

Archetype

The Date and Later History of the Manuscript

On the dating of uncial manuscripts

Dated uncial manuscripts

Oldest group of uncial manuscripts

Characteristics of the oldest uncial manuscripts

Date of the Morgan manuscript

Later history of the Morgan manuscript

Conclusion

Transcription

Part II. The Text of the Morgan Fragment. By E. K. Rand.

The Morgan Fragment and Aldus’s Ancient Codex Parisinus

The Codex Parisinus

The Bodleian volume

The Morgan fragment possibly a part of the lost Parisinus

The script

Provenience and contents

The text closely related to that of Aldus

Editorial methods of Aldus

Relation of the Morgan Fragment to the Other Manuscripts of the Letters

Classes of the manuscripts

The early editions

Π a member of Class I

Π the direct ancestor of BF with probably a copy intervening

The probable stemma

Further consideration of the external history of P, Π, and B

Evidence from the portions of BF outside the text of Π

Editorial Methods of Aldus

Aldus’s methods; his basic text

The variants of Budaeus in the Bodleian volume

Aldus and Budaeus compared

The latest criticism of Aldus

Aldus’s methods in the newly discovered parts of Books VIII, IX, and X

The Morgan fragment the best criterion of Aldus

Conclusion

Description of Plates

Part I.

THE PALAEOGRAPHY OF THE MORGAN FRAGMENT

BY

E. A. LOWE

THE PALAEOGRAPHY OF THE MORGAN FRAGMENT.

DESCRIPTION OF THE FRAGMENT.

Contents

 size

 vellum

 binding T HE Morgan fragment of Pliny the Younger contains the end of Book II and the beginning of Book III of the Letters (II, xx. 13-III, v. 4). The fragment consists of six vellum leaves, or twelve pages, which apparently formed part of a gathering or quire of the original volume.

The leaves measure 11-3/8 by 7 inches (286 x 180 millimeters); the written space measures 7-1/4 by 4-3/8 inches (175 x 114 millimeters); outer margin, 1-7/8 inches (50 millimeters); inner, 3/4 inch (18 millimeters); upper margin, 1-3/4 inches (45 millimeters); lower, 2-1/4 inches (60 millimeters).

The vellum is well prepared and of medium thickness. The leaves are bound in a modern pliable vellum binding with three blank vellum fly-leaves in front and seven in back, all modern. On the inside of the front cover is the book-plate of John Pierpont Morgan, showing the Morgan arms with the device: Onward and Upward. Under the book-plate is the press-mark M.462.

Ruling There are twenty-seven horizontal lines to a page and two vertical bounding lines. The lines were ruled with a hard point on the flesh side, each opened sheet being ruled separately: 48 v and 53 r , 49 r and 52 v , 50 v and 51 r . The horizontal lines were guided by knife-slits made in the outside margins quite close to the text space; the two vertical lines were guided by two slits in the upper margin and two in the lower. The horizontal lines were drawn across the open sheets and extended occasionally beyond the slits, more often just beyond the perpendicular bounding lines. The written space was kept inside the vertical bounding lines except for the initial letter of each epistle; the first letter of the address and the first letter of the epistle proper projected into the left margin. Here and there the scribe transgressed beyond the bounding line. On the whole, however, he observed the limits and seemed to prefer to leave a blank before the bounding line rather than to crowd the syllable into the space or go beyond the vertical line.

Relation of the six leaves to the rest of the manuscript One might suppose that the six leaves once formed a complete gathering of the original book, especially as the first and last pages, folios 48 r and 53 v have a darker appearance, as though they had been the outside leaves of a gathering that had been affected by exposure. But this darker appearance is sufficiently accounted for by the fact that both pages are on the hair side of the parchment, and the hair side is always darker than the flesh side. Quires of six leaves or trinions are not unknown. Examples of them may be found in our oldest manuscripts. But they are the exception. ¹ The customary quire is a gathering of eight leaves, forming a quaternion proper. It would be natural, therefore, to suppose that our fragment did not constitute a complete gathering in itself but formed part of a quaternion. The supposition is confirmed by the following considerations:

In the first place, if our six leaves were once a part of a quaternion, the two leaves needed to complete them must have formed the outside sheet, since our fragment