Download the full version of the ebook at

https://ebookultra.com

Donati Graeci Learning Greek in the

Renaissance Federica Ciccolella

https://ebookultra.com/download/donati-graeci-
learning-greek-in-the-renaissance-federica-
ciccolella/

Explore and download more ebook at https://ebookultra.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

The Language of Word Meaning 1st Edition Federica Busa

https://ebookultra.com/download/the-language-of-word-meaning-1st-
edition-federica-busa/

ebookultra.com

The Classic Greek Dictionary in Two Parts Greek English

and English Greek Gorgias Historical Dictionaries Greek
and English Edition George Ricker Berry
https://ebookultra.com/download/the-classic-greek-dictionary-in-two-
parts-greek-english-and-english-greek-gorgias-historical-dictionaries-
greek-and-english-edition-george-ricker-berry/
ebookultra.com

Renaissance Now The Value of the Renaissance Past in

Contemporary Culture 1st New edition Edition Brendan
Dooley
https://ebookultra.com/download/renaissance-now-the-value-of-the-
renaissance-past-in-contemporary-culture-1st-new-edition-edition-
brendan-dooley/
ebookultra.com

Patronage in the Renaissance Guy Fitch Lytle (Editor)

https://ebookultra.com/download/patronage-in-the-renaissance-guy-
fitch-lytle-editor/

ebookultra.com
The Great Pox The French Disease in Renaissance Europe
Arrizabalaga

https://ebookultra.com/download/the-great-pox-the-french-disease-in-
renaissance-europe-arrizabalaga/

ebookultra.com

Philosophy of Religion in the Renaissance Paul Richard

Blum

https://ebookultra.com/download/philosophy-of-religion-in-the-
renaissance-paul-richard-blum/

ebookultra.com

The Greek Concept Of Nature SUNY Series in Ancient Greek

Philosophy 1st Edition Gerard Naddaf

https://ebookultra.com/download/the-greek-concept-of-nature-suny-
series-in-ancient-greek-philosophy-1st-edition-gerard-naddaf/

ebookultra.com

The Italian Renaissance Harold Bloom

https://ebookultra.com/download/the-italian-renaissance-harold-bloom/

ebookultra.com

Writing History in Renaissance Italy Leonardo Bruni and

the Uses of the Past I Tatti Studies in Italian
Renaissance History 1st Edition Gary Ianziti
https://ebookultra.com/download/writing-history-in-renaissance-italy-
leonardo-bruni-and-the-uses-of-the-past-i-tatti-studies-in-italian-
renaissance-history-1st-edition-gary-ianziti/
ebookultra.com
Donati Graeci Learning Greek in the Renaissance
Federica Ciccolella Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Federica Ciccolella
ISBN(s): 9789004163522, 9004163522
Edition: Bilingual
File Details: PDF, 4.78 MB
Year: 2008
Language: english
Donati Graeci
Columbia Studies in the
Classical Tradition

Editorial Board
William V. Harris (editor)
Eugene F. Rice, jr.†, Alan Cameron, Suzanne Said
Kathy H. Eden, Gareth D. Williams

VOLUME 32
 Donati Graeci
Learning Greek in the Renaissance

By
Federica Ciccolella

LEIDEN • BOSTON
2008
Cover illustration: Milan, Biblioteca Trivulziana, MS. 2167 (Liber Donati, end of the fifteenth
century), fol. 13v: young Earl Massimiliano Ercole Sforza at school.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Ciccolella, Federica.
Donati Graeci : learning Greek in the Renaissance / by Federica Ciccolella.
p. cm. -- (Columbia studies in the classical tradition ; 32)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-90-04-16352-2 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Greek language--Study and
teaching--History--To 1500. 2. Greek philology--History--To 1500. I. Title. II. Series.

PA57.C53 2009
480.71--dc22
2008039458

ISSN: 0166-1302
ISBN: 978 90 04 16352 2

Copyright 2008 by The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York.

Published by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV
provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.

printed in the netherlands

Marco carissimo
 CONTENTS

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

Chapter One. The Latin Donatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1. Aelius Donatus’ Artes: A Pedagogical Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. The Shaping of the Medieval Donatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3. Donatus(es) as Schoolbook(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4. Ianua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5. Ianua(e): Structure and Variants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6. Vernacular Donatus(es) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7. Donati meliores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
8. The Association with Disticha Catonis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
9. Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Printed Editions of
Ianua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
10. Learning Latin: Repetition, Memorization, and
Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
11. The Latin Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Chapter Two. The Greek Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

1. The Position of Greek in Roman Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
2. Greek Grammar in the Middle Ages: An Impossible
Dream? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
3. Humanism and the Revival of Greek Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
4. The Byzantine Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5. Practicing Greek Grammar: Erôtêmata, Epimerismoi, and
Schedography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
6. The Making of Humanist Greek Grammar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
7. Other Grammars and Course Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
8. Teaching Greek in Humanist Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
9. Schools of Greek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
10. Teaching Greek in Greek: Michael Apostolis and the
“Direct Method” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
viii contents

Chapter Three. Donati graeci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

1. In Search of the Greek Donatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
2. The Four Donati graeci or Pylai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
3. Pylê a: The Manuscripts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
4. Pylê a: Toward a Stemma Codicum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
5. Pylê a as a Grammar Book: The Variable Parts of Speech . . 180
6. Pylê a as a Grammar Book: The Invariable Parts of
Speech and the Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
7. The Other Donati graeci: Pylai as Compilations or Donati
compositi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
8. The Manuscripts of the Donati compositi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
9. The Donati compositi as Grammar Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
10. The Language of the Greek Donatus: Between Greek and
Latin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
11. The Greek Cato . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

Chapter Four. The Greek Donati and Their Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

1. Latin in Byzantium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
2. Maximus Planudes and the Greek Donatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
3. Places of Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
4. Using the Donati graeci in Schools: “Reutilization” and
“Superimposition” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

TEXTS

Donatus graecus a
Siglorum conspectus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
Textus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
Appendix latina. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
Donatus graecus b
Siglorum conspectus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401
Textus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
Donatus graecus c
Siglorum conspectus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
Textus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430
Donatus graecus d
Siglorum conspectus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493
Textus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495
 contents ix

Notes
Donatus graecus a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513
Donatus graecus b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
Donatus graecus c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529
Donatus graecus d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544

Appendix I. Comparing the Four Donati graeci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555

Appendix II. The Manuscripts of Ianua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587
Index of Personal Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623
Index of Manuscripts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 635
 INTRODUCTION

Hi nunc Constantinopoli capta quis dubitet incendio quaevis scriptorum monumenti

concidentur? Nunc ergo et Homero et Pindaro et Menandro et omnibus illustrioribus
poetis secunda mors erit. Nunc Graecorum philosophorum ultimus patebit interitus.
Restabit aliquid lucis apud Latinos, at fateor neque id erit diuturnum.
[Now that [the Turks] have captured Constantinople, who can doubt
that every memorial of the ancient writers will be set on fire? Now
Homer, Pindar, Menander, and all the most famous poets will die for
the second time. Now the last destruction of the Greek philosophers
will be at hand. A gleam will survive among the Latins, but, I would
say, it will not last for a long time either.]1

Few phenomena shaped Western European culture as significantly as

the rediscovery of ancient studies during the Renaissance. As Jacob
Burckhardt has pointed out, “though the essence of the phenomena
[i.e., the cultural aspects of the Renaissance] might still have been
the same without the classical revival, it is only with and through this
revival that they are actually manifested to us.”2 As the ideal training
for the ideal citizen of the new era, the system of humanist education
replaced the medieval curriculum, which had equipped individuals
with complex skills appropriate to specialized tasks, but was based on
the authoritative message of a few selected texts.
The influence of the culture of antiquity had not died out in
Europe during the Middle Ages. The revival of classical antiquity pro-
moted by Charlemagne in the ninth century was already a form of
Renaissance; even some aspects of monastic scholarship can be under-
stood by considering the direct influence of Latin writers, whose works
had continued to be copied, studied, and imitated within the walls
of medieval monasteries. Despite the increasing spread of vernacular
languages, Latin kept its role as the language of the church, law, and
international affairs, as well as of science and learning, throughout

1 From a letter by Enea Silvio Piccolomini (Pope Pius II) to Cardinal Nicholas of

Cues, 21 July 1453 (Pertusi 19902, 2. 54).

2 Burckhardt 1990 [1860], 120.
xii introduction

the Middle Ages, especially in Italy, where the Roman past had left
the most outstanding traces.
However, the Renaissance’s attitude toward classical antiquity was
very different from that of the Middle Ages. The rebirth of city life,
which started in Italy in the fourteenth century, favored the rise of
a new culture and, at the same time, the rediscovery of the past:
“Culture, as soon as it freed itself from the fantastic bond of the
Middle Ages, […] needed a guide, and found one in the ancient
civilization.”3 Men of culture continued to study the Latin authors
of the medieval curriculum, but expanded their knowledge by adding
other authors and literary works. Recovering ancient texts that, for a
long time, had lain neglected in monastic libraries of Europe became
the goal of many humanists. The new manuscripts made up large
collections, and the texts they contained reached a wider audience:
the use of a simplified handwriting in manuscripts and, later, the
invention of printing sped the reproduction of books and made their
circulation easier. Translations spread the knowledge of these texts
among a wider public.4
This new culture had enormous effects on education. In the hu-
manist system of global education of the perfect citizen, the humani-
ties acquired a significant place, along with the seven liberal arts and
more practical disciplines, such as law and medicine.5 At the same
time, ethical and religious values were nurtured: finally, the conflict
between ancient pagan culture and Christianity found a solution in

3Burckhardt 1990 [1860], 123. See also Kristeller 1979 [1955], 19–20; Witt 2000,
173; and Marcucci 2002, 15–19. Scholars have often emphasized that, among the Ital-
ian city-states, Florence had partially recreated the political and social environment
of fifth century Athens: the rise of a new class of merchants and traders encour-
aged the development of human abilities and being open to the world, while wealth
and power—and not the nobility of birth—determined participation in political life.
Florentines grounded the pursuit of human happiness in the use of creative intel-
ligence and the fulfillment of the values of antiquity: virtue, justice, wisdom, and
prudence, i.e., the four Platonic virtues (cf. Symp. 209A). Thus, there was no contra-
diction between the individual quest for material wealth and Christian morality. See,
e.g., Stinger 1988, 176ff.
4 On Renaissance translations, see in particular the excellent works by Baldassarri

(2003) and Botley (2004).

5 The idea that the humanities are a necessary component of a “global educa-

tion” is expressed in Pier Paolo Vergerio’s treatise De ingenuis moribus et liberalibus studiis
adulescentiae (text and translation in Kallendorf 2000, 2–91, in particular 28–29). See
Buck 1959, 273f.; Gundersheimer 1965, 7 and 25 (with a partial translation of the
treatise, 26–38); and Garin 1966, 114f.
 introduction xiii

the West. By the first half of the fifteenth century, the studia humani-
tatis became a clearly defined circle of scholarly disciplines: grammar,
rhetoric, history, poetry, and moral philosophy. In each of these dis-
ciplines, the reading and interpretation of Latin and Greek authors
played an important role.6 The humanities were not regarded as an
encouragement to otium, but as a necessary support of negotium, a stim-
ulus to action; the imitation of the style and content of the works of
the classical writers provided an excellent source of inspiration.7
The picture, however, is not homogeneous. Although the crisis
of medieval pedagogy had already emerged during Petrarch’s time
(1304–1374), there was no conscious break with the past until the fif-
teenth century. For a long time, humanist teachers continued to use
medieval teaching methods, readings, and schoolbooks, and to regard
repetition, memorization, and imitation as the students’ main tasks.8
Moreover, in spite of the steady rise of the vernacular languages, the
prevalence of Latin as the medium of instruction remained unchal-
lenged for a long time.9
The manifold aspects of the humanist revival of ancient culture
have been extensively studied. In the last hundred years, the discov-
ery and publication of many documents has offered a more precise
and detailed picture of Renaissance education. Evaluating the rela-
tionship between the new pedagogy and medieval culture and educa-
tion, however, is much more difficult:10 the interpretation of the extent

6 According to Kristeller (1979 [1955], 23 ff.), the humanists’ main concern was
literature. In fact, most of them were teachers, professors, or secretaries to princes or
cities; most of their works were orations, letters, poems, or historical works. Therefore,
“Renaissance humanism must be understood as a characteristic phase in what may
be called the rhetorical tradition of Western culture.” Kristeller denies a philosophical
origin of Humanism, even if he acknowledges the impact of the new culture on
philosophy because of the emphasis placed on the individual and the rediscovery
of the Greek philosophers.
7 Witt (2000, 8ff.), instead, interprets Renaissance education as being based on a

polarity between vita contemplativa and vita activa and considers grammar and rhetoric
to represent the terms of this opposition. Such a contrast was not felt in antiquity:
grammar and rhetoric were complementary in education. For an overview of the
history of modern studies on the Renaissance after Burckhardt see Rabil 1988; and
Celenza 2004, 1–57.
8 See Padley 1976, 9: “Rather than a training in original thought, [humanist

pedagogy] proposed a model of elegance.” Therefore, “everywhere, Renaissance

grammar remains to a large extent bound up with rhetoric.”
9 See, e.g., Bolgar 1954, 267 ff.; and Garin 1958, XIII ff.
10 For example, Garin (1958, 91–104, al.) emphasized the contrast between medie-

val education and Renaissance pedagogy, which he regarded as a sort of revolution.

xiv introduction

and effects of the changes in humanist education, as well as the evalu-

ation of its continuity with the past, are still being discussed. However,
it is undeniable that the classical revival was extremely important, at
least in the intentions of humanist educators: the idea of an indissolu-
ble bond between past and present inspired the pedagogical theories
of the Renaissance.11
The re-introduction of Greek studies in the West represented a sig-
nificant innovation in Renaissance culture. Most contemporaries were
aware of its importance and described it as a sort of “miracle,” due
to the initiative of some individuals (Coluccio Salutati and the Flo-
rentine humanist circles) and to the ability of a Byzantine teacher
(Manuel Chrysoloras) who taught Greek to Westerners. Actually, the
Greek revival was the culminating point of a long process; the alter-
nately friendly and hostile relationships between Byzantium and the
West had contributed to the mutual knowledge of the two worlds.
Interestingly enough, the West and Byzantium followed parallel paths
in their mutual approach: the interest in Greek culture that, during
the fourteenth century, began to develop in the West, corresponded to
the spread of Latin culture in Byzantium.12 The migration of Byzan-
tine scholars to Italy, which had started long before the capture of
Constantinople by the Turks (1453),13 disclosed to Westerners a culture
almost unknown to them: Greek writers, whom Westerners had for-
gotten since the end of antiquity, were read, translated, commented
on, and imitated. Gemistos Plethon’s lectures challenged centuries of
Scholasticism and, in this way, the foundations of medieval culture.
On the other hand, both Byzantine scholarship and Western culture

Almost three decades later, Anthony Grafton and Lisa Jardine (1986, xii–xiv) chal-
lenged Garin’s assumption by pointing out the aspects of continuity with the past dis-
played by humanist culture, in general, and with school, in particular. Black (1991a,
315 ff.) offers a summary in an analysis of the conclusions reached by Grendler (1989;
see, however, Grendler 1991, 335 ff.). See also Witt 1988.
11 See Grafton-Jardine 1982, 55.
12 See in particular Kristeller 1966, 21ff. In any case, Byzantium’s interest in Latin

culture was less intense and was basically restricted to the Latinophrones, the supporters
of the Union (i.e., of the return of the Orthodox Church under the sovereignty of the
Church of Rome).
13 See Monfasani 2002, 30: “We no longer believe in the myth that Greek emigrés

fleeing the fall of Constantinople in 1453 caused the Renaissance in Italy.” This
idea, expressed by the humanist Pier Candido Decembrio, has been repeated for
centuries in textbooks as the “logical” cause of the Italian Renaissance; see Burke
2001 [19992], 243, who compares this migration to the flight of central European
scholars to England and America after 1933; and Bianca 2006, 4.
 introduction xv

were heirs to the homogeneous Greco-Roman κιν of late antiq-

uity. Thus, for example, Byzantine and Western scholars practiced the
same methods of teaching and approaching ancient texts; the focus on
studia humanitatis in humanist schools resembled the rhetorical training
of Byzantine schools in the Palaeologan age.14 For this reason, Byzan-
tine curriculum and pedagogy could be easily transferred in the West;
Western scholars who wanted to practice their Greek read the same
texts and did the same exercises as Byzantine students.
The re-introduction and the spread of Greek studies in the West,
however, required important transformations with respect to the an-
cient Greek and Byzantine traditions; for example, it became neces-
sary to adapt Byzantine grammar, conceived for native Greek speak-
ers, to the needs of students who approached Greek as a foreign
language, usually through Latin. Only those changes could grant to
Greek studies a permanent place in Western culture. So far, scholar-
ship has paid little attention to grammar books, lexica, and dictionar-
ies: in other words, to the tools that made this revival possible, as well
as to the methods that teachers followed to impart to their students a
knowledge of Greek.15
Even a partial analysis of these tools reveals that the return of
Greek studies to the West was everything but a straightforward pro-
cess; its history includes bright triumphs and depressing failures, con-
sent and criticism, acceptance and resistance. Byzantine emigrés who
taught Greek in Italy became rich and famous (e.g., Manuel Chrysolo-
ras) or were frustrated in their ambitions (e.g., Michael Apostolis);
Westerners who spent their energies learning Greek could reach an
impressive mastery of the language (e.g., Bruni, Filelfo, and Politian)
or remain obscure and mediocre scholars. More importantly, this
“minor” grammatical material, still largely unexplored, reveals that
Chrysoloras, the author of the first Greek grammar for Westerners,

14 See in particular Geanakoplos 1988, 350f.

15 See Cortesi 1986, 164 f.: “La difficoltà maggiore nasce […] dalla mancanza di
studi sistematici e organici relativi all’uso dei manuali di grammatica per l’apprendi-
mento del greco in occidente, alla loro struttura e alle fonti in essi confluite […] La
conoscenza del fenomeno grammaticale greco imporrebbe […] un preciso lavoro
di raccolta dapprima di tutti i testimoni rimasti, fase indubbiamente faticosa per
l’immenso materiale che giace inedito nelle biblioteche, per passare poi all’analisi
e alla verifica dei contenuti.” Pontani (1996, 135) also stresses the importance of the
study of lexica and grammar books: “Qualunque discorso sulla presenza della lingua
greca in Occidente deve fondarsi sula positiva conoscenza degli strumenti attraverso i
quali la lingua poteva essere appresa: cioè grammatiche e lessici.”
xvi introduction

was not the demiurge or the deus ex machina that his contemporaries
described. First of all, Byzantine scholarship of the Palaeologan age
already had promoted a rethinking of Greek grammatical tradition;
during the Palaeologan age, Byzantine elementary grammar was
slowly undergoing a process of simplification to meet the demands
of students for whom the Attic Greek still used in literature and
documents was like a foreign language. Secondly, Chrysoloras’ main
innovation—the use of the Latin system of declensions based on the
ending of the genitive singular for Greek nominal inflection, antici-
pated by Roger Bacon in the thirteenth century—was not the only
case of application of a Latinate scheme to Greek grammar. The four
Greek Donati, the object of this book, represent four attempts to create
a Greek grammar modeled on Latin; thus, students could learn Greek
using patterns as familiar to them as those that they had used to learn
Latin.
A study of the four Donati graeci must take into account the com-
plex balance between continuity and innovation in grammatical stud-
ies and pedagogy, as well as the interaction and exchanges between
East and West during the Renaissance. The Greek Donati are Greek
translations or adaptations of the so-called Donatus or Ianua, an ele-
mentary book used during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance in
learning Latin. By unveiling the origin, function, and fate of the Greek
Donati, it will be possible to analyze an almost unknown aspect of the
revival of Greek studies in the Renaissance. As Greek grammar books,
in fact, the Greek Donati are failed experiments: they were not deemed
worthy of a printed edition, nor, apparently, did they circulate outside
of Italy and/or Crete.
One of the four texts, version a, probably originated as a sim-
ple word-for-word translation of the Latin textbook for Greeks who
wanted to learn Latin. During the fifteenth century, this version,
perhaps originally written in the interlinear spaces of a Latin text,
became an independent grammar and was used to learn Greek;
apparently, Greek Donatus a did not undergo the process of adap-
tation of Latin morphology to the “target language” that led to the
composition of Donati in modern languages.16 More advanced and
improved grammars replaced the Greek Donatus, but the replacement

16 See below, 44–46. “Greek Donatus a” applies to several Greek versions of Ianua,

which are different from each other but, apparently, closely related for their approach
to the original text and the language used.
 introduction xvii

may not have been complete. In fact, when the extant manuscripts of
version a were produced, the Greek grammars of Manuel Chrysolo-
ras, Theodore Gaza, Constantine Lascaris, and some other Greek
scholars already existed. Thus, Greek Donatus a, the Donatus transla-
tus, may have been transformed into an independent grammar in an
area where such books were not circulating. Many elements point to
Crete or some other Venetian colony in Greece as possible places of
origin. It is highly probable that some Venetian officers and their fam-
ilies brought the most widespread elementary Latin schoolbook, Ianua,
and that the book was later translated into Greek.
Versions b, c, and d, on the other hand, are clear and conscious
attempts to create “real” Greek elementary grammars using Ianua’s
structure. Some parts maintain a tight link with the Latin text, while
some other parts are taken from authentic Greek grammatical mate-
rial, especially from Moschopoulos’ erôtêmata or from his source(s).
In all three Donati compositi, for example, the paradigms of the sec-
tion on verbs are derived from the same source, which was prob-
ably an improved Greek translation of Ianua. Most probably, Donati
compositi were just some of the many compilations of grammatical
material available at that time. In any case, compiling seems to be
a typical method in the composition of Renaissance Greek gram-
mars: for example, some sections of Chrysoloras’ Erotemata closely
echo Moschopoulos’ work.
As Greek grammars, in spite of their many differences, the four
Donati graeci show some common features. All of them consider five
nominal declensions and four regular verbal conjugations (with the
addition of a variable number of irregular verbs, all modeled on
Latin). The parts of speech expounded are the same and in the same
order as in Ianua: this means that in Greek there is no article, but,
as in Latin, there is an interjection. Greek nouns lack a dual but
have an ablative (and Greek prepositions can take the ablative, too);
Greek verbs lack both the dual and the middle voice but have the
impersonal voice, the future imperative, all tenses of the subjunctive
(in a), and even a supine and a gerundive (in a). The Donati compositi,
on the other hand, acknowledge the existence of the aorist, but often
confuse it with the perfect. These four grammars build up a type of
Greek grammar that I would call “Donatus-type” or “Pylê-type.”17 The

17 The use of the term Pylê is explained below, 154–155.

xviii introduction

Greek Donati are closely connected with Latin elementary grammar:

they represent the introduction of Latin parsing grammar (Poeta quae
pars est, etc.) within a different system, which privileged definition (τ
στιν νμα, etc.).
Greek Donatus a, first of all, is a translation from Latin. Therefore,
the first chapter of this study deals with its Latin original, the Pseudo-
Donatan Ianua, by sketching out the evolution of Aelius Donatus’ Ars
minor in its medieval forms; Ianua was just one of them. Chapter
Two examines the rediscovery of Greek culture and the revival of
Greek studies in the West. After a brief description of the study of
Greek in antiquity and in the Middle Ages, this chapter describes
and evaluates the role played by Byzantine emigrés in re-establishing
a Greek curriculum in the West. Three aspects receive particular
emphasis: the creation of a new Greek grammar for Westerners, the
similarities between Byzantine and Latin pedagogy, and the position
of Greek in Renaissance schools.
The last two chapters focus on the Greek Donati. Chapter Three
offers an analysis of the texts, describing the manuscript tradition and
the content of the four versions, with particular emphasis on version
a. Since, however, a critical edition of a grammatical text makes sense
only if it takes into account the pedagogical context within which the
text was produced,18 the final chapter deals with the questions raised
by the Greek Donati: chronology, authorship, place of origin, and use
in classrooms and/or for the self-study of Greek.

The anonymous translator(s) of Greek Donatus a probably did not

intend to write a Greek grammar and Maximus Planudes did not
know that his Greek translation of the Disticha Catonis would become
an elementary reading for Western students of Greek. In the same
way, I did not approach the Greek Donatus originally for its signif-
icance in Renaissance Greek studies. This project started as a final
paper for a graduate course on the reception of antiquity, taught at
Columbia University by Professor Suzanne Said in the fall of 1998.
While inquiring into the reception of Latin culture in Byzantium, I
came across Maximus Planudes’ translations from Latin; among the
works of this extraordinary polymath, the (supposed) translation of

18 See Carlotta Dionisotti’s programmatic assertion (1984, 208): when dealing with

grammatical texts, it is necessary “to engage with the text, to ask it questions, in short
to understand both it and why one is working on it.”
 introduction xix

Aelius Donatus’ Ars minor still awaited a critical edition. I decided to

undertake this task in my dissertation: the limited number of manu-
scripts transmitting the text—six, five of which are in Italian libraries
and directly accessible to me—seemed to offer an ideal condition for
textual criticism. Also, that topic granted my study a fair level of origi-
nality; in fact, the only existing monograph on the Greek Donatus was
an unpublished dissertation that Wolfgang Oskar Schmitt defended
in 1966 at the Humboldt Universität of Berlin. Schmitt’s outstand-
ing work—which, unfortunately, had almost no circulation outside of
the former German Democratic Republic—contained a thorough dis-
cussion of the problems related to the Greek Donatus (especially of
Planudes’ authorship) and a critical edition of the text.19
I began my work by checking the existence of other manuscripts
containing the Greek Donatus; I was able to use catalogues, electronic
resources, and data banks that were not yet available at the time when
Schmitt was doing his research or were not accessible to him as a
scholar living beyond the Iron Curtain. The result was the discovery
of five new manuscripts, containing three different versions of the
same text. In my dissertation (Columbia University, 2004), I presented
a critical edition of the “Planudean” Greek Donatus, i.e., version a, as
well as an overview of other two versions, i.e., b and what I believed
was the only extant part of c, the section on verbs.20 In my edition
of the text, the new manuscripts allowed me to confirm or to correct
many of Schmitt’s assumptions.
Further research has led me to discover the missing parts of ver-
sion c, as well as a fourth version, d, in the grammar attributed to
Zacharias Calliergis in one of the manuscripts of version a. Another
significant result has been the identification of some elements that

19 Schmitt’s dissertation was made available to me in microforms, thanks to the

effort of the Interlibrary Loan Service of Butler Library at Columbia University.

Schmitt’s dissertation still represents an indispensable starting point for further re-
search on the Greek Donatus. Starting from a general outline of Planudes’ activity
as a translator (pp. 1–36), Schmitt analyzed the text of the Latin Ianua (37–103), its
Greek translation, and its manuscript tradition (104–211). He equipped his edition
of the Greek text (1+–92+) with a commentary centered mainly on language and
style (212–265). The hypothesis of Planudes’ authorship was examined and rejected in
the final part of the work. My attempts to contact the author in Berlin through his
former advisor, Johannes Irmscher, have yielded no result. This book is also dedicated
to Wolfgang Schmitt, an extraordinary scholar, and to the memory of Johannes
Irmscher.
20 See Ciccolella 2004, 260ff.
xx introduction

point to Crete or the Northeastern part of Italy as the place of ori-

gin of the four Greek Donati.21 These new discoveries have immensely
widened the field of inquiry. One Greek Donatus—the “vulgate,” ver-
sion a—might still be viewed as the result of the initiative of an indi-
vidual or as the authentic or spurious work of a Byzantine scholar
and, as such, as a contribution to literary history only. But four ver-
sions of the same text, which probably originated within the same
environment, indicate that they were created to respond to precise
cultural demands; thus, we must consider the four extant Donati graeci
in general, within the context of the revival of Greek studies in the
West, and in particular, as products of the search for adequate tools
for the teaching of Greek, which distinguished the first stages of that
revival.
Working on Renaissance Greek grammar represents a challenge
and requires, so to speak, the spirit of a pioneer. First of all, no mod-
ern critical editions are available for the most important Byzantine-
humanist grammars: Manuel Chrysoloras’ Erotemata, Theodore Ga-
za’s Introduction to Grammar (Εσαγωγ γραμματικς), Constantine Las-
caris’ Summary of the Eight Parts of Speech (Επιτμ τν κτ λγων
μερν), and, of course, minor works such as Chalcondyles’ and Cale-
cas’ grammars. Secondly, there is no general survey of the study of
Greek in the Renaissance comparable, for example, to Robert Black’s
2001 extensive study on Latin education. A monograph that may con-
sider not only the products of “high” scholarship, such as translations
of classical texts, but also the tools available for elementary instruc-
tion in Greek is still a desideratum for the study of Greek culture in
the Renaissance. Also, we need systematic studies on the structure,
sources, and use of Greek grammar manuals in the West, but not
without the preliminary, careful work of collecting and cataloguing all
the immense amount of extant material scattered throughout Euro-
pean and American libraries.
This book is intended as a first attempt to fill this gap by describ-
ing a tradition of Greek studies somehow connected with Venice and
Crete; this tradition was certainly inferior in quality and circulation
when compared with the Florentine scholarship, but it is still impor-
tant in the cultural history of the Renaissance.22

21 See Ciccolella 2005, 15–20.

22 On the differences between Venetian and Florentine humanism, see Witt 2000,
85–87, 454–458.
 introduction xxi

The edition of grammatical texts raises particular problems. It is

true that Renaissance texts present the advantage of being closer in
time to our age than classical texts.23 However, texts created for school
use were subject to continuous modifications. As a matter of fact, a
grammar was not merely read but used: like all secular books, gram-
mar books were not made to last.24 In the past as well as in the
present, a grammar was continuously open to corrections. Unusual
forms were likely to be “corrected” and replaced with more normal
forms or perhaps deleted entirely. Teachers were free to modify the
text by excluding superfluous material or including what they con-
sidered appropriate to their own pedagogical methods and to the
demands of their classes. Typically, later editions of schoolbooks are
better than earlier ones: this reverses the idea of an “archetype,” in
Lachmann’s sense, as a possible goal of a critical edition. We should
also consider that elementary school texts were usually much more
tolerant of forms of the spoken language than literary texts. Theoreti-
cally, then, an excess of “normalization” of language and style would
be inappropriate. Practically, however, we should not exclude that
some “modern” or extravagant forms were introduced in the copy-
ing of manuscripts unintentionally by copyists rather than intention-
ally by grammarians. Applying common sense or skeptical suspension
of judgment is often the best solution: in some cases, abandoning the
idea of correcting the text or even using cruces desperationis may be not
signs of defeat, but ways to respect what is no longer accessible to
minds educated in “analogical” Greek grammar.25

23 See Celenza’s considerations about the editing of Renaissance texts (2004, 136).
24 See Cavallo 1980, 158.
25 For a discussion of Lachmann’s method and of its use in modern textual criti-

cism, see Reynolds-Wilson 19913, 214; Irigoin 2003 [1977]; and Montanari 2003, 33–
40. Polara (1991) has effectively described the difficulty of editing grammatical works;
his remarks deserve to be quoted extensively: (102) “Tra gli obblighi più evidenti per
un editore di testi grammaticali ‘seri’ c’è quello di correggere, o almeno tentare di
correggere errori visibilmente non d’autore, che rendano l’esposizione incomprensi-
bile, incoerente o contraria alla dottrina consolidata.” (103) “Di fronte ad evidenti
inesattezze, che non si possono neppure attribuire ragionevolmente ad un momento
di distrazione del grammatico, l’intervento editoriale si impone ed il rispetto della
tradizione manoscritta significa solo incomprensione della dottrina.” On the other
hand: (107) “[…] nel tentativo di formire un testo ‘ragionevole’, non solo si può incor-
rere in madornali errori, quando ci si lasci prendere la mano dal gusto dell’intervento
e si sostituiscano il proprio pensiero e la propria dottrina a quelli dell’autore, ma c’è
anche il pericolo sottile di eliminare, come sviste involontarie e perciò emendabili,
veri e propri usi stilistici, o addirittura consuetudini di lingua.”
xxii introduction

I have corrected or modified the texts only when they appeared

clearly altered or corrupted and when their alterations could be ex-
plained by the manuscript tradition.26 In general, however, I have
tried to preserve elements that I consider as constituent features of
the Greek Donati and closely bound to their Latin model, such as
the confusion between declensions and verbal tenses or the Latinate
lexicon and syntax of some passages. Similarly, I have preserved forms
that reveal the influence of demotic Greek in the study of Greek
classical grammar. In fact, I have not aimed to make the Greek Donati
similar to grammars in the modern sense, but to offer to readers and
scholars four texts that, with their imperfections, might document a
particular stage of the revival and spread of Greek studies in the
West.
In laying out the texts, I have tried to offer a complete picture of the
variae lectiones found in the manuscripts of versions a and b by present-
ing them in parallel columns when they represent different branches
of the manuscript tradition.27 Often, I have given my preference to

26 Of course, fixed rules do not exist: choices may vary according to specific

situations. The fact that most of the scribes of the Greek Donati so far identified
were professional copyists, priests or notaries and, as such, presumably in control
of the texts they were copying would discourage any textual intervention; an excess
of conservatism, however, may harm the clarity and readability of texts, which is
the purpose of any modern critical edition. Thus, on the one hand, assuming that
the Greek Donati were tools to teach literary Greek, I have corrected nominal and
verbal forms influenced by the spoken language (δημτικ). Most probably, in fact,
these anonymous grammarians relied on the grammar taught by late antique and
Byzantine grammatical texts, which were based on Attic Greek; the influence of
the current language may have easily affected the writing and the transmission of
ancient grammatical forms. On the other hand, I have preserved some non-classical
forms and constructions attested in Hellenistic and Byzantine literary texts, espe-
cially in the parts of the Greek Donati intended for describing concepts—e.g., defi-
nitions and examples—where grammarians may have chosen language and style in
order to communicate more easily with their students. I have preserved inconsisten-
cies and omissions, as well as some forms attested by all manuscripts and reflect-
ing the common usage of the spoken language, because correcting them would have
meant introducing an abstract idea of Greek into a text that originated as a response
to concrete demands. Conversely, I have corrected forms and passages that may
have appeared obscure to modern readers. Finally, I have avoided textual interven-
tions in the many cases of non-attested grammatical forms or irreparably corrupted
passages.
27 In the Greek Donatus a, I have italicized the passages that belong to MS. R only.

This manuscript is closely related to the “vulgate” text (x), but is often independent
from it; see below, 172 ff. In the Latin texts facing the Greek Donati a and c, I have
indicated in italics the passages where the Greek and Latin texts do not coincide. Also,
in the transcription of c’s Latin version (Pl), I have italicized words and forms that do
 introduction xxiii

readings contained in the manuscripts bearing the most recent ver-

sion of the text, which happen to be more complete and correct than
the earlier versions. On the other hand, I adapted punctuation and
orthography to modern usage. In the negative critical apparatus, I
did not mention the mistakes of iotacism, psilosis, and orthography
in each manuscript, unless they represent significant (possible) textual
variants. Versions a and c have been edited with a Latin translation
facing the Greek text. In c’s case, I have offered a transcription of the
Latin text as it appears in the manuscript, with all its orthographic
peculiarities, its gaps, and its mistakes. In a’s case, I have not offered
an existing text, but a sort of ideal “Ur-Ianua a” that may or may not
have been the original of Greek Donatus a, but that functions as a
point of reference and a support for better understanding the Greek
text. For this reason, unlike the c-text, for a I have maintained the
standard classical writing (e.g., ae and oe instead of e).28

I wish to express my gratitude to my advisors, Alan Cameron and

Carmela Vircillo Franklin, who have supervised my dissertation with
patience and care and provided invaluable intellectual and moral sup-
port during the various stages of the process. I am also grateful to the
other members of the defense committee, Consuelo Dutschke, Kathy
Eden, and James Zetzel, for their constructive criticism and sugges-
tions. Alexandros Alexakis and Roger Bagnall were very helpful at the
first stage of my research, while Maria Luisa Angrisani and Maria
Grazia Jodice gave me the opportunity to present the first results in a
lecture at the University of Rome “La Sapienza,” in April 2001. The
questions raised during that lecture and the other presentations that

not correspond with “regular” grammar and vocabulary. The notes on pages 513–553
were not intended as an extensive commentary on the four texts, which would deserve
a separate volume. With these notes, which supplement the description of the texts in
Chapter 3 and the critical apparatus, I have tried to explain some difficulties in the
language of the Latin and Greek Donati, their relationship with other grammatical
texts, and my choices in establishing the texts. I have devoted more attention to the
Donati compositi, which, unlike version a, are not treated individually in Chapter 3 and
have never been objects of specific studies until now.
28 I have used the Latinized form of Greek names that are familiar to modern

scholars and readers (e.g., “Marcus Musurus,” instead of “Markos Mousouros”).

Conversely, I have transliterated less familiar Greek names (e.g., “Moschopoulos” or
“Margounios”). Greek words have been usually transliterated (e.g., erôtêmata instead of
ρωτματα, but Erotemata as the title of Chrysoloras’ grammar). The bibliography is
updated to March 2007.
xxiv introduction

I gave on Renaissance Greek grammar have stimulated me to recon-

sider many of my assumptions and widen the field of my research.
Two grants from Texas A&M University have allowed me to ex-
plore some Italian libraries in order to find the Latin originals of the
Greek grammars edited in this book; I wish to thank in particular
Isabella Fiorentini of the Biblioteca Trivulziana in Milan for her
assistance.
I completed the revision of the manuscript as a fellow of Villa I
Tatti, the Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies.
Like all those who have had the privilege of working at I Tatti, I
benefited from a stimulating intellectual environment and invaluable
resources.
I am extremely grateful to my colleague Craig Kallendorf and to
Christopher Celenza for their continuous encouragement and their
patience in reading the manuscript and pointing out mistakes and
omissions. Giuseppina Magnaldi helped me solve many doubts con-
cerning the constitutio textus, while Wolfgang Haase, Steve Oberhel-
man, and three anonymous referees were lavish with advice when an
article based on my dissertation appeared in the International Journal of
the Classical Tradition (2005). Their contributions have been so numer-
ous that it would be impossible to acknowledge all of them as they
occur. I thank Concetta Bianca, Msgr. Paul Canart, Guglielmo Cav-
allo, Mario De Nonno, Elizabeth Fisher, James Hankins, Umberto
La Torraca, Athanasios Markopoulos, Antonio Martina, and David
Speranzi for many useful conversations, for a wealth of bibliography,
and for often making available to me their works before publication.
I am grateful to William Harris and the editorial board of the
Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition for accepting this work in
their prestigious series, to Krista May for revising my English carefully
and patiently, and to the staff of Brill for solving all kinds of editorial
problems.
My professors and fellow graduate students at Columbia, my
friends in Italy and in the U.S., my colleagues at Texas A&M, and
the other fellows at I Tatti have shared in one way or another the long
process that has led to this book. Particular thanks go to my family,
especially to my mother Paola and my husband Marco, for tolerating
my long absences and making me feel their warm support in all ways
possible.
I consider this book as a point of departure rather than a point of
arrival. Much research still needs to be done on Renaissance Greek
 introduction xxv

studies, and I hope that, in the future, new discoveries will add new
information, widen the perspective, and even challenge the conclu-
sions reached so far.

Florence, May 2007

 chapter one

THE LATIN DONATUS

The use of Aelius Donatus’ Ars minor and of other grammars derived
from it during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance bears witness to
the effectiveness of Donatus’ method for teaching elementary Latin.
At the same time, the many modifications that the text underwent
throughout the course of the centuries—in particular, its “contamina-
tion” with Priscian’s Institutiones and other medieval works on gram-
mar, as well as the massive insertion of paradigms—correspond to
important changes in the teaching methodology used for Latin. This
chapter analyzes the causes and effects of the evolution of the Ars minor
into one of its many new forms, Ianua, which became the most com-
mon Latin elementary grammar in the Italian schools of the Middle
Ages and the Renaissance. An early version of Ianua constituted the
original of Greek Donatus a.

1. Aelius Donatus’ Artes: A Pedagogical Program

During the Middle Ages, the Latin grammarian Aelius Donatus, al-
though pagan, was held in the greatest esteem. He owed much of his
fame to Saint Jerome, who proudly referred to him as his teacher
(praeceptor meus Donatus: Contra Rufinum 1. 16, PL 23, 429 A; etc.).1
Donatus, grammaticus urbis Romae, was active between 354 and 363 C.E.
The name “Donatus” is especially attested to in Africa, which was
also the place of origin of other grammarians of that age, including
Probus, Nonius Marcellus, and perhaps Charisius.2
Aelius Donatus’ grammatical works constitute a corpus (Ars gramma-
tica Donati) of four books. The first book, known as Ars minor, contains
a synthetic treatment of elementary morphology—the eight parts of

1 Humanists explicitly attributed to Donatus the merit of Jerome’s refined literary

education. See Brugnoli 1965; Rice 1985, 85; and the passages quoted ibid., 231 n. 5.
2 On Donatus’ life, see in particular Holtz 1981, 15–20; and Kaster 1988, 275–278.

For a survey of Donatus’ life, work, and fate, see Holtz 2005.
2 chapter one

speech—in a catechistic format. The last three books make up the

Ars maior, where grammar is treated more extensively. The second
book (Ars maior 1) deals with the constituent elements of words and
phrases: letters, syllables, accents, and punctuation. The third book
(Ars maior 2) analyzes the eight parts of speech: noun, pronoun, verb,
adverb, participle, conjunction, preposition, and interjection, paying
particular attention to the properties (accidentia), i.e., the changes to
which words are subject when related to other words. The fourth
book (Ars maior 3) focuses on style and contains a description of its
qualities (figures of speech) and defects (barbarism, soloecism, etc.).
The genetic structure of the Ars maior and its transition from sim-
ple to complex, from essential to ancillary elements, correspond to
the method followed in classrooms. At the same time, however, the
Ars maior has the framework of the rhetorical-philosophical treatises
of antiquity: there is, in fact, a clear attempt to codify previous knowl-
edge into an all-inclusive, self-contained system.3 The pyramidal struc-
ture of each chapter, the division of the matter into classes and sub-
classes, the exposition by antitheses and complements, and especially
the dogmatic tone, make the Ars maior a complex work. Adding to
this complexity, Donatus does not ever declare his aim or his general
plan.4 At any rate, a comparison between the Ars minor and the Ars
maior reveals that Donatus conceived the two works as two stages in
the study of grammar. The Ars minor is a compendium, a textbook for
an introductory course; it focuses on the rudiments of the language
and presents them in a form that is easy to memorize. The Ars maior
meets the demands of more advanced students, who require a real ref-
erence book in order to accomplish the stylistic ideal of artistic prose.
Although the treatise in three parts was by far the most common
method in expounding grammatical material, short grammars like

3 See the observations by Holtz, 1981, 61. Lomanto (1987, 1113 ff.) has focused on
the uniformity in structure of Roman Artes grammaticae, of which Donatus’Ars maior
represents a clear example. Based on the Stoic distinction between λ ις (dictio, the
word considered per se) and λγς (oratio, the word within a context), most Artes deal
first with the elements of λ ις (de voce, de littera, de syllaba, de dictione, de oratione; de
accentibus, de tonis or de distinctione or de posituris; de rhythmo, de metro, de pedibus), then
with what concerns λγς (the eight parts of speech), and finally with the elements of
style (Latinitas). This tripartite structure seems to have been elaborated by Remmius
Palaemon in the first century C.E.
4 As Holtz remarks (1981, 54): “Il ne s’agit pas ici d’un corps de doctrines qui se

crée sous nos yeux dans une libre méditation, […] mais d’une série de très pesantes
affirmations qui ont pour effet de constituer une sorte d’inventaire.”
 the latin donatus 3

the Ars minor were not unknown in antiquity. The most successful
handbook for the study of Greek, the Τ"νη γραμματικ by Diony-
sius Thrax, of the second century B.C.E., shows the same character-
istics found in Donatus’ Ars minor: it consists of a set of definitions,
sometimes explained with examples. Dionysius’ Τ"νη allows us to
locate the origin of the short grammar within the Alexandrian cul-
tural milieu.5
In the initial chapters of his Institutio oratoria, Quintilian criticized
the use of manuals (commentariola) for the teaching of elementary gram-
mar (1. 5. 7):
Ex quibus ( scil. grammaticis) si quis erit plane impolitus et vestibulum modo artis
huius ingressus, intra haec, quae profitentium commentariolis vulgata sunt, consistet;
doctiores multa adicient.
[If a teacher is quite uneducated, and has barely crossed the threshold
of his profession, he will confine himself to the rules commonly known
from teachers’ manuals; a more learned man will be able to add many
more.]6
Quintilian was perhaps aware of the incongruities and obscurities
that such elementary books could contain: they synthesized—often
arbitrarily—complex issues, summarized longer works, or reported
teachers’ dictations in classrooms, but they lacked thoroughness and
consistency.
The innovative character of the Ars Donati lies in its combination
of an elementary textbook with a grammatical treatise, thus offering
a complete course of Latin. Moreover, Donatus devotes much more
space to practical issues, such as inflection, than to theory, defini-
tions, and concepts. We cannot say to what extent Donatus’ inno-
vation reflects an actual change in the teaching of Latin in classrooms.
However, it is interesting to note that other grammarians of the late
fourth century—for example, Charisius and Diomedes—also reduced
the extent of the traditional theoretical parts in their Artes: a more
pragmatic view of grammar seems to have prevailed during this time,
and it was perhaps a general custom not restricted to individual schol-
ars.
A comparison of the treatment of a topic common to both the Ars
minor and the Ars maior, the eight parts of speech, will clarify this
point. The Ars minor is conceived in question-and-answer format, as

5 On Dionysius’ Τ"νη, see below, 106.

6 Translation by Russell 2001, 125.
4 chapter one

a dialogue between a teacher and a pupil who repeats his assignment

in the classroom. The colloquial style of the Ars minor is evident also in
introductory expressions typical of the language of classrooms, such as
Da declinationem verbi activi (4, p. 593 Holtz); Da adverbia loci; Da temporis,
etc. (5, p. 596 Holtz). As noted by Holtz, this pattern, which is as
old as the school itself, reflects not only the philosophical (Platonic)
dialogue, but also the Roman tradition of a father educating his son.7
The dialogical form was not uncommon in grammatical works, but
in the Ars minor it is used extensively and systematically for the first
time. The Ars minor became a model for later works on grammar: the
dialogical form, in fact, was more suitable than the enunciative form
for recognizing and memorizing rules or definitions at the elementary
level.
The following passages on the noun offer an interesting example of
the similarities and the differences between Donatus’ two Artes:
Ars minor, p. 585 Holtz: (2) Nomen quid est? Pars orationis cum casu corpus aut
rem proprie communiterve significans. Nomini quot accidunt? Sex. Quae? Qualitas,
comparatio, genus, numerus, figura, casus. Qualitas nominum in quo est? Bipertita
est: aut enim unius nomen est et proprium dicitur, aut multorum et appellativum.
[What is the noun? A part of speech with cases, which signifies a person
or an object either specifically or generally. How many properties apply
to the noun? Six. Which ones? Quality, comparison, gender, number,
form, and case. What does the quality of nouns consist in? It is twofold:
either the noun belongs to one, and it is called “proper”; or it belongs
to many, and it is called “common.”]

Ars maior 2, pp. 614 f. Holtz: (2) Nomen est pars orationis cum casu corpus
aut rem proprie communiterve significans, proprie ut Roma Tiberis, communiter
ut urbs flumen. Nomini accidunt sex, qualitas, conparatio, genus, numerus, figura,
casus. Nomen unius hominis, appellatio multorum, vocabulum rerum est. Sed modo
nomina generaliter dicimus. (3) Qualitas nominum bipertita est. Aut enim propria
sunt nomina, aut appellativa. Propriorum nominum secundum Latinos quattuor
sunt species, praenomen, nomen, cognomen, agnomen, ut Publius Cornelius Scipio
Africanus […] Appellativorum nominum species multae sunt. Alia enim sunt
corporalia, ut homo, terra, mare; alia incorporalia, ut pietas, iustitia, dignitas. etc.
[The noun is a part of speech with cases, which signifies a person or
an object either specifically or generally: specifically like “Rome” or
“Tiber,” generally like “city” or “river.” Six properties apply to the
noun: quality, comparison, gender, number, form, and case. The name
refers to one man, the noun to many, the term to objects. However,

7 Holtz 1981, 100.

 the latin donatus 5

we call them “nouns” only, in a general sense. The quality of nouns

is twofold: nouns are either proper or common. In Latin there are
four kinds of proper names: the personal name, the gentile name,
the surname, and the nickname, like “Publius Cornelius Scipio the
African” […] There are many kinds of common nouns. Some of them
are corporeal (= concrete), like “man,” “land” or “sea”; others are
incorporeal (= abstract), like “devotion,” “justice” or “dignity”; etc.]
Apart from some slight differences, the definitions of the Ars minor
build up, so to speak, the framework of those of Ars maior 2. By
first learning, most likely by heart, the basic rules in the Ars minor,
the pupil would acquire the background necessary to understand the
more complex classifications of the Ars maior. Moreover, the Ars minor
contains charts of declensions and conjugations, but very few techni-
cal details and examples that may distract pupils from absorbing the
essential concepts. On the other hand, in book 2 of the Ars maior the
author has generously supplied examples and details but has omitted
charts. The student who tackled the Ars maior, in fact, was supposed to
have already mastered the Latin language well enough to concentrate
on word analysis (μερισμς); therefore, examples were an indispensable
tool for remembering rules and grammatical categories.8
The Ars minor and the Ars maior, the handbook of elementary mor-
phology and the encyclopedic treatise on grammar, were not ends in
themselves, but were conceived as preparatory to the study of liter-
ature, the final purpose of the teaching of the grammaticus. Donatus’
commentaries on Terence and Virgil represent the fulfillment of his
effort to equip late-antique teachers with pedagogical tools useful for
their task. The first has been handed down with gaps and interpola-
tions. Of the second commentary, which is probably the earlier of the
two, only the biography of Virgil taken from Suetonius’ De poetis, the
letter of dedication to Munatius,9 and the introduction to the Bucolics

8 See Holtz (1981, 110–117): isolated words are taken from everyday language and
from the school environment or refer to the Roman tradition, whereas sentences are
usually quotations from Virgil, the auctor mainly studied in schools.
9 This letter (published by C. Hardie in Vitae Virgilianae antiquae, Oxford 1960)

is particularly interesting in identifying Donatus’ aims and methodology. Donatus

intended to write a book that might be useful to his colleagues, especially those
who were just beginning their career; at the same time, he wanted to improve the
ancient commentaries by taking into account the different pedagogical demands of
his age. For this purpose, as Donatus claims, he had collected a considerable amount
of documentation, had carefully selected the material, and had decided to reproduce
his sources to the letter. Donatus shows the tendency, typical of Roman scholarly
prose, to juxtapose heterogeneous elements, as well as a remarkable taste for inserting
6 chapter one

are still extant. The rest can be reconstructed through Servius, espe-
cially the so-called Servius Danielis or Servius auctus.
Literature had become a science during the Hellenistic age thanks
to the accurate studies of the Alexandrian scholars, and had received
a place of distinction in the Hellenistic school. In its three-level cur-
riculum studiorum—γραμματιστς, γραμματικς, and #τωρ—the second
stage, that of the “grammarian,” was in fact devoted to the study of
poetry. When literary studies were introduced in Rome in the late sec-
ond century B.C.E., the grammaticus was assigned the same role in the
Roman school system: for Cicero, Horace, Juvenal, and other Latin
authors, the grammarian was first of all a teacher of literature whose
main task was the interpretation of poetry. Donatus himself was bet-
ter known for his commentaries than for his grammatical treatises.
Throughout the imperial age and up until the final decline of the
ancient educational system, Virgil and Terence (with Cicero and Sal-
lust for prose and, from the late fourth century, also Lucan, Statius,
and Juvenal) held a steady place in the Latin curriculum. The four
stages of the teaching of auctores in classrooms remained unchanged:
lectio (reading a text, usually aloud), enarratio (exposition and inter-
pretation of the content and the language), emendatio (correction and
improvement of the transmitted text), and iudicium (evaluation of the
author and his work).
From the fourth century B.C.E., with Plato, Aristotle, and the Sto-
ics, the origin, development, and functions of language had become
objects of study as well.10 Consequently, grammatical studies followed
two parallel lines, codified in Quintilian’s distinction between the
interpretation of the authors (historice, exegetice, enarratio auctorum) and
the science of speaking and writing (methodice, horistice, scientia loquendi et
scribendi).11

quotations in the text. However, he rarely mentions his own interpretation. See Holtz
1981, 29ff.
10 See in particular Irvine 1994, 25–39.
11 Cicero (De oratore 1. 187) indicated the main tasks of grammar in the study of

poets (poetarum pertractatio), the knowledge of the contents of literary works (historiarum
cognitio), and the explanation of words and their correct pronunciation (verborum intepre-
tatio and pronuntiandi sonus). Quintilian’s division of grammar into the study of correct
speech (recte loquendi scientia) and the interpretation of poets (poetarum enarratio: Inst. or. 1.
4. 2; 1. 9. 1, etc.) substantially followed Cicero’s assumption. In the fifteenth century,
Niccolò Perotti still hinted at Quintilian’s definition in his Rudimenta grammatices: Gram-
matica est ars recte loquendi recteque scribendi, scriptorum et poetarum lectionibus observata (quoted
by Percival 1981, 237).
 the latin donatus 7

The interpretation of literary texts (scientia interpretandi) and the rules

for the correct use of language in speaking and writing (ratio scribendi et
loquendi) were both still relevant for late-antique grammarians. Audax,
who lived some time between the fourth and the sixth centuries,
specifies this in the question that introduces his grammar book (GL
7, 321):
Grammatica quid est? Scientia interpretandi poetas atque historicos et recte scribendi
loquendique ratio.
[What is grammar? The science of interpreting the poets and the
historians and the method of writing and speaking correctly.]

The same concept is expressed in the pompous words that Diomedes

addressed to Athanasius when introducing the three books of his Ars
grammatica (GL 1, 299):
Artem merae Latinitatis puraeque eloquentiae magistram sub incude litteraria doci-
liter procudendo formatam humanae sollertiae claritas expolivit.
[The brightness of human ingenuity refined the art of the true Latin
style (Latinitas) and the master of pure eloquence [i.e., grammar],
molded by hammering (it) on the anvil of literature in a teachable way].

Literary sources demonstrate that Latin grammarians taught exactly

as their Greek colleagues: grammar’s distinction between historice and
methodice applied also to Roman schools. As for methodice, Varro and
Remmius Palaemon had adapted to Latin the Greek grammar codi-
fied by Dionysius Thrax. The adaptation of Latin to Greek was car-
ried to such a point that Roman grammarians felt obliged to find
a Latin equivalent for the article in the demonstrative pronoun hic,
haec, hoc; to distinguish between subjunctive and optative, even if in
Latin the same forms function for both meanings; and to introduce
an eighth part of speech, the interjection, in order to make the num-
ber equivalent to that of their Greek models.12
However, the use of correct language in writing and speaking,
which in late antiquity had already gained importance in the common
concept of grammar,13 gradually came to prevail over the study of

12 See Bonner 1977, 193 ff.

13 See, for example, Dositheus’ definition (1, p. 2 Bonnet): Τ"νη γραμματικ στιν
γνσις διωρ$ωμνης %μιλας ν τ& λγειν κα' ν τ& γρ()ειν πιημ(των τε κα' *να-
γν+σεως ,μπειρς διδασκαλα / Ars grammatica est scientia emendati sermonis in loquendo et
scribendo poematumque ac lectionis prudens praeceptum. On this subject, see Sandys 19583, 1.
8f.; Percival 1988, 83 n. 22; and Irvine 1994, 53–55.
8 chapter one

literature. The gradual but inexorable changes in the linguistic facies

of the Roman world required that teachers should pay more attention
to the correctness of language than to the reading of the auctores.
Thus, the study of literature became subsidiary to that of language.
At the same time, instead of being a preliminary stage for the study of
the auctores, grammar became an end in itself. The attempt to save
Latinitas from inevitable decline made elementary grammar books
increasingly necessary to meet the demands of students who, because
of the diffusion of the vernaculars, more often than not had to learn
Latin as a foreign language. Over the course of time, Donatus’ Ars
minor became the preferred handbook for Latin grammar in schools.
Donatus’ twofold commitment to language and literature fully con-
forms to the Greco-Roman grammatical tradition. However, he can
also be considered as a point of departure: his Ars minor, which was
used to learn the Latin language for about twelve centuries, built up
the foundations of medieval and Renaissance elementary grammar.

2. The Shaping of the Medieval Donatus

The Ars Donati was just one of many works on grammar handed
down from late antiquity to the Middle Ages. Both abbreviated school
texts, like the Ars minor, and encyclopedic treatises, like the Ars maior,
belonged to the so-called Schulgrammatik-type, which was based on the
methodical analysis of the morphological elements of the language,
the parts of speech. For each part, a definition, a list of properties
(accidentia), and a fairly detailed discussion of its functions is given;
definitions usually prevail over examples and paradigms.
With more than one thousand pages, Priscian’s Institutiones grammat-
icae is the most monumental work of this kind. A medieval student
of Latin could benefit also from Artes dealing with specific aspects,
such as metrics, orthography, and figures of speech: for example, De
orthographia by Caper, Agroecius, and Bede, or De arte metrica by Bede.
Less systematic guides to nominal and verbal inflection, known as Reg-
ulae and containing lists of paradigms, were available also: for exam-
ple, Pseudo-Palaemon’s Regulae, Probus’ Catholica, and Priscian’s Insti-
tutio de nomine pronomine et verbo.14 These categories, however, should be

14 See Irvine 1994, 57; and Law 1997, 54.

 the latin donatus 9

considered in a very broad sense because few works on grammar fall

within only one of them: every kind of variation and cross-influence
was possible, depending on the goals of the grammarian and the
demands of his audience.
This point explains why Donatus’ Ars, “the most successful textbook
ever written” in the history of Western education,15 underwent an
endless process of transformations and adaptations from late antiquity
to the sixteenth century. Like many other ancient grammatical texts,
Donatus’ work survived a transformation of the culture that had
produced it. Christian communities, in fact, realized very quickly that
Latinitas and emendatio—writing correctly and establishing a correct
text—were indispensable to the preservation of a written tradition
and the continuation of their textual culture. In order to achieve
their goals, Christian scholars had to rely on a well-established set of
rules and on the authority of accepted literary models.16 The demand
for a normative grammar became even more compelling after the
sixth century, when vernaculars were gradually replacing Latin in
everyday usage: therefore, access to the Latin texts of ecclesiastical
and monastic culture had to be assured through the systematic study
of Latin grammar. Donatus’ pedagogy, based on a course of Latin on
two levels, was seen as particularly suitable in satisfying this urgent,
practical need.
It was Servius, grammaticus urbis Romae at the beginning of the fifth
century, who mainly contributed to making the Ars Donati an authori-
tative text. His commentaries on Donatus’ Ars minor and Ars maior were
widespread. As in his commentary on Virgil, Servius treated Donatus
as an auctor, whose statements were subject to comments by teachers
and were memorized by students. Servius often used the formula ut
Donatus dicit to reinforce his assertions.17

15 Irvine 1994, 58. See Murphy 1974, 139.

16 Irvine 1994, 74 ff. A strong and lasting opposition to the use of pagan grammari-
ans, however, arose among the most conservative Christians. Law (1994a, 100) quotes
a short text, handed down by two ninth-century manuscripts, which bears witness to
the debate between those who asserted the usefulness of ancient grammar and those
who considered it as a vessel of the “wine of error which lying teachers poured out”
(vinum erroris quod […] propinaverunt magistri mendaces: a quotation attributed to Gregory
the Great).
17 On Servius and “Sergius,” see Holtz 1981, 223 ff., 428–429; and Kaster 1988,

169–196, 356–359, 429–430. Two versions of Servius’ commentary (GL 4, 405–428

and 428–448) have been handed down by an eighth-century manuscript (Paris, Bib-
liothèque Nationale, MS. lat. 7530), severely corrupted in spite of its antiquity. The
10 chapter one

From the fifth to the seventh centuries, Donatus’ work had several
imitators and commentators: for example, Cledonius, a Latin gram-
marian in Constantinople, who wrote the first commentary on Dona-
tus equipped with lemmata (thus bearing witness to the condition
of Donatus’ text that was circulating at Constantinople at the time);
Servius and the mysterious Sergius or Pseudo-Cassiodorus; Pompeius,
who taught in Africa; and Julian of Toledo, a bishop of Visigothic
Spain.18 Writers and grammarians from the sixth century onwards
demonstrate that Donatus had risen to the level of a symbol.19 Pri-
scian, who taught Latin in Constantinople during the sixth century,
praised Donatus and made extensive use of his work, even if his
attitude toward the Ars Donati was cautious and realistic rather than
blindly laudatory.20 Cassiodorus, Gregory the Great, Isidore of Seville,
and Bede held Donatus’ work in great esteem. In most cases, however,
they relied not on the original text but on commentaries that ampli-
fied the authentic Donatan material through more or less arbitrary
additions.21
Between the fifth and the sixth centuries, ancient grammar was
Christianized. Donatus’ work also underwent the same treatment:
words taken from Christian texts or lexica and passages from the
Scriptures replaced, or were added to, the examples taken from Vir-

first editor, Jenson (Venice, ca. 1476), attributed the first to Marius Servius Honora-
tus and the second to “Sergius grammaticus.” A “Servius plenior,” a more extensive
version of a commentary on Donatus’ Ars with a massive use of Virgil to explain
Donatus’ rules, is also attributed to a Sergius, which is most likely just a wrong read-
ing of the name “Servius”; see Heinrich Keil’s introduction to his edition in GL 4,
LII. This “Servius plenior” was used by Cledonius, Pompeius, and the anonymous
author of the two books of Explanationes in Donatum (GL 4, 486–565). Holtz (1981, 429),
in turn, attributed the two books to two different authors. On the vexatae quaestiones
of the origin and authorship of the Explanationes, see De Paolis 2000. A fragmentary
treatise (Sergii fragmenta Bobiensia: GL 7, 537–541) and a commentary on the Ars minor
(GL 8, 143–148) have also been attributed to Sergius: see Holtz 1981, 429.
18 On Cledonius (GL 5, 7–79), see Holtz 1981, 235, 429–431. On Pompeius (GL

5, 95–132), ibid., 236f., 431, and the comprehensive study by Kaster 1988, 139–168.
Excerpts from Julian of Toledo’s work have been edited in GL 5, 317–328, and 8,
CCIV–CCXXXIX.
19 For example, Boethius (Categ., PL 64, 257 D, 260 A) considered Donatus and

Aristarchus as the undisputed authorities on Latin and Greek grammar respectively.

See Holtz 1981, 238.
20 Priscian’s works are edited in volumes 2 and 3 of GL. On Priscian’s use of

Donatus’ Ars, see Holtz 1981, 239–244, 425.

21 Holtz 1981, 245–259, 318f.
 the latin donatus 11

gil and from the Roman pagan tradition.22 This Donatus Christianus
became the basic textbook in the cloisters of eighth-century Ireland,
where learning Latin was a compelling necessity for religious prac-
tice.
Donatus, however, had conceived his Ars for fourth-century native
speakers of Latin. With his work—especially the Ars maior—he had
aimed to impart not knowledge of the Latin language, which was
taken for granted in native speakers, but a taxonomy and classification
of words necessary to define the style of the auctores. Therefore, in
the Ars minor Donatus had offered the conjugation of only one verb,
lego, and the declension of five nouns or adjectives, one for each
gender traditionally recognized: hic magister (genus masculinum), haec musa
(genus femininum), hoc scamnum (genus neutrum), hic et haec sacerdos (genus
commune), and hic et haec et hoc felix (genus omne). This certainly was not
enough to acquaint a non-native speaker with the complex verbal and
nominal inflections of Latin. Donatus’ grammar, in fact, does not deal
with Latin morphology, but restricts the treatment of the language to
basic definitions and to very few examples of the main grammatical
categories.23
In order to adapt this text to the needs of Christian students for
whom Latin was a foreign language, Irish grammarians resorted to
several strategies: from the contamination of the Ars minor with Book
Two of the Ars maior to the improvement of Donatus’ text by the
works of other grammarians, such as Charisius, Diomedes, Probus,
Consentius, and Priscian, probably made accessible through an influx
of manuscripts from the European continent. This is the case, for
example, in Virgilius Maro and the source of the seventh-century Ars
Malsachani. Commentators also continued their activity, focusing on
the Ars maior: the anonymous Ars Laureshamensis, the Ars Ambrosiana,
and Quae sunt quae of the seventh-eighth centuries.24 The Ars minor

22 For example, in Donatus Christianus the nouns ecclesia and templum and the adjec-

tive fidelis replaced Donatus’ musa, scamnum, and sacerdos as examples of nominal gen-
ders and as paradigms of inflection; fructus and species were added as paradigms of
fourth- and fifth-declension nouns; the question “(part of speech) quid est?” became
“Quid est (part of speech)?”. See Law 1994, 73–74.
23 See Percival 1988, 72.
24 Vivien Law has devoted several important studies to the problems connected

with the preservation, transmission, and use of Latin grammars in medieval Ireland
and England (1994; 1997, 28–49, 91–123; etc.). On the reception of Donatus in Ire-
land, see Holtz 1981, 272–320. On the treatise Quae sunt quae, see Munzi’s observations
in his recent edition (2004, 9–15; text and commentary on pp. 17–66).
12 chapter one

gradually prevailed over other short grammar books, such as the man-
uals by Asper, Dositheus, and Scaurus, or the Ars breviata attributed to
Augustine. Even more important, however, was the fact that the Ars
minor was integrated with Regulae-type grammar books. Irish gram-
marians of the seventh and eighth centuries (e.g., Tatwine and Boni-
face) concentrated their efforts on improving the content and struc-
ture of the Ars minor by adapting it to the needs of their pupils: they
abandoned the semantic and derivational criteria of ancient grammar
and reduced the space traditionally devoted to definitions in favor of
a more thorough description of “accidence” and morphological phe-
nomena.25 The merging of Schulgrammatik with Regulae created a model
of elementary foreign-language grammar unprecedented in antiquity.
The creation of a “grammar for foreigners” seems to be peculiar to
the insular grammarians of the seventh and eighth centuries. Works
conceived by teachers who taught Latin to Greek students, such as
Eutyches, Phocas, and Priscian, although based on a comparative
approach to the Latin language, in fact were written according to the
usual formal and descriptive criteria.26
The earliest surviving example is the Ars Asporii. Although still
defective in its disposition and organization of contents, we can con-
sider it as a first experimental grammar for non-Latins: written per-
haps in Gaul at the end of the sixth century, the Ars Asporii consists of
a contamination between the Ars minor and the second book of the Ars
maior. Donatus’ Ars is reproduced in its Christianized form and with
a significant increase in the number of examples quoted.27 Typical
Christian contents and methods are displayed by another anonymous

25 Law 1997, 104 ff.; see also Contreni 1986 (1992). Word separation, graphically

visual forms, and modification of the word order were some of the devices through
which Insular grammarians made Latin grammar more easily accessible to pupils; see
Saenger 1997, 83–90.
26 See Law 1986; 1997, 58, 73.
27 A version of the Ars Asporii, or Ars Donati exposita ab Aspero, was published in GL 8,

39–61 from MS. lat. 207 of the Bürgerbibliothek in Bern. On the transmission of the
text and its versions, see Holtz 1981, 432. The author keeps and expands Donatus’
distributional classifications of nouns by gender (GL 8, 40: Genera nominum sunt quattuor,
masculinum, femininum, neutrum, commune. Masculinum ut hic iustus, femininum ut haec ecclesia,
neutrum ut hoc ieiunium, commune duobus generibus ut hic et haec finis vel hic et haec sacerdos vel hic
et haec dies. Est praeterea trium generum, quod omne dicitur, ut hic et haec et hoc ingens felix prudens.
Est epicoenon nomen, id est promiscuum, ut vultur ardea accipiter vel aquila, etc.). Christian
paradigms are quoted for the verbal system (49–51): ieiunio, oro, vigilo, praedico, supplico,
commendo, etc. See Law 1994a, 91 and 1997, 102 f.
 the latin donatus 13

elementary grammar in question-and-answer format, the fragmen-

tary Ars Bernensis, which was composed in Ireland during the eighth
century. As in the other Artes of that age, Donatus is considered an
absolute authority: his words are constantly quoted in the form of
lemmata, paraphrased, and explained, like the Scriptures, in a literal
sense. The anonymous author of the Ars Bernensis contaminated Dona-
tus’ Ars minor and the second book of the Ars maior with Pompeius,
Priscian, Sacerdos, Charisius, and Isidore, following a procedure that
reminds us of the catenae of the early commentators of the Bible.28
The adoption of the formal classifications of nouns and verbs into
five declensions and four conjugations, used by Priscian in his Institutio
de nomine pronomine et verbo, represented a significant improvement: it
provided the framework for a description of Latin morphology that
complemented Donatus’ definitions.29 In turn, this new “Priscianic
Donatus” was supplemented by commentaries, which often preceded
the text in manuscripts, and by tools aimed at making the gram-
mar book suitable for beginning students. They included, for instance,
exercises and lists of paradigms taken from the stock material avail-
able to teachers and often circulating separately in schools, such as
Declinationes nominum, i.e., lists of nouns declined without a connecting
text, composed in England perhaps during the seventh century.30 This
“Insular elementary grammar” was, therefore, an elementary descrip-
tive grammar, which Vivien Law has defined as “a succinct systematic
exposition of Latin grammar in which morphology takes first place.”31
It originated in England during the seventh century and built up the
foundations of later elaborations of the Ars minor.

28 Text in GL 8, 64–142. Another catena grammaticalis is the so-called Donatus orti-

graphus (edited by J. Chittenden, CCCM 40 D, Turnhout 1982), a dialogue between a
teacher and a pupil, in which Priscian and other grammarians are also used exten-
sively. See Holtz 1977, 70; 1981, 434–436.
29 Cf. 1. 1, GL 3, 443: Omnia nomina, quibus Latina utitur eloquentia, quinque declinationibus

flectuntur; 3. 38, 450: Omnia verba […] habent coniugationes quattuor. On the (probable)
origin of the traditional classification of Latin morphology from Varro and Remmius
Palaemon, see Barwick 1922, 236ff.
30 See Holtz 1981, 341, 344–348; Law 1994, 74–75 and 1997, 75 ff., 104; and Colom-

bat 1999, 69 (on Vestibulum, a list of three thousand Latin words in 427 sentences,
which usually supplemented Ianua). Declinationes nominum were copied, for example,
after Donatus’ Ars maior 2 in the third part of Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. lat.
5570, dating from the beginning of the twelfth century. According to Holtz (1981, 419),
they are a “free exploitation, in catechistic form (at least at the beginning of the text)
of Priscian’s Institutio de nomine pronomine et verbo” (my translation).
31 Law 1984 and 1997, 78.
14 chapter one

The British-Irish case was not isolated: in the rest of Europe, Dona-
tus’ Ars also underwent transformations and adaptations. Among the
many variants of the Ars Donati handed down to us, Louis Holtz has
recognized another main tradition: the “Visigothic,” which is of Span-
ish origin. In Italy, the Visigothic and the Irish traditions merged in
the middle of the eighth century, perhaps in the Irish monastic foun-
dation of Bobbio.32
Whereas the transmission of the Ars minor, constantly used in
schools, was continuous and uniform, the three books of the Ars maior
had a more varied fate. From the time of Servius, because of two
books devoted to the morphology of the parts of speech (the Ars
minor and the second book of the Ars maior), Donatus’ corpus was often
handed down in two independent parts: Ars minor and Ars maior 1,
and Ars maior 2 and 3. Book Two of the Ars maior competed with the
Ars minor, which was considered too elementary, especially during the
so-called Carolingian Renaissance, when an elevation in culture also
caused a change in pedagogy.
An increase in the number of manuscripts of classical authors (e.g.,
Virgil, Terence, and Horace) copied in the Carolingian age attests to a
renewed interest in ancient literature and, most probably, to a revival
of the practice of reading poetry in schools. The teaching of grammar,
however, remained generally restricted to the doctrine of the parts
of speech.33 Elementary morphology, based on Donatus, built up the
core of the most widespread grammatical works of that age: the tracts
by Paul the Deacon,34 Peter of Pisa,35 and Smaragdus.36
Because of its simplicity, the Ars minor became in later centuries the
most common elementary schoolbook for Latin. From the thirteenth

See Holtz 1981, 446–499.

32

On the conservatism of Carolingian education, see Munzi 2000. For example,

33

the parts of speech constitute the main theme of Alcuin’s De grammatica (PL 101, 848–
902; see below, n. 39), a dialogue between a teacher and two students, one Frankish
and one Saxon. Alcuin, although trying to insert the grammatical doctrine within a
wider context, did not go very far beyond elementary grammar. See Holtz 1989, 155.
34 In his Ars Donati quam Paulus Diaconus exposuit (re-edited by M.F. Buffa Giolito,

Genova 1997), Paul contaminated an interpolated version of Donatus’ Ars minor

with a complete Declinationes nominum-type treatise and other shorter supplements
(on formae casuales, monosyllabic nouns, compound pronouns, impersonal verbs). See
Holtz 1989, 155; Giolito’s introduction, 23–31; and Law 1994, 73 ff. and 1997, 134.
35 A partial edition in GL 8, 159–171.
36 Liber in partibus Donati, ed. by B. Löfstedt, L. Holtz, and A. Kibre, CCCM 68,

Turnhout 1986.
 the latin donatus 15

century on, an increasing number of manuscripts handed down the

Ars minor with other more advanced grammars, such as the Doctrinale
by Alexander of Villedieu, a verse grammar through which students
would complete their study of Latin grammar. Commentaries by
Irish and Carolingian grammarians (Murethach, Sedulius Scottus,
and Remigius) replaced those transmitted from late antiquity.37
Carolingian teachers also introduced a significant innovation in
foreign-language grammar by supplementing the Ars minor with a new
tool, the parsing grammar, in which the descriptions of the character-
istics and properties of each morphological element were introduced
by the analysis of a headword. The closest model was Priscian’s Par-
titiones duodecim versuum Aeneidos principalium, a detailed analysis of every
word of the first line of each of the twelve books of the Aeneid. Priscian,
who lived and worked in Constantinople, may have been influenced,
in turn, by the methods used in Greek and Byzantine schools.38
The return to the traditional practice of parsing (i.e., identifying
and labeling grammatical forms) was a consequence of the rediscov-
ery of Priscian promoted by the Carolingian grammarians and influ-
enced the later development of medieval grammar and teaching.39
The most important elementary grammar books used in the Mid-
dle Ages, Remigius and Ianua, were parsing grammars resulting from a
contamination between Donatus’ Ars minor and Priscian’s Institutiones.
Parsing grammar was an “open” form that easily permitted varia-
tions and insertions of new material: this flexibility was its key to suc-
cess.40 On the other hand, the imitation of Priscian’s Partitiones caused
a revival of the dialogical form, which had been used already in the
Ars minor and perhaps corresponded to the actual practice that was
being followed in schools. In his dialogue De grammatica, Alcuin had

37 See Holtz 1981, 505 and n. 23; Holtz 1989–1990; and Law 1997, 60f., 144–146.
38 On Byzantine schools, see below, 106ff.
39 Quintilian (Inst. or. 1. 8. 13) recommended the practice of parsing in the teaching

of grammar. The “rediscovery” of Priscian, which corresponded to the higher stan-

dard of Carolingian scholarship, was promoted by Alcuin of York, abbot of Tours,
who lived between the eighth and ninth centuries. By means of his Dialogus Franconis
et Saxonis de octo partibus orationis and his abstracts of the final two books of Priscian,
Alcuin attracted the attention of his contemporaries to Priscian’s main work, the
eighteen books of Institutiones grammaticae. The transmission and use of Priscian’s Insti-
tutio de nomine pronomine et verbo had continued without interruption from late antiquity
onwards, and in Mediterranean Europe the knowledge of Priscian’s whole corpus had
never ceased. See Law 1997, 61 f., 83; and Holtz 2000.
40 Law 1997, 85.
16 chapter one

tried to set the content of Priscian’s Institutiones grammaticae in question-

and-answer format. However, the earliest proper example was offered
by Peter of Pisa, who taught grammar to Charlemagne: in Peter’s Ars,
questions such as “What is pater?” and “To what word class does it
belong?” introduced an analysis of each part of speech. This format
was later maintained and improved to such an extent that it became
a distinguishing feature of these handbooks, for the most part anony-
mous, and usually known by their initial question: Codex quae pars, Doc-
tus quae pars, Quid est doctus,41 Magnus quae vox, or, in the more distinctly
Christianized versions, Anima quae pars and Propheta quae pars. At the
end of the ninth century, Usuard of St. Germain introduced in his
grammar the first declension with the parsing of poeta. Poeta quae pars
est? was also the introductory question of the twelfth-century Ianua,
which, together with the contemporary Dominus quae pars and Magi-
ster quae pars, was one of the most widespread grammar books of the
Middle Ages.42
Therefore, together with Donatus, Priscian gradually became an
authority and an object of commentaries.43 In particular, the Scotti
peregrini Sedulius and John Eriugena commented on Donatus’ Ars on
the basis of Priscian. Priscian’s works were used both as a complement
to Donatus’ grammar and as autonomous textbooks until at least the
eleventh century, when they eventually supplanted the Ars Donati in
schools.

3. Donatus(es) as Schoolbook(s)

A catalogue of the Library of St. Gall allows us to identify the content

of the schoolbag of a student of Latin during the Carolingian age
and to evaluate the presence of Donatus’ Artes in the curriculum.

41 On Quid est doctus / TI ESTIN DOCTUS, see below, 90.

42 Law 1994a, 93 ff.; 1997, 134ff., 141–143. For a list of the anonymous parsing
grammars of the ninth and tenth centuries, see Law 2000, 29–31. On Dominus quae
pars, see also below, 23 n. 61.
43 As Carlotta Dionisotti remarks (1984, 204 f.): “It is a curious fact that, Roman

Donatus notwithstanding, the Latin grammars written for Greeks, from Charisius
and Diomedes, to Cledonius, Priscian and Eutyches, were all at some point imported
into the West. […] One reason […] was that Donatus naturally assumes you know
the language, he teaches how to analyse it; the Eastern grammars taught Latin as a
foreign language, so with heavy emphasis on descriptive morphology, and plenty of
vocabulary: and this was what was increasingly needed in the West.”
 the latin donatus 17

Eight copies of Donatus’ Ars minor, supplemented with three charts of

nominal declensions and one of verbal conjugations, were to be used
at the elementary stage, while nine copies of Donatus’ Ars maior, one
of the so-called Priscianus maior (books 1–16 of Priscian’s Institutiones),
and two of Priscianus minor (books 17 and 18) were for the intermediate
level. Other books (three copies of the first book of Isidore of Seville’s
Etymologies, five of Bede’s De arte metrica, and copies of commentaries
on Donatus’ Artes) probably functioned as reference books on a more
advanced level.44
Another interesting document is the Dialogus super auctores by Con-
rad, a schoolmaster of the Cluniac monastery of Hirsau, between
the end of the tenth and the beginning of the eleventh centuries. By
means of a conversation between a teacher and a student, Conrad
described and analyzed the literary works read in schools. He took
into account the life of the author, the title of the works, their purpose,
content, and usefulness, and the branch of philosophy to which each
work could be assigned.45 As for Donatus, Conrad at first listed the
qualities of his Ars in the elementary teaching of grammar: Donatus
should not be considered a minor author because he only deals with
the basic elements of grammar (quia rudimentis parvulorum aptus cognosc-
itur). In fact, other grammarians also used Donatus’ way of expound-
ing grammar because they considered him to be a “remarkable foun-
dation” (inter maximos ponendus est et quasi quoddam singulare fundamentum in
ceteris auctoribus habendus: 79. 238–244 Huygens). Moreover:
Quantus autem fructus finalis legentium in hoc opere sit, per hoc cognoscitur, ut
ignoret quid grammatica sit qui Donatum neglexerit: de maiore enim et minore
Donato nobis sermo est, qui unus idemque minores quidem lactis fovet in minoribus
disciplinis alimento, maiores in institutis fortioribus pascit solido cibo. (81. 311–
316 Huygens).
[The great degree to which readers can profit from this work can
be seen from the fact that he who neglects Donatus ignores what
grammar is. For we are dealing with a major and a minor Donatus,
who, being one and the same, foster the younger with the nourishment
of milk in minor disciplines and feed the elder with solid food in braver
undertakings.]

On the one hand, the question-and-answer format of the Ars minor,

its conciseness, and its presentation of the matter divided into short

44 See Ising 1970, 24–25.

45 On Conrad’s work, see in particular Murphy 1980, 167.
18 chapter one

sections, ensured easy memorization of its content.46 On the other

hand, the subject matter was complete enough to provide material for
a basic knowledge of Latin. These qualities and the extensive use of
the Ars minor in medieval schools gradually made “Donatus” (Donat,
Donnet, etc.) synonymous with “primer” or “elementary textbook.”47
For example, along with the Psalter, the first reading, Donatus appears
in some thirteenth-century North Italian documents concerning the
hiring of private teachers.48
In most cases, however, the Donatus used in medieval schools was
no longer the original text of the Ars minor. The insertion of the
necessary tools for students who were learning Latin as a second
language—paradigms, examples, and tables of inflection—had also
brought about significant changes in the theoretical parts of the gram-
mar book. Thus, if we trust Bede’s complaint, it was already impossi-
ble in the seventh century to distinguish Donatus’ authentic text from
the additions that had corrupted it:
Artium Donati liber ita a plerisque vitiatus est et corruptus, dum unusquisque pro
libitu suo, sive ex aliis auctoribus, quod ei visum est addidit, sive declinationes aut
coniugationes et ceterum huiusmodi inseruit, ut nisi in antiquis codicibus, vix purus
et integer ut ab eo est editus reperiatur.49
[Donatus’ Artes have been spoiled and corrupted by many people—for
everyone has included at his whim whatever contributions from other
authors seemed proper to him, as well as declensions, conjugations, and
other material of that kind—so that it can hardly be found to be pure
and complete, as it was edited by him, except in ancient manuscripts.]

46 Schmitt 1966, 40.

47 On the antonomastic use of “Donatus,” see Murphy 1974, 32.
48 See Grendler 1989, 4, who quotes two Genoese documents of 1221 and 1248.
49 Preface to Cunabula grammaticae artis Donati a Beda restituta, PL 90, 613 C; an

English translation of the whole passage can be read in Law 2000, 25 f. Bede himself
tried to improve the Ars minor by increasing the number of examples quoted and
parsed. In addition to the Cunabula (PL 90, 613–632), in question-and-answer format,
Bede also wrote a treatise on elementary morphology, the Libellus de octo partibus
orationis (631–642). The usage of interpolating grammar books is condemned also in
the lines quoted by Thurot (1869, 32) from an anonymous verse grammar:
Haec alicui si qui legat exponendo minori,
deprecor hunc ut, quod posui minus exposuive
non bene, supplere velit. Apponet moderate,
non tamen in serie ponendo, sed memorando
tantum per verba, vel margine suppleat extra.
Si, quaecumque velit, lector addas seriei,
non poterit libri certus sic textus haberi.
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
already vying with Rotterdam, and was expected to surpass it as a
trading town, in consequence of a law having passed to lower the
transit duties, and which was to take effect in January 1822.

Before retiring early to-bed, I secured my place in the diligence to

Brussels, for the following morning; at which place I proposed to rest
for some time, after so long a series of travelling; during which, in the
course of three months, I had never slept more than four nights in
the same bed; and farther, I was induced to select this place, for my
repose, as I hoped to meet with some old friends there.

We commenced our journey at seven o’clock; about ten we

stopped to change horses at Mechlin, the city so celebrated for its
manufacture of fine lace of that name. The cathedral here is said to
be a very grand structure and well worth seeing. About noon, we
arrived at Brussels, after a journey of twenty-five miles from Antwerp.
 CHAP. XXXII.
BRUSSELS, GHENT, OSTEND, AND RETURN TO
ENGLAND.

On the recommendation of M. G. Mignon, the French gentleman

with whom I had travelled from Berne to Cologne, and who had
arrived in Brussels the day before myself, I fixed my residence at the
Hotel de la Paix, Rue Violet.

The great anxiety of various countries to become the masters of

this city, may alone be regarded as a strong indication of its
importance. It is extensive, handsomely built in an eligible situation,
and its inhabitants regarded as a polished people; their politeness
towards the English visitors, has, however, been latterly no little
tempered by political or commercial jealousy, arising from our being
able to furnish better and cheaper commodities than they can
manufacture; while, at the same time, they have been subjected to
heavy imposts, and deprived of the advantage of exchanging their
productions for French wines and goods. They do not hesitate to
express their preference of the French government, under which
they had been so long subjected, and even the wish to return to it;
indeed their habits and characters assimilate more with the French
than the Dutch, with whom they are now connected.

The manufactories of carpets, lace, &c. carried on at this place,

are well known; few of the former are, however, actually the
productions of this city, but made in a number of the towns around,
particularly Tournay; they are conveyed, however, into the
merchants’ stores at this place, and then come out as real Brussels
carpets.
 Brussels appears to have had a particular partiality for the number
seven; hence there were formerly seven public fountains; seven
principal streets that centre in the great market-place; seven parish
churches; seven principal noble families; and seven gates of Doric
architecture.

There is a canal encircling the town, and forming it into a kind of

island, planted with trees, and which runs to Willibrook, a village on
the Scheldt, at the distance of fifteen miles; along the banks of this
canal lies an excellent road, shaded with four rows of trees on each
side, upon which the ladies of Brussels take the air in their carriages.
The treckschuyts pass by this canal from Brussels to Antwerp, twice
every day.

The great market-place is one of the most beautiful squares in

Europe. One side is occupied by the Stadt-house. The states of
Brabant used formerly to meet in a palace in this square, which was
most richly adorned. In three large rooms the resignation of his
empire, by Charles the Fifth, is wrought in tapestry. The other rooms,
which belonged to this august assembly, were embellished with fine
original paintings. In this square are also situated the halls of the
various trading companies of Brussels, the fronts of which are
adorned with exquisite sculpture and workmanship.

The herb-market is also a fine square, as well as the horse-market

or sablon; both of which are environed by some excellent buildings.
The Place Royal, situated near the palace and park, is an airy
situation, and contains the two principal hotels, the Bellevue, and the
Hotel de Flandres. The museum, and the botanic garden are also
situated by this square; in the former is deposited the cradle of
Charles the Fifth, and the chair in which

“The Spaniard, when the lust of sway

Had lost its quickening spell,
Cast crowns for rosaries away,
An empire for a cell.”
 This museum contains also a number of interesting objects of
nature and art; amongst the former a good collection of minerals,
and amongst the latter, an extensive one of paintings; and which
comprises a few valuable originals.

In company with a friend, Mr. M’M⸺, to whom my warmest

acknowledgments are due for his unceasing attentions in conducting
me to, and explaining its various parts, I made the complete tour of
this city along the ramparts, commencing at the gate of Namur.
These ramparts appeared in a bad state, not calculated for a
fashionable promenade; we passed an old fort with a very few guns
upon it, and these certainly not in fighting order. We did not complete
the tour on the first day, but left off at what was lately named Port
Napoleon, but now Port Guillaume; this is a handsome modern
structure.

On the following day we completed our tour, finishing at Port

Namur; in the course of this walk we passed a number of persons
employed in making a boulevard, and building a wall from a depth of
six feet to the surface to support it.

One afternoon we went to examine the environs around the royal

palace of Lacken, and might without much difficulty have been
admitted into the palace itself, had it not been too late in the
afternoon; we were informed, however, that it offered nothing
particularly magnificent or interesting; with its grounds it is enclosed
within a wooden fence, which altogether does not comprise an area
of two miles in circumference, certainly not an extensive domain for
a royal residence, in the neighbourhood of so fine a city.

The churches at Brussels are very fine, particularly that of St.

Gudulo, which is a magnificent building with two steeples. There are
two places of worship, where the English service is performed in an
impressive manner, by their respective preachers; the one the
church of St. Augustine, for morning, the other a chapel in the Place
Royal, for evening service.
 Brussels is almost wholly supplied with firing, from the forest of
Soignè, which covers a tract of sixteen or seventeen thousand acres
of land, one sixtieth part of which is allowed to be cut down annually,
and thus a constant supply ensured.

Lodgings and all kinds of provision are very reasonable, but

French wines now comparatively dear. We one day went to a coach-
maker’s, where we saw vehicles of every description, which my
friend on examining into, declared were as well got up as they
generally are in England, and at about two-thirds of the customary
English prices. We visited also the lace manufactories, where my
companion made some purchases, but I did not choose to run the
risk of being laughed at, for taking back the produce of my own
country, which, I am assured, is now frequently put off as the
manufacture of Flanders.

One evening I went to the larger theatre, with Mr. S⸺, for the
express purpose of hearing the celebrated Mademoiselle Mars, in
the character of the Femme Colère in the play of that name. I
thought the piece very inferior, and to comprise common place
incidents, and trifling dialogues. The plot is founded upon the
stratagem of a peaceable kind of husband, to quell the turbulent
temper of his wife, and who succeeds in convincing her of her folly,
by shewing the impropriety of such conduct in himself; for this
purpose, on one occasion, when she has been enraged at her
waiting-maid, he throws himself into a still greater passion; upsets
the tables, chairs, and every thing that comes in his way; she hears,
sees, and is astonished at his violence, becoming proportionately
tame, as his rage increases, and at length convinced of her error,
determines to reform.

The stage of this theatre I thought not sufficiently advanced

towards the audience, the greater part of the sound appearing to be
retained upon it.

One day, amongst other amusements in the suburbs, I was

present at that of shooting the popinjay, which consists in placing the
figure of a bird at the top of a long pole, and shooting at it with bows
and arrows; the person who succeeds in displacing the mark, is
remunerated with a gold or silver watch, or whatever prize may be
contended for; it did not appear, however, an easy matter to effect
this, as it was four o’clock when we were there, and they had been
engaged the whole day, without being able to remove the popinjay.

During my stay at Brussels, I discovered very few symptoms of

gaiety, although the royal family were at the time resident. The
English families were many of them gone to different bathing places.
I had, however, the gratification of finding there my friend, Admiral D
⸺, whose great condescension and hospitality, demand my
warmest acknowledgments, and have left an indelible impression of
gratitude and esteem; nor can I forget the kind attentions of his friend
Mr. P. H⸺.

On the 10th of September, I received a letter from my friend C⸺,

dated at the port of Lubec, describing his progress towards St.
Petersburg, and which gave me unfeigned pleasure.

Being desirous of reaching England, before the equinoctial gales

might come on, on the 12th of September I took my place for Ghent,
in one of the many coaches that go daily to that city; after an early
dinner, I left Brussels at half past two o’clock, occupying the same
seat with an English gentleman and his dog; the middle seat was
taken up by a Dutch captain, from Batavia, with a parrot and dog;
while a pair of monkies belonging to him, enjoyed the fresh air on the
roof, and amused the people as they passed along. We arrived at
the fine city of Ghent about half past eight o’clock, and, at the
recommendation of Admiral D⸺, I went to the Hotel de Vienne, in
the merché au blê, where, in consequence of using his name, I was
treated with particular attention, and charged reasonably for very
superior accommodations.

This city derives no little of its celebrity from having been the birth-
place of Charles the Fifth, as well as our John of Gaunt, duke of
Lancaster, and son of Edward the Third.
 We were now in what was formerly called Flanders, the Austrians
possessing the larger part with this city for their capital; the French,
the south-west, comprising Lisle and Dunkirk; and the Dutch, the
north-east, with the strong fortress of Sluys.

On the following morning we breakfasted at seven o’clock, and,

after taking a short walk into the town, set off for the barge to
Bruges, which lay at a considerable distance from the hotel, and
starts at nine o’clock in the morning. The day was unfavourable; it
blew hard, and we had frequent showers of rain; however, we were
better situated for these gales than had we been in the packet
midway between Ostend and Margate. Between twelve and one
o’clock, a better dinner was placed before us, than I had met with at
any table d’hôte in France, Germany, or the Low Countries, and the
wine was universally praised. I certainly had as good a pint of
Burgundy as I had met with on the continent, for which, with my
dinner, and the fare for thirty miles’ journey, including the
conveyance of baggage, I was only charged seven francs and a half.
Our dinner concluded with a magnificent dessert; we had more
baskets of peaches than we could make use of, grapes (the first I
had met with this season), and abundance of the more common
fruits. We arrived at Bruges at half-past three, and, without tarrying,
immediately traversed the city to the barge for Ostend, on a canal at
the opposite side of it. All I know of this place is, that we walked
through the town for nearly two miles before we reached the boat.

Our barge from Bruges, as well as our party, was much smaller
than the one we had travelled with from Ghent; soon after seven
o’clock we arrived at Sas van Ghent, a small village, about a mile
from Ostend, where we rested a few minutes, after which we
proceeded into the town, when about eight o’clock I reached the
Wellington hotel, an inn conveniently situated for the custom-house,
and the packets sailing to and from England, and which has been
established by an Englishman, lately the head waiter from
Nicholson’s hotel.
 On our arrival at Ostend we found two packets intending to sail for
England, a private one for Margate and London, on the following
day, and a government one for Dover on the succeeding day to that;
those to whom time is of importance, however, unless a vessel is on
the point of sailing from hence, and the wind favourable, will do well
to take the barge to Dunkirk, and travel from that place to Calais by
the diligence.

On the Friday the wind was unfavourable, and we had nothing to

do but amuse ourselves as we pleased; in the morning we walked
about the town, and in the evening visited again the village of Sas
van Ghent, with the object of examining Paren’s museum, which, as
the sole collection of a humble individual, the proprietor of a small
inn at this place, is by no means contemptible. He had great variety
of land and sea animals, several of the former coming under the
head of lusus naturæ. No remuneration is expected for seeing his
curiosities; but we could not do less than take refreshment at his
house of business; and I presented him with a small piece of Mosaic
work which I had brought from Rome, with which he appeared highly
pleased, never having seen any before. On returning to our hotel we
found the captain intending to sail at midnight, and therefore we did
not go to-bed until we ascertained that he had abandoned this
intention.

On Saturday the morning was delightful, and the wind favourable;

at one o’clock, a.m. we took leave of the town and harbour of
Ostend, in the Fox packet, commanded by Captain Fox, with whom I
engaged to be landed at Margate. The Dover packet immediately
followed, but soon steered a more westerly course. The wind, at first
fresh, gradually decreased until midnight, when it became calm, and
the weather foggy. At day-break a slight breeze sprung up; at eleven
o’clock the fog cleared off; we found ourselves close under the North
Foreland; and at twelve myself and a few other passengers were put
on board a lugger, which soon landed us upon the pier of Margate.

The indescribable delight with which I hailed my native land, after

so long an absence, was not a little enhanced by the general
improvement my health had experienced; the restoration of which,
had formed one of my leading motives for undertaking the journey.

On a retrospective view of the various incidents and

circumstances to which I had been exposed, I found no reason to
think that my tour had been defective in interest, or that I had
returned without commensurate advantages. Amongst other results,
I felt enabled to contrast the advantages of our happy isle, with the
less substantial comforts, and more specious characters, of its
continential neighbours, and to appreciate its superiority; an
inference, which, should it be deemed erroneous or unphilosophical,
I am proud to attribute to that spirit of patriotism, which ought to
pervade every human bosom, and like the magnetic influence,
incline its affections to their native pole.

“Such is the patriot’s boast! where’er we roam,

His first, best country, ever is at home.”

FINIS.

Printed by W. Woodcock, St. Helena Place, Spa Fields.

 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE
NARRATIVE OF A JOURNEY UNDERTAKEN IN THE YEARS 1819,
1820 AND 1821 THROUGH FRANCE, ITALY, SAVOY,
SWITZERLAND, PARTS OF GERMANY BORDERING ON THE
RHINE, HOLLAND AND THE NETHERLANDS ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world 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.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
 about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.