Scholia Bobiensia

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Scholia Bobiensia (mostly scientifically abbreviated schol.Bob. ) Are a collection of learned explanations, so-called Scholia , to twelve speeches by Cicero .

Rediscovery and spending

The Scholia Bobiensia have been handed down in a palimpsest that was originally kept in the library of the monastery of San Colombano von Bobbio near Pavia . Part of the palimpsest and other pieces reached the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan in 1616 , where it was discovered by the Italian cardinal curia and philologist Angelo Mai and published in Milan in 1814 . In the Biblioteca Vaticana , which had also received manuscripts from Bobbio in 1618 , Mai - one of the founders of palimpsest research - soon discovered another part and now edited both together again in 1828. Mai initially believed - even against Barthold Georg Niebuhr Objections raised in 1816 - that Asconius Pedianus had comments on Cicero in the manuscripts , he moved away from this point of view with the submission of the Vatican text. The palimpsest is now under the abbreviations Ambr.E.147 and Vat.Lat.5750 kept in the libraries.

Leo Ziegler was the first to undertake a new reading of all the fragments of the Palimpsest, but in 1872 and 1873 he was only able to bring preliminary publications to print. He was followed by Cornelius Brakman with an autopsy of both parts, while Thomas Stangl , from whom the edition most cited today comes, examined only the Milan part and re-read it. Paul Hildebrandt , who received his doctorate on the Scholia and also got an edition that is still used today, saw both parts. Emendations followed the work of Stangl and Hildebrandt by Cornelius Brakman and DR Shackleton Bailey . Franziskus Ehrle published a photographic reproduction of the Vatican section in 1906.

Content and structure

The Scholia Bobiensia contain scholias to twelve speeches by Cicero from the years 65–51 BC. BC, of ​​which nine have also been handed down by hand, while three have been lost. The speeches received at the same time are:

The lost speeches were:

  • 2. In P. Clodium et Curionem (61 BC), 3. De rege Alexandrino (65 BC) and 11. De aere alieno Milonis (53 BC).

The order is mostly chronological. The 65 BC Speech given by De rege Alexandrino was changed against the chronology as well as Pro T. Annio Milone and Pro Archia poeta. The speech Pro Murena , probably also Pro C. Rabirio Postumo (“For Gaius Rabirius Postumus ”, 54 BC) is deliberately not included . In addition, a block of speeches is missing, which may not have been included in the manuscript available to the scholiast. These are: Pro M. Caelio, De provinciis consularibus, Pro L. Balbo, In L. Pisonem. The speech De haruspicum responso (“About the opinion of the victims' show) could not have been taken into account for Christian reasons, because in his comment on Pro Cn. Plancio the author describes the Ferarium Latinarum sacrificio , the sacrifice on the occasion of the Feriae Latinae , as a custom according to old superstition.

The text is distributed over 102 of the former 581 folia , so less than a fifth has survived. They are assigned to Quaterniones 46–73 of the underlying Codex . The subtext of the palimpsest probably dates from the 5th century and was rescribed in Bobbio in the 7th or 8th century.

The commentaries on Cicero's speeches preserved in the Scholia are an important source for philologists, historians and lawyers alike. For the three lost speeches, they provide the basis for understanding and chronological order and play an important role in the recovery of Cicero's biography.

Dating

The commentary itself is generally dated to the 4th century. According to Paul Hildebrandt, it is an excerpt from the 4th century on a rhetorical commentary from the 2nd century, which was developed for teaching. It is possible that a classic commentator by Hieronymus named Volcacius, who wrote in orationes Ciceronis , was the author of the underlying script. Hieronymus lists him between Aemilius Asper , the commentator and grammarian of the 2nd century, and the church father Gaius Marius Victorinus from the 1st half of the 4th century. This is followed by Jerome's teacher, Aelius Donatus , from the 2nd half of the 4th century. Even Peter Lebrecht Schmidt believes it is possible that an author of the 4th century has restructured a strictly designed according to chronological point of comment his time as and edited. According to him, the underlying commentary of the 2nd century was based on the commentaries of Asconius Pedianus on the work of Cicero from the 1st century in terms of well-founded historical knowledge.

Editions and translations

  • Angelo Mai : M. Tullii Ciceronis trium orationum in Clodium et Curionem, de aere alieno Milonis, de rege Alexandrino fragmenta inedtia. Pirot, Milan 1814 ( Google Books ).
  • Angelo Mai: Classicorum auctorum e vaticanis codicibus editorum. Volume 2. Typis Vaticanis, Rome 1828, pp. 1–268 ( digitized version ).
  • Paul Hildebrandt : Scholia in Ciceronis orationes Bobiensia. Teubner, Leipzig 1907 ( digitized version ).
  • Thomas Stangl : Ciceronis orationum scholiastae. Volume 2. F. Tempsky, Vienna 1912 (Volume 1: Prolegomena and Volume 3: Indices have not been published).

literature

  • Cornelius Brakman: Bobiensia. Utrecht 1904.
  • Cornelius Brakman: Bobiensia. In: Mnemosyne . New series Volume 42, 1914, pp. 380–384.
  • Martin Schanz , Carl Hosius : History of Roman literature. Volume 1: The Roman Literature in the Time of the Republic. 3. Edition. CH Beck, Munich 1927, pp. 449-450.
  • DR Shackleton Bailey : Notes on the Bobbio Scholia. In: American Journal of Philology . Volume 104, 1983, pp. 390-394.
  • Peter Lebrecht Schmidt : Volcacius (?), Commentarii in orationes Ciceronis (Scholia Bobiensia). In: Reinhart Herzog , Peter Lebrecht Schmidt (Hrsg.): Handbook of Latin literature of antiquity. Volume 5: Restoration and Renewal. The Latin Literature from AD 284 to 374. Beck, Munich 1989, pp. 140-142

Web links

Remarks

  1. ^ Barthold Georg Niebuhr: M. Cornelii Frontonis reliquiae. Reimer, Berlin 1816, p. XXXIV with note 5 ( digitized version ).
  2. ↑ Leo Ziegler: On the textual criticism of Scholiasta Bobiensis to Ciceronian speeches. In: Rheinisches Museum . Volume 27, 1872, pp. 420-437 ( Google Books ); ders .: Contributions to the textual criticism of Scholiasta Bobiensis on Ciceronian speeches. Program of the k. Maximiliansgymnsasium Munich 1872/73. Straub, Munich 1873 ( digitized version ).
  3. ↑ Cornelius Brakman: Bobiensia. Utrecht 1904.
  4. ↑ Cornelius Brakman: Bobiensia. In: Mnemosyne . New series Volume 42, 1914, pp. 380–384.
  5. ^ DR Shackleton Bailey: Notes on the Bobbio Scholia. In: American Journal of Philology . Volume 104, 1983, pp. 390-394.
  6. ^ Franziskus Ehrle: Codices e Vaticanis selecti phototypice expressi. Volume 7: Frontonis aliorumque fragmenta, quae codice vaticano 5750 rescripto comprehenduntur. Milan 1906.
  7. ↑ The lost speeches were edited by Giulio Puccioni: M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationum deperditarum fragmenta. Mondadori, Milan 1972, pp. 65-69. 88-104. 109-116.
  8. ↑ For the chronology of Cicero's speeches, see the overview in Michael von Albrecht : History of Roman Literature. From Andronicus to Boethius. Taking into account their importance for modern times. Volume 1. Second, improved and expanded edition. Saur, Munich et al. 1994, pp. 417-423.
  9. ↑ Scholia Bobiensia 118 (Stangl) ( Latin ).
  10. ^ Peter Lebrecht Schmidt: Restoration and renewal. The Latin literature from 284 to 374 AD Beck, Munich 1989, p. 141.
  11. ↑ Scholia Bobiensia 155 (Stangl) ( Latin ).
  12. ^ Paul Hildebrandt: De scholiis Ciceronis Bobiensibus. Mayer & Müller, Berlin 1894, p. 39. 49 ( digitized version ).
  13. ↑ Already considered by Angelo Mai: Classicorum auctorum e vaticanis codicibus editorum. Volume 2. Typis Vaticanis, Rome 1828, p. XI; further elaborated by Peter Lebrecht Schmidt : Restoration and renewal. The Latin literature from 284 to 374 AD Beck, Munich 1989, pp. 140 f.
  14. ↑ Hieronymus, apologia adversus libros Rufini 1.16; epistulae 70.2.
  15. ^ Peter Lebrecht Schmidt: Restoration and renewal. The Latin literature from 284 to 374 AD Beck, Munich 1989, p. 141.