Among the manuscripts produced after the ninth century, valuable copies of Virgil’s works are preserved in outlying areas which were secluded from the influence of the dominant centre of the Carolingian world. In fact, distance was a guarantee against contamination. Innovations usually spread from a region’s centre toward the periphery, yet did not always manage to reach it. Furthermore, the province, being more conservative than the centre, was more likely to preserve ancient elements. This phenomenon, known to philologists as ‘geographical criterion’ or ‘survival at the periphery’, has been compared to the norm of lateral areas used by ‘neolinguists’.[1] One of the largest marginal areas for medieval manuscript production was Southern Italy, where a unique culture flourished between the eighth and eleventh centuries. The development of a regional Longobard script that was very different from Caroline minuscule is a clear sign of geographical and political separation from Northern Italy, France, and Germany. This script reached fruition in the territory of Benevento, and for this reason is known as Beneventan script.[2]
Books produced in this area deserve deeper consideration. Thanks to the intense copying activity in the Abbey of Monte Cassino in the eleventh century, many classical texts survived long after the Carolingian Renaissance, and independently from it. As Cavallo has shown, these manuscripts are often based on an ancient ancestor, even if sometimes an intermediate step can be traced back to the eighth or ninth century.[3] For example, today we are able to read some of the major works from Antiquity that were only transmitted by Beneventan manuscripts. These include Varro’s De lingua latina, of which there are two copies (Par. lat. 7530, saec. VIIIex and Flor. Laurent. 51.10, saec. XIex), and Tacitus’ Historiae (I-V) and Annales (XI-XVI), based on a single manuscript, Flor. Laurent. 68.2 (saec. XImed), which itself is our unique source for Apuleius’ Metamorphoses and Florida.
One of the most spectacular of these isolated survivals is represented by thirty-six verses in the sixth satire of Juvenal, discovered in a Beneventan manuscript (Oxford, Bodl. Canon. Class. Lat. 41, saec. XI/XII, perhaps from Monte Cassino) by E.O. Winstedt in 1899. These lines are clearly ancient (the question of whether they are genuine or interpolated remains unresolved), and their excision or intrusion took place during the earliest stages of transmission.[4] On the other hand, for texts with a rich manuscript tradition, such as Gregory of Nyssa or the New Testament, the group of manuscripts produced in Southern Italy preserve genuine and ancient texts.[5]
As far as Virgil’s texts are concerned, at present we know of ten codices in Beneventan script — seven complete and three fragmentary — copied during the tenth and eleventh centuries.
BENEVENTAN MANUSCRIPTS OF VIRGIL
In the first contribution to the study of Virgil’s Beneventan manuscripts, Lowe surveyed eight, describing their palaeographical features.[6] He stressed their value as “witnesses of intellectual activity”, claiming that the renewed interest in classical learning can be considered a consequence of artistic and literary awakening in Southern Italy. This revival culminated in the century of Abbot Desiderius (1027-1087), the period to which the majority of Virgil’s Beneventan manuscripts belong. As Lowe observed:
[O]ne is tempted to interpret the centuries-wide gap in the transmission of Virgil as a reflection of a lack of interest in classical learning. Likewise, we should perhaps be not far wrong if we interpreted the survival of the Beneventan manuscripts of Virgil as marking a revival of interest in secular learning.
In their material features and layout, these Beneventan books resemble the Carolingian manuscripts (see THE EARLY MEDIEVAL BOOK). For example, the layout of Neapolit. Vind. lat. 5 (ν), Canon. Class. lat. 50 (o), and Compact. XV is similar to commented editions. The codices Neapolit. Vind. lat. 6 (n), Par. lat. 10308 (δ), Vat. lat. 1573 (ε), and Reg. lat. 2090 (η) instead present the layout of the glossed edition. Furthermore, neumes typical of Southern Italy have been detected in the manuscripts Neapolit. Vind. lat. 5 (ν), Neapolit. Vind. lat. 6 (n), and Reg. lat. 2090 (η).[7]
Virgil’s Beneventan manuscripts have usually been neglected by editors as witnesses to the text. Butler collated Canon. Class. lat. 50 (o),[8] but the results of his examination were not taken into account by Ribbeck.[9] In his edition, Geymonat reported the variant readings of Neapolit. Vind. lat. 6 (n), but only the recent edition of the Bucolics and the Georgics;[10] Ottaviano and Conte included all the complete Beneventan manuscripts in this recension.[11]
THE TRANSMITTED TEXT
The philological value of the Beneventan manuscripts of Virgil can be measured in two ways. First, they occasionally preserve genuine readings and ancient variants. Secondly, they share many conjunctive errors, which allow us to consider them as a consistent group depending on a common source, or at least on a common ‘Beneventan vulgata’.
The agreement between the Beneventan manuscripts is indicated as Λ (codd. Longobardici) in the recent Teubner edition of the Eclogues and Georgics.[12] The siglum Φ refers to the codd. Carolingi, and the siglum ω indicates the agreement between ΦΛ, or between the majority of the manuscripts belonging to these two groups.
SCHOLIA
The Beneventan manuscripts display interesting exegetical materials appended to Virgil’s text. For example, the Harvard editors assert that Neap. lat. 5 (ν for Virgil’s text, N for Servius’ text) and Vat. lat. 3317 (V for Servius’ text), which come from the same area, represent a particular group in the transmission of Servius’ commentary.[13] The position of N in Servius’ stemma has been more precisely determined by Murgia: it represents an independent branch (σ) bearing some relationship with the vulgate text (γ).[14] On the contrary, Vat. lat. 3317 bears witness to an isolated tradition, as shown by the commentary to the Georgics published by Thilo under the title of Scholia Vaticana.[15]
The exegetical notes contained in o (Can. Class. lat. 50) conflate Servian materials and glosses attributed to Phylargirius;[16] further investigation is, however, needed.
ILLUSTRATION AND DECORATION
The Beneventan manuscripts of Virgil are sparingly decorated, according to the predominant practice in manuscript production until the twelfth century. Some initials are decorated with interlaced straps, ribbons and tendrils, geometrical ornaments, and occasionally with animal and human figures. Sometimes the decoration includes narrative elements, imaginary beasts, and grotesque characters.
Religious images seldom appear. However, Reg. lat. 2090 (η) is adorned with two female figures that have been tentatively identified as images of the Virgin Mary. Likewise, Par. lat. 10308 (δ) is decorated with Christ and the Evangelists Luke and John, while animals unrelated to the text are depicted in the margins of the book.
Neap. Vind. Lat. 6 (n), written in Campania around the middle of the tenth century, perhaps on request from John III, Duke of Naples, is exceptionally embellished with a series of miniatures that serve as illustrations to the text. Initials are richly decorated with natural and figurative elements. a typology that has parallels in late Gothic illumination. Moreover, two miniatures are located at the beginning of Aeneid 1 (f. 45r: Aeneas reaches Carthage) and of Aeneid 12 (f. 168v: the duel between Turnus and Aeneas). Other initials decorated with relevant scenes appear at the beginning of the Eclogues, each book of the Georgics, and the Aeneid, and the Argumenta before each book of the Aeneid. Five portraits of Virgil found in these books perhaps represent the vestige of ancient systems of illustration customary in papyrus scrolls (on this phenomenon, see Weitzmann).[17] Courcelle,[18] Belting,[19] and Bertelli[20] have demonstrated that various figurative traditions, combining influences from ancient models with medieval features, contributed to the ornamentation of n. Decorated initials which are connected to the text are also found at the opening of Aeneid 8 on Can. Class. lat. 50 (o), f. 113v. Here, Turnus lifts up military insignia under Juno’s protection.[21]
In addition to Lowe’s article, the following works are useful tools to the study of Virgil’s Beneventan manuscripts:
Lowe on the origin and the morphology of the Beneventan script,[22] with Brown’s updates to the manuscripts list.[23] Moreover, Virginia Brown discovered a new fragment in the Bernard M. Rosenthal Collection (acquired by the Beinecke Library, Yale University);
Newton on the scriptorium and the library of the Abbey of Monte Cassino, to which he connects five out of the ten manuscripts of Virgil in Beneventan script (Par. lat. 10308; Vat. lat. 1573; Vat. lat. 3253; Vat. gr. 2324; Compact. XV);[24]
The catalogue of the exposition of Beneventan manuscripts, Virgilio e il Chiostro, held in Monte Cassino (1996);[25]
The online bibliography of Beneventan manuscripts available at http://edu.let.unicas.it/bmb/
[1] G. Pasquali, Storia della tradizione e della critica del testo, Florence: 1952, 175-78; S. Timpanaro, The Genesis of Lachmann’s Method, ed. and trans. by G.W. Most (Chicago: 2005; original Italian edition: La Genesi del metodo del Lachmann [Florence: 1963]), 85-88; N.G. Wilson, “Variant readings with poor support in the manuscript tradition”, RHT 17 (1987), 1-13.
[2] E.A Lowe, The Beneventan Script. A History of the South Italian Minuscule, second edition prepared and enriched by Virginia Brown (Rome: 1980).
[3] G. Cavallo, “La trasmissione dei testi nell’area beneventano-cassinese”, in Dalla parte del libro. Storie di trasmissione dei classici, ed. by G. Cavallo (Urbino: 2002), 235-83 (original Italian edition: La cultura antica nell’Occidente latino dal VII all’XI secolo [Spoleto: 1975], 357-414).
[4] R.J. Tarrant, “Juvenal”, in Texts and Transmission. A Survey of the Latin Classics, ed. by L.D. Reynolds (Oxford: 1983), 203.
[5] J. Irigoin, “Éditions d’auteur et rééditions à la fin de l’antiquité (à propos du Traité de la Virginité de Gregoire de Nysse)”, RevPhil 44 (1970), 101-106; D. Lafleur, La famille 13 dans l’évangile de Marc (Leiden: 2013).
[6] E.A. Lowe, “Virgil in South Italy”, Studi medievali 5 (1932), 43-51 (=Paleographical Papers, vol. 1 [Oxford: 1972], 327-34].
[7] Y.-F. Riou, Chronologie et provenance des manuscrits classiques latins neumés, RHT 21 (1991), 77-113.
[8] G. Butler (ed.), Codex Virgilianus, qui nuper ex biblioth. Can. abbatis Venetiani Bodleianae accessit, cum Wagneri textu collatus (Oxford: 1854).
[9] O. Ribbeck, “Prolegomena”, in P. Vergili Maronis, Opera, ed. by O. Ribbeck, 4 vols. (Leipzig: 1859-18681; 1894-18952), 348-53.
[10] M. Geymonat (ed.), P. Vergili Maronis Opera, post R. Sabbadini et A. Castiglioni (Turin: 1973, 2nd ed. 2008).
[11] P. Vergilius Maro, Bucolica et Georgica, ed. by S. Ottaviano and G.B. Conte (Berlin, New York: 2013).
[12] P. Vergilius Maro, Bucolica et Georgica, ed. by S. Ottaviano and G.B. Conte (Berlin, New York: 2013).
[13] A.F. Stocker, “A Possible New Source for Servius Danielis on Aeneid III-V”, Studies in Bibliography 4 (1951-52), 129-41.
[14] C.E. Murgia, Prolegomena to Servius 5. The Manuscripts (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: 1975), 136-41.
[15]Servii Grammatici qui feruntur in Vergilii carmina commentarii. Vol. 3.1: Vergilii Bucolica et Georgica commentarii, ed. by G. Thilo (Leipzig: 1887).
[16] J.J. Savage, “The Manuscripts of Servius’s Commentary on Virgil”, HSCPh 45 (1934), 201-202.
[17] K. Weitzmann, Illustrations in Roll and Codex: A Study of the Origin and Method of Text Illustration (Princeton: 1947).
[18] P. Courcelle, “La tradition antique dans les miniatures inédites d’un Virgile de Naples”, Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 56 (1939), 243-79.
[19] H. Belting, Studien zur beneventanischen Malerei (Wiesbaden: 1968), 137-43.
[20] C. Bertelli, “L’illustrazione di testi classici nell’area beneventana dal IX all’XI secolo”, La cultura antica nell’Occidente latino dal VII all’XI secolo (Spoleto: 1975), 918.
[21] P. Courcelle and J. Courcelle, “Lecteurs païens et lecteurs chrétiens de l’Enéide”, vol. 2: Les manuscrits illustrés de l’Enéide du Xe au XVe siècle (Paris: 1984), 25, fig. 9.
[22] E.A Lowe, The Beneventan Script. A History of the South Italian Minuscule, second edition prepared and enriched by Virginia Brown (Rome: 1980).
[23] V. Brown, “A Second New List of Beneventan Manuscripts”, StudMed 40 (1978), 239-89.
[24] F. Newton, The Scriptorium and Library at Monte Cassino, 1058–1105 (Cambridge: 1999).
[25] M. Dell’Omo (ed.), Virgilio e il chiostro. Manoscritti di autori classici e civiltà monastica. Catalogo della mostra (Abbazia di Montecassino, 8 luglio – 8 dicembre 1996) (Rome: 1996).