Martianus Capella and the Carolingians: Some observations based on the glosses on books I-II from...

Listen, O Isles, unto MeStudies in Medieval Word and Image

in Honour of Jennifer O’Reilly

DR JENNIFER O’REILLY, MRIA, FSA

(Photo courtesy of the Royal Irish Academy)

Listen, O Isles, unto MeStudies in Medieval Word and Image

in Honourof Jennifer O’Reilly

Edited by

ELIZABETH MULLINS

andDIARMUID SCULLY

28

Martianus Capella andthe Carolingians:

Some Observations Based on the Glosses onBooks I–II from the Oldest Gloss Tradition

on De nuptiis

SINÉAD O’SULLIVAN

This paper pays tribute to my former teacher, Jennifer O’Reilly, by exam-ining the Carolingian reception of Martianus Capella’s De nuptiis. Itconcerns the transformation of late antique inheritance in the early medievalWest, a topic at the core of both our interests.

The oldest gloss tradition on Martianus’ De nuptiis, one of three majorCarolingian efforts to elucidate the work,1 provides insight into the centralityof an author whom Joseph Scaliger (1540–1609) and many after him haveregarded as barbarus scriptor.2 In this paper I examine the glosses for clues toMartianus’ strong appeal for ninth-century scholars, especially from the firsttwo books of De nuptiis, whose lengthy allegorical fantasy frequently receivedthe glossators’ most concentrated attention. His ninth-century vogue,together with his pre-Caroline reception,3 have been documented but oftennot explained.4

The oldest gloss tradition is sometimes attributed to the famousCarolingian scholar Martin of Laon, but no consensus to its authorshipobtains.5 In the extant manuscripts, the glosses are usually written by morethan one scribe. These scribes sometimes appear to have worked in tandem.What they have left us comprises multiple, overlapping layers of annota-tions, corrections, additions and emendations. Their work displays keeninterest not only in elucidating and interpreting but also in establishing thetext of De nuptiis.

Though this tradition of glossing is fluid in form, it comprises a relativelystable and coherent body of commentary, hence a reasonably reliable basisfor drawing inferences about the Carolingian reception of the text. Glossesare both marginal and interlinear in the extant ninth- and tenth-centurymanuscripts.6 Rarely do they appear as a running commentary.7 Notable isthe sheer number of glosses shared by all or many of the manuscripts

Martianus Capella and the Carolingians 29

transmitting the tradition. This degree of sharing strongly suggests not somuch random accretion as a larger and more diffuse process of transmission.Codicological and palaeographical evidence further supports the idea thatthe tradition was well established. Teeuwen, for example, has demonstratedthat many of the manuscripts were actually laid out to contain both glossesand text.8 In addition, the glosses were often contemporary with the text.Most of the extant manuscripts date to the second half of the ninth century,with the oldest surviving manuscript dating to the first half of the ninthcentury (Leiden, Universiteitsbiliotheek, Voss. Lat. F. 48). Copying and dis-semination happened in many of the key intellectual centres of theCarolingian world: Auxerre, Corbie, Rheims and Fleury. And glossingactivity was not just centred in the Loire valley, northeastern and easternFrance, but also spread further eastwards towards Lorsch (Leiden,Universiteitsbibliotheek, BPL 36) and Cologne (Cologne, DombibliothekMS. 193, and possibly London, British Library, Harley 2685).9

The oldest gloss tradition is not, however, the only witness toCarolingian scholarly interest in Martianus. Other indications that Denuptiis was a central text for ninth-century scholars are not difficult to find:the large number of extant manuscripts from the period; the presence of allnine books in many manuscripts, which are actively corrected, annotated,illustrated and supplied with alternative readings; the frequent copying andcirculation of the text; the production of two other major commentaries; theabundance of glosses comprising all three commentaries, attesting to enor-mous scribal activity, especially in the allegorical books; the glossators’interest in the poetry, classical content, pagan imagery, cosmological setting,philosophical currents and secular disciplines; and the identification ofMartianus as an authority on certain disciplines, for example astronomy.10

Such industrious devotion, which undoubtedly helped to establish thereputation of De nuptiis henceforth in the Middle Ages, is in sharp contrastto the post-medieval reception of his work, which leaves a legacy of strongcriticism. Later resistance, if not strident critical objection, suggests, in itsfocus on Martianus’ language, style and form, a fundamental cultural riftbetween us and the Carolingians.

Martianus’ language and style render him more than a little abstruse, par-ticularly in the allegorical books. And modern commentators have oftenbeen less than enthusiastic in their praise. While there have been efforts toappreciate the literary achievements of Martianus, most notably in the workof Fanny LeMoine, Danuta Shanzer and Sabine Grebe, clearly a profoundstylistic gulf separates Martianus’ ninth-century readers from the majority

30 Sinéad O’Sullivan

of modern critics, who often describe his work in negative terms such as‘florid’, ‘rococo’, ‘tortuous’ (Stahl), ‘strange’ (Lewis), ‘bizarre’ (Rostagni),‘dull’ (Rose) and ‘sterile’ (Taylor).11

Stahl described the experience of reading De nuptiis as one in which thereader is ‘elevated by great puffs of cumulus clauses . . . [and] transportedto a cloud-cuckoo land’.12 Parker declared that Martianus’ ‘style isdetestable, and the badness of his Latinity stirs up the bile of scholars to sucha degree that even his editors pick up stones to fling at him’.13 Monceauxmaintained ‘c’est le plus étrange qu’on puisse imaginer: une incroyable com-binaison de latin vulgaire et de maniérisme’.14 Teuffel spoke of his‘insufferable jumble of abstractions, of old and new Latin, of poetical andprosaic phraseology, which the beclouded reader is hardly expected tounderstand save vaguely and partially’.15 Martianus’ competence as a prosestylist has been reassessed by Shanzer, however: she notes that the principaldifficulties arise from his vocabulary, which to Martianus would haveseemed ‘luxuriant, elegant and fascinating’.16

Moreover, the form of De nuptiis – the seemingly promiscuous mixture ofthe allegorical with the verisimilar – causes further disquiet to modern sensi-bilities, which, to a degree, bear the imprint of the ‘plain style’, which arose inthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.17 Arguments for plain style, whichcited classical forebears to undercut the status of rhetoric, metaphors and fig-urative language in general,18 underscored plainness and perspicuity.19

Though the ‘grand style’ of classical oratory was not lost, nor prose thereafteruniformly plain and perspicuous,20 nevertheless, henceforth, and well into thetwentieth century, figurative language was in bad odour for explanatory andexpository purposes.21 And metaphor remains at best an undesirable expe-dient in our most prominent explanatory genre, namely scientific prose. ThusMartianus’ mixture of the technical and scientific with the allegorical and fan-tastical often appears incongruous to modern tastes.

In addition the close fit of De nuptiis to Menippean satire, a genre writtenin prose and verse, presents further difficulties, as does the tone of the work,which is a mixture of the serious and satirical. Though recent scholarship hasdone much to elucidate the form and development of Menippean satire, theorigins of this shadowy genre in the lost works of Menippus of Gadara and inVarro’s now fragmentary Saturae Menippeae remain somewhat elusive.22

Even the purpose of the genre is often debated.23

Finally, modern critics situate Martianus in the context of long-standinghistoriographical debates regarding a Spenglerian decline and fall of theancient world. Taylor, for example, described De nuptiis as ‘the sterile union


of fantasy with pedantry, so dear to the closing years of pagan scholarship,when the old straw was thrashed, re-tied in queer-shaped bundles, and thenthrashed again’.24 Martianus was thus construed as odd, as in Lewis’s famouspronouncement: ‘This universe, which has produced the bee-orchid and thegiraffe, has produced nothing stranger than Martianus Capella.’25

The pre-modern and modern criticisms of Martianus’ language, styleand form are, however, countered point for point by abundant evidence ofwhat the Carolingians appear to have most appreciated in him. To beginwith, Martianus’ unusual words and polyglot vocabularies received consid-erable attention, in particular the Graeca. We find glossary parallels, forexample, in the Latin–Greek glossary of the pseudo-Philoxenus. It is clearthat Martianus provided opportunities for collecting rare words, a long andwell-established practice especially in the field of medieval glossography andencyclopaedic compilation.26 In the tenth century, Ratherius of Veronaspecifically quarried De nuptiis for unusual words and wrote them in themargins of Leiden, Universiteitsbiliotheek, Voss. Lat. F. 48.

Moreover, for Carolingian scholars, the prosimetric form of De nuptiisseems to have been a bonus. We see this in the meticulous attention paid byscribes to the layout and presentation of the prose and verse passages, oftensingling out the change from one to another or the beginning of a newsection through the use of rubrication, majuscules and different scripts.27

Furthermore, the heavy glossing activity on the first two allegoricalbooks, as well as on the secular disciplines (in particular, Books IV, VII, VIIIand IX), indicates that it was precisely Martianus’ blend of fantasy with text-book pedagogy which fascinated ninth-century readers. It demonstrates thatto them De nuptiis, in its mixture of allegory with encyclopaedic information,was not a hotch-potch but a unified work. Indeed, it would seem to be thecase that for the glossators Martianus’ allegorical tale provided the contextfor his technical treatise on the arts, illustrating the essential link betweenhuman learning and divine understanding. This link is highlighted by theglosses on Philology, which emphasize both her earthly learning and heaven -ly wisdom – her scientia and sapientia, standard divisions well known in theninth century.28 The link is further illustrated by Philology’s heavenlyjourney. In fact, the cosmological and philosophical setting of the workfocused the glossators’ attention on wisdom and the higher goals of learning.In this regard, a key figure was Pallas Athena, whom the glossators saw as animage of the highest wisdom. For them, wisdom, embodied by PallasAthena, was both incorruptible and incomprehensible, removed from allearthly ties.29 To underscore its importance, wisdom was further linked by


the glossators to the occult wisdom of the ancients. Following well- established tradition, the glossators associate its recovery with the ancientEgyptians, who preserved all knowledge in their secret sanctuaries.30

In addition, it would seem as if Martianus’ rich blend of Neopythagoreanphilosophy, Neoplatonic ideas, astral religion and classical mythology fur-nished Carolingian commentators with an opportunity to reflect on theunity of the Christian universe, ordered by divine plan, structured into hier-archies, arranged by number and governed by a supreme deity. Evidence forthis is supplied by the numerous glosses on the divisions and unity inherentin nature, as well as on the ultimate principle of unification, the supremedeity (discussed below under the philosophical currents). Moreover, thevisionary and mystical nature of the allegorical books inspired Carolingiancomment on the ascent of the soul and the attainment of immortality, oftenassociated with learning. The glossators even maintain that the soul remainsbrutish without learning.31 Moreover, the considerable attention paid by theglossators to the themes of destiny, fortune and fate, themes very much tothe fore in Martianus, would suggest that he functioned as a catalyst forreflection on the fortunarum cursus.32

More generally, Martianus’ densely metaphorical language and imageryafforded opportunities to elucidate the text and decode meaning.33 To them,I suggest, Martianus’ difficult style and dense imagery attested to the needfor the multilevel strategies of interpretation which they practised, rangingfrom the literal to the figurative, levels which were important features ofmnemotechnic and creative thinking in the medieval world.

The attention paid by the glossators to Books I–II highlights the central -ity of the allegory. Often examining the obscure imagery, philosophicalcurrents and classical myths, the glossators annotated key passages:Mercury’s search for a bride, the apotheosis of Philology, her ascent throughthe planetary realm, her arrival at the celestial abode, the lengthy discourseson number, the harmony of the spheres, the physical order of the universe,the assembly of the Olympian gods and the elaborate pageant of the marriagebetween Mercury and Philology. Such passages served various functions fortheir ninth-century readers. To begin with, the glossators saw in them anopportunity to enlarge upon Martianus’ suggestions in the course ofexplaining his opaque and dense imagery. For example, the annotators renderwhat they took to be the meaning of the seven rivers across which Mercuryhas to travel by interpreting them as the planets.34 The glossators supply thename of Saturn’s fire-breathing dragon, which according to Martianusdevours its own tail. They see this as an image of the solar year.35


In a number of the extant manuscripts, the glossators even identify theimportance or function of the allegory, explicitly linking allegory and truth.Martianus himself provided the cue when he stated, at the beginning ofBook III, that his fictitious tale clothes the truth and adorns the liberal arts.36

Echoing essentially Macrobian formulations on the use of fabulous narra-tive, a Cologne annotator writes that ‘Si enim ueritas sola sine intermixtionefabularum semper manet usus poetarum non obseruatur’ (‘For if truthremains always alone without intermixture of fables, the usage of the poets isnot observed’).37 Elsewhere glossators declare that the liberal arts ought notto be left bare, that is, without adornment (‘NVDVM: sine ornamento’),38 andthat fiction reveals the poetic truth (‘VSVM: Poetalem qui per fabulasueritatem ostendunt’).39 In a number of manuscripts, then, the annotationsestablish the centrality of the allegory by associating it with truth, thus pro-viding a rationale for Martianus’ myths and fables, which they interpretedaccording to the standard Christian strategy of finding hidden truth under-neath the surface of pagan wisdom.40 The same goals lie behind theirabundant ethical glosses, for instance on the personification of Virtue, whoassists Mercury in finding a bride. The annotators explain that, withoutVirtue, eloquence, symbolized by Mercury, is rendered ineffective, that is,of no use (‘nullius utilitatis’).41 We witness the same moralizing tendenciesin the glosses on the Greek goddess Pallas Athena, whom Martianus depictsresplendent with a seven-rayed crown. It is the glossators, however, whoexplain that her seven-rayed crown is an image of purity: the number seven,they comment, begets no number and is begotten by no number. In thegoddess’s emergence full-grown from the mind of Jupiter they read an imageof virginity. Hence to them the goddess, embodying physical purity, is asymbol of the highest wisdom.42

Allegory was not, however, the only reason for the glossators’ interest inMartianus. Their preoccupation with the opportunities he provided forliteral interpretation, together with his encyclopaedic learning, his schemefor the liberal arts and use of classical philosophy and pagan tradition, alsofound a home in the wider intellectual and cultural environment of theCarolingian period.

Literal Understanding and Encyclopaedic Knowledge

Not surprisingly, even a cursory examination of the oldest glosses onMartianus reveals that a primary concern was to make the text compre -hensible. As mediators between what had become a canonical text and its


Carolingian audience, the glossators often sought to make things plain viathe discipline broadly known as grammar, regarded as the ‘origo et funda-mentum artium liberalium’ (‘origin and foundation of the liberal arts’).43

To elucidate the literal sense of the text, the annotators sought to givetheir readers a solid grasp of grammar and vocabulary, together with a basicunderstanding of classical mythology and the literary and scientific arts. Tothis end, they furnished lexical equivalents of words, explained their gram-matical properties, identified the subject of a line or series of lines,highlighted the poetical metres and supplied information on the Greek gods,myths and liberal arts. Often they drew on standard late antique and medievalreference works, Carolingian texts and glossaries. In effect they made of Denuptiis a lexicon-encyclopaedia, containing explanations of words, polyglotvocabularies and mythological persons, supplemented with information ofvarious kinds. Crucially, Carolingian scholars were able to exploit the basicframework of De nuptiis, seeing in its encyclopaedic structure a means of creat ing a storehouse of late antique and medieval learning.44 All this wasclearly thought to be important. Thus what has sometimes appeared tomodern scholars an indication of barbarity, namely Martianus’ unusualcoinages and densely figurative prose, was for his ninth-century audience asign of highly valued knowledge requiring investigation and study.45

The Liberal Arts

While it is clear that the renewed interest in the liberal arts in the ninthcentury must surely have brought Carolingian scholars to Martianus (aninterest attested by broad programmatic efforts to instigate educationalreform, the pedagogical manuals of men like Alcuin and Hrabanus Maurus,and the literary works of contemporary scholars), the glossators seem tohave often focused on the higher goals of learning. To this end, the philo-sophical currents and mystical overtones of his work furnished them withabundant opportunities to comment on the cosmos, universe, the supremedeity and pursuit of wisdom.

The importance of the liberal arts had already been established in thefirst wave of Carolingian endeavour by figures like Alcuin, who saw theartes as a propaedeutic towards wisdom and adornment of the soul.46 Theseassociations find a fresh focus in the oldest gloss tradition. Drawing onessentially Platonic ideas of reminiscence, the arts are interpreted by theglossators as innate in memory and fixed in the soul.47 Above all, they areassociated by them with wisdom48 and higher truth. For example, the


glossators maintain that the truth of the liberal arts is only revealed toimmortals.49

Because of their association with higher truth, it is no surprise thatcertain subjects within the liberal arts curriculum attracted considerablescholarly attention in the ninth century, for example astronomy.50 The glos-sators provide many glosses on Book VIII. And while astronomicalpreoccupations accorded well with the general interests of Carolingian kingsand scholars,51 study of the celestial bodies, intermediate between heavenand earth, also furnished an obvious, ideal opportunity to reflect on the spir-itual realm, as is illustrated by the glosses. In particular, it provided theglossators with a backdrop for discussion of celestial and infernal geography,with a planetary location for the dwelling place of gods and the destiny ofman,52 an empyrean realm of pure understanding where ‘angeli et sancticontemplantur deum totius creaturae’ (‘the angels and saints contemplatethe God of all creation’)53 and a place for the suffering of the damned in thePyriphlegethonian region with its turbulent atmospheric conditions andfiery nature, where evil souls are tortured.54

Philosophical Currents

De nuptiis also proved a rich source of Neoplatonic thought for itsCarolingian glossators. Interest in this philosophical tradition is mostevident in John Scottus Eriugena, whose writings were especially indebtedto the Christian Neoplatonism of the Greek Fathers55 and were not withoutcontemporary relevance.56 As for Plato, only the Timaeus was in circulationin Latin translation in the ninth century. However, McKitterick notes thatthe copying of the Timaeus ‘signals recognition, appreciation and a degree ofknowledge of Plato’s stature as a thinker and what he had to offer toCarolingian intellectual development’.57

That the glossators noticed the Neoplatonic currents of De nuptiis isevident from their frequent references to Plato and use of Platonic andNeoplatonic ideas: they refer to Entelechia as the ‘animam mundi’ (‘worldsoul’)58 and employ the image of the monad, linking it with the Platonicideas.59

The Neoplatonism of De nuptiis also focused the glossators’ attention onthe nature of the universe. The glossators commented on Martianus’ essen-tially Platonic model of the universe divided between visible and invisiblereality. This is particularly apparent in their comments on Philology’s cup,likened to an egg by Martianus. The glossators interpret its outer parts as


the ‘imagines corporum’ (‘images of corporeal reality’), manifested in fan-tasies and dreams, its inner parts as the ‘summa intellegentia rerumincorporalium’ (‘the highest understanding of incorporeal things’).60 Its sig-nificance is further underscored by an accompanying diagram in a numberof manuscripts where a drawing of an egg appears (with an outer circumfer-ence and inner centre).61

Moreover, Martianus’ essentially Neoplatonist construction of the uni-verse focused Carolingian attention on the unity and multiplicity inherent innature.62 For example, the glossators interpret the union of opposites as theunion of male and female for the creation of offspring.63 They also commenton the ultimate principle of unification, the sun.64 They associate the sunwith the conjunct tetrachords, the meaning of which they explain: the lastnote of the first tetrachord forms the first note of the second.65 Hence thesun, midway between heaven and earth, becomes an image of balance andharmony. The importance of the sun is further demonstrated throughnumber. According to Martianus, the number 608 is associated with the sun,as are three letters. The Carolingian glossators supply the Greek letters Θ, Ηand Θ which have a numerical value of 608.66 Indeed, number is often at theroot of the annotations on the supreme deity.67

This brings us to another important reason for the appeal of De nuptiis inthe ninth century – number. Even though Martianus was by no means themost important authority on number (Boethius, for example, was a muchmore vital source for the mathematical sciences), he provided the glossatorswith a focus for their explorations, not only in Book VII and the otherquadrivial books, but also in Books I–II. Number was the unifying principleof the cosmos, the key to the universe and the means of probing its secrets.These ideas were enthusiastically explored by the glossators and reflect thebroader scientific, mathematical and astronomical interests of theCarolingians.68 Numerology, after all, was the quintessential explanatorypractice – that is, the most economical, complete and perfect way ofexplaining both the rational order and the hidden secrets of the universe.And so, when examining the marriage of Philology and Mercury, the glos-sators draw on number to understand the harmony of the nuptial union.Philology calculates the number of her own and Mercury’s names to dis-cover this harmony: hers as four, his as three. The annotators explain howthe Greek letters of Philology’s name contain the number four.69 Takingtheir cue from Martianus, they highlight the significance of Philology’s cal-culations, linking the numbers three and four with the basic harmonicintervals – the duple ratio or octave (2:1), the hemiolic ratio or fifth (2:3)


and the sesquitertian ratio or fourth (4:3). The glossators associate thenumber three with the threefold harmonies in music and four with all theproportions with which these harmonies are produced. The wider signifi-cance of these musical intervals becomes evident in the glosses on theharmony of the spheres – a theme of great importance in De nuptiis and itsoldest scholia, as Teeuwen has shown.70

Music was the harmony of right relations expressed numerically. Theglossators keenly explored its relationship with astronomy, which connectedmusic with the journey of the soul and the geography of spiritual space.Taking their cue from Martianus, the glossators describe Philology’s journeythrough the planetary realm as a musical scale.71 And it was not only theannotators who were interested in the link. We find passages on the musicalintervals and distances between the planets side by side in Oxford, BodleianLibrary, Laud. Lat. 118.72

In sum, the Neoplatonic and Neopythagorean currents in Martianus fur-nished Carolingian scholars with a source of speculative thought.Specifically they provided the glossators with a focus for reflection on thenature of the universe, its divine order and structure.

Antique Tradition and Classical Learning

The pagan content of De nuptiis appears also to have inspired Carolingiancommentary. The glossators explain the origins of the Greek gods, mythsand fables, provide etymological interpretations of Greek names and places,furnish annotations on the liberal arts and elucidate the allegorical signifi-cance of the classical imagery. Mostly they were interested in the paganimagery for its own sake. Martianus’ pagan text was wholeheartedlyaccepted by its Carolingian commentators.73

The sheer number of Carolingian glosses on the pagan content ofMartianus indicates a particular interest in antique tradition, which accordswell with ninth-century interests. Moreover, long-standing debates over thefunction of secular learning received fresh impetus in the ninth century. Andtexts like De nuptiis provided a focus for such debate. It aroused the criticismof scholars like Prudentius of Troyes, who specifically berated Eriugena forhis study and use of writers like Martianus.74 And it caused one anonymousninth-century scholar to have severe misgivings about his past study ofMartianus.75 However, the oldest gloss tradition on De nuptiis indicates thatthe glossators adopted late antique attitudes to classical learning: their over-whelming response was one of acceptance and even warm approval.76

Conclusion

So what can be said about the Carolingian interest in Martianus and whatclues can be found in the oldest gloss tradition about the reasons for hisappeal? First, certain factors must surely have brought Carolingian glos-sators to De nuptiis, in particular, Martianus’ textbook on the seven liberalarts which suited the renewed interest in the secular disciplines. Such inter-ests are evident in the efforts of the annotators to gloss not only the first twobooks, but also the other seven on the artes. Martianus also appears to haveprovided a focus for the encyclopaedism of ninth-century scholars, perhapsmost evident in the glossators’ efforts to compile information of all kindsaround the text. In addition, Martianus’ allegory had an obvious appeal andfurnished an important context for the liberal arts. The attention paid by theglossators to the first two books not only indicates a vigorous interest inantique tradition, but also, more generally, the wider function of allegory asa vehicle for higher truth and understanding, a function explicitly discussedin a number of the extant manuscripts. In sum, the glosses strongly suggestthat it was both Martianus’ allegory and his rudimentary textbook whichwere the focus of scholarly attention. Together they ensured Martianus’high status in the ninth century and singled him out as an authority onlearning in the Carolingian period.


46 Elliott (ed.), The Apocryphal New Testament.47 Ibid., pp. 365–8.48 On this topic, my thanks are due to David Scourfield of NUI Maynooth for his unpub-

lished paper on ‘Violence, Desire, and the Christian Heroine’.49 John Petruccione, ‘The Portrait of St Eulalia of Mérida in Prudentius’s Peristephanon 3’,

Analecta Bollandiana, vol. 108, 1990, pp. 81–104; for the framing epithalamium in Deraptu Proserpinae, S-C. Kevin Tsai, ‘Hellish Love: Genre in Claudian’s De raptuProserpinae’, Helios, vol. 34, no. 1, 2007, pp. 37–68 at pp. 29–41.

50 ‘ille uelut stabuli decus armentique iuuencam / cum leo possedit nudataque uiscera fodit/ unguibus et rabiem totos exegit in armis’ (Rapt. 2.209–11).

51 René Girard, Violence and the Sacred (Baltimore, MD, 1977), pp. 1–38.52 A very common metaphor is of the desert blossoming for the Christian anchorite, see

Jerome, Epistula 14.10 and in particular the fifth-century De laude eremi 39, 40, 42(Eucherius, De laude eremi, ed. Salvator Pricoco [Catania, 1965]). Cf. also the reversebelief that, without Christian faith, life is a desert: Prudentius, Pe. 3.45–7. See Roberts,Poetry and the Cult of Martyrs, pp. 82–91.

53 Prudentius, Pe. 5.245–8; Passio Sanctorum Montani et Lucii 4.2. Musurillo, Acts of theChristian Martyrs, pp. 216–17.

54 Passio Sanctorum Mariani et Iacobi 6. Musurillo, Acts of the Christian Martyrs, pp. 200–1.55 Passio Sanctarum Perpetuae et Felicitatis 4.8. Musurillo Acts of the Christian Martyrs, pp.

110–11.56 For this theme in Christian literature, see Psalms 49, also Psalms 47:3: ‘He subdues

nations under us, and peoples under our feet’ (King James version).57 Brown, Cult of the Saints, pp. 2–6.

MARTIANUS CAPELLA AND THE CAROLINGIANS (Sinéad O’Sullivan)1 C.E. Lutz (ed.), Iohannis Scotti Annotationes in Marcianum, Medieval Academy of

America 34 (Cambridge, MA, 1939). É. Jeauneau, ‘Le Commentaire Érigénien surMartianus Capella (De nuptiis, Lib. I) d’après le manuscrit d’Oxford (Bodl. Libr. Auct.T.2.19, f.1–31)’, in É. Jeauneau (ed.), Quatre thèmes Érigéniens (Montreal, 1978), pp. 91–166. C.E. Lutz (ed.), Remigii Autissiodorensis Commentum in Martianum Capellam, 2 vols.(Leiden, 1962–5). I. Ramelli, Tutti I commenti a Marziano Capella. Scoto Eriugena,Remigio di Auxerre, Bernardo Silvestre et Anonimi (Milan, 2006).

2 G.W. Robinson, ‘Joseph Scaliger’s Estimates of Greek and Latin Authors’, HarvardStudies in Classical Philology, vol. 29, 1918, p. 160.

3 Traces of a late antique format are found in one of the oldest extant Martianus manu-scripts, the Reichenauensis. See D. Shanzer, ‘Felix Capella: Minus sensus quam nominispecudalis’, a review article on Martianus Capella, ed. J.A. Willis, Classical Philology, vol.81, no. 1, 1986, p. 66. Though sketchy, the pre-Caroline reception indicates that theCarolingian reception did not take place in a vacuum. For Martianus’ medieval fortuna,see especially C. Leonardi, ‘Nota introduttiva per un’indagine sulla fortuna di MarzianoCapella nel Medioevo’, Bullettino dell’Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo e ArchivioMuratoriano, vol. 67, 1955, pp. 253–88; S. Antés, ‘Témoignages précarolingiens surMartianus Capella: Cassiodore, le pseudo-Cassiodore et Grégoire de Tours’, in M.Woronoff and J. Doignon (eds.), Hommages à Jean Cousin: rencontres avec l’antiquitéclassique (Paris, 1983), pp. 289–97; J. Gruber, Kommentar zu Boethius ‘De ConsolationePhilosophiae’ (Berlin, 1978), p. 18; D. Shanzer, ‘Tatwine: An Independent Witness to thetext of Martianus Capella’s De Grammatica?’, Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica,vol. 112, 1984, pp. 292–313.

4 An exception is M. Teeuwen, Harmony and the Music of the Spheres: The ‘Ars Musica’ in

Notes to pages 24–28 321

Ninth-Century Commentaries on Martianus Capella, Mittellateinische Studien und Texte30 (Leiden, 2002).

5 See J. Préaux, ‘Le Commentaire de Martin de Laon sur l’oeuvre de Martianus Capella’,Latomus, vol. 12, 1953, pp. 437–59. For a re-evaluation, see J.J. Contreni, ‘A Note on theAttribution of a Martianus Capella Commentary to Martinus Laudunensis’, in E. Cranzand P. O. Kristeller (eds.), Catalogus Translationum et Commentariorum: Mediaeval andRenaissance Latin Translations and Commentaries (Washington, DC, 1960–), vol. 3(1976), pp. 451–2.

6 The oldest gloss tradition is found in Besançon, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 594 (B);Köln, Dombibliothek, MS 193 (K); Leiden, Universiteitsbiliotheek, Voss. Lat. F. 48(La); Leiden, UB, BPL 88 (Lb); Leiden, UB, BPL 87 (Lc); Leiden, UB, BPL 36 (Ld);London, British Library, Harley 2685 (L); Orléans, Bibliothèque Municipale, Ms. 191(Or); Oxford, Bodleian Library, Laud. lat. 118 (O); Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale deFrance, lat. 8669 (Pa); Paris, BnF, lat. 8670 (Pb); Paris, BnF, lat. 8671 (Pc); Paris, BnF,lat. 12960 (Pd); Rome, Città del Vaticano, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Reg. lat.1987 (Va); Rome, BAV, Reg. lat. 1535 (Vb); St Petersburg, National Library of Russia,Class. lat. F.V.10 (R); Trier, Bibliothek des Priesterseminars, Ms. 100 (T);Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Cod. Guelf. 133 Gud. lat. (W). TwoCambridge manuscripts contain an eclectic mix: Cambridge, Corpus Christi College153, and Cambridge, CCC 330. For a description of many of these, see Teeuwen,Harmony, pp. 60–150.

7 Or and Pd contain a running commentary.8 M. Teeuwen, ‘The Study of Martianus Capella’s De Nuptiis in the Ninth Century’, in A.A.

MacDonald, M.W. Twomey and G. Reinink (eds.), Learned Antiquity: Scholarship andSociety in the Near-East, the Greco-Roman World and the Early Medieval West, GroningenStudies in Cultural Change 5 (Leuven, 2003), pp. 185–93.

9 Bischoff observed the presence of Lorsch hands in Leiden 36, together with others fromdifferent schools. See B. Bischoff, Die Abtei Lorsch im Spiegel ihrer Handschriften (Lorsch,1989), pp. 45, 96–7. The earliest strand of glossing in K, contemporary with the text,transmits glosses from the oldest gloss tradition, very similar to those found in othermanuscripts from the Loire valley, northern or northeastern France and especially closeto Leiden 36, a manuscript which may very well emanate from Lorsch. As for the Londonmanuscript, it appears at one stage to have been at Cologne. Its glosses are closely relatedto those in Leiden 36.

10 For the manuscripts, see C. Leonardi, ‘I codici di Marziano Capella’, Aevum, vol. 33,1959, pp. 443–89; Aevum, vol. 34, 1960, pp. 1–99, 411–524; J. Préaux, ‘Les Manuscritsprincipaux du De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii de Martianus Capella’, in G. Cambier, C.Deroux and J. Préaux (eds.), Lettres latines du moyen âge et de la renaissance, CollectionLatomus 158 (Brussels, 1978), pp. 76–128. For astronomy, see B. Eastwood, Orderingthe Heavens: Roman Astronomy and Cosmology in the Carolingian Renaissance, History ofScience and Medicine Library 4 (Leiden, 2007), pp. 179–311.

11 C.S. Lewis, The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition (Oxford, 1936), p. 78; A.Rostagni, Storia della Letteratura Latina, vol. 2 (Turin, 1952), p. 699; H.J. Rose, AHandbook of Latin Literature (London, 1936), p. 458; F. LeMoine, Martianus Capella: ALiterary Re-evaluation, Münchener Beiträge zur Mediävistik und Renaissance-Forschung10 (Munich, 1972); S. Grebe, Martianus Capella De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii:Darstellung der sieben freien Künste und Ihrer Beziehungen zueinander, Beiträge zurAltertumskunde 119 (Stuttgart, 1999); D. Shanzer, A Philosophical and LiteraryCommentary on Martianus Capella’s ‘De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii’ Book 1, ClassicalStudies 32 (Berkeley, CA, 1986).

322 Notes to pages 28–30

12 W. Stahl, ‘To a Better Understanding of Martianus Capella’, Speculum, vol. 40, no. 1,1965, p. 103.

13 H. Parker, ‘The Seven Liberal Arts’, English Historical Review, vol. 5, 1890, p. 438.14 P. Monceaux, Les Africains: Étude sur la littérature latine d’Afrique. Les païens (Paris,

1894), p. 456.15 W.S. Teuffel and L. Schwabe, History of Roman literature, 2 vols., trans. G.C.W. Warr

(London, 1891–2), vol. 2, pp. 448–9.16 Shanzer, Philosophical, p. 3.17 In the first instance, the plain style is not so much a way of writing as a way of regarding

the relation between language and truth. Hence, Bishop Thomas Sprat’s (1667) call forthe purity of ‘a close, naked, natural way of speaking’ and the denunciation of rhetoricalornamentation. See R. Frazer, ‘The Origin of the Term Image’, English Literary History,vol. 27, no. 2, 1960, p. 151.

18 For the origins of a Christian plain style, see P. Auski, Christian Plain Style: The Evolutionof a Spiritual Ideal (Montreal, 1995). For its relation to the rise of modern science, see J.P. Zappen, ‘Francis Bacon and the Historiography of Scientific Rhetoric’, RhetoricReview, vol. 8, no. 1, 1989, pp. 74–88.

19 In 1548, John Jewel wrote: ‘Truth, indeed, is clear and simple; it has small need of thearmament of the tongue or of eloquence. If it is perspicuous and plain, it has enoughsupport in itself; it does not require flowers of artful speech.’ Reference from W.S.Howell, Logic and Rhetoric in England, 1500–1700 (New York, 1961), p. 123.

20 D.K. Shuger, Sacred Rhetoric: The Christian Grand Style in the English Renaissance(Princeton, NJ, 1988); B. Vickers and N.S. Struever, Rhetoric and the Pursuit of Truth:Language Change in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Los Angeles, 1985).

21 See M. Black, ‘More about Metaphor’, in A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought(Cambridge, 1979), p. 19; W.C. Booth, ‘Metaphor as Rhetoric: The Problem ofEvaluation’, Critical Inquiry, vol. 5, no. 1, 1978, pp. 49–72.

22 See especially, J.C. Relihan, ‘On the Origin of Menippean Satire as the Name of aLiterary Genre’, Classical Philology, vol. 79, no. 3, 1984, pp. 226–9; idem, AncientMenippean Satire (Baltimore, MD, 1993); B. Pabst, Prosimetrum. Tradition und Wandeleiner Literaturform zwischen Spätantike und Spätmittelalter, 2 vols., Ordo: Studien zurLiteratur und Gesellschaft des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit 4/1 (Cologne,1994); J. Ziolkowski, ‘The Prosimetrum in the Classical Tradition’, in J. Harris and K.Reichl (eds.), Prosimetrum: Crosscultural Perspectives on Narrative in Prose and Verse(Woodbridge, 1997), pp. 45–61; H.D. Weinbrot, Menippean Satire Reconsidered: FromAntiquity to the Eighteenth Century (Baltimore, MD, 2005).

23 In the case of De nuptiis, Joel Relihan sees it as a ‘parody of encyclopaedic knowledge’,Shanzer as a useful mask. See J. Relihan, Ancient Menippean Satire, p. 138; Shanzer,Philosophical, p. 43.

24 H.O. Taylor, The Classical Heritage of the Middle Ages (New York, 1911), p. 51.25 Lewis, Allegory, p. 78.26 Works such as the Hisperica Famina, the cosmography of Aethicus Ister, as well as the

writings of Virgilius Maro Grammaticus and Aldhelm attest to a vibrant pre-Carolingianinterest in difficult words.

27 A particularly good example of a manuscript in which rubrication was used to good effectis Lb (s.ix3–4). Here colour is used to highlight the metre, Greek words, sections, head-ings, refrains, prose and verse passages, and the beginning and end of books.

28 The glossators use the words scientia and sapientia when referring to philology.29 ‘PALLADE: Pallas in significatione summae sapientiae quae incomprehensibilis et

incorruptibilis est ponitur’ (‘Pallas symbolizes the highest wisdom which is


incomprehensible and incorruptible’) T LbVaLcR (Willis, Martianus Capella, 56, 22).30 ‘PER AEGYPTIORVM ADYTA: Quia omnis sapientia cum perdita esset ab Aegiptiis

recuperata est’ (‘WITHIN THE SANCTUARIES OF THE EGYPTIANS: Because allwisdom, when it had been lost, was recovered by the Egyptians’) LaBOT LbVaLc (Willis,Martianus Capella, 42, 17).

31 ‘FERINO MORE: anima nisi congruis doctrinis fuerit erudita, ferina est’ (‘the soul,unless instructed in suitable teaching, is brutish’) LaBTVb LbVaLcPb (Willis, MartianusCapella, 11, 8).

32 For example, the glossators often reflect upon the ‘mutabilitas humanae uitae’ (‘change-ability of human life’) LbVaLc (Willis, Martianus Capella, 8, 11–12).

33 Chiara Tommasi sees De nuptiis as partly esoteric in character. See C.O. TommasiMoreschini, ‘Il De nuptiis di Marziano Capella: da manuale “privato” a testo canonico’, inF. Bellandi and R. Ferri (eds.), Aspetti della scuola nel mondo Romano, Supplementi diLexis (Amsterdam, 2008), p. 211.

34 ‘AMNES: per septem amnes septem planetarum cursus possumus accipere’ (‘throughthe seven rivers we are able to understand the orbits of the seven planets’) LaBOLbVaLcPb Ld (Willis, Martianus Capella, 7, 16).

35 ‘FLAMMIVOMVM DRACONEM: ZHΘOC . . . Z uero lx, T ccc, H v significant. Suntin summa ccclxv tot dies sunt anni’ (‘ZHΘOC . . . Z indeed signifies 60, T 300, H 5. Thetotal is 365, as many as the days of the year’) LaBO LbVaLcR Ld (Willis, MartianusCapella, 22, 2).

36 See H. Mayr-Harting, Church and Cosmos in Early Ottonian Germany: The View fromCologne (Oxford, 2007), pp. 21, 204–8, 210–12, 215–17, 220–5.

37 LdPcK (Willis, Martianus Capella, 58, 13–14). Mayr-Harting, Church and Cosmos, pp.210 and 226.

38 LaB LbVaLcR (Willis, Martianus Capella, 59, 9).39 Ld (Willis, Martianus Capella, 58, 14).40 For example, when they explicate the meaning of Apollo’s cave, they comment that

Martianus spoke ‘under the guise of fable figuratively’ (‘sub specie fabulae figurateloquens’) LaB LbVaLcPb (Willis, Martianus Capella, 6, 17).

41 ‘CONSTITVTVM: Allegorice autem idcirco dicitur Virtus Cillenio adherere quia sermonisi uirtuti misceatur per se uagus et nullius est utilitatis’ LbVaLc (Willis, MartianusCapella, 5, 20).

42 ‘SEPTEM RADIORVM CORONAM: Pallas non est de copula nuptiarum, sed de solouertice Iouis nata. Nec obit, nec prolem gignere potuit, unde et in significatione summaesapientiae ponitur’ (‘Pallas was born not from the union of marriages, but from the headalone of Jupiter. Neither does she die or produce offspring. Hence she signifies thehighest wisdom’) LaBOVb LbVaLcR (Willis, Martianus Capella, 17, 2–3).

43 Hraban, De Institutione Clericorum iii.18, trans. D. Zimpel, in Fontes Christiani, vols. 61–2 (Turnhout, 2006), p. 528. For the significance of grammatica, see M. Irvine, TheMaking of Textual Culture: ‘Grammatica’ and Literary Theory, 350–1100, CambridgeStudies in Medieval Literature 19 (Cambridge, 1994).

44 Teeuwen, ‘Study’, p. 191.45 Liebeschütz notes that the artificially difficult nature of Martianus’ text enabled scholars

like Eriugena to display their learning. See H. Liebeschütz, ‘John Eriugena and HisCosmological Interpretation of Martianus Capella’, in A.H. Armstrong (ed.), TheCambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy (Cambridge, 1970), p.577. See also M. Teeuwen, ‘The Vocabulary of Martianus Capella Commentators: SomeObservations’, Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi, vol. 63, 2005, pp. 71–81.

46 For an introduction to Alcuin’s idea of wisdom, see J. Marenbon, ‘Carolingian Thought’,


in R. McKitterick (ed.), Carolingian Culture: Emulation and Innovation (Cambridge,1994), pp. 171–92.

47 See C.E. Lutz, ‘Remigius’ Ideas on the Classification of the Seven Liberal Arts’, Traditio,vol. 12, 1956, p. 67.

48 ‘MATHEN TETRADAN: Illa enim doctrina in quattuor constat: arithmetica,geometrica, musica, astronomia. Ipsum est quadruuium sapientiae’ (‘For that teachingis based on four subjects: arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy. These are thequadrivium of wisdom’) LbVaLc (Willis, Martianus Capella, 30, 15).

49 ‘VIRGO DIFFVDIT: Per illud uero sorbillandum, i. poculum, quod Philologiae dederat,ueritas artium, quae solis immortalibus et ueritatem contemplantibus manifestabitur,apertissime significatur’ (‘Through the sipping of the drink which Immortality gave toPhilology, the truth of the arts, which will only be manifested to immortals and thosecontemplating the truth, is clearly signified’) LaBO LbVaLc (Willis, Martianus Capella,43, 7). Passage discussed by Mayr-Harting, Church and Cosmos, pp. 220–1.

50 B. Eastwood, ‘Johannes Scottus Eriugena, Sun-Centred Planets and CarolingianAstronomy’, Journal for the History of Astronomy, vol. 32, 2001, pp. 281–324.

51 S.C. McCluskey, Astronomies and Cultures in Early Medieval Europe (Cambridge, 1998),pp. 132 and 140.

52 ‘SVPERNIS – POLIS: Omnes deos et deorum filios in astris lucere perhibent’ (‘Theymaintain that all the gods and sons of the gods are resplendent in the heavens’) TVb Ld(Willis, Martianus Capella, 14, 18).

53 LaB (Willis, Martianus Capella, 55, 7).54 ‘PYRPHLEGETHONTA: Poetae dicunt quod ex circulo Martis igneus Phlegeton pro-

greditur, i. fluuius in quo terrentur uel torrentur animae malae uiuentes in hoc saeculo’LaBO LbVaLc LdK (‘PYRPHLEGETHONTA: the poets say that the fiery Phlegethon,that is the river in which evil souls living in this world are terrified and scorched, proceedsfrom the circle of Mars’) (Willis, Martianus Capella, 49, 1). For the localization ofinfernal topography in the ancient world, see F. Cumont, After Life in Roman Paganism:Lectures Delivered at Yale University on the Silliman Foundation (New Haven, CT, 1922).

55 Eriugena may even have come into contact with certain Neoplatonic ideas via writers likeMartianus. See C. Kavanagh, ‘The Philosophical Importance of Grammar for Eriugena’,in J. McEvoy and M. Dunne (eds.), History and Eschatology in John Scottus Eriugena andHis Time, Ancient and Medieval Philosophy, series 1, 30 (Leuven, 2002), p. 63

56 See É. Jeauneau, ‘Influences Érigéniennes dans une homélie d’Héiric d’Auxerre’, in J.J.O’Meara and L. Bieler (eds.), The Mind of Eriugena: Papers of a Colloquium, Dublin 1970(Dublin, 1973), p. 120; G. Mathon, ‘Un Florilège Érigénien à l’abbaye de Saint-Amandau temps d’Hucbald’, Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale, vol. 20, 1953, pp.302–11.

57 R. McKitterick, ‘Knowledge of Plato’s Timaeus in the Ninth Century: The Implicationsof Valenciennes, Bibliothèque Municipale MS 293’, in J. Westra (ed.), From Athens toChartres: Neoplatonism and Medieval Thought: Studies in Honour of Edouard Jeauneau(Leiden, 1992), p. 95.

58 LbVaLc (Willis, Martianus Capella, 4, 11). 59 ‘SPECIES: Monas est igitur intelligibilis omnium numerorum proprietas quae Grece

sermone idea vocatur’ La (Willis, Martianus Capella, 262, 14). 60 LbVaLc LdK (Willis, Martianus Capella, 43, 17).61 For example, in fol. 17v of Va, fol. 25v of Lb and fol. 81v of T.62 Many glosses at the beginning of Book I focus on nature, the elements and the under-

lying unity of the natural world. 63 ‘DISSONA NEXA: Dissona per naturam sicut uirum et feminam nectit per copulae



gratiam ad creandam prolem’ LaBPa Pb (Willis, Martianus Capella, 1, 7).64 For the special role of the sun, see M. Teeuwen, ‘L’Armonia delle sfere nel nono secolo:

Nuove prospettive su fonti antiche’, Harmonia Mundi: Musica mondana e musica celestefra Antichità e Medioevo, Micrologus Library 19 (Florence, 2007), pp. 95–113.

65 See Teeuwen, Harmony, p. 206.66 ‘OCTO – TRINA: T ccc, H viii, T ccc’ (‘T 300, H 8, T 300’) LaT Ld (Willis, Martianus

Capella, 53, 8).67 For example, on the monad, the symbol of unity and image of Jupiter: ‘MONAS: i.

Unitas’ (Willis, Martianus Capella, 354, 2); ‘RITE: Monas et Iouis unum sunt’ (Willis,Martianus Capella, 262, 16).

68 See J.J. Contreni and S. Casciani (eds.), Word, Image, Number: Communication in theMiddle Ages (Florence, 2002).

69 ‘VOCABVLVM: Nam Φ d, Iota x, Λ xxx, O lxx, Λ xxx, O lxx, Γ iii, Iota x, Α unum fiuntdccxxiiii. Nouies l, ccccl, supersunt cclxxiiii; nouies xxx, cclxx, remanent iiii’ (‘For Φ is500, Iota 10, Λ 30, O 70 , Λ 30, O 70, Γ 3, Iota 10, Α 1. This makes 724. 9 × 50 is 450; theremainder is 274 (i.e. 724−450); 9 × 30 is 270; the remainder is 4 (i.e. 274−270))’LaBOT LbVaLc LdK (Willis, Martianus Capella, 29, 21).

70 See Teeuwen, Harmony, pp. 190–232.71 Ibid., p. 20472 These passages appear on folio 90r in O.73 See M. Teeuwen, ‘Off-Limits: Suspicious Learning in the Early Middle Ages?’, in L.

Teresi (ed.), Foundations of Learning: The Limits of Learning (Leuven, forthcoming). 74 Prudentius of Troyes, De Praedestinatione contra Joh.Scotum, PL 115, col. 1294.75 See J.J. Contreni, ‘Inharmonious Harmony: Education in the Carolingian World’, in J.J.

Contreni (ed.), Carolingian Learning: Masters and Manuscripts, Variorum CollectedStudies Series (Aldershot, 1992), p. 87.

76 See H. Hagendahl, Latin Fathers and the Classics: A Study on the Apologists, Jerome andOther Christian Writers, Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 6 (Göteborg, 1958).

‘IN THE NETS OR ON THE LINE’ (David Ganz)1 I am grateful to Dr Valentina of the Biblioteca Vallicelliana for allowing me to examine the

manuscript, to Dr Éamonn Ó Carragáin and Dr Consuelo Dutschke for encouraging meto do so, and especially to Professor Rossana Guglielmetti for her generosity in providingme with off-prints of her articles on Justus’ commentary, and Professor Rafaele Savigni foralerting me to her work. For their views on the identity of Basinus, I am grateful to DrMartin Heinzelmann and Professors Helmut Reimitz and Hans Hubert Anton. I have dis-cussed the decoration of the manuscript with Professors Florentine Mütherich, DavidWright, Lawrence Nees and Nancy Netzer, none of whom has seen it in person. None ofthese scholars is responsible for any errors in this paper, which is offered as a tribute toJennifer O’Reilly for encouragement and inspiration at every encounter.

2 Clavis Patrum Latinorum 1091. An abridged version first edited in 1529 was reprinted inPL 67, 961–994. A new edition is in progress.

3. New Palaeographical Society, Facsimiles of Ancient Manuscripts, series 2 (London, 1903–12), plate 7. Liebaert described the volume as a ‘charming little book’.

4 E.H. Zimmermann, Vorkarolingische Miniaturen (Berlin, 1916), Tafeln 94–8. 5 E.A. Lowe, Codices Latini Antiquiores I–XI and Supplement (Oxford, 1930–72). 6 MGH Poetae IV, no. LXXXIV, pp. 637–8 and plate. 7 C. Bouchard, The Cartulary of Montier-en-Der, 666–1129 (Toronto, 2004), pp. 54–8.

Note that Bouchard, arguing that all the bishops mentioned in this privilege were fromthe diocese of Reims, identifies Basinus with the bishop of Thérouanne who died in 710.

Martianus Capella and the Carolingians: Some observations based on the glosses on books I-II from...

Documents

Transcript of Martianus Capella and the Carolingians: Some observations based on the glosses on books I-II from...