Working Papers 3/2023 ERC AdG 882588 PAGES Priscian’s Ars Grammatica in European Scriptoria: A Millennium of Latin and Greek Scholarship A project that relies on the manuscript tradition of the text Anna Gioffreda Michela Perino Sapienza Università di Roma Sapienza Università di Roma anna.gioffreda@uniroma1.it michela.perino@uniroma1.it Michela Rosellini Chiara Rosso Sapienza Università di Roma Sapienza Università di Roma michela.rosellini@uniroma1.it chiara.rosso@uniroma1.it The CARMEN project receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 954689. CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 Edited by Prof. Dr. Marietta Horster and Dr. Erika Fischer Historisches Seminar – Alte Geschichte Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz Welderweg 18 (Philosophicum) D-55122 Mainz Email: carmen-itn@uni-mainz.de; https://carmen-itn.eu DOI: http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-10025 CARMEN Working Papers are published under the CC BY-ND 4.0 licence. ERC AdG 882588 PAGES Priscian’s Ars Grammatica in European Scriptoria: A Millennium of Latin and Greek Scholarship A project that relies on the manuscript tradition of the text Anna Gioffreda, Michela Perino, Michela Rosellini & Chiara Rosso In this paper we aim to describe the great importance of manuscript study for research related to the PAGES project.1 The formative stages of the manuscript tradition, from its Oriental origin to its widespread diffusion in the Carolingian world up to the 10th century and later in the humanistic age, can be explored through the testimony of the preserved codices and palimpsests. We will show how we operate in the study of manu- scripts and palimpsests, also with the help of multispectral analysis techniques. 1. About PAGES: a short summary (Michela Rosellini) Written at the beginning of the 6th century CE in the bilingual context of Constantino- ple, the Ars grammatica Prisciani in 18 books is the last and largest Latin grammar hand- book of Antiquity. Bringing together the inheritance of Latin and Greek grammatical traditions, it stands as a milestone in the history of linguistic speculation, and it is also an important source of fragments of lost literary works. The deep impact of this text on European culture goes beyond its original scope. It was conceived to teach Latin to Greek speakers, but it was soon disseminated in the Western countries of Europe (Italy, Ireland, and later France, Germany, and so on). Thus, in the early Middle Ages (8th–10th 1 The ERC Advanced Grant 2019 project PAGES has received funding from the European Research Council under the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant agreement No. 882588, PI Michela Rosellini) and is hosted at the Sapienza Università di Roma. 4 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 centuries) and during the Renaissance (15th–16th centuries) the Ars turned out, due to its great number of Greek passages, to stimulate the study of Greek by Western scholars. In the last two decades Priscian’s Ars has been the object of a strong revival of in- terest in the scientific community. Scholars from various countries have published con- tributions ranging from the analysis of the manuscript tradition2 to that of sources,3 literary quotations,4 ancient bilingualism,5 the history of linguistics,6 and the medieval and early modern reception.7 The French team “Groupe Ars Grammatica” has under- taken a modern translation of the work with exegetical notes (book 17 in 2010; books 14–16 in 2013; book 18 in 2017). Three international conferences have been devoted to Priscian in Lyon (2006), Rome (2012), and Bordeaux (2019). Their proceedings collect many of the most recent essays on the Ars.8 In the meantime, my edition of the second half of book 18 appeared in 2015 (Rosellini 2015a), followed by Spangenberg Yanes’s commentary in 2017 (Spangenberg Yanes 2017b). The knowledge of Greek in the Caro- lingian age, however, has not been fully investigated yet after the pioneering works of Bischoff (1951), Berschin (1980), and the studies collected by Herren (1988). Not a single study on Greek script in the West is available so far, and little is known about scriptoria and scribes who faced the transcription of Latin texts encompassing a great number of Greek passages (not only Priscian, but also Macrobius, Martianus Capella, and others). Much more is known about Greek humanists and the study of Greek in 15th-century Italy.9 Nevertheless, it remains unknown who arranged the first editiones of Priscian’s Ars and tried to restore the Greek parts lost in late medieval tradition. Therefore, time has come for a new reappraisal and a new critical edition of this crucial text of ancient linguistics. PAGES is part of a major project of renovation of Latin grammarians’ critical texts. Indeed, the new edition of Priscian will be published in the Collectanea Gram- matica Latina (Olms), a collection of new critical texts by Latin grammarians aimed to replace and complete Keil’s outdated corpus of Grammatici Latini. The series already consists of 17 titles, including my edition of Priscian’s Atticismi (Rosellini 2015a), the last part of the Ars. To begin with, some information about the text and the crucial steps of its transmis- sion is given. The Ars was composed by Priscian and immediately transcribed by Flavius Theodorus, an important officer at the court of Constantinople and a pupil of Priscian from 526 to 527 CE as attested by some subscriptiones at the end of several books. Nev- ertheless, there are only few indications that Priscian’s Ars was known between the 6th 2 Rosellini 2014a; 2020; Martorelli 2014b; Krotz 2015; Pecere 2019. 3 Rosellini 2010; Spangenberg Yanes 2017b; 2019. 4 Garcea – Giavatto 2007; Rosellini 2011; 2014b; 2015b; Spangenberg Yanes 2017a; 2018a; 2018b. 5 Adams 2003; Baratin 2014; Swiggers – Wouters 2007; Biville 2008; 2009; Mullen – James 2012; Rochette 2014; 2015; Rosellini – Spangenberg Yanes 2019. 6 Adams 2007; Callipo 2015; De Paolis 2015; Dickey 2015. 7 Baldi 2014; Krotz 2014; Cinato 2010; 2011a; 2011b; 2012; 2015; Spangenberg Yanes 2016. 8 Baratin – Colombat – Holtz 2009; Martorelli 2014a; Lambert – Bonnet 2021. 9 See surveys in Ciccolella 2008; Botley 2010 and the essays collected in Antonazzo – Cascio 2016 and Abbamonte – Harrison 2019. Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 5 and the 8th century, that means between 527 CE, when Flavius Theodorus finished his transcription of the 18 books of the work, and the Carolingian age, when the direct re- ception and transmission of the Ars apparently began on the Continent. Then however, within a few decades, hundreds of manuscripts were copied and Priscian’s major work was firmly integrated into the grammatical curriculum north of the Alps. Alcuin of York, master of the Palace School of Charlemagne in Aachen and later Abbot of Tours, was probably responsible of the first reappraisal of the Ars: in his work Excerptiones he also showed a particular interest in the last two books about syntax (although not at all in the Greek parts of them). The PAGES research group has taken 41 manuscripts, five pal- impsests, and more than 40 fragments from the 8th–10th centuries into consideration; we are collating them in order to identify their position in the genealogical tree of the whole tradition and to generate the new text of the Ars from them. However, in this reconstruction process we encounter a major problem. Most manu- scripts from the 8th–10th centuries (but many later manuscripts as well) were planned to contain only books 1–16, and many of the others, containing books 1–18 or only 17–18, omit the last part of book 18 (that means: the last 100 pages in Hertz’s edition [Hertz 1859, 278–377], not a short lacuna!). This part consists of a very rich collection of ‘good Greek’ and ‘good Latin’ idioms with plenty of quotations from Attic authors from the 5th–4th centuries BCE. This section, full as it was of passages in Greek, represented for most western scribes (and also for many masters) an unsolvable problem (words im- possible to understand, very difficult to copy). Thus, this valuable material, containing more than seventy fragments of lost Attic works, was duly and thoroughly transcribed only very rarely (in this period and later, down to the 15th century). Scribes often pre- ferred to omit all the Greek characters, or part of them. We thus owe our knowledge of the complete text of Priscian’s Ars to no more than a dozen scribes of the Carolingian age, working in Tours, St. Germain d’Auxerre, Corbie and a few other places in Northern France and South-West Germany between roughly 820 and 920 CE. None of these copy- ists, however, really understood the Greek characters they transcribed, or rather copied by just outlining the letters. Nevertheless, the quotations from Attic works can always be identified and also whether they come from directly transmitted texts or if they do not and are mainly restored. Indeed, the transmission of the Greek parts, with a big number of significant errors and lacunae, gives us very important information about the history of the text. First of all, after collating these most complete and faithful witnesses, we can draw a plausible stemma codicum for the last part of the Ars, embracing four families, and therefore reconstruct the text of the common ancestor of this group of manuscripts. The stemma involves some of the most important witnesses of the whole text so that it turns out to be a useful tool for the exploration of the whole tradition of the Ars. Moreover, some of these manuscripts also tell us something about the (poor) knowledge of Greek in those places where they were corrected and annotated: some emendators, mainly at Corbie, could identify and translate some single and simple words in Priscian’s lemmas or exempla ficta (but generally not in quotations). Finally, in the humanistic period, the recovered knowledge of the Greek language and texts enabled the scholars of the time 6 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 to integrate, though solely based on conjecture, words, examples, and quotations into some of the lost Greek parts. These additions have nothing to do with Priscian but testi- fy to the skill, care, and commitment that was put into the restoration of the text. The manuscripts are at the core of the following schema of the project’s aims: critical edition and commentary of the reconstructed Lexicon syntacticum Prisciani Sources among Priscian’s Greek sources: a 2nd century lexicon of Attic Greek PAGES PRISCIAN’S ARS GRAMMATICA IN EUROPEAN SCRIPTORIA: A MILLENNIUM OF LATIN AND GREEK SCHOLARSHIP manuscripts of 8th–10th manuscripts as the text as source of cent.: scriptoria and hands sources of text: further texts: fragments for Greek (and Latin) transmitted text of lost works preserved Text and by Priscian transmission online palaeographical new critical edition and physical description of Priscian’s Ars online collection of of Priscian’s Carolingian grammatica, in fragments of lost witnesses 6 volumes, with Attic works quoted by modern translation Priscian (transcriptions in usum editorum) manuscripts as witnesses of incunabula and editiones interest on Greek language in (15th–16th cent.) as witnesses Carolingian Europe: corrected of knowledge of Greek language text, shortened text, glosses and texts in Italian Humanism and related glossaries and European Renaissance: Reception and refilled text contexts of dissemination palaeographical online repertoire and online repertoire and studies of Greek script study of glosses on Greek study of replaced Greek in Priscian’s and other in Priscian’s Carolingian examples in Priscian’s authors’ manuscripts manuscripts early modern printings The research consists mainly in the study of the transmission of the work: manuscripts as products of different scriptoria and cultural milieux or as witnesses of the text, of the interest in language, in particular Greek, in the Carolingian age, and of the actu- al knowledge of the Greek language, as attested, for instance, by the glosses on Greek words. The research will lead, of course, to a critical edition of the Ars but also (see Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 7 at the top of the schema) to a critical edition, with commentary, of the reconstructed Greek Lexicon syntacticum that Priscian used (and copied, in part) in the exposition of syntax (books 17–18) and which is known only through his Ars. The existence of this lexicon was barely noticed by Priscian’s former editor, Martin Hertz (1855, pp. VII–VIII), and mostly disregarded by later studies. Its approximate chronology, cultural context of production, structure and linguistic peculiarities have been thoroughly investigated by various scholars only in the last years.10 The acknowledgment of Priscian’s source as one of the greatest Atticist lexica of the Imperial Age (1st or 2nd century CE) enhances a critical edition of this work as it can be recovered from the extensive quotations in Priscian’s Ars. PAGES also aims at illustrating the tradition of the Ars thoroughly by taking advan- tage of the progress in digital philology. In the last 30 years, remarkably few manu- script-based digital critical editions of classical Greek or Latin texts with a multites- timonial tradition have been produced. More generally, the predominant model for scholarly digital editions is still that of the archive-edition: PAGES sets out to overcome this limit by integrating an archive of information about the manuscript and print trans- mission with a proper critical text. The infrastructure will make available the results of the systematic survey of medieval manuscripts and early printed editions, including the comprehensive examination of the Greek script and glosses in 8th–10th-century man- uscripts and of the emendations and interpolations in 15th–16th-century manuscripts and printed editions. To sum up: PAGES aims to both supersede Hertz’s outdated and unreliable edition (Hertz 1855; 1859) and, in a broader perspective, to reconstruct Priscian’s key role not only in the revival of Latin in 9th-century Europe but also in the practice of Greek script and language in Carolingian scriptoria, in the renaissance of Greek philological studies in the humanistic age, and in the history of linguistic education in Europe. The project tackles these challenges with a multidisciplinary approach, gathering experts in textual criticism, digital humanities, palaeography and multispectral imaging, the history of linguistics, and medieval and humanistic scholarship. We will build an open-source dig- ital scholarly resource on the text, the tradition, and the reception of Priscian. 2. The contribution of palaeography to the study of the manuscript tradition of Priscian’s Ars (Anna Gioffreda: 2–2.2; Chiara Rosso: 2.3–2.5) The palaeographic and codicological analysis of a handwritten book involves a descrip- tion of its internal and external parts. As far as its internal part is concerned, in the absence of subscription with which the scribe himself provides information on the date, sometimes down to the hour of the day, and the place where he completed his activity, only the analysis of the script allows scholars to date and localise a manuscript, thus 10 See Rosellini 2010; 2012; Valente 2012 and the studies collected in Martorelli 2014a. 8 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 defining its origin. In addition, the survey of external features, namely material support, quire composition, ordering system, layout, ruling and pricking as well as decoration and binding adds important data about the structure of the book and its preparation (Maniaci 2015, 69–88). In the case at hand, the main objects of our investigation are the early medieval man- uscripts of Priscian’s Ars, that is, about 45 complete manuscripts out of a total of over 400 witnesses of the work as well as approximately the same number of fragments.11 Only few of them present secure dating elements, e.g. the codex Leiden, Universiteits- bibliotheek, BPL 67: on folio 7v, after the end of Priscian’s Periegesis, it bears a subscrip- tion written by a certain Dubthac, who states to have finished his copying work on April 11th, 838 (Fig. 1): Dubthac hos versus transcripsit tempore parvo / Indulge lector que mala scripta vides / Tertio Idus Apriles / Tertio anno decennovalis cicli / Tertio die ante pascha / Tertia decima luna incipiente / Tertia hora post meridiem / Tribus degitis / Tribus Instrumentis / Penna Membrano Atramento / Trinitate auxilia “Dubthac transcribed these lines in a short time: reader, forgive the mistakes you see. On the third day to the Ides of April, in the third year of the 19-years cycle, three days before Easter, at the beginning of the thirteenth lunar cycle [of the year], in the third hour of the afternoon, with three fingers, three tools, that is pen, parchment, ink, and the help of the Trinity” Figure 1: Leiden, BPL 67, f. 7v. © Leiden, Universiteitsbibliotheek In addition to giving reliable chronological information to date the copyist’s work, the Leiden manuscript is an interesting witness because of its subscription, which includes a brief list of the essential tools of scribes: pen, parchment, and ink. In this formula, 11 For the manuscripts of Priscian’s Ars see Passalacqua 1978; Ballaira 1982 and Rosellini 2015a. Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 9 Dubthac appeals to the readers’ indulgence resorting to Christian numerology by the repetition of the number three (Bischoff 2004, no. 2142; Ruzzier 2014, 463–468). Unlike Dubthac’s manuscript, the majority of the investigated codices has been dated to between the end of the 8th century and the 10th century only on palaeographical grounds. Our main task is to confirm or deny previous dates and localisations by means of a formal comparison between scripts, which is favoured by the availability of cata- logues of dated and datable manuscripts. To offer an example of our research material and how we dissect it, we have tried to organise the many and varied books and writing forms that constitute the 8th–10th cen- tury manuscript tradition of the Ars in several groups according to the following criteria: a) their state of conservation (whether they are intact or fragmentary); b) the organisa- tion or the density of the text on the written surface (in columns, full-page etc.); c) the type of script used; d) the ways and contexts they were read and employed in. 2.1. The state of preservation of the witnesses Unfortunately, as noted above, not all manuscripts have survived in the original codex form. Nevertheless, the structure of many of them has remained intact over time, and we can thus leaf through the books of the Ars in the form in which they were set up and used in the Middle Ages. Among the many available exemplars, MS Par. Lat. 7504, a witness entirely devoted to Priscian’s work, transmits other treatises by him together with the Ars (Bischoff 2014, no. 4458; Ruzzier 2014, 497–499). The manuscript, consisting of 188 folios in whole, was copied probably at the end of the 9th century in the Loire region by several hands (at least seven), who copied the Ars in full-page layout, each page containing 35 lines of writing. The end of the text is marked by a distinctive script, the so-called rustic capital, on folio 179r (Fig. 2). Figure 2: Par. Lat. 7504, f. 179r. © Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France 10 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 The physical integrity of a codex does not always correspond to textual integrity (see above Rosellini). Indeed, within the manuscript tradition we can distinguish between codices that contain the entire work and those that contain only a part of it, usually cor- responding to the first 16 books of the text, which are known collectively as Priscianus maior. None of the three oldest codices of the Ars (St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 903; Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, Class. 43; Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Reichenau- er Pergamenthss. Aug. 132), which are all dated to the 8th century, transmits the work in its entirety; they all lack the section with the Idiomata, namely the two last books (Rosellini 2015a, 343). The codex St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 903 transmits only the first 16 books of the Ars, although the index on p. 4 also mentions the presence of book 17 and 18 (Fig. 3). It is impossible to say whether these books had ever been present in the manuscript (Bischoff 2014, no. 5870; Cinato 2015, 570–571). Figure 3: St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 903, p. 4. © St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek A significant part of the Ars manuscript tradition consists in fragments, that is, rem- nants of ancient parchment codices containing more or less extensive sections of the work. Sometimes, these hold very short pieces of text on one or two folios at most, such as folios 169–170 of the codex Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Reg. Lat. 329, which were copied probably in the second half of the 9th century in St. Denis (Passalacqua 1978, 315; Bischoff 2014, no. 6664). Then again, they can consist of a larger number of pages. A remarkable case is represented by the fragment stored in Piacenza in the Sant’Antonino Archive under the shelfmark Cass. 49, fr. 47, which amounts to 44 folia and transmits a text of excellent quality (Riva 1997, 7, 59, 220; Manfredini 2011; 2018). Thanks to her recent research, Chiara Rosso concluded that it should be dated to the 9th century and not to the 10th as claimed hitherto by Manfredini. 2.2. Presentation of the text: models of layout The page layout of a codex is influenced by both its contents and purpose in addition to the natural features of the material used as well as by the dominant aesthetic canons and the personal preferences of artisans and commissioners. The choice of the text layout Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 11 might also be determined by other factors such as the conditions of reading, the weight of local traditions, the influence of specific models, or the practical function of certain types of works (such as glossaries or bilingual texts; Maniaci 2015, 82). The medieval witnesses of the Ars commonly are medium-large in size and adopt a full-page layout. The text is arranged at the centre of the writing surface in about 35 to 40 lines of script and surrounded by wide margins for notes and glosses that could be layered over time. Among the countless examples of full-page manuscripts, let us consider Par. Lat. 7497, which was copied in France during the first half of the 9th century (Passalacqua 1978, 220; Bischoff 2014, no. 4449). The codex is medium-large in size, like almost every other Ars codex, and transmits only the first 16 books of the work on 131 folios. The writ- ten area occupies 243 × 149 mm of a total surface of about 300 × 213 mm in a full-page layout of 38 lines of writing. Thus, the lower and outer margins are quite large, ideal for reading notes and glosses on the text. In fact, at least two different readers penned their own reading notes in the margins of this manuscript (they are roughly contemporary or slightly later to the main copyist). The availability of extensive margins is not always exploited in the same way in the various witnesses as illustrated by the manuscripts Par. Lat. 7501 (Fig. 4) and Par. Lat. 7502 (Fig. 5). Par. Lat. 7501 is a full-page codex copied at Corbie in the second half of the 9th century (Bischoff 2014, no. 4453; Ruzzier 2014, 485–488). In this case, the marginal space surrounding the main text has been filled with notes to such an extent that no blank space remains. Par. Lat. 7502 (Bischoff 2014, no. 4454; Ruzzier 2014, 489–493), in contrast, presents the same wide-margin layout but remained untouched by readers’ and commentators’ hands. In very few – only five – manuscripts Priscian’s Ars is organised in two columns: two of them were copied at Corbie in the 9th century (Amiens, Bibliothèque Centrale Louis Aragon, 425 and St. Petersburg, Rossijskaja Nacional’naja Biblioteka, Class. lat. F.v.7, ff. 41–124),12 one hails from central Italy (Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, Class. 43; Fig. 6a),13 a fragment comes from eastern France (Frg. Bern. [olim Frg. Bern.1], Bern, Burgerbib- liothek, AA 90. 21)14 and the last one was prepared in the Irish monastery of St Gall in modern Switzerland (St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 904).15 The fragment München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 29364 (1), from a codex dated to 10th-century Germany of which one sheet and three fragments remain, is a truly singular case (Hauke 2001, 338). What remains testifies to the existence, in the 10th century, of a book in which Priscian’s work was arranged in three columns of writ- ing, each spanning about 40 lines. Looking at the proportion of full-page to columnar witnesses, which clearly tends to favour the former, it can be argued that the columnar layout was not very successful within the tradition of Priscian grammar. 12 See respectively Bischoff 1998, no. 40 and Passalacqua 1978, 132. 13 Leitschuh – Fischer 1966; Passalacqua 1978, 9–10; Bischoff 1998, no. 213. 14 Bischoff 1998, no. 509; Ammirati 2014, 427–428. 15 Bischoff 2014, no. 5870a. 12 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 Figure 4: Par. Lat. 7501, f. 1r. © Paris, Bibliothèque Figure 5: Par. Lat. 7502, f. 4r. © Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France nationale de France 2.3. Different types of scripts Priscian’s Ars enjoyed a wide circulation during the Middle Ages. Starting from the late 8th century, in fact, it became one of the most widely used reference grammars for the recovery of Latin. For this reason, its preserved manuscripts stem from all over the Holy Roman Empire. In line with the writing fashion of the 9th century, the majority of the Ars manu- scripts was copied in the Caroline script, a calligraphic minuscule, particularly elegant and regular, with rounded and simple shapes that make it easily legible. The broad dis- semination of this script had the effect that it underwent slight stylistic developments in different centres of book production, although it structurally retained the same mor- phology. A French scriptorium which played a prominent role in Carolingian book pro- duction was located in the monastery of Corbie.16 Here, in the second half of the 9th century, a particular type of the Caroline script was developed, which can be well illus- trated by some manuscripts of the Ars: for example, MS Par. Lat. 7501 (Fig. 4) is written in this calligraphic minuscule, very elegant and rounded, stylish and harmonious and only barely enhanced by elaborate decoration, like most of the books produced at Corbie (Bischoff 2014, no. 4453; Ruzzier 2015, 485–488). To a completely different scribal environment refers MS Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. Lat. 3313 (Bischoff 2014, no. 6872): the codex was written in 16 On Corbie see Ganz 1990. Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 13 the so called Beneventan script in southern Italy (Montecassino or Benevento) at the end of the 8th or the beginning of the 9th century. It shows all of the most characteristic letters of this type of script such as a in the form of two c’s, ‘broken’ c, tall e with the cross stroke enabling the connection or ligature with the following letter, long i used at the beginning of a word, and two forms for the ti-ligature, respectively for unassibilated ti (e.g. statim) or assibilated ti (etiam). The already cited Bambergensis Class. 43 (Fig. 6a), today acephalous and mutilated, was written not far from the Vatican one, nor long after, but in a quite different type of script. As mentioned above, the codex is believed to have originated in the first half of the 9th century in Central Italy, perhaps in Lazio or Southern Tuscany. In its writing, some peculiar features that the Caroline script, while taking root in Rome and in the surrounding areas, inherited from the Roman Uncial are clearly recognisable. Examples are a pointed, v-shaped u placed in the interlinear space (usually at the end of the line, this being a way to save space; Fig. 6b) and a majuscule T with forks or small triangles at the end of the top-stroke (Fig. 6c). The copyist of the Bamberg codex also made system- atic use of the ri ligature, a feature of minuscule writings prior to the Caroline minuscule that the Caroline script mostly rejected and that instead survived in the manuscript production of Lazio, Tuscany and Umbria for a long time. Figure 6b: pointed v-shaped u Figure 6c: majuscule T Figure 6a: Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, Class. 43, f. 27v. © Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek Among the surviving witnesses of Priscian’s Ars, and moreover among the oldest ones, there is also a copy produced in a scriptorium in Northern Italy, in all likelihood Verona. It is the above-mentioned codex St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 903, which is trace- able to the beginning of the 9th century. Here the Priscian text is written in a tiny and pretty clear Caroline script, indeed very similar to contemporary products of the Verona scriptorium, marked by very short f and s, p with the bow not quite closed, and the occa- sional use of long i following l or t (Fig. 7). 14 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 Figure 7: St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 903, p. 2. © St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek The corpus that is currently under investigation within the PAGES project also includes three codices written in Insular minuscule, that is, the script which developed on the British Isles and which was then also used by Insular scribes in Continental Europe. These manuscripts are the already mentioned Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Reichenauer Pergamenthss., Aug. 132; Leiden, Universiteitsbibliotheek, BPL 67; and St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 904 (Fig. 8). Insular minuscule can be easily recognised by the characteristic wedge-shaped finials on upright strokes and by some letterforms, among them f, r, and s that are at minim-height and the flat-topped g with a horizontal stroke instead of the upper bow. Figure 8: St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Sang. 904, p. 3. © St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek 2.4. Display scripts When studying ancient manuscripts, it is also necessary to take the so-called paratext into consideration. Since the pioneering studies of Gérard Genette (1979; 1982; 1987), paratext designates all those textual or illustrative elements that accompany the main text with the aim of presenting and illustrating it, providing the reader with various Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 15 information relating to it (e.g. author, content, articulation in subsections and so on).17 Paratextual elements range therefore from prefaces and indexes to illuminations, from all sorts of titles – e.g. incipit and explicit formulas (titles marking respectively the begin- ning and the ending of the text or of a section), subtitles, running titles, and so on – to subscriptiones. As already pointed out, in some of the manuscripts bearing Priscian’s Ars grammatica there are indeed some subscriptiones dating back to the very first history of the work and providing scholars with valuable information about its original composition and edition. In total, six subscriptiones survive: the first one (unattested in the most ancient witnesses) is located at the very beginning of Priscian’s work; the others are instead placed at the end of five of the six parts into which the copy of the lengthy grammar consisting of 18 books was originally divided (Fig. 9). From these subscriptiones we learn that the antiquarius Flavius Theodorus, adiutor of the quaestor in Constantinople and Priscian’s pupil, wrote down his teacher’s work between the summer of 526 and the summer of 527 CE, probably as the author progressively concluded the revision of each of the six parts. Figure 9: Par. Lat. 7496, f. 203r. © Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France Flavius Theodorus Dionisii vir devotus memorialis sacris scrinii epistularum et adiutor viri magnifici quaestoris sacri palatii scripsi manu mea in urbe Roma Constantinopoli tertio Kalendas Iunias, Mavortio viro clarissimo consule, imperantibus Iustino et Iustiniano perpetuis Augustis. As in today’s books, display scripts were used in ancient manuscripts to stress and make the paratext clearly visible. With the expression “display scripts”, scholars refer to those scripts that are of a higher grade and larger size than the script of the main text and that are used for titles, headings, chapter numbers, and so on in order to emphasise them (Jakobi-Mirwald 1999; Stirnemann – Smith 2007). For this reason, Uncial, Rustic Capital, and Square Capital scripts can be also found in the manuscripts transmitting Priscian’s Ars otherwise in minuscule script. Among them, an example for the highly accurate use 17 For a recent overview on the topic see Andrist 2018. 16 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 of display scripts is represented by the codex Autun, Bibliothèque Bussy-Rabutin (Bi- bliothèque Municipale), S 44 (40).18 It stems from Tours, a centre of primary impor- tance during the Carolingian Renaissance and renowned for the high-level manuscript production during the 9th century.19 Here, in the first decades of the century, a specific hierarchy of display scripts was developed: Square Capitals for major titles at the top of the hierarchy; Uncials for incipits, that is, the first words (usually, the whole first line) of the text; Half-uncials for prefatory texts; and, finally, Rustic Capitals for explicit for- mulas. In the Autun copy of Priscian’s Ars, all these criteria are carefully respected as can be seen on folios 1r and 2r. Square Capitals are used for the intitulation (Incipit … patricio), Uncials for the first line of the praefatio in red ink (Cum omnis eloquentiae doctri-), Half-uncials for the text of the praefatio (Fig. 10), and Rustic Capitals for the explicit formula at the end of the tabula capitulorum, which recalls the topic of each of the 18 books (Fig. 11). Figure 10: Autun, Bibliothèque Bussy-Rabutin (Bibliothèque Municipale), S 44 (40), f. 1r. © Autun, Bibliothèque Bussy-Rabutin Figure 11: Autun, Bibliothèque Bussy-Rabutin (Bibliothèque Municipale), S 44 (40), f. 2r. © Autun, Bibliothèque Bussy-Rabutin 18 Passalacqua 1978, 17; Bischoff 1998, no. 168; von Büren 2004. 19 On Tours see Rand 1929; Rand 1934; Ganz 2020, 244–246. Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 17 Display scripts deserve the same consideration that palaeographers dedicate to the main text script, because they possibly show useful elements for dating or placing a manuscript more precisely. The same applies to the decoration, which is, however, only marginally attested in the corpus of early-medieval Priscian manuscripts. 2.5. Signs of use and reading In order to discover more about the history of a manuscript and the use that was made of it over time, the writings that can be found in its margins (as well as between the lines of the text) are as valuable as the main content and the paratext. Marginal and interlinear notes are of various types. There are for example glosses, that is words or phrases meant to clarify a word or a phrase of the main text by com- menting on it or translating it. In some witnesses of the Ars, there is evidence of so- called syntactic glossing, which means the use of letters of the alphabet written between the lines, above words or phrases, with the purpose of suggesting the order in which they should be read as an aid for readers (Fig. 12). Figure 12: Par. Lat. 10290, f. 3r. © Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France The margins of a manuscript can also contain various other signs of reading, including headings and keywords written along the main text to mark its articulation in sections on different topics, notabene signs, mostly in the form of a monogram, maniculae (which are, as their name implies, drawings of a hand with a pointing index finger), and so on. Thanks to these and similar annotations, scholars can get valuable information about the reception of the work transmitted by the considered manuscript. Marginal and in- terlinear notes in Priscian texts are thus worthy of attention, as they provide us with in- formation about how the Ars grammatica was read and used for learning Latin grammar over the centuries, about which sections of the treatise aroused most interest among the medieval readers, and so on. The margins of a manuscript, as well as its guard-leaves, often contain still other types of annotations, which are equally valuable because they provide scholars with information on the history of the book. For example, ownership notes allow us to know where or in whose hands the book was at a given moment in its history. Thanks to the ex- 18 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 libris written on the upper section of the first page of the manuscript (“Monasterii Sancti Petri Corbeiensis”), it becomes obvious that the above-mentioned Amiens manuscript comes from the library of the Corbie abbey. Sometimes scholars happen to face marginal annotations that promise to be potentially revelatory but then remain obscure due to their conciseness. This is the case with the entry (late 10th century?) of some masculine names in the lower margin of folio 23v in the previously mentioned Bamberg codex: “Luiboldus, Vogo, Hicco, Rudgerus et Luizo, Adelgisus”. This brief list might refer, for ex- ample, to the confreres of the person who wrote their names down, or it might indicate a series of abbots or bishops. The identification of these six men, if ever possible, would be quite relevant because it would reveal where the codex was preserved at that time and thus the cultural environment in which it was read and annotated. 3. Reading the medieval palimpsests (Michela Perino) In this working paper, we introduce the ongoing research on the palimpsest manuscripts of the Ars Prisciani. Our aim is (i) to read the medieval palimpsests with multispec- tral imaging techniques and (ii) to analyse the various parchment supports with in- novative procedures for the extraction and sequencing of DNA. The work is part of the ERC-funded project PAGES – 882588. The following figures of the paper are taken from the presentation given on September 23, 2022, at the CARMEN Seminar-Conference in Rome. 3.1. A brief overview on palimpsests The word “palimpsest” comes from the Greek παλίμψηστος and means “a manuscript scraped clear for reuse”. Writings were generally removed with the help of pumice stone and washes, allowing the parchment to be newly available for another text, the latter called scriptio superior (Maniaci 2019). Invisible traces of removed writings (scriptio infe- rior) could remain on the parchment, and they can be recovered with different methods. Since the 19th century, scholars have tried to read the deleted texts in palimpsests by using chemical procedures. Among them, Angelo Mai applied an oak-gall solution to the pages of manuscript Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica, Vat. Lat. 5757. The attempt brought to light the scriptio inferior containing book IV of Cicero’s De re publica (Fig. 13). Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 19 Figure 13: Vat. Lat. 5757, f. 277r. Traces of the deleted De re publica text by Cicero (scriptio inferior) were visible after the application of an oak-gall solution. Photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/ wiki/File:Cicero,_De_re_publica,_Vat._Lat._5757.jpg. 3.2. Methods for reading the scriptio inferior Mai opened the way for the “palimpsest’s seekers” who aspired to rescue “lost” ancient manuscripts: they guessed that traces of a previous removed writing could be more legi- ble by painting the manuscript page with chemical reagents (Timpanaro 1980; Lo Mona- co 1996). Besides the increase in readability, the invasive method of reagents has often produced, especially in the hands of unskilled users, darkening, brown (gallic acid) or blue (potassium ferrocyanides) spots, and even the loss of the legibility of texts and irre- versibly damaged manuscripts. In 1898, the St. Gallen Conference on the Conservation of Manuscripts disapproved the use of gallic acid, thiocyanate, ammonium sulphide, sodium sulphide, potassium ferrocyanide, and tannin solution as chemicals used to re- cover texts. The advent of personal computers and digital photography has favoured non-invasive experiments up to digital image processing and new types of technologies (Fig. 14). Figure 14: The transition from chemical reagents to modern technology has benefited the development of non-invasive methods. © themazi natural dyes (left); ERC-PAGES (right) 20 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 3.3. Multispectral imaging (MSI) for the PAGES project Multispectral imaging (MSI) is one of the first technologies used to recover the scriptio inferior in palimpsests digitally (Knox et al. 2001). The portable MSI equipment funded by the PAGES project (Fig. 15) consists of a monochromatic camera equipped with a wheel containing band-pass filters and different radiation sources, including UV (ultra- violet), Vis (visible), and IR (infrared). Figure 15: PAGES equipment for multispectral imaging. © ERC-PAGES 3.4. The choice of equipment It is important to note that the choice of equipment (Fig. 16), e.g. instrument technolo- gy, radiation source, and filters, depends on several factors (often not definable a priori), i.e. • the conservation status of the manuscript, • ink and parchment composition, and • the parchment treatment. Figure 16: The equipment of choice for manuscript H141 moved for the anal- ysis into the Atelier de conservation-restauration du Service de coopération documentaire interuniver- sitaire of the Université Paul-Valéry-Montpellier 3. © SCDI de Montpellier Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 21 3.5. Montpellier, BUHM, H141 In July 2022, the PAGES equipment was moved to the Université Paul-Valéry-Montpel- lier 3 for the analysis of palimpsest manuscript H141 (Fig. 17a). The application of mul- tispectral imaging increased the readability of the scriptio inferior on the thirty manu- script pages examined. Figure 17b shows the results of multispectral imaging using the UV radiation. Figure 17a: Université de Montpellier (BUHM), Bibliothèque Universitaire Historique de Médecine, manuscript H141, f. 59r. © SCDI de Montpellier Figure 17b: Multispectral imaging with UV radiation and filter at 400 nm of the same page. © ERC-PAGE 22 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 3.6. Rome, Vallicelliana Library, C9 In March 2022, the PAGES equipment was moved to the Vallicelliana Library in Rome for the analysis of palimpsest manuscript C9 (Fig. 18). The conservation status of the manu- script and the removal methods of the scriptio inferior appeared very different compared to manuscript H141. For this reason, after the application of multispectral imaging, a more complex post-processing analysis is required to recover the text. The application of various methods of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is an ongoing research goal in collab- oration with the Department of Basic and Applied Sciences for Engineering (S.B.A.I) of the Sapienza University of Rome. Figure 18: Rome, Vallicelliana Library, C9, f. 156v with visible scratches (upper). Multispectral imaging with UV radiation and filter at 365 nm of the same page (lower). © ERC-PAGES 3.7. Parchment analysis Innovative parchment analysis (Fig. 19) is part of a research collaboration with the Plant Pathology Laboratory of the Department of Environmental Biology of the Sapienza University of Rome. The aim is to characterise the species, type/breed, and sex of the animals used to produce parchment (see also https://sites.google.com/palaeome.org/ ercb2c/home). Figure 19: Sampling of the parchment with a standard eraser in Montpellier. © SCDI de Montpellier Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 23 3.8. Conclusions We have outlined the aims and preliminary results of the ongoing research on palimp- sests within the PAGES project. We used a non-invasive and portable multispectral im- aging technology to recover text in palimpsests. Post-processing of images is generally required and includes various types of analysis (e.g. clustering algorithms, computer vi- sion procedures, etc., not discussed in this paper). Additionally, the parchment analysis can provide knowledge about the production context of the manuscripts. Editions of Priscian’s Ars Grammaticae latinae auctores antiqui […], opera & studio Heliae Putschii, Hanoviae 1605. Prisciani Caesariensis grammatici Opera, […] recensuit […] Augustus Krehl, vol. I, Lipsiae 1819; vol. II, Lipsiae 1820. Prisciani grammatici Caesariensis Institutionum grammaticarum libri XVIII ex recensione Martini Hertzii. Grammatici Latini II, Lipsiae 1855; III, Lipsiae 1859. Prisciani Caesariensis Ars, Liber XVIII, pars altera 1, a cura di Michela Rosellini, Hildesheim 2015. Bibliography Abbamonte – Harrison 2019 = G. Abbamonte – S. Harrison (eds.), Making and Rethinking the Re- naissance. Between Greek and Latin in 15th–16th-Century Europe, Berlin/Boston 2019. Adams 2003 = J. N. Adams, Bilingualism and the Latin Language, Cambridge 2003. Adams 2007 = J. N. Adams, The Regional Diversification of Latin, 200 BC–AD 600, Cambridge 2007. Ammirati 2014 = S. Ammirati, Schede di manoscritti I, in: L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Oc- cidente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2014, 423–460. Andrist 2018 = P. Andrist, Toward a definition of paratexts and paratextuality: the case of ancient Greek manuscripts, in: L. I. Lied – M. Maniaci (eds.), Bible as notepad: tracing annotations and annotation practices in Late Antique and Medieval biblical manuscripts. Manuscripta Bib- lica 3, Berlin 2018, 130–149. Antonazzo – Cascio 2016 = A. Antonazzo – G. Cascio (eds.), I graeca nei libri latini tra medioevo e umanesimo. Studi medievali e umanistici 14, Messina 2016. Baldi 2014 = D. Baldi, Le editiones di Prisciano e i Graeca. Considerazioni preliminari, in: L. Mar- torelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occidente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Priscia- no, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2014, 394–419. Ballaira 1982 = G. Ballaira, Per il catalogo dei codici di Prisciano, Torino 1982. Baratin 2014 = M. Baratin, À qui s’adresse Priscien? Pédagogie et bilinguisme dans l’Antiquité tardive, in: C. Longobardi – C. Nicholas – M. Squillante (eds.), Scholae discimus: pratiques scolaires dans l’Antiquité tardive et le Haut Moyen Âge, Lyon 2014, 33–54. 24 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 Baratin – Colombat – Holtz 2009 = M. Baratin – B. Colombat – L. Holtz (eds.), Priscien: transmis- sion et refondation de la grammaire, de l’antiquité aux modernes. État des recherches à la suite du colloque international de Lyon, ENS Lettres et Sciences Humaines, 10–14 octobre 2006, Turnhout 2009. Berschin 1980 = W. Berschin, Griechisch-Lateinisches Mittelalter, Bern 1980. Bischoff 1951 = B. Bischoff, Das griechische Element in der abendländischen Bildung des Mit- telalters, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 44, 1951, 27–55 [repr. in: idem, Mittelalterliche Studien II, Stuttgart 1967, 246–274]. Bischoff 1998 = B. Bischoff, Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts I, Wiesbaden 1998. Bischoff 2004 = B. Bischoff, Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts II, Wiesbaden 2004. Bischoff 2014 = B. Bischoff, Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts III, Wiesbaden 2014. Biville 2008 = F. Biville, Les Institutions de Priscien, une grammaire et une culture bilingues, in: C. Brunet (ed.), Des formes et des mots chez les Anciens, Besançon 2008, 31–50. Biville 2009 = F. Biville, Le latin expliqué par le grec: les Institutions de Priscien, in: B. Bortolussi – M. Keller – S. Minon – L. Sznajder (eds.), Traduire, Transposer, Transmettre dans l’Antiqui- té, Paris 2009, 47–60. Botley 2010 = P. Botley, Learning Greek in Western Europe, 1396–1529: Grammars, Lexica, and Classroom Texts, Philadelphia 2010. Callipo 2015 = M. Callipo, Lire Apollonius Dyscole à la lumière de Priscien? Une note sur l’his- toire des théories linguistiques, Revue des études latines 93, 2015, 273–286. Ciccolella 2008 = F. Ciccolella, Donati Graeci. Learning Greek in the Renaissance, Leiden/Boston 2008. Cinato 2010 = F. Cinato, Quand le Liber glossarum rencontre Priscien au début du IXe siècle. Les gloses collectée du manuscrit Vaticano, Reg. lat. 1650, Voces 21, 2010, 37–48. Cinato 2011a = F. Cinato, Expositiones verborum: le travail lexicographique produit sur l’Ars Prisciani du IXe siècle à Pierre Hélie, in: I. Rosier (ed.), Arts du langage et théologie aux con- fins des XIe et XIIe siècles. Textes, maîtres, débats, Turnhout 2011, 275–316. Cinato 2011b = F. Cinato, Marginalia témoins du travail de Jean Scot sur Priscien, in: I. Rosier (ed.), Arts du langage et théologie aux confins des XIe et XIIe siècles. Textes, maîtres, débats, Turnhout 2011, 539–563. Cinato 2012 = F. Cinato, Accessus ad Priscianum. De Jean Scot Érigène à Létald de Micy, Archivum latinitatis medii aevi 70, 2012, 27–90. Cinato 2015 = F. Cinato, Priscien glosé. L’«Ars grammatica» de Priscien vue à travers les gloses caro- lingiennes, Turnhout 2015. De Nonno 2009 = M. De Nonno, Ars Prisciani Caesariensis: problemi di tipologia e di composizio- ne, in: M. Baratin – B. Colombat – L. Holtz (eds.), Priscien: transmission et refondation de la grammaire, de l’antiquité aux modernes. État des recherches à la suite du colloque internatio- nal de Lyon, ENS Lettres et Sciences Humaines, 10–14 octobre 2006, Turnhout 2009, 249–278. Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 25 De Paolis 2015 = P. De Paolis, La parentela linguistica fra greco e latino nella tradizione gram- maticale latina, in: G. V. M. Haverling (ed.), Latin Linguistics in the Early 21st Century. Acts of the 16th International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Uppsala, June 6th–11th, 2011 I–II, Uppsala 2015, 611–625. Dickey 2015 = E. Dickey, Teaching Latin to Greek Speakers in Antiquity, in: E. Archibald – W. Brockliss – J. Gnoza (eds.), Learning Latin and Greek from Antiquity to the Present, Cam- bridge 2015, 30–51. Ganz 1990 = D. Ganz, Corbie in the Carolingian Renaissance, Sigmaringen 1990. Ganz 2020 = D. Ganz, Early Caroline. France and Germany, in: F. T. Coulson – R. G. Babcock (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Latin Palaeography, Oxford 2020, 237–261. Garcea – Giavatto 2007 = A. Garcea – A. Giavatto, Les citations d’auteurs grecs chez Priscien: un premier état de la question, Letras Clássicas 11, 2007, 71–89. Genette 1979 = G. Genette, Introduction à l’architexte, Paris 1979. Genette 1982 = G. Genette, Palimpsestes. La littérature au second degré, Paris 1982. Genette 1987 = G. Genette, Seuils, Paris 1987. Groupe Ars Grammatica 2010 = Groupe Ars Grammatica (ed.), Priscien. Grammaire. Livre XVII – Syntaxe 1, Paris 2010. Groupe Ars Grammatica 2013 = Groupe Ars Grammatica (ed.), Priscien. Grammaire. Livres XIV – XV – XVI. Les invariables, Paris 2013. Groupe Ars Grammatica 2017 = Groupe Ars Grammatica (ed.), Priscien. Grammaire. Livre XVIII – Syntaxe 2, Paris, 2017. Hauke 2001 = H. Hauke, Katalog der lateinischen Fragmente der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek Mün- chen 2. Clm 29315–29520, Wiesbaden 2001. Herren 1988 = M. Herren (ed.), The Sacred Nectar of the Greeks: The Study of Greek in the West in the Early Middle Ages, London 1988. Hertz 1855 = M. Hertz, Prisciani grammatici Caesariensis Institutionum grammaticarum libri XVIII. Grammatici Latini II, Lipsiae 1855. Hertz 1859 = M. Hertz, Prisciani grammatici Caesariensis Institutionum grammaticarum libri XVIII. Grammatici Latini III, Lipsiae 1859. Jakobi-Mirwald 1999 = C. Jakobi-Mirwald, Die Auszeichnungsschriften in mittelalterlichen Co- dices. Ein terminologisches Problem, in: P. Rück (ed.), Methoden der Schriftbeschreibung. Historische Hilfswissenschaften 4, Stuttgart 1999, 107–117. Knox et al. 2001 = K. Knox – C. Dickinson – L. Wei – R. Easton, Jr. – R. Johnston, Multispectral Imaging of the Archimedes Palimpsest, Proceedings of the PICS 2001: Image Processing, Image Quality, Image Capture Systems Conference, Montreal 2001, 206–210. Krotz 2014 = E. Krotz, Remigius von Auxerre und die Ars Prisciani, Archivum latinitatis medii aevi 72, 2014, 21–82. Krotz 2015 = E. Krotz, Sedulius Scottus and die Recensio Scotica of Priscian’s Ars, Peritia 26, 2015, 81–112. Lambert – Bonnet 2021 = F. Lambert – G. Bonnet (eds.), Apollonius Dyscole et Priscien: Trans- mettre, traduire, interpréter, Turnhout 2021. 26 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 Leitschuh – Fischer 1966 = F. Leitschuh – H. Fischer, Katalog der Handschriften der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Bamberg, Bamberg 1966 (revised edition). Lo Monaco 1996 = F. Lo Monaco, In codicibus ... qui Bobienses inscribuntur: scoperte e studio di palinsesti bobbiesi in Ambrosiana dalla fine del Settecento ad Angelo Mai (1819), Aevum 70/3, 1996, 657–719. Manfredini 2011 = S. Manfredini, Un Prisciano del sec. X con legatura antica nell’Archivio di S. Antonino in Piacenza, Aevum 85/2, 2011, 317–340. Manfredini 2018 = S. Manfredini, Messale e Prisciano, in: I misteri della cattedrale. Meraviglie nel labirinto del sapere, Milano 2018, 110–113. Maniaci 2015 = M. Maniaci (ed.), Codicology, in: A. Bausi (ed.), Comparative Oriental Manuscript Studies. An Introduction, Hamburg 2015, 69–266. Maniaci 2019 = M. Maniaci, Breve storia del libro manoscritto, Roma 2019. Martorelli 2014a = L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occidente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2014. Martorelli 2014b = L. Martorelli, Astra noctis. Trasmissione del greco nel lessico priscianeo nei secoli XI e XII, in: L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occidente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2014, 367–391. Mullen – James 2012 = A. Mullen – P. James (eds.), Multilingualism in the Graeco-Roman Worlds, Cambridge 2012. Passalacqua 1978 = M. Passalacqua, I codici di Prisciano, Roma 1978. Pecere 2019 = O. Pecere, La prima edizione dell’Ars di Prisciano: ricostruzione di un idiografo a testualità progressiva, Segno e testo 17, 2019, 101–142. Rand 1929 = E. K. Rand, A survey of the manuscripts of Tours, Cambridge 1929. Rand 1934 = E. K. Rand, The earliest book of Tours. Studies in the script of Tours, Cambridge 1934. Riva 1997 = A. Riva, La Biblioteca Capitolare di Sant’Antonino di Piacenza. Biblioteca Storica Pia- centina 7, Piacenza 1997. Rochette 2014 = B. Rochette, Utriusque sermonis cognatio. La lexicographie bilingue à la fin de l’Antiquité, in: L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occidente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2014, 3–31. Rochette 2015 = B. Rochette, L’enseignement du latin à Constantinople: une mise au point, in: G. V. M. Haverling (ed.), Latin Linguistics in the Early 21st Century. Acts of the 16th Inter- national Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Uppsala, June 6th–11th, 2011 I–II, Uppsala 2015, 626–639. Rosellini 2010 = M. Rosellini, Le costruzioni verbali nel libro XVIII di Prisciano, Materiali e discus- sioni per l’analisi dei testi classici 65, 2010, 69–94. Rosellini 2011 = M. Rosellini, Le citazioni latine nel lessico sintattico del libro XVIII di Prisciano, Materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei testi classici 67, 2011, 183–199. Rosellini 2012 = M. Rosellini, Exempla utriusque doctrinae: analisi del testo e individuazione di criteri editoriali per il lessico sintattico greco-latino del l. XVIII di Prisciano (GL III 278, 13–377, 18), in: L. Gamberale – M. De Nonno – C. Di Giovine – M. Passalacqua (eds.), Le strade della filologia. Per Scevola Mariotti, Roma 2012, 195–211. Gioffreda, Perino, Rosellini & Rosso 27 Rosellini 2014a = M. Rosellini, Graeca Prisciani nel mondo carolingio: considerazioni filologiche sulla storia del lessico sintattico (VI–X sec.), in: L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occi- dente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2014, 341–365. Rosellini 2014b = M. Rosellini, Frammenti di autori attici negli Idiomata di Prisciano: trascrizio- ni dei manoscritti altomedievali in usum editorum, in: L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occidente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/Zürich/ New York 2014, 517–595. Rosellini 2015a = M. Rosellini (ed.), Prisciani Caesariensis Ars, Liber XVIII, Pars altera 1. Introdu- zione, testo critico e indici, Hildesheim 2015. Rosellini 2015b = M. Rosellini, Attribuzioni enniane nel De constructione di Prisciano: a proposi- to di Ann. 167, 444 e 445 Sk., Res Publica Litterarum 38, 2015, 5–18. Rosellini 2020 = M. Rosellini, Tradizione e testo nel libro 18 dell’Ars di Prisciano, Segno e testo 18, 2020, 187–198. Rosellini – Spangenberg Yanes 2019 = M. Rosellini – E. Spangenberg Yanes, L’insegnamento di Prisciano, in: A. Garcea – M. Rosellini – L. Silvano (eds.), Latin in Byzantium I. Late Antiquity and beyond, Turnhout 2019, 163–182. Ruzzier 2014 = C. Ruzzier, Schede di manoscritti II, in: L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occi- dente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2014, 463–513. Spangenberg Yanes 2014 = E. Spangenberg Yanes, Greco e latino a confronto: soluzioni per la presentazione del materiale linguistico nel lessico di Prisciano, in: L. Martorelli (ed.), Greco antico nell’Occidente carolingio. Frammenti di testi attici nell’Ars di Prisciano, Hildesheim/ Zürich/New York 2014, 115–143. Spangenberg Yanes 2016 = E. Spangenberg Yanes, Giuseppe Giusto Scaligero e Prisciano: una col- lazione cinquecentesca dell’Ars Grammatica, Revue d’histoire des textes 11, 2016, 333–366. Spangenberg Yanes 2017a = E. Spangenberg Yanes, Le citazioni di autori greci nell’Ars di Prisciano, Athenaeum 105, 2017, 642–648. Spangenberg Yanes 2017b = E. Spangenberg Yanes, Prisciani Caesariensis Ars, Liber XVIII, pars altera 2. Commento, Hildesheim 2017. Spangenberg Yanes 2018a = E. Spangenberg Yanes, Lesefrüchte aus Priskian I. Note ad Antifane (fr. 145, 6 K.-A.), Eupoli (frr. 7; 32 K.-A.), Menandro (fr. 96 K.-A.), Sofocle (fr. 1119 Radt) e al titolo delle Vespe, Vichiana 55/2, 2018, 11–28. Spangenberg Yanes 2018b = E. Spangenberg Yanes, Lesefrüchte aus Priskian II. Note a Tucidide (3, 59, 2), Senofonte (Mem. 1, 2, 4. 40. 49. 51; 2, 3, 1; Hell. 4, 8, 22) e Platone (Symp. 191a5– b1), Materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei testi classici 80, 2018, 193–226. Spangenberg Yanes 2019 = E. Spangenberg Yanes, Materiali lessicografici greci e latini nell’in- segnamento di Prisciano, in: D. Bianconi – G. Agosti (eds.), Pratiche didattiche tra centro e periferia nel Mediterraneo tardoantico, Spoleto 2019, 217–249. Stirnemann – Smith 2007 = P. Stirnemann – M. H. Smith, Forme et fonction des écritures d’ap- parat dans les manuscrits latins (VIIIe–XVe siècle), Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes 165, 2007, 67–100. 28 CARMEN Working Papers 3/2023 Swiggers – Wouters 2007 = P. Swiggers – A. Wouters, Trasferts, contacts, symbiose: l’élabora- tion de terminologies grammaticales en contact bi/plurilingue, in: L. Basset – F. Biville – B. Colombat – P. Swiggers – A. Wouters (eds.), Bilinguisme et terminologie grammaticale gréco-latine, Leuven/Paris/Dudley (MA) 2007, 19–36. Timpanaro 1980 = S. Timpanaro, Angelo Mai, in: S. Timpanarao, Aspetti e Figure della cultura ottocentesca, Pisa 1980, 225–271. Valente 2012 = S. Valente, Quattro anonime citazioni greche in Prisciano, Eikasmos 23, 2012, 317–319. von Büren 2004 = V. von Büren, S 44 (40*) Priscianus, Institutiones grammaticae, in: C. Maître (ed.), Catalogue des manuscrits conservés à Autun. Bibliothèque municipale, Société Éduenne, Turnhout 2004, 145–147.