1
PATRIMONIUM IN MANUSCRIPTIS CONSERVATUM
EUROCLASSICA CONGRESS Dubrovnik, 29.03-02.04.05.
Ivica Martinović, Dubrovnik
Unpublished manuscript heritage of the Croatian Latinists in
the libraries and archives of Dubrovnik: preliminary report
Writers and scholars alike write primarily to see their work published, reviewed and, above
all, read. This, too, was the goal of the Dubrovnik-born Croatian Latinists who acquired their
classical learning either in Dubrovnik or at one of the Italian Universities of Bologne, Ferrara,
Padua, Naples, Rome, or even Paris. Upon completing their studies abroad, most of them
returned to their native city. Their academic careers varied from highly distinguished and
honoured to obscure and wretched. Myriad were the reasons of their return to Dubrovnik or
recurrent departure: crowned as poeta laureatus at the Academy of Iulius Pomponius Letus in
1484, Ilija Crijević decided to return to his hometown; having lost in a financial action,
Nikola Brautić was sententenced to prison at St Angelo Castle in 1621, after which he
renounced his bishopric and returned to Lopud, his place of birth; after Rome and Bologne,
Stjepan Gradić was to spend ten years in Dubrovnik (1643-1653), left for Rome again, where
he remained until death; Ignjat Đurđević renounced the Jesuit Society in Rome and returned
to Dubrovnik in 1705 to join a stricter Benedictine order; Bernard Zamagna returned home
after the suppression of the Society of Jesus in 1773. Having graduated from the best
European Universities, some Latinists were determined to pursue their careers in the most
sophisticated cultural, scientific and ecclesiastical centres of the day: a Dominican Ivan
Stojković in Paris and on the Councils, the Jesuits Ivan Lukarević, Benedikt Rogačić, Ruđer
Bošković and Rajmund Kunić in Rome, Marko Faustin Galjuf in Rome and Genoa. Lastly,
apart from an episode or two, some of the major Dubrovnik Latinists never left their
hometown: Damjan Beneša, Nikola Vitov Gučetić, Vice Petrović, and Džono Rastić.
Different life stories reflect different attitudes to the publication of one's work. As an
2
illustration, I shall provide three examples from three distinctive productive periods.
The first concerns the literary production of the turn of the fifteenth century. The works of
Ivan Gučetić, the first Latin poet of the Renaissance Dubrovnik, remained unpublished and
shortly before death he himself burnt his love verses. Out of his voluminous production, Ilija
Crijević published only 4 epigrams and a prose epistle dedicated to Sigismund Đurđević.
Damjan Beneša followed their example. Ludovik Crijević Tuberon, 'Ragusan Sallust', did not
live to see the publishing of his historical work Commentaria de temporibus suis; yet he is
among the rare authors whose major work had been reissued four times by 1800, although not
on the autograph basis. Contrarily, Fran Lucijan Gundulić published the novelette Baptistinus,
his only extant work, Jakov Bunić had his two epics printed (1490, 1526), and Karlo Pucić
published his love cycle Elegiarum libellus de laudibus Gnesae puellae (1499).
The second period concerns the most prominent figures after 1737 or following the death of
the polyhistor Ignjat Đurđević. Although in the period 1728-1752 Serafin Crijević authored an
impressive number of prose works, he did not publish any of them during his lifetime, not
even his principal work Bibliotheca Ragusina, a bio-bibliographical lexicon of Dubrovnik
writers, which, apparently, he had prepared for print. Out of his voluminous poetic
production, Vice Petrović lived to see the publication of but one epigram: praise of the poetic
accomplishment of Baro Bettera. Unlike his heroic poems and epigrams, Ruđer Bošković's
contributions to mathematics, astronomy and natural philosophy were published almost
regularly. His carefully selected verses were published in a collection Arcadum carmina
(1756). Bošković was equally determined to see his epic De Solis ac Lunae defectibus edited
three times (London, Venice, Paris). This period also saw the publishing of the two epics of
Benedikt Stay, in which he describes the natural philosophy of Decartes, Newton and
Bošković. Rajmund Kunić hesitated with the publishing of his ample epigrammatic
production, but his selection of elegies was edited several times. From his early academic
years Bernard Zamagna, Kunić's student, showed great zeal in publishing and is thus an
exception among the Dubrovnik Latinists. In the period 1791-1803 Đuro Ferić published
regularly, only to abandon the practice, leaving behind great many unpublished works,
particularly the valuable collections of epigrams and translations of folk songs. Džono
Rastić's Carmina were published posthumously, while Marko Faustin Galjuf managed to
publish a representative selection of his works shortly before his death.
3
The third period covers the last years of the Ragusan Latinism.Vlaho Getaldić, among the last
devotees of the Latin Muse in Dubrovnik, published but a few of his occasional poems (18381842), an epistle to Paravia of Zadar (1842) and a Latin translation of Gundulić's Osman
(1865), having left behind a voluminous manuscript production.
What has become of the unpublished manuscripts? A small but valuable amount was
published in the printing houses of Dubrovnik and Zadar during the nineteenth century, then
in the editions of the Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts, in the journal Rad JAZU and
in the series Hrvatski latinisti, and finally in the anthology of Hrvatski latinisti, edited by
Veljko Gortan and Vladimir Vratović (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1969-1970). It is difficult to
establish how much of this production will never be restored. The bulk of the literary
production of the Ragusan Latinists remains dispersed in the libraries and archives of
Dubrovnik, Croatia and elsewhere in the world. This is a brief survey of the Dubrovnik
resources of the unpublished manuscript heritage of the Ragusan Latinists, not a systematic
list but rather an essay on the available infrastructure of the neo-Latin heritage in Dubrovnik:
on the resources, transcribers and printed catalogues.
Resources
The following Dubrovnik institutions house the manuscripts of the Ragusan Latinists:
Franciscan Archives;
Research Library;
Library of the Dominican friary;
State Archives;
The private collection of Ivo Bizzaro, housed at the Institute for Historical Sciences of
the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
The first three institutions are particularly rich in autographs: Franciscan Archives files the
autograph manuscripts of Damjan Beneša, Ignjat Đurđević, Vice Petrović, Serafin Crijević,
Sebastijan Slade, Rajmund Kunić, Rafo Radelja, Inocent Čulić and Vlaho Getaldić, Research
Library keeps the autographs of Damjan Beneša, Ignjat Đurđević, Vice Petrović, Rajmund
Kunić, and Đuro Ferić, and the Library of the Dominican Friary of Serafin Crijević.
Franciscan Archives surpasses all the others in size, as it houses more than 2100 manuscripts.
4
In the first and so far the only available volume of the manuscript catalogue published to date
(1952), Mijo Brlek has compiled 276 manuscript items, of which 39 contain the literary works
of the Dubrovnik Latinists. An evident imbalance between Latin on one side and Croatian and
Italian on the other is the result of the editor's aim to embrace in the first volume the entire
manuscript heritage in Croatian, even at the cost of the changes in catalogue numeration.
Appendix 1
The manuscripts of Dubrovnik Latinists in the Franciscan Archives:
Selected bibliography for nn. 300-2000
Vital Andrijašević
Viridiarium, n. 558.
Ivan Karlo Anđelić
Ad Admodum Illustrem Dominum Vincentium Petrovich, n. 792, 5 pp.
Ad Vincentium Petrovich ode, n. 1895, 4 ff.
In Principum Christianorum discordias, anno 1718, quod auget Othomanorum
imperium, ex libris Michaelis Milliscich, a Stulli Blasio, anno 1831 inventum, n. 761,
6 pp.
Vlaho Bolić
Carmina, n. 738, 51 pp.
Carmina, n. 1208, 22pp.
P. Bonifacius a Ragusio
Hymnorum ecclesiasticorum collectio, n. 364, cum notis, 17th c.
Baro Bošković
Carmina (edita et inedita), n. 1351, 96 pp.
Ilija Crijević
Carmina libris IX comprehensa, Agić’s manuscript ‘edition’, n. 409.
Serafin Crijević
5
Bibliotheca scriptorum Ragusinorum transcripta et redacta, 211 pp, n. 1407.
Historiae ecclesiasticae Rhacusinae epitome, n. 332, 986 ff.
Illustrium Ragusinorum scriptorum vitae, transcription from 1790, n. 1131, 210 ff.
Prolegomena in Sacram Metropolim Ragusinam, Caput V, n. 780, 19 pp.
Didak Pir
Elegiarum libri tres ad Dominicum Slatarichium, n. 410.
Sebastijan Dolci
De Epidaurensis et Ragusinae civitatis origine, autograph, n. 414.
Nonnulla poetica, n. 826, 32 pp.
Bernard Đurđević
Carmina varia, ex Codice Vaticano 6910, Radelja’s transcription, n. 1212.
Đuro Ferić
De laudibus Epidauri carmen, n. 1491, 56 pp.
Apophtegmata Erasmi latinis versibus explicata (1808), n. 931, 30 fascicles.
Vlaho Getaldić
Opera, autograph, nn. 1051-1067.
Lucubrationes poeticae, autograph, n. 1162. 1841.
Đuro Hidža
Elegiae ad varios, n. 1217.
Rajmund Kunić
Carmina, Radelja’s manuscript ‘edition’, n. 1156, 103 fascicles.
Elegiae, Radelja’s transcription, 20 elegias, n. 2055, 124 ff.
Ivan Lukarević
De cultu virginitatis, n. 1307, liber I.
De cultu virginitatis, n. 2095, liber II.
Infortunia .... carmen, n. 1855, 10 ff.
6
Fr. Michael Angelus de Ragusio
Disputatio in octo libros Aristotelis, nn. 544-545. Mediolani, 1620.
Vice Petrović
Epigrammatum liber I., autograph, n. 1190, 24 pp.
Carmina, autograph, n. 1511, 10 fascicles, 255 pp.
Nikola Pribisalić
Appendix ludi Corcyrensis, n. 1505, 39 pp.
Klement Ranjina
Commentaria in quatuor libros Sententiarum [1549], autograph, n. 595, 2 volumes.
Džono Rastić
Carmina, autograph, n. 846, 60 pp.
Benedikt Rogačić
Nonnulla carmina Benedicti Rogacci et Blasii Bolichii, n. 978, 69 pp.
Cvijeto Tvrdiša
Versi in varie lingue, n. 1621, 15 ff.Frano Volanti
Elegiarum et epigrammatum liber, n. 757, 38 pp. 1718.
Bernard Zamagna
Carmina, n. 315, 24 ff.
Nonnulla carmina minora inter quae varia autographa, n. 1520, 33 ff.
Ivan Luka Zuzorić
Antiquitates Graeciae, n. 894.
The Research Library in Dubrovnik, formerly Dubrovnik Library founded in 1941, houses
930 manuscripts, of which 127 contain the literary works of the Ragusan Latinists, from
Damjan Beneša to Ivan Stojanović, from the end of the fifteenth to the end of the nineteenth
7
century.
The manuscript collection of Luka Pavlović, housed at the State Archives of Dubrovnik,
comprises 12 volumes of the Ragusan Latin poetry, transcribed mostly by Pavlović and his
assistants. Besides the transcription of Agić's manuscript 'edition' of Ilija Crijević, the State
Archives files the works from Junije Palmotić and Stjepan Gradić to Đuro Hidža, and
particularly the minor poets from the seventeenth to the nineteenth century.
The private collection of Ivo Bizzaro contains 72 manuscripts. The works of the Dubrovnik
Latinists are to be found in 7 manuscripts within a time-span of about a century: from Vice
Petrović and Vlaho Bolić to Džono Rastić and Luko Stulli. Also filed here is Ivo Bizzaro's
short collection Carmina Latina, an autograph manuscript.
These resources in Dubrovnik should be appended by two manuscript collections in Zagreb:
that of the National and University Library (Nacionalna i sveučilišna knjižnica) and the
Archives of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts (Arhiv HAZU). Although in Zagreb,
these two collections represent 'Dubrovnik' resources sui generis. The manuscripts are
generally of the Ragusan provenance, as they reached Zagreb during the Croatian National
Revival, probably donated to the forerunners of the Croatian cultural scene in Zagreb or
transcribed from the Ragusan originals. They owe their current storage to the bequests of
Ljudevit Gaj and Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski, to mention only the two most significant
legacies.
Transcribers-editors in the nineteenth century: Agić, Radelja and Pavlović
At the turn of the eighteenth century Dubrovnik witnessed an interesting phenomenon:
transcribers-editors of the works of the Croatian Latinists, men who proved equally qualified
to transcribe and edit opera omnia of the most renowned Ragusan Latinists. Interestingly,
their laborious work was never crowned with a book. Viewed from the present-day
perspective, these transcribers appeared at the very last moment as far as the available
manuscripts were concerned. Only, the question remains whether the same result could
possibly be achieved today.
Three names stand out:
(1) franciscan Antun Agić (1753-1830);
8
(2) canon Rafo Radelja (? – 1831);
(3) don Luka Pavlović (1821-1887).
Agić and Radelja were contemporaries. The former edited Opera omnia of the two leading
Latinists from the turn of the fifteenth century Ilija Crijević (AMB, 409) and Damjan Beneša
(AMB, 256), along with a collection of eighteenth-century poetry (AMB, 244). Radelja
transcribed Carmina of Rajmund Kunić (AMB, 1156), together with the works of Ilija
Crijević (AMB, 195), Đuro Bašić (AMB, 204), Đuro Ferić (AMB, 179). Both of them
transcribed already published verse and of the same poet – Stjepan Gradić (AMB, 244; AMB,
184).
Luka Pavlović followed in their footsteps but went a step further, as he recopied what his
predecessors had already transcribed. Namely, he copied Agić's 'edition' of Ilija Crijević
(DAD, RO 283, 19) as well as Nonnulla carmina Junii Palmottae, Stephani Gradii et
Bernardi Georgii (DAD, RO 283, 35) from Agić's transcription, thus providing us with the
alternate solutions of Agić's editorial transcriptions. Additionally, he himself edited opera
omnia of Vice Petrović (DAD, RO 283, 24), approximately 11,500 lines, together with Đuro
Ferić's Carmina (DAD, RO 283, 18). Among Pavlović's valuable transcriptions one should
point to Vlaho Bolić's Carmina inedita (DAD, RO 283, 14), Đuro Bašić's Carmina (DAD,
RO 283, 14) and transcriptions of many minor poets of the nineteenth century. Pavlović has
thus saved from oblivion an epic Oeconomia by an unknown poet, a versified version of
Aristotle's work (DAD, RO 283, 14).
Appendix 2
The manuscripts of Dubrovnik Latinists in Luka Pavlović’s manuscript collection within the
State Archives of Dubrovnik:
Selected bibliography
Abbreviation: DAD, RO 283,
12 volumes; 26 collections; 21 poets.
12
Nonnulla epigrammata Georgii Antonii Hyggiae, ff. 336-347.
Carmina varia Domini Georgii Higgiae, pp. 1-57 of original pagination, ff. 361-389.
9
14
Blasii Bolich Rhacusini Societatis Jesu Carmina (inedita), pp. 35-112.
Carmina inedita Ioannis Caroli de Angelis Soc. Jesu (?), pp. 103-113.
Francisci Volanti Elegiarum, et Epigrammatum libri duo, pp. 1-26 of original pagination, pp.
115-140. 1718.
Didaci Arboscelli Civ. Rhacusini et Cancellarii Reipublicae Rhacusinae nonnulla Illyrica et
Latina carmina, pp. 1-17 of original pagination, pp. 193-209.
Carmina D. Georgii Bassich Soc. Jesu, pp. 287-297.
Appendix Ludi Corcyrensis D. Nicolai Pribissalich Presbiteri Rhacusini, pp. 311-345. 1770.
Varia carmina R. Florii Tvardiscia Ladestini, pp. 351-391. 1793.
Nonnulla carmina Bernardi Zamagnae Patricii Ragusini nondum typis edita, pp. 407-454.
Oeconomia ignoti Ragusini, pp. 551-607.
15
Carmina nonnullorum Rhacusinorum qui vixerunt saeculo XIX. Vol. I.
Carmina varia D. Raphaelis Radeglia Canonici Ragusini, pp. 105-127.
Luca Stulli, Collezione di varie poesie Latine ed Italiane, pp. 201-228.
Poesie del Sig. Antonio di Pietro Liepopilli, pp. 293-357.
18
Carmina D. Georgii Ferrich Ragusini, pp. 9-277.
Petar Frano Aletin, Carmina, pp. 349-372.
19
Aelii Lampridii Cervini carmina libris IX comprehensa, pp. 1-520, on pp. 147-520 transcribed
by Luka Pavlović. Transcription of Agić’s manuscript ‘edition’ of Ilija Crijević’s Carmina.
»Index« (of incipits), pp. 511-520.
»Notae ad carmina Aelii Lampridii Cervini«, pp. 1-66.
22
Ignatius Georgius Abbas Melitensis, Augustissimo Caesari Carolo Austriaco hujus nominis
sexto ... Epinicium, ff. 282-303. Notae, ff. 306-311.
24
10
Collectio carminum Vincentii Petrovich Ragusini, ff. 1-223.
35
Nonnulla carmina Junii Palmottae, Stephani Gradii, et Bernardi Giorgii.
Carmina Bernardi Giorgii, 129-141. 1675.
36
Raccolta di Poetici Componimenti in Lingue diverse; opera di Marco Bruere Desrivaux
Francese. MM. SS. ex autografo.
Marci Bruere Desrivaux nonnulla Latina carmina, pp. 49-82.
40
B.[lasius] S.[tulli], Memoriae nonnullorum Rhacusinorum et Exterorum doctrina et virtute
praestantium, ff. 3-65.
41
Poetici componimenti in Italiano, Slavo, e Latino di Marco Bruere Desrivaux Francese.
Poesie Latine-Italiane del medesimo, pp. 61-68.
Latina carmina Marci Bruere Desrivaux, pp. 119-143.
68
[Raymundi Cunichii Epigrammata] Encomiastica, ff. 1-272, 1191 epigrams. Radelja’s
transcription.
Apart from these major three transcribers, equally valuable was the work of Frano Stay,
Vijeko Grmoljez, Baldovin Bizar, Stjepan Marija Tomašević, Marko Marinović and many
others.
Printed manuscript catalogues
The here submitted list of the printed catalogues clearly testifies to the Herculean and timeconsuming task of cataloging:
11
Catalogo della Biblioteca del P. Innocenzo Ciulich detto P. Sordo nella Libreria de’ RR. PP.
Francescani di Ragusa redatto da Giovanni Augusto Dr. Casnacich. (Zadar, 1860).
Catalogo dei libri rari, manoscritti e membranacei, appartenenti alla biblioteca relitta da
Don Luka Pavlović (Ragusa: Alle spese della massa ereditaria, 1889).
Petar M. Kolendić, »Rukopisi gimnazijske biblioteke u Dubrovniku«, Srđ 6 (1907), pp. 991997, 1041-1048.
Mijo Brlek, Rukopisi knjižnice Male braće u Dubrovniku, knj. I. (Zagreb: JAZU, 1952).
Miroslav Pantić, »Rukopisi negdašnje biblioteke Bizaro u Historijskom institutu u
Dubrovniku«, Anali Historijskog instituta u Dubrovniku 8-9 (1962), pp. 557-596.
»Cunichiana u Arhivu Male braće u Dubrovniku«, u: Jozo Sopta, »Književna ostavština
Rajmunda Kunića SJ (1719-1794) u Arhivu Male braće u Dubrovniku«,
Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Dubrovniku (1996), pp. 9-29, na pp. 14-28.
»Kazalo rukopisnog zbornika Collectio Carminum Poetarum Rhacusinorum iz knjižnice
Stulli«, u: Ivica Martinović, »Poezija Rajmunda Kunića u rukopisnom zborniku hrvatskih
latinista iz knjižnice braće Stulli«, Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Dubrovniku
(1996), pp. 49-71, na pp. 63-68.
[Stjepan Kastropil - Matija Bete], Rukopisi Znanstvene knjižnice Dubrovnik: Knjiga II.
Rukopisi na stranim jezicima (Dubrovnik: Dubrovačke knjižnice, 1997).
The road to a 'reliable description', to quote Darko Novaković, is even harder. Thus creating a
data base of the entire manuscript heritage is a much-needed priority and an initiative that
should be applauded.
Conclusion
The fact that the bulk of the Ragusan manuscript heritage in Latin is still housed in the
12
libraries and archives of Dubrovnik may be accounted by by looking at a wider social context:
Many Dubrovnik Latinists produced outside Dubrovnik. Given that they published irregularly
and in less accessible editions, it was through manuscript copies that the work of these writers
could have been read and appreciated in their native city. Such is the case of the manuscript
heritage of Stjepan Gradić in the Dubrovnik resources. As he died while holding the keeper's
post of the Vatican Library, all of his works are housed in this famous institution.
Some prominent Latinists, such as Bošković and Kunić, were determined to see their
manuscript heritage housed in Dubrovnik. Sold at auction by his successors, Bošković's
manuscripts found their way to the Bancroft Library at Berkeley (USA, CA), where they are
still kept, while Kunić's works are mostly to be found in the Franciscan Archives in
Dubrovnik.
There were Latinists, poetae minores in particular, whose literary output was limited to
Dubrovnik, but since neither the city nor the Republic had a printing press, were unable to
publish them. It was not until 1783 that the Ragusan patrician government allowed the
opening of the first printing house. Even then, rare were the writers who decided to publish
their complete works or in continuation.
The period after 1700 was marked by a succession of qualified transcribers of the manuscript
heritage from autographs or good copies. The emergence of three transcribers-editors in the
nineteenth century deserves special credit. With utmost excellence have Antun Agić, Rafo
Radelja and Luka Pavlović copied and edited opera omnia of some of the most renowned
Dubrovnik Latinists - Ilija Crijević, Damjan Beneša, Vice Petrović and Rajmund Kunić –
having saved dozens of unpublished Latin poets from oblivion.
Today, eight Dubrovnik institutions house the Latin manuscripts of the Ragusan authors. In
the catalogues printed between 1952 and 1997, only 217 manuscripts with the literary works
of the Dubrovnik Latinists have been described. Thus the cataloging of the manuscript
heritage of the Croatian Latinists is a priority beyond dispute. This particularly concerns the
Franciscan Archives, the major resource of Latin manuscripts in Dubrovnik.
13
Darko Novaković, Zagreb
CROATIAN NEO-LATIN EPIC POETRY
There are several reasons why I decided to speak on the Croatian Neo-Latin epic poetry on
this occasion. Firstly, the epic was a highly praised genre in the Antique and has fully retained
its exalted status in the humanistic period. We should not forget that Petrarca believed that he
will be remembered primarily for his Africa and not for his more modest Latin compositions
and even less for his vernacular verse. Secondly, the Croatian Neo-Latin epic poetry has by
and large been preserved as ‘manuscript heritage’, the very title of our present gathering.
Many of our epics have only survived in manuscript form and saw printed publication only
during the XIXth and XXth centuries, some remain still unpublished. I have been further
guided by the location of our symposium. Dubrovnik acquired the first printing works only in
the late XVIIIth century, yet in such pre-Gutenberg conditions the literary life of the Republic
remained vibrant throughout; not only were the manuscripts carefully preserved but, as
catalogues of various Ragusan libraries attest, scarcer published works were regularly copied
in manuscript. Finally and unlike some other humanistic genres such as elegy, epigram or
oratory, the Neo-Latin epic poetry appeared for the first time on the Croatian soil in this very
town and for some four centuries remained intrinsically linked with Dubrovnik.
1.
According to present day knowledge, the first epic poem of our literature, both Latin and
vernacular, is ‘The Capture of Cerberus’ (De raptu Cerberi, c.1490) by the Ragusan JAKOV
BUNIĆ (1469-1534). This work was published some thirty, or at worst around twenty years
before Marulić’s ‘Judith’; it should be noted that Marulić owned a copy in his library. The
poem of 1006 hexameters is evenly arranged in three books and each book is named after one
of the Three Graces. The story deals with the mythical descent of Hercules to the Underworld,
where the most famous ancient hero meets captured lover Hylas, overcomes the three-headed
dog Cerberus and after contest with Dis, the god of the Underworld, frees Theseus. Clearly
Bunić did not intend a simple rendition of a pagan myth in verse form but sought an
14
allegorical interpretation which equates the labour of Hercules with the labour of Jesus.
Hercules, the conqueror of the evil Underworld forces, is the prefiguration of Christ the
Conqueror of Hell.
In the chronology of the genre, the next poem by IVAN POLIKARP SEVERITAN (1472- ?1526)
from Šibenik, parallels Bunić by its size and division into three books. His ‘Song of
Jerusalem’ (Solimais) was printed in Rome in 1509, but according to poet’s own admission
written before 1497. The narrative is based on the opening chapters of Genesis (1-3, 6-9,
dealing with the Creation, Adam and Eve, the Original Sin and the Great Flood) and the
second chapter of Matthew’s Gospel (dealing with the Adoration of the Magi). Unlike Bunić's
epic, in The Solimaid the allegory is no longer necessary to illustrate clearly Christian
dimension of the work. It is important to note Polikarp’s desire to reconcile the Old and New
Testament in the narrative argument; three repeated proemia are used for this purpose.
The attributes of The Solimaid should also be borne in mind when considering The Davidiad
(Davidias) by MARKO MARULIĆ (1450-1524), by far the most important epic of the Croatian
Humanism and a poem of major international significance whose recognition alas had been
postponed by some four and a half centuries. This epic presumably composed in the second
decade of the XVIth century, was published for the first time in 1954, 430 years after poet’s
death. Fourteen cantos narrating the story of David, son of Jesse, and his rise to the throne are
related to its genre predecessors by several obvious associations: Marulić shares Polikarp’s
primary objective to highlight the unity of the Old and New Testament and like him employs
three proemia in his narrative. In The Davidiad much like Bunić, Marulić uses the figure of
Christ as his principal character but resorts unequivocally to allegory: the reader is directed to
the addendum Tropologica Davidiadis expositio which correlates not only the Old Testament
figures but also their actions with New Testament values.
In the summer of 1522 Polikarp published in Venice in the space of few days two epic poems:
second edition of The Solimaid and The Feretreid (Feretreis), an epic dedicated to
Guidobaldo II, nine year old son of his patron the Duke of Urbino, Francesco Maria da
Montefeltro della Rovere. It is 150 verses shorter than The Solimaid (829 : 979) and an
entirely secular work celebrating the family history of both branches of the House of Urbino,
da Montefeltro (hence the title) and della Rovere, from the earliest times to the present.
15
Another Croat who managed to publish two epic poems in his lifetime is Jakov Bunić. In
1526 his voluminous ‘Life and Works of Jesus Christ’ (De vita et gestis Christi) of over
10000 hexameters was printed in Rome. Based on all four Gospels but mainly on Matthew,
Bunić used linear narrative in sixteen cantos. The first part consisting of nine books deals with
the Birth, Childhood and Youth of Jesus, the second part in books 10 to 16 starts with His
Disputation with the Pharisees and ends with the Passion and Resurrection. This imbalance is
intentional and corresponds to a complex symbolic numerical program clearly of singular
interest to the author. The first part is divided into three Hierarchiae of three cantos each and
each hierarchia is dedicated to one aspect of the Holy Trinity, the first to God the Father,
second to the Son and third to the Holy Ghost. In addition to such triadic structure each canto
is also entitled after one of the nine angelic choruses (Chori: 1. Seraphin, 2. Cherubin, 3.
Throni, 4. Dominationes, 5. Principatus, 6. Potestates, 7. Virtutes, 8. Archangeli, 9. Angeli).
Final seven cantos are also given names after the Gifts of the Holy Ghost (1. Timor, 2. Pietas,
3. Scientia, 4. Fortitudo, 5. Consilium, 6. Intellectus, 7. Sapientia). The narrative is
interrupted by various insertions: at the end of each Hierarchiae are dedicatory poems in
Sapphic strophes to each of the personifications of the Holy Trinity, in the second part first
four cantos end by the dedication to Virgin Mary and the remaining three again to the Holy
Trinity. Therefore the epic formally ends with the dedication to the Holy Ghost.
Nullus adhuc cecinit tam clare dogmata Christi/ carmine grandiloquo, quam fecerit ipse
Iacobus / Illyriae splendor, Racusaeae Gloria gentis – triumphantly wrote in his epigram ad
lectorem one of Bunić's predecessors, Ivan Polikarp Severitan. Neither such praise nor the
intervening issue of Girolamo Vida's ‘Christiad’ (Christias) discouraged another Ragusan
patrician DAMJAN BENEŠIĆ from undertaking a similar task. His colossal epic poem ‘The
Death of Christ’ (De morte Christi) in 8300 verses remains in manuscript form until present
day. As another participant in this symposium and the editor of the first critical edition of this
work, is scheduled to speak later, it suffices to say that Benešić's epic closes the period of
monumental humanist epic poetry in Croatian Neo-Latin literature. The decades which follow
are characterised by the narrowing of epic vision and by shorter works, albeit not necessarily
by lesser aesthetic quality.
Some reasons for the change were strictly of literary nature. The competition between
hexameter and elegiac distich is present in narrative poetry throughout the humanistic period;
in somewhat simplified terms it is the rivalry between Virgil and Ovid. The Ragusan ILIJA
16
CRIJEVIĆ (1463-1520), one of the leading poets of the Croatian Humanism and also one of the
foremost Croatian Latinists of all time, wrote ironically in the preface to his jocular elegy: nec
cuiusque ingenii est fingere, unde poetae nomen est. Nos non epici, sed opici sumus, sine
Venere, sale et gratiis (Carm. 7,23, praef.). Nevertheless he wrote epic poetry, albeit in a
modified form. His literary bequest contains an unfinished epyllium on local history ‘On
Ragusa’ (De Epidauro) which tells the story of the destruction of the ancient city of Epidaurus
(present day Cavtat) and of the flight of its inhabitants to the safety of neighbouring nascent
Ragusa. Ideological background to this story is the venerable and ancient origin of the city of
Ragusa: Barbara Romanis urbs est formata colonis, / Quam ueteres dicunt Epidaurum
(Carm. 7,3,87-88). He evidently also has in mind the Ragusan patrician families, which are
mentioned in the vaticinium ex eventu by the Almighty (vv. 400-412).
The same characteristic humanist desire to unearth ancient origins of the home towns is
evident in somewhat later work on the nearby township entitled ‘The Description of the City
of Cattaro’ (Descriptio Ascriviensis urbis) by IVAN BONA-BOLICA (c.1520-1572). Apparently,
Cattaro (Ascrivium) was founded by the ancient Greeks from Ascra in Beotia who, following
the death of their famous fellow citizen the poet Hesiod, decided to move en bloc to new
shores: postquam fata impia Vatem / Ascraeum rapuere suum, tum protinus omnes /
Deseruisse domos, atque execrasse Penates (vv. 321-323).
Thematically, between the great epics dominated by the hero figure and the epyllia
celebrating home townships, stands the hagiographical epic celebrating local patron saint.
Such is the unfinished epyllium on the Ragusan patron saint St. Blaise (Divus Blasius
Rhacusanus) written by the Portuguese Jew DIEGO PIRES (DIDACUS PYRRHUS, 1517-1599)
who found refuge from persecution and spent around a half of his long life in Ragusa.
Chronologically close is also ‘The Life of Blessed John, Bishop of Trogir’ (Vita beati Ioannis,
episcopi Traguriensis) written by SEBASTIJAN MLADINIĆ (1561?-1621?) from the island of
Brač, first published in error under another name at the beginning of the XIXth century.
2.
Although caution is always advisable when apportioning literary periods to specific centuries,
there are many reasons which justify the assertion that the end of Croatian Humanist NeoLatin literature coincided with the end of the XVIth century. Post-Tridentine Counter
Reformation acquired new characteristics with the arrival of Jesuits to Croatia and by
17
subsequent opening of their schools (Zagreb, 1607; Rijeka, 1627; Varaždin, 1628; Dubrovnik,
1658; Požega, 1698). The Jesuit Ratio studiorum, (1599), with Latin language at the centre of
instruction, dominated not only the linguistic and literary skills of future Latinists but also
their literary tastes and genre affinities.
In the XVIIth century grammatical and stylistic standard of Latin writing improved markedly,
accompanied however by notable reduction in thematic range. It is well known that one of the
results of the Counter Reformation is the stimulation of writing in the vernacular; therefore
this is the time when Croatian language began to replace Latin. The tendency is particularly
clear in this very city. Croatian epic writing in Ragusa is barely worth a mention in the XVIth
century; in the XVIIth not only is epic poetry written in Croatian language but seminal works
of foreign Neo-Latin epic poets are translated (e.g., Paskoje Primović: Sannazaro’s De partu
Virginis, Junije Palmotić: Vida’s Christias).
Generally speaking the entire Neo-Latin poetry of the XVIIth century is of devotional nature
and its conventional genre and stylistic characteristics are less evident under the influence of
this dominant attribute. Therefore it is not surprising that religious themes dominate the
XVIIth century epic poetry. Moral and philosophical epic poem Euthymia sive de
tranquillitate animi, written by the Ragusan Jesuit BENEDIKT ROGAČIĆ (1646-1719) and
advocating the path toward and subsequent maintenance of inner peace as the pinnacle of
happiness, is strongly didactical in nature, thus heralding the change in the genre. It was
clearly a success, a second edition followed within five years of the publication.
The study of the colossal opus of KAJETAN VIČIĆ from Fiume (? – before 1700) has begun
only recently; until the year 2000 he was not even mentioned in any history of the national
literature, which is rather surprising as he is the author of the longest Croatian Neo-Latin epic
poem ‘The Jesseid’ (Iesseis), in twelve cantos and more than 13500 verses, printed
posthumously in Prague in 1700. This epic narrates the story of the Virgin Mary, a subject
matter requiring on part of the reader thorough theological education and a familiarity with
canonical and apocryphal texts. He is also the author of another shorter epic ‘The Thieneid’
(Thieneis, 1686) dedicated to St. Caietanus, the patron saint of the Theatine Order of which
Vičić was a member.
A move towards international hagiographical themes is also manifested in the epyllium on the
18
famous penitent St. Marguerite of Cortona (Sanctae Margaritae Cortonensis admirabilis ad
paenitentiam pietatemque conversio) written by IGNJAT ĐURĐEVIĆ (1675-1737). This work
remains in manuscript form only and has not been hitherto listed in any survey of author’s
works; hopefully a critical edition is due shortly.
3.
The didactic epic poetry is prevalent in the ‘Enlightened’ XVIIIth century, which is also
characterised by the appearance of major epic translations. The famous astronomer RUĐER
BOŠKOVIĆ (1711-1787) is the author of the epic ‘On Solar and Lunar Eclipses’ (De Solis ac
Lunae defectibus, 1760) on Newtonian astronomy and optics which he wrote for some 25
years albeit with interruptions. He was also the principal adviser to a Ragusan priest,
BENEDIKT STAY (1714-1801), a Latinist in service of several popes (Clement XIII, Clement
XIV, Pius VI). Whilst still in Ragusa, Stay, aged 30, wrote the didactic epic Philosophiae …
versibus traditae libri sex on Descartes’ natural philosophy and ethics, published in 1744 on
the centenary of the publication of Descartes’s own Principia philosophiae. This work
contains some 10200 verses; the author added another thousand at a later date. Persuaded by
his brother Christian and by Bošković he also rendered into verse Newton's theory
Philosophiae recentoris versibus traditae libri decem, a work of impressive length in more
than 24000 hexameteres, augmented further by Bosković's notes and numerous digressions in
prose form. Nearly forty years elapsed between the publication of the first and last volume of
this impressive task (1755-1792).
Anachronic vitality of the Croatian Latinism on the eve of the French Revolution is attested
by several Ragusan epic poets. RAJMUND KUNIĆ (1719-1794), Jesuit professor of rhetoric and
a prolific epigrammatist, achieved international fame as the translator from classical Greek;
his Latin version of Homer’s ‘Illiad’ (Homeri Ilias Latinis versibus expressa, 1776) was widely
considered the best to date and this edition was used by Vincenzo Monti for his influential
Italian translation. His pupil and fellow Jesuit, BERNARD DŽAMANJIĆ (ZAMANJA) (1735-1820)
continued in his teacher’s footsteps and crowned his own efforts by the translation of The
Odyssey (Homeri Odyssea Latinis versibus expressa, 1777). In his varied opus two didactic
epic poems can be highlighted, ‘The Echo’ (Echo, 1764) dealing with acoustic,
meteorological and astronomic phenomena and ‘The Airship’ (Navis aeria, 1768) on the
flying machine supported by four hot air balloons.
19
4.
Contrary to the impression given by surveys of Croatian literary history, the Neo-Latin
writing continued in the XIXth century, well beyond the symbolic year of 1847 when Latin
ceased to be the official language of the Croatian Parliament. It comprised largely of
occasional dedicatory verse and shorter works, although there are notable exceptions. One of
these is ‘The Diocliad’ (Dioclias), an epic in three books written by JOSIP ČOBARNIĆ from
Makarska (1790-1852) and published posthumously in 1881, which takes for its subject the
Salonitan martyrs from the time of Emperor Diocletian. Two further Čobarnić's epyllia
Ecclesia Salonitana and Ecclesia Jadertina deal with local ecclesiastical history and his
hexametric poem (carmen) revisits the suffering of the Salonitan martyrs (Martyres
Salonitani).
When speaking about Croatian Neo-Latin Literature in the XIXth century and on heritage
regrettably confined to manuscripts only, the opus of one author stands out. We shall seek in
vain for the works of VLAHO GETALDIĆ (1788-1872) in the surveys of Croatian literary
history. Regardless of his enormous contribution as a writer and translator, it is his misfortune
that he wrote in the wrong languages, Italian and Latin, at the wrong time: on the eve, during
and even after the period of the reawakening of Croatian national consciousness, better known
as the National Revival. He published relatively little in his lifetime, mainly dedicatory verse
on the occasion of royal visits, namedays, marriages, episcopal consecrations and even an
address given at the foundation of district agricultural society in Zadar. In the main his oeuvre
remains in the manuscript form held here in Dubrovnik, mostly in the Franciscan Library and
the rest in the Scientific Library. It amounts to some twenty sizeable volumes or, to use a
modern benchmark, in the electronic format it would hardly fit on a single DVD.
Remarkably, by far the longest work published in his lifetime is his rendering into Latin of
Gundulić's epic Osman printed in Venice in 1865 (Osmanides). Our local participants will
need no reminder, but for the benefit of our foreign friends, it should be stated that Osman is
the seminal work of Croatian literature, an epic composed probably in the third decade of the
XVIIth century which (incidentally) also remained in the manuscript form for some two
hundred years. For Croatian political and cultural reformers in the early years of the XIX th
century Osman was something of a cult, a literary work dealing with the struggle against
foreign domination and the affirmation of the sense of belonging to a broad Slavic tradition
and to Christian community in general. The symbolic significance of this poem can be seen in
20
the fact that author of the Croatian national anthem, Antun Mihanović wrote a bilingual
Croat-Latin pamphlet seeking public subscriptions for its first publication in 1818.
At first glance it seems somewhat paradoxical that Getaldić decided to translate from Croatian
to Latin a poem which by his time was acknowledged as one of the key elements in the
revival of Croatian national consciousness. His motives can be seen in two prefaces to the
work: Nuncupatio and Ratio operis. The first one is in fact a dedication of his labour to the
city of Dubrovnik, full of praise for his home town but at the same time an assertion that his
rendition is also his ‘life’s work’ (extremus laborum meorum fructus). The second more
conventional preface states that he was led by two motives: firstly by the wish to introduce
Gundulić's ‘celebrated work’ to educated European public for which - despite long vernacular
tradition – Latin is still (in 1865!) a prestigious and universal language (communis hominum
conciliatrix, doctrinae vinculum); secondly he is generally encouraged by the example of
unnamed famous Ragusan fellow translators. It is not difficult to presume that he mainly
refers to Kunić, Džamanjić and possibly Ferić. Indeed he names two translators of this epic
from earlier generations; Džamanjić, whose translated fragment of thirty Latin verses he
included without changes in his own work (5, 14-43) and Faustin Galjuf, who undertook some
preparatory work for the translation of Osman into Latin. With such dual motive and
following a passage from Appendini’s Notizie istorico-critiche sulle antichità, storia e
letteratura
dei Ragusei, Getaldić queried the epic attributes of Gundulić's poem but
concluded that regardless of certain unusual characteristics it clearly belongs to the epic
genre. Therefore he resolved to base his own rendition on Virgil, whom he explicitly calls his
mentor and teacher (ducem et magistrum habui summum Maronem). He did not hesitate to
revert to Virgil’s original ‘parts of the text which Gundulić took from Virgil verbatim’. Of
course we recognise today that in 1865, despite Getaldić's fervent hope, Latin was no longer
the universal European language and even less so the language of European poetry. If and
when the Latin verse was written, it was the Franciscae meae laudes and not the epic
hexameter.
5.
In the conclusion let me remind you of a curious coincidence. The basic handbook of Neo–
Latin literature by the late Professor Josef IJsewein and Dirk Sacré opens its part on poetry
with the survey of the epic. At the very beginning of the chapter it states that Latin epic poetry
effectively ceased to exist in the middle of the XXth century:
21
At the final decline of Latin, after World War II, an Italian diplomat, Ippolito Galante, used
Sanskrit traditions to write his Saniucta (Rome, 1957) which probably will remain for ever the
last epic poem written in Latin. (Companion to Neo-Latin Studies, Part II, Leuven 1998).
Coincidentally and in that very year, another enthusiast, a priest from Split IVAN BAKOVIĆ,
rendered into Latin hexameters and published his translation of another seminal epic of
Croatian XIXth century literature, Mažuranić's The Death of Smail-aga Čengić (Mors Smailaga Čengić, 1957). With the exception of a short polemic review by Veljko Gortan in Živa
antika (VIII, 2), his effort received little public recognition. Today it seems that his work is
not held even by the largest libraries in Croatia; moreover, he is often confused in their
electronic databases with the eponymous and prolific author of business correspondence
manuals.
Much as is the case with Getaldić, this sad and undeserved neglect is a suitable topic for
another discourse on another occasion. In today’s conclusion it suffices to note that Neo-Latin
Calliope came to rest in the same area where she first appeared, on the Adriatic shores.
22
Irena Bratičević, Zagreb
LATIN OCCASIONAL POETRY IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY
DUBROVNIK
During his visit to Dubrovnik in 1839 Nikola Tommaseo, an Italian writer of Croatian
descent, recorded the following words: “Dubrovnik may be the only city where three different
languages are cultivated at one and the same time: the Italian spoken here is purer than in
many Italian cities, in Croatian they created a literature of their own, and their Latin writers
are more famous than all the Latin writers of Italy put together.” In the eighteenth and the first
half of the nineteenth century the Latin language gradually lost its position as the dominant
medium of European scientific thinking and artistic expression. However, in Dubrovnik,
thanks to its rich literary traditions – in all the three languages that Tommaseo mentions –
influenced by the trends in the West, especially in Italy, Latin verse continued to be written
and Latinists living in Italy became renowned for their many literary and scientific
contributions. A few examples will suffice: the polymath Ruđer Bošković, considered in his
lifetime one of the greatest men of science, produced a rich body of Latin poetry; Benedikt
Stay was honoured with the name “Second Lucretius” once he rehearsed Descartes’ and
Newton’s philosophy in hexameters; Rajmund Kunić, a long-time Professor of Rhetoric at
Collegium Romanum and an accomplished epigrammatist, gave us the best translation of
Homer’s Iliad into Latin; Bernard Zamanja, another Jesuit, was an esteemed translator of
The Odyssey and of Greek bucolic poets into Latin; Marko Faustin Galjuf was considered
the most accomplished improviser in the Europe of his time, while Džono Rastić represents a
prominent figure among those numerous poets who lived and worked in Dubrovnik –
especially because of his satires in which he ridiculed contemporary fashions and spoke in
favour of traditional values. Literature written in Latin from the fifteenth century went
through several phases: from its humanist beginnings and its later revival in the 18th century –
which we owe mainly to the four Latinists in Rome – was continued in the 19th century along
the lines of Neo-classicist poetics. Latin poetry written in the 19th century co-existed with
23
verse written in Italian and Croatian and was predominantly occasional, stimulated by the
wealth of social and historical events in the first half of the century. After the fall of the
Dubrovnik Republic in 1806, the decade that ensued saw the French authorities go and the
Austrian authorities arrive. It was in this context that individual poems or collections of
poems commemorated what were perceived as important events, for instance the arrival of
new governors or the visits of emperors, birthdays and feasts, weddings and funerals, births
and deaths, illnesses and healings, victories and defeats in war, masses and sermons,
inaugurations of bishops, launching of vessels and eclipses, book publications and
acquisitions of new type for the printing press. Even a cursory inspection of the catalogue of
manuscripts held in the Scientific Library and in the Library of Friar Minors – if we focus for
the moment on the two richest libraries in terms of Latin literature written in Dubrovnik –
shows that more than three hundred and sixty catalogued manuscripts contain occasional
verse written in Latin in the 19th century. In addition to this – although the interest of this
conference is in the manuscript tradition – the full picture of the extent of occasional Latin
verse can only be gained if we include the printed texts, especially because it was at the
beginning of the 19th century that a successful printing house finally established itself. Until
1848 occasional Latin poems written in Dubrovnik were printed in one hundred and twenty
editions (most often in multilingual collections, but also separately). There were more than
fifty poets who wrote occasional verse (in Latin or in Latin and some other language). The
number of the occasional poems, on the other hand, seems hard to estimate at all: they are
innumerable.
It is clear that the art of writing occasional verse was already taught in Dubrovnik at school
level. This is attested to by the various records concerning teaching practice which can also be
found in the libraries I mentioned. Important events were celebrated by organizing literary
academies where students composed verse under the guidance of their teachers of rhetoric.
The occasions were different and could range from the death of Maria d’Este, wife of
Emperor Francis I, in 1816, the inauguration of bishop Antonio Guiriceo in 1831, or the visit
of the governor of Dalmatia, Wenzel Lilienberg, in 1833. After the opening speech students
recited their poems – not so many Croatian ones, but mostly Italian and Latin: carmina,
elegies, epigrams, eclogues, odes, iambics and endecasillaba. At the end they would perform a
cantata in order to show their skill in singing and playing musical instruments. The list I just
gave represents in fact the range of different poetic forms in which the occasional Latin verse
of Dubrovnik was composed. These are usually short forms, suitable to the length of the
24
occasion. This is always true of occasional poetry: the occasion requires an immediate
response within rather a short time. Most frequently we encounter elegies and epigrams,
carmina in hexameters and odes in Alcaic and Saphhic stanzas are less numerous, while one
of the eclogues I found did not lend itself to easy deciphering. It was composed in 1835 in
order to mark the death of dean Milković.
The period of French rule offers many examples of flattering verse dedicated to Marmont –
graced with the title duc du Raguse – as well as to his generals and governors (Lauriston,
Molitor, Garagnin). One could single out the epigram written by Bernard Zamanja (17351820) in 1810 which serves to celebrate an important social event, “probably the most
important project the French authorities carried out in Dubrovnik: the road from Pile to Gruž,
which entirely transformed the relations between the city and its western suburbs” (Vuković:
42). Ever since Statius’ collection Silvae, Latin poetry has been written to describe
outstanding works of art and architecture or to praise those under whose power they were
made. In line with this, the epigram I mentioned represents a panegyric to Marmont, who
furnished the city with a useful novelty, and to Napoleon, who is praised for the wise choice
in his generals.
De via ab urbe Gravosium usque jussu ducis Marmontis strata
Pervia quae fueram capris, nunc apta vehendis
Marmonidae cura sum via facta rotis:
NAPOLEO sic namque Duces legit, omnis ab illi
Ut decor, et vitae floreat utilitas.
It is obvious straight away that the speaker of this epigram is the road itself, speaking in the
first person, the same situation that we find in Propertius (Elegy 1,16) where the door (ianua)
similarly describes its own state by means of the opposition quam fueram – nunc. One of the
material objects taking over the function of the real speaker has been – since the time of the
Palatine Anthology (7,82) – the grave, tumulus. Such epigrams are also to be found in the
corpus I studied, written in Greek as one of the poets, Niko Andrović (1798-1857), composed
verse in the Greek language as well. His funeral epigram dedicated to Tomo Chersa is
conceived as a dialogue between a traveller and a grave. The plate shows another example of
his Greek compositions, taken from the 1826 collection of marriage poems in which
25
Dubrovnik poets lavished conventional good wishes and praise on the otherwise hated
Russian consul Jeremija Gagić (a Serb) on the occasion of his marriage to Eustahija Lučić
from Dubrovnik. Andrović’s fellows in verse translated his Greek text into Latin, Croatian,
Italian and French, the latter being the speciality of Anđelo Maslać (1772-1838), a
Dominican friar who celebrated Francis I with the same fervour with which he had adored
Napoleon and switched from French to German accordingly.
The collection in honour of Jeremija Gagić was furnished with a motto or an epigraph at the
beginning, actually a quotation from Catullus’s poem number 64, an epyllion about the
wedding feast of Peleus and Thetis. The lines of the epigraph (Quare agite optatos animi
coniungite amores! Accipiat coniunx felici foedere diuam, dedatur cupido iam dudum nupta
marito. (64, 372-374)) stress the main intention of the collection (expression of good wishes
for the marriage and praise of the bride and groom), but they also serve to invoke the high
literary status of the occasional poem through a direct allusion to the authority of Catullus.
The collection further quotes its ancient model and then proceeds to establish the connection
in meaning and tone between itself and the collection of 1815, in which the annexation of
Dubrovnik to Austria is celebrated through the use of Horace (Odae 5,3) and the new ruler,
Francis I, is proclaimed to be Jupiter and divine Augustus. The expert versifier Antun Chersa
(1779-1838), capable of writing acrostic Latin verse (for instance: Franciscus Caesar;
Franciscus Augustus valeat), on this occasion composed a Prosopopeia in which the city of
Dubrovnik is given the human attribute of speech. The poem consists of ninety four
hexameters organized into only six sentences, of which the first sentence – where Ragusa
remembers the happy days of its liberty, peace and fame especially in diplomacy and culture
and then bewails the trouble caused by the French rule while celebrating the Austrian emperor
and the new, happy age he has ushered in – takes up more than fifty lines.
Prosopopaeia Rhacusae ad Caesarem Antonii Chersa
inter Arcades Salimbi Megaridis. Carmen.
Quae quondam fatis longe felicibus usa
Jure meo et propria gentem ditione regebam
Virtute insignem, summa et pietate, fideque
Spectatam late et fama, non extera jussa,
Non sortem adversam perpessa, nec arma, nec ignes,
5
26
Nec saevas bellantum iras, vultusque minaces;
Gratabarque mihi, quae longa in pace fruebar
Omnigenis secura bonis, totoque petitis
Orbe opibus (tanta est nostrae sollertia gentis),
Ingeniorum altrix nullius laudis egena,
10
Non Phoebo, doctis non atque ignota Camoenis;
Quodque omnes aequo reges venerabar honore,
Quodque Deos omni cultu, votisque colebam,
Regibus et fueram, Divis gratissima et ipsis:
Quae mox, martigena Gallo mea scripta tenente,
15
Indomitos cui nempe animos in corde gerenti
Addiderat vires concepta in pectore dudum
Spes, fore, ut Europae regnis sceptrisque potitus
Post orbi sua jura daret legesque subacto;
Quem Belga interea, Batavusque et Gallia forti
20
Felix prole virum, tellus atque Itala Regem
Rite salutarat, Germanae et maxima pubis
Pars meliorque opibus, belloque et pace potentes
Helvetii assuerant rerum appellare Patronum;
Fracta animis, discerpta odiis, subituraque triste
25
Excidium, fleram longum, noctesque diesque
Indulgens lacrimis, ingenti et victa dolore,
Seu mea, flos gentis, raperetur in arma juventus
Instructura rates nautis ad bella paratos;
Sive, meis impar fortunis, grande juberer
30
Pendere vectigal, quod vel vix pendere possit
Dives opum divesque agris terrasque per omnes
Exercens late propriis commercia fatis
Una vel Europae gens altera; sive viderem
(Quum semel atque iterum dura obsidione tenerer)
Convulsa ignivomis in praeceps alta domorum
Tormentis vasta collabi tecta ruina;
Quasque mea eximia gens struxerat arte, vehendis
Mercibus, apprime puppes, laus unde, decusque
35
27
Crevit, opumque meas vis ingens fluxit in oras,
40
Partim subductas portu marcescere inerti,
Hostili abduci partim trans aequora dextra:
Illa eadem, Austriaca praestantibus Alite pennis
Illyricas obeunte oras, hoste undique victo,
Depulsoque loco, felici sorte potiri
45
Et didici, et potui, quando et Pax candida terris
Longum absens, pleno gaudens et Copia cornu,
Quaeque perosa nefas, hominum malefactaque, Virgo
Ultima Coelestum terris migrarat in astra,
Me quoque neglectam tot post discrimina rerum
50
Respexere, diesque mihi indixere serenos.
Et jam rura colit tranquilla per otia arator,
Quin timeat, campis ne barbarus ingruat hostis,
Et ferro sata laeta, sacro populetur et igni:
Jam totis repetit gnavus compendia terris
55
Mercator, celerique secat maria alta carina,
Quin usquam praedo occurrat, vel tendat eunti
Insidias, rapturus opes, quas ille laborem
Per multum caris peperit solatia gnatis:
Sunt et doctrinae, sunt et sua praemia laudi.
60
Salve, o Austriacae spes prima et gloria gentis,
Salve, o Rex idem, Dux idem maxime, et idem
Austriadum, FRANCISCE, Pater, qui me modo iniquo
Vexatam misere fato, excindique timentem
Juvisti auxilio facilis, quin, unde timere
65
Desinerem rebusque meis, pubique meorum,
In tua jura tuam, meque in tua regna recepsti!
Ecquid, ubi potui dici tua, et urbibus, unde
Austriaci constat moles pulcherrima Regni,
Inserta, aeterna coepi clarescere laude,
Quid mihi, quidve meae timeam, tutissima, genti,
Quandoquidem, quodcumque velis, potes unus, et idem
Nil, nisi quod suadet fas certum, jusque severum,
70
28
Vis fieri, fierique sinis; teque insuper omnes
Europae populi et reges, ceu Numen, adorant,
75
Magnanimum experti, quotquot socialia certis
Junxerunt tecum studiis in foedera dextras,
Experti invictum, si quis tentaverit armis?
Ecquid non potius sperem, quando omnia patris
In populos, lata quos tu ditione gubernas,
80
Officia exerces, Patriae Pater atque vocere?
Tu solio sublime sedes: stant ordine circum
Hinc Verum, et vitae rectrix Prudentia, Dis et
Mortales aequans hilari Clementia vultu;
Hinc Pietas, et cana Fides, et nescia flecti
85
Justitia a lacrimis: Virtutum caetera turba,
Quae tua tecta colit, Caesar, te stipat utrinque:
Stant populi ante pedes, pendentque ex ore loquentis,
Incipis ut leni, quae condis grandia corde
Consilia, eloquio vulgare, et dicere leges,
90
Eximias leges, Ratio quas sanxit et Aequum:
Fama supervolitat, clamatque: Hic Maximus ille est,
Quem regum exemplar voluit Rex esse Deorum,
CAESAR: age Indigeti, gentes, age plaudite vestro.
This poem can perhaps serve best to illustrate the functional aspect of occasional verse in
general. Occasional poetry is not concerned with aesthetic quality. On the contrary, its
function is to state the values – above all those of moral and political nature – which society
holds dear and to point to the event which confirms these values and is therefore important
both for the individual and for society at large. Prosopopeia speaks about peace and the rule
of law – brought about by Dubrovnik’s inclusion in the Austrian Empire – and by employing
the idea of aurea aetas it announces the growth of trade, the abundance and safety that will
enable the flourishing of arts and learning. The emperor is surrounded by the personified
figures of Verum, Prudentia, Clementia, Pietas, Fides, Justitia and the rest of Virtutes; he is
likened to a god and graced with the name Pater Patriae. His name, as is often the case with
occasional verse, is written in capital letters.
29
A further example. In 1817 the Senkić brothers built a ship, the first of its kind in Dubrovnik.
It was a long-distance sailing vessel and at the same time the largest ship ever built in the
shipyard of Gruž. The act of building it signified the beginning of a new life in the ship
industry of Dubrovnik. Its launching therefore represented an extremely important occasion
for the city dwellers. The ship was christened “Bete”, after the nickname of the famous
mathematician Marin Getaldić living at the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the
seventeenth century. The event was by no means ignored by the occasional versifiers. They
produced a collection of poems published in Italy two years later and containing thirteen
Latin, three Italian and four Croatian poetical compositions. Among the Latin ones the
“eidyllium” Navis Ragusina by Marko Faustin Galjuf (1765-1834) is of particular interest.
It is conceived as a story about the celebrations in the port of Gruž, where the debate about the
name of the new ship is resolved by poeta clarissimus, Bernard Zamanja. He first declines the
honour of having the ship named after him. Then he comments on the hardships which
Dubrovnik underwent during the French occupation – in order, of course, to praise Francis I –
and mentioning the great Ragusans who excelled in Latinist philosophy, science and poetry
(Stay, Bošković, Kunić and Baglivi), he finally settles on the name Bete as the appropriate
one. The suggestion is received with great acclaim and once the prayer is over the ship is
eventually launched into the sea. The other Latin poems found in this collection can be
classified as propemptics, farewell poems before a journey. They are full of analogies with the
mythic Argo and incantations of secunda fata, cursus faciles, fortuna magistra, copia omnium
bonorum. Such wishes are often expressed by means of the imperative (for example
Appendini’s I, Retis, i longinqua novi pete littora mundi, or Zamanja’s semper et ad patrios
salva redito sinus). In spite of so many good wishes and heaps of praise lavished on this longawaited vessel, it sank on its very first voyage.
Probably one of the most productive writers of occasional verse in the nineteenth century was
Urban Appendini (1777-1834), an Italian who arrived in Dubrovnik with his brother Franjo
Marija in 1795 in order to run the Piarist College. He lived in the city until 1824, when he got
transferred to Zadar. During his stay in Dubrovnik he published a collection entitled Carmina
(1811), while his ten-year long stay in Zadar was marked by a series of occasional poems for
every dies natalis Francisci I (in the following order: carmen, elegy, phaleucium, idyll, ode,
idyll, iambic senarius, ecloga militaris, idyll and elegy). Out of the many occasional poems I
shall choose the one with the unlikeliest occasion for its inspiration: the decision of the Senate
in 1803 to buy new type for the printing house. Appendini seized on this event in order to
30
write an elegy in which he eulogizes the Latinist poets of Dubrovnik, but also Gundulić, who
wrote in the vernacular and authored the most significant text of Croatian literary Baroque:
his epic poem Osman.
It was in the 19th century too that Gundulić’s Osman was translated into Latin by Vlaho
Getaldić (1788-1872), a member of a Ragusan aristocratic family. Despite his many political
commitments Getaldić managed to make other translations and to compose about twenty
rather hefty volumes in manuscript which contain, for instance, more than three thousand
sonnets and probably a significant number of Latin poems which could be classified as
occasional in character. Here we can see his birthday gift to Ferdinand I (emperor from 1835
until 1848), composed in 1838. The poem in question is a 24-stanza Sapphic ode, which is in
itself a prime example of an occasional literary form.
In die natali Ferdinandi I. Imperatori set Regis P. F. A.
Ode
Sacra lux votis, resonansque plausu
Surgit en fulgens roseo nitore,
Exilit fausto Padus, Ister, Aenus
Cęsaris ortu.
Huc ades lauro redimita frontem,
5
Et modos plectro graviore querens,
Luce tam sancta, mea Musa, dignum
Dic, age, carmen.
Fama victorem celebrat secundo
Militem bello, horrifica cruentum
10
Cęde, crudeles minitantem et iras
Morte sub ipsa.
Ille num verax peritura nunquam
Gloria. Hanc solum tibi vindicare
Victor humanus, generosus ausit
15
31
Hoste subacto.
Fama pręstantem ingenio virum acri
Letteris clarum, studiisque doctis,
Facta naturae evolventem et artis
Tollit ad astra.
20
Viribus fidens nimium et paratis,
Templa si quando Superum beata
Instet audaci penetrare nisu
Mentis ocellus.
Ceu foret solis radiantis igne
25
Percitus, mox obruitur tenebris
Miscet hinc expers face vera falsis,
Sacra profanis.
Fama sic legum veteres latores,
Qualis aut Spartę fuerat Lycurgus,
30
Vel Solon Graijo sapiens athenis
Laudibus effert.
Ęre et insculptę pateant tabellę
Horret en natura, pudorque honestum
Candit os, nec lance Themis manere
35
Sustinet ęqua.
Sepius nempe evehit immerentis
Fama, virtutis speciem decoram,
Quum ferant prę se, illaquentque vulgus
Unica Virtus.
Emicat cui religionis almę
Lumen, heroem parit excolendum
40
32
Erigit terris, locat atque Olympo
Ob benefacta.
Festis excelsa Austriadum Potentum
45
Sic domus Magno veniens Rudolpho,
Quę suę heroes soboli recenset
Ordine longo.
Inter hos cęlo rutilens sereno
Jam novum sidus magis, et avita,
50
Luce Franciscus propria refulget,
Par sibi tantum.
Bellicus turbo, gravis et cruore
Civium, occasu reboans tremendum,
Ingruit vastam minitam ruinam
55
Pubi Alemannae.
Quisnam opem tanto ferat in periclo?
Hostium vindex animosus arma
Conteret, priscam patrię quietem
Restituitque.
60
Equa vinci nescia Cęsaris mens
Arduis in rebus, et insolenti
Temperata a lętitia, proculque fastu,
Sorte favente.
Non secus belli imperium gerentem
65
Albis, et Rhenus, Rhodanusque, et illum
Sequana experti, caput erigentes
Obstupuere.
Dignus at hęres Genitoris orsa
Recta Fernandus sequitur tuendo;
70
33
Mira quem Divum similem Patri clementia reddit.
Insuber plaudit, Venetusque gaudens
Ister hos plausus iteratque, et orbis;
Excipit miti reducem triumpho
75
Lęta Vienna.
Fama proclamans Patrię parentem
Laude Fernandum merita coronat;
Ipse nam pacis populo fideli
Commoda pręstat.
80
Intus exercet bobus arva cultor
Serica dives mage fronde; mutat
Institor cęlum, impavidusque nauta
Prępete penna.
Artium custos sapientiori
85
Justa doctrinę tribuens benignus
Clara virtuti haudrenuit modestę
Pręmia Cęsar.
Qui dies ergo niveus refulsit,
Cęsari primus, sacer esto ubique
90
Faustus et semper redeat, novoque
Lumine plenus.
The very first stanza mentions different rivers (Pad, Danube, Inn) as metonymies for the areas
through which they flow and which all joyfully greet the emperor. What follows is an
invocation: the poet asks his Muse to create a poem worthy of its dignified subject-matter.
The part which explicitly praises the emperor (the locus et persona topos) celebrates his
exploits in war, his wit, his learning and his artistic bent. It announces the victory of the true
faith while likening the emperor to Licurgus and Solon. His descent is singled out for special
34
attention so that the long line from Rudolph on culminates in its last new star: Francis I, his
military skill, wisdom and his famous expeditions. His son Ferdinand is joyfully welcomed by
Milan, Venice, the Danube and Vienna; Fama proclaims him to be the father of the homeland,
the peasant and the sailor work in peace and – most importantly – the emperor does not deny
the artists their rightful reward. Towards the end of the poem, in its last stanza, we find the
best wishes for the emperor’s birthday: that the day may be holy, happy and filled with light.
This example illustrates well the representative aspect of occasional verse as its last defining
characteristic. The author speaks on behalf of the community and the poem is devoid of
subjective utterance. He is the medium through which the whole community sends its good
wishes to the ruler and presents him in the most favourable light.
The same emperor, but also his predecessor – Francis I, the British Queen Victoria as well as
the Russian Empress Catherine II – was honoured by odes composed by Baro Prospero
Bettera (1770-1852). His occasional poems were very popular and went through several
editions or survived in different transcriptions. The titles I provide here indicate that
occasional poems most frequently carry a certain kind of information about the addressee, the
event and the genre of the poem. One of the transcriptions was made by Marko Marinović
(1791-1852), a transcriber but also a composer of occasional verse himself. In his own
collection of poems, which he began writing in 1815, he recorded an ode by Bettera, later
published by “Foglio di Zara”. The ode is accompanied by an article written in defence of
occasional poetry. The anonymous author describes the critics of occasional poetry as slaves
to pedantry, frowning Zoils and portentous and flawed ravens. They heap scorn and ridicule
on the cold, short-lasting, pedantic poetry full of commonplaces and quite worthless. The
author of the article, however, objects that this general censure is not applied by these critics
to all examples of the genre since everyone knows that the most beautiful odes by Horace
were occasional and had the name of Augustus inscribed at their beginnings. Similarly, Pindar
composed his own odes on the occasion of Olympic, Pythian and Nemean games in praise of
the winners. It is exactly these different occasions, the article argues, which can give energy
and poetic power to the spirit in the same way in which contemplation helps produce
meditative as opposed to occasional verse.
Later literary history, however, had few defenders of occasional verse. The poets of occasion
were charged with being too ornate in style, too hyperbolic in praise and celebration, too cold
and stiff in the movement of their verse, too weak in their poetic powers and invention
35
(Kasumović). They were called “poets and non-poets” whose occasional verse “flourished to
a horrid extent” (Lozovina), who lived under the false spell of Latinism and whose lines were
thought to descend to “the level of rhetorical exercise” (Kombol). They were seen as lacking
“creative power and personal investment” (Bogišić), while their poetic compositions were
considered deprived of any real literary value (Mardešić). In other words, poetry for them
becomes “a habit, an expression of sheer idleness, a poetics of time-wasting” (Stojan). Still, as
much as this kind of poetry does leave one with the impression of near disgust with poets
closed off in their own little worlds in which they had nothing better to do than to play with
the pen (Dum nihil habemus maius, calamo ludimus, written in one Dubrovnik manuscript
from 1810), it is important to note that no other country had the tradition of a living Latin
literature survive so late into the 19th century. The revival of Latin writing in Dubrovnik is
usually explained in the context of their wish to come closer to the rest of Europe by means of
an international language, but this does not account for everything. The aristocracy of spirit
survived in Dubrovnik longer than the aristocratic Republic. The culture which emerged from
the old humanistic studies, from the admirable classical educational system, found its last
resonance in the occasional Neo-classicist verse. It was to be overtaken by a new age – a time,
they thought, where traditional values are lost and where cultural ideals and good taste
disintegrate.
What is true of every study dealing with the cultural history of Dubrovnik in the 19th century
is true of this one as well: Josip Bersa’s Dubrovačke slike i prilike [Sketches of Dubrovnik?] –
filled with anecdotal material and describing the period from 1800 until 1880 – proved to be a
precious mine of information. It is from him that we learn about the poeta clarissimus
Bernard Zamanja, who “celebrated the Austrian emperor Francis I by re-writing the odes he
had written in praise of Napoleon”; or for instance that the Piarists organized a literary
academy to honour Marmont while the French kicked their college out of the old building in
order to establish a military hospital there. Bersa tells us about Urban Appendini’s compulsive
habit of writing and printing a Latin poem on the occasion of the emperor’s birthday; or about
the poems of Luko Didak Sorgo (1776-1865) which were subjected to the severe eyes of the
censors so as to remove every trace of patriotism from them, including the ode written in
honour of Ljudevit Gaj, the leader of the Croatian National Revival who visited Dubrovnik in
1848. Furthermore, we learn that Vlaho Getaldić sent Latin epigrams to Ida von Dueringsfeld,
a German literary artist who spent some time in Dubrovnik with her family during 1853 and
1854. Finally, we can read about the Franciscan friar Pacifik Radeljević – a poet, transcriber
36
and translator of Greek and Latin classics – who sent a Latin or a Croatian epigram to Father
Ivan Stojanović every morning. Stojanović (born in 1829, died in 1900) was a student of the
cultural history of Dubrovnik and in his monograph entitled Literature of Dubrovnik he gave
a wide-ranging picture of the late Ragusan Classicism. He also wrote verse in Latin. In the
Scientific Library in Dubrovnik there is a manuscript (number 555) with Stojanović’s
dedicatory poems to Bishop Josip Marčelić, while another manuscript (number 824) contains
his autograph of a poem written on the occasion of Franjo Uccellini’s inauguration as the
Bishop of Kotor. In the last decade of the 19th century – when other European literatures have
long forgotten their Latinate beginnings – Stojanović describes what it is that makes him write
poetry in Latin:
Dicam aliquid: pepulit me ad id haec occasio laeta;
Quamquam, risu qui sunt nostra lacessere scripta
Assueti, Antyciram me tendere saepe juberent;
Quod minime possum veterem deponere morbum,
Nec volo, si possem: tanta est insania versus!
Palladiis vates ridetur dignus Athenis,
Enervi, uti nos, si esset generatus in aevo. (10-16)
Perhaps the slightly ironic formulation vetus morbus can serve as an apt description of what
this presentation attempted to address.
37
Relja Seferović, Dubrovnik
The Censorship of Seraphinus Cerva’s book
Prolegomena in sacram Metropolim Ragusinam
Traditional history has taught us to seek the main sources of political power and the longevity
of the ancient Republic of Dubrovnik in commerce, navigation and diplomatic skill. On the
basis of these visible appearances there lies a solid structure of almost immovable instruments
of power in possession of the City nobility, embodied in institutions of Government in an
intermingled web. Since changes were to be avoided at any cost, it is not surprising that
Dubrovnik was the native place of many distinguished historians. There is no other city on the
Eastern coast of Adriatic whose past inspired generations of educated people to penetrate its
depths. Their efforts were not discouraged by the City Government, as they were perceived as
yet another means to increase the prestige both of the city and its nobility. Almost all the local
authors came from the noble families and their closest relatives participated in political
power. Thus it is not a surprise that these histories of Dubrovnik mostly served to describe the
early beginnings of the city, embellishing them with various legends, and also to show the
glorious deeds of the city inhabitants, whose origins were usually connected with the ancient
Romans. It was a locus communis, a common thing for European historiography from the
Renaissance onwards, we may say, and Dubrovnik belonged to the same circles from this
point of view as well. Things were similar not only in content, but in form too, for historians
used to write annals and no significant change appeared until the 18th century, a period when
we meet with Seraphinus Cerva.
Born in 1686, this Dominican friar has put us in his debt, not only by the quantity of the
material he left us, with thousands of pages still kept only in manuscript, but also by
introducing a new form in local historiography. This was the history of institutions. Cerva had
a relatively long and a very prosperous life that ended in 1759. He remained in memory of the
then existing Congregation of the Dominican Order in Dubrovnik as the general vicar and
prior of the city monastery of St Dominic. He was revered by the City Government on
38
account of several diplomatic missions he had successfully executed in Rome, but he should
be most remembered by his historical work. Although by his time there already appeared a
new approach to the city past, in form of biographies of domestic people and important
foreigners who were connected to Dubrovnik, Cerva was the most prolific author of this kind,
having left us more than four hundred biographies under the title Bibliotheca Ragusina,
divided into four volumes, which were also unpublished until recently. As he had collected
necessary experience by preparing this work, he decided to write the history of the then
existing Archbishopric of Dubrovnik from the same point of view, that is in the form of
biographies of the city archbishops. He apparently considered this text, entitled Sacra
Metropolis Ragusina, or ‘’The Holy Metropolis of Dubrovnik’’, as the main work of his life
and we may be assured of the truth of this by the quantity of preparations he had previously
undertaken. Indeed, it must have been a real challenge to plan in advance the distribution of
an immense amount of material, meticulously excerpted both from primary archival sources
and a collection of nearly two hundred books, into six volumes. It took him more than twenty
years to get it all done, but he succeeded and, with the help of a scribe, he managed to finish
this text before he died.
The only known attempt of a similar kind in Dubrovnik was made in the second half of the
16th century by another Dominican friar, the Italian Serafino Razzi. As a very talented and an
educated man, Razzi used couple of years he spent as the general vicar of the already
mentioned St Dominic’s Congregation in Dubrovnik to collect information on city
archbishops and to present it to the Italian audience, upon his return to the native soil. Yet
Razzi’s text is overshadowed when we compare it to Cerva’s, both for its accuracy and its
completeness. This point may be further corroborated by the fact that Razzi, as a stranger, did
not enjoy a complete trust of the City Government and they did not allow him to work with
manuscripts kept in the City Chancery, which was later to become the City Archives. There is
also the fact that the span of several centuries enabled Cerva to compare previous conclusions
with the new experience and thus to make more critical remarks. Besides, it seems that Razzi
was only interested in getting and expressing more information on the city past, while all the
texts written by Cerva had the strict purpose of presenting the relation between the State and
the Church as an inseparable unity.
Sacra Metropolis was the largest among them, yet the others, including the texts written on
the history of the Dominican Congregation in Dubrovnik, also deserve to be treated as
39
completely independent items. Among these preliminary works the particular place is
reserved for the Prolegomena in sacram Metropolim Ragusinam. The title itself and even the
basic intention, as the author himself expresses in the foreword, are designed only to provide
some necessary information before the main text, the Sacra Metropolis. We are inclined to
accept this as a real purpose of the Prolegomena even when Cerva warns his readership that, I
quote, Eadem Prolegomena fusiori forte, quam par erat, calamo a me descripta videbuntur,
or ‘‘It will seem perhaps that I have written these Prolegomena slightly longer than it was
right.’’ We should take this expression ‘’slightly longer’’ as a euphemism, for we deal with
the text consisting of nearly three hundred and fifty pages in original, distributed into forty
chapters.
However, it is not only the quantity that distinguishes Prolegomena; it is much more the
selection of topics, previously unknown in rich historiography of Dubrovnik that attracts our
attention. Cerva’s major concern here is to introduce his reader to the secular frame of the
Republic of Dubrovnik, the frame within which the Archbishopric had existed and, together
with it, represented a symbiosis that lasted for centuries. Therefore he examines the past of the
institutions of the City Government and compares them with ecclesiastical institutions. He is
interested in the work of the City Councils and the way they organise the everyday life of the
city, but he also describes customs and differences among various religious groups of the city
society, among domestics and foreigners. If his predecessors paid any attention to this task, it
was only sporadically and strictly within the purpose of their narrow political history and a
number of incidents, that were hardly connected together. On the contrary, Cerva finds the
purpose for this work exactly in this issue, in the history of institutions. It was impossible to
follow this approach by relying only on the old Annals, the irreplaceable primary source for
nearly all of his predecessors who used to write on the same subject. Although he mentions
them too on several occasions and includes a list of patrician families with the usual
information about their ancient origin, it is difficult to avoid an impression that he did this
only because of certain conventional reasons. At least two of them should be mentioned here:
first, the break with the previous works must not have been too abrupt, and second, it was
important to please the city authorities. Cerva himself was an offspring of a long lasting
patrician family, whose members on many occasions enjoyed the highest political positions in
the Ragusan society. So, it seems justifiable to attribute both to his prestigious origin and to
his modest intentions the willingness of the city authorities to help him in his historical work
by allowing him to examine the ancient archival documents.
40
According to the archival document, the Senate of Dubrovnik granted Cerva’s request to
examine papal bulls and other texts, in order to incorporate them into his book. As these
documents represented political power and were used by the Government on various
occasions to claim its rights in front of the Pope or other interested foreign parties, it is easily
understandable why there were only patricians who enjoyed the privilege of examining them.
Unfortunately, the Senate kept its right to re-examine all the texts that were written on
Dubrovnik, lest any unpleasant fact damaged the carefully arranged mosaic of the city virtues.
Since the previous authors, writing on the history of Dubrovnik, had a more or less uniform
view of the past, their texts have survived almost intact until the present day. But it was not
the case with Cerva’s Prolegomena or the Sacra Metropolis, which were both exposed to
severe censorship. This is a particular story, interesting from two separate points of view: the
destiny of the manuscript itself and the attempt of explanation what was the real purpose of
censorship.
We know from the author’s own words that he was writing several texts in the same time. It
has already been established that he finished the Bibliotheca Ragusina around 1742; two years
later he put the last period on the Prolegomena, while it was not before 1759 when the last
volume of the Sacra Metropolis was finally completed. We also know that he already suffered
from his illness and advanced age when he was endeavouring to finish the Sacra Metropolis
and this is why he used an assistant. It was Blasius Morgini, a Dominican friar from the same
monastery. This man also enjoyed confidence from the City Government, who appointed him
on two occasions as the public preacher in cathedral in Advent and Lent. His role in the whole
story seems significant, because his appointment came in the moment when Cerva’s
manuscript was already mutilated. He is also mentioned as the copyist of Cerva’s text. Thus it
can be said that the Government approved of his action, regardless of his personal connection
with Cerva. The facts speak for themselves: on one session in 1764 the City Senate, being the
supreme governing body in the Republic, decided to send envoys to the Dominican
monastery, requesting the extradition of Cerva’s texts. So, everything happens as late as five
years after Cerva’s death and, what is also important, the Senate explains this act by a
conclusion that it is a regular procedure. This means that censorship was a common thing in
Dubrovnik, equally pursued by the State and by the Church. For the next five years, until
1769, the manuscript was kept in the City Archives and then it was returned mutilated to the
Dominican monastery, while the censored parts were left in the Archives together with other
41
documents of the State and put, according to the decision by the Senate, “under those
obligations which pertain to the entire Archives.”
We are confronted here with various questions. Why did the Senate wait until five years after
Cerva’s death to check the manuscript? Why did they spend another five years examining the
text? Why did they not destroy the censored parts, but instead took a decision to keep them
together with other archival documents? To begin first with the most probable answer, it
seems that the clerks appointed by the Senate to undertake this job needed few years to issue
an adequate check. The manuscript was too big, for all Cerva’s major texts, Bibliotheca
Ragusina, Prolegomena and Sacra Metropolis were thoroughly examined. If we add their
regular duties to this new appointment, it becomes understandable why they spent so much
time, even with help of a few Senators themselves. Their names, unfortunately, remain
hidden, but they must have been employed in the City Chancery. Furthermore, the Senate
might have waited for so long since Cerva died because it kept his services in good memory
and because it was Senate itself who granted Cerva’s request to work on archival documents.
It must have looked strange, indeed, to check someone whom they had previously trusted so
much that he was even allowed to read the ancient papal bulls in the comfort of his cell in the
monastery, according to another document from the Senate session. These five years might
have erased the memory.
Finally, the greatest puzzle remains: why did they decide to keep the censored parts, instead
of destroying them? We may look for an explanation in the usual practice of the
Government’s work. It would happen occasionally that certain suggestions, officially
submitted during the Senate sessions, were thought to be potentially dangerous for the State.
On these occasions the majority would vote for the abolition of that suggestion from the
books and the scribe had to erase it. The usual form was that “it had to be deleted, so that it
cannot be legible in any way”. Some other secret documents were also kept in the Archives,
for the political situation might always change, and then these documents might have become
important again. Apparently, they were thinking of this situation exactly when they reached a
decision on their session that the censored texts were to be kept; I quote, “under those
obligations which pertain to the entire Archives.”
So, the Government was not used to destroying documents and the censored parts of Cerva’s
text shared the same destiny. It is a curiosity that they were mentioned also in a report on the
42
State Archives of Dubrovnik submitted by Luko Ćurlica, a clerk at the beginning of the 19th
century, to the Austrian Government. After that their trace is lost and, at this moment, we may
only assume that they were sent to Vienna together with some other documents from the
Archives of Dubrovnik, although it is possible that they were returned from Austria later on.
No less intriguing is an attempt to discover what the censored parts really represented. Thanks
to the Index written by the author and enclosed to the original immediately after the preface,
we know that these were the 14th and the 16th chapter of the Prolegomena. The entire 6th
volume of the Sacra Metropolis, dealing with those archbishops who were Cerva’s
contemporaries, has also disappeared, while the Bibliotheca Ragusina has remained intact.
When we examine the original text of the Prolegomena today, we notice that there is only a
little remnant of the 14th chapter, which was dedicated to the period of the Venetian
government in Dubrovnik, while the 16th chapter, describing relations between the Church
and the State on the question of possession of the real estate is removed entirely. So, there
were two basic motives for their removal: foreign policy, which required subtlety in relations
with Venice even in such a late period as the middle of the 18th century, and the relations with
the Church, a matter that was even more entangled. The 14th chapter had nine pages and it
was entitled Ragusini nunquam non liberi Venetos aliquando praetores habuere, that is ‘’The
Ragusans, never losing their liberty, once had Venetian Rectors’’, while the 16th chapter
consisted of six pages and had the title De veteri Ragusii more, ut iudices a Senatu delecti de
rebus, quas stabiles vocant, ecclesiasticos inter viros ius dicant, that is, ''On the ancient
custom kept in Dubrovnik, that judges appointed by the Senate judge among the clergymen on
issues of the real estate property’’.
The proscribed pages are removed. The endnotes, written by the author at the end of each
chapter, have survived at the end of the 14th chapter, but they have been thoroughly blackened
by scribes and thus made almost illegible. However, the censors made every effort to avoid
any unnecessary distortion of the text and they engaged a scribe to copy the adjacent pages, in
order to create formally unbroken sequence of chapters. The numeration is continuous, except
on the censored parts with gaps of several pages. A scribe has copied the lines belonging to
the subsequent chapters, to keep the order of the text. There are two entire copies of the text,
both belonging to the first half of the 19th century and written in Dubrovnik. Both copyists
used the original and neither of them managed to resolve the secret of the removed parts, nor
did they copy the blackened endnotes. Today, however, thanks to the modern technical
43
equipment that enables us to scan the document, it is possible at least partially to read the
existing lines at the end of the 14th chapter. Although they contain only references of the
sources Cerva had used to write this part of the text, their value belongs to the fact that they
represent until now unknown passages.
The censors obviously desired to keep the outer appearance of the text intact and this may be
attributed to the prestigious position Cerva had enjoyed in the ecclesiastical circles of
Dubrovnik. He was himself a member of the Council for censorship, established by the
Archbishopric, and he was appointed to that function by Raymond Gallani, who was the
Archbishop of Dubrovnik from 1722 until 1727. In a letter written to the Holy Congregation
of Cardinals in Rome in 1724 Gallani complains of an almost intolerable situation in
Dubrovnik, where almost no-one, especially among young people, paid any attention to the
ecclesiastical regulations concerning the forbidden books. They read, according to Gallani,
whatever they wish and therefore he decided to expose the Index of the forbidden books,
Index librorum prohibitorum, publicly in his palace. We may easily assume that the
archbishop’s concern was not so much to avoid those political texts that would have
imperilled interests of the State, but those that threatened to undermine either public morality
or the dominant position of the Catholic Church.
It seems that it was exactly in this last direction that the content of the censored 16th chapter
from Cerva’s Prolegomena led.
This chapter was completely removed, including the
endnotes. For centuries there was a latent confrontation between the Republic and the
Archbishopric on the issue of political power, which was manifested usually either through
struggles for the material property or through appointments of various dignitaries. The
Archbishopric’s possessions were collected in the Mensa Archiepiscopalis, ‘’The
Archbishop’s Table’’, while all the city monasteries were richly endowed by citizens’ last
wills. Therefore it is tempting to establish the relation between these two different approaches
to censorship. As the supreme ecclesiastical authorities were endeavouring to suppress any
challenge to the perennial supremacy of the Catholic Church and, if possible, to enlarge
further its sphere of influence, their civil counterparts in the City Government were mostly
interested in protecting their own position and in preventing changes in the established
equilibrium between civil and ecclesiastical power, where the lay authority had the advantage.
What they had in common was a suspicion towards any foreign influence that might bring
liberal ideas within the city walls and thus to put the delicate balance in danger, either by
44
introducing lower classes as the new political subject, or by creating stronger secular control
over the rigid ecclesiastical structures. Several fruitless attempts by Protestant clergy to
establish themselves in Dubrovnik were detected and annihilated in the very beginning,
according to the testimony issued by Cerva himself. So, although both the civil Government
and the Archbishop had a mutual interest to prevent any opposition to their power that might
arise from the outer world, each of these two parties was equally eager to enlarge its own
sphere of influence in the Republic. They had various instruments at their disposal to do so,
but even more to keep the other party within the existing limits. The case of censorship with
the text written by Seraphinus Cerva is an example of this action.
Acting both as a cleric and a connoisseur of the past and contemporary life in Dubrovnik,
Cerva tried to preserve his impartiality and to present an objective history of the native city.
His efforts were successful from an objective point of view; otherwise they would not have
provoked a reaction from the city authorities. As the censored parts still remain hidden, it
cannot be established with certainty the cause for their removal. We may only speculate that
this happened because of distrust exercised by the Senate towards any critical observation of
the city past, especially if verified by quotations of primary sources or by comparisons with
similar cases in abroad. This was exactly the way how Cerva used to write, by making many
critical remarks and by dedicating a lot of attention to the archival sources and various
published materials, in order to corroborate his points.
The mystery of these lost parts of his text adds another dimension to his literary legacy and
sheds more light on the perception of values in the narrowly closed society of Dubrovnik,
concealed behind a formal wish to keep the things as they are. Is there a better topic for a
historical study? The latest discoveries of some missing parts from the Sacra Metropolis by
archivists employed in the State Archives of Dubrovnik give us a hope that we shall manage
to find the answer to this mystery, although the major work is still in front of us.
45
Maria – Eleftheria G. Giatrakou, Athens
Our classical heritage saved through the “scriptoria” and
the archives of the Greek monasteries
The Greek Orthodox monasteries in all parts of the world except of their various
spiritual, missionary, cultural, philanthropic, social and scientific activities contributed
greatly to the saving and diachronizing of the Greek culture, the classics and generally
our classical heritage. The Greek monasteries cared for the cultivation of systematic
education (paedeia), for other admirable scientific and artistic editions 1. The orthodox
Greek Monasteries especially cared for the sections of philology, history, poetry,
hymnography, for saving bibliographical and archives material, being in this way
exemplary centres of research and civilization, attracting also many researchers of all
the fields of sciences to visit them and research there 2.
It’s necessary to refer to the most eminent Greek monasteries all over the world. The
first monastic centers were established in the 3 rd century A.D. in the Egyptian deserts of
the Christian East 3. There are also flourishing monasteries in Thebaida, Upper Egypt, in
the area of the River Nile, in the desert of Sina Mountain during the 4 th and 5th century4.
Other flourishing monastic centres are in Cyprus, Syria, Cappadocia. For 1100 years the
monastic life will flourish in Byzantine empire following the establishement of the first
monastic community of Dalmaton. There were also other monastic centres at Olympus
of Bythinia, in Asia Minor. Other monastic centres flourished in Thessaly, in
Cappadocia, in Palestine, in South Italy in the famous Monastery of St. Catherine on
1
2
3
4
See Maria – Eleftheria G. Giatrakou, the Greek culture through the Greek Monasteries and the work /
offered by clergymen. Organization of the monastic life, economic, spiritual activities of the
Monasteries, Public and private life in Greece II: The Modern Time, Patra 2002, Edition of EAP
(Open Greek University), p. 185-186.
See as above, p. 187.
See Kardan, Byzantium Oxford Dictionary, Vol. 2, Oxford 1991, p. 1391-1392.
John Hatzifotis, The Treasures of the Saint Mountain (Agion Oros), athens 1997 (edtion of
Apogevmatini Newspaper, p. 17).
46
Mount Sinai where a small team of monks keep their tradition at the place where the
burnt bush of Moses had been.
Very important monastic and cultural centres were also the monasteries of St. Mountain,
of Meteora, Patmos, Byzantine Monasteries of Dafni, Hosios Lucas, Nea Moni in Chios,
Monastery of Kaessariani, on the west side of Hemetus.
All the above Byzantine monasteries are not a simple and monentary “episode” in the
life of the Orthodox Church but a creation of hellenism in period of spiritual perfectness,
artistic flourishing, with a world radiation, centres of civilization, of letters, and artistic
achievements 5.
Another famous monastery in which were cultivated the letters and the arts, and has also
a world radiation is the Monastery of Saint John on Patmos island. It is considered to be
the “Saint Mountain of the world of islands” or as it was characterized by the French
tourist Lacroix, the “University of Archipelagos” as it was there since 1713 the
“Patmiada School”. The tourist of the 18 th century, R. Pochoche writes that “Patmiada
School” had the best teachers of the East 6.
The whole Greece is decorated by Monasteries which cultivated the Greek paedeia and
culture, the arts, the civilization.
The famous Byzantinologist Anthony Bryer has written down after a research in the
Byzantine sources about one thousand different monasteries from which about one third
is in Constantinople 7.
The Greek monasteries have always been in the process of time the guardian of the
dignities and the achievements that the classical antiquity heredited to us, in many fields
as well as in philology, history, poetry, hymnography, in codices, manuscripts and
generally regarding bibliography and the archives material. The Greek Orthodox
5
6
7
See the Cultural Treasures of Saint Mountain, Ministry of Culture and Museum of Culture,
Thessaloniki 1997, p. XII.
See Helen Glykat6zi-Arweiller, Historical Frame, “The Treasures of Patmos Monastery”, Athens
1998, p. 13.
See Alice – Mary Talbot, Anthony Cutler, Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, vol. 2, p. 1391.
47
monasteries satisfy the wishes of all the researchers who want to make a research there
and study the cultural heritage. So they organize scientific congresses, cultural activi ties
of high quality, presenting in this way the Greek culture and wishing our cultural
heritage to be common possession of the whole humanity.
The spiritual and intellectual treasure of the classical heritage was saved thanks to the
monks of the Byzantium and it is continuously kept up today thanks to the monks who
care for the useful before Christ texts and culture as it is considered to be a pre education for the Christianism according to Clement of Alexandria (2 nd – 3rd century
A.D.). He believed that in this way the Greek culture would contribute to the conquering
of educational and cultural dignities. On the other hand the Three Prelates (Ierarchs),
Basil the Great, St. John Chrysostomus and Saint Gregorius Nazianzenus had acquired
an admirable education and they had such a knowledge on classics which they offered
for the orthodox belief and the society. The monasteries offered their possession for
intellectual and cultural cultivation of the citizens. The Monastery of Stoudiou as well as
that of Odigiton in Constantinople had established what they called “Scriptoria”, that is
studies for producing and copying manuscripts. Cutler, the Byzantinologist researcher
has calculated that during the 10 th and 11th century 50% of the writers at the “scriptoria”
had been monks and during the 14 th century 25% of monks contributed to be writers at
the scriptoria8. The monastic libraries contained manuscripts, texts of classics and
philology was necessary for the singers of the chorus of the church monks. Many of the
monks devoted themselves to studying manuscripts and became writers, hymnographers,
scholars. As the eminent Byzantinologist Sevcenko calculated, during the 14 th century,
25% of the monks had been scholars and intellectual persons 9. The monasteries had been
patrons of all the arts, especially of architecture. In the monastic “Scriptoria” the monks
cared even to decorate the pages of the manuscripts with miniatures 10.
The Monastery of Saint Catherine of Sinai, which has also a brilliant history for fourteen
centuries, is a unique monastery playing the role of the relicguarder, having a very rich
library, which contains 3.000 precious manuscripts and codices of invaluable worth 11. It
is not an exaggeration to say that the most important treasures of the human s pirit,
8
9
10
11
See Alice – Mary Talbot, Monasticism, Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, vol. 2, p. 1394.
See C.I. Sevcenko, Society Pt. I (1974), p. 72.
See Alice – Mary Talbot, as above, p. 1394.
Evangelos Lekkos, The Greek monasteries, vol. 2, Athens 1995, p. 264, 267 -268.
48
examples of a unique and unrepeated civilization are kept in the Archives and libraries
of the Orthodox Christian monasteries. The manuscripts, the codices kept by the monks,
are the banks of knowledge and information and refer to an extended field of the history
of the human spirit. Except of their artistic value, they contain classical texts, religious,
scientific, social etc. which are really very important for people, for their behaviour and
paedeia and ethos 12. The whole humanity owes gratitude to the monasteries which saved
and kept the human civilization and the written word as it is slaved in the manuscripts
and the codes. Of course this was achieved after a great labour and many times with
danger of the life because of the mania of the collectors of manuscripts and codes and
many times because of the collecting mania of researchers and scientists. Knowing well
the monks how important were the Archives of the manuscripts had put a label over the
doors of the Archives and the Libraries with the title “ΙΑΤΡΕΙΟΝ ΨΥΧΗΣ” that means
“Medical consulting room”. Thanks to the Greek monasteries and their “scriptoria”, that
is workshops of copying codes, the classical antiquity was saved, the treasures of the
Prelates, the unique scientific works.
The monastic libraries in Byzantium were important centres of education. The
monasteries saved our cultural heritage in spite of the attacks of various enemies such as
the crusaders and the Turks and they are saved up today.
Until the end of the 15 th century, when the scene of history changes with the discovery
of the typography the libraries of the monasteries contained all the kinds of manuscripts,
that is books of all the shapes, “ειλητά” that is rolled round “pergamina” (parchments
rolled round a wooden or bone bar, fastened and containing not a religious text, but a
text written before Christ, that is a classical one. Thanks to the catalogues of many
monasteries we can see the importance of the archives which were kept there 13.
Many manuscripts are ornamented with icons and pictures, so that the reader can
understand better the texts. For first time appear micrographies in scientific books, that
is mathematics, historical writings of the art of sieging, of anthologies, writings of
cosmography and history. During the period between the second and fourth century the
12
13
Maria – Eleftheria G. Giatrakou, The Greek culture through the Greek moansteries and the activities
of the clerics, Patra 2002, vol. A, p. 238 (edition of the Open Greek University).
See The Treasures of the Monastery of Patmos, Athens 1988, pp. 327 -330.
49
cylinders of papyri were substituted little by little by the codes made of leathers,
(pergamini, parchments), that is leathers elaborated with the method used in Pergamos.
These codes made of leather “permamines” fastened binded making books. This new
material was offered to the micrographers as the ideal place for being painted. This
custom of making micrographies started initially at the court of the Emperors
Ptolemaeus. Later it was spread in the Roman world. This decoration of the manuscripts
was used by the monarchs. It is said that the Emperor Constantine the Great kept in his
library two cylinders written with golden letters and they contained the Iliad, Odysseia
and the Gospels with a brilliant iconography. “Grammatikoi”, that is scholars, orators
and perhaps philosophers were gathered in Constantinople which had been the capital
city of the new state (325 AD) 14.
The monastery of Sinai was initially a small temple built by Saint Helen, in 330 A.D. in
the place of the burning Bush, devoted to Virgin Mother and it was also a Tower for
refuge of the monks. Later the Emperor Justinianus built the very beautiful temple and
surrounded it with a very strong wall that is “οχυρώτατον φρούριον” (= a fortified
castle). This monastery wrote a brilliant history for 14 centuries.
The Library of the Sina Monastery is considered to be the second important Library of
the world regarding the number and the value of manuscripts. It contains 3.000 precious
manuscripts (2/3 are written in Greek language, the others are written in Arabic, Syrian,
Coptic, Iberian, Armenian and Aethiopian language. There are manuscripts having
historical importance. Many of them are religious ones. Many of the above manuscripts
have signatures of emperors, patriarchates, sultans, princes.
Many of these manuscripts are decorated with admirable and rare micrographies. In the
collection of the monastery of Sinai is contained the famous Sinaitic Code of the 4 th
century A.D. with the Greek text of the Holy Bible. In 1865. the German researcher
Tisentorf borrowed it without returning it. Nowadays it is exhibited in the British
Museum. A very important thesaurus / treasure of invaluable worth is the
“palimpsestos” “Syrian Codex” of the 400 A.D. having on it a second writing of the 7 th
and 8th century, containing also the most ancient translation of the Gospel as well as
14
Nikolaos Drandakis, Painting from the 5 th century until the Iconomachy, athens 1975, p. 161 -162.
50
other later written texts. The most ancient gospel being there is that of the year 717 A.D.
and it is a present of the Emperor Theodosius the Third. The Library also of St.
Catherine of Sinai Monastery contains more than 500 editions many of which belong to
the period of the first years of the typography. It is organized in an excellent and
systematic way and it has also workshops of microfilming and conserving manuscripts
for helping the researchers 15.
Manuscripts and codices and “chrysovoula”, that is manuscripts with golden seals, are
also kept in the Monastery of “Megalo Meteoron” that is in the Meteora mountains of
Greece, which was established in 1388 by the scholar monk from the Saint Mountain,
Athanasio. There are also 124 manuscripts kept in the Monastery of Saint Trinity of
Meteora which are also kept since 1953 in the sideboard of holy objects of the Saint
Stephanos Monastery at Meteora 16.
The Library of course of the Monastery of Saint Ioannis the Theologist at Patmos which
was established in 1093 by Hosios Christodoulos, it is considered to be one of the best
in the East. It contains about 1000 manuscripts. These being decorated are less than fifty
and most of the other holy contain other decoration except of the initial capital letters
and the titles.
Many of these manuscripts of the Library are impressive masterpieces. There are two
brilliant volumes decorated with micrographies having originality and many other
manuscripts may be considered as the best of this class and kind in the whole world. The
establishers of the Monastery, Hosios Christodoulos had accepted as an offer the one
quarter of the books from the monasteries of the mountain Latron of Asia Minor and
saved them from the invasions of the Selzucs. The catalogue of the monastery which
was composed in 1200 contains more than 300 manuscripts. The composer of the
catalogue gives us useful information regarding details about the book binding but not
necessarily the decoration of the books. After the death of the establisher of the
monastery the library had possessed more books and had also workshop of copying
codes, that is “scriptoria” as Hosios Christodoulos had wished. In the Library there are
also nowadays a few manuscripts of the 9 th and 10th century with iconography which
15
16
Evagelos P. Lekkos, as above, vol. 2, p. 267-268.
See as above, p. 171-175.
51
contains human figures while a large number of manuscripts belongs to the 11 th until the
15th century. There are religious texts, rolled cordes “eilitaria” with the Holy Liturgy
written on them, volumes with the speeches of Gregorius Nazianzenus, the Klimax of
Ioannes of the Klimax (ladder) and the book of Job 17.
The Library of the Holy Monastery of Patmos is one of the few byzantine libraries
which completed up to day a life of 900 years. It is an orthodox monastic Library
established at the end of the 11 th century but it also contains books which belong to the
time before its establishment. It contains almost only Greek manuscripts. There are also
texts of the Holy Bible (Old and New Testament) there are also many other old
manuscripts. Another category of manuscripts are the Father’s texts (Prelates’ texts) the
study of which have the researchers started during the last decades.
There are also manuscripts with hymnography for example those composed by Romanos
the Melodist. In the Monastery of Saint John in Patmos island are also kept texts not
religious. Until the end of the last century was kept in Patmos the most important code
referring to Platon’s texts written thanks to the care of the Bishop of Kaesareia Aretha
(10th century) and nowadays it is considered to be with the sculptors of the Parthenon
and other precious objects as treasures of our cultural heritage which decorate the
Museum and Libraries of England. There is also in the Library of Patmos the most
ancient Codex referring to the historian texts of Diodorus Siculus, as well as the most
ancient anthology with motos of Ancient Greek and Christian authors, commentary of
Proclus on Platon’s Timaeus, thanks to the copying activities of Eustathius, Bishop of
Thessaloniki, as well as Sophocles’ tragedies and others. Very important category of
texts are the saints’ texts and admirable codices reffering to the saints (hagiologic
codices)18.
There are also in Patmos rhetorical texts, dogmatic, ascetic, rules of Synodes, Typika,
Dictionaries, Anthologies, many codes referring to sciences, as it is medicine,
astronomy, mathematics, etc.
There are also manuscripts referring to the post-Byzantine civilization and consist
precious sources for studying Modern Greek, political, ecclesiastical, economic history.
17
18
See the Treasures of Patmos, as above, p. 277-278.
See Maria – Eleftheria G. Giatrakou, as above, p. 241.
52
In the same Library are also kept “mathemataria”, that is school material like books of
the “Patmiada School” (School of Patmos) which had been active for two centuries.
There are also many untided imperial and ecclesiastical documents.
The material on which these manuscripts are written are not made of papyrus but of
pergamena (parchments), as papyri could not be durable in the climate of the islands.
We have parchments in Patmos which had been durable, a kind of paper produced by the
manufactories of the West of the Renaissance. The binding of the books is artistic and
the edition is decorated. The Greek writing follows all the process and all the forms of
its evolution. From the archaic with capital letters writing until the bibli cal one, from the
thorned until the writing with small letters with all its forms especially regarding the
dated documents.
Studying the treasure of the Archives and books of the monastery of Patmos, we
discover many other Parametres which gave meaning to the civilizations. The Monastery
of Patmos possesses one of the most notable collections of byzantine manuscripts. There
is a collection of 53 imperial documents many of which are “chrysovoula” that is they
have a golden seal, written on parchments or paper of excellent quality with the
signature of the Emperor with cinabaris, that is red ink. In the Archieves of the Library
of Patmos are kept 27 manuscripts written by public official persons of the Byzantium
having a great historical importance. There are also kept many partriarchate, monastic
and private manuscripts and a huge archive material in foreign languages.
In the Archives of the Monastery of Patmos there are also about 70 Latin manuscripts
and Catastici (account books), 800 Turkish manuscripts, 36 Romanian, and about 20
Russian ones.
The Archives of the Patmos Monastery contain also 14000 manuscripts which refer to
the period from the 16 th to the 19th centuries), hundreds of account-books (Catastici) and
private for legal acts and constitutions books. There are also thousands of manuscripts
and “palaetypa”, that is old editions which are kept in the Library of Patmos. Since 1970
the Library of this Monastery was carried in another place which is equipped with
modern means of technology and has been developed in a centre of Byzantine and
palaeography research. The Library has been enriched by more modern editions which
53
are useful for scientific study and research 19. There are also in Patmos Monastery
Library musical codes and manuscripts with Byzantine music (parasemantics), that is
texts of hymnography on which there are written Byzantine musical symbols 20.
We also can’t omit to refer to the Athonean State of the Saint Mountain of Chalkidiki in
Greece, where so many precious manuscripts are gathered, together with codices and
other creations of the civilization which have a special importance for the world
civilization. As a vivid organism, Athos with its twenty monasteries, the twelve hermits
buildings (sketes), the huts, the sitting positions and the cells of quietness kept our
cultural heritage for more than one thousand years 21, having an influence on people all
over the world. Delighted by the Monastic State of Mount Athos, that is Holy Mount,
the poet Lord Byron, praised it in his poems “Child Harold” Song II (1812) 22.
It is said that the history of Saint Mount Monasteries of Athos, Chalkidiki, starts in the
6th century A.D. and others say that it starts in the 8 th century A.D. We know with
certainty that monks from the Saint Mountain (Agion Oros) participated in 843 A.D. in
the Ecumenical Synode organized by the empress Theodora, to reinstate the holy icons
after the iconomachy in Byzantium. Except of the other masterpieces of art in the Saint
Mountain of Athos are kept precious Archives with manuscripts and libraries with very
rare and important books.
Robert Gurzon, collector of manuscripts in te 19 th century A.D. writes about the
treasures of the Saint Mountain monasteries underlying the importance of their Archives
and Libraries 23. The monasteries of “Agion Oros” (Holy Mountain of Athos in Greece
contain one of the most important collection of manuscripts in the world. More than 800
manuscripts have their initial capital letters decorated with vivid colours and many of
them have been reproduced in a recently edited consisted of three volume editions which
was published in Athens. The first documents with iconography are dated from the 9 th
and 10th century while most of them have been edited later. The richest library of all in
the Holy Mountain of Athos contains 10.000 micrographies and they all belong to the
19
20
21
22
23
See
See
See
See
See
Maria – Eleftheria G. Giatrakou, as above, p. 242.
Athanasios Konninis, The Treasures of the Monastery of Patmos, Athens 1988, p. 351.
Maria – Eleftheria G. Giatrakou, as above, p. 243.
Chris Hellier, Monasteries of Greece, London 1936 (translation), Athens 1997, p. 95.
Maria – Eleftheria G. Giatrakou, as above, p. 248.
54
“Megisti Lavra” (“The Biggest Monastery”). Unfortunately Gurzon and other collectors
of manuscripts took away precious manuscripts from various monasteries of the Saint
Mountain (Agion Oros). Gurzon took a lot of manuscripts and between them it was an
excellent one with the signature of the Emperor Alexios Komninos and a series of
Gospels which had been a present of the king to the monastery. His strong will to take
the manuscripts and other treasures away for himself was stopped when he discovered
an “anathema” (= excommunication) which wrote the imperial donator on the book,
against the person who would sell or would give away the book. Anyway he had taken
away two other books and now they belong to a collection of the British Museum which
he donated in 1917.
As times have changed the monasteries of the Holy Mountain care to save strongly their
Archives and Libraries so that can use them the specialists researchers who are
interested in them.
It’s really very important that eminent Greek scholars have recently edited big volumes
with the treasures of the Holy Mountain, but there is also a special programme for
editions that started in Paris in 1937, with the title “Archives of Athos” 24.
The historical Archives of Mountain Athos are really a valuable treasure, multinational
we could say, as they contain except of the Greek manuscripts, Otoman, Slavic,
Romanian ones as well as seals of monasteries and old Greek and Slavic editions.
According to a census that took place in September 1996, it is calculated that there are
in the Saint Mountain (Agion Oros) about 15.000 manuscripts and these are the ¼ of all
the greek manuscripts which are scattered mainly in Europe and a part of them is kept in
America. The Greek manuscripts kept on the Holy Mountain are the most important and
numerous collection of Greek manuscripts in the world, as their number is larger than
that of the two largest collections in Europe, that is the collection of the Vatican and the
other of the National Library of Paris, both of which consist of no more than 10.000
manuscripts.
Many of the manuscripts kept in the Monasteries of the Holy Mountain in Athos are
painted in an excellent way and have also micrographies on them, that is small pictures
24
Chris Helier, as above, p. 130-142.
55
of small dimensions. The same manuscripts are named “ιστορημένα” from the word
history that in this case means painting. The micrographies which accompany the
written text, combine in this way the contents of the text with a visual stimulus causing
in this way a unique harmony.
The best manuscripts regarding their quantity and quality belong to the collections of the
three biggest monasteries of the Holy Mountain, that is of that of “Megisti Lavra”, the
Biggest, Monastery of Vatopedion and of Iviron Monastery.
The collector of manuscripts Gurzon calculated that there had been in 1837. in the
Libraries of the Monasteries of the Saint Mountain about 3.500 pergamena, that is
parchments, 14.000 paper manuscripts, totally 17.5000 manuscripts 25. The collection of
“palaeotypa”, that is of old editions in the monasteries of the Holy Mountain is really
admirable. We refer as example “The complete Works of Homer” edition of Florence,
1488. which is kept in the “Iviron Monastery” as it is also kept there the Great Lexicon
of Etymology, edition of Venice 1499. and it is kept in the Monastery of Dochiareion as
well as Theocritus' "Eidyllia", published in Rome in 1516. Holy Texts of Liturgies
published in Venice (1508-1509) in various editions are kept in the Monasteries of
Esphigmenou, Megistis Lavras. There is also kept “Portolanos”, a book containing
instructions for sailors. It was published in Venice in 1523. and it is kept in the
Monastery of Xenophontos, etc. 26
In the twenty monasteries of the Holy Mountain and in its twelve hermits building and
in many cells are kept about 5.500 manuscripts of Byzantine, Post-Byzantine and NeoHellenic music. This number is more than the one third of the manuscripts of
ecclesiastical music known all over the world. All these manuscripts have been written
down and have been edited three of their seven volumes with the title “The manuscripts
of Byzantine Music”, Holy Mountain 1975, 1976, 1993 27.
There is also the Musical Code of the Monastery with No 1601. Its composer was the
famous melodist Matheos Vatopedinos Efesios, who composed his melodies in a wide
area of ecclesiastical melody. The Monastery of Vatopedi has published in 1997 the
25
26
27
See The Treasures of the Saint Mount, as above, p. 587.
See as above.
See Treasure of the Saint Mount, as above, p. 627.
56
“Panegyriki”, vol. A΄, that is a musical code with lessons composed by the famous
composer of the 17 th century, Germanos of New Patra. This edition is a copy of the code
of 1601 and contains also except of the musical composings ancient lessons, explained
according to the old writing and according to the vatopedian explaining.
The monasteries of the Saint Mountain publish continuously new editions, using the
modern technology. We must note that the monasteries of the Holy Mountain is an
immense, a large museum, a large gallery, a huge bibliographical and archival treasure,
unique in the world and it is offered to the scholars, scientists, researchers, for research
being a guard who diacrhonizes our cultural heritage and the Greek civilization.
There are also many Greek monasteries in South Italy, about 262 of which have been
developed in official centres of monasticism and education 28. The Monastery of
Kryptopheris (Grottaferata) that was built at the area of Tuskulo by Osios Neilos is one
of the most distinguished Centre of Byzantine Studies Musicology and Codicology.
There are kept in it Hellenic diplomatic texts and archives which enrich the Byzantine
diplomacy29. The Orthodox Monastery of Valano in Finland is also a centre with
archives and it is also offered for study and research.
All the Greek manuscripts in the process of time have been gathered little by little in the
largest and most ancient libraries of the world and in the prementioned Orthodox Greek
monasteries.
This cultural and spiritual heritage has been saved thanks to the “scriptoria” of the
monasteries as it was that in the Moni of Stoudiou in Constantinople, where the monks,
followers of Theodoros Stoudites, copied in the 9 th and 10th century mainly the texts of
the Prelates of Ecclesia. Another very important bibliographical workshop and
“scriptorium” was that of deacon Aretha, who became later Metropolitis of Kaesareia
and cared for copying the texts of the classical writers, as it was Platon (of Oxford)
Eucleides, Lucianus and Aristotle’s Organum and he himself wrote in some of the codes
notes.
28
29
Dionysius Zakythinos, Byzantine History, 324 – 1071, Athens 1972, p. 411.
See as above.
57
In the 10th century A.D. there is another imperial bibliographical centre in
Constantinople
with
the
support
and
protection
of
Konstantinos
Ζ΄
(7th)
Porphyrogenetus. In the second half of the same century flourished in Byzantium the
bibliographical workshop of the monk Efraim, in which were written code Marianus gr.
201 (Aristotle) and other totally fifty codices from which some contain texts of classical
writers (Thucydides, Polybius, Lucian, Appian, etc.).
In the codices we find characteristics for other bibliographical centres and “scriptoria”
as they were those of the monasteries Prodromou Petras, of Virgin Mother Odigiton, in
Constantinople, of Megisti Lavra in the Holy Mountain, in the Moni of Sina, of Cyprus,
of the Asian province of Opsikion (Bithynia), of Palaestine. From the 14 th century there
were other “scriptoria” in Peloponese and Crete, as well as in South Italy. Among them
some are distinguished as those of Kryptopheris in Lation. Salermo and Capua in
Campania, Rossano in Taranta, Region and the monasteries of Kalavria, Palermo,
Mesena.
In these centres used to copy not only religious texts but also classical ones. In the
famous Paterion (Πατήριον) in the monastery of Rossano of Kalavria which was
established in 1103 there were until 1500, 160 manuscripts. In the Monastery of St.
Nickolas of Katoulon near Taranta there was a workshop – scriptorium with a notable
Library in which Bessarion from Byzantium discovered the text “Μεθ’ Όμηρον” (= after
Homer) of Kointus Smyrnaeus and the text “Carrying off of Helen”, by Koluthus.
The Orthodox Greek monasteries and the Byzantine “scriptoria” and the bibliographical
and archival workshops saved our spiritual and classical heritage and brought to light
world dignities, which contribute to the history of civilization, and to the knowledge of
the history of the human spirit 30.
30
See Elpidio Mioni, Introdution to the Greek Palaeography, (translation by Nikolaos M. Panagiotakis),
edition MIET, Athens 1985, p. 136-140.
58
Barbara Zlobec, Trieste
«SALVE TERRA PARENS»
Trieste between myth and reality in the short poem ISTRIA
written by the bishop of Trieste, Andrea Rapicio (1533-1573)
Together with Raffaele Zovenzoni and Pietro Bonomo, Andrea Rapicio is one of the greatest
representatives of the Trieste humanism, especially of the late humanism. He lived in the
middle of the 16th ct. At that time, there was a profound crisis in Trieste, due to poverty
caused by plague epidemic, Turks invasions and merchant smuggling from the inland to the
Venetian properties.
Rapicio was born in 1533, as a nobleman; his family wasn't related to the 13 noble families of
Trieste, but his ancestors from the 13th cent. took the active part in the town administration.
The fact that most of them were on good positions as clargymen and lawyers had a great
influence on the young Rapicio.
As a boy, he left his hometown and came to Capodistria - Koper, which at that time was
considered to be one of the most important cultural centres in the area of the north Adriatic.
His ambitious father Domenico Rapicio saw this istrian town as the best place for his son to
acquire basic knowledge of Latin, poetry and rhetoric. Very soon, when he was not even 12,
he moved to Vienna. Soon after that, in 1545 entered the University of Vienna to study law.
In the beginning of the 16th ct., University of Vienna was going trough the period of crisis,
especially after the death of patron Maximilian I. There was scarcity of financial means.
Epidemic and the danger of Turk invasions resulted in drastic decrease in the freshmen
number. Still, the tendency to renew the University in the field of organization as in the field
of content was already present. So the University was to be transformed and diffused into a
non-clerical institution governed by the state. Rapicio’s stay in Vienna was very selfproductive and it was then that he wrote many of his poems and met many influential people
at the court. Sigismundus Herberstein, whose name is very often found in the poems of
59
Trieste, was one of them. Already elder baron of Carniola, who still went on with his
diplomatic activities and was a chairman of the Court Chamber, accepted young Rapicio as
his countryman and offered him his protection. Very soon, in 1550, Andrea Rapicio left
Vienna to continue studying law in Padova.We can see in one of his autobiographical poems
that it was a case of a very urgent escape to avoid getting ill of a disease that was spreading all
over the town. This wasn't surely the only reason why he came back to Italy. Many students,
who began their studies in Wien, decided later to complete their education in Padova or in
Bologna. For centuries, the University of Padova was a famous Roman law school which in
the 16th cent. reached it's top. That period was also the period of the political predominance
of Serenissima. Professors preferred to teach in a concrete way, which prepared students to
practise law. In practice, those graduated students from Padua were the most respected in their
field of work. The professors were directly amenable to the Republic of Venice, which
appointed them and was paying them. They were not inclined to any rigid ideology and
academic wondering which came from the German regions was still in practise in the period
of Rapicio's stay in Padova. In 1552, Rapicio's first collection of poems was published:
FACILIORIS MUSAE CARMINUM LIBRI DUO, where we can find many names of
colleagues and professors he studied with. Andrea Rapicio graduated in December in 1554
and returned to Trieste very soon. This was a sad return, as his older brother died the very day
he graduated and in the year 1555 also started the plague epidemic, which shortened his
father’s life, and it was then that the poverty began and lasted for many years.
After he had come home, young Rapicio had a hope to live in peace about which he wrote in
his poems but the whole thing was nothing but an illusion. Even though those were the years
when he wrote a short poem Istria, which is his masterpiece published in 1556 and then
republished in 1561, he didn't spend too much time on Muses because his poetic passion was
overwhelmed by his political engagement. His father, however, gave all his inheritance for his
sons' best education so the poverty of his family made young Rapicio accept the job of a town
orator and a secretary of the Wien court in 1555. Rapicio was in favour of Trieste free
navigation (from 1562 he participated in numerous diplomatic meetings together with the
representatives of Serenissima) and he also wanted to end the Carniola smuggling to Venetian
regions.
For everything he did and for the diplomatic ability he showed concerning law business,
Ferdinand I appointed him the court secretary in 1562. He was the right man on the right
60
place. Although there weren't many educated people but those educated who would accept to
work hard in diplomacy were even in the smaller number. Small number of diplomats was a
big problem at the court in that time. They wanted to create an administration to rule in the
absolute way and were faced with the lack of competent people ready to do so. Who they
wanted most were multilingual educated people coming from the borderline regions such as
Subalps region. Concerning all this, Rapicio was perfect for this job.
In 1565, archduke Karl appointed Rapicio bishop of Trieste but at that time Rapicio was still a
lay brother. The fact that his diplomatic career at the court became ecclesiastic one shouldn't
surprise us because in the first part of the 16th cent. there was a tendency among educated
people of humanism, which was in favour of bishop appointment and cardinal’s garments.
With all the limits imposed, ecclesiastic career was still more desirable than the lay one.
Bishops often entrusted vicar with their work even though they didn’t want to escape from the
work of spiritual guidance; many implications (administrative, judicial and political) were
preventing them to do their job on their own. But very soon the idea of a bishop who should
lead an exemplary life was created. He should take care of a spiritual and physical benefit of
his believers, take into consideration the needs of the region and have clergy under control.
One of the men of influence was Carlo Borromeo, the bishop of Milan from 1564, who was
also a friend of Rapicio.
In the historiography of Trieste and in the collective mind still prevailed the image of a bishop
who would help or start Counter Reformation in Trieste. He should firmly try to exterminate
every kind of heresy, should unable the protestants spreading their ideas, should bring order
among the religious questions and should make believers follow the rules in an orderly
manner. In short, Rapicio would become the head of the Trieste spiritual guidance so he could
end the reform Bonomo had started, but among the “Orthodox” Catholics. It is evident that
this interpretation is very limited (we refer here to his friendship with people who were
suspected to be heretic, as Aonio Paleario was), however we can’t deny that Rapicio’s
attempts to improve morality were of great importance and very energical. His work doesn’t
seem to be based on religious erudition: he worked hard in refining illiterate clergy’s customs
with practical aims. His efforts probably seemed exaggerated to the city authorities that didn’t
want to accept his interfering that would in any way touch their authonomy. Even the
archduke Karl was opportune to call Rapicio in order by writing him a letter in which he
demanded him to stay away of the matters which were under authority of the captain (at that
61
time Antonio della Torre e Croce was the one) and the city judges. His work was also evident
in the town cultural life. They say Trieste would have been introduced to Renaissance-the late
one-if Rapicio hadn’t died premature. We haven’t got much information about his last years.
In 1570, as emperor’s deputy he participated in the pastoral visit, under the guidance of the
abbot Porcia, and the Pope referred laudably to him. Afterwards he continued his diplomatic
career for the Habsburgs trying to obtain economical benefits for his family and for himself.
Andrea Rapicio died in December in 1573. The ancient sources bring information that
Rapicio was poisoned at the dinner he organized in order to reconcile two families of Trieste.
This was never clarified and his murder (if there was a murder) remained unsolved. Those
who supposed to be guilty were never found. We can’t even say for sure that there was an
investigation taken by the city authorities. When his stepmother Caterina asked for a financial
support in the letter addressed to the Court Chamber (which is still kept in the Archives in
Graz), she didn’t mention the possibility of the bishop having been murdered nor she even
asked for the justice to be done. We can sum up that suspicious of the bishop having been
poisoned were nothing but rumours spread by the people who still remembered the
assassination attempt on Domenico Rapicio, Andrea’s father. So the rumours that Rapicio
obtained damnatio memoriae were exaggerated and the members of his family were not
forced to leave the city. The only one who moved to Pisino (Pazin) was Fabrizio Rapicio
looking for the job. In this way his family tree died out systematically in Trieste.
His main literary works are: two collections of poems (one written in hand and preserved in
the city library of Trieste and another, published in Venice in 1552), the short poem Istria,
which exists in two versions, two funeral speeches for Karl V and for Ferdinand I (preserved
in Österreichische Nationalbibliothek). We also must add to these some minor works of his.
I dare say Andrea Rapicio isn’t a great poet. His poetry was written in the late Humanism
when many collections of poems were published but those poems were deprived of real
inspiration and closely attached to an office or a private anniversary (titles were vague like
Elegiae, Epigrammata, Odae, Silvae, Nugae, Carmina, Poemata). It doesn’t make sense
trying to find perfection in these poems nor inspiration of Virgil or Horace but prejudices that
sometimes go along with this type of a poem (which is usually evaluated as artificial and
insincere) need to be overcome. In the last few decades the interest in the literature of
humanism has been growing which is closely related to revaluation of it’s formal
62
characteristics. Those who read these poems shouldn’t be superficial severe critics but should
identify with the author trying to understand the reasons which made the author choosing the
theme, the pattern or the metre, they should also try to situate the work into contemporary
historical and social situation and at the end respect the ideas, experience and the imagination
of the author. Even though the poetry of humanism lack the sound and is full of the
mythological fake and clumsy as well in the way of expressing thoughts, it contains
biographical, chronological and geographical information which are of great interest.
Poematum liber secundus, a collection written in hand, came to us as an autographical written
document and is preserved in the Trieste City Library (R.P. ms. 1-23). At first sight it seems
probably that Poematum liber secundus, which also consists of numerous poems composed
but never finished, chronologically precedes Facilioris Musae carminum libri duo because
some poems which we can find here were published in the collection issued in Venice in
1552. But we have to take in consideration that in that last collection the poet signs as
Andreas Rapicius nobilis Tergestinus and in the one written in hand as Andreas Rapicius
i(uris) c(onsultus) Tergestinus which proves that Poematum liber secundus was written after
he had graduated in Padua, in 1554. In my opinion Rapicio wrote it in the first years of his
stay in Trieste. There he wrote some poems of his youth that remained unpublished (here
poems with the style scripsit puer and the poems having as a theme his intention to study law
can be placed) and some poems which are slightly changed and were already published in
Facilioris Musae carminum libri duo; then he completed the collection with the new poems
which he composed contemporaneously with the second compilation of Istria. Even though
Poematum liber secundus wasn’t completely finished, it circulated among educated people of
Trieste in the sixties of the 16th ct. and was imitated by the young writer who worked together
on the collection of poems for the noblewoman Salomè della Torre. These poems were
preserved in the form of a manuscript in Marciana and show us that the poetry of Rapicio was
being read countinousely in Trieste even when the future bishop was to abandon muses. Not
less complex is the supposed existance of Liber prior o primus. If it had ever exited it is
definitely lost for us.
We have already said that the collection published as Facilioris Musae carminum libri duo,
was issued in Venice in 1552. The first part consists of 75 compositions and the second of 45
of them. The poet was 19 years old then. Scheme of poems shows us a clear composition
criteria: laudable poems dedicated to friends and patrons were put in the second part, while
63
themes of the first part are various, composed in short forms and witty.
The most interesting of his poems is Istria which made him famous. The first edition was in
1556. Rapicio was 23 and was trying to become the secretary of the Court. In the brief
introduction he dedicated the poem to Sigismundus Herberstein. Rapicio says that Herberstein
must have the poem in his heart, as the poem describes the area the diplomat knew well. It is
also well known that he devoted himself, and with the results, to the history and geography
studies like people in Celtis', Cuspinianus' and Lazius' circles did.
After the first edition, Rapicio continued with polishing up the poem and with its
modifications he republished it in the work of Wolfgang Lazius Typi chorographici
provinciae Austriae in 1561. Lazius was a professor of medicine at the University of Vienna,
he was also a historian, a headmaster of the Court Library and a member of the Secret
Council. This publication even remained unknown to the Rapicio’s scholars who agreed upon
the fact that the second edition was published after his death not early than in 1730, in Biga
librorum rariorum provided by Raimundus Duellius. Raimundus Duellius lived in Saint
Polten monastery in Austria and was a collector of the antique material from the baroque
period. It was he who decided to republish the work of Lazius because very few pieces of his
work were preserved. In doing this he also republished Istria which was contained in it, and a
historical work of Silvio Piccolomini which he obtained from Apostolo Zeno. Istria issued by
Duellius is to be considered a re-print of the edition of 1561.
After a long period of oblivion, the poem of Rapicio was discovered accidentaly by Pietro
Kandler, a local history scientist in Trieste. At that time he was a law student in Pavia and he
published the poem in 1826. Up to that moment Istria had been mentioned only in a few
quotations in the history work of Ireneo della Croce. The second edition (the one from Biga
librorum rariorum) was published by De Favento, a gymnasium professor almost half of the
ct. after, in 1870. A year after, De Favento published also the first edition of the poem. Even
though this is not philologically supported, those editions can be considered practically up to
today the most profund studies of the poem wich was alo translated several times.
Istria in the second edition consists of 460 hexametres. We could define it as a short epic
poem if we look at the form and the content. It is however difficult to place it in the poetic and
geographical literate genres popular at that time, like odes, topographical descriptions and
64
didactical poems even though it has many characteristics of the mentioned genres. However
humanistic description of the geographical characters in broader terms are not very different
in the content, but they are different in the poetical and rethorical form (epic poem, elegy,
ode). The common denominator could be tendency to sacrify the very aim - the description of
the contemporrary political, social and cultural situation - to the literate form and to insist on
referring to the antique sources in order to prove also very well known assertions.
Among antique sources Plinius is the one worth to be mentioned. His description of X regio in
the third book of Naturalis historia consists of two different parts: the trip around (periplous)
which is enumeration of the sea-shore toponyms, and listing of the inland places which are
territories of the single tribes. Separation of seashore places from that continental can also be
found in the poem of Rapicio. We can certainly say that Plinius is the basic model of the
description in the era of humanism especially in the preparation of the material. Humanistic
sources possibly known by Andrea Rapicio are Italia illustrata by Flavio Biondo, Pietro
Coppo’s works, especially Del sito del Istria, and De situ Histriae written by a doctor in Piran
who was Rapicio’s contemporary and whose name was Giovanni Battista Goineo; De situ
Histriae was published later as he escaped to avoid a heresy trial. My opinion is that Rapicio’s
description of Istria is not only based on geographical, antique and humanistic texts but also
on the personal experience. His genre and his form can be comprehensible only thank to being
compared with geographical sources in prose whether they are antique or coeval to the author.
There are many information about Istria that are repeated in the work of all those authors
we’ve mentioned so it is sometimes really difficult to establish from which source Rapicio
obtains information. The structure of the contents relates him manly to the work of Biondo
and that of Coppo.
Rapicio said it was love to his country that inspired him to write his poem. His affection
towards places of his homeland can be understandable by leaving out modern State categories
because his affection was like the one of those historical and philological movements
characteristic for Italian and later on German humanistic circles. Educated members of those
circles, not only the Italians who could evocate the greatness of the Roman Empire but the
Germans as well, broadened consciousness of their homeland; at that time, the Germans just
started to develop their national consciousness. They all referred to places they belonged to
which very often derived from ancient times but they didn’t look for ties they may have in the
wide linguistic or ethnical community. It is not surprising then that affection towards
65
hometown found its way of expression in the work of humanists: Renaissance with it’s
anthropocentric tendencies not only saw an individualistic side of a man but it saw a man as a
member of the community as well, a community which has on her own individuality, features
and dignity.
Eastern border of Istria for Rapicio is Timavo. Timavo and Pucinum, two wonders of the
nature, open the poem. After having mentioned Timavo, he also mentioned Trieste and
praised it for being the homeland of his family. Then the poem was interrupted by a long
digression in which the author praised the virtues of the captain Hoyos and those of the
emperor Ferdinand I.
Just after a long digression, there starts the true description of Istria: in front of the reader’s
eyes the idyllic Sylvula (Servola - Škedenj) (158-174), Mugilia (Muggia - Milje), famous by
it’s beautiful women and educated men (175-197), then we can observe the river Formio
(Risano – Rižana), ancient Italic border (197-206). There is also Aegida - Iustinopolis
(Capodistria - Koper), where the poet learned the basis of Latin, tutored by Febeo (207-248).
Descriptions of Istria continues with the fertile Insula (Isola - Izola) (249-255); then follows
Pyrranea tellus (Pirano - Piran), which evocates in the poet's memory the sea journeys and
memories of his friend Floro (256-271) while Humagum (Umago - Umag) makes him
remember care-free hours spent in fishing and in having fun (272-277). Aemonia (CittanovaNovigrad) was deprived of it's greatness by barbaric invasions (278-286). Rapicio sees river
Nauportus (Quieto - Mirna) as the ocassion to make a digression about the Argonauts (286295). Parentium (Parenzo - Poreč) is reduced to the mass of the ruins (296-298). Reffs near
Rovigno - Arupinae cautes – makes the author think about the summer vocation spent with
his friend Gradenigo (299-325) and other coevals. Talking about Pola he follows traces of its
ancient greatness: he describes glorious remains of the amphitheatre and of the building called
Zadro (326-338). This is where his description ends. Rapicio doesn’t continue his journey
along the coast and takes Arsa (Raša, antique Arsia) as a border, in the honour to Pliny’s
tradition. Besides this border the poet mentions islands Arsiades, sacraria divi Viti (Fiume Rjeka) and the city of Senia (Segna - Senj); where from he expands his view to the other coast
of the Adriatic Sea where cities Senae and Senogallia (339-349) can be seen. Then he turns
back towards the continent and lists the names of the places without order, he mentiones
Buleae (Buie - Buje), Monton (Montona - Motovun) and Pisinae arces (Pisino - Pazin). The
last place to be mentioned has it's own importance only for the fact it was left to be mentioned
66
in the end of the poem, it is Stridonia tellus, the native place of St. Jerome. Even Rapicio by
agreeing to the theory of Istria (408-415), wants to localize this place - which was the
question for years - in his own homeland.
Istria ends with elevation of the region according to the model of the Virgil’s so-called laudes
Italiae (416-433). The poet hopes to end his life in peace in his homeland, he wants it more
than any kind of wealth or honour (434-470). This wish is not only heratage based on literate
motives of the agricultural tradition but the sincere feeling of the person who achieved sucess
and got rid of illusions that any town tourtured by internal struggles could achieve a longlasting peace. If we think about Rapicio's death and suspicious of him being murdered, those
lines striving for long and serene oldness taste very tragically and bitterly.
Let's see now some other places of Trieste and it's surroundings which can be found in the
first part of the poem; I read the first lines of Oscar Sossich's italian translation (1924)
Colli dell’Adria vitiferi e belli,
Vitiferi colles Adriae, qua pulchra Timavi
donde il Timavo
cornua septeno properant ad litora cursu,
spinge il suo corso nel mare con
sette amenissime foci,
seu vos mellifluo perfundit rore Lyaeus
sia che voi cosparga Lieo di dolci
rugiade,
sive alius vestros montano vertice fructus
sia che un altro dio sui gioghi
vostri montani
excolit, o patrii colles, salvete, nec umquam
5
v’educhi i frutti, salvete o patrii col
colli, né Giove
Iuppiter innocuas infestet grandine vites.
mai con la grandine voglia colpire
gl’innoqui vigneti.
Non me despecti fallacia munera vulgi
Certo né i premi fallaci del volgo
spregiato né i sogni
irrita vel tumidae rapuerunt somnia famae,
vani e bugiardi di tumida fama, mi
furono sprone
ut vos cantarem, quorum pia munera norunt
a cantare di voi e dei vostri doni
ben noti
67
et Thule et Meroe postrema limina terrae.
10
fino a Tule ed a Mero, ultime terre
del mondo.
Altro zelo m’infiamma, altrimenti
Est aliud nobis studium: quis talia demens
uno stolto soltanto
s’assumerebbe
audeat, humanum longe excedentia captum?
un’impresa
che
varca ogni umano sapere.
Suasit amor patriae et fecundae praemia terrae,
Patrio amore mi spinse e i frutti di
fertile terra,
vanto vostro, che al cielo s’innalza
vester honos, cuius caelo se gloria tollit.
quall’inno di gloria.
For Rapicio the symbol of Trieste is Timavo, whose territory was also well known to the elders,
for example Strab. V 1, 8, Verg. Aen. I 242-246 Antenor potuit … fontem superare Timavi, /
unde per ora novem vasto cum murmure montis / it mare proruptum et pelago premit arva
sonanti, Mart. IV 25, 5-6 et tu Ledaeo felix Aquileia Timavo, / hic ubi septenas Cyllarus hausit
aquas.
There follows the reference to Bacchus and listing of wines which ends with praising of the
wine Pucinum:
Te colimus, Pucine pater, cui Livia quondam
40
Te veneriamo, o padre Pucino, che
a Livia serbasti
rettulit acceptos annos et tempora vitae.
tanto a lungo una volta i suoi anni
felici di vita,
Muneris id, Pucine, tui: qui dum ardua montis
questo è merito tuo, o Pucino, che
abiti i colli
aridi e l’alte rupi scoscese e i lidi
saxa colis rupesque altas et Iapidis oras,
giapidi
e ch’ogni altro frutto sorpassi in
longe alios fructus virtute et laudibus anteis.
valore ed in fama.
…………………
Sunt in conspectu positae refluentibus undis
50
Là dove le onde spumanti si frangon
sul lido, son poste
68
mille urbes, totidemque ferax tenet oppida tellus.
mille città e castelli, altrettanti su
fertile suolo,
Haud procul hinc Phrygii visuntur stagna Timavi,
indi non lungi si vedon gli stagni
del frigio Timavo
unde fluunt gelidae septeno gurgite lymphae.
donde le gelide linfe si versan da
sette bei gorghi,
Hic dum rimoso condit se fomite et undas
mentre ei qui si nasconde in
bucherellate caverne
secretis auget venis caecisque latebris,
55
alimentato da vene secrete, da cie
cieche latebre
stillatim manat, vires cursumque secundans.
goccia a goccia stilla e le forze ed
il corso seconda.
Vulgus iners densa noctis caligine saeptus
Certo accecato da densa caligine il
volgo ignorante
credidit hos fontes aliis scatuisse lacunis
immaginò che da altre paludi
sorgesse quest’acqua
e riboccasse alle valli d’Antenore,
atque Antenoreis fluxisse in vallibus, unde
donde il Brenta
Meduacus, plenis hodie lapsurus in aequor
60
placido giunge accresciuto alle
venete onde del mare
cornibus, assurgens Venetas excurrit in undas.
dove sfociar lo vedremo fra giorni
con lena maggiore.
Sed vanum quodcumque ferunt, hic ille Timavus,
Vane parole di gente accecata. È
qui quel Timavo
quem sacri celebrant vates, hic Cyllarus hausit
che celebrarono i sacri poeti; è qui
che alle sette
septenos latices fontano e gurgite et illos
fonti freschissime Cillaro estinse la
sete e seduto
inter saxa sedens Pucinis miscuit uvis.
65
sopra quei carsici sassi mescè del
Pucino le uve
Hinc, ubi Iapidium laevum latus obtinet atque
Qui
dove
stender
vediamo
Giapidia e il suo fianco sinistro
iratum pelagus sinuoso murmurat ore,
e rumorose le onde si frangon sul
lido lunato
69
Tergestae urbs procul apparet, qua gaudeo luci
lungi appare Trieste, dove mi
vanto esser nato,
emicuisse puer superasque in luminis oras,
gli occhi aprendo alla luce ed ai
raggi gloriosi del cielo;
antiquam repetens sobolem, cui nomina quondam 70
qui rinnovai quell’antica schiatta,
cui diede già nome
nota diu numerosa dedit Rapicia proles.
tutta la prole Rapicia, illustre per
numero e fama.
Pucinum of v. 40 was the favourite wine of Augustus's wife, Livia, who thought to own her
long life to this refreshing beverage (Plin. nat. XIV 6, 7: Iulia Augusta LXXXII annos vitae
pucino vino rettulit acceptos, non alio usa; gignitur in sinu hadriaci maris non procul a
Timavo fonte, saxeo colle, marino adflatu paucas coquente amphoras, nec aliud aptius
medicamentis iudicatur). The toponym Pucinium wasn't indentified with certainty but it
probably derives from a settlement north of Trieste (Duino – Devin, Prosecco – Prosek,
Opicina – Opčine).
The word Phrygii, which refers to stagna in v. 52, is equal to «Troy»: Antenor of Troy
according to the mythologists, colonized the Roman region Venetia (cfr. Claudian. de III
cons. Honorii 121 Phrygii numerantur stagna Timavi). According to the humanistic poet
Zovenzoni even the origins of Trieste can be based on the same mythological events (I 97, 1):
Urbs Tergesta, Phryges cum te posuere coloni. Cfr. also Lucan. VII 191 ss. Euganeo, si vera
fides memorantibus, augur / colle sedens Aponus, terris ubi fumifer exit / atque Antenorei
dispergitur unda Timavi, Sil. XII 214-216 atque Antenorea sese de stirpe ferebat / haud levior
generis fama sacroque Timavo / gloria et Euganeis dilectum nomen in oris, Sidon. carm IX
195-196 nec quos Euganeum bibens Timavum / colle Antenoreo videbat augur.
The history of Trieste, besides all this has also been enriched with another mythological
legend, the one about the Argonauts (vv. 62 ss.). According to Rapicio, they came to the
Adriatic Sea not navigating Meduacus but Timavo river, and Pollux, Leda’s son together with
the horse Cillar, accompanied them in their expedition (cfr. Mart. IV 25 5-6: et tu Ladaeo felix
Aquileia Timavo / hic ubi septenas Cyllarus hausit aquas). It is not then fundamental to
determine weather the poet had in mind Brenta (Meduacus Maior) or Bacchiglione
(Meduacus minor). GOINEO, who has already been mentioned (Corografie, 70-71), in his
70
polemics with Biondo who identifies Timavo with Brenta (Meduacus), quotes some educated
people of Trieste who had discussed this question: praesertim cum de hac ipsa re ita sentiat
Petrus Bonhomus, Tergestinus Episcopus … summa humanitate, prudentia, sapientia et
Evangelicae
doctrinae
purissima
et
sincerissima
cognitione
excellentissimus,
ut
praetermittam Bernardinum Baldum Jurisconsultum consultissimum in quo incredibilem
quandam infinitarum prope rerum memoriam atque scientiam semper suspexi, amavi, et
colui; quibuscum de Timavo aliquoties sermonem habentem mihi, ita esse, ut dixi,
constantissime asseruerunt. Goineo’s text is interesting as it shows that Timavo and the myths
referring to Timavo, were arguments that educated people of Trieste liked in their discussions
in the period of Rapicio. Those arguments could have influenced the future bishop in his
selection of the theme of his poem. Rapicio however could have used the antique sources
which say that the commercial importance of the region near mouth of river Timavo helped to
spread the believes that the Argonauts had reached the Adriatic exactly by navigating this
river (H. PHILIPP, RE A-1, 1936, c. 1244, s.v. Timavus). Pliny states (nat. II 18, 127) that the
Argonauts reached the sea non procul Tergeste.
For Rapicio, the first city on the Istrian coast, which, as it is said, starts with Timavo, is
Trieste (v.68). Even for Strabo, Timavo is considered to be west border of Istria, cfr. V 1, 9.
In this statement, Strabo put together information that he obtained from two different
historical moments. First, in the time of the Cesar, Timavo, together with the port, the saint
wood and the islands in front of the mouth of the river belonged to the territory of Aquileia,
while the inclusion of Pola in Italy happened later. However, according to Pliny, the first city
on the coast of Istria is Aegida, not Trieste (nat. III 19 129) oppida Histriae civium
Romanorum Aegida, Parentium, colonia Pola, quae nunc Pietas Iulia, quondam a Colchis
condita … mox oppidum Nesactium et nunc finis Italiae fluvius Arsia. Among the humanistic
geographers, the only one who included Duino, Muggia and Trieste in Istria is COPPO
(Corografie, 31); while GOINEO (Corografie, 57) rejects completely such division (Verum
ne qui fortasse malevoli nobis obiciant, Ptolomaeum et Livium in Istria complexos esse
Tergestum, quod nos tamen ab ea exclusimus, respondemus hoc pacto, ab his auctoribus non
posse aliquem certos Istriae terminos elicere, quum ex his, quos secuti sumus, certissimos et
apertissimos colligere possit). Rapicio joined this issue which had been obviously very
discussed among his contemporaries, in some of his verses which don't appear in the second
edition of his poem (v.post v. 78): multi etiam falso hanc urbem regionibus Histris /
disiungunt, statuuntque alio sub litore: verum / quid vetat hanc iisdem populis adiungere
71
gentem? (Many people wrongly separate this city from the other istrian regions and place it
on a different side: but what forbids these people to be related to those equal to them?)
The Argonauts are the protagonists in the last story I want to comment (v. 290 Argivae robora
pubis, cfr. Catull. 64,4= Verg. Aen. VIII 518 cum lecti iuvenes, Argivae robora pubes) but
here the poet refers to another mythological tradition which talks about the Greek heroes
navigating Nauportus and not Timavus.
Nec procul hinc celebris Nauportus panditur inque
Non lontano da qui si spiega il
Nauporto ben noto
che nell’Adriaco mare si versa
Adriacum properat pelagus, celeresque carinas
allargando le foci
admittit plenis venientes cursibus ad se.
per ospitare le navi che svelte a lui
drizzano il corso
Huc (si vera fides) Argivae robora pubis
290
Qui, se vera è la fama, i giovani
Argivi un giorno
vectam humeris navim per celsa cacumina montis
trasser la nave che a spalla avean
portata per l’alte
extulerant, Istri subiens quae fluminis undas
cime dei monti e dopo varcate le
lunghe giogaie
dum medios audet penetrans inter iuga cursus
sempre seguendo il corso tortuoso
dell’Istro, stanchi
rumpere, fessa olim patriis consedit arenis,
quivi il viaggio finivan fissando la
stabile sede.
unde ipsa antiquum felix tenet Istria nomen.
295
Indi l’antico suo nome deriva
dell’Istria felice.
Rapicio’s Nauportus is probably the river Quieto (Mirna) which is navigable and the sea
enters by far it’s mouth. So it is not the case of the same Nauportus mentioned by Tacitus (I
20) and Plinius (nat. III 18 humeris transvectam Alpis diligentiores tradunt, subisse autem
Histro, dein Savo, dein Nauporto), who referred to today’s Ljubljanica. DE FRANCESCHI,
one of Rapicio’s critics, in one of his articles from 1870 explained that Nauportus was not the
ancient name of Quieto but later was given that name to it because of the stirring between
Pannonian Emonia (Ljubljana) and the istrian one (Cittanova - Novigrad)
72
In the v.295, finally he connects the origins of the istrian peninsula’s name with the river
Hister which Pliny rejects (nat. II 18, 127 Histriae, quam cognominatam a flumine Histro …
plerique dixere falso), but can be found in Isidorus (etymol. XIV 4, 17 Istriam Ister amnis
vocavit, qui eius terram influit); this gives to the Rapicio’s poem the reflex of an ancient
archaism.
On the grounds of what I have said and what I must leave out because of the time limit
imposed, I could say that two aims in composing his poem governed Rapicio. On one hand he
wanted to express the greatness of the homeland which was the habit of humanistic scientist at
that time, so having this in mind we can explain his persistence in remembering all those
places which could have contained ancient signs while those places without historical
tradition or that haven’t been mentioned by Greek or Latin sources, were left out or barely
mentioned. On the other hand in his poem he wanted to revive the Istria of his time where
many of the mentioned friends lived. Those evocations of reality sometimes full of pain and
misery disturb the pastoral idyll and happiness disguised by distant heroic deeds.
The poet doesn’t want to hide from the reader the bad economic conditions or illness or
political conflicts which submerged Istria but persists in pointing out the potentials of the
region, even the intellectual ones. Two-sided approach can be seen in the description where
one moment we have sad and bare countryside and the other moment it is idyllic and peaceful.
His countryside descriptions are sometimes very real as are seen with the eyes of a 16 th ct.
traveller but sometimes they depend too much of the Latin poetical models like Virgil’s
Georgica.
After the Second World War the interest for the Trieste of the16th cent. began to cease so even
the educated humanist Rapicio fell into oblivion. The reasons of his oblivion are many, I’ll
state only two of them: for many years researches were focused on the characters close to the
Protestantism (for philosophical, theological and political reasons) while those who remained
faithful to the catholic Church were put aside even though their contribution in the Church’s
renovation by conducting decisions brought in the Trento’s convention was not small. Istrian
regions that belonged to the Habsburgs were not studied enough, there are very few
information about religious events in Trieste. In this case we cannot use the precise
descriptions written during the visitations of the pope’s or patriarch’s delegates because the
Austrian authority tried in any way to restrain inquisition in their territory. This author and
73
his work, which I analysed in my graduation thesis, presented at the University of Ljubljana in
2003, discovers that the study of the manuscript but also of the press of the 16th cent. can lead
to interesting historical discoveries concerning our towns, which were Italian, Croatian and
Slovenian but united by the humanistic tradition.
Basic references to the work of Andrea Rapicio

Andreae Rapicii Tergestini poematum liber secundus, Biblioteca Civica di Trieste, R.P.
ms. 1-23 (olim Alpha BB 4), membr. saec. XVI, 165 x 120 mm, foll. 18

Andreae Rapitii, nobilis Tergestini, facilioris Musae carminum libri duo, quorum prior
epigrammata quaedam continet, Venetiis 1552

Andreae Rapicii iurisconsulti Tergestini Histria, ad Sigismundum Herbersteinum regii
fisci praef. etc., Michael Zimmermann, Viennae Austriae 1556

Istria Andreae Rapicii iurisconsulti Tergestini. Ad illustrem virum d. Sigismundum,
liberum baronem in Herberstein et c. fisci Austriaci praefectum, in LAZIUS, WOLFGANG,
Typi chorographici provinciae Austriae, Viennae 1561, Eev - Ff v

Andreae Rapicii iurisconsulti Tergestini oratio de morte Caroli quinti imp. caes. opt.
max., Raphael Hofhalter, Viennae Austriae 1559

Andreae Rapicii episcopi Tergestini design. oratio in funere Ferdinandi Rom. imp. caes.
aug. p. f., 1565, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Wien, 8109, chart. saec. XVI, 205 x
290 mm, foll. 34
74
Bratislav Lučin, Split
AN EARLY HUMANISTIC MANUSCRIPT FROM TROGIR:
THE CODEX OF PETAR CIPIKO FROM 1436.
When we mention the name of Petar Cipiko, we are reading the earliest pages of Croatian
humanism, but it would not be an overstatement to say that we are also opening one of the
first chapters of the Renaissance Humanism altogether. Croatian humanistic literature owes its
early beginning and vigorous growth to manifold impulses. There was a constant and
powerful tradition of ancient culture and literacy in the towns on the eastern Adriatic coast
preserved in rich mediaeval production in Latin, which comprised public documents, law,
poetry and historiography. Of course, the awakening of humanism was stimulated by the
vicinity of the Italic centres, from which the waves of cultural change spread all over Europe,
but on its way they first touched the opposite Adriatic coast.
On this occasion we won't mention the humanistic circles formed in Dubrovnik, Split, Trogir,
Šibenik, Zadar and other towns on the coast and on the Adriatic islands, as well as the cultural
circle on the court of Croatian-Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus (1458-1490). We will focus
our attention on just one name, Petar Cipiko from Trogir, and on one of his codices only.
Petar Cipiko (Petrus Cepio, Petrus Cippicus) was born in Trogir, in the second half of the
fourteenth century, and he died ca. 1440. The commune of Trogir was then a part of the
Venetian republic, so that we find Petar, a Trogir nobleman, as a commander of the Trogir
galley in the fights of the Venetians against the family of Visconti and the Genoese (1431).
But much more interesting to us is his activity as a transcriber of various ancient texts and as a
collector of ancient inscriptions. Showing such a diffuse interest in classical antiquity, he
appears as a typical representative of early humanism, but at the same time as one of the
earliest European humanists and epigraphists. We should remember here that his
contemporaries – who were for the most part younger than himself – were actually the famous
“heroes founders” of the European humanism: Leonardo Bruni, Cyriac of Ancona, Poggio
Bracciolini, Guarino Guarini, Giulio Pomponio Leto, Giovanni Aurispa, Francesco Filelfo etc.
75
It still remains an assumption that Petar Cipiko contacted some of the Italic humanists during
his stay on the Appenine peninsula, but we know for sure that he cultivated a friendly
relationship with the Zadar humanist Juraj Benja, who in 1435 presented him with his
transcript of De viris illustribus by Pseudo-Sextus Aurelius Victor. Because of his work on
transcribing ancient works and collecting inscriptions Benja, who died ca. 1437, was styled by
Giuseppe Praga “almost a Dalmatian Poggio” (“quasi il Poggio della Dalmazia”) He
transcribed at least one of his codices in Florence, and was in personal contact with Cyriac of
Ancona (1391-1452). It is from Petar himself that the prominent humanist family of Cipikos
originated: his son Coriolanus was a writer of highly esteemed war memoirs (Petri Mocenici
imperatoris gesta, Venice 1477); Coriolanus' son Ludovik (Alvise) became a prominent
prelate (he was the secretary ab epistolis of the Pope Alexander VI and after that the
archbishop of Zadar), but he is also known for his learned occasional poetry in Latin and his
enthusiasm for the classical antiquity.
After some uncertainties and mistakes, three codices can undoubtedly be shown to belong to
Petar's hand. First of them is the above-mentioned Benja manuscript, in which Petar, having
accepted it as a gift, continued to transcribe various texts, among which are the ancient
inscriptions from Split, Solin, Trogir, Zadar, Osor, Ancona, Fano, Rimini etc. (the manuscript
is today kept in the Biblioteca Marciana in Venice, sign. Lat. Cl. XI, n. 124, colloc. 4044).
The fact that Theodor Mommsen described it as perquam memorabilis sufficiently shows its
importance. In 1436 Petar finished the codex we are going to deal with here in detail, and his
codex from 1438 which contains Cicero's works (Philippicae, Topica) is today kept in Oxford
(Bibliotheca Bodleiana, sign. Canon. Lat. 224). There is no foundation for the repeatedly
stated opinion that a Trogir codex with Juvenal's satires originated from Petar's hand, as well
as for the hypothesis that Petar could be the transcriber of the famous Codex Traguriensis,
which was found ca. 1653 in the library of Cipiko family, and which along with Tibullus,
Propertius, Catullus and other ancient authors contains fragments from Petronius' Satyricon,
among which is the only preserved text of the famous Cena Trimalchionis. That codex, which
I discuss more in detail elsewhere, is kept today in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, sign.
Codex Parisiensis Lat. 7989 olim Traguriensis.
*
Here we shall deal with the only manuscript by Petar's hand kept in Croatia today: the codex
76
written in 1436, with the texts of Lucian, Plutarch and Plato in Latin translation, as well as
some of Cicero's works and treatises by humanistic writers (Archive of the St. Ivan Cathedral
in Trogir, sign. M 181).
The codex is written on parchment, in humanistic script, and comprises 67 leaves with
dimensions 250x165 mm. Before its recent restoration it was bound in leather-covered
cardboard. The main text is written in black ink, the incipits and explicits in red (in places
violet), and the marginalia in black and red ink. Folios 15 to 18v were written by another hand
(smaller, more equal writing) [FIG. 1 (fols. 13v-14)]. The codex has five illuminated initials
consisting mainly of floral motifs (tendrils); three initials contain a human figure [FIGS. 2, 3,
4, 5, 6]. The text is accompanied by many marginalia in Petar's hand, often containing variant
readings. The codex has not been preserved in its entirety: the ending has disappeared and the
three folios between fol. 21 and fol. 22 are missing. The name of the scribe and the dating is
supplied by the subscription on fol. 21v (following Lucian's tenth Dialogue of the Dead, here
entitled simply Charon, but widely known under the title Charon, Hermes and the other
Dead). The subscription runs [FIG. 7 (fol. 21v)]:
Petrus Cepio absolui hu(n)c libellum Luciani / oratoris traductum é greco i(n)
latinum p(er) Rainu/cium ex corupto [sic] exemplari ideo lector si melius / [corrected from
melio/rem] uidisti errata emendes. Vale qui legis. / Pridie Kalendas Decembris 1436.
The codex contains the following texts (here presented in analytical order and not following
their sequence in the MS): translations of two of Lucian's dialogues (Dialogi mortuorum no.
12 and 10) with forewords by the translators Giovanni Aurispa (1376-1459) and Rinuccio
Aretino (ca. 1395 - after 1450), Pseudo-Plutarch's treatise De Liberis Educandis (On the
Education of Children) dedicated by its translator Guarino of Verona (1374-1460) to Angelo
Corbinelli, fragments from Plato's Phaedrus translated by Leonardo Bruni (1370-1444),
Bruni's treatise De Militia, Cicero's letter to his brother Quintus (Q. fr. 1,1) and Cicero's
Partitiones Oratoriae (Classification of Oratory).
Among the forewords it is that by Giovanni Aurispa which deserves special attention, because
together with the following translation of Lucian's dialogue it is preserved in some 75
manuscripts; such wide diffusion is not owed to Lucian's text itself, but to Aurispa's
introductory essay, which is filled with humanistic ethical postulates. The crucial importance
77
of that foreword for the diffusion of Lucian's dialogue is testified by the fact that, as distinct
from the 75 mentioned manuscripts that contain the foreword, only one manuscript of the
same dialogue is preserved in Bartolomeo Landi's translation, which originated shortly after
the version of Aurispa, but which has no accompanying text by the translator.
Also included in the codex are three inscriptions – one in Latin (CIL XI 30* [2]), a widely
known humanistic forgery [FIG. 8 (fol. 4)], and two in Greek (with interlinear Latin
translation), which are in fact two epigrams from the Anthologia Graeca [FIGS. 9 (fol. 18v)
and 10 (fol. 32v)] – as well as the letter from the consuls Gaius Fabricius and Quintus
Emilius to King Pyrrhus (Epistola ad Pirrum regem sedicionem medici patefaciens), which is
known from Aulus Gellius' Noctes Atticae.
It is to be noted that while the other two codices by Petar's hand (today kept in the Biblioteca
Marciana in Venice and in the Bodleian Library in Oxford) contain either ancient inscriptions
or works of Cicero and Christian Fathers, most of the Trogir MS consist of early humanistic
translations from Greek (made in the first quarter of the 15th century).
The contents of the codex show how current Petar's acquaintance with the humanistic studies
was and his considerable interest in political, educational and rhetorical topics. These facts
show that Petar was well informed about the news: Bruni's translation of Plato's Phaedrus was
probably made between 1401 and 1404, Guarino's translation of the Pseudo-Plutarchian
treatise De Liberis Educandis originates from 1410 or 1411, Bruni's De militia was written in
1421 or 1422, and the translation of Lucian's dialogue by Rinuccio Aretino was made early in
June of 1434 – at most two and a half years before Petar transcribed it in his codex! Finally, it
should be pointed out that the Greek texts in the codex represent perhaps the earliest
testimony of humanistic interest for the Greek language on the eastern Adriatic coast.
Lucian's twelfth Dialogus, known in the Renaissance Humanism under the title De
praestantia (or: praesidentia) imperatorum, with its competition among the three generals,
Alexander, Hannibal and Scipio, merits special attention. In Lucian's original text, the judge
Minos awards first place to Alexander, but Aurispa, claiming that he relies on the little-known
Greek rhetorician Libanius from the 4th century, gives the title of winner to Scipio. The
change was, in fact, motivated by the translator's desire to flatter the dedicatee of the
translation: the Roman born podestà of Bologna, Battista Capodiferro. But this alteration has
78
much wider political and ideological implications. For, whereas Alexander, like Caesar, was
the ideal ruler for the sympathizers of the monarchy, Scipio was the ideal representative of the
republican system of government. This is why, in 1435 – only a year before the Trogir codex
was transcribed – Lucian's dialogue became one of the arguing points in the polemic
concerning Scipio and Caesar, which developed between Poggio Bracciolini (1389-1459) and
Guarino of Verona. It was perhaps this circumstance that drew Petar's attention to Lucian's
text. Petar, who was the citizen of the autonomous commune of Trogir and subject of the
Venetian republic, very likely shared a sympathy for republican ideals with the Florentine
Poggio.
Leonardo Bruni's De Militia also deals with a political subject; in this treatise Bruni compares
the military organization in Greece, Rome and Florence. It may be mentioned here that Bruni
shows himself in his works, especially in Laudatio Florentinae Urbis (1401), as the
continuator of the views of Colluccio Salutati, who saw the city of Florence as the defender of
civil liberty. Bruni's ideal was libertas rei publicae, so in his Laudatio he compared Florence
to ancient Athens and considered it the inheritor of republican Rome. Cicero's letter to his
brother Quintus, then governor of the Roman province of Asia, contains a great deal of advice
about how to govern wisely and about the qualities needed by a good governor.
The Pseudo-Plutarchian De Liberis Educandis was, next to Quintilian's Institutio Oratoria,
the most important work for humanistic pedagogy. Cicero's Partitiones Oratoriae, a kind of
rhetorical repertory, belong to the foundations of oratory.
Since the oldest known MS of Cicero's letters to Quintus belongs to the beginning of the 14 th
century, and all others originated in the late 14th or the early 15th centuries or later, Petar
Cipiko's copy of Q. fr. 1,1 should be taken into consideration in preparing critical editions of
the letter. This is corroborated by some interesting variants in the Trogir MS, pointed out by
Miroslav Marković in 1953. To Marković, in fact, goes the credit of being the first who
described the contents of this codex, but he nevertheless failed to identify all of its contents
and to situate Petar's work in a wider context.
Petar's codex still remains completely unnoticed by the international scholars (it's not to be
found even in Kristeller's comprehensive Iter Italicum), but in Croatia itself the unique and up
to date way in which Petar followed the news on humanistic “market of ideas” has not been
noticed until now.
79
80
Vladimir Rezar, Zagreb
The manuscript legacy of Damianus Benessa (Dubrovnik
1476.(?) – 1539.)
The writers of Dubrovnik and their works, no matter whether they were writtten in Croatian,
Latin or Italian, have always been of great interest, both for the town itself and for the world
outside. Literary historiography can be traced inside the walls since 16th century, and untill
the middle the 18th it reached its acme with the monumental work of Seraphinus Cerva
Bibliotheca Ragusina (written between 1727 and 1744), where one can find data about lives
and works of 435 citizens of Dubrovnik who won recognition by their literary
accomplishements. Hardly less important are the works of Cerva's predecessor Ignatius
Georgi who wrote Vitae illustrium Rhagusinorum (1707-1716), or of a bit older Sebastianus
Slade Dolci, who composed a similar work entitled Fasti litterario ragusini (published in
1767). All the more, when Francesco Maria Appendini wrote his Notizie istorico critiche sulle
antichita, storia e letteratura de' Ragusei (published 1803), it was a beginning of a modern
literary criticism of the literature of Dubrovnik. During the 19th century the interest for this
particular literature finally spread out of the city walls, and since that time the literary
production of Dubrovnik hasn't lost its attraction for the domestic and foreign researchers up
to these days.
At the same time, it should be of no surprise that Dubrovnik itself, along with the Croatian
literary historiography as a whole, always used to be very proud of the oldest layer of its
literary production preserved, especially of its particular branch which is commonly called
humanistic literature. It is well known that very early, not later that the middle of 15th
century, Dubrovnik became the safest haven on the east coast of Adriatic for spreading revival
of classical literary forms and languages. An efficient humanistic educational mechanism,
which was introduced by Italian Filippo de Diversis, a teacher in Dubrovnik since 1434 till
1440, remained standard requirement and priority of Dubrovnik government in next decades
and centuries, and was encouraging generations of
youngsters to continue their high
education all over the Europe. The results showed quickly, so at the turn of the century an
extremely motivating cultural atmosphere inside the walls provoked a series of humanistic
81
works of considerable quality to be written. Those works and the authors themself mostly
remained a part of collective cultural memory of the town, and due to this the local literary
historiography provided them with a proper treatment. If some literary phenomena for any
reason escaped attention of domestic literary criticism of 18th century, the 19th century
criticism, and that of the 20th century even more, put efforts afterwards to fill the gaps
thoroughly. The last few decades was a period of sincere devotion to preservation of Croatian
humanistic literary heritage, even that part which for many reasons was never given a chance
to be published. So, doesn't it sound strange that Dubrovnik still keeps a literary corpus of
humanistic provenance, which counts more than 15000 mostly Latin, but also some Greek
verses, which was almost forgotten inside the walls up to the second half of 18th century, and
appeared not worthy of thorough research for the modern literary criticism up to last few
years. It is a manuscript heritage of Damianus Benessa that we talk about, and next lines will
try to shed some light on reasons for such a neglect of a corpus which ought to attract a
reasonable attention just by its mere extensiveness and provenance.
Few words about Benessa himself. He was born around 1476 in a noble family of Dubrovnik.
It is still not clear enough whether he studied abroad, but as his cursus honorum, which was
supposed to start from 1497 (namely, this is the year when he became a member of Consilium
maius), runs from 1504 on, we can presume that this time-gap represents the period of his
high education somewhere outside Dubrovnik. A lacuna between 1509 and 1515 should be
interpreted as a period when he left the town again, but his time for different reasons: he had
to earn for a living so he became a merchant on his own trading vessel. During his seafaring
he travelled all across the Old continent, from Britain to Asia, but never lost his humanistic
impulse. We can tell it from a fact that in 1514 he decided to prepare an edition of Italicus'
Bellum Punicum Secundum, which was printed in Lyons, at a printing-house of B. Troth. This
very rare edition includes two Benessa's letters which explain why a foreign merchant so far
away from home should undertake such a publishing adventure. His intention was, Benessa
claims, to help all other travellers who faced the same problem as he did, carrying heavy
books on a journey: thus he prepared a recently invented octavo edition, which should enable
all educated men to have their favorite writer always by their side. He apologizes for possible
editorial omissions, justifying himself by the fact that the life of a merchant, which he already
became fed up with, is very stressful, and announces his impending retirement. And indeed,
the next year he is back to Dubrovnik, gets married, never leaving his homeland for a longer
period again up to his death, as his cursus honorum clearly indicates. Letting his brothers in
82
law to run the business, he choses more quiet life, spending much time composing Latin
verses in his summer house in Zaton near Dubrovnik. Although he was now far away from
European capitals, he was still carefully observing cultural and political occurrences, and at
the same time he somehow believed that his words could be of some influence. It was really
surprising when we, completely by chance, found Benessa's autographic letters in State
Archive in Vienna few years ago, and realized that the poet addressed them to kings Francis I,
Ferdinand I, and to emperor Karl V. The poet warns them on critical state of Christianity
faced with Turkish invasion, and asks them to cut mutual hostilities off for a common sake.
The letters follow the best humanistic epistolary tradition, and are extremely charming due to
Benessa's unusual immediateness in communication with such prominent persons, as well as
for his authentic and peculiar political concepts which he didn't hesitate to expose infront the
kings.
Speaking about Benessa's literary heritage in narrow sense, his poetic corpus consists of two
autographic manuscripts, which together make some 280 folia, i.e. some 16000 verses. The
first of them, entitled Poemata (the title was added later), is kept in the Archive of Mala
braća in Dubrovnik (call number Brlek 78). Although the autographic character of the
manuscript was questioned during the 20th century, it should be no matter of doubt, since the
graphological comparison between a handwriting of the manuscript and a handwriting of the
letters mentioned above shows evident concordances. The manuscript contents range from
Benessa's early love lyric, poems addressed to domestic and foreign friends, numerous
comments on current political events, to religious poetry written in older age. Writing those
poems Benessa proved himself in most literary forms of humanistic period, so he composed
three books of epigrams (some 2300 verses), a book of eclogues (1116), two books of
carmina lyrica or odes (1745 verses), a book of satires (1735 verses), and some 800 verses of
various poetic compositions. It is not difficult to realize that Benessa's poetry is considerably
influenced both by classical authors, such as Catullus, Horace and Vergil, as well as by
modern poets, mostly by Pontano, Sannazaro, Marullo Tarchaniota or Battista Mantuano. The
universal character of his humanistic education and extraordinary talent is also proved by
nine epigrams written in Greek, or by several Latin translations of Classical and Christian
Greek writers. Finally, he ends the manuscript with a peculiar epilogue, where he announces
his intention to print this work. But this is not all: printing these poems should be just an
introduction for an appearance of his capital work, the large-scale religious epic which tells
about Christ's passion and resurrection.
83
This epic is entitled De morte Christi, it is written in separate manuscript which is being kept
in Scientific Library of Dubrovnik (call number 4). Some 8500 hexameters of the epic are
divided in ten books: first book is a kind of intorductory, the next three books retell the last
supper, the next three the interrogation of Christ infront of Jewish council and Pilate, and the
last three describe Christ's death on the cross and the resurrection. Needless to say that in his
epic Benessa tried to follow humanistic pattern of writing, emulating general formal and
stylistic characteristics of Vergil's Aeneid. But it is very interesting that trying to achieve this
goal Benessa made a step forward from the biggest part of epic production of his time.
Although most epics of 15th century tried to sound like Aeneid, the level of their general
composition, i.e. the way the telling of the topic was organized, still resembled the middle-age
concept of lineary, chronological lining up of events, which did not have to show strong
causal connection. If we have to state an example of such literary production on the Croatian
soil, let us mention the lenghty epic De vita et gestis Christi (Rome 1526) written by
Benessa's friend and literary model Jacobus Bona (1469-1534) from Dubrovnik, or the
allegorical epic Davidias written by Marcus Marulus (1450-1524) from Split.
On the
contrary, using the «in medias res» approach Benessa decided to sing mainly about the last
three days of Christ's life, instead of telling the whole of his dwelling among mortals: in such
way he made distance from the centuries of tradition and composed an epic which was
significantly closer to the Aristotelian idea of good epic. The moment which could encourage
Benessa to choose such epic design was publishing of Vida's Christiad
in 1535. This
particular epic, even before it found its way to public, was considered the peak of humanistic
epic production of the time, and one of its distinguishing characteristics was such avant-garde
design of Vergilian provenance, instead of the common model used in biblical epics, shaped
by Juvencus' epic Evangeliorum libri quattuor from the 4th century.
So, both Vida and Benessa use a number of digressions to tell the important parts which
happened before the main story, and it is definitely not by chance that Benessa chose the
whole second book to go back to the time of God's creation of the world , using an extremely
large ekphrasis of more than 800 hexameters to tell us the history of human race (based upon
the Old Testament) up to the time of Christ. A kind of novelty concerning the epic technique
which we can notice both in Vida's and Benessa's poem is describing of the events which
were not part of the scriptural canon, but could be accepted as possible according to some
incomplete reports in Holy Scripture. So, among other things in De morte Christi we will find
84
apostle John explaining metaphysical nature of relation between the Father and the Son in a
long monologue (almost 130 verses) addressed to apostle Thomas, then Joseph of Arimathea
defending Jesus infront of Sanhedrin, or Pilate having a horrible nightmare which in
allegorical way announces the events which are going to happen. A special case are Benessa's
several attempt to depict mother Mary crying for her son when she gets the news about his
arrest, or during his way to Golgotha. These scenes also are not part of canonical Gospels, but
during the Middle age they became part of so called Preces stationum (prayers on the Stations
of the Cross), or they gave material for the hymns like Stabat Mater, and there is no doubt
that they became extremely popular among believers. With time these scenes also became an
object of independent literary interpretations and we can speak about a separate genre of
Crying Madonna. As Dubrovnik was very fond of this particular genre, Benessa did not
consider it a theological problem to incorporate these scenes in his epic, especially for the
reason that the same thing was already done in the epic De vita et gestis Christi (1526) of
Jacobus Bona, although this epic is considered a conservative one. And as we can notice that
Benessa borrowed a lot from Bona, he borrowed even more from the poem Parasceve of his
friend Aelius Cerva (1463-1520), who wrote more than 400 hexameters on the topic of Good
Friday. Finally let us mention a significant number of theological comments which distinguish
Benessa as an experienced philosopher, and an unusually large number of invocations he
incoroprated in the epic: we can count some 15 invocations addressed to persons of Holy
Trinity, or to Virgin Mary, in which the poet cry for help, usually before he starts to treat
some difficult exegetic parts of his poem.
Benessa brought both manuscripts to an end almost simultaneously. Although we have no
exact data, everything points to the beginning of 1539 to be the time he wrote epilogue and
announced his intention to publish his works. Unfortunately, just few months later he died as
a first victim (as the annals of Dubrovnik claim) of an epidemic which started ad the end of
1539 and devastated population of Dubrovnik. Benessa's poetry was never published, even
worse, it disappeared for years. When Seraphinus Cerva writes his Bibliotheca Ragusina in
the first half of 18th century, he has no information about Benessa's manuscripts, neither he
knows what he actually wrote.The turning point was the year of 1759, when Jesuit priest
Ioannes Matthei (1714-1791), a well known erudite of Dubrovnik, found the manuscripts,
already significantly damaged, under unknown circumstances. It is our presumption that it
was his missionary work between 1755 and 1759 on the northern territory of Dubrovnik
Republic which led him to this finding: that is, if we suppose that the manuscripts didn't leave
85
the summer house in Zaton after Benessa's death, and that Matthei became familiar with local
residents during these few years, it is very likely that he found the manuscripts almost in situ.
Whatever the case was, since 1759 Benessa's manuscripts have been common good, only
changing libraries where they were kept during next decades.
So, if we now, from present point of view, consider the fate of Benessa's litterary heritage,
and try to draw comparison between his corpus and a literary corpus of his domestic
contemporaries, it seems that it mostly resembles the fate of the poetry of his friend Aelius
Cerva. Although they both wrote a large number of verses, and although they won recognition
of his contemporaries – just to mention that in 1484 Cerva became poeta laureatus in Rome they both had only few their epigrams printed, all of these in the same edition, as a praise to
the author Georgius Benignus and his work De natura coelestium spirituum (Firenze 1499).
On the other hand, Cerva and Benessa are the only two Latin poets of Dubrovnik from the
turn of 15th and 16th century, whose literary heritage almost complete reached our time in
manuscripts. The manuscripts of their predecessors Volcius Bobali (1420-1472), poeta
laureatus Petrus Menze (1451-1508), or these of poet and prose writer Ioannes Gozze (14511502) who wrote in three languages, were not that lucky. The time was not merciful neither to
allegedly very elegant poetry of Ludovicus Cerva Tubero (1458-1527), who remained
remembered exclusively after his historiographic work, which brought him huge fame all
over the Europe.
Finally there is another one interesting detail which connects the manuscript heritage of
Aelius Cerva and Damianus Benessa. That is, both literary legacies were copied and supplied
with notes by Franciscan Antonius Agich (1753-1830) at the beginning of 19th century. His
extremely large effort is especially important concerning the preservation of Benessa's opus.
If Agich hadn't copied it, a significant part of the corpus would have been lost for us, because
of the damages which Benessa's autographic manuscripts suffered during last two hundered
years.
At the same time, it is worth explaining how Agich actually decided to copy the manuscripts.
As he was invited to Corfu in 1816 to perform a series of Easter homilies, he took with him
both Benessa's manuscripts, hoping that educated Greeks could give him some hints for
understanding Benessa's Greek poems. But as Corfu was hit by plague, and Agich escaped to
Malta, he had to spend few weeks in quarantine, so he decided to spend this time copying the
86
manuscripts, as these two were the only existing in Dubrovnik. Agich himself discusses these
circumstances and other details in a foreword he wrote for his transcript three years later in
Rome. Surprisingly, this extremely unusual text strikes us from the very beginning, because
instead of praises which should motivate us for reading we face undisguised invective against
Benessa's poetry!
After very first few lines it becomes completely clear that Agich keeps completely hostile
attitude against the poetry he copied, and that his anger is proportional to the quantity of time
and effort he invested into this transcript. All the more, his huge discontent forced him to try
to discourage potential reader even before he would open the manuscript, so on the front page
he wrote a line of Horace with a clear message: Scribimus indocti, doctique poemata passim
(Hor Ep. 2, 1, 117). This warning is followed by a series of Agich's poisoned remarks, which
range from accusations for Benessa's superficiality in composing verses, large amount of
metrical errors, unacceptable inventing of new Latin words, to severe reproaches for
Benessa's daring to change scriptural tradition.What makes him extremely exasperated is
Benessa's imprudent intention to publish the works, which are nothing but mere deliramenta.
He emphasises that the only reason why he copied the manuscripts was that he hadn't other
things to do while staying prisoned in quarantine, and that his handwriting tells enough for
himself how indisposed he was while dealing with Benessa's poems. He would have done a
great favour to Apollo and his Muses if he had thrown Benessa's monstra idearum, vocum et
numerorum into fire, but as some Benessa's compatriots praised him, he had to desist from his
intention. However, these prayers, Agich explains, could have only been written by those who
didn't actually read Benessa's poetry, but they wanted to make a number of excellent writers
of Dubrovnik bigger than it really was. Or maybe they just wanted to mock him with such
exaggerated praises?! Finally, Agich is convinced that every reader who will survey this
poetry thoroughly will feel the same as he did. But even if this will not be the case, there is
still no way for him to change his opinion, even if he would get flogged!
What a way to write a Benevolo Lectori! If Benessa's death was the first important moment
which influenced essentially on the reception of his poetic legacy, should there be any doubt
now that Agich was the second? On the one hand, his credits for Benessa are enormous,
because his manuscript with transcription, which is also being kept in Archive of Mala Braća
(call number Brlek 256), has enabled us to read those parts of De morte Christi which are no
more readable from the autographic Benessa's manuscript (approximately one quarter of a
87
whole text). But on the other hand, there is no doubt that his exaggerated negative evaluation
of Benessa's works, which was mostly provoked by circumstances in which he made the
transcript, influenced all those who later on decided to open his transcription up and
discouraged them to study Benessa's corpus thoroughly.
One of them was eminent classical philologist Đuro Körbler (1873-1927) from Zagreb.
Writing an essay on juvenile poetry of Carolus Puteus, Aelius Cerva and Damianus Benessa,
he analysed the lyric part of Benessa's poetry and constructed the first, and for many years the
only biographic note on Benessa. One of the reasons why nobody tried to continue his work
for years was that after Agich he also marked Benessa's poetry with generally negative
opinion, which made this highly demanding and huge linguistic material very uninviting, or
better to say repellent.
However, as it was too large and too old corpus to be ignored that much, Benessa's work got
his place among other Latin works in a wide anthological survey of Croatian Latinism
entitled Croatici auctores qui Latine scripserunt (Zagreb1969). There Benessa was presented
with some 150 verses and with a short introductory essay which retells what was already told
by Körbler some 55 years ago. But, it was the last decade of 20th century which brought some
significant change regarding the treatment of Benessa's literary legacy. That is, his work
finally attracted more independent researchers, and the result was a number of various essays
appeared in a shorter period of time. The other significant detail is that this time these works
were written in affirmative manner, trying to put emphasis on better segments of Benessa's
poetry, which was quite the opposite to earlier approach, when the weaknesses of Benessa's
work were discussed on the first place.
Generally speaking, this shift in sensibility of approach to Benessa's poetry can be noticed the
best by comparing two standard encyclopaedic entries on our poet. While the first one, written
in 1983 in the Croatian biographic lexicon follows the trace of Agich's and Körbler's
evaluations and as a conclusion emphasises that in Benessa's poetry there is just a huge
number of verses and very little of poetry, the one written in 2000 in the Lexicon of Croatian
writers concludes that ignoring of Benessa's poetic phenomenon, which is unique in the first
half of Croatian cinquecento, is inadmissible.
The intention of our comparison was by no means to blame the former, or to praise the latter
88
approach – we just wanted to point the differences between two philological sensibilities,
which are shaped by the period and circumstances in which they developed. That is, in the
first half of the 20th century a new born Croatian modern literary criticism and modern
Neolatin philology had to give priority to the most influential representatives of national
latinistic production. As the volume of this corpus was huge and disproportional to active
scientific resources, many marginal, but still very interesting literary phenomena had to be
neglected for a while, and the quality of such works was being refuted partially on the basis of
«sour grapes» rationalization. But, as by the end of the century the top names of Croatian
Latinism mostly got proper philological treatment, finally went a time when a neglect of rare
intact literary collections of humanistic provenance could be called a sin of national
philology, even if these works were traditionally considered a second-rate poetry. And let us
mention that this particular sin, at least when we talk about Benessa's epic, was noticed by
great Belgian neolatinist Jozef Ijsewijn. In his comprehensive work Companion to Neo-Latin
Studies from 1990 among other things he wrote about Croatian Neolatinism he decently
added following remark too:
While the Christian epics of Vida (Christias) and Sannazaro (De partu Virginis) are well
known, mention is hardly ever made of a Dubrovnik poet, Jacobus Bonus (Bunić), who
published a De vita et gestis Christi nine years before Vida (1526). A similar poem by
Damianus Benessa, the De morte Christi, is still waiting to be edited.
Just a few words for the end. If we take into consideration what was said up to this point, we
can notice that during the last centuries two deadly epidemics played important role for the
destiny of Benessa's literary legacy. As a matter of fact, the first one directly obstructed the
publishing of Benessa's works. We hope that the third one is not knocking on our doors,
because De morte Christi is ready to go to press again!
89
James Neville, London
BUREAUCRACY AND BACKHANDERS – THE MANUSCRIPT
LETTERS FROM ALEXANDRIA
Bureaucracy does not change. We all moan about it, though some sort of regulation is necessary
to preserve the peace. For Hellenistic Alexandria we have a host of documents that vividly
illustrate everyday life in the cosmopolitan city.
Penalities could be severe, as the code concerning assault makes clear (Law*) with its marked
discriminations between slave and free-born (the former viciously flogged, the latter merely
fined), between drunkenness and sobriety (note that inebriation incurred twice the penalty).
Numerous personal bequests survive, of which I have selected a few: a charming gift to keep
teacher happy (letter*), a request from a lentil-seller to postpone his taxes in lean times (letter*),
a private declaring his bill to his doctor (letter*), Zenon an invalid asking for provisions (letter*),
possibly the same man who was charged with supplying wood for the festival of Isis (letter*);
note here that he failed to delivered the goods in time! Apollonius, who wanted this wood,
himself needed to be reminded of his duty to the priests of Aphrodite (letter*), a deity assimilated
to the Egyptian Hathor.
Questions to the oracle abound: one fragment (list*) perserves the sort of hopes and forebodings
experienced by ordinary people – for money or loss of it, for personal favours or public
aspirations, &c.
But if some of these worries seem rather alien – although many reveal the sort of worries we all
still now agonise over – bribery was certainly rife! (letter*) Questions to the gods may have been
commonplace, but downright blackmail was more likely to produce results. Times indeed do not
change.
90
Vesna Dimovska Janjatova, Skopje
Latin Manuscripts as Sources in the Study of Medieval
Macedonian History
Sources for the study of the medieval history of Macedonia and the Macedonian people are
generally scarce. Research on this period is further complicated by the fact that the majority
of these sources are not autochthonous. Most sources either originated in territories not
inhabited by Macedonian people or were written by non-Macedonians—foreigners frequently
in the service of enemies and conquerors. Consequently, it is difficult to single out a
manuscript which is not marred by partiality or subjectivism. But while the search for
objective truth in these documents at times resembles a search for a grain of sand in the sea,
they still offer precious data and are of exceptional importance as being often the only record
of a certain period or event. The data found in them, however scarce and seemingly irrelevant,
constitute valuable pieces in the construction of the mosaic of medieval Macedonian history.
What has survived as a legacy of the middle ages and as a relevant source for the study of
Macedonian history comprises notes, inscriptions or manuscripts of Byzantine, Oriental,
Slavonic and Roman provenance. Bearing in mind the geographical position of Macedonia
and the historic circumstances of the continued existence of the Macedonian people, it is
perfectly understandable that the largest number of these manuscripts were written in Old
Slavonic, Greek31, and Turkish. The number of manuscripts written in Latin and in the Latin
alphabet is much smaller, but this does not mean that they are of lesser importance.
The largest part of this precious legacy has already been the subject of serious and thorough
analysis by a large number of prominent scholars: authorities in the fields of palaeography
and historiography (most commonly, but not exclusively, from the countries neighbouring
Macedonia or from the countries which used to be a part of former Yugoslavia). However, the
issues relevant to the history of the Macedonian people in particular have often been treated
incidentally or one-sidedly within the context of studies of other issues, events or processes. It
31
Consequently, Old Slavonic and Ancient Greek palaeography in Macedonia are much more developed
than Latin palaeography.
91
is true that serious efforts undertaken in this direction since the Second World War—and, in
particular, since Macedonia became independent—have borne some excellent results.
However, more hard work is needed to shed light on the past of the Macedonian people and in
order to arrive at the truth about their place in the history of the peoples of the Balkans.
The diversity and dispersion of these documents, as well as the different viewpoints of their
interpretations to date, represent a considerable challenge to attempts at a new analytical and
comparative interpretation. For these reasons, some of the manuscripts should be carefully
reread, the palaeographic and language analysis should be revised, and a precise and correct
Macedonian translation should be made to enable historians to carry out further comparative
research which would serve to confirm or correct existing interpretations.
We would like highlight two examples—two specific manuscripts—in order to illustrate our
argument. These two Latin manuscripts have been comprehensively researched on several
occasions to date, but still offer possibilities for additional analysis for the purpose of
clarification of certain problems relevant to the history of medieval Macedonia.
The first manuscript is the Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja, also known as Bar Genealogy, or
Croatian Chronicles.32 This text (or more precisely, texts33) has a rich and tempestuous
‘biography’ and bibliography of some renown—for our hosts, in particular—and for this
reason we shall not dwell at length upon it. Despite all dilemmas and remaining questions
concerning its date, composition, authorship and the authenticity of some of its parts—and
despite reservations expressed with regards to its credibility and value—most researchers of
this text agree that it contains (along with certain vagaries) a great amount of historical facts
which can be confirmed by other sources and that it therefore cannot be ignored as a historical
source. This is particularly true of the data available in the part entitled ‘The Hagiography of
St Vladimir’, from chapter 36 to the end. It is this passage which contains data relevant to
medieval Macedonian history and which, for this reason, is considered suitable for
reanalysis—this time from the point of view and within the context of studies of Macedonian
history of the same period. This task was undertaken by prof. Ljubinka Basotova. In her
32
The last is in fact the title of the Croatian translation of the same text from 1546.
We say ‘texts’ because there are several versions of the text: the Latin transcript by Jovan Lučić, the
Italian version by Mauro Orbini, the translation into Croatian by Jeronim Kaletić and the well -known
Latin edition by Marko Marulić. The introduction to the Chronicle itself maintains that it is actually a
translation of an even older Slavonic original. On the basis of these manuscripts, several printed editions
of the Chronicle were published.
33
92
substantial work, The Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja as a Source for Macedonian Medieval
History, she highlighted several areas in the text bearing relevance to issues concerning St
Cyril and Methodius, the emergence and coronation of Tzar Samoil, his campaign to the west
and the radical changes that occurred after his death, including events concerning his
successors and the submission to Byzantium.
Some of the data in chapter VIII of the Chronicle concerning the person and the work of
Constantine – Cyril Philosopher can be compared and confirmed by other historical sources
about him (Pannonian and Italian Legends). But the most interesting data34 is that, before the
Khazar and the Moravian Mission, Constantine undertook a mission amongst the
Bulgarines35: more precisely, in the border territory between Byzantium and Bulgaria
inhabited by Macedonian Slavs. This mission’s aim was to spread education and Christianity
amongst the population and this can be confirmed by two other sources.36 In Chapter IX, the
priest of Duklja included other data about Constantine’s work, but also raised an enigma as to
the existence of ‘librum Sclavorum qui dictur Methodius’, which, according to Basotova37,
was in fact a nomocanon written by Methodius and to which an appendix was added
containing legal regulations, originating possibly from the time of the reign of the prince
Svetopolk. Basotova believes that the priest of Duklja created a construct and attributed these
to the legendary king Budimir.
The Chronicle becomes relevant as a source for Samoil’s Empire in Chapter XXXIII which
refers to the emergence of Samoil (‘Eo tempore surrexit in gente Bulgarinorum quidem
Samuel’), his proclamation as an emperor (‘qui se imperatorem vocari iussit’) and to the
expulsion of the Greeks (‘et commisit proelia multa cum Graecis preicitque eos ex tota
Bulagria, ut in diebus eius Graeci non auderent propinquare illuc’). Basotova paid special
attention to the ethnonym ‘Bulgarini’ used by the priest of Duklja whenever he referred to the
subjects both of Samoil and his successors and highlighted the clear distinction made between
Basotova Lj. ‘The Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja as a Source for Macedonian Medieval History’ ,
pp.38.
35
For more detail see Šišić F., Letopis popa Dukljanina, Belgrade-Zagreb, 1928, and Mošin V., Ljetopis
popa Dukljanina, Zagreb, 1950.
36
The data about this mission is confirmed by two other sources: The Legend of St. Ljudmila from the
13 th century and Cyril’s Short Hagiography called Cyril’s Assumption.
37
Compared with other sources, it can be deduced that the imprecise formulation eo tempore used by the
priest of Duklja referred to the time of the uprising of 976 AD against the domination of Byzantium
(after the death of the emperor John Tzimiskes), not the one from 969 which was a rebellion against the
Bulgarian rule.
34
93
this term and the ethnonym ‘Bulgari’38, a fact neglected by almost all other interpreters of this
text. She further drew attention to the fact that the suffix –inus is productive in Latin for the
creation of adjectives which are used as attributes to denote belonging to something,
affiliation or similarity to something, as well as being characteristic of adjectives ‘derived
from nouns which denote names of cities, and the adjectives themselves become substantives
again… in order to denote the inhabitants of those cities or areas. For example Ameria (a city
in Umbria) as opposed to Amerini (inhabitants of Ameria), Arpi as opposed to Arpini, Calatia
as opposed to Calatini… All these examples are identical both in form and derivation to our
form Bulgarini, because this form derived from the territorial denotation Bulgaria by addition
of the suffix –inus: Bulgaria – Bulgarinus –Bulgarini. This means that the form Bulgarini as
used by the priest from Duklja is not equivalent to the form Bulgari, which is a real ethnonym,
but denotes ‘inhabitants of a certain territory, in this case the inhabitants of the territory of
‘Bulgaria’39. Consequently, Basotova concludes that the priest of Duklja made a clear
distinction between the Bulgars and the Bulgarines, and for this reason he found it necessary
to create a new form to denote a part of the population of Bulgaria, the inhabitants that
become subjects of Samoil’s state. She believes that this supports the thesis about the Slavic
origins of the author of the Chronicle, because he was able to perceive the difference, first and
foremost, in the language of these two peoples: a difference which would be lost to both
Byzantine and Western writers40.
As far as Samoil’s proclamation as an emperor is concerned, the Chronicle states clearly—‘se
imperatorem vocari iussit’—that he himself ordered that he be addressed as an ‘emperor’ or
‘tzar’, but throughout the text he was exclusively referred to as ‘imperator’41. It is interesting
that Orbini in his Italian edition translated this title as ‘imperatore’, while he translated the
same title, when attributed to Peter, as ‘principe’. Byzantine sources avoid employing this title
when referring to Samoil due to the fact that he caused great troubles to the Byzantine state
and was considered a usurper of power who acted against the interests of Byzantine politics.
Byzantine sources (Ademar, Lupus), on the other hand, referred to Samoil as ‘rex’, while
other sources confirm his coronation. The priest of Duklja claimed that Samoil had an
Similarly, in chapter VIII, we read that Constantine-Cyril christened ‘omnem gentem Bulgarinorum,
that Samoil ‘surrexit in gente Bulgarinorum’, while Peter is named ‘imperator Bulgarorum’.
39
Basotova Lj., The Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja as a Source for Macedonian Medieval History,
pp.82.
40
This difference was felt also by Srećković, Istorija srpskog naroda, 1884, and Badžović D., Kojoj
slovenskoj grani pripadaju Sloveni u Gornjoj Albaniji I Makedoniji.
41
It clearly indicates the priest of Duklja had no dilemmas about Samuil being a ruler of the same rank
and with the same title as the ruler of Byzantium: that of an ‘imperator’.
38
94
emperor’s court: ‘Imperator in partibus Achridiae in loco, qui Prespa dicitur, ubi curia
eiusidem imperatoris erat’.
It is indicative that the successors to his throne, his son Gavril Radomir and nephew Jovan
Vladislav, had the same title and were referred to as such even by Byzantine writers
(Nikephoros Bryennios).
Chapter XXXVI is considered by many to be exceptional in its characteristics and
composition, standing out from the text as a whole. It is of interest to Macedonian
historiography because of the data, important and confirmed, about Samoil’s campaign to the
west (Duklja, Ulcinj, Durras): ‘Samoil, Bulgarinorum imperator congregato mango exercitu,
advenit in partibus Dalmatiae supra terram Regis Vladimiri…’. The priest of Duklja also
reports that Vladimir retreated to the Oblik mountain and later surrendered to Samoil and was
taken as a hostage to Prespa. As a result, Samoil declared Duklja his own province and
appointed a regent as a ruler.42 This is followed by the history of the love between Samoil’s
daughter, Kosara, and the captured prince, Vladimir; a love which resulted in the marriage of
the two and the ‘handing over’ to Vladimir, as a son-in-law, of the Durras area (‘totam terram
Duracenorum’), which implies that Samoil had already conquered it (historians have divided
opinions on this matter). In continuation of this chapter of the Chronicle, there are many
interesting details concerning the rule of Samoil’s successors, Gavril Radomir (his rule,
marriages, and cause of death) and Jovan Vladislav43 (his takeover of power, his possible
involvement in the murder of Radomir, and the conspiracy against Vladimir), concluding with
the definitive submission of the Macedonian state by the Byzantine emperor Basil II. This
source also offers important information about the involvement of Constantine Bodin in the
turbulent uprisings in Macedonia in 1072-73, his coronation and, eventually, his defeat and
exclusion by the Byzantines.
The second example we would like to refer to is the correspondence between the Bulgarian
emperor Kaloyan (1197-1207) and Pope Inocent III (1198–1216). This comprises Ivan
Kaloyan’s letter of 1202 to Pope Inocent III, 44 in which he demanded from the Pope ‘a crown
and honour’ (coronam et honorem), and the Pope’s riposte to this letter. These letters have
Some indirect allusions to this campaign of Samuil’s were made by Jahja.
The priest of Duklja’s portrayal of Jovan Vladislav was more detailed and comprehensive t han any
other source.
44
Migne, PL, 214, lib. V, ap. 115, col. 1122 and LIBI XII/3, p.312
42
43
95
also been used and commented upon by distinguished historians, primarily by Duichev and
Snegarov, but only as a source for the history of Bulgaria. We believe that certain fragments
of these letters offer and merit an opportunity for further examination from the point of view
of Macedonian history. They are again related to the issue of Samoil’s coronation or (self)declaration as an emperor. Kaloyan wrote in his letter: ‘In primo petimus ab ecclesia Romana
matre nostra coronam et honorem, tamquam dilectis filiis secundum quod imperatores nostri
veteres habuerunt, Unus fuit Petrus, alius fuit Samuel’. That is, he asked to be granted the
crown and imperial honours, as was the case with the former emperors Peter and Samoil, and
he cited some old Bulgarian books in support of his demand. In his reply, Pope Inocent III
pays due attention to Kaloyan’s reference to these old books: ‘Petisti vero humiliter, ut
coronam tibi Ecclesia Romana cederet, sicut ilustris memoriae Petro, Samoili et aliis
progenitoribus tuis in libris suis legitur concessisse. Nos igitur, ut supra hoc certitudinem
haberemus, regesta perlegi fecimus diligenter, ex quibus evidenter comprehendimus, quod in
terra tibi subiecta multi reges fuerint coronati.’ – ‘you have humbly asked from the Roman
church to grant you the crown, as it did to celebrated Peter and Samoil and your other
predecessors, as it could be read in your books that they were granted. In order to be certain in
this matter, we have made an effort to read our records carefully and we have learned without
a doubt that in the realm obedient to you many have been crowned as kings’. This extract
allows us to conclude that Pope Inocent III found evidence in the records that Samoil as well
as Peter had been granted the title of a king (rex) and not the title of an emperor (imperator) as
demanded by Ivan Kaloyan. This leads us to the conclusion that the other sources, including
the aforementioned Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja, were wrong when stating that Samoil
had declared himself an emperor; or, if not, it might be understood that Samoil was declared a
king by the Roman church but that he called himself an emperor regardless?!
Snegarov’s opinion with regards to this issue is symptomatic45: he claimed that Samoil had
not needed to enter negotiations with the Pope to be granted the title of an emperor and
patriarchal eminence because ‘he already had his own canonical patriarch who could grant
him the imperial crown’46. Snegarov later concluded that ‘…Innocent’s letter of December
1202 demonstrated that there were no documents in the papal archive that would confirm that
an imperial title had been granted by Rome to either Peter or Samoil.’ That Snegarov should
reach such a conclusion is strange, to say the least, when we contrast it with the explicit
45
46
Snegarov, I., Istorija na ohridskata arhiepiskopija, Sofija, 1924
Ibid. pp. 7
96
statement in the Pope’s letter ‘…regesta perlegi fecimus diligenter, ex quibus evidenter
comprehendimus, quod in terra tibi subiecta multi reges fuerint coronati.’ It is true that only
the formulation multi reges is imprecise and fairly general and that it might not have referred
to Samoil explicitly, but it is also true that the letter did not impart at any point that there were
no documents in the Papal archive concerning the issue of granting imperial titles, as was
claimed by Snegarov.47
We believe that the cited examples clearly suggest that the legacy of manuscripts is an
inexhaustible source which should be approached extremely carefully, scrupulously and
objectively because this legacy can be at times subjected to different interpretations and onesided commentaries which are not always free of partiality and bias. We should treat this
legacy with due respect because a single word preserved in it might represent an important
link in the clarification of the particulars in the chain of historical events.
47
Snegarov believes that if in actual fact, there were such documents or letters, the Pope would have
discussed them in greater detail, while Kaloyan’s claim about records in old Bulgarian books was
described by Snegarov as ‘a diplomatic game with the historical facts’.
97
WORKSHOPS
Olga Perić, Zagreb
MANUSCRIPT IN CLASSROOM
Dear colleagues,
I would like to share with you observations stemming from my experience and work in
studying manuscripts. I have partly tried to share these observations with my students, but I
believe that some forms of working with manuscripts can also be applied in school.
Of course, it is very difficult to make general conclusions. There are different ways of
teaching classical languages in Croatia and abroad, there are short courses, two-year courses,
and up to eight-year courses, reflecting different priorities and specific demands of a
particular culture. Besides, we can often hear nowadays that pupils should have fewer
obligations and less to learn, which in classical philology means moving away from text and
insisting on cultural and historical facts only. I mention this because I think using a
manuscript in the classroom could maybe reconcile these two opposing concerns: manuscripts
take us back to the text (in one phase of its life cycle) and on the other hand, we can clearly
see the civilizational context towards the antiquity.
This is the reason I have tried to structure our work today and, among numerous possibilities,
I have chosen the following four uses of manuscripts in class:
1. manuscript as an illustrative component in class;
2. manuscript in the service of communicating the text;
3. manuscript as the basis for a critique of a text;
4. philological analysis of manuscripts in the making.
I presume you all have your own experiences and ideas, and I hope we will be able to discuss
them later on.
98
Since my task for this lecture is primarily a didactic one, each of the mentioned possible ways
of working with manuscripts will be defined by the following categories:
1. is this work useful/not useful
2. previous knowledge is necessary/unnecessary
3. students are active/passive
We will answer these questions together in the end so I will ask you to bear them in mind all
the time.
1. Manuscript as an illustrative component in the classroom
Manuscripts are images of the history of written records of a people, country and its
civilisational circle. As such, they are taught in an interdisciplinary way, and are important
in history, history of literature, history of art, history of music. Ancient Greek and Latin
manuscripts are particularly important for us, but within this broad approach they are used
primarily as cultural and historical facts.
Let us just remember the great exhibition some fifteen years ago – “Two thousand years
of writing in Croatia” (“Dva tisućljeća pismene kulture na tlu Hrvatske”), which was
presented in Croatia and abroad under the motto “Verba volant, scripta manent!”
Here are some examples of manuscripts: Evangelistarium from Split (Splitski
evanđelistar) – testimony of the earliest literacy in medieval Split. It is the most
distinguished book of the Split Archdiocese; Sacramentarium of St. Margaret
(Sakramentarij sv. Margarete), 11th century, Zagreb Metropolitan Library; codices written
in Glagolitic script are precious to Croats. These few examples are interesting from a
civilizational point of view. Since we are dealing with the history of literature,
manuscripts of our Latinists, for example Šižgorić, Marulić, Panonnius are precious to us.
99
Let us now give answers to the earlier mentioned questions: as a way to visualise facts this
type of manuscript work is definitely indispensable and useful in the classroom; particular
previous knowledge is not necessary because pupils acquire facts passively – the goal is
only to awaken interest and broaden horizons.
2. Manuscript in the function of the communicating texts by ancient Greek and
Latin authors
Each text read in class, regardless of whether it is easy or more difficult, more boring or
interesting, part of obligatory literature or the teacher’s own choice – has its own interesting
story, told by written notes in codices and papyrus fragments. So, a text in front of students is
not the beginning or a given fact centuries away – it is a journey through time, through hands
of copyists in scriptoriums and monasteries, through research in libraries and monasteries. Let
us remember how Petrarca looked for and copied the works of Cicero, how Janus Pannonius
travelled to Italy, spending time in Florence in order to obtain codices for the court in Budim.
Maybe the most beautiful account of that story was told forty years ago by D. Reynolds &
Nigel G. Wilson in “Scribes and Scholars”. A book important for Croatia is Aleksandar
Stipčević's “Social History of books in Croatia” (Socijalna povijest knjige u Hrvata) from
2004.
Let us look at our questions. You will agree with me that communicating a text as a
historical category can arouse interest, and even intrigue a student, so it is useful. The second
question about the demand for previous knowledge is more complex. Basic information on
the book, e.g. its author and the content, is probably already known, so a manuscript would
just be a visual enhancement. However, if a folio is given to students to read as well, we have
to think about palaeography (which we will discuss later). So, previous knowledge is
necessary. How students will participate and to what extent, depends on the teacher’s concept
of delivering lessons. So, pupils can be active or passive.
You could be asking yourselves: How can we also include that in the programme? What is
the ratio between the time invested and the possibility to bring antiquity texts and contents
closer to students in an interesting way? We will answer these questions in the course of the
discussion.
100
3.
Manuscript in a function of the textual criticism
Critical editions were the next step in the history of our texts. I have to admit I have
always taken the critical apparatus in Teubner and Oxford editions for granted, although
various lessons and their philological justifiability were discussed in seminars. We never
thought about how those few lines of critical apparatus were chosen and how much effort a
text editor put into it. Perhaps that is why I have insisted on these questions with my students.
It is clear that in the course of classes in schools it is possible to talk about the critique of texts
only in certain cases and with students that show extra interest.
However, this type of work is indispensable at university and calls for students’ active
participation. I would like to share these experiences with you.
The basic question is previous knowledge – the knowledge of palaeography, because it
is the basis of all subsequent philological work, and this first step is really hard. In their
programme our students don’t study auxiliary historical sciences. Maybe there will be more
time for that after the university reforms, so palaeography would find its proper place. But,
there are simpler ways to introduce palaeography, for example if we show a palimpsest to
students, they will immediately notice the difference in script and they will be able to read the
Latin words. They will not have to recognize different scripts and we will help them decipher
the abbreviations informing them about auxiliary literature.
So far, we have talked about ancient Greek and Latin texts. We are in the city where
Croatian neo-Latinism had flourished, which still keeps unpublished manuscripts and where
literary heritage is zealously researched and preserved. In libraries and archives of our cities,
there are unpublished literary works and a large body of documents and archival materials,
since Latin was the official language in Croatia until as late as 1847. So, preparing pupils and
students for such philological work is very useful.
Obsidio Iadrensis is a text describing the siege of Zadar by Venice in 1345/46. Byron
was inspired by it. In 1666 Ioannes Lucius published editio princeps in Amsterdam. Two
manuscripts are known to us: the older one from 1532 in the Archives of the Croatian
Academy of Sciences and Arts (HAZU) (codex Zagrabiensis) and the later copy in the
Vatican Library (codex Vaticanus). And the classic question about the two manuscripts: How
do we prove the connection?
I will answer right away: the Vatican manuscript is a direct copy of the Zagreb one. I
101
suggest we take a look at a little segment of this story.
Here is the story: Lucius got hold of the Zagreb manuscript and had it copied. But the
copyist did not know or did not have the patience to decipher each abbreviation, and was
especially confused by shortened words: quia, quid, qui, quoniam. The copyist simply
avoided them by leaving a blank space or copying the abbreviations. Somebody else dealt
with them, and it seems to have been Lucius. He too did not always have enough time to think
about the whole sentences and the context, so his solutions are not always the best ones.
Examples:
A thorough knowledge of palaeontology is not necessary for this type of work. Every
student will immediately understand and be interested in finding the right solution to the few
abbreviations. This assignment establishes a creative relationship with the text, hence pupils
are active and draw their own conclusions.
I would also like to mention that Obsidio Iadrensis is a very interesting text. The people of
Zadar fought bravely and the following is mentioned: “visa est quedam mulier armata usque
ad femora in mai sita”.
102
What are the answers to our questions? At university this type of work is definitely useful
and meaningful. In my opinion it is also useful in schools, but only for students who show
interest and have very good previous knowledge. This type of work requires students to be
active and creative.
4. Philological analysis of manuscripts
And finally – the philological analysis of manuscripts that shows how a text is created
and how interventions in the text (corrections and glosses between the lines or on margins)
can be characterised as the author’s.
“Historia Salonitana” is one of the most famous and valuable medieval texts for the
history of Croatia. The author is Toma Arhiđakon Splićanin (Thomas Archdeacon of Split)
who studied in Bologna where he heard Francis of the Assisi. He returned to Split, where he
would spend his whole life, and took part in all relevant religious and secular events. His
work is important for both the history of literature and linguistic research into thirteenthcentury Latinity.
Today 14 manuscripts are available, the oldest of which is the manuscript from Split
(13th c.) and from Trogir – the most beautiful and representative from the 14th century. Both
manuscripts were produced in regional scriptoriums.
The manuscript from Split was hidden for a long time in a chest in the archives of the
Split cathedral and remained undiscovered until the end of the 19th c. It is written in
Beneventan script, the initials are modest.
Besides glosses on the margins dating from a later period, there is a whole series of
corrections between lines (above certain words) or on margins where the text was expanded
and there was not enough space for all the words. There are some 120 corrections, also in
Beneventan script, but sometimes letters are not very regular and are written in different ink.
Some corrections refer to adding certain words, most usually adverbs or pronouns:
tamen 122, 7; 296, 14, enim 128, 20; 158, 27, uero 140, 14; 150, 2; 294, 22, autem 210, 38;
148, 3, denique 52, 14, etc. These words are characteristic of the sentence structure of Toma
Arhiđakon Splićanin.
However, those interventions whereby words, or entire expressions, were added and
103
deleted are more numerous. For example:
- In enumerating the misfortunes which were wrought upon Salona, the writer adds et
alia facinora: …odia, rapine, usure, periuria et alia facinora totam inuaserant urbem (30, 8).
- The following sentence is expanded: Et quia pars magna eorum per orbem erat
dispersa et ipsi pauci et inopes remanserant... (42, 9-10).
- In the sentence: Qui licet corporalibus oculis cecutiret (130, 2) the word corporalibus
is added.
In the following sentence adjectives are added: …quos longa inedia pressuraque seua
torquendo plurimam ab eis extorsit pecunie quantitatem (170, 8).
- Deleting and rewriting a sentence: …cum plus quam centum milia hominum seua mors
unius diei spatio et breui loci termino deglutiret (234, 7).
- Sometimes, certain words are deleted, e.g. Spalatensium: fortiori annisu … incubuere
remis et totis uiribus remigantes conabantur… (282, 28). The previous sentence was: At uero
Spalatenses preter opinionem suam uidentes eos in mare exisse, gauisi sunt ualde (282, 2627). The repetition has been avoided.
104
These and similar interventions into the core of linguistic expression could not have
been the work of a simple scribe or a copyist. From the philological point of view it is an act
of an author. The text, and the codex itself, were in statu nascendi. The interventions were not
just simple corrections, the author considered them in search of a nicer, more meaningful and
more convincing stylistic expression. In addition to the philological arguments in favour of
authorship, it is also supported by the layout of the codex, which has been left unfinished –
initials and other letters have not been completely coloured. If it had been copied or written by
a scribe, the initials would have been filled with different colours after Toma’s death.
There has been much discussion about whether Toma was the author of the Split codex,
the main argument against it is a document signed by Toma himself and written in a different
script – the Caroline-Gothic script. However, Toma definitely knew both scripts, the
Beneventan script was typical of Dalmatian scriptoriums of that period, and he could have
learned the Caroline-Gothic script during his studies in Bologna.
Some facts are clear and beyond doubt: dating of the codex, its regional origin from
Split and Trogir scriptoriums, the process of its creation within the Split cathedral where it
would stay hidden from the eyes of the public for years to come. Maybe, due to its modest
layout, the fact it was unfinished and did not stand out with gold initials, the codex remained
preserved to this day exactly where its author had conceived, created and written it.
According to the palaeographic analysis and material characteristics, the codex could have
been written during Toma’s life. The philological analysis of the corrections in the text
confirms it was the act of an author.
Let us return to our questions:
Would this, partly research work, be useful in the classroom? I would like to hear your
opinions in the discussion later on, but in my opinion, it is an opportunity that teaches what
philological work is, so, it is useful. Of course, such analysis is impossible without previous
knowledge. Hence, the answer to the second question is: previous knowledge is definitely
necessary as is the knowledge of the basics of palaeontology, solid competence in Latin
morphology, syntax and stylistics. Students participate actively; this type of activity should
lead to individual conclusions and ideas.
In conclusion, and before I hear your thoughts on this topic, I would like to go back to
the idea I mentioned in the beginning – the use of manuscripts in classroom is an additional
way of gaining a broader perspective on the achievements of human civilization. The text gets
105
a deeper, more interesting dimension and once for all ceases being a defined fact from ancient
times. The story of each literary text travelling through centuries to our time always attracts
interest because behind every text there is a novel “The Name of the Rose”.
106
Christine Haller, Neuchâtel
Before the Book : Suggestions on how to Use Manuscripts in
Class
In 2002-2003 an exhibition at the Roman museum of Vidy-Lausanne, entitled Future Perfect,
showed that a large number of archaeological discoveries would remain incomprehensible if
we didn’t have the texts of the Ancients. And what would we know about their texts if we
didn’t have the manuscripts on which our modern editions are based.
Future generations, our posterity, won’t have this opportunity when faced with today’s
objects, if and when they discover them some day (just think, for example, of pieces of
computers or other machines). Because, in addition to the fact that we use more and more
virtual documents, the short-lived paper we write on is likely to disappear quickly without
leaving any traces. (Incidentally aren’t we already using recycled paper ?)
Our pupils, who will soon be able to communicate only by SMS or e-mail, murdering
grammar and spelling along the way to create a code that tends to escape us, will no doubt
take an interest in thinking about the transmission, thanks to manuscripts, of the texts of
which they read extracts.
Without pretending to be original or exhaustive, I’d like to briefly think about and investigate
a few trails. I shall limit myself to the field of Latin.
1. The transmission of texts in general
We must remember that stone, wood, horn, writing tablets or pieces of papyrus can also be
used to transmit a text (complete or fragmentary) but that when classical philologists talk of
manuscripts they mean manuscript books, as opposed to printed ones.
These manuscripts, as far as the so-called classical texts are concerned, are never autographs
of their authors. Nor do they date back to their time. They are copies made on order in
specialized workshops, scriptoria, during the centuries that followed their original
publication. They don’t go back further than the IVth or Vth centuries A.D. (I won’t mention
here the papyruses recovered in the sands of Egypt or the Vindolanda tablets.)
107
This interest in manuscripts will quite naturally lead to an interest in the history of writing, of
the book and consequently in the intellectual history of Europe as shown by the circulation of
texts.
Mention should be made, at this point, of the cultural centres represented by the scriptoria of
the famous abbeys built on islands or on the continent. They have both collected and
transmitted the texts of the Ancients (making choices, we must admit) but have above all
helped spread the Bible and the writings of the Fathers of the Church. Which is why so many
documents are of a religious nature.
Some monks are copyists, specialized in the mere reproduction of texts. Their task reminds us
of that of the photographer, and the result, often strange, of a scanned text. Others are
illuminators, often genuine artists. Some copyists, whose names are still connected with their
scriptoria, were scholars and intermediaries, popularizers of ancient texts, both secular and
religious, which they endeavoured to bring within the scope of their contemporaries. They are
the authors of bilingual editions or translations into the vernacular.
Thanks to Umberto Eco’s novel, The Name of the Rose, and the film based on it, pupils can be
made aware of the work and problems of the copyists of the Middle Ages. On this subject one
can profitably read Scribes and Scholars, A Guide to the Transmission of Greek and Latin
Literature, by L. D. Reynolds and N. G. Wilson, Clarendon Press Oxford, 19913.
As for antiquity, you all know the text of the De Finibus III, 7sqq, in which Cicero, on
holiday at Tusculum, discovers Cato in Lucullus’ library, surrounded by many works. This
could serve as a starting point for some research on ancient authors, books and libraries. In
this connection, there is an interesting book, in French, by Catherine Salles : Lire à Rome,
Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1992.
2. Establishing the text
This rather philological approach may seem forbidding to many of our pupils. But as they
retain, at bottom, something of their childhood treasure hunts, they may be drawn into
deciphering and reading the photocopy of a manuscript page. They will then be able to
compare their results with a modern edition. They will see the differences found in the text,
notice abbreviations and other habits of the copyists.
Of course, if successive stages of the same text are available, the comparison will highlight
some rules of textual criticism.
108
A modern exercise of the same kind, and a useful one at that, consists in downloading a Latin
text from Internet and to start looking for misprints due to a copying or reading error, or an
erroneous rendering of a scanned text.
If interested, some students may tackle examples from different periods: future historians will
get a foretaste of palaeography courses.
Cheating a little, I confess, and within the framework of lessons devoted to the fable, I have
often produced copies of a page from Aesopus, by the German humanist Heinrich Steinhöwel.
Strictly speaking, it is not a manuscript, but a XVth century illuminated incunabulum. The
exercise remains the same, but this time the whole text of the fable must be established.
This is a good opportunity to develop an interdisciplinary approach and study the genre of the
fable in Europe by drawing on Latin or Greek sources, examining the fables’ illustrations
through the ages…
3. Illuminations
Historiated or illuminated manuscripts will appeal to students who have so far been
impervious to the spell of manuscripts. They provide so many discoveries, both artistic and
historical. Depending on the period, attention will be paid to the subjects of the illustrations
(which will reveal how objects and ideas circulated) or to the fanciful details to be found in
the margins of even the most serious texts. They show scenes of daily life or some
illuminators’ unbridled imagination.
With today’s fascination with Celtic art and civilisation, an examination of Irish manuscripts,
especially of a facsimile of the Book of Kells, should appeal to teenagers. The meeting, daring
it seems to me, of the text of the Gospel with ornamental motifs borrowed from the art of socalled barbarian peoples keeps surprising, delighting, baffling us. There is always something
curious and extraordinary to discover, be it the tracery, the miniatures or the writing itself.
Moreover the Irish monks’ peregrinations, the monasteries they founded in the troubled
period preceding Charlemagne’s reign are fascinating. Saint-Gall, in Switzerland, is a famous
example.
4. Where to find manuscripts
There are celebrated libraries with wondrous collections : the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana,
the Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, the Bodleian
Library in Oxford, to mention just a few. In Switzerland the abbey of Saint-Gall (this is also
109
the name of a Swiss town and canton) was founded not far from the hermitage of the Irish
monk Gall, near the Lake of Constance. It included a well-known scriptorium which produced
or harboured the Sangallenses. From destructions to enlargements the abbey developed in the
course of time. (Its plan is said to have inspired Umberto Eco in The Name of the Rose). It is
now a baroque building, its library, which contains for example a first-rate collection of Irish
manuscripts (VIIth-XIIth centuries), is famous. In addition to the permanent exhibition one can
admire there, the abbey presents its treasures to the public in temporary exhibitions.
The library of the abbey of Einsiedeln, another baroque building today, also contains
remarkable documents. Some of them, for example, are known for their primitive musical
notation. If you’re lucky enough to be taken on a guided tour by one of the librarians you’ll be
spellbound by the immersion into History.
In French-speaking Switzerland it’s impossible not to mention, even if it cannot boast the
tradition of the two previous ones, the Bibliotheca Bodmeriana in Geneva, especially wellknown for its manuscript collection. For teaching purposes it has set aside a number of its
showcases for a permanent exhibition devoted to the history of the book. There are others, but
it is not my intention to mention them all. Each of you no doubt knows a library not to far
away, where he of she could take his or her students.
Visiting a library cannot be organized at a moment’s notice. For classroom work good
facsimiles are to be had for a few euros. They are quite suitable if the original is not available,
only a specialist is not taken in. Moreover CDs and DVDs can be found in shops.
Cheaper, no doubt, and in vogue today, the use of Internet, even if it doesn’t put us in touch
with the real thing, offers a wealth of discoveries of all kinds. Beginner or specialist, everyone
gets something out of it and it suggests to the teacher research topics for his students. A
technical hint : it is better to have a high-speed connection.
5. Vergil’s manuscripts at the Vatican
The Vaticani are a gold mine. Not only do they hold the oldest manuscripts we have but,
written in capitals they are easy to decipher. And to crown it all, they are historiated. A long
time before Petersen and other directors, illustrators have tried to represent the Trojan War, to
make Aeneas’ adventures visible. The Net offers a series of these representations. Using that
starting point it will then be possible to suggest some research on the iconography of the
Aeneid in the frescoes of Pompeii or the manuscripts of the Middle Ages, or on the
representation of Homeric heroes in the Greek ceramics of the VIth and Vth centuries B.C.
110
Jadranka Bagarić, Dubrovnik
THE EVALUATION OF PUPILS KNOWLEDGE
(Pedagogical workshop)
The basic task of a teacher in elementary and secondary schools – the teaching of students
incorporates an indivisible but no less worthy task – the incentive of interest for the subject being
taught. This task is by no means an easy one when classical languages are concerned. The
evaluation of a student's knowledge is an important element of this task.
Professors at universities have a slightly less difficult task in this sense. When one has chosen a
classical language, one is already motivated, one is mature and conscious of the fact that by not
studying regularly and adequately, one fails exams, fails the year and consequently all students’
rights. This is a strong motive. But the role of the professor, his manner of teaching and
evaluation are also important factors.
Therefore the role of this workshop is to give voice to many thoughts and share them with others.
Without the participation of students this is only possible in tests of an objective type.
The participants will, all in their own manner, point and in this way evaluate the test which of an
objective type, and in percentages denote each level from 1 to 5.
Let us compare that which has been done and ask what the subjective influence on the objective
evaluation of the pupil’s knowledge even on the objective type of test, may be. Let us ask
ourselves this question every time we evaluate student's knowledge.
111
Peter Glaz, Andreas Thiel, Lienz
Why Internet in Latin classrooms?
If you want to make use of the Internet in classrooms in general you have to focus your
attention on the qualities of this medium. Based on a reflected knowledge about both the
opportunities and the drawbacks of the Internet the WWW may virtually prove to be a
goldmine of topic- and image-related data ready for download. Your students and you may
however also take advantage of the opportunity of publishing yourself in the Internet.
Interactive exercises for your classes devised in Word, Excel and Powerpoint can be
published in the Internet and are thus easily accessible for your students from outside the
classroom.
If students do not just learn for their teachers or marks but rather for an interested part of the
public, it usually means a considerable boost of their motivation and quality at work.
For both teacher and student of Latin as the mother of many European tongues and sciences
the Internet offers a valuable platform.
Furthermore modern curricula all across Europe explicitly demand an introduction of Internet
and Communication Technologies in the classroom as a common didactic principle.
Modern Latin classes as we understand them thus demand certain characteristics:
1. a new role of the teacher:
Teachers are no longer omniscient sources of knowledge but creators of didactic
environments that encourage independent learning.
2. Learning comes before teaching
Thematic learning according to clearly set targets happens in a group because information
deficits may be compensated better.
112
3. Cross-curricular learning and teaching involves a network of subjects and means an end of
the exhausting single-combat in the classroom
4. facing the exponential growth of mankind’s knowledge multimedia literacy is gaining
importance.
5. An essential part of project work is occupied by documentation and presentation of results.
Apart from proper specialist contents the appropriate rhetorical presentation of them and the
application of modern presentation techniques have to be observed
Methodics:
A model class should include the following phases:
a. the phase of presentation
b. the phase of skill-acquistion
c. the phase of exercise and practice
d. the phase of transfer and presentation
In the phase of introduction modern media like the computer, the Internet, software, CDs,
DVDs, TV, radio offer our students many more options than the linear approach of a book
and support individual learning tracks.
In the phase of skill-acquisition, however, an instructional approach has to set in. If you do
not provide proper guidance here your students will run the risk of losing themselves in the
manifold options of formating and text embellishment
Therefore, if you decide to use ICT in your Latin classroom:
a. provide your students with the text that needs to be translated by putting the textfile
into a public directory on the network that is accessible for everybody.
b. Give clear and precise instructions concerning the format and structure of the
students’ output
c. Prepare linklists, by which your students will have guided access to a limited
number of websites and which offer clear tasks.
In the phase of exercise and practice worksheets may be offered electronically for download
113
in connection with their solutions. Interactive Crosswords and Online-exercise enable
immediate self-evaluation
In the phase of presentation students again demand clear instructions on your expectations of
the output.
Basically ICT can be taken advantage of in each phase of a class.
For beginners a mere download of teaching – or learning materials, already used in classroom
situation, from one of the numerous educational sites across the Internet will do.
The next step is the real usage of the computer in the Latin classroom. This can mean the
completion of online-activities (matching, gap-filling, crossword-activities, etc.) or the
individual download of appropriate exercise-sheets and their completion directly on the
computer.
A further option is the usage of educational software installed in the network room of the
school.
More advanced users may produce their own interactive exercises e.g. with the help of Hot
Potatoes or Crossword Compiler.
Advanced users may also take advantage of WORD in translation session and in sessions
reserved for thematical project- or group work. Here the concept of the linklist for targetoriented Internet research applies. In our workshops this simple but highly practicable concept
will be presented in detail.
In our workshops we will firstly present the concept of the Euroclassica website and its
national communities, the structure of which mirror organisational patterns from
European down to national, school and classroom levels and even to the very individual
student. After showing you what can be done by exploiting the options of these
communities we would like to present the concept of the linklist as a real hands-on
activity to you.