Prolegomenon to the Homeric Centos

American Journal of Philology 118 (2):305-321 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Prolegomenon to the Homeric CentosM. D. UsherHomeric centos are poems made up entirely of verses lifted verbatim, or with only slight modification, from the Iliad and Odyssey. Only a few have survived antiquity. There exist three short Homeric centos in the Palatine Anthology (9.361, 381, 382; cf. Hunger 1978, 98–101), a ten–line cento about Herakles quoted by Irenaeus (Wilken 1967), and a seven– line cento grafitto inscribed on the leg of a statue of Memnon in Egypt, which dates from the reign of Hadrian (Bernand 1960, 111–13; Bowie 1990, 65). There are also several cento–like incantations from the Greek Magical Papyri that use lines from Homer (Maltomini 1995). The only Homeric centos we possess in any quantity are the topic of this study. These originated with a Christian bishop named Patricius in the fourth century C.E., and were later expanded by Eudocia Athenaïs, wife of the emperor Theodosius II, in the early fifth.Eudocia's Homeric centos have long been neglected for lack of a complete and authoritative text. The responsibility for this situation rests with the otherwise eminent Homerist, Arthur Ludwich, whose Teubner edition of 1897, the only edition of the centos currently available, is based on a single, partially edited manuscript (Par. graec. suppl. 388: "Codex Mutinensis").1 Pessimism about establishing a reliable text and aesthetic disenchantment with the poem itself have hampered further study: according to Joseph Golega, for example, the Homeric centos are "weder des Druckes noch des Lesens wert" (Golega 1960, 1).Such an assessment lacks understanding and imagination. In his short study of 1979, Kurt Smolak called for a new edition of the centos in no uncertain terms, emphasizing the poem's great heuristic potential (49):Die Zentonen als spezielle Form der spätantiken Homerrezeption erwiesen sich als der Interpretation ihrer oft nicht anerkannten dichterischen Möglichkeiten durchaus zugänglich—dann sind sie doch wohl auch eine [End Page 305] Edition wert! Denn die frühbyzantinische Bibeldichtung kann dem Theologen, Komparatisten und sich auch dem Philologen ein wenig bebautes Arbeitsfeld eröffnen—sofern dieser sich nicht als Zensor im Namen einer klassizistischen Ästhetik versteht.The present study is offered as a prolegomenon to a new, complete edition of Eudocia's poem—a first installment on the larger interpretive program suggested by Smolak.2 It concerns my collation and transcription of a manuscript of the Homeric centos in the collection of the Iviron monastery on Mount Athos, Greece, which I inspected meis oculis in the summer of 1995.3 This hitherto unaccounted–for cento manuscript, datable on palaeographical grounds to the mid–fourteenth century, is one of a type used by Aldus Manutius for the editio princeps of the centos, published in Venice in 1502 (Renouard 1825, 57–62). Ludwich all but ignored Aldus' edition and the important revision of it published by Henricus Stephanus in 1578. His oversight was unfortunate, for the Iviron–Aldus–Stephanus recension of the centos (hereafter simply "Iviron," or "Iviron recension") is completely different from his, and as we shall see, better than his as well.Our investigation begins with the Aldine edition, the preface to which indicates that the text was transcribed and corrected for Aldus by Petrus Candidus, the son or perhaps nephew of Petrus Candidus Decembrius (1399–1477), papal secretary to Nicolas V. This younger Candidus belonged to the Benedictine order of the Camaldunensians, who were housed in the Venetian monastery of St. Michael Murianus. Following the preface of Candidus is a six–line elegiac poem on the centos composed by Scipio Fortiguerra, a member of the Aldine Academy who frequently collaborated with Aldus in preparing printed editions. We can safely infer, therefore, that both Candidus and Fortiguerra had a hand in the production of the editio princeps, and it is likely that the ms or mss they used were Venetian, or at least Italian (cf. Harris 1898, 25–26). That manuscript has yet to resurface, and may no longer exist, though it is possible that Iviron 4464 was once in Venice. The monastery obtained it, according to its librarian Father Theologos, from the personal library of [End Page 306] Maximos Margounios (1549–1602), bishop of Kythera, who...

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-20

Downloads
113 (#426,421)

6 months
31 (#286,865)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references