Comments on: 2.15 Printing the Cato

By: Paul F. Gehl

Paul F. Gehl — Mon, 09 May 2011 13:55:56 +0000

On the general issue of how pedagogy changed in response to printing, see Baldzuhn 2009 (cited in comment to para 12 below), 115-134.

By: Paul F. Gehl

Paul F. Gehl — Mon, 09 May 2011 13:39:34 +0000

To note 90: see also Michael Baldzuhn, Schulbuecherr im Trivium des Mittelalters und der Fruehen Neuzeit, Berlin & New York, Walter De Gruyter, 2009, esp. pp. 90-105.

By: Paul F. Gehl

Paul F. Gehl — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:55:43 +0000

On the linking of Cato and Donat, see now also Federica Ciccolella, Donati Graeci, Learning Greek in the Renaissance, Leiden, Brill, 2008, 52-54.

By: Paul F. Gehl

Paul F. Gehl — Tue, 12 May 2009 14:29:13 +0000

Dan Sheerin, in a note that appears by mistake on the previous section, remarks of this translation, “utriusque virtutis] We need more context to figure out to what utriusque virtutis, “of each virtue/of both virtues,” refers.
Unfortunately, as often happens in early modern books, such phrases appear pretty much without context. The Latin in note 95 is the entire text of the rubric which precedes the Cato in this edition of the Donat and which separates the Pseudo-Donatus rules from the precepts of Pseudo Cato. The sense might be understood as instruction in liberal arts and also every appropriate virtue. The rubricator seems to be struggling to get both grammatical and moral instruction into his brief advertisement for the book.

By: Paul F. Gehl

Paul F. Gehl — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:43:40 +0000

I have done some re-checking of my sources here and find that Edward’s correction is accurate as far as the Auctores octo goes. Baldzuhn as cited remarks some 60 (mostly Northern European) manuscripts that combined Avianus with the Distichs of Cato. But the print collection, Auctores octo, always includes the Aesopian fables in the verse translation of Walter the Englishman, not Avianus.

By: Paul F. Gehl

Paul F. Gehl — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:40:38 +0000

Thanks for the clarification on Avianus, Edward, which matter I will recheck. Baldzuhn is the correct spelling.

By: EWheatley

EWheatley — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:32:08 +0000

Although the material covered in this paragraph is not integral to the overall argument here, it probably needs to be reexamined nevertheless. I do not know the work of Baldsuhn (whose name seems to be misspelled in note 91), but most scholars understand Avianus to have been part of the Sex Auctores, the curricular compilation popular in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The Auctores octo, mentioned here, largely displaced the Sex Auctores in the thriteenth century and remained popular for centuries, appearing in at least 50 printings in five countries before 1500; its fable collection is the one commonly attributed to Gualterus Anglicus, whose introductory epistle, written in the voice of the emperor Romulus, credits the fables to Aesop, not Avianus. I have seen many, many printed versions of the Auctores octo, and they all include this collection, not the one attributed to Avianus. See Ronald E. Pepin’s translation of the Auctores octo for further information.