[[1.]] A. Cameron, Cahiers d'histoire mondiale, 10(1967), 653-673.
[[2.]] See also the formula for the urban prefect at Var. 6.4, which I do not choose to make much of because of the unresolvable question of the traditional element in these formulae, perhaps making them evidence for affairs at an earlier date than their composition. Var. 6.4.6: "Advocati tibi militant eruditi, quando in ilia patria difficile non est oratores implere, ubi magistros eloquentiae contingit semper audire." (An echo of Juvenal 1.1 and 1.30?) Justinian, Pragmatic Sanction (August 31,554), authorized subsidy for grammatici, oratores, medici, and iurisperiti; but might not his knowledge of western affairs have been outdated?
[[3.]] R.R. Bolgar, The Classical Heritage and Its Beneficiaries (1954), 405, collected the evidence. See also F. Ermini, Archivum Romanicum, 18(1934), 143-154; and H.-I. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, (Eng. trans., 1964), 460.
[[4.]] P. Riché, Éducation et culture dans l'occident barbare (1962), 100-104.
[[5.]] H.-I. Marrou, MEFR, 48(1931), 124-169. Agapetus' father was a priest of the church of John and Paul.
[[6.]] H.-I. Marrou, MEFR, 48(1931), 125: "The venerable band of holy men sits in a row, teaching the mystical precepts of divine law. Sitting among them, Agapetus, a priest by right, has founded an attractive repository for his books. In grace he is the equal of all men, his holy labor excels them; disparate words are used to express a single faith."
[[7.]] H.-I. Marrou, MEFR, 48(1931), 167.
[[8.]] Gaudentius is another writer on music, translated from the Greek at the Vivarium.
[[9.]] Riché, op. cit., 176, and Cappuyns, DHGE, 11(1949), 1389, oppose identifying Cassiodorus' Roman library with that of Agapetus. (But Cappuyns multiplied libraries beyond necessity, implying that there were two libraries at Squillace: Cassiodorus' private collection and that which the monastery possessed in its own right.) Courcelle, LLW, 334, accepts the identification.
[[10.]] Riché, op. cit., 201-203.
[[11.]] The identification of the Master and Cassiodorus was proposed by M.J. Cappuyns, RTAM, 15(1948), 209-268; followed by E. Franceschini, Aevum, 23(1949), 52-72; and by the same author, Liber Floridus: Festschrift Paul Lehmann (1950), 95-119; and by F. Vandenbroucke, RTAM, 16(1949), 186-226; and by the same author, Rev. Ben., 62(1952), 216-273. The identification was opposed by H. Vanderhoven, Scriptorium, 3(1949), 246-254; C. Mohrmann, Vigiliae Christianae, 8(1954), 239-251; F. Masai, Scriptorium, 2(1948), 292-296; A. de Vogüé, in the introduction to his edition of the Regula Magistri, SC 105.9-270; and most convincingly by D. Knowles, in his Great Historical Enterprises (1963), 135-195. A bibliography on the broader question has appeared: B. Jaspert, Subsidia Monastica, 1(1971), 129-171.
[[12.]] For the Institutiones, where an index is available, I find sixty-four cases of such phrases using the key words Deo, Domino, or Christo. Such phrases are a literary stutter; it had appeared (less often) in the Variae and peeks through once or twice in the Getica.
[[13.]] A. de Vogüé, ed., SC 107, s.v. Dominus, Deus, Christus.
[[14.]] R.W. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages (1970), 221-223, provides the nearest and most concise epitome of the differences between Benedict's and the Master's approaches, with illuminating parallel citations.
[[15.]] This scheme appears in H. Vanderhoven, Scriptorium, 3(1949), 246-254.
[[16.]] P. Courcelle, Revue des études anciennes, 56(1954), 424-428.
[[17.]] Inst. 1.32.1; Cappuyns made much of the "patrum regulae," interpreting the phrase overliterally to refer exclusively to the Regula Magistri. But Cassiodorus' looseness of usage here is proven by his other two uses of that phrase: Inst. 1.1.8 (the teachings of the church that Origen sometimes violated), and Inst. 1.24.1 (the same general sense even less strictly applied).
[[18.]] We know the monastery was at Squillace with certainty only from Gregory the Great, Epp. 8.30, 8.32 (MGH, Epp. 2.32-35).
[[19.]] Gregory the Great, Epp. 9.162 and 9.164 (MGH, Epp. 2.162-164).
[[20.]] There is an allusion to the rounding of monasteries on great estates: "Passer enim minuta et cautissima nimis avis est, monachorum significans parvitatem, qui in cedris Libani, id est in patrimonio potentium Christianorum velut in quibusdam ramis monasteria sibi quasi nidos aliquos aedificare monstrantur, eorumque roborum sustentati, velut passeres laudes Domini assidua voce fritinniunt" (Ex. Ps. 103.390-395). See also Ex. Ps. 103.410-412: "Sed magna est gloria illi arbori ubi nidus iste compingitur. Audiat enim a Domino se fuisse plantatum, qui tale continere noscitur institutum."
[[21.]] P. Lehmann, in his Erforschung des Mittelalters (1959), 2.41-55, dates the Institutiones; see further later in this chapter.
[[22.]] The chief efforts were F. Lenormant, La Grande-Grèce (1881-1884), 2.329-447, on the whole history of Squillace, with particular attention to the Cassiodorian sites; and T. Hodgkin, The Letters of Cassiodorus (1886), 68-72, based on the researchcs of A.J. Evans at Hodgkin's behest.
[[23.]] See chiefly P. Courcelle, MEFR, 55(1938), 259-307, as modified by his article in Actes du Ve congrès international d'archéologie chrétienne (1957), 511-528.
[[24.]] see Courcelle, MEFR, 55(1938), 289, for an important map.
[[25.]] Courcelle, MEFR, 55(1938), 300.
[[26.]] Cf. J. Carcopino, Souvenirs de sept ans, 1937-1944 (1953), 104-105, 120-121, for the story of the obstacles to formal excavation.
[[27.]] See Courcelle, Actes du Ve congrès .... 511-515, evaluating and reviewing the information first published by G. Jacopi, PEPRAGMENA TOU [9.] DIETHNOUS BYZANTINOLOGIKOU SYNEDRIOU (1955), 1.201-205.
[[28.]] The letter mentioned is a pseudo-Hieronymian martyrology.
[[29.]] M. Cappuyns, RTAM, 15(1948), 215.
[[30.]] P. Lehmann, in his Erforschung des Mittelalters (1959), 2.41-47, dated the Institutiones (in first draft) as closely as possible. He showed for the first time that the terminus post quem had to come after the visit to Constantinople, then demonstrated that the paschal computus, discussed below, clearly dated to 562, is not mentioned in the Inst., even though all four surviving copies of the work are bound in MSS with Inst. 2.
[[31.]] Mynors' introduction, lii-liiii, summarizes the evidence on titles lucidly.
[[32.]] While I find litterarum more Cassiodorian, no dogmatism is in order; but note Augustine's phrase, "litterae saeculares," De musica 6.1.1, a work present at the Vivarium (Inst. 2.5.10).
[[33.]] See all of Inst. 1.27 and the first words of the second book. Books I and 11 were very early divided from one another for practical purposes, with only three surviving manuscripts containing the authentic tradition of both books together. The tradition has by no means been settled; what we know is best summarized in Mynors' introduction, with later contributions by E.K. Rand, Speculum, 13(1938), 443-447; Courcelle, Revue des études anciennes, 44(1942), 65-86; and van de Vyver, Rev. Ben., 53(1941), 59-88.
[[34.]] The theory is repeated clearly at Inst., praef. 6.
[[35.]] This summary follows Courcelle, LLW, 377. But B. Fischer, Biblische Zeitschrift, n.F. 6(1962), 57-79 (summarized in B. Fischer, Settimane, 10, 557-561), argued that the nine-volume set used the Vetus Latina text; that the codex grandior used Jerome's revised Hexapla in the Old Testament, possibly Jerome's version of the Gospels (but there is no evidence on this point), and the Vetus Latina again for the rest of the New Testament; and that the Amiatinus got its format from the codex grandior but its text from other locally available sources. Fischer was followed in this by R. Loewe, Cambridge History of the Bible, (1966-1969), 2.116. --In the Amiatinus there is transmitted a miniature that has been thought by many scholars to represent Cassiodorus himself in his library (it purports to be the scribe Ezra); certainly the books in the picture represent the biblical library of the Vivarium very precisely. The picture, considerably enlarged, is most accessible in D.T. Rice, The Dark Ages (1965), 243, and has been printed often elsewhere; but none of the color reproductions shows very legibly the gold letteriug on the nine scriptural volumes in the armarium; arranged as they are in the picture (and as may be deciphered if one knows what to look for), they exactly match Cassiodorus' arrangement:
Oct. lib. Reg. Hist. Psalm. lib. Salomon Proph. Evang. iiii Epist. Ap. xxi Acta Apost. Apoca.
With the Amiatinus there is also transmitted a prologue to the whole of scripture that is now assumed to be from Cassiodorus' pen; the text is printed at PLS 4. 1387-1390.
[[36.]] Note that to fill out the available material on the Octateuch, Cassiodorus commissioned an original work: Inst. 1.1.9. In the case of other books of scripture, notably in the codex of Old Testament historical books, Cassiodorus had occasion to make up pseudo-commentaries (florilegia of scattered fragments of patristic works) where none existed before.
[[37.]] After only a cursory survey: "quantum transiens invenire praevalui" (Inst. 1.1.8); cf. Inst. 1.8.1 and 1.27.2.
[[38.]] Inst. 2, concl., printed in the apparatus criticus by Mynors, p. 163.
[[39.]] M. van den Hout, reviewing Besselaar's Cassiodorus Senator en zijn Variae in AJP, 69(1948), 233-235, showed at least the tenuousness of the evidence linking Proba to Symmachus; this had been used in the past to demonstrate Cassiodorus' kinship with Boethius and Symmachus.
[[40.]] Inst. 2.3.20 distinguishes between ars and disciplina. H.-I. Marrou, ALMA, 9(1934), 5-25, says Cassiodorus is the only author to insist upon the distinction.
[[41.]] See Courcelle's chapters on Cassiodorus, in LLW, 330-409, for the most extensive inquiry after the sources of the second book. For an earlier sketch, see L.M. Capelli, Rendiconti del Reale Istituto Lombardo, Ser. 2, 31(1898), 1549-1557.
[[42.]] It is just possible that the student went the other way. Perhaps the second book was originally a set of lecture notes on the secular sciences from which Cassiodorus taught; as he grew older, he set them down this way, whether for following teachers or for independent study. (This would answer, moreover, Courcelle's objection that Cassiodorus did not use all the works at his command for his treatment of the trivium and quadrivium; teachers are always slow to revise their lecture notes.) Then students would approach the Expositio Psalmorum to see theory put into practice.
[[43.]] Courcelle, LLW, 372-375, gives a careful list of the manuscript corpora known to have been compiled at the Vivarium.
[[44.]] G. Rohlfs, Griechen und Romanen in Uninteritalien (1924), 79-82; but cf. F. Blatt, Classica et Medievalia, 1(1938), 217-242. On the general loss of Greek in the west, see Courcelle, LLW, passim, and M.R.P. McGuire, Classical Folia, 13.2(1959), 3-25.
[[45.]] See most recently R. Hanslik, Philologus, 115(1971), 107-113.
[[46.]] See S. Lundström, Übersetzungstechnische Untersuchungen an dem Gebiete der christlichen Latinität (1955), and Zur Historia Tripartita des Cassiodor (1952).
[[47.]] The moderate view is in M.L.W. Laistner, Harvard Theological Review', 41(1948), 51-67, esp. 54-56.
[[48.]] See also L. Szymanski, The Translation Procedure of Epiphanius-Cassiodorus in the Historia Tripartita (1963).
[[49.]] M.J. Suelzer, The Clausulae in Cassiodorus (1944), showed that the clausulae of the Hist. trip. depart from the Cassiodorian pattern widely; cf. esp. p. 14 (although the numbers on that page do not quite match her own charts, where the difference is not so dramatic, though still great).
[[50.]] See F.A. Bieter, The Syntax of the Cases and Prepositions in Cassiodorus' Historia Ecclesiastica Tripartita (1938); S. Lundstrom, ALMA, 23(1953), 19-34; and L. Szymanski, The Syntax of the Nominal Forms of the Verb in the Historia Ecclesiastica Tripartita ... (1955). The Latin Josephus shows some of the same features; see the introduction to the edition by F. Blatt. On translation errors in the Josephus, see F. Blatt, Classica et Mediaevalia, 1(1938), 217-242; and H. Janne, Byzantion, 11(1936), 225-227.
[[51.]] P. Lehmann, in his Erforschung des Mittelalters (1959), 2.51-52, includes the only critical edition.
[[52.]] H. Zimmer, 'Pelagius in Irland (1901), thought that pseudo-Primasius was pure Pelagius. C.H. Turner, reviewing Zimmer in JThS, 4(1903), 132-141, identified the anti-Pelagian tendencies of the work; it remained for A. Souter to identify pseudo-Primasius with the Cassiodorian revision and to study this at length; see most conveniently his first article, PBA, 2(1905-1906), 409-439; the text of pseudo-Primasius appears in PL 68, and Souter's restoration and discussion of Pelagius' version appear in Texts and Studies, 9(1922-1931). Souter prepared an edition of the expurgated text for CSEL, but it has not appeared (A. Souter, A Glossary of Later Latin , vi).
[[53.]] R. Beer's pernicious hypothesis, that the classical codices of Bobbio had been transported there from the Vivarium, was a pillar of this theory; see his Bemerkungen über den ältesten Handschriftenbestand des Klosters Bobbio (1911). The demolition of this theory is easily accessible, as in Lowe, CLA, 4(1947), xxvixxvii, and H. Bloch, Speculum, 25(1950), 277-287.
[[54.]] Cassiodorus' quotations from classical authors in the second book of the Institutiones are only through the medium of other rhetorical and dialectical textbooks. (A point seriously misunderstood by R.R. Bolgar, The Classical Heritage and Its Beneficiaries , 110, who thought that Cassiodorus meant for his monks to read the classical poets and orators in the original.) Mynors' index to the Institutiones shows how bereft the Vivarium library was of classical authors.
[[55.]] For the limits of Cassiodorus' demonstrable knowledge of poetry, see M. Bacherler, Bayerische Blatter füur das Gymnasialschulwesen, 59(1923), 215-219.
[[56.]] The passages brackctcd in Adriaen's edition of the Psalm commentary as additions after Cassiodorus' return to Squillace are taken from suggestions in van de Vyver, Speculum, 6(1931), 271 ff.; van de Vyver, Rev. Ben., 53(1941), 79; and Cappuyns, DHGE, 11(1949), 1401. These are only, however, to be taken as provisional suggestions; we are always in danger of reading too much biographical information into these passages.
[[57.]] See G. Bardy, SE, 5(1953), 86-104; and Jean Leclercq's masterly The Love of Learning and the Desire for God (1961).
[[58.]] G. Ludwig, Cassiodor (1967), 41.