M rir)tA tivAUA (lRoNlN( tANA

ctlcnclu crtnutl

L. J. Engels, A. G. Jorrgkcel.W. Noomen, N. viln dcr Wnl

Fasciculus VII

MCMLXXXVI

Egbert ForstenGroningae

Vincent of Beauvais andAlexander the Great

Studies on the Speculum Marusund its translations into

medieval vernaculars

edited by

W. J. Aerts, E. R. Smits

&J. B. Voorbij

Egbert ForstenCltcnlngen l9t6

{$-i$g'&#"

i , il-Oi-. Liiri+|,/"r iI ultvtils. rli r, ,r,[ i

.-'

( ttver illurltaliott rcPrtxluectl hy couricny ol'llrc lllbllolhdque trel16nnle, Ptflr, lllrrr u trrelrrrxcri;rt ul'Jctttt tlc Vigttny'r Mlrulr ltltt,lrhtl(MS, l'r, 313, cnd ol' l4th e ,, ful, l,), 'fh; mlnlntrpc rlepl.tr Vilccnt ,l'llcrtuvlir wilh Snint l,ottir on the lcl't. whilc the othcr hulf rrhowr Queen Jeurlre rle llrurg'grrc with thcf rrcrrch lnrrrslntor ol'lhc spaculuttt llisrorialt', Jcun cre vignny,

Cover design: Ruud Hoogman

Published with financial support by the Faculty of Letters, Groningen

Copyright O 1986 Egbert Forsten, Groningen

Alle rechten voorbehouden. Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden verveelvoudigd, opgeslagen in eengeautomatiseerd gegevensbestand, of openbaar gemaakt, in enige vorm of op

"nig" wijze, hetzij

clcktronisch, mechanisch, door fotokopieen, opnamen, of op enige andere manier, ionaei vooiafgaandeschriftelijke toestemming van de uitgever.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, orlrunsmillul, in uns'.fbrm or hy any means, electronic, mechanical, pholocopylng, retttrding, or otherwise,wilhout thc prior written pc,rmisltion of the publisher.

lsBN 90 6er0 009 I

('ontcnts

Itrclircc

FF qll ni, Vincent of Beauvais: a note on the background of the\l't', ulttttt'

I a \ nnn ntJ, The Speculum Historiale: some aspects of its genesis andiltrr il t l\r' r'i pt tradition.

I F \ | rn rr r r l, The history of Alexander the Great in Jacob van Maerlant's.\ltl,'N,' I I I i't t oriael.

{ trnrtvtAtt, The lile of Alexander the Great in Jean de Vignay's Miroirlltttttt'ittl the problem of textual equivalence.

t W h s('nNIILL, Zur volkssprachlichen Rezeption des Speculum Histo-t hth' trr l)cutschland. Die Alexander-Geschichte in den Excerpta Chroni-t tl, ll,,t,

.i n t' trlN'r, The story of Alexander the Great in the Middle Englishlr iur\lirl ions of Higden's Polychronicon.

r{ r ^

r r{ r's. Proverbial passages taken from Vincent of Beauvais' Speculumlttu tt'itutlt, translated into medieval Greek: the methods of translationurr'tl hy thc anonymous Greek author.

VII

l1

57

85

l0l

127

t4t

177llihliography

Prcface

llrtq lrook is a joint publication realised by the Alexander Work Group of thelirrrrrrrrlicn Institute of Medieval Studies. Alter studying various aspects of theAlerrrrrrlcr stories themselves, a research which resulted in the volume Alexander the

litrttt irt tlrt, Middle Ages. Ten Studies on the Last Days of Alexander in Literary andllttt,tt'it'ttl Writing,edited by W.J. Aerts, Jos. M.M. Hermans and Elizabeth Visser,Nr;ruege rr 1978, the Group decided to focus its main activities upon the place andlltr'Irrrrction of Alexander material in medieval world chronicles. Vincent of||€rrrrviris' Speculum Historiale was chosen as a subject of investigation because oflhc ucntrll position of its author in the history of medieval intellectual culture andItelurrsc of its impact on later literature, both in Latin and in the vernaculars. As alilltllcr ol' flact, the size of Vincent's compilation, its numerous textual andr,unrpositional problems and its encyclopedic character turned out to be, in some

wtty\, ir considerable handicap. Nevertheless, a serious attempt was made to copewltlr thc Speculum Historiale as a whole and with the Alexander material inprrrtrerrlar. Several working units were created, each occupying itself with part oflhe lie ltl. A young member of the group undertook the huge task of making a

llrororrgh study of the complicated genesis of the different versions of Vincent's.\yt't'ulu; the results of his research will be published within one or two years. One ofllrr working units directed its attention to translations and adaptations of theAlt.riurclcr story in vernaculars and studied Vincent's 'Nachleben' in a broaderr rrntcr t. A symposium was organised on the 22thof March 1983, on which occasionir rrrrrrrbcr of papers were read on these subjects. These papers have been worked outrurrl lirrm the main contents of this book. Dr. Gerrit Bunt comments on therrrlrr;rtirticrn into Middle English of the Alexander story in the Polychronicon ofl{irrrrrlph Higden. Dr. Martin Gosman concentrates on the life of Alexander thetrrrirt in Jean de Vignay's Miroir Historial and discusses Jean's translationtrt'lrnique. Professor Rudiger Schnell deals with the Vincentian Alexander Story intlrt' cirrly German Excerpta Chronic'arum. The introductory paper of Dr. Edm6Srrrits rcviews new developments in intellectual life between the mid-twelfth and therrrrrl-tlrirtccnth century, the ideals and pcrsons (in particular Helinand de Froid-rrront) by whom Vincent was influoneed. snd Vincent's own attitude to knowledge,rrrtl sciences. The geneala of the Speeulum Hlstorlule and the thorny questions of its

,*frre rrff "*g#frk

'lil"serirrt trutritir)'s urc tliscussctl hy Mr. il'ns voorhij, ln rnnty wuyr, lrrs

cu.pcr*ti.' witlr thc .Atclicr virrccnt dt Bcauvaris' (A.R'Tn.M,) tll'tlte If triv$sity

or.N.'cy I pr.vcrr t' hc ,lost *ti,i',uiuting and fruitful. Prol'cssor willc'r Ae'ts'

contribution dir.r.crs in s.me respects rrom-the others. It does, indcecl. t'uch *pon

thc problc,n orvinccnt,s.Nachleuen' and of translation technique, but it dcals with

neither thc Alexan{er story nor the Speculum Historiale. A Byzantine Greek

collection of sayings, based upon ,.nt.n.t' taken from the fourth and fifth books of

vincent,s speculu-m Doctrinale is edited and commented upon. Special mention

must be made of the study on the uauftutio,' of the Alexander story in Maerlant's

Spieget Historiael, written by Dr. f..t de Graaf, shortly before his sudden death'

The Groningen Aiexander Group cherishes his memory, not only as an outstanding

specialist on medieval Dutch literature and one of its prominent members' but also

as an excellent colleague and a good friend' We owe ipecial gratitude to Mr' Hans

Voorbij fo, pr.parini Or' De Graaf's paper for publication'

The editors feel - last but not t.uri - obliged to Ms. corrie van os who

demonstrated her extraordinary accuracy in preparing th-e-texts for mechanical

reproduction. They also wish to express their g.uiit.rd. to Ms. Elsbeth visser and

Mr. Klaas Blok, who assisted witir great enthusiasm in the preparation of this

volume. W.J. AERTSE.R. SMITS

J.B. VOORBIJ

vlll ,-f *

'lry'll. R. Smits

Vincent of Beauvais:of the Speculum

a note on the background

l'lrc introductory contribution to this volume may be outlined in the following way.Sorrrc developments in the period between 1150 and 1250 are discussed whichrrrllrrcnced Vincent of Beauvais and contributed to the form of his Speculum Maius;lirrrrr, purpose and consequent function of this work found theirroots in Cisterciantrirtlition, where the emphasis was shifting from mystic contemplation to activerrrlcrcst and participation in society, from the uitq contemplatiua to the uita activa.llrc primary function of the Speculum having been determined, a change ofpirracligm may be detected in both the textual history of Vincent's work and in thetrirrrslations that have been made. To underscore the tradition in which Vincent'srre lricvement must be considered, an aspect of his work is brought lorward that haslrccn touched upon by Richard Rouse (1979: 157-158): 'Though the fact is notrrlwirys recognized, the Speculum too belongs in the milieu of aids for preachers. Inrclting forth the usefulness of his work, completed in 1244, Vincent of course

rrrcntions first of all that it will lead to the knowledge and the love of God; but hen()tcs as well a number of mundane tasks for which the Speculum will be of use.

l't'citching is given first place on his list.'Vincent's work has been considered as a result ol the developments that started

witlr the coming of the friars. r The most popular part of the Speculum Maius, the,\i1tt,s'111r* Historiale, is regarded by some as a first specimen of 'Mendikantenge-rr'lrichtsschreibung'2 andmany other new aspects of the middleolthe l3th centuryIoo lrave been explained as originating from the new spirituality of the Dominicansrrrrrl l"ranciscans. Recent studies, however, have thrown doubts upon this assump-tiorr and shed considerable light on the period between roughly 1 150 and 1250. Itrvirs in the twilight between the first scholasticism and the great period of Bonaven-I rrt'a and Thomas of Aquino that these new developments took place.

Around ll50 the legacy ol the past concerning jurisprudence, theologicaltloctrine and the Holy Scripture was gathered and organised in works such as( irirtian's Decretum, Peler Abelard's Sic et Non, the Lombard's Sentences and the( iloss to the Bible. Thesc works show a marked similarity because the authorities oftlrc past were collected, $omctimes unnlysctl und brought into harmony, Thet'orrtrast with the ycsr 1250 la evldent, By thut time works such as thc verb$lloncordance of the Blble fnd thf thOelelleel S'unmrrlc ure in cxistcncc, which ennble

rr rctrrrr t' trrc orrgrttrtrtr. rhc.rigir*rr works. "r'he period hotwee. llill otttl 1'tt0

witnessed nre,licu,ii,*.1',.,1,,r* ,ttu'ieii'e their appn"itu*' they crentetl new l..ls l.

*ervc their 'eetrs,

,r.lre .rigins of thi nicd rirr.hing. arc fouirel irr the gr'wtlt ttl'thc

sc5''ls, tlrc rise 'l' thc uniu.r*iy '"tf the. ch-ange froq. contcnrplutiotr itttd

r.eorcric.r thcol.ii i,,-nrrfrl.ui-it,.orogicar prob'iems. chitillon 1lt)tt2: tt90)

strcsscs thc rrcccl lbr 'unc activite p;;itq;;asociale' r6formatrice' r6gulatricc dc la

*li ct trcs rn'curs qu,est la pr6diiation.' preaching was urgently needed in this

pcri.cr. cspccially because of the'uioi.nt, multifariJus challenges made to ortho-

tl.xy in thcsc y.orr. The famou, aotto's of Paris instructed their students by their

cxcmplary preaching in order. ttt"iiftt' would undertake the task to convert the

hcrctics, preach ir,. zruruder, instl.r;; r'h. laity and contribute to a moral reform'

The period b.for; I150 can U. ,ttu'ut tetiied as a period of organisation' The

results are the works I have just mentioned: the Decretim. the Gross, the sic et Non,

the senten.., uJ the like. Hugh "rsi.

vi.ror emphasizes the concept of order in his

Didascalicon.. ,we ought, t6er"io.e, in all that we learn, to gather brief and

dependable abstracts to be ,tor.Jin'the little chest of memory''t As a tool' Hugh

treats *.*ory,'in it. classical rhetorical tradition' in his De tribus mqximis

t.ircumstantiis gestorum, awork in which the training of memory is outlined'a

About one hundred years later vincent of Beauvais, in ihe very first sentence of his

introduction to the specutr* uo^i'ur,cails attention to the deficiencies of memory'

He remarks that the enormou, nrr*ter of books' the shortness of human life and

thc slipperv nuiur. tf -.-ory do not allow comprehension of everything that has

bccn written down.s The contraslt *i'ft H"gh of St' Victor is clear' It illustrates the

fact that the period of organisati,on i-s over ind that it is forlowed by a period which

is marked by searchability' ,^ +o^lennlno, nf rl is replaced by or

Searchabiri,vi'"'u'p.'tofthetechnologyofthought.Memorylfinds considerable support in artificial finding devices' With some of these everyone

isacquainted:thelay-outof-thepage.Themise-€n-pageofscholarlyworksreceived new attention. Works are Introduced by tablel of contents' listing

chapter-headings,whichfecuf'of.o.,,,.,intheuootitself.Everypageoftheworkis marked by running-titles so that it has become possible-to see at once the main

subject treut.O on .u}, page' rn trtt book the chapier-headingsare often coloured'

which makes them stancl oo, .r.utly. Marginal notes, the forerunners of our

lootnotes, inform the reader about the contents or refer him to another passage in

the book. In the text initial letters are used to clarify and articulate the text'6

Lay-out-limitations led ,o oit., devices, for instance alphabetisation' This

meantu.trur'u..ut*i,rrtraditionsinceitimpliednewstructuresandevennewgcnres. One important.new g.nr. of these days prompted by alphabetisation was

lormecl ty tf-,.'.o'ections of giUii.ul distinttions:t ltt u distinction a word or

cxprcssionfromtheBible.ung..anumbe,j,f,''"'T]f:'^meanings.Theserncanings are illustrated by u puriugt from the.Bible' sometimes from works like

bestiaries or by the author himself. These collections, sometimes the work of

inrportant ,.u.rl.rs like Peter the chanter (summa- 4btt)' Peter of Poitiers

(Disrin<,rivncsSuperPsa.Ilcriunn\andPrepositinusofCremona(Summasuperpsulteriutrt). grcw out of ,r',. *JCl.,i pttutrte's' and provided them with material

tlrey coul,f ui.-in iheir pre$ching, sometime'"utn with ready-made schemes for

*at*.tot. ollen underlining ntoral topics'

'7#'

It ltits hccn shown thut tnnny ol'lhe nrtilicial finding dcviccs originuted in('istcrciart circles.s Vincent's works tou show C'istercian influencc. I could point int'trtrttcction with this to the Muriulr, thc grcat body of Mary legends includecl in the,\ltrurlum Historiule,o or to book 2tl ol'this part of,the Speculum Maius, which lrcrclusivcly devoted to that lamous Cistercian, Bernard of Clairvaux.ro

('istcrcian influence on Vincent is by no means surprising, since it is well knownllrlt hc worked in the Cistercian abbey of Royaumont, and if we take into accountlltc rccent articles by Madame Monique Paulmier concerning his primary sourcc, orrrt lcirst one of his primary sources, the Chronicon ol the Cistercian Helinand oflrrrriclmont.lr Helinand, who lived from about ll60 to round 1230, composed a

t,t(tgnutn opus,his Chronicon, which is, unfortunately, partly lost and partly uned-itcrl. I 2 It presents itself as a world-history, starting with the creation of the world,tlrc angels and man. Booki l-18, until the death of Alexander the Great, areprcscrved in manuscript; only small portions of this part have been edited. After a

r,'rrrtsiderable gap the thread of history is taken up again in 634, in the books 4549,lrrrhlished in PL 212. Here 1204 is the final year that has been treated. The('ltronicon comprises a compilation of knowledge which is not exclusively histori-t'irl. It has many characteristics of a Biblical commentary and history is rather theI'r';rrttework which enables Helinand at given points to elaborate on various differenttollics. Great digressions on, lor instance, astrology, the life hereafter, thehclruviour of princes, and discussions on subjects of theological doctrine havelound a place in his work. The part that treats recent history strikes the reader by thenriuly exempla and short-stories.

'fhe searchable aspect of the Chronicon is obvious from one of the two survivingrrurnuscripts, ms. Vat. Reg. lat. 535, dating from the first quarter ol the l3tht'crrtury. r 3 Many of the devices for information retrieval that have been mentionedirbove, can be seen in this codex. It fits remarkably well in the development ofsclrchability as outlined: tables of contents, chapter-headings in red, crosslcl'crences, effective use of colours, distinct articulation of the page etc.

Apart from those external features, Lhe Chroniconisalso a witness for the gradualirl)pearance of new structures as is clear from several distinctions scgtteredllrroughout this huge work, and from quaestiones with arguments pro Ehd umlntrvlrich are olten concluded by a solutio of Helinand. He also inserts earlier work intlw Chronicon,ta a device of which the origin, again, has been ascribctl to thelrliurs.l s It has to be noted, however, that the work as a whole betrays ut tinres thee rrrbarrasment ol the author belore his gigantic task; he clearly hns dil'liculties torrrirster his material.

Helinand also wrote a considerable number of sermons. r 6 Thesc scnnons witnessthc changes in the construction of homiletic works. Sometimes thcy arc divided liktlrc developing schoolsermons, at times distinctions are used, thc grcat vogue in t('cntury to come, and he vsesexemplaquite frequently. In contrust to his Cisterciprcdecessors Helinand shows no exclusive interest irr ntonasteries withrrttcndant isolation from the world. He lacks the intense interiority andnrcorporation with God that characterizes earlier Cistercians. It He is inter'ontcmporary probletrts. such as the organisation of the Church as appearsse vcrc criticism of Ronte. thc lifc of the clergy, the decay of his own orderrrrrrrrincnt threat of vgrious ltcrcsics. As with his Chronicon, Helinand's

s{br." ,

().l.ll) 9.144) ol'his ('hroniuttr.'l'he itlcntity ol'thc drunwtis pcrsutuc is revculctlIrrrrc: tlrc king is lidwarrl tlrc ('onlbssor and thc othcr person who dicd so

rrrrlrrrtunrrtcly, is Godwinc, carl ol'Wcsscx. In thc Chronicon it is clear that HclinandItrok his stury liorn William ol'Malmesbury's Gcsta Rcgum Anglorum (book ll,Sttrlrbs lttltT: 240\. The timeless tale in the sermon - the anonimity of the personsirr volvcd ancl thc absence of any exact time-indicators * does not allow to determinelrcyond any doubt that Helinand took this story from his Chronicon ralher thantlircctly from William of Malmesbury, but another passage, from his secondscnlr()n lor Ascension Day (Sermo 15, PL 212,609-6108), can be more conclusive.llclinand treats problems concerning preparation for death and he tells us, as anr'xirrrrple worthy of imitation, about the last days of St. Dunstan. Cherubim andScrirphirn arrive to announce his imminent death: St. Dunstan is supposed tot'clcbrate Ascension Day - for they pay their visit just then - in the company of thel,ortl. St. Dunstan is reluctant and manages to postpone his departure from thisworld on account of earlier urgent commitments: he cannot disappoint the believerswho wait for him to celebrate mass. Finally his guests agree to return on thelirlkrwing saturday. By then St. Dunstan has fallen ill. He lies in a bed. After his bedIrirs three times miraculously risen to the ceiling, the holy man finally dies. Again weli rrtl t he story in the Chronicon (PL 2l 2, 9l3B-91 48) and again Helinand says thatlrc is indebted to William of Malmesbury. There, however, the miraculous acount ofSt, l)unstan's death is not found. It is in Eadmer's Life of St. Dunstan that we findtlris story, although it is told here in a much more elaborate way than in the sermonrrrrtl the Chronicon.22 The version in the Chronicon shortened Eadmer's story byllriuly omissions and some abridgements. When the three versions'of the last days ofSt. I)unstan are compared, it is striking that the sermon- and the Chronicon-storyslrow a marked similarity. It seems:not to be far letched to suppose that HelinandIotrk the St. Dunstan exemp,lum ftorn his own Chronicon.

'l'o present more arguments for this hypothesis I wish to give a last example. Thetlrird stanza of the Ambrosian hymn Aeter,na Christi munera, sung by the( 'istcrcians at matins of All Saints' Duy, provides Helinand with an a occasion forlis Scrmo 25 (PL 212, 685 Alf.):

D ev ot a sanc t orum fide s,

Invicta spe s credentium,Perfe c t a C hristi c haritas,Mundi triumphat principem.

I lclinand discusses the fight against the Devil who puts obstacles in our way to;rrcvcnt us from obtaining victory; the obstacles are luxuria, avaritia and superbia.lririth, hope and love must help us to.overcome these difficulties as they helped thelroly virgins, confessors and rnartyrs. In the beginning of the sermon Helinandtlcscribcs how we can becorne soldiers in the army of Christ: Duo sunt autem, quae

lqitintunt militem,faciunl, tum corporolem, quam spiritualem, elec'tkt sc'ilic'el elnu'runentum. Qui enlm non c'leclu:t st,ipttum militiae ingerit, in se gladium provoccll,quun pntpria temerllale usurpdt; et ut uit flitctor illc, Romani maximus eloquii, nontttil(,r,,rcr/sir:ardur rcelQ namlnatur, In serlpturls utittr untiquorunt lulrone,r cl sdcclril

rc'cct trrc pcri.tr .r'rr*nsiti.rr, rrr his (trtutictt, lrc uses tltc ncw lttttlx, lrttl tttti

cxhuustivcly a'd syrt.in,,ti.,,llyl thc co'structi'n arrtl tlrc contettlr ,l'ltis sct'tttrttts

givc rrirn a placc ,.rmc*hcr. b.t*..n thc hrmilctic of the c.nvcrrt.untl thc 'l()rc

dcveloped sch oolscrmons'The promineni-role of the Cistercians in this process might casily bc gvcr

estimated. nouse and Rouse (tqzq: 6) judiciouily remark: '(...) it would be

misleading to consider the origin of tools as strictly an outgrowth of ti:::Tlii

spirituality. Instead, for the origin of tools. one must look to the growtng

concentration upon pastoral minis"try and preaching' which manifested itself in the

church as a whore(...)., The needroith. c^hurch wh-ich had to face the chalrenge of

heresy, compelled its.leaders to appeal to the Cistercians for help' The Cistercians

were persuaded to abandon their iilginut frof gsiltlm andto play an important part

in the initial stirmishes with the here"ti,''it tn 1177 count Raymond V of Toulouse

asked support in rri, ,t.rrggle against Catharism in southern France' The result was

thatpopeAlexanderlllsentamissionwhichincludednotablepreacherssuchasHenry de Marcy, abbot of Clairvaux and archbishop Garin of Bourges' also a

cistercian, who irad been abbot of pontigny. Rouse und Ro.,t e (1979:53) stress the

fact that the participation orcisterciu*Ininis mission is significant for the future'

pope Innocent III uses the cistercians as an 'elite corps of anti-heretical preachers

until the arrival of Dominicans upon the scene' Ai others have remarked' the

cistercians were employed by the Dth--century papacy for many of the tasks that

popes of the 13th and later centuries would assign to the Friars' (Rouse and Rouse

1979: ibidem).Not only in the South of France were the heretics prosecuted' Henry'

archbishop of Reims, brother or r.i"g Louis vII, and his successor' william of

Champagne, were actively involved init e fight against the enemies of orthodoxy're

with these two archbishops Helinand of Froidmont had possibly close connec-

tions'2. -, L:^ "'^*1" 6aAff tn fit well in the t ed political and

Helinand and his works seem to fit well in the summarily sketch

scholarly developments. Taking a closer look at the collection of his sermons and

the chronicon, oneis struck by the many corresponding passages in these works'

One expects to find these first and foremost in the '*'*plo'and so one does indeed'

but also theories concerning the state or pythagorean views on matters of doctrinal

discussion are found in chronicon andin sermons. This is no absolute novelty, since

the technique of using parts of earlier work in a new one was known already in the

age of the Fathe., JnO has been fointed out in various other' earlier medieval

writers as well. 21 But the fact that an attempt is made to put this technique to

effective and consistent use in the context of the other scholarly devices, seems to be

characteristic of those days. A few examples can serve to illustrate this point.

lnSermo2Helinanddiscusse.tt.,,.,tssityofprayingbeforestartingameal'Headds strength to his theoretical t;;;;iti"n by matinguse of some similitudes; one of

these is the following: (...) sic et ilL dives qui sedebat ad mensam regis Angliae ' quem

rex suspectum habeiat de morte fratris 'ii, 'u* teneret offam in manu' et diceret ad

regem: Domine mi rex, si ego rri, ,r* vel conscius de necefratris tui'nunquam offam

istam possim transglutire, quin suffocer ab .e.a' Quo dicto misit offam in os suum: quae

c:um ad gutrur veniret haesit, mox- ocuros iue invertens c:ecidit mortuus super mensam

(PL 2 12,4g2D 493A). The story about an anonymous wealthy man and an English

king whose name is not *.nt1on.o either. is also I'ouncl in book 46 (PL 212'

ii,5

..{

't;i

-*gdrn*. ,

i

As stutctl in the irrlrorlrrcloly l)lu'ltglrrplt ol'tltis cotttributiort, the lunction ol'sclnron aid or uid to $tudy lrus irlso hccrr ascribcd to Vinccnt's Spc'culunt TheI)orrrinican himscll strel*ltes tlrc scarchability in his prolclguc. Hc rcvculs theproblcms he had with the propcr way to organise the knowledge compiled, for he

could have decided, he says, to gather sentences from diflerent authors concerningtlrc same subject under one heading: carita,s for example, or ca.rtitus.2? He clcurlyhad given thought to the tool of alphabetisation. He chose the historical line, but, he

irdds, hopes to deal with the difficulties caused by the historical order, by making tconcordance of the parts that are pertinent to a given subject. Vincent points to therrroral aspect of his work in the explanation of the title. In his works lacts arccollected which deserve admiration and imitation. His work is useful, he continues,Ior preaching, reading, disputation and to explain every kind of question. I callirttention to the activities mentioned by Vincent: praedicatio, lectio, dispulatio,solutio and explanatio. These are terms concerning preaching and teaching, twoactivities which are so neatly interwoven in the period between I 150 ad 1250.

The masters who taught, also preached and made preaching aids: the studentsthey taught were being prepared to spend much of their time in the pulpit. Toillustrate this I quote from the lamous first chapter of Peter the Chanter's VerbumAbhreviatum'.28 'The practice of Bible study consists in three things: reading(lcctione), disputation, preaching. Reading is, as it were, the foundation andbasement lor what follows, for through it the rest is achieved. Disputation is thewall in this building of study, for nothing is fully understood or faithfully preached,il'it is not first chewed by the tooth of disputation. Preaching, which is supported bythe former, is the roof, sheltering the faithful from the heat and wind of temptation.We should preach after, not before, the reading of Holy Scripture and theinvestigation of doubtful matters by disputation.'

Three academic functions appear here together: lecture, disputation and preach-ing. Although there is still some uncertainty as to the exact form of disputation, itscems clear that questions and solutions or explications are part of it. Terms liketlttt,stio and solutio often occur, as said above, in the margins of Helinand's(hronicon It is in the context of preaching and teaching that a work like Vincent'sSpcculum emerged. Vincent's intention, it seems, was to produce an aid for study,2eirr which he offers texts, often with a moral outlook, compiled by him from his

;rredecessors, reducing however his own responsibility for the contents to a

rtrinimum.3oOne more short remark on moral character. When Vincent refrained from

irlphabetical presentation of his sources under diflerent headings, he gave as

cxamples caritas and castitas. In the context he mentions 'other virtues and vices'.'f 'lris aspect is noticeable in parts of the Speculum, especially in those parts in whichIrc presentsflores from different authors. Their dicts and sayings have been chosenl}om a moral-didactic point of view, corresponding to the character ol separatecontemporary flores-collections. He is therefore different from Helinand, who doesrrot seem to have made his selections in this way: apart from morality, admirationlirr poetical and rhctorical diction also provided guiding principles for the('istcrcian, who wutt, by the wuy, rtn ex trouvdre.3l

I stressed just now that Vinecnt'u intcntiorr was to offer his fellow brethren a

lrreaching or study eld, A rtrlklng Exanlplc ul'curly rcccption which conhrms this

tlicutttttr , tlttirtttttlrtt, ltgt, t,(rtt Irt,(rt,(,.l1tit,tttt, (tnil(t rxtt'rttttr , Arnut nunrquc' tplhtt't lc \' ltrtlt

tttirrt, lcgtrrr i,rr1r,',1a,,rri,tt. ('ttttt ntilitattt ttttn dicil, rtisi c'unr (ccl' ottt')2' clul 'tu''rililt"ttl('

utr ntiritiutn,junt liutsecru!r,J (,,rr. (rrttrt,.l'iriurrr suuftt tnoncr in epistoltt, nt'prutliutrt

incrtl. Nt,gut,ni,r, iw c,ssc cunt lnste pigrrrc ei, qui miles non sil, id c'sl alc'cltr's t'l

consecrutus. Opr,,rtcr enim militatturum' prius eligi, deinde electum ad militium

sacruntenro usrriing-i.' jurrius (ecr. Jurianu;) Frontinus ait, Lucio pranco et caio

Varrone consulibus, milites primo jureiurando factos esse: antea enim Sacramento

tantummodo a tribunis rogabonrui (ed. cogebinturl. Conceptio sacramenti' ut ait

Vegetius, haec est: Jurant milites per Deim Patrem, el Christum filium eius' et

spiritum sanctum, et per moiestatem principis, quae secundum Deum humano generi

diligenda est et colenda, se strenui Torturos omnia, quae praeceperit princeps:

nunquam se deserturos militiam, vel mortem recusaturos pro republica' cujus sunt

conicripti militiae (ed' cuius sunt milites ) '

This rather lengthy quotation it " .""nation of passages taken from book VI'

chapters 5-8 of J;nt oi Sulirbn ry's folicraticus' This was surely not Helinand's

direct source. Again the Chroniroh p,oues to have provid-ed the Cistercian with his

information. For clarity,s sake and^b."uur. now I quote from an unpublished part

oftheChroniconlreproducetheput*g.infull(Bookl1,38;ms'vat'Reg'lat'535p.2g3): Oro ,r'ot qrL forirnr militem tam corporalem quam spiritualem, electio et

Sacramentum.Longapaxmilitemincuriosiuslegit.LucioFlaccoetGaioVarroneconsulibus milites p"ri*o iureiurandofacti sunt'2a Antea enim sacramento tantummo-

do a tribunis rogabantur. Conceptio iuramenti teste Ve.get\ hec '::' !:'o't milites per

Deum et christum eius et spiritum sanctum et per maiestatem principis que secundum

Deum humano grnrri diiigenda est et colinda, se strenue facturos omnia que

preceperit princeps, nunquam deserturos militiam uel mortem recusoturos pro

republica cuius ,rnr'rorrriiptf mititie. Cato militem non dicit 'nisi eum qui sacramento

ad militiam iam consecratus est. Monet enim in epistula filium suum ut caueat' ne

prelium ineat. Negat enim ius esse cum hoste pugnare ' qui miles non sit ' Miles igitur

sicut laboris ita et honoris nome, est. r{emo uiro sibi honorem sumit, sed qui uocatur a

Domino. Qui non electus seipsum militie ingerit, in se gladium prouocat ' quem propria

temeritate rrrrpor. Et, ut ait Cicero, rin miles sid sicqrius recte nominatur' In

scripturis enim antiquorum sicarii dicuntur et ratrones, quicumque rege non precipiente

arma tractant. Arma namque quibus lex non utitu;' legem impugnanf' By these

examples I hope to have ,ho*n that Helinand used' and probably conceived' his

ChroniconasatooltoadornandenrichhisSermons.In this connection it is illuminating to noticeJhe title of a later florilegium' This is

called pharetra,.quiver'. Rorrr. uniRorrr. (1979:41) quote the Dominican Hugh

of st. cher, who says: 'First the bow is bent in study, then thearrow is released in

preaching.' In one of his r.r*on, (sermo8, PL 212,546A) Helinand uses the very

samemetaphor.Therethepreachetisthesagittarius'thearcher'Inshort'theChroniconprovidedHelinandwithpreachingmaterialandthereforeseemstohave

been intended aS a Sermon aid, o. u,, aid to study, two terms.which were almost

synonymous at the time.2u t, ir, of .ourr., h11d to decide whether it was intended'

apart for private use' for circulation as well. The unfortunate fate of the Chronicon,

which t..o*"dirp.ir.A u, u fuiiiy.utfy dat9, does not yield sufficient information

in this respect. rt might u. u poi.t oi further investigation, since there are also

coilccti.ns otdistinctions *uo. r,r, personal usc, ancr coilections made for the usc rl'

thc clcrgY'2o

rd:Ed

T,udffLg

vicw curr bc glcunctl lrom nn curly l4tlr ccntury cutulttguc ol'thc D0minietttt lihr[r'y

at Dijo'. 'thc cutgloguc clntcs tiom t307. 'l"hc library was arrunged uccorditrg ttt

subjcct mlttcr: thc first group arc Biblcs, thc scconrJ concerns canon l$w; the third

gr"irp is, accor6ing to dondainc (1937) who studied thecatalogue, lcss hgmogc-

i.ou.r. This group-comprises works concerning the Bible: concordances, commen-

taries and theological works, but, to Dondaine's surprise, also works like Vincent's

Speculum. It is hardly necessary now to stress the fact that Vincent's work is found

here in the company of ,on.oidunces, Bible-commentaries and exegetical works,

tools for inventio and memoria, in short, aids to study.

What about Vincent later on? The Speculum Historialewasthe most popular part

of the Speculum Maius.Did it keep its ancillary function or was it later on regarded

as a specimen of world historyi Did the translators of Vincent conceive the

Speculum Historiale as an aid for study or did they translate what was for them a

historical work? Elements of answers to these questions can be found in other

contributions in this volume. My intention has been to show how deeply Vincent

was indebted to the learned tradition of which Helinand was an important, though

rather neglected representative, doctorHelinandus, who is deservedly mentioned in

an enumeration oi uiri docti in a manuscript now in Toledo together with lamous

scholars such as Peter Abelard, Richard of St. victor, Alan of Lille, Peter the

Lombard and Peter Comestor.32

NOTES

I For the introductory paragraphs I am indebted to the works of Chdtillon (1982)'

Manselli (1982) and esfecially Rouse & Rouse (197,9:3-90 and 1982)'

2 Von den Brincken(1978:437)'3 Didascalieon 3,11, quoted by Rouse & Rouse (1982:2A2-203).

4 See Green (1943)'

5 Lusignan (1979: I l5).6 See for the development of the lay-out of the medieval book Harkes (1976) with the

cautious remarks o,f Rouse & Rouse (1979l.27 n' 66)'

7 See for a discussion concerning distinctions. Rouse & Rouse (1974) and Bataillon

(r981).Rouse (1976).

See Barr6 (1966).

Leclercq (1964:22+225) drew attention to rns. Subiaco, Abbaye Sainte-Scholastique

f ZZ (Ciiul), which offers the text of Helinand's Liber, de commendatione S. Bernardi

eius)ue dictis.Leclercq (1977:94-96) published part of thir text. It is, however, far from

certain that this book'was written by Helinand. It seems,to'.be an excerpt of vinoentls

Speculum Historiale: book 28.

Paulmier-Foucart (l98l and forthcoming)'

See for fuller informationon Helinand's life and'works Smits (1983: 328-337)'

The other ms. is London BL Cotton Claudius BIX, dating from ttiefifteenth century; see

Srnits (1983: 334).

Smits (1983: 33G337).Longere ( I 983 : I 84):'Quelques auteurs insdrent des sermons dans un commentaire ou les

.1u*ta'po..nt. Un des premiers cas est celui du dominicain Constantin d'Orvieto, ("')"

Smits ( 1983: 330"-331 )'

tu

l7 llyrrurn ( 1977: 2lt3),It{ 'fhouzcllicr(19691 2l 2J)t l,ongrtlc(lt)H.l: ltO tll); ('ongur(l95tt).l9 Thouz.cllicr ( 1969: 4l ),

l0 llclinand was in any c$se u gootl li'icrrtl ol'two cousins of king Philip Augustus: Philip de[)rcux, bishop of Beauvuis und his hrothcr Hcnry, bishop of Orl6ans.

2l Scc c.g. Gr6goire (1965: 83 95).12 Stubbs (l 874: 217-221).23 I indicate between brackets omissions and variant readings olthe edition in P[, 212. Ms,

Paris Bibl. Maz.lat. l04l f. 74v has been used for comparison with the edition.24 ln the margin of the Vatican manuscript is noted: Julianus Frontinus.2.5 Scc c.g. Smalley (1952:268); Roberts (1968:43); Rouse & Rouse (1979: 59).2(r Rouse & Rouse (1974).27 Lusignan (1979: ll7).2ll Smalley (1952: 208).It) Von den Brincken (1978: 438443) and Bataillon (1981: 199)..10 Scc Minnis (1979).

.11 Smits (1983: 341-342).12 Leclercq (1953: 9 n.2).

*

,'nfl,l

8

9

t0

llt2l3

l4l5

l6

I '/'="ffi

J. B. Voorbij

The Speculum Historiale: some aspects of itsgenesis and manuscript tradition

lntroduction

Ol the works composed by the Dominican Vincent of Beauvais his SpeculuntIIi:;toriqle has always been first in rank of popularity. This success has not onlysurpassed Vincent's pedagogical works and other treatises,r but has also outshonetlrc other parts with which the Speculum Historiale was combined to form the hugecncyclopedia entitled Speculum Maius.The Speculum Historiale was transmitted inlr large number of manuscripts, and of all Vincent's works it has appeared mostollen in print. Numerous - direct or indirect - quotations and excerpts testify to al'rcquent use. Finally, its popularity is well demonstrated by the number oft ranslations into medieval vernaculars.

When looking at the Speculum Historiale, or at the entire Speculum Maius as

such, one imagines that one is dealing with a large, monolithic unity. From recentpublications concerning manuscripts of the Speculum Maius, however, it haslppeared that there are wheels within wheels. Vincent's encyclopedia is in fact acomplex of versions and redactions of several texts. The Speculum Maius is usuallyconsidered to be arranged in three parts: the Speculum Naturale,, an expos6 on thecrcation of the world including the Fall; the Speculum Doctrinale, a treatise on thesciences, the intellectual means to help man after the Fall; and the SpeculumIli:;toriale, which deals with the history of mankind alter the Fall up to Vincent'sown lifetime, and which includes morality. Each part is headed by the Lihellusupologeticas, Vincent's apologetic introduction to the entire encyclopedia, as well as

by a special prologue and a table of contents. For centuries Vincent was creditedwith another, fourth Speculum,the Speculum Morale,a treatise on vices, virtues andrnorality. This part must be considered apocryphal, however.

F'or some years now I have been interested in the account of Alexander the Greatirr the Speculum Historiale.' My focus on this particular fragment might seemlirnited in respect of the entire text. This focus, however, enabled me to tackle theirrtricate problem of thc gcnesis and manuscript tradition of the Spec'ulum H istori-ulc. On account of its size this text hutl to bc spread over severalcodices. Frequentlyit is divided into twg or four manuscript volumes, but a tripartitc or cvcn a

rltrirrclucpurtite dlvlllon g'ccuru too, The lirst volurnc usunlly contnins the Lihellult

',.Fil

I' 'it

-,*LdB&:. *ffsr

il1,(,lt)g(li('t,,r. llte spce irtl prologttc to thc llislttiult,and the tlbte pl'c6rrtr-1ls; it rrrrryitlso cttttlttilt tt dctliclltol'y lcttcr lry Vinccnt to his royal patrgn, kilrg l..1uis lX ril'f iritrtcc, hut tlris tlcpcrrtls on thc copy.Thc number of books ol'thc Ilistoriult,tcxtcolttitinctl in copics ol'tlrc llrst volume varies from five to eighteen books. Thehistory tll'Alcxanclcr thc Great always occurs in this first volume, of which I havelirurrd sixty livc copics until now. I have also found codices containing a volume oflhc Iti'rtoriule I'ext which forms a sequel to the first volume. A number of theseclcarly bclong together with copies of the first volume, for instance because theywcrc produced by the same scribes; together these volumes contain a fuller, or eventlrc cornpleLe Historiale text.In this way my focus on the account of Alexander theGreat has supplied me with data which illuminate parts of the tradition of the entireSpec'ulum historiale.

The text of the Speculum Historiale has a close connection with the entireSpeculum Maius, thus with the Speculum Naturale and Doctrinale, and even withthe apocryphal Speculum Morale. Each part yields information on the otherSpecula and contributes to their understanding. Therefore its seems inevitable todevote a few words to the composition of the whole Speculum Maius.

II Design of the Speculum Maius

Some of the texts written by Vincent of Beauvais yield information on the genesis ofthe Speculum Maius.3 Three of these texts are letters of dedication: the firstaccompanying the Spec Hist (dated ca 1244), the second the De eruditione filiorumnobilium (written between 124617 and 1249), and the third the Tractatus de moraliprincipis institutione (between 1260 and 1263). Finally, there is the Epistolaconsolatoria or Libellus consolatorius pro morte amici, addressed to King Louis IXon the decease of the crown-prince Louis, in 1260. Further information on thecomposition of Vincent's encyclopedia can only be gathered indirectly, from theSpec Nat, Doct and Hist themselves. For the sake of clarity we here present anoutline of the design of the Speculum Maius.a

In the years before 1244 Yincent designed the plan of his encyclopedia. Hecollected different sources, among which the Chronicon by the Cistercian monkHelinand of Froidmont ranked highly (cf. note 2). Perhaps a first draft of thismaterial resulted in'a Speculum vel imago mundi,a work of which nothing is knownfQr certain. Vincent started to rework this material into a bipartite encyclopediaconsisting of a Spec Nat and a Spec' Hist, and completed the latter in 1244. Heentitled the entire encyclopedia Speculum Maius to distinguish it from the Speculumvel imago mundi. King Louis IX heard of Vincent's project through Radulfui, abbotof the Cistercian monastery of Royaumont. This abbey was founded by the king in1228, and he stayed there regularly. Through the mediation of the abbot, Vincintreceived money from the king in or shortly after 1244.This enabled him to have thatpart of the Speculum'Maiu^s copied that he considered to be completed: it was arevised text of the first half of the Spec Hist. Through Radulfus' r.rCressor this partwas presented to the royal patron. Only afterwards did Vincent complete the text ofthe Spec Nat. Of this text, which consisted of thirty books, only books one to ei$hthave becn preserved: book one is the table of contcnts, books two to eight deal with

Ithc lirst. sccttlld, third ttntl lirurtlr rlrry ol'rlrc ('rcation, irr lrugk ciur.thc ^!2r'r'l/rlrr is incorp'rurerl, 't'hc tirlcs ,t'ttrc .thcrl tx;.;k;;;;,;,i;illl,|,iliil';l,lil:li:ctlt'ttcnts allow us to reconstruct llrc ovcrall contcnts ol'thi.s orig;'i.,1 Nat (l.or thistrriginal Nat I introduce hcrc rhc syrnbol Nat-r). It i.s rikcryliil,, vinccnt wusworking at Beauvais during this phase of compiling. In^thc .nurr*'n1.

1246 Vinccntcerme over to Royaumont to occupy there the positio n,o,f lactor T;; hc cnjoyecl theassistance of the monks who supplied him with ma,terial to ,.*orkl1.,c ^Spc. Nal undSpec Hist drastically. Vincent adapted the text of th,e first half of'the Spc. Hist lobring it into line with his new plans. He reorganized ancl even ,oi. than doublcclLhe l{at-I which he, in fact, elaborated into two new spec,u/a. The {,2 to t3 and parr or t4 of Nat-t were amplified ifi;;'i;;;;;l;Tl:;irJ:.r*:

Part of book 14, and books lg to 30 of Nat_I gave way.to an a.mpiitjcation whichresulted in the seventeenbooks of the Doct.This reorganization inti

tr spec Doct rert the first part of the spec Histrackingln,some "rr.iff,iJ#?iilireworked for a fourth time. But still the second part of th. e Spec

"1" n"rAed revisionand it also had to be brought up to date. In the process the i.^t of ii.,. SpetHisl wasabbreviated as well as expanded. This revision. of ^the lOr:ii* Maius was

;:Tr,i:,$i:ffi,ij'"?i" l:;;;' rert Rovaumont berore the bes;nning or 1260,

This outline leaves us with the problem of the quadrinartite r_consisting of Nar-2, Doct, Mor and, Hist. rhe 1,G;. ;; "{ftr!#*rY:i;::apologeticus (LA) announces the Mor as an integral co-nstituent j1

the SpeculumMaius. As the Mor contains copious extracts from !\r-!ry*o ,\iitosicabySaintThomas Aquinas, who composed his work after 126g, it was f6i'subject of discussion wheth.i vin..nt or his fellow-Dominican l.l iffi,jr?lo1The problem was tackled by the Black Friar Jacqy::

_Echard, who .u.ri.O out an

';::;'{,;:nff TI::::{:#';I#',ffi9.,r;3.'Jl,"l;,lL3,iix*sof thespecDoct and spec Hist. Apart from anatyzing tne rel il,v.;.lri",i,J;?##;lf:;presentation as used in the four Specula, and he examiled in detall the sources oftheMor as well as historic al datapresented in it. From all this eviden^^

t:L!;{::il1ffi niHJ?f ff ;TT"T--'iri"ffi ;;;ili::J"';T:,1ifi1Though it is beyond question that the Mor is an apocryphal Work, Echard,sconclusions need to be adjusted. Recently it has

_b:.r.shown that'the Mor hadalready been compiled before the end of the l3th centyry. il.e important,however, was the discovery that Vincent not only compiled u tripq;,,, e Spec,ulumMaius, but that he also planned to compose a quadripartite.n.u.ri.

Professor von den Brincken analysed ,.u.rui ".;;;;;';;r1;iliJ#rouna inmss of the spec Nat, Doct and Hist. From this text she deriven lhvpothesis on the genesis or the specutum Maius:yi;i;i;;iffi ,tlt.i[X#fo;::',;';;";Tff

TS'ill'i"":.:x1i'trll,T;,,T-ffi":il",",T^,umesrr,ratt(Nat I Doc't * MorlHisr); bur vincent compleied, nnuf v, o trip.rlit.'ril|.f,il#ff:;:iTff:/|",||;i I;ITJfl"

t t D oc' t t H isr); the M or is a n apocrypha I *n,* ( vonMmc Paulmier studied two mss o| trrc Royar Library nt Brussers which contuin

#*,or&rru,, .. . 13

-

pttrts ol'the ljrst vcrsiun ol'thc ,tpcc Nal. 'I'hus shc lbund how the originnl Nal- / wusdritsticully rcworkcd ittto tr Nul-2 and a Doct (see outline above). Most importalrtwas hcr discovcry that Vinccnt left material from books l5 to l7 of Nat-t which hcclid not include into the new Spec'ula.This matter appeared to be incorporated intolhc Mor which, according to manuscript evidence, was compiled before 1297. MmePaulmier (1978: 103) inferred that'il devient ainsi n6cessaire d'envisager que lacr6ation du Morale a fait partie d'un "plan d'ensemble" de remise en chantier duSpeculum Naturale initial (...)'.

A closely similar conclusion was reached by Lusignan, who took into account thepossibility that part of the material now contained in the Mor was collected duringthe composition of the three authentic Specula (Lusignan 1979: 88-90). Heobserved that the insertion of the Mor broke up the original structure of the entireSpeculum Maius which was, in fact, based on the classification of sciences as used byHugh of Saint Victor and his successors (Lusignan 1979 79, and in detail:9l-l l l).

These new data demonstrate that there must be some relation between Vincentand the Mor, although this work is apocryphal. They also show that knowledge ofthe plans Vincent designed for his Speculum Maius is very important as it mayelucidate the structure and contents of the entire text.

III The Spe culum Historiale: Introduction

In an article published in 1924 Oursel called the attention of scholars to ms 568 ofthe Bibliothdque municipale at Dijon. Since that time the ms has always beenregarded as the most important copy of the Spec Hist. Preceded by a table ofcontents, the ms contains a dedicatory letter by Vincent to king Louis, an LA and aspecial prologue, as well as the text of books one to seven of the Hist. Oursel mainlystudied the letter and the special prologue, of both of which he prepared an edition(Oursel 1924: 257 -262).

In the dedicatory letter Vincent made clear that at the request of the king he gaveorders for that part of his bipartite encyclopedia to be copied which he consideredas completed: the first half of the Spec Hist. As he noted in the letter, the second halfof the Spec Hist as well as lhe Spec Nal still had to be corrected and hnished.6 Aterminus post quem ca. 1244 for the texts of the Dijon ms can be established on thebasis of references in the dedicatory letter to contemporary events, and of areference in book VII, chapter 98, to the second year of the pontificate of InnocentIV. A l3th-century ex-libris Liber Beate Marie de Regali Monte (on folio 264r)indicates that the ms once belonged to the abbey of Royaumont. The letter ofdedication begins (on folio 6r) with an initial D. This initial is filled by a miniaturedepicting a king. In Oursel's opinion it is a portrait of king Louis IX. The presenceof the letter in this copy, as well as the ex-libris and the miniature led Oursel to theconviction that the Dijon ms must have been the one Vincent originally presented tohis royal patron (Oursel 1924:251-253).

This, however, is doubtful for the following three reasons. When Oursel waswriting his article, the dedicatory letter was known to him from only one ms, theDijon copy. Since that time the letter has come to light in ten other copies as well asin an incunable eclition of the Spec IIist.1

An analysis of thc rledierttory lcltcr srrggcsts a sccond countcr $rgulnent,Lusignan has rightly ohscrvetl tlrnt Virrcclrt's dcscription of that part ol'1[c ,l'pt'r'//i'rt which he presentcd to thc king clocs not lit the text of the Dijon ms. ln pis lctterVincent promised a world history from the very beginning up to the death of thecmperor Valentinian, all in one volume: Cujus videlicet hystorie medium (irc'ilerpurtem ad presens in uno volumine completam ... usque ad mortem imp(alorlltValentiniani ... (Oursel1924:259;spacing is mine). The Dijon ms, however, oflers inone volume only the history up to the accession of the emperor Nero, thussuggesting that it is an incomplete copy of the text Vincent originally preserrted tothe king.8 Lusignan's observation is confirmed by a ms discovered by MmePaulmier: Brussels, Royal Library 17970 (Paulmier-Foucart 1979:94). This Hi,t'lcoPY, indisputably produced by the same team of scribes and decorators whichproduced ms Dijon 568,e gives the history from Nero up to Valentinian's death, i.e.the second half of the text Vincent presented to king Louis.

The third argument is paleographical. The hands of mss Dijon 568 and Frusscls17970 most probably belong to the end of the l3th century, instead of circa l244,toThis date is the best argument for the thesis that both mss are only copi.s of thededicatory ms which Vincent presented to king Louis. What ,.1nuin, lrur is thatthey once belonged to the monastery of Royaumont.

At the end of his article, Oursel pointed out the existence of textual variants in theDijon ms. He mentioned a few of these variants in the LA,butwith respsst to thellrsr itself his remarks remained vague (Oursel 1924:256).

Mme Paulmier was the first to give some more details. She distinsuished twophases in the genesis of the Spec Hist. The oldest she called the Dijonl,rer5ion, forwhich she at first (1978) relied upon the Dijon ms only, and later (1979) nlso uponms Brussels 17970. The later and vulgate Spec ^Flisl she labelled the Douai version,as she used the Douai 1624 edition. Mme Paulmier observed that the structure ofbooks III and IV of the Dijon version has been reorganized into books III, IV and Vof the Douai version, almost without altering the contents of these books (1978:I l8). She noted the only change of contents in book VII where excerots frompseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite have been deleted in the Douai version (979t95). Mme Paulmier also paid attention to the date of this reorgani24tion.llAlthough book XXXI of the Douai version carries the historical narrative up to1253, chapter 105 reads 1244: Ecce tempora sextae aetatis usque ad praeSenlemannum summatim perstringendo descripsi, qui est annus ... ab incarnatione pomlnl1244". Originally, this sentence must have concluded the preceding book XXX,which does indeed end in the year 1244. The final book most probably *ur u/ded tothe Hist shortly after 1253, in order to bring it up to date.r2

Although Mme Paulmier had only the first part of the Dijon version at herdisposal, she produced a cautious hypothesis regarding the structure of 11t|s oldestversion. From the reorganization of two books into three and the addition of a newbook she inferred that the oldest version of the Spec Hist,like the first versiop of theSpec Nat (see outline above), originally consisted of thirty books: one bookcontaining the LA and other introductory matter, followed by twenty nine booksgiving the Hilt tcxt (Paulmier l97lt: ll6 ll8).

14 *rifliei*a,'

IlV Thc vcrsions ol'thc filtt'culurtr ltistoriule I

I

All stuclics puhtishetl until nrtw takc it lbr granted that there are two vcrsions ol'thc {Spe c H i.st , whcreas some scholars also assume several redactions or revisions ol'onc I

of these versions (see, for instance, Gciller 1959: 29-35, and Richard 1965: l0-l l). Ihave, however, identified four versions of lhe Spec F/,rt which I will discuss here inchronological sequence:I The Klosterneuburg version.I use the term Klosterneuburg version for the oldest

version of the Spec Hist.It is transmitted in ms Klosterneuburg, Chorherrenstift128 (circa 1430). Of this version only the table of contents is preserved (fol. 8v to45v).

2 The Dijon version. This version is named after the text of ms Dijon 568. I use theterm in conformity with Paulmier (1978). Until now this version, or parts of it,has been found in the following mss:

Augsburg, IJniversity Library II.1. fol. 194 (dated 1469-1470), books I-XXXI(olim Harburg tiber Donauwiirth, Frirstl. Oettingen-Wallerstein'sche Biblio-thek); t 3

Brussels, Royal Library 11970 (end of 13th c.), books VIII-XV, and Dijon,Bibliothdque municipale 568 and 569 (end of l3th c.), books I-VII andXVI-XXIII;'a

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 8 (early 14th c.), books I-XIV, with a fewcontaminations;

Chalon-sur-Sadne, Bibliothdque municipale 5 (14th c.), books I-VII;Cracow, Biblioteka Jagiellofrska 442 (first half of 15th c.), books I-VI (counted

as II-VII), partly giving a contaminated text;Erlangen, University Library 40711,2. (before 1297), books XVI-XXIII and

XXIV-XXXI;Heidelberg, University Library Cod. Sal. IX 4l (early 14th c.), books I-VI and

XVI-XXIII;Innsbruck, University Library 17,18 and 23 (circa 1319), books I-VI, XVI-

XXIII and VII-XV;Innsbruck, [Jniversity Library 103 (middle of l5th c.), books I-VI;Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek C\m2662,2663 and2664(first half of l4th i

c.), books VII-XV (counted as IX-XVI, with contaminations), XVI-XXIIIand XXIV-XXXI;

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 8201B and 8201C (dated 1332),books- XVI-XXIII and XXIV-XXXI (counted as XVII-XXIV and XXV-

XXXII);Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 28184 and Clm 7988 (early 14th c.),

books XVI-XXIII and XXIV-XXXI.When referring to the Dijon version, I use the readings of the Augsburg ms, sincethis ms is the only full ,opy of this version.

3 The Vienna version.I use the term Vienna version for the version which can befound in the following mss: l

Klosterneuburg, Chorherrenstift 128 (circa 1430), text (!) of books I-VI;Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 292 (dated 1432), text and tables ol

contents of books t-VI;

l)raguc. Nurotlnl Muecrrrrr XVll ll l9 ( l4th c.), tcxt ol'books l Vl, us well us ntablc ol'contents ol'the errtirc //r.rl.

Vicnna, Osterreichischc Nutiortulbibliothek 392-393 (first half of l4th c.), booksl-VI and XVI XXIll. as wcll as a table of contents of the entire Hist.

When referring to the Vienna version, I use the readings of the Vienna mss sincethey constitute the best and most complete copy of this version.

4 The Dousi version. The version, finally, which is transmitted in many copies ofthe Spec Hist, and by most of the printed editions, is referred to as the Douuiversion, because it was at Douai in 1624 that this version was printed for thc lasttime.rs Although (according to, for instance, Ullman 1933: 325) this edition ofthe Douai version is not always reliable, I will use it for purposes of reference,since it is easily accessible.r 6

When Vincent was compiling his Speculum Maius, its size was growing too Muius,so that not all those who were interested in it could possibly afford to buy a copy ofthis massive text.17 Therefore he designed a structure which could guarantee eachpart of his encyclopedia an independent existence. He placed an LA as well as aspecial prologue at the head of both the l,{at,the Doct and the Hist.Into the Nut hcincorporated a resum6 of the Hist and, similarly, into the Hist a summary of theNat.

Thus a complete Spec Hist is composed of four texts: an LA, a special prologue,and the Hist text itself, which contains a Nat resum6. A table of contents usuallyprecedes the Hist.In one version, the Dijon version, Vincent's letter of dedicationmay be placed before the Spec Hist (cf . note 7). Depending on the version the Spec'

Hist contains a variable number of books. The introductory matter is oftenconsidered a book in itself, and the Hist may be composed of twenty-nine, thirty orthirty-one books.

In the Klosterneuburg version the Hist (: Hist-l) counts twenty-nine books.Since in this version the table of contents itself is numbered as the first book, thetotal number of books of the Spec Histhere runs up to thirty. The LA as well as thespecial prologue belonging to this version are not preserved.l8

The Dijon version contains thirty-one books of the Hist (: Hist-2). Theintroductory matter is left unnumbered. The scribes of some copies, however,considered the LA and the special prologue parts of the first book of the Hist, lnthese mss the Spec Hist also counts thirty-one books.

In the Vienna version, on the contrary, the introductory matter is alwaysregarded as the first book. Here the list (: Hist-3) consists of thirty books,Consequently the total number of books of the Spec Hist here amounts tothirty-one.

The Douai version, finally, contains thirty-one books of the Hist (- Hi,st-4) towhich, in many mss, an alphabetical table is appended. Usually there are thirty*twobooks in this Spec' Hist, since in most copies the introductory matter is labelledbook one. The editors of the Douai edition of 1624 issued the entire Spec,ulum

Maiu,s in four volumcs, The LA itnd a special prologue were printed only once,preceding the rVol-J, Thc tubles ol'contcnts and the indices belonging to eachSpc,c'ulum were prlnt€d gt th€ cnd oleuch volumc. Hencc, in opposition to thc mss ofthc Dousi verrlon whloh urually courlt thirty two books, the editors counted the

'.-t

t6 t7*;L&i&cir:;

botrks rrl'thc Spec Ili,rt us one to thirty onc. ?'o uvoicl t'ontusion, I v,lll.litllon, tlrt'l)ouui edititttt ol' 1624 in utunting thirt), one hook.s. The reader should noticc thatwhcn thc cdition speaks of, forexample, book XVII, it is usually XVIII in the mss ofthe Douai version.

V Versions of the Libellus Apologeticus and the specialprologue

The Libellus totius operis apologeticus (LA) is Vincent's apologetic introduction tothe whole of his encyclopedia. This text offers a justification and explanation ofVincent's aims in compiling the Speculum Maius,of its title and structure, and of theworking-methods and sources used. It has been shown that there are severalversions and redactions of the LA, which throw a vivid light on the laboriousevolution of the Speculum Maius.

The first version of Vincent's preface introduces a still incomplete SpeculumMaius which is planned to contain two Specula: a Nat and a Hist.le This LA, forwhich I use the symbol LA-1, consists of twelve chapters. It is only transmitted in anumber of mss containing the Dijon version of the Spec Hist.

The second version of lhe LA, LA-2, now composed of eighteen chapters,introduces a bipartite Speculum Maius which is completed. LA-2 is transmitted inthe two copies of the Spec Nat at Brussels which also contain Nat-I (analysis byPaulmier 1978: 93-98). The heading of chapter 17, De bifaria diuisione totius operis,makes it indisputable that Vincent originally compiled a bipartite version of hisencyclopedia. If we compare LA-2 with LA-1, it appears that the first chapter ofLA-l has been rearranged into two chapters. Furthermore, new chapters have beeninserted, one treating of the quotations from Aristotle, another of the design of thewhole Speculum Maius. Three chapters, finally, have been added in which Vincentcomments and criticizes the structure and contents of both Nat and Hist.

Vincent's reorganization of Nat- I into a Nat-2 and Doct is reflected by a thirdversion of the LA, LA-3, which was discovered and partly edited by Echard (1708:4l-81). The text is a slight reworking of LA-2, all revisions being intended tointroduce the existence of the Doct. The heading of chapter 17 now reads De trifariadiuis[one totius operis. The final part of chapter 18 has been replaced by a textintroducing the Doct in detail. LA-3 seems to occur only in mss of the SpecDoct.2o

The fourth version of the LA, LA-4, is closely linked up with the planning of theapocryphal Mor.It should be remembered that Mme Paulmier's analysis of the twoSpec Not mss at Brussels showed that part of the material included in the Mororiginally belonged to the Nat-I (see p. 14). We might add that Lusignan admittedthe possibility that some of the material in the Mor was collected while the other ,*Speculawere being compiled. He suggested that, in anticipation of this Mor,a new Tversion of the LA (which I call LA-4) was written. This might explain the relativelyrare occurrence of the earlier versions of the LA (Lusignan 1979 89-90).

LA-4 has become the vulgate text of the LA. Of LA-4 one shorter and two longerredactions are preserved. The shorter redaction, LA-4A, I have lound in the Viennaversion of the Spec'Hl.rt. In eighteen chapters it introduces a quadripartite Spaculunt

M uiu,s, ln LA-4 A tlre linul purt ul'ch$pter l0 nntl the whole ol'chuptcr l l hnve beenomitted.:r '[hc hencling ol'chupter 16 (17 in I-A-2 mcl LA-3\ now reuds Dequwlrilhriu diui,rione totiu,t ttptris, rnd herc lhc Mor is explicitly mcntioned. But,irpparently, this Slteculum was planned to compose one single volume together withthc,Spcc' Doct. This is evident from chapter l6 which announces a quudripurtitecncyclopediaconsistingof threevolumes:Quapropter ipsumopusuniuersum in IIIFIlrurtes princ'ipales tunquam in tria uolumina perfecta et a se inuicem distinxi,,,, ln<rrder to introduce the Mor, chapter l8 of LA-2 and LA-3 has been split up here(chapter 17, Retractatto prime partis, and chapter 18, Retractatio secunde, tercle elquurte partis), with some insertions dealing with the Mor.

Possibly the introduction of the Mor in LA-4A was considered unsatislactory inview of the structure of the whole Speculum Maius, which is in fact based on theVictorine classification of sciences (see Lusignan 1979:91-ll0). Or, perhaps,Vincent recognized that the length of the Mor was becoming greater than it wasoriginally planned to be. This might explain why a second, longer redaction ofLA-4, LA-48, was composed. LA-48 shares the characteristics of LA-4A, but itadds some new elements. Part of chapter 16 (De quadrifaria diuisione totius operis)isreplaced by a long philosophical discussion which breaks up the Victorineclassification. Basing itself on Plato, it divides philosophy into naturalis, doctrinalitt,trnd moralrs. Arguing with Aristotle, it denounces the subject-matter of the Hisl asneither belonging to philosophy nor being a science since it brings only admiratict,recreatio,andutilitas. As a result of this elaborate change, the rest of chapter l6 hadto be set apart to form a new chapter: De materia uniuscuiusque partis.

LA-48, which still announces a quadripartite encyclopedia in three volumes, isthe common text in mss of the Spec Nar which contain Nat-2.In the Douai versionol the Spec Hist, LA-48 was adapted. In this adaptation, which I call LA-4C,chapter l6 reads quatuor partes ... in quatuor volumina.The Speculum Maius is nowextended to four parts in four volumes.22

As Von den Brincken (1978: 412) and Lusignan (1979: 34-36) have observed,each of the Specula is introduced by a special prologue. Vincent appended thesctexts to the LA,and they, too, added to the independence of each Speculum.Insomemss the special prologue is clearly separated from the LA by a large initial.ztMostly, however, it is attached to this text as its final chapter. Each Speculumrequired its own version of the prologue text. Always beginning with the sameopening address, they present different readings demanded by the text they areintroducing and by references to the other Specula. The title of the prologue readsContinuatio quatuor partium ad inuicem (: Pnat) in Spec Nal mss, 2a and Conti-nuacio huius secunde partis ad alias (: Pdoct) in mss of the Spec Doct.

To my knowledge, only the special prologue to the Hist (- Phist) exists in severaldistinct redactions. The oldest and longest redaction, Phist-1 - preceded by LA-lwhich introduces a bipartite Speculum Maius - is transmitted in some copies of theDijon version. It is headed by the following caption: Incipit prologus secunde partisSpeculi Maioris omnimoclum hystoriam continentis. This redaction shows a peculiar-ity concerning its rcference to the Spec Nut.lt announces that a summary of the Histwill be presented in book slx olthe S'pe,r' Nut: in VF lihro uidelicet , ubi de temporihusugitur. As Mme Pculmler her proved, this resum6 was ultimately incorporated intotrook eight of th€ oldmt Yl!|l9n of the ,S'pe,r' Nat, which contains Nut-1, Having

IE *r.* a

writtcn tltis spcciul prologuc. Vittccrrt irpparcrrtly rcorgurrizccl irr sorrrc tlcglec tlrcstructurc ol'Nal-/ antl placcd tlrc rcsumc in book cight.2s

Attcrwards, al'tcr Vinccnt had drastically reorganized the entirc Nut-lirrto i,r

Nut-2 and a l)ocl, the summary of the Hist was placed at the end of Nat-2, in thelinal book. Therefore, in the second redaction of the special prologue (: Phist-2),the announcement was changed into infine uidelicet, ubi de temporibus agitur (cf .

Von den Brincken 1978: 498). Compared with Phist-1, the new redaction shows onemore difference. It lacks the phrase si quis autem legentium ... facilius detinere (seeVon den Brincken 1978:.499,and Lusignan 1979 35 and 139). In the Vienna versionof the Spec Hist, Phist-2 bears the title Continuacio tercie partis ad alia.r. The Douaiversion has Continuacio huius quarte partts ad alias; here Phist-2 is often counted aschapter 20 of LA-4C.

It is tempting to connect these headings of the Vienna and Douai versions withtwo redactions of the LA,viz. LA-4A and LA-4C. LA-4A gives a short introductionto the Mor; although Phist-2 of the Vienna version mentions the Mor as the thirdpart of the Speculum Maius and the Hist asits fourth, the title announces the F/rst asthe third part. In I A-4C of the Douai version the introduction to the Mor is wellelaborated, and four volumes of the encyclopedia are now announced. Might weinfer from these prefaces that the Vienna version of the Spec Hist reptesents a stagein the development of the entire Speculum Maius when the planning of the Mor wasnot firmly fixed, and that Vincent's encyclopedia took a more definite shape whilethe Douai version was being compiled?

VI Versions of the Historiale: Partl26

In dealing with the four versions of the Hist, one preliminary remark is required.There is some uncertainty as to the Klosterneuburg and Vienna versions, becausepart of the latter and even the entire former version are only known from theirtables of contents. The tables supply us with superficial indications regarding thebooks and chapters of these versions; on the texts themselves, however, they do notprovide much information. Therefore, in order to allow a collation with the Dijonand Douai versions, I assume that if the chapter-headings of the Klosterneuburg orVienna versions agree with those of the Dijon or Douai versions, the texts whichmust have been contained in these chapters also agree. In comparing texts in detail,I will only refer to the Dijon and Douai versions.

The first part of the Hist counts fourteen books in the Klosterneuburg andVienna versions, and fifteen in the Dijon and Douai versions. The differencesbetween the versions are due to changes in organization and to changes incontent.

Changes in organization are reflected in a different build-up of a number ofbooks. This occurs in the first place in that part of which the history of Alexanderthe Great is the very heart. In book IV of the Klosterneuburg and Vienna versions,and III of the Dijon version, Vincent presents the history of the world from thePersian king Cyrus up to the beginning of Alexander's reign in Macedonia; book V(IV in the Dijon version) contains the history from Alexander up to the reign ofJulius Caesar. In the Douai version, however, these two books $re rcorganized into

s

20

bookslll,lVutttl V(el', ltuulruir,.r'l()7H: llt{).'I'hisdivisionwilsnppilrcntlyintcndcclto givc Alcxunder thc (irerrl ltis own book. sincc book IV now prcscnts his historytur, better, his triogrophy, l'rorn lris nrarvcllous begetting by Ncctanabus up to hisshanreful death by puison (outlinc in Appendix I).

A second differencc can be seen in the arrangement of part of late Romnn history,l'rom the emperor Vespasian up to Diocletian and Maximian. Here Vincentrcorganized the same matter three times. In the Dijon version this history is spreuclover books IX, X and XI. In the three other versions, on the other hand, it is

contained in two books, though with divergent arrangements: in the Klosterncu-hurg and Vienna versions, book X is composed of 94 chapters, book XI ol 160; thislristory is arranged in 126 chapters of book X and 129 of book XI ol the Douaivcrsion. These divergences are tabulated in Appendix II.

Changes in organization are also encountered at the level of chapters. Presuma-bly because Vincent preferred his chaptes to be neither too long nor too short, anumber of them are reorganized. Sometimes chapters are merged, without anychange in their content. On the other hand, and more often, they may be split up.'Ihis phenomenon mainly occurs in the Dijon and Douai versions, with thercstriction that one version is always in opposition to the other three, e.g.:

I)ijon version Klosterneuburg, Vienna and Douaiversions2T

VI.9

VI,36 De cena Domini etins tituc ione eukar is t ie

V1,37 De traditione Domini

XI.59

l)ouai version

De ieiunio et temptztione VII,9Domini et prima uocationediscipulorum

De ieiunio et temptationeDomini

VII,l0 De prima vocacionediscipulorum

VII,37 De cena Domint etins t ituc ione eukar is t ie

Klosterneuburg, Dijon and Vi0nnaversions2 7

IV,93 De fuga Nectanabi inMacedoniam et eiuscolloquio cum O lltmpiude

(: Drjon version III,94)

De sancto Mammete puero XI,l47 De sancto Mammete pueroXI,l48 De agone eius in passione(: Douai version XI,1 l6-117)

lv, I

lv,2

De fuga (read: origine)Alexandri Magni et fugaNectanahi in MacedoniamDe rclkryuio ipsiusN ec tanahl cutn 0litttpiude

lv.l 5

lv.l6

vlll,27

VITI,28

Q uu I I t tr l'lt i I lpptt,r ( i rr iutrt,tuhic't'i t, c I N ugttlu,y ludcunri lcnmt t r i hu t ur iam .li'c i tDe L,socrale

De sacrumentoconJirmationisDe collatione huius

Quul iter PhII|ppul ( i t,t,t,ituttsuh icc' i t c' t N ctgtt,ttt,r I uilctttttt r ihutar ium i t cr wn .fi'c i t

lv.l05

sacramenti ad baptismum

XII,l25 De constanti agone beatiVincencii in equuleo

){II,126 De uaticula eiusdem

( : Drjon version III,l06)

VIII,26 De sacramentoconfirmacionis

(: Drjon version VlI,27)

XII,l25 De constanti agone beatiVincencii

The changes in content are much more sweeping. They mark off the Dijon andDouai versions from the Klosterneuburg and Vienna versions. These changesconsist mainly in addition and insertion as well as in cancellation. The most strikingchanges are found in the Douai version: the removal of some passages onconfession, and of a long excerpt from the works of pseudo-Dionysius theAreopagite (as Paulmier-Foucart 1979:95 noticed); and the addition of miraclesconcerning the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalen (see Appendices III and IV). Inthe Dijon version excerpts from the works olQuintilian are omitted (see AppendixV). Whereas in book XV the Klosterneuburg and Vienna versions both give the lifeand miracles of Saint Evroul and of Saint Marcel of Paris as well as the dicts andsayings of the Desert Fathers, the Dijon version omits all matter regarding theFathers, and in the Douai version the two French saints are cancelled (tabulated inAppendix VI).

One may wonder if some changes of this kind are connected with the reorganiza-tion of the entire Speculum Maius.It might be rewarding to make an inquiry in theDoct, or even in the apocryphal Mor, to see whether these deleted passages onconfession were used elsewhere when Vincent reorganized his encyclopedia. A moredelicate question concerns pseudo-Dionysius. As Saint Denys was the patron saintof the French kingdom, a reasonable amount of information on his person and hisworks could not be lacking, of course, in a text presented to king Louis. One mightask, however, if the reduction of these long excerpts into one single chapter gf theDouai version is due to only a reorganization, or whether it was caused by'someother reason.

Insertions and deletions are also made on a smaller scale, as may appear from afew examples taken from the Dijon and Douai versions. In the history of Alexanderthe Great, Vincent treats of the Greek philosopher Plotinus and some of hisremarkable sayings. In the Douai version these sayings have been amplified byexcerpts from the oeuvre of Hermes Trismegistos, with the result that all Plotinus'sayings had to be spread over two chapters:

22

%

I )i.ion vcrsion

l ll. l00

l)ouui vcrsion

IV,8 De Pbtino philosophrtActor. Fuit et aliusPlatonic'us .., similem Deo

fieri.Mercurius ubi supra.Plotinus singularisPhilosophus ... sanguinismorte, tabesceret,Dicta eius de quqtuorvirtutibusMacrobius de somnoScipionis libro I. cap.7.Plotinus in lihro ...

De Plotino et dlcli,s t'itt,t,Ac'tor. Fuit t,t uliu,tplatonicus ... lsitnilem cleo

.fieri.

IV,9

Macrobius in libro primo de

sompnio Scipionis.Plotinus philosophus in eo

libro ...

ln the passage on confession (cL Appendix III) omissions occur apart from thechapters deleted. Dijon version VII,39 (De contritione) and 40 (Qualiter contritio sitpur.t iustificationis impii) are run together in the Douai version into VIII,40 (Det'ontritione) and a considerable amount of text is omitted. Book VILI,44 (De modouutliendi confessiones, et faciendi interrogationes) of the Douai version containsvariant readings and divergences from its counterpart in the Dijon version, VII,45.'fwo phrases of this chapter 44 are taken from VII,47 of the Dijon version, which forthe rest is deleted.

But even when on the surface the organization of books and chapters has notbcen changed, considerable divergences do occur within the text itself, e.g. in bookIX (Douai version: book X), chapters 21,23,25,57,64,67, from which I take twodctails. In chapter 67 the Douai version has flores from the letters of Pliny, all ofwhich are lacking in the Dijon version. The Douai version omits an interestingrcmark in chapter 25 concerning the people who lived in the city and region ofBcauvais during and after Julius Caesar's wars against the Gauls. This chaptertrcats of Saint Lucian who was sent to Beauvais vbi custodia Romanorum, elmilitaris exercttus residebat; quia gens Beluacensium semper bellicosa fuerat. TheDijon version here continues: Vnde ex eodem solummodo pogo LX' et eo ampliusmilia armatorum exisse leguntur ad prelium contra lulium Cesarem et contraexercitum Romanorum une cum reliquis Gqlliarum conciuibus. Ideoque propterin,solentiam eorum... Several times data concerning the Beauvaisis have been used toprove Vincent's connection with this town.28 In this context, the omission of thispassage in chapter 25 is a little ironical. One might wonder whether those sixtythousand were considered as detracting from the glorious past of Beauvais, orwhether their deeds did not fit in with Vincent's conception of French history.

It will be clear that, us H rcsult of the changes in organization and of those incontent, the number of chupters in nrany books shows differences between the fourvcrsions. A few fentUf€E, however, $eenr to reveal some uncertainty concerning thequcstion how tho nefnnltetlon: of the l/irt had to be carried out in detail, Anumber of mrnUdFE mC pflnted editions of the Douui vcrsion cont$in Hn

irlplrllrclicnl tnhlc which nnnourtccs. undcr thc lcttcr A: Apokntll 7'!rl[e',rlrr itr lirtt'quilrtilrhri.'l'his tcxt. htlwcvcr, is not prcscnt at all in thc Hisl,lo

A nrorc striking cxanrplc ol' wavcring organization occurs in thc ltistory ol'Alcxanclcr thc Great. ln the Dijon version, book III, chaptcr 93 (Dc AtttutttcKurthuginc,nsi) is concluded by a comment on contradictions between Eusebius andLhe Historia Alexandri3o: Actor. Hec Orosius. Eusebius autem in Cronicis ita scribit:Anno Ochi decimo et Philippi sexto, quifuit annus undecimus Nectanabi regis Egypti,Alexander Philippi et Olympiadisfilius nascitur. Quod omnino non congruit HystorieAlexandri, que scribit eum a Nectanabo iam extrq regnum facto generatum. Nuncigitur de exilio Nectanabi et ortu Alexandri hystoriam prosequamur. Chapter 94

begins: Ex Historia Alexandri regis. Inter Egypti sapientes... In the Douai version,however, this criticism is placed at the very beginning of book IV, chapter l, and -apart from variant readings - it is elaborated with information concerning the

chronoiogy of that period. This is followedby Ex historia Alexandri. Inter .'Egyptisapientes... Another divergence occurs in the organization of the first few chapters,concerning Nectanabus'flight from Egypt and his prophecy to Olympias: III,94 ofthe Dijon version is split up into IV,l and IV,2 in Douai. The Alexander story in theDijon version is treated in 68 chapters, whereas the Douai version gives it in 7l (cf.Appendix I and p. 21). An intermediary form of the history of Alexander istransmitted in a number of manuscripts which probably all originate fromSouthern Belgium and the Northwestern regions of France.3l At first sight theyseem to belong to the Douai version of the Hist,, as they contain the chapters Dictaeius de quatuor uirtutibus and De Isocrate. But a closer look reveals somepeculiarities in their presentation of the Alexander story: the criticism of Eusebiusand the Historia Alexandri are placed at the end of III,93, and so book IV begins: ExHistoria Alexandri. Inter Egyptt sapientes...; and Nectanabus' flight and prophecyare treated in one single chapter. As a result of these changes the history ofAlexander in these manuscripts counts seventy chapters. These facts are notsufficient for me to assume a fifth version of the Hist.I consider these mss to belongto a peculiar redaction of the Douai version, because with this version they have

most characteristics in common.

VII The resum6s of the Naturale and the Historiale

Yet another change in content occurs in the first half of the Hist: there existdivergent versions of the Not resume. This matter is closely bound up with thequestion of how many variant versions of the second part of the Hist Vincentcomposed. At the same time these divergent summaries may shed light on thegenesis of the entire Speculum Maius.

In the preceding I mentioned how Vincent guaranteed the independence of each

Speculum by his decision to place the LA as well as a special prologue at the head ofboth Nat and Doct and Hist. This independence was augmented by the incorpora-tion of a resum6 of the Histinthe Spec Nat,and of a resum6 of the Natinthe Spec

Hist.Around 1244, when Vincent presented part of the Spec Hist lo king Louis, thc

Spct' Nut was not complcted, as is apparcnt from the dedicatory lctter which

24

" sFttl

Vincent prcfixcd to thc Dijon versiorr (cl', p. 14 tnd note 6). Yct this versioncontuins a Nut resum6 (Rnut-l\, which occupics book [, chapters I to 55, Thercsum6 is also present in the older Klosterneuburg version, in II,l-55. As we do notposscss the text of the Klosterneuburg version, I assume that its N4t summary wnssirnilar to Rnat-l of the Dijon version.

Rnat-l corresponds to that part of the Nat-l which was later used to compile theNut-2 and the Mor (cf . pp. l3-14 on the two Brussels copies of the Spec Nat). Buttlrcre are discrepancies as regards the doctrinal matter of Nat-1, which was latertlcvcloped into the Doct. Apparently Vincent had not yet finally decided what toinclude in this very part of the Nat-I when he composed the summary Rnat-l (cf ,I)aulmier 1978: 107-109). It seems justified to consider Rnat-I as a kind ofprospectus, a preview of what the Nat-l around 1244 was planned to contain.

Afterwards, when Vincent had completed the first version of his Spec Nat, hetlccided to reorganize it into a new Spec Nat anda Spec Doct, and thus the resum6 inthc Spec Histhad to be adapted. This adapted text, Rnat-2,which is preserved in theVicnna and Douai versions, shows additions in chapters 54 and 55 of the firstbtrok.32 The text of these chapters deals with the content of the Doct (cf. Lusignan1979:67-69).

Two versions of the Hist resum6 are preserved. The oldest, Rhist-1, gives a worldlristory up to l242l1244.This epitome appears in book VIII of the oldest version ofthe Spec Nal, which is only preserved in ms Brussels 18465.33 This resum6 is alsoIound in ms Paris 13702, though here parts of it are expanded (Lusignan 1979:2s -27).

It was Vincent himself who gave Rhist-l an independent existence. He entitled itMemoriale,3a and prefixed a short prologue to the text.3s In this prologue Vincentstated that he excerpted this libellus manualis from his big book on behalf of thosewho were interested in it but who, on the other hand, shrank from using it or evenlrom buying a copy because it was so voluminous.

Afterwards Vincent brought this resum6 of the Hist up to date (Rhist-2\. Thenarrative now ends in 1250. Rhist-Z is found in book XXXIII of the reorganizedSpec Nat.

VIII Versions of the Historiale: partII

Rhist-I and Rhist-2 aptly reflect the evolution of the second part of the /fisl itself.Regarding this part, the relations between the versions are substantially differentliom those we encountered in the first part of the text. Now it is only theKlosterneuburg version which is clearly differentiated from the other versions. Thesecond part of the Klosterneuburg version counts fifteen books, whereas in theDijon, Vienna and Douai versions the corresponding section consists of sixteenbooks which are identical, or almost identical,36 in all three versions. Therefore wewill refer in this section to only the Klosterneuburg and the Douai versions.

A comparison of the chapter-headings in the Klosterneuburg version with thoseof the Douai vcrsion makeo it abundantly clear how drastically Vincent re*wrotethe second part of hlt Hlal, He both abbreviated and expanded it, and thusproduced I lmt nunbor of ehanges in orgnnization as well as of changes incontent.

As irr tlte lirrrrrct'purt. cltnrtgcs itt orglnizution ilrc rcl'lccterl in n tlil'l'clcntbuilcl up ol'scvcnrl books. lrt thc lirst placc this can bc sccn in the 0rnutgentr,rrrt ol'books XXll antl XXlll.'l'hc last chaptor of book XXII of the Klostcrrrcuhurgvcrsirrn contains cxcerpts fiorn popc Gregory the Great's Homeliac; book XXIIIgives thc history of the world from the emperor Phocas up to the reigns ol'theernperor Constantine VI and his mother lrene. In the Douai version, on the otherhand, the history of Phocas' reign is given in book XXII; book XXIII presents thehistory beginning with the reign ol the emperor Heraclius (see Appendix VII).

A second difference concerns the arrangement of the final book. In book XXX ofthe Klosterneuburg version, the historical narrative was probably brought down toa point of time shortly after 1243. The heading of chapter 94 mentions the warbetween the emperor Frederic II and pope Innocence IV, who was elected in June1243. Since the chapter-headings of this book do not record the deposition of thisemperor (l7th July 1245), a terminus ante quem may be inlerred from this fact.Chapter 95 immediately continues with a long epilogue concerning the end of worldand the Last Judgement. From the final sections of the Douai version it is clear thatthe Hist was expanded later: Vincent inserted new material in books XXIX andXXX, and added a new one, book XXXI, carrying the narrative up to 1253. As aresult of this expansion, the epilogue on the end of world had to be used as the finalsection of book XXXI (see Appendix VIII).

I mentioned above the remarkable inconsistency which occurs in this bookXXXI: though Vincent's world history extends to 1253, the epilogue is introducedby an item belonging to the year I 244 (cf . p. l5). Since this inippropriate dateindicates that the epilogue on the end of world was composed in 1244, it mayconfirm the date of completion of the entire Klosterneuburg version. Moreover, itmay be a demonstration of the difficulties Vincent encountered in organizing andrearranging all the material of the Speculum Maius. In his dedicatory letter to kingLouis he complained about those who helped him to elaborate his encyclopedia,and warned several times that his exemplar still had to be corrected (see note 6).Might this erroneous date 1244be due to one of Vincent's helpers, and did he, as

captain of the crew, not notice it within sight of the harbour?A few changes in organization are encountered at the level of chapters, as in the

first part of the Hist.In this second part, however, we only find chapters of theKlosterneuburg version split up into two chapters in the Douai version, e.g.:

Klosterneuburg version

XX,l 19 De episcopatu eiusdem elexilio et regimine

, monasterii

XXIII,l5l De Alcuino <qui> etAlbinus, et scriptis eius

Douai version

XX,l05 De episcopatu eiusdem, etexilio

XX,l06 De ite.rato eiusdem.ex.ilio,et regimtne monasterii

XXIII,l73 De Alcuino qui et Albinus

XXIII,l74 De scriptis eius

26-.flr

q

XXlX.3(r I)t utttl:rslottt',\ttttt'1,' (','l('i,rel orlu Ltuhn,l<,il'r,gi r

XXlX,43 I)c utttis,ri.rttt',\utt(l(tt, ,]"ttt'i,r

XXIX,44 De ortu l.udouit'i,l'iliiPhilippi, ct t,u1tt itmcHierulsulenr

'l'hc number of changes in content is stupendous. Whereas many chapter hcaclingsol'thc Klosterneuburg version do correspond with those of the Douai version, otherhcadings are only present in the former. The matter which the chapters in questioncontained according to their headings is searched for in vain in the Douai versi6n. Artumber of chapters of the Douai version, on the other hand, show a substitution 9r,nlore often, an addition of material. Since the number of changes in content is sovast, I must confine myself to a general overview of the versions. A few phenomena,however, will be illustrated by referring to appendices.

From a certain point of view, the Douai version of the Hist may be characterizcdits a condensed text of the Klosterneuburg version. This condensation almostcxclusively concerns excerpts from the works of ecclesiastical authors. Book XVI isrrrainly composed of flores from St. Jerome's works; after chapter 88. thc:Klosterneuburg version mentions five chapters which have been deleted from thcl)ouai version. Book XVII contains eighteen chapters regarding St. Anrbrose'socuvre (see Appendix IX), as well as a section devoted to St. John Chrysostom(chapters 64-76),which have been omitted in the Douai version. In book XVIII, theDouai version has greatly reduced the excerpts from the works of St. Augustine olHippo: between chapters 92 and 93 the corresponding part of the Klosterneuburgvcrsion gives eight more chapters (: 92-99), and between 97 and 98 nine morechapters (: 105-l l3); at the end of this book, finally, the Klosterneuburg versionpresents another twenty-one extra chapters regarding Augustine's oeuvre. tn theconcluding phrase of XX,16, the Douai version announces excerpts from the worksof St. Peter Chrysologus: luthor. Extant vero sermones elegantes sancti PepiRuuennatis episcopi, ex quibus excerpta plurima opusculis nostris inserui, but thesecxcerpts can not be lound at all in this version. At the corresponding place in theKlosterneuburg version, however, dicts and sayings of this saint are included(XX,17-24). Similarly, chapters 3844 contain a florilegium of the works of popeLeo I, whereas XX,29 of the Douai version only announces the incorporation ofsome.flores at several places in Vincent's works. In book XXI of the Douaiversion.the excerpts lrom Boethius and Cassiodorus have been reduced. One is surprised tollnd, however, that, after XXI,61 , excerpts from the Rule of St. Benedict have beencompletely deleted which are contained in XXI,74-*78 of the Klosterneuburgvcrsion. The reduction of book XXII is even more amazing. Seventy-nine chaptcrsdcaling with the Dialogi of pope Gregory the Great are not mentioned at all by thcI)ouai version: between chapters 53 and 54 the corresponding part of thcK losterneuburg vcrsion nrcnl,ions scventy-six chapters ( : 54 I 29); bctwcen 5tl and59 another three ( = 135 137), Sintilar radical omissions occur in books XXVI anclXXVIII. In book XXVI it concertts tltc.//orr,,r of Hugh of St. Victor:chapters g3 g7

rund 105=114 of the Klolt€rncuburg version have bccn cancclled in the Dougiversion. Moct r€vrHly, howlygr, thc excerpts liorn thc works ol'St, Bcrnurcl ol'

"w('lttirvtttlx ltttvc bcett retlttced: rnorc thun onc hundrecl uncl twenly clrrr'rerItcatliltgs, cove rittg XXVlll,l l9 24(lol'thc Klostcrncuburg version, ure nrt grrcscnttlny morc in thc l)tluai vcrsion. An important omission, finally, occurs in thccpiltlguc on thc cnd of world, in the final book of the Hist.In the Klostcrncuburgvcrsion it numbers eighteen chapters more than in the Douai version (sixteen oTthese headings are tabulated in Appendix X). Part of this omission concerns thesouls of deceased people. As some of the headings (viz. those of chapters 100, l0l,102 and 106) correspond to Spec Nat XXIII chapters 77-80,which also deal withthe human soul, I suppose that this cancellation is due to a reorgan ization of theentire Speculum Maius which involved the transfer of some material to the SpecNat.

I want to stress that most of the omissions in question deal with morality. Here Imay recall a similar phenomenon that has been observed in respect of the firstversion of the Spec Nat.Mme Paulmier (1978: 99-103) discovereO inat books l5 tol7 of the Nat-1, which were also devoted to morality, were used later to compile theapocryphal Mor. Could there be a parallel between this matter of the Spec Nat andthe moral matter which occurred in the Klosterneuburg version but which wasdeleted from the Douai version? Did these omissions perhaps also contribute to thecreation of the Mor? I presume that some interesting conclusions regarding thegenesis of the Speculum Maiusmay be drawn from a collation of the Mor withthosemoral parts of the Klosterneuburg version which were omitted in the later versions.Since such a collation exceeds the scope of this article, I will leave it at this.

Whereas cancellation of material can be seen again and again, the phenomenonof substitution occurs only occasionally. In fact, I have found oniy o.r. remarkablecase of substitution I need to mention here. As the heading of XV1,134, theKlosterneuburg version gives De sancto Epyfanio Cypro episcojo.As appears fromthe heading of XVIII,5 (De sanctis Donato et Epiphanto iptsciprs), the acts of thisbishop are discussed once more. Afterwards the formei .trupt.r was probablyregarded as redundant, since, in thecorresponding section of book XVII, the Douaiversion has replaced it by flores of St. John of Damascus: 103 De loanneDamasceno;104 De falso crimine in eo punito; 105 De miraculo per beatam virginemin eo demonstralo.

Over against extensive cancellations of material, I can point out large additionsof new material. In book XXIII of the Klosterneuburg version, the heading ofchapter 47

-reads: De heresi Heraclij et Sarracenis et de sanctis itliius temporis.lhe

corresponding heading in the Douai version is that of XXIII ,39: De haeresi'Heraclii, et principatu ac lege Machometi. At this point, a long stretch of text has

been inserted into the Douai version covering chapters 39 t;67, which treat ofMohammed and the Koran. A voluminous addition occurs at tire end of bookXXV: chapters I l8-145, which contain excerpts of Peter Alfonsi, are not present inthe Klosterneuburg version. The largest additions, however, can be found in thefinal books of the Hist;they led to the creation of book XXXJ of the Douai version.To books XXIX and XXX Vincent added information dealing with the Tartars andMongols, which he took from the Ystoria Mongolarum Uylne Franciscan FriarJohn of Plano Carpini and from the Historia Tartarorumby the Dominican Friarsimon of st. Quentin3T (Douai version xxlx,6g-69; XXX,95-9g and I 39-146).Excerpts from these works constitute the main component of the new book XXXI

2t,

covcrittg chlptcrs 2 52. Vitteettl'$ nr.w inlcrcst irr ltratters conccrtrilrg tlre Arnhwtrrld antl thc Oricnt is reflecterl by tlrc irrscrtion ol'cxcerpts lrom the lllstorluI)unriutittu by Thomas Olivcr (l)ouni vcrsion XXX,79 84 and 86 94), and by thenddition of material regarcling thc Oricntal world and Palestinc (f)ouai veisionXXXI,53-66) as well as by an account of the crusade of king Louis IX (Dgugivcrsion XXXI,89-120).

Other changes concern insertions and additions of matter concerning the liveritnd miracles of saints who lived in the twelfth century, or who were Vinccnt'scontemporaries. Thus inlormation on Alpais (XXIX,23) and on Peter of Clairvnux(XXIX,3 l-32) has been inserted in the Douai version. Remarkable changes occurwith regard to St. Dominic and St. Francis of Assisi. In XXX,6+66 theKlosterneuburg version treats of the foundation and the early years of theDominican order. Next it presents information on St. Francis in chapters6T-77.Miracles of St. Dominic and his death, finally, are the subject of chapters 78 80,The Douai version, on the other hand, contains a rearrangement of this particularsection of book XXX; it seems to have been carried out so as to give morsattentionto the Black Friars. The early history of the Dominicans has been expanded(chapters 65-70),and new miracles of St. Dominic have been added to the narrative(chapters 7l-77). Information on St. Francis is not given until chapter 99:according to their headings, chapters gg-l0g correspond to XXX , 67-i7 of theKlosterneuburg version. The section XXX,1l0-120 of the Douai version, again,contains information on St. Dominic, on his virtues, his decease, and the miracleshe worked later on; chapters I l l and I13, for the rest, correspond to XXX,79-80 ofthe Klosterneuburg version. In book XXXI of the Douai version, Vincent has alsoincorporated information regarding contemporary saints. In chapters 67-88 hetreats of the life, death and miracles of St. Edmund of Abingdon, who wascanonized in 1247. Chapters 103 and 104 give information on St. Peter the Martyr,canonized by pope Innocent IV in 1253.

Some additions, finally, may demonstrate the contacts Vincent had with kingLouis and the milieu of the royal family after he came over to Royaumont. Thiadditions in question regard subjects about which Vincent was possibly informedby court-+ircles, for example Douai version XXVII,l2g, XXIK,24 or XXX,l24-r 30.

In concluding this section, one more point needs to be discussed. I have statedthat the text of part II of the Hist is identical, or almost identical, in both the Dijonand the Vienna and the Douai versions. This statement does not imply that the threeversions never show textual divergences here. In fact, I have founa some smalldifferences. The Dijon version, for instance, has a lacuna in XXVI ,116 (De hiisquibus lapsos a miseria reparauit): the second part of this chapter is always lackinghere. Moreover, the Dijon version shows some uncertainty regarding thi arrange-ment of book XXIII. In some copies chapters 65 (Descriptio paradisi iuxtafigmeitaMachometi) and 66 (Adhuc de eodem) are run together into one chapter,

-viz. 65

De.scripcio paradlsi iuxta .figmenta Muchomeli, whereas other copies have leftblanks for the heading-of chapter 66. On the other hand, some copies of thc Dijonvcrsion have divld€d th€ mett€r of chupter 74 (De sancto Georico Merensiumipl-sc'opo) into 73 Dc ganeloEearlea Melenilum episc'opo and74 De tanslacionet (or: Deohitu) Arnu(fi a4lJ[{fd l{lhnh whcreaa other copies havc only lcft blanks at thc

corresl)(tlltling plttcc, ll sltottltl bc rtolctl thlt tlrc ncw chapter hentlirrg grvcs nlorcscllse ltr tlte hcrttling rtl'cltit;rtcl'75 (l)c uitu t,iu:;dcm Arnul/i et api,rutprrlrrt,irr,r), tlr irl'cw ctlpics ol'thc l)ouai vcrsion thc tcxt ol'chapters XXtX,23. XXX.l2(r lnclXXX,l37 is lacking.rs

Divcrgcnccs <ll'this kind may occur in mss which contain books belonging to thesccond part ol'thc Hr.rl. In view of the enormous differences between the secondpart of the Klosterneuburg and Douai versions, it seems an exaggeration to speakof lour distinct versions of this second part. Therefore I regard the second part ofthe Dijon, Vienna and Douai versions as redactions of one and the same revised andexpanded text.

IX The genesis of the Speculum Historiale and of theSpeculum Maius

The limited scope of this article forbids me to present here more than a shortdescription of the diflerences between the versions of the Spec Hist. The foregoingsurvey proves that a study of the Klosterneuburg and Vienna versions, especially ofthe former, may yield a deeper understanding of the Spec Hist. These versionselucidate the aims and conceptions that Vincent originally had in mind as well as thestructure he originally designed for his text. They also allow us to find out to whatdegree Vincent changed his intentions and designs afterwards, and why heintroduced such drastic reorganizations. For these inquiries an integral edition ofthe table of contents of the Klosterneuburg ms is a first requirement.3e

Before summarizing the foregoing sections, I want to point to a few questionswhich, in my opinion, especially deserve the attention of scholars who study theSpec Hist. First, Vincent incorporated in the Klosterneuburg version muchmaterial that was derived from the works of the Fathers and other ecclesiasticalauthors. This material has been omitted from the Douai version. One of the mainsources Vincent used was the Chronicon by the Cistercian monk Helinand ofFroidmont (cf. note 2). One might imagine that Vincent, while compiling theKlosterneuburg version, more depended on this source than he did afterwards,when he reorganized his own text. Could it be that the Klosterneuburg version ismore in line with the conceptions of Helinands 's text than the later versions are?Could we gather from the Chronicon why Vincent incorporated such a voluminouspatristic dossier into the Klosterneuburg version? When extending these questionsto the kind of text Vincent compiled, one may ask whether the Klosterneuburgversion reflects a genre of historiography which could be most suitably described as'ecclesiastical'. Do the later versions of the Spec Hist reflect the evolution of an'ecclesiastical history' into a universal chronicle?

A second point concerns the different ways Vincent structured part olthe historyof the late Roman empire as well as of the Byzantine empire (see Appendices II andVID. Since substantialparts of the sections in question are devoted to the history ofthe Church. one may ask if Vincent aimed to emphasize some topics of ecclesiasticalhistory by these reorganizations, or even tried to shcd another light on it.

A third problem also concerns conceptions of historiography. ln the Douaiversion Vinccnt rcorganized the history of Alexnrrcler the (ireat, so that now thc

cntirc book lV is tlevotcrl lo tlrc Mncctlorrilrr king (scc Appcnrlix l). lrr tlrc linullrooks ol'this vcrsion Vincurt irruor'porutctl rnltcrial rcgarding thc Oricntnl worltl ns

wcll as iln account ol'the crusudc tlrut kirrg l,ouis lX undcrtook in l24tt. I supposethirt thcre is a conncction bctwccrr thcsc thrcc topics. Vincent's interest in thc Orientwns probably aroused by the crusade of saint Louis. In this context thc lil'e uncl

cxploits of Alexander, who had made a solemn entry into the city and tcmplc ol'.lcrusalenl,ao may have served as a shining example for the crusader kirrg whosetlcstination, ultimately, was also Jerusalem. If my assumption is right, we must inferthirt the Spet'Hist was adapted in order to justify and propagandize king Louis'political aims. Are we justified in expecting that this assumption will be corrobo-rirtcd by Vincent's rendering of other topics of French politics in the Spec Hist"!

'fwo lacts mark a turning-point in the evolution of the entire Speculum MuiustVincent's relationship with king Louis IX, and his coming to the Cisterciunrrrunastery of Royaumont. The king was much interested in Vincent's literaryrrctivities, and through the king's financial support Vincent was enabled to reworkiurd complete his encyclopedia (cf. Lusignan 1979:55-58). Vincent probably camettr Royaumontinthecourse of l246,andstayedthereuntil 1260(cf. Lusignan 1979:

5l 55). In this period he reorganized the Speculum Maius. This is apparent lronrccrtain sections of the Spec Nat for which Vincent used excerpts from the Summu de

honrine by Albertus Magnus and from Thomas Aquinas' De veritate. These workswcre composed around, respectively, 1244-1248 and 1256-1259 (cf . Lusignan'ssrrrvey, 1979:67). Regarding the Spec Hist I may refer to, for instance, the excerptslj'om the Historia Tartarorum,which was composed in or after 1248 (see note l2).Vincent's stay at Royaumont must have been ol great importance for thercorganization of his encyclopedia. It is most probable that he enjoyed there theirssistance of the Cistercians in re--creating his work. One may ask, however,whcther this support was confined to only the transcription of the texts that Vincenthad selected. For it is possible that Vincent incorporated certain material in his,l1tct'ulum Maius at the instance of his helpers, the Cistercians, as Lusignansrrpposed (1979:72-74). These and, possibly, other helpers may have contributed tothe evolution of the entire Speculum Maius, not only by supplying Vincent withnraterial, but also by exerting an influence on the conceptions that he had in mindwhen he reorganized his text.

ln the above sections I have discussed the texts which constitute the Spec Flisl: theLA, the special prologue, the Hist and the y'y'at resum6. Of each of these texts we

possess several versions, sometimes also distinct redactions. These texts do not onlysupply us with information on the Spec f/rsl itself, but also on the other parts of the,\1tt,c'ulum Maius. The other Specula, on the other hand, yield information on the,\pct' Hist, especially their introductory matter, as well as the Hr'st resume in the

Spat' Nat. Thus each part of the Speculum Maiu.s is closely linked up with the otherparts.

On the basis of a collation of thc versions of all the texts which make up the Spec

IIist a reconstruction of its genenin cnn bc drawn up. Because of the relationshctwcen the Spee,rla, howgv€r, Bny reconstruction of the genesis of the Spec' Hlstcnn only be valld on e€nCltlon that lt ic confirmed by data supplicd by the otherSpetula, On the Ethu hrldr U thl S-pec Hd,rt contnins information on the other

;&cc

c

&6:

SPEC NATBrussels mss30 books

LA-2ilat-1llhist- 1

SPEC HISTKlosterneuburg

versl0n30 books

llLst - |? Rnat-l

SPEC HISTDilon versr.:15 + 16 books

EpLA- 1

Rnat- l

FOHHFut d.E<)x

EF

SPEC DOCT18 books

t'doctDoct

:-.

F

cf,ooat)E

:'

SPEC NAT33 books

LA-41]PnatNat-2Rhis t -2

Gmesis of the Speculum Maius

j:i

l'j

l

I

i

'lI

,lI'.1

il

.i

lri

:i,l

I,i

.l

1

1

I

:1

l

,l

jl

lIIi

I

1

I

I

l

SPEC HISTVienna versi,onL5 + 16 books

Phist -2Hist -3Rnat-2

SPEC HISTDouai version32 books

LA-4CPhist-2Hist-4Rnat-2

MOR

apttcryphal

$1*;*ii J -? == 1

=iFlFFsiaiig$s ?= i

$*;iBi

d

ltlgigglls I ii lg lgglg lSliigiEiggggi!ii lri l'Eini$sli6+$*$i$ggg$

eigri1

EEgiilsli iE$Frg Frii ril

EiiEigiii iggs*B sgii iillglgli

!.,1!}I

^;aff84* ;

'l'lrc Nal stltlrlllilry itt botlk ll, howcvcr. is aclaptcd to the ncw plu' 'l'tlrcSpaculum M uius ( Ilnu t-J).

7 Thc planning of' thc Mor took a more definite shape in t6e proccss 9l'rcorganizing the natural matter of Nat-t into a new,Spec:Nat. This i'pcr, Nal iscomposed of thirty-three books. Book one contains an expanded version ofLA-4A, LA-4B,which is intended to justify more exactly the incorporation of theMor rnto the Speculum Maius. LA-48 introduces a quadripartite encyclopediawhich is arranged in three volumes. Apart from a table of contents, book onealso gives a special prologue to the Nat (Pnat). Books two to thirty-three containthe revised text Nat-2.In book XXXIII a revised resum6 of the Hist (Rhist-2) isincorporated; the text of Rhist-2 is continued to 1250.

8 Vincent set out to reorganize the Spec Hist drastically and this resulted in a newversion, the Douai version. At the time of compiling this version, the plan of theMor had apparently taken its definite shape, since the LA (LA-4q unnoun.., uquadripattite Speculum Maius arranged in four volumes, implying that the Moris now a volume by itself. The special prologue gives the second redaction(Phist-2), and the Nal resum6 is in the second version (Rnat-2), both texts inconformity with the Vienna version. The Hist text of the Douai version counts 3lbooks. Its first part is a reorganized text of books two to fifteen of Hist-1. Bookssixteen to thirty of Hist-l,however, have been thoroughly rewritten in the Douaiversion. They have been abbreviated on the one hand, but, on the other hand, thetext has been expanded to sixteen books and the history contained in them hasbeen continued up to 1253 (Hist-4).

9 The sixteen books of the second part of Hist-4 were appended to the Dijon(Hist-2) and the Vienna (Hist-3)versions. For the Dijon ui.iion this resulted in aHist text of thirty-one books, whereas the Vienna version of the Hist iscomposed of thirty books.

l0 After Vincent's death, the Mor was finally compiled. In this Speculum themoralmatter of Nat-I was incorporated. Perhaps the compiler of th" Mo, also usedmaterial that Vincent had left over in reworking the second part of Hist-1. Thecompilation of the Mor marked the completion of the quadiipartite SpeculumMaius arranged in four volumes.

x The speculum Historiale: aspects of its manuscripttradition

The genesis of the Spec Hist is closely connected with the creation and re-creation ofthe other parts of the Speculum Maius. Perhaps one would expect that themanuscript tradition of all Speculashows a strong correlation too. Vincent himself,however, undermined this close relation. Owing to the LA, the special prologuesand the summaries, each Speculum could have an independent circulation. Buithereality of'manuscript tradition was even worse. Thosc who were interested inVincent's work frequently preferred only one independcnt part instead of buying togreat expense a copy of the entire encyclopedia, To my knowlcdgc. only onc cop/allin one piece of the entire Spec'ulum Maiult has cvei been iclcitificd.4r From-thcsurviving mss it is evident that one part of the eneyclopedia was particularly

_il

;1'el'crrctl, viz, the Spe't' lll,rl,'l'he nunlhcr ol'tttss llow prcscrvcd ol'hotlt tltc '!rrcNrrl. tlrc Spt,c Dot,, und thc Mor is snurll. 'l'hcir circulation must have bccn rather

lilnitcd, *her.a* the $'pr,r,//irl h6s beqr trurtstnitted. in full or in port, in u ltrrge

rrrrrnbcr of copies. Catalogucs ol'rrrcdicvnl libraries sometimes recorded a Spec Nut

trr a Spc,r, Do-ct, but morc frcquently they make mention of Spec Hisl mss. There

circulated numerous excerpts from the Hist, especially in l5th-*entury Germany

rlrcl Central Europe. And it is mainly this Speculum which was translated intorncdieval vernaculars.a2

Ilut what has been the manuscript tradition of the versions of the Spec Hist' Since

Iluny mss have not yet been satisfactorily investigated, it is impossible for me to

prcsint here an overall view. The Spec Hist copies in which the history of Alexander

thc Great is contained, however, enabled me to form an impression. The Douai

vcrsion was the vulgate text. It had the best of its circulation in France in the early

l4th century, and in Southern Germany and the areas around it in the I 5th. The

tIree older versions seem to have enjoyed a limited circulation, mainly east of the

Ithine, in Central Europe during the l4th and l5th centuries.

The versions of the Spec Hist are clearly distinct from each other. Yet, at the same

time, the traditions of these versions as well as of some other texts of the Spec'ulum

Maius are not always strictly separated. A few examples may serve to illustrate this

point.The Spec Hist ms Madrid, Escorial O.I.2. (14th c.), which represents the Douai

vcrsion, contaminates the special prologues of the Spec Hist and the Spec Nat

(Phist-2 and Pnat). Ms Cambridge, CCC 8 contains the Hist text of the Dijonvcrsion (Hist-2).Yet it gives us tables of contents which partly belong to the Douai

version (Hist-4). Apart from the omission of the dedicatory letter (Ep) and the

special prologue (Phist-I), this ms presents the second version of the Ndl summary

(Rnat-2).As to ms Cracow, BJ 442,itsintroductory matter (LA-4C, Phist'2),as well

as that section of its table of contents which deals with part of the history ofAlexander the Great, arein conformity with the Douai version. The Hist text itself,

however, belongs to the Dijon version (Hist-2). Ms Cracow, Biblioteka Jagiellofis'

ka446(dated l4]g)contains a second volume of the Spec Hist (onsecond volumes,

see p. l2). It gives us books eight to eleven of he Hist according to the

Klosterneuburg or the Vienna version (Hist-l or Hist-3, which have the samc

leatures with respect to these books!). The following books, on the contrary, which

are counted as thirteen to sixteen, belong to the Douai version.

Could it be that some of these contaminations were originally produced in

Vincent of Beauvais'atelier, by the scribes who helped him to produce the Speculum

M aius? Other conflations are probably due to the necessity of dividing the Spec Hist

over several ms volumes, as this text was too large to be contained by one single

volume. This is demonstrated by a few mss.

Mss Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 2661, 2662, 2663 and 2664 (first

half of l4th c.) constitute a full Spec Hist copy. Clm266l, containing books I-VIll'is a regular represcntative ol the Douai version, whereas the three subsequent

volumJs represent the Dijon version. The rubricator of Clm 2662. however,

brought ths book numbcriRg into line with the Douai version, The first book was

counied IX (= Dlfon vlrulon Vll), uncl so on, At the end of XIl,87 (= Dtjon

versign X,8?i, thr nu h1r lr3c lnitial lette r D, in conformity with the beginning of

.35

il llew hottk irt tlte I)i.iorl versiott (cl'. Appcndix Il). Yct. instcad ol'c'urrtirrg llre rrcxtchitptcr us Xlll,l,llte rubricutor procedcd with numbcring XII,88 up to xll.t.5g.thus prtxlucing ull ilrrangcrncnt which rcsembles book xiol thc rctostcrneuhurgancl vienna vcrsions. As a rcsult.of this change, the book numbering of clnr 2662amounts to XVI. The books of Clm 2663 andbl^zooqare labelled xVI(!) xxxl,in- conformity with the Dijon version. Mss Munich, Bayerische StaatsbibliothekClm 8201a, Clm 8201b and Clm 8201c (dated l33z)constitute a parrial copy of Clm2661-2664' clm 8201a is a copy or zLoat; so it is a reprer.rrtliiu. of the Douaiversion' Clm 8201b and Clm s20tc are copies of Clm 2663 and, clm 2664. Theyrepresent the Dijon version, but their booknumbering has been brought into linewith the numbering in the Douai version. Hence, the books have been labelledxul-xxxll'43 To clm 820la,,at its turn, goes back ms Munich, BayerischeStaatsbibliothek Clm 9509 (dated 1437), which'also contains books I-vIII of theDouai version.The confusion, however, can be more complex. Mss Klosterneubur gl2g and 129constitute a partial copy of the spec Hist which gives a combination of threeversions' The table of contents gives us the Klosterneuburg version (Hist-t);the LA(LA-4A), the special prologue (Phist-2)and the text of book, t*o to six (Hist-3) arein the vienna version. Books twelve to sixteen, finally, which are contained in ms129, represent the Douai version (Hist_4).A complex co-nflation is presenlin ms Troyes, Bibliothdque municipale 170 (firsthalf of l4th c')' It is a full spec Hist copy, whose LA isa contamination of LA-l withLA-4C; its special prologue is phist_2; the table of contents is in the Douai version;the Nat summary is a conflation of both existing versions, lacking, however, someelements of both. In the arrangement of books two to seven of the Hist,the msfollows the Klosterneuburg or the vienna version (Hist-I or Hrs;t:-i);which of theseversions it gives cannot be traced, because both versions have the same features inthis part of the text. The next book, originally counted as vIII, is in the Douaiversion (Hist-4), but the numbering was J.ur.i later. The following books, whichare counted as ten to thirty-two, also give the Douai version @xtlq.It seems likely that some of the conflitions in question were produced by scribes,or teams of scribes, who were unaware of the different versions of the spec Hist.Probably they collected their spec Hist exemplar by gathering from various placesthe volumes, or parts of volumes, necessary to assembt" u ro-llete text. In this waythey may have produced contaminations at their writing desks.

But even the decoration may go wrong. A decorator who works on a copy of, forinstance, the Douai version' may produce a striking decoration if he uses as hismodel a volume of one of the other versions. This is i]lustrated uy ms Munich clm2662 (see p' 35). A similar phenomenon seems to occur in ms Uppsala, UniversityLibrary c 680 (second half of l4th c.), which contains books on. io ri*t..n. Thoughthe Hist text is a representative of the Douai version (Hist-4),with large initials atthe beginning of books IV and VI (: IV and V in the Douai 1624 ed,itjon), thedecorator also placed a large initial uilv,22 (oe regno Dariifitii Arsami et Alexandriet moribus eius), where a little lombard letterwoull have been sufficient. From hereon' however, he counted the book as V. As this entry corresponds exactly with thearrangement of the history of Alexander the Great in tire other versions (cf.Appendix I), we might describe this as a conflatecr trecor.tion.

'lr I

*tSiq;

&

Sotnctimcs medievul Correelors urrrl users ol'tlrc Spec Hi.rt were itwrtre ol'thecxistcncc ol'distinct versiunn, 'l'lrc irrcorporltion ol' Vinccnt's dcdicatory lette r ol'tlrc Dijon version into u lbw copies ol'the Vicnna and Douai versions may be prool'ol'this consciousness (cl'. notc 7). I nray also point to the incorporation into mss ofthcsc versions of theflorc.r of pseudo -Dionysius the Areopagite, and of the live s andtttiracles of St. Evroul and St. Marcel of Paris (cf. note 7). Some marginalcrrrrections, like those reported in notes 25 and 31, also demonstrate this awarcncss,Numerous marginal additions in ms Heidelberg Cod. Sal. IX 41, which belongs tothe Dijon version, show that somebody compared the ms with a copy of the l)ouuiversion.

A complex contamination has been corrected in ms Paris, National Library lat,4t197 (early l4th c.), which contains parts of the first half of the Spec Hist. This ms isit representative of the Douai version. Originally, however, it contained a tablc ofcontents which was proper to the Klosterneuburg or the Vienna version withrcspect to books two to eight (Hist-l or Hist-3); which of these versions I cannottrace, because both versions have the same features in this part of the text. Thcarrangement of the history of Alexander the Great in books IV and V originallyconformed to that peculiar redaction of the Douai version (see p. 24). Someonccorrected both texts, however, into a regular representative of the Douai version,making use of erasures and filling up margins. Unfortunately the text of V,l I toXI, I 09 ( : Douai l624edition IV, I I to X, I 09) has been cut out. But from what hasremained we may inler that this ms gives us the Douai version (Hist-4).

Corrections like the examples given here are useful tools in determining theversions of the Spec Hist as well as the manuscript tradition of this text. Thecxistence of distinct versions as well as the occurrence of contaminations compli-cated the manuscript tradition of the Spec Hist. If we want to have a betterunderstanding of this tradition, we must establish for each ms volume to which ofthe versions it belongs.

XI Epilogue

In this article I have discussed several aspects of the genesis and the manuscripttradition of the Spec Hist. I have shown that Vincent of Beauvais and his assistantsproduced a few versions which are rather different from the Spec IIist we are usuallylamiliar with. These versions enabled me to reconstruct the genesis of this particularSpeculum. All versions yield information regarding the other parts olthe SpeculumMaius: the Spec Nat,the Spec Doct and the Mor. All parts, moreover, show a strongcorrelation, as each gives information on the other Specula. Thus my reconstruc-tion extehded to the genesis of the entire Speculum Maius.

The Spec Histhasbeen the mostpopular of Vincent's works and is preserved in alarge number of mss. This rnanuscript tradition is oomplicated by the existence ofdistinct versions. The complication has probably been amplified by some scribcswho copied the text sfter their lirshion and thus, in fact, produced their ownrc creation of the Spec, Hlst,

Sometimes medlavel :erlbcs Rnd users ol thc Spec Hrst knew that there existedscveral verBioru of thtlrt, It:gems prohuble , howcvcr, thut most meclievul users of

11

i

l

,

I

I

:

I

l

l

:

j

l

)

l

i

l

i

I

I

l

l

1

I

l

d

k'

t.

APPENDIX I(cf.pp. 20-21)

IV-l De inicio regni Cyriaput Persas

{-}tl*,tt De Annone

CartaginensiLryJJ fle fuga Nectanabi in

Macedoniam et eiuscolloquio cumOlympiade

t*t ()[tll-! l0 De incestu Minucie III,I I I

uirginis et matronarumRomanarum (/)

De regno Darii filii IV,lArsami et AlexandriMacedonis et moribuseius

( .)Iterum de eodem IV,50De diuisione monarchie IV,5lAlexandri in quatuorregna et de ProtholomeoO Sother Egipti

Klosterneuburg version

\--l

(.--)v.5lv.52

Dijon version

III, I

( ..)III,93

III,94

De inicio regni Cyri aputPersas

De AnnoneKarthaginensiDe fuga NectanabiinMacedoniam et eiuscolloquio cumOlimpiade

De incestu Minutieuirginis et matronarumRomanarum facinore

De regno Darii filiiArsami et AlexandriMagni et moribus eius

Iterum de eodemDe diuisione monarchieAlexandri in 4or regna,et de Ptolomeo Sotherrege Egypti

De regno Cleopatre etinicio Romani imperiiDe hiis qui Romanamrem publicam anteJulium Cesaremsserunt

Vienna version

IV,I De inicio regni Cyriapud Persas

(. )IV,93 De Annone

KartaginensiIV,94 De fuga Nectanabi in

Macedoniam et eiuscolloquio cumOlimpiade*

(. )IV,I I I

v,l

De incestu Minucieuirginis et matronarumRomanarum facinore

De regno Darii filiiArsami et AlexandriMacedonis et moribuseius

(.. .)V,50 Item de eodemV,5l De diuisione monarchie

Alexandri in quatuorregna et PtholemeoSother rege Egypti

(.. .)V,167 De regno Cleopatre et

inicio Romani imperiiVI,l De hiis qui Romanam

rem publicam rexeruntante lulium Cesarem

t chopter-teding nly prevnin b*x of clrqtos

Douai version

III, I De initio regni Cvriapud Persas

(.)III,93 De Annone

CarthaginensiIV,I De Fuga (read orlirl

Alexandri magni- et fiugnNectanebi inMacedoniam()

IV,2l De incaestu MinutueVirginis, et facinoreMatronarumRomanarum

[V,22 De regno Darii llliiArsami, et AlexandriMagni et moribus eius

(. ..)IV,71 lterum de eodemV,l De diuisione

Monarchiae Alexandriin quatuor regna. et dePtolemaeo Sothero ReeeAEgypti

(. )V,l l7 De Regno Cleoparrae. et

initio Romani ImperijVI.l De his qui Romanam

Rempublicam rereruntante lulium Caesarem

tI

(..-) ( .)V-167 De regno Cleopatre et IV,l66

inicio Romani imperiiW- l De hiis qui Romam V,l

rexerunt ante JuliumCesarem

,i*irk

x,l

(...)x,94

XI,I

(...)xL,32

Klosterneuburg version

De imperio Vespasianiet bonis eius iniciis

De Iustino philosophoet scriptis eius et morteAntoniiPiiDe impgrio AnthoniniVeri et AureleiCommodi etpersecucione eorum inChristianos

De ClementeAlexandrino ac ceterisillius temporisscriptpribus

XI.33 De imperio Seueri etLeonide patre Origenis

(...)XI.86 De passione eiusdemXI,87 De imperio Valeriani et

Galli et passioneDyonisii Alexander (/)

(...)XI,l60 De passione amborum

XII,I De imperio Dyoclecianiet Maximiani

De imperio Vespasiani X,let de bonis eius iniciis

(...)De Iustino philosopho X,94et scriptis eius, et morteAntonini PiiDe imperio Antonini XI,lVeri et AureliiCommodi etpersecucione eorum inChristianos

APPENDIX II(cf. p. 2l)

(...)XI,32

Vienna version

De imperio Vespasianiet bonis eius iniciis

De Iustino philosophoet scriptis eius et morteAnthonini PiiDe imperio AntoniniVeri et AureliiCommodi etpersecucione eorum inChristianos

De ClementeAlexandrino ac ceterisillius temporisscriptoribus

XI,33 De imperio Seueri etLeonide patre Origenis

(...)XI,87 De passione eiusdemXI,88 De imperio Valeriani et

Galieni (src?) et passioneDyonisii Alexandrini

( ..)XI,l60 De passione amborum

XII,I De imperio Dyoclecianiet Maximiani

Douai version

X,l De Imperio Vespasianiet eius initio

(...)X,94 De Iustino Philosopho-

et scriptis eius. et morteAntonim (.) Pii

X,95 De Imperio MarciAurelij et Lucij Veri etpersecutiones O eorumin Christianos

(...)X,126 De Clemente

Alexandrino, acscriptoribus caeterisillius temporis

XI,l De Imperio Seueri, etLeonide patre Origenis

(...)XI,55 De passionibus eiusdemXI,56 De Imperio Valeriani er

Gallieni, et passiomsancti DionysiiAlexandrini

(. .)XI,l29 De Passione ambtrr@

XII,I De lmperio Diodctia@-et Maximiani

Dijon version

IX,I

(. .)IX,94

x,1

(...)x,32

x,33

(. .)x,87XI,I

(...)xl,7l

XII,I

De ClementeAlexandrino ac aliisscriptoribus

De imperio Seueri etLeonide patre Originis

De passione eiusdsmDe imperio Valeriani etGalieni et passioneAlexandrini Dyonisii

De passione amborumsanctorumDe imperio Dyoclecianiet Maximianiimperatorum

lllrllll

F

9x

<xt)^)u)

=6(D(!

o9dtlc;

o

o

o(to

- F; rr

= = = == = =l-l \v/

F F- rrF i i 'i'i i 5= =

.-Y's -+ .s ss s sa (J Stli o\ u 5(.r.l N)rr) NJ S

s

H F€F s tg FgEeiYSi€€€r-1E i$gr 3?€ 911g!liasA eg"F f di?i,=-=Ag;:rj.(e \vi(D ii a8: K l. 6- AeX r'E

-19P^r.9r.:-. =.

5 'v) r- +. -.! g.'=.u I t. s E a tr*al-o(T(rgv)'+(T

| <--l:rH.v

Gl"+. lq.+\oLAS(".l)N)

5 5 r,-r ;,-( F J-( ;'-t F-H-H----

-OTOOO-lO\(JrS

UUUUUUOgcDo(DCDo(D(Do€ E T B FE E €4BiQfl3ss9- o.E a e- g g'd6-6=Fr=.='=.=S -'6jY.* P Fo 6'HU)JO(+;.o

t+

HJn*(}

1...J

CD V\/'-rCD<U) :- F{P i+ ir.

er' 3' s.J3o

Oo)

=' i"11 rJ

atOoF0(t H'

il

U

U)

\

I

UJ

* g F ge€ €H F= i+iB€Ha i*'?i P e

= u lRs if 3; ga

-Jq;' o- Ag- io-

U(D

<tFo

(A

9o'oa+

o(D

UUr. CDgr:o)e(D

sa.seav)e.gC.)ut

=.

CD Ft-lF. r4i \J

E 6'(DFt

-- S.

aDA)!D

cl?(D

-(1FI'u=tD

'J

ill

nl)l)liNl)tx lv(ct'. p, 22)

Alf l'liN l)lx v(e l', p. 221

1X.94 Dc dispersione earum cum 1X,94quibusdam discipulis

IX,95

IX,96

IX,97

IX,98

IX,95 De dracone quem Martha IX,99ligauit et post (Dijon andVienna: populus) occidit

K lostcrrtcuhurg, I)ijon anclVicttna vcrsions2 ?

(...)IX,l03 De loco sepulchri et de

comitibus eius

IX,l04 De sancto MaximinoAquensi (episcopo) etsociis eius

(: Dijon version VIII,94-95 qndvII,103-104;

: Vienna version IX,93-94 and IX,r03-104)

De dispersione earum cumquibusdam discipulisQualiter Maria Magdalenaducem Marsiliae conuertit,et ei filium a dominoimpetrauitQualiter idem duxHierosolymam, et locasancta visitauitQualiter in regressupuerum suum miraculosenutritum inuenitQualiter etiam vxoremdefunctam per beatamMariam MagdalenamrecuperauitDe dracone quem Marthaligauit, et populus occidit

De loco sepulchri, et decomitibus eiusDe Sacerdote beataeMariae miracula noncredenteDe clerico desperato peream consolatoDe Britone per eam anaulragio liberatoDe sancto MaximinoAquensi episcopo, et sociiseius

l)i.ion vcrsion

V lll.l l3 De Galba imperatore etmorte eius

Vlll,ll4 De Ottone imperatore etmorte eius

Klosterneuburg, Vicnna andDouai versions2T

IX,1l3 De Galba impcratorc ctmorte eius

IX,t 14 De Quintiliano oratorc cteius flosculis

IX,l15 Iterum de eodem (Viennu:Iterum de flosculiseiusdem; Douai: DeFlosculis eiusdem)

IX,l l6 De eodemIX,l l7 Adhuc de eodemIX,1 l8 Iterum de eodemIX,l l9 De Ottone imperatore et

morte eius(: Douai version IX,120-126)

Douai version

(...)IX, 107

IX,l0g

IX,l0g

IX,I IO

IX,I I I

* -*f

.ii

.i!T{4ti

i

,1

I

ii

:l

nrl

Il

ll

i

i

,1

jIi

,l

:i

i

i

l

IlI

1

:

1

I

l

h

ht

l

I

l

l

J

5

APPENDIX VI(cf . p.22)

Klosterneuburg version

XV,78 Qualiter tandemmortuam eam agnouit

XV,79 De sancto EbrulfoBaiocensi

XV,80 De latronibus per eumconuersis

XV,8l De substancia fratrumtemporali multiplicatadiuinitus et conseruata

XV,82 De monasteriis per euminstitutis et miraculisperpetratis

XV,83 De dormicione eiusdem

XV,84 De sancto MarcelloParisiensi quid antepontificatum egerit

XV,85 De hiis que ineplscopatu gessit

XV,86 De documentisquorundam patrum demodo viuendi

XV,87 De contemptu uel amorepecunie

XV,88 De contemptu carnalisaffectus

XV,89 De amore solitudinisXV,90 De luctu et

compunccione

XV,9l De silencio et locucioneXV,92 De abstinencia

.nw{i**ffiffi.

Dijon version

XV,78 Qualiter eademmortuam agnouit

XV,79 De sancto EbrulfoBaiocensi

XV,80 De latronibus pereundem sanctumconuersis

XV,8l De substancia fratrumtemporali multiplicatadiuinitus et conseruata

XV.82 De monasteriis per euminstitutis et miraculisperpetratis

XV,83 De dormicione eiusdemsancti uiri

XV,84 De sancto MarcelloParisiensi quid antepontificatum egerit

XV,85 De hiis que inpontificatu gessitsanctus Marcellus

Vienna version

XV,78* Qualiter tandemmortuam eam agnouit

XV,79 De sancto EbrulfoBaiocensi

XV,80 De latronibus per eumconuersis

XV,8l De substancia fratrumtemporali multiplicatadiuinitus et conseruata

XV,82 De monasteriis per euminstitutis et miraculisperpetratis

XV,83 De dormitione eiusdem

XV,84 De sancto MarcelloParisiensi quid antepontificatum egerit

XV,85 De hiis que inepiscopatu gessit

XV,86 Documenta quorundampatrum de modo uiuendi

XV,87 De contemptu uel amorepecunie

XV,88 De contemptu carnalisaffectus

XV,89 De amore solitudinisXV,90 De luctu et

compunctione (ms:compunctone)

XV,9l De silencio et locucioneXV,92 De abstinencia

Douai version

XV,78 Qualiter randemmortuam eam agnouil

XV,79 DocumentaquorundamPatrum de modo r"iuendi

XV,80 De contemptu rel:rnxrrcpecuniae

XV,8l De contemptu carn&E$affectus

XV,g2 De Amore solitwtinrqXV,83 De Luctu et

compunctione

XV,84 De Silentio et locuriLrneXV,85 De abstinentia

(continued on p.45)

Klosterneuburg version

Xfrp3 De simplicitate (ms:simplicite) et humilitate

XVpl f)e pacienciaXYts De pace fraternaIYS De stabilitate et

perseueranciaft};fil De pusilanimitate et

inconstanciaXVJB De presumpcione et

iactanciaXlo-99 De fugienda inani gloriaXlr-100 De ira cauendaX\'.101 De temerario contemptu

fratris tepidi uel lapsiX\'.102 De suspicione et

detraccione (zs:detracione)

XV.l03 Detemptacionibusdemonum

XV.lO4 De temptacione carnisXV.l05 Adhuc de eodemXV.106 De vtilitate temptacionisXV.l07 De remediis contra

impetum prauecogitacionis

Dijon version

APPENDIX VI (continued)

Vienna version

XV,93 De simplicitate ethumilitate

XV,94 De pacienciaXV,95 De pace fraternaXV,96 De stabilitate et

perseueranciaXV,97 De pusillanimitate et

inconstanciaXV,98 De presumpcione et

iactanciaXV,99 De fugienda inani gloriaXV,l00 De ira cauendaXV,l0l De temerario contemptu

fratris temptati uel lapsiXV,l02 De suspicione et

detractione

XV,l03 Detemptacionibusdemonum

XV,l04 De temptacione carnisXV,l05 Adhuc de eodemXV,l06 De utilitate temptacionisXV,l07 De remediis contra

impetum prauecogitacionis

In the table of contents of the Yiennams, these chapters are nwnbered 79 to108; this is, hon'eter, the result of

(m error tn caloilatiott

Douai version

XV,86 De simplicitate ethumilitate

XV,87 De PatientiaXV,88 De Pace fraternaXV,89 De Stabilitate ac

perseuerantiaXV,90 De Pusillanimitate a

inconstantiaXV.9l De Praesumptione er

iactantiaXY,92 De fugienda inani glonaXV,93 De ira cauendaXV,94 De temerario contemptu

XV,95 De Suspitione etdetractione

XV,96 De TentationibusDaemonum

XV,97 De Tentatione carnisXV,98 Adhuc de EodemXV,99 De Vtilitate tentationumXV,l00 De remediis contra

irnpetum prauaecogitationis

w

De Imperio Mauricii etsubuersione partisAntiochiae

De bono hospitalitatis, etEleemosynaeDe initio imperiPhocae, et strage belliSenonensis

Adhuc de doctrina, etactibus eiusdemDe Imperio Heraclii, etquodam miraculo SanctiIoannis Baptistae

De iterato Imperio Irene etincidentibus eiusdemtemporis

API'lrNl)lX Vlll(cl', p, 26)

'qlAIII'IiNI)IX VII

(cl'. p. 26)

K losterncuburg version

XXII,I De imperio Mauricii etsubuersione partisAntiochie

( .)XXII,l82 De bono hospitalitatis et

elemosineXXIII,I De inicio imperii Foce

< et > strage belliSenonensis

(...)XXIII,T Adhuc de doctrina et

actibus eiusdemXXIII,S De imperio Heraclii et

quodam miraculo S.

Johannis Baptiste(...)

Douai version

XXII,I

(...)XXII,I03

XXII,I04

( ..)XXII,I lO

XXIII,I

(...)

K lostcrneuburg versiorr

XXX,I De imperio Fridericisecundi et expulsioneOctonis

...que usque nuncperseuerat contraInnocencium papam

( .) (..)XXX,93 De guerra imperatoris XXX,l38

Friderici contra Romanamecclesiam ...

Douai version

XXX,I De Imperio FridericiImperatoris sccundi ct deexpulsione OthonisImperatoris

De itinere transmarino subducatu Regis Nauarriac, etdiscordia inter Fridericuln.et Papam Gregorium

xxx,13g-l5lXXX,l52 De initio Pontificatus

Innocentii quarti, et dequibusdam incidentibusillius temporis

XXXI,I DecondemnationeFriderici Imperatoris, etpraedicatione crucis

XXIII,l53 De iterato imperio Hyrene XXIII,l76et incidentibus illiustemporis XXXI,2_I03

XXXI,l04 De ipsius miraculisxxx,94 De presentibus temporibus xxxl,l05 De temporibus

praesentibus(.) ( ..)xxx,l33 De ineffabile plenitudine xxxl, 129* De plena sanctorum

pacis et felicitas eorum felicitate

* in mss usually counted as ch. 128

.rl

XVII,4IXVIT,42

XVII,43

xvll,44

XVII,45XVII,46

xvll,47

XVII,48

xvII,4gXVII,50

XVII,5I

XVII,52XVII,53XVII,54

-

AI'PIiNI)IX IX(cf p. 27)

K lostcrneuburg vcrsion Douai version

XVII,39 De fidelitate et amicicia XVII,39 De fidelitate, et amicitiaXVII,40 De pietate erga amicumdefunctumItem de eodemDe miseriis huius vite etmortis remedioDe contemplacione rerumnaturalium adedificacionem fidei etmorumDe eodem et de adulteriofacieiDe gestis Abrahe et LothDe mortis remedio contrapresentes miseriasDe beneficio redemptoriset tranquillitate cordisDe laudibus JosephpatriarcheDe humilitate et penitentiaDe comendacione ieiunii etlasciuia mulierumDe cupiditate diuitum etoppressione pauperumDe eodemAdhuc de eodemDe adulterio facieimulierum et institucionevirginum

XVII,55 De viduis et sacerdotibusXVII,56 De contemptu diuiciarum

et de libertate spiritusXVII,57 Flosculi sermonum

AmbrosiiXVII,58 De iniuriis illaris

Ambrosio, et de gestiseiusdem

XVII,4O De iniuriis illatisAmbrosio, et de gestiseiusdem

"trrr4 .,

il3

$

Ii

..," -. "*",%

AltPliN l)lx x(cl'. p. 2t{)

Klostcrncuburg vcrsion, b69k XXX Douai version, book XXXI

97

9899

r00

t0l

t02

94 De presentibus temporibus95 De misterio iniquitatis quod iam per

malos operatur Antichristus inmundo

t04

Quod mali bonos impungnant et

malos boni tollerantQuod bona et mala temporaliavtriusque sunt communiaDe locis animarum defunctorumDe statu earum in generaliDe statu animarum que sunt ininferno et in limboDe statu animarum que sunt (ras:

sut) in purgatorioDe statu animarum que sunt inbeata requieDe suffragiis ecclesie pro defunctisquibus prosint, quibus nonDe duabus opinionibus vtrumprosint dampnatisUtrum prosint paruulis baptizatis et

qualiter prosint aliisUtrum mortui sciant quid aput viuosagaturDe sanctis qui sunt in requie qualitereis innotescant peticionesDe statu (ms: statit) angelorum et

demonum usque ad extremumiudiciumDe futuri iudicii certitudine (rzs:

certudine)De incertitudine dilacione eius et

signis iam apparentibusDe futura pungna Ismahelitarumcontra ecclesiam et eorum interitu et

de Gog et MagogDe aduentu Antichristi et qualitererit secundum operacionem Sathane

De superbia et fallacia eiusdem

r06

t09

105 De temporibus praesentibus

103

r05

107

r08

il0 l06f

107*

De signis futurae consummationis

De quibusdam dictis Ioachim, et

sanctae Hildegardis

De aduentu Antichristi,...

... et eius fallaciis

l0g*

lll

ll2

in the Douai 1624 editktn counted as ch.

107-t09

N ( )',t'li s

t lowr:rspccialtlcbt to Mnrc l)aulrrricr lioucartand Mllc M. (', l)uchcrrncol'the AtclicrVinccnt dc llcauvais (Univcrsity ol'Nancy II) for the uscl\rl inlirrrrrirtion rcgardingVinccnt ol'Bcauvais they rcpcatcdly supplied mc with in thc past years. I am indebted tothc Ministry of Cultural Affairs, Recreation and Social Welfare, and to the DutchInstitute in Rome, lor grants enabling me to study mss and old and rare books in theVatican Library, in Rome and elsewhere in ltaly. I am also indebted to the NetherlandsOrganization for the Advancement of Pure Research (Z.W.O.), for a grant enabling meto study mss in Poland, Austria and Western Germany. I wish to express my gratitude tomy c<llleagues Ms. W.C.M. Wtistefeld, who commented on an earlier draft of this article,and to Mr. G.H.V. Bunt, who helped me with advice on the English text. For anyremaining errors responsibility is entirely mine.

I Since I do not want to overburden this article with facts concerning Vincent's biographyand works, only those will be presented which are necessary for my argument. Generalinformation can be found in Quetif-Echard 1719: I,212-240; Daunou 1835; Ullman1933; and, presenting the most up--to-date survey, Lusignan 1979.

2 I am preparing an edition of the histories of Alexander the Great in the SpeculumHistoriale and its main source, the Chronicon by Helinand of Froidmont. On the relationbetween the works of these two authors, see Paulmier-Foucart 1979,96-97; Paulmier-Foucart l98l; and also the article by Dr. Smits in the present volume. Recentpublications on Helinand are Smits 1983, and Paulmier-Foucart (forthcoming).

3 The following abbreviations are used: l,l stands for Libellus apologeticus; Spec Histret'ers to the text of the Speculum Historiale includinE LA, the special prologue and thetable of contents; Hist indicates the Historiale text proper, without any introductorymaterial; similarly by Spec Nat and Spec Doct I refer to resp. the texts of the SpeculumNaturale and Speculum Doctinale rncluding their introductory matter, by Nat and Doctthis material is excluded; for the Speculum Morale I use Mor because its frontmatter onlyconsists of a table of contents.

4 For this outline of the genesis of the Speculum Maius, cf. Goller 1959: 29-35; Schneider1976; Paulmier 1978; Von den Brincken 1978: 410463; and Lusignan 1979: 5L-73. Myconclusions, however, which are based on my study of mss of the Spec Hist, do not agreewith what has been postulated so far.

5 The date 1256-1259 is based on the occurrence of long excerpts from the De veritate, a

work by Saint Thomas Aquinas (for further information, see Lusignan 1979: 58).To this internal argument we may add external evidence from the Dutch Spiegel

Historiael, the oldest translation of the Spec Hist.The Spiegel Historiaelwas undertakenby the Flemish poet Jacob van Maerlant in the twelve eighties. After his death the partswhich he left untranslated were translated by Philip Utenbroeke and, finally, by Lodewijcvan Velthem, who completed the translation in l3l5 and even added a continuationtreating of the years 1256-1316. At the end of the text which Velthem translated, he statedthat Vincent completed the Spec Hist in 1256 (Spiegel Historiael,lYth Partie, book VIII,ch. 50, 89-94. De Vries-Verwijs (1863), lIl,432):

Hier mede maec ic des boex een ende,

Op dat jaer ons Heren, als ict kende,M CC L ende zesse

Scree.f' men doe, in ware lesse,

Doe thoec wart geint,Dat gemue(t hcel't broder Vin<'ent('Hcrc I put an cnd to the book at thc yc$r ol'our l,orcl whcn, as I conceivetl, the

i

rlrrlc w.s wlittcn lti M('t'l ntrrl srx, witlr trutlt, wltctt thc hook wtts cotnplctctl

wlriclr l'rnrthcr Virrcctrt crttttllrrsctl' ;

.l'lrc pirir ol'rhynrc worrls :(,,r,$(,/ft,,T,fr, tttitkc it ccrtain that this datc is nol corrupted' As tltc

cclitors or. tlrc spicg:al lli,rtrtriittaln.tcd (pp. vll vlll- ol thc lntroclucti.n), Vclthcrrr's

cviclcncc is ol'imptirtirncc sincc hc st'yci'at Paris in 1293, whcrc hc might hitvc lcttrnetl

s.rrrc dctails conccrning Vinccnt's oeuvre. For more information on thc 'S2ir'gt'/

Ili,storiut'!sce pp. 57-60 in this volume'

Thc so called cambron manuscript mentions the year 1244 as datc of complction: see

(iuzman 1983: I 16-l17 '

(r I rrray quotc the following passages from the letter: ... quoniam dignationi veslre plucttit

Ittrntilirutis nosye laboriosum opus premissis sumptibus per manum e.iusdem uhhutis lrun'

,tcrihcnclum expetere, cum utique licet a multis jamdiu postulatum est, et rutndum penilutt

c.rpletum aut correctum esset ...; .'. tum quia totum opus ex causa predicta' videlic'el Prtpl$

t,.xcntplur incompletum adhuc et incorrectum ex parte, necdum vobis transmittere vului "'itrnd: Residua vero ipsius operis, id est primam partem, que continet naturalem hislorium t't

rnnnium proprietaies rerum, et eciam residium hujus secunde partis' que temporulcttt

prosequitur hysloriam, multosque continet morales catholicorumflores dot:lorum ' si quundtt

Sublimitas vestra conscribi jusserit, quia propter infidelitatem et lallaciam scriplorunt <'l

(orrectorum ulfra modu- grouo, de hujuscemodi cum eis agere vel tractare' parolus (ro

tlante cuicumque benignitas vestra decreverit exemplar transcribendum libentissimc cont'

mendare , dum tamen, ut dixi, prius fuerit diligenter correctum, et eciam inJine per quasduttt

purcium concordancias eluciclatum breviteritqu, distinctum (Oursel 1924: resp' 259'260

and 261).

7 Apart from the Dijon ms, the letter has until now been found in mss Augsburg'

University Library II.l. fol. r94 (orim Harburg iiber Donauwi.irth, Fiirstl. oetringen

wallerstein'sche Bibliothek); chalon-sur-Sa6ne, Bibliothdque municipale 5; Heidcl'

berg, University iib.u.y cod. Sal. IX 4l; Innsbruck, University Library cod' l7' and

Cod. 103. All these mss are representatives of the so-called Dijon version (see p' l6)'

The letter is also preserved i.t t*o mss of the so-called Vienna version (see p' l6)' The

lctter has been interpolated into ms vienna, osterreichische Nationalbibliothek 392 by a

.'."]il;rli., "" a prefixed binio. This scribe also added, at the end of the ms' the texts on

the lile and miracles of St. Evroul and St' Marcel of Paris (see p' 22)' Since ms Munich'

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm292is a copy of the vienna ms, it contains both the lettcr

and the texts on the two saints in corpore'

The letter is also preserved in a few mss of the so--called Douai version (see p' l7): ms

Munich, nu'.rir"frJStaatsbibliothek Clm 17416, and Clm 18060' In both mss' howevcr'

the letter is the result of interpolations made by contemporary scribes on inserted leavcs'

The interpolator of clm 18060 also added, at the end of ms clm 18061' the-flores from thc

works of pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (on these flores, see p' 22)- -

Mss MunictL,-Bayeriiche StaatsbiUiloitret btrn ZeOt ,2662,2663 and 2664 constitutc a

complete text of the spec /hsl which gives a contamination of the Douai and f)ijon

vcrsions. One would expect to find thJ dedicatory letter in front of Clm 2661' which

contains books I-VIII of the spec Hist.The letter is given, howev€r, in clm 2662: this is

tlrc rcsult of an int.rpolation made by the main scribi of Clm 2662 on an insertcd lcaL

young I 930: 4-5 pointed out the o..ur.rn". of the letter in the 1474 edition of thc '5)rr'r'

II ist by the monastery of SS. Afra and Ulrich at Augsburg (wrongly locatcd by Young

( 1930: 3) at Strassbourg)' 'fication -pointcd out s.nrc crrurs intt l,trsigna n 1979:3 I , where he also - without any specr

thc Lihcllu,r upo-lorrrrcas which cottlcl not possibly havc occurrcd in an c''tt'Dt;r/rtr'

g (Jnrirrtunatcly, this Brussels rrrs tltrcs rr.t bcar an cx libris of Royaumont. Thc relntion

hctwccn both mss is confirnrecl, howcvcr, by thcir prcscncc in thc Hhhcy tll'('ilettttx whet'e

t

Ij

I

t0 -4lfl# 5l

-

1

,.,.,,*1*Qlil

lltcy werc kepl.ckrsc togelhcr, lloth rtrnn heru'in rr.verrrl ;rl*ccs lhc 'rirrk

Lifur (,i,trrrt,ii.Morcovcr. on l'ul, 2O4rlhc l)ijon rrts rerttll; rh, tltutrultt ltttttt,tt lt, ltttc,t.t,refi,cttrii Iill,,|lrcllrttsscls tns is tnitrkccl at lill. iottu: .tt ,1, q,,r,,:t-r,'i,'r-,',',r,,, tlt, lttrare rtfi,rrttrii..l.hc prcscncc ol.thc mss itl ('itcaux at thc cncl ol'trrc rsirr cc;i;;;;

'nrl rhcir lr*rti.n in r5c library arcpr.vcd by thc cataloguc which abb.t Jcair.i.'cir.y.u,,*..1-i.,-i.,tr,,*n up. Thisinvcntory is cditcd in cumlogue gtntral tles nrunuJsc,rirls cles hihlirtrhdque.s puhliques de

i;;:, Dtpartements _ Tome V, Dijon learis taS{il 339452, t...-fOl nos. 197 and

l0 I have compared the hands of both mss with ch. Samaran et R. Marichal, Catalogue desmanuscritsen'critureratine (...),vors.2,3,5and6(paris,resp. l962,rg74,r965and1968)' It should be noted that in the Cataiogu" tr," out.'middle ortr,.-t:tr, c.,, as usuallyassigned to ms ?,jol 56g, is questioned tuoi. O,p. irZl.For ms Brussels l7gl\,see J. van den dheyn and others , Catalogue des manuscrits de laBibliothdqur r-ollk !, Bergique,vor. III6.rrr.i, 19 03),2gsnumb-er 2rl0,where the dateis given as 'XIV sidcle'' Note that the contents of the ms are erroneousry reported as .books 8 to l6 inclusive; this should be 8 to ts:in io, sequenti volumine continentur octoIibri speculi hystorialis fratris vincentii, videlicet octauus liber usque ad sextum decimum(fol. lr and 3r).

I I The date of the reorganization of the spec Hist had, puzzled scholars for many years.Echard (1708: 500-501) mentioned Labbaeus, g.tlu.-inus, vossius and their-unnamed- followers' who already wrestled with the pro'ur.-- rt was also alscurs.o by, for instance,_ Daunou (1835: 513-514) and Gciller (1959: 2g4:,j;.'l2 Paulmier 1978: I I Gl l8 and Paulmier-Foucart tgiig: ga-g.5. The quotation is taken fromthe Douai edition of 1624 of the spec Hist, p. 1323. The date oi this reorganization iscorroborated by Richard's study on the Histiria Tartarorumby Simon of Saint euentin.The Historia Tartarorumhas only- survived as part of the spec Hist,as vincent includedexcerpts of Simon's text in the finalparts of the Tpe:c"n*t.Richard produced an edition ofthese excerpts.as well as an analysis, Frgm thirliupp.urs that the Historia Tartarorumwas composed in or after 1248 (Richard 1965: n_.1s1. This date yi;il; a rcrminus postquem for the final parts of the Spec Hist.

Recently Lusignan (1979: ol) has doubted that the final part of the spec Hist wasreorganized' It seems apparent to him from Vincentis letter to king Louis IX, that in orshortly after 1244 only that part of the sp", H;;;;;completed whi-ch vincent presentedto the king.l3 At present the ms is preserved in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek at Munich.14 As Richard (1965: l0 n. 4) observed, the hands oi-, Dijon 569 show resemblances tothose of ms Dijon 568, an observation which l.orrn.*. Although the ms does not bear anex libris of Royaumont, a relationtetween rn* rj^tj;. 56g and 569 and Brussels 17970may be assumed, since ms Dijon 569 is also mentiorrlo in the inventory of citeaux, undernumber 200 (cf ' note 9)' In Dijon 569, unforrunui.iv, the text of book xxIII has beenlost' with the exception of chapter l and pu.t or"t uit., z.15 A list of the printed editions can befound i;i;;;"r, cahiers de l,Atetier vincent deBeauvais I (1978): 14-15. The Augsihurg !474'incunable edition of the Spec Hist,however, is the result of a contamination; in a later article I will discuss this edition.'Douai version'does not refer to ms Douai 797, siniethis ms o..urionuity has a deviantHist text (see p. 24).t'

lfrfr}!!?i:t"ntr Nachdruck der Akademischen Druck- und verlagsans tatt, Grazf

l7 In the special prologue of the spec Histvincent wrote: ... qc propter nimiam transcrihendisumptuttsitatem alteram (sc. partemYsine altera nonnulli huhituri sunt ... (Oursel, 1924:262)' cf ' also the prologue oi the Memoriale ruipirun,: ,,, nonnulli ve, c,tium hot, rihimugno opere' trunsnihi rupientes in expensls nolarkrunt pecunicte rim(,nr cliltpt,nclium ,.,,

:il

,tt

rclbrrirrg to the portihility ol'eopying urrly thc ,\1tt't, llitt (l)c Wuilly |t14411845: .1U0), twill dcal with both lhete'textr lrr,low,

llt 'Ihc I'/ itnd thc spccinl prologuc. ns well irs thc //rsl tcxt ol'ms Kkrsterneuburg l2ll.bclong to thc Vicnnu versiott! l)erlrnps wc mily cxplain thc abscncc ol'prologuJ te*t*bclonging to thc oldcst versiorr lronr thc assuntption that Vincent's e.vcmplur toxl did notcontain any prologue at all'l

It) Oursel (1924:254-256) was the first to call attention to this preface. It is cditecl byLusignan (1979: ll5-129),as well as in the synoptic critical edition by Prolbssor Von dcnBrincken ( 1978: 465499).

20 CL Lusignan 1979: 34, and Schneider 1976: 178. Text edited by Lusignan 1979: I I 5 l29and l3l-139 (in combination), and by von den Brincken l97g:465499.

2l The passage omitted from chapter l0 is Si quibus autem, ut alias dixi ... arrogantie timort,depravare, as indicated by LusignanlgTg:132. The final clause of the chaptcr in thisshorter redaction shows some variants compared to the longer versions (l givc thereading of ms Vienna 392,fol.6ra): ... audacter tamen et scribam et dicam hanc uel illam'sententiam illius auctoris esse cuius scilicet nomen in titulo continetur.

22 Cf.Schneider 1976:179-180. LA-4Bcanbefoundintheprintededitions,whereas LA-4Cis given by LusignanlgTg: ll5-129 and l3l-139 (in combination). Von den Brinckcn1978: 465499 gives both LA-48 and LA-4C. Professor Von den Brincken made unanalysis of LA-L, LA-3, LA-48 and LA-4C, in order to shed light on Vinccnt'sconceptions of history as well as on the genesis of the Speculum Maius (1978: 4104991,Above, on p. 13, I have given an outline of her hypothesis regarding the genesis.

23 This occurs, for instance, in mss of the Dijon and Vienna versions of the Spec Hi,tt.24 It should be noted that the two Brussels mss of the Spec Nat,which contain Nat- l ,do not

include any special prologue at all. Only Pnat is printed in the Douai 1624 edition, involume l, Speculum naturale, col. 16.

25 Paulmier 1978: I16. This redaction was published by Oursel (1924:261-262)and by Vonden Brincken (1978: 49H99).

Ms Innsbruck 17 contains one of the copies of this first redaction. On folio 6v,however, the words VIo libro were expuncted from the clause in VIo libro uidelicet, ubi detemporibus agitur. This expunction was carried out by a second, contemporary hand whoin the margin substituted the word: in fine. Thus he brought the phrase inio line withPhist-2 (see below), apparently after having collated this prologue with a ms containingthe Vienna or the Douai version. From our inquiries into the texts of the Alexander stor!in mss Augsburg II.l. fol. 194 and Innsbruck 103, it appears that both these mss must goback to ms Innsbruck 17. This is confirmed by the correction in question: both mss havcthe words infine in the body of the text.

26 Above I have introduced the symbols Hist-|, Hist-2, Hist-3 and. Hist-4 for the Hist textol, respectively, the Klosterneuburg, Dijon, Vienna and Douai versions. In order to keepthe discussion of the versions of the Histclear,I will not use the symbols in the threelollowing sections. They return in section IX below.

27 I use the readings of the Klosterneuburg version. If corrections are required, they aretaken from the other versions.

2tt E.g. by Daunou (1835: 452453) and Lusignan (1979:5zt-55).29 In ms Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 17129 (l4th c.) this inconsistency was

rcmoved. Somebody changed the announcement of the table of contents into ApolonltTyri gesta inJine huius libri, and appended a new quire to the ms on which he wrotc thegesta Apollonii, These changcs wcrc copied by the scribe of ms Munich, BaycrischeStaatsbibliothek Clm 1E060 (lSth c.). In ms Oxford, Bodleian Library Bodley 287 (l4thc.) the gestct Apollonll wars edded try u sccond scribe after book XV (countcd as XVI).

30 By Historla Alexandrl Vlncent mcanB n widely popular epitomc of Julius Valeriur' ResGe,stae Alexandrl l{rrr4'J,, Tbe epltomc has been edited by Zaehcr 1867,

j

:f

.'.&i t3

,ll llruvc lrithcllo lirrrrttl tlrir irrtcrrrrt,tliury lirlrrr in tlrc lirlhrwirrg rrrnnusclipts: Arlirs.llihliollrr.\tgrrc trrutticipuL. 56(r ( I .1th c, )l lluttlogne Hul Mr.r, llihliotltt\t;ue rnunicipulc I .10

(el, ll(l(l) urrd l.ll (ll()7)t l}'usrr,,ls, l{oyul l,ihrnry llu4l (crrtl ol'lltlr c,). nrtcl ll 1.196

(l4thc.); l)ouai. llihliotlrCquc rnurricipnlc 7t)7(eurly l4tlrc,): IItrcclrt. tJrrivcrsity l,ibruly73t{ (1465 1472): und Vicnnu, Ostcrreiclriselrc Nuliortnlhibliothek S.rr. 127(14 (ca.l'470 l4tl0). Origirrally it irlsu occurrctl irr rtrs l)uris. llibliolhCquc nllion:rlc lat.4ti97(carly l4th c.), but latcr thc tcxt wls corrcctcd to conlirrrtr to lhc rcgular f)ouai vcrsion(scc p. 37). A ms of this intcrmcdiary lbrrn had scrvcd as thc modcl ol ms Paris,Bibliothdque nationale lat. 6428D (cnd of l3th/carly l4th c.), which contains abbrevia-tions of both the Spec Nat and Spec Hist.

32 Inms Dijon 568 a second hand has interpolated ch. 54 and 55 of the Rnat-1, adding in thelower margins of fol. 3lv some elements belonging to Rnat-2.

33 Book VIII of the original Spec Nat deals with the works of the fourth day of Creation,when God created time. On the place of this summary, see the discussion on pp.t9-20.

34 Asamatterof fact,thecirculationof theMemorialewaslimited. Itispreservedinthefollowing copies: Boulogne-sur-Mer, Bibliothdque municipale 134 (l3th c.); Paris,Mazarine Library 1549 (l5th c.); Paris, National Library lat.4936 (l4th c.); Vienna,Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek 604 (l3th. c.); and Wolfenbiittel, Herzog AugustBibliothek Helmst. 643 (l4th c.).

35 The prologue has been edited by De Wailly (1844145 390). In Spicae, Cahiers de I'ArelierVincent de Beauvais I (1978): 16, information can be found on excerpts edited from theMentoriale.

36 Minor divergences regarding this part of the Dijon, Vienna and Douai versions will bediscussed below, on pp. 29-30.

37 See note 12 lor information on Simon's work. The excerpts from John's and Simon'shistories in the Spec Hist are discussed by Guzman (1974) and by Von den Brincken(te75).

38 In his edition of Simon of Saint Quentin's Historia Tartarorum, Richard (1965: l0-l l)pointed to these omissions in ms Paris, National Library lat. 17550. They were alsoreported by Daunou ( I 835: 513) and Guzman ( 1975: 124-125). Guzman ( 1969: l0l n.22)observed that part of these omissions also occur in the so-called Cambron ms (but see

Lusignan 1972 on this ms).

39 I am preparing an edition of the table of contents of the Klosterneuburg ms.40 See Klosterneuburg versionY,l2; Drjon version IV,l l; Vienna version V,l l; and Douai

version IV,32. The chapter-heading reads: De hostiis quas Alexander in templo Deiobtulit.

41 This is the so-called Cambron manuscript. Two volumes of its Spec Nar belong to thecollection of the Museum of Electricity in Life at Medtronic, Inc. of Minneapolis(Guzman 1983: I l8). The third Spec Ncr volume is London, British Library, Add. Ms.15.583. The first volume of the Spec Hist is now ms Brussels, Royal Library II 941; twoother volumes are part of the James Ford Bell Collection, which is housed in the WalterLibrary of the University of Minnesota (see Guzman 1969: 97, and Guzman 1983). Avolume of the Spec Doct, containing books one to eight, is ms Mons, Bibliothdquemunicipale 321362 (according to information received from Mme. Paulmier).

42 Aparl from the translations of the Spec Hist discussed in the present volume, I may pointto ms Munich, University Library 2o Cod. ms. 750 (: Cim. 30) which is a fragment of a

Middlc Low German translation of the Spec Hist.The ms belongs to the l4th century.For cvidcnce as to the popularity of the Spec Flr'sl, see Paulmier-Foucart 1979: 97.

Gcollicy Chauccr is known to have used parts of the Spec Nat as a souree; sce Bunt l9tl3:notcs 9 and l0lbr thc lullcst bibliography on thc subicct. Somc parts of the,5|rt,r'Ncltranslatcd inlo Gue li<'sccnl to bc transmittcd in ms Oxltrrd. Jcsus Collcge CXLI ( I .5tlt c, ),

lipr.ir (i1eck l16nslrtti6tt 6l'1ut'lr 1l'tlte ,\/rr'r' l)rrr'l scc tlts cotttribtttitlrt by ltroll'sstlt'Acrtl

irr tlrc Prcscttt volttttlc,.11 'l'hc ('tttttlttgtt,t ctttlitttttt lvltttttt'\t't'll'l"tttttt lliltlitttltt'<'tk' Rt'giuc Mrtnucot'ti't lV: ('ultlogtt'r

(''tliruttr I.uti,,()niltrll.l (Mttttich txl+). p. 7 r'eports ('lm ti20ld irs bcing tt volutne ol'thc

Sltcc Ili.ttcopy in qucstiorr. ('lrrr t{20lrlcirrrtairr^s. howevcr, a tcxt ol'thc Rcgukt lJutullcti

irr [.irtin and German. scc: l)it, l]erteliktrt'gt'l in Bayern' Ausstcllung dcr l]trycrisclrcn

Sraatsbibliothek,2g. Novcmbcr 1980*10' Januar l98l (Munich 1980)' p' 27 nr' tt'

TI

t4 "- br55

57

J. tt. Voorbij

The history of Alexander the Great in Jacob van

Maerlant's Spiegel H istoriaelr

I Introduction

The Flemish poet Jacob van Maerlant (before 1235--ca. 1290) composed the most

voluminous oeuvre of Middle Dutch literature. Apart from some longer and

shorter poems of his own hand, his works include a great number of translations -.

9r rather free adaptations - of Latin and French works of various genres and

lcngths. From the following enumeration it may appear how interesting Maerlant's

*oik actually is.2 He translated Latin tracts on precious stones (Lapidarils) and on

<Jreams (Sompniarirs), the latter of which has been lost, while the former may have

been incorporated into his later work Der Naturen Bloeme which is a translation ofThomas of Cantimpr6's Liber de natura rerum. From the French he adapted the

Arthurian romances Torec, the Historie van den Grale and Merliins Boeck, for the

latter two of which he relied upon Robert de Boron's Estoire del Saint Graal,

Maerlant used classical matter for his romances Alexanders Geesten, an adaptation

crf Gautier de Chfitillon's Alexandreis, and for the Historie van Troyen which isbased on the Roman de Troie by Benoit de Sainte-Maure. In his Historie van Troyen

he incorporated, at the same time, an adaptation of Vergil's Aeneid. Possibly

Maerlani also produced the Heimelichede der Heimelicheit,whichis a translation ofpseudo-Aristotle's Secretum secretorum. To his Rijmbiibel Maerlant appended the

Wrake van Jherusalem. These works are free translations of Peter Comestor's

Historia Scholastica and of De bello Judaico by Josephus. Apart from a - lost -translation of the Life of St. Clare, he produced an adaptation of Bonaventura's

Vita seu legenda sancti Francisci, called Sinte Franciscus Leven. Finally, Maerlant

has lelt us a partial translation of Vincent of Beauvais' Speculum Historiale which

he entitled Spiegel Historiael.This imptitriu. oeuvre compels still more admiration from another point of

view. Maerlant rendered his Latin and French sources into Middle Dutch rhyming

couplets, this irrespective of whether his source texts were written in prose orcomposed in verse lines. lt is striking to see how accurately the translator

reproduced the contcntB of his sourccs in spite of the restrictions the use of rhyme

must have imporcd upon him, Apart from these formal changes Maerlnnt

frequently altercd thr contents of' his sources. He abridged these texts or,

"q#c()llverscly. itttcrpolatctl tltcln wittr rnuteriul l'rottt ollrer,rour,ecs (it is tlrr.ugh tlrescittlcr;loltttions thilt wc cittclt a glimpse ot' Mnerhml's witlc rcutling). lly hisitlte rittiolts tll'thc tcxts hc translated, Maerlant nctuully crc'tcrl

'cw w.rks.In tlrc cycs of his contemporaries and the followinli g.,r.ri,ii,ru*,,,,,. trupsl.torwits rcputcd to be a great poet. It will not be surprirln! thtt lris wsrks cxercisedsolllc ittl'lucncc on other Middle Dutch authors. The writers ol'nrodcrn histories oflI)rrtch litcrature, however, hold a rather negative opinion of Maerlant's oeuvre. onthc onc hand, its size is admired and its cultural importance is acknowledged. Thelitcrary merits of the oeuvre, on the other hand, are not rrigrrrv appreciated.Maerlant is reproached for lacking creative imagination, uniliterary merit isdenied to his poetic art, which is even qualified as b-eing oniy oogg.rel.3 It was notuntil recently that scholars showed anyinterest in the inventivety and subtlety thatMaerlant was able to invoke in order to re--create his sources into Middle Dutchworks.a

II The Speculum Historiale and the Spiegel Historiael

The Spiegel Historiael (henceforth called Spiegel) is the last work of the series oftranslations Maerlant has left us. Around izsa n" set out to translate vincent ofBeauvais' Speculum Historiale (henceforth: Speculum). But when he stoppedtranslating, he had not completed his Spregel-at all. possibly he was unable tocomplete it because he died. For his work Maerlant relied upon u manuscript of thevulgate Douai version of the specurum,r an exemplar which, apparently, wasdivided into four volumes. The translator also divided his work into four volumesor Partien' As appears from Dordinandse, anoutline of the contents that Maerlantappended to the first Partie,he intended to render the complete speculum intoDutch and to continue it up to his own lifetime. He translated ,only, the first andthird parts of the speculum,6 as well as books xxv-txvll, .rr.'is of the fourthvolume,T altogether more than 90,000 verse lines. Two other men eventuallycompleted the Spieget. Philip Utenbroeke translated books X to XVI of theSpeculum, the part that Maerlant had skipped at first. Lodewijc van Velthemcontinued the last Partie from the year I I l3 on - where Maerlant had broken off histranslation - up to the end of vincent's text. But velthem also afpended a fifthvolttme to the Spiegel in which he treated world history up to the year 1316.One may ask if the Spiegel can strictly be regarded as a translation of theSpeculum' The Spiegel opens with a prologue text. This is not a translation ofVincent's Libellus totius operis apoligeticr-r, ho*.ver, but a text by Maerlanthimself' In his prologue our translator announced that he would considerablychange his source text. He intended to confine his translation to only the historicalnarrative,the jeesten, andto omit the matter he defined as clergie:Vincent,s learnedexpositions and digressions, as well as his many excerpts from"pagan and Christianphilosophers' Maerlant made these omissions in consideration of his audience. Histranslation was intended primarily for laymen, possibly the lay aristocratic milieuof the count of Holland, Floris v (t I 2g6i,on rhor. insiigation Maerlant set out totranslate the spec'ulum.8 The translator regarded vincJnt's ,irrgi, as being toodilficult lor laymen. This matter was only oflnteres t lct tlrtt purprnip,the clergy and

llrc scholitrs.') Mtlre()ver, he l'cnrctl llrrrl trc worrltl gct lrinrscll'into troublc with theclcrgy bccausc ol' trunslrrtirrg r'lr,r'gir'. llc lracl cxpcrienccd this ot'lcc belirre onitcctruttt ol' his Rijnbiihcl. bccnusc hc had rcvealed the rnysterics ol'the lliblc tolnynrcn.r0

'l'hc Spiegel was edited by Matthias De Vries and Eelco Verwijs ( 1863), wh6 nlsoroughly collated this text with its source. In their excellent introduction to the,\1tit'gcl, De Vries-verwijs (1863: I,viii-xii) pointed out how much Maerlanttrrtritted from the Speculum. The omissions concern, in the first place , the cfu,rgit,which Vincent excerpted from the works of the Fathers of the Church. From DcVrics-Verwijs' collation it appeared that Maerlant also abbreviated Vinccnt'slristorical narrative, especially the history of early Antiquity as well as sacredlristory. For the latter Maerlant referred to his Rijmbijbel. The translator, finally,rrlso omitted or abbreviated the many flores of famous philosophers and poetswhich occur in the Speculum.

As De Vries-Verwijs (1863: I,xii*xxxix) also proved, there is still anotherintportant difference between the Speculum and the Spiegel. It appeared thatMaerlant substantially extended his translation, especially the later Partien, byinsertions of excerpts from other source texts. Among the works from which hetlcrived his excerpts, we find Orosius' .Fftsloriae adversum paganos and Petcr('omestor's Historia scholastica, which were used to amplify the history of earlyAntiquity. For the history from the decline of the Western Roman empire on hettscd, again, Orosius as well as Jordanes' De origine actibusque Getarum and Paultlrc Deacon's Historia Romana. For medieval history Maerlant relied upon workslike Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, Albert of Aachen'sllistoria Hierosolymitanae expeditionrs and Martinus Polonus' Chronica. Conse-quently, De Vries-Verwijs (1863: I,xii) emphasized that the Spiegel is not just atranslation, but constitutes to some degree an independent work.

However, whereas Maerlant, in the prologue to the Spiegel, informed us soclcarly of his intention to cancel Vincent's clergie, he kept silent in respect to thoserrrany additions. He only promised to render the complete history of the Speculuml'rom Latin in beautiful and light words. r I Apparently we must assume that makingadditions to his source text belonged to the textual methods of the translator

The collation of the Speculum and the Spiegel as well as the Middle Dutch textitself, led De Vries-Verwijs (1863: I,xliv-xlviii) to express a rather positive.irrdgement of Maerlant's text. They regarded the Spiegel as the work of a capableirnd skilled translator who faithfully and accurately rendered his Latin source. The,\piegeltestifies to Maerlant's thorough knowledge of Latin. The editors found onlyit small number of translation errors which are not equal, of course, to thetlumerous verse lines which yield a correct translation. Where Maerlant substantial-ly abbreviated the contents of the Speculum, he showed how well he understood thetcnor of Vincent's text. Sometimes, however, he condensed his source so strongtytltat the proper gist becomes clear only alter consultation of the Specularl itsJlf,Mitcrlant produced a discerning and not uncritical translation in which he.somctinics successfully, correctcd crrors of the Spcc,ulunt De Vrics Verwijs utsocxprcssecl a largely poBitiv€ judgernent ol'thc way Maerlant enrployecl the MiclelleI)utch lunguage in hl: rhymlng translution, Ccrtainly, they criticized thc trunsla.tor's verbosity end hh ufe €f ttopgnpli und rreedless repetitions, Similurly they

au

*'

cellstlrc(l thc occurre ncc tll'tong sentences rtr we ll nn tlel'ee ts in the rnetricul sch'ncwhich solnctinrcs givc thc S}trcael the oppeorunec ol'rhyrning pru*., on thc etherhtttttl. Dc vrics Vcrwijs approved Maerlant's linguistie rTsirge 1s bcing casy,rrntrflbctcd. smooth and pure. His narrative style is niturul. und t]ftcn thc <tiilogueshc crcatcd are pre-eminently successfut. fhat is why the cclitors qualified Maer-lant's translation as having a sober chronicle styli which is oniy occasionallyclcvated to the level of poetry.

De Vries-Verwijs' observation that Maerlant abbreviated the history of earlyAntiquity deserves the attention of anyone who wants to study the history ofAlexander the Great in the Spiegel. bn. -uy ask if Maerlant confined hisabbreviations to only the clergie. Did he perhaps abbreviate the narrative of thehistory of Alexander too? And if so, did those abbreviations result in a differentrepresentation or even an other portrayal of king Alexander?

In order to answer to such questions ron".rning contents, Dr Kees de Graaf(1983) studied Maerlant's history of Alexander and compared it with its source,Vincent's Speculum.r2 De Graaf did not limit this comparison to only thosepassages which, strictly speaking, deal with Alexander, but extended it to the wholeAlexander story of both Speculum and Spiegel, from Nectanabus, seduction ofqueen Olympias up to the correspondence between Alexander and Dindimus. In thefirst instance De Graaf drew up an inventory of all places where Maerlant alteredthe history of Alexander and studied them, eipecially with the intention to discoverhow the translator interpreted the character oiAl."inder. Subsequently, De Graafmade a detailed study of Maerlant's translation technique. For this purpose hechose the following chapters of Maerlant's text: t to q trrr. N..ianabus story,Alexander's birth and youth, Xenocrates, king Philip's conquests);39,40 and partof 4l (Alexander's combat with Porus, Poius' treasures); 4445 (Alexander,sexpedition through the Indian desert); 4g (the tree oracle); and 5g (part ofAlexander's correspondence with Dindimus). Thus this detailed study extends to746 verse lines of- the Spiegel which ronriit,.t. about u quuit., of the entireAlexander story (cf. De Graaf 1983: 34). De Graaf .o-pur.i the text of these 16chapters,line-by-line and word-by-word, with Vincent's history ofAlexander. Onthe basis of this material he aimed at producing a precise description of Maerlant,stext as a translation, and to give a well-grounded virdict on tendencies and featuresof this translation (De Graaf l9g3:20).

In the following sections we present a summary of De Graafs study. We willillustrate his observations and conclusions with qultations from the Speculum and,the Spiegel,the latter group with an English translation. It will be obvious that wecannot present here a word-by-word comparison of the two histories of Alexanderand that we have to restrict the number of quotations. Therefore the use ofexamples is limited to only those instances where our argument needs to bespecified. For a m_inute description of Maerlant's translation lechnique, the readeris referred to De Graaf 1983, of course.

60 at

lll A eontrpeclui ol' Milcrlilnt's history of n le xunder

A rough comparison between the two historics of Alexander shows that Maerlant'sirrtcrvcntions are not restrictcd to only thc c'lergie of the Spec:ulum. As a mnttcr ofl'itct, he omitted much lrom Vincent's text. Like Vincent's history (ch. l.lll),Maerlant's text begins with the marvellous begetting of Alexander by the Egyptianking and magician Nectanabus. But information on his magic power, his cunningprophecy to Olympias, as well as his seduction of the queen is substantially reducedto ch. 1,144 and 2,1-24 (cf . De Graaf 1983: 4145). Maerlant reduced or evencompletely omitted long digressions regarding the dicts and sayings of thephilosophers. Of ch. VI only Plato's death and his great age are mentioned(4,31-34). Chs. VII to X, yielding information on Apuleius, Plotinus and HermesTrismegistos, are all omitted. Most information on Isocrates is left untranslated(ch. XVI). Ch. XL, dealing with Epicurus' dicts and sayings, is substantiallyreduced to 3l ,29-32. Although Vincent's expos6 on Epicurus' moralistic sayingsand his errors (ch. XLI), is reduced too, the criticism of this philosopher iscmphasized (31,33-56). Information on Anaxarchus, finally, given by ch. LXI, hasbeen left out. With the exception of the Nectanabus passage, these omissions maybe considered the clergie Maerlant spoke of. In this context we may also place theomission of geographic detail. Thus, for instance, the description of India (ch,XLVID has been cancelled.

Information of another kind, however, is omitted from a number of chapters: thestory of Manasses (XVII), Pausanias' thirst for glory (XIX), the unchastity of theVestal virgin Munitia and the story of the wicked matrons (XXD. These historicaldetails are not strictly connected with the history of Alexander, which might be thereason Maerlant omitted them.

While all these omissions do not concern Alexander directly, two others arestriking since they do deal with the king's character. The last part of ch. LXI, Deiactantia et ambitione Alexandri, an excerpt from Quintus Curtius concerningcriticism of Alexander's kingship, is strongly reduced. Maerlant only left its title(50, Van Alexanders verweenthede, 'Of Alexander's arrogance') and a reminiscenceof Onesicritus in 50,33-35. Ch. LXII, De superstitione eiusdem, ac livore, is eventotally suppressed. Both chapters are negative in respect of Alexander. By omittingthem Maerlant reduced any emphasis on Alexander's bad qualities (cf. De Graaf1983: Gl0).

As a result of these omissions Maerlant left only those parts of the Alexanderstory which deal with the life and exploits of the Macedonian king. He effected astronger emphasis on the action of Alexander's own story, and through this on theperson of the king himself. Alexander's portrayal seems scarcely affected, except forthe last two examples which changed it in some degree. Here the Spiegelyields a lessnegative image of Alexander (cf. De Graaf 1983: l0).

In contrast to these omissions, there are only two important additions, both in ch.56. In lines l*14 Maerlant showed his disbelief in the French story of Alexandcr.Here he probably alluded to the fourth branch of the Roman d'Alexandre byAlexander of Paris, which rclated that people were distressed at the king's dcath. Inlines 29-52 Maerlent provlded e Burvcy of Alexander's habits. If it had not been forhis craving for drlnk rnd hh lntemperate behaviour no king would have bccn wiser.

And irr his ltrxury hc wttltted to be rt gotl, on tlrc ollrer lrnrrrl, orr rhe ltlvicc ol'Aristotlc.rr Alcxandcr alwuys hutl *evei cotuuellorn witlr hirn, lior cvcry problcnrhe consultcd each of thcnl, hc retitined their worrls, nnrl lirrnlly chose tlre bcst advicc.Maerlant is balancing here the good with the bud quutiriis pl'kirrg Alcxander.Perhaps this peculiar addition may cxplain why he supprcssccl Vincclt's chaptersLXI and LXII on Alexander's bad quarities (cf, De craaf l9tt3: l0 I l).

This broad outline sufficiently indicates that the history of Alexander inMaerlant's Spiegel differs considerably from the text Vinclnt composed. DeGraaf's detailed study of the Middle Dutch Alexander story demonstrates thatMaerlant also altered those parts of the Speculum he aciually did translate.Maerlant introduced a large number of deliberate changes. Apart from theintroduction of rhyme, he used other textual methods such as omissions, additionsand other alterations. There is no need to suggest that the translator used thesedevices for those instances where he met Latin words unfamiliar to him, lackedequivalents to denote something he found in his source text, or misunderstoodVincent's text. De Graaf , in fact, found only a couple of instances of Maerlantmisunderstandinghissource(1983: 156-158).Thetranslatorhadagoodknowledgeof the Latin language. Therefore the changes he introduced cannoibe explained isspringing from a wish to evade difficulties or patch up misunderitandings.Moreover, we must take into account the possibility that r-o-. divergences wereprovoked by errors in the exemplar manuscript of the Speculum Maerlant used. Anumber of such suspect readings are listed by De Graaf 1Dg3: l5l-155).

One might suggest, of course, that Maerlant's textual methods were di.tut.d bythe rhyming couplets he used. Incontestably the restrictions of the Dutch u.rr.,such as its length and its pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables, and notablythe need to invent convenient rhyme-words must have required much of Maerlant'stranslating skill. The requirements of the rhyme mighi have affected upon histranslation in a variety of ways.

One source of difficulty occurred when the translator rendered a sentence or aclause or some other group of words into Dutch, where the final part of the messagetook up the first line of a rhyming couplet. Consequently, he had to rhyme tf,esubsequent group of Latin words to be translated with this first line, in order tocomplete the rhyme scheme. Thus the rhyme of the first line (co-)determined theform, and possibly the contents too, of the next group of words of the translation.An example of this impact of the rhyme we find ln the passage dealing withAlexander's expedition through the Indian desert. When sufieringlfrom thirst, theking and his army found a river. But its water was so bitter that nobody could drinkit, whereas animals who had drunk it suffered agonies. In this distress it appearedthat men are more resilient than anim als: Tunc illis flumen apparuit ( ...) ; oqio ,rrofluminis inuenta est gustu amarior helleboro, quam nec homi bibere, nec pecus sinetormento poterat. ll Tunc cognitum est, hominem durabiliorem in cunctis ,ihrr, quampecudem (ch. LIIf). Maerlant translated:

Daer naer quamen si tere riviereVan also hittere maniere,Dat rut man no beeste en mochte,f fDuer hevant men encle hesoehte,

' '&ft

,, 4-"

I)ul een num nft'et dugettt nttk,ltl)un t,t,tt(('11 l1gg,ts11' tntrbt,den ilm'lt

'"'"'' '''lvt&,il

(44.23 2l,l)('Thcrcaftcr they umivetl ul u livcr lthc watcr of] which was so bittor thut nrunnor animal liked it.// Tlrcrc it wls lirund that man can endure morc than unyanimal on earth').

'l'lrc clause Tunc cognitum e.el is rendered in line 26 into the doublet hevinclen andlt(srx'kcn (3 sg. pret. bevant and besochte respectively), both verbs used in thcrttcitning'to experience, to find'. The word besochte seems to be necessitated by the

lrrcccding rhyme word mochte.'l'he reverse also occurred. The translator had already invented a rhyme-word for

tltc sccond line of a couplet, and only afterwards found a convenient rhyme' wordlirr the first line. A combination of both types of rhyme constraint seems present inllrc passage dealing with king Philip's subjection of the Greek cities: Graec'iae autenttiuitates ll dum imperare singulae cupiunt (ch. XV). Maerlant had to insert newirrlirrmation here in order to render Vincent's text:

In Grieken waren vele s t e den I ITien tiden van groter rijcheden,Wel ghemuurt ende wel gevest,f fEnde elc wilde wesen best (9,l5- l8)('There were many cities in Greece ll inthat time, very rich, well walled-inand well-fortified,/ I and each of them wanted to be of the highest rank').

( )nc may regard these instances as cases of rhyme constraint in a narrow sense. Incotttrast to this there occurred rhyme constraint in a wider sense: the final part of atranslated message coincided with the second line of a rhyming couplet. The breakhctween two pieces of inlormation coincided with the breaks between two rhymingcouplets. When rendering the next passage into Dutch, the translator was notguided by an extant rhyme word, but was conlronted with only the need to invent artcw rhyming couplet.

Whether or not constricted by the rhyme, Maerlant produced a translation of theAlcxander story in which the impact of rhyme is not always perceptible. As willilppear in the sections below, a number of additions that he made may be due to thecxigencies of rhyme. In the omissions and other changes that Maerlant introduced,Itowever, it is only occasionally that the influence of rhyme can be demonstrated.l)ossibly the requirements of the Dutch verse led Maerlant to omit certain words orcvcn sentences. Certain rhyme-words may also have set problems of translationirncl thus resulted in omissions of Vincent's text. This too may be regarded as a kindol' limitation imposed by rhyme. It is difficult, however, to measure with anynccuracy the influence of rhyme on words, clauses or sentences that are nottritnslated. The requirements of the Dutch verse may perhaps explain the occur-rcncc of small omissions and small changes of other kinds. But the larger theonrissions and other nlterations arc. the more we have to take into account thepossibility that it wss the contenls of thc Spet'ulum that provoked Maerlant to alterhis source text, Moreov€r, aeeording us the Dutch text is morc in harmony with theSpec'ulum and ita verm llngr run Bmoothly, the rcquirements of the rhyme $re le$B

perceptible. llcsides, when ehnnget vlr A vir the rouree tcxl tlo rrot occur inlinc llnul posititltt, thut is in rhyme purltlun, hut elrewlrcrc in the vcrsc linc, wc cunhardly maintain that, in these instrtnces, Mnerlnnt'n une ol'rhyntc lcd t11 tlivcrgcnccsfrom the Latin.

Anticipating the discussion bclow, wc cun say thut the ltrrnr of vcrsc thatMaerlant employed seems to be of importancc only in thc aclditions that he made tothe Speculum.If he had written his translation in prose, he would have introducedomissions and other changes just as well, and also a number of additions - all beingalterations that he considered to be essential for his text. We hope to discoveiMaerlant's motives for doing so in the following discussion of the textual methodshe used (cf. De Graaf 1983: l7-18, 59-60 and,145-146).

IV Maerlant's omissions

In those parts that Maerlant chose to translate, large omissions occur, too, as mayappear from the following example. One of the marvels Alexander witnessed duringhis expedition in India was the oracle of the trees of the Sun and Moon. On the firstday of his arrival at the sanctuary both trees predicted that he would soon die. Thenext morning, when Alexander returned to consult the oracle for a second time, theoracle's priest was still asleep. Here Vincent's text contains some clergie as it gives adescription of the priest as well as a concise expos6 on the customs and diet of thepeople living in that region (ch. LVII mane facto, inuenta est ... viuunt annis 300).This digression is omitted by Maerlant; he immediately continues with the secondprophecy by the Sun tree (48,36). Similar omissions occur in chapters V (onAristotle and Leonides), XI (Agathocles), XII (the altercation between Alexanderand Nicholaus), or LVII (the prohibition to sacrifice to the oracle trees). On a minorlevel, too, considerable omissions occur, for example chronographical informationas given in chapters XII and XIV (quotations from Eusebius ind Helinand), ormuch of the descriptive information of chapters LIII and LIV regarding the host ofanimals invading Alexander's camp. Some of these omissions..ituinly belonged towhat Maerlant regarded as clergie, whereas other material is not related to thehistorical narrative of Alexander sensu stricto.

In the 746 verse lines that De Graaf studied in detail, there occur 138 omissions ofvarying length. A fair number of them consist of only words or small groups ofwords most of which function in Vincent's text as adjectives and adverbs oradverbial constructions. As to the contents, they usually consist of descriptiveelements. Thus descriptive detail is omitted regarding landscape, buildings, people(e.g. the description of the priest from ch. LVII), or animals (e.g. the occurrence ofsavage animals in the forests of the region Alexander is travelling through, ch. LIII),whereas other omissions regard the description of circumstantial details such asindications of time (e.g. tribus horis and nocte of ch. LfD.

The omission of a series of descriptive details sometimes leads to a divergentpresentation of the narrative. This is apparent, lor instance, in the story of the-treeoracle. Vincent's account (ch. LVII) gives amusing clctails regarding the languagethe prophetic trees spoke: Indieo sermone tenulssinut, Grece and graece. Further-more, it mentioned the specific polnt of tlme when thc Sun tree uied to prophesy:

,,

tlrttunh ,urlchut,to/is urhor hnlul,lly lenvirrg out lltcse clemcnts, thc S2i('gc'l prescntn

tlrc spcaking of thc trees as lern uruul urrtl rnorc immcdiatcly conccrned with theru'rival of Alcxander,

Sonrctimes the omission ol'clescriptivc clctail concerns largcr groups of words likevcrhal and participial constructions, or general statements such as so/cl enln,guurlcrc ./igmentis or Vna genti lex est contra ius non ire naturae in Alex$nder'lt(:orrcspondence with the Brahman king Dindymus (ch. LXVII). As the omissionsol'dcscriptive detail occur at unevenly spaced points in the Dutch Alexander story,it is impossible to draw up a more specified classification of their distribution.Apparently, there is no method in Maerlant's use of these omissions (cf. De Graaflett3: 60-61).

Other omissions concern the suppression of details of the narrative's action. This

llhcnomenon occurs at every syntactic level. Examples of this are found in, e.g., ch.Xl, which treats of Nectanabus' teaching of astrology to Alexander, and Alexun-tlcr's murder of his teacher and father. In the beginning of the chapter Vincentprovided the reason for this teaching. During king Philip's absence on campaign,his wife Olympias consulted Nectanabus and asked him to use his astrologicalcxpertise to make certain about her relation with Philip. Alexander was a witness oftlris consultation. This phrase (dum ergo Philippus ... ex arte illa astrica, loqueretur\was omitted by Maerlant (cf. 5,9). During one of the lessons which they used to havcirt an abyss, Alexander pushed Nectanabus over the brink. The dangerouslywounded magician asked why Alexander did this (conquereretur, cur hoc fecl.ssct), a

tlucstion that Maerlant lelt out (5,22).In his last words Nectanabus confessed hisllight from Egypt (,,Egypti fugam),hrs seduction of Olympias and his paternity ofAlcxander. The element of the flight is cancelled by Maerlant (cf. 5,33). Alexandercarried the dead body home on his shoulder (in humens, omitted in 5,36), and, afterthc funeral, told all the truth to his mother (atque matri omnia indicauit). Maerlantsuppressed this statement, and thus there is no evidence in the story how queen

Olympias got at the truth (cf. 5,39). By cancelling details of action here and at otherplaces in the history of Alexander, he simplified the story and tightened it, usuallywithout affecting its main outline (cf. De Graal 1983: 6l-62).

By cancelling so many elements of Vincent's text, Maerlant not only simplifiedthc main lines of the Alexander story, but he also accelerated the narrative's action.As a result of this device the story may seem more arid, whereas connectionsbctween its parts are sometimes less perceptible. For instance, after the combat inwhich Alexander overcame Porus (ch. XLIX), the Indian king refused to live anyIonger though Alexander pardoned him (cum veniam ab hoste accepisset). ThisIrandsome gesture is suppressed in the Spiegel (cf .40,10). Relations between (partsol) sentences are weakened by the omission of connective words as iterum, aulem,ctium, or by the suppression of clauses like Cum diceret Alexander eas.frequenlihusinthrihus tantum creuisse (ch. LVI; cf. 48,18-19). Probably these suppressions do notsignificantly impede the understanding of the story. But sometimes the narrative is

totl much condensed. Whcn Maerlant omitted to give the motivation of an act ordicl not explain some of the circumstances, the point at issue is obscured. Thus, incuntrast to Vineent, he omitted to cxplain how Alexander's mother lound out thctruth with regard to Ncetanabus (see above). So, in spite of Maerlant's simplifica-tiorr ol'the nsrrctive by whleh thc Spir,gr,/ scems lcss difhcult to understand thsn the

65

tt-"

,\1tt'utlurtt, tott tlrttstic itbbreviutions somellnlei cguse tlrc l)rrfeh tcxt lo be tlil'licultto colnprchclrcl (cll I)c Craal'l9li3: 62 64),

A snrall ttutttbcr of otnissions mily testily to Mncrl6nl's lltiludes uncl gpinigns.'lhesc canccllations all concern omens. hrte. antl nort ('lrrislinn srrpcrnaturalclcmcnts. At the taming of Bucephales (ch. XII), when Alexandcr prounted thehorse' he seized its mane with his left hand. Onc may wontlcr il'it was by pureaccident that the horse was later slain by king Porus' right hancl (cn. *ltX).Alexander had a prosperous wind when he sailed to Pisa, *li.t. he won the chariotrace afterwards (ch. XII). Maerlant omitted these elements (cf . 6,27 and 3g,40, and7,ll-12). If he omitted these elements because he regarded them as omens, onemight assume that they did not suit Maerlant's view of [fe, i.e. his Christian belief.This conjecture is supported by a number of omissions from the oracles of the treesof Sun and Moon (ch. LVII). Maerlant totally omitted the notion of 'fate'from thisprophecy: quoniam fata de capite tuo ita statuerunl is not translated (cf. 4g,30).Moreover, he substantially abbreviated the prophecies. One of the predictionsconcerning the point of time of Alexander's death (ad annum et menses-8. morieris)he left out, and the cause of the king's death as well (non ferro quod suspicaris, sedveneno).In Vincent's account the Sun tree predicted Alexander'i lordship of all theworld twice: vnus eris Dominus terrarum and Tu autem, et si breue superest tempus,dominus tamen eris orbis terrarum. The latter prediction Maerlant omitted, and theformer he reduced to an epithet, Eenech here van erderike('one and only lord of theworld' in 48,28). Maybe the reduction of these oracles reveals a disapproval ofpagan supernatural elements? Such disapproval might explain why otherelementsof this particular section are omitted, e.g. Alexander's woiship of t-he trees, the Suntree's relation to the three fatal siste rs (mihi quoque tres sorores irascerentLtr, Clotho,Lachesis, Atropos), the sex of the trees (Erat autem arbori Solis virile robur, Lunae,faemineum,ch. LVI), or their use of language. It should also be noted that Maerlantreduced the dialogue character of Alexander's consultation of the oracle. By leavingout the phrases vt consuluisti and ut petis he created a greater distance between theking and the trees. A disapproval of pagan supernatural elements may also haveeffected another important reduction: the drastic abbreviation of the Nectanabusstory, which is full of magic and elements of idolatry. Of course, the abbreviation ofthis section may agree with the tendency noted above of omitting those parts of thenarrative which are not strictly connected with the history of Aleiander himself. Nosection, however, yields as much information on sorcery as the Nectanabus story,and Maerlant abbreviated no other passage of the narrative so scrupulously u, h.did this one with its necromancy and the marvellous begetting of ilexander (cf.1,144 and2,l-24). The substantial omissions from the Nectanubu, story as well asfrom the consultation of the tree oracle tend to a pattern of rationalisation of pagansupernatural elements, an attempt to make the text less offensive to Christiani. fnittendency seems to be most suitably characterized as a christianisation (cf. De Graal1983:6+-67).

May we inler from the abbreviation olthe Nectanabus story yet another result ofMaerlant's convictions, viz. a tendency to cxpurgatc his iour.. text? Dicl thctranslator regard the account of Nectsnabus' elaborate preparations for thcseduction clf queen Olympias as seneational literature'l We di<j not find any positiveindication-

:"t tln onswer to this qufftlon, But, ut uny rate, Maerluni strongly

*flflI}&,

",.".,r=r,'''il

rcrluccrl this pussrrs, All that rerrruirrerl wns thc uct ol'Olynrpius"utlultery'ultd tltcbcgctting ol'Alexunder, told in hut n I'cw wortls:

Encle wus mel hur(, (nd( v'uttAlexandere, den sloult'tt ttttttt (2,23 24)('And lay with her and begot Alexander the brave').

Another instance where Maerlant possibly expurgated his source concerns Alcxun-tlcr's personal appearance when, at the entrance of the tree oracle, he is ordercd tolnkc off his clothes, rings and shoes (ch. LVD. The translator reduced this to takingol'f his shoes and precious ornaments (48,12). On the other hand, he omitted to tcllrus that Alexander wore the clothes of a common soldier at his visit in disguise tol)orus' army camp (ch. XLIX). In 39,16 he only related that Alexander took off his

l'oyal garments. Possibly the last two omissions show something of Maerlant'svicws of royal dignity, testifying to his opinion of what a prince ought not to do (cf.

I)c Graaf 1983: 67-68).One may object, of course, that these omissions of supernatural and pagan

clcments as well as the supposed expurgation do not reveal Maerlant's ownconvictions, but those of the audience of laymen he was writing for. Unfortunately,it is impossible to reach a firm conclusion on this point here. From Maerlant's pro-logue to the Spiegel we know that he intended to suppress the clergie of Vincent'stcxt. As a matter of flact, most omissions studied here, irrespective of whether theylure small or large, are in conformity with this intention. They regard thccancellation of factual information and of erudition, whereas only a few of themscem to be provoked from other reasons. When we look again, for instance, at thescction of the tree oracle (ch. LVI-LVII), a number of omissions of facts and oflcarning can be pointed out. We mentioned above the description of the priest, thecustoms of the people living in the region where this oracle was located, and a

number of smaller omissions. We can add that Maerlant partly omitted the

dcscription of the holy wood in which the sanctuary of the tree oracle was actuallylocated (ch. LYI, opobalsamum cum optimo odore ... ex genere frondium: cf.48,13-16). Whereas these omissions certainly belong to what Maerlant calledclergie and a correlation between this matter and his audience may be assumed, wc

are in uncertainty as to the reasons why he omitted so many elements flrom thecourse of things during Alexander's consultation of the two trees, and notably fromtheir oracles. Possibly he considered inlormation of this kind of no interest lor his

audience of laymen, or possibly he considered it unsuitable for his own Spr'egel, Atany rate, none of the omissions provide us with certainty on this issue (cf. De Graaf1983:68-69).

V Additions to Vincent's Alexander story

Over against the omissions stunds a lair number of additions, From f)e Grattlsstudy it appears that most ol' Muerlunt's additions consist of single words or ol'sntall parts of verse lineg, Sometimes lorrgcr additions occur which constitute one ortwo or. in a few lnttancrr iv€fl more whole lincs, Of the 746 lines thtrt Dc Grnuf

Ti

,' 67

studietl ilt detrtil. solllc I .50 show adclitions ( l9lt3: 92 gl), 'l'he irllu*rec ,l'rlrynrc ispcrccptiblc in a grcitt ttuntbcr ol'adclitions. As a nruttcr ol'lirct. rnosl ol'tlrcr, arclbund in line cnding position whcre thcy repeatedly .no.,pi.r. irp lurt lirrc ol'arhyming couplet. A fcw examples may serve herc to clenrorrstrnte this. lirr which wccompare a couple of lines of chapter-LIII of the Speculum and ol'chaptcr 44 of thespiegel. The additions are indicated by the ur. of ,pucings.During the expedition through the Indian desert, Alexander and his armysuffered from thirst. In this distress it appeared that human beings ur"-o.. resilientthan animals: Tunc cognitum est, himinem durabiliorem in iunctis rebus, quampecudem. Maerlant's text reads:

Daer bevant men ende besochte,Dat een mqn meer dogen machDan eenech beeste onder den dach g4,26_2g)('There it was found that man can endure more than any animal on earth,),

a translation which amplifies the situation in which animals for slaughter perishedprematurely.Thirst made soldiers lick iron: Milites ferd (read: ferri) sudorem lambebant.Maerlant translated:

Sulcke lecten dor dien nootCout yser ende sulc loot('In this distress some men licked cold iron, and others lead,).

(44,29-30)

As the river that they found contained bitter water, Alexander and his armymarched along the banks, searching for guides who could take them to drinkablewater' Finally they arrived at a townlocuGd on an island in the river. But the peoplewho lived there hid at the arrival of the army. Therefore Alexander ordered hissoldiers to shoot arrows into the town: pauc:as in eos iecit sagittas. The Spiegethas:

occur rnore than once nB rhynle lrtgn, ln lhc culrtcxt, howevcr, their presence seemsuIrnost rneaningless.

lrrtlm thcse examples one moy corrclude that Maerlant did not aim to arld newinltlrmation to thc Alcxlrrdcr story nor to change it. This conclusion is nottliscounted by the fact that a lbw small sections are slightly changed as the result ofthc occurrence of a couple of additions. Apparently, many additions were notintcnded for reasons of information. They seem to be employed primarily to fulfiltlrc needs of rhyme as they supply verse lines with the convenient rhymc worcl,'l'hus, a number of additions as, for instance, those asseverations of truth, must beconsidered only stopgaps. From this point of view Maerlant's rendering of theAlexander story into rhyming couplets worked negatively. On the other hand, thenccd to find convenient rhyme-words also effected solutions which must be given apositive appreciation. We refer to additions in line-ending position which contain,c.g., descriptive elements belonging to objects, materials or plants. Sometimes suchan addition extends to the whole concluding line of a rhyming couplet. In contrastto the omissions by which the Alexander story of the Spiegel has sometimes becomeitrid, Maerlant's interpolations added little bits of information which not onlycffected an enlivening and a peculiar colouring, but which sometimes also led to nsharper, clearer composition. Hence, it seems too facile to consider the needs ofrhyme as the sole explanation of Maerlant's additions, since he might have chosenother words and phrases to translate Vincent's text. Therefore, it is necessary tocxamine what the translator achieved by these additions (cf. De Graaf 1983:e3-es).

Whereas Maerlant, as we have seen, omitted many descriptive elements, he alsoadded much descriptive matter. We encounter these additions especially inindefinite numerals, adjectives or adverbial constructions. When, foi instance.Alexander's army is in great danger as a result of attacks by numerous snakes,Vincent's account (ch. LIV) provides a description of their species: post cerastasvenerunt humidi serpentes variis distincti coloribus, nam quidam rubentibus squamlscrant, quidam nigri, et candidi coloris: quidam auri colore consimiles conspiciebantur.... Maerlant amplified this danger by adding three more species:

Daer na serpente menegertiere,Nu blaeuwe, geluwe, rode nu sciere,Nu wit, nu swart, nu goudijn huut (45,9_l l)('Thereafter [came] all kinds of serpents, one blue, one yellow, one red, thenext grey, with a white, a black, then again a golden skin,).

The additions in this example are rather small. But descriptive additions may belarger: constructions with prepositions (we already mentione d Over dwater in44,39), appositions (e.g. the name of Alexander's wet-nurse Alexerine is accompa-nied, in 4,24, by the rhyming apposition Eene welgedane fine, ,a well-shapedbeauty'), subordinate clauses, or even principal clauses. An example of the iastgroup we find as the conclusion of the passage where, after his birth, Alexander'splrysiognomy is described (ch. V). The description of his eycs. altero uclmocluntnignt,lguo vero gluuea atquc dlulmili, is translated and concluded as follows:

Over dwater scoot hi hem naer('across the river he shot at them'),

making the distance between the town and the army more explicitly. ThenAlexander sent two hundred of his Macedonian soldiers to swim across to thistown, but they were swallowed up by hippopot ami: ab Hippopotamis absorpti sunt.In Maerlant's words:

Worden si verswolgen te warenVanden waterpaerden daer,Die hem maken daden mesbaer('thev were swallowed up there, it is rrue, by hippopotami which

j1f;]i#flcry out loudly in agony').

Te wurcn and similar asseverations of truth like ovr,r tru(rt vorw(t(r or cfutl,t ,,ck,r

(44,39)

.

lly tlris conclusion Macrlant effected a stronger emphasis on Alexander's appear-ilncc' Thcsc and other smalldescriptive additions helped to emphasize and heightenccrtain clements of the narrative (cf. De Graaf l9g3: 95).We have dealt with elements of action which Maerlant deleted from theAlexander story, but may we also speak of additions to the action? If we considerthe two large additions that Maerlant made in ch. 56 to the dispute concerningAlexander's funeral (see section III), the answer must be negative. Surveying thesmall interpolations that Maerlant added, one must also arrive at the conclusionthat he did not aim to extend the action. A small number of rather varied additionsmay be pointed out, however, which affect the action in some way. We confineourselves here to only three instances. The pheno-.rron--it i.rro in a fewsubordinate clauses, e.g. the relative clause in iq,q6 concerning the Macedonian

soldiers who were devoured by th.e hippopotami (e"ample mentioned above). Wemay also point out the adjunct of time Dair hi lach'voer ene stede(.when he besiegeda city') in 2,26 which specifies the moment when the story or ilng rhilip and thehen's egg took place (ch. IV). Similar interpolations occur both in principal andsubordinate clauses of direct speech. For instance, after Alexander had pushed overNectanabus into the abyss, the dying magician said: olim per hanc scientiam cognouime dfilio interfectum iri (ch. Xr). Maerlant translated:

Thc additions in question agree with the omissions discussed above in exhitriting '

tctltlcttcy ttl'Muerlrtttt to rirrrplily llre nun'utivc ol'lris sourcc tcxt.'['his tendency isctlttlirmccl by Mnerlttnt's urlnptntions ol'tlre nirrrativc's contcnts ns hc introtlucctlrttcclicvalisatiolts. Whererts tltis plrcrrt)nle non will bc discusscd in thc scction below,ollc cxitmple ol mcdievnlisution needs to bc rrrcntioned here. Thc translator nrnde rr

pcculiar addition in his dcscriptiorr ol'thc Creek towns that king Philip su|rdued (eh,XV). This description seems more appropriate to medieval towns:

In Grieken waren vele stedenTien tiden van groter rijcheden,Wel ghemuurt ende wel gevest('In that time there were many cities in Greece, very rich, well walled in andwell fortified').

For more examples of additions which elucidate the narrative's action and structurewe reler to De Graaf (1983: 97-99).

From the prologue to the Spiegel we know that this translation was intended foran audience of laymen. Possibly it was this audience which caused Maerlantsometimes to use devices that could make his text less demanding to understanclthan Vincent's account. But did he also expect his audience not to be acquainteclwith daily lile in Antiquity? Maerlant made one addition which seems to betray thisview. It is lound in the translation of ch. XII, where Vincent related that king Philipsent messengers to consult the oracle of Delphi. Maerlant translated:

In dien tiden hevet ghesentPhillip in Delfos sijn prosentAn Apolline, om dat hi woudeWeten, wie na hem soudeConinc sijn in sijn conincrike('In those days Philip sent to Delphi his offering to Apollo, because he wantedto know who would be the heir to his throne').

Thus the translator explained the consultation of the oracle as a kind of sacrifice toApollo by which the offerer could get to know something (cf. De Graaf 1983:r00-l0l ).

It is remarkable that none of Maerlant's additions seem to reveal anythingdefinite of his own values and opinions. Many additions are too brief, indeed, lor usto detect anything that deserves notice. Only a few interpolations, which belong todirect speech, seem to betray an opinion. In the wordy quarrel between Alexanderand Nicholaus, lor example, which took place before the chariot race (ch. XII),Maerlant let Alexander say:

Scelden es des bloots mans aert,Enten coenen betaemt dat zwaert (7,25 26)('lt is in the nature of the faint-hearted to abuse, but the sword is propcr tothe brave').

ln tlrc corrcspoRdenee betweerr Alcxander and Dindimus, the king of the

1t

llul lut'lttt't' gru(,u t,ttilt ltruun ilttl t,(,(,ltl(,t.(,;,'l lil utiltt(,r, n,(r,r d ia s I o u 1., t,(,(, lt I (, rt,('lris lcli [cycJ was grcy. tlrc right orrc brown: thatthis').

Ic kende wilen, nu wettict bet,Dat mi doden soude mijn sone('Formerly I became aware of it, and now Iwould kill me').

... ende ginc al omme dare,Alse oft gerne weder in ware('and it was going round there as if it liked to be back

- (4.1I 22)brave wurrior lookcd likc

(3,37_38)in the shell').

(9, t5 l7)

(6, t-5)r ealizemore clearly,,t"t; fi r'jl

In a similar way, Maerlant added a few phrases expressing frequency and duration(cf. De Graaf 1983: 95-97).Some additions occurring in main clauses do not only affect the narrative,saction, but also elucidate its structure. we here refei to introductory andconcluding remarks, cross-references, repetitions and explanations, which all makethe Dutch Alexander story more lucid ani easier to understand than Vincent,s text.we confine ourselves to one example of an explanation which Maerlant added tothe story of the hen's egg (ch. IV of ihe speculum). Because the egg fell down philip,s

knees, its shell broke, and alittle dragon crept out. The animal ,,iJnt round the shell,but it died while it tried to enter. Maerlant explained this circumcursans, et ambiens,oui testulan in this way:

:

I

J70

l}'ulttttuns, thc lutter rcputliuted sluvery or enl'oreed ohedlencc ol'tlrosc wlro urc ourl'elltrw men: qwtl nohi,t.fi'ulrtr rucliltt ttuluru pnryc,null (ch, l,XVll), Mucrllnt rnudcl)intlirnus writc:

Dic onls dic mocdcr die nutureBroeder maec't ende 0nse ghelike (58,68-69)('those who Mother Nature makes our brothers and equals').

It would be an overstatement, however, to consider these commonplaces as

expressions of Maerlant's own convictions (cf. De Graaf 1983: 99-100).It is impossible to describe here more types of Maerlant's additions to the

Speculum, as some are of a very heterogeneous nature or even unique. From theabove discussion it will be apparent that a number of additions confirm tendenciesthat we thought discernable in Maerlant's use of omissions. Hence we are justifiedin assuming that it was not only the requirements of the rhyme that provoked thetranslator to introduce these additions. That does not remove the fact, of course,that the impact of rhyme is notably perceptible in the additions.

VI Other alterations

The problem of classification is much greater when we come to the other alterationsthat Maerlant introduced in his translation of Vincent's Alexander story. We herehave to do with both minor and major changes which are of a very varied natureand which are found at every level of the text. Sometimes there is only a change inword order or in the placing of a clause within a particular section of the text. In thisarticle we will not deal with these instances (they are listed by De Graaf 1983:

134-136), In the746' verse lines studied in detail, De Graaf found ll9 instanceswhere the contenls of the Spiegel are not strictly equivalent to Vincent's text. Inthese instances the translator rendered the content of the Speculum differentlywithout the result, however, that the Dutch text is- saying more or less. Twoexamples may illustrate this phenomenon.

Alexander had overcome Porus, king of India, in single combat. After the Indianhad recovered oflhis wounds, Alexander let him return to his realm: in regnum suumremisit (ch. XLIX). In the Spiegel, however, Alexander restored his country toPorus with peace. By his choice of words in rendering this act, Maerlant suggestedthe relation between a feudal sovereign and his vassal:

Dat hem Alexander met desen

Sijn lant weder gaf in vreden (40,I 2-13)('At this [viz. Porus' recovery] Alexander gave him back his own country inpeace').

In ch. LIV Vincent related how Alexander's army camp near the oasis was invadedby numerous snakes whose hissing was heard throughout that region: sibilahatquetotu regkt Maerlant reduced this hissing into thc lcss spccific

--*l& ."

(45, t2)

to Macrlant, sincc thisskin') of the prccerJing

Hier omme dede Alexander dan

Raetbraken sine lee tsman

('For this reason Alexander ordered

The treasure of gold that Alexander captures after his victory over king Porus' ie

used, among other things, to ornament the bridles of all riding-animals and

fack-animals ol his arm-y, which in Vincent's text are specified (ch.L)' Maerlant

condensed this into:

Al was goudiin dat ghesmide

Vanden beesten (...)('The animals' harnesses were all of gold')'

In other instances Maerlant's translation conforms more to ordinary speech than

Vincent,s text does. The translator used, for instance, plainer terms in the

correspondence of Alexander and Dindimus which in the Latin now and then

contains bookish and metaphorical language. But simplifications also occur in thc

narration of concrete evenis, lor instan.. in the description of the fox- like mice

which invade Alexander's army camp during the overnight stay at the ousis'

Anirn*ls die when irruirtou. been bittcn by thesi mice, whereas pcople survive their

bitcs: htntinibus uulem non vttque uil iniuitutn ident rtorrlt,l' nocehul (ch. LIV)'

Mnerlnnt render€d thlr more plcinly inttt:

.'#,73

Alt lunt h,url vun hem ge'ltutl

('Thcir noise wrts throttghottl tltc rcgitln')'

lrossibly the constraint ol'rhymc suggcstcd this- rendering

vcrse line had to rhymc wiLh goutliin huut ('with a golden

line.De Graaf (1gg3: 105-135) listed the 119 instances of non-equivalent translation.

He classified this material by distinguishing between changes affecting the action,

the protagonists, inanimate obiects,-and place and time of action' But, as De Graaf

pointed out (1983: 136-137), this ciassification does not show at all how Maerlant

actually translated his source-text. Moreover, the classification does not really

cnable us to draw any conclusions or point out tendencies in the changes in

content.Yet some patterns are visible in this material. In 60 instances the changc in

content is attended with a change that is more suitably qualified as stylistic. It

consists in a shortening o, a similification which seems intended to elucidate the

narrative. In the .ur" o1shortening, Maerlant used considerably fewer words than

his source to render the same contJnts. The Latin message can be recognized in the

Dutch text which, however, is to be qualified as a thinned-out rendering' A few

examples maY illustrate this.

Alter numerous savage beasts have attacked Alexander's army during the

overnight stay at the oasis, the king is heartily sick of it. He gives orders to punish

the guiies who brought him to thaipla ce: Tunc Alexander ductores suos *ucifragio

(read: crurifragio)-p,lnirt iussit andmanus quoque confringifecit (ch. LIV)' Maerlant,

,ummariri"g itte-"arration of his source, rendered this as flollows:

(45,4546)to break his guides upon the wheel').

(41 ,9 - l0)

r

M ucr licilt,rt ttto(htcr il,|' l4iltl,lt,tt('but pcoplc coultl rccovcr ol'thcir bitc').

(45.44)

Sornctimcs thcsc simplil'ications resultcd in a lcss prccisc rcprcscntation ol'dctails orin a less colourlul and less dramatic account of the Alexander story than in theSpec'ulum. We find such a less dramatic rendering, for instance, in two passages

which tell us about Alexander's mother Olympias. After Nectanabus has died,when she has learned the truth about the magician's deceit towards her, Olympiasmarvels at the fact that she had rem probrifecisse (ch. XI). Maerlant weakened thisinto

"A.l,!" spru( hi, "nlilllt'n t'illt l't't'nlt'l't'(,1I)utlt,ttt tlic gocle hthlwt I{(,,r(,/, (5,26("'Ow", he said, "nobudy cnn lvcrt what the gods havc providctlhim"').

-fhc translator also totally omitted the notion 'fate' from the second oraclc of the

Sun tree, at the tree's relusal to reveal his murderer's name to Alexandcr. For thisknowledge might enable the king to escape his death: Si mortis tuae ( ...) insidictlo'rcm tibi prodidero;facile instantiafata vitabrs (ch. LVII). Maerlant rendercd thisinto:

"Wiet di doen sal willic niet wroegen,Hem soude die redene niet genoegen." (48,39 40)("'I do not want to reveal who will kill you; that would be unseemly"'),

but he did not explain why it would be unseemly.The expurgation of the story by the introduction of a few subtle changes is also a

quite striking leature of Maerlant's translation. In ch. XIV Vincent related how the

whore Phyrna vainly tried to seduce the chaste Xenocrates at a moment when thephilosopher was intoxicated. In the Spiegel this scene is given a briefer and vaguerrendering. Maerlant translated the clause itaque cum diu eum pro libitu attrectasscl,omnino eum allicere ad libidinem non potuir as follows:

Soe dede mettem aldat soe woude,

Maer hets omme niet begonnen('She did with him all she wanted, but it was all in vain').

(8,18-t9)

An interesting instance occurs, again, in the passage dealing with the tree oracle.When Alexander wanted to enter the sanctuary, the oracle's priest ordered him totake off his clothes and other things. As we have seen in section IV, Maerlantmitigated this order by way of an omission. According to the text of the Speculumthe priest had stated another condition on which Alexander was allowed to enterthe sanctuary. The king had to refrain from sexual contacts with boys as well as

lrom each contact with women: Si d coitu pueri et contactufaeminae vacas,licet vt

intres diuinum locum (ch. LVf. In Maerlant's account this has been changed into a

more neutral statement:

Waer hi reine, so mochti gaenWel aldaer die bome staen (48,9'-10)('If he were chaste, he would be allowed to go to where the trees were').

The element of chastity is also perceptible in the correspondence betweenAlexander and Dindimus, when the Brahman king relates of the pure conduct of hispeople: Genus Bragmanorum pura et simplici vita uiuit (ch. LXVII). The translatorrendered this into:

Bracmanne leden ecn sintpel leven,

27tl'or

Dat die dinc also ghevel('that the affair happened in this way').

(5,42)

The Sun tree predicts that Olympias will die a miserable death, turpissimo, acmiserando (...) exitu (ch. LVII). Maerlant modified this into sware doot ('unpleas-ant death' in 48,43).

Over against these alterations there are only a few instances where Maerlant uses

more words than Vincent to express the same idea. But these instances do notinvalidate the conclusion that, as a result of changes in content, the history ofAlexander in the Spiegel is obviously simplified. The story is condensed and it isrendered less dramatic. But, despite all these clarifications, it is also sometimes'vaguer'than the Speculum (cf. De Graaf 1983: 136-138).

There is a tendency in the changes in content which Maerlant introduced whichneeds to be mentioned: the substitution of medieval notions and images for classicalones. We find an example of such a medievalisation in the description of the chariotraces at Pisa (ch. XIf . Maerlant changed this quadrigis certandiinto a tournament,Een spel van wapinen (7,5). Alexander, having won the races, offers his father thelaurel wreath, which he describes as hunc primum laboris mei fructum (ch. XIII).Maerlant represented the reward as the laurel wreath of chivalry, when he madeAlexander describe it as Van minen ridderscap deerste crone ('the first crown of myknighthood') in 7,43. Perhaps the description of the chariots in Porus' andAlexander's armies (ch. L) may also be regarded as a kind of medievalisation.Maerlant reduced these chariots drawn by a pair of horses (bigae) or by four horses(quadrigae) into two- and four-wheeled vehicles (kerren and waghenen respectivelyin 41,13 and 40,21 and 4l,ll). Other such substitutions give us more certainty:stadia (ch. LIV) by mile (milen in 45,4); and the more classical word for priest(Antistes oraculi, in the story of the tree oracle, ch. LVI) by the medieval phrase[die]pape vanden bedehuse, 'the priest of the place of worship'in 48,3 (cf. De Graaf 1983:

I 3e).Skipping over a number of alterations of various kinds listed by De Graaf (1983:

139-140), we will give some attention to two small groups of changes. We are hereconcerned with alterations that seem connected with certain tendencies which wethought discernable in Maerlant's use of omissions: a rationalisation or christianis-ation as well as an expurgation of the story.

Again we see that Maerlant avoided the notion 'late'. In ch. XI the dyingNcctanabus acknowledged the impossibility ol escitping his death, for nullennrtuliutrt cytntru./ittutrr.lugu c,rl. ln Maerlunt's words:

JL* 75

t'!

iil

"*-: ''

Iindt' lttl ttl dt,Y ]n' t'lPtt'

('And [hel liglrtcd l5()(l lircs')'

(45,5)

Onrrlintlt'ltcit t,,t lunut ruilrev.'n (.51{,29 30)('Thc llrahrnans lcad a sirnple lif'e. li'ortr wlrich ull irnpurity hits bccn

cxpcllcd').

Possibly Maerlant's paraphrasing translation of puru was dictatcd by thc need torhyme lines 29 and 30.

In the conclusion of section IV we raised the question whether the omissionswhich apparently testified to a rationalisation and expurgation of the Alexanderstory reveal Maerlant's own convictions or those of the audience he was writing for.We may put the same question here. Once again we cannot reach a firm conclusionon this matter. But concessions to Maerlant's lay audience are not at all out of thequestion. The abridgements and simplifications, which make the Dutch text less

demanding to understand than the Speculum, may be regarded as evidence thatMaerlant had to make concessions; the same may be said of his less learned andmore everyday wording and his narrative style. These indications do not exclude, ofcourse' the possibility that the requirements of the verse and the translator's owntaste may also account for a number of alterations (cf. De Graaf 1983: 140-143).

VII Maerlant's portr ayal of Alexander

The omissions, additions and other alterations all affected Maerlant's representa-tion of the characters and animate and inanimate objects occurring in Vincent'shistory of Alexander. It would certainly be interesting to examine how Maerlant'stextual methods influenced the representation of each of these objects. Here,however, we will deal with only one character in particular: king Alexander theGreat. How great is the impact of Maerlant's textual methods on the portrayal ofthe king?

In section III we stated that Maerlant, through his omissions, put a strongeremphasis on the life and exploits of Alexander and, consequently, on the person ofthe king himself. The Macedonian's image seemed to be somewhat more positivethan in the Speculum,especially because Maerlant all but omitted chapters LXI andLXII of Vincent's text in which an unfavourable image of Alexander appears. In the

two larger additions, on the other hand, the translator depicted a contrast between

Alexander's good and bad qualities.From the detailed comparison between Speculum and Spiegel, however, it

appears that by and large Maerlant's view of Alexander is the same as that of the

Speculum. Yet a number of small modifications can be pointed out. In the firstplace, it is conspicuous that the translator paints a less clear portrait of theMacedonian king by omitting a number of elements from Vincent's text. Alexanderappears less as an active character. This is apparent, for instance, in the passage

dealing with Alexander's taming of the horse Bucephalos (ch. XII). The omission ofphrases like custodibus evocatis and equum educit weakens Alexander's active r6le.This is even more striking when omissions derogate from his leadership. ThusMaerlant's wording implies that Alexander orders 1500 fires to be made after the

army-camp has been set up near the oasis. The translator, however, omitted theproper order (lu,ssitque in ch. LIV):

Atter the camp hacl bccrr pitchctl, Alcxandcr had his supper during which he let

2000 golden lamps burn. Macrlant totally omitted this scene' In section lV we

already pointed tJ tr',. "r"ission "f

;g;;;;e which gives a favourable impressi.n ol'

Alexander: his pardon of king P";t. ihis' as *Jll ut the reason why hc let the

Indian return to his realm @a nonorr* virtutis in ch' XLIX)' is suppressed'

There are also omissions of i.t, positive elements' Maerlant omittcd thc

digression on two of Alexander's ,.*ft't", Leonides and Aristotle' As a resUlt Ol'

this omission, the information tt ui nft*ander had Leonides thrown to the lions

also disappeared (ch. v; cf .4,25-io;. nro*the story of Xenocrates the translator

omitted Alexander's gilt ol money io tt'e philosopher' and thus also Xenocrates'

sneef that the king intended to U,rVLi, ftieniship (ctr' XtV; cf' 8'6)' All cancellations

mentioned here ,..- to effect th;;: on ,rr. one t atto, Alexander's conduct and

status are less expressly representJ;t iho" of a prince and' on the other hand' that

;;;;;."ts in a little more benevolent light'

Maerlant's additions, too, did not *6aify Alexander's portrait drastically' In a

few instances, however, the t irrg'r p.rson is somewhat highlighted' This occurs' for

instance, in the description of the enormous treasures Ae*ander found in PoruS'

palace (ch. L). vr".rr"", cor,"trrd.o this description by adding a couplet stressing

it',at is was Alexander who found these treasures:

Dit ende meer, alsict bevant 'Vant Alexander in dat lant , - -t i^ +L

(40'59-60)

(.All this uni -or., as I found recorded, Alexander met in that country')'

Byinsertingnewinformation,MaerlantmadeexplicitseparateactionsofAlexan-der while he entered the tree oru.i.. Whereas in the Specutim(ch' LVD these actions

were onlY imPlied, Maerlant wrote:

Die coninc deder in sinen gQnc'

Ende sach die bome scone ende lanc r -1 - ,^^^-'+: (48'17-18)

('Thekingwentintoit[:thesanctuary]andsawthebeautiful'talltrees')'

Maerlant's alterations which affect the content' too' did not drastically change the

imageofAtexander,eventfrougtrthetranslatorsometimesstressedtheking'sperson or threrJa ,figf,U' modiil"Jiight on him' Thus' in Nectanabus' prediction to

Olympias, the transiutoi.*ptt^ir.Jtnt active r6le of her future son as a protector

of his mother. The claus e vltorem omnium, si qua Philippus in te audebir (ch' II) he

rendered, using indirect speech' into:

Ende wildse huer man ver.iaghen'

PhiltiP, dies sot' wus in vure '

Hi soude wcrl hesce'rtttt'lt lturt' r ,.. r.--...L (2'6 8)

(.And iirriitrurbana philip wunrcd ro repudiate her, lor which shc l'eared' he

would Prote€t her')'

*r"-Jt **---77

?*ff;sq- r: -

-'lttst ttow wc stlw tltitt, itt tlrc.!irirgr'l. u tnore uetive r0lc is gssigrretl tu Alcx*nclerwlrilc hc cntcrs thc trcc oraclc. Thc sume occurs in thc tlescriptilip pt'lris ,rrivul atthc sanctuilry, though Maerlant herc userl nnother metlrod to cll'cct this. InVitlccnt's itccount thc pricst has thc activc rdlc: Tuac uppttrttit t,i Arrti,ylt,,r,rctculidrutrum urborum (ch. LVI). Maerlant, however, dcscrib.i tn. pricst's appearancethrough the king's eyes:

Alse Alexander daer bi quam,Sac'h hi comen ende vernamDen pape vanden bedehuse daer (4g,1-3)('When Alexander arrived there, he saw come over to him the priest of thaiplace of worship').

On the other hand, Maerlant introduced a few changes in content which show a lessactive, and possibly a less combative, portrait of thi king. When Alexander, afterhaving overcome Porus in single combit, puts down the rebellion among the Indiantroops, Vincent's text reads: Quo viso Indimox in Alexandrum insurgere conabantur;Alexander autem manu silentium poscens; tumultum repressit, rationeque ab eoreddita, omnis vis Indorum se illi subdidit (ch. XLIX). Mairlant translated:

Dat volc van Ynden upscootEnde wilde wreken dat,So dat Alexander hem bat,Dat sine eene wile horden,Ende verwan so met worden,Dat si hem worden onderdaen,Ende sijn hem in hant ghegaen

eg,54=60)('The Indian soldiers jumped to their feet and wanted to revenge this [:Porus'defeat], so that Alexander urged them to listen to him for a -o1n.nt,and thus he won by words that they became his subjects and submittedthemselves to him').

In the negotiations preceding the single combat between Alexander and porus, theMacedonian makes clear to the Indian how pointless it is that kings fight battles inwhich numerous of their subjects perish. In Vincent's text Alexander uses the wordsimperatores and subditis srzrs (ch. XLIX). Maerlant had Alexander use the wordslantsheren and een groot here ('sovereign lords' and,a big army,, in 39,6 and,7respectively). This last Dutch phrase is, of course, a specincatty -itiiu.y term. HereMaerlant's translation seems well-balanced in respect to the teims.rr.d by Vincent.In other instances, however, Maerlant clearly toned his source down. During theconsultation of the tree oracle, for example, the Sun tree calls Alexander Inuictebelli1 (ch. LVII). The translator rendered this into less superlative terms: sondergelike ('without a peer' in 48,27).

Taking it all in all we may speak of a slight shift in king Alexander,s character.Maerlant touched it up in such a manner that Alexander seems less of a hard,combative leader. In spite of the concentration on his life and exploits, theAlexander of the Spicge lsometimes is less visible and dominates the narrative,s

tction ancl attcntion less thun hc uetuully tlocs in the Spcculant.'fhere is. ltttwever,rro qucstion of his being cltunged irtlo it bcttcr or worse king.'a

VIII Conclusion

lirom the above discussion we may conclude that Maerlant's history of Alexttnderdillers in a number of respects from its source, Vincent's Speculum. This is alrcadyapparent from a rough comparison between both texts, and is confirmecl by aclctailed collation between certain parts of the Latin source and thc Dutchtranslation.

Maerlant's Alexander story is considerably shorter than Vincent's. This abridge-ment, which especially concerns clergie, descriptive details and elements of thenarrative's action, can be pointed out at all levels of the text. It varies from thecancellation of entire chapters dealing with philosophers, to the suppression ofsentences or words, as well as to condensations achieved by other kinds ofalteration. This abridgement partly confirms what Maerlant, in the prologue to the

Spiegel,announced he would do (see section II). But De Vries-Verwijs'observation( 1863: I,viii-xii) that Maerlant abridged the historical narrative itself, is also

confirmed. This especially concerns historical details which are not immediatelyrelated to Alexander's history. Moreover, many small details of Vincent's textappear to have been omitted, irrespective of what they reler to. The main effect ofthese omissions and abridgements is that the main lines of the history of Alexandershow up more clearly. In the Middle Dutch text the narrative is rendered soberly,somewhat more aridly and less dramatically. Maerlant related the narrative moreplainly, but when he condensed the story too much, he caused his text to be

obviously difficult to understand (cf. De Graaf 1983: 144-145).De Vries-Verwijs' observation (1863: I,xii) that Maerlant repeatedly extended

the narrative of the Speculum, is not convincingly conhrmed by his history ofAlexander, even though the translator interpolated it in two places. Apart fromthose instances, Maerlant incorporated a number of small additions into his text,but many of these did not contribute any new information to the narrative. In fact,some of the additions seem to be the result of one of Maerlant's textual methods: the

use of rhyming couplets. Since many additions occur in line-final position, theymay be considered rhyme-tags. Whereas the requirements of the rhyme must have

induced Maerlant to introduce additions, rhyme constraint seems to have led onlyoccasionally to omissions and other alterations. If he had produced a prose-translation, he would probably have introduced only those additions which were

cssential to make his text easier to understand. A prose translation might have been

much more drastically abridged than the rhymed Spiegel (cf. De Graaf 1983: 144

and 146).

A number of changes give Maerlant's text a more medieval and Christianilppearance than thc .Spcc'u lum: thc omission of pagan supernatural elements, andthc mcdievalisation of classicul notions and ideas (cf. De Graaf 1983: 147). lt is

unccrtain whethcr theEe ehanges rcsulted from Maerlant's own attitudes sndopinions or arc du€ to thoce ot' his audience. Especially the omissions ofclussical :pagan fef tUnf nrc lnteresting. lt might be worthwhile to investigate other

TI

i

;i$

Erf

ssE#'i;

nl ,, ?€

' ""{::lEre.':'-"'.-"':=-:-

sectiotls ol'thc lst Purtie ()l'rhe ,\plege'\, the volunrr,. whie h prc eminently rlc'ls witlrthc classical world. in ordcr to see if tnis ptt.,riiii,.'()r ()ee ,l.s crsewrrere rru (cr., r)cGraaf 1983: t47 148).From a number of omissions it appcnrs that Macrlunt maclc allowanccs for thelay audience he was translating nor. we poi"i.a to the omission of many details,especially those containin gclergie.A fair number of alterations seem to be intendedto simplify vincent's text, to elulidate it and to make its structure more explicit. wemay safely say that the translator wanted to make his text easier to understand thanthe Speculum'rnhis prologue to the Spiegel, Maerlant promised to render Vincent,stext in light words (see note I l). I; ,J.-, quite hfely that, with these words,Maerlant alluded to such a succinct and simpiin.o ,.no.ring'oivincent,s text ascan be found in the history of Alexander. Ali Maerlant's in6rventions, however,did not modify the portrayal of Alexander of the speculumstrongly. By and largeMaerlant left the portrayal of Alexander in the ipiegel unchanged, even though heslightly retouched Alexander into a less combative frince (cL ie Graaf l9g3: l3g,148 and 150).

De Graaf's conclusions on Maerlant's history of Alexander agree with what Devries-verwijs say in their edition about the spiegel,s relations to its source.Through his detailed collation of the two histories of Alexander, De Graaf broughtto the fore new materials which only confirm the general conclusions Devries-verwijs drew from their broad .o-pu.lron of the entire speculum and,spiegel' De Graals study also confirms De Vries-verwijs' statement (1g63: I,xii)that the Spieget is not just a translation, but constitutes to some degree anindependent work' For, although Maerlant adapted the narrative of the Alexanderhistory by omissions, additions and other alteraiions, he followed the main lines ofthe Speculum.Yet there are two topics left which deserve our attention. when we surveyMaerlant's omissions from the history of Alexander, we must ask ourselves to whatgenre the spiegel belongs. since the translator rendered the fitle- ipeculum Histo-riale into Dutch and therefore retained it, one -ight assume that Maerlant intendedto write a text 9f the same genre as his ,ourJ.. From this point of view it isremarkable that Maerlant omitted the introductory chronicle-like information ofchapters XI and XIV (cf. 5,42 and 8,1). Simitarty, tre drastically

"ondenred that inchapter I, where vincent presented iniormation'on the exact date of Nectanabus,flight from Egypt (cf. l,r-7 and r,l5-19). In this way Maerlant dropped everyfurther indication concerning the point oltime when the events discussed in thesechapters took place. In this iontext, the omiss ions of flores ofphilosophers whoflourished during Alexander's life-time also seem to be of importance. DidMaerlant decide not to translate vincent's discussions on chronotogy because heregarded his text as belonging to an other genre than the speculum, e.g.aromanceor a historical novel? or was this shilt in emphasis caused by Maerlant,sconcentrating on Alexander's biography? But it is also possible, of course , thatthese peculiar omissions resulted fl""r th. t.unrlator's intention to abridge thespeculum anyhow, or from order to do so by those who commissioned him to writethe sprcacl' Further investigations.into .orpu*ble passages of the Dutch tcxt areneeded ilwe are to attain any certainty on trrir rut:..t (cf. De Graaf l9g3: 21,69 70and 149).

EOt +ur*iiiiidr,

TI

'l'o somc clegrcc thir toplc ir tied up witlr a scconcl question which concernnMacrlant's opinion olking Alcrnntlcr.'l'his qucstion lcads us to tuke u glunce nt u

l'cw othcr parts of the Splcgtl, us well as, espccially, at one of Maerlunt's enrlierwtrrks: his romance Ale.tunrfur.r (it,t,:st(tt, lln adaptation of Gautier de ChAtillon'sAlc.randreis. In an articlc on Ale.randers Geesten,DeGraaf (1978: 225 z}7\showedhow Maerlant, at the time of writing that work, was very much impressed by thepcrsonality and achievements of the Macedonian king. [n Maerlant's opinion,Alexander's history is better than all other gesta and stories. Since the first man sndwoman were created, there lived no more excellent man than Alexandcr. Beside hisachievements the Trojan war, the exploits of Arthur and Gauvain as well as thewars of Charlemagne and Attila paled. Because the history of Alexander was sogood and so pleasant to listen to, the narrator prayed God that He would enablehim to render its truth into the Dutch vernacular. Maerlant then related a storyabout Alexander in which the goddess Fortuna (Aventure) played a decisive r6le usan instrument of divine Providence.

However, when Maerlant was writing his Spiegel, his opinion of the truth ofAlexanders Geesten was quite different. In the lines which immediately precede thchistory of Alexander in the Spiegel, the translator told us:

In desen tiden, in desen onweder,Doet dus keselen reinde neder,Wart grote Alexander geboren,Der werelt plage, der werelt toren,Die gesele van erderike,Die noch nie en wan ghelike.Dit, wanic, meende dat onweder,Dattere viel van hoghen neder,Alse u die bouc hier na ontbint,Daer ghi die vraye jeeste in vint,Die ic dichte hier te voren,Also alsemense vint in auctoren;Maer daer sijnfavelen toe geslegen,Dier ic hier niet en wille plegen,Noch der redenen van hem int WalschNe volgic niet, wont soe es valsch:Ic houts mi an broeder Vincent.('At that time, during that thunderstorm, when it rained pebbles, the greatAlexander was born, wrathful tormentor of the world, and the world's grief,scourge of the earth, who never faced his equal. This, I believe, is what thethunderstorm signified, which came from above as the book will tell youhereafter. In this book you will hnd the true gesta, which I once before putinto verse as they are found in the auctores; but untrue stories have beenadded to those gestq, which I will omit this time. I will not follow the Frenchaccount about Alexander either, as it is unreliable, so I shall stick to brotherVincent.')1s

In thc intriguingconclusion ol'his article, De Graaf (1978: 261 263) speculated on

"stb. &ryba- tll

"u-.*=il

Macrlttttt's reilsolls lilr this scvere criticisrn ol'lris owrr enrlicr work, l)c (ir*.fconjccturcd that this criticistn can be rrucecl buck to the dill'crerrce hctwcen theAugustinian and Ilocthian ways of writing history. ln Alc.ruttrlcr,r (i(t,,r/r,, clcmcntsof the Boethian hierarchy (God - Providen.. - Mirn's Fatc [rortuna thc lice willof man) are to be found. The Spiegel, onthe contrary, De Graaf characterized as amore Augustinian work, a record of 'the history of God's interference with thecourse of world history. As such it could incorporate many mirabilia.yetfavelenabout a goddess Fortuna would be quite out of place in the spiegrt.'(De Graaf1978: 261)' If De Graafs speculatibn is right, an interesting development inMaerlant's view of the relation between God and Alexander seems to be reflectedhere' It is most regrettable, indeed, that De Graaf was forced to leave hiscomparison of the portrayal of Alexande r in Alexanders Geesten and Spiegeluncompleted (cf. De Graaf l9g0: 76_77).

One aspect of this portrayal is Maerlant's opinion of Alexander,s magnitude asgiven in the Spiegel, which seems to differ from Alexanders Geestenin at least onerespect' In the earlier work Alexander is represented as the most excellent man thathas ever lived' But in a passage in the rYth iartre of the spiegel,which deals with thehistory of Charlemagne, we find a small nuance. Here Maerlant mentioned thefables about this king which were then current. He pointed out that there were, infact, five kings bearing the name Charles: Charles Martel, Charlemagne, Charlesthe Bald, Charles the Fat, and Charles the Simple. r 6 In lines 65-66 of this passageMaerlant wrote:

Karel die grote dat was die ander,Die coenre was dan Alexander('Charlemagne was the second [Charles], who was braver than Alexander').

It is hazardous' o-f course, to allege on the basis of only one rhyming couplet thatMaerlant now valued Alexander's magnitude differently than he did before, whenwriting his Alexanders Geesten. If we want to decide on a changed opinionregarding Alexander' a complementary study is required of those parts of thespiegel which deal with charlemagne or even with tther princes such as JuliusCaesar, king Arthur or Godfrey of Bouillon. Possibly the r.rult, of such a study willyield more relevant data on Maerlant's translation of the history of Alexander theGreat than the elements discussed above do.

NOTE S

* I am most grateful to Mr. J.P.M. Jansen and Mr. G.H.v. Bunt, who corrected my Englishtext.I This article is to a high degree based on Alexander de Grote in de spiegel Historiael. Eenonderzoek naar de verhaaltechniek van Jacob van Ma-erlanr (Nijmeg;n l9g3), a studywhich Dr Kees de Graaf completed in March 1982, afew days u.ro.! he suddenly died.His inquiries into the history of Alexander the Great in Jacob van Maerl ant,s spiegelHistoriael substantially contributed to one o[ thc ficlds o[ interest or lrre GroningenAlexandcr work *group: a study of the mcclieval vernue ulHr translations and adaptationsof thc history of A|e)(andcr the Great in Vincent ul' Be,,uvuis' spccr lunt Ilistttriule,

l)c (iriral'intendetl to eorrlirrtrs gs1 lllrpllr lris slrrtly ol'Mitcrlitttt's ltistory ol'Alcxttttdcrnrrtl to prcscnt the rcsrrlls ol'llrir lirrtlrcr irrquiry in thc prcscnt collcction ol'urticlcs,IJnl'ortunatcly, hc died bclirre cvcr putting thcsc plans into clfcct. Thercftrre it wus

tlcciclctl to includc an English sutnnlitry ol'l)c Graaf (19S3) in this volumc. Thus justice

can bc done in some dcgree to his intcntion of contributing to this volumc. and his study

can bc presented within its most appropriate context. On the othcr hand, Dc Cruttl'spbscrvations and conclusions on Maerlant's history of Alexander may in this wuy

bccomc accessible to scholars who do not understand the Dutch language.

In fact, De Graaf s study is an annotated collection of textual material on thc basis ol'

which he made his observations and drew his conclusions. The concluding scctions ol'hisstudy contain numerous references to the material of the Spiegel studicd. This

arrangement makes it impossible to make a summary in a literal sense of Dc Craal( 1983). We must generalize De Graals observations and conclusions to some degrcc, we

must select from the textual material to illustrate and confirm his words, and wc must

present all this in a way more suitable for an article. I am aware that as a result of my

choices some nuances and restrictions may have been worded less explicitly than in Dc

Graaf (1983), for which I take responsibility. In order to meet this difficulty, this articlccontains references (cf.)to the pages of De Graaf (1983) where the points at issuc arc

discussed and which enable the reader to study the textual material itself.Moreover, I have added a few introductory sections and other additions to thc

summary in order to provide the reader who is not familiar with Jacob van Maerlant withsome information on this Dutch author as well as to make the summary fit better into thc

context of this volume. A comparison with De Graaf (1983) will make clear how much his

study, after all, guided this article. I dedicate this article to the memory of Dr Kees De

Graaf.2 We do not present here a limitative nor a chronological catalogue of Maerlant's works. In

fact, much is unknown about Jacob van Maerlant's lile and works. This uncertainty has

caused historians of Dutch literature to express divergent views on Maerlant, which have

led to controversies. For a general survey we refer to Van Mierlo (1939: 286-303) and

Knuvelder (1970: l18-121, 147-148 and 207-216). A better understanding of the

controversial Maerlant problems may be gained from Van Mierlo (1946), Van Mierlo(1952) and Van Mierlo (1957), Noterdaeme-Schaap (1966), and Peeters (1964); fromCramer-Peeters (1977); and from De Graaf (1978: 259*263).

3 Negative judgements on the literary qualities and merits of Maerlant's oeuvre can be

found in, e.g., Van Mierlo 1939:291-293,297 ,299-301, and in Knuvelder 1970: I 20,207,2ll-213, and 215-216.

4 See, e.g., Gerritsen (1975), Gerritsen (1981) and De Graaf (1980).

5 We compared the text of the Spiegel with the lour versions of the Speculun (on these

versions see pp. I l-55 of this volume). However, since Maerlant did not translate the

cntire Speculum (see discussion below), the number of passages of both texts to bc

compared was, naturally, limited. As regards content Maerlant's text appears to

correspond best to the vulgate Douai version. The two continuators of the Spiegelto bc

mcntioned below also used this version of the Speculum,

It is not yet known, however, which manuscript of the Speculum Maerlant actually had

bcfore him. Moreover, there is the problem of the textual tradition o[thc Spiegel.Thccdition used (De Vries-Verwijs 1863) is based on Ms. The Hague, Royal Library, Aca'dcrric van Wetenschappcn XX which is dated to ca 1350. So the manuscript was writtcnirbout half a century tl'ter Mucrlant composed the Spiegel. Wc do not know how

accurltcly this munuseript represents Macrlant's autograph tcxt (cf. Dc Crauf l9tt3: 6),

6 The lirst und the third pgrti, tltut is: Sltct'ulurtr, Douui vcrsion, trooks ll lX und

XVll XXIV ( - Douel 1624 etlition, hooks Mll nnd XVI XXlll).7 l)ouni 1624 edltlon, bookr XXIV XXVI, ch, 15,

J ,, t3

l{ 'l"lris is clcttr lirrrtt.llte prologue lo hook I ol'llrc lsl l\ttleol'thc,\,/rir,$r,/(l)c Vrics VcrwiisItJ6l; I.l5 l6).'Ihc Middle l)utch texr relels:( i r u v ( I; l o r c n.r, t, t t rt i tt t, ll/ i I I e n t s,r o nt,,Ont.litct dit w,crt,! Ghi n,at,rt dt,glultt,,Die mi tlit detle unevu?n.Ghenoughet u, w,ildijt lntluenDanckelike, so bem ics vro,Ende ic houts mi gepayt also.God geve u leven sonder blame!Ic beghinne in ons Heren name.g Drrr"yrrorirn altemale

urrrc' (prologue' 93-100)

Vanden Spiegle ystorialeSalic uten Latine dichtenIn sconen worden ende in lichten,Eist dat mi God wille ghevenGhesonde, tijt ende leven;Die jeesten daer af al ghemeene;Maer die clergie alleene,Diere vele in es gesayt,Willic dot dat paepscap mayt,Want den leeken eist te swaer.

l0 Ende oec mede hebbr, ,o"r,'"'' (prologue, 69-79)

Dat des dat paepscap belgen soude,Of ic mi dies onderwinden woude.Ende anderwaerven hebbic gewesenIn haer begripen van desen,Want ic leeken weten dedeUter Byblen die heimelichede.

I I see lines 69-i2quoted in note 9. (prologue' 80-s6)

12 rn the Douai version of the speculum vincent's history of Alexander can be found inbook v' In the Douai ft24 edition, however, this book is counted as IV; it covers pp.l17-137 ' Maerlant's history of Alexander comprises the entire book 4 of the rst partie ofthe Spiegel (De vries-Verwijs 1863: I,l3g-i7g). In quoting from both histories ofAlexander we will' for practical reasons, omit to mention the books of both speculum and,spiegel and limit ourselves to indicating chapter-numbers and verse lines. Romannumerals refer to chapters of the specului,Aratic numerals indicate the chapters of theSpiegel. Spacings and virgules are ours.l3 This is probably an allusion to pseudo-Aristotle's secretum secretorum. The passagesalluded to can be found in ch. 67 of the Latin text which Moller (1963) edited parallel tohis edition of the Middle High German prose translation of the secreium secretorumbyHiltgart von Htirnheim. The passages are printed on pp. l3o-132 and p. 136 of theedition.14 Cf. De Graaf 1983:4041,91, 123, l3g_140 and 149_150.15 spiegel,rst Partie, b-ook 3, ch. 56 (De vries-verwijs 1863: I,137). The English translationis quoted from De Graaf l97g:235.16 spiegel,rYth partie, book I, ch. 1,39-76 (Devries-verwijs lg63: III,l70).

t1 n*flft*

-

M, Cosmun

The life of Alexander the Great in Jean de

Vignay's Miroir Historial: the problem of textual

equivalence

I Introduction

Jean de Vignay's activities as a professional translator seem to be concentrated in

the period 1320-1350. The first work by his hand is, if we may believe Paul Meyer

11907: 522-8),a rendering into French of Vegetius' De Re Militari. His last work isprobably the translation of a lost Latin original, known as the Chronique de Primal

iKnowles 1954a:371). Some support for these dates is offered by the dedications in

the prologues of his works, which indicate that some of his translations were

undertaken by order of Jeanne de Bourgogne and, sometimes, her husband,

Philippe VI de Valois. His vernacular version of the Ludus Scaccorum by the

Dominican Jacques de Cessoles was dedicated to Jean de Normandie, son of Jeanne

and Philippe (Knowles 1954a: 353). Other direct evidence for dating Jean's works is

not available.lAs far as Jean de Vignay himself is concerned, very little is known.' Some of the

manuscripts which contain a copy of one of his works refer to him as a hospitalier de

l'Ordre de saint Jacques du Haut Pas (Knowles 1954a: 355-6), and in a colophon atthe end of the Jeu des Eschecs Moralists we read: Icifenist le livre et la moralilt des

nobles hommes et des gens du peuple sur le jeu des eschts, translatt de latin enfrangols

parfrere Jehan hospit:alier (ms Paris, BN, fr. 12440,fo1. 173r). In the preface to this

text he had presented himself as a petit religieus entre les autres (Knowles 1954a:

354).2 These assertions are not impossible: in the thirteenth century the Parisian

suburb of Saint-Jacques did have some monastic establishments.

If we do not take into account a now lost translation ascribed to Jean de Vignay,

registered in the catalogue of Charles VI's library as an Alexandre en prose, there

remain eleven translations to be attributed to our translator.3 Some of these

translations are extremely important, not because of their technical and qualitativc

aspects, but exclusively on account of the fact that they preserve, in French, lost

originals. These include the above-mentioned text of Primas and the Enseignements

of theodorus Paleologus. The text with which we are occupied here is the

translation of the Alexander passage of the Speculum Historiale by Vincent de

Beauvais in Jean de Vignay's Miroir Historial.aWith regard to its dato thc following data must be taken into consideration. In

Jcittt's tlwtt prclitcc, prccctlirrg ttte orrc writtcrr hy Vincclt, we re1tl, rrl'tcl. thctrttclititlltitl rc'icctitltt tll'Ot,rcu,rt' (t'ho:te nui:;uttl t,l contmertt,t,rttt,ttl t,l ttllrttil tlt, l,u,yt'it't'|; ) tltat ttllc d(s ltt,rl;t'.t du prct'ieuls li,r heruti,tl que Dieu planlu dt,,rrt ntttitt tttt dpttl: elgracieux vergier clc France luquelle lasse eslraicte et nourrie el ult,vct,dtt lrc,i t,.ut,ellenlli'r rttyul cle Frant'e a tant.fiuc'tiJit qu'elle a porte fleur et fruit si tres prec.ieus ct si nobleque ledit vergier de la douce France et aultres pluseurs en sont et seront plantez,pcuplez et ennoblis... Paulin Paris ( I 836 II: 88-90) may have been right in identifyingthis /as.ce with Jeanne de Bourgogne. In the preface she is not refeired to as being aqueen. This might imply a definitive redaction of the Miroirbefore 1328,the yeaiofher husband's accession to the throne. In the prologue to the L1gende Dorbe Jeanstates that he translated the Latin text a la requeste de treshaute, poissant et nobledame madame Jehanne de Bourgoigne, royne de France... s No other, more pertinent,evidence is available.

With some reservations one could maintain Christine Knowles' dating (1954a:359): lhe Miroir was written in the twenties of the XIVth century. The questionwhether the process of translation was interrupted (this would account for thediflerences of level between the translations of the first two books and the otherones) cannot be discussed within the scope of this study. The proposed date seemsnot quite impossible: the manuscript Paris, BN, fr. 316, containing books l-g of theMiroir, gives the following indication (quoted by Christine Knowles 1954a:360):Cest volume fu achevt I'an de grace mil ccc et xxxiij, la veille de sainte Katerine; thems Leyde, [Jn. Libr. Voss. Gall. 3 A, which gives a complete text of the Miroir, wascompleted in 1332.6

As lar as Jean's attitude towards his models is concerned, one must mention (andour analysis will furnish the necessary evidence) that he follows his sources closely.In the prologue to the French rendering of the De Re MititariJean pretends to takethe pure veritt de la lettre as a leading criterion for his translational aitivities,T but inthe Miroir de l'Eglise (translation of the Speculum Ecclesiae by Hugues deSaint-Cher) he very clearly presents some elements as additions. Elsewhere, in theJeu des Eschecs, there are amplifications and interpolations without any explan-atory observation. In illustration of Jean's procedure one could think here of theopinion of the copyist of ms Paris, BN, fr. I 170 that the version of the JeubyJean deVignay (which he combined with the translation of the same text by Jean Ferron)semble plus clere en langaige, et aussi contient aucunes histoires beites et notables,combien qu'elles ne soient pas en latin.s Christine Knowles is probably right insuggesting that at the end of his career Jean shows some independence towards hissources.

Generally speaking, however, Jean's tendency to remain as close as possible to hismodel (one might even speak here of 'fidelity') guarantees, if the Latinmodel doesnot offer complicated grammatical or lexical constructions, a correct and reasona-bly faithf,ul translation. In all other cases an 'impressionistic' approach is his onlyresource. In his study on the translation of Vegetius Paul Meyer calls Jean a'laborieux et un bien m6diocre 6crivain'(1896: 406). Christine Knowles shares thisopinion. She reproaches Jean for his'servilit6, manque de souplesse', 'connaissancelort m6diocre du latin' and a 'manque d'ind6pendince', even 'n6gligence' (1954a:372 3). Elsewhere she admits that he does not always translate'slavishly all the waythrough'(1956: 456). These opinions are correct, hut thcy lack a systcmatic and

scicntillc irrgurrrentntion unrl thc.y ignorc.leirn's rcul ohjectivc: the protluctiott ol'ttIit c t uu I ancl .f un t' t ittrru I tnt nslu tion,

tn thc lollowing parugraphs we shllt look into Jean's prol'cssiorral tcchnique undtry to arrive at a morc balanced judgment of his status as translator.o In tlre firstinstance our approach will be 'quantitative': we shall try to answer the questionswhether the macro-structure of the Alexander passage of the Miroir (completedlralfway his career) corresponds with that of the Speculum.ln the second instttnceour analysis will be 'qualitative': we shall compare Jean's wording on the

rnicro-level with that of Vincent's text. We must concentrate here on thc shilts inmeaning inherent in translation processes. In other words, is Jean's renclcring as

represented by the text we use here (the Vatican manuscript) 'equivttlent' toVincent's? Did the recipient of that specific text have access via Jean's rcnderinginto French to what we (tentatively, as we do not take into account all the extuntmanuscripts of the Speculum) might consider as Vincent's message?

II The ambiguity of the notion of 'equivalence'

Before passing on to an analysis of Jean's technique we must circumscribe the statusof this translation. In case of a transfer of a document from Latin into thevernacular (in casu Old French) every analysis has to take into account the literary,ideological and scientific polysystem into which the document is going to be

integrated (Even-Zohar 1978 120). A rendering into French of a Latin text, likeany linguistic transfer, involves acculturational problems; in the l4th-century Latinhas still the status of a 'dominating' language. It is not only the vehicle of thecultural upperclass, but also the means of expression current in the educationalsystem. Being a religieus Jean must have been familiar, qualitate qua,with the Latinculture largely controlled by the Church to which he belonged. The allusions in hisprologue to the opinions of Saint Augustine and Saint Gregory suggest some

knowledge of Latin authors, at least of the Fathers.lo His bilingual status willcertainly have lacilitated the transfer from Latin into French as long as elementsbelonging to his own polysystem were concerned. When confronted with 'exotic'or'classical' data, Jean is compelled to produce approximative renderings. Detailsmentioned by classical authors like Justin and Quintus Curtius (and repeated byVincent) without any explicative comment cause him a great deal of trouble whentranslating the Latin into his l4th-century French. There is no question of a totally'shared code' (Newman 1980: 20).

When analysing the basic system of his approach, it is not without interest torecall the aspects of transformation Lausberg commented upon in his Hanclhuch cler

Literarischen Rhetorik:rr four procedures are supposed to dominate the transfor-mation processes in literature: I adiectio (addition); 2 detractio (omissionX 3

immutatio (substitution) and 4 transmutatio (permutation).12 Quite rightly VanGorp ( 1978: 105-6) proposes to add here a fifth lacto r: repetitio, a factor, it must be

admitted, which does not, unlike the four others mentioned by Lausberg. involvenon identical transformations, lfut all these five factors imply (qualitatively orquantitatively) a MOpIFICATION of the source text (ST). Their application (and

their cffect) dependr on thf tranilrttor's intention, his pragmatie attitude towards

r7orfrro

tlre pr.c*is rs n rnenna'l'uhrnining a rerult, thc rurgct rext ('1.T.).As a nrittter ol'l'ttet. we cnn (ui lcnrt thcurctier,Tlyt iti*ririg,iir1, thrce typcs el'output in thc process ot'trunslilrnurlion:

I cxut'l lrun,rlulion (in which loyalty to the ST communcls tlrc translator,sactivities): the mcaning of thc sr ha.s to pass unarterctr into thc TT.2 adaptation (the TT mostly follows thc ST, but contains qualitativc modificationsand quantitative differences): the meaning of the 3r

^oy undergo somealterations.

3 new text (the TT contains and integrates constituent elements of the ST and usesthem according to a different pragmatic intention): the meaning of the TT is nolonger identical with that of the ST. In I the level of interventioi is very low: thefive transformation factors are not, or hardly, functional. In 2 their level isevidently higher: the factors are functionalized-in the TT (on the one hand theymay tend to conserve as many ST data as possible; on thsother hand they mayfavour the intentions of the TT). In 3 the effect of the transformation-factors isdominant and totally independent of the intentions of the sT. withoutanticipating too much we may say that Jean's Miroir does not belong to thesecond or the third categories, but to the first.

Not only things that are changed need to be taken into consideration, but also thosewhich remain unchanged, respected. The analyst of transformation processes musttherefore consider a sixth factor: conservatLo. This may sound paradoxical, becauseevery process (even a process of translation) suggests'activity'. However, conserva-tion of certain textual data is as much u .o-pJi.nt of a process as the rejection ofothers.l3

we have already noted Jean's fundamental loyalty to his ST's in the first half ofhis career. His intention regarding the Miroir is the creation of an .equivalent, toVincent's text, which, because of linguistic barriers, was no longer accessible to all

those who were interested (and did not have the necessary knowledge of Latin). His'equivalence'(considered as the basic relation between Si and TT) Functions at twolevels: on the macro-level Jean aims at anidentical shape as well as completeness,and on the micro-level he gives priority to pragmatic'equivalence'. In the followinganalysis we shall try to define what'equivilence'means to Jean de vignay.

III Formal .equivalence,

What immediately strikes the eye (and Jean's prologue, which we quoted above,announced it) is his effort to maintain Vincent'i systematic structure. The purposeof his translation of the Speculum is to offer the histoires et les fais des anciens as asubject for meditation: with the knowledge acquired here one ianfaire et ensuir lesfais des bons et eschiver etfinir ceuls.des miuvars. Apart from the stereotyped aspectsof this remark oncmust acknowledge that there is a certain congruency between theintended pragmatic status of the text and its execution: the macro-structure of theST (which is at the same time that of the TT) permits immediate access to the desireditems' Jean maintains Vincent's division ofine material and provides all chapterswith the headings given by the ST. Most of these hcadings are copied faithfully. r+For example' the heading of chapter II of the Alexancler p-ass ug" 6o ,'r,lloquio ipslus

TNt'rtttttcbi cum Ollntptude beeorrrcx in tlre vcrnucula r: Du purlenk'nt Ncctttnuhtl,t (rl'('('

()linrpiudt,.rs ln chupter XXV tlre l,utirr lrcnding Quuliter'l'.yrum sihi repugnunlundc,ytru.rit is rendered us lirllows: ('tntun(nl il dcstruit Tyr utmhulunt umlre ll,llowcver, the Vatican rniuluscript ctlntains some headings which no longcr show u

systcmatic loyalty to thc ST'. At thc beginning of chapter XLIX we rcad: QuallterAlcxuntler Porum bello superavit. In the French we hnd an elaboratcd text:('ontment Alixandre vint a bataille contre Porrus et comment Buci/ul, son chc'vul,|uto<'t'iet comment les .ij. roysfurent d'accort d'eulx combatre corps a corps et Ali.randre/r,,r (read: le) tua.

There are more of these 'narrative' headings, which reveal some, not clcarlydcfined, conception of translation.l6 Jean is evidently 'guiding' the participants inthc process of communication. As far as the headings are concerned, we notice fewpragmatically oriented modifications of chapter-headings of the above-mentionedtype.r T The conservation factor plays a prominent part here.

The same (conservative) attitude is perceived in Vincent's references to the

tuut'toritates that he cites (sometimes via Helinand de Froidmont).18 The references

to Justin, Orosius, Martianus Capella, Valerius Maximus and the HistoriaAlexandri are copied without any intended alterations; Seneca in epistola xviii(chapter VI) becomes'. Seneque dit en la .xviij. epistre,etc. Sometimes the transfer isIrot immaculate: Hieronymus in epistola ad Aletam. Graeca narrat historia (chapterV) becomes Jeroisme en l'epistre Alixandre I'istoire grecque. Deficient translationalskill and pragmatics collide. At other places Jean's text reveals some attempts tornodily the referential system if this might lead to confusion. In chapter XLIVVincent refers three times to Justin. The first time the Latin text givgs Justinus lih. l2and the second and third times: Justinus ubi supra. Jean also produces threereferences, but slightly alters his wording. In his text we read: Justin ou .xije. livre;thereupon: Justin dit ou.xij. livre and finally: Justin dit.He retains the level oforganization but to some extent he adapts the signalling devices: on the one side he

refuses to take over ubi supra as too vague a reference, on the other side he rejects a

third, identical, mention. However, here too the conservation factor determinis thetransfler, which is corrected only for redactional reasons. Even the enigmatic actorisusually (but not always) taken over by the TT.le The organization respects thesignalling apparatus. The conservatio is dominant as it was in the case of thechapter-headings. We may speak here of FORMAL 'equivalence'.

IV Macro-pragmatic'equivalence'

As far as quantity is concerned it is evident that reproduction of ST-items in a TTcannot always take place without differences (N.B. the qualitative aspects of thequantitative transformations will be discussed below). When enumerating the

twelve cities founded by Alexander to celebrate his own glory (chapter XLVI) theVatican manuscript manifests some independence; it mentions Alexandrie Bucifule,du nom de son cheval, et les autres selon les pails ou elles se sient. The enumeration has

disappeared. At the end of chapter XLVI the ST gives a long description of the

death of Callisthenes: Vuleriu,v 1.7 Aristoteles Calisthenem uuditorcm suum acl

Ale.rundrum millens monull, ul ilt,r, ('o quum iu<'undis,sime loqueretur, qwt sc'lllc'el

ft te

uliltd rqliu,t (tur(,,t tcl slleulht lulh,r ve,l ;enntrrr, .,,r,t.,1 (lt(.,lrlior, At illa tltttttAle'uundrtun Muc(thnt'm lterricu rttlttttttltnte gtttttle,tttertt tilttlut)irii, ,, ttrl Muittretrtttlor(s ittt'iluttt r(vo('ur( hcnt't'ole y1,rs.,.rtc'rul, ,tplrlttt .,(rt.,r.t ,r,r,r,r,r, ,t(rurn ttt,glcc,li'vulubri'r c'on,riliipttcnilcnliunr t,git.'ihr Fr.n.h text rends: Vttlcri*r tlit ctt lt, .r,iije. rluccommc icelui (luli,vlenes hluma"sl Ali.ruttdrt, (,1 l(, vttt.tl.ri,rl ruppek,,r tt l,usuige de,sMac'edoniens, Alixandre c'ommuncla que on te ./ei';rt ttuturir.lmmediately after the listof the twelve cities the Latin original tells us: In,tignivit quoque tnuros earum(i.e. thecities) primorum quinque elemeitorum Graecorri carac'teribus, ut legeretur in eis;Alexander rex genus Jovisfecit. A.R.G.L1'. The French text gives only: Mais certes ilennoblit les murs de ses citts de lectres grecques de son nom, en ceste maniere;Alixandre, roy du linaige mefist. Et cefist it aIn qu'ilzfussent leiies en ses citts en laremembrance de lui.The abbreviatlon A.R.bL.h.nainot been taken over by thetranslator' The formula Et ce fisr... is to be considered as an expansion of what thesr relates' In chapter LI there is also a slight addition to the original text: Igiturrebus ordinatis Polyperchonta cum exercitu Babyloniam mittitbecomes: ...i1 envoiaen Babilonie la prgie et la conqueslg qu'il avoitfitrt, avecques partie de ses effors.The number of divergences is limited. The examples cited here do not indicatesignificant shifts suggesting another'quantitative' conception than that offered bythe ST' on this level one is unable to perceive any desire for innovations or changes.conservatlo is still the exclusive operational device. Jean limits himself to what I.Even-Zohar has called a 'secondary activity', namely: maintaining the text of thesl20 The way the Miroir renders the Alexander passage of the speculumallows tisto introduce here the notion of MACRo-pRAduaitc .equivalence,.

V Micro-pragmatic ,equivalence,

If the analysis of the macro-structure of the Alexander passage in Jean,s text1!owed, owing to the dominating status of conservatio, a FORMAL andMACRO-PRAGMATIC 'equivalence', the study of the micro-level reveals theimportance of the other traniformation-factors we listed above. Though Jean devignay never abandons the principle of preserving as much as possible the ST-data,the following examples illustrate the sometimer nJt insignificant gup u.tween intentand realization.

Immediately after mentioning the chronological details of Alexander,s reign,2rvincent writes: ..-Alexander Philippi et ohmliadis fitius nascitur quod tamen ittivulgatae Alexandri historiae non videtur omnino congruere quae eum narrot aNectanebo iam extra regnumfacto, generatumfuisse... Jeanrenders this as flollows:"'fu Alixandrefilz de Phelipe et de otimpiade no taquel chose n'est pas veiie du toutacorder a cele comune hystoire de Atixaidre laquele raconle iceli aviir estt engendride Nectanabus ia mis hors du roiaume... (chapter I). The French preserves here thethree essential data of the ST: l) the parentai status of philippus'and olympias; 2)the doubts about this status and 3) the possible paternity oi N..tanebus.Semantically speaking there are no changes (if we except the translation of ./ac,tobymis)' without due contextual support th. iomt'rla mi;s hors clu rriaume remainsobscure, but with a little effort the recipient can grasp the intended mcaning of thetext.

'l'tris cxurnple in Hymptomntic lirt' .lcutt's tcchniquc. which is hnsed upon tllrirrgring approtrch to tlrc S'l': llrc vct'ttuculitr puts cvcry clcmcnt in the e xttct pluce it,,ccupiccl in ihc model ur, 1[ leust. lrics to do so (Testard 1975:41). Though he

lirllows this technique l'uirly lirithlirlly, it tlocs not always lead to a correct rcnclering

irrtg the vernacular. ln thc silt't'rc chapter we read in Vincent's text: ,,.si tttt'ltt't hellicu|t

ci itrrminebat non exerc'itum vel mac'hinamenta Marti movebat. In Jean's vcrsion wc

r.cacl: ...quant paour de bataille li apparoissoit , il ne deprioit point de dieu clc M urch pur

t,l.'lir,s ri po, engin... The grammatical construction of the French is quite dift'erent:

irr Vincent's passage there is a relation between Marti and mac'hinamenlu, but this

rclation has vanished in the French: par effors ne par engin qualifies ne deprioit poinl,

Again, the semantic difference is not catastrophic: in both texts, ST and TT,

Ncctanebus does not want to use the possibilities offered by the war-god. The TTlras the same pragmatic status.

Before going into the problems of the lexicon we must recognize that, although

wc encounter effective semantic shifts (which are to be considered as due to the

rcduced lexical range of our translator and not, at least not immediately, as a result

ef laziness), Jean clearly shows that he is capable of analytical thinking. In the

rrbove-mentioned examples deprioit could be interpreted as a translator's interven-

tion, as a case of substitution: the paraphrase replaces the (to him) incomprehensi'

ble Latin passage. This type of approach is typical: classe elqborata (ch. XXIV)becomes: grant multitude de nef assemblee. The ablative absolute is respected, but

the analysis of the whole leads to substitution. In chapter XXVIII maiugena ('born

out of Maja') is translated with: les gens de la lignie Alchides et de Polus which is

proolof a considerable analytical effort (whether the translation is right or wrong).'Elsewhere,

in chapter XIII, Vincent discusses the reconciliation of Philippus and

Olympias, effected by Alexander: ...ingreditur Alexander ad Philippum, et Olym'

piodem matrem ei reconciliat.The French gives here: Alixandres entra a Phelipe el

rcc.oncilia a ti Otimpiade sa mere par noces royaulx. The last element Qtar noces

royaulx) is an analytical (and probably polysystematic) addition. However, the

number of this kind of additions is limited.The transfer from ST to TT leads sometimes to analytical interventions for

stylistic purposes. In order to ensure a correct connection between the announOG'

ment of a letter and its content, Jean frequently inserts parenthetic clauseg,

Missisque internunciis literas eis huiusmodi iussit deferri: 'Imperiale... gives in the

French: Et mesages envoits entre .ij., it commenda que teles lettres leur.fussent

portees, esqueles il estoit contenu ce qui s'ensuit: 'Chose imperial...If we do set aside

the formula ei:ntre.y., which is not motivated by the ST (unless it is a misreading for

inlernunciis), the clause esqueles... s'ensuit is a lunctional connector.22 A vety

interesting intervention is found in chapter XXXV: Alexander has penetrated

incognitoltr. i, posing as an ambassador) into the Persian camp. Darius has invited

him to share his meal. After finishing his wine, Alexander puts the empty goblets

under his coat. This action cannot but rouse Darius' fury. In answer to his

qucstioning, the Macedonian says: ...hunc morem ohservari in c'urir Alcxandri, el se

pytu,\,t(, talem ibi ohservari. The French gives a text of, grosso modo, the samc tcnor,

but Alcxander's words are illustratccl by a certain contextual logic; '('esle tnuniere

el;l gurclct,en lu court cle Ale,runtlrt', tluc quunl .i. mes,rugier de hort vit'ttl' louz lett

lr,,r,ri(lr,r u quoy en ll donne a holre,rort/ siell,t , t'l cttt,rsi euiclui ,le eslre ceslt' rcuslume

9lfr

Tgurcfu( (((ttz "'I'hc

rtdtlition is litnctiorrnt. on tlrc orrc lruncl Alexnnder urrtlcrli'cs lrisstutus os iln atnbassttclttr and on thc othcr hand hc furnishes'ii-'rn,,tivutiorr ol.hisct>nduct' Thc samc proceclurc can bc obscrvcd in the passage in w6ich lrlrmcniosuggests that Alexander should accept the offer of the plrsian"rulcr (Alcxancler is toreceive half of his empire as well ai the hand of his daughter).-The Latin reads:Alexander ad Parmenionem dicentem se usurum conditionebarii', si Alexander esset,respondit" 'Et ego uterer si Parmenio essem'. Here again the French introduces anexplicative clause which makes things more logical: ilixandre ,erponar a permeindedisant que se il estoit Alixandre, il usiroit de hTondicion que Daires li a mqndout; ,Etmoi en useroie se ie estoie Permeinde,, mes quant je sui Alixandre, je n,en ferai rien,.To the same category of logical and explicative additions-belongs a type ofinterventions provoked by the problem of acculturation. In chapte, xxx the STreads: "'magna celeritate Taurum transcendit, quingenta stadia rni di, prrtransiens.The French gives the following rende ring: ...Aiexandre ... trespossa le Taure a grantisnelett et erra en...i. jour cinq cens estadis (et est apel6 estat l'uitiesme partie d,uneliue)' supplies additional infbrmation concerning the lexem e estades (: stadia inthe ST).

As far as the other transformation-factors are concerned, we notice the absenceof repetitio as a standard procedure of transformation. Transmutatio, thoughstructurally inherent in translation as a process (the synthetic Latin is convertedinto a vernacular wllh a largely analytical .t.u.trrrl), cannot be considered here as adistinctive device of Jean's tecirnique. Anyway, a study of this factor in a translationprocess from Latin into French would only be remunerative on an intertextuallevel: one has to decide in what measure Jean's treatment is specific, or whether histechnique is identical with those applied by other translaiors. considering thelimited scope of this study it will nof b. porribl. to insist n... ,rfon this matter.The last transformation-factor, deiractio, has been touched upon in theabove-quoted examples: l.R .G.I.F. has not b..n taken over by th. u.rnucular.Either Jean has not understood the abbreviation, or he simply had no adequatesolution for the problems connected with the rendering of these letters. In thepassage relating the death of callisthenes (chapter xLVIj the vatican manuscriptdid not mention Aristotle's intervention. ihe iuintessence of the story (which wequoted above), the refusal of Callisthenes to salute the Macedonian king in thePersian way (which denial costs him his life), is respected. on the pragmatic levelthere is 'equivalence', but on the semantic level there is non.23The material cited above, which, it must be repeated, has only an indicative value(we did not mention all the occurrences which piovoked an intervention, positive ornegative, from the translator and, -or.ou.r, the Alexander passage constitutesonly a very small part of vincen t's Speculum), permrts, however, the followingconclusions: even on the micro-level our ttanrtuio, does not put a st.ain on the ST.He aims at an integral transfer of the Latin model into his own linguistic system andintroduces only minor alterations intended to make the text *orr. easily accessibleto his public' He did not really hly..another option: complete ,equivalence,

(i.e.immutatio, 'subttitution'), of a TT is impossiute. rne signiiying ffir., of the STand the TT are 19t based upon the iame actantial schemes. Alterations areinevitable (Lavis 1980: 243). The role of the non--identical transformation-factors(adiec'titt, detrat'tict and immutatio) is marginal. Jean's loyalty leads lo a MICRo=PRAG M ATIC'cquivatencc'.

Vl Setnuntic'equivulcncc'

Wc alrcady noticed the inevitnhility ol' nltcrttions duc to the anisotttorphicstructures of the languagcs involverl. .['hc transler from Latin into the F'rcnchpolysystcm of the l4th century was not rcalized without numerous errors. We hnve

rcl'crred to the translator's inability to understand typically 'classical'elemcnts andto transfer them into the French as well as to his limited lexical range. The followingrptrotations may serve here as illustrations.

ln chapter I Vincent tells us how Nectanebus receives a message that Egypt is

rrbout to be invaded by Indos, Arabes, Phoenices, Parthos et quaecumque Orienti:t:;tmt barbarae gentes. The adjective barbarae is translated by Jean as estrangc,

Whcther this is due to the fact that the mediaeval mirabiliqliterature describes every

clcment supposed to originate in the Far East (so far as people in the Middle Ages

rcally had any knowledge about that part of the globe) as estrange ('strange'),cirnnot be ascertained.2a It is quite clear that the notion barbarae no longerpossesses those emotional and psychological connotations which it had in theclassical context (adopted, through his sources, by Vincent). With regard to the STwc notice here a semantic change, or to be more precise, a semantic impoverish-rrrcnt. The same phenomenon occurs in the translation of viros barbaro hahitu(chapter XVIII). This is the qualification of the Persian messengers to the court ofl'hilippus of Macedon. Jean renders this as: hommes barbus (sic!) et en I'abit(',\[ronge. Elsewhere the expression dictis barbaricis related to the threats of Dariustr> Alexander is translated with dis estrange (chapter XXVD. The idea ofOreco-Macedonian superiority (as expressed by the ST) is lost in the TT.

Another example of non-assimilation of a (foreign) socio-political system is thetranslation of satrapasf satrapes. At one place Jean renders this with satrapoiens(chapter XXXVII) and another with serjant (chapter XXV). It is obvious that theword satrapas did not have the same value lor Jean as it had for the author of thenrodel. In the same chapter XXV we find serjanz as a result of the transfer fromLatin into French of servrs and in chapter XXXV it also translates satellite as well as

jimulo (chapter XXVD. Probably because of some shortcomings in his encycloped-ic education (though, if he had analysed his model thoroughly, he might havcknown that the title satrapa.r was related to an important function, because thecmperor Darius convokes these functionaries as soon as he is confronted with an

imminent Macedonian attack), Jean is unable to give the TT-recipient a certain'couleur locale'. Elsewhere the formula Tyro ... satrapam fecit (chapter XXV) is

rcndered by Jean asfist Atisacrapas (sic!) son prevosr. This is to be considered as atlcast one moment of moderate insight (unless the word Atisacrapas is a corruptioncaused by the cbpyist of this Vatican manuscript).

At other places we notice the same hesitations with regard to concrete'classical'notions: Triclinium (chapter IV and XIII) is translated by chambre, which in Oldlrrench may also mean 'palace', but technically speaking it remains only a veryapproximative rendering of the original meaning of the word, Nor does Jean

understand the word discumbit when Alexander partakes of the meal in the royalpalace. The Latin uscs this formula: ...his dictis adversus Philippum di,scumhit, butthe French text notes: s'Asirl, which pragmatically is the same (Alexander joins hisfather's tuble), but semcntlcelly is not: sitting at a table is not the same as reclining

I

J ,r.rf lr* 93

(in thc clttssicitl wtly) ttrtttttttl tt crtttch, A lnst cxurnplc ol'this lgrr iltegruti.n .,l''clttssicttl' ST clcnrcnts is tlre equipntent ol'the oricntnl clrnriols usctl in comb't:q u u d r ig e o nt n e s .l'u I t'clc bcco m es r o u r (t t, lru r t, t, r c,,r t, h rt r gc ur,

It is very interesting to obscrve thcconvcrgencc inlierent in a trlnsl'cr lrom a STto a TT' In chapter I, while discribing the'magical'actions ol'Nectanebus after hehas heard of the imminent invasion of his fingdom, Vincent writes: ...ex cerecomponebat navigii similitudinem; effigiesque hominum ihi collocahar...; the Frenchrenders this: .'.et faisoit semhlance de nefz de cire et metoit illeques semblance degent"' The French semblqnce replaces similitudinem and tfftgies(que), whichcannot be considered as synonymous (cf. DuCange, s.v.). tirJ same semblancefigures in some formulas. As a translation for herbas... ffigiat ex cera corpusculumfaeminae the French reads: ...fist... d'erbes et de cire un ymages a semblance de cefemme. Two remarks concerning this example: 1) effigiat is"translated in a veryneutral way by fist (- faire) and 2) the noun corpusculun is converted in thevernacular into un ymages a semblance de.In this particular case we find that ourtranslator is aware of the necessity of an analytiial approach. Semantically thistranslation (if we do not take into consideration t-he diminutive urp..t ofcorpusculum) is equivalent to the Latin text.

Jeans's text is full of these converging lexical shifts. In chapter L we frnd bannieresd'or used for aureis laminis (in: aureis laminis totum agmen inclusit) in one phrase,while in a subsequent phrase the same bannieresreplaces, this time correctly, vexilla.As we noticed before with regard to satropas, ii is clear that Jean is unable ofdiversification; and a last, very striking example, may afford further illustration ofthis phenomenon. The translation of the Latin words signifying'battle, or.combat'shows a remarkable convergence in the TT. In the Spicuiu*-purruge we find thefollowing words covering the above-mentioned notions: conflictu(Xxx); pugilla-rrzs (XXVrr); pugnam (xXyil); praetio (XXVII); congressz (XXVIT); congression_em (XXIX); luctam (XXVITD and bellem(Xxxv).2 s T;hough these words are not tobe taken as semantic equivalents, the TT gives inALL.ur.rr bataille.In one singlecase congressu (XXX) is rendered by assaut and in chapter XXVIII profitelurcertamen luctaminis is translated a^s, emprist l'estrif de tuitir.In the same chaptercertamenf certamini produces estrif in the TT, while the same word (in certaminaquadrigarum) is replaced by iouste (des charrettes). Considering the wealth ofsynonyms that Old French offered to any writer, Jean's lexicon miy be consideredas rather poor.26

It is worthwile to observe the numerous shifts in the socio-political colouring ofthe text. Jean's work offers several interesting illustrations of wh atlanMichael hascalled 'medievalization' (however much this term may suffer from a lack ofprecision).21 The shifts in the Miroir are by no means the result of a systematicapproach' Very significant here is the treatment of the vocabulary covering thenotions of 'nobility', 'kingship', etc. The Fren ch seigneurie replaces very disparatewords like monarchiam (xxxl), potestate (xxxryJ , princip)tum-(xXXr). prin-cipes (XXV) lecomes princes; primates (xxvD is reniere d,- as grois mestres de latnt: comes (XI) becomes compaignon. This last word also tranilates socros (XI!.The vocabulary describing family-relations is very much poorer in the TT:cognatis(qae) (XXVII), con.sanguineus (XXVI) and consohriium (XLy) are alltranslated t,oulsin,

,*,fffl *dff* & es

As l'ur as the prcsentntion ol'the clitc which surrounds Alcxattcler is cunccnted,wc noticc lhsl nohlltr (XXXV) is rurtlcrcrl nriltlc htntnn', somctimcs rutblcl du pul',t,

but cven here we note the convcrgetrce illustratcd above. Thc Old French ruthle cunrcplace a fair number ol'l-utin udjcctivcs with completely different mcanings. Thuswc find Xl operosissimum (sepulcrune ); XI egregius (- corporis); XXIX: egregiuttt( tlic'tum); XII: spectabilis (fbrme -); XIX: illustrem (- virum) and XXXY: inc'lytuc( voc'rs). Without insisting upon the exact meaning of these Latin words, wc findour conclusion concerning the French translations of 'battle', etc. confirmed.

The same vagueness characterizes the vocabulary replacing libertate (XXl I l) andiuununitatem (XXYII). Jean here usesy'anchise, which has as least two meanings inOld French: 'freedom' and 'exemption'. In chapter XLVI lihertate means 'frank-ness', but in the vernacular again becomesy'anchise. The derivative.franc'(in: lon -.

('ommencement) is a translation for liberum ortum (XXVfII). Semantically thedifference between 'free' and 'noble' (which, of course, implicates 'freedom')vanishes.

It would be possible to continue the enumeration of converging translations inthe Miroir (we could think here of the renderings in the vernacular of milite.l andcquites becoming chevaliers, hommes de cheval, etc., while chevaliers also coverssatellite...), but the mechanism is clear. Jean's lexical possibilities are inferior tothose of the ST-author.

Examples of the opposite phenomenon are rare. In chapter XVIII iaculo and thederivative iaculare, which occur at a short distance from each other, are translatedgavelot and dart (infier le du -).

Our analysis of seigneurie, noble, franchise, etc. has revealed a non--consistentvision with regard to the receiving polysystem. On the semantic level Jean's textcannot be considered as a real substitute for Vincent's Alexander passage. Thetransfer lrom ST (which, it must be said, does not present a clear--cut and wellorganized political system either) into TT is attended by a) an impoverishment onthe lexical level and b) a confusion on the definitional level. Since the greater part ofthe ST*data has been correctly rendered in the TT, we are here dealing with a partialSEMANTIC'equivalence'.

VII Conclusion

Ilwe consider the results of our analysis we are obliged to adopt a neutral positiontowards Jean de Vignay: his attitude vis-a-vis the ST is neither 'positive' nor'negative'. Not 'positive' because his comprehension of the ST leaves much to be

desired; not 'negative'since there is no question of a critical attitude towards the ST.Jean's approach is best qualified as a pragmatic'calque' of the Latin model: in mostcases he produces a mechanical transcription of ST-data into the code of thercceiving polysysteh, 3 'serial approach'; 'a sentence by sentence technique'(Holmes 1978: 72; Wittlin l976,II: 602).

The procedure employed and especially the lack of consistency and systcm in thercnderings of the different lexemes of the ST (cf milc,t, equites : thevalier, etc.) is theresult of the completc abeence of an overall conception of the 'm6tier' of thetranslator. There lt no rlgorously upplied method with regard to thc process of

-wIrultsltttiott in ttrdcr ttl itclticvc a ltorrrogcncous, rcally l4th centtry, tr,.rsl'cr.,1.what coulcl bc charactcrizccl as ctassicaf'c.rulcur localc'. The surnetirrrcs sligStlycnigmatic proclucts ol'Jcan's cfforts revearl the atsence of a final chcck (it r'ust beadmitted, however, that the dimensions of his modeldid make a linalchcck a ratheroverwhelming task, and it is very doubtful whether he would have been able tointroduce real corrections if we take into account the seriousness of some of hismisreadings).

When assessing the small critical distance between Jean's and vincent,s text weshould not forget that Jean never intended to produce an adaptation, but as faithfula translation as possible, meeting the pragmatic demands of the Latin model, i.e.supplying correct information about the Macedonian ruler. r, ir qui,. clear that hisaim has not been fully realized. In fact his translation is not free from the shiftsinherent in every transfer from one polysystem into another. In the Miroir thesedifferences, which are partly due to technical and professional reasons (he is notalways able to cope with the problems connected wiin the transfer from a syntheticinto an analytical linguistic system) and partly to semantic differences (.shifts ofexpression and meaning') between the two languages involved, do not create amodified textual image. De vignay's text has certiinl! not becomean integumentumserving as a context for a new (or anoth er) signtficatio (Kelly lgTg:300).The shifts of expression are a recurrent phlnomenon in the Miroir, and arechiefly conditioned by the transformation-f*,o, of substitution. Jean,s activity asa translator is what Georges Mounin (1963: l3*4) has called an.op6ration suigeneris': his product must offer to his readers the same ,factual, information(Newman 1980: 63) as did the sT. of course the attempt to achieve a maximumequivalential output has benefited from the numerous iniersections resulting fromthe sometimes close relationship between the Latin and the French of the l4thcentury' The Latin vocabulary showing too important deviations from the Frenchpolysystem(cf satrapas, triclinium, etc.fcauses real difficulties to our translatorjustlike the deviations he experienced when rendering into French the military andtechnical terms of the treaty of Theodorus PaleologrN did (Basti nlg46:7g-g2). Thecontemporary reader of this Vatican manuscript cannot imagine a socio-+ulturalidentity which in any way could pass fo, ,.lurrical,. JeaJ, output is not an'ethnographic' equivalent (Newman I g8o' 62-3).However, the intent was there andthe result is still an informative text, though it contains numerous alterations whichto a certain extent condition the readers's reception of the text. The spirit of the TTremains a comprehensible and overall fairly correct rendering of the Alexander-vita.The alterations we mentioned are not to be considered as a reflex of aprofessional consciousness (van den Broeck-Lefev ere 1979:99). There is not theslightest indication that Jean was aware of the philosophical aspects of translation.The fact remainslhiltrTT-map correspondi to the sr-map: the FORMAL andMACRO-PRAGMATIC 'equivalen..' i, the object pursued by our transtator.The other 'equivalences' (MICRO-PRAGMATIC and SEMANTIC) presenta.nother image. On the micro-level we note that Jean, for whatever reason(incompetence or sheer laziness) is only aute to approach vincent,s text in anapproximative or rather impressionistic ronn.r. On the one hand this is due to theimpossibility of translerring Latin phrases wittruii any additionart, explicative or

-er**, g7

intcrprctutive comrnent into lrre rre lr: llrc unisornorplty (Vun dcn lf rocck l97tt: 17) isit rcal complicating fuctori ort thc otlrcr to his inability to analyzc corrcctly s()t'nc

l,atin passages which contuirt too intricatc grammatical constructions (though uttinrcs he is capable of'quitc logical intcrventions). The MICRO PRACMATICsiclc of his translation is impossible without minor alterations. On the SEMANTIClcvcl we note a considerable lexical convergence. In contradistinction to the usuultcndency in informative texts the Miroir offers a relatively large number of scmanticshifts, in a negative way: his lexical range is more limited than that of theST -author.

The above analysis permits us to draw the following conclusions: Jean is a loyaltranslator in the sense that he does not, as the anonymous translator of lhe Romand'Alexandre en prose did, rework his ST in order to obtain a real 'medievaliza-[ion',28 nor does he combine, like Rudolf von Ems, two different ST's and bringthem, thematically, on one level.2e Notwithstanding its shortcomings one cannottrace in this copy of the Miroir (NB our study is based only upon the Alexanderpassage of the Speculum and cannot therefore be considered as the translation ofVincent's text) a 'Funktionswandel'. As a matter of fact Jean's text is not really'reader-oriented': he does not explain very much. His factual approach hasproduced a TTcharacterizedby a functional'equivalence', which-and this must bc

cmphasized because the Miroir is not his first work: he must have had somethinglike a reputation - must have come up to the requirements of the recipients. Theambiguities are of a micro-technical nature and their influence does not go so far as

to allect the macro-level. The whole Alexander-passage in the Vatican manuscriptis FUNCTIONALLY 'equivalent' to the text Vincent committed to parchment.Jean respects the signification of the ST and its way of expression: res et vcrhaponderantur (Coseriu l97l: 573).

The text we have used here (for Vincent the printed Douai edition and lor Jeanthe Vatican manuscript) are only manifestations of two independent traditions, Nogeneral conclusions can be drawn from the results we have described here. Ouranalysis has tried to give an answer to the questions formulated in the introduction,whether the recipient of the Vatican manuscript had access to the same informationas the reader of Vincent's text and whether this particular rendering is to be

considered as 'equivalent' to Vincent's Alexander passage. The first question hasreceived an affirmative answer. The second question cannot be answered imme-cliately . The essence of 'equivalence' is, though this may sound paradoxical,'plural': every angle of incidence has its own 'equivalence'. GLOBAL'equivalcnce'does not exist. Jean's text shows that the FUNCTIONAL 'equivalence' cover$FORMAL, PRAGMATIC (on the macro-level as well as on the micro-level) andSEMANTIC 'equivalences', each of which exhibits gradational structures ofpcrfection.

NOTES

I Sonrc othcr, intlireet, evidencc is to hc found in thc prologuc to thc Epistcs ct l)vttrtglles,conrplcted beforo 1326, end in lris translation oI thc Diret'kriuttt utl I'ulsugluntI.itricnduttr, Thl: lelt tert tcomr lo lurve hecn completcd in 1333.

T2 lt is lrrrssiblc lhnl ltnul Meyer wus riglrt irr ussunring thut sonre utltlitlurrr irr lhc ('hnntiqur

dc I'rinmt relbr ttt n Norntnn origin tll'Jcurr dc Vignay: thc trrtnsltrlor ltirttsell'tttctttionsMolay llucon (in Norrrtundy) ns thc vill:tgc whcrc hc wcnt to school (Mcycr ltt7l:passirn; Knowlcs 1954a: 355).

3 Thc cataloguc was publishcd by thc Societe dcs Bibliophiles Frangais (Pirris 1867). Forthe complete list of Jean's works, see Knowles 1954a.

4 The French text used here is that of Ms. Vatican Regin. lat. 538. The quotations fromVincent's Speculum are from the so-rcalled'Douai edition' (Bibliotheca Mundi seu SpeculiMaioris Vincentii Burgundi praesulis Bellovacensis ordinis praedicatorum theologi acdoctori eximii. Tomus quartus qui Speculum Historiale insuibitur..., Duaci, MDCXXIV,Ex officina typographica Balthazaris Belleri...).

5 Quoted by Knowles (1954a: 361) after Ms. Paris, BN. fr. 241, fol. lr.6 Cf. Gumbert (1982: 153).

7 Cf . Knowles (1954a: 372).8 Fol. lr.9 Although Jean's translations are preserved in a large number of manuscripts (the

L,lgende Dorie,for instance, has come down to us in about 30 rnanuscripts and some 40editions), the literary influence of his activities is rather limited. Christine de Pisanutilized his translation of the De Re Militari for her Livre des Faits d'Armes. Theprinter/publisher Caxton used some passages of the Jeu des Eschecs in his Game andPlaye o.f the Chesse (Knowles 1954b: passim).

l0 In his prologue he says; Et vous pouruez , se vous voulez, trouver moult d'auctoritez qui fonta cest propos ou livre de I'uevre des moines que mon seigneur saint Augustin fist... andl....monseigneur saint Gregoire meismes dit que c'est la chose par quoy on adresce plus tost ala voye de Dieu que par oir parole de verit,t humblement...

I I Munchen 1960.

l2 Lausberg 1960: 251*3.l3 This becomes very clear when we analyse the transler from verse into prose (a'formal'

translatiot) of some parts of the Roman d'Alexandre in the l5th--century Fais etConcquestes du Noble Roy Alexandre. See Gosman (forthcoming a): the greater part ofthe Voeux du Paon has not, like the other texts of the Roman d'Alexandre, been mutilatedand reworked, and this is more than a simple indication of preference.

14 We assume that these indications belong to the reception-pattern programmed by theauthor, and that they are not, at least not in all cases, due to scribal editing.

l5 In the quotations all capitals and diacritical signs are used in accordance with modernusage.

l6 Cf. chapters XXXVIII and XLIIII. We do not consider here the possibility of scribalerrors or modifications. The Vatican manuscript is taken at face value.

l7 This is, quantitatively speaking, a modification. Practically the heading of chapter XLIXis a paraphrase of the contents of that chapter.

l8 For Helinand's influence on Vincent's conceptions, see the studies by Edm6 Smits andHans Voorbij in the present volume.

l9 For the concept of auctor, see Minnis 1979: passim.20 A 'primary'activity implies the principle of innovation (Even-Zohar 1978 120).

2l The same carefulness regarding identification of the'sources'can be found in thereproduction of the dates Vincent incorporated into his text. Here, too, Jean is vcryscrupulous.

22 Other examples of this procedure can be found in chapter V whcrc thc Latin rcads:...supra culmen domu,r patri,r eiu,r: om(n duplici,r imparii... Thc Frcnch givcs: .,,sus luhuutest'e dc la maison son pere se'ne,llun$ le huult,,vt't,da dwhle empire,,. The substantiveont(n is rcplaccd by a connecting partlelpium prne$ens.

23 Thc clilfcrence bctwccn Vincent'g tert end Joan'i is rtol to hc interpreted un $n uttenlpt hy

Jcirrr tu ohscrrre the tllvirre it*t.tr ol'Ale rurrr['r" 'l'his w'ukl irnply tl prcc()nception ol'lhe

wh.lo work he is tr*nnlrttirtg, ttntl rtrci.i l* ttrt t*tcsti'n ol'any othcr attitudc vcrsrll{ the ST

than llndttmcntttl loy*lty' nd thcir marvcls' scc my cditi.n of

24 lior mcclicvalknowledgc rtbout lrttr Iittstcrn countrtes a

thc Lctter of Prcstcr John (Gosman t9tl2: tntroduction' paragraphs 7'4 and 7'5)'

25 Wc mention onif n.runs hcrc. Elsewherc one can find adjectives as hcllit'us (in: rnclrs

hellic,us),whictr is quite adequately translated by paour de bataille, etc.

26 Stcfenelli (1g67: 154) lists quite a number of subitantives expressing the idea of 'battlc' ()r

'combat'. Among these are estor, meslee, chaple, poignei'z ' assemblee ' champ ' tornei"itt'slc '

escremie,etc. See also Gorog (1973: 91)'

27 See chapter VI of his book (1970)'

2lt See Gosman (forthcoming b)'

29 Cf. Brackert 1968: Passim'

r should like to thank my colleague Gerrit Bunt for his help with the final version of this

article.

--*-esrl-

d*r.iry ,,, 101

R.W.K, Sehrrell

Zur volkssprachlichen Rezeption des Speculum

H is tor iale in Deutschland.Die Alexander-Geschichte in den Excerpta Chronic'arum

Uber die volkssprachliche Rezeption des Speculum Historiale Yinzenz' vonBeauvais in Deutschland ist bislang wenig bekannt geworden.r Dies liegt zum einenan der recht schmalen Uberlieferungsbasis: die Existenz einer (der einzigen?)vollstdndigen deutschen Ubersetzung (14. Jh.) kann aufgrund von (Miinchener undKonigsberger) Bruchsti.icken lediglich vermutet werden.2 Zum zweiten sind diewenigen vorhandenen Vinzenz-Auszrige bzw. -Bearbeitungen nicht hinreichendbeachtet worden.3 Von einer umfassenden Bestandsaufnahme der einschliigigenHandschriften (-fragmente) und Drucke sind wir jedenfalls noch weit entfernt.aDrittens mag die noch im Dunkeln liegende Textgeschichte des Speculum Historialeselbst an der recht unbefriedigenden Forschungslage hinsichtlich der deutschenYinzenz-Rezeption schuld sein: noch nicht einmal die wichtigsten Voraussetzun-genzueiner textkritischen Ausgabe des Speculum Historiale, ndmlich das Sammeln,Sichten und Priifen der Handschriften, sind geleistet worden.s Zwar kennt maninzwischen ca. 200 einschldgige Handschriften, doch werden noch weit mehr in denBibliotheken Europas und Amerikas vermutet.6 Doch scheint schon jetzt festzuste-hen, dass mehrere Redaktionen des Speculum Historiale (entstan'den zwischen 1244und 1259) existiert haben.T Hinsichtlich der Alexander-Geschichte kann manzumindest zwischen einer Dijon-Version (Ms. Dijon 568; die 68 capita derAlexanderteils sind iiber die Biicher 3 und 4 verteilt) und der Douai-Version (die 70bzw. 7l capita,der Alexander-Geschichte bilden das 4. Buch) unterscheiden.s

Als vorldufiges Fazit einer ersten Ubersicht ergibt sich, dass im Gegensatz zuanderen Ldndern (etwa Italiene und den Niederlandenlo) in Deutschland dasSpeculum Historiale kaum und dazuhin erst spdt zu Ubersetzungen oder Bearbei-tungen angeregt hat. Eines besonderen Interesses darf deshalb die deutscheWeltchronik der beiden Niiniberger Kanzleischreiber Johann Platterberger undTheodorich Truchsess aus dem Jahre 1459r I gewiss sein, die in der Vorrede zuihrem Werk als Hauptquellen das Speculum Historiale desYinzenz von Beauvais,die Chronik des Martinus Polonus und die Flores temporum des Hermann Cygasncnnen. Im ersten Band dieser zweigeteilten Weltchronik lesen wir eine Darstellungdcr fiinf Weltalter von der Schirpfung bis zu Julius Ciisar (Christi Geburt), derzweitc Band,enthAlt die Weltgeschichte von der Grtindung Roms bis auf KsiserFricdrich lll. und elnen Abrirs der Papstgeschichte bisauf Pius ll, (145E 1464).

-

I lcrrscher in nlter rrnd neuet Zeil rrr wisre n. sci scgcnhringcnd, ntitzliclr untl ldihlie lr,

rncincn die Verlbsner rler li,ttvrptu ('hrtmicurunr, Dcshalh haben sie den Plttngclasst, l'tir ein historilelr ilrtcrcssicrtcs, abcr latcinunkuncligcs Publikurn elie

cinschltigigc latcinische ('hroniklitcrutur zu cxzerpieren.2'3 Dass dic Konrpilntionriberdies Cottcs Prcis und Ehrc und dcm Ansehen der Stadt Ntirnbcrg clienen soll,kann als zweitrartgigcs Motiv gelten. Was nun den angesprochenen intercssiertenLeserkreis an der alten Geschichte im Einzelnen interessiert und lasziniert. dariibervcrlautet in der Vorrede nichts. Wir mi.issen es aus tiber die ganzc Vorredeverstreuten Formulierungen erschliessen: neben der Geschichte der Piipstc uncl

Kaiser, neben den Taten der Herrscher in vorchristlicher Zeit soll auch von

tre.ffenlichen geschichten (A, f. lrb) die Rede sein; der erste Band soll die Geschichteder fi.inf Weltalter, aber auch etwas wunderlicher geschichten (f. lvb) bringen; imzweiten Band werden die Taten und Entscheidungen der Piipste und Kaisermitsampt etlichen mercklichen seltzsamen taten und geschichten (f. lvb), die sieh

damals zugetragen haben, nachzulesen sein. Das Interesse an der Geschichtcverengt sich zum Interesse an Geschichten, an anekdotenhaften Erziihlungenrmerkwiirdigen Begebenheiten. Geschichte zerrinnt zur Ansammlung votlGeschichten: Und diss buch ist genant Excerpta Chronicarum, ein verltempnunglustperlicher sachen, tat und geschichten, gezogen aus vil Cronicken (f. lvb).

Diese Sicht der Historie prdgt als Gestaltungsprinzip die Anordnung des Stofl'es,z.B. bei der Darstellung des Trojanischen Krieges. Wdhrend Yrnzenz nur summa-risch die Zerstorung Trojas behandelt (Speculum Historiale II 60-63), nehmen dicAutoren der Excerpta dieses Sujet zum Anlass, die fortlaufende chronistischcBerichterstattung zu unterbrechen und auf ca. 35 Bldttern (ca. l0% des erstenBandes!) die Kiimpfe, 'Ritterspiele' und 'merkwiirdigen' Begebenheiten des Troja-nischen Krieges nach Guido de Columnis und Jacob Twinger von Kcinigshofenauszubreiten: Darumb wir hie mit der hystorien auffidren und rilen, von der selhen

Stat Troye etwas begreyffen und sagen, Darnach wider an die historien kumen wdllen

t...1 (f. l26ra). Das Ereignis der Zerstcirung Trojas wird so zur'Geschichte' (fabulalinnerhalb der Geschichte (historia). Dies zeigt sich schon an der Quellenbenutzung:Die Kampfschilderungen (3. bis 24. streyt) iibernimmt Platterberger ihrer Kfirzewegen wortlich aus der deutschen Weltchronik Jacob Twingers von Konigshofon(Anm. 2l),wahrend er die romanhaften Zwischenszenen und Episoden (Hektor imGesprdch mit Achill; Briseida und ihr Vater Calcas; Achills Liebe zu Pollixena;Achills Tod im Tempel; das trojanische Pferd) ausfrihrlich Guido de Columnirnacherzdhlt (f. l47rb-158va). So schieben sich zwischen die knapp berichtetenKriegshandlungen immer wieder die farbigen Schilderungen kleiner Geschichten.

Auch bei der Darstellung von Alexanders Leben zeigt sich das Bestreben, dieAlexandergeschichte von allen rein chronistischen Daten und Mitteilungen, dienicht unmittelbar die Person und die Taten Alexanders betreffen, die aber beiYinzenzim 4. Buch (dem'Alexanderbuch') untergebracht waren, zu befreien, um so

eine inhaltlich geschlossene'Fabel' mit fortlaufender Handlung zu erreichen: diese'stcirenden' Mitteilungen werden einlach vor die Alexander-Vita gesetzt, derenf)arstellung dadurch an Geschlossenheit und erzdhlerischer Kontinuitdt gewinnt(vgl. Anhang). Auch hier driingt sich jedoch der Eindruck auf, eine 'Geschichtc'clic wicdcr in zahlreichc 'Gcschichtchen' sich aufsplittert-- innerhalb der Geschichtevor sich zu haben, Deshulb rlarf rnit gutem Recht vcrmutct wcrden, dass Chroniken

l'rtttgc zeit, scil ll{(r4. tlel liltttleckulrg tlicscs wcrks durch (.url }{egel,rr his lt)7t)gillt tler zwcitc llittttl tlcr []lrtttcrhcrgci J'ruchscs.s'schcn weltchrr'ik 'ls

vcrsclr.l-lcttrt ttlttl witr nttr tlurclr tlic Ausirigc clcs Ntirnbcrgcr n,rryiii.ri.rrs urrtl Arztcsllitrttttitntr schcdct irt cincr Han<JschrifI des 15. Jhs. (clm472,f . l21 20g) unclclurchAtrsztigc in zwci Hss. dcs 16. Jhs. bekannt.ra Vom ersten Band habcn sich dreiI lanclschriftcn aus der 2. Hiilfte des I 5. Jhs. erhalten: r s A: Ni,irnberg, stadtbiblio-tltck. Clcnt. II 86 (die beste Hs.. vielleicht das Original);;; B: Nrirnberg,(jcrmanisches Nationalmuseum, Loffelholzarchiv 631 luon derselben Hand);r7 C:oxford, Bibliotheca Bodreiana, cod. Francisci Douce ,uttr i.ioerliefert denschlechtesten Text). I e

Dass der erste Band dieser deutschen weltchronik - mit ihm allein wollen wir unsbeschailtigen - bei den Historikern auf ein noch geringeres Interesse als der zweiteBand gestossen ist, ist angesichts der Arbeitsweise"der beiden Autoren verstdndlich:deren Tritigkeit besteht allein im Exzerpieren, Kompilieren und Kontaminieren derQuellen' zu Recht nennen Platterbirger und Truchsess ihr werk .Excerptachronicarum'(Auszrige aus chroniken)lEigene stellungnahmen, quellenkritischeBemerkungen' neue, sonst unbekannte Nichrichten dtirfen wir von den zweiKanzleischreibern nicht erwarten. Ein eigenes Geschichtsbild ldsst die weltchroniknicht erkennen. Deshalb kann unser Interesse weder der Frage nacn dem Wahr-heitsgehalt des dort Mitgeteilten noch der nach dem mciglichen geschichtsphiloso-phischen Horizont der Excerpta chronicarumgelten, sondern muss sich eher auf dieFragen nach den Motiven und Techniken d]eser Kompilation konzentrieren:20Wer besass ein Interesse an solchen Geschichtskompilationen? Wie mussten solcheKompilationen angelegt sein, um einen Leserkreis zu finden? Auf welche Art undweise werden die verschiedenen Quellen 'ausgebeutet'? welche Selektionskriterienlassen sich erkennen?2 t Uber diese und dhnliche Fragen gelangt man vielleicht dochnoch zu Einsichten dartiber, was Geschichte, was vergangene Ereignisse undMitteilungen ftir diese Kompilatoren bedeuteten, d.h. was an den historischenNachrichten ftir sie tiberhaupt interessant war.

Uber die Grtinde, die ru, Abfursung der Kompilation ftihrten, geben die erstenSdtze der vorrede Auskunft:22 wann iufruchtper-, nutze und loblichen ist, die tat undzeytung alter ges.chicht und regirer nit allein in der alten, sunder auch RdmischerBebste, kiing und regirer in der Newen Ee zii wissen, und nu etlich solichs zil lesen undzu hdren begirlich genaigt, (lnd doch des in lateinischer schrffi und sprachnit gniglichvernemend sind, Darr'imb voran got (em Almechtigen zu tobi"und de, krysrrtrrhen Statltluremberg, die dann mit zierliechem geri)cht"und loblichen namen in vil landenberilmet ist , zil sundern eren, Auff das die, die solch ergangen geschicht und hanndelkilnffiiclich lesen werden, got zu lobe- und'ern, autch gemaynen nutz zi gut, das bestedarinl brilfen miigen, Haben wir, Johannes PlatterbZrger"de, J;;;r;;nd TheodricusTru-chsess, d'e zeit-cantzleyschreyber daselbs, im bestenfilrgenomen, Nit allein tatund geschicht von den zeyten Rrimischer Bebste und keyser, Sunder auc:h der king undregirer in der alten le, und dabey von den ursprungen etlicher grossen reich und irerzergencknilss, Auch von treffenlichen geschichtenl drrmal, ergangen von anbegynnder werlt here, etvnrs zu begreyffen ,rd durch aygenschafft und innhalt lareinisc,herhystorien in dys't Deutsch buch zi) ziehent...l(A: N"tirnb..g, Stadtbibtiothek, Ccnt. II86, f. lra-rb).

vom Entstehen und vergehen m[chtiger Reiche, von den Taten gro$lier

ft02 ,sftn"g

103

'''"'

von dcr Art dcr li-tcerptct ('hronicunln, vor ultem eler kuriori$chen l,ekti,irc dicntcn,wic dics ja schon ofl l'iir dic Wcltchroniken der l)orrriniknner untl lirunziskancrbehauptet worden ist:2a die einzelnen gc,,rra, dit'tu und ntirtthilirl wlren intcrcssant.nicht die Gesamtstruktur einer Chronik. Diescs lntmesse fi.ir das Dctail frihrtletztlich zu so zusammengesttickelten Gebilden wie dem Alexandcrtcil der Excerpta(vgl. Anhang).

Neben der Bereitstellung von erbaulichen und unterhaltsamen Geschichtendienen die Excerpta Chronicarum dem Zweck, die massenhaft i.iberliefertenhistorischen Daten in ein widerspruchsfreies chronologisches Schema zu zwingen.Dabei verlassen sich Platterberger und Truchsess ganzauf die Datierungen andirerChroniken wie z.B. der Flores temporum in der von Hermann Gygas redigiertenVersion, deren Prolog-und damit die einschlzigige Diskussion riber die Zuver-iiissig-keit der tiberlieferten Daten - sie teilweise wcirtlich (ins Deutsche ribersetzt) in ihieeigene Vorrede iibernehmen.2s Eigene quellenkritische Arbeit liegt den Kompilato-ren der Excerpta fern.26 Auch die Teilung des Stoffes in iwei Brinde wirdoffensichtlich den Flores temporumverdankt.2T

Von den zahlreichen in mittelalterlichen Chroniken diskutierten Funktionen derGeschichtsschreibung2s lesen wir also bei Platterberger kaum etwas. In dieserHinsicht scheinen die Verfasser der Excerpta und deren Leser ziemlich anspruchs-los gewesen zu sein. Grossere M{ihe haben sie dagegen fiir die Heranziehung deshistoriographischen Materials aufgewendet. Als Quellen des zweiten Bandeswurden von der Forschung flber die bereits in der Vorrede genannten dreiHauptquellen (Vinzenzvon Beauvais, Martinus Polonus, Flores teiporum) hinausbislang ausfindig gemacht: Ekkehard von Aura, Sigebert von Gembloux, Gottfriedvon Viterbo, Sdchsische Weltchronik, Andreas von Regensburg, Jacob Twingervon Konigshofen, Heinrich von Rebdorf, Mathias von Neuburg, Albert vonStrassburg und spezielle Niirnbergische Quellen.2e Die wichtigste Quelle des erstenBandes bildet das Speculum Historiale:3o daneben ist aber .in. gunre Reihe vonanderen Texten benutzt worden - von Guido de Columnis und Jacob Twinger alsGrundlagen des Trojateils war bereits die Rede -, was hier exemplarisch an derAlexandergeschichte3r vorgefiihrt werden soll.32 Ftir den Alexanderteil derE x ce rp t a wurden herangezogen:Yinzenz von Beauvais, Speculum Historiale;33eine Mischredaktion der Historia de preliis (I2ll3);3aJacob Twinger von Konigshofen, Weltchronik.3 s

Walter von Ch6tillon, Alexandrels36 und die ps.-aristotelische Schrift SecretumSe cret orum3 1 (aus Babiloth?);s 8

interpolierter Q. Curtius Rufus-Text3e bzw. ein Textcorpus von 4 lateinischenReden;ao

eine chronistische Quelle (nicht Flores temporum).arDariiber, wie Platterberger seine verschiedenen Quellen zum Alexanderteil

auswertet, erfahren wir in der Vorbemerkung des Autors (der Autoren) zurAlexander-Vita nichts: Und sind nu Allexarcder der rnechtigist ki)ng und her,rc'hergewesen ist, der itdtn der werlt ward, und auch darumb der.gross Atixun(ter genunlwirl, So zimpt .sich von seinem ursprung, gepurl und regirung auch etwas zu sag:en, tlussic'h clann ettlicher mass lenger denn von anclern gcmuynen kiingen zu hegreylli,ncruJitschet (A 283ra-rb, B 289vb, C l53va), Hier wird lediglich der relatiu ginr*e

LJml4ng clcr Alexnndergeachielrtr,. (cn, .10 vott insgcsamt ca. 355 Uliittcrn) nrit dettt

Hinwcii aul'clie bcsondEre historisclrc llcclcutung Alexandcrs dcs Crosscn bcgriin'

clct. Ftir 6ie Beurteilung v91 Vinzcnz' Quellenbenutzung aufschlussrcichcr ist die

crstc Kapiteliiberschrift dcs Alcxanderteils: Von kilng Allexander dem grossen,

,teincn mercklichen geschichten und taten und des erslen vctn seiner wunclerlichen

empf'enc,knils (A2g3;b). An Alexanders Leben interessieren vor allem die merckli'

,hii gurchichten und taten,d.h. merkwiirdige Begebenheiten und Handlungen. Als

nekrlftigung dieser Sicht folgt die Formulierung, die das erste berichtenswerte

Ereignis d., Al.*under-Vita charakterisiert: von seiner wunderlichen emplencknils

(n Zgf rU). Auf das Seltsame und Merkwiirdige als herausragende Merkmale des

Alexanderteils hat uns der Autor bereits in einer Vorankiindigung auf diescn Teil

seiner Weltchronik eingestimmt: von des [Alexandersf wunderlichen gepilrt und

.seltsamen geschichten iernach verrer erclerung geschicht (A 28lva). Die einzige

Autor6usserung innerhalb der Alexanderpassage hebt wiederum auf das mirahlle

als Selektionskriterium fiir Platterbergers Umgang mit den Quellen ab: r/as [die

Schilderung weiterer Eroberungen Alexande rsl vermeyden wir hie umb kurcz wlllen,

Auch umb des willen, das sich daielbst nichtz wunderlichs oder treffenlichs ergeben hal

(A 295vb, B 300rb, i: t Slua;. Neben dem Wunderbaren soll die Alexandergeschich'

ie auch Vorztigliches, Hervorragendes (in Taten und Reden) vermitteln. Damit ist

eine mogliche lehrhafte Komponente der Excerpta Chronicarum angedeutet. Hiilt

man die mirabilia, die morilia und die chronistischen Angaben als die drei.Leitschienen' von platterbergers Alexanderdarstellung fest, dann entstcht in

Umrissen bereits eine Vorstellung dessen, was durch die Kompilation von Vinzenz'

Speculum Historiale,der Historia de preliis (l2ll3mit Jacob Twinger von Kcinigsho-

fen), dem ps.-aristotelischen S e cre tum Se cre t orum undvier gesondert ilberlieferten

rhetorisch stilisierten Reden erreicht werden sollte.

Das Bildungsniveau platterbergers selbst und seines Leserkreises scheint nicht

sehr hoch gewesen zu sein. Den Terminus oratoriameint der Autor erkliiren zu

mtissen: In-der kiinste Oratoria, das ist des aussprechens oder wolredens (A 302vb' B

306va, C l63ra). Das Wort Liber erkennt Platterberger nicht als Beinamen des

Gottes Bacchus und iibersetztfiducia religionis liberi patris (Yinzenz M8,17: 'im

Vertrauen auf die Ehrfurcht gegeni.iber dem Vater Bacchus') wie folgt: verliessen

,sich die purger daselbs auff ite geystlicheit und freitthum des vaters (A 305ra' B

308vb, C l64ra;vgl. auch ,q. lOgtu, B 3l lva, C 165vb, wo von der Hohle 'des freyen'

statt von der Hohie Bacchus' die Rede ist, VinzenzIY 56,2). Im grossen ganzen abcr

haben die Autoren der Excerpta Chronicarum denlnhalt ihrer lateinischen Quellen

korrekt wiedergegeben, wenn sie auch sich vom Wortlaut des Lateins oft kaum

losen. Einige Abweichungen vom lateinischen Text sind sicher durch Verschreibun'

gen der Vorlage bedingt: wenn 2.8., in den Excerpta, plumen f;J,t .fores ('Tiircn')

it.ht, so liegt in der Voilage wohl eine Verschreibung vonfores in.flores ('Blumen)

vor (lhnliche Fiille : rei statt dei; par solls statt parens solis ) '

I Speculum Historialc als Quelle: Der Wortlaut anderer Drucke wie z.B. dcs

von 1473 (Strassburg) und l4g4 (Venedig) steht der mutmasslichen Vorlugeplattcrbergers zwgr iiiher.*, doch gehe ich bei dem folgcnden Vcrglcich von

Speculum-Htstorlale und 6#r,e, rptu von dem inzwischen fast klassisch gcwordencn

tjruck von 1624 (Doual) eus, de cr am chesten zugiinglich sein cliirfte.

t05

llci ciltcltl gr.ssfliichigen vergleieh zwischc' d'n Alcxanclcrbuch ctcs speruluntllhtoriult' (lluclt IV) ui.t dcr A-lcxr,rd;6;;;;,,g. d* Exct,rpta (,hronicurunt firtzuniichst itul' dass Plattcrbcrger (uncl Truchscss) die ersten ca. 20 Kapitcl deslluchcs IV ollbnsichtlich auf alle Faktcn unJ Norr.,richte; hi-n, oie wissenswertcrschienen' aber nicht direkt mit der Person Arexanders ,ururr.nhiengen,durchforscht.und dann separat vg d9n eigentlich.n nl.^uno.lt.ir gestellt haben(vgl' Anhang): z.B. Iy 6, r lpratos Tod); IV;"gi. lpr_atos Arter); tv 6, rg_20 (prarosNachfolger); IV 6,21-26(Lebensweise von Platos s_chtiler); IV 7, l-6 (Augustin iiberzwei Bticher Apuleius', eines Plato-Schtilr;, Iv 7,2H2 (ethisch e dicta ausApuleius' werken)' Es folgen in iihnlicher weise Ausztige chronistischen, anekdo-tischen und moralischen tnhalts aus den rcapitetn g bis r l, r 4 bis 17 ,22,29 und 3g.Dadurch wird die sich anschliessende ar.iuna.rgeschichte, die nun wieder beiYinzenz IV I ansetzt, von allem 'Beiwerk' entlastet und zu einer kontinuierlichfortschreitenden Erzdhlung iiber das Leben u[.in Alexanders umgeformt. In dieserKonzentration auf die Person Alexander, *irJrugleich.in *riiu-orausschauenderumgang mit der Quelle sichtbar: die Bearbeitung des 4. Buches von yinzenz,speculum Historiqle durch die deutscrt." a,rto*n (ftir den l. Band der Excerptawird allerdings oft Platterberger als einzige. v.rfusr.. u.r-u,et; erfotgte nichtkapitelweise, sondern stets mit"dem Blick Juf das ganze4. Buch. Nur so ist etwaauch die verschiebung des 46. Kapitels rtini* das 60. Kapitel zu verstehen:zusammen mit den Kapiteln 6l und oz bildet das 60. Kapitel nun einen inhaltlichgeschlossenen Block iiber Alexande ,s ,uprrbto auf dem Hohepunkt seiner Macht.Dem ziel' dieAlexandergeschichte als eine fortlalgni. Handlung zu prdsentieren,dient sicher auch das wegriicken der Dindi-ur-Kupitel vom E;?. des 4. Buches(rv 66-71), wo sie ars Anhiingser fungie.err, und deren Einftigung vor dieSchilderung von Alexanders letzten Tagen.

Dass von den insgesamt 54 uberschrlften (mit roter Tinte jeweils den einzelnenHandlungsabschnitten vorgesetzt) des eigentlichen Alexanderteils d.er Excerptaiiber zwei Drittel (41) mit oen uueischrifte"n iii iprrrrum Historiare korrespondie-ren' zeigt die tiberragende Bedeutung ai"r.r ftrrk, frir den ersten Band derdeutschen weltchronitt. a.rrgrund a.i qu.ii.ni.nutrung ldsst sich sogar eineDreiteilung der deutschen A-lexanderg.rihi.ht. uo.nehmen: Bis einschliesslichYinzenzrv 42arbeiten die deutschen Aito..r, no.rr mit anderen euellen (vor allemmit12bzw. Jacob Twinger); im Mittelreil (vi";;;;rv 43bis 7r -it Aurnahme von63 bis 65) exzerpieren sL ausschliessrich ;^;;;;;rtum Histo,rtoir';- ru^schruss (A3l2ra-3l3rb) muss Yinzenz' werk seine Funktion ars euelle mit der Historia depreliis (I3) bzw. Jacob Twinger teilen.wenn das '!peculum Hiioriale als entscheidende vorlage ftir platterbergersAlexandergeschichte fungiert, dann erscheint es methodisch als sinnvoll, nach denspeculum-stellen zu fragen, die in die deutsche Alexanderdarstellung nichtEingang gefunden

-haben. inrg.ru-t ergeben sich mir "i..?.,egorien vonStreichungen bzw. Ktirzungen, d]e allerdinis rrirtrtln allen Fdllen klar voneinanderabgrenzbar sind:

a Fast szinitliche, Mitteilungen tiber 'Nebenfiguren' oder ,Nebenschaupldtze,werden unterdriickt (auch kleini Episoden aus all"xanders Leben konnen darunterfallen); d'h' wir haben es mit einer Konzentroiinn auf die grossen Linien inAlexanders Unternehmungen zu tun, Als Beispi.l. iti, diese nrt

-r,, nuslassungen

kiinncn gcltenr lV l9 (15 17) lipinrrle nus I'lrilipps Lcbenl lV 20 uttd 2l:weiterel)ctails aus I'hilipps Letrcn: lV 25 (l7b 201) i.ibcr dic Sippc dcs Strato in'fyrus: lV25 (22 30) riberden Konig Ahtlnloninrus in Sydon; IV 2tt ( l0b 26a) dic Episode. diezum Wiederaufbau Thebcns l'i,ihrt: cin'I'hcbaner siegt in Korinth im Dreikampf (inrlcn Ext'crpta dagegen wird nur das Rcsultat, der Wiederaufbau, crwfihnt); lV 3l('l l2) die gesonderten militdrischen Aktionen einiger Heerftihrer; IV 3l (2lb 2tl)

.iiidische Geschichte; IV 48 (18-25a) das Verhalten von Alexanders Heer im'l'cmpelbereich des Bacchus; IV 48 (35b-41) Episode vom verwundeten Lysimn-chus; IV 51 (15-23a) Episode von einer Verwundung Alexanders; IV 55 (35b 43)Episode vom Schneefall und der Hilfsbereitschaft Alexanders; IV 60 (7 l2) Auftragl'iir Alticon (Antigonus), zwei Sdulen zu errichten.

b Nicht-handlungstragende Teile (Beschreibungen, Charakterisierungen, Re-11 exionen, naturwissenschaftliche Exkurse) werden gekiirzt oder tibergan gen. A uchdiese Kategorie zielt somit auf einen kontinuierlichen Handlungsablauf, auf einstetiges Aneinanderreihen von Aktionen. So entsteht gegentiber dem Kompila-tionscharakter von Vinzenz' Alexanderbuch (Speculum Historiale IV) eine auf diePerson Alexanders konzentrierte, inhaltlich auf die Darstellung von Handlungenabhebende Erzdhlung. Als Beispiele frir diese Kategorie von Auslassungen seiengenannt: IV 33 (8-16) kritische Charakterisierung Alexanders nach Orosius undValerius Maximus (ein neues Alexanderbild stellt sich aber in den Excerptu nichtcin); IV 34 (2lb-26a) Begriindung eines Verhaltens bzw. Tuns; IV 36 (2-10) TraumAlexanders; IV 36 (27-37) Charakterisierung Alexanders.und Schilderung vonNaturerscheinungen; IV 38 (30-33) innere Reaktion Alexanders auf die Nachrichtvom Sieg Antipaters; IV 43 (18-26) Naturkundliches tiber das Kaspische GebirgctlV 44 (1G39) Begriindung fiir Alexanders Tun und Aufziihlung von AlexandersStridtegri.indungen; IV 45 (20-24) Gemtitszustand Alexanders und der Einfluss desPhilosophen Kallisthenes auf Alexander; lV 47 (ganz weggelassen) Naturkundli-ches tiber Indien; IV 50 (15-2la) Beschreibung von Porus' Konigspalast; vgl. auchKap. 58 bis 60, aus denen viele naturkundliche Details keine Aufnahme in dieEx c e r p t a gefunden haben.

c Die Tendenz, das Handlungsgeschehen nicht unterbrechen zu lassen, ist ganzdeutlich dort zu fassen, wo Platterberger Sdtze iibergeht, deren Inhalt denErzdhlfluss storen, z.B. IV 30 (31-38a): mitten in einer Schlachtschilderung bringtYinzenzdie Darstellung von Alexanders Herannahen (er ldsst vo r der Schlacht denTragtierenZweige anlegen, um durch den dadurch aufgewirbelten Staub den Feindzu verunsichern). In den Excerpta fehlt diese Episode. An einer anderen Stelle (lV35,37-48) erzahltYinzenz mitten in der Schilderung von Alexanders Flucht aucDarius' Lager eine ganz andere Episode, die sich in Alexanders Lager zugetragenhat: Darius' Mutter verwechselt Hephaistion mit Alexander. Auch diese Passage

ii bergeht Platterberger.d Die Konzentration auf die summo.facti fiihrt zum Zusammenstreichen von

Szcnen oder Briefen, von denen dann nur die ftir den Handlungsfortgang wichtigenInlormationen in der deutschen Weltchronik erscheinen: z.B. IV 34 (32= 36):nachdem das Wichtigste bercits im ersten Satz des Briefes mitgeteilt war (dag

Vcrsohnungsangebot Darius' sei i,iberfltissig, meint Alexander), spart sich dertlcutsche Bearbeitor dlc weitcrcn Ausliihrungen in Alexanders Brief.

-rr$x , 107

lnsgcstttttt crgibt sich gcgcrrtibcr dem ,!pe,r,uhmt lll;trttrittlt,ilr tlcr Atcxandcrtl'rstcl-lung dcr li.ru'rptu ('hrutnit'urum eine sturke Konzenlnrtion auf die Hancllung(cn),und zwar aul'dic Aktionen Alexanders. Dcr Atcxunclcrtcil tlcr Exterptanflhert sichdamit dem Genrc einer Erzdhlung und stimmt in der Tendenz zur Streichung bzw.Ktirzung nicht-handlungstragender Teile (Reflexionen, Beschreibungen, Briefe,Exkurse u'a.) mit den Tendenzen der volkssprachlichen spdtmittelalterlichenRomanliteratur und Geschichtsschreibung tiberein.a3

Abschliessend stellt sich die Frage, ob Plutterberger selbst die Kiirzungenvorgenommen hat oder ob ihm ein bereits in dieser Ait gektir zter yinzenz-Tixtvorlag' Fiir die letztere Moglichkeit spricht die TatsaJhe, dass die Excerptazahlreiche Kiirzungen mit der vinzeni-Ub.rr etzung des Jacob van Maerlant(Spiegel Historiaef 1. Partie, 4. Buch, 62. Kapitel)aa gemeinsam haben.as Doch ananderen Stellen stimmen die Kiirzungen Jacobs van Maerlant und platterbergersnicht iiberein. Deshalb ist wohl eher inzunehmen, dass den beiden volkssprachli-chen Yinzenz-Ubersetzungen gleichgerichtete Tendenzen zugrundeliegen: mitRticksicht auf das volkssprachliche pubtit<um, das offensichtlich an einer fortlau-fenden Handlung interessiert war und filr gelehrte Exkurse nicht viel tibrig hatte,verzichteten beide Autoren auf viele beschieibende, exkursartige, gelehrt-wissen-schaftliche Passagen. Einer dhnlichen Bearbeitungstenden, *..i.n ja auch anderelateinische historiographische Werke unterzogen-, wie z.B. die Historia rerum inpo,"iblt_.,ransmarinis gestarum desWilhelm uon Tyrus (12. Jh.) in einer altfranzcisi-schen Ubersetzung (13. Jh.;.+o

2 Die Historia de preliis (I2/I3-Mischredaktion) und die deutsche Weltchro-nik Jacob Twingers von Kcinigshofen (ca. 1400) als euellen: Nach yinzenz,speculum Historiale bildet die Historia de prelizs, und zwarin einer Mischredaktionvon 12 und 13, die zweitwichtigste Quelle fiir Platterbergers Alexandergeschichte.Bis zu Yinzenz rv 42 und dann ftir IV 64 und 65 greift der deutsche Bearbeiterimmer wieder auf die Historia de preliis zurtick. Dabei besitzt Twingers Textlediglich die Funktion einer subsidieren Quelle: dort, wo platterberger derI2/I3-Redaktion folgt, verzichtet er, falls die entspre.chende earsug. bei Twingerbereits in deutscher Sprache vorliegt, auf eine eigerre Ubersetzung ,ira ribernirnmtwortwcirtlich Twingers Text. In den anderen Frillin greift platterbfrger unmittelbarauf I2lI3 als Vorlage zuriick. Dieses Hin- und Herpendeln zwischen deutscher undlateinischer Quelle war deshalb mciglich, weil Twingers Alexanderpassage auf derAlexanderdarstellung Frutolfs von_Michelsberg (MGH ss vI 6lJ5) basiert, derseinerseits die Historia de preliis Leos (wie sie'in der Bamberger Handschriftvorliegt) ausgeschrieben und einige Abschnitte aus Orosius hinzugeftigt hat.Insofern kann auch Twingers Alexanderteil als Exzerpteiner lateinisch en Historiade preliis (in einer 12 nahestehenden Form) gelten. ohn. Schwierigkeiten konnteP.latterberger

^also zugleich der lateinischen vorlage und Twiniers deutscher

Ubersetzung folgen.Zwei Beispiele.rncigen gentigen: Gestalt und Ansehen des agyptischen K<inigs

Nectanabus, des spiiteren Vaters Alexanders, schildert platterblrier zuniichst mitden Worten Twingers:(A 283rb- va)waseinki)ng in Egipren, Nectuncthusgenctnt,clerwus cin grosser mai,rtcr in zauherkiinslen, (Jnclwenn sc,in veincle uuJ!'ln rugen,,t(t,tut:ter ';ich u'ccler mit volk noc'h harrutst'h lii r+,t,re, Suncle,r er glng"in ,i,uiu'pulnrl 1vgl,

.",..,'t*.rrswrq@E

'l'wingcr, S, 300,5 ll), llei der rielr urrnclrliessctttlctt Schiltlcfullg von Nectutltttrus'

nigroinantischer 'l'tliigkeir urrrl irr elcr Aulziihlung dcr Agypten bedrohenden

lbindlichen Vdlker lirl[t Plutte rbcrgcr tlnnrr l2 I (7b' l4) und Vinzenz lV I (361'.). du

Twinger 6iese ljukrcrinicht otler rii.llt so tletailliert bringt. Ein zwcitcs Beispiel:

dcn Anfang eincs Alcxandcrbriclbs bringt Platterberger nach Twingcr (S. 306'25'

29):Andeianclcrntaglie.ssAllcxundereinbrieffschreibenalsolautenclc" Allexunder,

Philippi und Olimpiacle sune, dem irdischen kung Dario, vqter der sunnen uncl o he .f'ttt,ler gitter[nach iint nt|6,2gbzw.Zacher-Epitome I 38?] empeut ich hail' E',r isl

e,in schande und unere einem durchleuchtigen fiirsten und als mechtigiste n kelser, dcts

er einem also cleinem mann solche stoltze wort schreibet und empeutet uncl cloc'h dett

sterbens allezeit vor im in sorgen steet (A294rVva). Da Twinger den weiteren lnhalt

dieses Briefes aber nicht nach 12 mitteilt, sondern stark verdndert bzw. ktirzt, greift

Platterberger wieder auf die lateinische Quelle (Historia de preliis 12) zuriick.

Da Platfurberger das Speculum Historiale alsHauptquelle fiir seine Alexanderge'

schichte wehlte; die Historia de preliis (I2/I3-Mischredaktion) dagegen nur

punktuell als Ergdn 1arng heranzog, erscheint hier die Frage angebracht, n$ch

welchen Gesichtsfunkten der deutsihe Autor die Historia de prelirs auswertete, d,h,

was er aus ihr i.ibernahm und warum er gerade diese Passagen iibernahm. Insgesamt

muss man wohl mit mindestens sechs Kategorien rechnen, die bei der Selektion der

lateinischen Vorlage I2lI3 bestimmend waren:

a Es zeigt sich eine grosse Vorliebe Platterbergers fiir Redeszenen und

Gesprdche.oiln ihnen wird entweder die Handlung vorangetrieben oder abcr cin

moralisch es dictum (dicta) mitgeteilt. Alle nachfolgend aufgefiihrten Reden aus l2

(bzw. Twinger) fehlen in Vinzenz' Speculum Historiale: 12 I (l7F|2l) Nectanabus

zu einem Satrapen iiber die rechte Haltung angesichts einer militiirischen Bedro-

hung (A 283 ui);lZ 9 (l-7a) Nectanabus zu Olimpias unmittelbar vor Alexanders

Geburt (A 285va); f2 i0 (2-6),in der Ubersetzung Twingers von Konigshofen, S,

301,20f., iibernommen) Philipp zu Olimpias iiber Alexanders Herkunft (A 285vb)l

12 lZ (2_3: in der Ubersetzung Twingers, S. 301,29-31, iibernommen) Philipp zu

Alexander tiber dessen Tapfeikeit (A 289vb); 12 13 (6-16: in der ubersetzung

Twingers, S. 302,9-14a, ribirnommen) Nectanabus und Alexander im GesprAch

tiber Nectanabus' Tod (A 29Ma); 12 l8 (1G27) Versohnungsgesprdche Philipp/

Alexander und Olimpias/Alexanier (A 29irb-va);1221 (7_l3: in der Ubersetzung

Twingers, S. 305,5-ll, iib..nommen) Alexanders Rede vor alten Soldaten (A

292vb);12 46 (17-20: in der Ubersetzung Twingers, S. 308,2-7) Darius wird von

seinem Bruder zu grcisserem perscinlichen Einsatz aufgefordert (A 298vb); 12 7l

(4-ll: in der UberJetzung Twingers, S. 309,16-24) Darius zu seinen Mordern (A

302ra); 12 72.(6f.: in der ubersetzung Twingers, s. 309,27f.) Alexander zum

sterbenden Darius (A 302rb).In und mit diesen Redeszenen werden keine weltgeschichtlich bedeutsamen

Nachrichten vermittelt, sondern meist moralische dicta in kleinem Kreise mitge'

teilt. Zwar kommt die Handlung in diesen Redeszenen zuweilen zum Stillstand,

clafi.ir offnet sich aber der Blick auf die moralia, neben den mirahilia eine wichtige

strukturbildende und selektionsbestimmende Kategorie der Excerpta Chronica'

rum. Offensichtlich fand dieses Einhalten in dcr Darstellung von Aktionen und das

so ermoglichte Aullretcn einer redenden Person die Zustimmung dcr damaligen

Weltchronik Lcecr. Dcnn auch in das Werk Jaeott Twingcrs von Konigshofen sind

l0r . ,. llllfrh*"

lirsl .lle tlcr cben 'ulgelistercn

szencn..ulgenr)n*rr.' w'rden,ai Auclr tl'rt rcilrtsich auf'dicse Weise lilrisoeleirn tipisode.b Dic Tende nz zur Biltlung kleiner szcncn und (ieschichten, dic aber inhaltlichdirekt mit der Hauptfigur A'lexnnd.r* ,io"icr H'upttr,,irJiung vcrknripft seinmi'issen' wird verstfirkt dort sichtbar, *o-plorterbergcr ,,ui:-ii (bzw. Twinger)zuriickgreift' um eine Szene zu dramotiri.r.n, o.n. ai..i"inr.in.n Handlungsschrittedetailliert schildert und dem ril sp""i""g erwarteten Ende der Handrungentgegenftihrt' Dies gelingt etwa bei der Bufefalus-Episode (A 290va_vb: ent_spricht 12 r5 (4-r3),inder ubersetzung Twingers, S. 302,27_32, und S. 303,2_3 und4-9 tibernommen)' Dies-gelingt auch bei aer tlumultartigen szene, in der Alexandereinen vertrauten seines vut.it erschldgt uno ptritipp ri'it o.- s.rr*ert Alexanderbedroht (A29lrb: entspricht 12 ]!rz-islj. a"r1 ai._vergiftungsszene in Babylon(A 3 r2r a-rb : entsprichi t: rg0,2.2-.\g?,fi') g.ror,., pratterberger gegentiber vin-zenz rv 64 als eine ribersichtlich rottraJi.nae Handlung mit dramatischemAblauf.c Die vorliebe ftir beriihmte dicta veranlasst platterberger manchmal, in einebereits bei vinzenz angelegte Rede- oder nrieivene ein dict-umaus 12 einzufiigen.So findet sich z'B' auch-bei Yinzenz rv is-iie Begegnung zwischen Darius,Zinsboten und demjungen Alexander, doch aie cteictrririo.

"'"- Huhrr, das keineEier mehr regt, ribernimmt pratterberger aus ti tg (2-5)brw. ar^ i*inge., chronik(s' 303'27-304'11)' Auch Yinzenztv :s urittgi .in. n.o. 0., ,t.rbenden Darius,doch nur in d'en Excerptabeton

P:.i5 ai. v;reenglichkeit alles irdischen Ghicks(r273 (2-8) bzw. aus Twinger, s.309,31-3l0,i,ii.rnormen). uber yinzenzrv 26hinaus bringt der (erste) B;iei Alexanders in a"n nrrrrpta nochfolgende Inhalteaus 12 3l (6-24): l ' Der sterbliche tvt.nrch ,oili. ,irn nicht mit den unsterblichenGcittern auf eine stufe stellen (diese or;r;";uch nicht bei iwinger); 2. FrirAlexander und Darius erwdchst aus einem m<iglichen Sieg unterschiedlicherPrestigegewinn. --Der gegentiber yinzenz aus 12-35 (l-r5;; ur*. r*inger (s.307'19-22 und .25-28) hinzugeftigte zweit.-gri.rr.chsel zwischen Darius undAlexander scheint mir seine"Auinuh-. in oi.- Excerpta vor allem der darinenthaltenen eindrucksvollen Kontrastierung des massenhaften, aber weichenMohnsamens und der wenigen, aber harten fr.ir.rt,irner zu verdanken: wdhrendder erste Teil von AlexandJrs irief (riber oi. rruntheit der rurrilr. olimpias) inindirekter Rede.wiedergegeben ist,';il qi;;;p"sition von Mohnsamen undPfefferkorn durch oie direkte Rede heruorg.hobJtiio 295rb).- 2u ai...r Karegorieder dicta-zusatze gehoren auch die bereii, .,nt* a) erwdhn,. v.irorrnungsszenezwischen Philipp/Alexander/olimpias gz isl *c Alexanders Rede vor den alrenSoldaten (12 2t).

d Der vorliebe ftir mirabiliaund Legendenhaftes ist wohl die Mitteilung von derGrablegung der Gebeine Jeremias' in et.^unariu und dem dadurch bewirktenSchutz der stadt.g.q.r schlangen zyzugc.hreiben (nach 12 24 (2,2g)).Hierher zurechnen ist auch die Schild.tun! der Errichrung.i,r'., gordenen Thrones in Babylonund die der Anferti*ung einer foldenen Kr;;(";.r, B r23 (s. rg6, r g_34,und S.188'20-23))' Die Gebuit eines' sonderbarrn wr*s (vom Kopf bis zum Nabelmenschliche Gestalt und tot, vom Nabel bis ru orn r'.'issen Tiergrltori'uno lebendig)wird auch nur des mirahile*charakters wegen aus I3 124 (lgg,24-2g) tibernommenworden sein.

c ltt cinigcn Ftlllcn schelnt rlic Motivicrung cincr Hundlurrg tler Anluss l'tir die(ibcrnahrne einer Sntzcr utrr rler lll,tttriu ilt, prclii,r gcwcscn zu scin: Dass chcrnaligellcwohner der zersttlrten Studt'l'yrus zu l)arius fliehen und ihm von Alexunclcrhcrichten (1229,1f',) gibt clcn Anstt)ss zunl crsten Bricf Darius'an Alexancler (A293vb 294ra). Auch dic Rtickkchr Alcxanders aus Kleinasien nach Griechenland(und die dann erfolgte Belagcrung Thebens!) wird erst verstdndlich, wenn cin Motivdafiir gegeben wird, dass Alexander plotzlich seinen Kleinasien-Feldzug abbrichtund dann Stddte wie Theben und Athen angreift: die Krankheit der Mutter gibtdafi.ir eine plausible Erkliirung (12 35 (6 ff.)).

f Der Tendenz zur Vervollstdndigung des bereits bei Vinzenz Mitgeteiltenverdanken einige andere Sdtze ihre Aufnahme in die Excerpta: wdhrend Vinzenz IV24 (l2f .) nur 2000 Soldaten und 40000 Talente Silber (?) als Zinsleistung der Rcimercrwdhnt, ftigt Platterberger gemdss 12 22 (4) noch 6000 Pfund Gold hinzu,aoYinzenzI-4 (l7b) spricht von einer Prophezeiung des Gottes Sesonchosis, ohneaber deren Inhalt anzugeben; Platterberger fiillt diese Liicke mit 12 24 (5 und I I * l4)aus. Bei Yinzenzl{ (24f .) wird lediglich Alexanders Ankunft in Syrien mitgetcilt,Platterberger liigt noch die Nachricht von Kampf gegen die Syrer hinzu (nach 1226(l) bzw. nach Twinger, S. 305,19_21). Uber YinzenzlV 32 hinaus, wo nur von denPrivilegien ftir die Juden in Israel die Rede ist, erwdhnt Platterberger die Religions-l'reiheit auch ftir die Juden in Babylon und Medien (nach 12 28 (37-39)). FtirPlatterberger scheint es auch notwendig zu sein, dass Alexander bei seinemRegierungsantritt in Persien einige Anordnungen verktindet (nach 12 74 (9 I l)bzw. Twinger, S.310,10-13), eine Mitteilung, die er bei Vinzenz olfensichtlichvermisst hat. Dass Alexander das Land Hircania unterwirft (I2 77 ,l ) und einTestament niederschreiben liisst (I3 127 (192,28-194,13)), stellen weitere Faktendar, mit denen Platterberger die Informationen des Speculum Historiale glaubtevervollstdndigen zu miissen.

Zuweilen mag auch kein anderer Grund vorzuliegen als dass Platterberger dasUbersetzen des einfacheren Stils der Historia de preliis leichter gefallen ist als dasVerdeutschen der oft komplizierten Satzkonstruktionen des Speculum Historiale,Nur so kann ich mir den Umstand erkldren, dass Platterberger einen Brief Darius'an Alexander nicht nach YinzenzlY 26, sondern weitgehend nach 1229 wiedergibt,obwohl sich der Inhalt der beiden Versionen nahezu deckt.

Abschliessend wird man festhalten diirfen, dass die Alexanderdarstellung derExcerpta Chronicarum durch den Riickgriff auf die Historia de prelirs an erz6hleri-scher Vielfalt gewonnen hat: die Einftigung neuer Redeszenen (gegentiber Vinzenz),die Dialogisierung und Dramatisierung schon in der Vorlage (Vinzenz) vorhande.ner Szenen, das Hinzielen auf eingdngige dicta, die Berichterstattung von weiterenmirabilia ldsst die Alexander-Vita farbiger erscheinen. Dadurch dass Platterbergereinerseits aus dem Vinzenz'schen Alexanderbuch (Speculum Historiale IV) alleweltchronikartigen, mit der Gestalt Alexanders nicht in Zusammenhang stehendenDaten, Ereignisse und Exkurse eliminiert - und somit eine rein Alexanderbetreffende Geschichte aufbaut - und andererseits gerade die erzdhlerischenHohcpunkte aus der romanhaften Historia de preliis ribernimmt, ndhert er denAlexanderteil der Exc'erptu clen rein erzdhlenden Alexanderquellen an, wie z.B. derZ.acher Epitome, die ja die Basis l'iir die erzlhlenden Partien in Vinzenz' Alexan-dcrbuch ubgibt. So erhHlt die Alexundcr Vita innerhalb der E,rc'c'rptu Chronlc'arum

,- tlt

T('ontcstor u.il,), nicht gher rlitlnkIise lrrr 'I't'uktrttc.

Dic Thcsc cincr lfshilollr unrl !,,i\t't't'ptu gctncinsarncn Vorlagc scheitert iiberdienan dcr Tatsachc. dtrn uuch tlic liinlcilung und die tibcrlcitcndcn Schlusswtlrte derAristotelesszcne in tlen li.t't,t'rptu unrl dcr llabilothschen Fassung identisch sind: unrluls er [Alexandcr) zii zx,a|l|'.furu n(lk't und sein maister Aristotiles c'itts lttgs vtttt ltttaus der schfil gegange n h/a.T, rd.rr Allexander und betrachtet wie se in vulu dem kilngDario undertenig sein und zins gehen must (Excerpta, A287ra). Bei Babiloth luutcndie entsprechenden Sdtze (nach der Gothaer Handschrift):ss Da er dannot'h zwcll!'iar alt was und sein maister Arystotiles was von im uss der schul gegangen, I)d ,rd,r,r

Allexander und gedacht, wie sein vater undertanig must sein und geben dcn zinls Daryo(hg. von Herzog, S. 50,18-23). In der Uberleitung von Aristotelesrede zumAulgreifen des Handlungsfadens zeigt sich die Abhiingigkeit der Exc'erpta-Passage

von Babiloths Text noch deutlicher. Bei Babiloth lautet die Stelle: Wunn wenn clle

trevi zerget, so werden die lewtt sam das vieh. Nach disser lere und ander vil, Altt mangeschriben vindet in dem buch, das da haist Secreta Secretorum, Du nam slah

Allexander an und vieng menlich werck unduberwandt Nicolaum (hg. von Herzog, S,

58,17-23). Platterbergers Text weicht davon kaum ab: Wo aber die treiie zugeel,,ittwerden die levit daselbs some das viehe. Nach disen und andern vil leren, Die wlr umhkurtz willen hie vermeyden, tJnd yn dem buch Secreta Secretorum geschriben steend,

Da nam sich allexander an ernstliche und menliche wercke zu volbringen (A 2tt9vtt),Eine solche Quellenangabe haben weder Babiloth noch Platterberger in einerinterpolierten 12ll3-Redaktion vorgefunden. Auch ist es unwahrscheinlich. duss

Platterberger unabhiingig von Babiloth dieselben Worte ftir den Ubergung vonAristotelesszene zur fortlaufenden Alexanderhandlung, wie er sie nach Vinzenz undI2 schildert, verwendet.

Mit dem Alexanderroman Babiloths haben wir somit eine zweite deutsche Quelleftir den Alexanderteil der Excerpta ausfindig gemacht. Wie Platterbergers Darstcl-lung zwischen dem lateinischen I2-Text und der deutschen Weltchronik Twingershin- und herspringt und somit den volkssprachlichen Text als gleichrangigehistoriographische Quelle -freilich nachprilfbar an 12 - neben den lateinischenstellt, so konnten die Niirnberger Kanzleischreiber offensichtlich auch ohneBedenken auf den volkssprachlichen Alexanderroman Babiloths zurtickgrcifen,zumal an dieser Stelle, wo die Quellenberulung auf das Secretum Seuetorum dicGlaubwi.irdigkeit des Geschriebenen verbtrgte, und zumal angesichts der zahlrei.chen ntitzlichen Lehren, die die Babiloth-Passage vermittelte. Das Streben nachmoralia und dicta war wohl das eigentliche Movens fiir die tJbernahme derBabil othschen Fiirstenlehre-Kompilation.

4 Ein interpolierter Q. Curtius Rufus-Text als Quelle (A 295vb-298va):die Episode von der drohenden Belagerung Athens durch Alexander und demAuftritt dreier athenischer Redner, die ihre Auffassung vom richtigen Vorgehengegenriber Alexander darlegen, gestaltet Platterberger nicht nach Yinzenz M9,iruch nicht nach 12 42 44, sondern nach einer Darstellung, die er vielleicht in cinerinterpolierten Q. Curtius Rufus Handschrift vorfand. Das Werk des Q. CurtiusRulus (De rehus ge,rl/,r Ale.rundri Mugni\s6 war ohne die Biicher l, 2 und 10, sowie

mit cincr Liicke am Ende dec 5, lf uchcs auf das Mittelalter iiberkommen und ludcleshulb zu Int€rpolntlEnen gerudezu cin. Vom Endc des I l. Jhs. iln entstanden

:j::l !tt"z cige nctt ('ltitritktsr: weltchronik urrcl Irorrrlrr sirrtlcilc

'cue vcrbirrtlungclllgcgilngcn' cinc-vcrbindung, die zwrr hei virrzcrrz sch,n lngelegt w'r, drrt arbcr

il:i'zu dcr von Plattcrbcrgeierreichten crziihlerischen (icscijossurhcit gcfunclen

3 Babiloths Alexanderroman (walter von Chatillon und Secretum Secreto-rum) als Quelle: Abweichend von vinzenz und der Historia de preliis schiebtPlatterberger anldsslich der Schilderung uonAl.xanders Jugend eine umfangreicheFiirstenunterweisung ein, die Aristoteles an seinen zwoldiihrigen Schriler richtet.Sie handelt zundchtiuo- Ratnehmen und naigeuen, vom Umgang mit Unedlen,vom verhdltnis von Adel und rugend, von oer-Rectrtsprechung und vom rechtenverhalten des Herrschers in der- Schlacht-fi. r.il;. Es folgt eine eingehendeErcirterung der vo.raussetzungen rechter und falscher Freigebigkeit und derenGegenteils, des Geizes. Es sch"liessen sich a*r.inr,rngen tiber die verheerendenFolgen torichten, unklugen verhaltens und eines schlechten Rufs (Neid, Hass,Lrige' Gewalt, Feindschaft, Todschlag, Zerstcirung des Reiches) und tiber dieGefahren sinnlicher Lust an- Die Fiirstenunterweisung endet mit Ratschl6gen zumUmgang des Regenten mit seinen Hoflingen: nicht rri--nger ut" o16 oder vier Tagesollte er sich durch Spielleute aufheitern 6;;;";.i (hochstens zwei) Trinkgelagen(pro Jahr) sollte er sich zurtickhalten; er sollte die Grossen des Reiches gebiihrendehren' nicht zu hiiufig lachen, die Rechtbrecher streng bestrafen, angemesseneDistanz zu den untertanen halien und Treue bewahren tzl r.il1. in 0., Reihenfolgeund in Details der Lehren stimmt der l. Teil dieser Ftirstenunterweisung mitwalters von chatillon Alexandreis r 27-155 tiberein.so Auch der Anlass zu dieserRede ist bei walter und in den Excerpta d,erselbe: Alexander hatte in einemAugenblick von verzweiflung seine ohnmacht beklagt, die politische Abhdngigkeitseines Landes aufzuheb.n' ,iahrend doch Herkures schon als kleines Kind zweigrosse Schlangen erwtirgt habe. Aristoteles uerrr.ht nun mit seiner FtirstenlehreAlexanders Blick nach uo.rr. zu richten. Der tieite Teil von Aristoteles, Redeorientiert sich inhaltlich stark an dem ps.-aristotelischen Traktat secretum secreto-rum (vgl' Anhang), der im vlittelalter eine *.ir. verbreitung, auch in denVolkssprachen erfahren hat.Diese Kompilation von Walters Aristotelesszene (I27_155;s r und einem Auszugaus den Kapiteln 4-8, 14_16, 18 und 22 des secretum secretorum hat aberPlatterberger wahrscheinlich nictrt selbst zusammengestellt: wir begegnen ndmlichdemselben Text,-wort ftir wort, im Alexanderroman Babiloths (ca. 1400), wo er indemselben Handlungsabschnitt steht wie in d,en Excerpta.s2 Es stellt sich nun dieFrage' ob Platterberger unabhringig von Babiloth auf eine beiden Autorengemeinsame Quelle zurtickgegriffen-oae. nafiio,rrc Ubersetzung einer r2lr3-Redaktion ausgeschrieben nit."uinrichtlich g"bii"trr Arisroteler..o. plddiert dieneuere Forschung, soweit sie die einschliigigen il*tto.respondenzen tiberhaupterkannt hat's3 ltir die Existenz einer vorlalelin der die Entlehnungen aus waltersAlexandreH und aus dem secretum secretirun bereits interpoliert waren.sa Docheine dergestalt iirterpolierte I2/13-Redaktion der iirtoria de preliisist bistang nichtbekannt' Sie wird siih wohl auch kaum finden lassen, da die Interpotatoren von I2und [3 in Prosa vorliegende historiographisch. oJ.i ars solche geltende Alexundcr-texte ?'u exzerpieren pflegten (orosiis. b, c'urtiu, Rurur, Zscher:Epitome, petrus

,dfl ll2, ,,= = ll3

r'ril

mehrcrc untcrschiedliche Versionen rolcher intcrpolicrlcr ('urtius l{untlschrillen,bci dencn nicht nur die Liicken uulge l'tlllt. nundcrn nuch innerlrnlh rles lihcrliclbrtcnTextcorpus Zusiitze angcbrucht wurden.r? l)atrei bedientc nrun sich vor allcm dcrAlexanderdarstellungen des Orosius, lustinus untl dcr Zuclrer F,pitomc. Eingang ineinen dieser interpolierten Texte (schon des 12. Jhs,) habcn auch vier lateinischeReden gefunden, die Demades, Aschines und Demosthenes (zwei Reden) anliisslichder militiirischen Bedrohung Athens durch Alexanders Truppen gehalten haben.Diese vier Reden haben spdter auch eine gesonderte Uberlieferung erfahren, undzwar als festes Textcorpus in Handschriften des 15. Jhs.s8 Deshalb verwundert es

nicht, dass in einigen Hss. diese Reden als Ubersetzungen des Leonardo Bruni(1370-1444) bezeichnet wurden. Dass Platterberger moglicherweise nur diesegesondert iiberlieferte Sammlung der vier Reden vorlag, legt der Umstand nahe,dass die Athen-Episode der interpolierten Curtius-Hss. und die der Excerptanur inden erwdhnten vier Reden iibereinstimmen, diese also genausogut der separatenUberlieferung entnommen sein konnen. Die einfi.ihrenden Bemerkungen zurAthen-Szene (gastliche Aufnahme von Fliichtlingen durch die Athener) wirdPlatterberger von dem argumentum, das den vier Reden in einer Hs. vorangestelltwar, ribernommen haben.

Platterberger hat an der Reihenfolge und am Inhalt dieser vier Redeauftrittenichts gedndert. Seine Ubersetzung folgt der lateinischen Vorlage (in der OxforderHandschrift, Corpus Christi College 82, sind es die Zeilen22l-27 5 und 28G-341) so

eng, dass man sie beinahe zur textkritischen Edition der einschldgigen Passagenheranziehen konnte. Lediglich einen Namenswechsel nimmt Platterberger - ohneersichtlichen Grund - vor: statt Demosthenes hiilt Aschines die vierte (letzte) Rede.Vielleicht war aber diese Anderung bereits in der Vorlage erfolgt.

Weshalb Platterberger die Athen-Episode nicht nach Yinzenz oder 12 erzdhlt,sondern auf einen interpolierten Curtius-Text bzw. auf das separate Textcorpuszuriickgreift, scheint mir drei Griinde zu haben: a) die vier Reden boten zahlreichewichtige staatspolitische dicta bzw. moralische Einsichten. Deshalb kiindigt sie

Platterberger in der Uberschrift als weyss rete und treffenlich antwort an (A 295vb).b) Stilistisch gesehen gldnzten diese vier Reden durch rhetorische Glanzlichter undverdankten wohl dieser rhetorischen Finesse ihre gesonderte handschriftlicheUberlieferung im 15. Jh. Vielleicht war Platterberger selbst nicht ganz unbeein-druckt vom stilistischen Kcinnen, das aus diesen vier Reden spricht. Um 1460 warenja auch in Deutschland erste Anzeichen einer Begeisterung fiir die humanistischenBildungsziele zu erkennen. c) Die entsprechende Szene bei Vinzenz und in derHistoria de preliis (I2) war nicht frei von Widerspnichen: Demosthenes, zundchstals Verrdter, durch persisches Geld bestochen, eingeftihrt, plddiertzum Schluss ftirdie Unterwerfung Athens.

Die Hereinnahme der breit angelegten Redeszene(n) - eine Szene in Athen undeine in Alexanders Heerlager - ftigt sich gut zu der anfangs bereits erwd.hntenVorliebe Platterbergers ftir Redeszenen und Gesprdche (vgl. oben S. 109). Zugleichverleiht diese Szene aufgrund ihrer rhetorisch zugespitzten Formulierungen, dievom schmucklosen Berichtsstil des Kontexts abstechen, der Alexandergeschichteder Exc'erpta einen hellen Farbtupler und l[sst vom Eindringen des Humanismusauch in die deutsche Chronistik zumindest etwu$ uhnen.

Ars lrazit dcr vor*ng€gangene. Be.rr..errturrgcn crgibt sich: r. r)rrtterhcrger hut l'tir

dic Darsrelung derh[cxnrr.,rcr virr;'il:;;;'T;dcst-t'iinlvcrschicclcnc Tcxte zurlick-

gegriffen, uur crei ri,i.li,i*erre (,!,r,r,rr luttt Histrriale, Hisroria tlc preliis uncl ein

Textcorpus mit vier 1teden) ,,u,i'r*.i deutsche iT*ing.tt weltchronik und

Babiloths Alexuncler)' 2' Das Koniaminieren dieser onttttittiedlichen Tcxte fiihrt

bei PlatterU.rg.r';ii1,t ru.iner inhalttich konfusen Kompilation' sondcrn zu ciner

geschlossenen, weil auf die Haupthandlung (summa facri) und die Person Alexan-

ders konzentrierten Darstellu"g. ll g.r uil.i Nan e'zum' wortlaut der jeweiligen

vorlage - es lassen sich nur ganz;;i;. sLt-ze finden, die keine Entsprechung in

einervorlage b.;i;;;, dies siid d;;;".iribf.tt.itungen von der einen zur andern

Quelle - verwendet platteru..g., di. einzelnen Quellin, vor allem das speculum

Historiale, nach einem grossflacht;; P; was sich dem erzdhlerischen Fluss der

Alexanderg.rrnilnt. ni"tt "innrg?,'*i.J *.gg.turr.., oder vor diese 'Historie'

gestellt. +. trr.ert uib di.r., ut, dunr.s t onripierten Alexandergeschichte reihen

sich aber Episode an Episod.,s-t.t. an szene: Geschichte zerfiillt in Geschichten'

Dazvtragen gun onterscttiedliche iendenzen der Verfasser (und ihres Publikums)

bei: a) die Vorliebe fiir dicta uni *o'olia, b) die Vorliebe fiir Redeszenen' c) die

Vorliebe f.or mirabilia, d)die Tendelrzzrl$ Dramatisierung einzelner Handlungs'

phasen. 5. Gegeniiber Vinze", .;;ibi'ich 'omit ein ganz-anderer Charaktcr der

Alexande.g.rrn-Jtti.' *.rrA. U.i VTn'enz versucht' allJerreichbaren Daten' Nach'

richten und Lehren aus der Epoch" Ale*anders des Grossen zusammenzutragen' so

tendieren die Excerpta chroniroru*eher zur 'erzehrenden wertchronik" wie sie

schon in der Christherrr-Chroni-i ("a 1320/30) und in Twingers Weltchronik

fassbar wird. Zu dieser r.na.rrrfurJ,_l"ll auch'vorziiglich die wahl der Historia

de preliisur, ,*.it*ichtigster a'itllt fiir die Alexanderleschichte der Exc'erpta' 6'

Das Streichen und Kiirz.n uon-ueschreibenden und wissenschaftlich-gelehrten

Exkursen h6ngt aber auch mit a.m wechsel des Publikums zusammen: Vinzenz

von Beauvais orientierte sich an.i,',* gun, ande,e,' (lateinkundigen) Leserkreis als

etwa ein Twinger von rorrigrhofen-ode*i. joitunnes Platterberger' 7' Dic

Alexandergeschichte der nrrni-,oist von formalen Kriterien her aufgebaut - cinc

stets interessante Handlung ioii ,,.,r weiterlaufen -, nicht von inhaltlichen:

Alexander wird als handerrro. p.rron vorgestellt, eine Bewertung seiner Taten wird

von den deutschen verfassern selbst nicht uo'gtno-men' somit ergibt sich in den

E*rr rProkein neues Alexanderbild'

ANHANG

Quelleniibersicht zum Alexanderteil

der Excerpti Chrontcarum (A 28lva-3l3rb)

[A 28tvalVinr.n, III 93 (bis Zeile 30)

Vinzenz IV I (l-51 8f')Vinzenz III 93 (30 32)

Autor tca.-l-zejten: Hinweis uuf spateren Alexander' Bericht)

Uf,crschrift Vlnz€nz IV"dti"'i 't'm todt

-Plat:onis' auth Apulitt Hernrcs und

emclern sQlnan lanrcm )

J---*l&- n5

[A 2tl2ra]Yinzenz lV 6 (l; ttf.; ltt 26)Vinzenz IV 7 (l-6;2G-422.T. frei ribcrsctzt)Yinzenz IV 8 (l-4)Yinzenz IV 9 (l-13; 3l-39)Yinzenz IV l0 (lf.)Yinzenzlv ll (29-36)Yinzenz IV 14 (2-6; 17-24 frei iibersetzt)U b e rsc h ri ft Vinzenz IV I 5 (b) (Wie Vagosus Judeam betwang und von Ysocrate

dem orator)Yinzenz IV 15 (12-25a)Yrnzenz IV l6 (lf.; 7f.)Yinzenz IV l7 (l-4) und chronistische QuelleUUerschrift VinzenzIY 22 (a) (Von kilng Dario und sein geschichten)

[A 283ra]YinzenzlV 22 (l-5) und chronistische QuelleYrnzenzlV 29 (8-10)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 286, 20-23Yinzenz IV 38 (34-38)Autor (ca. l7 Zeilen: Begri.indung der relativen Ausfiihrlichkeit des Alexander-

Teils

[A 283rb]UUerschri ft(Von kilng Allexander dem grossen, seinen mercklichen geschichten

und taten, und des ersten von seiner wunderlichen empfencknils\Chronistische Quelle (Von den Daten bei Yinzenz IV I (l-5) jeweils I Jahr

abgezogen: I Jahr vor Alexanders Geburt)

[A284ra]Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S.

(7b-l l)Historia de preliis 12 I (12-14)Vincenz IV I (36f.)12 t (t7-21)12l (22-24) und YinzenzM (26-29)12 t (24f .)Yinzenz IV 1(40f.)12 t (2s-2e)YinzenzlY 2 (l-9a)

300,5-9 und Historia de preliis 12 I

Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 300, 26f.Yinzenz IV 2 (9b-30) und 12 3 (5f.) zu VinzenzIY 2 (14)Yrnzenz IV 3 (ganz)U be rsch ri ft Vinzenz IY 4

[A 285 ra] VinzenzlY 4 (ganz)

-drlflE*

('lhcrschril't Vinecnr lV 5

t29(t 3a)

Vinzcnz lV 5 (ll',)12 t) (3b 7a)

Vinzcnz IV 5 (3)

Vinz.enz IV I (l-5) [wic A 2tllva]129 (7 'll) und Yinzenz IV 5 (4-6)

Yinzenz IV 5 (7-l0a)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S' 301 '20f '

Yinzenz IV 5 (13)

t2 l (2)

Yinzenz fV 5 (14-28)

$3:i:1, ri ft ( von der kindtheit Ailexandri, seiner rernung und der hubschcn re/.el

und underweysung von Aristotili empfangen)

12 I I (6b-8)12 l2 (lb)

lA288ralBabiloth, S' 50-58Walter von Chdtillon' Alexandreis I27-155

U bersch rif t (Von der mass der miltigkeyt)

Secretum Secretorum cap. 4,7 und 4,9-17;5,1-3 und 5,10

Babiloth, S. 55, 16-18

Secretum Secretorum, 6,5-1 5

Ubersch rift (Wider Pose begYr)

[A 289ra]-Secretum Secretorum 7,1-2; 8, l-5; l4'l-3

U be rschri f t (Von -fursten stat und regirung seins hofs)

Secretum Secreiorum 15, l_9; 16,l-2 und 5; l8' l-2;22'14U berschrift ( Wie Nectanabus verging)

Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S] ldi ,29-31 und Yinzenzlv I I (3b-aa)

Yinzenzlv ll (54aa)

[A290ra]JacobTwingervonKonigshofen,s'302'9-14'und1213(l2a)Vinzenz IV l1 (l5a-27a)tJberschrift (Von dem

hofen S. 302'25)Yinzenz IV 12 (l-5)

tyer oder ross Bucephata) (Jacob Twinger von Konigs'

t-'lw,m

.lacob Twinger von Konigshofen S'

Quclle'? (ca. 4Zerlenl. Aussehen von

t2 t4 (2\.trrcob Twinger von Konigshofen' S' 302'27-32

t2 ls (lf.)

*fr- ll7

302,26 und 12 14 (l)Bucefalus)

t

t: f ,'r _rn.:- .*sEr

Jacob -lwingcr von Kdinigshol'cn, S, ,101,2 ]Vinzcnz lV l2 (191.)

Jacob Twingcr von K(inigshol'cn, S, .101.4h gYinzenz IV l2 (25b 26)Uberschrift (Von tlem crstc,t streit Allc.utndtr.r) (vgl. Jacob Twinger von

Konigshofen S.303,10)Yinzenz IY 12 (2748a)12 t7 (20) und 12 l6 (5f.)12 t7 (2t-25a)

IA 291rc]12 t8 (t-27)UUerschrift Vinzenz IV l5 (a)chronistische Quelle (nach Yinzenzlv l4 (2) weitergezahrt)Yinzenz M5 (l-11)UUerschrift VinzenzlY 19 (a)Yrnzenz IV 19 (l-l3a sehr frei)Uberschrift Vinzenz IV l8 und IV l9 (b) (Von dem tod Phitippi und pusania,

seinem morder)chronistische Quelle (nach Yinzenzrv li (l) weiter gezahlt)Yinzenz IV l8 (l-l2a)

lA 292ralJacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 303, 27-3O4,llYinzenz IV 18 (19-29; 34-/l)Uberschrift VinzenzlY 22 (b)YinzenzM2 (2-5) und chronistische euelleY.inzenzM2 (6-11 sehr frei) und Quelle (?) (interpolierter Q. Curtius Rufus?)Ubersch ri ft Vinze nz IY 23YinzenzM3 (l-7; Af .)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 305,5-l IYinzenzrv 23 (17-29 z.T. frei) und Quelle (Iustinus XI 6,2: lg0 Schiffe)

[A 293ra]Uberschri ft Vinze nz IY 24YinzenzM{ (3V12)12 22 (4)YinzenzM4 (14f.)12 24 (16f.)YinzenzM4 (I6b--l8a)12 24 (5; I I b-l4a; 26-28)12 2s (3-4)YinzenzM4 (20H2la)12 2s (6)Jacob Twinger von Konigshoflen, S. 305,19 ZlYinzenz. lV 24 (2G27 a: 28b)tJ be rsc h ri ft Yinzenz M5

t-

Vinzcrrz lV 25 (lh lTtu 2llh lln)t22e (t 7lUhcrschrilt Vinrcne lV 16

Yinzent,lV 26 ( lh 3)

IA 294ra]tz 29 (7-t4a)YinzenzM6 (l5b-l7a)t3 29 (38, 1 8b-2 I )Quelle ? (ca. 4 Zeilen Funktionen zweier Geschenke)

t2 29 (19-22) und 12 30 (l-9)Uberschriit (Wie Allexander Dario antwortet) (vgl. Jacob Twinger, S.

306,24)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, 5.306,25-2912 3t (6V24a)U be rschri ft Vinzenz lY 27

[A 295ra]Yinzenzl7 (l-7a; I6-20a1' l3f .;25V28)UUerschrift (Wie Darius Allexandern mahen samen und er im do gegen ein

wenig pfeffers schicket) (vgl. Jacob Twinger, S. 307,18)

Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 307,19-2212 3s (l-l5a)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 307,25-28

123s(l8b-le)U b e rsch ri ft Vinzenz lY 28

t2 37 (a-5a)t2 38 (24) lseire I l6]12 39 (ta)Yinzenz IV 28 (l-lOa; 26b-28)12 4s (l) und 1222 (lf.) [Seite 138]

Autor (ca.7 Zeilen: der brevitd.t wegen einiges ausgelassen)

Uberschrift Vinzenz IV 29 (Von der grimmikeit Allexanders wider die von

Athen, die doch durch etlicher philosophen weyss rete und fteffenlich antworl

gesenffmiltigt warfi

lA 296ra-297rbltnterpolierter Q. curtius Rufus (vgl. De Falco 1955: 52-54)

U beisch rif t (Eschinis Oration zu Allexandro von der von Athen wegen)

[A 298ra]interpolierter Q. Curtius Rufus (Vgl. De Falco 1955: 5l Anm. 3)

U berschrift Vinzenz IV 30

Yinzcnz IV 30 (l 5a; 7tl 17)

Jacob Twinger von Konigshofcn, S. 308'2-7Vinzenz IV 30 (19f,) und Jacob Twinger' S. 308'8f.

'T%m

I

'TM;F'

lA 299rulVinzcnz lV 30 (25 3l: 39 43)tJ bc rsc h ril't Vinzenz lV 3lYrnzcnz.lv 3l (l 6; l3 2l; 29b 3tl)Uberschril't Yinz,cnz lV 32Yrnzenz IV 32 ( l-7; l{ 37a)

[A 300ra]12 28 (37b-3e)YinzenzM2 (38-46)UUe rsc hri ft Vinzen z IY 33

Yinzenz IV 33 (l-7; l7-18a)Ubersch ri ft Vinzenz lY 34Yinzenz IV 34 (l-2la; 26b-31 ; 36b--39a)Uberschrift Vinzenz IV 35Yinzenz lV 35 (l-4)12 60 (l Gl9a)Yinzenz IV 35 (10-l4a)12 6t (l lb-15)

[A 30lra]12 62 (7b-e)Yinzenz IV 35 (2+-27)12 63 (2-8)Yinzenz IV 35 (3lb-34)Yrnzenz IV 35 (52-54)UUe rsc h ri ft Vinzenz IY 36Yrnzenz IV 36 (ll-26)

[A 302ra]YrnzenzMT (l-18; 2240)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 309,16-24UUerschrift Vinzenz IV 38Yinzenz IV 38 (lf.)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 309,27*310, IYinzenz IV 38 (9b-12)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S.310,4*9 und VinzenzIY 38 (l5b-16)Y inzenz M 8 (17 -l9a; 23V24a; 27 ; 3 5-38)Ube rsc hri ft Vinzen z IY 39Yrnzenz IV 39 (I*2a;4b-14)Quelle? (3 Zeilen Seneca flber Anaximenes)Yinzenz IV 39 (15-17)UUerschrift Yinzenz IV 40

[A 303ra]Yinzenz IV 40 (1V24)(Jberschrift Yinzenz IV 4l

.'-

Vinzenz lV 4l (l l5l 2l 21t 27 1()l l6h 4tt)

Ubcrschrift Vinzenz lV 42

Vinzenz IV 42 ( l)Jacob Twinger von Kdnigshol'en, S. 310,10-13

[A 304ra]Y inzenz M2 (5- l 9a; 21b_34)t2 77 (tf .)U be rschri ft Vinzenz IY 43

Yinzenz M3 (l-18; 27-29)U Ue rschri ft Vinzenz lY 44

Yinzenzt-4 (l-15)t-l U e rsch ri ft Vinzenz IY 45

Yinzenz IV 45 (l-8a; l0-20a)Uberschrift Vinzenz IV a7@) und 48(b)

[A 305ra]Y inzenzlv 48 ( l-1 8a; 25V29a; lZ-tSa)UUe rschri ft Vinzenz IY 49

Y inzenz M9 (l-2a; 4f. ; 8 f. ; I 4-19 a; 24-30a; 3343a; 54b-5 5)

Uberschrift Vinzenz IV 50

Yinzenz M0 (1-14; 21t:_34 gekiirzt)

[A 306ra]YrnzenzMl (2942)U be rschri ft Vinzenz lY 51

Yinzenz IV 5l (l-l2a;23H33)U Ue rsch ri ft Vinzenz IY 52

Yinzenz IV 52 (l-23;25Mla;42b49)Uberschrift Vinzenz IV 53

[A 307ra]Yinzenz IV 53 (l-12; l5b-l7a;20b-35)Yinzenz IV 54 (l-7;1lb-I3; l7Fa9)

[A 308ra]Yinzenz IV 55 (l f.; 5b-20;22V23a;25V30a; 35; 44; 46-51)U be rsch ri ft Vinzenz IY 56

Yinzenz IV 56 (l-26)U berschrift VinzenzIY 57

Y inzenz IV 57 (l-l4a; 23-29; 32-34)UUerschrift Vinzenz IV 58

[A 309ra]Yinz,enz IV 5tl (l 31 7 lOa: l5 l7a;22-24a)Vinzcnz IV 59 (l-91 l4F l7u; 2lb)Vinzenz IV 60 (l:7; l3= l6a: 23b 26 schr frci)

r2t, t

'ilF(ihcrschril't (wit' Alle.rtutilt'r t'tliclt tiiut,tt lit,,y, tlit, in nicltr utryret.,,, u,ttltut)Yinzcnr.lv 46 (3 4a: 5h 7tr; ll 22:25 30)Ubcrschril't yinzcnz lV 6lYinzenz IV 6l (l;3-7a)Yinzenzlv 62 (r-r0) und varerius Maximus III 3 ext. lYinzenz IV 62 (fi-23)

[A 3l0ra]U be rsc h ri ft Vince nz Iy 66Yinzenz IV 66 (l-t4a; I Gl9)YinzenzMT (I-7; t5a; tgb_30; 32_36a;37H7)YinzenzIV 69 (14;8a-15; lgb__23a)

[A 3l lra]Y inzenz M 0 (t-1 2; t 6b-26)Y.inzenzIV 7I (l0b--l ; Ig)U be rsc h r ift yinzenz Iy 63Yinzenz IV 63 (l-9; 14V2!27b)Yinzenz IV 61 (2942)

[A 3l2ra]13 123 (186,4a und 6b)Jacob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 3l I ,17_2013 123 (186,19_34)13 123 (188,20_28)Ubersch ri ft Vinze nz Iy 65Yinzenz M4 (16-20; 27: 37-39)t3 t25 (190,10f.)

{1cob Twinger von Konigshofen, S. 3l I ,24_1312,113 125 (190,13-16 und I 9-22)13 126 (190,23*26)13.127 (l?0,.7--192,3;192,7-fi und t4_lg und 23_2g)

Ybrrschrift ( voy d9m geschffi Ailexanders) (vgl. Babiloth)13 127 (t92,29_194,t3)13 129 (196,23-25 und 28-30)

[A 3l3ra]13 127 (t94,13_15)13 t29 ( 196,30f.)Yinzenz IV 65 (17;32-39)13 129 (196,31-35; 198,4f.)[Ende des Alexander-Teils]

Uberschrifi Vinzenz V I

[A 3l3rb]Vinzenz V I

ANMIiRKtIN(l11N

I Lchnrann. P, und O, (llnunirrg, Ml,tnlultarlirlte Ilundschrif'tmhrurhsliick( du Unlver,rl-tiitshihlktthc'k und ile,r(ire'grrlunwn:u Miin<'hcn,Lcipzig l'940: l4tl'l5l:Palmcr(1976),Dic Fragmcntc dcr LJll Miinchcrr sincl irn Jahre 1944 bis auf zwci llliittcr vcrbrunnt, vgl,Kornrumpf, C. und P.G. Volker, Dic deutschen mittelalterlichcn Hundschrif'len derUniversitcitsbibliothek Miinchen, Wiesbaden 1968: 107 f. und 346 Nr. l4l.

2 Die Konigsberger Fragmente (dazu Palmer |976: 192,f,), befinden sich hcutc in Berlin(Geheimes Staatsarchiv Przussisctter Kulturbesitz, XX. HA StA Konigsbcrg, Hs. 33,13),

Diese Mitteilung verdanke ich N. Palmer (Oxford). Wie mir Dietrich Schmidtkc (Bcrlin)freundlicherweise mitteilte (Brief vom24.ll.l983), ist ein weiteres Konigsberger Vin-zenz-Fragment von ihm aufgefunden worden (Signatur: ebd., XX. HA StA Kcinigsbcrg,Hs. 34.13; der Inhalt des Fragments entspricht Speculum Historiale XXY 60'-69),

3 Steer (1973:92 Anm. 450) nennt insgesamt vier Handschriften, die deutsche Aurz{lge uu:dem Speculum Historiale enthalten sollen (Berlin, Ms. germ 80 407,70v-72r = SpeculumHistoriale XXIII c. 99; Wolfenbiittel, Herzog-August-Bibl., Cod. Aug, 55.8 in 40,83r-88r; bei den zwei anderen Handschriften, ONg 2902 und 2866, handelt es sich abornicht um Ubersetzungen des Speculum Historiale, sondern um eine Ubersetzung dorVierten Partie des niederldndischen Spiegel Historiael (wie auch bei Ms. germ, 40 201t,vgl. Palmer 1976). Deshalb ist auch die Zitierweise Steers irrefiihrend; Spec:.Hist lV melntin diesem Fall ndmlich nicht das 4. Buch des Speculum Historiale (die Alexandergcschich.te), sondern die von Lodewijk van Velthem i.J. l3l5 fertiggestelte'Viertc Partic'deiSpiegel Historiael (: Speculum Historiale XXVI sqq.). Steer wie auch Palmer (1976)ribersehen aber etwa die deutsche Weltchronik Johann Platterbergers, die in hohcmMasse Yinzenz von Beauvais verpflichtet ist. Die von Palmer (1976: 102 Anm, 2)angefi.ihrte Strassburger Handschrift (UB, Ms 2119, Bl. l-70 [frtiher L gcrm. 195. 201)

konnte ich leider nicht einsehen, doch informiert dariiber Herrkommer (1972: 66=-68).

Auf cgm 4879, 5lb-59b (vgl. Stammler 1963: 39 ff.) machte mich D. Schmidtkeaufmerksam.

4 Eine systematische Aufarbeitung der Uberlieferung einzelner Erziihlungen und Legen-den wtirde sicher auch neues Licht auf die Vinzenz-Rezeption in Deutschland werfen,vgl. etwa die Zusammenstellung der Dichtungen und Handschriften, die dic Amicus/Amelius-Legende (im Speculum Historiale XXIII 162-166 u. 169) enthalten, bei Leach(1937: X-XIV). In seiner in Arbeit befindlichen Dissertation mochte Rudolf Weigand(bei Prof. G. Steer, Eichstiitt) die deutsche Uberlieferung des Speculum Historlaledarstellen (Brief vom 22.3.1984).

5 Uber die Aufgaben und Ziele des Projekts 'Vincent de Beauvais' an der UniversitfltNancy II informieren Nais-Schneider (1974) und Schneider (1976); vgl. auch die ncueZeitschrift Spicae: Cahiers de I'atelier Vincent de Beauvais I (1978),2 (1980),3 (1981),Vgl. auch den ersten Beitrag von J.B. Voorbij in diesem Band.

f .Guzman (1975). Bei Guzman ist allerdings nicht zwischen 'reinen' Spec'ulum-'Hss. undsolchen Hss., die lediglich Spe culum-Excerpte enthalten, unterschieden.Ygl. zu'letzt Von den Brincken (1978) und Lusignan (1979: l5-l I l).Die Excerpta Chronicarum scheinen der Douai-Fassung niiherzustehen. Zur Douai-Fassung vgl. den ersten Aufsatz von J.B. Voorbij in diesem Band.Bi llanovich-Prandi-Scarpati (197 6).Vgl. das Vorwort von Deschamps (1970); vgl. auch Pfister (1976a:73f .\.Als Datum der Fertigstellung nennt die Vorrede den ll. Juli 1459 (Niirnbcrg, Stadtbl.bliothek, Cent. ll tl6. f. I vb 2ra). Unverstdndlich ist mir, warum Kriigcr ( 1976: 45) dierte

Wcltchronik auf dge Juhr l4(r.5 dnticrt.llegcl ( I 864: 257-2671,Kurrns ( l9E0),

7

8

9

t0il

t2t3

t23

I .:"qry|

t4l5l6

t7l8l9

Vgl. I lcgcl ( I lt64: 267): .lorrcltitttsolrrr ( lllt)5: | .r.1lll.Rul'(194.i: 902) kennt nur I Hs.: l)listcr (1976h: 2.t0) nennl nrrr zwsi llss,Schncidcr. K., Dic, Ilundschril't(n du Stulthiblitttlrck Nilrtthil'H,, I'ul, l: l)fu ltutschenH und,schrifit n, Wicsbadcn 1 965: 43 1 l'.

Vgl. Kurras (1980).Priebsch (19 12: 169-17 l).Fi.ir die Anfertigung von Mikrofilmen danke ich den Bibliotheken in Ntirnberg undOxlord sowie dem Germanischen Nationalmuseum (Niirnberg).Vgl. zuletzt Minnis (1979) und Minnis (198a). Vgl. auch den Beitrag von E.R. Smits indiesem Band.Diese Fragen stellte nicht Schneider (1968: 6G-68), die bislang als einzige einen Abschnittder Excerpta Chronicarum mit der entsprechenden Vorlage (in diesem Fall mit derHistoria destructionis Trojae des Guido de Columnis) verglichen hat. Ihre Resultatelauten: Platterberger reduziert sdmtliche Kampfschilderungen auf das dusserste Mini-mum (67); Gesprdchs-, Verhandlungsszenen nehmen dagegen einen breiten Raum ein;die TendenzzurK.jrzung nimmt generell gegen Ende der Troja-Passage zu. Schneider istallerdings entgangen, dass Platterberger nicht nur Guidos lateinische Trojadarstellung,sondern fiir die Schilderung des dritten bis 24. Kampfes die deutsche Weltchronik JacobTwingers von Konigshofen wortlich ausschreibt (vgl. A l47ra-152va mit Jacob Twingervon Konigshofen, herausgegeben von Hegel (1870: 291-297). Deshalb sind SchneidersAusfiihrungen im einzelnen zu korrigieren.Bei den Zitaten aus den Excerpta Chronicarun werden lediglich die Ki.irzeln aufgelostund Interpunktion eingeftihrt. Wenn nicht anders vermerkt, wird stets aus der Hand-schrift der Stadtbibliothek Niirnberg (Cent. II 86) zitiert. Dabei folge ich in derBlattziihlung der alten Foliierung, die die Zahlen 276 und 286 tiberspringt.Zum lateinunkundigen Publikum als Adressat zahlreicher deutscher Ubersetzungen imSpiitmittelalter vgl. Schnell (1984: 247 Anm.l09).Vgl. z.B. Rouse (1979: l57f ., zuYinzenz); Grundmann (1965 22f .).

Vgl. Holder-Egger (1879: 231,1-6 und l3-2l,mit Excerpta Chronicarum (A,f.lva).Zuden Flores temporum zuletzt Johanek (1980).Im Alexanderteil tibergehen sie sogar einschldgige Bemerkungen Vinzenz'von Beauvais:l. A295ra;B299vb; C l59rb gegeniiber Speculum HisrorialelY 27,231.;2. A 305rb, B309ra, C l64rb gegeni.iber Spec. Hist.lY 49,47-54a.Das Speculum Historiale zitiereichnach der leicht zugzinglichen, wenn auch mangelhaften Ausgabe von 1624 (NachdruckGraz 1965). Der schnelleren Auffindung und Uberprtifbarkeit der Vinzenz-stellenwegen gebe ich fiir das Buch IV des Spec. Hist jeweils Zahl des Kapitels und die (proKapitel durchnummerierten) Zeilen an, in denen sich das gemeinte ZitatbefrndetVgl. Holder-Egger (1879: 231,30f.) mrt Excerpta Chronicarum (A, f. lvb).Landfester (1972) und Melville (1975).Hegel (1864: 264f.) und Joachimsohn (1895: 154).Der erste Band endet mit Vinzenz, Speculum Historiale YI 33134.

Die Alexandergeschichte steht in A 283rb-3l3rb; in B 289vb-3l6rb und in C l53va-I 68rb.Vollmer (1912: l7l Anm.) und danach Pfister (1976b:250) nennen als einzige QuelleYinzenzvon Beauvais.Vgl. dazu Anm. 26.Ich zitiere nach folgenden Ausgaben: 12: Hilka-Bergmeister (1976); Hilka-Grossmann(19'17): 13: Steffens (1975). Bei 12 gebe ich jeweils Kapitel und (in Klammern) Zeile proKapitel an, bei t3 Kapitel und (in Klammern) Seite und Zeile.

35 Jacob Twinger von Kcinigshofen, hg. von Hegel (1870: 153-498); Hegel (1871: 499

e r0).36 Colkcr ( 1978).

t7 zugruntlegelegt ltnhe tch hiet tlttt l{tclrrlscllctt'l'cxt tlcr Ausgilhe v()ll Mtiller(1961)'

.tt{ Zur l.ruge, un fiiuitert,o,'gu,. urr,l i'i'rrcl,scss tlirckt itul'Wnlter von ('hiitillon rrntl tlal

s((r(tuttt sc,crcltrutl ,tlrilckgctsril'l'crr otlcr tlic e ntsprcchcndctr Pttssitgcn denr AlcxInder'

roman ll'hiloths entnor,r,nllcrr lruhcrr. vgl. untcn 3. ttzt. ltahiloths Ale.\(ndt,r ist r,T,

cclicrt von I lcrzog ( lt{9?)'

39 Vgl. etwa dic o*rirr.t., Handschri|t corpus christi college 82 (s. Xll), pcpgurnent, 205

Bll. Eine Erlition dcr vcrschicdcnen mit;lalterlichen Redaktioncn dcs intcrpolicrtcn Q'

CurtiusRufusbereitetdrEdmeR.Smits(Groningen)vor.40 De Falco (1g55: 5r-54;dort nur drei Reden abgedruckt; aber in cinigen_Hss, gcht circ

weitere Rede Demosthenes'voraus' vgl' ebd' 5l Anm' 3; Hinweis von E'R' Srnits)'

4l Die tiber vinzenz hinausgehenden chronistischen Daten (von Anfang dcr welt' von

Griindung der stadt Rori an) hat platterberger liir den Alexanderteil kcincsfrrlls dett

Flores temporumentnommen, vgl. Meuschen (ll+l:20); Eccard (1723 I 562f.). viellcicht

waren ai. .ntrpr..h.rrd.r, zahlinam Rande einer vinzenz-Hs. vermcrk t.

42 ygr.z.B. vinzJi,-lv iz,zz. wo die beiden Drucke vor sarpedon noch Rilutes er h$b.n

(entsprechend"Excerpta A 303vbr Imphates) und vinzenz IV 56'2' wo in dcn belden

Drucken montes Theneseos statt montis Dionysios steht (entsprechend in dcn E'rcerplu A

308ra: das gePirge Thenosios)'

43 Vgl. Schnell (1984)'

44 D;Vries-Verwijs (1863, Vol' 1)'

45InbeidenVinzenz-Bearbeitungenfehlen:Yinzenzlvl8,30-32(olimpias'Auffordcrungan Alexander, Pausanias zu toten); lV 23,7-L3--(Alexanders Massnahmen bei Regie'

rungsantritg; iv 25,22_30 (Abdalonimus zum Konig von Sydon gemacht); lv 33,1{ l6

(kritische charakterisierung Alexanders); IV 35,3748 (Darius' Mutter in Alex[nders

Lager); lv x'27-17 (chara-kt.riri.iung Alexanders und Schilderung von Naturerschei'

nungen);Mg,30_33 (Reaktion Alexaiders auf die Nachricht vom Sieg Antiputers)l lV

39,lg_20 (Teriullian iiier Epikurl; rv 53,13-15a (Naturkundliches liber cinen Fluss); lV

55,3543 (Schneefall und Hilfsbereitschaft Alexanders); IV 63, 26f ' (Ausspruch eincs

PhilosoPhen).46 Vgl. Schwinges (1977:44f)'

47 Dies hat Schneider (lg6g) schon ftir platterbergers Darstellung des Trojanischen Kricgcs

festgestellt.4g Der Einwand, platterberger habe nur deshalb die genannten Redeszenen seiner Alexan'

dergeschichte eingefiigt, weil ,i. i.ii*inger bereits verdeutscht vorlagen, kann durch die

Tatsache *id;rle ,i"rden, dass platterberger i.iber Twingers Text hinaus weitcre

Redeszenen aus 12 iibernommen hat'

49 statt den 12000 plund Silber in12 22 (a) gibt platterberger aber 20000 Pfund Silber an,

wasaufeineVerschreibungvonXllundxxzuriickgeftihrtwerdenkann.50 Vgl. Anm' 36.

5l walters Aristotelesrede ist in vollem Umfang von Rudolf von Ems in dessen Alexandor'

roman tibersetzt worden, vgl' dazu Wisbey (1955)'

52 DerText der Babiloth'schen Aristotelesrede ist gedruckt bei Herzog (1897: 50-58)'

53 Moller (1g63: LXXII) weiss nichts von walter von chdtillon als moglicher vorluge

Babiloths. Steinhoff (197g: 5Tg) giui".u.n walters Alexandreis die Epistola Aristolilis ad

Arexandru. ui, qu.lle an. DiJse Epistora aber (Suchier 1883: 473+80) bringt nur

medizinische Lehren und hat mit Babiloths Aristotelesrede nichts zu tun'

54 Buntz (1g73:34). Christensen (rqos' 129-135) ist der Auffassung' dass Babiloth selbst

walthers Text iibersetzt und das Secretum secretorum exzerpiert hat. Die Arbeit von

Schmidtgall (1961) war mir nicht zugdnglich'

55 Einc tcxtkritische Edition dcs llnbilJth'ichen Ale.runtler ist bis heutc ein wisscnschtrllli'

chcs Desiclcratum, Die Zitierr,ugiiur H.rzogs Tcilabdruck kann dsshalb nicht mchr alc

cin Notbehelf :eln,

2t

2425

272829303l

32

33

34

ur, *

.56 llcdickc ( 1908).57 Vgl' hicrzu die ungekiindigte Studic vorr dr lidrrrd R, Srrritn (Anr1, ,19), Vgl, vrrliiulig

Bossuat ( 1946u) und Bossuut ( 1946b).58 De Falco (1954 51-54); dic viertc Rctlc ist clort nieht ubgedruckt. vgl. obcn Anm.40.

,,.r{x ,".ff1*" 127

G,H.V, Burrt

The story of Alcxander the Great in the MiddleEnglish Translations of Higden' s Polychronicon

Vincent of Beauvais' Speculum Historiale and its companion Specula in theSpeculum Maius must have been well-known in later medieval England. Chaucer,in the so--called G version of his prologue to The Legend of Good Women,l husCupid refer him to Vincent in his Estoryal Myrour 0. 307) for source material onwomen who were faithful in love, and Pauline Aiken has given us a long series ofarticles in which she traces Vincent's influence on Chaucer.2 Yet no medicvtrlEnglish translation of Vincent's work is known to exist. When a demand arose furvernacular translations of the great Latin storehouses of historical learning, it wusnot Vincent's Speculum Historiale that was turned into English, but the laterPolychroniconby the Chester monk, Ranulf Higden.3

Higden entered St. Werburgh's Abbey in Chester in 1299, and died there in 1364.His Polychronicon enjoyed great fame throughout England in his own day and inlater centuries. Well over a hundred Latin manuscripts are now extant.4 It wastranslated into English by John of Trevisa in 1385-7, and again in the I 5th centuryby an anonymous translator. Higden's fame even penetrated to king Edward III,who in 1352 summoned him to court to show his histories. As he tells his readers inhis prologue (I, 8-9), he began the work as a history of England, but, at the instanceof his fellow monks, widened its scope so as to turn it into a universal chronicle. ThePolychronicon is divided into seven books, of which the first is given to ageographical description of the world which, not surprisingly, devotes much spaceto an account of the British Isles. The other six books deal with the history of theworld from the Creation to Higden's own day, and many manuscripts containcontinuations by a variety of other writers. Philip of Macedon is treated in chapter26 of book III, and chapters 27 to 30 give the story of Alexander. In addition, thcreare numerous scattered references to Alexander; an important one is the famousDiogenes anecdote at the beginning of chapter 20 of book III.

Like Vincent's Speculum Historiale, Higden's universal chronicle consists ofcxtracts from a large number of sources which are identified at the head of eachqu<ltation, with occasional passages under Higden's own name, Ranulphus.Vinccnt, or rather, his immediate source, Helinand of Froidmont, s usually quoteshis sources in more or lcs$ abbrcviated form, but in most cases his citations aresulficicntly literal to ellow us tr) idcntify what he took from his sourccs without

nluch dilliculty, Higtlcrr, httwevcr, us lte lrints irr lris prologue.o pnnrplrruscs 5issourccs and ol'tcn condcnscs drasticully. Hc ulsu hus a woy olislipping iri

'dditionalinlormation which the named source does not supply. tior instgnr., in chapter 30(lV'4) Higden cites Vinccnt on the story of Alexandcr's visit to thc trccs oflthc sunand moon, and states that the trees warn Alexander against entering the city ofBabylon; but this warning cannot be found in Vincent's text. Nor are Higdln'ssource ascriptions always reliable; thus he cites Trogus, that is, Justin's epitJme ofPompeius Trogus' Historiae Phitippicae, as the rour.. of several passages whichcannot be found in a modern edition of Justin.? One such passug. 11il,+24) givesJustinus,libro sexto as the source of a letter from Darius to Alexanier telling trim togo back to his mother's lap, and sending him a whip, a ball and a purse with goldcoins, and of Alexander's reply. Incidentally, this is also the only case in Higd-en'sAlexander story where Justin is cited under his own name, not as .Trogus,.Elsewhere (III,444), a letter to Alexander from the inhabitants of the Maeotidanmarshes is given as derived from Trogus book XII, where it cannot be found.s Avery striking misattribution is the scene of the philosophers at Alexander,s grave,who comment platitudinously on the futility of the king;s achievement in the face ofdeath; this scene ultimately goes back to Petrus Alfonii's Disciplina Clericalis, andis also found in The Dicts and Sayings of the Philosophers andin manuscripts of allthree versions of the Historia de Preliis. Higden gives us the sayings of only fivephilosophers, and he assures us that he takes the passage from Trogus book XII. Onthe other hand, a well-known episode such ut thut of the GorJian knot, whichJustin relates, is not taken over by either Higden or Vincent, although Helinandgives it in his chapter 6 of book XVIII. One is led to wonder what kind of Justin textHigden used.

In his chapter 27,Higden opens with a comparison of the characters of philip andAlexander taken from Justin. His account of Alexander's begetting by Nectanabusand his birth are largely taken from Vincent, but in a much c-ondensed form.Vincent is also Higden's source for the scenes in which Alexander kills Nectanabus,rides the horse Bucephalus, reduces the rebel town of Methona to subjection andrefuses to pay tribute to Darius. The remainder of this chapter, however, whichrelates Alexander's conquests and his final defeat of Darius, is mostly based onJustin, with occasional passages derived from other authors. Among these otherauthors are Josephus and Peter Comestor, from whom Higden took several shortpassages' including that which deals with Alexander's visii to Jerusalem; Augus-tine's De Civitate Dei and'Policrotica'(that is, John of Salisbu ry,s policraticus! aregiven as sources of the anecdote of the pirate Dionides; and Vincent gave Higdenthe story of Alexander's visit to Darius' court. Chapter 28, which ii again

-urrylargely drawn from Justin, gives much prominence to the deterioration ofAlexander's morals, which had been already touched upon in the precedingchapter, and to his adoption of Persian manners. It highlights his intemperance, hisdrunkenness and his tyrannous behaviour, and we are told at some length ol themurders of Cleitus and Callisthenes. Peter Comestor here supplies thJ story ofAlexander's inclision of the Ten Tribes. The chapter concludes with the deaths ofthe Indian king Porus and of the horse Bucephalus.

The whole of chapler 29 is devoted to Alexnndcr's contact with the Brahmansand their king Dindimus. Vincent placed Bn 6ccount of the correspondence between

Alcxnnder und Dlnellmur HB an appenrlix ut tlre end of his history ol'Alexunderl itctrnsists of nn introductory cltuptcr (66) which hc hcads Epllogu,r clt' pctre

llragmunorum (um Alexundro unrl live lcttcrs. The Epiktgus rclatcs how Alexsnderprcpared to conquer the islund ol'thc llrahmans, but received a letter from thcmwhich persuaded him to leave thcm in peace. In the following chapters Vincent thengivcs us five letters, three by Alexander, who has the last word, and two byI)indimus (Vincent calls him Didimus), ultimately based on what we know as the(ollatio cum Dindimo.Higden's chapter 29 opens in very similar terms; Alexanderintends to conquer the island of the Brahmans, but receives a letter from them, thelirst part of which strongly resembles Vincent's chapter 66. However, Higden hasthis letter continue with slightly paraphrased extracts from what is given in Vincentas Dindimus' reply to Alexander's first letter, together with material whichVincent's account does not contain. Higden has nothing corresponding toVincent's first letter from Alexander asking Dindimus for information concerninlthe Brahman way of life, although the first letter of Alexander that he gives is vcrysimilar to the opening lines of Vincent's chapter 70. But the later parts of Higden'rBrahmans episode are quite different from what Vincent tells us. Higden concludeethe correspondence with a letter from Dindimus, after which Alexander sendiOnesicritus with a summons to the Brahman king to come to him, which, however,lirils to impress Dindimus. The episode ends in Alexander's complete discomfiture;he crosses to the Brahman island, humbly asks to be taught wit and wisdom, andconfesses to his anxieties and fears. Alexander offers Dindimus costly prescnts, buthe accepts only the oil and throws it on the fire. It would appear that Higden hashere combined material from the Collatio, which he probably did not take fromVincent, with extracts from what Pfister (1976) has described as the 'Dandamis*Gesprdch'.e

Chapter 30 finally tells us of Alexander's visit to the trees of the sun and moon,who prophesy that he will be lord of the world, but will never return to his nativeland; they warn him against entering Babylon, because there he will be killed, not byiron, but by poison. Most of this scene is taken from Vincent, with a short extractfrom Peter Comestor. Higden also adds a note under his own name with the story ofthe wonderstone. This story is not, as is usually the case, connected with the EarthlyParadise; an unnamed Indian, wishing to rebuke Alexander for his 'ambition'.sends him a stone which is said to resemble the king. Nobody understands what theresemblance consists in, until it is laid in a balance; nothing will outweigh the stoneuntil a little clay is placed in the other scale. When Alexander is on his way home,messengers from the West assemble in Babylon to submit to his lordship. Alexanderis moved to enter Babylon to speak with the messengers, thus ignoring the warningof the trees. This incident is again taken from Peter Comestor's Historia Scalasllaa,which is cited several times in this chapter. The greater part of it, however, includingthe narrative of Alexander's poisoning and death, is taken from Justin.

Most of the material for Higden's account of Alexander thus comes from Justin,Peter Comestor and Vincent. Higden acknowledges Vincent as his source for fourpassages:

I The story of Nectanabus, the birth of Alexander and the portents attending it,2 Alexander's murder of Nectanabus, his taming of Bucephalus, his subjection of

Methona and his refusal of the Persian tribute.

t29r,cafla*"

l4

Alexnntler's visit to l)urius' eourt nnrl ltis thell ol'u goltl cup.His visit to thc trees of the sun und moon,Vincent's ultirnute $ource fur nearly all thc muterisl in the lirst threc of these

passirgcs is the I{istoriu Ale.rundri, thitt is, the Julius Valeriu,r Epitome; a shortpassagc on the naming of Alcxander and on his appearance is prefixed Actor. Thestory of Alexander's consultation of the trees is given by Vincent as derived from the

Epi,stolu A lexandri ud A ristotelem.Higden uses Vincent only for his Alexander story,r0 and, it seems, only for

material which from a modern point of view would be described as legendary. Hemay possibly have decided to cite Vincent because he looked upon him as a morereputable authority for this kind of material than the anonymous HistoriaAlexandri, to which he does refer at the end of his chapter 27,where he discusses twoaccounts of Alexander's dealings with the Amazons.l I

The only edition of Higden's Polychronicon that we possess is that by ChurchillBabington and J.R. Lumby in 9 volumes (Rolls Series 4l), which also includes thetwo English translations. Its Latin text is based on only five manuscripts, althoughthese five were carefully selected. Two of them represent an early version which ends

in 1327, another two contain a longer version which continues into the 1340s. ThisAB version was by far the best known; according to Taylor (1966 99) nearly 70

copies of it are now extant. It is also the version from which the two translations intoEnglish were made. But there are also a few manuscripts which carry the narrativeup to 1352, and the Rolls Series editors use one of this group as their base

manuscript. It is believed that a closely similar manuscript, now No. 132 in theHuntington Library, San Marino, California, ffi&y well be Higden's autographworking copy. It is in origin a copy of the early short version, with numerousadditions in the margins, and with leaves cut out and inserted; and there is goodevidence connecting it with St. Werburgh's Abbey.

Of the two English translations of the Polychronicon the later anonymous one

survives in only one manuscript, BL Harley 2261. The anonymous translator omitsa fair number of phrases, sentences and passages, but it is difficult to detect apattern in these omissions; here and there he seems to reject passages unfavourableto Alexander, but elsewhere such passages are dutifully translated. The Rolls Series

editors surmise (vol. I, p. lxix) that he omitted whatever he was unable to construe,but such a theory cannot account for all his omissions. Some major omissions in theHarley translation are the following:III, 393. In the comparison of Philip and Alexander the statements that the son was

magnificentior ... animo, that Philip often hid and overcame his anger, but thatAlexander neither delayed nor tempered his revenge; that both were lovers ofwine; and the puzzling Cultus utrique similis (on which see below).

III, 399. Part of the brief description of Alexander's appearance.

III, 403. Alexander's question Numquid tu es pater meus; and Alexander telling hismother of his murder of Nectanabus.

III,4l5. An extract from Trogus book ll, which relates how Alexander gives

kingdoms to men of low rank.lll, 421 . Alexander bribing the 'bishops' of thc tcmple of Ammon.111,423. The anecdote of Alexander and the pirute.I11,437. The phrase impleto utero is omitteel fronr the translation of Justin's

version of the itory of Alersntler nrrtl lhc Arnueons,

lll, 447, Alexnnder putting hintrcll' tthove l'hilip.lll, 459. Dindimur' stntctnetrt thnt thc ]lruhnrans never lie.

1V,3. Alexander's rem&rk to the priest of the trees of the sun and moon on the

frequency of rain, and the pricst's rcply.

lV, 13. The joy of Alexandcr's propinqui over his death. The suicide of Darius'

mother.I V, I 5. A passage from the Policraticus on Alexander's succession.'Ihe Harley translation is,often in a strongly Latinate style which seems to attempt

to imitate the periodic syntax of its original, and which is occasionally incompre'

hensible without reference to Higden's Latin. The opening sentence of chapter 27 is

lirirly typical: The noble conquerour Alexander hauenge xx'i yere in age, hegan lo

rcigne o\tq the dethe of hisfader in the realme of Macedonia,whiche reignede xl,l, yere

ttntl vj.-monethes: Ih comparison Trevisa's translation of the same Latin sentenc€l'fhe

-grete Alisaundrr, *hon his fadtr was deed, gun to regne after his fader ln

M acidonia, in his 12 twentipe jere of elde; he regnede but twelve Sere and sixe monles,

while not aspiring to the heights of elegance, is fluent and easy to read.

.lohn of Trevisal3 was a prolific translator. Besides the Polychronicon he tranglated

Ilartholomeus Anglicus'encyclopaedia De Proprietatibus Rerum,as well as scver0l

shorter pieces. A native of'Cornwall, he entered Exeter College, Oxford. in 1362.

and later became a Fellow of Queen's College. Here he became associated with such

men as Nicholas Hereford, who is known as one of the translators of the Early

Wycliffite Version of the Bible, and Witliam Middleworth, another promincnt

loilower of Wyclif. John Wyclif himself rented rooms at the College in 1374, and he

probably remained there until 1381. In 1378 Trevisa, together with Middleworth

and some others, was expelled from the College as the result of a conflict the nature

of which is not entirely clear. A document drawn up by their opponents states that

the expelled Fellows took a number of books with them, among which was a copy ofthe poly,chronicon.Trevisa became chaplain to Lord Thomas of Berkeley, one of th9

most prominent nobles in Gloucestershire, and vicar of'BerkeleYl he also acquired,

with the dubious assistance of an esquire in the service of,Lord Thomas of Berkeley

(on which see Saul l98l: 166 and 176), a prebend in the'collegiate church ofWestbury-on{rym near Bristolj Ttevisa was thus closely associated with Wyclifand his immediatl circle, but there is no evidence that he shared those opinions ofWyclif s which were later condemned as heretical. Therewas, however' a persistent

tmdition that he translated the Bible into English. He is credited with translating

the Bible by,the first Eirglish printer, William Caxton, in his preface to his edition ofTrevisa's translatiotr oi the Polychronicon of 1482; and later John Bale, in hig

Scriptorumlllustium Majoris Britanniae Catalogus (1557-9), and the preface t9 !!cAuthorised Version of l6lI repeat the attribution to Trevisa of an English Bible

translation. No translation by trevisa is extant today; but Trevisa did express hir

views on the necessity of vernacular translations, implicitly including translationl

oll the Bible, in his Dialogue between a Lord and a Clerk and in the Epistle to Lord

Thomas of Berkeleyra whioh accompany his translation of the Polychronlcon in

many manuscripts and in Caxton's printed edition'

",,*lInre. l3l

rfi@w::'

Trcvjsu clertrly ttims ttt u liritlrlul trnnnlntion ruthu thun u li.cc lduptuti'n.l'Higdcn's Lutin chronicle. His division into hookr und chuptcrs is the surnc us thut ol'his source text, and thcre $rc in the chupters on Alexancler no renlly importantadditions or omissions other than those discusscd in the following pagcs.

One of the most interesting f'eatures of Trcvisa's translation is tris'na1.it oladdingan occasional explanation or comment of his own, usuatly headed by his no*. onJconcluded by the formula pan it Jbtowep in pe storie. ihe best-known of theseadditions occurs in book I, chapter 59, in the geographical description of Britain,where Higden makes some remarks on the use of French in England. Children, hetells us, are compelled to leave their own language, and to.onri.u. their lessons inFrench. Moreover, in upper-*lass families children are taught French from the timethey are rocked in their cradle, and, as Trevisa transLtes Higden's remarks,vplondisshe men speak French for to be i-told of (Il,l59). Trevisla, writing somethirty years later, adds that things have changed. iwo Cornishmen have introducedEnglish as the medium of instruction in schools, and it is no longer so common lorupper--class children to be taught French.

In the chapters that deal with Alexander there are two major additions byTrevisa. One occurs in chapter 29,which tells of Alexander's confrontation with thlBrahmans. In the second letter of Alexander Trevisa adds a brief explanation to anobservation on the human senses. More interesting is Treviru', ungry protest inchapter 27. He cannot translate the remark of the dying Nectanabus that No manmayflee his owne destanye (III,401) without adding thai l,{ectanabus seide pis sawe,and was a wicche, and perfore it is nevere le bettr:e to trowynge: but it were a vileschamefor a Cristen man to trowe pisfalse sawe of his wtcchi,.firfrom every myshappat man is i-schape in pis worlde io fatle ynne, CLi -oy hym"savl Jtf it is his wille.

The blatant fatalism of Nectanabus' dying words rnurt have bein too much forTrevisa to swallow, especially since they are spoken by a wicche.

Other additions by Trevis a are of minor significance. When, for instance, Higdentells us, in the opening sentences of chapte r 27, that Philip and Alexander wereuterque vini avidus (III,392), Trevisa translates eyper loved wel wyn, but adds, moreor less redundantly, ond were bope goode drynkeres. A little late,r, when Higdenrelates that Nectanabus per concava quoque virgulae hebeninae loqu:ebatur, Hildenslightly expands this into Also he wolde take a Serde offtr holowS wil ynne as a pipe,and he wolde speke in pe holownesse of pat Serd (III,395),- bul

'adds nothing

substantial.The anonymous Harley translator makes only very few additions. He likes to

refer to Alexander as the noble conquerour (III,393) or the noble and worthyconqueroure (I1I,397), where Higden merely has Alexander magnas. On p. III,405 headds to the name of Philip that he was fader putatiuus to kynge Alexqider, and headds an occasional minor explanation here and there, but generally his omissionsare much more conspicuous than his additions.

Unlike his anonymous fellow translator, Trevisa does not usually omit anythingfrom Higden's-text. The most notable omissions are found in the narrative ofAlexander's visit to the court of Darius, where he steals a gold cup (11I,430-2). Thisscene is taken from Vincent, in abbreviatecl lorm. Contrary to i.rir usual practice,Trevisa's translation omits several minor dctails: his English text does not tel usthat Alcxander hnd pitched his camp by e rlver, thut, on hii visit to Darius'c$mp, he

titkcs two compunlunr with hirrr, that hc gocs by night nnd thut his nirn wus ltt see

[)arius'army,Trevisa's style in tnortly rlrrrple und dircct, but also not inlrequcntly clumsy und

lacking in elegance. The periodic sentences of Higden's Latin, which contain a goocltlcal of subordination, ure trunsformed into much simpler, largely parutacticscquences which may bc rathcr shapeless and sprawling. The anonymous Harleytranslator shows similar tendencies, although generally speaking he attempts moreollen to carry the syntactic structures of Latin over into English. For instance,Trevisa renders Higden's ablative absolute depositis vestibus et ornamentn (1V,2) bymeans of a coordinate clause but pey schulde of do her clopes and hire urrey, while thcHarley translator attempts an absolute construction theire clothes putte uweye,Later in the same chapter, Higden, citing Justin, recounts the poisoning ofAlexander as follows: Igitur ad coenam Thessali medici inter epulus Alexanelerintoxicatus, velut gladio confossus ingemuit, tactus hominum tanquam vulneraubhorruit, ferrum in remedium doloris deposcit, amicis autem ejus causam methlintemperantiam coenae arbitrantibzs (IV,l0). Trevisa translates, again turning thel'inal ablative absolute into a coordinate structure: pan at soper o.f Tessalus lte

.f i,rician, among greet service of mete and drynke, Alisaundre was i-poysoned, andgrente as he were i-stiked wil a knyf lorry pe body, and dradde pe handelynge ol'rnanis hond as sore as harde woundes, and axede a tool to slee hymsef'in remcdle o,l'

.torwe. Hisfrendes trowede pat unsete mete pat he hadde i-ete at soper was utus( of'his:;iknesse.

The Harley translator, however, introduces more subordination (and omits oncor two elements): Alexander was poysonede at the soper of Tes,ralu$ the lec'he,

sorowenge as if he hade bene woundede thro the body with a spere, ahhorrenge thelowchenge of man as woundes, willenge to sle hym selftfor peyne, hisfrendes iuggengethat passion to haue commen by the intemperance off meytes.

The Harley translator seems so fond of participle constructions that heintroduces them where Higden's Latin has a sequence of clauses each with a finiteverb. Another instance of this tendency is his rendering of Cum igitur amiciAlexandri eum omnino deficere viderent, quaerunt ab eo quem haeredem imperllluciant...(IV,l2), which he translates as Thefrendes of Alexander seenge hym lyke lodye, inquirede of hym whom he wolde haue to succede in his realme... whereas Trevisatranslates more straightforwardly, Whanne Alisaundres frendes seigh pat he schuldedeie, pey axede of hym who schulde be his eire and emperour after hy^.

Trevisa's rendering is more fluent and easier to read; he does not attempt to lendhis style greater dignity by the use of complex syntax, polysyllabic Latinate vocab-ulary, and similar devices. As the last two sets of quotations show, Trevisa seems toprefer simple words of native origin where the later Harley translator uses Latin orlrrench words, e.g. siknesselpassion for Higden's morbi, axedelinquirede lorquacrunt: but sometimes we meet with the opposite, e.g.fisicianlleche for medlcl,

Trevisa's main concern appears to have been to make Higden's meaning quitoclear (although here and there, as we shall see below, he misses Higden's point). Hesccms to share the ideas olthc s.vmple creature who wrote the prologue to the LaterVersion of the Wycliffite Biblc translation, who writes, First it is to knowe, that lhehesl translating ls out ot'Latyn lnto English, to translate aJiir the sentenc'e, und noloneli cliir the wordlg, go thal lhe ,wt(nce he us opin, either openere, in English us lnLut,yn, and go notfcrfra lha leilre,tl

-. r*.- 133.'

' 't - ' o.=r"n'!:1re

'l'lte sultrc writcr nlso recornnrendn turnlng l,ntirr ryntux irrto simpler Englishstructures: In lrun.rlating into Engllth, numle rexilurktnl,noun nruke tlu, lsentence

opctt, us un ubluti/'cusc, uhsolute' mu,y he rexilukl lttltt llte',rt' lhre',rwtrdil, v,ith urutnuhlev(rhc, thc whilc,lbr, if, (s grunrorie,n,r,re.''n,' tts lhul, thc mnistir rcdingc, I stondc, maihc resoluid tftus, while the maistir redith, I stonde, eithu il'thc maistir redith, clc'.cither lor the maistir, etc.; and sumlyme it w,oldc ucorcle wcl w,ith thc sentence to beresoluid into whanne, either into aftirward, thus, whanne the maistir red, I stood,either aftir the maistir red, I stood,' and sumtyme it mai wel be resoluid into a verhe oJ'

the same tens, as othere ben in the same resoun, and into this word, et, that is, and inEnglish, as thus, arescentibus hominibus prae timore, that is, and men shulen wexedrie for drede. Also a participle of a present tens, either preterit, of acqf vois, eithirpassif, mai be resoluid into a verbe of the same tens, and a coniunccioun copulatif, asthus , drcens, that rs, seiynge , mai be resoluid thus , and seith, eithir that seith ; and thiswole, in manie placis, make the sentence open, where to Englisshe it aftir the word,wolde be derk and douteful. Also a relatif, which mai be,resoluid into his antecedentwith a coniunccioun copulatif, as thus, which renneth, and he renneth.r6 Trevisa'sfamiliarity with this.view of translation is apparent on every page.

A well-known feature of medieval, and even post-medieval, English prose,original as well, as translated, is the use of pairs of synonyrns, in translated textsoften corresponding to a single word in the source text. Thus theOrder for MorningPrayer rn The Book of Common Prayer opens with an exhortation to the assembloilfaithful to acknowledge and confess their manifold sins and wickedness,and not todissemble nor cloqk them.,In,Trevisa's translation of Higden such doublets are alsoof frequent occurrence. Thus frugalitati (III,392) is rendered, erroneously, as toskilful largenesse andfrenesse of Siftes. A small selection of other doublets is

III, 395 werre and bataille Higden bellill[, 4ll dukes and lederes ducesIIl, 419 warnep and seip nay negatIII, 423 pou impugnestr1 and wip-seist impugnasIII, 425 (but pou be) entendaunt and buxum passage expanded from

( to myn) corntnaundements and quod si non paruerishestes'(an:d doo as )

I commqunde pe and hotelordschipe and mageste

lll, 449 made so grete d,oel. and sorwepe manere and pe arrayq.gentil man and a noble

IV, 'l I pe,strengpe anQ pe maliceso grym and'so grisliche

IV, 13 pe ofspringe and lynage

Higden majestatiin tantum condoluitmoremquidwt nobilisvls

tantanecessitudinum

A striking phenomenon is that the doublets appear in clusters; in some passagesthey occur very densdly, whereas in others they are almost entirely dbsent. So far as Ican see, there is no clear relation between the density of doublets and thesubject-matter of the passages in which they occur.

In some cases the worils coupled in c doublet cannot really'be said to besynonyms. Examples are

,eg *, , 135

'q;403 perllou,r und evel hllt'nge405 ln un funtellelrc unl ryetlul

compunl'e und nterfe421 he wax fc'rnore' Pnnulc und

unesy

lll, 459 wi! culter and w'ih sc:hare

lll, 467 olde men heeP solte andwexeP feble

one effect of the doublets is to make Trevisa's English translation more diffuse and

less precise than its Latin source, where Higden seems to cultivate a certain terscn68g

of expression. The Har,ley translator uses doublets more sparingly, but is by no

means averse to them; for instance, the Latin phrase pulcherrimam c'ulpanl

(reoturam (III,460) is translated by Trevisa pey blameh he fairest of creatures,

whereas the Flarley translator has the more correct and more florid (whos)

heautuous and noble creature thei reproue and blame'

Besides the lexical exuberance of the doublets we must note the contrasting but

related phenomenon that not infrequently one or two English words are used to

translate a wide range of Latin synonyms. Thus the Latin occidere, inlerllc:ere,

caedere, interimere, f,erimere and extinguere are nearly always rendered by both

English translators as s/ee. The same verb is used, with even less precision, 1o

traislate transfodit, 'stabbed' (111,432), and, in Trevisa only, in (hostes) insillt,

literally, .leaps upon his enemies' (III,392), which in the Harley Ms. is rendercd .,.

urrngi rrudeirte irfghte .... vn to his enmye.s. other renderings of Latin verbs roughly

,r'.uii.rg 'kill' octur in the case of occiso jam patre (111,392), which Trevisa

translates whan his fader was deecl, while the Harley Ms. has after the dethe of hls

.fader, and of Nectanabus' saying cognovi me a filio meo fore occidendum (lll'402),

where Trevisa uses s/ee, but the Harley translator has y knewe ... hat myne awne

sonne scholde be cause of mY dethe.

In similar fashion the English verb deie translates the Latinsynonyms occumberel

decedere, obire, mori and dificere, although the anonymous translator once rendcrs

,ccumberet as scholde ... suffre dethe (III,398). But this may be regarded as an

instance of his tendency to resolve a verb into a more or less empty verbal operator

with a noun expressing action; examples are Safe metenge to the bischoppe (IV'3)'

where Higden iu, orruryit ei antistes, and Trevisa pe bisshop ... come asenst hym,

and 3ffi batelle (III,43?) for Higden's confligere,whichTrevisa translates fiSt.Less pronounced is this lexical convergence in the case of words for'war, battle',

Higden-u ses bellum, res bellicae, praelium, certamen and congressio, which Trevisa

translates bataille,f$tynge or werre, and once werre and bataille;but the Harley

translator nearly always has batelle-

In his contribution io the present volume, Dr Gosman notes similar phenomena

in Jean de Vignay's translatibn of Vincent's Speculum Historiale; a variety of Latin

synonymr t.id to be translated by a single French word, even though a wide range

of French synonyms must have been available. In English, synonymous words or

phrases were certainly available for'slay', 'die'and 'war', but many of these seem to

have bcen mainly roitrlctcd to verse, and Trevisa and his anonymous colleague, ifGy *rtr familier wlth thcm, ffi6y have considered them inappropriatc for u3e in

il1,lll.

lll.

lligderr nntrduxin qwdum,lcuniliari

CONSC'SSU

illi adauc'ta est

animi insolenliavomerihusimbecillitale (sc.

gaudet) canities

{

plilin prosc' Mttrcovcr. tltey muy hnve ltrund it dil'licult or cven impossiblc torcproducc in Middlc English the d-enotative urrtl corrnotu(ive nuunces that dif'fcrcn-tiated the Latin wtlrcls, if inclecd they were ,,*rrrc ol'these nuonces. lf llkc ( 1977) hasrecently pointed out that Middl; English worcls rurely hnd sharply define4meanings and connotative values, and t[at a choice bctwccn synnny6 was oftenmade on metrical or rhetorical grounds rather than because of evocative orconnotative associations. English was often regarded as lackinj the elegance andprecision of Latin and French, and ur ruff.iing from its unsettled state anduncertainty of usage which were the result both of dialectal variety and of rapiddiachronic change.It is a well-known fact that in medieval Latin semantic changes had occurredwhich are most fully revealed in translatio". tn the two Engiiri' translations ofHigden's Polychronicon we also find the usual medieval Latii meanings given tosuch words as miles (invariably transla ted kn$t) or luxuria, which is alwaysrendered leccherieeven in passages ultimately taken from Justin, to whom the wordmust have primarily meant 'intemperanca'.18 This seems clearly the meaningoriginally intended in Frugalitati pa.tir,luxuriaefilius magis deditus (rlr,3g2),whereboth translators render luxuria as leccherieltecihtery: they also have problems withfrugalitas, which we shall discuss presently. of couise, 'lethery,may also have beenthe.meaning which Higden gave to luxuiia. This medieval ,.nr. oif luxuriaand itsderivatives (which was also possible in classical Latin) seems more ctearly present inInde coepit Alexander luxuriose vivere (III,412), where in the same sentence we aretold of his love for Barsine' on whom he begof hir ron Hercules. Trevisa translatespanne Alisaundre gon to lyve in leccherte; t:he Harley Ms. has From whiche tymeAlexander exerc.isede gretely the synne of lecchery.

The two English translations do not agree in tteir rendering of magus.This termis, of course' used to refer to Nectanu6ur, whose magical practices are usuallysharply condemned in medieval Alexander lit..uiure, the -o.. so since he employshis magic to seduce olympias' Yet the word magus can hardly have had anunequivocally pejorative meaning, because ir was ui;; mJ'"ir;; ivise Men fromthe East of Matthew 2. The Hariey translator avoids the translation of magus bysubstituting the name of Nectanabus, but Trevisa uses the strongly opprobriouswicche, and expresses his disapproval of the magician's art in hisingry commentthat we quoted above.of a more commonplace character are the translations of antistes as bisshoplbischoppe and of pontifex (i.e. Iadus, the Jewish high priest) likewise as pebisshoplthe bischop.Two remarkable translations occur on the first page of our Alexander story(rrr'392)' Here Higden tells us of Philip and Alexander that cultus utrique simili.s.rtis not easy to determine what exactly Higd.n -.unt here; Justin, who is his sourcehere, wrote literarum cultus,which isalso what we find in Vincent,s version of muchthe same passage in his chapter 22. TheHarley transrator omits this sentence, butTrevisa assures us that they were of 9on byleve. rrris is in itself not an impossibletranslation, but in the context it is itt but nonsensicar.ln the sentence immediately following we arc told that Frugalirari patcr,luxuriuc,

./'iliu"t mugi,r deditu't. Both translators misunclerstood .Trugaliias, *t,i.t, usually, inmedieval as well as in classical Latinr mcang,tenrper,,nce,. And both givc much the

silnlc ntistrtrnsl&tlonl Trevlnn ltnn sklllul/rlr'gcrr',r,rt' uttd.lient,sst' ol'g|l'k',t. thc HurleyMs. has liherullte, Wc sre lad to usk oursclvcs whcthcr our two trtnslutors nrighthavc uscd a munu$eripl ol'tlre /'rrl.r'r'hnnium which had a corrupt rcadingut thispoint, Unfortunatcly thc Rolls Series cdition does not enable us to discovcr whetherany of the manuscripts now cxtant has a reading of this kind.

A corrupt reading in the exemplar used by the translator can be more confidentlyassumed in a few other cases. On the same first page of his account of Alcxander,Higden relates that, unlike Philip, Alexander neque dilationem neque motlum ulcl-:sccndi quaerere consuevit, that is, 'he was not accustomed to seek either delay ormeasure in revenge'. The Harley translator omits this statement, but Trevisa has thenonsensical Pe sone used nou7t to seche love noper pe manere o.f wrac'he. His /oyeseems likely to depend on a reading dilectionem for dilationem in the Latinmanuscript that he used. Similarly, when Trevisa translates Alexander moribus elvitiis atque incessu magistri sui Leonidis ...cerere non potuit as Alisaundre mygt nou1lleve the maneres andpe vices andpe leccherie of his maister Leonides (1II,398-9), higsource manuscript may well have read incestu rather than incessa. Again, on p,l[l,4l4 we are told that Alexander multos reges Orientis cum incolis obvios huhult,which Trevisa renders meny kynges of be Est come ajenst hy^, and lordes wllt('rownes and dyademes;but it is difficult to believe that Trevisa misunderstood thoword incola, which he translated quite correctly only a few lines further on (etmnes

incolas - alle pat woned pere); it seems more likely that what he read was ('tltr l4lhlls,This is in fact the better reading; it is what we find in Justin (XI,x,6), whom Higdenis here quoting, and in Vincent (ch. 25), who uses the same material. Finally, Trovlsrtranslates Higden's inter qmicos Alexandri convivio considentes (111,446) as ut u,lbstoumong Alisaundre his trustyfrendes; and we may suspect that trusty goes back to aLatin confidentes. The Harley translator here simply says in a feste ...amonge the

.frendes of kynge Alexander. In cases such as these, the presumed underlying Latinreadings might help us identify the manuscript or the group of manuscripts thatTrevisa used; on the other hand, we must also envisage the possibility thatmisreadings originated with Trevisa himself.

ln a fair number of instances, however, we cannot hold variant readings in a

Latin manuscript (or the translator's misreading of his exemplar) responsible fore rroneous renderings. Trevisa has the largest number ol more or less straightfor-ward errors; a few characteristic instances are the following.

HigdenIII, 398 sub crispa cesarieIII, 408 qui in lacertis, non in

pedibus spem ponerenl

Trevisawip faire heer

for pey putte hope in braynand nouSt in here feet

(or is brayn a scribal error for brawn? None of the English Mss. used by the RollsSeries editors is reported to read brawn)lII, 418 Celebrefuit hoc servorum

facinus toto terrarumorhe

Ill, 440 Parthis ,., tktmiti,tIll, 450 montlum praeruptulll, 460 gratiarunt aellone

pis manere doyng of cherle:s

comounliche was i-used inevery lond

whanne pe Parthies wue i c'ltu,teclpe utppes ol'he hille,twih .,. fonkvngct ol'hi,r grlce

-'{dreh' 137

(The Harley translator similarly has fat u ntun ,rcholdc' he' lorcle ol'the' norlclc;Latin must mean'that he would be sole lord..,')

lV, 4 quocl unus/bre,t elornlnasorbi,s lerrac

lV, 12 Mater vero Darii mortemsibi conscivit

III, 412 aspirans ad regnum Orien-tis Syriarn adiit

IlI, 444 omnium gentium latro esIIl, 470 Calamus quidorn quia (var.

qui) a nobis ad vosprffigit

lII, 422 Me fortunae inaequalitaset rei familiaris angus*tia, te fastus intolera-bilis et inexplebilisavaritia,furemfacit

hal 00n schulde hc' lorde qf'ulIte'worlele uhoult'

Darius his moder ordeyned./irhis deep

he wente in to pe este partes, vn toa reelme calledde Siria

being as maister of alle theuesThe writenge sende from vs to yow

Lite fortune and povert andscarste of riches makep me a

heef; greet pride and covetisepat may noust be fuffilledmake! lthel a peef

..!.!.4,.!fri'lr*.:.t1:}:.94.:!?,ala!5?''j1,]!*1rgr..i.]'11Tffiry1-'.]'!-e".';i1'-:.. '-'*'"Erftm

rcnde ring of Higden'r greet cltrgtlicle , I lis work now survives, in whgle or in purt' in

somc lburtcen tonor.?ptr, ttt l4H2 it was printccl' in ntodernised fornt nnd with tt

continuation up to thc yfur 146(1, hy William Caxton, and it was rcprinted sevcrul

timcs. To many gener$tions ot'rcndcrs hc thus presented Higden's learncd survey of

the world's histoiy l; ;" emine nrly readable ior*, giving the literate laity of late

medieval and.earli modcrn England access to one of the great medievalcompendig

of historical learning.

NOTES

I Ed.. Robinson (1957).

2 A list of pauline Aiken's publications on this subject is given in Bunt (1983: 9),

3 Ed.BabingtonandLumby(1s65-g6)ingvolumr.,Rollrseries4l.ReferencestoHigdenand the English translations are to volumes and pages of this edition.

4 See Taylor (1966: 152-g),supplemented by Edwards (1978)' Edwards also notes OlbOrn

Bokenham,s free translation of part of Higden's description of Britain-(ed. Horstmgnn

1887), and the use in English of material from the Polychroniconin a Lollard chronielo of

the papacy (ed. Talbertlg+Z)and in an English chronicle in Ms. Lyell 34 in the BodlOlan

Library, Oxford (ed. Davies 1856). A more recent survey of Higden's work io SlvOn by

Gransden (1982: 43_57); but I find it impossible to accept her statement thnt Hlgdon.gave a eulogistic account of Alexandei the Great' (p. 53). In anr earlier artlelo Dr

Gransden noted that Higden uses numerical symbolisrnin the design of his work gnd ln

some passages (Gransden 1977)'

Higden is also the author of a treatise on the art of preaching, the Ars componendl

Sermones,on which see Jennings (1978), and of a Speculum Curatorum'

5 on vincent,s o.p.rro.n.e on-Fleliouii, see Monique Paulmier-Foucart (1979) and

(1981).6 Et quamvis alienum sit quod assumo, meum tamen facio quod meis aliquando verhls

an t iquor um s ae p e s en t e n t ias p r ofer a (I, 1 8-20)'

7 I have used the edition of Otto Seel (1972)'

I On this letter see BunL(1%3: a).

9 On Higden's use of vincent, see also Bunt (1983).T1. Latin text of lhe Dandamls-Ge'

sprriahis printed by Mtiller (1g46: 109-20). iwish'to thank my co'rlhague J.B. Voorbijrfor

pointing out this treatise as a possible ultimate source of part of Higden's chapter 29'

l0 Higden cites Vincent by name only in his chapters on Alexander, but elsewhere hC alSO

includes two ci,tations from Helinand, whose rru-. is given' as Helmandus ot Helynandut;

one of these deals with plato (III,35i), the other with rrajan,(v,4). Helinand gives the

Plato story in his book xvII, ch. l0; hi, u.ro.t"t of'Trajan is now lost' Higden qlv havo

taken the passages from Vincent, who gives the same rnaterials in book III' ch' 77-8 and

book X, ch. +O,iitingHelinand. as his ,J,lr".. I wish to thank Dr A'J' Minnis for bringing

Higden's citations from Helinand to my atterilion'Higden,s dependence on Vinceniiorilir account of Alexander has been overestimated

(Cary 1967 ,Taylor 1966;see Bunt 1983); but he may have made oqcasional use of Vincent

in other parts of his chronicle.ll Higden ilso treats the same material in book I, ch. l8 (I'153).

l

l2 The Ro,llsSerios edition, wh,ich uses Ms. St.Iohnls College Carmbridge204 as its basc text'

has tym:e,betore twentllte, which rmakes little sense. Two other Mss' which the editors huve

collated, as well 8c Cgxton'n printed edition, omit tyme'

r3 ForTrevisa,srifccndwork,B€cpcrry(1925:ir-"***iii;andFowlcr(1960)'(1962).(1970)'antl (1971), Seo elrolbrlr* ehaptcr of Fo'wler (1977)'

the

The anonymous Harley translator may be suspected of omitting sentences andphrases which caused him difficulty. Yet he also has occasional errors, forinstance:

(Calamus is a Brahman who has joined Alexander's following; the Harleytranslator has apparently thought of calamus 'reed, reed pen')

Both translations thus contain a sprinkling of obvious errors. There are also a fairnumber of cases where the English rendering, while far from being altogethermistaken, must be considered loose and imprecise. The tendency to use only one ortwo English synonyms to render a wide range of Latin words also contributes to thislooseness. A typical instance of such imprecision is Trevisa's translation of

IiIl'

, lr: i,S;t' {,

iI

t

The overall tenor of this remark of the pirate Dionides is rendered adequatelyenough, but no attempt is made to give English equivalents of such words asinaequalitas and intolerabills. We should also note that Trevisa has resort to acircumlocutory phrase in order to translate inexplebilis.

A comparison of the two translations of the Alexander chapters in thePolychroniconmustlead us to the conclusion that Trevisa's is the more faithful andalso the more attractive rendering. The anonymous Harley translator frequentlyemploys a tortuous syntax and seems to be fond, like many 15th--century Englishwriters, of a polysyllabic Latinate vocabulary; Trevisa's syntax strikes us as muchmore natural, although his sentences can be quite shapeless, and his vocabularyappears to favour simple words of native origin. Unlike the Harley translator,Trevisa does not make substantial omissions. His translation is often less thanprecise and on occasion mistaken, and his atyle. while simple and direct, lackselegance; but taking it all in all, he glver s vcry largely faithful and attractive

& tI 39'

t41.5

l6t7

':L

litlitctl, irr rrr.de'rriscd spcllirrg, irr r\rltrrr.tl ( l9rt.t),Qtr<tlcd li'orn l.orslrull urrtl Mirtldcrr ( 18.,i0: 1,.f 7), n lbw ex;rlunutory glosscs would sccntI' bc in rr(lcr: M,ttrt'il((','nlclrning. scnse'; opitt.clcttr, intclligiblc,; f i|ft,,r. ..rr../Dir/. Glosscs:,tum.wiil'; t,,ut,nuhlt,.suitablc.; ,r,,r,,r,n.scntcncc..Thc Rolls scrics cdition has thc corrupt ttctnpn(,,tt (takcn from M.s. St John's collcgccambridgc204),and givcs impugnest in a textual notc as a variant reading. Thc choicc ofthc often corrupt cambridgc Mi. as the base text must be considcred unfortunatc.Eichert ( I 882) s.v. luxuria givcs' uppigkeit, schwergerei, prunkriebe,.

W.J. Aerts

Proverbial passages taken from Vincent ofBeauvais' Speculum Doctrinale translated intoMedieval Greek: the methods of translation used

by the anonymous Greek author

In the Ceskt Museum Filologiske (401416) and (1-28) of the years 1900 and 1901,the Czech scholar Leo Sternbach published a learned article :De Vinc,entllBellovacensis Excerptis Graecis. Sternbach, like scholars such as C. Wachsmuth. H,Diels, J. Freundenthal, A. Elter a.o., was especially interested in collections ofproverbia and 'bon mots' from Antiquity, such as can be found in several Grgeltmanuscripts. One of these manuscripts, the Codex Vaticanus Graecus no. ll44written on oriental, so--called 'silky', paper (bombycin), presents on the folla225v-228r a collection of sayings, entitled in Greek ix ro0 &xc<,rpo6 ),atrvrxo0 prBllou('from the Latin book of Actor').1 Sternbach, who edited also a number of othorgnomologiae from the same manuscript,2 was puzzled lor a long time about thgsource of this Greek translation, until he found that these gnomics were taken fromthe Speculum Maius of Vincentius of Beauvais, and more specifically, from thofourth and fifth books of the Speculum Doctinale, dealingwith matters of morality,As becomes clear from the article of Sternbach, there can be hardly any doubt thetthe sayings were taken from Vincent, be it that the translator used either a selectionalready drawn from the Speculum, or made the selection himself, because thesequence of sayings in the Greek translation exactly follows the sequence ofpresentation in books four and five of the Speculum Doctrinale, with only threeexceptions. The Greek text comprises in Sternbach's edition 103 sayings; of theseonly no. l0 breaks the sequence, by preceding no. 9 in Vincent's text; no, 88 islacking in the Douai-edition of Vincent, used by Sternbach,3 but Sternbachsupposes that this saying must have been present in book V, chapter 14 (de morlhussenum) in the exemplar of the compilator or the translator. No. 95 offers a moreserious problem; it is a note on the Carthaginian queen Dido, which, according toSternbach, ffi?y have been interpolated here from book V, chapter 48 (de pueroruminstructione) of lhe Speculum Doctrinale, with a reference to Augustin ConfessionesI 13,20.

Having compared the texts edited by Sternbach with the Douai-edition ofVincent, in order to get an idea of the contexts from which the quotations wer€taken by the compilator and/or translator, I have taken the Sternbach-texts as g

base of operation.a As a result of my comparison I can only say that at f'rrst sightone gets the impression that the selection was made with the help of the shortindications in the margins such as in the Douai--edition, but this supposition provesto be untenable, as far as the Douai--edition is concerned. It remains, theoreticallyspeaking at least, possible that this was the procedure followed in selecting thequotations, and in that case. it must in principle be possible to find out from which

t8

t4t.*sr{L,

lllillluscript the sclcction wtts mudc,t An nnnlysis ol'thc trunntnti,n hcilrg r,y lirstconccrn' howcvcr, I ntadc lbr the limc treing no rurtrt.r inui*iiguti,rrr in thatdirccti<ln.As to thc translltign techniquc one may make some preliminary obscrvations.sincc the second world war (and certainly also as a consequence of this war) a veryintensive interest in translation problems has arisen. This interest has "been

provoked by the promising possibilities which seem to present themselves in thedevelopment of translation machineries. Not only the practical and technical sidehas found:a rich field for research, also the theoreticai aspects t ao. come up fordiscussion, in which either'structuralistic or (transformational) generative, psychol-inguistic and communicational approaches have had to provide the basis for anoverall theory of translation. The range of results runs from Leo weisgerber,sbasically pessi'mistic viewpoint '...,die t4einung der ernsthaften Ubersetzer,liiuftdarauf hinaus, dass ein volkommenes UberrrtJ.n-uon sprache zu Sprache nichtmoglich ist',6 to the basically optimistic approaeh of Erwin Koschmieder whostates that translating means the transposition of a token x that indicates a notion xin language x into a-toke-n y indicating a.notion y inlurrg.rage yby making coincidetheir essences - both in implication and in style.?Kade expressed the procedure in a diagram:8

Ll text

Surface Structure Source Language

Depth Structure S L

Translation

Translator

Rf,cSL2 text R'

Surf;ace Structure T L

Depth Structure Target Language

twith tlcliber$tc ntunipulnllon thc tlunslutor rttay wish to tttuintnin c.g. the Bntne

word orclcr, thc utnte lrurtrher ol'rrorrns ttrd/or vcrbs, thc same sound impressittnn,the same metrc$, the snrne rhyrrrc worcls ctc. ctc. One may obscrvc that, cspecinlly inthose cascs wherein tlre sourcc tcxt is ol'a sacred character, the translators avoid freerendering as much as possiblc and tend to resort to a word for word translation,whereas in special cases the translator may act as a recreator of a piece of art ofwhich he wishes to render as adequately as possible its emotional effects, as forexample the translation made by the Dutch poet Nic. Beets of the Mazcppn ofByron.11 It is rather obvious, in my opinion, that judging the result in the latter cuse

risks being more subjective.When we turn now to the translation made by the Greek anonymous of thcsc

sayings taken from Vincent, we may expect that his translation rather follows theline of the word for word rendering, sayings of famous people or expressions ofgeneral truth working more or less as sacred texts and demanding a translstion gr

close as possible. We can say, indeed, that the Greek translator follows his soureetext in general very closely. This circumstance enabled me to work with a marklngsystem such as used by the Dutch Consumers League, thus

* * (very good) + (good) + l- (mediocre) - (mistaken) - - (very mirtakon)

according to the level of accuracy and/or inventiveness brought in by the trunglgtor,In order to have a criterion for thesejudgements, I compared'the crucial termi wlthgraeco-latin and latino-greek wordlists, such as existed in (late) Antiquity cndearly Medieval times and which can he found in the Corpus Glossariorum Latlnorumof'George Goetz.rz

First, I feel obliged to give some statistics. Sternbach gives 103 Greek lemmata.Of these I lelt 5 out of consideration, the numbers 51 and 8V because they nrerepetitions of the numbers 8 and 28, the numbers 48 and 49 because they containtext corruptions, which make the interpretation too uncertain, and the number 95,because it has no Latin counterpart. On the other side I split up the lemmata 15, l'8,46,50 into two, the lemma 8l into four and 90 into seven parts, because they makodifferent judgements necessary. Most of .the lemmata do not exceod'one or twolines. Only 12,15,45,46,67,81,90 and 95 are longer.'Number 90 is the longost: lllines in the edition of Sternbach.

Thus I applied my system ofjudgement to I I I lemmata. I qualified14 or ca. l3 o/o as'very good'55 or ca. 5l o/, as 'good'27 or ca.24oh as 'rnedium'l0 or ca. 9'/o as lmistaken'5 or ca. 4o/o as'very mistaken'

Another result of my investigation is that I was able to establish 'thet'thc

translator did not in,general use stereotyped translations. One of the few'calques'igthe translation of the Latin word uitium ('vice') by n&$o6 (mostly = 'affcct','passion''). The translator uses this 'couple' sevsn times ( 16, I 7 , 45, 56, 57 ,63, 75)and though the rendering is accqptable in'all these casesr one leels neverthelcls som€discrepancy in one or two of thcm, As an,example I quote no. 57:

The message of the sender [S] in the source language [Ll-textJ is received [R] by thetranslator, 'who 'transcodes' [Tc] the message Into"ttre target"lffiage, actlng as asender [S] hirnself,for the finar:receiver [R']In the receivinl uog,iug..The generative modele shows a simiiar idea in its own terminology:

t'ransfer.SL _ TL

It is clear that 'the transfer itself is the crucial and focal point of the translationprocess', as has been stated by Nida-Taberro and that the level of the translationdepands on the ability of the Jranslator 6o decode the *.*g. of the sourcelanguage, to ana'lyse its esse,ntiar elements, and to rearr,ange as comp{etely aspossible the mes5age in- the target language. tn oth.. *oros,*ttr. ia*r translatortransfers the messa€e of language A into r pi.turc in his mind and then he rendersall t'he relevant elements of ihe .picture into language B. But precisely thisestablishnrent 'sf 'the nclevant elcrrcntc fonnc u .o*ptiJuting factor. Besides therendering of the meaning itself, which ig of courri ,.tw.nt - unlcss one has to do

*rfl4, r43

-(57) Hcu quam caccus i'est uitiis t'llor (Vine, ,!,rre,,, Dttrt,lV 106),'ltl, ftftl,cov tugtriv lvcon rtfic, n&.llcorv 6 tpor,,

'

The line is taken from claudianys /n Eutrtpiurr ll 50. Vincent,s text offers heuinstead of sedin the original. I understand trre latin text as;t o*-Gtrungly) belongsblind love to the vices', whereas the Greek line is suggesting so much as: .how muchis love among the passions a blind one', or: 'a u"ry blind thing is in the passions:Love!'. problematic is the neuter cus).6v, though i;ir;;;;i;;;;"rallel: prutarch

Moralia (2,)2b offers a text such as fi g6o;tq&veig,a${1oeo.r6 rug},6v .without instructionnature is an obscure thing'. one may also interpret cug).6v as elliptical for rug),6v SC.nri$o6' considering, however, the stiict.orr.rptndence between the Latin text andthe Greek rendering, I think that neither interprelation is logical and that rug),6v is amistake of perseveration after 6n6oov and that the translation originally read: ,Idr,6n6oov rug).d6 tvean roi6 nd,$eor,v 6 dp<,.rq.

There is anotherinteresting detail in this line. If one eliminates the exclamation'Idr the Greek translation shows the structure of a so--called 'political verse, 6rc6oovtug)'dq 'tveatt coiq nd$eor,v 6 dpor6. This is less far-fetched than it seems, for there aretwo other examples in the series of translations. This is ve.y obvio.rs in lemma 3:

(3) omnis sapiens liber, omnis stultus seruus (vinc. spec. Doct.rv l4)." Anc.. oooi,,q 6),e6$epo6. &nac, V"upd6 gi goU),oq./ .. .'/ ' . I .',liil": *-.,i'"".""/'*.,'

The third example is no. 59 with an interesting problem. The line runs as follows:

(59) Res est soliciti plena timoris amor (vinc. spec. Doct.rv 109).np&yp"a iocv ipp6pr,pvov xai n),!pe6 g6pou 6 dpr<.././././ll. i./ yi'.I o. /

vincent quotes ovid's Heroides I,l2 here in spec. Doct.IV l0g, but also in IV I l3and in speculum Historialevl 107. sternbach makes the observation that the Greektranslation suggests solicita er in his exemplar instead of soliciti. This may be thecase' but it is possible too that the translatoi added first xai in order to get a politicalverse scheme in the second half of the line, and as a consequence adapted the firsthalf which needs an accent on the fifth syllab.iil; passage has also been translatedby Max. Planudes, for which see p. 174. )

I return once more to the 'caique' uitium - rcd$o6. This couple is, speaking inmedieval terms, rather uncommon. If one consults the vocabularies of Goetz onemeets the following Greek rendering s of uitium: i),drctopa (4x), oivo6 (3x), og&rpra(2x), &.paprrtrd,6rox$1pda, n).eov6xrr76.ra, g$op& (lx each); -isoi o;rt;;r. occurs as atranslation of uitium,but in the co.nuinaiion nd$oq irci, v6oou (.a morbid passion,,'morbidity')' The common rendering of ,r&.'x,q is--oifrrto or morhus. our translatorhas once detached himserf from thi'carqur: uii,:u^- nd,$oq. He rendcrs in (90)propter appetitum libidinis (vinc. spee;, D.o,ct, v 33) correctry by b.d rr,v y,pj{1y so;n&.ltulq, where n&lloq has its common tlgnlflcation.

Sometimes the word fur wortl lrunnlution leuds towurds a clunrsy and ob$surcrcndering. As an €renlple I clroorc 92:

(92) lllum quidem eruditorem elige, qucm magis mireris in suis, quam in Blienis(Vinc.,Spcr,. I)oct, V 47).'Exeivov nar,Dcurlv lxtre{ar, 0v &v p&},},ov $aupr.&o16 Bv toiq l8[o16 ii ]v toi6&).).ocplor,q.

Except for the word quidem,which was probably absent in the translator's exemplar(as in Vinc. Spec. Historiale VI 59, where however the word order is the same as inVarro Sent.53, p. 267: eruditorem elige instead of elige eruditorem, and where thesecond rn (before alienis) is lacking), the rendering follows the original word forword. The obscurity emerges from the fact that suis unmistakenly refers to theeruditor, whereas i8[or,q ('own') may refer both to nar,Seurdv and to the subjoct ofsaupdol6 (thus: 'your own surroundings' or'milieu'). Here he should have chosen arendering with 6aucoU, and not with 'iEr,oq, which he stereotypically usco fortranslating a reflexive pronoun.

It is impossible within the framework of this article to discuss all the 103translations in detail. I therefore give one example of each category into which Ihave classified the translations. Thereafter I shall give the full Latin texts and theirtranslations, discussing only those cases which need discussion.

I start with

(63) : Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV I 18 (: IV l2I,V 49, Spec. Hist. VI 25)Stultitiae proprium est aliorum uitia cernere, suorum obliuisci.Mopiaq'i8c6v iorr,v &).),6rpr,a r&$r7 p),6zer,v, r6v Ei iSiorv ircr,l,av$&veo{}au.

Though the translator maintained the strict word order, he decided to avoid the'calque' c6v &).).ov as a rendering of aliorum, probably because aliorum rathersignifies 'of others' than 'of the others', whereas &).).cov zc&$1, if acceptable, is far lesseffective than &I).6cpta zr&$1 as a translation of 'the vices or passions of others'. Thetranslation can thus be considered very adequate.

In this context I observe that there are some cases in which the translatorrendered the same basic text twice, e.g. in no. 4 and in no. 6l . In 6l we find threealternatives in comparison with 4:

(4 and 61; same Latin text) : Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV l9Prudentis proprium est examinare consilia, et non cito facili credulitate ad falsaprolabi.

4: Opoviprou i8r,6v iocr,v paoavl(euv pou).riq xai pi1 rayiti,q e0x6Lcp trtatet rcpi6 td {cu8lir),r,o$aiver,v.

6l: Opovipou i8r,6v Botr, t,i Doxr,pd(er,v pou).ri6 xai 5ri1 ruyiuqe0lepei rtater, npd6 {cu8iirfu,o$aIver,v.

The common translations <>f examinare areSoxrpr,&(erv , E(ayu&(e,.v, Draxp{vcrv. The listgof Coetz give alao ar1xo0v, which means 'to weigh'. []aoav{(av is a much strongerword, rendered ln the Letln lists by coercio, cruc'io. tor(lueo, But it can very well be

t45

uscd to cxprcss ideus like: 'rub upon the touch [tone', 'ptrt to thc test', 'pruvc' undthe likc. l,)Uxr,troq and :r)1:pi1q 0r€ lxef€ $yn()nymi, whcrerts the one who re nders Latintexts into Creek, or into other langungcs which know the urticle, unknown to Latin,will always have to decide whcther the noun to be rcndered is meant as beingdetermined or not.

An example of a weak translation is represented by no. 39:

(39) : Vinc. Spec. Doct.MTipsam uictoriam uicisse uidetur, qui ea quae illa adepta est, uictis remisit.A0ti1v civ vixrlv vevtx1xLvut ga|verut 6q ixelvov c6v e0nop1$6vcorv roTq ictlp6vor,qnapeX6ploev.

The translator clearly did not know what to do with the words ea quae illa adeptaest.He misjudged the function of illa,which he did not recognize as referring backto uictoriam, and in order to extricate himself he constructed an obscure genitiuusabsolutus. It is also possible that he took the form adepta est for a passive one, whichled him to the rather peculiar, but non unparallelled late Greek and Byzantineerizcopl$dvrcov. The glossaria of Goetz's edition do not give this combination. Stand-ard translation of e0rcopdr is abundare, or'vulgar' verbs like copiari, opire, opulescere.As translations of adipisci one finds several compositions of xr&.oput (npoo-, Tcepr-,

3nr,-), nep r,yivo pr.al, ruyXd,v c,r, Lrcr.rvyy&vco ettd ).aprp&v o.In the same category I place no.23:

(23) : Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 53 (: Spec. Hist. VIII 108), from Sen. Ben.IV 40,5

Qui nimis cito soluere cupit, inuitus debet: et qui inuitus debet, ingratus est."06 rd Sdrpov 61La,c, &zo8r,86var,3nr,$upei, &x.rv 6gei).er,, xai 6 &xtov 6gei).rov

&y&.puoc6c, Bocrv.

The word nimis comes from Seneca; nimis cito is written, indeed, in both placeswhere this quotation has been used by Vincent. There is nothing wrong with thetranslation of cito by 61tac, though there are more common words to render'quickly' into medieval Greek, e.g. ray6, rayiaq, yopy66. Goetz has, however, s.v.6E6trs three translations: cito, raptim, uelociter.I was somewhatpuzzled about therendering of nimis by E6pov, but the same glossaries convinced me that thetranslator either misread the text or used a manuscript that had munu.s instead ofnimis. Munus is one of the standard translations of 86pov, apant from donum andmunusculum. If my supposition is correct, the translation can be considered acorrect one.A simple case of a wrong interpretation can be found in no. 6:

(6) : Vinc. Spec. Doct.lV 21, taken from Pub. Sen l. (123)Publilius' text reads as follows: Discipulus est prioris posterior dies, but inVincent:legitur, quod discipulus prioris est posterior dies.).6yerar,, 6tr 6 pa$1dte dq rportpaq, tctlv iotlpc f1p.tpa.

The funny thingis that cech'word hru bcan rcnderecl in the proper wuy, For instance

'"".:l1l"]'''.'-i|{I.'.:'!.]-1*.'!q.?r*]1!i!-;....j:?'{.

tliscipulu,t hus boen ge1116ferl twelvc titncs by pal)1r'ic in Goctz's glossuricn, ua

against oncc A,,rrqt{c, thc rcgulur tttotlcrn Greck word lbr u stuclent, llut thc

translator dicl not underntuntl thnt thc group posterior r/rcs is subject and thst

clist,ipulus functions us u predicutc. tn thc Greek translation pr,a{[r{c should miss its

article, and the articlc I shoulcl bc added to the connection 6ct6pa ip6pn.As a text which was fully misunderstood I quote:

(91) : Vinc. SPec. Doct.V 43

Naturam expellas furca licet usque recurret ('you may try to root out nature

with all violence, it will always come out again').civ g6orv &v &noDrdr[pc tra$paic'r c, rtra,c, zravcaXo0 SpapeTcau'

It is clear enough that ),a$paic,rq points to the fact that the translator instead of .furc'u

read or interprete dfurtim,but what happened further on can only be a guess. Under

some circumstances usque can be rendered by ciaq, but also by ncvtaloE

'everywhere'. ApapeTro(L can scarcely be a serious translation of recurret, OnC may

even ask oneself which idea the translator made himself of his own translationl

After these preliminary remarks I quote the whole translation with the textn ofVincent of Beauvais, to which I add the (texts of the) sources from which Vincent'rquotations have been taken, intending to discuss only the passages of some interegt

for the translation technique of the translator (: T.).

I O'186v iocr,v eUxo).ov rcp&ypa, c5oce ptil S6oxolov efvar,, i&v &x<,-rv toUto zcor,frq.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV,l I Nulla est tam facilis res, quin difficilis sit, dum inuitus

facias (Vinc. Spec. Hist.Y 73 si instead of dum).: Ter. Hau.805 sq. Nulla est tam facilis res quin difficilis siet, quam inuitus

facias.Translation: *. T. adequately adds the pronom coOto.

2 'Ep[o1oav &papcd.ver,v o[ &ya$oi cQ ctq &pe{q Eporct

i6rioloav &papc&velv o[ novlpoi "Q

q69e cic crg.toplae .

Vinc. Spec. Doct.lV 12 Oderunt peccare boni uirtutis amore. Oderunt peccare

mali lormidine paenae (the second verse also in Spec. Doct.IV 106, not in Spec.

Hist. VI 68).: Hor. Ep. I 16,52 only the first verse. The second verse reads in Horace as

follows: tu nihil admittes in te formidine poenae.

Translation: f . 'Epioloav c?11 (by chance (?) be interpreted as an aorislus

gnomicus. It seems, however, that T. 'automatically'rendered the Latin perfect

into an aorist. In the Greek-Latin wordlists in CGL the classical perfect withpresent meaning odi'I hate' is often replaced by a present form odio (CGL III413,15;458,30;500,25).Thus odishasbeenrenderedbyproelc(CGLIII4l3,l6)'oclist i by ipio(1o)ee (ibid'. 413,20).

3 " Anaq ot,cpitc, &trrritlcPog, &naq plr,rp')q b'l 8o0),oq.

Vinc. Spcc, Do('t,lV l4 Omnis sitpicns liber, omnis stultus seruu$.

*rflba 147

'il;

'r,*-"'**!*offi:!."..*:

Also in spcr', Doct, V 5tt nnd ,5per', f//,r'1, Vl 19, cl', ,$rer,, Ihrct, v x; lv I ltt (V 2lt):omncs sapicntes esse liberos ct omnes stultor ,ieructs,: Cic. Purud. Y.Translation * *. T. shapcd his translttiort into a political vcrsc, cl'. p. 144.

opovipr.ou i8r,6v iotr,v paoavi(er,v pou).ri6 xai pl caytaq e0x6).<p trtcter, npd6 r& {.,eu8i6ir,o$aiver,v

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV l9 prudentis proprium est examinare consilia, et non citofacili credulitate ad falsa prolabi.: Pseudo-Seneca (Martinus Dumiensis) De formulq honestae vitae II 4 (ed. F.Haase 1902 67).Translation: *. See p. 145, no. 4 and no. 61.

ToUc6 iocr cd gpoveTv, td fri pr6vov cd npd c6v noDdrv p).6ner,v, &Li.& xai c& p6).).ovcanpoop&v (n'o8drv Sternbach, rlS. zco).16v; in the text of Sternbach pr,i1 droppedout).Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV l9 Istud est sapere, non modo quod ante pedes videre sedetiam illa quae futura sunt prospicere (cf. Spec. Hist.V 73 where the metricalform has been maintained).: Ter. Ad.386 sqq. Istuc est sapere, non quod ante pedes modost/ videre, sedetiam illa quae futura/sunt prospicere.Translation: *. Opoveiv is the common translation of sapere (llx in CGL,against lx voeTv).

A.tyerat,6cr, 6 pa$r1rhe rits nporipaq Soriv 6oc6 pa ipipa.Vinc. Spec. Doct.Ml (Vnde in prouerbiis sapientum) legitur, quod discipulusprioris est posterior dies.: Pub. Sent.l23 Discipulus est prioris posterior dies.Translation: -. See p. 146.

OrlSiv 6ge).e?, 6nep xai p).&ncer,v ori 86varar, rd arjc6.vinc. spec. Doct. rv 24 Nil prodest quod non laedere possit idem.: Ov. Tr.Il266.Translation: * l-. T. maintains the word order, but what is understandable inthe Latin pentameter, becomes unclear in the Greek rendering because in thiswa) cd arlr6 bears the suggestion of being an object of pi.&ncer,v. Instead of an'automatic'translation of idemby cd a0c6 at the end of the sentence a renderinglike droa6tcrrq ot xar& rd a0c6 would be more adequate.

t l /rr ar,'Avar6).).ovroq i).[ou pou].{1, 86vovco6 oupn6orov pe},ecdo$o.Vinc. Spec. Doct.lV 26 Oriente sole consilium, occidente conuiuium cogitato(also in Spec. Doct.IV 96 (: no. 5l infra) and Spec. Hist.III 58).: 'Caeciliuq Balbus' Paris. p. 4l n. 4l (inter Socratis dicta).Translation: *. The translation is correct in itself, if one assumes that T. read incogitato a second pers. sing. of the active imperative and then shilted the activeconstruction into a passive one, (ln t he renders c'aueto actively by np6orlr). ButSternbach (1901:4) already remarkt thst T,'s interpretation suggests that he

**rrfll ,,& 149

reud (,(,,g,t(rrtrr rathgr tltnn rqgllrrltt,l le ulso rclbrs to Wulter llurley (Cuulterus

Burlueu.c) De ultu el tttttrlhtut pltiluittphorum, chapter xxx (cd.H, Knust.

Tiibingcn llilt6: p. 126), whcre iistcad of t'ogitato,c:ttgitundutn has been used,

and to Scn. Op. LXXI l:r,on,rilium nasci sub diem dehct.lt remains open to

question whether T. had indeed a text before him that read cogitutor or thut he

(mis)interpreted cggitato as a passive form, or that he himself changed the

construction. Only in the second case would T.'s translation actually be

incorrect. T.'s choice of pe).erdr(par) as a rendering of cogito is a correct but

rather surprising one: botir verbs'irave several different translations in CGL, but

nowhere is cogito rendered by pe).et6 or conversely'r3

9 "Ocav y6v1 eioXtq, toTq 3vavtior,6 r,gocLye'

Vinc. Spic. Doct.IV 28 Cum fueris felix, quae sunt aduersa caueto.

: Dionysius Cato Dist.I l8,l (ed. Boas 1952)'

Translation: * I - . In CGL cauere has nowhere been rendered by npootlrtv,

Neither is it the obvious translation, gu).&cco p"at (2x in CGL for cauere) bef ng.a

more correct rendering. Another difficulty is to be found in coiq Bvavt[ot5 which llnormally understood as a masculine dative, not as a neuter one. More correct

would have been: (tpdq) c& ivavtla gu]'dccou'

10 "Oq &).).ot6 tcpoo6Xer, SaucQ o0 npoo61er"

Vinc. Spec. Oo'it. M8 Quique aliis cauet, non cauet ipse sibi (sec atro Spee,

Hist. VI I I l: correctlY cauit).: Ov. Ars | 84 quique aliis cauit, non cauet ipse sibi'

Translation: * . T. uses the same translatio n of cauere as in 9, but this mectg loff

objection now.

I[].eT6v Bocr, gu].&{u cd.6vru ii rcopioao$al cr' v6ov'

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 28 Plus est seruare quaesitum' quam quaesisse nouum'

: Claudianus de lqud. Stitich. ll 326 sqq. plus est seruasse repertum quam

quaesisse nouum.Translation: *. The translation is not fully adequate (repertum - c& 6vta), but

neither cd nopr,o$6 v f nenopvopr,dvov nor cd xc1$6v as translations of quaesitum seem

to be alternatives. @u),&Ear, raises the question whether T.'s text reads seruasse ot

seruare as in the Douai-edition of vincent (not noticed by Sternbach).

'E(ou$6ver, cdv x6opr.ov, 3{ou$6ver, p186va, 3[ou$6vet tautdv &ei, (i[ou$6ver, td

i[ou$eveio$ar)' iv coiq c6ooapor, co6cor,q c& &ya$& eiouv ((i[ou$6ver xt]..) addidit

Sternbach).vinc. spec. Doct.IV 38 Spernere mundum, spernere nullum, spernere sese,

Spernere se sperni, quatuor haec bona sunt (see also Spec. Doct' V 130)'j Anony-ui lup.rdVinc.). From Spec. Doct.V 130, a chapter in which for the

first time Ganfredus (: Galfridus de Vino Salvora) is mentioned, but where, at

the end, someone is qualified as 'versificator', one might suppose that thig

quotation could be taken from Galfridus himsell the more since frequently

hexameters attributed to the 'vcrsif-rcator' (as in IV I 26,145 and V I I 3) $eem to

bc taken from Gelfriduc, This is, however, not the case here, because Galfriduc

ll

t2

nowhcrc has hcxumctcr pentumeter distichrt, Aho Archhishop Mnlucltias has

bcen supposcd as thc author of the tlistichon, wlticlt is quotcd in various

ways.lsTranslation: */-. There is something puzzling in the Crcck translation. The

ms. clearly reads S[ou$6ver. One has to interprct this lorm as an imperative. Inthat case 6cuc6v : oecrut6v, which occurs also elsewhere. It would imply,however, that T. rendered the infinitives by imperatives,,which is not impossible

as such, but would be rather striking in the light of T.'s technique. Sternbach

rightly restored the fourth member of the four good things, but it becomes clearfrom this passage that our ms., the Codex Vaticanus Graecus n.ll44,is not the

original text. It seems likely that this text contains yet another corruption,namely i[ou$6ver, instead of an original ifou$eveiv. 'Aei has been added by T.,perhaps in order to emphasize the generality of the advice. 'E{ou8eveTv / i[ou$eveiv

(even SEou$evi(er,v!) is a frequent translation of spernere in CGL, besides

xacagpoveiv, 6zepop&v etc.

l3 YuXil ).unoup6vr1 oi-tytnerat cfr coU npocrd.crovcoq 8la1vcloer,, &).).& td i8r,ov 3[av6er,

$6).qpa.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 40 animus dolosus non sequitur imperantis arbitrium, sed

suas explicat voluntates (cf . Spec. Hist. XXI 49).: Cassiodorus Var.I Epist. l3 (CCSL 96, p.24) Animus enim dolosus non

arbitrium sequitur imperantis, sed suas potius explicat voluntates.Translation: - . T. confused dolosus (86lro6) with dolorosus. This mistake occurs

also in CGL II54,37 ,where dolus is not only rendered by 86),oq but also by &).yo6,

&Iy1pLa. Neither is 8r,&yv<,.ror,q the most obvious term for rendering arbitrium; one

would expect xpr,tdpr,ov or a circumlocution with the help of xgur1c,.'E[av6<,r is

translated by fficio in CGL, but it rather well covers what has been meant here

with explicat.

l4 'HDJ xai e'inpercLqLa:r" td 6zcip ciq racpl8oq &rco$aveTv.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.M2 Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.: Hor. Carm.III2,l3.Translation: +. T. did evidently not have any association with Tyrtaeus

l0,l*2Te$v&pevar, y&p xa).dv Srci ngop&yorct nec6vra

&v8p' &ya$dv nepi fi nacpiSt papv&pevov,

or with Kallinos 6-8cupi6v re y&.p Lc:* xai &y).adv &v8pi pr&Xeo$ar

\itq,nLp,. xai naiScov xoupr,Silc c'&).6Xou

b''ropr.ev6or,v.

l5 (l) fIer,o[otpaco6, 6 c6v'A$1va[ov t6pavvo6, 6ce Vfrpaltc,ipurt ci6 $ulacpd6 a0to0

i{ag$ei6 nap$6vou, iv 81poolg yeyov6co6 ouvavrdparoq, :.a:6tr1v igi],1oev, 6tpuvo6o16

tlq ou(6.fou, [va &n'ar]toU xegatrr,xiv x6trcrolv I&91, &zrexpivaco' (2)'ei toU6

&^ycrn6vcac ip&q &varpoUpr,ev, t[ &v &xc[vol6 nol{ooplev, o16 plr,oo6pe$a;'

Vinc. Spec. Doct. IV 43 ( I ) Pysistratus Atheniensis Tyrannus, cum adolescens

quidam amore filiae eius uirginia eeceneus, in publico obuiam sibi factam

n;()scul$tu; eg66ti hortante gxore, ut uh co enpitule supplicium stlnlerct, responclit:

(2) .Si eos qui 66i gplHli oce iderinluli, quid his lacicmus quibus tldio $umus"

- V. Mux, V I cxt, 2

qui (.rr,. Pisistrutus Atheniensiuttr tyrannus) ...: 'si eos.., interhciemUs. ""Translation: (l) + + (2) + +. I think that T. has given a very good $nd

adequate transiation of this longer fragment. CGL (ll 348'28) gives as a

standard translation of capitale (supplicium) I capitclis (sc' poena) xcaetrtxl

tr,pc'-rpia'

l6 If ip{v1v 61e pet& t6v &v$pcirrcc,rv, pec& t6v na$6v n6}'epov'

Vinc. Spec. Doct.lV 44 Pacem habeto cum hominibus, cum vitiis bellum (cf,

Spec. Hist. VIII 102).: Pseudo-Seneca De moribus 34 (ed. Haase 1902 60) pacem habebis ""Translation:*.Foruitium-n&$o6,seep'l43,andcf'no'sl7'45'56'63'75'

l7 oi oogoi &vEpe6 pel(ova pr,ecd c6v na$6v ii g.ec& c6v ix$p6vrdv n6].epr,ov [o1ov,

Vinc. Spec. Doct.lV 44Sapientes uiri, maiorem cum uitiis quam cum inimieh

pugnam gerunt.: -Frlg.r

tius Mythologiarumll 4, p. 676 (: Fulgentius, ed. Helm 1970: 43)'

Translation: +. i. chose anaoristui gro^.for gerunt.Foruitiutrl-n/;,lloc, scc 16,

Fulgentius presents this sentence as a quotation from Plato: sit'ut Plato ln

moralibus ait:'sapientes ...'. As far as I can see, there is no such expression in

Plato.

l8 (l) "Ocav xurLyneru, rind punapdv 6vopra xrirrut (2) iiyouv olx6qic:*,8o0),6c &otlv, &trtr'

d8orxaq' e0epy6qp& iottv.Vinc. Spec. ooi}.lV 46(Illud quo te diuitem putas), (l) quamdiu possides, sub

sordido nomine iacet: (2) domus est, seruus est, nummi sunt; cum agtem

donasti, beneficium est (cf. Spec. Hist. VIII 108)'

: Sen. Ben.yl3,4 (istud quod suspicis, quo te diuitem ac potentem putas,)

quamdiu possides, sub nomin. totdido iacet: ......: cum donasti, benehciUm

est.Translation: (l) + (2) + I -. Though CGL (II 166,l7;321,21) presents &9' 6cov

as a translation of quamdiu (tel.), tcav seems quite adequately used here' The

second half of the tianslation confronts us with some problems:

a. it seems clear that T. did not fully understand how to handle Seneca'g

precising addition to possides; domus est etc.;iiyouv can introduce a precision (cf,

bennisto n, Greek Pirticles 45g),but the transition is rather awkward;

b. nummi sunthasnot been translated, but these words probably were lost in the

process of transmission;c. in &).).' 68<oxaq the noti on cum has disappeared'

The Greek translation may have run as follows: ii1'ouv oix66 iotr,, 8o0166 tottv,

(voilppoi eiorv) (or &py6pr,6v Socr), &I).' (ei) {Sorxaq (or &trtr' (&v) iiSc'rxa6) xttr.

Supposing, however,'tirat there i"no .orruption in the text and that T' reduced

the 'preciiing

words to three notions: olxo6, Eo0tro6, e'1epy6t1p.a parallelly

connected bitctr(v), but with the two first notions made opposed to the third by

, ,,*fr* l5l

the interjecterl wortls &II' IBruxa6, then one hns to obrcrvc tlrut thc trunslutioncsscntinlly devintes f'rom the source lext.(Bencliciurtr : einpltqpa: hcrc und in 20; = r,)tpycc ld in 2l , 22, 24),

l9 'l'oU rcapaxa).oilvto6 &tpepr,i rruvr,ot&o{)oroav r& pilpara'6 ydp 8el},6q napaxa},drv8r,8doxer, rir &rapv{oaot}as.Vinc. Spec. Doct. IV 5l Rogantis autem intrepida constent uerba. Nam quitimide rogat, docet negare (cf . Spec. Hist. VIII I14, preserving the metre).: Sen. Phaed.593 sq. intrepida constent verba: qui etc.Translation: * *.

20 Tiv e0y6ver,av p).&nrer,, 66 &v&{r,ov r.apaxa\il, eriepy6qpa.Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 5l Ingenuitatem laedit, qui indignum rogat. Beneficium(...).: Pub. Sent.233 Ingenuitatem laedas, cum indignum roges.Translation: + (?). In the proverb of Publilius Syrus, indignum is masculine; inVincent the same interpretation is probably valid. Sternbach supposes that T.connected the next word beneficium (the first word of the following sentence :Publ. Sent.235) with the proverb under discussion. In case that T. made, indeed,this connection (whatever the reason may be), one cannot blame the translationitself. One may perhaps criticise T. for not having recognised the possibility ofinterpreting indignutm as masculine. (Beneficium - eiepyLrrFa, see l8).

2l },1&co 6 riv eriepleoiav Et8o6q, 8r,1yeio$c,.r 6lap6v.Vinc. Spec. Doct.M2 Taceat qui beneficium dedit, narret qui accepit (cf. Spec.Doct.IV 50, Spec. Hist. VIII 107).: sen. Ben. rr I 1,2 qui dedit beneficium taceat, narret qui accepit.Translation: *.The use of a participle * article for translating a relative clauseis rather common, cf. 15, 22,25, 29 etc.

22 'o Er,8oJ6 e'iepyeoiav cdv @edv pr,peicar, 6 Lnava(1t6v Savr,or{q iocr,v (Davr,oc{c:a ogrcrSlq Sternbach, r oq[olr1c ms. ).vinc. spec. Doct. IV 52 Qui dat beneficia, Deum imitatur; qui repetit,foenerator est.: Sen. Ben.III 15,4 qui dat beneficia deos imitatur, qui repetit feneratores.Translation: + (?). There are a number of remarks to be made:a. 8r,8o6q: Sternbach thinks that 8r,8o6q has been repeated (by a scribe?) from no.2l and that 8o6q should be read. This assumption is unnecessary, in myopinion;b. irava(rir6vl Sternbach correctly remarks that'3nava(1ce?v in Lexicis desider-atur'. Indeed, the word is only noted in Modern Greek lexica: Dimitrakos s.y...vecirr' (1cdr nd).r,v. It is very interesting to find the word here in a medieval text.c. I have written Savr,oc{q because of the clear corruption in the text: consideringthat the stari'dard translationof f(o)eneratoris 8crver,od16, ord supposing that thicorruption was generated by miswriting ofl Ea into co attd v into 1, I think itreasonable to propose the emendation 8avr,od16. t 6 If this suppocition is corrcct,then the translation is quite in order.

23 ^( )q tt, l6rpr,v 6Etr,re rln,,Erll/,var lnr,l)rr1lgi, &xt,rv dgch,cr,, xal l, &xt'tv igrh,r,rv &x&,protie

Eotrv.

Vinc. .Spcr,. Doct.lV 53 Qui nimis cito soluere cupit, inuitus debet: et qui inuitusdebet, ingratus est (cf. Spec. Hist. VIII 108).: Sen. Ben.IY 40,5 qui nimis cupit soluere, inuitus debet, qui inuitus debet,ingratus est.

Translation: * . See suPra P. 146.

24125 (1) 'AX&prot66 iotrv, 66 eiepyeolav &noSiSoorv &veu c6xou'

(2) rolfuixr,q cd 8r,86pevov &g.u8p6v iotrv, cd &xo).ou$o0v 3x co6tou &r6Ya.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 53 Ingratus est qui beneficium reddit sine usura: saepe

quod datur exiguum est, quod sequitur ex eo magnum (cf . Spec. Hi.rl, Vlllt34).: Sen. Ep.LXXXI 18 + 14.Translation: 1 + 2 +. Comparing this passage with Vinc. M3, I got theimpression that no.24 and 25 in Sternbach should be taken together. ThoughSpec. Hist. has another punctuation: ..., ingratus est; qui ...saepe etc., in bothpassages there has been made aclear connection between Sen. l.c. $ l8 and $ 14,

My supposition seems to be confirmed by Mr. Hermans' consultation of thcms.: whereas most of the first letters of the proverbs have been written in red,rubrication is lacking here. But there are also some mistakes in the rubricatlon'which are, indeed, simple mistakes. As to the translation itself: it should b0

noticed that &pu8p6q is a rather peculiar rendering of exiguus, which in CGL helalways been translated by i).rixr,oco6. 'Apu8p6s does not occur in CGL,

26 Xgrl,p.o.rov iv t6ncp xacagpovelv p6yr,otov ivioce x6p8oq.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 53 (ascribed to Seneca, but in Spec. Doct.IV 146 and ,Spee,

Hist. V 73 rightly mentioned under Terentius) Pecuniam in loco negtigerc.

maximum interdum est lucrum.: Ter. Ad.216 pecuniam in loco neclegere maxumum interdumst lucrum.Translation: * +. T. is right in attributing to neglegere the shade of meaningxacagpoveTv and in suppressing est f tort, which provides the line with a

proverbial style.

27 Tt ipiv noleT ld$r1v c6v ).1g$6vrov; 3nr,$up[a t6v ].1g$1oop6vc'rv.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 54 (Quaeris) quid nobis faciat obliuionem acceptorum:cupiditas accipiendorum (cf . Spec. Hist. VIII 134).: Sen. Epist. LXXXI 28 Quaeris quid sit quod obliuionem nobis acceptorumf aciat? cupiditas accipiendorum.Translation: *. T. obviously preferred a rendering in direct speech, becausc ofthe absence of a context. In CGL accipio has most often been translated by).appciv<,r (l4x), against 6x S6Xopar (lx &xo6<,r).

28 O086v Eotr, rarDic p&.prvp,tq $e$ut(.nepov, 6tr xai rcpir6 to0tou6 ror)q 1p6vou6 tglla,ocv,'lva vofr, xal rli nplr6 to6ttr'l(, ,,,[q &v Bnr,n],d,trlrort.

Vinc. Spee , Doct, IV 60 Nihil est puero teste certius: nam et ad eos annoaperuenit, ut intelllgrtict non $d eos quibus fingat (cf. Spec, Doc't. V l2 and Spec,

Hlst, VIll ll2),

-

152,,

: Sen. ('oa, Vll 5,'l"ranslatitln: * l- . ln tt7 the $onlc provcrb ltur hccn trlltlutctl. T'hc rcsult thereis slightly different: altcr vr,fr foltows: xal ori npil6 lxrlvouq, lva lntrtr&trr1rar,. Therendering of ad eos unno.t peruenit seems to be too literal, though i),rx[a is notvery attractive either because of the signification, common in midieval Greek,of stature (besides age).That lva is to be understood as a consecutive, can beillustrated by examples in CGL, where s.v. [va three alternatives are given: ita ut,,ne, ut. S.v. nr one finds 'tvq. xqi cl-rq, 6rc<.oq (II2l2,l4) tva'(332,1g) drc (4g2,34) 6ncoq(386,9) xa$&nep (334,33); uti, ut - 6nto6 (II 212,28)..,Iva is, however, not thetranslation one would expect, whereas olq &v Lnm)..&rr1tut offers a looseconstruction for 3v o16 xr).. In 87 T. creates a contrast between co6cou6 o,1dixeivouq, but equalises the constructions of the subordinate clauses. The use ofdnun),&tteo$ar, is also somewhat surprising instead of the simplex rc).&rreo$al. Inclassical Greek ircr,tr,).dcr<,r f-oy"uonly signifies'plaster over', imould upon'. Theidea of 'feigning' or 'falsehood' is found in the adj. verb. izc[n],ao.ro6 (since Flav,Jos. Bell. Jud.4,4,3).

29 ' o Snrerx6q 6noracc6pevoq galvet an d'. rirrrp npoor&lar. ii(6q Lctw.Vinc' Spec. Doct. M2 qui modeste paret, uidetur qui aliquando imperaredignus esset (cf. spec. Doct.IV 40 and spec. Hist. vI 2g: ... videtur quoo ...;.: Cic. Leg.III2,5 (... imperet dignus esse).Translation: + / - . The consecutive connotation of the Latin text has disap_peared in the Greek one. "A).),<p is a careless renderingof aliquando.On the otherside paret - imperet has found a good counterpart in 6rcocarr66revo6npoor&lau

30 ouor,x6v ioav, 'tv' oi. xp :'ad, o5 xape6or€pov &xo6ouor,v, eiyegtarepov 6r,&).).ovrclore6o-lor,v.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 63 Naturale est, ut iudices, his quos libentius audiunt,facilius etiam credant (cf . Spec. Hist. rx 122: flosculi e euintiliano): Quint. firsl. IV l,12 (sed ego cum auctoritate summorum oratorum magisducor, tum pertinere ad causam puto quidquid ad dicentem pertinet,) cum

-sit

naturale, ut iudices iis quos libentius audiunt etiam facilius cridant.Translation: * l- . The use of [va instead of 6cr, has been provoked by ut and iscomparable with 28. T. has chosen a collective singular instead of ttrl plural inVincent, unless one should read o0q for o6. But T. suppressed the antecedent too.Far from adequate is the double comparative e,ix6ocepov p&).),ov, where p&).).ovhas taken the place of etiam.

3l oe6v rc).1o[ov 3xeTv6q iotr,v, 6v ].6yo6, oi $upo6 xrveT, 66 r& Epya &vaprfl oupBou]fr Bv t{rctptipeTv 86vao$ar,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 64 Diis proximus ille est, quem ratio non ira mouet. euifacta rependens consilio punire potest (cl. S2ec. Hi,st. XVII l0t: De Claudianopoeta, et flosculis eius).: Claudianus de c'onsul, Mull, Theod,227 aqq,Translation: - -. T. did not und€ntnnd theee tines ol'Claudian. His mistakewas to confuse rc'perulere wlfh (de )p€ndere and to connee t this idea with rpn,r///r.

'['hc 'tttil' lv t{r rrlllpclv ilr'rvryrrll,n nrust givc sonrc sensc ttl the sentence: 'who,having thc potrlhlllty to lluniih, nrukcs thc dccds dcpcndent on reflexion'. Thecompnrative ntr'4o(rrv uB n lnrnslutiorr ol'thc superlativc pro.rimu,t m$y be seen inthe light o[the $uperlutive going out ol'use. CGL Il 163,50 gives lo pro.vimu,r thetranslatiofls ly.yriialo< ttttd nl'4o{,,q; proximum - rc}.1o[ov in II 410,6.

32 ''l'nip &piororv &v8p6v $ct'clC &v p.eoo).ap{1o1, oi p&}.}.ov tff ro0r<,rv galverar [3o11]rlvcbge).eiq nap& civ i8[av inar,veiv.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 65 Pro optimis uiris quisquis interuenit, non magis illsrumvidetur iuuare commodum, quam suum commendare iudicium.: Symmachus.Eprst.II29 (ed. J.P. Callu, Paris 1972).

Translation: * (+ + ?). In the text as it stands one has to interpret {v llhv trciv i8[av cige],e[av, which is interesting enough but not quite the intentiOn Of thfLatin source text. I have a feeling that between iSiav and Ezratvciv or aftGr lnltvrfra notion dropped out, to which div i8[av was connected as an adjeetlVOr 1,3,yvrlprlv, 86{av, xplorv, being the translation of iudicium. If this suppolltlon lfcorrect, then the translation is very good indeed. Interesting from n hiatorleOlln.guistic point of view is the use of nap& instead of ii.

33 'O xpr,ri6 xatuxg[vetat,6re 6 6ne6$uvoq &rco].6ecar,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 66 Iudex damnatur, cum nocens absoluitur,: Pub. Sent.257.Translation: * *. "Ote makes clear that T. read cum and not the varlunt readingubi.

34 'Er6pcp &ei ouyyivr,roxe o,3, oeautd) p1Eap6q.

Vinc. Spec. Docl.IV 68 Alteri semper ignoscito, tibi ipsi nunquam.: Pseudo-Seneca De moribus lll (ed. Haase 1902:64\.Translation: *. One would expect p186nore instead of plSaptdrq; but CGL Ill152,4 renders numquam (once) by o08ap6q. Source of the sentence was Plut,Mor.198 E (on Cato Maior nr. 4): ti91 Ei Bo6).eo$au ... n&,orv &ei tolc &.papt&vovat

Xr,rpis EaucoD 8r,86vau ouyyv6plv, or Plut. Vit. Cat. Mai. VIII l7: xai ouyyvc|pr,r1v [gr?

EL86var, n&ol roTq &papcd.vouor, n).iv airoD. On the Latin side the pronouncement canbe found in many variations, e.g. Sal. Cat.52,8,Sen. Ben.V 9,2, Publilius Syrus(sub flalsis) 142 lgnoscas semper alteri, numquam tibi etc. (cf. O. Friedrich,Puhlilii Syri Mimi Sententiae, Berlin 1880 (repr. Hildesheim 1964): 289).

35 'l'1,oov rd n&,olv ouyyvopoveiv <ip6qc ioriv, 6oov orlSevi.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 68 Tam omnibus ignoscere crudelitas est, quam nulli.: Sen. CL I2,2.Trahslation: * *. Somewhat striking is the use of the unusual ouyyvc,rpovr?v(nowhere in CGL) instead of the common ouyyr,(y)vc|oxerv.

36 l,li gprrveTq, otryy[v(,)axc tfl ou(riyr;r p18] ariotlpoii t)eopoilq &ro85rrr.r rivhp6q (gpovrle

Sternbuch. trls. gprrvrT, ntlt gprrvciv as was rcad by Sternbach).Vinc. Spcc, [)oc'l,lV 6tt Si supis indulge dominue (uultusquc scueros Erue), nec

rigieli iurn tuere uiri,

r55,

= Ov, Attr,lll 4.41 .., severolt/lixue nBC ,,,Translatiotlt ! l-. one muy itttugine beiier trsnslutiurrs ltrr intlulgc,, rigidi untltucre' cGL is' howcvcr. not ucry helplul in trri* cuse by oftcring twiccivvtruxalverv (s'lc) for indulgere. lylierhups auyxr|p:t woultl be s bctter alterna-tive' or Tapi(rtv. For rigltlus cGL orrrrr oii.rnativcs likc ox),1p 6q, &xag''rr,c,,&'n6rop-oq etc. and renders a0orr1p66 by asper, duru,t,.rarvus,,tevcrus etc. Tueor canbe translated by gu),drcor, ivop6, &ceu[i<,r, x{gopr,ar,, ouvc2p6or, &.oga},,r.(ogtc*, ?ndouvrdper, would fit better.

37 'O pi xor),6o.rv rd &pdpq6rcr ei g6var at, npoor&.rrer.vinc. spec. D_oct. rv 69 eui non uetat peccare cum possit, iubet.: Sen. Tro.29l.Translation: +. Perhaps xe).euer instead of npooc<iccel would be better because ofthe assonolce xco]'6erv - xele6erv. The substantive d.paprrytafor the infinitivepeccare is an adequate solution. Kor),6or is standard transluiion for uetoin CGL(16x, against lx eipy<,.r).

38 M<,rp6v iocl gopeio$ar,, 6rcep &rogp&oal o0 g6vaoar.vinc' spec' Doct'lv 74 Stultum.est timere, quod uitare non possis (cf. spec.Doct.V ll4, Spec. Hist. VfIf 109)

I

: Sen. de remed. fortuit. II 3.Translation: + ' 'Arco8p&oar, is a neologism; Ps-ellos uses &noEp&var (Mich. vI,32'5) alongside &zco8pdoao$aa (const. Ii, roo,rbl. It is, however, not unthinka-ble that &no8p&oar' is a proleptic mistak. prouok.d by g6vaoar (cf. plato Apol.29b& pi; oiSa ... o0D6noce gop{oo6rar, o0gi 9e6{opro,r,).

39 Aritlv tiv vixr;v vevtx'qxtvat ga(verat,6q ixeiv<,rv rd;v e0nop1$6vcc,.rv col6 iro26r6vor,6napeXcipr2oev.

vinc' spec' Doct' rv TT Ipsam uictoriam uicisse uidetur, qui ea quae illa adeptaest, uictis remisit (cf. Spec. Hist. VI 30).: Cic. Marc.IV 12.Translation: * l-. See p. 146.

40141 (l) Eiq roJq ro).pr1c&q oux iorr,v.i r6tr6ra &p6pr,prvo6. (sternbach: o6x 6ocr,v).(2) roTq ro).pr,1taTq xai 6 Oebq a0rdq po1$ei. ' '

,Xt#; spec' Doct' Iv 78 In audacet non est audacia tuta, audentes Deus ipse

: Ov. Met.X544 + 596.Translation: (l) - (2) *. In vincent these lines are taken together. sternbachcites them separately, and he mightbe right, tuting into consideration that the sof tois is a red capital. My reason for r.itpi.ion lies in xai. If the line had beenmeant as a separate proverb, 5 oed6 o.itr6q would have been ruinri.n,. Kal hasbeen added to strengthen the first assertion. It seems, however, that T. did notunderstand the first line too well. His choiee uf *pfp,pv?,6 as a translat ion of utainstead of &ogcr{q does not took very trUetworthy,

42 )Jelrvf &.e'X.'qpr'oitv4 torlv ,inr,llave'iv 'lnlp xatric alrlac.Vinc, Spec, Doct,lV tl2 Honcsta turpitudo est mori pro bona caus$.: Pub. Sent.207 Honcsta turpitudo est pro causa bona.Translation: *. Neith€r oepv{1 for honesta nor &oxrlpoo6vrl for turpitudo is astandard translation in CGL. Kcrtr6q for honus shows the 'modern' meaning ofthe word.

43 " ll),e1ev ir ).Jcoxpd,r16' 'o166 cr,6 i$6).er,, Sppuv noul c&ra oor xal &8r,x[av' o0Dlv &v n4t]0r,6,

&v p6vov pec& oo0 fl i &ped1' (oloq rlq ms., Sternbach).Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 83 Dicebat autem Socrates: Quisque uolet tibi contume-liam faciat et iniuriam, tamen nihil patieris, si modo tecum erit uirtus (cf. Spec.Hist.III 58: ... faciet...; tu tamen...).: Sen. Ep. LXXI 7 Socrates (qui totam philosophiam reuocauit ad morcs ethanc summam dixit esse sapientiam, bona malaque distinguere, 'sequ€re'inquit'illos, si quod apud te habes auctoritatis, ut sis beatus,,et te alicui stultum uiderisine). Quisquis uolet tibi contumeliam faciat et iniuriam, tu tamen nihilpaticris,si modo tecum erit uirtus'.Translation: + I -. It should be noticed that Vincent's quisque instcad ofSeneca's quisquis is far from normal. Ancient Comedy presents examples ofquisque : quisquis. It seems therefore that T. resorted to the peculiar erl66 ttq,trying to suggest something like oiav rtc,i$6).er,6pprv (unless o166 ra6 is, in some wayor another, a corruption of 6ocr,6).

44 Oi.uclpq {6yoq 3ociv (p}) &noxgtvao$ar (pi1 add. Sternbach).Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 83 Garrulo non respondere conuitium est (cf, Spec. Doct.IV 170 and 172: in the latter uitium instead of conuitium).: Sidonius Apollinaris Epist.III 7 (PL LVIII; 500c).Translation: *. One should face the possibility that non was lacking in theexemplar. CGL renders {6yos by culpa, defoutio, nota, uituperatio, conuiciumbyxar ap6r1c ts (2x), 6X).ayar yic, ij P p,c (2x), xaxo).o yla.

45 Zaxparrlc, tpo:#loaLvr6q cvoq, 'tvu r(. i Svallayf cdrv r6rcov o08iv txeivov rbg6tr1ocv el6

&nopo).lv r6v na$div ,'tg\' 'ci $crup&(er,q; oriD6v oe a[ &no8qp"(.u cige],ioar 86vavtar,izcei, navcaXoU oeaucdv nepr,96per,q'.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 87 Socrates quaerenti cuidam, cur mutatio locorum nihilsibi prodesset ad depositionem uitiorum, ait: Quid miraris nihil tibi peregrina-tiones prodesse, cum te circumferas (cf. Spec. Hist.III 58, in indirect speech,taken from Sen. Ep. CIV 7).: Sen. Ep. XXYIII2 ...querenti cuidam Socrates ait, 'quid miraris nihil tibiperegrinationes prodesse, cum te circumferas?'Translation: */-. The gen.abs. serves as a substitute for the dat.partic.con-iunct.,ivac(. (cf. Aristoph. Eccl.7l9, Pax 409, Nub. ll92'to what,end'?) isusually connected with rzr quid.For quidSr,& ci would be the plausible translation.The Latin acc,c',inf. construction obviously offered a problem to T.: he solvedthe problem by construing two main clauses with the addition of 86vavrar. Hestrengthencd aloo the ideu of neprg6per,v by adding rcavtcXoU. One would even betempted to tuppote thst T. had before him a text that ran as follows: quid

t57,* bt

**_"-*,%tEF- . rIttiruris'l nihil titri pcrcgrinntiones pnrdcssc (possunt) cum (ubiquc) tc ((ip-surn)) circuml'eras.

46 (l) lltt^r1,)< yevdoopr.ar,, petd zsoL),drv Eorrpr,al' tl6pr,trtrtc,yev{or.,pr,al, y:vvr2t/,v pr,e }xeToe

$notrl1rfopar,'Seopr,eu{)ilctttp.at rty&.p; v0v },6},upar; ei6 ro0ro xaly&.p pe f1 grior,6 [3apeioLpa:r.tq &X{)er, ouvdogr,y{eu' (2) $avoUg,ar, vooeiv na6oo Suvardv Eeopreut}ivar,,

b'uvardv $aveiv.Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 88 (l) Pauper fiam: inter plures ero: exul fiam, ubi menotum (sic in IV 88, sed natumin Spec. Hist. VIII 123) putabo: alligabor, quidenim nunc solicitus (Spec. Hist.: solutus) sum? ad hoc me natura graui corporismei pondere (Spec. Hist.: graue ... pondus) astrinxil: (2) Moriar, desinamaegrotare posse, alligari posse: mori posse (cf . Spec. Hist. VIII 123).: Sen. Ep.XXIY 17 (l) Pauper fiam: inter plures ero. Exul fiam: ibi me natumputabo, quo mittar. Alligabor: quid enim? Nunc solutus sum? Ad hoc me naturagraue corporis mei pondus adstrinxit. (2) Moriar: hoc dicis: desinam aegrotareposse, desinam alligari posse, desinam mori posse.Translation: (l) + (2) This passage is one of the clearest to demonstratethat T. had a text before him different from the Douai text. cl yap; vuv ),6).upar,;

shows that the Vincent text used by T. was closer to the original of Seneca: quidenim? nunc solitus sum?, as is the case in Spec. Hist.VlIl l23,which also has thebetter reading in the case of natum (instead of notum) and solutzs (instead ofsolicitus). On the other hand we hnd in Spec. Hist. VIII 123 pauperfiam? ... exulfiam?... with question-marks. This text conception is lacking in Seneca as wellas in Spec . Doct.IV 88, nor does the Greek text give rise to the supposition thatyev{1oopar, (2 times) was originally followed by a question-mark.As to the addition of xai yap one may ask whether this addition is due to acorresponding enim in the source text or to T.'s wish to achieve a strongerconnection between these two parts of the sentence. I am inclined to believe thelatter.The translation of astrinxil by ouv6ogr,y[ev seems to be all right. CGL offers forouogiyy<,r a.o. constringo, for astringo (Lnt)ogQyer,v. What has happened to T. intranslating the last sentence of the quotation is far from clear. But one mayassume that here, again, T. had not the text of Spec. Hist. VIII 123 on his desk:Spec. Hist. VIII 123 repeats desinam 3 times, as does Seneca. The misunder-standing of T. has been provoked by the shortening of the sentence as isrepresented in Spec. Doct.IV 88.

47 AiSdq iv g.elpaxr orlpe?ov &ya$6v.Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 9l Verecundia in adolescente bonum signum est (cf. Spec.Doct. V 13, Spec. Hist. VIII I 18 Verecundia bonum in adolescente signumest).(Sen. Ep. XI I uerecundiam, bonum in adulescente signum, uix potuitexcutere.Translationl *. Sternbach (incorrectly) suggests that Vincent read in adolescen-tiain Spec. Doct.IV 91. The choice of aiSdrs as a translation of uerec'undiaiscorrect, though CGL translates uerecundiaby aloX$v1, tvtpon{1,:$}'4flna, alE<ir6 bypudicitia, pudor.

4tl lryfiv cl lltltre, fip{r11r16 r{144',v,Vinc,spe,,,Dot,t,lV92Aliurnsilercquoduis,printussile(cl. Spec,l)oct,lV 170,

Spec. f/ist, Vlll ll4 where uoles instcad of ur,r).

: Sen. Phued, tt76 uliurn silerc quod uoles primus sile.Translation: '1. Stcrnbach supposes that the elimination of &L),ov before aryiv isdue to a scribe. The translation ei might point to a readingquom = cum,Thecompendium used in the ms. suggests rather zrpdrrov than np6crr6. These uncleerlactors in the transmission of the text made it expedient to leave this passage outof consideration.

49 T6v flu$ayopr,x6v rcal8eia ioci, or,y&v eiq rpter(.uv xai pet& ta0ta nenalS:uptvor6

).a).eTv.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.lV g2Pythagoricorum disciplina est tacere per quinquenniumlet postea eruditos loqui (cf. Spec. Doct.IV 170, Spec. Hlst. III 26 whereportinstead of postea).: Hieronymus Comment. in Eccles.IlIT,l lGl 18, ed. P. Antin, CCSL LXII,p.276 Pythagoricos reor, quorum disciplina est tacere per quinquennium €tpostea eruditos loqui, (hinc originem sui traxisse decreti).Translation: ?. I left out this passage too, because of the textual diflicultlo:,Striking is the translation rprcrtavfor quinquennium,a period which is mentionedeverywhere in the tradition of the Pythagorean method of educatign (ece

Sternbach l90l: l2). The exception, mentioned by Sternbach: HippolyturPhilosophumenonl2,16 - H. Diels Doxograph. 558,3 = PG XVI p.3025 xct6n6peve orolzdrv 6ci g.iv 'ic'r1 tp'tu 6ri 8i n6vce prav$&v<ov, is not very likely to havO

been of any influence on T.'s alteration. Suspicious is also nenarDcuptvor6, As atranslation of erudilo.r one would expect nezcau8eup6vou6. One may even think ofrcenau8eup6vorv in concordance with c6v fluSa'yopr,x6v.

50 (l) IIpd roU &.plac$ar.ouprpou).e6ou xai (2) petd.rd ouppou),erloao$ar retetpaco td lpyovnoleiv.Vinc. Spec. Doct.M4 Priusquam incipias consulto: at ubi consulueris matureopus facto est (cf. Spec. Doct.M6,V 19, 24, Spec. Hist. VI 33).: Sal. Cat.I2 et priusquam incipias consulto et ubi consulueris mature opusfacto est.

Translation: (1) + (2) -. The second half of the translation is not verysatisfactory: mature has been neglected and nene[paoo xr].. can scarcely be

considered a good rendering of opus facto est.

5l 'Avar6).).ovroq roU iliou ouppou).{1, Sdvovcoq oupn6orov pe},et&o$ol.

See no. 8. It should be noticed that T. chose here ouppou),{ instead of Boutrri as a

translation of consilium, perhaps in order to imitate the'assonance' con-silium,t,on-uiuium. But Sternbach (app. crit. ad 5l) notes that the common word fornocturnal or matutine deliberation is poul{1.

52 'l'epxrr'itrro6 Slrlyeitci riv Er}rlnttgttv A1pr,6xpr,cov &xrug),droanlavtiv, Dl6rt tplfflt{aryuva4lv &vru lnrtlu;r[c6 t,'ix t8"ruaro.Vine, .Spec, I)oet, IV gtl (uuctor.) Tertullianus quoque refert Democritum

r5E 159'*db*

Philosophutll cxcaccasuc scipsutn, co quod muliercs nnpicere sirre eoncupisccn-tia non ualebat (cl'. S'pcr'. Doc,t,lV 176, Spec. Hi.st.lll 32).(Tcrtullianus: Apolog.46,ll (ed. E. Dekkers in CCSL I, p. 162) Dcmocritusexcaecando semetipsum, quod mulieres sine concupiscentia aspicere non posset(et doleret, si non esset potitus, incontinentiam emendatione profitetur).Translation: *. Sternbach (1900: 408, note 9) supposes that the corruption'l'epxo6),r,oq lor Tertullianus is due to a compendium in the.source text, which wasnot understood by T. The word quoque has been omitted in the translation. InCGL the verb i6rp).6zcerv is not registered, but see Ps. Callisth. Alexander romanceI,4,1I ... Svdple{.,e SprpJ cfr 'O}.uprnr,ci8r,. The story of Democritus has been told bymany authors (cf. Sternbach l90l: l3). In Spec. Doct.W lT6Vincent adds thatDemocritus acted rightly because he obscured the human eye by the darkness ofmagic: 'porro merito sibi oculos eruit, qui magicas tenebras oculis humanisinuexit'.

53 Mor,16q doru xai 6 ci6 i8ia6 yuvar,xd6 &xpar\q ipaocl1q.Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 99 Sextus'Pythagoricus in sententiis'. Adulter est in suamvxorem amator ardentior (cf . Spec. Hist. XVI 75).(Sen. de matrim. vol. III p. 434 (Haase) (cf. Hieronymus, Contr. Jovin.ll49 :PL XXIII:2814, and Hugh of St. Victor De nuptiis I, l:PL CLXXVI: 1205c).Translation: *. In the text of Sternbach the word &xpart1c, has fallen out. Theidea, which seems to condemn rape in marriage, haunted a number of ancientand medieval authors, as can be seen from Sternbach's commentary. The sayingis also transmitted as: porXdq cie €aucoU yuvar,xdq n&q 6 &x6).aocoq and has beenascribed to Clitarch. Rufinus translated it into Latin: adulter etiam propriaeuxo.ris omnis impudicus, whereas a Pseudo-Publilian trimeter says: adulter estuxorem qui amat ardentius. T. made a rather satisfactory translation, albeit thathe neglected the idea reflected in the Latin comparative ardentior.

54 OriSep(.q LnavaxrrlcLa rLyvX g$apeioa i ai8<iq iocr,v.Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 100 Laesa pudicitia est nulla reparabilis arte (but in Spec.Hist. VI 107 the text is the same as in the original).: Ov. Her.Y 103 sq. Nulla reparabilis arte f Laesa pudicitia est.Translation: *. It is clear that T. translated a text represented by Spec. Hist.YI107. One may make two suppositions: l. T. knew the original saying or(another) Greek rendering of it and restored the good word order; 2. a mistakeslipped into the transmission of the text of Vincent Spec. Doct. M00 as a resultof a reversal of the two verse halves. The second supposition looks the mostprobable, but it should be noticed that in margine has been written: pudicitialaesa est irreparabilis, sed non laeditur sine consensu, which suggests that it wastaken from a'reversed' version, unless indeed the remark in the margin causedthe reversal. For the translation made by Max. Planudes, see p. 174.

55 ll),o6or,ov n,rr,elir,va o0 rd [pi1] no].].& xexcio$ar,, &].],d rd ii],[y<,rv tzrl,{}upr,civ,

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 103 Locupletem facit aliquem non multa possiclerc. sedmodica desiderare (cf. Spec'. Hist.YI 124),(V. Max. IV 3,6 (de Fabricio Luscino) locupletempossidere sed modicn desiderurc.

IT'ranslntion: *. Sternbnch riglrtly cxpunged p{. Onc may wondcr how thisparticlc came into the text, lt is pcrhaps duc to a reminisccncc of one of the m$ny

variations of this thought (cl'. Ste rnbach ud loc.),such as e.g. Joh. Chrys. Homil.II dc Lazarc (PG XLVlll p. 9tt2): orlSi n).o6or66 Sottv &xeTv,,6 6 nolrl*neprpep).1p6vo6, &),),' ri pi1 no).trdrv Selrpevoq (o08i n6v1e Sociv Sxeivoq fi g.1Dlv xexr\pr6vo6, &).).' 6 rcotr).6v igr,6pevoq).

56 'ELe6$ep6q iocr,v o6coq, d6 nd$eor,v orl 8ou).e6eu' e6nop66 3ocrv, {r lxav6v iottv 0 Elct'

ncorldq 6 n),eiovo6 3nr,$upd.rv (ms. i).eu$Lproc,. E in eUnopo6, zc in nray6q scripta inrubr.).Vinc. Spec. Doct. M05 Liber is est uitiis, qui non inseruit, abundans / Cui satis

est quod habet, pauper qui plus cupit.: Galfridus (Ganfredus) de Vino Salvo: Poetria nova ll. 1839-1840 (Gallo

r97t rl2).Translation: *. I have emended Sleu$6pr,oq of the ms. to iLe6$epo6 because

neither in ancient nor in medieval Greek is i)'eu$6pr'oq (: 'of a free man" 'liber6l"'generous'etc.) the adequate term lor rendering the Latin adjective liber, So in

CGL i).eu$6pro6 : liberalis, i).e6$epoq : ingenuus, liber etc. It seems that eitherT. or the scribe considered each part of the sentence as a separate saying. T. uses

here again his 'calque' uitium - n&$o6 (cf. 16,17,45,57,63).

57 Id 6n6oov tug).dv iiveocrv coiq n&$eotv 6 Eporq.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. M06, cf. 109, l2l,V 18 Spec. Hist. XVII l0l Heu quam

caecus inest uitiis amor.(Claudianus in Eutrop.II50 sed quam... etc.

Translation: *. See Page 144'

Td ip&v xoci gpoveTv p6).r,q ix OeoD napalorpeicar,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 109 : IV l2l Amare et sapere vix a Deo conceditur.(Pub. Sent.22 amare et sapere vix deo conceditur.Translation: *. T. can, of course, not bear responsibility for the 'christianisa-

tion' that the saying underwent during its transmission from Publilius Syrus toVincent. Ilapaxopelv is one of the possible translations of concedo in CGL.

IIp&ypt& iotlv ipp6prpvov xai n),ipeq g6pou 6 Epc'r6.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 109 Res est soliciti plena timoris amor.

Translation: */-. See P. 144.

'Ev6zsvra &n6topa Qeu8i p).6nouor,v vuxti a[ 8eu]'ai {,'u1ai.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV ll3, (cf. V 73) Somnia fallaci ludunt temeraria nocte: Etpauidas mentes falsa timere iubent.: Tib. III 4,7 sq.

Translation: - -. It is clear that the Greek translation as it stands can scarcely

be seen as a correct reflexion of the Latin source text: the last threc words and c'l

have been left out, pauidas mentes has been translated as at nominative, lutlunt

has been read as uiclent. rlne'rDt can be an itacistic mistake for,|tu|rT, and &ndtop,a

is perhaps a corruption in thc Grcek text of &n4tolpe,

59

60

l6l

lllun fubbtt non multir

,ugdflbo

=E*W6l tllpovl,1lor.r [8r,6v tatr, r,', Dr,xtp4(e rv poutr&6 xal p.l ra16t,rq cril:prT n(ore t npdq ,f c'rDii

iLr,nlla[ver,v.

Vinc. Spcc. Doct.lV I I 5 Prudentis proprium est examinare consilia, ct non citofacili credulitate ad falsa prolabi.(Senec. in lib. de 4 virtutibus (-- de formula honestae vitae, ed. F. Haase 1902:

67).Translation: *. See 4. It will be clear that T. did not notice that he had alreadymade a translation of this sentence. As a result his translation differs at threepoints from his previous one: paoavi(er,v - Soxrp&(er,v, erix6).<g - e0XepeT, c,i rlreuSi -r{"eu8fr'

62 "Eveare cQ yip+ &oraoi.a xai ocpep).6tqc,,6t,. n&vreq, lva to6tou ircut6X<,rouv, eUlovral,xai 6rav ro0rou r61coor,, xac;yopoUor,v (ms. e6Xorvrar corr. Sternbach).Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV I l8 Tanta inest stultitiae inconstantia atque peruersitasquod omnes eam vt adipiscantur exoptant, et eandem adepti accusant (cf . Spec.

Hist. VI 16 Tanta inest hominibus stultitiae etc.).(Cic. Sen.ll4 quo in genere est in primis senectus, quam ut adipiscantur omnesoptant, eandem accusant adeptam: tanta est stultitiae inconstantia et peruersi-tas.Translation: * (?). Apart from the striking differen ce stultitiae - ,Q y{1pq thetranslation is fairly adequate and T. at least picked up from the context that thesentence referred to old age. But one may ask if perhaps his exemplar readsenectuti instead of stultitiae.T. neglected further tanta.

63 Mcopiaq i8r,6v 3orr,v &),),6tpr,a nd$1 p).6ner,v, t6v Ei i8i<,rv 3nr,),av$&veo$ar,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 118 Stultitiae proprium est aliorum uitia cernere, suorumobliuisci (cf . Spec. Doct.IV 121 ,y 49, Spec. Hist.VI25).(Cic. Tusc.III 30, 73 est enim proprium stultitiae aliorum uitia cernere suorumobliuisci.Translation: * *. See p. 145.

64 Oe6yovco6 rco),).oi inr$ug.oUor, prtooUou cd &v$rordpevov.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. IV 120 Quod refugit multi cupiunt, odere quod instat (cf.Spec. Hist. VI I l1).(Ov. ArsI7l7.Translation: * I - Q).There are reasons to believe that T.'s text should read(coU) 9e6yovco6 according to his habit of rendering relative clauses by construc-tions with participle and article. Without article the meaning becomes obscurehere.

65 'AvEpd6 &pa$oUq orlEiv &8r,xdrrepov, 6q oriEiv 6p$dv olera4 ei pl 6 arird6 neno'r"yxev.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.I-2l Quid homine imperito iniustius, qui nihil rectum putat,nisi quod ipge fecit (cf . Spec. Hist. V 73 Homine imperito nihil iniustius, quietc.).(Ter. Ad.98 sq. homine imperito numquam quicquam iniustiust, Qui nisi quodipse fecit nil rectum putat.Translation: * (+ + ?). This lemma ofT€rr r nrloul tottul Froblem, lf T.'s

Isourcc text reud, indccd, whut is written in ed. l)ouai Spec. I)o(!,lV l2l, hcdescrvcs a complirncnt l"or his hundling the fincsse 'what is more unjust tirun.,.' -. 'nothing is more unjust than ...'. lt is possiblc, however, that T. did .on*ultthe parallel text (Spec. Hist. V 73), unless the compilator of the source ;;ihimself chose the version of Spec'. Hist. instead of that of the Spec, Dncl. Inrendering imperito T. deviates from the standard translations given bV CCLi&pasd6 indocilis, indoctus, rudis, but imperitus &rer'poq.

66 "O 6tropev xai Xapl6vccoq zcuoreiopr,ev xai I lpelq vooUpev, xai cor)q &).).ouq 6pcrtr,rq

voeiv itrni(opev.Vinc. Spec. Doct. IV, l2l Quae uolumus, libenter credimus, et guae iorisentimus, alios quoque sentire speramus (cf . Spec. Hist. VI 5 Libenter hornin[,id quod uolunt credunt; this has, however, been quoted by Vincent as frOmCaesar Bell. Gal.I).(Caes. Civ.Il2T,2namquae uolumus et credimus libenter et quae sentirnus ipdreliquos sentire speramus.Translation: *. T. renders the plural relative of the exemplar by a singular. butit is not very likely that he was influenced by Spec. Hist. VI 5. T. strikinqlvrenders libenter by Xapr,6vto6, whereas i86cdq or eriXapdotc,:q Would be the mJfeobvious translation. The standard translation of sentire is uio$&veo$a,L in CCL.but given the context T. made an acceptable choice in rendering it 6y uo.iu, Th;same can be said about quoquef6poi<,.r6. As a whole T. gave an acceptable

translation.

67 il6$ev rineplgcrve0ecal &v$porrcoq, o6 ! oUIII{,,r,6 ncaiopa, i ^l6vvr7ouq nolvil, x6roc S

(ai1, dv&yx1 $aveTv' p"arata oc,lclpia &v$p6nou, p.&rauoq 6 x6roq' T&vtd. t ,i.n,n. iutoiq gt-aratorq oiEiv y"acut6'cepov &v$pdrnou' g.ec& rdv &v$peonov oxci.r).1E' petd 15u

ox<l).1xc yivecar, 'x6vtq, iarcarat' oSrorq Lr&vercw eiq x6vr,v ! lpec6pa 86[a iSio(v.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.lV 122.(Anonymus apud Vinc. ('Versificator') Vnde superbit homo, cuius conceptioculpa. / Nasci paena,labor uita, necesse mori. I Yana salus hominis, ua uslabor, omnia uana. / Inter uana nihil uanius est homine. / Post hominerx ue.mis,post uermem fit cinis heu heu. / Sic redit in cinerem gloria nostra suum.

Translation: * t. Apart from T.'s neglect of the metrical conception of thesource text, his translation is very adequate. Only his imitation of the Latiiword order in the last line seems overdone. The use of iurturat for heu, heurerhinds not only Aristoph. Eq.liiarratatilE r6v xcrxdrv, iurrura" but also TheoJ.Prodromos, Karopuopuyla 193: iffirara,.&|,, dr n6vov ia).6pcov.

68 Xalpouor { g{p1 rira}.ri d.rta.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 128 Gaudent prae nomine molles auriculae (cf. Spsg , Hlst,vr 69).(Hor. Sal. II 5,32 sq. gaudent praenomine molles / auriculae.Translation: *.

69 M{tc orcutdv lnalvlole prltr oca'.,tdv {6[X6 norl' to6to noloUot p,c,rpo[, o0q 86[a

copci xrv{,

t63,, ,

Vinc. Spcr'. Dott.lV l2tl Ncc tccollaudes, nec teculpuuerin ipne, lloc lirciuntstulti, quos gloria ucxat inanis.(Dionysius Cato Dist.ll l6 (ed. Boas 1952).Translation * l-. Somewhat striking is T.'s rendering of uexat by oo[3ei, whichhe must take in a rather special signification: 'scare away' -+ 'agitate' - 'uex'(?).As standard translations CGL offers 8x ox6).).o for uexo, lx 6x).6, yety"&(a.Planudes uSeS rap&ooer, Sec p. 174.

70 Xxo),udv xai novlp6v iorr, pl $augui(er,v &v$porcov $aupraor.6ryroq&luov.Vinc. Spec. Doct. M30 Prauum atque malignum est, non admirari hominemadmiratione dignissimum (cf . Spec. Doct. V 69, Spec. Hist. X 67, in bothinstances ac instead of atque).(Plin. Ep.XYl9 prauum malignumque est ... .

Translation: +. T. neglects, indeed, the superlative dignissimum, buI thepositive &6r,ov is sufficient and less confusing than a superlative &lt|racov wouldbe.

7l 'Opyi &.y.eqospavlav yevv{.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. IV 133 Ira immoderata insaniam gignit (cf . Spec. Hist.lY41).(Sen. Ep.XYIII 14 (delegabo te ad Epicurum. Ab illo fiet numeratio) inmodicaira gignit insaniam.Translation: *.

72 ' Hcvyclrana i(1oav &v o[ &v$pozcor,, ei 8ud pdprata 3x co0 p6oou &g1p6$1oav, rd ipdviiyouv xai rd o6v.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 135 Quietissime namque uiuerent homines, si duo uerba demedio tollerentur, meum scilicet et tuum (cf . Spec. Doct.Y 77: quoque instead ofnamque, scilicet omitted).(Pseudo-Seneca De moribus 98 (ed. Haase 1902: 63). Quietissimam uitamagerent homines in terris si haec duo uerba e natura rerum tollerent, meum ettuum.Translation: * l-. T. has become a victim of the fact that in Medieval Greekthe constructions of the irrealis were far from stable: in any case the aorist wentout of use as an expression for the irrealis (of the past). T. should have taken theimperfect for a correct rendering of the Latin construction.

73 'O &v$pcozroq roo&w.q &no$viloxe 4 6a&w.g &nop&),).erar, coJ6 iSious.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 139 Homo toties moritur quoties amittit suos.(Pub. Sent.215 ... totiens... quotiens ....Translation: *.

74 EiSlgov xai $dvacov gope?o$ar, 6 coU XpuooU o0x o78ev 6prq.Vinc. Spec. Doct.M47 Ferrum mortemque timere / Auri nescit amor.(Lucanus III I l8 sq.Translation: *. Both word order and the 'calque' timere ... nescit gopciollar, ,..

orix o?8Ev give the Greek translation a tortuous appearancc,

I '!! "*' Ettl'1 lt

75 ltparn&),1 ripf3trriqc vr,4q lrlnv, lt\htc l4]ou l)pai)rrr,q, oapxuilc&.xpaotaq n&,|]rruc

na'Xkt q rolq aio [] i'l oerrtv e lcaXt)6vtoq.

Vinc. Spet'. Doc't. IV 155 (... Ventris ingluuies est immoderata ciborumconcupiscentiae satisfactio.) Crapula (est ex deliciosorum sumptuum superflui-tate cordis, sopiti praegrauantia. Item) hebetudo mentis est acutae rationisobtusio, carnalis intemperantiae uitio crassis sensibus inducta.(Hugh of St. Victor (PL CLXXVI: l00lD).Translation: -. T. or the Latin compiler took only the second 'definition' ofcrapula. The translation has, however, many errors. A6yoq for ratio may beacceptable, $pa0or,6 for obtusio scarcely is. The last part of the sentence is evenincomprehensible. Ilci$oq has been chosen again as a translation of uitium (cf .16, 17, 45, 56, 57, 63) but uitio should have been rendered by rcd$er. I do notbelieve that Sternbach (1902:407 note 7) is right in stating that T. read crasso

and inducto,butthat he, aware of the proleptic praedicative meaning of crassrs,

tried to find a solution by introducing the absolute genitive nuytoq... eioax$6vco6.

A plural of rca16, with the signification'stupidity', is not very likely. But perhapsnaytoq does not function as a substantive, but as an adjective with n&$ouq:

'whereas the stupid vice of the incontinence of the flesh is brought into thesenses'. It will be clear, however, that T. was not able to find an adequatesolution for the difficult addition carnalis -inducta.

76 Md.po.l &x6).aoroq ri6rapr&vet, y6pov &x6),aocoq ,p.atverat.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 160 Adolescens luxuriosus peccat, senex luxuriosus insanit(cf . Spec. Doct.V 14, Spec. Hist. VIII 112).

(Sen. Con.lI 14.Translation: * *.

77 Ilape( ci6 yuvar,xdq 6liya npdq ouvouolav xuvoUvru(Qa iyx6pova.Vinc. Sprr. Doct. IV 160 Praeter mulierem pauca animalia coitum noueregrauida.(Plin. Nqt.YII ll (sect.9),48.Translation: -. T. interprets (or reads) moueref mouerunt instead of nouere.Further, he uses the atticistic (Herodotean) n&.pel, which is lacking in CGL. Forpraeter the vocabularies of CGL uS€ n).{v (2x), iirep'; &veu, n&.pextoq,8i1a, ixr66,

Xra,p"c (all lx).

78 " Eocoroav r6ilpro &g' ip6v veavioxor, 6q yuvalxeq xa).).conr,(6pevor,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.M62 Sint procul a nobis iuuenes vt'femina compti.: Ov. Her.IY 75.Trans'lation: *. See for Planudes' translation p. 174.

79 Td 9[].1pa p6poq Soci por,1eia6.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 163 Osculum est pars adulterii.(anonymus.Translation: # . Vincent ascribes the saying to Cioero, but as Sternbach ( 1902:

20 note l5) observes. the addition 'Tullius' is probably due to the lollowinglemma in Vinoont, where is written idem in Tuscul,lib.3 (which should be IV 33,

#e 165

8l

7(l\:.llugitii print'ipiunt (',tl (ut nit Ennius) inter ciuas nuclure iltporu, Tltc tlrotrghtis found in Ps. Augustinus (Aclredus Rhicvallenis) de amic.6 in P[, Xl,: ll35 ... ut

sic osculari nihil sit aliud quam adulterari (cf. Sternbach ibid.).

Mer& notrutr6yov pril $6Ie ipi(er,v ).6youq' 6 ).6yo6 8[8ocar, zt&,ouv, i "tq bravoia6 oog[a

ri).iyor,q.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.MT l Contra uerbosos, noli contendere uerbis /. Sermo daturcunctis, animi sapientia paucis.(Dionysius Cato Dist.l,10 sq. (ed. Boas 1952:82).Translation: *. 6 is written in red in the ms. Perhaps T. or the Greek scribe read

two separate sayings, which would, certainly, be possible.

(l)IIaUoov preya).opp16roo6vr1v' xIft 6 Oed6 z&v irepfgavou' (2) t& pey&).a zcizrtouor,

r& neguor,t.rp.6va {.,ogoUor, c& oiSaivovca ntL(ovrau, (3) cd 8pr,pU clq 6gp6oq &n6$ou,

p&$e npooL"Tew'(6) &vapaivouolv iv coiq ri,.hloTq o[ tazcer,vol, norpaSl8ovtar, iv toT6

X$a g.a).oiq o [ 6rcepd gavor,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.IV 175 (ante pedes... Christi oz.)(l) Desine grande loqui, frangit Deus omne superbum./(2) Magna cadunt, inflata crepant, tumefacta premuntur./(3) Disce supercilium deponere, disce cauere./(4) (ante pedes foueam, quisquis sublime minaris./(5) Peruulgata uiget nostri sententia Christi)/(6) Scandunt celsa humiles, traduntur ad ima feroces(cf. Vinc. Spec. Hist. XVII 102).

(Prudentius, Psychomach.285 sqq., (PL LX c.44 (6) scandere celsa humiles, et

ad ima redire feroces).Translation: (1)+ (2)+ + (3)+/- (6)+ l- Q).I have given a judgment

of each line for reasons of shading. There is, however, a textual problem:Vincent's text lacks the fourth and fifth line of the quotation from Prudentiusand T. is hardly to blame that Vincent rendered the infinitives scandere andredire by a personal form. T. adequately renders the infinitive constructiongrande loqui by the substantivo peya).opp1poo6v1v, but the addition of the article,as in line 2, would have improved the translation. In the second line T. found in

{.,ogouor, a right equivaient for the 'rough' signification of crepant. Td 8grpril cfr6

6gp6oq, however, seems to be a rather awkward rendering of supercilium,whereas T. neglects the double disce * inf. of the source text. In the sixth line&vapaivouor,v does not seem to be the most adequate translation of the Latinsource text, but, as a whole, this is one of the more interesting lemmata of theensemble.

82 'Hyepr6va Xpi pil p,6vov XEitpas xai y),6ctav, &).).& xai 6g$a).p.oJ6 EXeLv iyxpaceiq.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. V I Praetorem decet non solum manus et linguam, sed et

oculos habere continentes (cf. Spec. Hist.lII42).(Cic. O.ff.1,40,144 (bene Pericles, cum haberet collegam in praetura Sophoclempoetam iique de communi officio conuenissent et casu formoluo puer praetcriretdixissetque Sophocles 'o puerum pulchrum, Periclel') 'lt enim prsctorem,Sophocle, decet non solum manus, sed etiam oculot rbrtlnantal hebere',

166 ,.,, ,, i '\

T'Iranslntion: +, Sternbrtclt rcutl 'lycp/,vac in thc ms. und rightly supposcd thcreading should bc {yrp/,vn, My inlirrmant, Mr. Hermans, stated, however, thstthere is no trace of a q in the ms. The story is told also by severalCreek authors:Plut.Pc,r.VIIItl(1568),Stob.XVIl 19,(Ps.)Plut,Vitadec.orat.lVp.S3SF(cf,Sternbach 1902: 2l ), but T. does clearly not know these passages, where e.g. thecommander is a mparqy6q, i.c. the tragic poet Sophocles.

83 'Eriv eiq oixer6rlra &v$pcirzcou zc),ouoiou xai Suvd,orou g$&o1c, tl .iu &).{$euav tl "i,gr,).lav &no].6oer,q.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 7 Si in clientelam et hominis felicis potentisque perueneris,aut ueritas aut amicitia perdenda est.(In older editions falsely ascribed to Publilius Syrus: Sent.96,cf . ed. E. Wcilfflin,Leipzig 1869: 106.)Translation: * l- . Though it is very difficult to hnd a good equivalent for thetypically Roman idea of cliens, clientela,T.'s choice of oixer,6qq does not seem tobe the proper word, assigning either kinship or property. CGL renders clientelaby rcpoogufl; Proc. Gaz. Ep. 72, Schol. Il. 9, 640 use np6o9u[ with thesignification cliens. Sternbach (1901: 415) app. crit. ad loc. proposes to readSuvacoU instead of 8uv&ocou, referring to no. 85. Such a correction is neithernecessary, in my opinion, nor probable, because it supposes two mistakestogether in the transmission of the same word. In that respect it would be moreobvious to accept a corruption in 85: Suva(o)c6v. Auv&oc1q offers, at least, amore clearly profiled signification against n).o6or,os than 8uvcrr6q, which is rathersynonymous with n),orior,oq.

84 'B{el$6cco cdrv &vaxr6pc,rv, 6q $6}.er, eivar, e0}.apd6.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.Y 7 Exeat aulam, Qui uult esse pius.(Luc. VIII 493 Exeat aula lqui etc.Translation: *. The translation e'ioep{e for pius would be more obvious (l lx inCGL), but erirap{1c looks acceptable too: CGL offers the translations modestus,religiosus, reuerens, uerecundu^r. Here T. has rendered the relative clause in Latinalso by a relative clause in Greek instead of, as usual, a participle construction 6

$6).orv etc.

85 Oi gitror, c6v ntrouolorv xai cdrv Suvacd-rv eior, g[].or, xai dty4c, xai rcpoo<lrnou' 6$cv xaiB&pparv 3v raTq &nog&secw 'o[ gi].or,' gloi 'c6v n].ouoir,rv &yvg& eior, tpdq oitov'.Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 7 (Nam) diuitum et potentum amici, sunt amici fortunae,non personae. Vnde Varro in sententiis. Amici, inquit, diuitum paleae sunt circagrana (cf . Spec. Doct. V 90 and Spec. Hist. VI 59).: Var. At. (in Yar. Men, ed. A. Riese 1865: 266 n.20).Translation: - - (?). The text offers several problems. It is far from clear why T,wrote xaidyrlqxai npoodrnou, whereas the correct translation would be d1q6 elol

gl).r.,r, o0 npoccirzrou or the like. Indeed, the xcri before t6lrlc makes it difficult tosuppose a simple error (of a scribe). For the idea of tho eentence see Sternbachl90l : 409 note 10, Surprising is also the xal before B*ppruv and the translatlon oft'ircu by npde (perheps a scribe's mistake by rnldnerpt€tlng a ligature of, nepl).

For the reat, T, eorr€etly chosc oitov for rond${il enna (grunum in CGL llx

-NltxlxttCt lX xlnx,4-rr[Torr, I X olrtirv, gf UnU pdiilcC, Nltt*ttt, x/rxxturlG), "A1'rpr,v n'ltrrv 0.8.

in Matth.3,l2.

86 ' ( )plo{)'.rp61N1)v n&oal a[ nev{}epal plooUor, t&q v6gr.gaq.

Vinc. Spec'. Doct. V l0 Vno animo omnes socrus oderunt nurus. (cf. Spec. Hist.v 73).(Ter. Hec.20l itaque adeo uno animo omnes socrus oderunt nurus.Translation: * *. Not only 6pr.oSupa8dv demonstrates inventiveness, T. rightlyavoids the calque oderunt - SpiorToav.

87 O0E6v Sotr nar,Siou pd,ptupoq pepar,6cepov, 6cr xai zpdq co6tou6 toU6 Xp6vou6 Eg$aoev,

lva vofr, xocl o0 npdq ixeivouq, .iva Lnrn]r&r:1ra.u

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 12.See no. 28.

88 IIpd toi) ytpos <irpooa, 'lva xa)'66 eho^,3v co6tqr, fva xa].66 &zco$dvc'r.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 14 (?) Ante senectutem curaui ut bene uiuerem, in illa, utbene moriar (cf . Spec.''Hist. VIII 129).: Sen. Ep. LXI2 ... uiuerem, in senectute, ut ... .

Translation * l-. T. surprisingly'translated iuraui instead of curaui. There is

another problem. The saying is lacking in V 14 of the Douai edition. The

sequence of the translations indicates, however, that T. found this saying in the

chapter about de moribus senum (: Spec. Doe t. V'14), unless the compiler of thesayings took this sentence from V l0l and put it here in order to 'complete' thecontrast with V 12, which deals with the children.

89 flo).).oi6 8outre6er,, 6q tQ o<bp.au 8ou)'e6er.

Vinc. Spec. Doct..V 27 Multis seruiet qui corpori seruit (cf . Spec. Ilisl. VIIII le).(Sen. Ep.XIY I multis enim seruiet, qui corpori seruit.Translation: *.

90 (l) O[ Iro'ixoi nepi coU plou c6v &pXaftov lep6cov dq Aiy6nrou ].6'y,ouorv, (2) 6tr. n&wu

c&.roD x6opr,ou xp&ygrarot xui'cil.c, i).ni8as &nopatr6pevor, &ei Bv cQ vaQ.fioav (3) xai

c6v rpaypr &.tia.v cd.q g$oeq r&.q uirLa,q rE xai coilq ).6youq t6v &oc6po.rv i$edrpouv, (4)

o686loq €auroJ6 yuvar,fiv ipri.gvuov, orl86).<oe ou.gyeveTq xai yvlo[ou6, &].].' o08i cor)e

ulor)q dp).enov, &g' o61p6vou flplavro rQ Seiqr oep&opr,atr,8ou).oSivar'(5) xpe,ico.rv xaloivou &eitrirceiyov 8r,& ciTv ).ercr6cr1ca coU vod6 xai p&}.).ov Suri civ 6pefw toU n&$ou6, (6)

&pcqi 8i Stp6govto,'lva pril intgopcf(ootrdv ot6paXov, (7) cd d].ar,ov p6vov 3v toT6

npoogayior,q iyv6pr,ouv, xal. roUco 6).iyov 8r,dl cd riv vauclav xai civ ox].r2p6c1to risye6oeo.r6 iIopa].i(er,v.Vinc. Spec. Doct. V ,33r(l) Stoicus narrat de uita antiquorum sacerdotumAegypti, (2)-quod.omnibus mundi negotiis curisque postpositis, semper intemplo fuerunt, (3) et rerum naturas causasque ac rationes syderum contemplatisunt; (4) nunquam mulieribus se miscuerunt, nunquam cqgnatos. propinquosnec liberos quidem uiderunt, ex eo tempore quo eepltsent diuino cultuimancipari; (5) carnibus et uino se semper ebstinucruntr prgptor tenuit$tem

:frf"1.:!.'*.

sensu$t et ntuximc propter rppctitum libiclinis, qui cx his cibis, et huc potioncnascituri (6) pune nlro uescebuntur, ne onerorent stomachum; (7) olcum tantumin pulmentis nouerunt, ct hoc parum, propter nauseam et asperitatem gustusliniendam.(Hieronymus (lnntra Jovin. Il l3 (PL XXIII c.316) Chaeremon Stoicus. uireloquentissimus, narrat de uita antiquorum Aegypti sacerdotum, quod ,.,fuerint et ... contemplati sint, ... miscuerint, numquam cognatos et propinquoa,ne liberos quidem uiderint, ... cultui deseruire, ... abstinuerint, propter tenuita.tem sensus et uertiginem capitis, quam ex paruo cibo patiebantur, et mgximepropter appetitus libidinis, qui ex his cibis et ex hac potione nascuntur; pane ,,,stomachum et si quanto comedebant, tusum pariter hyssopum sumcbsnt lncibo, ut escam grauiorem illius calore decoquerent. Oleum tantum in olerlburnouerant, uerum et ipsum parurn ... leniendam-Translation: (l) +l- Q) - (3) - (4) +/- (s) + (6) - (7) +.This is by lar the longest passage which has been translated and it give: thOopportunity to study T.'s abilities in a more complicated syntactical en;emble,The passage offers also some problems. In order to make the comparison eealor Ihave divided the whole passage into seven parts.For some reason or another T. rendered the singular stoicus into a general pluraloi lc<,-rr,xo[.

The switch from an abl.abs. in the source text into a partic.coniunct. construc.tion is acceptable, of course, but ndvcc ... &nopoc).6pevor scarcely covcrs thesignification of omnibus ... postpositis. Curae is clearly something else than r&cii.ni8aq.The calque tdrv nguyp.&rav c&q g6oer,6 for rerum naturas makes clear that T. doesnot clearly understand the Latin rerum natura, for which i1 g6ouc, alone wouldhave been suff,rcient. Further, he does not see that -que in causasque connectscausas with naturas. He renders -que by ce, but the effect is a ce xai clause whichsuggests a connection betweafi oriri.uq and ).6youq. Oi ).6yor, rdrv &oc6pc,rv Olt Itranslation of rationes siderum does not look very trustworthy, though 6 ),6yo6 ao

v6poq g6oer, and in expressions as 6 ro0 x6opou ),6yos and the like is a usual term inStoic philosophy to indicate physical law.Ori86lc,.rq reflects more the idea of in no way' than numquam (: never), Semiscuerunl has been rendered by €auroJ6... Spiyvuov, whereas Spnyv6ovto /iployovro would be the more obvious translation. The cognatos, propinquos, necliberos quidemof the source text gives a tripartite enumeration, T. offers with xcl... &).).' orlSi in fact a bipartition. The addition Xp6vou in &9' o61p6vou is inspired bythe Latin tempore but factually superfluous.With &neTxov, certainly correct in itself, T. does not follow the Latin ret'lexiveconstruction. One may also ask whether 8t& riv ).enc6r1ca coU vo66 suggCsts thCsame thing as propter tenuitatem sensus or not, but in this case T. is hardly toblame, for in the source text just these words have been omitted which make thepassage better understandable: Hieronymus has: propler lenuitatem sensus eluertiginem cupitis, quom ex poruo cibo patiebantur.ln other words, it concerng akind of physical lability, which would grow worse by the use of meat and wine,Arnr/rry16 ro0 vo66 points. however, in any c&se, to thlg obacurity that lr& {vtrrnr6u1tc to0 vo66 muet rignily 'in order to keep their tubtlety of mind', whereae

T

(l)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

l6t ,' , u lltne 38*r

np!.,n.,iy 1:F# n"*r*,*u*1,Tj!llG*!,,

8r& r'lv lipr(r,v toil n&llr,'r( rlrust suy 'beenuse ol'tlreir ntirnulntirrg ol'pttssiolt'. tltus'in ordcr to avoid thcir stimulus for pussiun'. As u word lirr wortl trunslatiott,the rendering of this part of the sentcncc cunnot be criticised too rnuch. Thcwords qui ex his cibis ... nascitur have for unclear reasons not bccn translated.The same must be said about the neglecting of ruro, as a result of which theassertion in Latin says the opposite of what T. has written.The last part is perhaps the best one. One may ask why Vincent or a predecessor

substituted Hieronymus' oleribus by pulmenlis, but that is not of our concernhere. CGL gives as a translation of pulmentum: r,poog&yr.ov (: 6rfov, see LSJ, cf.Ev. Joh. 21,5).As a whole T.'s translation of this longer passage is rather disappointing. This is

partly due to some obscurities in the source text, partly to some misinterpreta-tions of T.

Tiv g6olv &v &no8t<b[Iq ].a$paio q, c|roq navtaXoU SpapeTcar,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 43 Naturam expellas furca licet usque recurret (cf . Spec.

Hist. VI 68).(Hor. Ep.I10,24 Naturam expelles furca, tamen usque recurret.Translation: - -. It is clear that T. read or interpretedfurtim instead of furca.The interpretation became hopeless thereby, and r6coq navcaXoU are also

desperate solutions for licet usque.

92 'Exd;ov rcar,Seurilv Lx).e[ar,, 6v &v p&].].ov $aup&o1c iv roT6 iSior,s ii iv toiq &].].otp[or,q.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 47 Illum quidem eruditorem elige, quem magis mireris insuis, quam in alienis (cf . Spec. Hist. VI 59 Illum elige eruditorem quem ... in suis,

quam alienis).Translation: *. See p. 145.

93 O'i8iv 6reya),onpeniq 8r8&1er,, 66 &9' tautoU (pr18iv) dg.a$ev.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 47 Nil magnificum docebit, qui a se nil didicit.: Varro Sent.67 p.268.Translation: + (?). If Sternbach rightly supposes the involuntary omission ofp1Eiv, the translation is correct.

94 'H),mta coU &v$p6nou p&).r,ora t6ce nalEevr{atccra,,, 6cav inoxpiveo$au orix olSev xaitoiq npoot&ctouor,v erix6),oq napal<opeT.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 48 Aetas uero hominis tum maxime formanda est, cumsimulandi nescia est, ac praecipientibus facillime cedit (cf . Spec. Doct. V l2 andSpec. Hist.IXl2l with a number of deviations).(Quint. Inst. I3,12 ... aetas tam infirma quae ..., tum uel maxime formanda, ...

et praecipientibus ... .

Translation: */-. Here the word-for-word rendering shows its drawback:what looks pgssible in Latin: aetas hominisformanda eslo has an awkward soundin i).ixr,a coU &v$po.rzrou rcar8euria'iorra.. The connection nar,Seut6a Earo is, besides,pleonastic, and 6occo is no adequate rendering of esl. 00x eilSov for nesciu crt looksreasonable, but erlx6).t.rq neglects an aspect of .facillime. llpaardtrto is not the

most obvious translation of praecipere, cither.

T

(6)

(7)

95 "l,llraoa I xaI Jtirlr !rX.lr,r6'lv y'rv'l'l"rp{r,rv flarrr,ltr,rq' &ntxtctvc 6l toItrrv lluyra)t[t,rv

xal lxpdr'4ae ri< ()acttetac'xal, r&trrv trri)trrv &rtxtrtvtv I Al|cb xal grrft1l):Ioa n&trr,v

&ri),tlev el6 Ar,ff ilv xai Excoe tlv l(apt)&ycvcrv xal roi] y&.p.tt,t&nort1oitca Invl(cv

Eautlv (ms. n,rp{rt'v ('otr. Sternbach, ms. Kal}&,pyevav t'orr. Stcrnbach. Instead ofXr,16<,rq one would expect Xr,1a{r,'r of Xulalorl, relTlsrks Stcrnbach.)This text has no equivalent in Vincent. It might be an interpolation evoked by a

remark on Dido's death in Spec. Doct. V 48. It should be noticed that the

character of this passage is totally different from the other quotations. Asimilar, though lengthier, story is told by Malalas (p. 162,9). There the name ofthe queen is spelled 'ELrood,v, of the town Kapcdyevcrv (ms. Xapcalaivav).

96 Mey&).ou celvltou Soci neptxtreToar cd 6).ov iv &pu8pQ.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 57 Magni artificis est clausisse totum in exiguo.(Sen. Ep.LIIJ I I ... clausisse ... .

Translation: - . If ne pux),eToar for clausisse is acceptable, 3v &puDpQ for in exiguo is

certainly not. T. used this pair already in 25.

97 'Ev npuylt"art oageT 6xvov noleT td ixcerap6vov (ms. 6ocvov, Sternbach 61lov).

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 57 In re aperta piget esse prolixum.: Symmachus Eprsl. IV 59 (PL XVIII:240 A).Translation: *. The standard translation of piget me etc. in CGL is 6xvelv. The

idea of the saying is that comprehensiveness in a clear matter is embarrassing.This embarrassment is very well expressed by the words 6xvov zcoleT.

98 "Oq tiv ncorleiav gopelcar, ),iav 8er,tr6s Sotrv'

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 77 Qui paupertatem timet quam timidus est.

Pseudo-Seneca De moribus 99 (ed. Haase 1902: 63) ...quam timendus est.

Translation: *. On the preferability of the reading timidus against timendus,see

Sternbach 1901 : 25 ad loc. T . has found, in my opinion, a good alternative inrendering quam timidus by ).iav 8el),6q.

99 fl).eTov dXer ixeivoq, 66 i).aXiocou 3rrr,$upei.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 77 Plurimum habet is qui minimum cupit (cf . Spec. Doct.Y76 ... quis plurimum habet? qui minimum cupit).(Pseudo-Sen. De moribus (ed. Haase 1902:62) 46 quis ...? is qui ....Translatio n: -f l- . Striking is n).eiov for plurimum. Perhaps Sternbach is right inguessing that n).eTocov w&s intended. But the use of zc).eTov ought, possibly, to be

seen in the light of avoiding the superlative in later Greek. 'E).dxr,oro6 is, ofcourse, also superlative, but one of these that maintained itself longer.

100 O[].oq inr$uplcdv 6vo6ra, &v$pono6 (p6lrq ) ipgocvllq, SuocuX[crq xuro.gvytl,

dxar&navcto6 eicuXia.Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 82 quid amicus desiderabile nomen, homo vix apparens,infelicitatis refugium, indesinens felicitas (cf. Spec'. H ist. X 7 l).(Secundus gnomologus (cf. Fragm. Philos. Graec, ed. Mullach I 512 e.v.).

Translation: + I -. Herc again appear some problems, Why e,g. did T.eliminate the queotion ut thc top of the scntcnce'l How should the clearly

9l

t7t,,rftru

mistakcn &v!)pr,rnoc lp,gav{e be enrentled'l'['o tregin with the lutter: Sternbachquotes the l'ull parallel liom Secundus in F'ragm, Phllos. Gruil', (ed. M ullach)I 5 l4 no. I l: r[ iotr, gltro6; l) (1r,r'iprevov [w1.ra 2) &vt)pr,rn14 &.,pavfic 3) ]'r6g'ip611rv

xclpa 4\ xaragvyl SuoruXtaq 5) &nopto.q rcapapr,6th,ov 6) &xoq talalnt,rplaq 7)xar&.oxonrtq piou 8) &v$p<,lnoq &xar&7r7nco6 9) &vvn|atarov xeup{}.rov l0)dxur&)r'rproq e0cuX[a. From these qualifications only four ( | , 2, 4 and l0)were left in Vincent. Secundus, teacher of Herodes Atticus (A. et M. CroisetHist. Lit. Gr. V 552), belongs to the group of philosophers such as Q. Sextius,Demophilus and Demokrates (Ip, IIp) who expressed their thoughts in pithysayings. These sayings met also great dernand in Latin translations. We thushave here a clear example of 'Riickwanderung', with as a result a retransla-tion which is recognisable, though deviating in details. The most difficultpoint is &v$pornoc, Lv"gav^l)c, in full contrast with the original &v$porro6 d.gavi1c,.

Sternbach proposes to restore this 'original' reading. In my opinion,however, Lqgavtlc,is correct, but in the transmission of the text the translationof vix has disappeared for one reason or another. I therefore read &v$p<oroq

(p6luq) Lp"guvt1c,, but the text ran perhaps more apodictically &v$porco6 (onix)3pr,gavd6. The original expression &xacdlqxroq ericuXia became &xur&navccoge0ruxla according to the 'standard' of CGL indesinens - &navoro6 II 80,21,dxar&navocos II 222,25 &).1xrov 1II469,78.

l0l T6v gr,).o6vr<ov tugtrai eior,v uixp|oer.c,.

Vinc. Spec. Doct.V 92 Amantium caeca sunt iudicia (cf. Spec. Doct.IV 121

and Spec. Hist. V 2 under sayings of Theophrast).(Hieronymus Comm. in Osee III (PL XXV 9054).Translation: * * . See further Sternbach 190 I: 27 on the background of thissaying.

102 llo).).oTg &paprllpcrca llvovrau ai oupa).oxai c!6 gr,).i46.

Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 92 Multis delicta fuere nexus amicitiae (cf . Spec. Doct.Y85, Spec. Hist. XVII l0l ).(Claudianus in Rufin.Il320 sq. ... delicta fuere f nexus amicitiae.Translation: + T. generalises the saying yet more in rendering fuere byyivovcat.

103 Ti 1&p pr.op6cep6v Bocr,v ii c,i &81),4 drq &pi81la'taew;Vinc. Spec. Doct. V 100 Quid enim stultius, quam incerta pro certis habere?: Cic. Sen. XIX 68.

Translation: * *.

My study of T.'sJranslation technique leads me to the following conclusions:I the Greek translation shows as a whole a serious attempt to render the Latin

sayings into Greek in an adequate way.2 most translations are based on a word-for-word rendering.3 this method sometimes leads to'mcchanicrl'mlrtekot,

.ri

I

4 sotne 'culquen' ltnve eottstutttly bccn uscd, suclt ils c.g, vitiutrt n&tloc or thercndering of relutive cluuscs by participle constructions: clui tlut (gr deilltl ,,, 6

8u8or16; clui ucccpll .,. h icprirv, clui repetil ...6 Enava(4rdrv ctc.5 the incidental use ol o l'c'r,ru:s politicr,rs in the Greek translation points to tr

translator of Grcck rather than of 'Latin' origin, though some translationsprovoke doubts about their'graecitas'.

6 it isclear that the text of T.'s exemplar was not identical with the Douai edition.The exemplar probably read in8 cogitalor instead of cogitato,in23 munus insteadof nimis, in 46 natum instead of notum, in 62 senectuti instead of stultitiae, in 77movere (?) instead of novere, in 82 praetores (?) instead of praetorem, in 88 iuruvi(?) instead of curavi.In l8 the words nummi sunt were perhaps lacking, in 44 non,in 8l the lines 4 and 5, in 93 the second nil.In some cases T. translates a text that isfound elsewhere in Vincent, see e.g. 54,65,92.It is possible that in the exemplarthe lines 40141were connected.

7 the Greek text of the Vaticanus Graecus no. 1144 is certainly not the originalversion of the translation, as caR be seen from mistakes like rd p6vov instead of rdpi1 p6vov (no. 5), the lack of B[ou$6ver, rd 3(ou$eveio$al (no. 12), whereas in the samelemma the original version had perhaps an infinitive i[ou$eveiv.

Two last though not uninteresting questions have thusfar not been put forward:who was the translator and how did he come across this text of Vincent? The mostfamous translator of Latin texts into medieval Greek is Maximos Planudesr t (ca.1255-1305). With certainty he made translations of Ovid's Heroides and Metamor-phoses, of Cicero's Somnium Scipioms with Macrobius? c.oumentary, and of theConsolatio Philosophioe of Boethius. He also translated the so-called DistichaCatonis and he was very interested in sententious literature. Considering Vincent'slifetime being \18,4194 - ca. 1264 there is no objection to the acceptance thatPlanudes was the translator of the gnomics taken from Vincent's work. There a,re,moreover, at least two circumstances by which Planudes possibly came into contactwith the work of Vincent: l. he himself was a member of the Byzantine delegation toVenice in l296,which had the delicate mission of convincing the Venetians that theemperor had nothing to do with the anti-Venetian actibns in Cbnstantinople in1294. The Venetians detained the delegation during several months; 2. the.presenceof the Latins in Constantinople from 1204-1261 and the policy of MichaetVIII infavour of the Union of the Catholic and Orthodox churches after 126l hadcreateda clir,nate in which the interest of Byzantine intellectuals for'Latin'culture (and viceversa) could grow; and one may inragine that Planudes became acquainted with amanuscript of (a su'rnmary of) the Speculum Doctrinale of Vincent. Thus, in theserespects, Planudes can certainly be taken into consideration as the translator of thegnomics frorn Vincent" Also, if one looks to the nature of mistakes irt thetranslations of Planudes himself, one meets with some cases that correspond withthese of T. ln Heroides III 3 e.g. Planudes translates lituras by crorleia, confusingthe Latin word with litteras; in M64 he renders regia totaby i x,i,pn r&aa (takingregiafor regio), Planudes also often maintains the word order of his Latin exemplareven whan this leads to an absurd or at least un-Greek word order.rB

Nevertholeas, for the following reasons,I am inclincd to exclrldc Flanudes as thetranslstor of th€ Vincent pag$ages. There are som€ inrteneeg wherc Planudes'tranahtlonl mn bc comparcd with those of T,

afr l7t-.**"

Ovid IIer.l 12: res est sollicili plcnu lirnoril; u,norruns in Planudes' translation:

n),!pe6 y&p ippeptpvou g6pou Xpip& t[ &otr,v 6 Egcrq,

where T. offers:zrp&,1pci iocrv Spp6ptpvov xai, n),!peq 96pou 6 Spoq

lsee' p. 144). T. used here a versus politicus. A significant agreement in both

translations is the use of the middle-Greek adjective Spp6prpvo6; a significant

difference is np&,ypa against Xpip& cu, and the construction.

Ovid Her.Y 103: nulla reparabilis arte f laesa pudicitia est

There are some striking differences in the translations. Planudes reversed the word

order, whereas it is is clear that he had the correct text of Ovid before him. T.

reversed the word order in comparison with the Vincent text, thus obtaining the

'correct'word order! More striking is, however, Planudes'renderingof pudicitiabyot-rgpoo6v1. Kenneyle observed already that Planudes is inclined to bowdlerize texts

he considers too offensive. This probably accounts for his choice of oorgpoo6vl iIS it

translatio n of pudicilia. Not very elegant is his solution of nulla reparabilis arte withthe essential negation being'hidden'in the neologisrn &venav&xtr1toq (not in LSJ!).

T.'s translation is certainly more clear and efficient.

Ovid Her. lY 7 5: sint procul a nobis iuvenes ut femina compti

Planudes:r. (54):

Planudes:r. (78):

I 18, l:Planudes:r. (e):

II 16:

Planudes:

r. (6e):

Planudcs'

p).apeToa V,ip i o<,rgpoo6v1 &vercav&x).7t6q Lo::" n&'on tLyvn

oiSeplg LnuvaxrytLa rLyv"l1g$apeToa i ai8<bs iott'v'

n6ppor &g' ip6v iiocooav oi xa).).corcr,(6pevor, veavlal xutd. ywaixaq

Eoccooav n6ppo &g' ip6v veav[oxou cit6 yuvaTxeq xa].].c,lnr,(6plevor,

cumfuerisfelix, quae sunt adversa, caueto

e6 np&rcc,.rv o6 ye xai rdvavr(.u n&vca gu)'&ooou

6cav y6vp ericuxic co36 ivavcfotqngoctye

nec te collaudes nec te culpaueris ipse:

hoc faciunt stulti, quos gloria uexat inanisplce oeaucdv inoc[vel, pdc' a0$r,6 Q6yt' xai 1dlp

- roUr' &v61cot Spdror, xevi toU6 86[a tap&ooet

p{pe oeaucdv 3natv6on6 pite oeautdv {6tne nott'ro0to noro0ol p.opo[, ot)q 86[a ooBcl xw{

translation is in hexameters. whieh fOrcf: hln tO lon€ 'Homeric'

Both translations have much in common; T.'s solution with dre yuvaTxeq is, if not

more correct, certainly more elegant than Planudes' xar&. ywaixuc,.

There are also three possibilities for comparison in the translations of Dyonisius

Cato's Disticha:

It should be noticed that Planudes translates in hexameter (as often). Moreover

he uses the proper idioms (e6 rcp&ctc,rv, gu)'&ooou).

l, ,,& 175

intcrlbrcncc (rr,r)c). Striking is thc usc ol'dilTcrent ilspects in both translations (p{rc

... izsafver, against p{te ... iiarv6olq). One can hardly imagine that the same author

uses such ttiflerent solutions for his translation of the same lines. Planudes'

rendering seems to be more to the point.

I l0:

Planudes:

r. (80):

contra uerbosos noli contendere uerbis:sermo datur cunctis, animi sapientia paucis

pi &v$iotcroo p18' Bpi8ar,ve ).&.).or,6 &8o)'6oXo6

6ctt, ).6yoq 868ocar, rc&.ou, {6veouq 8' 6}.r,y[ocot6

pec& no).u),6yov pi1 $6).e ipi(er,v ).61or,q' 6 l6yoq

Sisocat n&orv, t "is 8r,avofaq oog[a 6].[lorq

One may admire Planudes' inventivity in producing an adequate translation in

hexameters. He doubles the idea noli contendere, reduces the coupling animi

sapientia to the single idea [6veor6 (with Attic spelling). The prose rendering of T.

follows the exemplar more closely, producing a rather unusual joining: i c!6 Sravo[46

oogia..

These examples may suffice to show that an identification of T. with Planudes

meets with considerable difficulties. Another objection to Planudes' authorship ofthe Vincent translation is the passage on Dido (95). It seems rather remarkable that

the translator of Dido's letter to Aeneas in the Heroides of Ovid gives this clumsy

piece of information, that, in principle based on Malalas (p. 162,9 ff') or better

Cedrenus (I245,19), is even deteriorated by the assertion that Dido before leaving

Tyrus had Pygmalion killed. It is, of course, possible that this remark on Dido was

inierpolated by someone during the transmission of this Vincent translation. In that

.ur. ih. remark on Dido's death in Spec. Doct.V 48 cannot be made responsible for

this insertion. If Planudes should, nevertheless, be the translator of the Vincent text,

then he must have made this translation before he made the great translations which

made him famous, a circumstance which would imply that he found the Vincent

text or the extract already in Constantinople.

NOTES

I Sternbach wrongly read ix rdiv "Axcc,rpoq. I wish to express my cordial thanks to my

colleague Mr. J.M.M. Hermans, who carefully inspected the ms. again, enabling me to

"o....t some of Sternbach's readings and/or conclusions. See further note 4. Abbrevia'

tions of Classical Latin authors and their works follow the system of the Oxford Latin

Dictionary. Other abbreviated forms are chosen in a way which contributes to clarity.

2 Sternbach 1900:401 note I3 Sternbach 1900: 402 note 4: ad manus est editio anni 1624: etc.

4 Here follows some further information about the text in the ms., as provided by Mr.

Hermans. The title is written in red and runs: * ix to0 &xrup,,c,tracvuxoU pr,pllou: : 225v,

4th line from bclow. The first letter of each saying is also in rcd, but the text is continuous,

cxccpt for sgme white 1[tcr 2. Rcd is lacking in 25, 33, superfluous ('l) in 56 :iiropoq snd

n"ru)1,r,80 t,, Some lemmuts havc traces of rasura:2 'rtv in &p,aptavcv, &14 in &yat),,{, -tr

in tpofll &vtlponoe r llr6e Bte mo$tly noted as nomins 3acra. lottv etc, und some endings e,g,

-;qFF,f 're'!4wllFrilFs

irt (rrv iu'c ollcn writtctt itt ligult/r(r, Rclcvttnt rtririlnkcs in Stcrntr$eh't lext ot'ul,lwrutu,tu il icus itrc: ( tcxt: ) .5 ri, p'i pltvttv,.53 yuvarxi6 &xpa rlic lpaor.{c, l{ I t.trl,c kluh,l. f 2 ,ilpc"1/,va, 90fnr.((nunrisprint).94thcwordtvisnotintherrrs,.(cp. vlt,:)6lorlvf lottvthclns.hlstrnly a ligaturc with acccnt,22 ot'gr.,n{c wits in lirct u eorrection. th€ ft1, has l,rltorqq,lgucss Scvrorri€, 36 thc ms. has gpovei and dvlpo{, .52 thc nrs, hnn lpflll{ct, 92 i)] xai the ms.has ii, 97 (ou?ei) the third letter is a g not o p, lbr /rd,vov r |,rvrrv (not 6XIov) .see mycommcntary ad loc. The text ends 228r, l. 7 .

5 ln this respect, I have consulted (microfilms of) two mss., which contgln selections fromIhe Speculum Doctrinale,l. ms. HB III 35 of the Stuttgtrrt W0rtemborlor Landesbiblio-thek, XIII-XIVIh c., 2. Basel B/IX 6, Universitetsbibliothek XlVth 0, Both mss. showthat several kinds of selections from the work of Vinccnt have boen made. The mss.mentioned here distinguish themselves from the thcorctic$l modol of th€ Sternbach-textsin any case in that they copy the names of the classical and rncdlovalsulhors from whomthe quotations have been taken by Vincent. In thc Crcck trnnrlatlont thcse narnes havebeen suppressed. On the other hand these mss. olten sclcct in u wny comparable with thequotations in the Sternbach-texts.

6 L. Weisgerber, Vom Weltbild cler deutschen Sprac'he. Diisseldorf 19t0, p. 40, quoted in:Handbuch der Linguisltk (HdL), unter Mitarbeit von Hildcgsrd Janrrcn zusammenge-stellt von Harro Stammerjohann, Mi.inchen 1975,p.517.

7 E. Koschmieder, Beitrcige zur allgemeinen Syntax, Hcidclbcrg 1965, p, 104, quoted inHdL, p. 517.

8 O. Kade, Kommunikationswisschenschaftliche Probleme der Trunilullon,ln Grundfragender Abersetzungswissenschaft, Beiheft zur Zeitschrift Fremdspru,hen2,Leipzig,pp. 3-19;diagram p. 7, quoted in HdL, p.521.

9 HdL p.521.l0 E.A. Nida - C.R. Taber, The Theory and Practice o.f Tranththn Lelden 1969 p. 99,

quoted in HdL p.523.I I Nicolaas Beets, Mazeppain Dichtwerkenl133-158. Amsterdnm 1t76,12 G.Goetz, Corpus Glossor'iorum Latinorum(CGL).Leipz.ig 1923, fomm, reprint Amster-

dam 1965, I-VII.l3 CGL VII s.v. petrer6: condisco, edisco, meditor (cf. .meleto) A p{tr,rp, dcclarnat.

VI s.v. cogito: ).o1i(opar,6 Borr,v iv$upoUpar, II 361,60

Bibliography

BABTNGToN-LUMBY I 865-1886Babington, Ch. and J. Lumby (eds), Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden Monachi Cesftensis,together w,ith the English translations of John Trevisa and of an unknown writer d'thcfifteenth century. London 1865-1886 (repr. 1964).

eannE 1966

Barr6, H., L'6nigme du 'Mariale Magnum'. ln: Ephemerides Mariologiae 16 (1966):265-288.

nesrrn 1946

Bastin, J., Le trait6 de Th6odore Pal6ologue dans la traduction de Jean de Vignay. In:Etudes Romanes dbdibes d Mario Roques par ses amis, colldgues et ilives de France.Paris1946:77-88.

BATATLLoN l98lBataillon, L.J., Les instruments de travail des predicateurs au XIIIe sidcle. In: Hasenohr,G. and J. Longdre (eds), Culture et travail intellectuel dans I'Occident mtdibval. Bilan de,s

'Colloques d'humanisme mbditval' ( 1960-1980 ) fondbs par le R.P. Hubert, O.P. Paris l98l:t97-209.

BIL LANovrcH-pRANDr-scARp e,rt 1976Billanovich, G., M.Prandi and C. Scarpati, Lo 'Speculum'di Vincenzo di Beauvais e la

letteratura italiana dell' etd gotica. ln: Italia medioevale e umanistica 19 (1976): 89-170.nl'arn 1977

Blake, N.. The English Language in Medieval Literature. London etc.1977.BossuAr 1946a

Bossuat, R., Les sources du Quinte-Curce de Vasque de Lucdne. In: M,tlanges F. Grat.Vol. l. Paris 1946:345-351.

BossuAr 1946bBossuat, R., Vasque de Lucdne, traducteur de Quinte-Curce ('1468).In: Bibliothiqued'humanisme et renoissance 8 (9aQ: D7-245.

BRACKERT 1968

Brackert, H., Rudol,f von Ems. Dichtung und Geschichte.Heidclbcrg 1968.

nuNr 1983

Bunt, G.H.V.. Alcxander and the Universal Chronicle: Scholnrs uncl Translators. ln:Noblc, P., L. Polak and C. Isoz (eds), The Medicval Allexander l,ege,nd trul Romunc'e Epit'.trs.rays in llottour ql'Dctvid.l.A. Pvxs. New York etc, l9t3l I 10,

BUNrz 1973

Buntz, H,, Ol€ cleat,cthe Alt'.\'ttndprtlichtung dcs Mlttchlfit , etuttgart 197.1.

).oyi(oporr.

8r,a).o1i(opar,

peprpvdr

Further: axLn'colt-at (4x), 3v$upoupcrr, (2x), 8ravo0pr.ar, (lx), lvvoo0pct (lx), pou).edopar, (l0x).l4 E. Gallo,, The 'Poetria Nova' and its Sources in Early Rhetorlcal Daelrlne, The Hague -

Faris 1971.

I 5 See H. Walther, Lateinische Sprichwdrter und Sentenzen dcs M lllelahcn ln alphabetischerAnordnung, Gottingen 1967,lV no. 30154, 30155, wirth literature,

l6 Mistakes based on confusion of I and 6 are signaled e.g. by D, HolwOrda in the CodexReginae Suecorurn 147 (l{rh,c.) with Aristophanes tcxts (roc lil,J,W. Koster - D.H olwerda, De Eustath io, T zetr,a, Moschopulo, Plantrdc A ri s tophulr CommentatoribusV. [n: Mnemosyne Series IV, Vol. VIII (1955) p. 199.

17 On Planudes'works and translations see: W. Buchwald t,o,, lbJculum-Lexikongriechi:scher und'lateinischer Autoren des Altertums und iles Mlltelalnru( 1982) s.v.; H.Hunger, Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzuntiner (M0nchOn 1978;, espec. I[,6tt ff.; W.O. Schmitt, Lateinische Literatur in Byzanz. ln: Jslvhueh *r iisterreichischenh'vzantinis<'hen Gesellscha./i 17 (1968) p,127 ff.i €, Wcndclin PW t,v, Planudcs;ctc.

I tl Sce P. ,Ovidi Nasonis H,eroides od. .Arthur Prlner, Oxford I 898, ropr, Hildesheim 1967,chaptcr Ill p. xlvii

It) See e,g. E.J. Kenney. A Byznntine Vcrrion of Ovld, ln: Hernpt gl ( l96t), 213 227, espec.p,224,

III 339,12II 272,39II 367,57

.

q "q

BYNrrMl9TTllynunr. C.W., Jesus ns Mothcr und Abbot us Mothcr, Some Themer in Xlllh ('cntury

Cistcrcian Writings. ln I I urvurd T'heokry4ifttl Rcvit'u' 70 (1977): 257 2114,

canv 1967

Cary, G., Thc Medieval Alexander. Edited by D.J.A. Ross. 2nd cdition. Cambridge1967.

r:HArrlr.oN 1982

Chdtillon, J., Le mouvement th6ologique dans la France de Philippe Auguste. In: Bautier,R.-H. (ed.), La France de Philippe Auguste. Le temps des mutations. Actes du Colloque

international organisb par Ie C.N.R.^S. (Paris, 29 septembre-4 octobre 1980). Paris 1982:

88 l-902.CHRIsTENSBtt 1905

Christenseil, H., Das Alexanderlied Walthers von Chatillon. Halle 1905 (repr. Hildesheim1969).

colrsn 1978

Colker, M.L. (ed.), Galteri de Castellione Alexandreis. Padua 1978.

coNc.q,n 1958

Congar, Y.M.-J., Henri de Marcy, abbb de Clairvaux, cardinal-|v)que d'Albano et lbgatpontifical. Roma 1958.

cosgntu l97lCoseriu, 8., Das Problem des Ubersetzens bei Juan Luis Vives. In: Bausch, K.-R. and

H.-M. Gauger (eds), Interlinguistica. Sprachvergleich und Abersetzung. Festschrift (...)M ario Wandruszka. Tiibingen 197 l: 57 l-582.

cRAMER-ppBrens 1977

Cramer-Peeters, E., Jacob van Maerlant. In: Wetenschappelijke Tijdingen 36 (1977):

4146.DAUNOU I835

Daunou, P.C.F., Vincent de Beauvais, auteur du 'Speculum majus' termin6 en 1256. In:Histoire litttraire de la France. Vol. 18. Paris 1835:449-519.

DAVIES I856Davies, J.S. (ed.), An English Chronicle of the Reigns of Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V, andHenry Vl,writtenbefore the year l47l.London 1856.

DE FALCO I955De Falco, Y ., Demade Oratore. Testimonianze e frammenti.2nd edition. Napoli 1955.

pr conoc 1973

De Gorog,D., Lexique Franqais Moderne-Ancien Frangais. Athens 1973.

DE GRnnr 1978

De Graaf, K.R., The last days of Alexander in Maerlant's'Alexanders Geesten'. In: Aerts,W.J., Jos. M.M. Hermans and E. Visser (eds), Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages. Ten

Studies on the Last Days of Alexander in Literary and Historical Writing. Nijmegen 1978:

23V266.I)E GRAAF I98O

De Graaf, K., Maerlant Historicus. In: Wie veel leest heeft veel te verantwoorden.... Opstel-

len over filologie en historische letterkunde aangeboden aan prof. dr F. Lulofs. Groningen1980:68-77.

Ds cna,qn 1983

De Graaf, K., Alexander de Grote in de Spiegel Historiael. Een onderzoek naar de

vertaaltechniek van Jacob van Maerlanl. Nijmegen 1983.

t)[scHAMPS 1970

Deschamps, J., Het Weense handst'hril't van de Tvveede Partle van de Spiegel Ititttoriael,Kopcnhagcn 1970,

t)ti vRil1s vtlnwtJi llt6ll)e Vrics, M, nnd ti, Verwi.js (ctls). Juuilt vun Muerlant's Spiegel Historiael, met de

.frugnu,ntt,n ilc,r lulcr lu,grt,tte,gtlc gcdceltcn, hcwerkl tloor Philip Utenbroeke en Lodewiit'

vun Vcllhul, 3 Vttls,. l,eiden lll(r3.Von Hcllwal<J, J1., M, Dc Vrics and E. Verwijs (eds), Jacob van Maerlant's Spiegel

Historiael. Tweetlc Purtie, bewerkt door Philip Utenbroeke. Leiden 1879.

(reprint of the 4 Vols. Utrecht 1982).

DE wArt-lv 1844145

De Wailly, N., Notice sur une chronique anonyme du treizidme sidcle. ln: Bihliothique de

I'Ecole des Chartes 6 (1844145): 389-395.DoNDATNn 1937

Dondaine, A., La bibliothdque du couvent des Dominicains de Dijon au d6but du

quatorzidme sidcle (1307). ln: Archivum Fratrum PraedicatorumT (1937): ll2-133.rccanp 1723

Eccard, J.G. (ed.), Corpus historicum medii aevi.Yol. l. Leipzig 1723.

f cHlnp 1708

Echard, J., Sancti Thomae Summa suo auctori vindicata, sive de V.F. Vincentii Bellovacen'

sis scriptis dissertatio. Paris 1708.

EDWARDS I978Edwards, A.S.G., Notes on the 'Polychronicon'. ln: Notes and Queries 223 (N.S. 25)

(t978\:2-3.nrcHBnr 1882

Eichert, O., Vollstrindiges Wtirterbuch zur philippischen Geschichte des Justinus. Hannover

1882 (repr. Hildesheim 1967).

EVEN-zoHnn 1978

Even-Zohar, I., The Position of Translated Literature within the literary Polysystem. In:

HoLMES-LAMBERT-vAN DEN BRoEcr 1978: ll7-127.FORSH A L L-TrAI NOBN I 850

Forshall, J. and F. Madden (eds), The Holy Bible (...) from the Latin Vulgate by John

Wyclffe and his Followers. Oxford 1850.

nowr-rn 1960

Fowler, D.C., John Trevisa and the English Bible. ln: Modern Philology 58 (1960):

8l-98.nowlsn 1962

Fowler, D.C., New Light on John Trevisa. ln: Traditio 18 (1962):289-317.

rowLsn 1970Fowler, D.C., John Trevisa: Scholar and Translator.ln Transactions of the Bristol and

Gloucester Archaeological Society 89 (1970): 99-108.

nowlpn l97lFowler, D.C., More About John Trevisa. In: Modern Language Quarterly 32 (1971):

2s3-254.rowlsn 1977

Fowler, D.C., The Bible in Early English Literature. London 1977.

GALLO I97IGallo, E., The 'Poetria Nova' and its Sources in Early Rhetorical Doctrine. The Hague etc.

197t.criRRrrsrN 1975

Gerritsen, W.P., Pollitcs, Pirrus en Penthiseleye. Compositietechniek in Maerlant's'Historie van Troycn'. ln: Junscn-Sieben, R., S. de Vriendt and R. Willemyns, Spel van

zinncn. Alhum A, vun lney,lJrusscl 1975: 125*136.(i ti R R I T'SF:N l9t I

Cerritscn, W,P,, Jaeob van Mnerkrnt und Geoff'rcy of Monmouth. In: Varty, K. (ed.), ln

t79,t ,.

Arlhurltut'l'upt,:slrl'.li,rsrl.t',t itt tttt'tttttt.l' ol' l,t'x'i,t'l'lnrpt, (ilrrsgow l9ltl; 36t{ lltlt.<;(ir.r.rin 1959

Giillcr, C., Vint'cnz von lleuuvui,r 0,1'. (um Il94 hi:r 1264) ttrul sein Musikftuklul irtt

Spcculum Doctrinale. Rcgensburg I 959.(iosMnN 1982

Gosman, M., La lettre du Pr|tre Jean. Les versions en ancien.frangais et en uncien occitan.

Textes et commentaires. Groningen 1982.

cosMAN (forthcoming a)

Gosman, M., Les Fais et Concquestes du noble Roy Alexandre: d6rimage ou remanie-

ment. ln'. Actes du IVe Colloque International sur le Moyen FranEais tenu d Amsterdam en

1982. (forthcoming).cosMAN (forthcoming b)

Gosman, M., Le 'Roman d'Alexandre en prose'. IJn remaniement typique. (forthcom-

ing).cRANSDEN 1977

Gransden, A., Silent Meanings in Ranulf Higden's 'Polychronicon' and in Thomas

Elmham's 'Liber Metricus de Henrico Quarto'. ln: Medium Aevum a6 Q977):231-240.cRANSDEN 1982

Gransden, A., Historical Writing in England.ll: c. 1307 to the Early Sixteenth Century.

London etc.1982.onpsN 1943

Green, W.M., Hugo of St. Victor, 'De tribus maximis circumstantiis gestorum'. In:

Speculum l8 (1943): 484493.cntcornB 1965

Gr6goire, R., Bruno de Segni, exbgite mbdibval et th1ologien monastique. Spoleto 1965.

cRUNDrvtlNN 1965

Grundmanfl, H., Geschichtsschreibung im Mittelalter.2nd edition. Gottingen 1965.

cuvrsrnr 1982

Gumbert, J.P., Manuscrits frangais m6di6vaux d Leyde. In: Mok, Q.I.M., L Spiele and

P.E.R. Verhuyck (eds), Mblanges de linguistique, de littbrature et de philologie midi4vales

offerts d J.R. Smeets. Leiden 1982 145-156.

cuzunN 1969Guzman, G.G., The Cambron Manuscript of the'Speculum Historiale'. In: Manuscripta

l3 (1969):9s-104.cuzrraeu 1974

Guzman, G.G., The Encyclopedist Vincent of Beauvais and his Mongol Extracts fromJohn of Plano Carpini and Simon of Saint-Quentin. In: Speculum.49 (1974): 287-307 .

cuzrunN 1975

Guzman, G.G., A growing tabulation of Vincent of Beauvais' 'Speculum Historiale'manuscripts. In: Scriptorium 29 (197 5): 122-125.

cuzrralN 1983

Guzman, G.G., Another volume of the Cambron Manuscript of Vincent of Beauvais'

'speculum Historiale'(Brussels, B.R. II94l). In: Scriptorium 37 (1983): ll2-119.Hnorcre 1908

Hedicke, E. (ed.), Q. Curti Rufi Historiarum Alexandri Magni Macedonis Libri QuiSupersunt. Leipzig I 908.

srcnl 1864Hegel, C. (ed.), Die Chroniken der deutschen Stiidte vom 14. bis ins 16. Jahrhundertlll: Dic

Chroniken der frtinkischen Sttidte. Nilrnberg. Vol. 3. 2nd edition. Leipzig ltl64 (rcpr.

Gottingen l96l).HEclir, 1870

Hcgel, C. (cd.), Dit,C'hnmikt'n der deutrchen Stddte vom 11, bls lns l6' Juhtlnnrdcrt Vlll:

I

l{

;

li

Dlt,(lvtttlken d* fihc,7p'1,,,,,,,,rrhrtt,ltihllr'.,\trc,r,r/ttrrg, Vtll, l.2nd editiorl, l,eipzig lll70

(repr. Gottinge rr l96l),ilti(itir, lltTl

Hcgel, C', (ccl,), Dlt,('hrutiktn lt,r tlt'utst'hcn Stiiclte wttt 14. bis itt,t 16. Juhrhutulcrt lX: Dit'

Chioniken dt,r oht,ruln,lni,rclu,n Stiitltc. Stussburg. Vol. 2,2ncl cdition. l,eipzig ltJTl (rcpr'

Gottingen l96l).HI]RKOMMEN I972

Herkommer, H., t)berlie/'erungsgeschichte der 'Siit'hsist'hen Weltt'hnmik'. Miinchcn

1972.HERZOG 1897

Herzog,S., Die Alexanderchronik des Meister Babiloth. Stuttgart 1897.

Hr LKA-BERGMEISTEn 1976

Hilka, A. (ed.), Historia Alexandri Magni (Historia de Preliis). Rezension J2 (Orosius:

Rezension). Vol. l. Zum Druck besorgt durch H.-J. Bergmeister. Meisenheim am Glan

1976.HrLKA-cRossue,NN 1977

Hilka, A. (ed.), Historia Alexandri Magni (Historia de Preliis). Rezension J2 (Orosius

Rezension). Vol. 2. Zum Druck besorgt durch R. Grossmann. Meisenheim am Glan

1977.HoLDER-Bccsn 1879

Holder-Egger, O. (ed.), Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores'Yol- 24' Hannover

1879.HOLMES I978

Holmes, J.S., Describing literary translations: models and methods. In: HoLMES-

LAMBERT-vAN DEN BRoEcn 1978: 69-82.HoLMES-LAMBERT-vAN DEN BRoEcr 1978

Holmes, J.S., J. Lambert and R. van den Broeck (eds), Literature and Translation- New

perspectives in Literary Studies with a basic Bibliography of Books on Translation Studies.

Leuven 1978.

HoRSTMANN 1887

Horstmann, C. (ed.), 'Mappula Angliae', von Osbern Bokenham (Ubersetzung aus Hig'

den,s polychr. i Cup. :l ff.;, Ms. Harl. 401I fol. 144. ln Englische Studien 10 (1887):

r-34.JENNINcs 1978

Jennings, M., The 'Ars Componendi Sermones' of Ranulph Higden. In: Murphy, J.J.

(ed.), Medieval Eloquence. Studies in the Theory and Practice of Medieval Rhetoric,

Berkeley etc. 1978: l12-126.JoACHIMSosN 1895

Joachimsohn, P., Die humanistische Geschichtsschreibung in Deutschland.Yol. l. Bonn

l 895.loneNsr 1980

Johanek, P., art. 'Flores temporum'('Martinus Minorita'). In: Ruh, K. (ed.), Die deutsche

Literatur des Mittelalters. Verfosserlexikon. Vol. 2. 2nd edition. Berlin etc. 1980:

7 s3-7 58.

r r;r-rv 1978

Kelly, D., Translatio Studii. Translation, Adaptation and Allegory in Medieval French

Literature. ln: Philological Quarterly 57 (1978): 287-310'

KNowLEs 1954a

Knowlcs, C., Jcan dc Vignay. Un traductcur du XIVe ridcle, lnt Romunia 75 (1954):

3s3 377.- ililili:rlF,l?.'r-,on and his two rrrcnch sourc€.! thr'€rnc end Playe ol'thc chesse

* ,,; l&r* ,[bflhh**,

'Anel

Tthe compositc tttttttuscripts ol'tlre two lirenclr lrurrslntiuns ol'thc '[,udus Scuccorurn', ltr:Mod<,rn Lunguage Rcvit'u,49 (19.54): 417 421.

KNowlris 1956

Knowles, C., A l4th--century Imitator of Jean de Mcung: Jean de Vignay's translation ofthe'De Re Militari'of Vegetius. In: Studies in Phitology 53 (1956): iSZ-qSg.

KNUVET-prin 1970Knuvelder, G.P.M., Handboek tot de geschiedenis der Nederlandse letterkunde.yol.l.5thedition.'s-Hertogenbosch 1970.

r nucEn 1976

Krriger, K.H., Die (Jniversalchroniken. Turnhout 1976.runnes 1980

Kurras, L., Excerpta Chronicarum. Der zweite Band der Platterberger-TruchsesschenWeltchronik. In: Zeitschrift filr deutsches Altertum und deutsche Liieratur 109 (19g0):8G89.

LANDFESrnn l9T2Landfester,F.', Historia magistra vitae. (Jntersuchungen zur humanistischen Geschichts-schreibung des 14.-16. Jhs. Genf 1972.

Llusspnc 1960Lausberg, H., Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik. Eine Grundlegung der Literaturwissen-schaft.2 Vols. Mrinchen 1960.

lavrs 1980

Lavis, G., Remarques methodologiques pr6liminaires d une 6tude de la synonymie verbaledans I'ancienne langue frangaise. In: Etudes de Phitologie Romane et diHistoire litttraireoffertes d Jules Horrent d I'occasion de son soixantidme anniversaire. Lidge 1980:239-246.

LeecFr 1937

Leach, M.E. (ed.), Amis and Amiloun.London 1937.rnclsnce 1953

Leclercq, J., S. Bernard et la th6ologie monastique du XIIe sidcle. ln: Analecta SacriOrdinis Cisterciens,s 9 (1953): 7-23.

lrclence 1964

Leclercq, J., Textes et manuscrits cisterciens dans diverses bibliothdques. In: AnalectaSacri Ordinis Cisterciensis 20 (1964):2.

r-ncr-Bnce 1977

Leclercq, J., Nouveaux t6moins de la survie de Saint Bernard. ln: Homenaje a Fray JustoPerez de Urbel.Yol.2. Silos 1977: 93-109.

roNcinn 1983

Longdre, J., La pr,idication m6di6vale. paris 19g3.r-usrcuaN 1972

Lusignan, S., Again the Cambron Manuscript of the 'speculum Historiale'. ln: Manu-scrip ta 16 (197 2): 32-34.

r-usrcNnN 1979Lusignan, 5., Prbface au'speculum Maius' de Vincent de Beauvais: rhfraction et dffiaction.Montr6al etc.1979.

ranNser-Lr 1982Manselli, R., Spiritualit6 et h6t6rodoxie en France au temps de philippe Auguste. In:Bautier, R'-H. (ed.), La France de Phitippe Auguste. Le temps des mitations. Actes duColloque internaiional organis| par le C.N.R.S. (Paris,29 septembre4 octobre t9g0).Paris 1982:905-926.

unlvrr.ln 1975

Melville, G., System und Diachronic. Unterauchungen zur theoretischen Grundlegung

geselrichtsschrcihcrrtlcr lrrsxin ittt Mittclultcr. In: Ill,rtorisrht's Juhrhurlt dery (iiirrc,tGesellltcltu.fi 95 ( l97,f ll 31 67 lnd .101t 341.

MriUs(:HriN 1743

Mcuschen, J,C, (cd.). Ilermunni(i.t'gunlis ordinis.fiutum mirutrilunr l;lorcs lemporum ( ,,, ),Leidcn 1743.

rr,tsvrn l87lMeyer, P., Doc'uments manuscrits de l'ancienne litttrature de Francc: un.servts dans les

Bibliothiques de la Grande-Bretagne. Paris 1871.

urYnn 1896

Meyer, P., Les anciens traducteurs lrangais de V6gdce, et en particulier Jean de Vignay. lnrRomania 25 (1896): 401423.

prevEn 1907

Meyer, P., Manuscrits frangais de Gonville et Caius College. ln: Romania 36 (1907):

522-528.urcHner 1970

Michael, 1., The Treatment of Classical Material in the 'Libro de Alexandre'. Manchester1970.

urNNrs 1979

Minnis, A.J., Late-Medieval Discussions of 'Compilatio' and the R6le of the 'Compila-tor'. In: Beitrtige zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur l0l (1979):38542t.

tr,uNNrs 1984

Minnis, A.J., Medieval Theory of Authorship. Scholastic literary attitudes in the latermiddle ages. London 1984.

u6r-lBn 1963

Moller, R. (ed.), Hiltgart von Hilrnheim. Mittelhochdeutsche Prosaiibersetzung des'Secretum Secretorum'. Berlin 1963.

vrouNrN 1963

Mounin, G., Les probldmes thtoriques de la traduction. Paris 1963.

tvtut-lBn 1846

Mtiller, C. (ed.), Pseudo-Callisthenes. Accedit Itinerarium Alexandri. In: Diibner, F.(ed.), Arriani Anabasis et Indica (...). Paris 1846.

Nlis-scsNsrorn 1974Nais, H. and J. Schneider, L'atelier Vincent de Beauvais. In: Revue d'histoire des textes 4(1974):438443.

NEwMAN 1980

Newman, A., Mapping translation equivalence.Leren 1980.

NoTERDAEME-scHA,tp 1966Noterdaeme, J. and H.P. Schaap, Nieuwe Maerlantproblemen. In: Tijdschrift voorNederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde 82 (1966): 8l-l19.

ounsst- 1924

Oursel, C., Un exemplaire du'Speculum majus'de Vincent de Beauvais provenant de labibliothdque de saint Louis.In Bibliothdque de I'Ecole des Chartes 85 (1924):251-262.

pnr-rraen 1976

Palmer, N., Eine deutsche Ubersetzung von der Vierten Partie des Spicgel Historiael. In:De Nieuwe Taalgids 69 (1976):102-110.

t,ARts 1836

Paris, P., Les manuscrits.frang'ois de la BibliothCque du Rol. Vol, 2, Pnris ltl36.PARKris 1976

Parkes, M.8,, The lnfluence ol'thc Concepts of 'Ordlnatlo'end'C'ornpilutio'on theDcvelopment of the Book, ln: Alcxander, J,J,€, tnd M,T, Glbroll (eds), MedlevulLearnlng and Llleruture, &lr,rrqr',t presented rc nlc/ffitd Jlllllam llunt, Oxfortl 1976t

il 5:t4t,

IrAUt.MiliR l97t{l)rtttlt'tticr. M., fltutlc sur l'i'tlt dcs corrntisslrrccs lrr rrrilicu clu Xltle sic\clc: Nouvcllcsrcchcrchcs sur la gcnisc du'Spcculum nllius'tlc Vinccnt dc Bcauvais. ln: ,!ri<,rtc. (uhit,rsde I'Atclier Vint'ent tlc Beuuvuis I ( l97tl): 9l 122.

pA u r.MniR' t oucen'r I979Paulmicr-Foucart, M., L'Atelier Vincent de Beauvais. Recherches sur l'6tat des connais-sanccs au Moyen Age d'aprds une encyclop6die du XIIIe siecle. ln: Le Moyen Age 80(1979):87-99.

pA u LM rriR-Foucenr l98lPaulmier-Foucart, M., Ecrire l'histoire au XIIIe sidcle. Vincent de Beauvais et H6linandde Froidmont. In: Annales de I'Est 5e s6rie,33 (1981): 49-70.

P A u L M I ER-Fouc ARr (forthcoming)Paulmier-Foucart, M., H6linand de Froidmont. Pour 6clairer les dix-huit premiers livresin6dits de sa Chronique. pdition des titres des chapitres et des notations marginalesd'aprds le ms. du Vatican, Reg. lat. 535. ln Spicae. Cahiers de I'Atelier Vincent de Beauvais4 (forthcoming).

pBsrsns 1964

Peeters, H.C., Nieuwe inzichten in de Maerlantproblematiek. In: Handelingen van deKoninkliike Zuidnederlandse Maatschappij voor Taal- en Letterkunde en Geschiedenis 18(t964):249-28s.

ppnnv 1925

Perry, A.J. (ed.), Dialogus inter Militem et Clericum, Richard FitzRalph's Sermon:'Defensio Curatorum' and Methodius: 'pe Begynnyng of pe World and pe Ende of Worldes'by John Trevisa ( ... ) . London 1925 (repr. l97l\.

PFrsrER 1976aPfister, F., Das Nachleben der Uberlieferung von Alexander und den Brahmanen. In:Kleine Schriften zum Alexanderroman Meisenheim am Glan 1916: 53-19. (Originallypublished in Hermes 76 (1941): 143-169).

PFrsrER 1976bPfister, F., Studien zu spdtmittelalterlichen deutschen Alexandergeschichten. In: KleineSchriften zum Alexanderroman Meisenheim am Glan 1976 228-253. (Originally pub-lished in Zeitschrft fil, deutsches Altertum 79 (1942): ll4-132).

PoLLAno 1903

Pollard, A.w. (ed.), Fifteenth Century Prose and verse. westminster 1903.pnrpsscn 1896

Priebsch, R., Deutsche Handschriften in England. Vol. l. Erlangen 1896.qunrrr-f cnnnn l7l9

Qu6tif, J. and J. Echard, Scriptores ordinis Praedicatorum.2Vols. Paris l7l9 (repr. Torinos.a.).

RICHARD 1965

Richard, J. (ed.), Simon de Saint Quentin, Histoire des Tartares ('Historia Tartarum').Paris 1965.

nosBnrs 1968

Roberts, P.8., Stephanus de Lingua-Tonante. Studies in the Sermons of Stephen Langton.Toronto 1968.

nosrNsox 1957

Robinson, F.N. (ed.), The Works of Geoffiey Chaucer.2nd edition. London 1957.nousn 1976

Rouse, R.H., Cistercian Aids to Study in the Thirteenth Century. ln: Studies in MetlievulC'istcrciun History 2 (1976): 123-134.

Rousti 1979

Rttusc, R,H,,'Florilcgia'and Latin Classical Buthor$ in twclllh und thirtccnth centuryOrl6nns, hti Viutet l0 ( lt)79): I 3 I 160,

,*hto*

Roustl Horrstr 1974Rourtc. R,ll, rurtl M,A, llousc. lliblicnl l)islinctions in tltc Tlrirtccrrth ('crrtury, ltt:Ar<'hivcl il'lll,rtnlrr lhrtrinuk ct I.itttruir( lu Mrt.t'('n Agc 40 (lt)74): 27 37.

Rousri- nousri lt)7t)Rousc, R,H, trnd M.A, Rouso, Prcuchers, F'lorilagiu uttil Sunkns: Studi(,t ttn lhe' Manipulus.fkrum' ol' T'homus d' Ireland. Toronto 1979.

RousE-RousE 1982

Rouse, R.H. and M.A. Rouse,'Statim invenire'. Schools, Prcachcrs and Ncw Attitudet tothe Page. In: Benson, R.L. and G. Constable (eds), Rcnaissant'e and Renewal in the T'we(l'lhCentury. Oxlord 1982: 201-225.

nur 1943

Ruf, P., art. Plattenberger, Johannes, d. J. In: Langosch, K. (ed.), Die deutsche L,lterulutdes Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon Vol. 3. Berlin 1943:901-902.

SAUL I98ISaul, N., Knights and Esquires: The Gloucestershire Gentry in the Fourteenth ('(ntut1',Oxlord 1981.

scHMrDrc tn 196lSchmidtgall, G., Vorstudien zu einer Gesamtausgabe der Alexandergeschichte du Mel$erBabiloth. Diss. FU Berlin 1961.

scHNErDEn 1976

Schneider, J., Recherches sur une encyclop6die du XIIIe sidcle: le 'Speculum Mtjrrr' tleVincent de Beauvais. In: Acad,bmie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Comptes rutclult ilt',tsbances de l'ann,le 1976: 174-189.

scHNErDEn 1968

Schneider, K., Der'Trojanische Krieg'im spriten Mittelalter. Berlin 1968.

SCHNELL I984Schnell, R., Prosaauflosung und Geschichtsschreibung im deutschen Spiitmittelaltcr. ln:Grenzmann, H. and K. Stackmann (eds), Literatur und Laienbildung im Spritmittelulterund in der Reformationszeit. Stuttgart 1984: 214-248.

SCHWINGES I977Schwinges, R.C., Kreuzzugsideologie und Toleranz. Studien zu Wilhelm von Tyrus,Stuttgart 1977.

senr 1972Seel, O. (ed.), M.Iuniani lustini'Epitoma Historiarum Philippicarum Pompei Trogi' (,,,),Stuttgart 1972.

SMALLEY 1952

Smalley, 8., The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages.2nd edition. Oxford 1952.

surrs 1983

Smits, E.R., Helinand of Froidmont and the A-text of Seneca's Tragedies. ln: Mnemos.y'neS. IV, 36 (1983): 324-358.

STAMMLEn 1963

Stammler, W ., Spritlese des Mittelalters. Vol. l. Berlinsrnnn 1973

Steer, G., Germanistische Scholastikforschung (III).(1973):65-106.

STEFENELTt 1967

1963.

In: Theologie und Philosophic 48

Stefenelli, A., Der Synonymenreichtum der altfrunziisisc'hcn Dichlc'r,sprac'he.Yienna 1967,

STEFFENS I975Steflcns, K. (cd.). Die Ili,vtoriu de pre'liis AIe.rurulri Mugtti R(2t'rt,tirttt./3. Mciscnhcim umGlan 1975.

srtlrNHoF'F l97tSteinhoff, Fl, H,, art, Meipter llnhiloth. ln: Ruh, K, (ed,), Dle ileutlt'ltc l"iterutur de's

u,n 115, ,,.

Mittclultut, Var.lit,rlt,rfu.rlktn, Vul, l, 2ntl ctlition, llerlin etc, l97l,l: 577-579,s'l'rlRNnnc:rr 1900

Stcrnbach, L., f)c Vinccntii lJclluvaccnsis Exccrptis Graccis. ln: (i,.rftri Musc'unt I'ikilo-giski 6(1900): 401416.

srrRNnncu l90lSternbach, L., De Vincentii Bellovacensis Excerptis Graecis. ln: Ceskt Museum Fiktlo-siskt 7 ( l90l ): l-28.

STUBBS I874Stubbs, W. (ed.), Memorials oJ'Saint Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury.London 1874.

STUBBS I887Stubbs, W. (ed.), Willelmi Malmesbiriensis Monachi De Gestis Regum Anglorum ( ...).Yol.l. London 1887.

sucurnn 1883

Suchier, H., Denkmiiler provenzalischer Literatur und Sprache. Vol. I . Halle 1883.

reLsenr 1942

Talbert, E.W. (ed.), A Lollard Chronicle of the Papacy. ln The Journal of English andGermanic Philology 4l (1942): 1 63-1 93.

rnvlon 1966

Taylor, J., The Universal Chronicle of Ranulf Higden. Oxford 1966.

rssrnnn 1975

Testard, M., La traduction du latin. ln: Probldmes littbraires de la traduction. Textes des

conf,trences prbsenttes au cours d'un stminaire organist pendant I'annbe acadtmique1973-4. Leuven etc. 1975:29-55.

rHouzELr-rsR 1969

Thouzellier,C., Catharisme et valdbisme en Languedoc d lafin du XIIe et au dbbut du XIIIesidcle.2nd edition. Louvain etc. 1969.

ULLMAN 1933

Ullman, B.L., A Project for a New Edition of Vincent of Beauvais.ln: SpeculumS (1933):3t2-326.

vAN DEN snoncr 1978

Van den Broeck, R., The concept of equivalence in translation theory: some criticalreflections. In: sor-uES-LAMBERT-vAN DEN BRoEcr 1978: 2947.

vAN DEN BRoECK-rprevBnn 1979

Van den Broeck, R. and A. Lefevere, Uitnodiging tot de vertaalwetenschap. Muiderbergt979.

vlN con p 1978

Van Gorp, H., La traduction litt6raire parmi les autres m6tatextes. In: solMES-LAMBERT-vAN DEN BRoEcr 1978: l0l-l16.

vAN MrERr-o 1939

Van Mierlo, J., De letterkunde van de Middeleeuwen tot omstreeks 1300. Met een

inleiding van G.S. Overdiep over Middelnederlandsche taal en stijl. In: Geschiedenis van de

letterkunde der Nederlanden. Vol. l.'s-Hertogenbosch etc. 1939: l-307.vAN MrEnr-o 1946

Van Mierlo, J., Jacob van Maerlant. Zijn leven - zijn werken - zin beteekenis. Turnhout1946.

vAN MrERro 1952Van Mierlo, J., 'Jacob, die coster van Merlant'. In: Verslagen en mededelingen van de

Koninklijke Vlcmmse Academie voor Tqal- en Letterkunde jan. 1952:49-70.vAN Mrnnlo 1957

Van Mierlo, J., De ontwikkelingsgang van Jacob van Maerlant. In: Verslagen cn medcde-Iingcn van dc Koninklijke Vluamsc Ac'ademie wor Tuul. en Lettcrkunde'april 1957:

I t9 137.

'-. '-,. .,,..1!

VIN('liN I lll' llf'AtlV,tll,\/rt'r'tiltnt filultt,r l6]4Ilihllotlrcrtr fi!uttill, I'h,*:,1tii lhtrgnnli, t',t' tr"dittt' l'ruulicutttrum (.,.), Sltct'ttlum Quudru'

plt,.t, Ntttyt\tle', l\trtrlnilr, llttnilt', llil;loriult' (...), 4 Vols, I)tltrili 1624 (rcpr. Graz

te64 te65).Vol.l,rrllin l9l2

Vollmcr, H,, Mutt,riulit,tt :ur llihclgcst'hi<'hte untl religiiisen Volkskundc dcs Mittelalters.

Vol. I, |: Ohc'r untl ntitIt'ltleut:;t'he H istorienbibeln' Berlin I9I 2'

voN DEN BRINoKIiN 1975

Von den Brincken, A.-D., Die Mongolen im Weltbild der Lateincr um die Mitte des 13.

Jahrhunderts unter besonderer Beriicksichtigung des'speculum Historiale' des Vincenz

von Beauvais oP. ln Archivfilr Kulturgeschichte 57 (1975): I l7-140.

voN DEN snlNcrpN 1978

Von den Brincken, A.-D., Geschichtsbetrachtung bei Vincenz von Beauvais. Die

Apologia Actoris zum Speculum Maius. In: Deutsches Archiv .fiir Erforschung des

M it telalters 34 (l 978) : 410499,wrsspv 1955

Wisbey, R., Die Aristotelesrede bei Walter von Chatillon und Rudolf von Ems. ln: Zeit'

schriftff)r deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 85 (1955): 30+-31 l. (repr. in: Wisbey,

R., Das Alexanderbild Rudolfs von Ems. Berlin 1966: 100-108)'

wrrrlrN 1976

Wittlin, C.J., Les traducteurs au moyen Age: observations sur leurs techniques et

difficult6s. ln: Actes du XIIIe Congris International de Linguistique et de Littbrature.Yol.2. Laval 1976: 601'611.

vouNc 1930young, K., The'speculum majus'of Vincent of Beauvais.ln The Yale University Library

Gazette 5 (1930): l-13.zecnsn 1867

Zacher,J. (ed.), Julii Valerii Epitome. Halle 1867'

rt7ruCflk