Greek Paleography by Inmaculada Pérez Martín
Segno e Testo, 2023
We offer a codicological and paleographical analysis of
Salm. 232 (one of the main testimonies of... more We offer a codicological and paleographical analysis of
Salm. 232 (one of the main testimonies of Themistius’ speeches) that
allows us to explain how the current codex was created. The oldest part is
dated by watermarks to the years 1310-30 and its copy is probably located
in Thessalonica; it consists of three codicological units on which four co-
pyists worked partly autonomously and - at least copp. 2, 3 and 4-, partly
on the basis of what was already copied by the others. The duplicate con-
tents of Synesius and Libanius show that the codicological units that now
make up the volume were copied independently and were put together
circumstantially perhaps by their possessor, cop. 3. At the end of the 14th
or beginning of the 15th century Ioannes Chortasmenos read its copy of
Synesius and reorganized the quires of the UC2. In the mid-15th century
Ioannes Sophianos restored the Paleologan volume, perhaps commissioned by the Bologna professor of Greek, Lianoro Lianori, who was its owner and whose coat of arms was included in the band of f. 1r. Like other Lianori’s codices, Salm. 232 was annotated by El Pinciano and preserved at the University of Salamanca.
Porphyra, 2023
I identify the name of the scribe of MS Escorial Φ-II-20, misread by previous scholars, in the no... more I identify the name of the scribe of MS Escorial Φ-II-20, misread by previous scholars, in the note added by Andreas Darmarios: Χεὶρ Κωνσταντίνου Σκορδιλίου τοῦ Κρητός. Skordyles/Skordylios is the name of a well-known Cretan family.
En su catálogo de 1970 Paul Canart daba a conocer la existencia del Vat. gr. 1910, un códice misc... more En su catálogo de 1970 Paul Canart daba a conocer la existencia del Vat. gr. 1910, un códice misceláneo cuya parte más antigua, que contiene las Parekbolai o «notas explicativas» de Eustaquio de Tesalónica a la Periegesis de Dionisio de Alejandría, fechaba en el siglo XIII. Puesto que en aquella primera etapa de su labor como estudioso de los manuscritos griegos Canart todavía no había llevado a cabo las investigaciones sobre la escritura griega que nos legó más adelante y, por ello, se enfrentaba a las dataciones de los códices que describía con los instrumentos disponibles en los años 60 del siglo pasado, nos ha parecido un justo homenaje a su inmensa contribución a los estudios de Paleografía griega retomar el análisis del Vat. gr. 1910 a la luz de lo que sabemos ahora, casi cincuenta años más tarde, de las escrituras griegas de época bizantina, en buena parte gracias a él.
Thirty-nine years ago, Professor Costas N. Constantinides wrote the most accurate and enlightenin... more Thirty-nine years ago, Professor Costas N. Constantinides wrote the most accurate and enlightening analysis of the ὕπατος τῶν φιλοσόφων, the only precise title held by an imperial professor in the Palaiologan period. 1 In the present paper written to honour Constantinides' professional career as a specialist in Palaiologan scholarship, libraries, schools and books, as well as in many other aspects of the Byzantine civilisation, I would like to return to a Byzantine teacher, John Pothos Pediasimos, whose career was outlined by our honorand and whose handwriting I myself identified. A recent contribution that questions my identification of the hand of Pediasimos has encouraged me to take up the subject again, which in 1982 raised some issues as well. In order to approach these without repeating the entire corpus of evidence on the hypatos gathered by Prof. Constantinides, the reader is referred to his book. I will add here a few new pieces of information and some considerations about the role of the Church and the court in Constantinopolitan higher education. In the second part of the paper, I will tackle once more the information we have of John Pothos Pediasimos in order to append some new pieces of evidence, especially the attribution to his hand of some notes in Par. gr. 2403.
This contribution offers a number of observa- tions on the reasons that lead a Byzantine copyist ... more This contribution offers a number of observa- tions on the reasons that lead a Byzantine copyist to modulate his writing and, in particular, on the influence that the writing of a teacher can have on that of his disciples. In the case of the scholar and professor Maximos Planoudes (ca. 1255-1305), we analyze his influence on the graphic manifestations of a collaborator of his, whom we call cop. Ed because of his presence in the Edimb. Adv. 18.7.15, and we reconfigure the role of both in Laur. Plut. 32.16. Likewise, we establish the features that define and distinguish the writing of a disciple of Planoudes, the cop. Ps, from that of his teacher, which resolves the paradox of the attribution to Planoudes of manuscripts copied on a paper whose date is later than that of Planoudes’ death (Marc. gr. XI.6, Par. gr. 2722, Ambros. A 119 sup.). Finally, it is also proposed to attribute to the cop. Ps codices traditionally attributed to the hand of Planoudes such as Vat. Urb. gr. 125 and Vat. gr. 1340, as well as some annotations in Monac. gr. 430.
This article is intended as an update on the codices in which the hand of George/Gregory of Cypru... more This article is intended as an update on the codices in which the hand of George/Gregory of Cyprus (1241–1290) has been identified. The review of these identifications confirms that most paleographers have accepted the interpretation of the evolution of the Cypriot’s handwriting that the author proposed in her 1996 book. Despite the absence of dated copies, but with the help of an overall study of the Cypriot’s codices, the 1996 paleographic analysis made it possible to distinguish a formative period in which George of Cyprus copied with other colleagues or alone works of oratory and philosophy in order, in many cases, to have a copy in his possession; in a second stage—but without an abrupt cut and without losing the distinctive features—, the copying of works is more selective and the handwriting of the Cypriot evolves towards faster and less emphatic forms. After drawing up the list of manuscripts copied by Gregory, the writings of two copyists are examined: the «Anon. Salm.» (one of the scribes of the Themistius MS. Salm. 232) and the «Anon. Chis.» (one of the scribes of the MS. Vat. Chis. gr. 12), which allow us to reflect on the influence of the Cyprian’s writing on a later generation.
Modalidad de contrato: Funcionario/a Régimen de dedicación: Tiempo completo Cargos y actividades ... more Modalidad de contrato: Funcionario/a Régimen de dedicación: Tiempo completo Cargos y actividades desempeñados con anterioridad Entidad empleadora Categoría profesional Fecha de inicio
Estudios bizantinos, 2020
The codicological and palaeographic study of MS Laur. Plut. 59.35, the most important manuscript ... more The codicological and palaeographic study of MS Laur. Plut. 59.35, the most important manuscript of the epistolary of Theodoros II Laskaris, determines that it is made up of three codicological units and that, despite the dauntingly changing aspect of the handwriting, only four hands transcribed texts and one out of them (scribe 1) copied the primary texts of the codex (the epistolaries of Theodoros II Laskaris and Synesius and a homily by Maximos Planudes). Initially the codex was possessed by Manuel Angelos, whose death around 1303 provides a terminus ante quem for its copy. For his part, scribe 4 has to be iden- tified with a subsequent owner of the manuscript, since he included in it private notes, dated between 1324 and 1325. Those reminders present him as an aristocrat who belonged to imperial and ecclesiastical circles and a man of letters with economic interests in the Sporades Islands. The current book was there- fore produced from before 1303 to before 1324-1325 in a stable copying environment, whether a private library or a public bureau. The last addition to the book were five letters composed probably by Manuel Angelos, that we publish here for the first time.
Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 2018
EVWUDFW 7KH DUWLFOH SUHVHQWV WKH HGLWLRQ DQG D GHWDLOHG GLVFXVVLRQ RI DQ DQRQ\PRXV WUHDWLVH RI HO... more EVWUDFW 7KH DUWLFOH SUHVHQWV WKH HGLWLRQ DQG D GHWDLOHG GLVFXVVLRQ RI DQ DQRQ\PRXV WUHDWLVH RI HOHPHQWDU\ DULWKPHWLF WKDW VHUYHG DV WKH VRXUFH RI WKH VRFDOOHG Letter to Khatzykes DXWKRUHG E\ WKH %\]DQWLQH VFKRODU 1LFKRODV $UWDEDVGRV 5KDEGDV $Q XSGDWHG VXUYH\ RI WKH H[WDQW HYLGHQFH DERXW WKH ORJLVWLF WUHDWLVHV FRPSRVHG LQ WKH 1LFDHDQ SHULRG DQG LQ WKH HDUO\ 3DODLRORJDQ HUD DQG D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH prima facie VXUSULVLQJO\ ZLGHVSUHDG SKHQRPHQRQ RI DSSURSULDWLRQ RI VFLHQWLILF WUHDWLVHV ZULWWHQ E\ RWKHU FRQ WHPSRUDULHV LQ ODWH %\]DQWLQH WLPHV ZLOO DOVR EH SURYLGHG +LV SURGXFWLRQ KRZHYHU ZDV DVVHVVHG LQ D ZD\ WKDW LV SDUDGLJPDWLF RI D JHQHUDOL]HG GLVPLVVLYH DWWLWXGH WR %\]DQWLQH VFLHQFH 3 7ൺඇඇൾඋඒ 0DQXHO 0RVFKRSRXORV HW 1LFRODV 5KDEGDV Bulletin des Sciences mathématiques e VpULH ± UHSU ,ൽ 0pPRLUHV 6FLHQWLILTXHV ,9 7RXORXVH±3DULV ± LQ IDFW SDVVHG WKH IROORZLQJ MXGJPHQW RQ 5KDEGDV ¶ ZULWLQJV ZKRVH HGLWLRQ KH QHYHUWKHOHVV SXEOLVKHG WZR \HDUV ODWHU ³/ ¶LQWpUrW GH VHV pFULWV HVW VXUWRXW GH PRQWUHU MXVTX ¶R pWDLHQW WRPEpV OHV KpULWLHUV GpJpQpUpV GX QRP KHOOqQH FHX[Oj PrPH TXL DYDLHQW DORUV 'LRSKDQWH HQWUH OHXUV PDLQV´ $FFRUGLQJ WR WKH WKFHQWXU\ 1HRSODWRQLF FRPPHQWDWRU (XWRFLXV GLYLGLQJ WKH XQLW GRHV QRW SHUWDLQ WR DULWKPHWLF EXW WR ORJLV WLF -/ +ൾංൻൾඋ HG $UFKLPHGLV RSHUD RPQLD FXP FRPPHQWDULLV (XWRFLL ,±,,, /LSVLDH ± ,,, ± ੮ıIJ ¶ ਥʌ ¶ ਥțİȓȞȦȞ >scil VXSHUSDUWLFXODU DQG VXSHUSDUWLHQW UDWLRV@ įȚĮȚȡİIJȑȠȞ IJȞ ȝȠȞȐįĮ İੁ țĮ ȝ țĮIJ IJઁ ʌȡȠıોțȠȞ IJૌ ਕȡȚșȝȘIJȚțૌ ਕȜȜ IJૌ ȜȠȖȚıIJȚțૌ IJȣȖȤȐȞİȚ ³VR WKDW IRU WKHP RQH KDV WR GLYLGH WKH XQLW HYHQ LI WKLV GRHV QRW KDSSHQ WR ILW WR DULWKPHWLF EXW WR ORJLVWLF´ $Q HDUOLHU GHILQLWLRQ RI ORJLVWLF²ZKLFK FDQ DOPRVW FHUWDLQO\ EH DVFULEHG WR *HPLQXV D VWFHQWXU\ %&( PDWKHPDWLFDOO\PLQGHG SKLORVRSKHU PD\EH D SXSLO RI 3RVLGRQLXV²GRHV QRW DOORZ GLYLGLQJ WKH XQLW 7KLV GHILQLWLRQ FDQ EH IRXQG LQ SVHXGR+HUR Def ± -/ +ൾංൻൾඋ ± / 1ංඑ ± : 6ർආංൽඍ ± + 6ർදඇൾ HGV +HURQLV $OH[DQGULQL RSHUD TXDH VXSHUVXQW RPQLD ,±9 /LSVLDH ± ,9 ± DQG LV DOVR SUHVHUYHG WKURXJK D GLIIHUHQW OLQH RI WUDGLWLRQ DV D VFKROLXP WR 3ODWR Chrm ൾ 6FKROLXP LQ ' &ඎൿൺඅඈ 6FKROLD *UDHFD LQ 3ODWRQHP , 6FKROLD DG GLD ORJRV WHWUDORJLDUXP ,±9,, FRQWLQHQV >Pleiadi @ 5RPD ,W LV SRVVLEOH WKDW WKH GRPDLQ RI ORJLVWLF ZDV H[SDQGHG WR LQFOXGH IUDFWLRQDO SDUWV DV D FRQVHTXHQFH RI WKH DGRSWLRQ RI WKH VH[DJHVLPDO V\VWHP LQ *UHHN PDWKHPDWLFDO DVWURQRP\ ,Q IDFW ORJLVWLF GHYHORSHG JUHDWO\ LQ /DWH $QWLTXLW\ DV D VXSSRUW WR PDWKHPDWLFDO DVWURQRP\ DQG DOVR SOD\HG WKLV VDPH UROH LQ WKH %\]DQWLQH SHULRG 7KH ILUVW NQRZQ WUHDWLVH RI WKLV NLQG LV LQFOXGHG LQ WKH Prolegomena to the Almagest DQG DPRXQWV WR WKH QRQUHGDFWHG OHFWXUH QRWHV RI D FRXUVH KHOG LQ WKH FLUFOH RI WKH 1HRSODWRQLF SKLORVRSKHU $PPRQLRV 7KLV WUHDWLVH LV D FRPSXWDWLRQDO SULPHU WR WKH Almagest D WLJKWO\ RUJDQL]HG ³KDQGERRN RI ORJLVWLF´ IHDWXULQJ DV LWV PDLQ WKHPHV DQ LQWURGXF WLRQ WR WKH VH[DJHVLPDO V\VWHP D GHVFULSWLRQ RI FRPSXWDWLRQDO DOJRULWKPV IRU PXOWLSOLFDWLRQ GLYLVLRQ DQG H[WUDFWLRQ RI DQ DSSUR[LPDWH VTXDUH URRW D SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI LQWHUSRODWLRQ WHFKQLTXHV DQG DQ H[SRVLWLRQ DERXW FRPSRXQGHG UDWLRV DQG UHPRYDO RI D UDWLR IURP D UDWLR $FFRUGLQJ WR WKH DQRQ\PRXV DXWKRU QR FRPSUHKHQVLYH SUHYLRXV H[SRVLWLRQ RI WKLV NLQG H[LVWHG² DQG LQ IDFW QR VXFK RQH KDV EHHQ WUDQVPLWWHG WR XV 6HH DOVR QRWH EHORZ 7KH EHVW LQWURGXFWLRQ WR *UHHN ORJLVWLF LV VWLOO . 9ඈൾඅ %HLWUlJH ]XU JULHFKLVFKHQ /RJLVWLN (UVWHU 7HLO Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Abteilung 0XQLFK ± &I WKH H[SOLFLW VWDWHPHQW RSHQLQJ Anonymus $ $අඅൺඋൽ /H SUHPLHU WUDLWp E\]DQWLQ GH FDOFXO LQGLHQ FODVVHPHQW GHV PDQXVFULWV HW pGLWLRQ FULWLTXH GX WH[WH Revue d'Histoire des Textes ± ± DQG LQ D VPRRWKHU IRUPXODWLRQ 3ODQXGHV ¶ Great Calculation $ $අඅൺඋൽ HG 0D[LPH 3ODQXGH /H JUDQG FDOFXO VHORQ OHV ,QGLHQV /RXYDLQOD1HXYH ± 'HVSLWH LWV WLWOH DQG WKH DXWKRU ¶V VWDWHPHQW VLPLODU WR WKDW RI 3ODQXGHV 3 &ൺඋൾඅඈඌ >HG@ ǺĮȡȜĮȝ IJȠ૨ ȀĮȜĮȕȡȠ૨ ȁȠȖȚıIJȚț %DUODDP YRQ 6HPLQDUD /RJLVWLNp >Corpus philosophorum Medii AEvi. Philosophi byzantini @ $WKHQV±3DULV± %UXVVHOV ± %DUODDP ¶ Logistic LV QRW D ZULWLQJ RI ORJLVWLF EXW D IXOO\IOHGJHG WUHDWLVH RI WKHRUHWLFDO DULWKPHWLF IRUPXODWHG LQ DQ LPSHFFDEOH GHPRQVWUDWLYH VW\OH %DUODDP PLP QR XQGLVSXWDEO\ WKH %\]DQWLQH VFKRODU EHVW YHUVHG LQ PDWKHPDWLFDO PDWWHUV DQG D PDMRU DFWRU LQ WKH KHV\FKDVWLF FRQWURYHUV\ GLHG LQ 6HH PLP QR 7KH XQSXEOLVKHG JUDPPDWLFDO V\QRSVLV DGGUHVVHG WR 3DXO LV SUHVHUYHG LQ WKH PLVFHOODQHRXV PV 3DULV %LEOLRWKqTXH QDWLRQDOH GH )UDQFH JU Diktyon II U±Y 7KH FRS\LQJ LV GDWHG 'HFHPEHU DP > @ I Y FHUWDLQO\ UHIHUULQJ WR II U±Y DQG SRVVLEO\ DOVR WR II U±Y DQG Y±Y SHQQHG E\ WKH VDPH KDQG +RZHYHU WKH VFULSW RI 5KDEGDV ¶ V\QRSVLV ORFDWHG LQ TXLUH QR Țș D WHUQLRQ FORVHG E\ WKH EODQN II U±U VHHPV HDUOLHU SHUKDSV GDWLQJ EDFN WR WKH PLGGOH ± WKLUG TXDUWHU RI WKH WK FHQWXU\ 7KH V\QRSVLV LV SUHVHQWHG DV D JUDPPDWLFDO FRP SHQGLXP ZKRVH DLP LV H[SRXQGLQJ WKH DSSURSULDWH XVH RI ZRUGV LQ RUGHU WR DYRLG EDUEDULVPV DQG VROHFLVPV 7KH H[SRVLWLRQ LV EDVHG RQ DQDO\WLFDO GLYLVLRQV RI WKH PDLQ JUDPPDWLFDO LVVXHV WUHDWHG E\ PHDQV RI ȝȚțȡȠȪȢ IJȚȞĮȢ ਫ਼ʌȠȝȞȘȝĮIJȚıȝȠȪȢ ³VRPH VKRUW QRWHV´ ,W VWDUWV IURP OHWWHUV ȖȡȐȝȝĮIJĮ DQG ıIJȠȚȤİĮ DQG JRHV RQ GHDOLQJ ZLWK V\OODEOHV DQG ZRUGV LQVRIDU DV WKH\ DUH
Euphrosyne, 2018
This contribution intends to elucidate the copying work of a Greek scribe, Antonios Kalosynas, bo... more This contribution intends to elucidate the copying work of a Greek scribe, Antonios Kalosynas, born in Crete, in the workshop of Andreas Darmarios in Venice and Trent during the years 1560-1563. Even if some manuscripts sold later to Spanish bishops attending the Council of Trent had been previously written in Venice, Kalosynas himself was transferred to Trent in order to copy texts industriously for Martín Pérez de Ayala, then bishop of Segovia. After an early probationary period in which he copied small parts of texts under the supervision of the workshop manager, Kalosynas started taking responsibility for copying whole texts. Contemporarily, he also began to use a different, more regular, upright and round script, at first to include titles and exlibris and then to write texts, in an attempt to improve his usual handwriting. We have described both handwritings and indicated their presence in the manuscripts copied in that period.
Scriptorium, 2017
Aucun témoin du texte de Strabon daté d’entre la seconde moitié du Xe siècle et le milieu du XIII... more Aucun témoin du texte de Strabon daté d’entre la seconde moitié du Xe siècle et le milieu du XIIIe siècle ne nous est parvenu. Face à cette lacune remarquable, le premier siècle paléologue marque à nos yeux un renouveau d’intérêt porté par les Byzantins pour le texte de la Géographi : Grégoire de Chypre et Maxime Planude en font tous deux usage, le premier en en recueillant des extraits , le second en annotant quelque peu l’exemplaire complet de Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BnF), gr. 1393, utilisé pour composer sa fameuse Synagogè. C’est aussi à Constantinople, dans les dernières années du XIIIe siècle, que fut restauré le témoin le plus important du premier tome, le Paris, BnF, gr. 1397 (Xe s.) . Une génération plus tard, c’est à Nicéphore Grégoras et à ses collaborateurs que l’on doit trois travaux de natures différentes sur le texte de la Géographie : la restauration effectuée sur le Par. gr. 1393, la compilation d’excerpta dans le ms. de Heidelberg, Universitätsbibliothek (UB), Palatinus gr. 129, et la copie d’un épitomé célèbre, le Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (BAV), gr. 482 (sigle E pour les éditeurs de Strabon), sur lequel on reviendra . Au début des années 1320 en particulier, le mouvement semble s’accélérer, dans une coïncidence de dates singulière : en 1321-22, Jean Catrarès copie à Thessalonique les Tables faciles de Ptolémée conservées dans le Vatican, BAV, Vat. gr. 175 , et l’on suppose d’ordinaire que la série d’excerpta de Strabon intitulée Σύνοψις τῶν κόλπων τῆς καθ’ ἡμᾶς οἰκουμένης aux f. 1v-8v du même manuscrit a été copiée à une date non éloignée de celle-ci ; précédant de peu la copie de Catrarès, le ms. Venise, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana (BNM), gr. XI.6 (coll. 1142) a été réalisé en 1321 dans un milieu post-planudéen.
Notre contribution a pour but de placer dans son contexte historique et philologique ce manuscrit, le Marc. gr. XI.6 (sigle D) , copie des livres X-XVII de Strabon faite à une date connue, en mai 1321, mais dans un lieu inconnu. L’étude codicologique, paléographique et textuelle que nous offrons ici, accompagnée de l’édition des scholies et de textes inédits du Marcianus, établit que le modèle de ce deuxième tome de Strabon, appelé δ dans le stemma de François Lasserre, était ou a vraisemblablement été dépecé au moment de la copie pour permettre d’effectuer rapidement le manuscrit. Nous mettons également en évidence le fait que le copiste principal, qui a organisé la transcription et annoté le texte dont il fut sans doute le possesseur, a probablement eu accès à un autre manuscrit de Strabon aujourd’hui perdu, ωʹ, copié au plus tard dans la deuxième moitié du XIIe siècle, puisqu’il a servi pour ses commentaires à Eustathe de Thessalonique, à qui il appartenait sans doute et qui semble l’avoir annoté . Nous essayerons de lier les renseignements textuels avec les données historiques sur le manuscrit pour comprendre cette partie de l’histoire du texte de Strabon, connaître les intérêts de ses copistes et de ses lecteurs, et proposer d’identifier son « maître de copie » à un élève de Planude, Georges Lakapènos.
Estudios bizantinos, 2017
The paleographical and codicological analysis of a valuable Greek manuscript, Vindob. phil. gr. 3... more The paleographical and codicological analysis of a valuable Greek manuscript, Vindob. phil. gr. 31, with Euclid's Elementa, Optica and Phaenomena, establishes that seven scribes collaborated in its copy at the end of the eleventh or beginning of the twelfth century and that their work is linked to the different models of Euclid they used both for the text and for the commentary. Several later hands added notes to the text, noticeably Maximos Planudes, whose handwriting we identify in the autographic addition on the upper margin of f. 144v (sch. Elem. X.223).
L. Del Corso, F. De Vivo, A. Stramaglia (eds.), Nel segno del testo. Edizioni, materiali e studi per Oronzo Pecere, 2015
Estudios bizantinos, 2015
Matrit. 4641, a manuscript belonging to Konstantinos Laskaris in the 15th century, is the most im... more Matrit. 4641, a manuscript belonging to Konstantinos Laskaris in the 15th century, is the most important copy of the corpus of rhetorical works by Choricius of Gaza. We offer its codicological and paleographical analysis, precising the dating of its first stage of composition at the end of the 13th century or the beginning of the 14th century and a second stage (perhaps from the 1320's) when Gabriel, known as monk of St George of Mangana in Constantinople, and an anonymous assistant completed the copy adding several discourses, hypotheseis (long titles or introductory texts) and protheoriai (explanatory comments), the index of contents, and a forged letter by Pho-tius which is simply the codex 160 of his Bibliotheca.
Bremen, Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, b.23 is a miscellaneous codex from the first half of ... more Bremen, Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, b.23 is a miscellaneous codex from the first half of the 14th century gathering different literary and astronomical school texts written by a student whose name, Isidoros, appears in f. 206v (only ff. 4-95v are by a second hand). The texts were copied by Isidoros in different periods and finally bound together as well as with independent leaves. One of them (f. 2r-v) is apparently the draft of a letter of Michael Gabras written and corrected by the author. Nevertheless, since the composition is full of syntactic mistakes and its copyist is Isidoros, it can not be an autograph but somehow be based on Gabras’ composition. Some mistakes suggest that the text was dictated and that Isidoros could act as Gabras’ secretary, while the presence of a small sentence from Cyropaedia I 4, 12 (one of the texts preserved by the Bremen codex) allows us to consider that Isidoros was also involved in the re-writing of the letter, a failed exercise that must be understood as aimed to the acquisition of composition skills.
Scriptorium, Jan 1, 2010
El trabajo precisa la actividad del "hypatos ton philosophon" Ioannes Pediasimos en Constantinopl... more El trabajo precisa la actividad del "hypatos ton philosophon" Ioannes Pediasimos en Constantinopla (1296-1303) e identifica su escritura en un manuscrito de los Elementa de Euclides, el Laur. Plut. 28.2. Pediasimos es identificado con el “Anon. R” que organizó la copia del Vat. gr. 191 y cuya mano aparece en otros manuscritos científicos y filosóficos.
in S. Lucà ed., Libri Palinsesti Greci: Conservazione, Restauro Digitale, Studio. Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Villa Mondragone (Monte Porzio Catone). Università degli Studi di Roma tor Vergata, (Roma, 2008), 2008
Se estudia un códice griego de la Biblioteca de S. Lorenzo de El Escorial (Escorialensis X.IV.6),... more Se estudia un códice griego de la Biblioteca de S. Lorenzo de El Escorial (Escorialensis X.IV.6), en parte copiado en el Salento en el s. XII/XIII reutilizando pergaminos anteriores de diversas procedencias, todos ellos escritos en griego, en mayúscula o minúscula, con textos teológicos y homiléticos. El Escorialensis X.IV.6 es un códice misceláneo, adquirido en Italia por Antonio Agustín y formado con fragmentos de otros códices localizables en el sur de Italia. Se trata de textos de uso eclesiástico, con la excepción de un iatrosophion (conjunto de compuestos curativos y su administración) para cuya transcripción se reutilizó el pergamino y que interesaba a Constantino Láscaris, profesor mesinés a cuyo círculo hay que vincular el códice misceláneo actual.
N. Tsironi et al. eds., The book in Byzantium. Byzantine and Postbyzantine bookbinding. Proceedings of the International Symposium Athens 13-16 October 2005, (Athens, Hellenic Society for Bookbinding, Institute for Byzantine Research, 2008), 2008
Byzantine bookbindings in Spain (Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional and Monasterio de S. Lorenzo de El E... more Byzantine bookbindings in Spain (Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional and Monasterio de S. Lorenzo de El Escorial)
Uploads
Greek Paleography by Inmaculada Pérez Martín
Salm. 232 (one of the main testimonies of Themistius’ speeches) that
allows us to explain how the current codex was created. The oldest part is
dated by watermarks to the years 1310-30 and its copy is probably located
in Thessalonica; it consists of three codicological units on which four co-
pyists worked partly autonomously and - at least copp. 2, 3 and 4-, partly
on the basis of what was already copied by the others. The duplicate con-
tents of Synesius and Libanius show that the codicological units that now
make up the volume were copied independently and were put together
circumstantially perhaps by their possessor, cop. 3. At the end of the 14th
or beginning of the 15th century Ioannes Chortasmenos read its copy of
Synesius and reorganized the quires of the UC2. In the mid-15th century
Ioannes Sophianos restored the Paleologan volume, perhaps commissioned by the Bologna professor of Greek, Lianoro Lianori, who was its owner and whose coat of arms was included in the band of f. 1r. Like other Lianori’s codices, Salm. 232 was annotated by El Pinciano and preserved at the University of Salamanca.
Notre contribution a pour but de placer dans son contexte historique et philologique ce manuscrit, le Marc. gr. XI.6 (sigle D) , copie des livres X-XVII de Strabon faite à une date connue, en mai 1321, mais dans un lieu inconnu. L’étude codicologique, paléographique et textuelle que nous offrons ici, accompagnée de l’édition des scholies et de textes inédits du Marcianus, établit que le modèle de ce deuxième tome de Strabon, appelé δ dans le stemma de François Lasserre, était ou a vraisemblablement été dépecé au moment de la copie pour permettre d’effectuer rapidement le manuscrit. Nous mettons également en évidence le fait que le copiste principal, qui a organisé la transcription et annoté le texte dont il fut sans doute le possesseur, a probablement eu accès à un autre manuscrit de Strabon aujourd’hui perdu, ωʹ, copié au plus tard dans la deuxième moitié du XIIe siècle, puisqu’il a servi pour ses commentaires à Eustathe de Thessalonique, à qui il appartenait sans doute et qui semble l’avoir annoté . Nous essayerons de lier les renseignements textuels avec les données historiques sur le manuscrit pour comprendre cette partie de l’histoire du texte de Strabon, connaître les intérêts de ses copistes et de ses lecteurs, et proposer d’identifier son « maître de copie » à un élève de Planude, Georges Lakapènos.
Salm. 232 (one of the main testimonies of Themistius’ speeches) that
allows us to explain how the current codex was created. The oldest part is
dated by watermarks to the years 1310-30 and its copy is probably located
in Thessalonica; it consists of three codicological units on which four co-
pyists worked partly autonomously and - at least copp. 2, 3 and 4-, partly
on the basis of what was already copied by the others. The duplicate con-
tents of Synesius and Libanius show that the codicological units that now
make up the volume were copied independently and were put together
circumstantially perhaps by their possessor, cop. 3. At the end of the 14th
or beginning of the 15th century Ioannes Chortasmenos read its copy of
Synesius and reorganized the quires of the UC2. In the mid-15th century
Ioannes Sophianos restored the Paleologan volume, perhaps commissioned by the Bologna professor of Greek, Lianoro Lianori, who was its owner and whose coat of arms was included in the band of f. 1r. Like other Lianori’s codices, Salm. 232 was annotated by El Pinciano and preserved at the University of Salamanca.
Notre contribution a pour but de placer dans son contexte historique et philologique ce manuscrit, le Marc. gr. XI.6 (sigle D) , copie des livres X-XVII de Strabon faite à une date connue, en mai 1321, mais dans un lieu inconnu. L’étude codicologique, paléographique et textuelle que nous offrons ici, accompagnée de l’édition des scholies et de textes inédits du Marcianus, établit que le modèle de ce deuxième tome de Strabon, appelé δ dans le stemma de François Lasserre, était ou a vraisemblablement été dépecé au moment de la copie pour permettre d’effectuer rapidement le manuscrit. Nous mettons également en évidence le fait que le copiste principal, qui a organisé la transcription et annoté le texte dont il fut sans doute le possesseur, a probablement eu accès à un autre manuscrit de Strabon aujourd’hui perdu, ωʹ, copié au plus tard dans la deuxième moitié du XIIe siècle, puisqu’il a servi pour ses commentaires à Eustathe de Thessalonique, à qui il appartenait sans doute et qui semble l’avoir annoté . Nous essayerons de lier les renseignements textuels avec les données historiques sur le manuscrit pour comprendre cette partie de l’histoire du texte de Strabon, connaître les intérêts de ses copistes et de ses lecteurs, et proposer d’identifier son « maître de copie » à un élève de Planude, Georges Lakapènos.
This paper contributes to the debate on the circulation of Aelios Aristides in Constantinople, among scholars of the early Palaeologan era; in particular in Metochites’ and Gregoras’ circle in Chora.
The author shows how Gregoras approached Aristides, and gives a thorough example of Gregoras’ reading and teaching practices by editing his annotations on Aristides’ Panathenaikos, preserved in Escorial Φ.Ι.18. In his reading of the Panathenaikos, Gregoras was looking not only for a refined text in Attic prose, but also for information about Ancient Greece. His curiosity about this historical period, which he no doubt saw as part of the past of Byzantium, was satisfied not only by reading ancient historiography but also works by the orators. The political and military history of the Greeks was the inspiration for Gregoras’ own Rhomaïke Historia as well as for all the thoughts and moral judgements expressed in his vast work. Gregoras did not use the Panathenaikos for his own study of the history of ancient Athens. His at times intense, at times partial and trivial notes were designed as an introduction for other people with less knowledge of the koine, the history of Athens, and its political virtues. This study suggests that Escorial Φ.Ι.18. was used as a schoolbook at the monastery of Chora.
An English translation follows the most important notes. Two Appendices, “The Panathenaikos’ excerpts in Heidelberg. Palat. gr. 129” and “Gregorios Kyprios’ marginalia”, conclude the article.
Michael Psellos († 1078 or 1081) holds a unique prestigious position in later generations’ minds. The versatility of his thought and his literary quality impressed other Byzantine writers, who did not forget his contributions to many fields of knowledge and put their admiration into words. Psellos’ immense legacy is marked by dispersion: he probably never organized his writings nor his correspon¬dence ever constituted a proper collection. The earliest testimony of a corpus with his letters and his rhetorical, theological and philosophical writings is Laur. 57.40, for a long time dated in the 15th century, but now correctly dated during Alexios Comnenos’ reign (11th/12th c.). There, some writings are indicated as Psellian, others specify their author with τοῦ αὐτοῦ and others are small pieces separated by a simple (:-), without title or author. This kind of anonymous collection is found also in Barocci 131 and constitutes one of the major problems in Psellian transmission. They are usually considered the basic materials used by Psellos’ teaching, “little more than very intelligent scissors-and-paste exercices” (Duffy).
The other big collection of Psellian writings, Par. gr. 1182, was also copied before 1204, the big watershed in Byzantine textual transmission. Curiously enough, nor the Florence nor the Paris ms. have been hegemonic in the textual tradition. We can assume that during the Palaeologan Renaissance both ancient collections were not kept in a very accesible place and therefore they were rarely copied, even if in this period the interest on Psellos’ writings is guaranteed by a big amount of copies. Their exclusive aim to collect Psellos’ letters and opuscula will not be shared by any later testimony.
The isolated transmission of a single Psellian writing is very frequent. It can flank a main text which is in the origins of the one written by Psellos. This is the case of his writings on Gregorios Nazianzenos’ Homilies, transmitted jointly, a twofold succesful procedure, since it allowed to legitimize Psellos’ thinking by the proximity of Gregory of Nazianzus and to guarantee its preservation next to one of the most copied texts in Byzantium, his Homilies.
The transmission of single Psellian works in miscellaneous manuscripts was also very frequent. The handy size of many writings forced them to be copied keeping company to other texts akin in content: for example, Psellos’ commentaries on Aristotle were usually transmitted with similar Late Antique commentaries. This is the procedure by which Psellos entered the extensive and long-running corpora of tools serving the study of Philosophy, Grammar or other disciplines and it must be explained as a success of his teaching and as a proof of his ascendant over his contemporaries and the next generations.
From 1261 onwards we will find miscellaneous manuscripts responding to the personal taste and requirements of a person gathering basic materials mostly for his legal, rhetorical or philosophical training. This user’s or collection’s profile fits to almost every manuscript with a corpus of Psellian writings copied after 1261. Their scribes are not intending to preserve an entire corpus of writings for posterity but to gather in a single manuscript a certain group of texts to make them available for its owner or reader.
Among those manuscripts, we study four of them connected to each other by their scribes or their content: Oxford Bodleian Barocci 131, Heidelberg Palat. gr. 356, Vat. Barber. gr. 240 and Vat. gr. 207. They are the material reflex of the high education in Constantinople after 1261. They are not school manuscripts since they dont look like copied by students under the direction of a teacher, but they reflect the interests awoken by this education in the students and later officials.
Psellos’ writings seem to have experimented new formulas of preservation, mainly by the combination of Psellos’ works with other opuscula from the same field of knowledge. His transmission shows that the first generation of Palaeologan scholars and professors had interests as wide as those of Psellos himself. The new copies of his writings they were responsible of, can be defined as individual acts of preservation of a legacy difficult to grasp.
[EN] Vaticanus graecus 228 is a Plato's manuscript written in Constantinople in the early 14th Century, probably in the years 20-30, by Nicephours Gregoras, known historian and polymath and some of his fellows-scribes. This scholar, a disciple of Theodours Metochites, studied deeply Ptolomaeus' texts, as is known, and his interest on harmonic intervals is perhaps in the start of the diagramma he included in the margins of his copy of Timeo. His scholar is arithmetic development of the indications given by Plato on the demiurges' creation of the world's soul (Timeo 358-36B,l:. it's based on Timaeus of Locri De natura mundi et animae and wrobablv on Proclus' Commentary, but it goes further in defining intervals and consonants. A good example, then, of the work Palaeologan scholarship could produce on ancient texts."
1. Introduction: Questions of (dis)continuity and the ‘why not’ question
2. The cursus studiorum
3. The educational context
4. Scientific books: The path of learning
5. Fragmenting knowledge
6. Outlining knowledge
7. Other pedagogical strategies
Les données rassemblées dans ces pages mettent en lumière, à nos yeux, un phénomène historique que Michel Kaplan et d’autres historiens ont abordé à partir d’évidences de nature distincte. L’inclusion dans la vie monastique de notaires qui ajoutaient au nombre de leurs activités la copie de livres est un aspect parmi d’autres de la sécularisation du monachisme. C’est ainsi l’occasion, une fois encore, de montrer que la compréhension correcte des témoignages écrits ne peut se passer de la réflexion sur leur contexte historique.
The introductory chapter focuses mainly on the modern vs Byzantine conceptions of science and to the semantic fields covered by this term, then and now, whereas the first two chapters analyse the Christianisation of pagan science and the beginnings of Byzantine science as well as its teaching during the Byzantine civilisation. Thereafter follow eleven chapters that cover the following fields: Logic, Arithmetic, Harmonic Theory, Geometry, Metrology, Optics and Mechanics, Theories of Vision, Meteorology and Physics, Astronomy, Geography, Zoology, Botany, Medicine and Pharmacology, Veterinary medicine, Science of warfare and Occult Sciences.
This volume, organized by topic, with essays by distinguished scholars offers the most comprehensive and up-to-date history of byzantine science currently available. It is an important editorial venture, aimed not only at specialists, including students of the history of Byzantine science, but the wider public, to all readers interested in medieval history in general.
Se presentan las distintas dinámicas de resistencia y conquista en el proceso que supuso la pérdida de Anatolia para el Imperio de Constantinopla, destacando las influencias entre las civilizaciones griega y turca y las adaptaciones a las nuevas realidades por parte de ambas."
Presenta los nuevos modelos de urbanismo de la ciudad oriental cristiana, redimensionada y a la defensiva en su nueva posición elevada desde el s. VII."
Trata la educación elemental, media y superior de la mujer en Bizancio. Menciona los tópicos denigratorios hacia la mujer culta, el fenómeno de la reclusión y la actividad intelectual de personajes como la princesa Ana Comnena, Teodora Raulena, Irene Cumno…
URI :"
[EN] This article presents a large group of sixth-seventh Century late Roman unguentaria retrieved in the recent excavations at Carthago Spartaria, modern Cartagena, Spain. These unguentaria are studied in their typology, chronology, context, function, stamps and distribution patterns; they increase the body of archaeological evidence about Byzantine presence in Spania, providing us with new information about the archaeology, history and economy of this territory during this period.
palaeography,
philology, and aspects concerning the Digital Humanities (DH),
historical (socio)linguistics (HSL).
While presenting specific case studies, our papers should contribute to creating a coherent intellectual journey. Medieval Greek is the key word and a unifying factor of our conference: we regard Medieval Greek from educational, cultural, linguistic, and the hermeneutical points of view.
Panorámica de los códices bizantinos, con ejemplos datados del s. IX al s. XVI, y un análisis preciso de un grupo de ellos, prueba de la riqueza de la civilización bizantina y la perfección alcanzada en la producción libraria."
This contribution aims to examine the Madrid MS in order to understand the meaning of the miscellany of its texts: a brief Byzantine chronography updated in the reign of Leo VI and partially coinciding with the Tables attributed to the Patriarch Nicephorus, then the initial fragment of the Synagoge of Hippolytus (3rd c.), one of the works that started the assimilation of the biblical computus into the Christian mind-set. Finally, after a brief transition between biblical history and Roman geography, a fragmentary Mediterranean periplus which essentially dates back to the Augustan era and was incorporated by Hippolytus into his Synagoge. Our research will conclude that these historiographical and geographical materials, despite their fragmented nature, were copied in Constantinople shortly after the intense recovery of historical texts promoted by Emperor Constantine VII.
Es un placer para mí responder a la invitación de escribir un prefacio a la traducción española de Byzantine Matters y saber que el libro será accesible para una audiencia nueva y más amplia. Estoy asimismo muy agradecida a mi colega Inmaculada Pérez Martín, que es la Presidenta de la Sociedad Española de Bizantinística, por su entusiasmo y excelente traducción. Compartimos el deseo de que Bizancio sea mejor comprendido, y lo sea por las razones correctas y no por las equivocadas.
La recepción de Bizancio ha tenido una historia turbulenta en el pasado que en parte sigue existiendo en nuestros días. Mi objetivo en este libro es abordar algunas de estas cuestiones y estimular nuevas formas de pensar sobre este tema y sobre las razones por las que nos interesa a todos.
El Imperio bizantino tuvo una vida extraordinariamente larga, de casi once siglos. Naturalmente, muchos fueron los cambios y variaciones de fortuna a lo largo de todo este tiempo. En su fase final, el mundo en el que vivían los bizantinos sufrió una transformación drástica. Se esfumaron los mundos antiguo y medieval en los que Bizancio se había conformado; en 1453, cuando Constantinopla cayó en manos otomanas, el Renacimiento italiano estaba en camino y la edad de la imprenta daba sus primeros pasos. Los intelectuales bizantinos eran muy conscientes de lo que Italia podía ofrecer, y los manuscritos que se abrieron camino hasta allí jugaron un papel fundamental en el redescubrimiento de la literatura clásica en Europa occidental. Paralelamente, en el este, el Imperio abbasí había cedido el lugar a los fatimíes y más tarde a los ayyubíes, y el Imperio mongol se había fragmentado. Los viajes de Marco Polo eran cosa del pasado y los viajes de Cristóbal Colón estaban a punto de empezar.
Desde sus orígenes mismos como mitad oriental del Imperio romano hasta su etapa final, Bizancio estuvo a medio camino entre Oriente y Occidente. En este presente en el que nos enfrentamos a las divisiones de nuestro mundo, es más necesario que nunca tener en cuenta a Bizancio y evitar la simple oposición binaria entre Europa occidental y el este.
La gran afluencia de público a algunas exposiciones recientes demuestran la fascinación por Bizancio y el alto nivel de interés popular en su arte y cultura. Sin embargo, un compromiso serio con Bizancio como sociedad es mucho más difícil de alcanzar. El estudio académico de Bizancio es todavía un campo minoritario, y hasta hace poco se ha caracterizado por su enfoque conservador y propio de especialistas. Esto está cambiando, gracias a que nuevas generaciones de estudiosos jóvenes están descubriendo por sí mismos todo lo que Bizancio puede ofrecer, a la vez que aportan nuevos enfoques a la materia.
Sin embargo, aún queda mucho camino por recorrer antes de que el estudio de Bizancio se convierta en parte integrante de una conciencia histórica europea más amplia. Queda por hacer mucho trabajo básico. La percepción de Bizancio como una sociedad embrutecedora y burocrática dominada por la religión ha de ser cuestionada con más energía así como contextualizada gracias a su comparación con otras sociedades. Pero las asunciones más viejas empiezan a ser retadas y la interconexión de Bizancio con un mundo más amplio empieza a ser reconocida. Tal proceso es esencial si queremos entender nuestro propio pasado y evitar una retórica peligrosa y simplista sobre el “oeste” y el “este”.
Los estudiantes y estudiosos españoles y el público de lectores españoles son ya parte de esta re-orientación más amplia y de la nueva apertura hacia Bizancio, y me complace poder contribuir a este proceso. Estoy inmensamente agradecida a la Princeton University Press en primer lugar y ahora a la Editorial Bellaterra y especialmente a Inmaculada Pérez Martín por conseguir que esto suceda.
La obra está, en efecto, organizada de modo cronológico, empezando por la época helenística y acabando en el Renacimiento italiano, cuando poco a poco los textos griegos se difunden gracias a la imprenta, un fenómeno que se prolonga durante el siglo XVI conviviendo con la actividad de copistas de origen griego no sólo en Italia, sino también en nuestro país y en otros. El manual pasa así revista a los distintos estilos de escritura mayúscula y minúscula, con estudios separados siempre que es posible de las manifestaciones “provinciales” de la escritura, desde Palestina y Egipto hasta el sur de Italia. Complementariamente, el lector puede encontrar un capítulo inicial sobre la terminología y problemas generales de la escritura griega y una serie de apéndices finales de gran utilidad sobre las abreviaturas (indispensable para aprender a leer la escritura griega minúscula), las notas cronológicas y de copia de los manuscritos y, especialmente importante, el estudio codicológico de los libros antiguos y medievales, desde el material de escritura hasta la encuadernación pasando por el pautado y los cuadernos.
La descripción de los distintos estilos de escritura está acompañada de un buen número de ilustraciones de manuscritos, muchos de ellos custodiados en la Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. Las imágenes son el complemento indispensable para que el lector adquiera los rudimentos de la datación y descripción de las escrituras griegas.
Es la primera vez que podemos disponer en castellano de un libro de estas características, que da las claves para el aprendizaje de una disciplina fundamental para el estudio de los textos y su transmisión.
The paleographical and codicological analysis of a valuable Greek manuscript, Vindob. phil. gr. 31, with Euclid's Elementa, Optica and Phaenomena, establishes that seven scribes collaborated in its copy at the end of the eleventh or beginning of the twelfth century and that their work is linked to the different models of Euclid they used both for the text and for the commentary. Several later hands added notes to the text, noticeably Maximos Planudes, whose handwriting we identify in the autographic addition on the upper margin of f. 144v (sch. Elem. X.223).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESUMEN ESPAÑOL
El análisis paleográfico y codicológico de un valioso códice griego que contiene Elementa, Optica y Phaenomena de Euclides, el Vindob. phil. gr. 31, pone de manifiesto que siete copistas colaboraron a finales del siglo XI o comienzos del XII en su copia y que su trabajo está relacionado con los diferentes modelos de Euclides que usaron tanto para el texto como para el comentario. Diversas manos posteriores añadieron notas al texto, en especial la de Máximo Planudes, cuya escritura identificamos en la adición autógrafa del margen superior del f. 144v (sch. Elem. X.223).
The codicological and palaeographic study of MS Laur. Plut. 59.35, the most important manuscript of the epistolary of Theodoros II Laskaris, determines that it is made up of three codicological units and that, despite the dauntingly changing aspect of the handwriting, only four hands transcribed texts and one out of them (scribe 1) copied the primary texts of the codex (the epistolaries of Theodoros II Laskaris and Synesius and a homily by Maximos Planudes). Initially the codex was possessed by Manuel Angelos, whose death around 1303 provides a terminus ante quem for its copy. For his part, scribe 4 has to be identified with a subsequent owner of the manuscript, since he included in it private notes, dated between 1324 and 1325. Those reminders present him as an aristocrat who belonged to imperial and ecclesiastical circles and a man of letters with economic interests in the Sporades Islands. The current book was therefore produced from before 1303 to before 1324-1325 in a stable copying environment, whether a private library or a public bureau. The last addition to the book were five letters composed probably by Manuel Angelos, that we publish here for the first time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESUMEN ESPAÑOL
El estudio codicológico y paleográfico del Laur. Plut. 59.35, el manuscrito más importante del epistolario de Teodoro II Láscaris, determina que está formado por tres unidades de copia y que, a pesar del aspecto general cambiante de la escritura, solo cuatro manos transcribieron textos y de ellas solo una (cop. 1) copió los textos primarios del códice (los epistolarios de Teodoro II Láscaris y Sinesio y una homilía de Máximo Planudes). Inicialmente, el códice fue propiedad de Manuel Ángelos, cuya muerte hacia 1303 proporciona un terminus ante quem para su copia. Por su parte, el cop. 4 ha de identificarse con un posterior propietario del manuscrito, ya que, en él, aparte de dos poemas en ff. 185v-186, incluyó notas privadas, fechadas entre 1324 y 1325, que lo presentan como un aristócrata que formaba parte de los cír-culos imperiales y eclesiásticos y un hombre de letras con intereses económicos en las islas Espóradas. El volumen actual fue, por tanto, producido desde antes de ca. 1303 hasta antes de 1324-1325 en un entorno estable de copia, ya sea este una biblioteca privada o unas oficinas públicas. El último añadido al libro fueron cinco cartas compuestas probablemente por Manuel Ángelos, que editamos aquí por vez primera.