Cicero's books more

Cicero’s Books and the "Giessener Verres" Jacqueline Austin August 2008 Cicero’s Books and the "Giessener Verres"........................................1 Jacqueline Austin................................................................................1 August 2008.......................................................................................1 Prologue..............................................................................................3 Tiro and Texts......................................................................................5 The script............................................................................................9 The Form of the Roll...........................................................................12 Books and Slaves...............................................................................15 The Verso..........................................................................................17 Cicero and his Manuscripts.................................................................23 Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 2 Prologue Nearly 30 years ago now in 1979 Richard Seider wrote a description, in pessimistic terms, of the small piece of papyrus that he called "Das Giessener Verresfragment".1 Since I use the passage in some detail in what follows, I reproduce it in full here below. Seider wrote: “Roman script of the Julio-Claudian era P. Iand. 90, Fragment of a papyrus roll Recto: In Verrem II.2.3-4 Verso: Remains of some letters, slave names Provenance: Presumably Egypt Location of find: ? s.i1/2 AD. Nothing is known of the findspot and history of the oldest fragment of a Cicero manuscript (P. Iand. 90). The papyrus was acquired in 1926 in Medînet el-Faijûm. It comes from a time in which a direct copy of a Tironian publication of Cicero’s work would still have been possible. The fragment preserves a non-corrupted text. The carefully placed punctuation marks attest a good textual tradition. The interpunctio is consistent; an apex occurs occasionally over long vowels. The scribe left approximately 1 cm. between the written lines. Sadly, only the top part of a single column with the ends of 8 lines and traces of a ninth are preserved. The lines are uneven in length. The intercolumnar space may have been about 4 cm. in breadth. The papyrus is about 16 cm. high and 19 cm. wide. The width of the whole writing space of a column – about 24 cm. (lines of 1 Giessen, Hochschulbibl. Papyrus Iandana 90 (Inv. 210); see (Seider: 1979). An image of the papyrus is on the Giessen Hochschule website at: http://digibib.ub.uni-giessen.de/cgi-bin/populo/pap.pl. It is catalogued in (Gundel: 1977, 36) online at: http://bibd.uni-giessen.de/pub/kbgi39/kbgipap39-036.html. I visited the Universitäts Bibliothek in Giessen to see this papyrus in the spring of 2007, and would like to thank the library staff for their assistance on that day. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 3 59-67 letters) – is particular to early Latin book rolls. The “Giessener Verresfragment” belonged to a stately, beautiful bookdealer’s copy. The upper margin is approximately 5.5 cm. and the lower margin would certainly not have been less. More about the layout of the roll, which was probably already damaged c. 100 AD, unfortunately cannot be known. The “Giessener Verresfragment” seems in any case, to have been cut from the roll at this time. The verso of the papyrus was then used for notes. Three slave names can be read here. That further traces of writing indicate that there was also a fourth slave’s name follows from the specification of the total “F. (fiunt or faciunt) mancipia IIII”. Above these, widely-spread ink traces perhaps indicate a heading.”2 So ended Seider’s enquiry, which no scholar has since taken any further.3 Yet reconsideration of this fragment today reveals this tiny 2 “Römische Schrift iulisch-claudischer Zeit / P. Iand. 90, Fragment einer Papyrusrolle / Recto: In Verrem II.2.3-4 /Verso: Buchstabenreste, Sklavennamen / Schriftheimat: Vermutlich Ägypten / Fundort: ? / 1. Hälfte des 1. Jhs. N. Chr. Über Fundort und Fundgeschichte des ältesten Bruchstücks einer Cicerohandschrift (P. Iand. 90) ist nichts bekannt. Der Papyrus wurde 1926 in Medînet el-Faijûm erworben. Er stammt aus einer Zeit, in der es noch unmittelbare Abschriften der Ciceroausgabe Tiros, des Freigelassenen des Cicero, geben haben könnte. Das Bruchstück überliefert einen unverdorbenen Text. Schon die sorgfältig gesetzten Satzzeichen lassen eine gute Textüberlieferung erkennen. Die interpunctio ist durchgeführt. Über langen Vokalen ist gelegentlich ein Apex gesetzt. Der Schreiber ordnete die Zeilen in einem Abstand von etwa 1 cm an. Leider sind nur der obere Teil einer Kolumne mit 8 Zeilenausgängen und Spuren einer 9 Zeile erhalten. Die Länge der Zeilen des Rollenfragments ist ungleich. Das Interkolumnium mag eine Breite von etwa 4 cm. gehabt haben. Der Papyrus ist ca. 16 cm. hoch und ca. 19 cm. breit. Die grosse Schriftspiegelbreite der Kolumne - sie betrug ca. 24 cm (Zeilen mit 59-67 Buchstaben) - ist frühen lateinischen Buchrollen eigentümlich. Der Giessener Verres papyrus gehörte einem stattlichen und schönen Buchhändlerexemplar an. Die Höhe des oberen Randes der Papyrusrolle betrug ca. 5.5 cm und die des unteren Rollenrandes war gewiß nicht geringer. Weitere Angaben zur Anlage der Verresrolle, die wahrscheinlich um 100 n. Chr. schon zerstört wurde, lassen sich leider nicht machen. Das Gießener Verresfragment scheint jedenfalls um diese Zeit von der Rolle abgeschnittten worden zu sein. Die Rückseite des Papyrus wurde dann für eine Aufzeichnung benutzt. Drei Sklavennamen sind hier deutlich zu lessen. Die Angabe der Summe "f. (fiunt oder faciunt) mancipia IIII" läßt erkennen, daß noch ein 4 Sklavenname, von dem Schriftspuren vorhanden sind, aufgeführt war. Darüber lassen sich breite Tintenspuren vielleicht einer Überschrift erkennen." (Seider: 1979, 103-113). All translations from German in this paper are my own. Translations from Latin are taken from the relevant Loeb editions, unless otherwise indicated. 3 Seider had earlier edited this papyrus in (Seider: 1978, No.1). See also his comments in: (Seider: 1975). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 4 witness to a once expensive copy of Cicero’s notorious “Verrine Orations” to be uniquely instructive. In particular, quite aside from its contribution to our understanding of the early Latin book roll and the circumstances in which these may often have been written, there are cogent reasons why greater antiquity should be claimed for the Giessener Verres than scholars have to date been prepared to acknowledge. Let me begin with the little that we know of the chronology of the composition and issue of Cicero’s text of his speech against Verres, for it is notable that in Seider’s considered opinion this particular copy of it is early enough to be itself perhaps copied from a “publication” of Cicero’s work by his freedman secretary Tiro. Tiro and Texts Cicero (106-43 BC) had spoken against Verres in 70 BC. We know that the time of the trial left to him for his prosecution oration was so short that he delivered orally only the first part of his text, the “Actionis Primae". Therefore the second day's speech, which he had probably prepared at least in draft, can only have come down to us in a written, presumably polished, form. A section of this particular part (the “Actionis Secundae”) of the text is preserved in the Giessen papyrus. Cicero probably prepared the whole oration for dissemination shortly after this legal success, but the finer details as to how this was done and how many copies of the text were produced under Cicero’s direct supervision must remain largely a mystery.4 In Cicero’s day, making the text of one's speeches available to one's friends and the interested public was well-established practice. Furthermore, there is plenty of evidence that Cicero's written works 4 Following McDermott who thought that this speech was “probably published promptly” (McDermott: 1972, 278). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 5 were not dusty rolls lying untouched on library shelves but widelycopied, actively read (and imitated) texts. Indeed it is possible that even in his own lifetime more people had read a Ciceronian speech than had heard one delivered.5 By chance, we do actually know a little more of the circumstances of the publication of this particular work than is usual for Ciceronian works, for Aulus Gellius (AD 130 – c. 180) tells us that he himself had read an apparently Tironian-made copy of the “Actionis Secundae”. This manuscript he valued most highly, writing that it was: “a copy of unimpeachable fidelity, since it was the result of Tiro's careful scholarship...”6 McDermott suggests that this already available text had at some time needed revision, and that Tiro had perhaps corrected a former edition incorporating marginal changes and amendments Cicero had made in his own manuscript copy. Tiro may also, McDermott proposes: “have checked references and made a few editorial changes” (McDermott: 1972, 278). Surely it is equally likely however, that Tiro had been responsible for the production of the first available “editions” of this important early 5 Cicero's writings came to constitute an important part of the intellectual inheritance of the Roman elite in the Augustan age and far beyond it. Over 100 years after his death, in c. 90 AD, Quintilian sought to institute the writings of Cicero as the prime model for study and imitation by students of oratory, writing: "... for posterity the name of Cicero has come to be regarded not as the name of a man but of eloquence. Let us therefore, look to him, take him as our model and let a student know that he has made progress when he becomes an admirer of Cicero." Inst. Or. 10.1.112. 6 "Libro spectatae fide, Tironiana cura atque disciplina facto". Aul Gell. Noct. Att. 1.7.1. Fronto in a letter to Marcus Aurelius also speaks of books “emendata” by Tiro (Ad M. Caesarem 1.7.4). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 6 addition to the Ciceronian oeuvre. Tiro (born 103BC or perhaps 80 BC), who also put into circulation several others of Cicero's texts, had long been Cicero's right-hand man in his literary affairs.7 Best remembered today for the use of his shorthand system, the socalled Tironian notes, Cicero also valued his literary judgment.8 Gellius tells us a little more on the subject. He writes that since he wished to check a particular reading, he had read Cicero’s text in more than one Tironian copy, such copies being: “of very trustworthy antiquity".9 This would seem good evidence then, that Tiro had at some time, copied (or had had copied) more than one copy of Cicero’s speech and that several of these manuscripts were still available in Gellius’ day.10 The script on both recto and verso of this fragment is small, (c. 3mm.) neat and has been rapidly and yet expertly executed. It is, as has been noted, the work of a skilled scribe, someone we would probably today call a “professional” (or “professionals”). Jean Mallon was in fact the first scholar to notice the importance of the “Giessener Verres” for the history of script, wrote that it is, 7 8 (Cancik et al.: 1996 - 2003). eg. Cic. Fam. XVI, 4, 3. (= SB 123); Att. 7.5.2, 10.2, 14.1. Tiro’s services to posterity were a collection of the letters of Cicero, begun perhaps in 45 BC, an edition of at least some of his public works, including In Verrem, the De Gloria, a collection of Cicero’s Ioci in three volumes and a ‘Life’ of Cicero. (Quint. Inst. Or. VI. 3. 5, X. 7.31; Aul. Gell. op. cit.) 9 “hoc enim scriptum in uno atque in altero antiquissimae fidei libro Tironiano repperi" (Aul Gell. 13.21.15). Zetzel, while commenting that, "Gellius' reliability... is generally good in such matters", is of the opinion the text Gellius saw was a forgery (Zetzel: 1973, 231 and Note 26). 10 This obviously begs the questions of a) how Gellius knew he was reading a Tironian copy and b) of the quantity in which books were usually copied at this period. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 7 “… more than likely that the vast majority of books of the Classical era were written in the same way… that is to say, in a “cursive” which is a “libraria” (Mallon: 1952, 173 & Pl.IV,1).11 By “libraria” he means a bookhand, and by “cursive”, rapidly written. Since ancient books were often very long and had to be repeatedly recopied, it makes sense that good scribes wrote fast. On both sides of this fragment, the writing is good and legible with attractive features. Notable in particular, is the delicate and yet marked careful serifing to the tops and feet of letters (<u> for example, <i> and <h>) and the evidence of fluid, easy hand movements attested to by the shooting, oblique top strokes that occur on several letters and are used in the punctuation marks. The care taken over the execution of the script, together with the obviously stately appearance of the whole original roll as attested to by the size of its generous margins strongly suggest that the Giessen “Verres” is no draft working copy but a fine and finished edition. Furthermore, all the comments made about the script of the recto side of the “Giessener Verres” also hold good for the writing on the verso side. I do not say that the two sides are written by the same scribe, but rather that the scribe of each side writes within the tradition of the same “Early Roman” style. On the basis of the lettering alone, there is no reason to distinguish chronologically the recto and verso sides. The era in which the Giessen fragment was written must obviously be a matter of hypothesis and guesswork. It used to be the case 11 "Il est meme plus que probable que l'immense majorité des livres de l'époque classique étaient écrits comme le Cicéron des Papyri Iandanae, … c'est á dire dans une 'cursive' qui est une 'libraria'”. By “libraria” understand “bookscript”. See also (Brunhölzl: 1962, 100). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 8 however, that there were no recognised examples of early Latin books with which either its script or the roll that contains it could usefully have been compared.12 This situation is however, a little altered today. The script Also writing in 1979, Jan-Olaf Tjäder set out his view of the progress through time of the alphabet of everyday use in early Rome, the roots of which he recognized in the “sgraffio” (scratched) letters, customarily used on wax tablets and other hard materials prior to wide use of papyrus (Tjäder: 1979, 33).13 Tjäder thought that use of papyrus as a writing material would have become far more common in Rome after the conquest of Egypt, from which it would have been easily obtainable, and in combination with which reed pens and ink would necessarily have replaced the customary stilus. Tjäder attributed changes in the contemporary letter forms entirely to the increasing adoption of this new equipment, and in his view, many early alterations in the letters result from changes in the ductus of letters that are a direct result of the new ease in writing ink pens and papyrus facilitated (Tjäder: 1979, 33).14 Tjäder’s observations were later acknowledged by another Scandinavian scholar Knut Kleve, a man who has spent many years working with the fragments of the Latin Herculaneum scrolls. Kleve, in his 1994 paper, set out his own view of the evolution of Roman writing on papyrus, as this had been informed by the extremely early examples of it that he was familiar with from the Villa of the Papyri at Herculaneum (Kleve: 1994). Kleve divides early Roman 12 Historically comparison has commonly been made with the letter of Macedo (P. Vindob. Lat. 1a (Seider: 1972, No. 4) but this is a similarity in certain respects rather than a striking affinity. 13 His term is: “l’alfabeto della usuale primitive romana”. 14 “il papiro … per l’evoluzione della scrittura corsiva é il solo importante” (Tjäder: 1979, 33, Note 2). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 9 bookscripts into four chronological divisions. The earliest of these is the one of particular interest here. This he calls “Early Roman” and dates to Republican times (“first century BC or earlier”), although he takes care to stress that this is a “relative dating” rather than a hard and fast rule (Kleve: 1994, 317).15 Its style he describes as: “… a rugged handwriting with an affinity to Pompeian graffiti” (Kleve: 1994, 317). The “ruggedness” is a feature that disappears in the later “Capital” styles, which he later describes as smoother and more regular in form. By this he presumably means to suggest that the later scripts are increasingly bilinear in form, having letters that sit within, as if constrained by, the head and baselines of the writing. In contrast, “Early Roman” makes a feature of both ascending and descending strokes that commonly overshoot the upper and lower registers in several letters. Kleve’s “Early Roman” is best illustrated amongst the fragments from Herculaneum on the remains of a bookroll containing a work of the Roman poet Ennius. This scroll, in Kleve’s estimation, is the earliest Latin book there preserved. In his analysis of the Ennius scroll, the oldest Latin book from Herculaneum that had at that time been analysed and possibly the oldest Latin roll yet found anywhere, Kleve describes the forms of its letters as: “the most archaic observed… in any Herculaneum papyrus… decidedly more archaic than those in P. Herc. 817” (Kleve: 1990, 6). He also describes it as having: 15 This phase is followed by “Pre-Classical Capital”, this latter being represented by the “Bellum Actiacum” (P. Herc. 817), to date the best known of the Latin Herculaneum papyri. Excitingly, Kleve estimates there are 30 Latin papyri in Naples written in the Early Roman script (Kleve: 1994, 319). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 10 “uneven letters of uneven size, sometimes cursive” (Kleve: 1990, 6).16 The unevenness in the size of the lettering on the Giessen fragment, with its bold shooting strokes, long <q>, tall <l>, descending <r> etc., might seem likewise to suggest that its writing style stems from within the earlier script phase, the phase of “Early Roman” and that it may also have been written in at least approximately the same period as the Ennius scroll.17 Kleve’s description of the Ennius manuscript contains both photographs and careful drawings of its letters, and while these are perhaps insufficient to permit proper judgement, his descriptions of several letters seem also applicable to those of the Giessen fragment. <e> for example, he describes as ‘squarish’, often having a “decidedly upwards tilt on the top stroke”; <s> also has an upwards sloping top stroke. Both letters can be compared with examples in the Giessen piece.18 Amongst the letters Kleve isolates as particularly ancient are the forms of <a>, <b>, <d> <o>, <r> 16 Kleve uses the word “cursive” to describe the script of the Ennius manuscript, and he probably means by this that the letters are to be contrasted with the more regularly “Capitular” styles of writing that come later. However a “cursive” script is a rapidly-written, running (currens) hand, and “cursive” is a term that should properly refer less to the form of the letters than to the speed at which they are written. A particular difficulty with this word occurs in the description of Roman writing, for which in modern scholarship two key terms have been used to designate its two principal stages of development as these were earlier perceived. These are: “Old” and “New Roman Cursive”. In this usage “Cursive” apparently does refer to the letter forms and not, or not only, to the speed at which these are written. For a good overview of the terminology here, see (Bowman et al.: 1983, 51-69). 17 The antiquity of the Giessen fragment script was noted by Bischoff, who described it as “written in a skilled cursive” (Bischoff: 1990, 57). Bischoff had also noticed the Herculaneum papyri, commenting that some of these too “approache[d] cursive” (Bischoff: 1990, 57 and Note 20). See also (Marichal: 1967-8). 18 Although in this last case the letter is titular in characteristic, and has been flourished in its word final position. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 11 and <p>. Again, very similar forms of these same early letters occur in the “Giessener Verres”.19 Several other parallels too, can be drawn between the lettering style of the fragments surviving from these two important early Roman books. The <a> for example, in both manuscripts has a third stroke, the small tick at the bottom of stroke two, which has not yet developed a cross stroke as in the more “capitular” styles (Kleve: 1994, 316).20 Also common to both the Ennius and the Cicero is the very small <o>. In his classification, Kleve describes the earlier form of <u>/<v> as “rounded. This is in contrast to the more pointed <u>/<v>, with its characteristic oblique first stroke, used in the later “Pre-Classical Capital” script of post-31 B.C. (Kleve: 1994, 317). Both forms of this letter are visible in the Giessen piece.21 The Form of the Roll The Giessen fragment is small, but since it preserves the ends of several lines and the right-hand margin, some detailed calculations as to the original length of the lines can be made. On the basis of the known text of the In Verrem, it can be calculated that the columns of writing in this roll were in excess of 23.5 cm. in width. To this, if an estimated distance between columns of (at least) 4cm. is added, the measurement from the left-hand edge of one column to the next was therefore 27.5 cm. The lines of writing that make up the width of the columns are long, (averaging 74 characters including interpunctio) and for balance the 19 I believe that Kleve has misunderstood the ductus of archaic <b>, which he draws in its later minuscule form with bow on the right. The letter is not visible in any of the photographs he reproduces in his article, and neither is there a <p>. 20 This form of <a> has been seen as particularly archaic (Marichal: 1988, 21). 21 The rounder form occurs for example, at the end of line 2 in “arbitrabatur” and in line 6, the second <u> in “cum manu”. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 12 columns are likely to have contained at least 23 lines of writing.22 The interlinear space of the preserved lines of c.13mm. gives a projected minimum height for the column of 28.6 cm. The visible top margin of the roll is 5cm. and this is also therefore a minimum measurement. The bottom margin was surely not less than this and would normally be expected to be greater. If 11 cm. is added therefore, for the upper and lower margins, the whole roll would have measured in excess of 39.6 (say 40) cm. in height. This large size indeed seems at first glance surprising, since it is certainly unequalled, as far as this can be known, by any other early Latin scroll of Egyptian provenance. Evidence afforded by the remains of the Latin library found at Herculaneum shows that it is a mistake to expect papyrus rolls carrying Latin texts to be comparable in format to those bearing Greek (as indeed Seider notes in his description quoted above). While published information on the size of the Herculaneum scrolls is as yet sketchy, Gianluca Del Mastro has recently published the following brief observations, based on his own experience of working with the collection. He writes as follows: “The Latin volumina on average, are taller than the Greek rolls and also the layout seems different sometimes: the columns are wider, the upper and lower margins are more generous (up to 6 and sometimes even 7 cm.), and the intercolumnar space too, is greater than that found in most Greek papyri” (Del Mastro: 2005, 194).23 22 Made on the basis of the preserved parts of lines this calculation is similar to that made by Lowe (CLA VIII, 1201). The lines are slightly uneven in length. 23 “I volumina latini, in media, sono più alti dei rotoli greci e anche il layout sembra talvolta differente: le colonne sono più larghe, I margini superiori e inferiori sono molto ampi (fino a sei e, talvolta, fino a sette centimetri) e anche l’intercolumnio è più ampio di quello riscontrato nella maggior parte dei papyri greci”. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 13 With respect to this generally greater height of the Latin rolls, he also recounts that a bundle of rolls uncovered at Herculaneum in the 18th century by an Italian excavator, Paderni, were then said to measure approximately 32 cm. in height (Weber: 1755; Del Mastro: 2005, 185). This may be large but is nonetheless still not quite the size of the “Giessener Verres”, although it certainly begins to approach it.24 There is another confirmation however, that the 40 cm. measurement may be approximately correct and that it may help elucidate the age of the Giessen papyrus. According to the Historia Naturalis of Pliny the Elder (AD 23/24 – 79), there were several standard papyrus measurements in use, or that had been in use, for the making of bookrolls. The largest of these, he tells us, used papyrus sheets a cubit (c. 44cm) in height and was known or referred to as a “macrocollum”.25 Pliny also informs us that in his day “macrocolla” were no longer in use since they had been found defective in the best preservation of texts.26 Pliny’s comments suggest then, that the projected size of the Giessen roll may point fairly convincingly to its antiquity. In looking for support for Pliny’s statement to strengthen this hypothesis, nowhere more appropriately could this have been found than in the work of Cicero himself. Indeed Cicero does in fact refer to “macrocollum” papyrus in two places, a fact particularly 24 The Ennius scroll is too fragmentary to allow an estimation of its size to be made. Its lettering however, is considerably larger than that of the Giessen fragment. Script size may be seen as a personal preference of the scribe on the particular occasion and does not affect letter form or style per se. The Ennius work is poetry rather than prose. 25 Nat. Hist. XIV, 78-80. 26 Pliny’s words are: “Sed ratio deprehendit vitium unius schidae revolsione plures infestante paginas”. I read “revolutione” rather than “revolsione” since otherwise I cannot make sense of this line. I understand Pliny to mean therefore, that use of rolls in this format was given up because the problem caused by their size was that should a roll be attacked in a single place by a worm, this creature’s progress towards the centre had the consequence that many columns were damaged (since most would extend right around the roll’s circumference). The problem would be thus lessened with a narrower column width. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 14 remarkable since no other ancient author barring Pliny himself is recorded as using this word. Cicero firstly in a letter to Atticus writes that he is sending him a copy of his De Gloria marked with additions and corrections. He asks Atticus to have this text copied onto a large-format papyrus (“macrocollum”) and then read to a suitable audience at dinner.27 Secondly, again in a letter to Atticus, he mentions having spent money on buying this size of papyrus, and implies that this was probably a fairly substantial amount.28 Both these instances reveal Cicero’s use, and presumably preference for this size of papyrus roll which he may have inclined towards because it was impressivelooking and therefore especially well-suited to use in the orallydelivered readings at which he presented new texts. In summary, both the form of the script of the Giessen fragment and the size of the roll that contained it point strongly towards its antiquity. Books and Slaves Analysis of Cicero's correspondence and other works, shows the important part played in his literary activities by literate slaves, both his own and those belonging to Atticus. All Roman aristocrats kept a slave "familia" and household slaves trained in book-related skills of various kinds were known as “librarii”.29 27 "hunc tu tralatum in macrocollum lege arcano convivis tuis”. Att. XVI.3.1 (= Shackleton Bailey: 413). 28 "… quoniam impensam fecimus in macrocolla, facilie patior teneri." Att. XIII.25.3 (= Shackleton Bailey: 333). The use of the plural here perhaps indicates that the work had been written in more than one roll. 29 Slaves offered for sale were clearly worth more if they were literate (Suetonius, de Vir Illus., IV). The prospect of manumission or higher services as a reward for literacy of various levels, provided a good stimulus to slaves to seek to acquire it. On slaves working in the Imperial public libraries see: (Houston: 2002); also (Vogt: 1973). On Seneca's research assistants see Quintilian, Inst. Or. 10.1.128. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 15 Probably the most important of the duties of a “librarius” was the copying of texts, works both in progress and complete, from the various stages they went through in the drafting process until their completion. They would then write them out in an appropriate bookhand in a papyrus roll. Copying (as distinct from 'composing') was regarded as a low status activity. “Librarii” also undertook other book-related duties. Some were skilled in the making of papyrus rolls and in their conservation. Cicero, for example, borrowed ''librarioli'' from Atticus to help as "glutinatores" in his new library at Antium (56 BC). These men were obviously repairing, and perhaps also recopying, the papyrus rolls that were Cicero's books (Turner: 1983).30 Some slaves acted as public (or more private) readers (“anagnostes”), delivering works orally to assembled listeners.31 Cicero records feeling what he regards as a sorrow greater than was proper for a slave at the death of one such reader, Sositheus.32 Another, who had charge of Cicero's valuable personal library, ran away with a considerable portion of it. In this case Cicero regretted the books noticeably more than the man.33 Cicero knew the "librarii" well and he knew they were important to him. He several times mentions by name individuals on his friend Atticus' staff who were clearly engaged in writing up his work. He was in the habit of sending his drafts to Atticus so that his men could copy it.34 Atticus' “familia” would have been exceptionally On the involvement of slaves in the literary activities of wealthy Romans, see importantly (Horsfall: 1995, passim). Cicero shows himself to be wary of commercial copyists and therefore probably shunned them (Q. Fr III.5.6 (= SB 25.6); also Q. Fr. III.4.5 (= SB 24.5). 30 Cic. Att. IV.4a (= SB 78); V. 3 (= SB 96); also: Cic. Att. XVI.6.4. (= SB 414). 31 Readers could also sometimes double as scribes, Diphilus for example, was both "scriptore et lectore”. Cic., De Or. 1.30.136. 32 Att. 1.12. (= Shackleton Bailey 12). On readers see: (Starr: 1991) 33 Fam. XIII.77.3 (= Shackleton Bailey 212). 34 Att. XIII.44.3 (= SB 336). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 16 useful to Cicero because according to Cornelius Nepos all the slaves there were trained in literary skills. Atticus’ large staff apparently consisted of "librarii" and a smaller number of specialists who had more advanced training.35 A sufficient number of well-trained staff were probably a luxury Cicero found it hard to afford although he clearly did have some men.36 Cicero as author was particular about the quality of the texts that appeared in his name.37 At times at least, he personally checked through his manuscripts, complaining at the detailed work this entailed.38 More commonly perhaps, this would have been his secretary Tiro's job. Tiro was familiar with Cicero's handwriting and was trusted to decipher it correctly.39 He was also, during Cicero’s lifetime, in charge of his master's book-copyists and other clerical or library staff, men who, as he himself also long was, were Cicero’s slaves. 40 The supervision of the work of such men was an important part of Tiro's duties and Cicero often relied on him in this respect. After Cicero’s death Tiro perhaps had sufficient wealth as a freedman to have kept his own small staff of slaves. The Verso Very little is now known about the acquisition of this Giessen-owned papyrus fragment. Prof. Karl Kalbfleisch bequeathed it in 1928 to the university as part of his personal collection, having himself 35 "Usus est familia, si utilitate iudicandum est, optima… namque in ea erant pueri litteratisimi, anagnostae optimi et plurimi librarii, ut ne pedisequus quidem quisquam esset qui on utrumque horum pulchre facere posset.” (Nep. Atticus 13.3.3); available in an edition and translation: (Horsfall: 1989). 36 Price of good copyists: Seneca Ep. 27, 6; Horace Ep. 2.2.5-8; Cod Just. 6.43.3.1. 37 Cicero sent his texts to Atticus for his comments before allowing himself to be satisfied with them (Att. XV. 13a. 3 (= Shackleton Bailey 417). Atticus sometimes had them read to his friends, also apparently for critical appraisal (Att. XVI. 2. 6 (= Shackleton Bailey 412). 38 Q. Fr. III.5.6 (= SB 25.6). 39 Ad Fam.. XVI.22 (= SB 185). 40 Tiro’s duties would very probably also have included training up younger slaves in book-making and book-related skills. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 17 earlier acquired the piece from scholar and manuscript hunter, Dr Carl Schmidt. Schmidt had apparently himself bought the piece from an unknown dealer in the Fayum, just one of many papyri this latter scholar obtained on the Egyptian market in the 1920s and 30s, most of which probably went for analysis to Berlin. It was first edited and published in 1931, under Kalbfleisch as editor, by Josef Sprey.41 That the piece had been cut from its roll, as Seider maintains, is certainly true; but the right-hand edge is quite sharp and very little frayed, a circumstance which possibly indicates that the piece had been parted from the rest of the roll rather more recently than 100 AD. Nothing more however, can now be known about that. On the fragment’s verso side are written, as Seider notes, the names of four slaves (one of which is no longer legible), the abbreviation “F” plus a point and the words “mancipia IIII”.42 The “F” is indeed best interpreted as meaning that the four slaves have made something (i.e. as “f[aciunt]”). There are some faint marks above the top name in the column which cannot by any ordinary means be any longer made out, but of which Seider commented (in the passage given above) that they perhaps indicate a heading. Seider seems to have been prompted towards his earlier rather than later estimation of the date of the separation of the fragment by the whole by the existence of this text on the verso side; use of the verso side of papyrus usually indicates its reuse after the text on the recto is no longer thought worth keeping. This particular assumption had been made first by Josef Sprey, and all later 41 (Sprey: 1931, 210ff), online at (http://bibd.unigiessen.de/pub/iand/piandv5/papiandv5-210.html). It has been most recently discussed by (Kuhlmann: 1994, 77 – 82)), online at http://geb.unigiessen.de/geb/volltexte/2006/3638/. The verso side has also been published separately in ChLA (ChLAXI: 1979, 492). 42 The slaves are owned under a particular type of slave contract, a “mancipium”, hence their title “mancipia”. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 18 scholars have followed him in this. Sprey was additionally prompted to make it by the fact that the writing of the verso runs perpendicular to that on the recto side. He took care to comment at the same time however, on the similarity of the lettering on both sides of the piece. This circumstance indicated to him that the verso was not written so very much later than the recto side had been.43 Taking this latter observation as my starting point, I began to consider the text of the verso as belonging in some way, to the book text written on the other side. A few calculations showed me that this might be a fruitful approach. On the basis of the part lines that survive, the original roll, I have argued above, was large in format, perhaps a “macrocollum” approximately 44 cm. in height. However, the remains of the text permit more extensive calculations to be made, particularly given the convenience of a digitally available text of the whole work on the internet.44 The entire “Actionis Secundae” is 19, 273 words in length (132,854 characters including “interpunctio”). In my hypothesis of 23 lines per 28 cm. column (made above), I estimate this text to have been contained entirely in a roll approximately 22 metres in length.45 43 44 “daß man sie nicht viel später als jene setzen kann” (Sprey: 1931, 212). At: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext %3A1999.02.0012;query=chapter%3D%23103;layout=;loc=Ver.%202.1 45 In this I assume the division of the separate books of the entire “In Verrem” into separate rolls, which on the basis of the above calculations would have been a practical necessity. Suerbaum has argued for the division of large works at Herculaneum into separate rolls (Suerbaum: 1992), (Suerbaum: 1994). This has long been accepted as likely practice for other ancient texts. Arns writes that “liber” in Jérôme’s day, was a semantic or literary unit regardless of its length and could be written into several rolls. He gives several examples of known works written in more than one “volumen” (Arns: 1953, 104 and 118). Kenney also assumes this (Kenney: 1982). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 19 The further interesting circumstance that now becomes evident if the division of the work into separate rolls is assumed together with columns 23 lines in length is that the section preserved on the “Giessener Verres” would have fallen at the start of the second column of the “Actionis Secundae” roll, and therefore very near to the beginning of the complete finished roll.46 Let me explore this idea a little further. T. Birt in his early study of the surviving evidence for ancient bookrolls draws on Pliny (Nat. Hist. XVI, 229) to maintain that in the earliest days these were often kept in wooden chests (Birt: 1907, 248).47 These items of furniture, he shows, are copiously mentioned and illustrated in Greek sources. They were sufficiently large to accommodate a number of rolls laid down flat, rather than stood up on their ends, for storage and safekeeping (Birt: 1907, 250 with illustrations). Wendel, discussing how identification of a particular roll was made in this case, writes that: “As long as the books were kept in chests, it was necessary that they showed their contents on the outer side, so that one could find the roll one was looking for” (Wendel: 1949, 24).48 This is a logical premise and one for which Greek rolls again offer considerable evidence; several literary examples are cited by Birt together with illustrations which show that for some books at least, a “title” (“epigramma”) appeared at the beginning of the roll on the 46 This calculation is predicated on the basis of 1668 characters (including “interpunctio”) in column 1 at 74 per line (= 22.54 lines). 47 See also Seneca, Tranq. An. 9,6. Del Mastro mentions that many of the books at Herculaneum seem to have been found in chests (Del Mastro: 2005, 194). 48 See similarly (Oliver: 1951, 243). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 20 outside where it would show (Birt: 1907, 237).49 The papyrological evidence has been conveniently listed by Luppe (Luppe: 1977).50 Luppe, in his efforts to calculate the precise placement of the titles on the verso sides of rolls, so far as these survive, found some variations in this. This would be locally expected of course, since the placement would depend on the length and thickness of the particular roll. In summary however, he writes that: “At the beginning of the roll, one or even two, columns precede the column which bears the title on its reverse… a title can be on the back of the second or third column in the roll” (Luppe: 1977, 99).”51 He points out with regard to the differences also that the way placement of a title falls out in practice depends too on the width of the columns and it is worth noting that these are generally much narrower in Greek rolls than are those of the “Giessener Verres”. The measurements he calculates show that the placement of the title on the outside falls between 17 and 20 cm. from the start of the roll, drawing an analogy between the size of a finished, rolled papyrus scroll and the ergonomic comfort in the hand of a wine bottle with a 24 cm. circumference (Luppe: 1977, 88). The length of a papyrus roll cannot usually be known with any certainty, but for the Giessen fragment I have been able to calculate (above p.??) that the original roll was roughly 22 metres in length. 49 “The earliest books show that the title when present, consisted of the simplest possible wording: the author's name, the title of the work, and, if the work contained more than one book, the number of the book" (Oliver: 1951, 244). On Cicero’s interest in what his own works could be called see Att. XVI,11,4 (= SB 420.4). 50 See also (Turner: 1987). 51 “Vor derjenigen Kolumne, auf deren Rückseite sich ein Titel befindet, können – am Anfang einer Rolle – noch ein oder zwei Kolumnen stehen”. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 21 This calculation, while approximate, can be accepted as at least feasible and not altogether unlikely.52 The slaves’ names on the verso of the “Giessener Verres” are written perpendicular to the right-hand edge of the second column in the roll.53 I suggest that Seider was correct that above them had once stood a heading and that this was probably a title. If this was the case, might not the phrase “F[aciunt] mancipia IIII” have then signified that the copying of the text on the other side of the roll was the work of these four slave “librarii” and that one of the team, not the same man who wrote the visible part of the recto text but his co-worker say in the endeavour, wrote their collected names under the title? This he did either for verification and identification purposes or simply because the “librarii” were proud of the work that they customarily did and had done in this case.54 The slaves’ names were obviously less important and subsidiary to the title information and thus placed underneath it and in a less obvious place. I calculate that the first slave’s name falls c. 43 cm. from the start of the roll. This means that the titular information could have been written anywhere between say 41 cm. to 30 cm. from the beginning. The roll might then have looked, when rolled up, something like the illustration in the attached diagram. We 52 Unfortunately a further factor that has a significant bearing on the roll’s circumference is the thickness of the papyrus itself. This is known to be highly variable and dependent on papyrus quality. As things stand it cannot be known for the Giessen fragment which is, like most ancient scraps, kept between glass. 53 One alone of the five examples listed by Luppe, a tiny fragment P. Oxy 2358, has the small title, probably written by the same scribe as the book, running perpendicular to the text on the recto. On the date of the latter its Oxyrhynchus editor E. Lobel, writes: “As well as I can judge from the small quantity of writing preserved both sides are to be dated in the second century [BC].” (P. Oxy. Vol XXIII.) 54 The documents and inscriptions of the late Republic/early Empire reveal the existence of many household educated slaves who celebrated their positions as readers, secretaries, copyists, stenographers, scribes and writing teachers. Kampen writes that such a phenomenon reflects a reaction against deracination and inhumanity and is a form of resistance to social order. Work or labour, gives a vehicle for a collective identity (Kampen: 2006). See also (Clarke: 2003, 128); (George: 2006, 23, Note 26). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 22 have no information at all as to what the title actually looked like and the script shown on the diagram is entirely hypothetical and based on the script of the recto. INSERT DIAGRAM We do not know either whether it could have been hidden under an overlap of the end of the roll which would then have been lifted slightly in order to read it when necessary, or placed so that it could be seen at a glance.55 As is obvious from its layout and projected size, the “Giessener Verres” fragment comes from what was once a luxury and doubtless very expensive, roll. It is of exceptionally large proportions and of considerable length. Its circumference must have been quite large whatever quality of papyrus was used. In the hypothetical illustration of the roll shown here, I have suggested a circumference of c. 38 cm. This might be thought be large, but it could actually be an underestimation. A roll of such a size can be held comfortably in a man’s hand, and given that the part held in the right hand diminishes as the reading progresses, this could be quite a manageable size to a practised reader. Alternatively, it may have been placed on a specially fashioned lectern during reading, rather than held in the hand at all.56 Cicero and his Manuscripts The suggestions made in the previous section are of course hypothetical rather than proven facts. However, several 55 If the end of the roll covered the title, this would have protected the writing from abrasion through wear, which might perhaps have been sensible. On the large series of unknowns about the form of early rolls, see (Kenney: 1982, Appendix 2). 56 On bookstands see (Wood: 2001); also (Cutler: 2006, 107). Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 23 propositions have been put forward in this paper and they may be thought more powerful collectively than taken as isolated ideas. I briefly rehearse them again. I have suggested that the Giessen “Verres” fragment may be an earlier witness to Cicero’s text than has previously been considered. This suggestion I have based principally on the archaic nature of the script, but also on the exceptionally large size of the roll that once contained it, this being a format for papyrus books that seems not long to have been sustained. I have also tried to sketch the context in which Cicero and his freedman secretary Tiro were accustomed to compose, write out and issue rhetorical and literary works. This information should be regarded as relevant background in support of the proposition made herein that the names of the slaves on the verso of this piece and the words once visible above them, are of the same era as the text on the recto side and an integrated part of the finished scroll. Thus far, a possible association of the roll of which the Giessen “Verres” formed part, with Cicero himself, or with his freedman secretary Tiro, is perhaps nothing more than one possibility among many. Yet there is one final key feature of the “Giessener Verres”, perhaps the most powerful yet cited, in support of a close connection of the fragment with Cicero himself, or at least with his trusted assistant. Seider, in his description of the manuscript given above, notes that there are no errors in the short piece of the “In Verrem” text here preserved and that the same has been carefully written.57 The fragment is certainly too small to allow any judgment of the consistency of the textual quality in the entirety of the work. The 57 The quality of the text of the Giessen fragment contrasts strikingly with that of late antique exemplars which are notorious for the poor quality of their texts. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 24 detailed punctuation is also worth noting: the scribe has separated words by placing points between them, long vowels are shown with apices and several other diacritical marks appear.58 It is probable that the whole roll had been marked up with such appropriate signs as to make it ready for oral delivery by a professional reader (a “lector”) and that The marks are not so much punctuation, as we would understand it, as indications to help emphasis, phrasing and rhythm. They were probably added by a “librarius” rather than Cicero himself.59 One in particular, of the marks used on this scrap recently caught the attention of Shane Butler: the sign generally interpreted as a letter <k> and thought to be an abbreviation for “kaput” (i.e. “caput”) (Butler: 2000, 10).60 Butler, in his PhD thesis, made a study of the historical evidence for marks of this nature, and shows that scribes as early as the 2nd century BC deployed features of layout to indicate major divisions or sections of text. He derives the term “caput” (or “capita”) from its use in legal documents and sees its similar function in rhetorical works as also there used, to indicate a major division of sense.61 For the Giessen fragment he argues that the annotator (probably the “librarius” himself) placed the “K” mark 58 On the history and use of punctuation in Latin manuscripts (including the Giessener Verresfragment) see (Parkes: 1992). Apices and other devices to facilitate reading are believed to have come into use c. 80 BC. Interpunction and punctuation in general began to fall into disuse in the late 1st century AD. For a recent detailed analysis of the punctuation in this fragment see (Butler: 2000, 12 & 118 and Note 39). 59 On readers in the Roman world see (Starr: 1991). Cicero mentions readers on his own staff and on that of Atticus, eg.: Att. I.12.4 (= SB 12); XVI.2.6 (=SB 412). Cic. de Or., III, 44, 173 - mentions points dividing rhythmical clausulae. Cicero was scornful about educated readers who relied on punctuation, asserting that the end of a sentence ought to be determined not by the speaker's pausing for breath, or by a stroke interposed by a copyist (“interductu librarii”) but by the constraint of the rhythm (Orator, LXVIII, 228) See also De Oratore, iii, 173. 60 Parkes categorically states that “K set off by points” indicates the beginning of a new “kaput” or head in the argument. He does not adduce any evidence for this, simply citing a 5th C. explanation of the meaning “caput” as a rhetorical term. He repeats his assertion in his glossary entry under “caput” (Parkes: 1992, 12 & Note 4, 302). 61 Other apparently similar marks occur in some other early papyri, e.g. P. Herc. 817, and the “Gallus Papyrus” P. Qasr Ibrim Inv. 78-3-II/I. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 25 before “denique” (l. 3) to indicate the beginning of a new “caput” or head in the argument. Butler then turns to examine Ciceronian manuscripts in their entirety, most of which are medieval, rather than ancient, books. He notes that many of these are "good" texts, having been well copied and produced. Furthermore, the late antique examples among them show extensive evidence of marks and highlighting features used to indicate, in particular, content divisions (Butler: 2000, 170). Most importantly for purposes here he finds that the sign that looks like the letter “K”, as is found in the Giessen fragment, occurs very frequently throughout the Ciceronian corpus, and in fact he is able to list a full 23 Cicero manuscripts that contain it (Butler: 2000, 191). Lest it be thought otherwise it is worth stressing here that this sign is not commonly used in manuscripts of any era. Amongst preMedieval books there is indeed only one other example, a copy of Virgil’s Aeneid of the 5th/6th century, and no other medieval examples are mentioned by Parkes or by Butler himself.62 Butler suggests that use of this mark should be traced back to Cicero himself, arguing that the particular marking practices used in Cicero manuscripts including the “K”, are too great a coincidence not to be evidence of a single influence, an influence which can only be that of the writer and his collected scribal team (Butler: 2000, 181). For Butler the “K” is an illustration of and a survival from an ancient textual tradition adhered to and practised by Cicero in his book-writing activities.63 The Giessen “In Verrem” I would suggest, was probably copied at an extremely early date, possibly within Cicero’s own lifetime. Its large 62 63 PSI 142 (Seider: 1978, No. 62). Presumably also shared by Virgil. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 26 format is unique amongst surviving early Latin rolls and may represent early roll-making practice; its script is more accomplished than many and the title on the verso points to an age in which bookrolls were stored in chests and not cupboards. The high standards used in book making and book copying preserved in the Giessen fragment I would suggest, represent the closest link that we have to the form of the book in Cicero’s lifetime and shortly thereafter. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 27 Arns, E. (1953) La Technique du Livre Après St Jérôme, Paris, Boccard. Birt, T. (1907) Die Buchrolle in der Kunst, Leipzig, Teubner. Bischoff, B. (1990) Latin Palaeography, Cambridge University Press. Bowman, A. K., Thomas, J. D. & Society for the Promotion of Roman, S. (1983) Vindolanda : the Latin writing-tablets, London, Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies. Brunhölzl, F. (1962) Zur Überlieferung des Lukrez. Hermes, 90, 97104. Butler, S. (2000) Litterae Manent: Ciceronian Oratory and the Written Word. Columbia University. Cancik, H., Schneider, H. & Pauly, A. F. V. (1996 - 2003) Der neue Pauly : Enzyklopädie der Antike, Stuttgart, J.B. Metzler. Chartae Latinae Antiquiores XI, Marichal, R. & Bruckner, A. (Eds.) (1979), Urs Graf. Clarke, J. R. (2003) Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans: Visual representation and non-elite viewers in Italy, 100 B.C. - A.D. 315, London, University of California Press. Cutler, A. (2006) The Violent Domus: Cruelty, Gender and Class in Roman Household Possessions in D'ambra, E. & Métraux, G. (Eds.) The Art of Citizens, Soldiers and Freedmen in the Roman World. Oxford, BAR International Series. Del Mastro, G. (2005) Riflessioni sui Papiri Latini Ercolanesi. CronErc., 35. George, M. (2006) Social Identity and the Dignity of Work in Freedman's Reliefs in D'ambra, E. & Méraux, G. (Eds.) The Art of Citizens, Soldiers and Freedman in the Roman World. Oxford, BAR International Series Gundel, H. G. (1977) Katalog der literarischen Papyri in der Gießener Universitätsbibliothek 2, Giessen, Giessen. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 28 Horsfall, N. (1989) Cornelius Nepos: A selection, including the lives of Cato and Atticus, Oxford, Clarendon Press. Horsfall, N. (1995) Rome without Spectacles. Greece & Rome, 42, 49 - 56. Houston, G. W. (2002) The Slave and Freedman Personnel of Public Libraries in Ancient Rome. Transactions of the American Philological Association, 132, 139-176. Kampen, N. B. (2006) The Art of Soldiers on a Roman Frontier in D'ambra, E. & Metraux, G. P. R. (Eds.) The Art of Citizens, Soldiers and Freedmen in the Roman World. BAR International Series 1526. Kenney, E. J. (1982) Books and Readers in the Roman World in Kenney, E., and Clausen W. V., (Ed.) Cambridge History of Classical Literature II. Cambridge, CUP. Kleve, K. (1990) Ennius in Herculaneum. CronErc., 20, 5-16. Kleve, K. (1994) An approach to the Latin Papyri from Herculaneum Storia, Poesia e Pensiero nel mondo antico. Studi in onore di M. Gigante. Kuhlmann, P. A. (1994) Die Giessener Literarischen Papyri und die Caracalla-Erlasse. Berichte und Arbeiten aus der Universitätsbibliothek und der Universitätsarchiv Giessen, 46, 77-82. Luppe, W. (1977) Rückseitentitel auf Papyrusrollen. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 27, 89-99. Mallon, J. (1952) Paléographie romaine, Madrid, [Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Instituto Antonio de Nebrija, de Filologia]. Marichal, R. (1967-8) Paléographie Latine et Française Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes Annuaire IV: Section Sciences Historiques et Philologiques. Marichal, R. (1988) Les Graffites de la Graufesenque, Paris. Mcdermott, W. C. (1972) M. Cicero and M. Tiro. Historia, 21, 259-86. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 29 Oliver, R. P. (1951) The First Medicean Manuscript of Tacitus and the Titulature of Ancient Books. Transactions of the American Philological Association, 82, 232-61. Parkes, M. B. (1992) Pause and effect : an introduction to the history of punctuation in the West, Aldershot, Scolar. Seider, R. (1972) Paläographie der lateinischen Papyri Band I, Stuttgart, Hiersemann. Seider, R. (1975) Zur Paläographie der frühen Lateinischen Papyri Proceedings of the XIV International Congress of Papyrologists, Oxford 24 - 31 July 1974. London, Egypt Exploration Society. Seider, R. (1978) Paläographie der Lateinischen Papyri II, 1. Seider, R. (1979) Beiträge zur Geschichte und Paläographie der Antiken Cicerohandschriften. Bibliothek und Wissenschaft, 13, 101-149. Sprey, J. (1931) Papyri Iandanae 5, Leipzig, Teubner. Starr, R. (1991) Reading Aloud: Lectores and Roman Reading. The Classical Journal, 86, 337-343. Suerbaum, W. (1992) Zum Umfang der Bücher in der archaischen Lateinischen Dichtung: Naevius, Ennius, Lukrez und Livius Andronicus auf Papyrus-Rollen. Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 92, 153-73. Suerbaum, W. (1994) Herculanensische Lukrez-Papyri. Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 104, 1-21. Tjäder, J.-O. (1979) Considerazioni e Proposte sulla scrittura Latina nell'età Romana Palaeographica diplomatica et archivistica, Studi Battelli I. Rome. Turner, E. G. (1983) Sniffing Glue. CronErc., 13, 7 – 14. Turner, E. G. (1987) Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World. Vogt, J. (1973) Alphabet fuer Freie und Sklaven. Rh. Mus., 116, 129 42. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 30 Weber, K. (1755) Copy of a Letter from a learned Gentleman of Naples... Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, XLIX, 112-115. Wendel, C. (1949) Die Griechisch-Roemische Buchbeschreibung Verglichen mit Der Des Vorderen Orients, Halle, Max Niemeyer Wood, S. (2001) Literacy and Luxury in the Early Empire: A PapyrusRoll Winder from Pompeii MAAR, 46, 23-40. Zetzel, J. E. G. (1973) Emendavi ad Tironem. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 77, 225-243. Jacqueline Austin 17/06/2011 31