Commentarii

Abstract: Migne, Patrologia Gracca 24, columns 529–605, prints a work of Eusebius which he entitles Eusebii Caesariensis Commentarii in Lucae Evangelium quantum superest in Codicibus Vaticanis, the text of which is that of Angelo Mai, Bibliotheca Nova Patrum iv. 159ff., published in 1847. The work is abstracted from the big Lucan catena of Nicetas of Heraclea, other parts of which were published separately by Mai. No mention of a Commentary on Luke is made by later patristic writers such as Jerome and Photius in their notices of work by Eusebius, and J. Quasten, Patrology iii, does not include it in his description of Eusebius' work. Mai, however, is confident, I believe rightly, that it is a genuine work of Eusebius.

Abstract: This article examines Leonardo Bruni's ideas on history writing, tracing their evolution from 1404 down to the latter half of 1443. It establishes that Bruni saw history writing as a textual activity closely related to, if not identical with, translation. The various implications of this discovery are explored in relation to several of Bruni's major historical works, including the Cicero novus (1415), the Commentarii de primo bello punico (1419), and the De bello italico (1441). The article concludes by showing how Bruni's views - in their final, extreme formulation - were challenged by his younger rival, Biondo Flavio, in the early 1440s.

Abstract: Why did Christians in the second through fifth centuries overwhelmingly utilize the codex format while other contemporaries used the scroll for literary texts almost exclusively? We offer the concept of "generic materiality," which connects genre with material format. The early readers and users of the Gospel according to Mark in particular, and other gospels more generally, often described and treated them not as "books" with authors but as ὑπομνήματα or commentarii. Notebooks like ὑπομνήματα are typically described as circulating in tabulae, or the codex form. The prevalence of the codex form among second- through fifth-century biblical manuscripts derives in large part from durable generic expectations.

Abstract: The creation of a political image based at best on a tenuous reality is a fragile and delicate process. None knew it better than Gaius Julius Caesar. Early in his career, he had fostered the belief that he was the heir of the ‘true’ Marian/popularis tradition with some credibility and lasting success. He presented himself as the great general in the Gallic commentaries and for good reasons this image too gained widespread popularity. There were other important but sometimes less convincing messages to follow. The commentarii on the civil war sought passionately to justify his part in the outbreak of hostilities: this was the published form of a process his intermediaries had begun in the first months of hostilities whereby they stressed his respect for peace and the traditional order, even when he himself was busy ignoring both. In an effort to reinforce this ‘constitutional’ regard, Caesar returned to Rome from Spain in 49 to establish a ‘properly elected’ government with himself and P. Servilius Isauricus as consuls; the correct number of praetors (all eligible to hold the office), aediles, and quaestors. The dictatorship was cast aside after a mere eleven days; Rome was to function as it always had. The uprising of Marcus Caelius Rufus and Titus Annius Milo in 48 B.C. ruined this admirable picture and brought home to Caesar the realities of attempting to dominate Rome by leaving the constitution in its traditional form and hoping for the best from the supporters he had entrusted with office. Moreover, the chaos of civil war and urban disorder combined to allow others to project their own policies and power struggles.