Bibliography
Luciana
Cuppo
Contributions to edited collections or authored works
Cuppo, Luciana, “Felix of Squillace and the Dionysiac computus II: Rome, Gaul, and the Insular world”, in: Immo Warntjes, and Dáibhí Ó Cróinín (eds), Late antique calendrical thought and its reception in the early Middle Ages: proceedings from the 3rd International Conference on the Science of Computus in Ireland and Europe, Galway, 16-18 July, 2010, 26, Turnhout: Brepols, 2017. 138–181.
abstract:
The dissemination of the Dionysiac computus in Rome and in Gaul did not happen in a vacuum, but found a strong competitor in the well-entrenched Victorian computus. The first part of the paper considers such opposition on the basis of three manuscript witnesses: Reg. lat. 2077 and Vat. lat. 1548 of the Vatican Library, and MS 645 of the Burgerbibliothek at Bern.
The second part of the paper considers the dissemination of the Dionysiac computus in the insular world. The main witness is MS Digby 63 of the Bodleian Library, Oxford. Written in its present from in AD 867, the manuscript includes various blocks of computistical material derived from earlier sources. They include a dossier with the letters of Dionysius Exiguus and others on the computation of Easter. The dossier ends with the prologue and preface to the cycles of Felix of Squillace (AD 616).
Certain palaeographical traits betray the Roman provenance of the Dionysiac dossier. While it is not possible to establish a definite date for the arrival of the Dionysiac collection in England, there is a strong possibility that the dossier was sent from Rome in the time of Pope Vitalian (AD 672-76) in the context of his support for the Dionysiac computus and its adoption in Rome.
The second part of the paper considers the dissemination of the Dionysiac computus in the insular world. The main witness is MS Digby 63 of the Bodleian Library, Oxford. Written in its present from in AD 867, the manuscript includes various blocks of computistical material derived from earlier sources. They include a dossier with the letters of Dionysius Exiguus and others on the computation of Easter. The dossier ends with the prologue and preface to the cycles of Felix of Squillace (AD 616).
Certain palaeographical traits betray the Roman provenance of the Dionysiac dossier. While it is not possible to establish a definite date for the arrival of the Dionysiac collection in England, there is a strong possibility that the dossier was sent from Rome in the time of Pope Vitalian (AD 672-76) in the context of his support for the Dionysiac computus and its adoption in Rome.
abstract:
The dissemination of the Dionysiac computus in Rome and in Gaul did not happen in a vacuum, but found a strong competitor in the well-entrenched Victorian computus. The first part of the paper considers such opposition on the basis of three manuscript witnesses: Reg. lat. 2077 and Vat. lat. 1548 of the Vatican Library, and MS 645 of the Burgerbibliothek at Bern.
The second part of the paper considers the dissemination of the Dionysiac computus in the insular world. The main witness is MS Digby 63 of the Bodleian Library, Oxford. Written in its present from in AD 867, the manuscript includes various blocks of computistical material derived from earlier sources. They include a dossier with the letters of Dionysius Exiguus and others on the computation of Easter. The dossier ends with the prologue and preface to the cycles of Felix of Squillace (AD 616).
Certain palaeographical traits betray the Roman provenance of the Dionysiac dossier. While it is not possible to establish a definite date for the arrival of the Dionysiac collection in England, there is a strong possibility that the dossier was sent from Rome in the time of Pope Vitalian (AD 672-76) in the context of his support for the Dionysiac computus and its adoption in Rome.
The second part of the paper considers the dissemination of the Dionysiac computus in the insular world. The main witness is MS Digby 63 of the Bodleian Library, Oxford. Written in its present from in AD 867, the manuscript includes various blocks of computistical material derived from earlier sources. They include a dossier with the letters of Dionysius Exiguus and others on the computation of Easter. The dossier ends with the prologue and preface to the cycles of Felix of Squillace (AD 616).
Certain palaeographical traits betray the Roman provenance of the Dionysiac dossier. While it is not possible to establish a definite date for the arrival of the Dionysiac collection in England, there is a strong possibility that the dossier was sent from Rome in the time of Pope Vitalian (AD 672-76) in the context of his support for the Dionysiac computus and its adoption in Rome.
Cuppo, Luciana, “Felix of Squillace and the Dionysiac computus I: Bobbio and northern Italy (MS Ambrosiana H 150 inf.)”, in: Immo Warntjes, and Dáibhí Ó Cróinín (eds), The Easter controversy of Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages: its manuscripts, texts, and tables. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Science of Computus in Ireland and Europe, Galway, 18–20 July, 2008, 10, Turnhout: Brepols, 2011. 110–136.
abstract:
Thanks to a previously neglected fragment in the Bobbio Computus (MS Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 107v-109r) the original text of the computistical tract of Felix chillitanus can now be restored. On grounds of internal evidence and textual transmission its author can be identified as Felix of Squillace, a scholar of computus in the Alexandrian tradition propagated in the West by Dionysius Exiguus, then by Cassiodorus at Vivarium, and last by Felix in AD 616.
The fragment of Felix in the Bobbio Computus shows a recension independent from that known from the manuscripts Digby 63, 67r–v and 70v–71r, and Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 50v. It is inserted in the Etymologiae of Isidore (VI 17), but neither the arrangement of Isidore’s work nor the cycles in Etymologiae VI 17 resemble the standard edition. They may reflect the early organization of the work in fifteen books as arranged by Braulio, rather than the later division in twenty books attributed to Theodulf of Orléans.
The 95-year cycle also shows independent features. Though inserted in the Etymologiae and thus presumably Isidorian, it is quite unlike other known cycles from AD 627 to 721 (Ambrosiana L 99 sup., Digby 63). But there are also discrepancies between the contemporary cycles from 798 to 892 (Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 93v–98r) and those in the Felix/Isidore section of the same codex. Without further study we cannot determine when the texts of Isidore and Felix became known at Bobbio, but the evidence, such as it is, suggests that the Bobbio computist was not merely copying, but elaborating this material, and this fact may be indicative of a school of computistics at Bobbio in the seventh and eighth century.
The fragment of Felix in the Bobbio Computus shows a recension independent from that known from the manuscripts Digby 63, 67r–v and 70v–71r, and Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 50v. It is inserted in the Etymologiae of Isidore (VI 17), but neither the arrangement of Isidore’s work nor the cycles in Etymologiae VI 17 resemble the standard edition. They may reflect the early organization of the work in fifteen books as arranged by Braulio, rather than the later division in twenty books attributed to Theodulf of Orléans.
The 95-year cycle also shows independent features. Though inserted in the Etymologiae and thus presumably Isidorian, it is quite unlike other known cycles from AD 627 to 721 (Ambrosiana L 99 sup., Digby 63). But there are also discrepancies between the contemporary cycles from 798 to 892 (Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 93v–98r) and those in the Felix/Isidore section of the same codex. Without further study we cannot determine when the texts of Isidore and Felix became known at Bobbio, but the evidence, such as it is, suggests that the Bobbio computist was not merely copying, but elaborating this material, and this fact may be indicative of a school of computistics at Bobbio in the seventh and eighth century.
abstract:
Thanks to a previously neglected fragment in the Bobbio Computus (MS Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 107v-109r) the original text of the computistical tract of Felix chillitanus can now be restored. On grounds of internal evidence and textual transmission its author can be identified as Felix of Squillace, a scholar of computus in the Alexandrian tradition propagated in the West by Dionysius Exiguus, then by Cassiodorus at Vivarium, and last by Felix in AD 616.
The fragment of Felix in the Bobbio Computus shows a recension independent from that known from the manuscripts Digby 63, 67r–v and 70v–71r, and Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 50v. It is inserted in the Etymologiae of Isidore (VI 17), but neither the arrangement of Isidore’s work nor the cycles in Etymologiae VI 17 resemble the standard edition. They may reflect the early organization of the work in fifteen books as arranged by Braulio, rather than the later division in twenty books attributed to Theodulf of Orléans.
The 95-year cycle also shows independent features. Though inserted in the Etymologiae and thus presumably Isidorian, it is quite unlike other known cycles from AD 627 to 721 (Ambrosiana L 99 sup., Digby 63). But there are also discrepancies between the contemporary cycles from 798 to 892 (Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 93v–98r) and those in the Felix/Isidore section of the same codex. Without further study we cannot determine when the texts of Isidore and Felix became known at Bobbio, but the evidence, such as it is, suggests that the Bobbio computist was not merely copying, but elaborating this material, and this fact may be indicative of a school of computistics at Bobbio in the seventh and eighth century.
The fragment of Felix in the Bobbio Computus shows a recension independent from that known from the manuscripts Digby 63, 67r–v and 70v–71r, and Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 50v. It is inserted in the Etymologiae of Isidore (VI 17), but neither the arrangement of Isidore’s work nor the cycles in Etymologiae VI 17 resemble the standard edition. They may reflect the early organization of the work in fifteen books as arranged by Braulio, rather than the later division in twenty books attributed to Theodulf of Orléans.
The 95-year cycle also shows independent features. Though inserted in the Etymologiae and thus presumably Isidorian, it is quite unlike other known cycles from AD 627 to 721 (Ambrosiana L 99 sup., Digby 63). But there are also discrepancies between the contemporary cycles from 798 to 892 (Ambrosiana H 150 inf., 93v–98r) and those in the Felix/Isidore section of the same codex. Without further study we cannot determine when the texts of Isidore and Felix became known at Bobbio, but the evidence, such as it is, suggests that the Bobbio computist was not merely copying, but elaborating this material, and this fact may be indicative of a school of computistics at Bobbio in the seventh and eighth century.
