Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T20:57:13.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 10 - Editing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2024

By
Samuel J. Huskey  and
Robert A. Kaster
Edited by
Roy Gibson  and
Christopher Whitton
Roy Gibson
Affiliation:
University of Durham
Christopher Whitton
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

This chapter considers the concept of an ‘edition’ from two different perspectives. In the first half, Bob Kaster writes as an editor preparing a critical edition for conventional publication, first retrieving the relevant data - chiefly, the versions preserved in manuscripts - then analysing them to form a theory of the text’s transmission that began with the author’s original copy. Much attention is given to the ‘stemmatic method’, used to sift variations among the transmitted versions, aiming to establish the archetype - the latest copy of the text absent which no other copies would survive - or to show that no archetype can be reconstructed, or even to show that the notion of an ‘author’s original’ is misconceived. In the second half, Sam Huskey writes as the director of the Digital Latin Library, a project that aims to move critical editions of Latin texts to a digital paradigm. To demonstrate that such a transition does not render obsolete the methods and skills described in the first part of the chapter, but rather depends on them, traditional editions are described as databases of information encoded visually (e.g. with typography and layout). The experiences of two editors making this transition close this part of the chapter.

Keywords

archetypestemmatic methodvariants / innovationscritical apparatusdigital editionedition as database
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature , pp. 516 - 562
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Apollon, D. and Bélisle, C. (2014) ‘The digital fate of the critical apparatus’, in Apollon, Bélisle and Régnier 2014, 81–113.Google Scholar
Apollon, D., Bélisle, C. and Régnier, P., eds. (2014) Digital Critical Editions, Urbana, IL.Google Scholar
Bagnall, R. S. and Heath, S. (2018) ‘Roman studies and digital resources’, JRS 108: 171–89.Google Scholar
Billerbeck, M. and Somazzi, M. (2009) Repertorium der Konjekturen in den Seneca-Tragödien, Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackwell, C. and Smith, N. (2014) ‘The Canonical Text Services protocol, version 5.0.rc.1’, http://cite-architecture.github.io/cts_spec/.Google Scholar
Bouquet, M. and Méniel, B., eds. (2011) Servius et sa réception de l’Antiquité à la Renaissance, Rennes.Google Scholar
Casali, S. and Stok, F., eds. (2008) Servio: stratificazioni esegetiche e modelli culturali / Servius: Exegetical Stratifications and Cultural Models, Collection Latomus 317, Brussels.Google Scholar
Conte, G. B., ed. (2009) P. Vergilius Maro: Aeneis, Berlin.Google Scholar
Cornell, T. J., ed. (2013) The Fragments of the Roman Historians, 3 vols., Oxford.Google Scholar
Courtney, E. (1981) ‘The formation of the text of Vergil’, BICS 28: 13–29.Google Scholar
Courtney, E. (2002–3) ‘The formation of the text of Vergil – again’, BICS 46: 189–94.Google Scholar
Damon, C. (2015) Studies on the Text of Caesar’s ‘Bellum civile’, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damon, C. (2016) ‘Beyond variants: some digital desiderata for the critical apparatus of ancient Greek and Latin texts’, in Driscoll and Pierazzo 2016, 201–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damon, C. (2018) ‘The editor(s) in the classroom’, https://classicalstudies.org/annual-meeting/149/abstract/editors-classroom.Google Scholar
Del Turco, R. Roselli, (2016) ‘The battle we forgot to fight: should we make a case for digital editions?’, in Driscoll and Pierazzo 2016, 219–38.Google Scholar
De Nonno, M. (2010) ‘Transmissional history and textual criticism’, in Barchiesi, A. and Scheidel, W., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Roman Studies (Oxford), 31–46.Google Scholar
Delvigo, M. L. (2011) Servio e la poesia della scienza, Pisa.Google Scholar
Deufert, M. (2017) Prolegomena zur Editio Teubneriana des Lukrez, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deufert, M. (2019) Titus Lucretius Carus. De rerum natura libri vi, Berlin.Google Scholar
Dolveck, F. (2015) Paulini Nolani carmina. Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 21, Turnhout.Google Scholar
Driscoll, M. J. and Pierazzo, E., eds. (2016) Digital Scholarly Editing, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dunston, A. J. (1952) ‘Two manuscripts of Suetonius’ De vita Caesarum’, CQ 2: 146–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, T., Bodard, G., Cayless, H. et al. (2006–17) EpiDoc: Epigraphic Documents in TEI XML, http://epidoc.sf.net.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, E. (1948 and 1949) ‘Review of Rand et al. 1946’, JRS 38: 131–43, 39: 145–54.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Fraistat, N. and Flanders, J., eds. (2013) The Cambridge Companion to Textual Scholarship, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Franzini, G., Andorfer, P. and Zaytseva, K. (2016–) Catalogue of Digital Editions: The Web Application, https://dig-ed-cat.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcea, A., Lhommé, M.-K. and Vallat, D., eds. (2016) Fragments d’érudition: Servius et le savoir antique, Spudasmata 168, Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Goffaux, B. (2003) ‘Mémoire et citation poétique dans l’Histoire Auguste’, REL 81: 215–31.Google Scholar
Goold, G. P. (1970) ‘Servius and the Helen episode’, HSPh 74: 101–68.Google Scholar
Gotoff, H. C. (1971) The Text of Lucan in the Ninth Century, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Håkanson, L. (1979) ‘Problems of textual criticism and interpretation in Lucan’s De bello civili’, PCPhS 25: 26–52.Google Scholar
Haslam, M. W. (1978) ‘Apollonius Rhodius and the papyri’, ICS 3: 47–73.Google Scholar
Heslin, P. (2016) ‘The dream of a universal variorum: digitizing the commentary tradition’, in Kraus, C. A. and Stray, C. A., eds., Classical Commentaries: Explorations in a Scholarly Genre (Oxford), 494–511.Google Scholar
Heyworth, S. J. (2007a) Cynthia: A Companion to the Text of Propertius, Oxford.Google Scholar
Heyworth, S. J., ed. (2007b) Sexti Properti elegos, Oxford.Google Scholar
Housman, A. E., ed. (1926) M. Annaei Lucani Belli Civilis libri decem, Oxford.Google Scholar
Huitfeldt, C. (2014) ‘Markup technology and textual scholarship’, in Apollon, Bélisle and Régnier 2014, 157–78.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. and Oakley, S. P., eds. (2016) Latin Literature and Its Transmission: Papers in Honour of Michael Reeve, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Huskey, S. J. and Cayless, H. (2018) Guidelines for Encoding Critical Editions for the Library of Digital Latin Texts, https://digitallatin.github.io/guidelines/LDLT-Guidelines.html.Google Scholar
Ihm, M., ed. (1907) C. Suetoni Tranquilli De vita Caesarum libri viii, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Kaster, R. A. (2010) Studies on the Text of Macrobius’ ‘Saturnalia’, Oxford.Google Scholar
Kaster, R. A. (2016a) Studies on the Text of Suetonius’ ‘De uita Caesarum’, Oxford.Google Scholar
Kaster, R. A. (2016b) ‘Making sense of Suetonius in the twelfth century’, in Grafton, A. and Most, G., eds., Canonical Texts and Scholarly Practices: A Global Comparative Approach (Cambridge) 110–35.Google Scholar
Keeline, T. (2017) ‘The apparatus criticus in the digital age’, CJ 112: 342–63.Google Scholar
Keil, H., ed. (1855–80) Grammatici Latini. 7 vols., with a supplement edited by Hagen, H., Leipzig.Google Scholar
Kiss, D. (2013, 2017) Catullus Online: An Online Repertory of Conjectures on Catullus, www.catullusonline.org.Google Scholar
Langlois, P. (1997) ‘Le texte d’Ausone en face de la théorie des “variantes d’auteur”’, Latomus 56: 142–53.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H. and Wilson, N. G. (1990) Sophoclea: Studies on the Text of Sophocles, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H. and Wilson, N. G. (1997) Sophocles: Second Thoughts, Göttingen.Google Scholar
Maas, P. (1927) Textkritik, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Maas, P. (1957) Textual Criticism, Oxford.Google Scholar
Malaspina, E. (2015) ‘In Anglia invenitur: come Guglielmo di Malmesbury leggeva e soprattutto correggeva Cicerone nel XII secolo’, in De Paolis, P., ed., Dai papyri al XX secolo: l’eternità di Cicerone, Studi e ricerche del Dipartimento di Lettere e Filosofia 13 (Cassino) 31–52.Google Scholar
Malaspina, E. (2019) ‘A tradição manuscrita do Lucullus de Cícero: do Corpus Leidense a William de Malmesbury e à fortuna no período humanístico’, in Cardoso, I. T. and Martinho, M., eds., Cícero: obra e recepção (Coimbra), 19–53.Google Scholar
Marinone, N. (1946) Elio Donato, Macrobio, e Servio, Vercelli. Reprinted in N. Marinone, Analecta graecolatina (Bologna, 1990), 193–264.Google Scholar
Marshall, P. K. (1997) Servius and Commentary on Virgil, Asheville, NC.Google Scholar
Marshall, P. K. (2000) ‘The Spangenberg Bifolium of Servius’, RFIC 128: 192–209.Google Scholar
McGann, J. (2013) ‘Coda: why digital textual scholarship matters; or, philology in a new key’, in Fraistat, N. and Flanders, J., eds., The Cambridge Companion to Textual Scholarship (Cambridge), 274–88.Google Scholar
Munk Olsen, B. (1982–2009) L’Étude des auteurs classiques latins aux XIe et XIIe siècles, 4 vols., Paris.Google Scholar
Murgia, C. E. (1975) Prolegomena to Servius 5: The Manuscripts, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Murgia, C. E. and Kaster, R. A., eds. (2018) Serviani in Vergili Aeneidos libros ix–xii commentarii, Oxford.Google Scholar
Mynors, R. A. B., ed. (1958) C. Valerii Catulli Carmina, Oxford.Google Scholar
Pasquali, G. (1929) ‘Review of Maas 1927’, Gnomon 5: 417–35, 498–521.Google Scholar
Pasquali, G. (1971) Storia della tradizione e critica del testo, 2nd edn, Florence.Google Scholar
Pellegrin, E. (1975–2010) Les manuscrits classiques latins de la Bibliothèque vaticane: Catalogue, 3 vols., Paris.Google Scholar
Pellizzari, A. (2003) Servio: storia, cultura e istituzioni nell’opera di un grammatico tardoantico, Florence.Google Scholar
Pichler, A. and Bruvik, T. M. (2014) ‘Digital critical editing’, in Apollon, Bélisle and Régnier 2014, 179–99.Google Scholar
Preud’homme, L. (1902) ‘Première étude sur l’histoire du texte de Suétone, de vita Caesarum’, Bulletin de la classe des lettres et sciences morales et politique et de la classe des beaux-arts 3: 299–328.Google Scholar
Rand, E. K. et al., eds. (1946) Servianorum in Vergilii carmina commentariorum editionis Harvardianae volumen 2: Quod in Aeneidos libros i–ii explanationes continet, Lancaster, PA.Google Scholar
Reeve, M. D. (1969) ‘Author’s variants in Longus?’, PCPhS 15: 75–85.Google Scholar
Reeve, M. D. (1985) ‘Archetypes’, Sileno 11:193–201.Google Scholar
Reeve, M. D. (1986) ‘Stemmatic method: “Qualcosa che non funziona”?’, in Ganz, P., ed., The Role of the Book in Medieval Culture, Bibliologia 3 (Turnhout), 57–9.Google Scholar
Reeve, M. D. (2000) ‘Cuius in usum? Recent and future editing’, JRS 90: 196–206.Google Scholar
Reeve, M. D. (2007) ‘Reconstructing archetypes: a new proposal and an old fallacy’, in Finglass, P. J., Collard, C. and Richardson, N. J., eds., Hesperos: Studies in Ancient Greek Poetry Presented to M. L. West on His Seventieth Birthday (Oxford), 326–40.Google Scholar
Reynolds, L. D., ed. (1983a) Texts and Transmission: A Survey of the Latin Classics, Oxford.Google Scholar
Reynolds, L. D. (1983b) ‘Velleius Paterculus’, in Reynolds 1983a: 431–3.Google Scholar
Reynolds, L. D. and Wilson, N. G. (2013) Scribes and Scholars: A Guide to the Transmission of Greek and Latin Literature, 4th edn, Oxford.Google Scholar
Sahle, P. (2013) Digitale Editionsformen: Zum Umgang mit der Überlieferung unter den Bedingungen des Medienwandels. Teil II: Befunde, Theorie und Methodik, Norderstedt.Google Scholar
Sahle, P. (2016) ‘What is a scholarly digital edition?’, in Driscoll and Pierazzo 2016, 19–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santoro, A. (1946) ‘Il Servio Danielino e Donato’, SIFC 20: 79–104.Google Scholar
Savage, J. J. H. (1925) ‘The scholia in the Virgil of Tours, Bernensis 165’, HSPh 36: 91–164.Google Scholar
Savage, J. J. H. (1934) ‘The manuscripts of Servius’s commentary on Virgil’, HSPh 45: 157–204.Google Scholar
Skemer, D. (2013) Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the Princeton University Library, 2 vols., Princeton.Google Scholar
Smith, N. (2009) ‘Citation in classical studies’, Digital Humanities Quarterly 3.1 (n.pag.).Google Scholar
Stocker, A. F. et al., eds. (1965) Servianorum in Vergilii carmina commentariorum editionis Harvardianae volumen 3: Quod in Aeneidos libros iii–v explanationes continet, Oxford.Google Scholar
Stok, F., ed. (2013) Totus scientia plenus: percorsi della esegesi virgiliana antica, Pisa.Google Scholar
Stover, J. A., ed. (in preparation) The Oxford Guide to the Transmission of the Latin Classics, Oxford.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. J. (1983) ‘Lucan’, in Reynolds 1983a, 213–18.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. J. (1995) ‘Classical Latin literature’, in Greetham, D. C., ed., Scholarly Editing: A Guide to Research (New York), 95–148.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. J. (2016) Texts, Editors, and Readers: Methods and Problems in Latin Textual Criticism, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiepmar, J. and Heyer, G. (2017) ‘An overview of Canonical Text Services’, Linguistics and Literature Studies 5: 132–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timpanaro, S. (1986) Per la storia della filologia virgiliana antica, Rome.Google Scholar
Timpanaro, S. (2001) Virgilianisti antichi e tradizione indiretta, Florence.Google Scholar
Timpanaro, S. (2005) The Genesis of Lachmann’s Method (ed. and trans. G. W. Most), Chicago.Google Scholar
Wardle, D. (2014) Suetonius: Life of Augustus, Oxford.Google Scholar
West, M. L. (1973) Textual Criticism and Editorial Technique Applicable to Greek and Latin Texts, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Wills, G. (1992) Lincoln at Gettysburg: The Words that Remade America, New York.Google Scholar
Wilson, N. G. (2015) Herodotea: Studies on the Text of Herodotus, Oxford.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J. E. G. (2004) ‘In Rand’s margins – from Fraenkel’s review to a post-modern Servius’. Paper presented in the panel ‘Whither the APA/Harvard Servius?’ at the 135th Annual Meeting of the American Philological Association (San Francisco, 5 January 2004), www.academia.edu/35776337/In_Rands_Margins_From_Fraenkels_Review_to_a_Post-modern_Servius.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J. E. G. (2005) Marginal Scholarship and Textual Deviance: The ‘Commentarium Cornuti’ and the Early Scholia on Persius. BICS Supplement 84, London.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J. E. G. (2018) Critics, Compilers, and Commentators: An Introduction to Roman Philology, 200 bce–800 ce, Oxford.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, M., ed. (2012) Apulei Metamorphoseon libri xi, Oxford.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×