¹ The standard edition of Th. Graesse (Dresden–Leipzig 1846) is used here.Google Scholar

² Illustrated here are two methods of LA etymologizing. In one, the name in question is a Latin word capable, through conversion if necessary, of conveying a moral meaning; in the other, the name is divided into elements through the composition of which the moral meaning is revealed. All the etymologies presented hereunder from the LA and our new text illustrate the second method, except perhaps the Legenda's third etymology of Martinus, the rationale for which is not clear to me. The examples quoted below (n. 4) from the Accessus all illustrate the first method.Google Scholar

³ Theodore de Wyzema, La légende dorée (Paris 1939 [= 1902]) XXVII–XXVIII.Google Scholar

⁴ For orientation one consults still the magisterial paper of Edwin A. Quain, S.J., ‘The Medieval Accessus ad Auctores ,’ Traditio 3 (1945) 215–64. Examples of etymologizing applicable here are from R. B. C. Huygens (ed.), ‘Accessus ad Auctores,’ Bernard d'Utrecht, Conrad d'Hirsau: ‘Dialogus super Auctores’ (Leiden 1970); p. 19 (in an ‘Accessus Prudentii Psichomachiae’ [I], after an etymology of Liber [‘a liberando uel a librando’]): ‘Solebant autem philosophi alicuius auspicati nomine nominare. Ergo iste Aurelius decorus est quasi aureo ore loquens. Prudentius non sine causa dicitur (multi enim sunt sapientes sed non prudentes), quia iste utrumque fuit’; p. 27 (in an ‘Accessus Theoduli’): ‘Auctor … non absurde Theodulus nominatur …’; p. 28 (on the name of Prosper).Google Scholar

⁵ The heading is ‘Item de nomine sancti Martini’; the text is found in Graesse's LA, cap. clxvi (161), p. 741. Just this paragraph (less the clause ‘ut dicit Dionysius in epistola ad Demophilum’) appears, immediately before Sulpicius’ Vita sancti Martini, in a Tuscan version, in a manuscript to be mentioned below: Florence, Bibl. Riccardiana 2624, fol. 31^I-V; the text is given by Braccini, art. cited below (n. 18) p. 344.Google Scholar

⁶ Ullman, B. L., The Humanism of Coluccio Salutati (Padua 1963) 172 (No. 58), 267–68, with PI. X.2 (fol. 14^v).Google Scholar

⁷ See Ullman and Stadter, P., The Public Library of Renaissance Florence: Niccolò Niccoli, Cosimo de’ Medici and the Library of San Marco (Padua 1972) 161 (No. 308), 314–15.Google Scholar

⁸ Details in Resta, G., op. cit. (below, n. 14) XII–XIII; Angela Daneu Lattanzi, I manoscritti miniati delle biblioteche italiane 2, Primo volume: Bibl. Nazionale di Palermo (Roma 1965) 39–41 and Tav. VII.1 (fol. 33^r); eadem, ‘Minii della bottega di Don Simone Camaldolese alla Bibl. Naz. di Palermo,’ Accademie e biblioteche d'Italia 23 (1955) 127–29 and Fig. 1 (fol. 3^r), 2 (33^r), 3 (65^v), 4 (109^v). Daneu Lattanzi (I manoscritti 41) reports the date and place of writing as recorded on fol. 105^v. I have seen only photographs of this MS; it is probably identical with the MS in Sicily to which I alluded in ‘Girolamo da Prato and his Manuscripts of Sulpicius Severus,’ Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 13 (1936) 37 n. 2.Google Scholar

⁹ Resta loc. cit.; Daneu Lattanzi, I manoscritti 40–41.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Below the LA extract referred to supra (at n. 5) a different hand has copied the Gennadius chapter (De uiris illustribus 19) on Sulpicius.Google Scholar

¹¹ Ullman, The Humanism 130, 134–35.Google Scholar

¹² Ibid. 267.Google Scholar

¹³ Zaccaria, Iter litterarium per Italiam (Venice 1762) 65; Cosenza, La leggenda di S. Martino nel medio evo (Palermo 1921) 154–56. Cosenza's quite useful book is excessively rare. The library of The Catholic University of America owns a bound xerox copy.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Vita S. Martini di Anonimo, a cura di Gianvito Resta (Padua: Antenore 1964). (It appears that copies cannot be bought from either the publisher or Prof. Resta himself.) Writes Resta (p. xii): ‘[La Vita], a quanto risulta, è stata trasmessa da uno solo ms.’ Recent notices of the copy in C (both too late to have been available to Resta): Ullman, The Humanism 172; Daneu Lattanzi, I manoscritti 39.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See the recent treatment of B. de Gaiffier, S.J., ‘Odalric de Reims, ses manuscrits et les reliques de saint Clément à Cherson’ in Mélanges E.-R. Labande (Poitiers 1974) 315–19 (the verses, p. 316). It would appear that Père de Gaiffier is incorrect in holding that the entire notice, and not simply the verses alone, was inscribed on the cover of the gift-volume. He aptly notes the absence of the verses in H. Walther, Initia carminum ac versuum medii aevi posterioris latinorum (Göttingen 1959).Google Scholar

¹⁶ ‘Four books’ on St. Martin could mean either the Sulpician Martiniana, which are commonly divided into four books (Bk. I, the Vita accompanied by the Epistulae; Bks. II–IV, the three Dialogi), or the four books De uirtutibus sancti Martini of Gregory of Tours. The Odalricus notice never appears at the head of the Sulpician material so as to make it clear that the four ‘infra scripti libri’ are Sulpicius'; they regularly follow his four books. Sometimes (as in C and P) the Gregorian four succeed thereto, in such fashion as apparently to mark those books as the ‘infra scripti quattuor.’ Possibly, indeed, it was a work by Gregory of Tours and not (basically) Sulpicius Severus which Odalricus brought down from Reims, and I have tentatively proposed a manuscript at Lucca (Capit. 65) which might be his very gift, less its covers (‘Girolamo da Prato’ [cit. above, n. 8] 38 n. 1). But the verses on the cover tell of the ‘charité’ at Amiens and all but require that the story be contained in the pages within — and Sulpicius, of course, has the story, while Gregory does not. Again, the necrological notice at Lucca quoted by de Gaiffier ([n. 15] 317) states that Odalricus presented to St. Martin a ‘librum uite eius,’ while Gregory's work is a collection of posthumous miracles. It is likely, therefore, that the ‘Quo tempore’ notice, originally placed at the head of the ‘four books’ of Sulpicius, was incautiously shifted to a position after them, with no correction made of ‘infra’ to ‘supra.’Google Scholar

¹⁷ [In the following list, when no bibliographical reference is given, one may consult my ‘Girolamo da Prato’ 37.] The 14 MSS: Boulogne-sur-Mer, Bibl. mun. 105 (J. Van der Straeten, Les mss. hagiographiques d'Arras et de B.-s.-M. [Subs. hag. 50] 130–31) / Florence, Bibl. Naz., Conv. Soppr. I. VI. 18 / Florence, Bibl. Med. Laur. 89 Inf. 27 / ibid. Conv. Soppr. 530 (see the following paragraph [3]) Lucca, Bibl. Capit. 555 / Palermo, Bibl. Naz. I. E. 13 / Vatican City, B.A.V. lat. 1188 / ibid. 1209 / 13699 / Urb. lat. 50 [these in Latin; in vernacular the following, for all of which see Braccini, art. cited in the next note] Florence, Bibl. Med. Laur., Ashb. 548 / ibid., Bibl. Riccardiana 1343 / 2624 / 3038.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Mauro Braccini (‘Frammenti dell'antico Lucano,’ Studi di filologia italiana 22 [1964] 224), in speaking of the vernacular translation of Sulpicius, Gregory of Tours, etc., found in the four MSS which end the list given in the preceding note, sees its ‘capostipite’ in ‘una versione … eseguita a Santa Maria degli Angioli sulla fine del’ 300' (for the date, 1397, he cites MS Ricc. 3038 [fol. 143^r]; he does not find the place stated there but gives several reasons which lead to S. Maria degli Angeli). Of the vernacular Martiniana in Ricc. 2624 he says (p. 223): ‘La lingua … è una coinè toscana quattrocentesca’; this MS is the basic source of the samples of the vernacularized Martiniana he gives in pp. 344–49 (on pp. 344–45 the translation from LA cited above, n. 5).Google Scholar

¹⁹ ‘Frammenti’ 224; cf. preceding note.Google Scholar

²⁰ Peebles, ‘Girolamo da Prato’ 29–38.Google Scholar

²¹ The paragraph appears on fol. 109^r following Sulpicius’ Dialogues, with only the Gennadius biography (above, n. 10) intervening.Google Scholar

²² Ullman, The Humanism 252. Coluccio sets one of his annotations (shown in Ullman's plate X.2) against a charge of depravity and corruption made by Sulpicius against his own times (Vita sancti Martini 20.1; p. 128, line 23 Halm); Coluccio's observation: ‘Non uidisti nostram etatem, facunde Sulpici.’ — Sulpicius is herein cited after Karl Halm's edition, CSEL 1 (Vienna 1866).Google Scholar

²³ Sources. The author makes resourceful use of Scripture and, naturally, has effective control as well of the Martinian material. Sulpicius is never named — his biography is the ‘istoria’ (48), or else the expressions ‘sicut scribitur’ (88) or ‘sicut legitur’ (153) are used — but speeches given to Martin by Sulpicius in Ep. 3 are quoted verbatim (51–52), while a rare word used pointedly by Sulpicius is retained (33). I did not detect verbal borrowings from LA, which may indeed have furnished to DIN only the two of its three etymologies. Text. Between the two MSS there is little to choose. Several common errors tend to indicate derivation from a (slightly) faulty archetype: fore (82; error if fuisse stood in the original), p(re)ese (143), sic sic (151; error if the original had a single sic), omission of secula (171). In this printing the spellings of the MSS have been retained (or at least noted), including extimabatur (90), which seems to represent an approach to the vernacular.Google Scholar

²⁴ In ‘Tertio,’ to be sure, the ‘Q.E.D.’ stands not at the very end but in lines 158–60, before a largely exhortatory conclusion. Amid the somewhat formal rigidity one finds the endearing piety of ‘suus ille Iesus’ (136). In references to the Vita (sancti Martini); Epistulae, and Dialogi of Sulpicius Severus, the author's name is omitted. 11–12 1 Cor. 9.27 (Vulg. ‘… et in seruitutem redigo’) 18–19 1 Ioh. 2.16 (Vulg. ‘… et superbia uitae’) 27–28 Iac. 4.4 30, 35 triumphans … triumphum (cf. 42, 55 uictoria[m]): possibly a reminiscence of the triumph imagined as Martin's after his death in Ep. 3.20–21 32–33 scuto—tela: Eph. 6.16 36 exufflans: cf.Dial. 3.8.2 (205.27 Halm), with Sulpicius’ comment on the word 38–39 uas (cf. 37): cf. Rom. 9.21 44 Pagan shrines and idols: see Vita 13–15 for typical actions taken by Martin against them 47 principem m. h.: Ioh. 14.30 ‘uenit… princeps mundi huius, et in me non habet quidquam’ 48 narrat istoria: Ep. 3.16 51–52 ibid. (149.17–18 Halm), where the text gives ‘funeste’ 57–58 Cf. Leg. aur. clxvi (161): ‘fuit … martir saltem uoluntate et carnis mortificatione’ (p. 741 Graesse). An early, fanciful narrative which actually confronts Martin with judge and executioners has been recently published by Peebles in Studia patristica 12 (TU 115). The idea goes back to Ep. 2.9 ‘nam licet ei ratio temporis non potuerit praestare martyrium, gloria tamen martyris non carebit, quia uoto adque uirtute et potuit esse martyr et uoluit. quodsi el Neronianis Decianisque temporibus in illa, quae tunc extitit, dimicare congressione licuisset, …’ (143. 26–144.3 Halm). 64 Rom. 5.3 65–66 Ps. 104.18 68 Luc. 2.35 74 calicem s.a. Ps. 115.13 75–78 Greg. Hom. in Euang. 2, hom. 32.3 or 37.5 (PL 76.1234B, 1277AB) 78–79 2 Cor. 11.29. Ep. 2.13 (144.22 Halm) had already applied the Apostle's words to Martin. 82 fore: was fuisse intended? 82–86 Bernardus (?), Liber sententiarum 148 (PL 184.1152; habuit²] exercuit) 85 uidua S.: 1 Reg. 17.9 (cf. Luc. 4.26) 88 The division of the cloak: Vita 3 89–90 Vita 2.7 (112.20–21) ‘[frugalitate] ita usus est, ut iam illo tempore non miles, sed monachus putaretur’ 91–94 Cf. Vita 10.1–2 ‘idem … constantissime perseuerabat qui prius fuerat… inplebat episcopi dignitatem, ut non tamen propositum monachi uirtutemque desereret’ (119.27–120.3 Halm) 95–97 From the Magnificat antiphon for 2nd vespers of St. Martin (Nov. 11) 101–102 Ps. 1.3 109–110 superbis— suam: lac. 4.6, 1 Pet. 5.5 (Vulg. does not show ‘suam’) 117–118 uoluptatibus—inpudicitiis: three of the four terms are found in Rom. 13.13 121 securis—posita est: cf. Matt. 3.10, Luc. 3.9 126 simplicem oculum: Matt. 6.22, Luc. 11.34 126–127 Christo—legis: Rom. 10.4 127 inanem gloriam: possibly a reminiscence of Vita 1 ‘Plerique mortales studio et gloriae seculari inaniter dediti’ (110.10 Halm). 133 ego ero merces tua: In Gen. 15. 1, “‘Noli timere, Abram, ego protector tuus sum, et merces tua magna nimis,’” our author takes the sentence as a single phrase, making of ‘merces tua’ a second predicate nominative, coordinate with ‘protector tuus.’ Commonly ‘merces tua’ is treated as the subject of an ‘erit’ to be supplied: see B. Fischer (ed.), Genesis (Vetus Latina 2; Freiburg im Br. 1951) ad loc. 135 oculos—celum: Ep. 3.14–15 137 qui numquam—recedebat: Vita 27.2 ‘numquam in illius ore nisi Christus, numquam in illius corde nisi pietas’ (137.2–3 Halm) 143 If preesse is to be read here, the complete agreement in error of the two MSS is remarkable. A free and occasionally abridged 14th-century vernacular translation of our DIN found in MS Florence, Bibl. Riccardiana 3038, seems to support preesse: ‘Questi sono coloro [= ‘Hii sunt qui …’ line 139] che con grande presuntione ancora nuoui e rozzi nella uia di dio uogliono prendere stato di reggiemento [= ‘preesse’?] e uogliono essere doctori di quello che non anno ancora apparato, e predicare prima che fare’ (fol. 2^r). On the MS see above, p. 195. 145 Ps. 126.2 151 The improbable doubling of sic is retained simply because both MSS provide it. 153 Martin and Hilary: Vita 5–7. See the admirable commentary of J. Fontaine in his edition of Sulpicius Severus (Sources chrétiennes 133.529–637); also, in Hilaire et son temps (Paris s.a.), J.-R. Palanque (pp. 15–16) and P. Antin (105–106). 154–155 degens in monasterio: Vita 7.1, 10.3–9 155 ipso plurimum renitente: on Martin's ‘nolo episcopari’ ibid. 9.1–2; cf. 5.2 (Martin resisting even the diaconate) 156 Aaron's reluctance (?). Insofar as the author attributes any reluctance to Aaron, he appears to ascribe to him, the future high priest, the series of excuses made by his brother, Moses, when charged by God to lead the Israelites out of Egypt (Exod. 3.11–4.16). 161 suaues—aspectum: cf. Gen. 3.6 ‘bonum … lignum ad uescendum, et pulchrum oculis aspectuque delectabile’ 165 arborem—paradisi: cf. Gen. 2.9 170 trahere nos post se: Iob 21.33 ‘post se omnem hominem trahet’Google Scholar