API tools faq
paste
jonstond2

Chronicles (Classics)

jonstond2
Jan 22nd, 2018
1,153
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 140.01 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. Introduction
  2. Most classicists only know of chronicles in relation to the Middle Ages or perhaps Late Antiquity, and they are chiefly thought of as Christian texts. But chronicles were one of the most common forms of historiography throughout the classical, Hellenistic, and Roman periods and were probably inspired by Babylonian chronicles, so they are not in origin Christian at all. Indeed, because of the general ease of creating and maintaining a chronicle and their enduring appeal to readers, chronicles are in fact the oldest and longest-lived genre of historiography in Western civilization. Unfortunately, almost no pre-Christian classical chronicles have survived and that is why so little is known or has been written about them. They probably first appeared in Greece in the late fourth century BCE, but they proliferated in the Hellenistic period and continued right through into the third century CE. In the first century BCE they first came to be composed in Latin in Rome, arising from both native traditions involving consular fasti (consularia) and the influence of Hellenistic Greek chronicles. But the latter influence proved to be fleeting and only consularia continued to be compiled into the fourth century CE, when Christian chronicles on the Hellenistic model first came to be written in Greek at the beginning of the century and then in Latin at the end. Even these later, more well-known chronicles are little studied, in relation to the standard canon of Greek and Roman histories, and so the purpose of this bibliography is less to analyze and discuss the literature surrounding these obscure texts, since there is little to comment upon, but more to introduce readers to the texts themselves and to the important studies of these works so that those interested may have a kind of primer on the works individually and as a whole.
  3.  
  4. What Is a Chronicle?
  5. As can be seen in The Question of Genre, the definition of a chronicle can vary considerably and has become somewhat contentious. Since this is a survey of Hellenistic, Roman, and Late Roman chronicles, with a brief introduction concerning their Near-Eastern antecedents, it is best to follow the definition of a chronicle generally accepted among Near Eastern and classical scholars, one that derives from ancient descriptions and the surviving works themselves. This definition is set forth, elaborated, and justified in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013, a history of the chronicle genre from its beginnings through to the high Middle Ages. Therefore, even though modern medievalists and Byzantinists have quite different definitions of a chronicle (see The Question of Genre), only the classical definition will be employed here since only classical chronicles are being discussed. This explains why such often cited “chronicles” of Late Antiquity as Hippolytus, Julius Africanus, John of Antioch, Malalas, Panodorus, and Annianus are not discussed here: by the classical definition employed here they are not chronicles. Chronicles are, in their most basic form, designed to make sense of the chronology of past events: “When did X happen?” After all, the name χρονικά is simply the adjective from χρόνος (“time”). That chronicles develop into more complex histories over the millennia does not change this fundamental fact. A chronicle is therefore an annalistic framework that attempts, if feasible, to mark each year, be it with a number (like years counted forward or backward from a fixed point, or regnal years) or a name (like year names, eponyms, archons, or consuls), into which is inserted a collection of reports of individual historical events that are recounted briefly—a word that cannot be given a rigid definition—and in strict chronological order. Often years can be presented in succession with no historical content at all. This stress on the reporting of an annalistic chronology, with or without historical content, is the fundamental characteristic that separates chronicles from all other forms of universal historiography. Indeed, in the earliest surviving Greek chronicle, the Parian Marble (see Parian Marble (Marmor Parium)), as well as the early imperial Chronicon Romanum, the main clause of each historical “entry” is the chronological statement, and the historical content is placed within a subordinate clause or prepositional phrase: “From the time when X happened/From X, (it has been) Y years, and Z was archon in Athens.” Chronicles have no set ending and simply stop when the writer or compiler ceases. Conversely, because of their natural brevity, they usually tend to start at the “beginning” of history, however that is interpreted, be it Creation, the first king of Athens, the Trojan War, or the first Olympiad. As a result they can cover hundreds and thousands of years in a small compass. Such brevity generally did not allow the lengthy explanatory, descriptive, and didactic narrative intrusions that characterize usual Greek and Latin historiography. As a result, chronicles are paratactic, which means that historical events are related as a series of “and”s, not “because”s or “as a result”s, and there is no necessary connection between one report and the next, no matter how important or unimportant, apart from the natural succession of time. Because of the lack of an ending and their brevity, chronicles can often be the work of different successive individuals.
  6.  
  7. Burgess, R. W., and Michael Kulikowski. 2013. Mosaics of time. The Latin chronicle traditions from the first century BC to the sixth century AD. Vol. 1, A historical introduction to the chronicle genre from its origins to the High Middle Ages. Studies in the Early Middle Ages 33. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.
  8.  
  9. DOI: 10.1484/M.SEM-EB.5.106285Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  10.  
  11. This is the only diachronic study of chronicles as a genre ever undertaken. The arguments in favor of the definition adopted here appear on pp. 1–62. See also pp. 278–287 for a short discussion of the development of the word “chronicle” (χρονικά/chronica) in the classical world.
  12.  
  13. Find this resource:
  14.  
  15.  
  16. The Question of Genre
  17. The study of chronicles faces two major hurdles. First of all, in both the ancient and modern worlds they have not been highly regarded as works of history. This topic is discussed in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 6–7, 357–358 (see What Is a Chronicle?), which offers a wide range of negative assessments of the chronicle genre—including the opinion that they are not even histories at all—as well as other, more positive evaluations from scholars who do not judge chronicles in terms of purposes and criteria that they were never intended to meet. The negative, and sometimes overtly hostile, attitude toward chronicles has resulted in their almost complete disappearance over the centuries, so that very few survive from the classical world for us to study. In the modern world, this negative judgement has given rise to a tendency to label any minor universalizing history as a chronicle. This is what has happened in Byzantine studies, even though works so labeled have no chronology and advance by reign, not by year (for which characteristics, see What Is a Chronicle?). But the Greek chronicle, for all intents and purposes, came to an end with the Chronici canones of Eusebius (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones) in the fourth century, and so the Chronicon Paschale (c. 630) and the much later Chronographia of Theophanes (c. 814) are the only true surviving Byzantine chronicles until the so-called Kleinchroniken at the very end of the period, which are quite different texts that probably evolved independently of the earlier chronicle traditions. This is not just a problem of nomenclature: it has prevented an understanding of the origins and development of Byzantine universal historiography as a whole. A different problem has arisen for scholars of the medieval West, when the term “chronicle” came to mean “a work of history” in general, covering many different genres. Modern scholars of the medieval period have more closely defined the word, with the result that the medieval versions of what are here called chronicles have for the most part come to be known as “annals.” Burgess and Kulikowski 2013 (see What Is a Chronicle?) considers “annals” to be chronicles and excludes many other works that have been called chronicles by Byzantinists and medievalists, but are not so, according to the classical definition. As a result they have been forced to come up with new generic names for these “historical texts formerly known as chronicles.” Burgess and Kulikowski 2013 and Burgess and Kulikowski 2016 are the first attempts to bring their new “ecumenical” interpretations directly to medievalists and Byzantinists respectively. Although the result of their efforts to spread these ecumenical definitions will not be known for some time—so far some scholars are receptive to them, others are not—it is worth emphasizing again that the subject here is classical chronicles and it is the uncontroversial classical definition that is being employed to distinguish them from other contemporary works.
  18.  
  19. Burgess, R. W., and Michael Kulikowski. 2013. Medieval historiographical terminology: The meaning of the word annales. In The medieval chronicle VIII. Edited by Erik Cooper and Sjoerd Levelt, 165–192. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
  20.  
  21. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  22.  
  23. The first attempt to show that the term “annals” is an erroneous modern definition that owes nothing to the genre as it was understood in the Middle Ages and that so-called “annals” are in fact true chronicles, the corollary of which is that many so-called chronicles of the medieval period are not.
  24.  
  25. Find this resource:
  26.  
  27.  
  28. Burgess, R. W., and Michael Kulikowski. 2016. The historiographical position of John Malalas. Genre in Late Antiquity and the Byzantine Middle Ages. In Die Weltchronik des Johannes Malalas. Edited by Mischa Meier, Christine Radtki, and Fabian Schulz, 93–117. Malalas Studien 1. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
  29.  
  30. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  31.  
  32. This is the first attempt to show that so-called Byzantine chronicles, of which one of the earliest is considered to be the universal breviarium (epitome history) of Malalas, are not chronicles and are not even related to chronicles.
  33.  
  34. Find this resource:
  35.  
  36.  
  37. Pre-Greek Chronicles
  38. There is a large body of literature on the many surviving Assyrian and, in particular, Babylonian chronicles, which, unlike later Greek chronicles, have been the object of specialized study for over a century because so many have survived on cuneiform tablets, which are virtually indestructible. A short general introduction to and bibliography on these chronicles can be found in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 63–80 (see What Is a Chronicle?), but the interested reader should then move immediately to Glassner 2004, a monument of scholarship that provides everything the beginner could want, with an overview of the genre as a whole, translations, and a full bibliography pointing to more detailed and advanced scholarship. Mesopotamian Chronicles is also an excellent, though more compact, introduction to these chronicles along with some related texts, but more important it also offers pre-publication editions (and a few translations) of twenty-one new Hellenistic chronicles edited by Bert van der Spek and Irving Finkel, two of the most important scholars of Babylonian chronicles today. The fact that Babylonian chronicles continued right down into the late Hellenistic period strengthens the view that the development of true Greek chronicles (see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles) was probably influenced by Babylonian chronicles via Ionia, as hypothesized by Burgess and Kulikowski 2013. Grayson 1975 is for the more advanced reader, as is Waerzeggers 2012, a work included because of its important attempt to advocate a fundamental rethinking of Near Eastern chronicles as a whole. There is only one surviving Egyptian chronicle, the so-called Royal Annals, preserved chiefly on the Palermo Stone and a few other fragments. There is a short discussion of this in the context of later Mediterranean chronicle developments in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013, but the first stop for any interested reader should be Wilkinson 2000.
  39.  
  40. Glassner, Jean-Jacques. 2004. Mesopotamian chronicles. Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the Ancient World 19. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature.
  41.  
  42. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  43.  
  44. This is the standard English translation of the surviving, published Assyrian and Babylonian chronicles with an invaluable overview of the genre, introductions, notes, and bibliography.
  45.  
  46. Find this resource:
  47.  
  48.  
  49. Grayson, A. K. 1975. Assyrian and Babylonian chronicles. Texts from Cuneiform Sources 5. Locust Valley, NY, and Glückstadt, Germany: J. J. Augustin.
  50.  
  51. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  52.  
  53. This remains the standard collection of critical editions of the Assyrian and Babylonian chronicles, though many other new texts have been published since (see Mesopotamian Chronicles). Reprint. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrahms, 2000.
  54.  
  55. Find this resource:
  56.  
  57.  
  58. Lendering, Jona. Mesopotamian Chronicles.
  59.  
  60. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  61.  
  62. This site provides an excellent general introduction to Mesopotamian chronicles. Beneath the heading “Chronicles” on the page Mesopotamia there is a slightly different list of chronicles along with many other related texts. Babylonian Chronicles: Literature provides a basic bibliography on Babylonian and Assyrian chronicles of almost 150 items.
  63.  
  64. Find this resource:
  65.  
  66.  
  67. Waerzeggers, Caroline. 2012. The Babylonian chronicles: Classification and provenance. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 71:285–298.
  68.  
  69. DOI: 10.1086/666831Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  70.  
  71. An important recent review and overview of the Babylonian chronicles and their generic relationships with one another.
  72.  
  73. Find this resource:
  74.  
  75.  
  76. Wilkinson, Toby A. H. 2000. Royal annals of ancient Egypt: The Palermo Stone and its associated fragments. London and New York: Kegan Paul.
  77.  
  78. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  79.  
  80. The most recent detailed study of the only surviving Egyptian chronicle. It includes a detailed study, transliterated edition, and translation.
  81.  
  82. Find this resource:
  83.  
  84.  
  85. Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles
  86. The difficulty with studying classical and Hellenistic Greek chronicles is their almost complete disappearance. One is therefore forced to hypothesize almost solely on the basis of titles, apparent titles, and later quotations and descriptions. Furthermore, they have for the most part been neglected by modern scholarship since the pioneering work of Jacoby at the beginning of the twentieth century (Jacoby 1926–1930, Jacoby 1930, and Jacoby 1949): in spite of the fact that such a basic work as Wachsmuth 1895 could include a lengthy chapter on Greek chronicles as a whole, modern surveys tend to ignore chronicles as a genre while mentioning them only with regard to specific chronicles or authors (though Rüpke and Glassner 2006 is an important exception). Up-to-date studies of the genre as a whole as well as of individual authors are a desideratum. We know of other chroniclers than the few noted here, but so little has been written about them that there is no point in listing them. A general guide can be found in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 80–91 (see What Is a Chronicle?) and testimonia, fragments, and commentaries appear in Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 (Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 239–251), revised versions of some of which have now started to appear in Brill’s New Jacoby.
  87.  
  88. Brill’s New Jacoby.
  89.  
  90. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  91.  
  92. This is the ongoing English language update to Jacoby’s Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. A subscription is required.
  93.  
  94. Find this resource:
  95.  
  96.  
  97. Jacoby, Felix. 1926–1930. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 2 B. Berlin: Weidmann.
  98.  
  99. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  100.  
  101. This is the text volume. For the most part these are the standard editions. pp. 992–1151. Reprint. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1962.
  102.  
  103. Find this resource:
  104.  
  105.  
  106. Jacoby, Felix. 1930. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 2 D, Kommentar. Weidmann: Berlin.
  107.  
  108. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  109.  
  110. This is the commentary volume. There is a wealth of information to be gained from the individual commentaries, though much of what Jacoby says is now somewhat-to- seriously outdated. See pp. 661–827. Reprint. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1962.
  111.  
  112. Find this resource:
  113.  
  114.  
  115. Jacoby, Felix. 1949. Atthis: The local chronicles of ancient Athens. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  116.  
  117. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  118.  
  119. An important, though overly polemical account of the development of early Greek chronicles, written to overturn the prevailing views at the time. It has more recently been questioned with respect to the rise of Attic historiography, which Jacoby has probably dated too early. Reprint. New York: Arno, 1973.
  120.  
  121. Find this resource:
  122.  
  123.  
  124. Rüpke, Jörg, and Jean Jacques Glassner. 2006. Chronicles. In Brill’s New Pauly.
  125.  
  126. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  127.  
  128. A short but valuable diachronic presentation of chronicles from Near Eastern to Roman. Available online by subscription.
  129.  
  130. Find this resource:
  131.  
  132.  
  133. Wachsmuth, Curt. 1895. Einleitung in das Studium der alten Geschichte. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.
  134.  
  135. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  136.  
  137. A unique survey of all Greek chronicles (and other works that should not be considered chronicles by the definition of this bibliography) in a general work devoted to Greek history and historiography. pp. 137–142.
  138.  
  139. Find this resource:
  140.  
  141.  
  142. Parian Marble (Marmor Parium)
  143. Lamentably, this is the only surviving Greek chronicle before the fragmentary Chronicon Romanum of the early first century CE. Two large fragments of this chronicle once survived out of what was once a 200-by-69-centimeter stone plaque that was inscribed (or at least written) in 264/263 BCE. It presents a combination of Athenian and Greek political, military, religious, and intellectual history, which starts with Cecrops, treated here as the first king of Athens, in the year we would call 1581/1580 BCE. It is upon this text that much of our detailed knowledge of the nature of Hellenistic chronicles depends. Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 84–86, 301–309 (see What Is a Chronicle?) puts the text in the context of the development of Greek and late Roman chronicles, with an English translation of the complete text. Jacoby 1904 and his work in Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 239 (= Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles]) were the only serious studies of the Parian Marble until the appearance of Brill’s New Jacoby 239 (= Sickinger 2016) and Rotstein 2016. These latter are now the starting point for anyone interested in this text, and their importance for both the Parian Marble and Greek chronicle studies as a whole cannot be overstated. The new Digital Marmor Parium project, with which Rotstein is associated, is a good example of the long overdue renewed interest in this text.
  144.  
  145. Digital Marmor Parium.
  146.  
  147. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  148.  
  149. An exciting modern project to produce an updated digital text of this chronicle along with associated chronological, geographical, and lexical studies. Particularly useful is the digital timeline (at the moment only compiled to the time of Homer).
  150.  
  151. Find this resource:
  152.  
  153.  
  154. Jacoby, Felix. 1904. Das Marmor Parium. Berlin: Weidmann.
  155.  
  156. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  157.  
  158. Until Rotstein 2016 this was the only full-length study of the Parian Marble. It was updated in the commentary to Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 239. Reprint, with extra material (Chicago: Ares, 1980).
  159.  
  160. Find this resource:
  161.  
  162.  
  163. Rotstein, Andrea. 2016. Literary history in the Parian Marble. Hellenic Studies Series 68. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies.
  164.  
  165. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  166.  
  167. The only major study since Jacoby, with a revised edition and translation, and up-to-date bibliography.
  168.  
  169. Find this resource:
  170.  
  171.  
  172. Sickinger, James P. 2016. Marmor Parium (239). In Brill’s New Jacoby.
  173.  
  174. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  175.  
  176. This is the updated version of Jacoby’s edition and commentary. Available online by subscription.
  177.  
  178. Find this resource:
  179.  
  180.  
  181. Eratosthenes, Περὶ Χρονογραφιῶν
  182. Around 222 BCE, Eratosthenes composed the first carefully researched, detailed universal chronology of Greek history, beginning with the Trojan War, placed in the year we would now call 1184/1183 BCE, and continuing down to Alexander. Eratosthenes was the first to use Olympiads as a unifying chronological system in a chronicle, a device he borrowed from Timaeus of Tauromenium, a Sicilian historian of the early third century, and this system was continued by later chroniclers down to the Chronicon Paschale, more than 230 years after the abolition of the games themselves. There is less interest in Eratosthenes’ chronicle than in his other scientific works, but the interest in these other works means that his chronicle does get at least some general attention in biographies, such as Fraser 1971, Pfeiffer 1968, and Geus 2002, but Niese 1888 and Fragmente der griechischen Historiker/Brill’s New Jacoby 241 (= Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles], and Pownall 2009) still stand today as the major studies of the work, providing the standard editions of the texts and witnesses. Detailed studies have concentrated mostly on Eratosthenes’ use of Olympiads, as can be seen from Möller 2005 and Christesen 2007, in which Christesen’s argument that Hippias of Elis first established the synchronism of the first Olympiad with our year 776 BCE is to be preferred to the argument of Möller 2005, who argues that it was Eratosthenes himself.
  183.  
  184. Christesen, Paul. 2007. Olympic victor lists and ancient Greek history. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
  185.  
  186. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511550966Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  187.  
  188. An important study of Eratosthenes’ use of Olympiads as a chronological system, along with texts and translations of the relevant fragments. See pp. 11–13, 19–20, 146–157, 173–179, 371–373, 491–504.
  189.  
  190. Find this resource:
  191.  
  192.  
  193. Fraser, P. M. 1971. Eratosthenes of Cyrene. London: Oxford Univ. Press.
  194.  
  195. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  196.  
  197. The most recent general account of Eratosthenes’ chronicle in English (pp. 26–28). Also: Proceedings of the British Academy 56 (1970): 175–207 at 198–200.
  198.  
  199. Find this resource:
  200.  
  201.  
  202. Geus, K. 2002. Eratosthenes von Kyrene: Studien zur hellenistischen Kultur- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Münchener Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 92. Munich: C. H. Beck.
  203.  
  204. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  205.  
  206. This is the best and most recent general account of Eratosthenes’ chronicle. See pp. 309–310, 313–332.
  207.  
  208. Find this resource:
  209.  
  210.  
  211. Möller, Astrid. 2005. Epoch-making Eratosthenes. Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 45:245–260.
  212.  
  213. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  214.  
  215. Möller argues that it was Eratosthenes who first equated the first Olympiad with our year 776 BCE (but see Christesen 2007).
  216.  
  217. Find this resource:
  218.  
  219.  
  220. Niese, B. 1888. Die Chronographie des Eratosthenes. Hermes 23:92–102.
  221.  
  222. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  223.  
  224. An important, though early, analysis of Eratosthenes’ chronicle and the starting point for all later studies.
  225.  
  226. Find this resource:
  227.  
  228.  
  229. Pfeiffer, Rudolf. 1968. History of classical scholarship from the beginnings to the end of the Hellenistic age. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  230.  
  231. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  232.  
  233. A short but useful overview in English of the importance of Eratosthenes’ work. See pp. 163–164.
  234.  
  235. Find this resource:
  236.  
  237.  
  238. Pownall, Frances. 2009. Eratosthenes of Cyrene (241). In Brill’s New Jacoby.
  239.  
  240. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  241.  
  242. This is the updated version of Jacoby’s edition and commentary. Available online by subscription.
  243.  
  244. Find this resource:
  245.  
  246.  
  247. Apollodorus, Χρονικά
  248. Apollodorus’s chronicle covered 1,040 years of history from the Trojan War down to 146 BCE, and included the same mixture of mythological and historical material as is found in Near Eastern chronicles and earlier Greek chronographic works, but it also included notices on a large number of Greek writers, particularly philosophers, thus making literary figures and their works a common subject for later chroniclers (though such material can already be found in the Parian Marble (see Parian Marble (Marmor Parium)) and making his chronicle an invaluable source for later scholars of Greek philosophy. It was written entirely in iambic trimeters, to aid memorization, and used Athenian archons instead of Olympiads for chronology. Later prose reworkings (with added Olympiads) and continuations down to at least 109 BCE became more popular than any other chronicle, including that of Apollodorus himself. It was Apollodorus’s title that gave the standard name to the genre, which had previously been called χρονικὴ σύνταξις. Once again, Jacoby’s pioneering work of over a century ago pretty much remains the last word (Jacoby 1902 and Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 244 F 1–87, 331–51 [= Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 (see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles)]). Published originally in Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft more than sixty years earlier Schwartz 1957 therefore predates Jacoby, but is still useful. The only good general account in English is that of Pfeiffer 1968, though it is very short. The chronicle is generally only cited in modern scholarship as a source for other, later works, particularly with regard to philosophy, but such studies are all too detailed or the references too brief to warrant citation here, with perhaps the exception of Bravo 2009.
  249.  
  250. Bravo, Benedetto. 2009. La chronique d’Apollodore et le Pseudo-Skymnos: érudition antiquaire et littérature géographique dans la seconde moitié du IIe siècle av. J.-C. Studia Hellenistica 46. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters.
  251.  
  252. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  253.  
  254. This book is more about Pseudo-Scymnus than Apollodorus, but it still provides many new insights and hypotheses with regard to Apollodorus as Bravo attempts to show that Apollodorus was Pseudo-Scymnus’s source for the dates of Greek city foundations.
  255.  
  256. Find this resource:
  257.  
  258.  
  259. Jacoby, Felix. 1902. Apollodors Chronik. Philologische Untersuchungen 16. Berlin: Weidmann.
  260.  
  261. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  262.  
  263. Still the standard and only full-length study of Apollodorus. Reprint. New York: Arno Press, 1973.
  264.  
  265. Find this resource:
  266.  
  267.  
  268. Pfeiffer, Rudolf. 1968. History of classical scholarship from the beginnings to the end of the Hellenistic age. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  269.  
  270. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  271.  
  272. This is the standard account of Apollodorus’s chronicle in English. Pp. 164, 253–257.
  273.  
  274. Find this resource:
  275.  
  276.  
  277. Schwartz, Eduard. 1957. Griechische Geschichtsschreiber. Leipzig: Koehler & Amelang.
  278.  
  279. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  280.  
  281. An early and mostly outdated, but still useful, account of Apollodorus. pp. 253–281. Reprinted from Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft I. 2 (1894), coll. 2856–2875.
  282.  
  283. Find this resource:
  284.  
  285.  
  286. Castor of Rhodes, Ἐπιτομὴ χρονικῶν
  287. Very little is known about Castor himself. He composed a universal Olympiad chronicle in six books from Aegialeus, king of Sicyon, and Ninus, king of Assyria, both shortly after 2100 BCE, down to 61 BCE. He was thus the first Greek chronicler that we know of to write within a distinctly Roman world, and Feeney 2007 shows the effect that he had on early Roman chronography, while Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 88–89, 128, 364–365 (see What Is a Chronicle?) and Christesen 2007: 258, 260, 311–322, 418–432 (see Eratosthenes, Περὶ Χρονογραφιῶν) put his work into the context of earlier Hellenistic chronography. The major study remains Kubitschek 1919. Castor’s chronicle was an important source for Eusebius (Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones), particularly the chronologies of the Assyrians, Sicyonians, Argives, Athenians (kings and archons), and Romans (kings and consuls), and perhaps the Medes, Lydians, and Persians as well, and it is cited by authors from Josephus and Plutarch down to John Lydus and Stephen of Byzantium, as well as by the Latin writers Ausonius and Augustine, as can be seen from Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 250 (= Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles]). He seems to have been the first major Olympiad chronicler to establish a large number of pre-Trojan chronologies—the Trojan War was the starting point for both Eratosthenes and Apollodorus (see Eratosthenes, Περὶ Χρονογραφιῶν and Apollodorus, Χρονικά)—and to synchronize and integrate Syrian and Eastern chronologies with the usual Greek chronologies. Castor also condensed his chronicle down into a much more abbreviated work in a single book called the Κανών, which appears to have been a collection of various types of king lists and chronological tables, a genre we know much more about from later Christian and Byzantine examples.
  288.  
  289. Feeney, Denis. 2007. Caesar’s calendar: Ancient time and the beginnings of history. Sather Classical Lectures 65. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
  290.  
  291. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  292.  
  293. A short but valuable discussion of Castor and his influence on late Republican and Christian historiography. pp. 20, 63–64.
  294.  
  295. Find this resource:
  296.  
  297.  
  298. Kubitschek, Wilhelm. 1919. Kastor von Rhodos 8. In Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft X. 2. Stuttgart: Alfred Druckenmüller.
  299.  
  300. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  301.  
  302. This remains the longest and most detailed study of Castor, though, as one might expect, it is now rather out of date. Coll. 2347–2357.
  303.  
  304. Find this resource:
  305.  
  306.  
  307. Greek Chronicles of the Imperial Period
  308. Like classical and Hellenistic chronicles there is no detailed account of Greek chronicles of the Roman imperial period, though there are, at least, some recent discussions of specific chronicles. Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 89–91, 95, 343–353 (see What Is a Chronicle?) puts these chronicles into context with earlier Hellenistic chronicles and later Roman chronicles, and includes an appendix on an obscure and lost imperial chronicler not covered here, Cassius Longinus, but otherwise there is no detailed study other than the testimonia, fragments, and commentary in Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 252–259 (= Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles]), some of which have now appeared in new revised versions in Brill’s New Jacoby. Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 260 (Porphyry) has not been included here since we now know that Porphyry did not write a chronicle (see Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 90 n. 87, 120 n. 82, 346 [see What Is a Chronicle?]).
  309.  
  310. Chronicon Romanum
  311. The Chronicon Romanum is the name used to describe two sets of excerpts from a single Greek chronicle preserved on two of the Tabulae Iliacae (18L and 22VP/Get), which are tiny, otherwise mostly Homeric bas-reliefs with accompanying inscriptions on the front and back. These two inscriptions were produced by the same engraver in 15/16 CE in the vicinity of Rome, each one preserving a bas-relief of an unknown subject on the obverse (perhaps related to the Alexander Romance) and two columns of legible text on the reverse, though 22Get has evidence of a third column. The first column of 18L is an almost annual account covering Roman and Egyptian history between 88 and 80 BCE and derives from a late Hellenistic chronicle. The second column of 18L and the two columns of 22Get present an eclectic selection of highlights from Athenian, Lydian, Persian, and Roman political and literary history from the sixth to fourth century BCE with 18L being an edited version of the text used for 22Get. There is no good evidence to support the hypothesis that the source of this work was the chronicle of Apollodorus or Cornelius Nepos (see Apollodorus, Χρονικά and Cornelius Nepos and T. Pomponius Atticus) as suggested by Burstein 1984 and Jenkins 2016. Modern scholars are too often inclined to associate anonymous works with known authors, and in the case of chronicles, which we know were easy to compose, extremely tralatitious, and probably almost ubiquitous, this tendency is particularly ill-advised. Just like the Parian Marble the original chronicle was written with a countdown chronology calculated from the date of writing (on which, see Rotstein 2016: 57–66 [see Parian Marble (Marmor Parium)]). The standard edition of 18L is Fragmente der griechischen Historiker/Brill’s New Jacoby 252 (= Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles], and Jenkins 2016), while Burstein 1984 and Petrain 2008 provide the editio princeps of and necessary corrections to the newly discovered 22Get, which is also included in Jenkins 2016. Jenkins updates the commentary of Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 84 n. 70, 95, 121, 309–310 (see What Is a Chronicle?) briefly puts the work into its chronicle context, along with an English translation of 18L, while Petrain 2014 and particularly Squire 2011 put these fragments into context with the Tabulae Iliacae.
  312.  
  313. Burstein, Stanley M. 1984. A New Tabula Iliaca: The Vasek Polak Chronicle. The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 12:153–162.
  314.  
  315. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  316.  
  317. The editio princeps of the new fragment (which he names 22VP, though Petrain refers to it as 22Get, since it resides in the Getty Museum). It is the twenty-second surviving Tabula Iliaca.
  318.  
  319. Find this resource:
  320.  
  321.  
  322. Jenkins, Fred W. 2016. Chronicon Romanum (252). In Brill’s New Jacoby.
  323.  
  324. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  325.  
  326. This is the updated version of Jacoby’s edition and commentary and includes 22Get. Available online by subscription.
  327.  
  328. Find this resource:
  329.  
  330.  
  331. Petrain, David. 2008. Two inscriptions from the Tabulae Iliacae: The epic canon of the Borgia Tablet (IG 14.1292.2) and the Roman Chronicle (SEG 33.802B). Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 166:83–84.
  332.  
  333. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  334.  
  335. Important textual revisions of 22Get.
  336.  
  337. Find this resource:
  338.  
  339.  
  340. Petrain, David. 2014. Homer in stone. The Tabulae Iliacae in their Roman context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
  341.  
  342. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139342612Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  343.  
  344. This is the second of the two new monographs on the Tabulae Iliacae, though it has almost nothing to say about these two chronicle excerpts since they do not concern the Iliad. This book updates the general bibliography of Squire 2011. See pp. 18, 20, 126, 170.
  345.  
  346. Find this resource:
  347.  
  348.  
  349. Squire, Michael. 2011. The Iliad in a nutshell. Visualizing epic on the Tabulae Iliacae. Oxford and New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
  350.  
  351. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  352.  
  353. This volume provides an excellent analysis of the inscriptions themselves and a context for understanding them within the Tabulae Iliacae, along with detailed descriptions, photographs, and drawings. It also includes an exhaustive bibliography. See 32–33, 47–53, 55–56, 58, 60, 65, 69, 71, 192, 194, 198–199, and especially 407–408, 411–412, with Plate XXIV.
  354.  
  355. Find this resource:
  356.  
  357.  
  358. Phlegon, ᾽Ολυμπιονικῶν καὶ χρονικῶν συναγωγή
  359. Phlegon began the fifteen or sixteen books of his well-known chronicle, A Compendium of Olympic Victors and Chronicles, with the first Olympiad (776 BCE) and concluded with the two hundred and twenty-ninth (137–140 CE). All that survives intact are the events of part of a single Olympiad quoted in the Bibliotheca of the ninth-century Byzantine bibliophile, Photius. The major studies are Fragmente der griechischen Historiker/Brill’s New Jacoby 257 (= Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles], and McInerney 2012), Hansen 1996, and Christesen 2007: 210–213, 258, 326–334, 437–444, 520–523 (see Eratosthenes, Περὶ Χρονογραφιῶν). Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 89–90, 283–284, 315–316 (see What Is a Chronicle?) put him into the context of imperial chronicles and provide a translation, as do Hansen 1996 and Christesen 2007.
  360.  
  361. Hansen, William. 1996. Phlegon of Tralles’ Book of Marvels. Exeter Studies in History. Exeter, UK: Univ. of Exeter Press.
  362.  
  363. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  364.  
  365. An important general study of the fragment in the context of Phlegon’s other work, with a translation. See pp. 20–22, 58–62, 190–198.
  366.  
  367. Find this resource:
  368.  
  369.  
  370. McInerney, Jeremy. 2012. Phlegon of Tralles (257). In Brill’s New Jacoby.
  371.  
  372. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  373.  
  374. This is the updated version of Jacoby’s edition and commentary. Available online by subscription.
  375.  
  376. Find this resource:
  377.  
  378.  
  379. Second- and Third-Century Olympiad Chronicles
  380. Oxyrhynchus Papyri I. 12 (Grenfell and Hunt 1898 = Fragmente der griechischen Historiker/Brill’s New Jacoby 255; see Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles], and Rzepka 2013) and XVII. 2082 (Hunt 1927 = Fragmente der griechischen Historiker/Brill’s New Jacoby 257a; see Jacoby 1926–1930 and Jacoby 1930 [see Classical and Hellenistic Greek Chronicles], and Rzepka 2011) are both fragments of Greek chronicles that survive on papyrus and were found in Oxyrhynchus in Egypt. The first chronicle covers events between the 106th and 116th Olympiad (356–313 BCE) and was copied in the first half of the third century CE. Soltau 1899, Bilabel 1922, and Johanson 1979 also analyze the first chronicle, the latter being the most important. The date at which this chronicle was originally composed is unclear: that it dates to not long after the beginning of the imperial period is nothing more than a guess. The second chronicle is much more fragmentary and covers Greek history from roughly 300–293 BCE and was copied in the second half of the second century. Hunt, followed by Jacoby, assigns it to Phlegon, but there is no evidence for that conclusion (Christesen 2007: 520–523 [see Eratosthenes, Περὶ Χρονογραφιῶν]) or for the suggestion that it is the work of Eratosthenes (see the “Biographical Essay” in Rzepka 2011). For the dangers of ascribing anonymous chronicles to known works, see Chronicon Romanum. Translations and short studies can be found in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 90,121, 313–315 (see What Is a Chronicle?) and Christesen 2007: 33–34, 210–213, 334–340, 445–451.
  381.  
  382. Bilabel, Fr. 1922. Die kleineren Historikerfragmente auf Papyrus. Kleine Texte für Vorlesungen und Übungen 149. Bonn, Germany: A. Marcus und E. Weber.
  383.  
  384. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  385.  
  386. An edition of Oxyrhynchus Papyri I. 12 with a short textual and historical commentary at the foot of each page. See pp. 36–46.
  387.  
  388. Find this resource:
  389.  
  390.  
  391. Grenfell, B. P., and A. S. Hunt. 1898. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri 1. London: Egypt Exploration Fund. 25–36.
  392.  
  393. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  394.  
  395. This is the first edition of the text of Oxyrhynchus Papyri I. 12 with an introduction and a basic textual and literary commentary.
  396.  
  397. Find this resource:
  398.  
  399.  
  400. Hunt, A. S. 1927. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri 17. London: Egypt Exploration Fund. 82–95.
  401.  
  402. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  403.  
  404. This is the first edition of the text of Oxyrhynchus Papyri XVII. 2082 with an introduction and basic textual and literary commentary.
  405.  
  406. Find this resource:
  407.  
  408.  
  409. Johanson, S. F. 1979. “Scholar” at work: The compiling of the “Oxyrhynchus Chronicle” (P. Oxy. I, 12). In Actes du XVe Congrès international de papyrologie III: Problèmes généraux: papyrologie littéraire. Edited by Jean Bingen, Georges Nachtergael, and E. G. Turner, 78–85. Papyrologica Bruxellensia 18. Brussels: Fondation égyptologique Reine Élisabeth.
  410.  
  411. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  412.  
  413. This is the only detailed study of either chronicle fragment.
  414.  
  415. Find this resource:
  416.  
  417.  
  418. Rzepka, Jacek. 2011. Anonymous, Olympic Chronicle (Chronicon Olympicyum) (vel Phlegon) (P. Oxy., 17.2082) (257a) In Brill’s New Jacoby.
  419.  
  420. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  421.  
  422. This is the updated version of Jacoby’s edition and commentary. Available by subscription.
  423.  
  424. Find this resource:
  425.  
  426.  
  427. Rzepka, Jacek. 2013. Anonymous Olympic Chronicle from Oxyrhynchus (P.Oxy. I 12) (255). In Brill’s New Jacoby.
  428.  
  429. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  430.  
  431. This is the updated version of Jacoby’s edition and commentary. Available by subscription.
  432.  
  433. Find this resource:
  434.  
  435.  
  436. Soltau, W. 1899. Ein chronologisches Fragment der Oxyrhynchos-Papyri. Philologus 58:558–576.
  437.  
  438. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  439.  
  440. This was the first detailed study of Oxyrhynchus Papyri I. 12 after its initial publication, with a text and detailed analysis.
  441.  
  442. Find this resource:
  443.  
  444.  
  445. Consularia of the Early and Late Empire
  446. Consularia are a sub-genre of chronicles and can be considered as distinct from them in the following ways: for the most part they are compilations of imperial proclamations—and so almost always present positive accounts of imperial actions—and notes of local natural, celestial, and meteorological phenomena inserted into a chronological framework of fasti, that is a list of the pairs of annually elected consuls. They are written in an anonymous, telegraphic style that favors passive verbs, and many surviving examples are illustrated. No other chronicles are illustrated. They do not treat ecclesiastical history, a standard subject matter of chronicles after Eusebius and Jerome (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones and Jerome, Chronici canones). Finally, they exist not as single works by named authors but as anonymous traditions that travelled back and forth across the empire, shaped by many different compilers and editors. A good survey of the nineteenth-century German scholarship that led to the modern understanding of consularia can be found in Muhlberger 1990. A general survey of consularia can be found in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 35–57 (see What Is a Chronicle?). Late antique consularia, which survive in manuscripts, derive from the same tradition as the Latin epigraphic fasti and consularia of the early empire, most particularly the famous Fasti Ostienses (see Epigraphic Consularia of the Early Empire). Although there was probably influence on the early development of consularia from Apollodorus and Castor of Rhodes (see Apollodorus, Χρονικά and Castor of Rhodes, Ἐπιτομὴ χρονικῶν) as well as from the early Latin chronicles of Cornelius Nepos and T. Pomponius Atticus in the first half of the first century BCE, consularia are for the most part a native Roman tradition, independent of the development of Greek Chronicles of the Imperial Period and Late-Roman Christian Chronicles. The near identical nature of both the earlier and the later consularia shows that in spite of the more than one-hundred-year absence of evidence between epigraphic and manuscript consularia during the third century there must have been a continuous tradition from the reign of Augustus right through to the beginning of the seventh century. The earliest surviving Late Antique chronicles are the consularia of the fourth century, which for the most part divide into two completely independent traditions: those related to the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) and those related to the Consularia Italica. The former is the earliest. While there certainly was an original author who began a single text at the origin of each of these traditions, the texts quickly ramified, as later readers across the empire brought their copies up to date and combined different recensions. Some traditions became particularly popular and were copied often, and they travelled widely across the empire. As a result there is no single “author” or even “text” of such works, since that text was constantly changing in ways that we cannot now see because of the fragmentary nature of our witnesses and the lack of a single surviving early, complete, and uncontaminated text.
  447.  
  448. Muhlberger, Steven. 1990. The fifth-century chroniclers: Prosper, Hydatius, and the Gallic chronicler of 452. Leeds, UK: Francis Cairns.
  449.  
  450. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  451.  
  452. An important survey of consularia and in particular an important summary of nineteenth-century German scholarship on the origins, nature, and relationship of consularia, here called “consular annals.” See pp. 23–46.
  453.  
  454. Find this resource:
  455.  
  456.  
  457. The Nature of the Consularia Genre
  458. The most contentious area in the modern study of classical chronicles concerns consularia: do they exist as a separate genre, what is the origin of their information, and what was the manner of their dissemination? The origins of the dispute lie, as is so often the case, in late-nineteenth-century German scholarship. These original debates are nicely summarized by Muhlberger 1990: 23–46 (see Consularia of the Early and Late Empire), who argues in favor of the hypothesis of private works disseminated via book sellers, rather than official “city chronicles” that were produced by imperial or local governments. In the same year Croke 1990 argued instead for the latter: these works, the product of official compilation in the major cities of the empire, were officially posted and later updated in a permanent form there. Thus each “city chronicle” would contain a standard core of official imperial news as well as a selection of local events. Such chronicles would therefore lie behind all surviving chronicles. Croke also demonstrates, much more conclusively, that the source of such imperial news was the official proclamation notices of important events disseminated by the imperial court. Burgess 1993 and Burgess 2000 argue forcefully against the idea of “city chronicles,” not only because there is no evidence for such works, but chiefly, as the latter article shows, because there is no evidence for the official compilation or publication by anyone of even such a basic “official” text as the names of the annual consuls, let alone “city chronicles,” which would have contained just such a list of consuls. Croke reiterated his belief in “city chronicles” and even went so far as to deny the existence of consularia as a distinct genre by claiming that the apparent generic differences in the surviving examples (as set out in Consularia of the Early and Late Empire) are simply a result of medieval excerpting of normal Christian chronicles inspired by Eusebius or Jerome (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones and Jerome, Chronici canones) (Croke 2001a, Croke 2001b). But his arguments derive from his hypothesis of “city chronicles,” not from the texts themselves. The distinct nature of consularia was defended, as was their close connection with epigraphic consularia of the early empire and their independence from both Greek and Christian chronicles of Late Antiquity, by Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 137–155, 317–327, 360–361 (see What Is a Chronicle?), who also emphasize the close parallels between the content of Roman calendars and early consularia and demonstrate the unofficial nature of surviving calendars. The conclusion is again reinforced that if central and local governments did not compile or publish such basic texts as fasti or calendars, they would not have compiled or published “city chronicles.”
  459.  
  460. Burgess, R. W. 1993. The chronicle of Hydatius and the Consularia Constantinopolitana: Two contemporary accounts of the final years of the Roman Empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  461.  
  462. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  463.  
  464. The first direct critical response to Croke 1990, accepting the fundamentally “official” nature of the major source of consularia, but arguing that consularia themselves were the product of private not official compilation and illustration. It also demonstrates the fact that consularia like the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) travelled back and forth across the empire and were not compiled in a single city. pp. 178–186.
  465.  
  466. Find this resource:
  467.  
  468.  
  469. Burgess, R. W. 2000. “Non duo Antonini sed duo Augusti”: The consuls of 161 and the origins and traditions of the Latin consular fasti of the Roman Empire. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 132:259–290.
  470.  
  471. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  472.  
  473. See especially pp. 279–284. A defense of the unofficial nature of consularia on the basis of an analysis of all surviving fasti. Also: R. W. Burgess, Chronicles, Consuls, and Coins, Historiography and History in the Later Roman Empire (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), Paper XV.
  474.  
  475. Find this resource:
  476.  
  477.  
  478. Croke, Brian. 1990. City chronicles of Late Antiquity. In Reading the past in Late Antiquity. Edited by Graeme Clarke, et al., 165–203. Rushcutters Bay: Australian National Univ. Press.
  479.  
  480. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  481.  
  482. An early and influential account that presents consularia and related texts as local copies of officially compiled “city chronicles” that existed in every major city of the empire.
  483.  
  484. Find this resource:
  485.  
  486.  
  487. Croke, Brian. 2001a. Count Marcellinus and his Chronicle. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
  488.  
  489. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  490.  
  491. In his discussion of Marcellinus’s sources Croke includes a Constantinopolitan city chronicle and argues that Marcellinus’s information on imperial events, including those in the western empire, derived only from such a local and official source. See pp. 163–164, 181–195.
  492.  
  493. Find this resource:
  494.  
  495.  
  496. Croke, Brian. 2001b. Chronicles, Annals and “Consular Annals” in Late Antiquity. Chiron 31:291–331.
  497.  
  498. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  499.  
  500. A long and wide-ranging discussion of chronicles and nomenclature, with a large bibliography, intended as a further defense against Burgess 1993 and Burgess 2000 in particular, this time even denying the existence of consularia as a distinct genre and claiming them to be mere medieval fragments of regular Christian chronicles.
  501.  
  502. Find this resource:
  503.  
  504.  
  505. Epigraphic Consularia of the Early Empire
  506. Thanks to the ground-breaking work of Rüpke 1995 and Rüpke 1997 we can now see that the earliest extant consularia survive in inscriptions from the reign of Augustus and that these epigraphic texts were not official and practical chronological guides, as once thought, but political texts compiled from private historical research. The sorts of information contained in texts like the Fasti Antiates maiores, which was found in a villa not a public space, and the Fasti Capitolini, with its associated list of triumphatores, make no sense in an official religious, bureaucratic, or chronological text. Even the Fasti Capitolini can now be recognized not as an official text erected by Augustus from archival sources, but as a historical text produced by historical research, perhaps even by T. Pomponius Atticus (see Cornelius Nepos and T. Pomponius Atticus). The next step, historiographically speaking, from these annotated fasti, is true consularia: the Fasti Venusini, Amiternini, Cuprenses, Gabini, and Tauromenitani, of which most are found in Degrassi 1947, and all are described in detail in Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 165–166 (see What Is a Chronicle?). These epigraphic consularia are quite fragmentary and patchy in their historical coverage, but the Fasti Ostienses, which once covered the period from c. 60 BCE to the early fourth quarter of the second century CE, was historically very detailed and survives in substantial fragments, thus providing important evidence for the development of this genre from the early to the late empire (text: Vidman 1982; study: Bargagli and Grosso 1997). Building on Rüpke’s work, Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 138–139, 141 n. 20, 156–169 was able to consider early imperial epigraphic calendars and consularia, particularly the Fasti Ostienses, in the same historiographical context as late Roman consularia and to show that consularia of the late empire are the direct descendants of these early imperial texts, completely independent of and, in the case of the Descriptio consulum (Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) pre-dating by four decades Jerome’s Chronici canones (see Jerome, Chronici canones and The Nature of the Consularia Genre).
  507.  
  508. Bargagli, Barbara, and Cristiana Grosso. 1997. I Fasti Ostienses: Documento della storia di Ostia. Itinerari Ostiensi 8. Rome: Ministero per i beni culturali e ambientali, Soprintendenza archeologica di Ostia.
  509.  
  510. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  511.  
  512. The best and most recent general account of the Fasti Ostienses.
  513.  
  514. Find this resource:
  515.  
  516.  
  517. Degrassi, Attilio. 1947. Fasti et elogia 1: Fasti consulares et triumphales. Inscriptiones Italiae 13. Rome: La Libraria dello Stato.
  518.  
  519. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  520.  
  521. This is the standard edition of the early imperial fasti and consularia, but has never been updated, so it is missing the more recently discovered texts.
  522.  
  523. Find this resource:
  524.  
  525.  
  526. Rüpke, Jörg. 1995. Fasti: Quellen oder Produkte römischer Geschichtsschreibung?’ Klio 77:184–202.
  527.  
  528. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  529.  
  530. Rüpke shows that the fasti, both manuscript and epigraphic, were the product of historical research, which began with Fulvius Nobilior and Q. Ennius, and not of the need for practical chronological, bureaucratic, or religious guidance.
  531.  
  532. Find this resource:
  533.  
  534.  
  535. Rüpke, Jörg. 1997. Geschichtsschreibung in Listenform: Beamtenlisten unter römischen Kalendern. Philologus 141:65–85.
  536.  
  537. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  538.  
  539. Rüpke advances Rüpke 1995 with further argument and detail, linking fasti to early chronicles and later consularia. He concludes by demonstrating that the presence of fasti in a text like the Chronograph of 354 was a result of its historical, not its chronological, value.
  540.  
  541. Find this resource:
  542.  
  543.  
  544. Vidman, Ladislav. 1982. Fasti Ostienses. Prague: Československá Akademie věd.
  545.  
  546. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  547.  
  548. The standard edition of the text.
  549.  
  550. Find this resource:
  551.  
  552.  
  553. Descriptio Consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)
  554. This is a complex document based upon consular fasti from 509 BCE to 468 CE. It was originally compiled in Trier in c. 342 with the compilation of a solid block of detailed and dated entries deriving from imperial proclamations and perhaps even local calendars between 286 and 337 and a few less detailed entries between 340 and 342 that were added from local knowledge. It is also probable that the earlier material now found before 286 was also included at the time of the original composition: historico-literary entries, derived, it would seem, from an early Latin chronicle (112–19 BCE), early Christian and martyrological entries (2 BCE–258 CE), and an oddly random assortment of entries relating to imperial history at the end of the third century (261–284). The original text travelled from Trier to Rome (entries for the years 350–355), Constantinople (356–388.1, with a few earlier additions going back as far as 341.2, hence Mommsen’s title of Consularia Constantinopolitana), Spain (388.2–395), north Africa (398–405), and Rome again (410–423). Different recensions of the Constantinopolitan text between 370 and 388 served as an important source for many later eastern writers in Latin and Greek, the earliest being Jerome (see Jerome, Chronici canones). Its unique preservation of many otherwise unknown or corrupt dates and unknown or poorly known events makes it of fundamental importance for the chronology of the fourth and early fifth centuries. Descriptio consulum is the title given to the work in the unique complete manuscript (Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Phillipps 1829) and the appearance of a title is unique among such works. The evidence of the Consularia Berolinensia (see Consularia Berolinensia (Fasti Berolinenses)), which includes illustrated entries from the Descriptio, suggests that this text was originally illustrated, like the Consularia Italica. There have been a number of different editions since the complete text was first published in 1657. Mommsen’s text (1892) was the standard until Burgess 1993: 175–245 (see The Nature of the Consularia Genre), which includes the only detailed analysis of the text and its tradition, though both editions are really little more than lightly corrected diplomatic texts.
  555.  
  556. Mommsen, Theodor. 1892. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auctores antiquissimi 9, Chronica minora 1. Berlin: Weidmann.
  557.  
  558. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  559.  
  560. Until Burgess 1993 the only reasonably modern study and edition of this text. Pp. 199–147.
  561.  
  562. Find this resource:
  563.  
  564.  
  565. Consularia Italica
  566. Unlike the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)), this is not a surviving text, but a tradition whose influences can be traced in over twenty later sources in Latin and Greek, in Italy, Constantinople, and Alexandria, from the fifth to the ninth centuries. The surviving witnesses show that it covered the period between 379 and 493. The date of 379 suggests that its narrative was considered in some ways as a continuation of Jerome. All the surviving witnesses to this tradition that retain the original consularia format are treated here as subheadings: Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores), Excerpta Sangallensia, Consularia Scaligeriana (Barbarus Scaligeri, Excerpta Latina barbari), Consularia Golenischevensia (Alexandrian World Chronicle), Consularia Hafniensia (Chronik von 641, Additamenta ad Prosperum Havniensia + Auctuarium Prosperi Havniense, Prosperi Continuatio Havniensis), Consularia Marsiburgensia (Ravenna Annals), Paschale Campanum, and Cassiodorus. Three other major witnesses to the tradition do not retain this format and so are not treated here: chapters 36–38, 48–56 of the Anonymi Valesiani pars posterior of c. 530, Agnellus’s Liber pontificalis ecclesiae Ravennatis of c. 846, and Theophanes’s Greek Chronographia of c. 814. Another important witness, Marcellinus comes, is discussed under Late-Roman Christian Chronicles. Like the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)), the Consularia Italica was probably originally compiled in northern Gaul, but at the beginning of the fifth century it came to Rome and was soon after taken to Ravenna, which seems to have been the home of the main tradition. At least twice recensions were taken to Alexandria where they were translated into Greek, once in the fifth century (witnessed by Theophanes) and once in the sixth (witnessed by the Consularia Scaligeriana and Consularia Golenischevensia [see Consularia Scaligeriana (Barbarus Scaligeri, Excerpta Latina barbari) and Consularia Golenischevensia (Alexandrian World Chronicle)]). The popularity of the Consularia Italica tradition in Late Antiquity and afterwards and its immense importance today are both a result of the fact that it is unique in providing a detailed chronology for the western empire from the end of the fourth to the end of the fifth centuries. Without it, our chronology for the emperors of this period would be even more opaque than that for the emperors of the third century. Holder-Egger 1876 produced the first detailed analysis of all the possible witnesses to the Consularia Italica, along with a reconstruction of it. It was as a result of this study and his own objections to the form of that reconstruction that in 1892 Mommsen published his own edition, not of the hypothetical original text as Holder-Egger had attempted, but of the major witnesses, set out in columns across a double page spread (Mommsen 1892: 251–321 [see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)]). Cessi 1916 is the only detailed textual comparison of the witnesses since Holder-Egger.
  567.  
  568. Cessi, Roberto. 1916. Studi sulle fonti dell’età Gotica e Longobarda I. “Fasti Vindobonenses”. Archivio Muratoriano 17–18:293–405.
  569.  
  570. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  571.  
  572. A detailed and explicit comparison of the text of the Consularia Vindobonensia (see Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores)) with many other witnesses to the Consularia Italica. It is an important advance on the analysis of Holder-Egger 1876.
  573.  
  574. Find this resource:
  575.  
  576.  
  577. Holder-Egger, Oswald. 1876. Untersuchungen über einige annalistische Quellen zur Geschichte des fünften und sechsten Jahrhunderts III. Die Ravennater Annalen. Neues Archiv 1:215–368.
  578.  
  579. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  580.  
  581. The fundamental article that first established the existence of the Consularia Italica, even presenting, in an ill-advised attempt, a recreation of its text.
  582.  
  583. Find this resource:
  584.  
  585.  
  586. Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores)
  587. This is a recension of the Consularia Italica that extended that work from 493 to c. 527 and is our best witness to it. It survives in two separate recensions found in a single late-fifteenth-century manuscript (Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 3416), called priora and posteriora by Mommsen, the priora (CVpr) extending from Caesar to 493, with a lacuna between 403 and 455, and the posteriora (CVpost) from Caesar to 539, with lacunae between 46–75, 388–437, and 455–495. A more complete version of the CVpr was available to Walahfrid Strabo c. 830 and his excerpts from it continue down to 572 (see Excerpta Sangallensia). The core of the work is fasti from c. 44 BCE to the end, becoming consularia in 379, where frequent historical entries first begin to appear. The CVpr prefaces its fasti with a list of the seven kings of Rome. This common text is the best and most compete witness we have to the final version of the Consularia Italica. There are no general accounts of the CVpr or CVpost and so the bibliography here contains mostly technical discussions in the context of other studies. Burgess 2000 and Burgess and Dijkstra 2012 are analyses of the consular fasti upon which the Consularia Italica and hence the Consularia Vindobonensia were founded. Burgess 2013 and Burgess and Dijkstra 2013 are analyses of the two surviving witnesses to a Greek translation of an earlier, less corrupt offshoot of the CVpost tradition. Both the CVpr and CVpost are preserved in the Vienna manuscript within the text of the Chronograph of 354, though they were not originally part of it, and Burgess 2012 is concerned with the relationship among those three texts and the history of the manuscript. Holder-Egger 1876: 217–232, 238–247 (see Consularia Italica), Mommsen 1892: 263–264, 274–334 (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)), and Cessi 1916 are concerned with the CVpr and CVpost as witnesses to the Consularia Italica. Mommsen presents the standard edition of the text.
  588.  
  589. Burgess, R. W. 2000. “Non duo Antonini sed duo Augusti”: The consuls of 161 and the origins and traditions of the Latin consular fasti of the Roman Empire. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 132:259–290.
  590.  
  591. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  592.  
  593. A very technical paper that sets out the close relationship among the fasti of the Consularia Vindobonensia and other surviving fasti, including those used in consularia and chronicles. Also: R. W. Burgess, Chronicles, Consuls, and Coins. Historiography and History in the Later Roman Empire, Variorum Collected Studies 984 (London: Ashgate, 2011), Paper XV.
  594.  
  595. Find this resource:
  596.  
  597.  
  598. Burgess, R. W. 2012. The Chronograph of 354: Its manuscripts, contents, and history. Journal of Late Antiquity 5:345–396.
  599.  
  600. DOI: 10.1353/jla.2012.0028Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  601.  
  602. At 351–353, 359–361, 363–387, 390–395. A detailed account of the Vienna manuscript and its contents in the context of the Chronograph of 354, into which the two Consularia Vindobonensia texts were interpolated at some point before the ninth century.
  603.  
  604. Find this resource:
  605.  
  606.  
  607. Burgess, R. W. 2013. The date, purpose, and historical context of the original Greek and the Latin translation of the so-called Excerpta Latina Barbari. Traditio 68:1–56.
  608.  
  609. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  610.  
  611. At 8, 12–15. A study of the Consularia Scaligeriana (see Consularia Scaligeriana (Barbarus Scaligeri, Excerpta Latina barbari)) the earlier of the two Greek versions of an early recension of the CVpost.
  612.  
  613. Find this resource:
  614.  
  615.  
  616. Burgess, R. W., and Jitse H. F. Dijkstra. 2012. The Berlin “Chronicle” (P. Berol. inv. 13296): A new edition of the earliest extant Late Antique consularia. Archiv für Papyrusforschung 58:273–301 at 275–283.
  617.  
  618. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  619.  
  620. Further detailed study of the fasti that underlie the Consularia Vindobonensia in relation to the Consularia Berolinensia (see Consularia Berolinensia (Fasti Berolinenses)).
  621.  
  622. Find this resource:
  623.  
  624.  
  625. Burgess, R. W., and Jitse H. F. Dijkstra. 2013. The “Alexandrian World Chronicle,” its consularia and the date of the destruction of the Serapeum (with an appendix on the list of Praefecti Augustales). Millennium 10:39–113 at 44–58.
  626.  
  627. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  628.  
  629. A study of the Consularia Golenischevensia (see Consularia Golenischevensia (Alexandrian World Chronicle)), the later of the two Greek versions of an early recension of the CVpost.
  630.  
  631. Find this resource:
  632.  
  633.  
  634. Cessi, Roberto. 1916. Studi sulle fonti dell’età Gotica e Longobarda I. “Fasti Vindobonenses”. Archivio Muratoriano 17–18:293–405.
  635.  
  636. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  637.  
  638. The only detailed textual and historical analysis of these two texts in relation to the other witnesses of the Consularia Italica.
  639.  
  640. Find this resource:
  641.  
  642.  
  643. Excerpta Sangallensia
  644. In 1950 Bernhard Bischoff showed that St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek 878 was the vade mecum of Walahfrid Strabo, tutor of the future king Louis the Bald and abbot of Reichenau in the second quarter of the ninth century. Contained within that vade mecum is a small collection of excerpts made by Walahfrid from an early witness to the complete Consularia Vindobonensia priora (see Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores)). These excerpts include consuls and historical entries that for the most part relate to unusual natural phenomena such as earthquakes and plagues between 390 and 572, thus showing that the text of the Consularia Vindobonensia priora must originally have extended to at least 572, eighty years beyond the point at which the only surviving text now stops (493). De Rossi published the editio princeps of this text in 1867 (De Rossi 1867) and Mommsen published what is now the standard edition twenty-five years later (Mommsen 1892: 298–336, see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) as one of the witnesses to the Consularia Italica, on the basis of the work of Holder-Egger 1876: 232–247 (see Consularia Italica). A detailed study of the Excerpta in relation to the Chronograph of 354 and the Consularia Vindobonensia priora, can be found in Burgess 2012.
  645.  
  646. Bischoff, Bernhard. 1950. Eine Sammelhandschrift Walahfrid Strabos (Cod. Sangall. 878). In Aus der Welt des Buches. Festgabe zum 70. Geburtstag von Georg Leyh. 30–48. Beiheft zum Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen 75. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz.
  647.  
  648. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  649.  
  650. The study that established that Stiftsbibliothek 878 had been the vade mecum of Walahfrid Strabo. Also: Bernhard Bischoff, Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, Vol. 2 (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1967), pp. 34–51.
  651.  
  652. Find this resource:
  653.  
  654.  
  655. Burgess, R. W. 2012. The Chronograph of 354: Its manuscripts, contents, and history. Journal of Late Antiquity 5:345–396.
  656.  
  657. DOI: 10.1353/jla.2012.0028Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  658.  
  659. At 351–353, 363–368, 381, 390, 393–394. A discussion of how the Excerpta fit into the tradition of the Consularia Vindobonensia priora.
  660.  
  661. Find this resource:
  662.  
  663.  
  664. de Rossi, Giovani Battista. 1867. Excerptum ex chronica Horosii. Documento inedito per la storia dei secoli quato, quinto e sesto. Bullettino di archeologia cristiana 5:17–23.
  665.  
  666. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  667.  
  668. The editio princeps of the text.
  669.  
  670. Find this resource:
  671.  
  672.  
  673. Consularia Scaligeriana (Barbarus Scaligeri, Excerpta Latina Barbari)
  674. The Chronographia Scaligeriana is a Latin translation made in Corbie in the 780s of an illustrated Greek chronograph compiled in Alexandria early in the reign of Justinian I (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale lat. 4884). The third and final part of this chronograph is a heavily augmented Greek translation of an earlier and less corrupt recension of the Consularia Vindobonensia posteriora (see Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores)). The Chronographia as a whole is very closely related to the Chronographia Golenischevensis (see Consularia Golenischevensia (Alexandrian World Chronicle)), which also contained consularia. Like the Consularia Berolinensia (see Consularia Berolinensia (Fasti Berolinenses)), Consularia Marsiburgensia (see Consularia Marsiburgensia (Ravenna Annals)), and Consularia Golenischevensia (see Consularia Golenischevensia (Alexandrian World Chronicle)), the consularia of this text were originally illustrated, though the surviving manuscript includes only blank spaces for the pictures and a few captions. It exists for the years 44 BCE–99 CE and 296–387. The most important studies of the Chronographia as a whole are Frick 1892 and Burgess 2013, while Garstad 2012 includes a translation and copious notes. Jacoby 1956, a reprinting of his 1909 article in Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, is a useful general introduction, but long outdated and erroneous in a number of key places. The standard edition of the Chronographia as a whole is Schoene 1875, which was reproduced by Frick 1892 and Garstad 2012, and even Mommsen’s edition of the Consularia is just a surprisingly corrupt version of the same edition (Mommsen 1892: 274–298 [see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)]).
  675.  
  676. Burgess, R. W. 2013. The date, purpose, and historical context of the original Greek and the Latin translation of the so-called Excerpta Latina Barbari. Traditio 68:1–56.
  677.  
  678. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  679.  
  680. At 8, 12–16, 17, 18–19, 20. The most up-to-date and detailed study of the Chronographia as a whole, with an appendix of known sources.
  681.  
  682. Find this resource:
  683.  
  684.  
  685. Frick, Karl. 1892. Chronica minora 1. Leipzig: Teubner.
  686.  
  687. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  688.  
  689. An indispensable work that contains an important and careful study of the work as a whole, as well as a Latin edition (Schoene’s) and a Greek retroversion created by Frick on the basis of the existing witnesses to the original Greek. See pp. lxxxiii–ccx, ccxxi–ccxxii, 184–371.
  690.  
  691. Find this resource:
  692.  
  693.  
  694. Garstad, Benjamin. 2012. Apocalypse. Pseudo-Methodius. An Alexandrian world chronicle. Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 14. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
  695.  
  696. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  697.  
  698. This contains an introduction, edition (Schoene’s), translation, and a valuable commentary. See pp. xviii-xxxv, 142–387
  699.  
  700. Find this resource:
  701.  
  702.  
  703. Jacoby, Felix. 1956. Griechische Historiker. Stuttgart: A. Druckenmüller.
  704.  
  705. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  706.  
  707. An early and useful but now outdated survey. See pp, 257–262. Also: Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft 6.2 (1909): 1566–1576.
  708.  
  709. Find this resource:
  710.  
  711.  
  712. Schoene, Alfred. 1875. Eusebi Chronicorum libri duo I: Eusebi Chronicorum liber prior. Berlin: Weidmann.
  713.  
  714. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  715.  
  716. Still the best edition, and the only one that reproduces the mise-en-page of the manuscript, with captions, headers, and large blank spaces for the illustrations. See Appendix VI. 177–239.
  717.  
  718. Find this resource:
  719.  
  720.  
  721. Consularia Golenischevensia (Alexandrian World Chronicle)
  722. These consularia are known only from a single incomplete folio that was once part of the Chronographia Golenischevensis, an illustrated chronograph of the second quarter of the sixth century that survives in a small collection of broken papyrus fragments copied in c. 575 (Moscow, Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts 310/8). The text as a whole is very closely related to the Chronographia Scaligeriana (see Consularia Scaligeriana (Barbarus Scaligeri, Excerpta Latina barbari)), and so its consularia, like those of the Consularia Scaligeriana, are closely related to the Consularia Vindobonensia posteriora (see Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores)). It only exists for the years 383–392. Much has been said and argued about this text, but the only two major studies are Bauer and Strzygowski 1905 and Burgess and Dijkstra 2013, of which the latter includes a new critical edition of the text of the consularia.
  723.  
  724. Bauer, Adolf, and Josef Strzygowski. 1905. Eine alexandrinische Weltchronik. Denkschriften der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse 51. Vienna: C. Gerhold’s Sohn
  725.  
  726. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  727.  
  728. The editio princeps of the Chronographia as a whole, along with a fundamental, though now superseded by Burgess and Dijkstra 2013, study of the text and invaluable color photographs of the fragments.
  729.  
  730. Find this resource:
  731.  
  732.  
  733. Burgess, R. W., and Jitse H. F. Dijkstra. 2013. The “Alexandrian World Chronicle,” its consularia and the date of the destruction of the Serapeum (with an appendix on the list of Praefecti Augustales). Millennium 10:39–113.
  734.  
  735. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  736.  
  737. This puts the consularia into their proper context and presents the first completely new edition of the consularia since the editio princeps, along with a textual and historical commentary that includes a new analysis of the dating of the papyrus. It also provides an important bibliography.
  738.  
  739. Find this resource:
  740.  
  741.  
  742. Consularia Hafniensia (Chronik von 641, Additamenta ad Prosperum Havniensia + Auctuarium Prosperi Havniense, Prosperi Continuatio Havniensis)
  743. This is an important witness to the Consularia Italica tradition, preserved in a unique Copenhagen manuscript of the first half of the twelfth century (Copenhagen, Royal Library 454). In c. 523 a copy of the same recension of the Consularia Italica that had been used by the compiler of the Consularia Vindobonensia, along with excerpts from a now-lost Gallic chronicle, were interpolated into and after a copy of Prosper’s chronicle that had had its epitome of Jerome’s chronicle replaced with a complete version of Jerome minus the individual regnal years. The years 457 to 473 of the consularia continuation were lost before 625 and the text between 475 and 489 exists in duplicate and triplicate versions, the remnants of attempts to improve and flesh out the bare entries of his source into a narrative, as was done in the second part of the Anonymus Valesianus with the same source material (see Consularia Italica). In 625 this compilation was continued with a short narrative account from 526 to 619 based on a known Gallic continuation of Isidore’s chronicle epitome, a papal laterculus based on the Liber pontificalis, and other unknown Italian sources. Later a concluding sentence to 626 and a date of 640/1 were added. Although this final narrative part of the Hafniensis text is extremely important for early Lombard history (see Borri 2014), it is not a chronicle by anyone’s definition and quite separate from the earlier material, and so bibliography relating to it will not be presented here. There are three editions of the unique material in the manuscript (Hille 1866; Mommsen 1892: 266–271, 298–339 [see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)]; and Cessi 1922), of which Mommsen’s is the standard, though no edition of the text as a whole includes Prosper and the other interpolations. Cessi 1922 and Muhlberger 1984 are the only studies. Holder-Egger 1876: 259–268 (see Consularia Italica) only discusses the text in relation to the Consularia Italica.
  744.  
  745. Borri, Francesco. 2014. Romans growing beards: Identity and historiography in seventh-century Italy. Viator 45.1: 39–71.
  746.  
  747. DOI: 10.1484/J.VIATOR.1.103782Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  748.  
  749. At 45–49. A discussion of the last, non-chronicle part of the Hafniensis, relying on Muhlberger.
  750.  
  751. Find this resource:
  752.  
  753.  
  754. Cessi, Roberto. 1922. Studi sulle fonti dell’età Gotica e Longobarda II. “Prosperi Continuatio Hauniensis”. Archivio Muratoriano 22:585–641.
  755.  
  756. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  757.  
  758. A detailed textual study with a new edition that breaks the text into sections following Cessi’s erroneous hypotheses on the composition of the work. This fact and the obscurity of the publication account for the fact that Mommsen’s edition is still the standard.
  759.  
  760. Find this resource:
  761.  
  762.  
  763. Hille, Georg. 1866. Prosperi Aquitani Chronici Continuator Havniensis. Berlin: Weidmann.
  764.  
  765. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  766.  
  767. The editio princeps of the text (though only from 455) with a short textual and historical analysis and a chronology.
  768.  
  769. Find this resource:
  770.  
  771.  
  772. Muhlberger, Steven. 1984. Heroic kings and unruly generals: The “Copenhagen” continuation of Prosper reconsidered. Florilegium 6:50–95.
  773.  
  774. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  775.  
  776. This is the only study of the text as a literary work with an author. It includes a translation and a discussion of Cessi’s hypothesis on the genesis of the text.
  777.  
  778. Find this resource:
  779.  
  780.  
  781. Consularia Marsiburgensia (Ravenna Annals)
  782. These illustrated consularia are preserved on the bottom half of a single piece of damaged parchment preserved in Merseberg cathedral library (no. 202). The text contains consuls and/or entries for the years 411–413 (no consuls for 412), 421–423 (no consuls for 422), 427–429, 434–437, 439 (illustration only) -443, and 452–454. In spite of its fragmentary nature, this is an important witness to the Consularia Italica because it fills an important lacuna in the Consularia Vindobonensia (see Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores)). Like the Consularia Berolinensia (see Consularia Berolinensia (Fasti Berolinenses)), Consularia Scaligeriana (see Consularia Scaligeriana (Barbarus Scaligeri, Excerpta Latina barbari)), and Consularia Golenischevensia (see Consularia Golenischevensia (Alexandrian World Chronicle)) many entries are illustrated with stereotyped drawings. Bischoff and Koehler 1939 is the only study and edition.
  783.  
  784. Bischoff, Bernard, and Wilhelm Koehler. 1939. Eine illustrierte Ausgabe der spätantiken ravennater Annalen. In Medieval studies in memory of A. Kingsley Porter 1. Edited by Wilhelm R. W. Koehler, 125–138. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
  785.  
  786. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  787.  
  788. The editio princeps, along with a valuable analysis of the manuscript.
  789.  
  790. Find this resource:
  791.  
  792.  
  793. Paschale Campanum
  794. This is an Easter table, beginning in 464, that was first compiled in Campania in c. 512, to which were added a variety of entries between 465 and 493 from the Consularia Italica followed by ten random notices from the compiler’s own knowledge and various other sources down to 512 (Vatican Library, Reginae 2077). The standard edition is that of Mommsen, a small part of which is also reproduced in his edition of the Consularia Italica (Mommsen 1892: 305–334, 744–750 [see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)]). The most interesting of the local additions concern the appearance of the Antichrist (493 and 496), which were analyzed by Troncarelli 1989, and two eruptions of Vesuvius (505 and 512), hence the modern title of the text. The Easter table and various other accompanying chronological markers were continued at various later dates down to 585 (along with one historical note in 576), the approximate date of the manuscript, and then in a later hand to 613.
  795.  
  796. Troncarelli, Fabio. 1989. Il consolato dell’Anticristo. Studi Medievali, 3d ser., 30:567–592.
  797.  
  798. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  799.  
  800. An analysis of the two entries in the text that make mocking reference to the birth of the Antichrist, whose birth was expected six thousand years after Creation and 500 years after the birth of Christ.
  801.  
  802. Find this resource:
  803.  
  804.  
  805. Cassiodorus
  806. The famous author and statesman of the Italian Gothic court wrote his chronicle for presentation to the consul Eutharicus on 1 January of 519. It covers the period from Creation to that date. Although it is always referred to as a chronicle, it is in fact a kind of minimalist consularia with a very short account of the period between Creation and 510 BCE appended to the beginning. The unique consular list, derived chiefly from Livy and Victorius of Aquitaine (who copied his list from Prosper), has been lightly annotated in the manner of consularia with text from Jerome (see Jerome, Chronici canones), Eutropius, Prosper, and a recension of the Consularia Italica otherwise known only from the Historia Romana of Paul the Deacon. The only scholarly study of the chronicle is Klaassen 2010, which has a complete bibliography and a new critical edition. The standard edition is Mommsen 1894.
  807.  
  808. Klaassen, Michael. 2010. Cassiodorus’ Chronica: Text, chronography and sources. PhD diss., Univ. of Pennsylvania.
  809.  
  810. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  811.  
  812. The only detailed study of the chronicle, with a new edition.
  813.  
  814. Find this resource:
  815.  
  816.  
  817. Mommsen, Theodor. 1894. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auctores antiquissimi 11, Chronica minora 2. Berlin: Weidmann. 111–161.
  818.  
  819. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  820.  
  821. The standard edition of the text.
  822.  
  823. Find this resource:
  824.  
  825.  
  826. The Continuations of Prosper
  827. A number of the manuscripts of Prosper contain mid-fifth-century continuations that should probably be classed as consularia rather than chronicles, but they are so short that it is difficult to be certain and the distinction in this case is almost meaningless. Some continuations are merely fasti or emperor or king lists, but they are mentioned here as well for the sake of completeness. There is no study or edition of these works beyond Mommsen 1892. The earliest, the Continuatio codicis Alcobaciensis, was appended to a 445-edition of Prosper’s chronicle in 455 and survives in manuscripts XZ of Prosper. It simply supplies the consuls for the years 446 to 455 and includes two brief entries in 454 and 455. It was composed in Africa. Next are the Continuationes codicum Ouetensis et Reichenauiensis, which extend from 446 to 451 (Ouetensis) and to 457 (Reichenauiensis). They are found in Prosper manuscripts OR. These two continuations start off as chronicles and share a common source for the first two entries of 447 and 448 (sections 3, 5), concerning the lead-up to the Council of Chalcedon; the consular list to 451; and three reworked entries (9/10, 13–14). But apart from these underlying similarities these two texts really are quite different from one another and should be considered separately. The Ouetensis ends with the accession of Marcian, his marriage to Pulcheria, and the condemnation of Eutyches (at Chalcedon) in 451. The Reichenauiensis continues on past that to describe Chalcedon and report news of Atilla’s invasion of Gaul in 451, but with a change to a new source shifts back in time to Marcian’s accession in 450 and continues down to 457 as pure consularia. Both texts appear to have been written in Rome, though the Reichenauiensis soon ended up in north Africa and was continued down to 534 with a list of Vandal kings (Mommsen 1898). Prosper manuscript Z also contains an epitome of Jerome/Prosper, which is continued by a short emperor list from c. 423 to 462 (Mommsen’s Continuatio ad a. 462). The Continuatio codicis Vaticani is appended to a lengthy epitome of Prosper and extends from 455 to 459. This continuation is found in the same manuscript that contains the Paschale Campanum, which was written in Campania, and a reference to the arrival of Valamer in Dyrrhachium (in 459) in the Continuatio, like a note on the arrival of Theoderic in the same city in the Paschale Campanum (in 478), indicates that the continuation was compiled in southern Italy as well. Many of these manuscripts also have additions made to the text of Prosper itself, some of which appear in Mommsen’s edition of Prosper, others of which are included with these continuations. The longest is the emperor list found in the Vatican epitome between entries 1189 and 1190, which extends from Theodosius I to Anastasius.
  828.  
  829. Mommsen, Theodor. 1892. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auctores antiquissimi 9, Chronica minora 1. Berlin: Weidmann. 486–499.
  830.  
  831. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  832.  
  833. These are the only editions of these works and Mommsen says little about them.
  834.  
  835. Find this resource:
  836.  
  837.  
  838. Mommsen, Theodor. 1898. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auctores antiquissimi 13, Chronica minora 3. Berlin: Weidmann. 456–460.
  839.  
  840. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  841.  
  842. Mommsen’s edition of the Vandal regnal list from manuscript group R with a short introduction.
  843.  
  844. Find this resource:
  845.  
  846.  
  847. Consularia Berolinensia (Fasti Berolinenses)
  848. These consularia survive only for the years 251–273, 306, and 312–338, with ten historical entries and four illustrations, written in two columns on a single side of a damaged piece of fifth- or sixth-century parchment in Berlin. This is an odd text, since it is a Greek translation of two unrelated Latin traditions: consular fasti that are closely related to the precursor of the fasti found in the Consularia Vindobonensia (see Consularia Vindobonensia (Anonymus Cuspiniani A and B, Consularia Ravennatia A and B, Fasti Vindobonenses priores and posteriores)) and Prosper, and historical entries (and their associated illustrations) that derive from the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)), which had its own fasti, here ignored. There have been only two studies, Lietzmann 1937 and Burgess and Dijkstra 2012, the latter of which provides a much more complete edition of the text.
  849.  
  850. Burgess, R. W., and Jitse H. F. Dijkstra. 2012. The Berlin “Chronicle” (P. Berol. inv. 13296): A New Edition of the Earliest Extant Late Antique Consularia. Archiv für Papyrusforschung 58:273–301.
  851.  
  852. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  853.  
  854. The only study of this work since Lietzmann, which presents a new, expanded edition and several textual and contextual studies.
  855.  
  856. Find this resource:
  857.  
  858.  
  859. Lietzmann, Hans. 1937. Ein Blatt aus einer antiken Weltchronik. In Quantulacumque. Studies presented to Kirsopp Lake by pupils, colleagues and friends. Edited by Robert P. Casey, Silva Lake, and Agnes K. Lake, 339–348. London: Christophers.
  860.  
  861. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  862.  
  863. The editio princeps of the text along with a basic, though now outdated, study.
  864.  
  865. Find this resource:
  866.  
  867.  
  868. Consularia Caesaraugustana (Chronica Caesaraugustana)
  869. These lost consularia survive only as a collection of excerpts covering the years 450–568 preserved as notes copied no later than the eighth century into the margins of a manuscript of Victor of Tunnuna and John of Biclar. Although the style is that of earlier consularia, the content does not derive from imperial proclamations, and the subject matter is more akin to a regular chronicle. It probably represents the later continuation of earlier consularia like the Descriptio consulum. Although Mommsen 1894: 221–23 (see Cassiodorus) used to be the standard edition, it has been superseded by Cardelle de Hartmann 2001 with its definitive introduction, edition, and commentaries.
  870.  
  871. Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. 2001. Victoris Tunnunensis Chronicon cum reliquiis ex Consularibus Caesaraugustanis et Iohannis Biclarensis Chronicon. CCSL 173A. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.
  872.  
  873. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  874.  
  875. A new edition and study of and textual commentary on the text and its confusing manuscript history, along with an historical commentary by Roger Collins. See pp. 79*–80*, 115*–24*, 3–55 (entries in italics with an “a” appended to the entry number). 95–109.
  876.  
  877. Find this resource:
  878.  
  879.  
  880. Latin Chronicles of the Late Republic
  881. With a few exceptions it has been almost forgotten that the first Latin chronicles were written not in the fourth or fifth centuries CE but in the middle of the first century BCE. Two, written by L. Scribonius Libo and M. Terentius Varro, are little more than titles, but those of Cornelius Nepos and T. Pomponius Atticus were popular enough to have left behind more than a few fragments and testimonia. Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 36–37, 91–95 (see What Is a Chronicle?) put these chronicles in the context of both the developing Hellenistic chronicle in Greek, particularly Apollodorus and Castor of Rhodes (see Apollodorus, Χρονικά and Castor of Rhodes, Ἐπιτομὴ χρονικῶν) and the flowering of the Latin chronicle during the reign of Augustus (see Epigraphic Consularia of the Early Empire). Cornell 2013 provides introductions, texts, translations, and commentaries on Libo and Varro.
  882.  
  883. Cornell, T. J. 2013. The fragments of the Roman historians. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
  884.  
  885. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  886.  
  887. What little is known about Libo and Varro’s chronicles can be found here. Nos. 36 and 52.
  888.  
  889. Find this resource:
  890.  
  891.  
  892. Cornelius Nepos and T. Pomponius Atticus
  893. Little survives of the Latin chronicles of Cornelius Nepos and T. Pomponius Atticus. The former was composed in three books in the early 50s BCE and was mentioned by Catullus in his first poem. It was based on the chronicle of Apollodorus (see Apollodorus, Χρονικά), even sharing its name, and would seem to have been a relative chronology of the cultural and political history of Greece and Rome, with added consuls and ab urbe condita dates. It survived into the fourth century, when it was overtaken by the new Late-Roman Christian Chronicles. Atticus’s chronicle was written about 46 BCE in a single book called the Liber annalis and was immediately championed by Cicero. Unlike Nepos’s chronicle Atticus’s began with the events that led up to the foundation of Rome and focused more specifically on Roman history, though he included some famous Athenians as well. Cornell 2013 presents a radical reevaluation and reworking of the surviving fragments and includes an important and detailed introduction, text, translation, and commentary for each, while Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 91–97 (see What Is a Chronicle?) put them into their contemporary chronographic context on the basis of the earlier collections of fragments.
  894.  
  895. Cornell, T. J. 2013. The fragments of the Roman historians. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
  896.  
  897. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  898.  
  899. Numbers 33 and 45. This is now the standard study and edition of the surviving fragments of and testimonia to these two late Republican Latin chroniclers, though the selection of fragments is quite different from earlier collections.
  900.  
  901. Find this resource:
  902.  
  903.  
  904. Late-Roman Christian Chronicles
  905. All late-Roman chronicles (though not consularia) are the direct descendants of the Chronici canones of Eusebius (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones), which was, as far as we know, the first Christian chronicle. Croke 1983 was the first scholar to realize that his chronicle was not fundamentally Christian in conception at all but the result of two parallel traditions that had continuous traditions extending back into the early Hellenistic period: Greek Olympiad chronicles and cultural apologetic. His groundbreaking analysis was developed and expanded by Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 84–126 (see What Is a Chronicle?).
  906.  
  907. Croke, Brian. 1983. The origins of the Christian world chronicle. In History and historians in Late Antiquity. Edited by Brian Croke and Alanna M. Emmett, 116–131. Sydney: Pergamon.
  908.  
  909. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  910.  
  911. An important analysis that first demonstrated the double debt that late Roman chronicles in general and Eusebius in particular owed to Hellenistic chronicles and Hellenistic cultural apologetic.
  912.  
  913. Find this resource:
  914.  
  915.  
  916. Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici Canones
  917. A proper bibliography of the work on Eusebius’s chronicle would be extensive, but here is offered a basic collection of introductory works that will set interested readers on the right track. Adler 1992 is an excellent starting point, followed by Wallace-Hadrill 1960, the first half of Mosshammer 1979 (which gets rather technical after that), Barnes 1981, and Burgess and Kulikowski 2013: 119–131 (see What Is a Chronicle?). Also important are Sirinelli 1961, which shows that Eusebius was a real historian, not just a Christian hack who used history for his own ends, and Finegan 1998, which provides a detailed analysis of Eusebius’s chronologies. Other more detailed and technical works can be found in the bibliographies of The Work and The Surviving Witnesses.
  918.  
  919. Adler, W. 1992. Eusebius’ chronicle and its legacy. In Eusebius, Christianity, and Judaism. Edited by H. W. Attridge and G. Hata, 467–491. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
  920.  
  921. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  922.  
  923. One of the best summaries of the chronicle and its influence. A good starting point for anyone interested in the topic.
  924.  
  925. Find this resource:
  926.  
  927.  
  928. Barnes, T. D. 1981. Constantine and Eusebius. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
  929.  
  930. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  931.  
  932. An important study that puts the chronicle in the context of Eusebius’s life and intellectual and historiographical development. Superseded on the date of the chronicle by Burgess 1997 (see The Work). See pp. 111–125.
  933.  
  934. Find this resource:
  935.  
  936.  
  937. Finegan, Jack. 1998. Handbook of Biblical chronology: Principles of time reckoning in the ancient world and problems of chronology in the Bible. 2d ed. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
  938.  
  939. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  940.  
  941. A useful analysis and breakdown of Eusebius’s chronologies in the chronicle. See pp. 1160–1192.
  942.  
  943. Find this resource:
  944.  
  945.  
  946. Mosshammer, Alden A. 1979. The chronicle of Eusebius and Greek chronographic tradition. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell Univ. Press.
  947.  
  948. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  949.  
  950. Certainly the most important book ever written on Eusebius’s Chronici canones and the historiographical traditions that lie behind it. A must read for anyone interested in the text.
  951.  
  952. Find this resource:
  953.  
  954.  
  955. Sirinelli, Jean. 1961. Les vues historiques d’Eusèbe de Césarée durant la période prénicéenne. Université de Dakar faculté des lettres et sciences humaines, Publications de la section de langues et littératures 10. Dakar, Senegal: Université de Dakar. 31–134.
  956.  
  957. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  958.  
  959. An important analysis that demonstrates that Eusebius was more of a historian, and less of a apologist, than he used to be given credit for.
  960.  
  961. Find this resource:
  962.  
  963.  
  964. Wallace-Hadrill, D. S. 1960. Eusebius of Caesarea. London: A. R. Mowbray.
  965.  
  966. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  967.  
  968. A general introduction to Eusebius and his chronicle in the context of Eusebius’ life and writings. See pp. 155–167.
  969.  
  970. Find this resource:
  971.  
  972.  
  973. The Work
  974. Eusebius’s chronicle was a two-part work, the Chronographia presenting the raw material and sources for composing a chronology of the world and the Chronici canones in the second volume presenting the compilation and synthesis of that material into a universal chronicle covering the years 2016 BCE to 325 CE. This second volume marks the confluence of two distinct streams of Greek chronography: Hellenistic chronicles and apologetic chronology, the latter focused through Jewish and later Christian apologetic (see Late-Roman Christian Chronicles). Croke 1982 is an important paper that demonstrates the originality of both Eusebius’s chronicle and its form, a conclusion picked up and expanded by Grafton and Williams 2006, who show how Origen’s Hexapla and the form of the codex influenced the unique and complex form of the Canones. The completion date of Eusebius’s first edition of this work has proven controversial, but scholarship seems to be settling on a date toward the end of the Great Persecution, as detailed in Burgess 1997, and away from the views of earlier scholarship and, in particular, the extremely early date of 277 favored by Barnes 1981 (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones). Strangely, the Canones marks both the end of the chronicle tradition in Greek and the beginning of the late antique chronicle traditions in both Latin and Syriac. It was not well received in the Greek world, chiefly because its columnar format was too complicated to copy cheaply and accurately and therefore open to corruption (as is demonstrated in Burgess 2006), but also because its anti-millenarian chronology went against the chronological thinking at the time. It was for the most part attacked and reworked, not only in content but in structure as well. In spite of this, its impact on later Greek chronography was enormous, since Eusebius’s chronology became the de facto standard against which all other chronologies were measured, and his text became a mine for facts, dates, and chronologies, to be either accepted or argued against. In addition, its universal and compact nature, much more compact than the standard Olympiad chronicle, last known from the mid-third century CE, may have spearheaded the shift away from full-blown narrative history to the more abbreviated historical forms that became popular in the Byzantine empire. Unfortunately, it attracted only a few continuators and had no known imitators in Greek. The only later Greek chronicles that survive were inspired either by the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) in the early seventh century (the Chronicon Paschale) or Syriac chronicles and the Consularia Italica in the early ninth (Theophanes).
  975.  
  976. Burgess, R. W. 1997. The dates and editions of Eusebius’ Chronici canones and Historia ecclesiastica. Journal of Theological Studies 48:471–504.
  977.  
  978. DOI: 10.1093/jts/48.2.471Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  979.  
  980. A detailed study examining the date of composition of the chronicle in particular, but also the related Ecclesiastical History. Also: R. W. Burgess, Chronicles, consuls, and coins: Historiography and history in the later Roman Empire (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), Paper I.
  981.  
  982. Find this resource:
  983.  
  984.  
  985. Burgess, R. W. 1999. Studies in Eusebian and Post-Eusebian chronography. Stuttgart: Steiner.
  986.  
  987. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  988.  
  989. A study of the Chronici canones from a historiographical point of view and an attempt at reconstructing the content and form of the end of the chronicle from 284 to 325. See pp. 21–109.
  990.  
  991. Find this resource:
  992.  
  993.  
  994. Burgess, R. W. 2006. A chronological prolegomenon to reconstructing Eusebius’ Chronici canones: The evidence of Ps-Dionysius (the Zuqnin Chronicle). Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 6:29–38.
  995.  
  996. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  997.  
  998. Further analysis of the Syriac, Latin, and Armenian witnesses to the Chronici canones and what that analysis says about the accuracy of those witnesses and the problems that must have existed at the time with copying the Greek text accurately. Also: R. W. Burgess, Chronicles, consuls, and coins: Historiography and history in the later Roman Empire (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), Paper II.
  999.  
  1000. Find this resource:
  1001.  
  1002.  
  1003. Croke, Brian. 1982. The originality of Eusebius’ chronicle. American Journal of Philology 103:195–200.
  1004.  
  1005. DOI: 10.2307/294250Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1006.  
  1007. A fundamental defense of the originality of the format of Eusebius’s Chronici canones, a hypothesis confirmed by Grafton and Williams 2006.
  1008.  
  1009. Find this resource:
  1010.  
  1011.  
  1012. Grafton, Anthony, and Megan Williams. 2006. Christianity and the transformation of the book: Origen, Eusebius, and the library of Caesarea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
  1013.  
  1014. DOI: 10.4159/9780674037861Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1015.  
  1016. An excellent analysis of how the chronicle’s innovative form was influenced by Origen’s Hexapla and the development of the codex. See pp. 133–137.
  1017.  
  1018. Find this resource:
  1019.  
  1020.  
  1021. The Surviving Witnesses
  1022. Since Eusebius’s original Greek text does not survive we must look to the early translations to learn what he wrote and what its form was. Jerome’s Latin translation of the Chronici canones (see Jerome, Chronici canones) is available in two excellent editions, each offering something the other lacks, Fotheringham 1923 and Helm 1984. For a primer on how to understand and navigate these editions, as well as further background on the chronicle in both its Greek original and Jerome’s translation, see Burgess 2002. The Armenian translation of both the Chronographia and the Chronici canones can be found in a German edition of the Armenian text in Karst 1911 and the former only in a Latin translation with most of the surviving Greek parallels (not included by Karst) in Schoene 1875 (see Consularia Scaligeriana (Barbarus Scaligeri, Excerpta Latina barbari)). This latter volume also includes other later witnesses to the Chronographia. Unfortunately, the edition of the Canones in Schoene 1866–1875 is pretty much valueless, lacking important manuscripts and following the format of the Armenian translation rather than Jerome. A comprehensive listing of Eusebius’s surviving sources and other unrelated though parallel texts is provided for each entry in an appendix of Helm 1984, an amazing work of scholarship in and of itself. The structure of the Armenian chronicle makes clear the sort of reworking that Eusebius’s original (and complicated) format, as preserved by Jerome, underwent. The best general studies of the Syriac evidence for the Canones can be found in Keseling 1927 (continued in 1928) and Witakowski 1999–2000. These witnesses, too, reveal the later changes to Eusebius’s format.
  1023.  
  1024. Burgess, R. W. 2002. Jerome explained: An introduction to his chronicle and a guide to its use. Ancient History Bulletin 16:1–32.
  1025.  
  1026. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1027.  
  1028. A sort of “Dummy’s Guide to Jerome” and the first stop for anyone wanting to understand the text and how to use it. Also: R. W. Burgess, Chronicles, Consuls, and Coins, Historiography and History in the Later Roman Empire (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate), Paper III.
  1029.  
  1030. Find this resource:
  1031.  
  1032.  
  1033. Fotheringham, John Knight. 1923. Eusebii Pamphili Chronici Canones, Latine uertit, adauxit, ad sua tempora produxit S. Eusebius Hieronymus. London: Humphrey Milford.
  1034.  
  1035. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1036.  
  1037. The best edition of Jerome’s translation of the Chronici canones, though now hard to find and difficult to cite.
  1038.  
  1039. Find this resource:
  1040.  
  1041.  
  1042. Helm, Rudolf. 1984. Die Chronik des Hieronymus. Hieronymi Chronicon. Third edition. Eusebius Werke 7. GCS. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
  1043.  
  1044. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1045.  
  1046. This is the standard edition of Jerome’s translation of the Chronici canones. This edition is easy to cite and has years BCE and CE in the margins and important apparatuses at the foot of each page. It is a monument of scholarship and is marred only by the occasional weakness of the edition. The original editions were published in 1913–1926 (written by hand) and 1956 (reset in type).
  1047.  
  1048. Find this resource:
  1049.  
  1050.  
  1051. Karst, Josef. 1911. Die Chronik aus dem armenischen Übersetzt mit textkritischem Commentar. Eusebius Werke 5. GCS 20. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrich.
  1052.  
  1053. DOI: 10.1515/9783110279207Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1054.  
  1055. German translations of the Armenian translations of both the Chronographia and the Chronici canones.
  1056.  
  1057. Find this resource:
  1058.  
  1059.  
  1060. Keseling, P. 1927. Die Chronik des Eusebius in der syrischen Überlieferung. Oriens Christianus 23:23–48, 223–241.
  1061.  
  1062. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1063.  
  1064. The first and best study of the Syriac translations of Eusebius. Continued in Oriens Christianus 24 (1928): 33–56
  1065.  
  1066. Find this resource:
  1067.  
  1068.  
  1069. Schoene, Alfred. 1866–1875. Eusebi Chronicorum libri duo II. Berlin: Weidmann.
  1070.  
  1071. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1072.  
  1073. The first volume is the more important of the two, and includes a Latin translation of the Armenian translation of the Chronographia, along with parallel witnesses from surviving Greek texts and an assemblage of many types of other texts that provide witnesses to and a context for Eusebius’s chronicle.
  1074.  
  1075. Find this resource:
  1076.  
  1077.  
  1078. Witakowski, Witold. 1999–2000. The chronicle of Eusebius: Its type and continuation in Syriac historiography. ARAM 11–12:419–437.
  1079.  
  1080. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1081.  
  1082. An important overview of the evidence for Eusebius’s Chronici canones in Syriac and its influence on Syriac historiography.
  1083.  
  1084. Find this resource:
  1085.  
  1086.  
  1087. Continuatio Antiochiensis Eusebii
  1088. The Continuatio Antiochiensis Eusebii is a now-lost continuation of Eusebius’s Chronici canones (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones) completed c. 350 in Antioch. It must have been a popular version of the chronicle, for this was the version of the text of Eusebius that Jerome (see Jerome, Chronici canones) used to make his translation and it also found its way into both the later Greek and Syriac chronicle traditions. In fact, it may have been one of the few texts of Eusebius’s work to survive the fourth century intact. This continuation was first identified, reconstructed, and studied in Burgess 1999.
  1089.  
  1090. Burgess, R. W. 1999. Studies in Eusebian and post-Eusebian chronography. Stuttgart: Steiner. 113–305.
  1091.  
  1092. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1093.  
  1094. A study and reconstruction of this lost Greek continuation of Eusebius.
  1095.  
  1096. Find this resource:
  1097.  
  1098.  
  1099. Jerome, Chronici canones
  1100. Jerome probably found a copy of Eusebius’s Chronici canones (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones) with its Antiochene continuation (see Continuatio Antiochiensis Eusebii) in Antioch and produced his augmented and extended Latin translation in 380–381 in the lead-up to the Council of Constantinople. It seems to have become immediately popular in the West (Vessey 2010). The Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana) predates Jerome by about forty years, so it would seem that the West had already been experimenting with chronicles and was ready for the reintroduction of a Latin chronicle based on Hellenistic exemplars, a genre that appears to have been moribund in Latin since the first century BCE (see Latin Chronicles of the Late Republic and Cornelius Nepos and T. Pomponius Atticus). For general accounts of the chronicle in the context of Jerome’s life and writings, see Kelly 1975 and Rebenich 2002. The only book-length study of the chronicle is Schöne 1900. For shorter accounts see Burgess 1999: 90–98 (see Eusebius, The Work) and Mosshammer 1979: 37–40, 51–54, 60–63, 67–73, 79–81 (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones), which are both concerned with the ways Jerome tackled the problem of translation and augmentation and how it is the best guide to the format of Eusebius’s original. Donalson 1996 includes a translation of Jerome’s continuation. There are two excellent editions, each offering something the other lacks, Fotheringham 1923 and Helm 1984 (for both see Eusebius, The Surviving Witnesses). For a primer on how to understand and navigate these editions, as well as further background on the chronicle in both its Greek original and Jerome’s translation, see Burgess 2002 (see Eusebius, The Surviving Witnesses). Jerome’s major sources for his additions and continuation were (1) an epitome of Roman Republican history from its earliest origins culled from Livy and used by Eutropius as well (Helm 1927); (2) the famous Kaisergeschichte of Enmann, an epitome history of the Roman empire, also used by Eutropius (Helm 1927 and Burgess 1995); (3) a Constantinopolitan recension of the Descriptio consulum to 370 (Burgess 1993: 195–197 [see The Nature of the Consularia Genre]); (4) the Continuatio Antiochiensis, a continuation of Eusebius down to 350 (Burgess 1999: 113–161 [see Eusebius, The Work]); (5) Suetonius’s De uiris illustribus (Helm 1929); and (6) a similar work, covering famous writers of the reign of Constantine (Burgess 2002: 28 [see Eusebius, The Surviving Witnesses]). There were other nonhistorical sources as well, such as earlier patristic writings and contemporary ecclesiastical documents, as well as his own knowledge.
  1101.  
  1102. Burgess, R. W. 1995. Jerome and the Kaisergeschichte. Historia 44:349–369.
  1103.  
  1104. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1105.  
  1106. A study of one of Jerome’s most important sources for his continuation of Eusebius, the Kaisergeschichte, a now-lost breviarium of Roman imperial history also used by other fourth-century historians like Aurelius Victor and Eutropius. Also: R. W. Burgess, Chronicles, Consuls, and Coins, Historiography and History in the Later Roman Empire (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), Paper IV.
  1107.  
  1108. Find this resource:
  1109.  
  1110.  
  1111. Donalson, Malcolm Drew. 1996. A translation of Jerome’s Chronicon with historical commentary. Lewiston, NY: Mellen.
  1112.  
  1113. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1114.  
  1115. A useful translation of Jerome’s continuation of Eusebius from 325 with a commentary.
  1116.  
  1117. Find this resource:
  1118.  
  1119.  
  1120. Helm, Rudolf. 1927. Hieronymus und Eutrop. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 76:138–170 and 254–306.
  1121.  
  1122. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1123.  
  1124. An important article that disproved the generally accepted conclusion (first detailed in an 1850 article by Theodor Mommsen that is still cited) that Jerome was copying Eutropius, Festus, and Aurelius Victor for the additions to and continuation of his chronicle.
  1125.  
  1126. Find this resource:
  1127.  
  1128.  
  1129. Helm, Rudolf. 1929. Hieronymus’ Zusätze in Eusebius’ Chronik und ihr Wert für die Literaturgeschichte. Philologus Supplementband 21, Heft 2. Leipzig: Dieterich.
  1130.  
  1131. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1132.  
  1133. A fundamental study of Jerome as a witness to the literary lives in Suetonius’s De uiris illustribus.
  1134.  
  1135. Find this resource:
  1136.  
  1137.  
  1138. Kelly, J. N. D. 1975. Jerome. His life, writings, and controversies. London: Duckworth.
  1139.  
  1140. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1141.  
  1142. Still the best account of how the translation of the Chronici canones fits into Jerome’s life and works. See pp. 72–75.
  1143.  
  1144. Find this resource:
  1145.  
  1146.  
  1147. Rebenich, Stephan. 2002. Jerome. London and New York: Routledge.
  1148.  
  1149. DOI: 10.4324/9780203456828Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1150.  
  1151. A very short introduction to Jerome and his chronicle that is surprisingly out of date in some of its details. It also contains a translation of Jerome’s preface. See pp. 10, 22, 27–29, 75–78.
  1152.  
  1153. Find this resource:
  1154.  
  1155.  
  1156. Schöne, Alfred. 1900. Die Weltchronik des Eusebius in ihrer Bearbeitung durch Hieronymus. Berlin: Weidmann.
  1157.  
  1158. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1159.  
  1160. This was an innovative and trail-blazing volume when it first appeared and is still the only book-length analysis of the Chronici canones. Although it is now in many ways out of date, it is still extremely valuable and has not been replaced.
  1161.  
  1162. Find this resource:
  1163.  
  1164.  
  1165. Vessey, Mark. 2010. Reinventing history: Jerome’s chronicle and the writing of the post-Roman West. In From the Tetrarchs to the Theodosians: Later Roman History and Culture, 284–450 CE. Edited by Scott McGill, Cristiana Sogno, and Edward Watts, 265–289. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
  1166.  
  1167. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511712296.014Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1168.  
  1169. An important new study of fourth-century historiography and Jerome’s influence on it and later historiography in the West.
  1170.  
  1171. Find this resource:
  1172.  
  1173.  
  1174. Prosper
  1175. Prosper of Aquitaine, a well-known supporter of Saint Augustine from Marseilles or its environs, first composed a continuation of Jerome in 433 (see Jerome, Chronici canones). Valentin 1900 and Hwang 2009 put this chronicle in the context of Prosper’s life and other considerable literary works, but contrary to popular belief Prosper never lived in Rome and had no connection with Pope Leo (Markus 1986 and Salzman 2015). Instead of attaching his continuation to Jerome’s full chronicle, as later chroniclers would do, Prosper composed an epitome of that work to take its place, adding a short preface from Creation down to the birth of Abraham. This continuation he himself continued in 445 and again in 455, the latter edition involving extensive revision to earlier material. There is no good evidence for an edition of 451. Prosper shows the influence of consularia in his substitution of consular dates for Jerome’s regnal years. The best and most recent study of the chronicle is Muhlberger 1990: 48–135 (see Consularia of the Early and Late Empire), though there is still much to be gained from Holder-Egger 1876. Recent articles from Markus 1986 and Humphries 1996 have provided important correctives to long-held but erroneous attitudes to the chronicle and Prosper’s methods. The only modern edition (Mommsen 1892: 343–485 [see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)]) is marred by Mommsen’s belief that Prosper never revised his work and by his consequent failure to publish different texts for the different editions. Murray 2003 provides a good translation of a large selection of excerpts from the chronicle, and though de Paor 1993 translates the entire text, it should be avoided. Prosper’s chronicle was recommended along with that of Marcellinus (see Marcellinus comes) by Cassiodorus in his Institutes, and after Jerome (see Jerome, Chronici canones) it was the most popular and well-known of all the late antique chronicles during the Middle Ages.
  1176.  
  1177. de Paor, Liam. 1993. Saint Patrick’s world: The Christian culture of Ireland’s Apostolic age. Blackrock and Dublin: Four Courts.
  1178.  
  1179. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1180.  
  1181. A poor translation from the inferior and antiquated Patrologia Latina edition. See pp. 72–87.
  1182.  
  1183. Find this resource:
  1184.  
  1185.  
  1186. Holder-Egger, Oswald. 1876. Untersuchungen über einige annalistische Quellen zur Geschichte des fünften und sechsten Jahrhunderts I. Die Chronik Prospers von Aquitanien. Neues Archiv 1:15–90.
  1187.  
  1188. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1189.  
  1190. An important, pioneering study of the chronicle.
  1191.  
  1192. Find this resource:
  1193.  
  1194.  
  1195. Humphries, Mark. 1996. Chronicle and chronology: Prosper of Aquitaine, his methods and the development of early medieval chronography. Early Medieval Europe 5:155–175.
  1196.  
  1197. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0254.1996.tb00052.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1198.  
  1199. An important article that tries to understand Prosper’s methods and explain his chronology through those methods rather than excoriating him for his chronological mistakes.
  1200.  
  1201. Find this resource:
  1202.  
  1203.  
  1204. Hwang, Alexander Y. 2009. Intrepid lover of perfect grace: The life and thought of Prosper of Aquitaine. Washington, DC: Catholic Univ. of America Press.
  1205.  
  1206. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1207.  
  1208. The most recent biography of Prosper.
  1209.  
  1210. Find this resource:
  1211.  
  1212.  
  1213. Markus, Robert A. 1986. Chronicle and theology: Prosper of Aquitaine. In The inheritance of historiography, 350–900. Edited by C. Holdsworth and T. P. Wiseman, 31–43. Exeter Studies in History 12. Exeter, UK: Exeter Univ.
  1214.  
  1215. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1216.  
  1217. A discussion of Prosper’s theology as seen in his chronicle with particular attention to his supposed connection to Rome, to the papacy in general, and to Pope Leo in particular. This article lays the foundation, completed by Salzman 2015, for disproving the commonly held belief of a close association between Prosper and Leo.
  1218.  
  1219. Find this resource:
  1220.  
  1221.  
  1222. Murray, Alexander Callander. 2003. From Roman to Merovingian Gaul: A Reader. Peterborough, ON: Broadview.
  1223.  
  1224. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1225.  
  1226. A very good English translation of excerpts. See pp. 62–76.
  1227.  
  1228. Find this resource:
  1229.  
  1230.  
  1231. Salzman, Michele Rene. 2015. Reconsidering a relationship: Pope Leo of Rome and Prosper of Aquitaine. In The bishop of Rome in Late Antiquity. Edited by Geoffrey D. Dunn, 109–125. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
  1232.  
  1233. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1234.  
  1235. A fundamental study that once and for all puts a stake through the heart of the belief that Prosper worked as a secretary to Pope Leo.
  1236.  
  1237. Find this resource:
  1238.  
  1239.  
  1240. Valentin, L. 1900. Saint Prosper d’Aquitaine: Étude sur la littérature latine ecclésiastique au cinquième siècle en Gaule. Paris: Alphonse Picard et fils.
  1241.  
  1242. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1243.  
  1244. An old biography of Prosper that still has some important things to say about the chronicle and its place in Prosper’s literary output. See 195–204, 411–441.
  1245.  
  1246. Find this resource:
  1247.  
  1248.  
  1249. Gallic Chronicle of 452 (Chronica Gallica ad annum CCCCLII)
  1250. This anonymous chronicle is a continuation of Jerome, written in Valence or Marseille and attributed to Prosper in the manuscripts. For a general background to the chronicle see Muhlberger 1990: 136–192 (see Consularia of the Early and Late Empire) and the introduction to Burgess 2001. It is a pessimistic account of the collapse of Gaul and the entire Roman empire in the face of barbarian invasion and the spread of heresy, and as such it is a valuable and unique window into the events and provincial mindset in the middle of the fifth century. There are three different groups of manuscripts, all descending from a single exemplar of the sixth or seventh century. With the exception of Sigibert of Gembloux, who used it as a major source for his famous chronicle at the end of the eleventh century, no medieval author betrays direct knowledge of this work. Mommsen’s was the standard edition (Mommsen 1892: 617–625, 646–662 [see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)]) until Muhlberger 1983 demonstrated its errors, and Burgess 2001 follows Muhlberger by retaining the readings of the manuscripts. Murray 2003: 76–85 (see Prosper) is a good translation of Mommsen’s edition.
  1251.  
  1252. Burgess, R. W. 2001. The Gallic Chronicle of 452: A new critical edition with a brief introduction. In Society and culture in Late Antique Gaul. Revisiting the sources. Edited by Ralph W. Mathisen and Danuta Shanzer, 52–84. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
  1253.  
  1254. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1255.  
  1256. A short introduction to and new edition of the text.
  1257.  
  1258. Find this resource:
  1259.  
  1260.  
  1261. Holder-Egger, Oswald. 1876. Untersuchungen über einige annalistische Quellen zur Geschichte des fünften und sechsten Jahrhunderts II. Das Chronicon imperiale oder Pithoeanum. Neues Archiv 1:91–120.
  1262.  
  1263. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1264.  
  1265. An early but still important study of the chronicle.
  1266.  
  1267. Find this resource:
  1268.  
  1269.  
  1270. Muhlberger, Steven. 1983. The Gallic Chronicle of 452 and its authority for British events. Britannia 14:23–33.
  1271.  
  1272. DOI: 10.2307/526338Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1273.  
  1274. An important paper that reveals and corrects peculiar errors in many regnal years in Mommsen’s edition of the chronicle.
  1275.  
  1276. Find this resource:
  1277.  
  1278.  
  1279. Hydatius
  1280. As bishop of Aquae Flaviae in Gallaecia (modern Chaves in northern Portugal) Hydatius played a leading role in defending his city and territory against the depredations of the Sueves and was even sent to Gaul on an embassy to Aëtius in 431–432. The only full-length study of Hydatius is Burgess 1989, but shorter accounts can be found in Tranoy 1974, Muhlberger 1990: 193–266 (see Consularia of the Early and Late Empire), and Burgess 1993: 3–172 (see The Nature of the Consularia Genre). Cardelle de Hartmann 1994 is a valuable study, much more wide-ranging than its title suggests. Hydatius completed his chronicle in 468/9, which begins in 379 as a continuation of Jerome (see Jerome, Chronici canones) with a typical account of the history of the Roman empire, but as the chronology advances Spain begins to take centre stage. The end focuses almost entirely on an isolated and battered post-imperial Gallaecia, making it the earliest extant example of post-imperial (and thus medieval) literature. The situation seemed so hopeless that Hydatius believed that the end of the world was approaching (in 482) and structured his work with an eye to demonstrating this (Burgess 1996 and Pawlak 2007). However, as Börm 2014 shows, he still believed in the essential unity of the empire, though under the rule of the eastern emperors, rather than the western. The chronicle was used by a number of later chroniclers, like the author of the Gallic Chronicle of 511 (see Gallic Chronicle of 511 (Chronica Gallica ad annum DXI)), Isidore, Fredegar, and Sigibert. The edition of Mommsen 1894: 3–35 (see Cassiodorus) is very confusing and suffers from many weaknesses, and it has now been replaced by Burgess 1993: 67–123 (see The Nature of the Consularia Genre) which also includes a translation. The edition of Tranoy 1974 should be avoided (for this see Muhlberger 1990 and Burgess 1993 [see The Nature of the Consularia Genre]).
  1281.  
  1282. Börm, Henning. 2014. Hydatius von Aquae Flaviae und die Einheit des Römischen Reiches im fünften Jahrhundert. In Griechische Profanhistoriker des fünften nachchristlichen Jahrhunderts. Edited by Bruno Bleckmann and Timo Stickler, 195–214. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
  1283.  
  1284. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1285.  
  1286. Börm argues that Hydatius was not the first Spanish national historian, as he is often called, but a Roman writer who, even at the end of his chronicle, saw the empire as still united, but under a single emperor, the emperor of the East.
  1287.  
  1288. Find this resource:
  1289.  
  1290.  
  1291. Burgess, R. W. 1989. Hydatius: A late Roman chronicler in post-Roman Spain. D.Phil diss., Univ. of Oxford.
  1292.  
  1293. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1294.  
  1295. The only full-length study of Hydatius and his chronicle. It contains a comprehensive bibliography.
  1296.  
  1297. Find this resource:
  1298.  
  1299.  
  1300. Burgess, R. W. 1996. Hydatius and the final frontier: The fall of the Roman Empire and the end of the world. In Shifting frontiers in Late Antiquity. Edited by Ralph W. Mathisen and Hagith S. Sivan, 321–332. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
  1301.  
  1302. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1303.  
  1304. An analysis of Hydatius’s belief in the coming end of the world and the text that prompted it.
  1305.  
  1306. Find this resource:
  1307.  
  1308.  
  1309. Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. 1994. Philologische Studien zur Chronik des Hydatius von Chaves. Stuttgart: Steiner.
  1310.  
  1311. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1312.  
  1313. An important and detailed study of many different aspects of the chronicle, not all of them philological.
  1314.  
  1315. Find this resource:
  1316.  
  1317.  
  1318. Kulikowski, Michael. 2004. Late Roman Spain and its cities. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
  1319.  
  1320. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1321.  
  1322. An important study that puts Hydatius into his contemporary social, political, and religious context. See pp. 151–214.
  1323.  
  1324. Find this resource:
  1325.  
  1326.  
  1327. Pawlak, Marcin. 2007. Hydace et le désordre de son temps. In Continuity and change. Studies in Late Antique historiography. Edited by Dariusz Brodka and Michał Stachura, 29–37. Electrum 13. Kraków, Poland: Jagiellonian Univ. Press.
  1328.  
  1329. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1330.  
  1331. A detailed survey of Hydatius’s view of the disintegration of Spain and the Roman Empire.
  1332.  
  1333. Find this resource:
  1334.  
  1335.  
  1336. Tranoy, Alain. 1974. Hydace. Chronique. Sources chrétiens 218–219. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf.
  1337.  
  1338. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1339.  
  1340. An introduction to, edition and translation of, and commentary on the chronicle. With the exception of the commentary, there is little of value here, particularly with regard to the edition because Tranoy was so seriously led astray by the bizarre revisionist views of Christian Courtois.
  1341.  
  1342. Find this resource:
  1343.  
  1344.  
  1345. Gallic Chronicle of 511 (Chronica Gallica ad annum DXI)
  1346. The Gallic Chronicle of 511 is another anonymous Gallic continuation of Jerome (see Jerome, Chronici canones), though like Prosper it follows only an interpolated epitome of Jerome. It was probably written in Arles and is attributed to Sulpicius Severus in the sole surviving, thirteenth-century manuscript (Universidad Complutense de Madrid 134). The text has been heavily epitomized (perhaps more than once), so it is difficult to say anything specific about the author or his purposes. Hydatius, Orosius, the Gallic Chronicle of 452 (see Gallic Chronicle of 452 (Chronica Gallica ad annum CCCCLII)), and a recension of the Consularia Italica are the most obvious surviving sources for the work, and they make up the bulk of the narrative before c. 450. There is also evidence for the use of a now-lost chronicle of Arles and a source that parallels Marius of Avenches, Isidore, and the Consularia Caesaraugustana (see Consularia Caesaraugustana (Chronica Caesaraugustana)). After 450 the chronicle becomes more valuable as an independent witness to events in southern Gaul, northern Spain, and northern Italy. The only full-length study of the chronicle is Holder-Egger 1875. Burgess 2001 provides a new edition that replaces Mommsen 1892: 626–628, 632–666 (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) and Murray 2003: 98–100 (see Prosper) provides a partial English translation of Mommsen’s edition from section 71.
  1347.  
  1348. Burgess, R. W. 2001. The Gallic Chronicle of 511: A new critical edition with a brief introduction. In Society and culture in Late Antique Gaul. Revisiting the sources. Edited by Ralph W. Mathisen and Danuta Shanzer, 85–100. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
  1349.  
  1350. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1351.  
  1352. A short introduction to and new edition of the chronicle.
  1353.  
  1354. Find this resource:
  1355.  
  1356.  
  1357. Holder-Egger, Oswald. 1875. Über die Weltchronik des sogenannten Severus Sulpitius und südgallischen Annalen des fünften Jahrhunderts. Eine Quellenuntersuchung. Göttingen, Germany: Gebrüder Hofer.
  1358.  
  1359. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1360.  
  1361. The only detailed study of the chronicle, but now somewhat out of date.
  1362.  
  1363. Find this resource:
  1364.  
  1365.  
  1366. Marcellinus comes
  1367. An Illyrian courtier living in Constantinople, Marcellinus composed a continuation chronicle of Jerome (see Jerome, Chronici canones) first to 518 and then to 534. Like Prosper, he was prompted by consularia to abandon Jerome’s chronological structure of regnal years, Olympiads, and years from the birth of Abraham and to substitute consuls as his main chronology, to which he added indictions, a fifteen-year numbered cycle originally designed for the levying and collecting of taxes. His major identifiable sources for the early part of his chronicle are Orosius, a recension of the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) that continued down to the early years of the sixth century (a related source was used in the Chronicon Paschale to 468), a recension of the Consularia Italica, and Gennadius’s De uiris illustribus. The chronicle was recommended along with Prosper by Cassiodorus in his Institutes, and it was later used by Jordanes, early Irish chroniclers, and Bede. Just about everything one needs to know about Marcellinus can be found in Croke 1995 and Croke 2001. Mommsen’s edition (Mommsen 1894: 39–104 [see Cassiodorus]) remains the standard.
  1368.  
  1369. Croke, Brian. 1995. The chronicle of Marcellinus. Sydney: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies.
  1370.  
  1371. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1372.  
  1373. An introduction to, edition and translation of, and commentary on the chronicle. The edition is Mommsen’s.
  1374.  
  1375. Find this resource:
  1376.  
  1377.  
  1378. Croke, Brian. 2001. Count Marcellinus and his chronicle. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
  1379.  
  1380. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1381.  
  1382. A detailed, full-length study of Marcellinus and his chronicle. Absolutely invaluable.
  1383.  
  1384. Find this resource:
  1385.  
  1386.  
  1387. Anonymous Continuation of Marcellinus
  1388. An unknown chronicler continued the second edition of the chronicle of Marcellinus comes from 534 to at least 548, where the text breaks off in mid-sentence in the sole surviving manuscript (Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. T. II. 26). The author’s sympathies are clearly imperial and not Gothic. Since Marcellinus’s chronicle was written in Constantinople, it is possible that his continuator wrote there as well (as Croke concludes), but the author’s sources of information and his focus are almost entirely Italian and the sixth-century manuscript is Italian as well, so the continuation is more likely to be Italian. The standard edition is Mommsen 1894: 104–108 (see Cassiodorus) and the best studies are Croke 1995 and Croke 2001.
  1389.  
  1390. Croke, Brian. 1995. The chronicle of Marcellinus. Sydney: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies
  1391.  
  1392. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1393.  
  1394. An introduction to, text and translation of, and commentary on the continuation. The edition is Mommsen’s. See pp. xxv. 45–52, 127–139.
  1395.  
  1396. Find this resource:
  1397.  
  1398.  
  1399. Croke, Brian. 2001. Count Marcellinus and his chronicle. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 216–236.
  1400.  
  1401. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1402.  
  1403. The most detailed study of the continuation with a complete bibliography.
  1404.  
  1405. Find this resource:
  1406.  
  1407.  
  1408. Marius of Avenches
  1409. Marius, the bishop of Avenches in Switzerland (573–593), continued Prosper down to 581, though his work is little more than annotated (and not even fully or regularly annotated) fasti that offer frequent entries only from 553. The best edition of the chronicle remains Mommsen 1894: 232–239 (see Cassiodorus), which has been translated by Murray 2003: 100–108 (see Prosper). As Favrod 1993 demonstrates in his preface, Marius employed five identifiable written sources, of which the most important are a recension of the Consularia Italica, an Italian chronicle or consularia exhibiting parallels with the continuation of Marcellinus comes, and a Burgundian/Frankish chronicle exhibiting parallels with Gregory of Tours. The work survives in a single manuscript (British Library, Add. 16974), the same manuscript that contains the Gallic Chronicle of 452 (Gallic Chronicle of 452 (Chronica Gallica ad annum CCCCLII)). The Gallic chronicle ends, then follow the years 453–455 from Prosper, which are followed by Marius.
  1410.  
  1411. Favrod, Justin. 1993. La chronique de Marius d’Avenches (455–581). 2d ed. Lausanne, Switzerland: Faculté des lettres de l’Université de Lausanne.
  1412.  
  1413. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1414.  
  1415. An edition and French translation, along with an excellent introduction and a full bibliography. Mommsen’s edition is to be preferred.
  1416.  
  1417. Find this resource:
  1418.  
  1419.  
  1420. Victor of Tunnuna
  1421. Victor, bishop of Tunnuna in Africa Proconsularis, lived during the second and third quarters of the sixth century and composed a chronicle that covers the years 444 to 565 as a continuation of the 455 edition of Prosper (Muhlberger 1986). He spent the last twenty-five or so years of his life in exile or prisons across the Mediterranean for his staunch support of the Three Chapters, anathematized by Justinian in 543/4. There are editions in Mommsen 1894: 165–206 (see Cassiodorus), Placanica 1997, and Cardelle de Hartmann 2001, but the latter is the best, and it includes a detailed introduction to Victor, his chronicle, and in particular the complicated manuscript tradition (which supersedes that of Mommsen). Victor’s chronicle follows Prosper in using consulates down to 541, then post-consulates for twenty-two years, and then regnal years of Justinian for the last four years. His content focuses exclusively on imperial, papal, and patriarchal succession; events in Africa involving the Vandals; and most especially ecclesiastical affairs. His main source down to 518 (section 101) was the Greek ecclesiastical history of Theodorus Lector, but he also used both historical works of Isidore and various ecclesiastical texts.
  1422.  
  1423. Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. 2001. Victoris Tunnunensis Chronicon cum reliquiis ex Consularibus Caesaraugustanis et Iohannis Biclarensis Chronicon. CCSL 173A. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.
  1424.  
  1425. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1426.  
  1427. The best introduction to the author, the manuscripts, and his text, along with an excellent edition and full bibliography. See pp. 7*–115*, 3–55.
  1428.  
  1429. Find this resource:
  1430.  
  1431.  
  1432. Muhlberger, Steven. 1986. Prosper’s Epitoma Chronicon: Was there an edition of 443? Classical Philology 81:240–244.
  1433.  
  1434. DOI: 10.1086/366992Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1435.  
  1436. Muhlberger shows that in spite of the fact that Victor indicates that his chronicle continued a version of Prosper that ended in 443, he was actually using a copy of the edition of 455.
  1437.  
  1438. Find this resource:
  1439.  
  1440.  
  1441. Placanica, Antonio. 1997. Vittore da Tunnuna Chronica. Chiesa e impero nell’età di Giustiniano. Per Verba 4. Florence: SISMEL edizioni del Galluzzo.
  1442.  
  1443. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1444.  
  1445. A useful but hard-to-find edition and Italian translation.
  1446.  
  1447. Find this resource:
  1448.  
  1449.  
  1450. John of Biclar
  1451. Born in Lusitania, educated in Constantinople, and exiled to Barcelona for ten years upon his return, John later founded a monastery in Biclar and was appointed bishop of Gerona between 589 and 592. He wrote his chronicle sometime after 604 (he knows of the death of Gregory in that year, section 81), even though the latest dated event is the Romano-Persian peace of 591. The chronicle is a continuation of Victor’s (see Victor of Tunnuna) and continues Victor’s Byzantine regnal years, to which are appended Visigothic regnal years from 569. John’s account was more influenced by Jerome’s version (see Jerome, Chronici canones) of history and by consularia than by Victor, in that he presents a traditional political and military narrative, mostly of Spanish affairs, with very few references to purely ecclesiastical matters other than papal succession and the floruits of local churchmen. There are editions in Mommsen 1894: 165–77, 207–220 (see Cassiodorus), Campos 1960, and Cardelle de Hartmann 2001, but the latter is the best, and it includes a detailed introduction to John, his chronicle, and in particular the complicated manuscript tradition (which supersedes that of Mommsen). Wolf 2011 provides an English translation of the text with a short introduction.
  1452.  
  1453. Campos, Julio.1960. Juan de Biclaro, obispo de Gerona: Su vida y su obra. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.
  1454.  
  1455. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1456.  
  1457. The only full-length study of John and his chronicle, with a critical edition.
  1458.  
  1459. Find this resource:
  1460.  
  1461.  
  1462. Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. 2001. Victoris Tunnunensis Chronicon cum reliquiis ex Consularibus Caesaraugustanis et Iohannis Biclarensis Chronicon. CCSL 173A. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.
  1463.  
  1464. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1465.  
  1466. The best introduction to the author, the manuscripts, and his text, along with an excellent edition and full bibliography. See pp. 7*–94*, 124*–143*, 59–83, 110–148.
  1467.  
  1468. Find this resource:
  1469.  
  1470.  
  1471. Wolf, Kenneth Baxter. 2011. Conquerors and chroniclers of early medieval Spain. 2d ed. Liverpool: Liverpool Univ. Press.
  1472.  
  1473. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1474.  
  1475. A short study and English translation of the chronicle (using Campos’s edition). See pp. 1–9, 51–66.
  1476.  
  1477. Find this resource:
  1478.  
  1479.  
  1480. Chronicon Paschale
  1481. The Chronicon Paschale is the last chronicle of Late Antiquity in Latin or Greek, completed in or shortly after 630, and although it is founded upon a Greek translation of the Descriptio consulum (see Descriptio consulum (Fasti Idatiani/Hydatiani, Consularia Constantinopolitana)) it was greatly expanded with text from Eusebius (see Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronographia and Chronici canones) (from the time of Abraham) and other chronicles, as well as non-chronicle sources, particularly Malalas, pages and pages of which are often just dropped into the text with no regard for the annalistic chronicle framework, which only begins with Abraham, where Eusebius’s Chronici canones began. There is no modern edition, translation, or full-length study of the work, so one is forced to make due with Dindorf 1832, which includes a Latin translation. A new edition is in the works. Interested readers should start with Whitby and Whitby 1989 and Treadgold 2007, of which the former includes a translation of and short commentary on the text from 284. More technical and detailed are the surveys of Gelzer 1885 and Schwartz 1957 (from his 1899 article in Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft), which are more interested in the text’s unusual chronological structure than anything else. Equally detailed and interested in numbers is Beaucamp, et al. 1979.
  1482.  
  1483. Beaucamp, J., R. Bondoux, J. Lefort, M.-Fr. Rouan, and I. Sorlin. 1979. Temps et Histoire I: Le prologue de la Chronique pascale. Travaux et mémoires 7:223–301.
  1484.  
  1485. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1486.  
  1487. A detailed study of the prologue, with particular emphasis on its purpose for and method of calculating Easter. It includes a very useful translation of the entire, lengthy prologue. Invaluable for specialists.
  1488.  
  1489. Find this resource:
  1490.  
  1491.  
  1492. Dindorf, Ludwig. 1832. Chronicon Paschale 1. Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae. Bonn, Germany: Weber.
  1493.  
  1494. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1495.  
  1496. This is (for now) the only edition of the text.
  1497.  
  1498. Find this resource:
  1499.  
  1500.  
  1501. Gelzer, Heinrich. 1885. Sextus Julius Africanus und die Byzantinische Chronographie 2. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.
  1502.  
  1503. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1504.  
  1505. A valuable, though extremely technical, analysis of the Chronicon Paschale and its chronologies. See pp. 138–176.
  1506.  
  1507. Find this resource:
  1508.  
  1509.  
  1510. Schwartz, Eduard. 1957. Griechische Geschichtsschreiber. Leipzig: Koehler & Amelang. 291–316.
  1511.  
  1512. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1513.  
  1514. Like Gelzer, a rather technical analysis of the chronologies used in this work that is not recommended for the beginner. Also: Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft 3.6 (1899): coll. 2460–2477.
  1515.  
  1516. Find this resource:
  1517.  
  1518.  
  1519. Treadgold, Warren. 2007. The early Byzantine historians. Basingstoke, UK, and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  1520.  
  1521. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1522.  
  1523. A very basic introduction to the text. See pp. 340–348.
  1524.  
  1525. Find this resource:
  1526.  
  1527.  
  1528. Whitby, Michael, and Mary Whitby. 1989. Chronicon Paschale, 284–628 AD. Liverpool, UK: Liverpool Univ. Press.
  1529.  
  1530. DOI: 10.3828/978-0-85323-096-0Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  1531.  
  1532. This is the best introduction to the work in English, along with a translation of and commentary on the text starting in 284. This should be everyone’s first stop.
  1533.  
  1534. Find this resource:
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Public Pastes
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!