Aratus and Eratosthenes: from a Synoptic Robert to a Hyper-Maass

I Fenomeni di Arato, i commenti, le illustrazioni, le traduzioni

Premesse per una edizione digitale
Pisa, July 2015

I wish to thank Anna Santoni for inviting me to take part in this scholarly meeting on
the Aratea. I must confess that over the last years I have been struggling to leave behind
the study of astral literature, but close collaboration with Prof. Santoni keeps me
strongly tied to Eratosthenes’ Catasterimi —which was the topic of my doctoral
dissertation (2003).

I could now go on saying that my relationship to Aratus and the commentaria to

Aratus has been only incidental. Yet, this is not the case. As a result of the German
scholarship of the end of the 19th cent. (cf. Pà mias, forthcoming), and particularly
thanks to the crucial study of Jean Martin (1956), we are well aware that a history of
Eratosthenes’ text cannot be written as detached from the history of Aratus’
Phaenomena. Indeed, the destiny of Eratosthenes’ Catasterismi and Aratus’ Phaenomena
was to eventually cross their paths in order to produce new textual artifacts. Such
intertextual crossroads (which also included images) were already a fact in the
Alexandrian Library. Hence, if you allow me to make use of an anachronism, the
intersection of Aratus and Eratosthenes would encourage, ever since antiquity,
hypertextual readings.

As a matter of fact, at a certain point of their history both texts merged into each
other. The text of the Phaenomena was eventually cut into pieces and extracts form the
Catasterismi were interspersed within the Aratean text. Images too. Henceforth, I can
envisage several reading strategies being at work: the text of the Phaenomena read in
succession; but also the Phaenomena read in combination with the related chapters of
the Catasterismi; or the Phaenomena along with the supporting images of constellations;
and so on. The ancient form of books (the papyrus roll), and the so-called ‘panoramic
aspect’ that the stretched arms enable, would make easier these alternative reading
‘programs’ (cf. Skeat 1990; 1994). [HO 1] Such multifarious forms of reading conform
with Chartier’s definition of the hypertext. 1 [HO 2]

My contribution today will delve into this notion: the intertextual connection
between Aratus and Eratosthenes. I will point to some particular items that in my
opinion should be taken into account before coming to grips with a digital edition of the
Aratea.

1) As an editor of Greek texts, I do not have an essentialist view regarding the text
that needs to be reconstructed. I assume that the editor’s goal is not to rebuild an Urtext.
In that sense, I share Bernabé’s opinion (2010, 72) that a critical edition does not match
any text frozen at a particular moment. Rather, an edition should be a ‘radiography of
the transmission’ of this text. It is the text itself as well as its own history [HO 3]:

En resumidas cuentas, llegamos a una afirmació n que puede parecer

sorprendente: el texto de la edició n crítica de una obra griega antigua no
corresponde a ningú n original de ninguna etapa concreta. Es en cierto modo un
«architexto» o una «radiografía de la transmisió n»; es el texto y su propia historia,

1
L'hypertexte et l'hyperlecture qu'il permet et produit transforment les relations possibles entre
les images [...] et les textes associés de manière non linéaire par les connexions électroniques [...]
Dans ce monde textuel sans frontières, la notion essentielle devient celle du lien, pensé comme
l'opération qui met en rapport les unités textuelles découpées pour la lecture (Chartier 2003).
 a modo de una proyecció n en un plano de las diversas etapas que ha atravesado.

Such a state of affairs is even more obvious when we are dealing with ‘unstable’
textual traditions like the Catasterismi or the Phaenomena, that is to say, textual artifacts
that have taken diverse forms of transmission over the years. More precisely, the
Phaenomena are what I would call a text-container. Digital media can help provide a
material expression to Bernabé’s metaphor —edition as a radiography of the text— as
long as a hypertext can encourage the reader (or should we say the user?) to approach
the text at different historical layers. So the first and foremost achievement of such a
digital platform is providing a text in its diachronic projection of the Aratean
Phaenomena.

2) As an editor of the Catasterismi I have made use and investigated the catasterismic
text contained in Maass’ CAR. The point of view adopted by Maass when collecting his
materials is a particular one. Ever since his first contribution to Eratosthenic studies
(Maass 1883), he never changed his mind on the authorship of the Catasterismi, even if
fresh and relevant textual evidence was at his disposal over the years. Maass’
essentialist vision of an ancient text prevents him from accepting the original
Eratosthenic authorship of the opuscule in the form and size that has came down to us
[HO 4]:

Ich werde also fortfahren, die nü tzliche aber ö de Kompilation entgegengesetzter

Erkä rungen desselben Sternbildes (,klassisch‘ nennt sie O. Ribbeck Geschichte der
rö mischen Poesie II S. 285 f.!) einem und demselben Werke des grossen Mannes
(der alles war, nur kein Kompilator) abzusprechen.2

Maass privileges the Aratean text as the centre of his interest, leaving the
Catasterismi at a secondary and subsidiary position. According to him, the catasterismic
extracts were originally collected by a commentator of the Phaenomena at around 100
ACE. This viewpoint should be abandoned when presenting the texts in a digital form.

3) And all this brings me to the third and foremost point. It is my understanding that
a digital edition like the one we are now envisaging cannot be based on a single text
(Aratus’ Phaenomena) as opposed to other texts that would only appear as
complementary and secondary. In my opinion, a digital edition of the Aratea should
consist of a hypertextual program to be accessed from different directions. In other
words, it should be a proper hypertext. For my own interest, for instance, the most
valuable approach would be Eratosthenes’ Catasterisms. In this regard, I believe that we
are facing an excellent occasion to take up afresh Carl Robert’s edition of Eratosthenis
Catasterismorum Reliquiae. In 1878 Robert collected the materials stemming from
Eratosthenes’ Urtext and he provided a synoptic edition of them all. See [HO Robert].
a) The Epitome of the Catasterisms. That is the Greek text that appears in the
Planudean manuscripts of Aratus and intended as a commentary to the Phaenomena.
b) The Scholia on Aratus, containing extracts of the Catasterismi.
c) The so-called Scholia on Germanicus (BP). This is the improper name given by
Breysig (1867) of the Latin translation of the Aratean scholia including extracts of the
Catasterismi. Thus, again, we are in fact dealing with Aratean materials.
d) The same goes for the fourth witness, the Scholia on Germanicus (G) —aka Scholia
Sangermanensia, that in fact coincides with the Aratus Latinus (Recensio Interpolata).
e) As for Hyginus, scholars dealing with the relationship between this text and the
Catasterisms (like Martin, Zucker and myself) do agree that the De Astronomia offers a

2
Maass 1895, 134, n. 14.

2
reliable reproduction of Eratosthenes’ primary work. And yet it is not altogether
independent from Aratus. According to Martin (1956, 124-125) [HO 5],

la comparaison de l’Anonymus II, d’Hygin et d’autres sources nous conduit à

reconstituer un manuel d’astronomie élémentaire et littéraire, destiné à faciliter la
lecture des Phénomènes d’Aratos, en les complétant sur plus d’un point [...] Il ne
faut pas croire que cette Introduction aux Phénomènes d’Aratos ait été
nécessairement figuré en tête du poème à l’époque où elle était intacte. Il est au
contraire à peu près évident qu’une telle masse de textes, qui occupait plusieurs
rouleaux de papyrus, avait été éditée à part.

Thus Robert’s synoptic edition is, so to say, the first attempt to work out a collection
of materials related to Aratus’ Phaenomena. His edition is an ancient forerunner of the
project we are discussing today. In other words, even without being aware of it, Robert
collected a preliminary and partial edition of Maass’ Commentariorum in Aratum
Reliquiae. It is my wish that one of the outcomes resulting from Anna’s project would be
a New Robert or a Hyper-Robert.

Indeed, as an editor of the Catasterismi such an edition would provide the reader
with a flexible approach to the different layers of the Textgeschichte of the Catasterimi.
For instance, the most ancient witnesses of the Greek original text of the Catasterimi are
provided by some Aratean scholia. These texts do not find a place in the modern editions
of the Catasterismi. The digital Maass could present such texts and the other testimonia
side by side. See for instance Sch. Arat. 225 (cf. Cat. 19), 403 (cf. Cat. 39) and 474 (cf. Cat.
44). In these scholia, Eratosthenes is quoted by name. Hence we have strong evidence
that these quotations come from an early version of the Catasterismi that circulated
under Eratosthenes’ name [HO 6].

τοῦ τον τὸ ν Κριὸ ν Ἐρατοσθένης εἶναί φησι τὸ ν Ἕλλης καὶ Φρίξου, ὃ ν θύ σας τῷ
Φυξίῳ Διὶ Φρίξος τὴ ν δορὰ ν ἔδωκεν Αἰή τῃ· διὸ καὶ τοὺ ς ἀ στέρας αὐ τοῦ
ἀ μαυροῦ σθαί φησιν ὡ ς ἐκδαρέντος (Sch. Arat. 225)

Extremely valuable is also the witness of Achilles Tatius, who cites Eratosthenes’
name along with the title of his book [HO 7]:

περὶ δὲ τού του (τοῦ γαλαξίου, scil.) φησὶν Ἐρατοσθένης ἐν τῶ ι Καταμερισμῶ ι

μυθικώ τερον τὸ ν γαλαξίαν κύ κλον γεγονέναι ἐκ τοῦ τῆ ς Ἥρας γά λακτος· τοῦ γὰ ρ
Ἡρακλέους ἔτι βρέφους ὄ ντος [καὶ] τὸ ν μαστὸ ν τῆ ς Ἥρας ἐπισπασαμένου
σφοδρό τερον ἐκείνην ἀ ντισπά σαι... (Ach.Tat. 24, p. 55 Maass)

At the other extreme of the textual history of the Catasterismi we find the so-called
Scholia Strozziana. This corpus of texts is described by Zucker as nothing else but the
revised Aratus Latinus along with some fragments of Plinius and of Hyginus. 3
Juxtaposition of different catasterismic materials could help explain embarrassing
concomitances between them. I will mention one example: the star catalogue of Cepheus
in the Strozziana coincides unexpectedly with the Greek version of the Catasterismi (Cat.
15) as it deviates from the revised Aratus Latinus [HO 8 and 9]:

habet Κηφεύ ς quidem stellas in capite splendidas duas, in singulis humeris

singulas, in singulis manibus claras singulas [Κηφεύ ς], in singulis cubitis obscuras
singulas, in zona tres obliquatas, in dextra coxa I, in sinistro genu II, supra pedes
quattuor, in ultimo pede I. fiunt omnes XVIIII (Sch. Germ. Strozz. p. 138 Breysig)

3
Pà mias & Zucker 2013, LXXXV.

3
 Ἔχει δ' ἀ στέρας ἐπὶ τῆ ς κεφαλῆ ς λαμπροὺ ς βʹ, ἐφ' ἑκατέρων ὤ μων αʹ, καὶ <ἐπὶ>
χειρῶ ν ἑκατέρων αʹ, <ἐπ'> ἀ γκώ νων ἑκατέρων αʹ, <ἐπὶ> ζώ νης γʹ λοξοὺ ς
ἀ μαυρού ς, [κοιλίας μέσης λαμπρὸ ν αʹ], <ἐπὶ> δεξιᾶ ς λαγό νος αʹ, <ἐπ' ἀ ριστεροῦ >
γό νατος βʹ, <ὑ πὲρ πό δας δʹ, ἐπὶ> ποδὸ ς ἄ κρου αʹ· <τοὺ ς πά ντας ιθʹ>. (Eratosth.
Cat. 15 ed. Pà mias & Zucker).

So far the concrete examples. I look forward to using extensively a digital edition of
the Aratea. I believe that digital media and hypertextual presentation can contribute to a
better understanding of the genetic relationship of this mass of texts.

I wish the best luck to Anna’s project.

Materials

Achille Tatius garantit l’existence d’un manuel astral d’Ératosthène dans son traité Sur l’Univers,
lorsqu’il fait remonter le catastérisme de la Voie Lactée à l’autorité d’Eratosthenes en to
Katamerismo. Si l’on admet la correction de Katamerismo en Katasterismo, le témoignage
d’Achille Tatius corrobore l’article de la Souda.

Zucker Pamias CV: Selon Martin, entre les deux, on peut supposer l’existence d’une formule
intermédiaire, un « manuel d’astronomie élémentaire et littéraire », basée sur la version
ératosthénienne et éditorialement indépendante d’Aratos, mais conçue pour « faciliter la lecture
des Phénomènes d’Aratos, en les complétant sur plus d’un point »

Sch. Arat. 403 Ἐρατοσθένης φησὶ τὸ Θυτή ριον τοῦ το εἶναι ἐφ' ᾧ τὸ πρῶ τον οἱ θεοὶ
συνωμοσίαν ἔθεντο ὅ τε ἐπὶ τοὺ ς Τιτᾶ νας ἐστρά τευσεν ὁ Ζεὺ ς Κυκλώ πων
κατασκευασά ντων ἔχον ἐπὶ τοῦ πυρὸ ς κά λυμμα ὅ πως μὴ ἴδωσι τὴ ν τοῦ κεραυνοῦ
δύ ναμιν. ἐπιτυχό ντες δὲ τῇ πρά ξει, ἔθηκαν καὶ εἰς οὐ ρανοὺ ς τὸ αὐ τὸ κατασκεύ ασμα, ὃ
εἰς τὰ συμπό σια φέρουσιν οἱ κοινωνεῖν βουλό μενοι, ἢ αὑ τοῖς αἱρού μενοι ὡ ς ἐπίθυσιν ἐν
τοῖς ἀ γῶ σι καὶ ἐν τοῖς ὀ μνύ ειν βουλομένοις, ὡ ς δικαιοτά την πίστιν τηροῦ σι, καὶ τῇ χειρὶ
ἐφά πτονται, δείκνυντες μαρτύ ριον εὐ γνωμοσύ νης τοῦ το. ὁ μοίως δὲ καὶ οἱ μά ντεις
τοῦ το ποιοῦ σιν.

Bibliografìa

Bernabé, Alberto [1992] (2010). Manual de crítica textual y edición de textos griegos.
Segunda edició n corregida y aumentada, Madrid.
Breysig, Alfred (1867). Germanici Caesaris Aratea cum scholiis, Berlin.
Chartier, Roger (2003). “Lecteurs et lectures à l’â ge de la textualité électronique”, in
Gloria Origgi & Noga Arikha (ed.), Text-e. Le texte à l’heure de l’Internet, Paris (ps. 17-
50). [accessed from http://www.text-e.org].
Landow, George P. (1992). Hypertext. The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory
and Technology, Baltimore & London.
Maass, Ernst (1883). Analecta Eratosthenica. Philologische Untersuchungen 6, Berlin.
—— (1895). Orpheus. Untersuchungen zur griechischen römischen altchristlichen
Jenseitsdichtung und Religion, Mü nchen.
—— (1898). Commentariorum in Aratum Reliquiae, Berlin.
Martin, Jean (1956). Histoire du texte des Phénomènes d’Aratos, Paris.
Pà mias, Jordi (forthcoming). “Eratosthenes’ Catasterisms and fin de siècle German
Scholarship (1878-1907)”, in Jordi Pà mias (ed.), Eratosthenes’ Catasterisms:
Receptions and Translations, Oberhaid.

4
Pà mias, Jordi & Zucker, Arnaud (2013). Eratosthène de Cyrène. Catastérismes, Paris.
Robert, Carl (1878). Eratosthenis Catasterismorum Reliquiae, Berlin.
Skeat, T. C. (1990). “Roll versus Codex - A New Approach?”, ZPE 84 (ps. 297-298).
—— (1994). “The Origin of the Christian Codex”, ZPE 102 (ps. 263-268).