The Acts of Early Church Councils

Acts: Production and Character

Thomas Graumann
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-acts-of-early-church-councils-acts-production-and
-character-thomas-graumann/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and

the Early Church Brittany E. Wilson

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-embodied-god-seeing-the-divine-
in-luke-acts-and-the-early-church-brittany-e-wilson/

Acts of John Joey Mcallum

https://ebookmass.com/product/acts-of-john-joey-mcallum/

The Idea of Nicaea in the Early Church Councils, AD

431-451 Mark Stephen Smith

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-idea-of-nicaea-in-the-early-
church-councils-ad-431-451-mark-stephen-smith/

The Idea of Nicaea in the Early Church Councils, AD

431-451 Mark S. Smith

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-idea-of-nicaea-in-the-early-
church-councils-ad-431-451-mark-s-smith/
The Pragmatics of Revision: George Moore’s Acts of
Rewriting 1st ed. Edition Siobhan Chapman

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-pragmatics-of-revision-george-
moores-acts-of-rewriting-1st-ed-edition-siobhan-chapman/

New Work on Speech Acts First Edition. Edition Daniel

Fogal

https://ebookmass.com/product/new-work-on-speech-acts-first-
edition-edition-daniel-fogal/

EuroTragedy: A Drama in Nine Acts Ashoka Mody

https://ebookmass.com/product/eurotragedy-a-drama-in-nine-acts-
ashoka-mody/

An Introduction to the Gospels and Acts (Essentials of

Biblical Studies) Alicia D. Myers

https://ebookmass.com/product/an-introduction-to-the-gospels-and-
acts-essentials-of-biblical-studies-alicia-d-myers/

Speech Acts and Other Topics in Pragmatics 1st Edition

Marina Sbisà

https://ebookmass.com/product/speech-acts-and-other-topics-in-
pragmatics-1st-edition-marina-sbisa/
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

OX F O R D E A R LY C H R I ST IA N ST U D I E S

General Editors
Gillian Clark Andrew Louth
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

THE OXFORD EARLY CHRISTIAN STUDIES series includes scholarly volumes on

the thought and history of the early Christian centuries. Covering a wide range of
Greek, Latin, and Oriental sources, the books are of interest to theologians, ancient
historians, and specialists in the classical and Jewish worlds.
Titles in the series include:
The Minor Prophets as Christian Scripture in the Commentaries of
Theodore of Mopsuestia and Cyril of Alexandria
Hauna T. Ondrey (2018)
Preaching Christology in the Roman Near East: A Study of Jacob of Serugh
Philip Michael Forness (2018)
God and Christ in Irenaeus
Anthony Briggman (2018)
Augustine’s Early Thought on the Redemptive Function of Divine Judgement
Bart van Egmond (2018)
The Idea of Nicaea in the Early Church Councils, ad 431–451
Mark S. Smith (2018)
The Many Deaths of Peter and Paul
David L. Eastman (2019)
Visions and Faces of the Tragic: The Mimesis of Tragedy and
the Folly of Salvation in Early Christian Literature
Paul M. Blowers (2020)
Art, Craft, and Theology in Fourth-­Century Christian Authors
Morwenna Ludlow (2020)
Nemesius of Emesa on Human Nature: A Cosmopolitan
Anthropology from Roman Syria
David Lloyd Dusenbury (2021)
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

The Acts of the Early

Church Councils
Production and Character

T HOM A S G R AUM A N N

1
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Thomas Graumann 2021
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2021
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2021931807
ISBN 978–0–19–886817–0
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198868170.001.0001
Printed and bound in Great Britain by
Clays Ltd, Elcograf S.p.A.
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Acknowledgements

The study of church councils in the ancient world has found renewed interest and
received fresh impulses over the course of the last two decades. The publication in
2016 of the final volume of the acts of the Second Council of Nicaea (ad 787),
edited by Erich Lamberz, marked the conclusion of the editorial project of the
Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum which Eduard Schwartz had started almost
exactly one hundred years previously. With it the acts and documents of the ecu-
menical councils of antiquity are finally all available in modern critical editions.
Simultaneously, Richard Price has published English-­language translations of the
great majority of these texts, and work is proceeding on the remainder. This
recent availability of critical editions and modern translations has opened up the
complex material to a new readership. It justifies a closer examination of the pro-
cesses that created these texts and a fuller analysis of their character. It is hoped
that clarification of the practical work of notaries and secretaries in the councils,
and of the expectations and intentions of the bishops and imperial officers under
whom they worked, may provide a helpful foundation for future study of conciliar
acts by historians and theologians alike.
The historical, cultural, and theological contingencies that characterize the
many councils conducted over the course of more than four centuries led to a
wide variety in the bureaucratic practices that produced their acts. No all-­
encompassing, universally followed ‘handbook’ of textual practices in these coun-
cils may be reconstructed. Yet examination reveals a defined range of procedures
and conventions that illuminate the work of conciliar secretariats and show the
importance of the role they played. It is these that are the subject of the pre-
sent study.
In my work on conciliar acts and documents I have benefited from frequent
discussions with doctoral and other students in Cambridge, from the critical
feedback from audiences at conferences and workshops, and from the generous
advice of colleagues and friends too numerous to list here individually. Among
them, particular thanks are due to Rudolf Haensch (Munich), who guided me
into the world of ancient papyri, and to Peter Riedlberger (Bamberg), who helped
my understanding of ancient legal practice and who kindly read a draft. I had
stimulating discussions with the members of the research group in Bamberg that
he leads. The editors of the series and anonymous readers for the Press made
helpful suggestions for improvement. Yet, above all, I owe a debt of gratitude to
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

vi Acknowledgements

Richard Price (London), who generously gave up time to read the entire draft and
offered most valuable comments. Parallel to working on this study, I had the add­
ition­al good fortune to collaborate with him on the English edition of the acts of
the Council of Ephesus. It is impossible to overstate the stimulus and enlighten-
ment that this provided.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Contents

Abbreviations and Conventionsix

Introduction1

PA RT I . T H E Q U E S T F O R D O C UM E N TAT IO N

1. The Earliest Church Councils: A Documentary History 13

2. ‘Council Acts’ and the Variations of Conciliar Documentation and
Recording Patterns 24
3. The Conference of Carthage (ad 411): An Imperial Model Case 32
Processes and Practices 33
Conflicts and Challenges 38

PA RT I I . ‘R E A D I N G’ A N D ‘ U SI N G’ AC T S

4. Examining the Records: Two Inquiries into Eutyches’ Trial (ad 449) 43
Types of Text: Authentica—isa—antigrapha—schedarion 44
Visual Features: Writing and Document Hands 51
5. Original Acts and Documents at Chalcedon (ad 451) 57
Objects of Reading 59
The Codex 61
The Schedarion 64
The Council-­Roll: Physicality, Practicality, Symbolism 71
6. ‘Authentic’ Documents: Visual Features, Annotation, and
Administrative Handling 83
Collections 87
7. Assessing and Performing Authenticity: A View from
Later Councils 92
Constantinople III (ad 680/1) 93
Nicaea II (ad 787) 103
Conclusion 109

PA RT I I I . ‘ W R I T I N G’ AC T S : T H E C OU N C I L’ S
SE C R E TA R IAT I N AC T IO N

8. All the President’s Men: Administrative Aides and the ‘Official’

Secretariat 113
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

viii Contents

9. The Stenographic Protocol: Professionalism, Conventions, and

Challenges 126
Exact Words? Memory, Recording, and Writing 130
What (Not) to Record: Comprehensiveness, ‘Omission’, and
the Status of Utterances 138
(Don’t) Write This! Dictation, Instructions, and Appeals for Alteration 146
The Collective Voice of the Council 152
10. ‘Transferring’ Shorthand Notes to Longhand Transcript 167

PA RT I V. T H E W R I T T E N R E C O R D
11. The Hypomnēmata: Production and Qualities 181
Praxis tōn hypomnēmatōn 183
Pistis tōn hypomnēmatōn 192
12. Documents Incorporated–Incorporating Documents 202
Description and Identification of Documents 202
Accepting—Reading—Filing 210
Document Placement: Recitation, Composition, and Writing 214
Hierarchical Order: Imperial Letters 215
Running Order 222
Document-­Reading and ‘Live’ Speech-­Acts 227
Order and Argument 233
13. Abstracting and Summary Records 237
14. Collecting and Appending Signatures 243
15. The Structure and Elements of the ‘Ideal’ Session-­Record and the
Role of ‘Editing’ 257

PA RT V. F I L E S , C O L L E C T IO N S , E D I T IO N S :
D O S SI E R I Z AT IO N A N D D I S SE M I NAT IO N

16. Council Acts Gathered and Organized: Minutes, Case Files, and
Collected Records 265
The Synodus Endemousa (Constantinople, ad 448) 266
Cyril’s Council at Ephesus (ad 431) 269
17. Ancillary Documentation and the Beginnings of Dossierization 277
18. The Preparation of ‘Editions’ and the Dissemination of
Documentation 283
Conclusion 297

Bibliography 309
Index 331
General Index 332
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Abbreviations and Conventions

1. Abbreviations Used for Councils, Synods, and Assemblies

C.Aquil.(381) Concilium Aquileiense (anno 381)

Coll.Carth. Collatio Carthaginiensis (anno 411)
C.Ephes.(431) Concilium Universale Ephesenum (anno 431)
CA Collectio Atheniensis (ACO I.1.7, pp. 17–167)
CC Collectio Casinensis (ACO I.3–4)
CP Collectio Palatina (ACO I.5, pp. 1–215)
CQ Collectio Quesnelliana (ACO I.5, pp. 321–340)
CV Collectio Vaticana (ACO I.1.1–6)
CVer Collectio Veronensis (ACO I.2)
CW Collectio Winteriana (ACO I.5)
C.Ephes.II(449) Concilium Ephesenum Secundum (anno 449)
CChalc. Concilium Chalcedonense (anno 451, but containing proceedings
dating ori­gin­al­ly from 431–451)
III(ii) we number sessions after the Latin tradition (also used in Richard
Price’s translation, q.v.) and add in brackets the session’s number
in the Greek traditions where they differ
trans. Price We reference by name only the frequently cited translation by
Richard Price (see bibliography Concilium Chalecedonense).1
C.Cstpl.II(553) Concilium Universale Constantinopolitanum Secundum (anno 553)
C.Cstpl.III(680–1) Concilium Universale Constantinopolitanum Tertium (anno 680–1)
C.Nic.II(787) Concilium Universale Nicaenum Secundum (anno 787)

2. General Bibliographical Abbreviations

Papyri are quoted following the standard abbreviations of the Checklist of Editions of Greek,
Latin, Demotic, and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca, and Tablets, Founding Editors: John F. Oates
and William H. Willis (http://papyri.info/docs/checklist) and using the editions cited
there. We additionally provide the Trismegistos number (TM) as their unique identifier.

1 The translations of the acts of most ecumenical councils in the period provided by Richard Price

in the Series of Translated Texts for Historians (see our Bibliography of ancient texts) are widely used
for the convenience of the reader. We regularly modify them to bring out the specific concerns with
document characteristics, the processes of their production, and the linguistic specificity of both in
the ancient texts.
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

x Abbreviations and Conventions

ABAW.PH Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,

Philosophisch-­historische Abteilung
ABAW.PPH Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
Philosophisch-­philologische und historische Klasse
ACHCByz Association des Amis du Centre d’Histoire et Civilisation
de Byzance
ACO Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum
ACW Ancient Christian Writers
AHC Annuarium historiae conciliorum
AKG Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte
APAW.PH Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu
Berlin. Philologisch-­historische Klasse
AW Athanasius Werke
BA Bibliotheque Augustinienne
BBS Berliner Byzantinistische Studien
BZ Byzantinische Zeitschrift
CCSG Corpus christianorum, series Graeca
CCSL Corpus christianorum, series Latina
CEFR Collection de l’École française de Rome
CrSt Christianesimo nella storia
CSCO Corpus scriptorum christianorum Orientalium
CSEL Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum Latinorum
FBR Forschungen zur byzantinischen Rechtsgeschichte
FC The Fathers of the Church
GCS Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei
Jahrhunderte
HAW Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaften
HZ Historische Zeitschrift
JbAC.E Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, Ergänzungsband
JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies
JRS Journal of Roman Studies
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
MBPF Münchener Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken
Rechtsgeschichte
MEFRA Mélanges de l’École française de Rome. Antiquité
Mus Le Muséon
n.F. neue Folge
ÖAW Österreichische Akademie die Wissenschaften
OCP Orientalia Christiana Periodica
OMRO Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden
te Leiden
OUP Oxford University Press
RAC Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum
RE Pauly’s Real-­Encyclopaedie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft
SBAW.PH Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Philosophisch-­Historische Klasse
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Abbreviations and Conventions xi

SC Sources chrétiennes
SEA Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum
STAC Studien und Text zu Antike und Christentum
StP Studia Patristica
TTH Translated Texts for Historians
TU Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen
Literatur
VigChr Vigiliae Christianae
WBS Wiener Byzantinistische Studien
ZKG Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte
ZNW Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
ZRG.Kan Zeitschrift der Savigny-­Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, kanonistische
Abteilung
ZRG.Rom Zeitschrift der Savigny-­Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, romanistische
Abteilung

3. Literature Cited in Abbreviation

CCO Clavis conciliorum occidentalium septem prioribus saeculis

celebratorum, edited by Andreas Weckwerth. CC Claves. Subsidia 3,
Turnhout: Brepols, 2013
COGD Conciliorum oecumenicorum generaliumque decreta, I: The
Oecumenical Councils From Nicaea I to Nicaea II (325–787),
curantibus Guiseppe Alberigo et al. Turnhout: Brepols, 2006
CPG Clavis patrum Graecorum, cura et studio Maurice Geerard, 5 vols.
Turnhout: Brepols, 1983; 1974; 1979; 1980; 1987 (2nd ed. 2018);
Supplementum, cura et studio Maurice Geerard and J. Noret.
Turnhout: Brepols, 1998; Addenda volumini III, a J. Noret parata.
Turnhout: Brepols, 2003
CPL Clavis Patrum Latinorum. Editio tertia aucta et emendata, edited
by Eligius Decker, Turnhout: Brepols, 1995
DACL Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie. 15 vols (in 30).
Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1903–51
DGE Diccionario Griego-­Español. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Científicas, Instituto de Filología. Red. bajo la dirección de
Francisco R. Adrados. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Científicas, 2008–
EAC Encyclopedia of Ancient Christianity, edited by Angelo Di
Berardino, Thomas C. Oden, Joel C. Elowsky, and James Hoover.
3 vols. Downers Grove, 2014
HLL Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur der Antike. Vol. 4: Klaus
Sallmann (ed.). Die Literatur des Umbruchs. Von der römischen
zur christlichen Literatur, 117 bis 284 n. Chr. München: C. H. Beck,
1997. Vol. 5: Reinhart Herzog (ed.). Restauration und Erneuerung.
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

xii Abbreviations and Conventions

Die lateinische Literatur von 284 bis 374 n. Chr. München:

C. H. Beck, 1989
Lexicon Gregorianum Lexicon Gregorianum: Wörterbuch zu den Schriften Gregors von
Nyssa, edited by the Forschungsstelle Gregor von Nyssa an der
Westfälischen Wilhelms-­Universität, bearb. von Friedhelm Mann,
10 vols, Leiden: Brill, 1999–2014
LSJ A Greek-­English Lexicon, edited by Henry George Liddell and
Robert Scott et.al. Ninth edition with a revised supplement,
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996
ODB The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, edited by Alexander P.
Kazhdan. 3 vols. Oxford: OUP, 1991
OLD Oxford Latin Dictionary, edited by Peter G.W. Glare, 2nd ed.
Oxford: OUP, 2012
PCBE I Prosopographie chrétienne du Bas-­Empire. Vol. 1: Prosopographie
de l’Afrique chrétienne, edited by André Mandouze. Paris: Centre
national de la recherche scientifique, 1982
PGL A Patristic Greek Lexicon: with addenda and corrigenda, edited
by G.W.H. (Geoffrey William Hugo) Lampe. 10th ed. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1991
PLRE II Martindale, J.R. (John Robert). The Prosopography of the Later
Roman Empire. Vol. II: AD 395–527. Cambridge: CUP, 1980
PmbZ Prosopographie der mittelbyzantinischen Zeit, edited by the
Berlin-­Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften; nach
Vorarbeiten F. Winkelmanns erstellt von Ralph-­Johannes Lilie . . .
[et al.]. 8 vols, Berlin: De Gruyter, 1998–2013
RE [Paulys] Realencyclopaedie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft.
Neue Bearbeitung begonnen von Georg Wissowa. 84 vols.
München/Stuttgart: Druckenmüller, 1894–
TLG Thesaurus Linguae Graecae © Digital Library, edited by Maria C.
Pantelia. University of California, Irvine. http://stephanus.tlg.
uci.edu
TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. Editus iussu et auctoritate consilii
ab academiis societatibusque diversam nationum electi. Leipzig:
Teubner, 1900–
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Introduction

The councils of the late antique church are remembered for important theological
and organizational decisions taken by venerable, even saintly ecclesiastical digni­
taries. In the case of imperial councils, the presence of emperors (or high officials
representing them) provides additional lustre. This, at least, is the impression
gained from iconographic depictions created of these events in later centuries.
Less glamorous and hardly ever depicted, however, these councils were also char­
acterized by a substantial administrative operation, to which we owe the trans­
mission of sizeable numbers of records and other texts from these occasions. Such
texts are commonly referred to as council acts.
The acts from church councils in the ancient world that we find in modern
editions such as the Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum are the product of mul­
tiple stages of textual collection and copying stretching over centuries before
arriving at those final shapes that form the basis of Eduard Schwartz’s magisterial
edition and the work of his successors. The processes of shaping, arranging, and
collecting individual texts into council acts began already during the meetings
from which they emerged and to which they bear witness. In this respect, coun­
cils can be portrayed as exercises in textual practices: in note-­taking, reading,
copying, transcribing, arranging, editing, handling, collecting, and distributing
significant quantities of texts, and in different formats and material manifestations.
And yet, the importance of using and producing ‘documents’ for the work of
the councils and the exertions of secretaries and scribes concerned with the pro­
duction of these records has attracted little scholarly attention. Ancient depictions
of judicial scenes in the civil sphere frequently show a small table with a docu­
ment or two displayed on top to illustrate symbolically the work of the court and
so alert us to the importance of paperwork.1 A similar depiction of a council, had
it been attempted, would have to show a much bigger pile of papers, documents,
and books, requiring a significantly larger table. In a rare exception from the
common neglect of these artefacts and the activities associated with them, the
illustrator of a Carolingian ninth-­century manuscript sketched a council scene in
which much space is given to the secretaries and to the texts they handled and

1 Representing this convention, the trial of Jesus before Pilate is illustrated in this way in the sixth-­
century Codex Purpureus Rossanensis, fol. 8r (ed. Arthur Haseloff, Codex Purpureus Rossanensis: Die
Miniaturen der griechischen Evangelien-­Handschrift in Rossano, Berlin: Giesecke & Devrient, 1898).

The Acts of the Early Church Councils: Production and Character. Thomas Graumann, Oxford University Press.
© Thomas Graumann 2021. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198868170.003.0001
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

2 The Acts of the Early Church Councils

produced.2 In the middle ground formed by an oval of the seated ecclesiastical

dignitaries, we see two lecterns with weighty codices opened and displayed, and
six scribes with their pens and ink wells and with scrolls of writing material across
their knees, hard at work to record proceedings. Despite its early medieval air,
this manuscript illustration allows us to imagine the similar administrative op­er­
ation running alongside the meetings of bishops in antiquity—normally remain­
ing unseen in the background of transactions.
Councils must have been feast days for ecclesiastical (and civil) functionaries
and administrators. Their specialist skills were in high demand. Even before
meetings were formally opened, the administrative operation kicked into gear
and remained in full swing long after the bishops retired, exhausted from their
sessions. In Roman administration, the creation and handling of texts had devel­
oped into a fine art of professional specialists and in ecclesiastical contexts, too, it
often remained the special preserve of the bureaucrats and the keepers of archives
and libraries. These men spoke a distinct language, replete with the technical ter­
minology used in the imperial bureaucracies.3
While the workings of the administrators could appear impenetrable to the
uninitiated, the administrative paper trail and its operations was ubiquitous in
late Roman society. The numerous papyri preserved mostly from Egypt (where
climatic conditions were unusually favourable for the preservation of such ma­ter­
ials) illustrate the pervasiveness of the bureaucracies of government and of the
judicial institutions constantly invoked to assess, adjudicate, and arbitrate nearly
all aspects of life. Virtually every Roman citizen had experience at some level with
some of this pervasive sprawl of documents, and those in positions of responsibil­
ity understood at least some of the mechanics that kept the paperwork flowing.
Churchmen shared in this cultural experience and formation. The increasing
integration of the church into the institutional set-­up of empire made many of
them practitioners of the bureaucratic arts themselves, whether acting as
scribes and notaries, financial administrators (oikonomoi), ecclesiastical advocates
(ekdikoi), or, in the case of bishops, as judges. In their own dioceses, bishops were
regularly involved in the daily struggle and legal wrangling over deeds, petitions,
and lawsuits, which they were required to mediate and adjudicate. The records of
these, one imagines, absorbed just as much time and effort as theological reading,
writing, and biblical study. Many will have recognized themselves and their daily

2 Utrecht, Universiteitsbibliotheek, MS 32, digitalized at http://psalter.library.uu.nl; the drawing is

found on fol. 90v.
3 Even in Greek-­speaking contexts, and despite the increased usage of Greek in government com­
munications—recently traced by Fergus Millar, A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief under
Theodosius II (408–450) (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2006)—Latinisms and echoes of
Latin technical ‘jargon’ are certain indications of ‘insider’ speak. They are particularly pertinent in
legal contexts. See now Matias Buchholz, Römisches Recht auf Griechisch. Prolegomena zu einer lin-
guistischen Untersuchung der Zusammensetzung und Semantik des byzantinischen prozessrechtlichen
Wortschatzes (Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 2018).
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Introduction 3

plight in Augustine’s well-­known complaint of the inordinate burden that such

legal and administrative work placed on him.4 This dimension of their episcopal
duties made them all ‘semi-­professionals’, or at least keen amateurs—out of neces­
sity and by practice, if not always by training—in the business of handling texts
and record-­keeping.5 Some inevitably moved in the imperial legal system and its
paperwork with more confidence than others.6 Specialists in the lower clerical
ranks soon emerged and gained importance quickly. The councils we shall exam­
ine bring to light a number of specialists in the ranks of the clergy assisting their
bishops with their various technical competences.
Such occupations and backgrounds in the handling of everyday church affairs,
outside conciliar meetings, then, fostered the expectations of churchmen about
the required—and formally correct—engagement with documents and paper­
work appropriate for an occasion of the significance of a council, even before we
take into account the involvement of imperial officers and their staff in many of
the councils examined in this study. They also equipped them with the skills and
knowledge to achieve it. The bishops and their office-­staff active in late antique
councils conducted the necessary scrutiny of documents before accepting them—
or at least made the pretence of doing so—in the same way as imperial bureau­
crats and legal experts. When preparing their own records, senior bishops—just
like civil office-­holders—also used the technical formulae that signalled to their
subordinates and administrative aides the intended processing of the records,
acts, and documents transacted during the sessions, and in this way prompted
them to action.
Analogies of conciliar transactions with the work of law courts and delibera­
tive civil assemblies that underscore such communality have long been observed.7
As the natural cultural environment of conciliar activity, such similarities cannot
surprise. Yet the significance of the seemingly lesser tasks in the ‘bureaucracy’ of
councils has failed to attract sufficient scholarly attention. And with it, the

4 Of his numerous complaints, see only Op.Mon. 29.37; Neil McLynn, ‘Administrator: Augustine in
His Diocese’, in Mark Vessey (ed.), A Companion to Augustine (Chichester: Wiley-­ Blackwell,
2012), 312–22.
5 Some, like Julian, the bishop of Lebedos, had experience of notarial work from earlier stages of
their career; CChalc. I.130.
6 Cf. Caroline Humfress, Orthodoxy and the Courts in Late Antiquity (Oxford: OUP, 2007);
Caroline Humfress, ‘Bishops and Law Courts in Late Antiquity: How (Not) to Make Sense of the Legal
Evidence’, JECS 19:3 (2011): 375–400; Erika T. Hermanowicz, Possidius of Calama: A Study of the
North African Episcopate at the Time of Augustine (Oxford: OUP, 2008); Norman Russell, ‘Theophilus
of Alexandria as a Forensic Practitioner’, StP 50 (2011): 235–43. From the perspective of legal history,
see now Peter Riedlberger, Prolegomena zu den spätantiken Konstitutionen. Nebst einer Analyse der
erbrechtlichen und verwandten Sanktionen gegen Heterodoxe (Stuttgart-­Bad Cannstatt: frommann-­
holzboog, 2020), 495–607.
7 See, classically, Heinrich Gelzer, ‘Die Konzilien als Reichsparlamente’, in Ausgewählte Kleine
Schriften (Leipzig: Teubner, 1907), 142–55; Pierre Batiffol, ‘Origine du règlement des conciles’, in
Etudes de liturgie et d’archéologie chrétienne (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1919), vol. 3, 84–153.
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

4 The Acts of the Early Church Councils

characteristics of conciliar ‘paperwork’ and the mechanics of its confection and

use have yet to be analysed.
The required textual-­administrative processes for the production of conciliar
records, instigated by the commands of bishops and officials and executed by
notaries, secretaries, and scribes with the technical skills of their profession, were
not accidental to the work of councils and—it is the contention of this study—
barely even secondary to formal proceedings when it came to achieving the
councils’ desired efficacy. What is more, the supervision and control of the
administrative, text-­based, and text-­creating processes was also an essential tool
in steering the council and its transactions in the desired direction. The adminis­
trative personnel behind the main actors on the conciliar stage who carried out
this work were indispensable for the operation of a council. Without them, the
bishops would be in danger of remaining largely ineffective. Yet with the right
aides at their beckoning, leading figures could shape events and records for their
benefit and to suit their agenda. The professional and personal affiliations of the
assistants working with bishops and officials—where they can be uncovered—
therefore hold at least one key to unlocking the lines of communication and influ­
ence operating behind the public-­facing exterior of the meetings (Chapter 8).
More important still is an understanding of the work these unseen men carried
out in between meetings and after the conclusion of sessions, so that the finalized
official record—on which so much depended at the time and which is still the
basis (often the only one) for any historical or theological investigation now—
could become a reality.
For the assessment and interpretation of conciliar acta, understanding the
practicalities of their creation is therefore imperative. Crucially, in a significant
number of instances, bishops, officers, and secretaries active in councils openly
addressed questions relating to the textual and administrative activities to which
these records owe their existence. Less frequently, the acts themselves signal for
unstated (but often reconstructable) reasons the special significance attached to
the documentary record for the purposes of the council. Such instances provide
fruitful starting points for our analysis.
With its concern for the textual practices and outputs of church councils, the
present study builds and seeks to advance existing scholarship on ancient coun­
cils. Assessing past scholarship on the rich treasure of conciliar texts creates a
somewhat paradoxical impression. On the one hand, church councils have for
centuries occupied historians, theologians, and canon lawyers. In various and
manifold ways countless works in these areas have illuminated important aspects
of late antique Christianity and late Roman society, of Christian doctrine, and of
the generation and transformation of its legal traditions. Research has borne and
continues to bear rich fruit in all these areas. The council records examined here
have often been the foundational sources and resources for such endeavours.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Introduction 5

At the same time, the forbidding complexity and sheer quantity of conciliar
texts included in the great collections has probably more often impeded than
stimulated interest. In 1927, the first editor of the ACO could observe with some
despair that ‘nobody reads council acts’ (Acta conciliorum non leguntur).8 With
the exception of a few specialists, this remained true long after Schwartz’s own
editorial exertions began to provide these texts in modern critical editions. The
editorial project that Schwartz started almost exactly one hundred years ago came
to its conclusion only in 2016. A recent surge of scholarly interest appears to be
connected not least with the appearance in print of modern language translations,
chief among them the English translations of the Acts of the Ephesus I (431), the
Council of Chalcedon (451), the Second Council of Constantinople (553), the
Lateran Council (649), and Nicaea II (787) by Richard Price and a number of
collaborators.9
Almost inevitably, most theological and historical approaches to church coun­
cils have been predominantly concerned with council acts as ‘sources’ for distinct
thematic research interests. The description of the material and its generation has
mostly been relegated to ‘introductory’ concerns and at the most prompted dis­
cussion of how the historical-­political and intellectual contexts shaping the coun­
cils also impinged on their acts and affects their ‘reliability’ as historical sources.
Though potentially decisive for the historical and theological interpretation of the
‘source’-material, the document characteristics and the textual practices to which
the acts owe their existence have not been analysed and examined across different
councils and as important in their own right. Only Fergus Millar’s important
examination of government communication in the times of Theodosius II—much
of it manifested in council acts—begins to gesture in this direction.10
A fundamental interest in the acts in and of themselves, therefore, is almost
entirely confined to, and summed up by, the great editorial feats of the Acta
Conciliorum Oecumenicorum and the numerous attendant studies of their editors:
Eduard Schwartz, Johannes Straub, Rudolf Riedinger, Heinz Ohme, and Erich
Lamberz. To these must be added the editorial work on other councils outside of
this corpus: the Council of Aquileia by Manuela Zelzer; the Conference of
Carthage by Serge Lancel and more recently by Clemens Weidmann; and less
directly, but no less important, the ‘Urkunden’ (documents) of fourth-­century
councils initiated by H.-G. Opitz and continued by H. Chr. Brennecke and his
collaborators.11 Many important insights are also found in the translation

8 Eduard Schwartz, ‘Die Kaiserin Pulcheria auf der Synode von Chalkedon’, in Festgabe für Adolf
Jülicher zum 70. Geburtstag (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1927), 212.
9 See the Bibliography, 309–11. 10 Millar, Greek Roman Empire.
11 Editions are given in the Bibliography, 309–11 and 315.
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

6 The Acts of the Early Church Councils

volumes by Richard Price mentioned previously, and his associated studies. Our
study owes an immense debt to the work of these scholars.
Yet for the provision of critical editions, the main focus of these scholars had to
be directed towards the archetypal form of the acts preserved in the manuscript
tradition, and the interest in the conditions and circumstances of their origins is
shaped by this principal purview.12 Different from such concerns (and comple­
mentary to them), this examination instead focuses on the practices employed by
the conciliar secretariats themselves when creating the very first form and textual
artefact that constituted the ‘official’ protocol of a session, and of the acts of a
council—activities that are situated one step (at least) prior to the manuscript
trad­ition that pushes off from what they produced.13 Consequently, our study
does not presume to rewrite the history of the creation of council acts from the
perspective of their textual transmission, which the editors of the separate vol­
umes of the ACO (and other standalone editions) have magisterially portrayed
for each separate occasion.
Our research of the creation of council acts, and the instances of their early use
and handling, instead aims to evaluate the importance of textual production,
receptions, and handling for the core business of various councils and for these
councils’ institutional convictions and self-­perception. As both texts and objects,
the completed records express the council’s sense of purpose and embody its
claim to validity. The acts, in this perspective, are not the by-­product and mere
textual fallout of the important transactions by the councils concerned, which
more or less directly present the ‘reality’ of discussions and decision-­making and
can safely be evaluated in historical and theological research with that interest
alone. Instead the acts—as paperwork—lay claim in essence to the authority of
the council and the legitimacy of its proceedings and decisions. This character
of council acts as legitimizing texts necessarily focuses attention on the open
or veiled attempts by their makers to engage with an implied audience in a persua­
sive manner. Eduard Schwartz has amply demonstrated this underlying purpose
as operative in the collections made of these texts in later centuries and pointed
out their resultant tendentiousness; he incisively called them ‘publizistische
Sammlungen’ (collections for the purpose of partisan argument).14 Similar aims
and mechanisms, we contend, not only inform such later collections but also
already shape the initial processes for the creation of the original acts. Council

12 Independent of such editorial work, only a few more studies have begun to analyse, sporadically on
the basis of select evidence from particular synods, elements relevant to the making of council acts.
Emin Tengström’s study of the work of stenographer and scribes at the Conference of Carthage has been
foundational in this respect; it forms a helpful springboard for our study (see Chapter 3, pp. 33–6).
13 How closely these theoretically distinct steps are linked is not least determined by the creation of
an authoritative ‘edition’ of acts by the conciliar authorities, or its absence (see Chapter 18, pp. 283–95).
14 Eduard Schwartz, Publizistische Sammlungen zum Acacianischen Schisma, ABAW.PH, N.F.10
(München: C.H. Beck, 1934).
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/06/21, SPi

Introduction 7

acts, then, are not simply, arguably not even predominantly, informational and
documentary in character and aspiration; they are rhetorical, argumentative,
persuasive, polemical from the outset—which tendencies later compilers and
copyists often developed further (at times redirecting and remoulding the
originators’ designs in the process). The acts must be understood as compositorial-­
editorial products of a guiding quasi-­authorial mind, even if their leading ‘voice’
may not be one individual’s but representative of complex negotiations of
divergent interests.
The argumentative and legitimizing values of the acts, we contend, are
inscribed in the practices of their creation and compilation; put differently, textual
practices speak of their creators’ intentionality and are the principal means to
execute them. These purposes and intentions are at the same time concretely
embodied in the acts and documents as physical objects. The acts, therefore,
simultaneously need to be understood in their materiality, as artefacts. These
ancient material objects are no longer directly available to the modern scholar,
having long since decayed together with the archives that kept them. Yet the
recorded descriptions and discussions of these objects by the clergy and officials
handling them allow reconstruction of important features, some of which may be
illustrated by papyrological evidence of similar documents from different social
and institutional contexts. Textual practices, then, are the way in which councils
actively construed their claims to ‘truth’ and authority, and material textual
embodiments of acts reveal and display the legitimizing claims of their makers.
The methodological approach of this study is directly informed by the ac­tiv­
ities observed in conciliar gatherings. Several councils responded to the work of
previous assemblies and openly engaged in the critical scrutiny of the paperwork
left behind by those earlier transactions. At the same time and on the same occa­
sions, the bishops (or officials) and the secretaries they instructed began to prod­
uce records of the same kind they inspected and discussed. We thus observe two
strands of ancient engagement with conciliar (and related) documentation folded
into one: one provided a description of textual and administrative activity in
action while matters were being transacted, running alongside them and looking
forward to their eventual completion; the other offered critical comment on the
characteristics of documents previously created by other assemblies by the same
kinds of practices and for comparable purposes. The latter perspective allows us
to infer expectations and conventions governing the final shape and required for­
mality of the record—whether the ancient critics held up earlier records as posi­
tive models or as negative examples of the mistakes to avoid. ‘Proper’ documentary
form, reconstructed from expressions of ancient expectation, in turn provides us
with the standards by which to evaluate the records they left behind for us. The two
counter-­directional yet complementary perspectives find expression in mirror­ing
parts in this study; they analyse the examination of existing records conducted in
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 The candidates being seated on the gunners’ seats, an officer of
the battery commands, for example:
1. Aiming point, the chimney on that white house.
2. Deflection, 440.
3. On No. 2 close 10.
At the last word of command for the deflection each man sets off
the deflection; applies the correction for deflection difference
appropriate for his piece; causes the trail to be shifted until the sight
is directed upon the aiming point; corrects for difference of level of
the wheels; raises or lowers the panoramic sight until the field of
view will include the aiming point; traverses the piece until the
vertical hair is on the aiming point; calls “Ready” and steps clear.
The trial being completed and the men again being seated, the
officer commands for example, in continuance of the assumed
situation:
1. Right, 120.
2. On No. 4, close 5.
At the last word of command for the deflection, each man operates
the sight and, if necessary, the trail as before; traverses the piece
until the vertical hair is on the aiming point; calls “Ready” and steps
clear.
The third and fourth trial is similarly conducted.
No credits will be given in the following cases:
1. If the sight is incorrectly set for the deflection or deflection
difference.
2. If, when the bubble of the cross level is accurately centered, the
vertical cross hair is found not to be on the aiming point.
3. If, at any time during the trial, the man has operated the
elevating device.
If the piece is found to be correctly laid within the limits prescribed,
credits will be given as follows:
 Time in seconds, exactly, or less than18 20 21 22 23 24
Credits 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.3

Laying for Range.

Six trials, using the range quadrant.
The man being seated on the seat on the right side of the trail, an
officer of the battery commands, for example:
1. Site, 280.
2. 3400.
At the last word of the command, the man sets off the angle of
site; sets the quadrant for range; corrects for difference of level of
wheels; turns the elevating crank so as to center the range bubble;
calls “Ready” and steps clear.
No credits will be given in the following cases:
1. If the quadrant is incorrectly set for angle of site or range.
2. If no part of the bubble of the cross level is between the middle
two lines on the glass tube.
3. If there be found to be an error of more than 50 yards in laying
for any range less than 1,500 yards or more than 25 yards for any
equal range to or exceeding 1,500 yards.
If the piece is found to be correctly laid within the limits prescribed,
credits will be given as follows:
Time in seconds, exactly, or less than14 16 18 19 20 21
Credits 3.0 2.3 2.6 2.4 2.2 2

Fuse Setting.
 12 Trials: 6 with the bracket fuse setter, 6 with the hand fuse
setter.
Drill cartridges with fuses in good order set at safety are placed as
in service. An officer of the battery commands, for example:
1. Corrector, 24.
2. 2700.
At the last word of the command for the corrector, in trials with the
bracket fuse setter, the man sets the fuse setter at the corrector, and,
as the data are received, at the range ordered, receives the cartridge
from an assistant, inserts its head in the instrument, sets the fuse
and calls “Ready.”
At the last word of the command for the corrector, in trials with
the hand fuse setter, the candidate sets the fuse setter at the
corrector, and, as the data are received at the range, ordered; with
the aid of an assistant, sets the fuse, and calls “Ready.”
No credits are given in the following cases:
1. If the fuse setter is incorrectly set for corrector or range.
2. If the candidate fails to obtain a correct fuse setting within one-
fifth of a second.
If the fuse setter is found to be correctly set and is properly
operated, credits are given as follows:
Time in seconds, exactly, or less than8 9 10 11 12 13
Credits 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0

Drill of the Gun Squad.

The subjects will embrace such parts of the following exercises (D.
and S. R. F. A.) as will thoroughly test the candidate’s familiarity with
the service of the piece: Formation of the gun squad (135, 138); to
form the gun squad (170-173); to tell off the gun squad (174); post of
the gun squads (175-177); to post the gun squad (178-179); posts of
the cannoneers, carriages limbered (180-182); to mount the
cannoneers (183-185); to dismount the cannoneers (186-187); to
change posts (189-190); to move by hand the carriages limbered
(191-192); to leave the park (204); action front (199); posts of the
cannoneers, carriages unlimbered but not prepared for action (188);
limber front and rear (202); action rear (200); limber rear (203); to
move by hand the carriages unlimbered (937); prepare for action
(938); march order (942); posts of the cannoneers, carriages
unlimbered and prepared for action (941); duties in detail of the
gunner (845-869); duties in detail of No. 1 (870-891); duties in detail
of No. 2 (892-901); duties in detail of No. 3 (902-911); duties in detail
of No. 4 (913-918); duties in detail of No. 5 (919-924); methods of
laying (985-988); and methods of fire (995-1008).
The questions will only cover the important parts covered in the
paragraphs above.

Materiel.
The examination of each candidate will be sufficiently extended to
test his familiarity with the use and care of the materiel of his
organization, and will be theoretical. The examination will be
conducted by questions on the following subjects: Nomenclature of
harness and of the parts and accessories of the wheeled materiel;
use of oils; method of cleaning and lubricating parts and
mechanisms; method of cleaning cylinder oil and of emptying and
filling cylinders; use of tools; the kinds of projectiles, of fuses, and of
powder actually issued for use, and their projectiles, of fuses, and of
powder actually issued for use, and their general purpose and effect,
omitting questions as to construction, weight, manufacture, and
technical description; the care and preservation of saddle and
harness equipment in use. Description of: breech mechanism, to
mount, to assemble; elevating screws, to dismount, to assemble;
hub liner, to remove, to assemble; brakes, piece and caisson, to
adjust; wheel, to remove, to replace.
Chevrons will be issued to those candidates who qualify and will
be worn as prescribed in orders.
 DON’TS FOR CANNONEERS.
Don’ts for All Cannoneers:
—Sacrifice accuracy for speed.
—Guess at the data.
—Expose yourself.
—Let your attention be distracted.
—Make unnecessary moves.
—Talk.
Don’ts for Chief of Section:
—Forget that you are responsible for the work of your
squad.
—Fail to assist the gunner in laying on the aiming point.
—Say “Muzzle Right (left),” merely move your hand in
the direction you desire the trail shifted.
—Write down the data.
—Forget your proper pose, covering No. 3 opposite the
float.
—Forget to extend your arm vertically, fingers joined,
after the gunner has announced “Ready.”
—Fail to caution “With the Lanyard” for the first shot.
—Fail to look at both gunner and executive.
—Command “Fire;” merely drop your arm.
—Fail to designate who shall assist No. 2 when he is
unable to shift the trail.
—Forget to announce “Volley Complete.”
—Forget to select the individual Aiming Points for the
gunner.
 —Forget to announce “No. (so & so) on Aiming Point,”
in reciprocal laying.
—Ever say “Range 3000,” merely “3000.”
Dont’s for Gunner:
—Forget to place the sight bracket cover in the left axle
seat.
—Forget to put the sight shank cover in the trail box.
—Forget to close the panoramic sight box, and fasten it
with your left hand.
—Forget to clamp the panoramic sight in its seat.
—Forget to close the ports in the shield.
—Forget to put your weight against the shoulder guard
while laying.
—Touch any adjustment after calling “Ready.”
—Forget to move your head from the panoramic sight
after calling “Ready.”
—Lean against the wheel.
—Fail to take up lost motion in the proper direction.
—Fail to watch the executive after calling “Ready.”
—Signal with your hand for movements of the trail.
—Fail to identify Aiming Points or Targets.
—Fail to secure hood on sight bracket.
—Say “Whoa” to No. 2 while the trail is being shifted.
Say “Trail Down.”
—Fail to lower the top shield at once at the command
“March Order.”
—Forget to relay vertical hair on A. P. at completion of
sweeping volley.
 —Forget to set range 1000, deflection zero in “Fire at
Will.”
—Forget to say “Ready” just loud enough for the chief of
section to hear.
—Forget to chalk up the deflection on the main shield in
reciprocal laying.
—Forget to set site and level bubble (British).
—Forget to release the brake in trail shifts (British).
—Forget to count “1001, 1002” to preserve proper firing
interval.
Dont’s for Number 1:
—Touch the firing handle until you announce “Set.”
—Fire the piece with the right hand.
—Try to throw the drill cartridge over the float by jerking
the breech open.
—Slam the breech.
—Fail to level bubbles.
—Fail to set and release brake in trail shifts.
—Fail to look squarely at the scales of the quadrant.
—Fail to take up lost motion properly.
—Forget to close the quadrant box.
—Fire the piece until the command is given.
—Lean against the wheel.
—Forget to keep up with the range in direct laying.
—Forget to lower the top shield immediately at “March
Order.”
—Talk.
Dont’s for Number 2:
 —Throw the breech cover on the ground.
—Fail to engage the handspike.
—Slam the apron.
—Put feet on the float.
—Wait for the command in shifts of 50 mils or more.
—Move the trail in a series of shifts.
—Fail to mark off 11 lines 50 mils apart at once on
taking your post.
—Fail to secure the breech cover.
—Fail to secure the handspike in “March Order.”
—Run between carriages.
—Fail to throw empty cartridge cases out of the way of
the cannoneers.
—Forget the tow and waste.
—Talk.
Dont’s for Number 3:
—Run between the carriages.
—Throw the muzzle cover on the ground.
—Throw the front sight cover on the ground.
—Slam the apron.
—Fail to see that fuze is set at safety at “March Order.”
—Fail to look directly down at the fuze setter while
adjusting scales.
—Take right hand from the corrector worm knob and left
from the range worm crank, during drill.
—Forget to set range zero in “Fire at Will.”
—Cross your legs.
 —Forget to set each announced range regardless of the
kind of fire being used.
—Talk.
Dont’s for Number 4:
—Throw the fuze setter cover on the ground.
—Slam the apron.
—Forget to set the fuze at “Safety” in “March Order.”
—Fail to glance into the bore to get the alignment.
—Touch a round after inserting it in the breech.
—Fail to completely set each fuze.
—Forget to take the round from No. 5 from beneath in
percussion fire and from the top when the hand
fuze setter is used.
—Forget to say, “3200, 2, last round,” only loud enough
to reach the chief of section.
—Forget to secure the cover on the fuze setter.
—Attempt to move the caisson with the door open.
—Forget to set and release the caisson brake (Model
1902).
—Turn the round to the left after setting.
—Talk.
Dont’s for Number 5:
—Slam the apron.
—Attempt to move the caisson with the door open.
—Forget to put your left elbow on the outside of your left
knee in using the hand fuze setter.
—Forget to set the brake on the 1916 caisson.
—Throw the waterproof caps under your feet.
 —Talk.

TRAINING GUN CREWS.

This article is not intended to cover all of the work of the gun crew,
it is intended merely to cover certain points sometimes lost sight of.
References are to the 3” gun, but any crew efficient in serving that
excellent weapon will have little trouble in mastering any other.
All refinements taught have but one prime object, that is accuracy
of fire. It is of no value to make atmospheric and velocity corrections
if still greater variations are constantly introduced by poor service of
the piece. The foundation of battery efficiency is well-trained gun
crews. Officers may be able to lay out orienting lines with the
greatest facility, may know the range tables in the dark, but it will
avail little if they cannot train men to apply properly and accurately
the data determined.
The safety of our own infantry and the effectiveness of our fire are
absolutely dependent on the continuous training of gun crews, and
the resultant precision and sureness with which they perform their
work. This can only be obtained by constant drill from the day the
recruit joins until the day of his discharge; not by long drills in which
he grows tired and loses interest, but by short periods broken by
instruction in other subjects; not by many hours one week and none
the next, but by a short period every day of the week. The best
gunners grow rusty in a very few days; constant short drills will give
results and are the secret of success. Every man must get
instructions every day, be he raw recruit or expert gunner.
Cannoneers should be taught that the greatest crime that can be
committed in laying the piece is to make an error—the only crime for
which there is no punishment. An error or mistake in the correct
service of the piece should not be punished, but it should be
carefully explained how the efficiency of the battery depends on
each member, and to insure that crime is not committed again,
additional hours of instruction beyond that required for the rest of the
crew will be necessary.
Every man must be on his toes from the time he comes in sight of
his gun, every movement at the piece must be at a run. Slow and
sleepy motions of one man will kill all the snap and energy of every
other member of the crew. Do not, however, confuse speed of
performing any given motion with hurry in execution of detail. For
example, the gunner must move with snap and energy in getting his
eye back to the sight and his hand on the traversing handwheel after
the piece is fired, but he must never be hurried in getting the vertical
wire exactly on the aiming point, or in making the ordered changes in
the deflection setting. Stop watches should not be used. They are a
fruitful cause of errors. Speed comes from continual practice and it
cannot be artificially attained by stop-watch timing. Do not
understand that speed is not desirable, it is highly desirable, but
practice alone will give it and it will nearly always be found that the
best-trained crew is the fastest crew. Competitions between crews
must be for accuracy, not speed. If every motion is made with a snap
and at a run the results as regards speed will be satisfactory.
The accuracy of fire is affected by brakes not being adjusted for
equal tension, by direction of recoil not being in line with the trail, by
No. 2 sitting on the handspike and shifting his weight after the
gunner has called “Ready;” by No. 1 jerking the firing handle; by the
gunner not keeping his shoulder against the guard; by elevating
cranks not being properly assembled; by sights and quadrants not
being properly adjusted or locked with means provided (this subject
deserves several pages); by variations in the amount of oil in the
cylinder; by improper adjustment of the gland; by the gunner coming
on to the aiming point sometimes from the right, sometimes from the
left; by the No. 1 centering the bubble sometimes from front to rear,
sometimes from rear to front.
You may have stood behind a battery firing and noticed how one
or two guns jump violently in recoil, while others would hardly disturb
the proverbial glass of water on top of the wheel, although all guns of
equal service. This was due almost entirely to the lack of proper
adjustment of some of the parts mentioned above.
 Every member of the crew must know his duties so well as to
make his motion automatic; the direction to turn the various
handwheels, milled heads, and gears to obtain the desired result,
and he must always do these things in the same way. The effect of
small differences in laying may be graphically shown the gun crew
by firing sub-caliber ammunition at a small arms steel target which
rings a bell when a bull’s-eye is made. Erratic shots means poor
adjustments of equipment or poor training of the gun crew. Pleas that
worn material or lost motion, or defective ammunition are the causes
of erratic shooting are largely excuses for ignorance, laziness, and
lack of proper instruction. Worn materiel requires more makeshifts,
takes longer to lay and more careful watching, so that fire cannot be
so rapid, but except for wear in the bore of the gun it is possible to
do almost as accurate shooting with worn materiel, especially if the
new materiel has not been thoroughly worked in.
Among the more important duties of the men may be mentioned in
the following:
Chief of Section.—Must teach his men to have pride in the gun
they serve, and the reputation of the section. He shows each
member how the accuracy of firing is dependent on him, and that
one man may ruin the best efforts of all the others. He must keep his
materiel as clean as when it left the makers hand, every part
functioning properly, every screw and nut tightened, no burred nuts
or bolts, or missing split pins. He helps each member to take a pride
in keeping the part for which he is responsible as clean as a new pin
and in perfect condition. He sees that the various canvas covers and
sponge and rammer never touch the ground where they will gather
dirt. He knows the proper use of his tools, and the correct adjustment
of the firing mechanism. He must be able to assemble and
disassemble blindfolded the firing lock and breech mechanism. In
firing he knows the settings of all scales without reference to a data
book.
The Gunner.—Knows that turning the levelling screw clockwise
moves cross bubble to the right; that turning scroll gear clockwise
increases the range; that turning the peep sight screw clockwise
increases deflection, and so on with all handwheels, etc., that he
operates and must know these things so well that he operates them
in the proper direction automatically. Must always bring vertical wire
on aiming point from the left to take up any play in traversing
mechanism. He verifies that he is on the aiming point after the
breech is closed and if there is any delay, again immediately before
firing. He gets his eye back to the sight and relays immediately the
gun returns to battery. He knows his scale readings at all times. He
keeps his sight scrupulously clean, never permits his finger to touch
the objective prism when turning the rotating head, nor wipes off eye
piece with hand. He keeps his shoulder against the guard at all
times.
The Number 1.—He knows his site and range scale readings
without having to look at them. In centering the bubble he brings it
always from front to rear to take up play in the elevating mechanism.
He centers the bubble so accurately that it is not the thickness of a
sheet of tissue paper nearer one graduation than the other, and what
is most important he sees that it stays there until he fires the pieces,
when he promptly recentres it. (The latitude allowed in centring the
bubble by our gunners’ examination is responsible for 20 per cent. of
our field probable error.) He must not fire the piece with a jerk but
with a constant even pressure, else he may destroy all his accuracy
of levelling. The same principle applies if he uses the lanyard. He
keeps his quadrant free from any sign of dirt and assures himself
that it is in perfect condition. If the gunner fails to keep his shoulder
against the guard when the piece is fired he reminds him of it. In
centring the bubble or setting the scales he gets his eye squarely
opposite the scale or bubble.
The Number 2.—He knows the width of the spade, float, etc., in
mils, and is able to make any shift under two hundred mils, within 5
mils. He shifts the trail so as to bring the direction of recoil in line with
it (except for moving targets). In receiving empty cases he should not
permit them to strike the trail or throw them against each other, as
they must then be resized before they can be again used. If he sits
on the handspike he must not shift his weight after the piece is laid.
The Number 3.—He knows that turning the corrector worm knob
clockwise decreases the setting; turning the range worm crank
clockwise increases the range. In making these settings he keeps
his eye squarely over the scales. He knows his scale settings at all
times. He is taught to keep his fuze setter and its cover clean, and is
shown how a small pile of dirt or wax behind the stop pin or in the
rotating pin notch can throw out his settings and ruin the reputation
of his section. Gum from the fuze often collects in these places. The
surest way is to keep a match stick handy and clean out these
places whenever there is a lull in the firing.
The Number 4.—If necessary to reset the fuze he must turn the
projectile until it brings up against the stop pin, then cease all turning
movement and draw the projectile straight out of the fuze setter. If he
continues the turning motion unconsciously he can easily alter the
setting by a fifth of a second. In loading he is careful not to strike the
fuze against the breech and so alter the fuze setting.
The Number 5.—He knows where the rotating pin notch is in the
fuze setter, and where the corresponding pin is on the fuze. He
places the fuze so that the pin is seated in the notch with little or no
turning movement and turns rapidly but with no more force than
required. He is careful to set all fuzes with the same force, that is,
not turn one with a violent twist and the next barely up to the stop.
APPENDIX “B”—Comparative table of
guns used in World’s War.
Gt. U. U.
Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Russia,
Britain, States, States,
1905 1897 1906 1912 1903
1917 1902 1916
Caliber, inches 3.01 2.95 3.03 3.3 2.95 3. 3. 2.95
Weight of
14.72 16.00 15.00 18.00 14.3 14.41 15.00 16.00
shrapnel, lbs.
Muzzle velocity, f.
1640 1750 1760 1680 1510 1930 1700 1600
s.
Muzzle energy, ft.
275 335 242 340 224 273 300 311
tons
Weight of gun 700 1000 766 880 690 785 710 765
Weight of gun and
2000 2650 1860 2600 2260 2075 2230 3000
carriage
Weight of g., c.
3750 4150 4200 4100 3350 3850 3730 4400
and limber
Maximum
18 18 16 33 65 16$ 16 53
elevation
Total traverse,
8 6 8 8 52 5½ 8 45
degrees
Length of recoil, 18-
51.5 47 44 28-48 42.5 50 18-46
inches 53
Height of wheels 4’3” 4’ 4’5½” 4’3” 4’3½” 4’4” 4’8” 4’8”
Independent line
No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. No. No. Yes.
of sight
Sights,
goniometric,
telescopic, P. G. T. G. O. P. T. P. O. P. O. P. O. P.
panoramic,
ordinary
Breech block, W. E. S. W. S. W. S. B. S. B. W.
wedge
swinging,
 eccentric
screw.
Traverse, axle or
P. A. P. A. P. A. A. P.
pintle
Recuperation,
spring or
S. H. S. H. H. S. S. S.
hydro-
pneumatic
Length of gun,
30 36 27.3 28.0 30 30 29.2 30.8
calibers
Width of track,
60 60 60 66 58 60 60 60
inches
Range, maximum 6400 7550 7600 9000 8850 7800 6500 9650
 APPENDIX “C”

TABLE OF EQUIVALENTS.
1 mil. 3.37 minutes.
1 meter (m) 39.37 inches.
1 centimeter (cm) .3937 inch.
1 millimeter (mm) .03937 inch.
1 kilogram (kg) 2.2046 pounds.
1 dekagram (dkg) .3527 ounce.
1 gram 15.432 grains.
1 liter 1.05671 quarts (U.S.).
1 inch 2.54 centimeters.
1 foot .3048 meter.
1 yard .9144 meter.
1 square inch 6.452 square centimeters.
1 cubic inch 16.39 cubic centimeters.
1 cubic foot .02832 cubic meter.
1 cubic yard .7645 cubic meter.
1 ounce 28.35 grams.
1 pound .4536 kilogram.
1 quart (U. S.) .9463 liter.
1 degree 17.777 mils.
1 kilogram (kg) per square 14.223 pounds per square
centimeter inch.
 INDEX
Abatage, French 75-mm, 95
Action of Recoil Mechanism, 3-inch Gun, 70
Aiming Circle, 274
Air and Liquid Pumps, 155-mm Howitzer, 189
American 75, 105
Ammunition, 199
Ammunition 3-inch Gun, 214
Ammunition, Definition of, 11
Ammunition Marking, 233
Ammunition Truck, 334
Angle of Site Mechanism, American 75, 127
Anti-Aircraft Guns, 60
Armament, Modern, 46
Army Artillery, 57
Artillery, Definition of, 11
Artillery Tractor, 330
Assembling 3-inch Gun, 76, 242
Assembling American 75, 133
Automatic Pistol, 315
Automatic Rifle, 322, 325
Axles, Discussion, 44

Ballistics, Definition of, 11

Battery Commander’s Telescope Model 1915, 270
Biblical References to Artillery, 16
Bicarbonate of Soda, 239
Bore, Definition of, 11
Borax, 238
Bracket, Fuze Setter, 283
Breechblock, 4.7-inch Gun, 156
Breechblock, British 75, 150
Breechblock, French 75, 87
Breechblocks, Discussion of, 31
Breech, Definition of, 12
Breech Mechanism 3-inch Gun, 63
Breech Mechanism, American 75, 106
Breech Mechanism, G. P. F., 162
Breech Mechanism, 155-mm Howitzer, 173
British 75, 147
Browning Automatic Rifle, 325
Browning Machine Gun, 323
Built-up Guns, Discussion of, 29

Caisson 3-inch Gun, 74

Caisson, Definition of, 12
Caliber, Definition of, 12
Camp Telephone, 286
Canvas Buckets, 241
Care of 3-inch Gun, 242
Care and Cleaning of Cloth, 252
Care and Cleaning of Leather, 249
Care and Cleaning of Metal, 252
Care and Inspection of Sights, 267
Care and Preservation, French 75, 101
Care of Guns During Firing, 253
Care of 155-mm Howitzer, Notes on, 194
Care and Preservation of Materiel, 236
Carriages, Gun, 3-inch, 65
Carriage, Gun, Definition of, 12
Carriage, American 75, Description, 111
Carriage 4.7-inch Gun, Description, 154
Carriage 155-mm Howitzer, Description, 179
Cartridge Case, Care of, 219
Cartridge, Case, Definition, 12
Charge, Definition, 12
Classification of fuzes, 224
Cleaning Material, 236
Cleaning Schedule, 254
Clock Oil, Use of, 237
Cloth Equipment, Care of, 252
Coal Oil, Use of, 237
Combination Fuzes, Tables of, 232
Cannoneers’ “Don’ts”, 360
Conventional Signals, 301
Corps Artillery, Discussion, 55
Cradle, Definition of, 12