Cover not available
Article published In:
Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 20:1 (1993) ► pp.25–47

Grammar in the early middle ages

A bibliography

| Cambridge University
Published online: 1 January 1993
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.20.1.04law
References (320)
References
I. Primary sources
Abbo of Fleury, Questiones grammaticales. Ed. by A. Guerreau-Jalabert. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1982.Google Scholar
Aggressus quídam, GL 81.xxxix–xli.
Alcuin, De orthographia. Ed. by A. Marsili. Pisa: 1952; GL 71.295–312.Google Scholar
, Dialogus Franconis et Saxonis de octo partibus orationis, PL 1011.854–902.
Aldhelm, De metris et enigmatibus ac pedum regulis. Ed. by R. Ehwald. Aldhelmi Opera. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auctores Antiquissimi 151. Berlin: Weidmann 1919, pp.59–204. The De metris and part of De pedum regulis was transl, by Neil Wright in Michael Lapidge and James L. Rosier. 1985. Aldhelm: The Poetic Works, 183–219. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer.Google Scholar
Anonymus ad Cuimnanum. Expossitio latinitatis. Ed. by Bernard Bishoff and Bengt Löfstedt. CCSL 1330.
Ars Ambianensis. Unprinted grammar usually cited from Amiens, Bibliothéque Municipale 426, ff.48r–71v. For other MSS see Law (1982:67).Google Scholar
Ars Ambrosiana. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. CCSL 133C1.
Ars Augiensis (“Uuoluuinus”). Unique copy in Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Aug. CXII1 ff.61v–101vb.
Ars Bernensis, GL 81.62–142.
Ars Brugensis. Unprinted grammar in Bruges, Bibliothèque de la ville, 5371, ff.l9rb–38vb and 41rb–46va.
Ars Laureshamensis. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. CCCM 40A1.
Ars Toletana. Unique copy in Toledo, Biblioteca del Cabildo 99–30, ff.33v–34v.
Asper/Asperius/Asporius/Asper minor. Ars. GL 81.39–61.
Beatus quid est. Ed. by Martha Bayless. This volume, pp.85–109
Bede. De arte metrica. Ed. by C. B. Kendall. CCSL 123A1.59–141; also in C. B. Kendall. 1966. Bede’s De arte metrica: Introduction, Text and Notes. Berkeley; and in GL 71.227–260.Google Scholar
. De orthographia. Ed. by C. W. Jones. CCSL 123A1. 1–57; also in GL 71.261–294.
. De schematibus et tropis. Ed. by C. B. Kendall. CCSL 123A1.142–171. English translation by Gussie Hecht Tanenhaus. 1962. “Bede’s De schematibus et tropis – a translation”. Quarterly Journal of Speech 481.237–253. Repr. in Readings in Medieval Rhetoric, ed. by J. M. Miller et al., 96–122. Bloomington: Indiana University Press 1973.Google Scholar
Boniface. Ars grammatica. Ed. by George John Gebauer and Bengt Löfstedt. CCSL 133B1. 13–99.
. Ars metrica. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. CCSL 133B1.109–113.
Christian. Ars minor. Ed. by Vivien Law. This volume, pp.231–238.
Clemens Scottus. dementis Ars grammatica. Ed. by J. Tolkiehn. 1928. Philologus Supplementband 201.3. Leipzig: Dieterich. Reviewed by Karl Barwick. 1930. Gnomon 61.385–395. Edition by A. M. Puckett and F. Glorie forthcoming (CCCM 40E1).Google Scholar
Clm/Nancy. See Sapientia ex sapore.
Codex quae pars, excerpt printed in GL 81, xxi. Found in Berne 2071, ff.l7r–18v (19r–20v), and in Leiden Voss. lat. Q. 331, f.71rv.
Congregatio Salcani filii de verbo. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. 1965. Der hibernolateinische Grammatiker Malsachanus, 194–260. Uppsala: Uppsala University Press.Google Scholar
Cruindmel, Ars metrica. Ed. by J. Huemer. 1883. Cruindmeli sive Fulcharii Ars metrica: Beitrag zur Geschichte der karolingischen Gelehrsamkeit. Vienna: Alfred Hölder.Google Scholar
Cunabula grammaticae artis Donati, PL 901.613–32.
Declinationes nominum. Usually cited from Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6281, ff.l08v–114v. A short version was printed in GL 8.61 app. crit.; and another version is embedded in the Ars Donati quam Paulus Diaconus exposuit, 41,12–10,22.
De dubiis nominibus. Ed. by F. Glorie. CCSL 133A1.743–820.
Dicuil. Ed. by Max Manitius. 1912. “Micons von St. Riquier De primis syllabis”. Münchener Museum für Philologie des Mittelalters und der Renaissance 11.121–177, at x1,21–177.Google Scholar
Distributio omnium specierum nominum inter cathegorias Aristotilis. Ed. by Paul Piper. 1882. Die Schriften Notkers und seiner Schule I: Schriften philosophischen Inhalts, lxxv–lxxxix. Freiburg: J.C.B. Mohr, completed in his “Zu Notkers Rhetorik”, Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie 221 (1890), 277–286.Google Scholar
Donatus Ortigraphus. Ars grammatica (Eclogae de libris grammaticorum). Ed. by John Chittenden. CCCM 40D1.
Dynamius. Ars grammatica. Ed. by Angelo Mai. 1852. Nova patrum bibliotheca vol. I1 part 21.182–198. Rome: Typis Sacri Consilii Propagando Christiano Nomini.Google Scholar
Erchanbert. Erchanberti Frisingensis Tractatus super Donatum. Ed. by Wendell Vernon Clausen. 1948. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Ermanric of Ellwangen. Ed. by D. C. Lambot. 1945. Œuvres théologiques et grammaticales de Godescalc d’Orbais, 504–508. Louvain: “Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense” Bureaux.Google Scholar
Excerptiones de Prisciano. Usually cited from Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale N.A. lat. 5861.
Godescalc. Ed. by D. C. Lambot. 1945. Œuvres théologiques et grammaticales de Godescalc d’Orbais, 351–496. Louvain: “Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense” Bureaux.Google Scholar
Hildericus of Monte Cassino. Partial edition by Anselmo Lentini. 1975. Ilderico e la sua “Ars grammatica” (= Miscellanea Cassinese 39). Montecassino: Abbazia.Google Scholar
Hrabanus Maurus. Excerptio de arte grammatica Prisciani. PL 1111.613–670.
Isidorus Iunior. De vitiis et virtutibus orationis. Ed. by Ulrich Schindel. 1975. Die lateinischen Figurenlehren des 5. bis 71. Jahrhunderts und Donats Vergilkommentar (mit zwei Editionen). (= Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 3rd ser., 91), 184–241. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Israel the Grammarian. Versus Israhelis de arte metrica super nomen et verbum (De syllabis finalibus). Ed. by Edouard Jeauneau. 1985. “Pour le dossier d’Israël Scot”. Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge 601.7–72, at 22–24.Google Scholar
Julian of Toledo, Ars. Ed. by Maria A. H. Maestre Yenes. 1973. Ars Iuliani Toletani episcopi: una gramática latina de la España visigoda. Toledo: Instituto Provincial de Investigaciones y Estudios Toledanos.Google Scholar
. De partibus orationis. Ed. by Luigi Munzi. 1980–1981. “ Il De partibus orationis di Giuliano di Toledo ” Annali dell’ Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, Seminario di Studi del Mondo Classico, Sezione Filologico-Letteraria 2–3.153–228.Google Scholar
Magnus quae uox. Cited from Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 14737, ff. 157v–183v.
Malsachanus. Ars Malsachani. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. 1965. Der hibernolateinische Grammatiker Malsachanus, 173–260. Uppsala: Uppsala University Press.Google Scholar
Mico of Saint-Riquier. De primis syllabis. Ed. by Max Manitius. 1912. “Micons von St. Riquier De primis syllabis”. Münchener Museum für Philologie des Mittelalters und der Renaissance 11.121–177, at 1261,1–154,20.Google Scholar
Murethach (Muridac). In Donati artem maiorem. Ed. by Louis Holtz. CCCM 401.
Ordo ad cognoscendi nomen (Quid est doctus?). Cited from St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, 8761, pp.30–32.
Paulus Diaconus. Ars Donati quam Paulus Diaconus exposuit. Ed. by Ambrogio M. Amelli. 1899. Montecassino: Abbazia.Google Scholar
Peter of Pisa. Ars. Facsimile ed. by Bernhard Bischoff. 1973. Sammelhandschrift Diez. B Sant. 66. Grammatici Latini et Catalogus Lib-rorum, 3–66. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt. Excerpts in GL 81.161–171.Google Scholar
Primum quaeritur quare Donatus. Cited from Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat. 13025, ff.60va–62vb.
Quae sunt quae. Best cited from the only complete MS, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat. 130251, ff.52vb–59vb.
Remigius, Expositio super Bedae De arte metrica et De schematibus et tropis libros. Ed. by M. H. King. CCSL 123A1.77–171.
. In artem Donati minorem commentum. Ed. by W. Fox. 1902. Leipzig: Teubner; GL 81.202–218.Google Scholar
. In artem maiorem Donati commentum. GL 81.219–74, supplemented by John Petersen Elder. 1947. “The missing portions of the Commentum Einsidlense on Donatus’s Ars grammatica ” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 56–57.129–160; and M. L. Coletti. 1985. “Un’opera grammaticale di Remigio di Auxerre: il commento al De barbarismo di Donato”. Studi Medievali 261.951–967.Google Scholar
. In Eutychis Artem de verbo commentum. Excerpts ed. by Max Manitius. 1913. “Remigiusscholien”. Münchener Museum für Philologie des Mittelalters und der Renaissance 21.79–113.Google Scholar
. In Phocae Artem de nomine et verbo commentum. Excerpts ed. by Max Manitius. 1913. “Zu Iohannes Scottus und Remigius”. Didaskaleion 21.43–88, at 73–88.Google Scholar
. In Prisciani Institutionem de nomine commentum. Ed. by Maria De Marco. 1952. “Remigii inedita”, Aevum 261.495–517; supplemented by R. B. C. Huygens. 1954. “Remigiana I. Le commentaire sur Priscien De nomine ”. Aevum 281.330–342.Google Scholar
Sapientia ex sapore (Clm/Nancy). Anonymous florilegium best cited from Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6415, ff.lr–44v.
Sedulius Scottus. In Donati artem maiorem. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. CCCM 40B1; and by Denis Brearley. 1975. Commentum Sedulii Scotti in maiorem Donatum grammaticum. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.Google Scholar
. In Donati Artem minorem. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. CCCM 40C1.1–54.
. In Eutychem. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. CCCM 40D1.85–130.
. In Priscianum. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt. CCCM 40D1.55–84.
Septem IIOPIOXAI (sic, for IIEPIOXAI) (Glosa Prisciani) . Cited from Barcelona, Archivo de la Corona de Aragón, Ripoll 591, ff.257v–288v.
Sergilius, Ars (Tractatio litterae). Cited from Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, BPL 1351, ff.71v–72r.
Smaragdus. Liber in partibus Donati. Ed. by Bengt Löfstedt, Louis Holtz, Adele Kibre. CCCM 681.
Tatwine. Ars. Ed. by Maria De Marco. CCSL 1331.1–93.
Terminationes nominum. Ed. by Vivien Law. 1991. “A French metamorphosis of an English grammatical genre: declinationes into terminationes ”. France and the British Isles in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, ed. by Gillian Jondorf and David N. Dumville, 17–42. Wood-bridge: Boydell.Google Scholar
Ursus of Beneventum. Adbreuiatio Prisciani. Excerpts printed by C. Morelli. 1910. “I trattati di grammatica e retorica del cod. Casanatense 1086”. Rendiconti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei, Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche. Ser. 51, 191.287–328.Google Scholar
Usuard of Saint-Germain. Artis grammaticae introductiones. Ed. by Josep M. Casas Horns. 1964. “Una gramàtica inèdita d’Usuard”. Miscelºlània Anselm M. Albareda 2 (= Analecta Montserratensia 10), 77–129.Google Scholar
Versus de nominibus litterarum seu Versus cuiusdam Scoti de alphabeto. Ed. by F. Glorie. CCSL 133A1.725–741.
Virgilius Maro Grammaticus. Epitomae and Epistolae. Ed. by Giovanni Polara. 1979. Virgilio Marone Grammatico, Epitomi ed Epistole. Naples: Liguori. With Italian translation.Google Scholar
Walahfrid Strabo. Cited from St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek 878, pp. 5–18 and 50–69.
“Uuoluuinus”. See Ars Augiensis.
II. Secondary literature
Amsler, Mark. 1989. Etymology and Grammatical Discourse in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (= Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. “Commentary and metalanguage in early medieval Latin grammar”. History and Historiography of Linguistics (= Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 51), ed. by Hans-Josef Niederehe and Konrad Koerner, 175–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baebler, J. J. 1885. Beiträge zu einer Geschichte der lateinischen Grammatik im Mittelalter. Halle: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses.Google Scholar
Ballaira, Guglielmo. 1982. Per il catalogo dei codici di Prisciano. Torino: G. Giappichelli.Google Scholar
Barabino, Giuseppina. 1976. “Le citazioni virgiliane in Malsacano”. Grammatici latini d’età imperiale, 195–218. Genoa: Istituto di Filologia Classica e Medievale.Google Scholar
Barwick, Karl. 1924. “Zur Geschichte und Rekonstruktion des Charisius-Textes”. Hermes 591.420–429.Google Scholar
. 1930. Review of Tolkiehn’s edition of Clemens. Gnomon 61.385–395.Google Scholar
Beeson, Charles. 1924. “The ars grammatica of Julian of Toledo”. Miscellanea Francesco Ehrle (= Studi e Testi 37), vol. 11.50–70. Rome: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana.Google Scholar
. 1927. “Paris Lat. 7530. A study in Insular symptoms”. Raccoltà di scritti in onore di Felice Ramorino, 199–211. Milan: Vita e Pensiero.Google Scholar
Bethmann, L. C. 1851. “Paulus Diaconus Leben und Schriften”. Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtkunde 101.247–334.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Dante. 1958. “Paolo Diacono e l’Ars Donati ”. Atti e Memorie della Deputazione di storia patria per le antiche provincie modenesi 8th ser., 101.185–202.Google Scholar
. 1958–59. “Paolo Diacono e Prisciano”. Memorie storiche forogiuliesi 431.159–172.Google Scholar
Biggs, Frederick M., Thomas D. Hill and Paul E. Szarmach. 1990. Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture: A Trial Version. Binghamton, N.Y.: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies.Google Scholar
Bischoff, Bernhard. 1967 [1950]. “Eine Sammelhandschrift Walahfrid Strabos (Cod. Sangall. 878)”. In his Mittelalterliche Studien vol. 21.34–51. Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann.Google Scholar
. 1967 [1960]. “Muridac doctissimus plebis, ein irischer Grammatiker des IX. Jahrhunderts”. In his Mittelalterliche Studien vol. 21.51–56. Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann.Google Scholar
. 1981 [1972]. “Die Bibliothek im Dienste der Schule”. In his Mittelalterliche Studien vol. 31.213–233. Stuttgart: Hiersemann.Google Scholar
. 1981 [1976]. “Bannita: 1. syllaba, 2. littera”. In his Mittelalterliche Studien 31.243–247. Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann.Google Scholar
Bischoff, Bernhard and Ludwig Bieler. 1956. “Fragmente zweier frühmittelalterlicher Schulbücher aus Glendalough”. Celtica 31.211–220. [Clemens]Google Scholar
Boas, M. 1930. “Cato und Julianus von Toledo”. Rheinisches Museum 791.183–196.Google Scholar
Boyer, Blanche B. 1937. “A Paris fragment of codex Bern 207”. Classical Philology 321.113–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bradley, Henry. 1921–1923. “On the text of Abbo of Fleury’s Quaestiones grammaticales ”. Proceedings of the British Academy pp. 173–180.Google Scholar
Brearley, Denis G. 1980. “A bibliography of recent publications concerning the history of grammar during the Carolingian Renaissance”. Studi Medievali. 3rd ser. 211.917–923.Google Scholar
Brunner, Karl. 1961. “Sprachlehrbücher im Mittelalter”. Language and Society: Essays presented to Arthur M. Jensen on his Seventieth Birthday, 37–43. Copenhagen: Det Berlingske Bogtrykkeri.Google Scholar
Buffa, M. F. 1979. “Una pagina anonima di sintassi latina nell’VIII secolo”. Studi e ricerche dell’ Istituto di latino, Faccoltà di Magistero, Università di Genova 21.19–34.Google Scholar
Campbell, Jackson J. 1967. “Knowledge of rhetorical figures in Anglo-Saxon England”. Journal of English and Germanic Philology 661.1–20.Google Scholar
Cervani, Roberta. 1979. “La pubblicazione di grammatiche e glossari mediolatini e lo studio della cultura medievale”. Cultura e scuola 701.44–49.Google Scholar
Clausen, Wendell Vernon. 1948. See Bibliography II under Erchanbert.Google Scholar
Clausi, Benedetto. 1990. “Elementi di ermeneutica monastica nel De schematibus et tropis di Beda”. Orpheus n.s. 111.277–307.Google Scholar
Closa Farres, J. 1976. “Notas sobre la difusión medieval hispana del Arte Menor de Elio Donato”. Anuario de Filologi̇́a 21.36–67.Google Scholar
Coallier, Christine. 1986. “Le vocabulaire des arts libéraux dans le Periphyseon ”. Jean Scot écrivain, ed. by G.-H. Allard, 343–360. Montreal: Bellarmin.Google Scholar
Cobbs, Susan Parker. 1937. Prolegomena to the “Ars grammatica Tatvini”. Diss. Chicago.Google Scholar
Coletti, Maria Laetitia. 1981. “La trattazione del patronimico nella grammatica medievale”. Studi e ricerche dell’Istituto di Latino, Università degli Studi di Genova, Facoltà di Magistero A31–12.Google Scholar
. 1982. “Citazioni latine come esempi di barbarismus nei commenti medievali irlandesi all’ Ars maior di Donato”. Sandalion 51.283–299.Google Scholar
. 1982–1983. “Gli esempi di soloecismus nei commenti irlandesi a Donato del sec. IX”. Romanobarbarica 71.77–109.Google Scholar
. 1983. “Il barbarismus e il soloecismus nei commentatori altomedievali di Donato alla luce della tradizione grammaticale greco-latina”. Orpheus n.s. 41.67–92.Google Scholar
Collignon, A. 1883. “Note sur une grammaire latine manuscrite du VIIIe siècle appartenant à la bibliothèque de Nancy contenant des fragments inédits de Virgilius Maro”. Revue de Philologie 2nd ser., 71.13–22.Google Scholar
Coronad, Lia. 1981–1982. “La dottrina del tetrametro trocaico in Beda”. Romanobarbarica 61.53–62.Google Scholar
Curtius, Ernst Robert. 1947. “Das mittelalterliche Bildungswesen und die Grammatik”. Romanische Forschungen 601.1–26.Google Scholar
De Marco, Maria. 1952. “Remigii inedita”. Aevum 261.495–517.Google Scholar
. 1957. “Letture grammaticali a Lorsch nel s. X”. Aevum 311.273–277.Google Scholar
De Nonno, Mario. 1979. “Contributo alla tradizione di Prisciano in area beneventano-cassinese: il Valliceli. C. 9”. Revue d’histoire des textes 91.123–139. [Hildericus and Ursus]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Della Casa, Adriana. 1985. “Rassegna di studi sui grammatici latini (1934–1984)”. Bollettino di Studi Latini 151.85–113.Google Scholar
Dionisotti, Anna Carlotta. 1982. “On Bede, grammars, and Greek.” Revue Bénédictine 921.111–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donnini, M. 1984. “Sul De orthographia di Beda nel cod. Neap. IV A 34”. Studi e ricerche 61.35–41. Genoa: Istituto di Civiltà classica e medievale della Facoltà di Magistero.Google Scholar
Draak, Maartje. 1967. “The higher teaching of Latin grammar in Ireland during the ninth century”. Mededelingen der koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, afd. Letterkunde, n.s. 301.109–144.Google Scholar
Dubreucq, Alain. 1986. “Smaragde de Saint-Mihiel et son temps: enseignement et bibliothèques à l’époque carolingienne”. Mélanges de la Bibliothèque de la Sorbonne 71.7–36.Google Scholar
Dutton, Paul Edward. 1992. “Evidence that Dubthach’s Priscian codex once belonged to Eriugena”. From Athens to Chartres: Neoplatonism and Medieval Thought. Studies in Honour of Edouard Jeauneau, ed. by Haijo Jan Westra, 15–45. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Eckhardt, W. A. 1969. “Das Kaufunger Fragment der Bonifatius-Grammatik”. Scriptorium 231.280–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elder, John Petersen. 1947. “Did Remigius of Auxerre comment on Bede’s De schematibus et tropis? ” Mediaeval Studies 91.141–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Esposito, Mario. 1917. “A ninth-century commentary on Donatus”. Classical Quarterly 111.94–97, repr. in his Irish Books and Learning in Mediaeval Europe, ed. by Michael Lapidge. London: Variorum 1990.Google Scholar
Evans, G. R. 1982. “The grammar of predestination in the ninth century”. Journal of Theological Studies 331.134–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fickermann, Norbert. 1932. “Nachrichten. 408”. Neues Archiv 491.762–764. [Boniface]Google Scholar
. 1935. “Der Widmungsbrief des hl. Bonifatius”. Neues Archiv 501.210–221.Google Scholar
Fortgens, H. W. 1947. “De paedagoog Alcuin en zijn Ars grammatica”. Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis 601.57–65.Google Scholar
Frey, J. 1886. De Alcuini arte grammatica commentano. (= Jahresbericht über das königliche Gymnasium zu Münster ) Münster.Google Scholar
Funaioli, Gino. 1911. “Su Giuliano Toletano”. Rivista di filologia e istruzione classica 391.42–79.Google Scholar
Gavinelli, Simona. 1985. “Un manuale scolastico carolingio: il codice bolognese 797”. Aevum 591.181–195.Google Scholar
Gebauer, George John. 1942. Prolegomena to the “Ars grammatica Bonifatii”. Guilford, N.C. (diss. Chicago 1940).Google Scholar
Gibson, Margaret. 1972. “Priscian, Institutiones grammatical A handlist of manuscripts”. Scriptorium 261.105–124.Google Scholar
. 1990 [1981]. “Rãg. reads Priscian”. Charles the Bald. Court and Kingdom, ed. by Margaret T. Gibson and Janet L. Nelson, 261–266. Aldershot: Variorum.Google Scholar
. 1992. “Milestones in the study of Priscian, circa 800-circa 1200”. Viator 231.17–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gładysz, Bronislas. 1932–1933. “Éléments classiques et post-classiques de l’oeuvre de Bède De arte metrica ”. Eos 341.319–343.Google Scholar
Gneuss, Helmut. 1990. “The study of language in Anglo-Saxon England”. Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 721.3–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gribomont, Jean. 1963. “Conscience philologique chez les scribes du haut moyen âge”. Settimane 101.601–630.Google Scholar
Guerreau-Jalabert, Anita. 1979–80. “A propos du Quaestiones grammaticales d’Abbon de Fleury: essai de statistique lexicale”. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 421.85–128.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez Galindo, M. A. 1989. “Sobre la presencia de los autores cristianos en los tratados latinos de gramática”. Helmantica 401.311–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haslam, M. W. 1988. “On the Sedulius commentary on Donatus’ Ars maior ”. Revue d’Histoire des Textes 181.243–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hauréau, B. 1894. Singularités historiques et littéraires. Paris: Calmann Lévy. [Malsachanus]Google Scholar
Herren, Michael. 1981. “Classical and secular learning among the Irish before the Carolingian Renaissance.” Florilegium 31.118–157.Google Scholar
. 1992. “Die Anfänge der Grammatikstudien auf den Britischen Inseln: von Patrick bis zur Schule von Canterbury”. Medialität und mittelalterliche insulare Literatur, ed. by Hildegard L. C. Tristram, 57–79. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Hofman, Rijcklof. 1988. “Glosses in a ninth century Priscian Ms. probably attributable to Heiric of Auxerre († ca. 876) and their connections”. Studi Medievali 3rd ser. 291.805–839.Google Scholar
. 1992. “The Priscian text used in three ninth-century Irish Donatus commentaries”. Diversions of Galway (= Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 68), ed. by Anders Ahlqvist, 7–15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holtz, Louis. 1971. “Tradition et diffusion de l’œuvre grammaticale de Pompée, commentateur de Donat”. Revue de philologie 451.48–83.Google Scholar
. 1972. “Sur trois commentaires irlandais de l’Art majeur de Donat au IXe siècle”. Revue d’Histoire des Textes 21.45–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1974. “Édition et tradition des manuels grammaticaux antiques et médiévaux”. Revue des études latines 521.75–82.Google Scholar
. 1975. “Le Parisinus Latinus 7530, synthèse cassinienne des arts libéraux.” Studi medievali 3rd ser. 161.97–152.Google Scholar
. 1977. “A l’école de Donat, de saint Augustin à Bède”. Latomus 361.522–538.Google Scholar
. 1977a. “Grammairiens irlandais au temps de Jean Scot: quelques aspects de leur pédagogie”. Jean Scot Érigène et l’histoire de la philosophie, ed. by René Roques, 69–78. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar
. 1977b. “Le rôle des irlandais dans la transmission des grammaires latines”. Influence de la Grèce et de Rome sur l’Occident moderne (= Caesarodunum 12 bis), ed. by R. Chevallier, 55–65. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
. 1977c. “La typologie des manuscrits grammaticaux latins”. Revue d’histoire des textes 71.247–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1978. “Sur les traces de Charisius”. Varron, grammaire antique et stylistique latine. Recueil offert à Jean Collari, 225–233. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
. 1981a. Donat et la tradition de l’enseignement grammatical: étude sur l’Ars Donati et sa diffusion (IVe-IXe siècle) et édition critique. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar
. 1981b. “Irish grammarians and the Continent in the seventh century”. Columbanus and Merovingian Monasticism (= BAR International Series 113), ed. by H. B. Clarke and Mary Brennan, 135–152. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.Google Scholar
. 1983a. “Les grammairiens hiberno-latins étaient-ils des anglo-saxons?”. Feritia 21.170–184.Google Scholar
. 1983b. “Nouveaux prolégomènes à l’édition du Liber in partibus Donati de Smaragde de Saint-Mihiel”. Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France, 157–170.Google Scholar
. 1984. “Les manuscrits latins à gloses et à commentaires de l’Antiquité à l’époque carolingienne”. Atti del Convegno Internazionale II libro e il testo, ed. by Cesare Questa and Renato Raffaelli, 141–167. Urbino: Università degli studi.Google Scholar
. 1986. “La tradition ancienne du Liber in partibus Donati de Smaragde de Saint-Mihiel”. Revue d’Histoire des Textes 161.171–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987. “Pline et les grammairiens. Le Dubius sermo dans le haut Moyen Âge”. Helmantica 381.233–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1988. “Les innovations théoriques de la grammaire carolingienne: peu de chose. Pourquoi?” L’héritage des grammairiens latins de l’Antiquité aux Lumières, ed. by Irène Rosier, 133–145. Paris: Société pour l’Information Grammaticale.Google Scholar
. 1989. “L’enseignement de la grammaire au temps de Charles le Chauve”. Giovanni Scoto nel suo tempo: l’organizzazione del sapere in età carolingia, 153–169. Spoleto: Centro italiano di studi sull’alto Medioevo.Google Scholar
. 1989/1990. “Les nouvelles tendances de la pédagogie grammaticale au Xe siècle”. Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 24/251.163–173.Google Scholar
. 1991. “Murethach et l’influence de la culture irlandaise à Auxerre”. L’école carolingienne d’Auxerre de Murethach à Remi 810–908. Entretiens d’Auxerre 1989, ed. by Dominique Iogna-Prat, Colette Jeudy, Guy Lobrichon, 147–156. Paris: Beauchesne.Google Scholar
. 1992a. “Continuité et discontinuité de la tradition grammaticale au VIIe siècle”. Le septième siècle. Changements et continuités, ed. by Jacques Fontaine & J. N. Hillgarth, 41–57. London: Warburg Institute.Google Scholar
. 1992b. “La grammaire carolingienne”. Histoire des idées linguistiques 2. Le développement de la grammaire occidentale, ed. by Sylvain Auroux, 96–106. Liège: Mardaga.Google Scholar
Hovdhaugen, Even. 1982. Foundations of Western Linguistics: From the Beginning to the End of the First Millenium (sic) A.D. Oslo: Univer-sitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Huntsman, Jeffrey F. 1983. “Grammar”. The Seven Liberal Arts in the Middle Ages, ed. by David L. Wagner, 58–95. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Huygens, Rene B. C. 1954. “Remigiana”. Aevum 281.330–344.Google Scholar
Irvine, Martin. 1986a. “Anglo-Saxon literary theory exemplified in Old English poems: interpreting the Cross in The Dream of the Rood and Elene ”. Style 201.157–181. [Bede’s De schematibus et tropis ]Google Scholar
. 1986b. “Bede the grammarian and the scope of grammatical studies in eighth-century Northumbria”. Anglo-Saxon England 151.15–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987. “A guide to the sources of medieval theories of interpretation, signs, and the arts of discourse: Aristotle to Ockham”. Semiotica 631.89–108.Google Scholar
Isola, Antonio. 1976. “Il De schematibus et tropis di Beda in rapporto al De doctrina Christiana di Agostino”. Romanobarbarica 11.71–82.Google Scholar
Jeudy, Colette. 1971. “La tradition manuscrite des Partitiones de Priscien et la version longue du commentaire de Rémi d’Auxerre”. Revue d’Histoire des Textes 11.123–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1972. “ L’Institutio de nomine, pronomine et verbo de Priscien: manuscrits et commentaires médiévaux”. Revue d’Histoire des Textes 21.73–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1974a. “L’Ars de nomine et verbo de Phocas: manuscrits et commentaires médiévaux”. Viator 51.61–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1974b. “Les manuscrits de l’Ars de uerbo d’Eutychès et le commentaire de Rémi d’Auxerre”. Études de civilisation médiévale (IXe-XIIe siècles). Mélanges offerts à Edmond-René Labande, 421–436. Poitiers: C.É.S.C.M.Google Scholar
. 1977. “Israël le grammairien et la tradition manuscrite du commentaire de Remi d’Auxerre à l’Ars minor de Donat”. Studi Medievali 181.185–248.Google Scholar
. 1978a. “Donat et commentateurs de Donat à l’abbaye de Ripoll au Xe siècle (ms. Barcelone, Archivo de la Corona de Aragón, Ripoll 46)”. Lettres latines du moyen âge et de la Renaissance, ed. by Guy Cambier, Carl Deroux and Jean Préaux, 56–75. Brussels: Collections Latomus.Google Scholar
. 1978b. “Un manuscrit glosé d’Eutychès à Reims à l’époque de Rémi d’Auxerre (MS. Milano, Biblioteca Ambrosiana B. 71 sup.)”. Varron, grammaire antique et stylistique latine. Recueil offert à Jean Collari, 235–243. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
. 1979. “Un nouveau manuscrit du commentaire de Remi d’Auxerre à l’Ars maior de Donat”. Saints, Scholars and Heroes. Studies in Medieval Culture in Honour of Charles W. Jones, ed. by Margot H. King and Wesley M. Stevens, vol. 21.113–125. Collegeville, Minn.: Hill Monastic Manuscript Library.Google Scholar
. 1982a. “Complément à un catalogue récent des manuscrits de Priscien”. Scriptorium 361.313–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1982b. “Un manuscrit de Remi d’Auxerre à Corbie au début du Xe siècle”. La chanson de geste et le mythe carolingien. Mélanges René Louis, vol. 11.171–175. Saint-Père-sous-Vézelay: Musée Archéologique Régional.Google Scholar
. 1982–1983. “Le Scalprum Prisciani et sa tradition manuscrite”. Revue d’histoire des textes 12–131.181–193.Google Scholar
. 1984–1985. “Nouveaux fragments de textes grammaticaux”. Revue d’histoire des textes 14–151.131–141.Google Scholar
. 1985. “Le florilège grammatical inédit du manuscrit 8° 8 de la bibliothèque d’Erfurt”. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 44–451.91–128.Google Scholar
. 1986. “L’attitude de Rémi d’Auxerre face aux innovations linguistiques de Jean Scot”. Jean Scot écrivain, ed. by G.-H. Allard, 299–310. Montreal: Bellarmin and Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
. 1990a. “A propos du mot paropsis: Isidore, Jean Scot et Rémi d’Auxerre”. Archives et Documents de la Société d’Histoire et d’Épistémologie des Sciences du Langage (SHESL) 2nd ser. 41.53–60.Google Scholar
. 1990b. “Un commentaire anonyme de l’Ars minor de Donat”. De ortu grammaticae. Studies in Medieval Grammar and Linguistic Theory in Memory of Jan Pinborg (= Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 43), ed. by G. L. Bursill-Hall, Sten Ebbesen and Konrad Koerner, 133–146. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991. “L’œuvre de Remi d’Auxerre: état de la question”. L’école carolingienne d’Auxerre de Murethach à Remi 810–908. Entretiens d’Auxerre 1989, ed. by Dominque Iogna-Prat, Colette Jeudy, Guy Lobrichon, 373–396. Paris: Beauchesne.Google Scholar
Jeudy, Colette and Yves-François Riou. 1975. “Tradition textuelle et commentaire des auteurs classiques latins conservés dans les manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Vaticane: III. Le commentaire de Rémi d’uxerre au livre III de l’Ars maior de Donat (ms. Vatican, Reg. lat. 1560).” Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo 221.213–229.Google Scholar
Jolivet, Jean. 1966. “Quelques cas de ‘platonisme grammatical’ du VIIe au XIIe siècle”. Mélanges offerts à René Crozet, ed. by Pierre Gallais and Yves-Jean Riou, vol. 11.93–99. Poitiers: Société d’Études Médiévales.Google Scholar
. 1977. “L’enjeu de la grammaire pour Godescalc”. Jean Scot Erigène et l’histoire de la philosophie, ed. by René Roques, 79–87. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar
Kaiinka, E. 1894. “Analecta latina”. Wiener Studien 161.78–120; 254–313. [Smaragdus; Distributio omnium specierum nominum; etc.]Google Scholar
Keil, Heinrich. 1848. Analecta grammatica. Halle: Typis Orphanotrophei.Google Scholar
. 1868. De grammaticis quibusdam latinis infimae aetatis commentano. Erlangen: Joann. Paul. Adolph. Junge et filii.Google Scholar
Kerlouégan, François. 1978. “Grammairiens latins du moyen âge”. Revue des études latines 561.85–89. [review of CCCM 40–40C]Google Scholar
. 1990. “Un exemple de metaphora reciproca dans le De excidio Britanniae: Gildas et le ‘Donat chrétien’”. Britain 400–600: Language and History, ed. by Alfred Bammesberger and Alfred Wollmann, 79–83. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Kibre, Adele. 1930. Prolegomena to the Unpublished Text of Smaragdus’ Commentary on Donatus, “De partibus orationis”. (Diss. Chicago.)Google Scholar
King, Margot H. 1979. “ Grammatica mystica, a study of Bede’s grammatical curriculum”. Saints, Scholars and Heroes: Studies in Medieval Culture in Honour of Charles W. Jones, ed. by Margot H. King and Wesley M. Stevens, vol. 11.145–159. Collegeville, Minn.: Hill Monastic Manuscript Library.Google Scholar
Kleiner, Yu. A. 1985. “Latinskaja grammatičeskaja tradicija v Anglii VII-XI vv. (Beda, Alkuin, El’frik)” [“The Latin grammatical tradition in England, s.vii-s.xi (Bede, Alcuin, Ælfric)”]. Istorija lingvističeskix učenij: srednevekovaja Evropa, ed. by A. V. Desnickaja and S. D. Kacnel’son, 62–76. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Lage Cotos, María Elisa. 1992. “Gramática y exégesis: sobre la interpretación de la elipsis en algunos autores hibérnicos”. Helmantica 431.41–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lagorio, Valerie M. 1975a. “An unreported manuscript of Bede’s De orthographia in Codex Vaticanus Reginensis Latinus 1587”. Manuscripta 191.98–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1975b. “Bede’s De orthographia in codex Vat. Ottob. Lat. 687”. Classical Philology 701.206–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambert, Pierre-Yves. 1981. “La traduction du pronom relatif latin dans les gloses en vieil-irlandais”. Études celtiques 181.121–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1982. “Les gloses du manuscrit BN lat. 10290”. Études celtiques 191.173–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987a. “Les gloses grammaticales brittoniques”. Études celtiques 241.285–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987b. “Les signes de renvois dans le Priscien de Saint-Gall”. Études celtiques 241.217–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambot, D. C. 1932. “Opuscules grammaticaux de Gottschalk”. Revue Bénédictine 441.120–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lammert, Friedrich. 1912. “Der Grammatiker Hieronymus des Mittelalters”. Berliner philologische Wochenschrift 321.1139–1140.Google Scholar
. 1913. “Zum Grammatiker Hieronymus des Mittelalters”. Berliner philologische Wochenschrift 331.1408.Google Scholar
Lane, Mary Charlotte. 1941. A Study of the Commentarium Ambrosianum in Donati Artem maiorem. Diss. Chicago.Google Scholar
Lapidge, Michael. 1991. “Textual criticism and the literature of Anglo-Saxon England”. Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 731.17–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Law, Vivien. 1979. “The transmission of the Ars Bonifacii and the Ars Tatuini ”. Revue d’histoire des textes 91.281–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1981. “Malsachanus reconsidered: a fresh look at a Hiberno-Latin grammarian”. Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies 11.83–93.Google Scholar
. 1982a. The Insular Latin Grammarians. Woodbridge: Boydell.Google Scholar
. 1982b. “Notes on the dating and attribution of anonymous Latin grammars of the early Middle Ages”. Peritia 11.250–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1983. “The study of Latin grammar in eighth-century Southumbria”. Anglo-Saxon England 121.43–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984a. “Irish symptoms and the provenance of sixth- and seventh-century Latin grammars”. Matériaux pour une histoire des théories linguistiques, ed. by Sylvain Auroux et al., 77–85. Lille: Université de Lille III.Google Scholar
. 1984b. “The first foreign-language grammars.” The Incorporated Linguist 231.211–216.Google Scholar
. 1985. “Linguistics in the earlier Middle Ages: the Insular and Carolingian grammarians”. Transactions of the Philological Society 851.171–93.Google Scholar
. 1986a. “Late Latin grammars in the early Middle Ages: a typological history”. Historiographia Linguistica 131.365–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986b. “Originality in the medieval normative tradition”. Studies in the History of Western Linguistics, ed. by Theodora Bynon and F. R. Palmer, 43–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Boniface]Google Scholar
. 1986c. “When is Donatus not Donatus? Versions, variants and new texts”. Peritia 51.235–261. [ Ars Toletana ] DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987. “Grammars and language change: an eighth-century case”, in Latin vulgaire – latin tardif, ed. by József Herman, 133–144. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. [Boniface] DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. “The history of morphology: expression of a change in consciousness”. Understanding the Historiography of Linguistics: Problems and Projects, ed. by Werner Hüllen, 61–74. Münster: Nodus.Google Scholar
. 1991. “A French metamorphosis of an English grammatical genre: declinationes into terminationes ”. France and the British Isles in the Middle Ages and Renaissance: Essays by Members of Girton College, Cambridge, in Memory of Ruth Morgan, ed. by Gillian Jondorf and David N. Dumville, 17–42. Woodbridge: Boydell.Google Scholar
. 1992a. “Carolingian grammarians and theoretical innovation”. Diversions of Galway. Papers on the History of Linguistics (= Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 68), ed. by Anders Ahlqvist et al., 27–37. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992b. “La grammaire latine durant le haut moyen âge”. Histoire des idées linguistiques 2. Le développement de la grammaire occidentale, ed. by Sylvain Auroux, 83–95. Liège: Mardaga.Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. “Grammar”. Medieval Latin Studies: An Introduction and Bibliographical Guide. Ed. by Frank A. C. Mantello and A. G. Rigg. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press. [grammatical terminology]
. 1993. “The study of grammar”. Culture and Society under the Carolingians, ed. by Rosamond McKitterick, 88–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leclercq, J. 1948. “Smaragde et la grammaire chrétienne”. Revue du moyen âge latin 41.15–22.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Paul. 1931. “Ein neuentdecktes Werk eines angelsächsischen Grammatikers vorkarolingischer Zeit”. Historische Vierteljahrschrift 261.738–756. [Boniface]Google Scholar
. 1932. “Die Grammatik aus Aldhelms Kreise”. Historische Vierteljahrschrift 271.758–771. [Boniface]Google Scholar
Lemoine, Louis. 1986. “Les méthodes d’enseignement dans la Bretagne du haut Moyen Âge d’après les manuscrits bretons: l’exemple du Paris, B.N., Lat. 10290”. Landévennec et le monachisme breton dans le haut Moyen Âge, 45–63. Landévennec: Association Landévennec, pp. 45–63.Google Scholar
. 1989. “Symptômes insulaires dans un manuscrit breton de l’Ars de verbo d’Eutychès”. Études celtiques 261.145–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lentini, Anselmo. 1932. “Ilderico e la sua Grammatica contenuta nel codice cassinese 299”. Bullettino dell’Istituto Storico Italiano e Archivio Muratoriano 471.167–72; repr. in his Medioevo Letterario Cassinese, 411–416.Google Scholar
. 1952. “La grammatica d’Ilderico documento dell’attività letteraria di Paolo Diacono”. Atti del 2° Congresso Internazionale di studi sull’Alto Medioevo, 217–240. Spoleto: Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo; repr. in his Medioevo Letterario Cassinese, 451–476.Google Scholar
. 1953a. “Citazioni di grammatici e di classici nell’Ars di Ilderico”. Aevum 271.240–250; repr. in his Medioevo Letterario Cassinese, 477–489.Google Scholar
. 1953b. “L’Ars Hilderici del codice cassinese 299”. Benedictina 71.191–217; repr. in his Medioevo Letterario Cassinese, 417–450.Google Scholar
. 1988. Medioevo Letterario Cassinese. Scritti vari (= Miscellanea Cassinese 57), ed. by Faustino Avagliano. Montecassino: [Abbazia].Google Scholar
Leonhardt, Jürgen. 1989. Dimensio syllabarum. Studien zur lateinischen Prosodie- und Verslehre von der Spätantike bis zur frühen Renaissance (= Hypomnemata 92). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leotta, Rosario. 1980. “Considerazioni sulla tradizione manoscritta del De pedum regulis di Aldelmo”. Giornale Italiano di Filologia 321.119–134.Google Scholar
Löfstedt, Bengt. 1965. Der hibernolateinische Grammatiker Malsachanus. Uppsala: Uppsala University Press.Google Scholar
. 1972a. “Zu Tatwines Grammatik”. Arctos N.S. 71.47–65.Google Scholar
. 1972b. “Weitere Bemerkungen zu Tatwines Grammatik”. Acta Classica 151.85–94.Google Scholar
. 1976. “Zur Grammatik des Asper minor.” Latin Script and Letters 400–900, ed. by John J. O’Meara and Bernd Naumann, 132–140. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
. 1979. “Some linguistic remarks on Hiberno-Latin”. Studia Hibernica 191.161–169.Google Scholar
. 1979–80. “Notizen zu mittelalterlichen Grammatiken”. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 421.79–83. [Tatwine, Paulus Diaconus, Hildericus]Google Scholar
. 1980a. “Zu den Quellen des hibernolateinischen Donatkommentars im cod. Ambrosianus L 22 sup.” Studi Medievali 3rd ser. 211.301–320.Google Scholar
. 1980b. “Zwei weitere Handschriften mit der Ars Laureshamensis ”. Latomus 391.418–420.Google Scholar
. 1981. “Spät- und Vulgärlateinisches in der Sprache des Virgilius Maro Grammaticus.” Latomus 401.121–126.Google Scholar
. 1982. “Zum Wortschatz des Virgilius Maro Grammaticus”. Philologus 1261.99–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984. “Zu Sedulius Scottus’ Kommentar zu Donatus Maior”. Sacris Erudiri 271.433–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. “Nochmals zu Sedulius Scottus’ Kommentar zu Donatus Maior”. Sacris Erudiri 291.119–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987. “Eine wenig beachtete hibernolateinische Grammatik”. Irland und die Christenheit: Bibelstudien und Mission, ed. by Próinséas Nĺ Chatháin and Michael Richter, 272–276. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. [Würzburg UB M.p.misc.f.28]Google Scholar
Luiselli, Bruno. 1976. “Il De arte metrica di Beda di fronte alla tradizione metricologica tardo-latina”. Grammatici latini d’età imperiale: miscellanea filologica, 169–180. Genoa: Istituto di Filologia Classica e Medievale.Google Scholar
McKitterick, Rosamond. 1989. The Carolingians and the Written Word. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. The Uses of Literacy in Early Mediaeval Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manitius, Max. 1886. “Zu Aldhelm und Baeda”. Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-historische Classe der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Vienna) 1121.535–634.Google Scholar
. 1911a. Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters 1. Von Justinian bis zur Mitte des 10. Jahrhunderts. Munich: CH. Beck.Google Scholar
. 1911b. “Zur karolingischen Literatur I. Remigius von Auxerre und Mico von St.-Riquier; III. Zu Smaragd von St.-Mihiel”. Neues Archiv 361.43–57; 60–66.Google Scholar
. 1912a. “Micons von St. Riquier De primis syllabis”. Münchener Museum für Philologie des Mittelalters und der Renaissance 11.121–177.Google Scholar
. 1912b. “Zur Grammatik Peters von Pisa”. Münchener Museum für Philologie des Mittelalters und der Renaissance 11.178–184.Google Scholar
. 1913. “Remigiusscholien”. Münchener Museum für Philologie des Mittelalters und der Renaissance 21.79–113.Google Scholar
Marenbon, John. 1983. Early Medieval Philosophy (480–1150): An Introduction. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Mariotti, Scevola. 1966. “Accio in Malsacano”. Rivista di filologia e di istruzione classica 941.181–184.Google Scholar
Marsili, Aldo. 1954. “De Smaragdi opere, quod Liber in partibus Donati vulgo inscribitur”. Studi mediolatini e volgari 21.71–96.Google Scholar
Martin, Lawrence T. 1984. “Bede as a linguistic scholar”. American Benedictine Review 351.204–217.Google Scholar
Matter, E. Ann. 1990. “Alcuin’s question-and-answer texts”. Rivista di storia della filosofia n.s. 451.645–656.Google Scholar
Morelli, Camillo. 1910. “I trattati di grammatica e retorica del cod. Casanatense 1086”. Rendiconti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei, Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, ser. 5. 191.287–328. [Ursus]Google Scholar
Morin, Germain. 1931. “Gottschalk retrouvé”. Revue Bénédictine 431.303–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, Lucian. 1865. “Versus Scoti cuiusdam de alphabeto”. Rheinisches Museum 201.357–374.Google Scholar
. 1867. “Zur Geschichte der lateinischen Grammatik im Mittelalter”. Rheinisches Museum 221.634–637.Google Scholar
Munzi, Luigi. 1979. “Note testuali all’Ars grammatica di Giuliano di Toledo”. Annali dell Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli. Seminario di Studi del Mondo Classico. Sezione filologico-letteraria 11.171–173.Google Scholar
. 1980. “Cipriano in Giuliano Toletano Ars gramm. 197,52–54 M.Y.” Rivista di filologia e di istruzione classica 1081.320–321.Google Scholar
. 1980–81. “Ancora sul testo dell’ Ars grammatica di Giuliano di Toledo”, ibid. 2–31.229–231.Google Scholar
Negri, Angela Maria. 1959. “De codice Bononiensi 797”. Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica n.s. 371.260–277.Google Scholar
Neuhauser, Walter. 1983. “Ein bisher unbekannter Textzeuge eines mittelalterlichen Donat-Kommentars (Murethach, 9. Jh.)”. Festschrift für Robert Muth, ed. by Paul Händel and Wolf gang Meid, 251–278. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar
Norberg, Dag. 1975–1976. “Latin scolaire et latin vivant”. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 401.51–63.Google Scholar
Ó Cuív, Brian. 1981. “Medieval Irish scholars and classical Latin literature”. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 81C1.239–248.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, J. R. 1976. “Alcuin’s Priscian ”. Latin Script and Letters A.D. 400–900, ed. by John J. O’Meara and Bernd Naumann, 222–235. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Orchard, A. P. McD.. 1987–88. “Some aspects of seventh-century Hiberno-Latin syntax: a statistical approach”. Peritia 6–71.158–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Robert B. 1959. “Bede as textbook writer: a study of his De arte metrica ” Speculum 341.573–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Passalacqua, Marina. 1978. I codici di Prisciano. Rome: Storia e letteratura.Google Scholar
. 1988. “Un manuscrit ‘cultivé’ de Saint-Amand: le Par. lat. 7498”. L’héritage des grammairiens latins de l’Antiquité aux Lumières, ed. by Irène Rosier, 147–154. Paris: Société pour l’Information Grammaticale.Google Scholar
Piacente, L. 1986–1987. “Un nuovo frammento ciceroniano in Beda”. Romanobarb arica 91.229–245.Google Scholar
Poli, Diego. 1984. “La ‘beatitudine’ fra esegesi e grammatica nell’Irlanda altomedioevale”. Giornale italiano di filologia 361.231–244.Google Scholar
Riché, Pierre. 1962. Éducation et culture dans l’occident barbare VIe-VIIIe siècles. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
. 1979. Les écoles et l’enseignement dans l’Occident chrétien de la fin du Ve siècle au milieu du XIe siècle. Paris: Aubier Montaigne.Google Scholar
de Rijk, L. M. 1963. “On the curriculum of the arts of the trivium at St. Gall from c. 850-c. 1000”. Vivarium 11.35–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roger, Maurice. 1905a. L’enseignement des letteres classiques d’Ausone à Alcuin. Paris: Picard.Google Scholar
. 1905b. Ars Malsachani. Traité du verbe publié d’après le ms. lat. 13026 de la Bibliothèque nationale. Paris: Alphonse Picard et fils.Google Scholar
. 1906. “Le Commentariolum in artem Eutycii de Sedulius Scottus”. Revue de Philologie 2nd ser. 301.122–123.Google Scholar
Sabbadini, Remigio. 1903. “Spogli Ambrosiani latini: commenti a Donato”. Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica 111.165–185.Google Scholar
Scaglione, Aldo D. 1970. “The historical study of ars grammatica: a bibliographic survey”. In his Ars grammatica, 11–43. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Schindel, Ulrich. 1968. “Die Quellen von Bedas Figurenlehre”. Classica et Mediaevalia 291.169–186.Google Scholar
. 1975. Die lateinischen Figurenlehren des 5. bis 7. Jahrhunderts und Donats Vergilkommentar (mit zwei Editionen) (= Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 3rd ser., 91). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Schmitz, W. 1908. Alcuins Ars grammatica, die lateinische Schulgrammatik der karolingischen Renaissance. Ratingen: Peter Jos. Brehmen. (Diss. Greifswald.)Google Scholar
Shanzer, Danuta. 1984. “Tatwine: an independent witness to the text of Martianus Capella’s De grammatica? ”. Rivista di filologia e di istruzione classica 1121.292–313.Google Scholar
Sivo, Vito. 1981. “Studi sui trattati grammaticali mediolatini”. Quaderni Medievali 111.232–244.Google Scholar
. 1987. “Appunti sull’ Opus prosodiacum di Micone di Saint-Riquier. Gli estratti del codice Parigino Bibl. Nat. lat. 8499”. Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia, Università degli Studi, Bari, 301.217–236.Google Scholar
. 1990. “Nuovi studi sui trattati grammaticali mediolatini”. Quaderni medievali 301.267–284.Google Scholar
Strati, Roberta. 1982. “Venanzio Fortunato (e altre fonti) nell’Ars grammatica di Giuliano di Toledo”. Rivista di filologia e di istruzione classica 1101.442–445.Google Scholar
. 1984. “Ancora sulle citazioni di Giuliano di Toledo (Ars grammatica e De partibus orationis)”. Rivista di filologia e di istruzione classica 1121.196–199.Google Scholar
Strecker, Karl. 1922. “Studien zu karolingischen Dichtern. I. Zu Micons Schrift De primis syllabis”. Neues Archiv 431.479–487.Google Scholar
Swiggers, Pierre. 1985. “Latijnse grammatica en de vroege middeleeuwen”. Klio 141.82–95.Google Scholar
Taeger, Burkhard. 1978. “Exzerpte aus Martianus Capella in einer frühen hibernolateinischen Grammatik (Anonymus ad Cuimnanum)”. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 1001.388–420.Google Scholar
Thurot, Charles. 1868. Extraits de divers manuscrits latins pour servir à l’histoire des doctrines grammaticales au Moyen Age. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, repr. Frankfurt: Minerva 1964.Google Scholar
. 1870–72. “Un opuscule grammatical de Sedulius”. Revue Celtique 11.264–265.Google Scholar
Tolkiehn, Johannes. 1912. “Der Kirchenvater Hieronymus als Donaterklärer”. Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift 321.766–767.Google Scholar
. 1913. “Noch einmal der Donatkommentar des Hieronymus”. Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift 331.447–448.Google Scholar
Vineis, Edoardo. 1988. “Grammatica e filosofia del linguaggio in Alcuino”. Studi e saggi linguistici 281.403–429.Google Scholar
Vineis, Edoardo and Alfonso Maierù. 1990. “La linguistica medioevale”. Storia della linguistica, ed. by Giulio C. Lepschy, 11–168. Bologna: il Mulino.Google Scholar
van de Vyver, A. 1935. “Dicuil et Micon de Saint-Riquier”. Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire 141.25–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, Roger. 1982. Late Latin and Early Romance in Spain and Carolingian France. Liverpool: Francis Cairns.Google Scholar
. 1983. “Unity and diversity among the Romance languages”. Transactions of the Philological Society 811.1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zaffagno, Elena. 1976. “La dottrina ortografica di Beda”. Romanobarbarica 11.325–339.Google Scholar