Nedum let alone and non solum not only analysed in the humanist tradition from Lorenzo Valla to Desiderius Erasmus

Transcription

1 Nedum letalone andnonsolum notonly analysedinthehumanist traditionfromlorenzovallatodesideriuserasmus TheoA.J.M.Janssen,VUUniversityAmsterdam FrederikeC.vanderLeek,UniversityofAmsterdam Abstract:ThisarticleconveyshowtheuseoftheLatinexpressionnedum letalone was conceivedofbylorenzovallainbetween1431and1449andhowhisinsightswerepassed on by later humanists such as Josse Bade, Hilaire Bertholf and Erasmus. Though undoubtedlythoughtprovoking,theiraccountsmeetwithseriousproblems,thuspointing totheneedforamorethoroughinvestigation. AbbasSeptimi,homocorpulentusetpinguis,vesperiFlorentiamproficiscens,interrogavit rusticumobvium,anportamseingrediexistimaret. Intellexit Abbas an putaret se perventuruminurbem,antequamclauderenturportae.illeveroinpinguedinemjocatus: Atqui, inquit, currusfaeni,nedumtu,portamintroiret. PoggioBracciolini[1451] TheabbotofSeptimo,anenormouslyfatandbulkyman,askedapeasanthemetwhileon hiswaytoflorence, DoyouthinkI llbeabletomakeitthroughthecitygate? Whathe meant to ask was whether he thought he could reach the gates before closing time. Pokingfunathisfatness,thepeasantanswered: ByJove,awagonofhaycouldmakeit throughthegate,letaloneyou! 1 1.Introduction Lorenzo Valla (1405/071457) describes in detail when the Latin connective nedum let alone canfunctioninaffirmativeandinnegativesentences( 2).Laterhumanistssuchas Josse Bade (Jodocus Badius Ascensius, ) from Ghent and Hilaire Bertholf (Hilarius Bertulphus Ledius, 1533) from Ledeberg follow his analysis, though not in all details( 3).DesideriusErasmus(1466/ )initiallyadoptsValla sapproachinfull, butendsupexcludingaffirmativenedumsentencesfromhisanalysis.evenso,heoffers points of departure for a coherent analysis of the use of nedum in both negative and affirmativesentences( 4).Thearticleendswithourconclusion( 5). 1 OnaparwithEnglishletaloneyou,theDutchliteratorGerritKomrij(Poggio1968:27)translates nedumtuinthefinalsentenceintolaatstaanjij letstandyou.

2 198 2.LorenzoValla Vallais asfarasisknown thefirstpersoninhistorytohaveconveyedhisviewsonthe useofneduminwriting.hedidsoinhiselegantiaeor,moreprecisely,delinguaelatinae elegantialibrisex(1449).inthosesix books concerningaccuratelanguageuse,hedeals withagreatmanynicetiesoflatinidiom,suchasfoundinthewritingsofmarcustullius Cicero(10643B.C.)andMarcusFabiusQuintilianus(ca.3096A.D.).Vallabeganworking ontheelegantiaein1431,whenlecturingonrhetoricinpavia.atthepresentationofa doctoraldegreecertificate,hedenouncedthebarbarouslatinusedbythecandidate,thus creatingsuchanoutragethathehadtopackhisbags.in1435hesettleddowninnaples intheserviceofkingalfonso.valla sbookwasfirstprintedin1471,inparis,romeand Venice. 2.1.Thetext InhisElegantiae(liber2,caput55,inlatereditionsusuallyreferredtoascaput18)Valla discusses the semantics and syntax of nedum and the difference between nedum and especially non solum. For the text of the chapter, we rely on the Venice edition (Valla 1471). We have solved the abridgments and ligatures, maintained the u/vspelling, the capitalsandtheinterpunction,correctedoneprinter serrorandaddeditalics. DeNedumetnonsolum Nedumduobusmodisperitiutisolent:unocumutranquesententiameodemclaudimus uerbo:alterocumsuumutriquesententiaeuerbumdamus.primomodosic:funderempro te sanguinem: nedum pecuniam: secundo sic: funderem pro te sang[u]inem: nedum pecuniam tibi crederem: et hoc affirmatiue.negatiue sic. Non perderem pro te obolum: nedumsanguinem.itemnoncrederemtibiobolum:nedumprotefunderemsanguinem. Atqueinaffirmandoidquodplusest:maiorisquemomentiinprimaparteponendum;in negandoquodminorisest.plusenimetmagisestmomentosumfunderesanguinemquam pecuniam: et minus est et leuius, perdere aut credere obolum: quam perdere aut profundere sanguinem. Imperiti uero hanc dictionem accipiunt pro non solum: sic dicentes.nedumprotelaboremsusciperemsedetiammortem.quodsicdicendumerat. Mortemprotesusciperem:nedumlaborem.Autpernonsolum:namcontrariusmodusest anonmodopernedumsicneprioraexemplaconuertamus.nonsolumpecuniamprote funderem sed etiam sanguinem. Item, non modo tibi pecuniam crederem: uerum etiam pro te sanguinem funderem: et hoc affirmatiue. Rursus negatiue: non modo pro te sanguinem non perderem sed nec pecuniam. Item non tantum pro te sanguinem non perderemsednecpecuniam.itemnontantumprotesanguinemnonfunderem:uerumne

3 199 obolumquidemtibicrederem.haecestigiturdifferentiainternedumetnonsolumsiue nonmodo:siuenontantum:aliquandotamenreperimushocposteriuspenepronedum accipi.ciceroinofficiisiii:huicigituruirobonoquemfimbriaetiamnonmodosocrates nouerat,nullomodouideripotestquicquamesseutile:quodnonsithonestum:possemus hic dicere pro non modo Socrates nouerat: nedum Socrates. Sed nedum auget: praepolletque alteri parti cui adiungitur non modo autem aequiperat. Ideoque puto Ciceronem uoluisse equiparare Fimbriam romanum Socrati graeco: dixisseque illud non modosicutinquibusdamaliisexemplis.vtineisdemofficiis:adquodestadhibendaactio quaedamnonsolummentisagitatio.etproplancio:pluranedicamtuaemelachrymae impediunt: uestraeque iudices non solum meae. Hic non ausim pro non solum dicere nedum. Onnedumandnonsolum Skilledwriterstendtousenedumintwoways.Intheonewaywhenwecloseoffeachof thetwosentenceswithoneandthesameverb;intheotherwaywhenweallottoeachof the two sentences a verb of its own. In the first manner as follows: Funderem pro te sanguinem,nedumpecuniam Iwouldgivemybloodforyou,letalonemymoney.Inthe secondthus:funderemprotesanguinem,nedumtibipecuniamcrederem Iwouldshed my blood for you, let alone lend you money. And this affirmative. Negative thus: Non perderemproteobolum,nedumsanguinem Iwouldn tloseasmuchasapennyforyou, let alone my blood. Likewise: Non crederem tibi obolum, nedum pro te funderem sanguinem Iwouldn tlendasinglepennytoyou,letalonethatiwouldshedmybloodfor you.andwithaffirmationthatwhichismore,andofgreatermomentum,mustbeputin the first part; with negation that which is less. After all, it is more and of greater momentumtospillbloodthanmoney.anditislessandlightertowasteapennyorlendit thantospillbloodorshedit. Unskilled writers, however, use this expression for non solum when saying the following:nedumprotelaboremsusciperem,sedetiammortem LetalonewouldItake thesufferinguponme,butevendeath.whichshouldhavebeenexpressedasfollows: Mortemprotesusciperem,nedumlaborem Iwouldtakedeathuponmeforyou,letalone thesuffering.orwithnonsolum forthemannerofexpressionwithnedumisopposite tothatofnonmodo 2 asfollows(letusrefrainfromchangingtheexamples):nonsolum pecuniamprotefunderem,sedetiamsanguinem NotonlywouldIspillmymoneyforyou, butevenmyblood.andsimilarly:nonmodotibipecuniamcrederem,uerumetiamprote 2 Hereonewouldhaveexpectednonsolum.Apparently,nonsolum,nonmodoandnontantumare sosimilarinvalla seyesthathevarieshischoiceofexpressionforstylisticreasons.

4 200 sanguinemfunderem NotonlywouldIlendmymoneytoyou,butIwouldevenspillmy bloodforyou ;thisintheaffirmative.oncemorenegative:nonmodoprotesanguinem non perderem, sed nec pecuniam Not only would I not spill my blood for you, but not even my money. Similarly: Non tantum pro te sanguinem non perderem, sed nec pecuniam NotonlywouldInotspillmybloodforyou,butnotevenmymoney.Alsothus: Nontantumprotesanguinemnonfunderem,uerumneobolumquidemtibicrederem Not onlywouldinotspillmybloodforyou,butiwouldnotevenlendyouapenny. This, then, is the difference between nedum and non solum or non modo or non tantum.andyetwesometimesfindthelattertobealmostaseasilyacceptedinsteadof nedum.ciceroindeofficiis,3[19,77]:huicigituruirobonoquemfimbriaetiamnonmodo Socratesnouerat,nullomodouideripotestquicquamesseutile,quodnonsithonestum So toamanofsuchhonesty,atypethatevenfimbriarecognized,notonlysocrates,nothing canseeminanywayexpedientthatisnothonorable. InsteadofnonmodoSocratesnove ratwecouldsaynedumsocrates.butnedumstrengthensandismoreforcefulthanthe other part it is connected with, whereas non modo equalizes. And that is why I think CiceropreferredtoputFimbriatheRomanonaparwithSocratestheGreekandsaidthe above non modo in the same way in certain other cases. As in the aforementioned De officiis,1[5,17]:adquodestadhibendaactioquaedamnonsolummentisagitatio where acertainamountofphysicalexertionhastobeincluded,notonlymentalactivity.and CiceroProPlancio,[42, 104]:Pluranedicamtuaemelachrymaeimpediunt,uestraeque iudicesnonsolummeae Yourtearspreventmefromsayingmore,justlikeyours,judges, notonlymyown.hereiwouldnotdaresayneduminsteadofnonsolum. 2.2.Commentary Intheabovechapter,Vallafirstenlargesuponnedum.Withthehelpofafewexampleshe showsthatthenedumconjunctcanoccurwithoutorwithaverbofitsown; 3 heillustrates thetwooptionsforbothaffirmativeandnegativenedumexamples,cf.examples(1)(2) and(3)(4)respectively. (1) Funderemprotesanguinem,nedumpecuniam. Iwouldgivemybloodforyou,letalonemymoney. 3 Nedumconjunct stands for the conjunct headed by nedum. Given that nedum connects a conjunct preceding it with one following it, we refer to the two as first and second conjunct respectively(conjunct 1 andconjunct 2 for short). In accordance with the polarity of conjunct 1, we speak of a nedum-sentence as affirmative or negative.

5 201 (2) Funderemprotesanguinem,nedumtibipecuniamcrederem. Iwouldshedmybloodforyou,letalonelendyoumoney. (3) Nonperderemproteobolum,nedumsanguinem. Iwouldn tloseasmuchasapennyforyou,letalonemyblood. (4) Noncrederemtibiobolum,nedumprotefunderemsanguinem. Iwouldn tlendasinglepennytoyou,letalonethatiwouldshedmybloodforyou. Valla subsequently discusses an important difference between affirmative nedum examplessuchas(1)and(2),withsanguineminconjunct 1 andpecuniaminconjunct 2,and thenegativeversions(3)en(4),withoboluminconjunct 1 andsanguineminconjunct 2.The sanguinemandpecuniam/obolumargumentshave,inotherwords,changedplaces.with affirmation,vallanotes,theweightier(or major )argumentmustbeplacedinconjunct 1, withnegationitisthelessweighty(or minor )argumentthatmustbeplacedthere.after all,asheremindsus,sheddingbloodisofgreatermomentumthanlendingmoney,and losingorlendingapennyisoflessmomentumthansheddingblood. NotethatValla,allinthehumanisttradition,reliesheavilyonexamplestosupporthis generalizations. Thus, he accounts for the distribution of the sanguinem and pecuniam/obolumarguments in examples (1)(4) by appealing to our intuitive understandingthatsheddingbloodisofgreatermomentumthanlendingmoney.wefeel, however,thatacomparisonatamoredetailedlevel inlinewithcurrentresearch will ensure a better understanding of Valla s views of nedum than achieved so far. That is, zoominginonthelevelofthetwoargumentsassuch,onemaynotethattheseare,inthe givencontext,beingcomparedintermsof thecommonsemanticnotionthatbothare, say,precioustous,beittodifferentdegrees.thuswerankbloodasthemore,andmoney asthelesspreciousofthetwo.inotherwords,theintuitionthatthewillingnesstogive blood implies the willingness to give money hinges on the understanding that the willingnesstogivewhatisthemorepreciousimpliesthewillingnesstogivewhatisthe lessprecious.andviceversaforthenegativecases. The next issue Valla turns to is a comparison of nedumsentences with sentences involving non solum (including non modo and non tantum), illustrating the use of non solumc.s.withexamplesusedearlierfornedum.comparingthetwosentencetypes,valla notes thatnedumandnonsolumc.s.areusedinoppositeways.hebeginsbyshowing howthetwocanc.q.cannotbeused.rejectingtheuseofneduminfrontposition,asin (5),hecontraststhiswithitscorrectusein(6)andthatofnonsolumin(7).

6 202 (5) Nedumprotelaboremsusciperem,sedetiammortem. LetalonewouldItakethesufferinguponme,butevendeath. (6) Mortemprotesusciperem,nedumlaborem. Iwouldtakedeathuponmeforyou,letalonethesuffering. (7) Nonsolumpecuniamprotefunderem,sedetiamsanguinem. NotonlywouldIspillmymoneyforyou,butevenmyblood. For Valla sentence (5) is incorrect, this in contrast with sentence (6), where nedum interconnectsconjunct 1 andconjunct 2,withthemajorargument(mortem)occurringinthe formerandtheminorone(laborem)inthelatter.nonsolumcanoccursentenceinitially, as in sentence (7). Here we find the minor argument (my money) in conjunct 1 and the majorone(myblood)inconjunct 2.Theorderoftheargumentsintermsofmajorversus minor in (7) is, in other words, opposite to that in sentence (6). In sentences with a negativefirstconjunctthatfeaturenonsolum,nonmodoornontantum,suchas(8)and (9)below,themajorargumentprecedestheminorargument.Thisargumentorderisthe sameasinsentence(6),butoppositetothatinsentence(7). (8) Nonmodoprotesanguinemnonperderem,sednecpecuniam. NotonlywouldInotspillmybloodforyou,butnotevenmymoney. (9) Nontantumprotesanguinemnonfunderem,uerumneobolumquidemtibicrederem. NotonlywouldInotspillmybloodforyou,butIwouldnotevenlendyouapenny. Valla ends the above discussion by concluding: This, then, is the difference between nedum and non solum or non modo or non tantum. This conclusion is summarized in Schema1. polarityconjunct 1 rankofargument conjunct 1 rankofargument conjunct 2 nedum affirmative major minor negative minor major nonsolumc.s. affirmative minor major negative major minor Schema1.Nedumennonsolumc.s.inaffirmativeandnegativecontexts

7 203 Sofar,Valla sevidenceislimitedtohomemadeexamples.asaresult,nedumandnon solum c.s. appear to convey the same meaning, differing only in that they are used in oppositeways.valla snextstepistoextendhisevidencetocertainauthenticexamples; theseenablehimtobringtolightanimportantdifferencebetweenthetwoexpressions. Twoofthem(fromCicero sdeofficiis,3[19,77]andproplancio,[42,104]respectively) arerepeatedbelow. (10) HuicigiturvirobonoquemFimbriaetiamnonmodoSocratesnoverat,nullomodo videripotestquicquamesseutile,quodnonsithonestum. Sotoamanofsuchhonesty,atypethatevenFimbriarecognized,notonly Socrates,nothingcanseeminanywayexpedientthatisnothonorable. (11) Pluranedicamtuaeme[etiam]lachrymaeimpediunt,uestraequeiudicesnon solummeae. 4 Yourtears[also]preventmefromsayingmore,justlikeyours,judges,notonly myown. The conjuncts headed by non modo in (10)and by non solum in (11)fill the slot sofar reservedforthenedumconjunct.withregardto(10),vallaobserves,wecouldalsosay nedumsocratesnoveratinsteadofnonmodosocratesnoverat.however,doingsowould, hepointsout,affecttheinterpretationofthesentence.thatis,nedumstrengthensandis moreforcefulthantheotherpartitisconnectedwith,whereasnonmodoputsthetwo partsonaparwitheachother.valla sinterpretationofnedum sfunctionasstrengthening canbeunderstoodasfollows.giventhatnedumismeanttoensurethatwhatisstatedby conjunct 1 implies what is stated by conjunct 2, it follows that nedum strengthens in the sensethatconjunct 2 makesamoreforcefulstatementthanconjunct 1.Usingnedum,that is,compelsonetocomparefimbriaandsocratesintermsof,say,wisdom, rankingthe firstashavingthelesserandthesecondashavingthegreaterwisdomofthetwo.thus the(pragmatic)logicunderlyingthenedumstatementintherelevantversionof(10)isthe following:giventhat,oftwopersons,theonewiththelesserwisdomiswiseenoughto recognizewhat amanofsuchhonesty standsfor,itfollowsthatthisapplieswitheven greatercertaintytothepersonwiththegreaterwisdom.putdifferently,the statement aboutsocratesmakesamoreforcefultruthclaimthantheoneaboutfimbria.andthatis, according to Valla, why Cicero opts for non modo in (10): he wants to put Fimbria the 4 MosteditionsofCicero saddresstothecourthaveetiaminthispassage.thefirstvallaedition known to us that includes etiam here is Valla (1526: fol. 26 r ); this edition will come up for discussionatalaterstage.

8 204 RomanonaparwithSocratestheGreek;theconjunctionnonmodo(oroneofitsvariants) involves, in other words, the coordination of two (logically) independent, and as such equalstatements.usingnedumin(11)insteadofnonsolumis,vallalastlypointsout,no option:thatwould,orsoheimplies,forceonetointerpretthetearsofthemencicerois addressing as playing a role (in the process of stopping him from saying more) that comparedtohisown isoflesserimportance. 5 That,ofcourse,wouldneverdo. Theabovemakesitclearwhyachangeinthepolarityoftheinitialconjunctofthe nedumconstructiongoeshandinhandwiththecontrastingargumentsexchangingplaces: nedumcausestheseargumentstotradeplacessothatineithercasethecontentofthe nedumconjunct, conjunct 2, is properly included in, hence implied by that of conjunct 1. Now the non solumconstruction (or the non modo or non tantumvariant), which involves, as we have seen, the coordination of two conjuncts stating truth claims independentlyofoneanother, exhibitsasimilartradingofargumentpositionsrelativeto achangeinpolarity(regardlesswhethernonsolumheadsconjunct 1 orconjunct 2 ).Thereis another similarity between the two constructions, one concerning the distribution of etiam ( even or also ): this expression may not occur in either the nedum or the non solumconjunct itself, but in what we will call their coconjunct it is often explicitly present, and never out of place anyway. We suggest, therefore, that the non solum constructionalsoinvolvessomekindofcomparison,beitthatthecomparisondoesnot, asinthenedumconstruction,functionattheleveloftruth.asweseeit,thestatement expressedbythenonsolumconjunctservesasastandardofexpectationthatallowsthe speaker/writer to present what is expressed by its coconjunct in a special light. In the case of example (10), for instance, Cicero conveys that Fimbria, given that he has an insightofadepththatonlyamanaswiseassocratescouldbeexpectedtoachieve,must be seen as an extraordinarily wise man. Next consider example (9), Non tantum pro te sanguinemnonfunderem,uerumneobolumquidemtibicrederem,whichdiffersfrom(10) notonlyinthatitisnegativebutalsointhatthetwoconjunctsarecontrastive.hereone ismadetounderstandthat,inlightofthefactthatanunwillingnesstospillone sblood forsomeoneis,assuch,whatonewouldexpect,theunwillingnesstolendsomeoneas muchasapennyisnotatallwhatonewouldexpect.itisthecomparison,inotherwords, that makes one see such an unwillingness as utterly excessive. Essentially the same applies to the positive version of (9), i.e. example (7), Non solum pecuniam pro te funderem,sedetiamsanguinem,wherethenonsolumconstructiononlymakessenseif 5 Notice that the nedumvariants of (10) and (11), despite being affirmative, require a minor argumentinconjunct 1 andamajorargumentinconjunct 2.Apparently,Schema1doesnottellthe wholestoryasfarasnedumisconcerned.

9 205 the arguments appear in reversed order: now the standard of comparison is the willingnesstogivemoneytosomeoneandwhatratesasunexpectedisthewillingnessto go as far as giving one s blood. To conclude this discussion of the workings of the non solumconstructionweendwithabrief,butgeneralcharacterization:astatementthatis setoffagainstanonsolumstatementgivesrisetoimplicationsthatitneednotgiveriseto inisolation. Thereis,finally,oneotherdifferenceinValla sdataconcerningtheuseofnedumand thatofnonsolumc.s.,adifferencethathedrawsnoattentionto.inthecaseofanegative conjunctheadedbynonsolumc.s.itscoconjunctcontainsitsownnegativemarker,both whenitisandwhenitisnotaccompaniedbyaverbofitsown,cf.examples(8)and(9) respectively;wheneverthenonsolumconjunctisaffirmative,itscoconjunctisaffirmative aswell.mattersaredifferentwherenedumisconcerned:inallvalla snedumexamples, cf.(1)(4),conjunct 2 lacksanegationmarkerofitsown,regardlesswhetherconjunct 1 is affirmativeornegative,andregardlessofwhetherconjunct 2 containsaverbofitsown. Thereisgeneralconsensusamonglaterhumanistswithregardtothedatainvolvingnon solum c.s.; however, concerning the nedumdata there turn out to be differences in opinion.itissuchdifferencesthatwewillconcentrateoninthefollowingsections. 3.BadeandBertholf ThereareagreatmanyElegantiaeeditions.In 3.1belowwelookatsomeoftheeditions in which the editors are specifically concerned with nedum: Jouennaux (1492), Bade s epitomeonneduminvalla(1501)andjouennaux&bade(1508).in 3.2welookintothe diagramsummarizingbertholf sviewsontheuseofneduminvalla(1526). 6 In 3.3,lastly, wecomparevalla sexamples(3)and(4)withthenegativeformsthatbadeandbertholf proposeinstead. 3.1.Bade sepitomeonnedum Bade sepitomeonnedum invalla(1501), 7 whichprecedes Valla sown nedumanalysis, 6 Asidefrommanymanuscripts,morethan150editionshave,from1471onward,beenpublished accordingtothecensusofijsewijn&tournoy(1969,1971);amongothers,valla(1526)ismissing fromtheirlist. 7 BadetaughtbonaelitteraeinValenceandLyon,whereheeventuallybecameaproofreaderand texteditor,e.g.ofthecomoediaeofpubliusterentiusafer,thistogetherwithjouennauxin1493. Around1500hewenttoParis,wherehesettledasprintereditorin1503andlateronbecamea professoraswell.healsomadenameasapoet(cf.janssen&marynissen2013).

10 206 shares the latter s main views on nedum and non solum c.s. (outlined in section 2.2 above), but follows its own direction where nedumsentences are concerned in which conjunct 1 isnegativeandconjunct 2 hasaverbofitsown.thatis,thepatternofbade s twoaffirmativenedumexamplesandvalla s,cf.(1)and(2)in 2.2,isexactlythesame. Thisisalsotrueofthefirstnegativenedumexamplehepresents,butinthesecondBade hasaddednoninconjunct 2,cf.(12)and(13)respectively. (12) Nonexponeremprotepecuniam,nedumsanguinem. Iwouldnotgiveupmymoneyforyou,letalonemyblood. (13) Nonsubiremprorebusmundanistormenta,nedumvitamnonexponerem. Iwouldnotsubmittotormentsforthesakeofworldlymatters,letalonethatI wouldgiveupmylifeforthem. With regard to (13) Bade comments: inueni sublatum illud secundumnon: vt sitnedum vitamexponeremquodsublatumnonoportuit Inoticedthatsecondnontohavebeenleft out, as if what was left out oughtnot to be present in nedum vitamexponerem (Valla 1501:fol.26 v ). Wewillreturntothisissuelater,firstdrawingattentiontothetreatmentofnedumin Jouennaux (1492), an abridged version of Valla s Elegantiae with comments by Jouennaux. 8 Intendedasatextbookforuniversitystudents,thebookprovidestheLatin examples with French translations. Note that Jouennaux, for want of a specific French expressioncoveringthesenseofnedum,usesnon passeullement ( notmerely )in(15) and(17)totranslatenedumin(14)and(16)respectively. (14) Profunderemprotevitam,nedumpecunias. Iwouldgivemylifeforyou,letalonesumsofmoney. (15) Jemettroismaviepourtoynonpasseullementmonargent. (16) Assemtibinondabonedumaureumtibisumprestaturus. Iwillnotgiveyouacoppercoin,letalonethatIwillgiveyouasmuchasagold coin. (17) Jenetedonneraypasun lenonpasseullementungescuouagrantpeine doncunescu. 8 See Guy Jouennaux (1492: fol. 20 r ). Guido Juvenalis Cenomanus from Le Mans died around

11 207 Inaposthumousedition,Jouennaux(1508),Badeadds(18)asaDutchtranslationfor(14) and, replacing (16) by (19), translates the latter into Dutch as in (20). Note that (19), Bade sversionof(16),differsfromthelatterinthatitcontainsnoninconjunct 2,thisin linewiththeexamplehegaveinvalla(1501),cf.(13)above.notefurthermorethatbade translatesnedumin(14)and(19)withthehelpofdifferentdutchexpressions,nietalleene (literally notonly )in(18),andiclatestaen( Iletstand )in(20).assumingthatdutchic latestaencould,atthetime,onlybeusedinfrontofafiniteclause,wesuggestthatbade hadnootheroptionthantoresorttonietalleenein(18)asthetranslationcomingclosest to the meaning of nedum in (14). The let alonetranslations of both (18) and (20) are intendedtoreflecttheirnedumoriginalsascloselyaspossible. (18) Icsoudesturtenmijnlevenoftbloedvoerhu:nietalleenemijngeld. Iwouldspillmylifeorbloodforyou,letalonemymoney. (19) Assemtibinondabonedumaureumtibinonsumpraestaturus. Iwillnotgiveyouacoppercoin,letaloneasmuchasagoldcoin. (20) Icensalhunieteenenpennijncgheveniclatestaendatichuenenguldensoude gheven. 9 Iwillnotgiveyouapenny,letalonethatIwouldgiveyouaguilder. In summary, where nedumsentences are concerned in which conjunct 1 is negative and conjunct 2 containsaverbofitsown,badediffersfromvallawithrespecttothepresence (Bade)orabsence(Valla)ofaseparatenegativemarkerinconjunct 2.Notice,incidentally, thatthereisaremarkablediscrepancybetweenjouennaux s(16),ourenglishtranslation of(19),andevenbade siclatestaenversionof(19)ontheonehand,andbade slatin form(19)ontheother:onlythelatterincludesthenegativemarkerbadeinsistsshouldbe presentinthenedumconjunctofthetypeofsentencesthat(19)isaninstanceof.inlight ofsuchdiscrepancy,bade s improvement viewsmaywellseemdubious.even so, he is not,asthefollowingsubsectionwillshow,aloneinthem Bade siclatestaeninjouennaux(1508)istheoldestattesteduse of theexpressionthatlater developedintolaatstaan(cf.janssen&vanderleek2009). 10 JandeSpouter(JohannesDespauterius,ca )fromNinovéalsousesnoninconjunct 2 inhicscientiamnonsibicomparatnedumvirtutemnoncolit heacquiresnoknowledge,letalone thatheexercisesvirtue (1513:fol.c5 v ).

12 B InVa ofwh seen Diagr 11 Ber (Bierl Cicero Ame Bertholf ssc lla(1526)b hathecons inconnecti ram1:theu rtholf,whod aire&biete onianusand eetingofgram chemaofne Bertholfpres siderstobe onwiththo useofnedu diedofthep nholz1995: inhiscolloq mmarians. edum,nons sents, 11 int etheessen oseofnons mandnons lagueinlyon ).Er quia,towiti solumetc. heformofa tialaspects olum,nonm solum(valla nalongwith rasmus,hold nthedivers adiagramre softhesyn modo,nont a1526:fol. hisfamily,w dinghimine oria Inns an eproduced ntaxandse tantum,non 25 v ) wasformers esteem,puts ndthesynod below,asu manticsof nabestand ecretaryofe himonstag dusgramma mmary nedum adeo. Erasmus geinhis aticorum

13 209 Diagram1portraystheuseofnedumandnonsolumasthisissummarizedinSchema1in 2.2.Ateachcornerofthesquarethereisabigcirclecontainingthreesentences,onein which conjunct 2 does not, and two in which it does have a verb of its own; the first examplesinthefourcirclescorrespond,contentwise,tooneanother;thesameappliesto thesecondandthirdexamples.thecirclesatthetoparelinkedbyabarindicatingthat both contain nedumexamples, while those at the bottom, linked by a bar labelled non solum,bothcontainonenonsolum,onenontantum,andonenonmodoexample.the barlinkingthetopandbottomcirclesattheleftindicatesthatbothcontainaffirmative examples, while the one linking the top and bottomcircles at the right points to their bothcontainingnegativeexamples. 12 Below we have arranged eight examples from Bertholf in what might, loosely speaking,becalledminimalpairs,eachasentenceandbsentenceinvolvingnedumand nonsolumc.s.respectively.(21)and(22)featuresentencescontainingoneverbandtwo verbexamplesrespectively,andsodo(23)and(24).theexamplesin(21)(22)andin(23) (24)are,lastly,affirmativeandnegative,respectively. (21) a Uitamtibiimpenderimnedumpecuniam. Iwouldevengivemylifeforyou,letalonemymoney. b Nonsolumimpenderimprotepecuniam:verumetiamvitam. NotonlywouldIgivemymoneyforyoubutevenmylife. (22) a Amoetiamtenedumdiligo. Ievenlove,letalonerespectyou. b Nontantumtediligo:sedetamo. NotonlydoIrespectyou,butIalsoloveyou. (23) a Nonimpenderimtibipecuniamnedumnonvitam. Iwouldnotgivemymoneyforyou,letalonemylife. b Nonsolumnonimpenderimtibivitam:verumnepecuniamquidem. NotonlywouldInotgivemylifeforyou,butnotevenmymoney. (24) a Haudquaquamtediligonedumnonamo. Idonotrespectyouatall,letalonethatIloveyou. b Nontantumnonamo:immonecdiligo. NotonlydoInotloveyou,Ido,infact,notevenrespectyou. 12 TheexamplesinthesmallercirclesinDiagram1areofnoconcerntousinthisarticle.

14 210 Looking at Bertholf s Latin examples, it is immediately clear that it is in complete agreementwithschema1in 2.2:theargumentorderineachofthenedumsentencesis thereverseoftheargumentorderinthenonsolumsentencesthattheyformaminimal pairwith.apartfromthis,thereisastrikingnoveltyinbertholf sanalysisinthatforeach minimal pair made upof a nedumand a non solumsentence, the second conjuncts of bothalwayshavethesamepolarity. All in all, three dissenting views regarding the absence c.q. presence of a negation markerinthesecondconjunctofnedumsentenceshavebeenunderreview,thatofvalla, ofbadeandofbertholf.inthefollowingsection,wewillgointothequestionwhatmight bebehindsuchcuriousdifferencesinopinion. 3.3.Samesense,differentforms Despitethestructuraldifferences,pointedoutabove,regardingtheabsenceorpresence of a negative marker in the second conjunct of nedumsentences with a negative first conjunct,opinionsdiverge,itisquiteclear,asfarasform,notasfarasinterpretationis concerned. That is, Valla s statement Sed nedum auget: praepolletque alteri parti cui adiungiturnonmodoaequiperat. iscommonlyaccepted,ifnotexplicitly(bade),thenat leastimplicitly(bertholf). Valla, we assume, sees the reinforcing power of nedum as applying at the level of interpretation.thatis,whenconjunct 1 isaffirmative,theeffectofnedumonconjunct 2 is that its content is understood as affirmed with greater certainty than the content of conjunct 1 is; when conjunct 1 is negative, we find the same pattern, but applied to negation: now nedum reinforces one s interpretation of the content of conjunct 2 : it is understoodtobedeniedwithgreatercertaintythanthecontentofconjunct 1 is.somuch is, in any case, in conformity with the pattern exhibited in Valla s examples (1)(4). Bertholf sanalysis,ontheotherhand,revealscompleteparallelismbetweennedumand nonsolumsentencesasfarastheformalabsenceandpresenceofnegationisconcerned. That is, not only within non solumsentences but also within nedumsentences do both conjunctsformallysharethesamepolarity(eithernegationisabsentinboth,ornegation ispresentinboth).nedum,inthisview, praepolleret theexplicitlyaffirmativeornegative secondconjuncttogreateraffirmativeornegativeheightsrespectively.bade spositionis inthemiddleofvalla sandbertholf s:whenthesecondnedumconjunctcontainsnoverb ofitsown,itsinterpretationdependsonthepolarityofthefirstconjunct;whenitdoes containafiniteverbofitsown,itisinterpretedintermsofitsownexplicitpolarity.

15 211 UnfortunatelyforBertholf(andinlesserdegreeforBade),thereisnoevidencefrom authenticlatinexamplescorroboratingtheformalnegationpatternstheywanttoimpose onthesecondconjunctofcertainnedumsentences. 4.DesideriusErasmus ErasmusmadeanabridgedversionofValla selegantiaeinthreeversions:thefirst,written around1489,appearedinanunauthorizededitionin1529,thesecondgotlost,whilethe third,authorizedversion,paraphrasis,seupotiusepitome,appearedin1531(heesakkers &Waszink1973).Thenedumepitomeinthisthirdversionwillbelookedintoin Thetext Erasmus nedumepitomefromthefreiburgedition(1534:fol.48 rv ),ispresentedbelow, editedasvalla stextin 2.1. Nedumpenèestidemquodnonsolum,sednonunomodoeisutimur. Nonmodo,etnonsolum(quaeidemualent)semperinprioreparteorationisponuntur,ut Nonmodotediligo,uerumetiamfratrislocoamo.Nonsolumpecuniamuerumetiamuitam proteimpenderem.nedumferèsemperinfineponitur,itatamen,utsioratiositnegatiua, idquodminusestponaturinprincipio,etmaiusinfine:sinaffirmatiua,contrariomodo fiet, ut Non solum laborem pro te susciperem, uerumetiam mortem. Non crederem tibi obulum, nedum uitam meam: non solum non crederem tibi uitam, uerum ne obulum quidem. Est item alia differentia inter nedum et non solum: Nedum iungit partes inaequales:nonsolum,aequales.vndeethaccausa,nonsolum,nonnunquaminorationis finereperitur.cicero.pluranedicamtuaemelachrymaeimpediunt,uestraequeiudices, non solum meae. Hic non recte dicetur, nedum meae. Nedum nusquam ponitur, nisi in orationenegatiua. Nedumiswellnighthesameasnonsolum,butwedonotusetheminthesamemanner. Nonmodoandnonsolum(whichhavethesamemeaning)arealwaysputinthefirstpart of the sentence, as in Non modo te diligo, uerumetiam fratris loco amo Not only do I respectyou,ievenloveyouasabrother.nonsolumpecuniamuerumetiamuitamprote impenderem NotonlymymoneybutevenmylifewouldIofferforyou.Nedumisalmost alwaysputattheend,butinsuchawaythattheminorpartisputinthebeginningwhen the sentence is negative, and the major part at the end, but when the sentence is

16 212 affirmative, it works the other way round, as in Non solum laborem pro te susciperem, uerumetiammortem NotonlywouldItakethesufferinguponme,butevendeath.Non crederemtibiobulum,nedumuitammeam NotevenapennywouldIentrustyouwith,let alonemylife.nonsolumnoncrederemtibiuitam,uerumneobulumquidem Notonly wouldinotentrustyouwithmylife,butnotnotevenwithapenny.thereisyetanother differencebetweennedumandnonsolum:nedumjoinsunequalparts,nonsolumequal parts.thatiswhynonsolumissometimesalsofoundattheendofthesentence.cicero [ProPlancio42,22]:Pluranedicamtuaemelachrymaeimpediunt,uestraequeiudices,non solummeae Yourtearspreventmefromsayingmore,justlikeyours,judges,notonlymy own.hereitwouldnotberighttosaynedummeae.nedumisputnowhere,unlessina negativesentence. 4.2.Commentary ApartfromValla sobservationthatconjunct 2 mayappearinfullyspecifiedorelidedform, Erasmus epitome comprises, on the face of it, the central points of Valla s nedum analysis:(i)theaffirmativeornegativeuseofnedum,(ii)themomentumofthecontentof each of the conjuncts, (iii) the reverse positioning of their lexical content, and (iv) the stricterrestrictiononnedum spositioninthesentencethanthatofnonsolumc.s. ErasmusdiffersfromVallaononeimportantpoint,however.Inhisclosingstatement hecontendsthatnedumcannotbeusedinanyotherthananegativesentence.however, thatcontentionfliesinthefaceofhisspecificationsconcerningtheuseofneduminboth affirmativeandnegativesentences.therehecompareshownedumcanbeusedinthe two sentence types with the way in which non solum c.s. can be used in them. Conspicuously absent in his sample sentences is, however, one exemplifying the use of neduminanaffirmativesentence.intheunauthorizededitionofhistext,erasmus(1529: fol.56 r ),thereissuchasamplesentence:mortemprotesusciperem,nedumlaborem.is there, then, a connection between its absence in the present text and the closing statementthatnedumisonlyusedinnegativesentences?thatisextremelylikely,since that closing statement is, in its turn, conspicuously absent in the unauthorized version containingtheaboveaffirmativenedumexample.apparently,erasmuschangedhismind abouttheuseofneduminaffirmativesentencesinbetweenthefirstandthirdeditionof his Valla text. That is also clear from his De copia. His 1512edition (fol. 18 rv ) contains nedumexample(25),butinthedecopiaeditionsfrom(1526)onward(cf.erasmus1988: 93)thesentencecontainsnonmodoinsteadofnedum,see(26).

17 213 (25) Vitametiamtibiimpenderim:nedumpecuniam. Iwouldevengivemylifeforyou,letalonemymoney. (26) Vitametiamtibiimpenderim,nonmodopecuniam. Iwouldevengivemylifeforyou,notonlymymoney. Thisreplacementconstitutesanindependentindicationthatnedumconstructionswithan affirmativefirstconjunctarelateronrejectedbyerasmus.hadheperhapscometorealize that,somehow,therewassomethingnotrightaboutnumber(2)ofvalla sfournedum examples, i.e. the one in which both conjunct 1 and conjunct 2 are affirmative, while the latter has a finite verb of its own? Below we reintroduce Valla s examples (1)(4), now accompaniedbyenglishtranslationsthatallowonetoseetheirmeaninginaclearerand, in fact, different light. In the case of examples (1) and (3), this means that the English translationsadd,inbrackets,whatisnotformallypresentinconjunct 2 andyetpartofour understandingofthatconjunct.mattersaremorecomplicatedinthecaseofexample(2). HerewepresenttwoalternativeEnglishversions.Thefirst,(2)(i),presentsconjunct 2 inits full,uncontractedform.curiouslyenough,thistranslationyieldsanenglishsentencethat isincoherent(indicatedby#).thesecondversion,(2)(ii)does,duetoitsincludingnotin conjunct 2, yield a coherent English sentence. Only in the case of example (4) does the originalenglishtranslationremainthesameasbefore. (1) Funderemprotesanguinem,nedumpecuniam. Iwouldgivemybloodforyou,letalone(thatIwouldnotgive)mymoney(foryou). (2) Funderemprotesanguinem,nedumtibipecuniamcrederem. (i) # Iwouldshedmybloodforyou,letalonethatIwouldlendyoumoney. (ii) Iwouldshedmybloodforyou,letalonethatIwouldnotlendyoumoney. (3) Nonperderemproteobolum,nedumsanguinem. Iwouldn tloseasmuchasapennyforyou,letalone(thatiwouldlose)myblood (foryou). (4) Noncrederemtibiobolum,nedumprotefunderemsanguinem. Iwouldn tlendasinglepennytoyou,letalonethatiwouldshedmybloodforyou. Thepatternthatemerges,isclearasfarasexamples(1),(3)and(4)areconcerned:the polarity of conjunct 1 is the reverse of the polarity of conjunct 2. Note that the form of nedumsentence(2)istheoddmanout:thewordbywordenglishversionisincoherent, nordoes(2)conformtothepatterntheotherthreenedumsentencesexhibit.itseems reasonabletoassume,therefore,thatvalla sexample(2)isnotacorrectlatinsentence

18 214 and should be reformulated as Funderem pro te sanguinem, nedum tibi pecuniam non crederem. 13 Given this adaptation, the incoherence problem is solved and the general principleonwhichtheuseofnedumisbasedisstraightforward:thenedumconstruction requiresthatitstwoconjunctsbeinterpretableintermsofreversepolarities. Thefollowingaffirmativenedumsentencefrom noless Erasmus Decopiaappearsto beanexceptiontothisprinciple. (27) Ingeniumquoquesenectusdeterit,nedumcorporisvigorperpetuoduret. Oldageweakenseventhehumanmind,letalonethatbodilystrengthwould endureforever. In this sentence, nedum does not get replaced by non modo or a related expression in later editions (see Erasmus 1988: 94). This sentence, in which both conjuncts are affirmative,appearstobeanexceptiontotheabovenedumprinciple;infactitisnot,beit that the principle needs to be refined. It is not the negative or affirmative character of conjunct 2 that is crucial; what is crucial is that conjunct 2 is, contentwise, in opposition with conjunct 1. This is the case in (27), due to the fact that weaken and endure have opposite meanings, as the following, less handsome translation confirms: Old age weakenseventhehumanmind,letalonethatbodilystrengthwouldnotweakenintime. ThatErasmus,asastudentoflanguage,rejectedtheuseofneduminsentenceslike (2) was, we conclude, fully justifiable; that he, as a user of language, fully accepted sentenceslike(27)turnsouttobeequallyjustifiable. 5.Conclusion Studyingtheuseandmeaningofnedumandnonsolumc.s.inpairsofsemanticallysimilar sentences,enablesvallanotonlytogetacrosshowcloselyconnectedthetwoexpressions 13 WeknowofoneLatinexample,fromCicero sdepetitioneconsulatus,6,21,inwhichconjunct 1 isaffirmativeandconjunct 2 negative,cf.: Minimusbeneficiishominesadducunturutsatiscausaeputentesseadstudiumsuffragationis, nedumiiquibussalutifuisti,quostuhabesplurimos,nonintelligant,sihoctuotemporetibi nonsatisfecerint,seprobatosneminiumquamfore. Even by very small favours men are persuaded to think they have sufficient reason for supportingacandidate,letalonethatanyonethatyouhavesaved andthere sagreatmany ofthem wouldnotrealizetheywouldneverbetrustedagainiftheydonot,atthisyourhour ofneed,complywithyourwishes.

19 215 areaccordingtohim,butalsotopinpointwhat,inhisview,thesubtlesemanticdifference betweenthemis: Nedumiungitpartesinaequales:nonsolum,aequales,inthewordsof Erasmus.Bade,disagreeingwiththeformofValla snegativenedumexamplefunderem protesanguinem,nedumtibipecuniamcrederem,proposeslatinvariantswithanexplicit nonaddedtothenedumconjunct.ourletalonetranslations,aswellasbade sowniclate staenversion,pointinanotherdirection:valla snegativenedumsentenceiscorrectlatin, Bade sisnot,andthatgoesforbertholf snegativenedumexamplesaswell.erasmus,in histurn,issuspiciousaboutvalla saffirmativenedumsentences,endingup,wronglyso, by rejecting them. All this, as well as our understanding of a fair number of twoverb affirmativenedumexamplesfromclassicallatin,leadsustoidentifyvalla sexample(2)as incorrectlatinandtosuggestreplacingitby(28),aformthatincludesnoninitssecond conjunct. A comparison of (28) and Valla s negative example (4) brings the following pattern to light: in each case the two conjuncts, considered independently of nedum s contribution,makeconflictingtruthclaims. (28) Funderemprotesanguinem,nedumtibipecuniamnoncrederem Iwouldshedmybloodforyou,letalonethatIwouldnotlendyoumoney. (4) Noncrederemtibiobolum,nedumprotefunderemsanguinem. Iwouldn tlendasinglepennytoyou,letalonethatiwouldshedmybloodfor you. Weconcludefromthisthatnedum sfunctionistoresolvethisconflict.thatis,ratherthan reinforcing the truth claim made by the second conjunct, nedum dismisses it as irreal because of what can be mentally concluded from the truth claim made by the first conjunct. 14 Toillustratewhatwemean,letusgobacktothepunchlineofPoggio sjoke quotedatthebeginningofthisarticle.inlinewithourviewsonnedum simport,thissays: ByJove,awagonofhaycouldmakeitthroughthegate,letalonethatyoucouldnotget through.thepeasantthusjokinglytellsthefatabbotthatitcannotpossiblybethecase thathecouldnotmakeitthroughthegate,sincethefactthatawagonofhaycanget through,unambiguouslyimpliesthattheabbotcantoo,withthegreatestofease. 14 In this analysis, the meaning of nedum in negative sentences is no different from that in affirmative sentences, this as opposed to earlier analyses, including at least by our book Goldstein (forthc.). We are preparing an article, Nedum revisited ( working title ), in which the theoreticalimplicationsofourviewsonthematterwillbepresentedindetail.

20 216 6.References Bierlaire,Franz&PeterG.Bietenholz(1995),HilariusBertholfofLedeberg,dcAugust 1533.In:PeterG.Bietenholz&ThomasB.Deutscher(eds.),Contemporariesof Erasmus:AbiographicalregisteroftheRenaissanceandReformation,Volumes13, Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress. DeSpouter,Jan(1513),ArsEpistolicaJoannisDespauteriiNiniuitaeexDato:Sulpitio: Nigro[:]Herasmo:Badio:BebelioetipsoCicerone:caeterisqueverelatinisdiligenter excerptamultocopiosiusquampostsyntaxinhabeatur,paris:jossebade. Erasmus,Desiderius(1512),D.ErasmiRoterodamideduplicicopiarerumacverborum commentariiduo[ ].Paris:JosseBade. Erasmus,Desiderius(1988),OperaomniaDesideriiErasmiRoterodami,BettyI.Knott,ed., Decopiaverborumacrerum,I6,Amsterdametc.:NorthHolland. Erasmus,Desiderius(1529).ParaphrasisD.ErasmiRoterod.lvcvlenta,iuxtaacbreuisin elegantiarumlibroslau.vallae[ ],Keulen:IoannesGymnicus. Erasmus,Desiderius(1534).Paraphrasis,sevpotivsepitome,inscriptaD.ErasmoRotero. luculentaiuxtaacbreuis,inelegantiarumlibroslaurentijvallae,multoquàmantea fuitetcastigatior,etlocupletior.[ ],FreiburgimBreisgau:JoannesFaberEmmeus. Goldstein,David(forthc.),Thesynchronyanddiachronyofascalarcoordinator:Latin ndum letalone,indoeuropeanlinguistics. Heesakkers,ChrisL.&JanH.Waszink,eds.(1973),OperaOmniaDesideriiErasmi Roterodami,I4,ParaphrasisseupotiusEpitomeinElegantiarumLibrosLaurentii Vallae,Amsterdam:NorthHollandPublishingCompany. IJsewijn,Jozef&GilbertTournoy(1969).Unprimocensimentodeimanuscrittiedelle edizioniastampadegli Elegantiarumlinguaelatinaelibrisex dilorenzovalla.in: HumanisticaLovaniensia18,2541. IJsewijn,Jozef&GilbertTournoy(1971).Nuovicontributiperl elencodeimanuscrittie delleedizionidelleelegantiaedilorenzovalla.in:humanisticalovaniensia20,13. Janssen,TheoA.J.M.&FrederikeC.vanderLeek(2009),Laatstaanindenegatieveende positievezin.in:egbertbeijketal.eds.,fonsverborum.feestbundelvoorprof.dr. A.M.F.J.(Fons)Moerdijk,Leiden:INL/Amsterdam:GopherBV, Janssen,Theo&AnnMarynissen(2013).Brabantsoudezot(1500)enErasmus goddelijke Zotheid(1509)ineenintiemerelatie?In:HannoBrand,EricHoekstra,BenGroen& CorvanderMeer,eds.,Detienduizenddingen,Leeuwarden:FryskeAkademy& StichtingAfûk,

21 217 Jouennaux,Guy(1492).InterpretatioinLaurentiiVallaeElegantiaslatinaelinguae,Paris: FélixBaligault. Jouennaux,Guy&JosseBade(1508).InlingualatinaexVallaetGelliosumptaerudition cumthematisgallicanisabipsopridem:ettheutonicisabascensionuperadjectis, Paris:JosseBade. PoggioBracciolini([ ]).Liberfacetiarum.IntraTextEditionCT: PoggiodeFlorentijn(1968).Grootgrollenboek.Boertenenverhalenuitdevijftiendeeeuw, TranslatedbyGerritKomrij,Amsterdam:DeArbeiderspers. Valla,Lorenzo(1471).LavrentiiVallensisdelingvaelatinaeelegantia,Venice:Nicolaus Ienson. Valla,Lorenzo(1501),LaurentijValledelingualatinaquamoptimemeriti:deeiusdem elegantialibrisex[ ].EtcumJodociBadiiAscensiiepitomatissinguliscapitibus antepositis[ ],Paris:AndréBocardforJehanPetit. Valla,Lorenzo(1526).LavrentiiVallensisElegantiarvmlibri[ ],Lyon:LaurentHilaire.