Chronography of 354

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/chronography_of_354_00_eintro.htm

In ancient Rome a wealthy Christian aristocrat named Valentinus received a codex containing an illustrated calendar for the year 354, together with a group of unillustrated documents, including a list of names of the consuls, prefects and bishops of the city Rome to that date. Other illustrated sections included depictions of the consuls of that year, and astrological signs. The calligraphy was of exceptional quality, being the work of the most famous calligrapher of the century, Furius Dionysius Filocalus. Indeed Filocalus, as a fellow Christian, had inscribed his own name alongside the wishes for Valentinus' well-being which adorned the opening page of the codex. The illustrations that accompanied the text were the earliest full-page illustrations in a codex in the history of Western art, and may also have been executed by Filocalus.

The original codex continued to be of use long after Valentinus' day. Polemius Silvius probably consulted it, almost a century later, for his own annotated calendar for the year 449. In the sixth century a planisphere for the year 579 was prepared, which seems to have been illustrated with copies of the illustrations from the codex of 354. Other traces of its existence are that St. Columbanus of Luxeuil may have copied its paschal cycle in 602, and an Anglo-Saxon work of 689 may refer to it.

The ancient codex still existed in the 9th century, when, because of its associations with the age of Constantine, a complete and faithful copy was made (the now lost Luxemburgensis). At the same time an unillustrated copy of the text was made, either directly from the original or from an intermediary. This latter is now St. Gall 878. After this point there is no further sign of the original autograph; indeed fewer than 20 fourth century codices survive altogether (see E. A. Lowe, Codices Latini Antiquiores, Oxford, 1934, vol. 1: codices I, IV, XIV-XV).

In the renaissance, the discovery of the 9th century copy caused great excitement, inspiring several copies during the 16th and 17th centuries. Unfortunately leaves were lost during the renaissance, and the best copy (the Romanus), which was executed under the supervision of the scholar Nicholas-Claude Fabri de Peiresc, was made after this event. On the death of Peiresc the Luxemburgensis was lost. Our knowledge of the text is thus from the surviving renaissance copies, no one of which is adequate by itself.