Terminological clarifications

For example, the 'Archimedes palimpsest' is a reference used for the actual manuscript which is a Byzantine prayer book and includes the only palimpsest fragments in existence from Hyperides which were recycled in the identical manuscript together with fragments from several other recycled manuscripts. In order to avoid confusion caused by the multiple obscurities of the term “palimpsest”, I use this term exclusively to identify the section(s) of current manuscript(s) which derive from the same discarded manuscript, regardless of their circumstances; that is, whether or not the unneeded texts were removed by erasure or clear-wash, whether or not the various pieces of the discarded manuscripts were recycled in one or more current manuscripts. By identifying a palimpsest in such a way, I do not identify the entire current manuscript which contains it.

The other frequently used name for palimpsests is the Latin passive participle rescriptus (literally, “rewritten”). This word implies the end result of the process, which is equally misleading for two reasons. First, not all rewritten manuscripts or those with multiple layers previously received the treatment of removing the unwanted text. Second, not all manuscripts that were pre-treated for the purpose were actually reused for writing, as we have just seen. Still, all manuscripts that are called “palimpsests” represent the same phenomenon of recycling the same writing surface for a writing project different from the first one.

Criteria based on functional distinctions exclude a couple of phenomena which can be considered as forms of recycling parchment or writing one text over another. It often happens that the writing surface used on the one side for writing presents a different use on the other side. This category of recycling, however, does not require the removal of the text from its first use. In papyrology, it is very frequent that each side of the papyrus sheet is used for a different purpose, literary or documentary alike. Other cases produce phenomena that are similar to the one we are studying here but are clearly also distinct: these involve corrections of texts by erasure, which satisfies the definition we saw above of an “erased text for the reuse of the material for other texts” but it is part of the production or reconstruction of a book. Marginal notes can be produced in dry point and in lead instruments of writing. These notes may look like texts that had been earlier rewashed but they are not. These cases can be classified to a distinct functional category which this pathway does not intend to address, although photographers may find in them challenges similar to the ones related to palimpsests proper.

The concept of the fragment clarifies the use of the expression, membra disiecta in the context of palimpsests. As in the analogy of fragments from ancient objects, inscriptions and statues led to the abstract concept of a textual fragment that represents the whole text of which it makes part, a small surviving portion of a book can be viewed as a fragment of the whole and somehow represents it. It is often possible to draw more or less precise conclusions on the volume, date, nature, contents as well as to the contexts of production and use of the lost ancient books even from tiny surviving fragments. This is possible thanks to the auxiliary disciplines of palaeography and codicology, which carefully compare the script, contents, and traces of the production of the manuscript. This latter aspect makes the study of the palimpsest close to archaeology. At the same time, palimpsests are similar to papyri or incomplete inscriptions which may be simultaneously regarded, just like a jigsaw or a cross-word puzzle. Like jigsaw puzzles, palimpsests contain recycled larger folios that are often folded in half or trimmed and cut into smaller sheets which can be reconstructed according to their original structure. The process of deciphering the erased or washed-off texts is similar to that of solving cross-word puzzles, wherein the textual contents and the legible letters constitute the basis of reconstruction which often includes conjectures about the missing links in order to arrive at a more-or-less clear and consistent picture that can be drawn from the manuscript which was once dismembered. The reader is invited to a fascinating journey which will demonstrate the complex process of reconstructing the lost past from the tiny and almost illegible traces of the original texts by way of a range of case studies.