FLORILEGIA

The word florilegium comes from the Latin words flores (flowers) and legere (to gather, to collect). It corresponds exactly to the word anthology, which derives from the Greek. It denotes a collection of flowers, the word flowers being used metaphorically, not to mean literary artifices with which an author embellishes his work, but rather to designate excerpts from earlier writings. This article confines itself to a study of Christian florilegia.

Terminology. A separate study, or monograph, on florilegia has not yet been undertaken. As a first step toward this end, a complete inventory of all florilegia needs to be made. Following are many of the terms by which florilegia are designated in the catalogues of manuscripts and printed works. This list, in which Greek and Latin words are mixed together, includes terms common to a number of collections, as well as terms that are applied to only one collection: Alphabetum, Analecta, Anthologia, Apomnêmoneumata, Apophthegmata, Aurifodina, Breviloquium, Candela, Collationes, Collectanea, Communiloquium, Deflorationes, Delucidarium, Dieta salutis, Eclogae, Epitome, Evergétinon, Excarpsus, Excerpta, Exerceptiones, Fasciculus, Floretum, Florilegium, Flosculi, Glaphyra, Gnomai, Gnomica, Gnomologion, Hiera, Liber pancrisis, Loci communes, Manipulus, Margarita, Melissa, Mensa spiritualis, Milleloquium, Miscellanea, Oculus moralis, Panarion, Pandectes, Parallela (sacra), Paterika, Pharetra, Philocalie, Polyanthea, Pré spirituel, Promptuarium, Rapiarium, Reductorium, Resina scriptuarum, Rosarium, Rosetum, Scarapsus, Scintillae, Sophologium, Speculum, Stillae verborum, Stromates, Sylloge, Sylva locorum communium, Themata, Thesaurus, Via salutis, Viridarium.

Literary Genre. Florilegia belong to gnomic or sententious literature, but within this type of literature they differ from collections of original thoughts or anonymous proverbs in that they consist of borrowed literature. In other words, they are compilations of excerpts (Latin, excerpta ) taken from earlier authors. The role of the compiler is expressed by the Latin verbs carpere, decerpere, deflorare, and colligere. The origin of this literary genre is intertwined with the beginnings of world literature. In Christian literature, the genre appears in the first Christian generations with the collections of the logia of the Lord or the Apostles and with the lists of auctoritates and testimonia, which were the earliest efforts toward a catechism, liturgical formularies, or Christian legislation. Later, there developed the anthologies of sententiae (see sentences and summae), of which isidore of seville was the first great compiler and which found their masters in scholasticism. The history of Christian florilegia has been traced in "Florileges," Dictionnaire de spiritualitéascétique et mystique. Doctrine et histoire, ed. M. Viller et al. (Paris 1932–) 5:435–512. The present study is confined to their classification and evaluation.

Classification. Florilegia can be classified according to the sources they use or according to their objectives. If classified according to their sources, florilegia are either profane, Christian, or a mixture of both. Although the profane florilegia are not the concern of this article, the mixed florilegia, because they borrow from both profane and sacred writers, are usually of Christian inspiration and are of interest in a study of Christian florilegia. In the classification of Christian florilegia according to sources, one can distinguish Biblical, patristic, Biblical-patristic, and mixed (sacred-profane) anthologies. At times a florilegium was compiled from the works of a single author, and in such case serves as an indication of his influence.

If classified according to the objectives that motivated the compiler, Christian florilegia cover the entire field of ecclesiastical disciplines. Thus, one finds florilegia that comment on Sacred Scripture, the valuable "exegetical chains." Still others try to prove or defend a specific point of doctrine—these are the dogmatic or apologetic florilegia. Liturgical florilegia furnish formulas of prayers for those participating in religious ceremonies. Other florilegia provide preachers with citations and examples, and are called homiletic sententiaries. Among these one must distinguish between collections of plans or excerpts of sermons laid out according to the liturgical year and those that are the result of the study of the art of preaching; there are also alphabetical lists of quotations on vices and virtues, on the spiritual life, and on prayer. Canonical florilegia codify the jurisprudence of the Church, and spiritual anthologies gather together traditional teachings on various aspects of the Christian life, such as spiritual combat and the way of perfection. In the field of ethics, P. Delhaye distinguishes between educational anthologies (among which one should set apart Mirrors of Princes ) and anthologies aimed at moral edification. M. Richard divides Greek florilegia into three groups: the Damascan, the sacred-profane, and the monastic florilegia.

Value. Florilegia may transmit excerpts of works that no longer exist; in some rare instances, it may even happen that these excerpts are of sufficient quantity and quality to allow a reconstruction of the general physiognomy of the original work. More often, however, the original works from which the compilers borrowed have survived; yet it is useful, even indispensable, to refer to the work as it was transmitted and interpreted through the florilegia when establishing the critical text of the work in question. Florilegia preserve interesting versions of Biblical and patristic texts, valuable either for the textual history of the Scriptures and the Fathers or for the history of their influence. As collections of citations of ancient authors, florilegia give a precise idea of the influence of these authors in the history of thought and literature. Further, by revealing what works have been commonly read in the past, they furnish information on the culture of a given period and on the condition of ancient and medieval libraries. However, it must be noted that the compilers did not always refer directly to the sources that they quoted; often they cited only already existing florilegia. Many anthologies are preceded by letters of advice or by prologues in which the compilers make explicit the reason for their collection. In the absence of such prefaces, however, their intentions can easily be determined by examining the plan and the contents of the collection, lists of capitula being significant in this regard. Knowledge of the compiler's objectives makes it possible to pass judgment on the methods he used to attain his end. By unveiling the didactic and pedagogic processes of reasoning and memorization implicit in the florilegia, one can penetrate the psychology of the compilers, of the scribes who copied and multiplied their work, and of their readers. A world of preoccupations, problems, proposed solutions, and realizations becomes intelligible, thanks to the florilegia, which are witnesses of a past no longer accessible except by the mirror of these writings.

Limitations. Florilegia, like all digests and excerpts, have their limitations. Selection, which is the basis of the work, implies discrimination. The compilers retain only what is considered useful for their ends, thus often ignoring nuances, explanations, and transitions. They preserve only the lapidary phrase, the punch line, the paradoxical sentences easy to memorize. Briefly, florilegia have a tendency to schematize, to devitalize the original idea, sometimes so much so that a sentence, taken out of its original context and used in the florilegia, no longer conveys its original meaning. Compilers were not always able or willing to transcribe faithfully, either because they did not understand certain passages of their model or because the model itself was defective for various reasons. It is quite possible that they copied from texts that had become illegible or that they tried to give passages a meaning alien to that of the author. Precaution is therefore necessary in using these collections. Before basing an argument on any one of the excerpts it is essential to refer first, whenever possible, to the text of the original work.

See Also: medieval latin literature.

Bibliography: h. m. rochais, et al., Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique. Doctrine et histoire, ed. m. viller et al. (Paris 1932–) 5:435–512. h. m. rochais, "Contribution à l'histoire des florilèges ascétiques de haut moyen âge latin: Le Liber scintillarum, " Revue Bénédictine 63 (1953) 246–291.

[h. m. rochais]