Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-17T00:31:34.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Notes on Propertius II, 16 and III, 7

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2018

F. H. Sandbach
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Meeting Report
Information
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society (Second Series) , Volume 5: New Series , 1959 , pp. 3 - 5
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published by Cambridge University Press 1959

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 3 note 1 Cf. Bailey, D. R. S., Propertiana, p. 129 Google Scholar.

page 4 note 1 lumbi for penis is an indecent metonymy in place in Persius and Juvenal, but unacceptable in Propertius, or indeed any elegist.

page 4 note 2 N has exclusit for exclusis. Were it not that this is probably to be explained as an anticipation of the final letter of the following agitat, one might imagine a progression in error: exutis, exusit, exclusit, exclusis. It may be observed that at Ovid, , Met. VII, 777 Google Scholar Heinsius restored excussae for exutae of the MSS.

page 4 note 3 This interpretation makes Propertius exaggerate the rapidity of the rise to riches of the slave, a familiar rhetorical turn when speaking of the nouveau riche, cf. Anaxandrides, , Kock, , C.A.F. II, 137 Google Scholar.

page 4 note 4 E.g. Cartault, A., Tibulle et les auteurs du Corpus Tibullianum, pp. 103–16Google Scholar, who associates the three passages Prop. 11, 16, 25–8; IV, 5, 49–52; Tib. II, 3, 59–60.

page 5 note 1 So W. Kraus corrects the MS. nota, Wiener Studien, LXIX (1956), p. 308 Google Scholar.

page 5 note 2 positumque in margine ripae Markland, positumque in gurgite, Venti, Lachmann, positumque in gurgitis ora Baehrens. Postgate adopted the reading positaque, but this is obviously unsatisfactory.

page 5 note 3 If that, and not minax, is the right reading.