Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T05:22:01.696Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Aldine Scholia to Thucydides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

J. Enoch Powell
J. Enoch Powell
Affiliation:
Trinity College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Parisinus suppl. gr. 256 was written, to judge from the hand, not long after 1300. As far as the end of book VI the writer copied both text and scholia from a descendant of M. At that point another MS. came into his hands. This was no other than that ancestor of J which, as we saw on p. 87, had received valuable readings from the source ω. From this MS. the scribe now corrected what he had already written, copied the two remaining books, and added the two Lives before the text and the Epistula Dionysii ad Ammaeum after it. (That he went on to copy Demosthenes‘ Philippics and other works, and bound them up with the Thucydides, is not our concern.) From 1—for so, after Dain (see p. 86 n.), I shall style our MS.—was copied the MS. from which, after it had been perfunctorily corrected from another source, was copied X (p. 91).

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 30 , Issue 3-4 , October 1936 , pp. 146 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1936

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 146 note 1 The process is particularly clear in places where the scribe, by a not uncommon inadvertency, has recopied half a page or so of his own copy under the impression that it was his exemplar. In these cases the cancelled repetition still shows the uncorrected text.

page 147 note 1 From a noteworthy sentence in the dedicatory epistle of Aldus' Thucydides we learn that at that period he insisted on having at least three MSS. of an author before printing: ‘eramdaturus …τ⋯ τε Ξενοφ⋯ντος, κα⋯ Πλ⋯θωνος, … sed quia non habebam minimum tria exemplaria, distulimus in aliud tempus.’

page 147 note 2 Some time in the last century X was taken to pieces and rebound in three volumes with a blank sheet of paper between every two leaves. The original binding and guard-leaves were discarded. Such a procedure cannot be condemned too strongly. Binding and guard-leaves are often the only source for information about a manuscript's past.

page 147 note 3 See Baschet, : Aldo Manuzio, Venice 1867 no. XIXGoogle Scholar.

page 147 note 4 It is no. 40 in the list of his MSS. which Pantin sent to Meursius in a letter of March 1st 1611 (reprinted in H. Omont: Cat. des MSS. de la Bibl. roy. de Bruxelles, Ghent 1885 p. 46.)

page 147 note 5 Meursii opera XI, ep. 312, p. 223.

page 147 note 6 In Schott's classified catalogue (Omont, l.c. pp. 47–50)Google Scholar I appears three times under different contents: nos. 1, 22 and 50.

page 149 note 1 The progress of the error is as follows. κρατο⋯ντες τῇ ναυμαχ⋯ᾳ]οἱ II. Aldine; κρατο⋯ντες] τῇ ναυμ. οἱ II. Stephanus;.1 κρατο⋯ντες οἱ πολ⋯μιοι] τῇ ναυμ. οἰ II. Poppo.