Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:59:59.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Unique Manuscript of Apvleivs' Metamorphoses (Laurentian. 68.2) and its Oldest Transcript (Laurentian. 29.2).

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

E. A. Lowe
E. A. Lowe
Affiliation:
Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The chief works of Tacitus and Apuleius have come down to us in a single Beneventan—i.e. South Italian—MS. of the eleventh century. The Annals (books XI.–XVI.) and Histories (books I.–V.) of Tacitus, and the Apologia, Metamorphoses, and Florida of Apuleius, depend solely on the authority of the famous Florentine MS. preserved in the Laurentian Library under the press-mark 68.2. Any new light that can be thrown on such a MS. is of interest to classical scholars. With the portion of the MS. containing the works of Tacitus the writer has dealt at some length in a paper read in April, 1913, in London before the International Congress of Historical Studies, which paper will be published shortly. Here it is proposed to deal with the portion containing the works of Apuleius, and with the oldest extant transcript of this portion, which is also in Beneventan writing, and is likewise preserved in the Laurentian Library under the press-mark 29.2. In the critical apparatus of Apuleius Laur. 68.2 is cited as F, and Laur. 29.2 as ø.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 14 , Issue 3-4 , July 1920 , pp. 150 - 155
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1920

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 150 note 1 Cf. Rostagno, , Praefatio, p. 11Google Scholar, in the facsimile edition of Tacitus (68.2) in Codd. Graeci et Latini photographice depicti, Vol. VII., pars 2 (Leyden, 1902)Google Scholar.

page 150 note 2 Butler, H. E. and Owen, A. S., Apulei Apologia, pp. xxxi sq. (Oxford, 1914)Google Scholar.

page 150 note 3 See F. Haase's edition of Tacitus I., p. lxix., and Manitius, M., Philologisches aus alten Bibliothekscatalogen, p. 68Google Scholar, in Rheinisches Museum, 47 (1892)Google Scholar, Ergänzungsheft.

page 151 note 1 Facsimiles of F will be found in Helm's, R. edition of the Florida (Leipsic, 1910)Google Scholar. Of T we have a complete facsimile reproduction in the Leyden series, and Chatelain, E. reproduces a page in his Paléographie des classiques latins, p. 146Google Scholar.

page 151 note 2 This is very striking where ordinary p and the pro-symbol come together. Cf. col. 2, lines 2 and 3 of folio 38, the page reproduced by Chatelain.

page 151 note 3 Keil, H., Observations in Catonis et Varronis de re rustica libros (Halle, 1849), pp. 77 sqGoogle Scholar.

page 151 note 4 See his preface (pp. xxix sq.) to the Teubner edition of the Florida.

page 152 note 1 Professor E. Rostagno very kindly examined this passage for me in both manuscripts.

page 152 note 2 See fol. 160v, col. I, 11. 6–7. This leaf is reproduced in Helvia's, edition of the Florida (Leipsic, 1910)Google Scholar.

page 153 note 1 Cf. Lowe, E. A., The Beneventan Script, pp. 286 sqGoogle Scholar.

page 154 note 1 Cf. Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift XVII. (1897), col. 1041Google Scholar; ibid. XX. (1900), col. 1479.

page 154 note 2 Ibid. XXXVI. (1916), col. 936.

page 155 note 1 Not only are script and abbreviations in ø typical of the thirteenth century, but all other graphic features are true to type.

page 155 note 2 I have recently consulted the opinion of Professor Rostagno and Professor Schiaparelli, two excellent connoisseurs of Italian MSS. They both ascribe ø to the twelfth century.