Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T05:31:36.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Vindiciae Platonicae III

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

John Burnet
John Burnet
Affiliation:
St. Andrews
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Schanz never edited either the Parmenides or the Philebus. For the former we have minute collations of B and T in Waddell's edition, but the readings of W are still unknown. As, however, Wilamowitz has no suggestions to make about the text of the Parmenides, this does not matter for our present purpose. It seems that this dialogue was transcribed with special care just because of its difficulty. At any rate, its text is remarkably good. For the Philebus I published the readings of T for the first time, and I have now procured a photograph of W in this dialogue from Vienna. Mr. R. G. Bury's edition was an anachronism. Though he published it in 1897, he had apparently never heard of the manuscript T. In his note entitled The Text of the Philebus (pp. lxxxii sqq.) he attributes to Schanz a view of the relation between the MSS. which that editor had recanted just twenty years earlier. Except for a few corrections regarding the readings of B (which he calls Cl.), Mr. Bury's own apparatus criticus is merely a reprint of Bekker's, which was published in 1823. For the Symposium we have Schoene's collation of W, which I was able to use in my second edition, and I have now a photograph of that MS. in the Phaedrus too.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , January 1921 , pp. 1 - 7
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1921

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 1 note 1 This is the more remarkable as the facts about T were adequately summarized in the late Dr. Adam' school editions of the Apology.

page 1 note 2 It is true that the MS, reading here is τί…ύπαρχόντων.

page 3 note 1 Mr. Bury rightly corrects Bekker's critical apparatus on this point, though the lemma of his explanatory note is misleading, since it implies that ϕύσιν is in ΔII, which it is not.