Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T09:24:35.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Byzantine Critic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

J. Enoch Powell
Affiliation:
University of Sydney.

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1938

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 2 note 1 Evidence of the contamination is provided by variants such as these: 6, 9, 1 ἲρασθαι ABFM; αίρµσθαι CG; αίρασθαι E; 8, 61, 2 ंॗलγθέॗµι ABFM; άॗलί σραल॑γού CG; ंॗलγθέॗµι σραल॑γού E.

page 2 note 2 In ξυνεσ⋯πεσον E :ξυν⋯πεσονcett’, 6, 100, 2, E is a mistake for BE.Google Scholar

page 2 note 3 Stahl adduces χρὐσειαι δ⋯ θ⋯ρσι πυκιν⋯ν δ⋯μον ⋯ντ⋯ς ἔεργον η 88, But there also, as ⋯ντ⋯ς proves ἔργω means ‘keep in’.Google Scholar

page 3 note 1 Aldus must have had access to E or a copy of it. See below on 4, 15, 1. This is not surprising ; for E came to the Palatine library in 1567 from Ulrich Fugger, who had acquired it from the library of the Venetian Giovanni Battista Egnazio († 1553), a close friend and collaborator of Aldus. See Christ, K., Z.f.B. 1919, 334Google Scholar, and generally Biedl, A., Byz. Zeit. 1937, 1841.Google Scholar

page 3 note 2 See the arts. Ellomenon and Klymenon in P.W.