Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:21:32.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Donatus-Extracts in the Codex Victorianus(D) of Terence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

W. M. Lindsay
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Terence was studied, though not so much as Virgil, in monastery-schools. Their magistri bestirred themselves to get aid for pupils. Some famous magister— we know not who—had written, between the lines or in the margins, interpretations of difficult words in at least the three opening plays of the MS. which he used—Andr., Ad., Eun.—if not in all. These interpretations (glossae) were collected from his MS. and found their way into many monastery-libraries. Goetz has published these glossae collectae of Terence from a tenth (?) century MS. (Vat. lat. 1471) in Vol. V. of his Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum, pp. 529–539; Mr. Austin (Class. Quart. XIX. 104) has added more from a Leyden MS. (67 F), written apparently in Belgium or Holland, c. 800–815 A.D. (see Palae. Lat., Part V.). Probably Dr. Theander will add a further batch from a Paris MS. (Bibl. Nat. lat. 10588, ‘saec. IX. in.’).

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 21 , Issue 3-4 , June 1927 , pp. 188 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1927

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 188 note 1 Goetz says ‘ninth’; I am sometimes inclined to say ‘eleventh’.

page 188 note 2 This MS. was examined, for the purposes of the new Oxford edition, by Mr. P. E. Postgate, who will, I hope, publish an account of it. It seems to be a mere text of the γ-Family.

page 190 note 1 The note on the first page of the Preface to the Oxford edition is designed to correct Jachmann's long argument on pp. 103 sqq., an argument so much lauded by reviewers. The variant, CLIT. for CLIN., in the Valenciennes MS. (υ) is, Dr. Kauer tells me, by a Renaissance hand. Therefore Jachmann's whole argument collapses like a house of cards. But since, with Daddie Ratton, I hold it to be ‘the most uncivil thing may be’ to mention names, at least when censure is necessary, and since Jachmann had unfortunately to write his book before Kauer's collations of the MSS. were available, I made no express mention of Mr. Jachmann. (Cambridge please copy.) Neither discourtesy nor ignorance should be imputed to us.

page 191 note 1 The symbol δ in the apparatus criticus is, of course (as explained on the last page of the Preface), a mere shorthand expression for ‘the consensus of DGLp. ’It is not to be supposed that δ-readings are only such as have this symbol. Often the real δ-reading is attested by p alone or by D alone or by G alone or by L alone (most often by the pair Dp), having been supplanted in the other MSS. of the δ-Family by the γ-reading.

page 191 note 2 If Professor Fraenkel will read Mr. Craig's Jovialis and the Calliopian Text of Terence, I think he will regret his assent (in his excellent review of Professor Housman's excellent edition of Lucan) to Jachmann's theory that Calliopius was (like Jovialis) a mere corrector of a friend's (or patron's) MS. of Terence.

page 191 note 3 Let me correct a misprint in it. At Andr. 513 read non habet ‘t.’