Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:53:39.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

TWO TEXTUAL NOTES ON CICERO, DE OFFICIIS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2019

Andrew R. Dyck*
Affiliation:
Los Angeles

Extract

(1) 1.21:

ex quo, quia suum cuiusque fit eorum quae natura fuerant communia quod cuique obtigit, id quisque teneat; †e quo si quis† sibi appetet, uiolabit ius humanae societatis.

The base text cited is that of Winterbottom. After discussing the origin of private property, Cicero asserts that it should be maintained as distributed (id quisque teneat). Of the matter marked corrupt, e quo (sometimes written ex quo or with a letter deleted after e; see Winterbottom's apparatus criticus) is likely to be a repetition of the preceding ex quo and therefore intrusive (as Winterbottom suggested ad loc.: ‘fort. delendum’). si quis evidently requires supplementation. Müller (after marginal corrections in printings of Lambinus's edition) inserted quid after quis, but in that case one would expect a further specification (quid alienum or the like). The better candidate for the supplement after quis is perhaps plus, the reading of the two fifteenth-century Munich codices 7020 and 650 (M and S respectively), an easy error. Cf. Cic. Leg. agr. 3.13: cum plus appetat quam ipse Sulla …; Sull. 84: ut ego mihi plus appetere coner quam quantum omnes inimici inuidique patiantur.

Type
Shorter Notes
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2019

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

1 Winterbottom, M., M. Tulli Ciceronis De officiis (Oxford, 1994)Google Scholar.

2 Müller, C.F.W., M. Tulli Ciceronis De officiis libri tres für den Schulgebrauch erklärt (Leipzig, 1882)Google Scholar, ad loc.

3 The presence of the reading in these two witnesses suggests that it may have been the reading of L (London, Harley 2716) and thus be Carolingian; cf. Winterbottom (n. 1), viii–ix.

4 For discussion, see Dyck, A.R., A Commentary on Cicero, De officiis (Ann Arbor, 1996), 164–5Google Scholar.

5 So already Pohlenz, M., Antikes Führertum: Cicero De officiis und das Lebensideal des Panaitios (Leipzig and Berlin, 1934), 36 n. 3Google Scholar.

6 See TLL 10.2.1612.10–19. The usage of Sil. Pun. 15.495–6 (belloque parata | prodigere in bellum) is dubiously relevant to Cicero.

7 See further TLL 7.2.1291.11–45; OLD s.v. liberalis 4.

8 I would like to thank this journal's reader for helpful suggestions.