Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:39:10.904Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Locus Vexatus in Lucan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

J. D. P. Bolton
Affiliation:
The Queen's College, Oxford.

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 1950

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 91 note1 See Oudendorp, ad loc.

page 91 note 2 Adversaria Critica, ii. 132–3.Google Scholar

paeg 91 note 3 The words nihil posse honestum are possible Latin but impossible Stoicism, and correspond to nothing in Cato's speech. What has happened is clear enough: a copyist wrote the nihil after vivimus, and on returning to his exemplar continued with the word following the nihil after nocere, namely, posse: a simple case of omission through haplography. An exact parallel occursat iii. 658: ‘si viscere permixtus legimus, scilicet cum viscere; si viscera permixtus, id est permixta viscera habens’ c; ‘si viscere …, si viscera permixtus, id est permixta viscera habens’ a. These two passages prove that c cannot have taken its common matter from a. That the reverse is not the case is shown by the evidence quoted in n. 5, below.

page 91 note 4 Rivista di Filologia, xxxi (1903), 463 ff.Google Scholar Cf. c and a ad B.C. i. 1.Google Scholar

page 91 note 5 In Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica, 11 (1903), 51.Google Scholar

page 92 note 1 Contrast the passages of Servius and Martianus Capella with those of Priscian adduced by Usener, ad loc.

page 92 note 2 ‘hospitis ille ciet nomen, vocat ille propinquum.’ Propinquum MG; propinqui ZPUVc: ‘Vocat Ille Propinquum π κοινοῦ ”nomen” accipimus’ a.

page 92 note 3 e.g. at viii. 756 and ix. 710. At iii. 237 a and c complement each other. From a comparison with the scholium (also from Σ) on v. 517, and Isid. Or. xvii. 7. 57–8 I believe the words of a ‘Agroetes significantur Indiae ulterioris populi, qui cannarum viridium caudicibus tunsis sive tritis dicuntur exprimere sucos’ to be from σ.

page 92 note 4 I have not been able to see Rinkefeil's, W. dissertation (Dresden, 1917) De adnotationibus super Lucanum, which is said to treat the relationship of a to c.Google Scholar

page 92 note 5 Nutting (A.J.P. Iii (1931), 49 ff.) holds that nihil at Luc. iii. 40 has a similar meaning. I wish I could believe him.Google Scholar

page 92 note 6 Cf. Sen. Epp. 93. 4 ‘licet aetas eius imperfecta sit, vita perfecta est’; Plin. Epp. v. 14.5 ‘quod non tam aetatis maturitate quam vitae merebatur’; Cic.Google Scholar adfam. x. 1. 1 ‘mea vita, cui satisfeci vel aetate vel factis’.Google Scholar

page 92 note 7 Cf. Quint. Inst. xii. 10. 13 (Radermacher): sit tamen bH; sed tamen BnBgNEP.Google Scholar

page 93 note 1 διαφέρειν in this sense is occasionally used personally, e.g. Plut. Caes. 65; Gal. U.P. ix. 5; Procl. in Plat. remp. ii. 241. 17 (Kroll)Google Scholar; and perhaps Eur. Hec. 599.

page 93 note 2 Housman, ad loc, and Postgate in C.R. xxx (1916), 142 ff. give other examples, to which I would add, as having some resemblance to the case under discussion, vi. 652–3 ‘dubium est, quod traxerit illuc aspiciat Stygias an quod descenderit umbras’.

page 93 note 3 Loc. cit.

page 93 note 4 See Bailey, ad locc.