Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:37:06.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Manuscripts of Sophocles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2017

Alexander Turyn
Alexander Turyn*
Affiliation:
University of Warsaw, At present Ann Arbor, Mich.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The manuscript tradition of the tragedies of Sophocles has never been fully investigated although many meritorious contributions were made towards this end. There exists, first of all, no complete list of the pertinent manuscripts. In former times several lists, far from being complete, were published by Fabricius-Harles, Blaydes, Campbell, Papageorgiou. The present writer has compiled, from all the known printed catalogs of Greek manuscript collections, a new list which will be presented in this study. Thus the groundwork will be laid for all further research aiming at the establishment of a complete genealogy of the extant mss. of Sophocles. This desideratum has been pointed out by Richard Jebb.

Type
Articles
Information
Traditio , Volume 2 , 1944 , pp. 1 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © 1944 by Cosmopolitan Science & Art Service Co., Inc. 

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 Ioannes Albertus Fabricius4 Harles, Gottlieb Christophorus, Bibliotheca Graeca , II (Hamburgi, 1791), 215–219.Google Scholar

2 Blaydes, F. H. M., Sophocles, with English notes , I (London, 1859), xli–xliv.Google Scholar

3 Campbell, Lewis, Sophocles with English notes and introductions , I2 (Oxford, 1879), xvii–xxii.Google Scholar

4

5 Jebb, Richard, Sophocles, The Text of the Seven Plays (Cambridge, 1897), p. xx.Google Scholar

6 Cf. Campbell, L., “The Mss. of Sophocles,” Journal of Philology , 5 (1874), 125–133. On several problems of textual criticism in Sophocles, cf. Cantarella, R., “Il testo di Sofocle,” Rivista Indo-Greco-Italica, 9 (1925), fasc. I–II, pp. 29-39.Google Scholar

7 Marco, Vittorio De, “Sulla tradizione degli scolii sofoclei,” Studi Italiani di filologia classica , N.S. 13 (1936), 3–44; idem, De scholiis in Sophoclis tragoedias veteribus (Memorie della R. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, serie VI, vol. VI, pp. 105–228 = fasc. II, Romae, 1937). On an analogous problem in Aeschylus cf. Turyn, A., The Manuscript Tradition of the Tragedies of Aeschylus (Polish Institute Series, II, New York, 1943), pp. 14 f. The view that—beside L—the other mss. of Sophocles should be relied upon for the text of the scholia had been voiced many years ago by Nauck, A., “De scholiis in Sophoclis tragoedias a Petro N. Papageorgio editis,” Bulletin de l'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg, N.S. 1 [33] (1890), 411-441, especially p. 414. I want to mention that De Marco's choice of mss., as instructive as it may be, seems still to be a casual selection (especially so far as the triad is concerned), because there are other “old” mss. supplied with scholia which may be likewise essential, as e.g. Venice gr. 468, Madrid 4677, Vatic. gr. 1332 (cf. Peppink, S., Mnemosyne, III ser., 1 [1934], 76-78, 155-159). Peppink's remarks show that the scope of the pertinent research ought to be extended. It will be particularly interesting to observe how many mss. exhibit Tzetzes' interpolations in the scholia (like Ai. 884 and Oed. Tyr. 1264; cf. De Marco, , Sulla tradizione, p. 11, p. 15 note 2) and to elucidate adequately the relation between the vulgate of ancient scholia, the Laurentian scholia, and the source of Suidas (cf. Kausch, Guilelmus, De Sophoclis fabularum apud Suidam reliquiis [Diss. Halis Saxonum, 1883], especially pp. 41 ff.; Jahn, Paulus, Quaestionum de scholiis Laurentianis in Sophoclem prima pars qua agitur de ratione quae inter Suidam et librum Laurentianum intercedit [Diss. Berolini, 1884]).Google Scholar

7a 7a ΣOΦOKΛEOΥΣ TPAΓΩΔIAI (Parisiis, 1553: Apud Adrianum Turnebum). Cf. Jebb, , Sophocles, The Text of the Seven Plays , pp. xxxvi f.Google Scholar

8 Cf. Turyn, , op. cit. p. 106 note 92.Google Scholar

9 Δημητρίoυ τoῡ Tρικλινίoν, Eἰς τὰ τoῡ Σoφoκλέoυς ἑκτὰ δράματα (Parisiis, 1553: Apud Adrianum Turnebum)—appendix to Turnebus' Sophocles. They are also reprinted in the editions of Henricus Stephanus (Sophoclis tragoediae septem. Unà cum omnibus Graecis scholiis, & cum Latinis Ioach. Camerarij. Annotationes Henrici Stephani in Sophoclem et Euripidem, seorsum excusae, simul prodeunt [1568]) with the prefix ΣXOΛ. TPIKΛIN.; of Paulus Stephanus (Sophoclis tragoediae septem. Excudebat Paulus Stephanus [1603]) with an asterisk * prefixed; of Johnson (see next note) with the prefix ΣXOλ. TPIKΛIN., and of Dindorf (Dindorf, G., Scholia in Sophoclis tragoedias septem , II [Oxonii, 1852], 278 ff.).Google Scholar

10 Johnson, Thomas, Sophoclis tragoediae septem scholiis veteribus illustratae I–II (Londini, 1758).Google Scholar

11 According to Johnson I, p. vii, who confused the old serial numbers of the Bodleian mss. denoted by him as B and L. Google Scholar

12 Hopfner, Theodor, Die thomano-triklinischen Scholien zu Sophokles Elektra (Jahresbericht des k.k. Staats-Gymnasiums mit deutscher Unterrichtssprache in Prag-Neustadt, Graben über das Schuljahr 1912–1913 [Prag, 1913], pp. 3–28).Google Scholar

13 Hopfner, Theodor, Thomas Magister, Demetrios Triklinios, Manuel Moschopulos. Eine Studie über ihren Sprachgebrauch in den Scholien zu Aischylos, Sophokles, Euripides, Aristophanes, Hesiod, Pindar und Theokrit (Sitzungsberichte der Kais. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Phil.-hist. Kl., 172. Band, 3. Abhandlung [Wien, 1912]). Cf. Holzinger, Karl, “Kritische Bemerkungen zu den spätbyzantinischen Aristophanesscholien,” in Charisteria Alois Rzach zum achtzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht (Reichenberg, 1930), pp. 58-85.Google Scholar

14 Cf. Turyn, , Aeschylus , p. 13.Google Scholar

15 On the chronology of Byzantine scholars of that period, cf. Turyn, , Aeschylus , p. 103 note 89.Google Scholar

16 Cf. the relevant remarks (with regard to Euripides) by Spranger, J. A., Classical Quarterly , 32 (1938), 200 note 1; 33 (1939), 98.Google Scholar

17 Jebb, , Sophocles, The Text of the Seven Plays , pp. xvi f.Google Scholar

18 Cf. Lipsius, Iustus Hermannus, De Sophoclis emendandi praesidiis (Progr. Misenae, 1860), pp. 18 f.Google Scholar

19 Cf. Gudeman, A. in Pauly-Wissowa, , Real-Encyclopädie , II A (Stuttgart, 1923), 656–662.Google Scholar

20 Elmsley, Petrus, Sophoclis Oedipus Coloneus , note on v. 7 (ed. Lipsiae, , 1824, pp. 88 f.).Google Scholar

21 Incidentally, we should consider for the triad in this connection also the other part of the Palat. 287, i.e. Laur. conv. soppr. 172 (cf. infra).Google Scholar

22 Erfurdt-Hermann, , Sophoclis tragoediae , VII1: Oed. Col. (Lipsiae, 1825), p. viii.Google Scholar

23 This is clearly revealed by the collations in Subkoff, Vladimir, Sophoclis Trachiniae (Mosquae, 1879).Google Scholar

24 Schneidewin, F. W., Neue Jahrbücher für Philologie und Paedagogik , 67 (1853), 500.Google Scholar

25 Lipsius, , De Sophoclis emendandi praesidiis , pp. 17 ff.Google Scholar

26 Cf. Turyn, , Aeschylus , pp. 76 f.Google Scholar

27 Some Byzantine readings in the triad were registered by Lipsius, , op. cit. pp. 21 f., without discrimination between the three Byzantine interpolators. A useful survey of the problem is found in Meifert, Carolus, De Sophoclis codicibus (Diss. Halis Saxonum, 1891), pp. 68-70; Jebb, , Sophocles, The Text of the Seven Plays, p. xvii.Google Scholar

28 Cf. Turyn, , Aeschylus , pp. 112 ff.Google Scholar

29 Cf. Ahrens, Henricus Ludolfus, Bucolicorum graecorum Theocriti Bionis Moschi reliquiae accedentibus incertorum idylliis , II (Lipsiae, 1859), xlviii f.; Wendel, Carl, Überlieferung und Entstehung der Theokrit-Scholien (Abhandlungen der Kön. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Phil.-hist. Kl., N.F. XVII, 2 [Berlin, 1920]), pp. 18 f.; Gallavotti, Carlo, Rivista di filologia e d'istruzione classica, N.S. 12 (1934), 352 f.Google Scholar

30 Such recent mss. occur especially in libraries of the Balkan peninsula and the Middle East. I name some of them: Athens, 'Eϑνικὴ Bιβλωϑήκη, 1321 (Kατάλoγoς [see infra, p. 10], p. 239); 'Iστoρικὴ καὶ 'Eϑνoλoγικὴ 'Eταιρεία, 217 (cf. ΔάμΠρoς, Nέoς 'Eλληνoμνήμων, 9 [1912], 453 f.); 5 [1908], 319 f.]; Athos, Mount, Moνή 'Iβήρων, 134 (λάμΠρoς, Kατάλoγoς [see infra, p. 11] II, 26 ff.); Moνὴ Bατoπϵδίoυ 670 (cf. Eustratiades and Arcadios [see infra, p. 11], p. 134); 738 (Eustratiades-Arcadios p. 145); Istanbul, , Bulletin de l'Institut Archéologique Russe à Constantinople, 14 [Scfia, 1909], 148); 143 (fol. 109 ff. and 290 ff.: cf. 'A. ΠαΠαδóΠoυλoς-Kϵραμϵύς, 'Iερoσoλυμιτικὴ Bιβλιoϑήκη, IV [ἐν ΠετρoυΠóλει, 1899], 123 ff.); 322 (cf. op. cit. p. 296); Jerusalem, , Patriarchal Library, 394 (cf. ΠαΠαδóΠoυλoς-Kϵραμϵύς, 'Iερoσoλυμιτικὴ Bιβλιoϑήκη, I [1891], 405 f.); 69 (cf. K. Δυoβoυνιώτης, Nέoς 'Eλληνoμνήμων, 13 [1916], 348).Google Scholar

31 I name here some of them: Google Scholar

Ms. formerly at Serres, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 3 [1894], 317 f.; I did not see the catalog of XριστóΦoρoς Δημητριάδης, Nέoς IIoιμήν, 2–4 [1920–1922]), now probably at Athens, 'Eϑνικὴ Bιβλιoϑήκη (cf. A. N. IIoλíτης, 'Eλληνικά, 4 [1931], 525 f.; 11 [1935], 379 f.), XIth cent., parchment; Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, 2946–50 (cf. Omont, , Catalogue [see infra, p. 13], p. 27); Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, , Ancien fonds grec 39 (cf. Omont, , Inventaire [see infra, p. 29], I, 7); 1630 (cf. Omont, II, 109 ff.); Ms. formerly at Bachkovo, unnumbered, written in 1460 (cf. Papageorg, Peter N., Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift, 7 [1882], 822; II. N. pp. 115-120; idem, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 3 [1894], 318 note 1; idem, Σoφoκλέoυς ‘Hλέκτρα p. σoα’), now probably at Sofia, Library of the Holy Synod = Sv. Sinod na Bylgarskata Tsrkva (cf. Ehrhard, , op. cit. [see infra, p. 20] pp. liv f.);Google Scholar

Venice, , Marc. gr. 507 (cf. Schenkl, Carolus, “De gnomologio quod est in codice Marciano DVII,” Wiener Studien, 11 [1889], 309-314).Google Scholar

32 For Sophoclean papyri, cf. Diehl, Ernestus, Supplementum Sophocleum (Kleine Texte für Vorlesungen und Übungen herausgegeben von Lietzmann, Hans, 113 [Bonn, 1913]); Pearson, A. C., The Fragments of Sophocles, I-II-III (Cambridge, 1917); idem, Sophoclis fabulae (Oxonii, 1923), p. xxiv; Oldfather, Charles Henry, The Greek Literary Texts from Greco-Roman Egypt (University of Wisconsin Studies, Social Sciences and History, 9 [Madison, 1923]), p. 56; Fritsch, Carl-Ernst, Neue Fragmente des Aischylos und Sophokles (Diss. Hamburg, 1936), pp. 33-61; von Blumenthal, Albrecht, Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, 259 (1938), 124 ff.; Page, D. L., Greek Literary Papyri, I (Loeb Classical Library [Cambridge, Mass.-London, 1942]), 12 ff.Google Scholar

33 The assertion of G(ustav) W(olff), Literarisches Centralblatt, 1860, col. 492, that the readings Liv.v originated from ms. Vatic. 57 is untenable, because Vatic. 57 does not contain Oed. Tyr. which is represented by Liv.v. Google Scholar

34 On the present location of the Kolyvas collection cf. 11 (1935), 365.Google Scholar

35 In connection with this palimpsest of Sophocles we note a similar occurrence of the famous palimpsest of Euripides: Jerusalem, Patriarchal Library, Σάββα 36 (cf. Horna, Konstantin, Hermes , 64 [1929], 416–431; Spranger, J. A., Classical Quarterly, 32 [1938], 197 ff.; Page, Denys L., Euripides Medea [Oxford, 1938] pp. xlv f.; photographic specimens in ΠαΠαδóΠoνλoς-Kϵραμϵύς, 'Iερoσoλυμιτικὴ Bιβλιoϑήκη, I, after p. 12; full photographic facsimile: Euripidis quae in codice Hierosolymitano rescripto Patriarchalis Bibliothecae XXXVI servantur photographice inlustrata cura et impensis J. A. Spranger [Florentiae, 1937]; list of libraries in possession of this facsimile in Spranger, , Classical Quarterly, 32 [1938], 198).Google Scholar

36 Also the ms. Venice gr. XI 7 [1340] (cf. Turyn, , Aeschylus , p. 83) seems to be written by Georgius Gregoropulus II.Google Scholar

37 On the possible identity of the scribe of this ms., cf. Gallavotti, , Rivista di filologia e d'istruzione classica , N.S. 12 (1934), 351 f., and Studi Italiani di filologia classica, N.S. 11 (1934), 293. According to Gallavotti, the Urbinas gr. 140 was written by the scribe of the ms. Paris Coislin 169 whose name is 'Iωάννης (cf. Omont, , Inventaire sommaire I p. xlii). Gallavotti also asserts that the same copyist wrote the portion containing Theocritus of the Vatic. 40. As to the Urbinas 140, cf. also Vogel-Gardthausen, p. 57.Google Scholar

38 If these are the same persons as and his son-in-law Θεóδωρoς ὁ λιϑoπυργίτης, mentioned in the ms. Laur. S. Marco 303 (cf. Rostagno-Festa, , Studi Italiani di filologia clas#x015F;sica , 1 [1893], 178 ff.; Reitzenstein, Richard, Geschichte der griechischen Etymologika [Leipzig, 1897], pp. 259 f.; Vogel-Gardthausen, , p. 348), we may, since Theodorus' marriage is dated in this manuscript as of Oct. 1, 1290, attribute also the Vatic. gr. 47 to the same period, i.e., about the verge of the XIIIth cent. (on the chronology of Thomas Magistros and Manuel Moschopulus, cf. Turyn, , Aeschylus, p. 103 note 89).Google Scholar

39 The same owned also the ms. Venice gr. I 36 (olim Nani gr. 29): cf. Castellani, C., Catalogus codicum graecorum qui in bibliothecam D. Marci Venetiarum inde ab anno MDCCXL ad haec usque tempora inlati sunt (Venetiis, 1895), p. 117.Google Scholar