We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
‘Der Text der Tragodien des Seneca ist in zwei Rezensionen iiberliefert.Die bessere (E) ist vertreten durch die Haupths. Laur. 37, 13 (Etruscus) s. xi/xii.… Zu der schlechteren, stark verfalschten Rezension (A) gehoren die iibrigen Hss., von denen keine iiber die Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts zuriickgeht.’
page 1 note 1 Teuffel, RSmische Litteratur6 (1910), II. p. 234,
page 3 note 1 Other mistakes of c will be found below on and to these must be added, as I hope to show the later the reading which c shares with against the consensthe most remarkable on p. 6. show later, the readings which c shares with against the consensus of E p. I have collected p. 6
page 4 note 1 On these forms, see Housman, Journal of Philology, vol. xxxi., pp. 236 sqq.
page 6 note 1 The m is not unlike id phrigium p.Ag. 732 fugitiuum p (for furtimim; futiuum ? A)
page 6 note 2 I.e Od misread as Qd.
page 6 note 3 I.e. nil‘for ul’. Cf. Tro. 68
page 6 note 4 Cf. H. F. 1080 torua E p (?)tot tua c.
page 7 note 1 It is perhaps also worth noting that there is Troad. 1023 nemo non comparatus p Exc. B, striking agreement between p and the text of B. some excerpts from the tragedies contained in the thirteenth century MS. 479i in the Royal Library, Brussels (Exc. B):
page 8 note 1 H. F. 592 decus E p d′s c; but d′s may have been the reading of A, and decus a conjecture of p
page 9 note 1 These lists do not include the following readings of c p, which disagree with the account of A given or implied by the Teubner edition of 1902, but which my MSS. show to be predominant or universal in: H. F. 8 tepenti, 109 furit362 agent (for gerant), 664 imiicti, 680 lethes, 769 puppim, 797 ferox, 826 caput, 1005 dextram, 1038 dabis, 1118 sera, 1123 seuo, 1181 mihi (for Lyci), 1191 ne [me p], (for tuae), 1319 hanc ego manum.
page 11 note 1 I am not sure of H. 0. 19T3, 1937, as I commentary on these points, and my English failed to examine the Italian MSS. of the authority is missing here.
page 13 note 1 Cf. description of Vat., During, Hermes, vol. 42, pp. 119–120.
page 14 note 1 At H.F. 536 the lemma of the commentary agrees with the error of c p multis (for mutis), though Treveth apparently interprets mutis, ‘quod dum gelatur non facit collisionem tumultuosam cum litoribus’.
page 14 note 2 This list shows how the text of Soc. etc. is partly dependent on, partly independent of, the reading of T.
page 18 note 1 If my information concerning Phoen. 115, Med. 168, Ag. 216, H.O. 1002 is correct, these partial steps towards the corruption of c are especially instructive.
