Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-27T20:34:32.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Five Dispensable Manuscripts of Achilles Tatius

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2013

M. D. Reeve
M. D. Reeve
Affiliation:
Exeter College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Four manuscripts of Achilles Tatius break off at i 10.3 τοῖς ῥήμασιν, and a fifth originally did so. All five begin with Longus, where they descend from Vat. gr. 1348. This manuscript too has Achilles Tatius after Longus, but complete, so that they may seem unlikely to descend from it in Achilles Tatius. According to the latest editor, E. Vilborg (Gothenburg 1955), they do not descend from it: they avoid three of its errors (p. lxii, lxvi). Expectation and evidence coincide, then, and that should be that.

Every fragmentary manuscript, however, goes back eventually to a complete one, and whether three errors will bear the weight of a stemma depends on others.

Type
Notes
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 101 , November 1981 , pp. 144 - 145
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1981

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 van Thiel, H., RhM civ (1961) 356–62;Google Scholar see also my full stemma in JHS xcix (1979) 165–7,Google Scholar hereafter ‘Reeve’.

2 I regard this as extant in one of them, Paris, gr. 2903 (cf. Reeve), but for the present purpose nothing turns on whether I am right.

3 As I am attacking Vilborg with his own weapons, I take his word for it that these readings are all errors. In fact I largely agree.

4 Certainly not Orsini's (cf. Reeve).

5 Published by Omont, H., Catalogues des manuscrits grecs de Fontaiuebleau sous François Ier et Henri II (Paris 1889) 371–2Google Scholar.

6 Cited by Delisle, L., Le cabinet des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Impériale i (Paris 1868) 152Google Scholar.

7 Reeve 166 n. 6.

8 Lefranc, A., Histoire du College de France (Paris 1893) 153–4,Google Scholar cited in the fullest treatment of Fondulo to be found, P. S. and Allen, H. M., Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami vi (Oxford 1926) 376Google Scholar. I owe to Carlotta Griffiths both this reference and the encouragement to consider the problem soluble. On Fondulo see also Zeller, J., La diplomatie française vers le milieu du XVIe siècle (Paris 1881) 97–9Google Scholar.

9 Delisle (n. 6) 156–7 = Correspondance politique de Guillaume Pellicier, ed. Tausserat-Radel, A. (Paris 1899) i 78–9Google Scholar.

10 Legrand, E., Bibliographie Hellénique i (Paris 1885) ccxiiiGoogle Scholar.

11 Omont, , Bibl, de l'Éc. des Ch. xlvi (1885) 613Google Scholar = Tausserat-Radel (n. 9) i 14.

12 Tausserat-Radel (n. 9) i xxxii.

13 Delisle (n. 6) 152.

14 So Omont (n. 5) iv–v; Tausserat-Radel (n. 9) i 14 n. 2.

15 Omont (n. 5) 371–2 nos 10, 13 + 43, and Rev. des Bibl. ii (1892) 154Google Scholar. On Albini, librarian of S. Antonio di Castello, see Bernardinello, S., Autografi greci e greco-latini in occidente (Padua 1979) 30, 71Google Scholar no. 81; on the importance of the library at the time, Zeller (n. 8) 116–19, with or without the modifications of Mercati, G., Studi e Testi lxxv (1938) 26–34Google Scholar.

16 In Reeve 166 I lazily followed Vilborg, p. xxi, lxxv, who followed Dörrie, p. 11.

17 See the edition of I. Hilberg (Vienna 1876) xlii.

18 Reeve 166 and before me Romero, F., Emerita xlvi (1978) 131–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Reeve 166 n. 8 on the authority of D. Harlfinger.

20 De Maio, R., Studi e Testi ccxix (1962) 299Google Scholar n. 1. His earliest dated manuscripts, Vat. gr. 205 and 324, were both written in 1536 ‘ad huius bibliothecae Palatinae usum’; cf. Vogel, and Gardthausen, , Die griechischen Schreiber des Mittelalters und der Renaissance (Leipzig 1909) 181–4,Google Scholar and de Meyier, K. A., Scriptorium xviii (1964) 261–2Google Scholar. Omont (n. 5) 37l no. 12, 17 no. 44, identifies a manuscript partly written by him, Cambridge Kk V 26, with one of Fondulo's purchases, ‘Αριστείδου καὶ τῶν ἄλλων περὶ μουσικῆς—strangely, because it contains Aristoxenus and no other writer on music. The manuscript in question is surely Paris, gr. 2456, which contains Aristides and ten other writers on music. Omont 129–30 no. 380 gives no provenance for it and attributes it to Valeriano Albini, on whom see above. Later, in his Inventaire sommaire des manuscrits grecs de la Bibliothèque Nationale i (Paris 1898)Google Scholar, he attributes it in one place to Albini (p. xxxiii), in another to Michael Damascenos (p. 264)—not the only discrepancy of the kind (cf. Vogel–Gardthausen 371 n. 6).