Auteur: Watt, William Smith
Titre: Some « codices » of Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum
Revue/Collection: "Hermes", XCIII
Annèe edition: 1965
Pages: 244-249
Mots-clès: Commentaires - Commenti - Commentaries, Philologie - Filologia - Philology
Description: Les "codices" souvent cités par les érudits des XVe-XVIIe siècles sont surévalués par l’édition de Shackleton Bailey (livres IX-XVI) [PhR] [Incipit :] Lost or unidentified manuscripts used by scholars of the 15th- I7th centuries still play a part in the constitution of many Latin texts. In the case of the Letters to Atticus two such manuscripts are of great importance: the codex used by CRATANDER and the codex Tornesianus used by LAMBINUS, TURNEBUS, and Bosius. Two others, the ’codex Faerni’ and the ’codex Antonianus’ used by MALAESPINA, are of minor importance. Apart from these four there are no lost manuscripts which are of any consequence whatsoever. Very different is the impression which is conveyed by the apparatus of Dr. D. R. SHACKLETON BAILEY’s recent edition2 of Books 9- I6; this is cluttered up with citations of ’codices’ or ’libri’ used by MANUTIUS, CORRADUS, MALAESPINA, LAMBINUS, URSINUS, POPMA, GRAEVIUS, and VERBURGIUS, to say nothing of entries like ’cod. Sichardi’, ’codd. Maffei duo’, ’codd. Memmi’,which are quite unintelligible except to the expert on the bibliography of Cicero’s Letters. To judge from his practice, S. B.’s principle appears to be that,wherever these scholars attributed a reading to a ’codex’, ’liber’, or ’exemplar’, they were referring to a manuscript, and that their testimony therefore deserves to be quoted as conferring manuscript authority on the reading in question, or as adding to the extant manuscript authority for that reading.
Oeuvres:
Sigle auteur: Watt 1965
Titre: Some « codices » of Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum
Revue/Collection: "Hermes", XCIII
Annèe edition: 1965
Pages: 244-249
Mots-clès: Commentaires - Commenti - Commentaries, Philologie - Filologia - Philology
Description: Les "codices" souvent cités par les érudits des XVe-XVIIe siècles sont surévalués par l’édition de Shackleton Bailey (livres IX-XVI) [PhR] [Incipit :] Lost or unidentified manuscripts used by scholars of the 15th- I7th centuries still play a part in the constitution of many Latin texts. In the case of the Letters to Atticus two such manuscripts are of great importance: the codex used by CRATANDER and the codex Tornesianus used by LAMBINUS, TURNEBUS, and Bosius. Two others, the ’codex Faerni’ and the ’codex Antonianus’ used by MALAESPINA, are of minor importance. Apart from these four there are no lost manuscripts which are of any consequence whatsoever. Very different is the impression which is conveyed by the apparatus of Dr. D. R. SHACKLETON BAILEY’s recent edition2 of Books 9- I6; this is cluttered up with citations of ’codices’ or ’libri’ used by MANUTIUS, CORRADUS, MALAESPINA, LAMBINUS, URSINUS, POPMA, GRAEVIUS, and VERBURGIUS, to say nothing of entries like ’cod. Sichardi’, ’codd. Maffei duo’, ’codd. Memmi’,which are quite unintelligible except to the expert on the bibliography of Cicero’s Letters. To judge from his practice, S. B.’s principle appears to be that,wherever these scholars attributed a reading to a ’codex’, ’liber’, or ’exemplar’, they were referring to a manuscript, and that their testimony therefore deserves to be quoted as conferring manuscript authority on the reading in question, or as adding to the extant manuscript authority for that reading.
Oeuvres:
Sigle auteur: Watt 1965
