Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:55:03.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Abstrvsa Glossary and the Liber Glossarvm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

W. M. Lindsay
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The wholesome severity of publishers' regulations restricted the small Teubner edition of Festus almost to the actual text of the archetype MSS. of Festus and his epitomator Paulus. The flimsy material to be picked up from mediaeval glossaries was excluded from this small and solid structure and reserved for the ampler space and freer air of a second volume, a volume which should attempt a reconstruction of Festus from Paulus' excerpts, like an antiquarian's reconstruction of the Forum from the ruins that now remain. In Goetz' Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum we have apographs of the chief MS. of each important glossary, and in his Thesaurus Glossarum Emendatarum we have all the glosses edited and arranged in dictionary form; but much spade-work has to be done before these glosses can be used by an editor of Festus. Some has been done already by a pupil of Goetz in a Jena dissertation (A. Dammann de Festo pseudo-Philoxeni auctore, 1894), who shows the so-called Philoxenus Glossary to be compiled in part from Festus, and collects and emends its Festus glosses. Yet even this piece of work is not complete. For our (we may say) unique MS. of Philox., a mere ninth-century MS. (of Laon ?), is an imperfec record of that large bilingual collection which has left so many traces of itself in the glossaries of the British Isles and of those parts of the Continent which received English or Irish culture. The Ab Absens Glossary, for example, printed by Goetz (C.G.L. IV. pp. 404–427) from a North Frankish MS. of Charlemagne's time, has (in the A-section) a number of Festus glosses from this collection which are not recorded in our MS. of Philox. and are accordingly ignored by Dammann.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , July 1917 , pp. 119 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1917

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 121 note 1 A palaeographer's desideratum is the mapping out of the times and places of Spanish predominance on French soil and details of the survival of Spanish script and the mannerisms of Spanish scribes in the monasteries of Aquitaine. Who will undertake this research?

page 123 note 1 Generally identified with the Abbot of Iona (end of seventh century), though the mere fact of that the abbot shews some acquaintance with Virgil is the weakest of weak evidenee. I thought I had found stronger in the absurd note on Iolla (Ecl. 3, 76): Iolla enim deus Mantuanorum; for this might be the blunder of an Irishman who pronounced ‘ídol’ (the Irish form of idolum) as ‘i-ol’ (or something like it). But Thurneysen, (Handb. Altir. p. 71)Google Scholar declares this Irish effacement ot intervocalic d to be a century or two later than the abbot. Is deus a mistake for dominus (or for dives)?

page 126 note 1 The symbol represents ‘de glossis,’ and ‘glossa’ has the sense of ‘glossarium,’ as in the title of the Second Amplonian Glossary: Duarum Conscriptio Glossarum in Unam, etc.

page 127 note 1 It should too be remembered that mediaeval scribes often use ‘alibi’ (188, 37; 197, 21) with mere conjectural emendations.

page 127 note 2 The lemma Haruspicina (206, 37) seems rather an excerpt of a scholium on Aen. 11, 759 (of Donatus?) then the full form of the Abol. gloss. Arrunx (20, 25; a Virgil gloss ?).

page 128 note 1 To be distinguished from the items of the ‘Glossar mit den zahlreichen Citaten’ (Goetz). Thus 227, 23 is an item culled from these Examples from Authors (often Virgil, but also Paulinus of Nola s.v. Acerbus, Dracontius, etc.) which shews us that the (Carolingian ?) writer used Donatus' commentary on Virgil. The scholium cited was apparently on Geo. 1, 374 (imprudentibus imber obfuit). His MS. seems to have had the miswriting ‘sensa’ for sensu (in Donatus' scholium on Geo. 2, 247. with Goetz). From it probably he gets his Plautus citations s. vv. Palumbes (230, 20), Rudentem (241, 22), Sinus (245, 4), etc. These Examples from Authors should be investigated and the separating-line between them and Abstr. determined.

page 129 note 1 Like 240, 39 Replum: species <uestis> muliebris. Ne peplum facere debuisset.