No CrossRef data available.
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.
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
The most reliable manuscript of Statius' Achilleid is the Puteaneus (P), and its authority, against the group QKC, is frequently upheld only by the Codex Etonensis (E). The readings of this manuscript (Eton College library), which contains, apart from the Achilleid, Maximian, Ovid's Remedium Atnoris and other poems, were collated by C. Schenkl, Wiener Studien, iv (1882), 96 ff., and were used by H. W. Garrod for the O.C.T. of Statius: Klotz in the Teubner 2nd edition merely notes the readings of Schenkl and of the Oxford text. Unfortunately these are neither complete nor always accurate; and the latter should be corrected as follows:
1. In three passages the Oxford text differs from the reading of PEKQ without noting the fact: Ach. i. 145 Non superant is not, as implied, the MS. reading, but Havet's conjecture: PEKQ have nam superant. 306 PEKQ have impulsam (inpulsam), not impulsum. 680 PEKQ ibi, not ubi.
page 45 note 1 Da tollere fructus (i.e. fructum ferre) might even be accepted, but da pellere luctus (P) seems the best reading.
page 45 note 2 There is thus no MS. support of Menke's conjecture sacrarit, accepted by Garrod and Klotz.
page 45 note 3 Thus tu uisa is without MS. support.
page 45 note 4 e.g. e for ae (commonly), omission or addition of h, mi for mihi, doubling of consonants or the opposite, misspelling of proper names, etc.
page 46 note 1 This is the reading of all except P, which has sordent; but sordet may well be right.
page 46 note 2 This is the reading of all except P, and may be right.