Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:12:56.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Greek Novelists, Miscellanea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

John Jackson
John Jackson
Affiliation:
Caldbeck, Cumberland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A word of apology may be due for the loose arrangement of this paper; but, as an orderly progress through the 600 odd pages of the Didot Scriptores Erotici was out of the question, I have simply taken a number of passages on which I had corrections to propose, appending to each a few lines of comment, and adding, where feasible, a selection of texts amenable, in my judegment, to the same or an analogous treatment. A reading cited with no mark of orgin may be taken as the consenting manuscript tradition (trivialities excepted); an asterisk denotes a conjecture of my own.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 1935 , pp. 52 - 57
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1935

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 53 note 1 Cf. Char. I 11 πηγ⋯ δ⋯ ἦν αὐτ⋯θι πολλο⋯ καἰ καθαρο⋯ ν⋯ματος—a passage which might perhaps be used for the correction of IV 2:—τ⋯ν ϒ⋯ρ πηϒ⋯ν ⋯νεὑρηκα το⋯ μεϒ⋯λου ν ⋯ μ α τ ο ς (*: αϊματος).In any case, Reiske's λ⋯ματος is wrong.

2 These trifling misadventures with final and initial consonants are common enough in the text of the Erotici. More curious than most is, possibly. Ach. Tat. IV 2:—ĸεϕαλή, περιϕερ⋯ς, оύσμιĸρά ⋅ έγγùς ϊππον παρεια⋯. Achilles Tatius, in a παρέкβασις featuting the river-horse, would if I read him aright, have reject ού μικρά as frigid, ού Σμικρά as Ogygian; and I think the critic who regularized the concord κεϕαλή… ού σμικρόν would have done better with:—κεϕαλή περιϕερής⋅ ούς μικρbν*⋅ έγγὐς ἴππου παρειαl.

page 55 note 1 As to the augment, present here and absent in тέθυто, it is necessarily omitted in Charition, Achilles Tatius, and Heliodorus after a long vowel or diphthong: otherwise, it is employed, or not, at pleasure. Hence the need for the following alterations:—Ach. Tat. I Ι θαλάσση [⋯]πεπε⋯σμην, though hiatus is allowed sparingly after v. The tense should be restored at Ach. Tat. II 10 ⋯π⋯σπαστο (*: ⋯πεσπ⋯το MV) μ⋯ν ⋯ Kλε⋯ω δ⋯ παρθ⋯νος ⋯ν τῷ περιπ⋯τῳ κατελ⋯ γεπτо, where the vulgate ⋯πεδπ⋯σθη has no authority worth the name; at VII 6 παρεδκεν⋯δμην (*: παρεδκεναδ⋯μην); probably at Heliod. II 16 ⋯πηκρ⋯ατο (*: ⋯πηκρ⋯το); and at VIII 9 παρεδ⋯δοτο (*: παραδιδοται) … καἰ ⋯νεβ⋯βλητο; not, however, at V 14 γραφῇ γἄρ ἔζεστο κα⋯ ε⋯ς μ⋯μημαξῴων ⋯κοιλα⋯νετο (⋯κεκο⋯λαντο H. Richards). Compare, inter alia, I 28 τ⋯ δ⋯ δ⋯ ἧν φὐσεως ἔργον… ⋯λλ⋯ τ⋯χνης λῃστνικ⋯ς… καἰ χειρ⋯ν A⋯γνπτ⋯ων ⋯ρνγμα, πρ⋯ς σὺλων φνλακ⋯ν περι⋯ργως κ о ι λ α ι ν ⋯ μ ε ν о ν. εἵργαστо δ⋯ ὦδ⋯ πως κτ⋯.

page 57 note 1 When in full feather, naturally; as at Ach. Tat. I 1 “Eρως, μικρ⋯ν παιδἰον ⋯πλὠκει τ⋯ πτερ⋯ν, ἥρτητο <τ⋯ν> φαρ⋯τπαν, ⋯κπ⋯τει τ⋯ π⋯ρ, Eust. H. et H. II 11 ⋯πλα φ⋯ρει κατ' ἄνδρ⋯ν. π⋯ρ κατἄ γυναικ⋯ν, τ⋯ξα κατ⋯ θηρ⋯ν, κατἄ πτην⋯ν τ⋯ πτερ⋯ν, etc. For passages like Ach. Tat. II 4, ⋯ρᾷς αὐτο⋯ τ⋯ σχ⋯μα ⋯ς ⋯στι στρατιωτικ⋯ν. τ⋯ξα κα⋯ φαρ⋯τρα κα⋯ β⋯λη κα⋯ π⋯ρ, obviously do not come into the count.