Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:38:40.016Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Palaeographical Notes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

N. Wilson
N. Wilson
Affiliation:
Merton College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The writer recently examined the two palimpsest folios of the manuscript Parisinus gr. 107B, otherwise known as the Codex Claromontanus, which contain most of the surviving passages of Euripides' Phaethon. Despite the damaging effects of the chemical reagents used in the nineteenth century the text is not wholly illegible and a collation was made where possible. A comparison of this with the standard texts published by Nauck, von Arnim, and Volmer revealed some puzzling discrepancies; it looks as if recent editors have not examined the manuscript, basing their work on their predecessors' false reports of the collation by Blass. Nauck writes (p. 599): ‘quoniam vero programmata academica in paucorum manus perveniunt, haud gravabor quae Blass legit hoc loco repetere’. von Arnim shows in his preface (p. 2) that he copied from Nauck, and Volmer says (p. 9): ‘J. de Arnim omnia tragoediae Euripideae fragmenta contulit in Supplemento Euripideo, quem librum prae aliis commentationibus in fabula restituenda adhibeo’. In future scholars who turn their attention to the Phaethon would do well to go back to the collation by Blass, but this too seemed faulty to me at certain points.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 10 , Issue 3-4 , November 1960 , pp. 199 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1960

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 199 note 1 T.G.F., ed. 2, pp. 599 ff.Google Scholar

page 199 note 2 Supplementum Euripideum, pp. 68 ff.Google Scholar

page 199 note 3 Diss. Monasterii Guestfalorum, 1930; I use his numbering of the lines.Google Scholar

page 199 note 4 Prog. Kiliae, 1885. This is superior to earlier collations, which in any case did not include the fragmentary columns.

page 202 note 1 N.P.S., pl. 79.

page 202 note 2 Edition of Isaeus, p. xii.

page 202 note 3 Short Manual of Greek Palaeography, p. 40.Google Scholar

page 202 note 4 Minor Attic Orators, vol. i, xi.Google Scholar

page 202 note 5 Dölger, in Archiv f. Urkundenforschung, xv. (1948), 400.Google Scholar

page 202 note 6 Dölger, Facsimiles byzantinischer Kaiscrwkunden, no. 25, with his comment.

page 202 note 7 Dölger, Aus den Schatzkammern des Heiligen Berges, pl. 5 and 7, gives a facsimile of both the documents in question.

page 203 note 1 Ep. 33, ed. Treu.

page 203 note 2 S.B. Berlin, 1909, 1030–46.

page 203 note 3 MS. gr. 38; mentioned by Gardthausen, , Griechische Paläographie, ed. 2, ii. 427.Google Scholar

page 203 note 4 Storia della tradizione, ed. 2, p. 141.Google Scholar

page 203 note 5 Scrivener-Miller, , An Introduction to the Criticism of the N.T., p. 55.Google Scholar

page 203 note 6 Post, L. A., The Vatican Plato and its Relations, p. 10.Google Scholar

page 204 note 1 Garitte, G., Catalogue des manuscrits georgiens littéraires de Sinai, p. 281.Google Scholar

page 204 note 2 Dumbarton Oaks Papers, viii. 38.Google Scholar

page 204 note 3 Migne, , P.G. 108. 1025.Google Scholar

page 204 note 4 Ibid. 95. 372.