Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T00:29:28.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Twelfth-Century Manuscript of Cicero's De Officiis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

R. H. Martin
Affiliation:
THE UNIVERSITY, LEDDS

Extract

The Brotherton Collection, which now forms part of the Library of the University of Leeds, contains a manuscript of Cicero's De Officiis which is usually assigned to the twelfth century. On page 3 of the catalogue of the Brotherton Library (printed for private circulation, Leeds, 1931) the manuscript is incorrectly said to contain ‘DE OFFICIIS LIBER PRIMUS’. In fact the manuscript contains all three books with the exception of nine leaves (seven of them from Book II) which have been removed. At present the manuscript consists of 41 folios on vellum measuring 11 in. X 7½ in. Ff. 39–41 are written by a later (14th-century?) hand.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1951

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 35 note 1 The missing leaves contain the following portions of the text: (a) i. 102. 8 abiciunt oboedientiam …109. 5 dum quod velint con. (b) ii. 22.9 aut metu, ne vi parere cogantur … 73. 7 multa populariter, turn illud male, non (c) iii. 38. 9 aeneumque equum, ut ferunt fabulae … 45. 8 Qui cum ad diem se.

page 35 note 2 According to the catalogue the following manuscripts in the Brotherton Collection also belonged to Dr. Askew: Commentary on Psalms xviii-cxxix (Greek: 2 vols. quarto); Anastasius (Greek: 1 volume quarto); Excerpts from Ptolemy (Greek, with numerous diagrams: 3 vols. 8vo). All the volumes including the Cicero bound in old russian morocco gilt.

page 38 note 1 I have said that the source from which Ashew got the manuscript is unknown, Is it something more than a coincidence that the manuscript is closely dependent on V, that V was associated with the family of Vossius and Leyden, and that Askew weems to have started collecting about the time of his days as a student at Leyden?