No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2009
446 1 Let me call attention to a copy of Statius' Silvae, Florence 1480 (Auct. N. inf. i. 6), with this entry at V. ii. 48 ‘ in antiquo erat venivea.’
446 2 Not however No. 112 of the ‘Poetae in Duodecimo’ in the ‘ Bibliotheca Heinsiana,’ viz. ‘Terentius, exc. Rob. Stephanus, 1540…Perpetuus Jos. Scaligeri comes, cujus multa leguntur.’ What has become of this volume?
446 3 Here are their present press-marks: Auct. S v. 10–12 (= Bibl. Heins. ‘Poetae in 12mo.’ No. 37), Auct. S v. 7–9 (= do. No. 38), Auct. S v. 5 (= No. 648 of ‘Poetae in 8vo.’), Auct. S v. 2 (=No. 637 of do.), Auct. S v. 1 (perhaps= No. 355 of do.), Auct. ii. R 6. 25 (= No. 641 of do.), Auct. ii. R 6. 23 (perhaps= No. 640 of do.). A good deal maybe learnt about the several MSS. from the descriptions jotted on fly-leaves by Heinsius. And the enquiry of a recent editor, whether Heinsius’ ‘codex Neapolitanus’ definitely ascribed the ‘de Medicamine Faciei’ to Ovid may be answered from Heinsius' entry on p. 323 of Auct. S v. 10: ‘ In cod. Neap. S. Johannis Carbonarii post Artem et Amores leguntur, Ovidivs De Philomela, De Pvlice, De Medicamine Avrivm (constat versibus 21), De Specvlo (est de medicamine faciei), DE Nvce, De cvcvlo, De Hvmoribvs, De Lvdo Schaccorvm. Omnia nugatoria.’
446 4 Auct. S v. 13–15 (= Bibl. Heins. ‘Poetae in 12 mo.’ No. 36), Auct. S v. 6 (‘Poetae in 8vo.’, No. 631), Auct. ii. R 6. 21 (= do., No. 639). But Auct. S v. 3 and 4, with collations, apparently by Nic, Faber, do not seem to have come from the ‘ Bibliotheca Heinsiana.’
446 5 So styled in the last marginal note (on Dom. Mars. 3.). Elsewhere ‘codex vetustus,’ ‘codex veterrimus,’ ‘codex vetus,’ c. antiquissimus, &c.
446 6 Ad. ii. 26. Securum… Venus] sic Aurispa Seneca aliter presidio noctis sentio adesse deam.