Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2rsb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T10:21:05.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Four Lucretian emendations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2012

David Butterfield
David Butterfield*
Affiliation:
Christ's College, Cambridge
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

      3.912–18:
      hoc etiam faciunt ubi discubuere tenentque
      pocula saepe homines et inumbrant ora coronis,
      ex animo ut dicant: ‘breuis hic est fructus homullis;
      iam fuerit neque post umquam reuocare licebit.’915
      tamquam in morte mali cum primis hoc sit eorum,
      quod sitis exurat miseros atque arida †torrat†,
      aut aliae quoius desiderium insideat rei.

917 torrat OIQ: torret Oa.c. : terra FC : torreat Gifanius : torres Lachmann: tortet Romanes : torqueat Wakefield : torrant Bockemüller aridus torror Housman

The sole difficulty of this passages lies at the close of 917. If atque introduces a second (necessarily subjunctive) verb, torrat of the paradosis would be an unparalleled third-conjugation form and is therefore highly improbable; the ungrammatical torret in O pre-correction can be readily dismissed. I find little attraction in Lachmann's and Housman's introduction of nominal forms, particularly since 918 implies that the reference in 917 is to a single torment (i.e. sitis). Romanes (1934) 25 conjectured tortet, which is supported neither by Lucretian usage nor the corpus of extant Latin.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Cambridge Classical Journal , Volume 55 , 2009, pp. 49 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published online by Cambridge University Press 2009

Footnotes

1

I am most grateful to Prof. E. J. Kenney, Dr M. Deufert and the anonymous readers for CCJ for their helpful remarks throughout.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, J. N. (1982) The Latin sexual vocabulary, London.Google Scholar
Bailey, C. (1947) T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex, Oxford.Google Scholar
Bockemüller, F. (1873–1874) T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex, Stade.Google Scholar
Brieger, A. (1899) T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Brown, R. D. (1987) Lucretius on love and sex: a commentary on De rerum natura IV, 1030–1287, Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruno, [O.] (1872) Bemerkungen zu einigen Stellen des Lucretius, Progr., Harburg.Google Scholar
Butterfield, D. J. (2008) ‘Sigmatic ecthlipsis in Lucretius’, Hermes 136, 188–205.Google Scholar
Creech, T. (1695) T. Lucretii Cari De rerum natura libri sex, Oxford.Google Scholar
Deufert, M. (1996) Pseudo-Lukrezisches im Lukrez: die unechten Verse in Lukrezens “De rerum natura”, Berlin and New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deufert, M. (1999) ‘Lukrez und Marullus: ein kurzer Blick in die Werkstatt eines humanistischen Interpolators’, RhM 142, 210–223.Google Scholar
Ernout, A. and Robin, L. (1962) Lucrèce De rerum natura. Commentaire exégétique et critique (2nd edn.), Paris.Google Scholar
Giussani, C. (1896–1898) T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex, Turin.Google Scholar
Heinze, R. (1897) T. Lucretius Carus De rerum natura Buch III, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Hoppe, C. (1893) ‘Duplex. Lisae. Torres’, ALL 8, 587–8.Google Scholar
Housman, A. E. (1972) Diggle, J. & Goodyear, F. R. D. (eds.), The classical papers of A.E. Housman, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kenney, E. J. (1971) Lucretius De rerum natura Book III, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lachmann, K. (1850) T. Lucretii Cari De rerum natura libri sex, Berlin.Google Scholar
Lambinus, D. (1583) T. Lucretii Cari De rerum natura libri sex (4th edn.), Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Merrill, W. A. (1907) T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex, New York.Google Scholar
Müller, K. (1975) T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex, Zurich.Google Scholar
Munro, H. A. J. (1886) T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex (4th edn.), Cambridge.Google Scholar
Romanes, N. H. (1934) Notes on the text of Lucretius, Oxford.Google Scholar
Romanes, N. H. (1935) Further notes on Lucretius, Oxford.Google Scholar
Smith, M. F. (1992) Lucretius De rerum natura (Loeb Classical Library) (3rd edn.), London and Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
Wakefield, G. (1813) T. Lucretii Cari De rerum natura libri sex (2nd edn.), Glasgow.Google Scholar
Watt, W. S. (2003) ‘Lucretiana’, PCPhS 49, 158–60.Google Scholar
Watt, W. S. (2004) ‘Error Wattianus’, CQ 54, 658–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, M. L. (1961) ‘Lucretius iii. 916–18’, CR n.s. 11, 203–4.Google Scholar