In 2007 I published the first part of some manuscript notes on the text of Menander Rhetor, which I attributed to F. Jacobs (1764–1847).Footnote 1 I now present the second part of these notes, alongside a global assessment of all the coniectanea and corrections by F. Jacobs on the text of this rhetor.
Let me first briefly recall the ‘status quaestionis’. Some manuscript notes were found (MS of Sinner 39, fols. 9-26) at the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale in Florence among the papers belonging to the Swiss philologist G.R.L. Sinner (his published bibliography is dated, according to W. Pökel,Footnote 2 between 1829 and 1865). These notes were written anonymously in Latin, without signature, with critical observations on the text by different authors, among them the important Greek rhetor Menander of Laodicea (third century a.d.). There are a total of 128 passages to be discussed from the edition by L. Heeren (Göttingen, 1785).Footnote 3 This would be, therefore, the terminus post quem of the elaboration of these notes; the terminus ante quem is the edition of C. Walz (Rhetores Graeci, vol. IX [Sttuttgart-Tübingen, 1836]), which the author of the manuscript notes, but does not cite. My first surprise was to verify that nearly fifty of these notes had already been partially or fully published in a journal, the Allgemeine Schulzeitung, in 1828,Footnote 4 by another well-known philologist—and almost contemporary of Waltz—F.W. Jacobs (1764–1847). Another 80 notes still remain unpublished, however. F. Jacobs was a prolific German philologist who published, from the end of the eighteenth century, the large bibliography mentioned above, mostly on Greek textual criticism. Of these publications, his editions of Theocritus and other Greek pastoral poets, the Greek Anthology, Euripides, Xenophon and Achilles Tatius are particularly noteworthy. The manuscript shows the result of a work in fieri, prior to the publication in the journal. For example, in fol. 11 of the manuscript the note ‘= Sch. Z’ appears in the margins, which corresponds without doubt to the journal Allgemeine Schulzeitung, in which some of these notes were published in 1828. The unpublished notes, however, do not have annotations in the margins. Some of the notes are still only rough; for example, those made in line 1 do not give the exact reference of the page of Heindorf's book that Jacobs cites. In another instance on the same page (line 12, on 335.29, Russell-Wilson), we find deletions in his correction made by the author. This clearly indicates that the manuscript predates the partial publication in the journal: first, ἐκ τῶν ἱερῶν; then, ἐκ τῶν θείων; finally, ἐκ τῶν καὶ τῶν, which was published in Allgemeine Schulzeitung ([1828], 651) and which is the only reading given in Russell-Wilson's edition. It is noteworthy that very negative judgements on Heeren's proposals are softened or even turned into praise in the published version (cf. 355.21-3, 356.10, 358.8).
In conclusion, it seems that almost all of the corrections published in the journal Allgemeine Schulzeitung already appear in the manuscript (with some exceptions, such as 342.7, 358.8, 365.25), while other corrections made to the manuscript were not published or appeared somehow altered (additions, omissions, etc.). Those published subsequently carry—although not always (cf. 351.5)—the abbreviation Sch. Zeit. in the margin of the manuscript. Where there are several manuscript corrections to the same passage, the second correction is the one eventually published in the journal, as well as the note added in the margin of the manuscript (cf. 332.14, 335.29, 344.2, 346.6, 351.28).
My working hypothesis is that the totality of these manuscript notes on the text of Menander rhetor must be attributed to F. Jacobs. I believe that for unknown reasons they were credited to G. Sinner, amongst whose papers those notes are currently preserved. Perhaps these are the preliminary manuscripts that Jacobs sent to Sinner for discussion, prior to its publication in the journal? From such a plethora of documents, about one third of the notes was selected and emended (those already published in the journal Allgemeine Schulzeitung). Most of them remain unpublished. There are two more possibilities to consider: either Sinner collected some of Jacobs's papers when he died, with the purpose of publishing them posthumously (although he did not manage to accomplish this task), or perhaps there was some sort of collaboration between the two philologists (such as the edition of the Platonic Crito of 1837).
Whatever the case may be, the most important thing to bear in mind is that the textual notes are very valuable. In fact, those already published enjoy recognition amongst editors of Menander rhetor: the most recent editors of the author, D.A. Russell and N.G. Wilson (Menander Rhetor [Oxford, 1981]), frequently mention the name of Jacobs in their critical apparatus and come to accept some of his conjectures as genuine (cf. 343.23, 356.10, 358.28, 364.2, 366.30). Despite this, if my hypothesis is correct, these editors were not aware of the other manuscript notes made by Jacobs. For this reason, they may have attributed to later philologists some corrections that already appear in the manuscript: 331.8 (Walz); 332.4 (Walz); 332.6 (Spengel); 340.8 (Spengel); 344.3 (Bursian); in 336.28, the manuscript correction made by Jacobs, εὐψυχοτέροις, is similar to that of Ernesti, ἐμψυχοτέροις, accepted by Russell-Wilson in their edition. I have seen other notes by Jacobs recently confirmed by manuscripts that until recently had not been taken into consideration, such as the Matrit. 4647, the Scor. Σ.III.15 or Vat. 728: for example, 332.4, 361.6 or 366.30. Finally, other notes are of interest, regardless of whether they have anticipated subsequent corrections or have been confirmed by manuscripts of which Jacobs surely did not know, such as the recentiores, or which he consulted only partly (such as manuscripts P and Z, thanks to a few notes by Bast). For example: 333.13 ἐν τιμῇ ἦσαν (for ἐτίμησαν); 339.16 ἀήθους (for μεγέθους); 341.6 υἱὸς ἔρως (for ὕστερον); 345.14 ὑετῷ vel αὐτόθεν (for αὐτοῦ); 349.22 ὅρος (for μέρος); 350.27 δῆλον (for αὕτη); 352.19 πέλματι (for κέλητι);Footnote 5 352.29 ἀνέσεως (for θέσεως).
The critical talent displayed by F. Jacobs is clear. In 1836 Walz—who knew only of the notes published in Allgemeine Schulzeitung—greeted Jacobs, on account of the quality of his coniectanea, as ‘senex egregius, verum Musarum ágalma’. If only he had been able to enjoy all of the German scholar's work!
What follows is the edition of the second part of the manuscript that I attribute to F. Jacobs. The original orthography is respected, except in some cases (for example, eius for ejus or cum for quum). The original's underlining is not reproduced, except in the case of Greek words (edited in italics). Underlined text in Jacobs's original is reproduced in italics. Any unsafe reading that is not clear in the copy of the manuscript on which I have worked is edited with a question mark. The corrections and the additions made by Jacobs in the margin are transcribed in the footnotes. Jacobs refers to Heeren's edition with the abbreviation ‘H’. After the edition, I will comment on all of the observations of F. Jacobs on the text of Menander rhetor, distinguishing between those that have already been published (AS I and II) and those that appear in the manuscript (MS).
MANUSCRIPT OF F. JACOBS (II)
‘Sect. II, c. I, p. 57. ἔπαινος μὲν γὰρ χώρας … διττῶς. Num διττός ? aut διττῶς iungendum cum διελέσθαι.
P. 58. Footnote 6 ἐν γὰρ τῷ περὶ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τὸ τῶν ὁρῶν συνείληπται. Scr. ὁρῶν. Vitium esse videtur typographicum.
P. 59. ἐπαινεῖν δεῖ. Frustra H. Footnote 7 lacunam hic esse existimabat, repetens verba: δεῖ οὖν ἐπαινεῖν. Nihil excidit; sed verba πρὸς ἡδονὴν ἢ πρὸς ὠφέλειαν arcte nectenda cum ἐκθήσομεν δύω, quod praecessit.
Ib. καὶ δύο πεδίων ληΐοις κατεστεμμένων. Unde profectum sit δύο, autFootnote 8 quid sub hac voce latebat, se assequi negat H. qui τῶν inseruit. Scribendum: καὶ δὴ πεδ. Sic plane habet Cod. Par. ap. Bast ad Gre. Cor. p. 410.
Ib. διότι οἱ καρποὶ οἱ γνησιώτεροι ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς αὐτοῦ κλυζομένεης–. Editor οὐ inseruit post αὐτοῦ, quod de regione agatur a mari remota, quasi κλύζεσθαι tantum (?) de fluctibus terram inundantibus usurpetur. Erat cum pro αὐτοῦ coniungerem ὑετῷ, sed hoc sponte intelligitur, et bene habet αὐτοῦ. Poterat etiam αὐτόθεν scribere eodem sensu. Optimos fructus dicit gigni in regione sua ipsius natura aut fontibus aut imbre rigata.Footnote 9
P. 59. εἰ δὲ νῆσον ἐπαινοίης, καὶ πρὸς ἡδονήν – comma promoverim post νῆσον. In iis, quae sequuntur: εἰ δὲ νήσῳ ἐοικυῖα, malim, neu ratio vacillet, ἐοικυῖαν.
P. 60. καὶ εἰ μὲν πανφόρος ὅτι γυναικὸς παιδίον ἔοικεν. Varia hic tentat H. sed noli dubitare ad fertilitatem uteri muliebris spectari. Fortasse legendum: ὅτι γυναικὸς νηδυῒ ἔοικεν, quod facile in παιδὶ depravari potuit.Footnote 10
P. 61. τὰ δὲ ἄδοξα. Haec verba damnat, ut temere inserta; nam ἐγκώμια ἄδοξα ne sub cogitationem quidem cadere posse(t). Verum cum sequatur: ἀμφίδοξα δέ, ὅδε πῆ μὲν ἔνδοξά ἐστι, πῆ δὲ ἄδοξα – apparet, cogitari posse talia encomia. Et ipse scriptor paulo post commemorat χώρας ἀφόρους, ἀνύδρους, ψαμμώδεις quae omnia sunt in vitiis, sophistica tamen arte in laudem possunt trahi.
P. 62. πόλεις δὲ ἐξ ὧν ἐπαινεῖν. χρὴ H. inseruit, perperam. Praecessit verbale ἐγκωμιαστέον, unde necessitatis notio assumenda. Vid. Lex. Gr. p. 145.
Cap. II, p. 63. τὸ γένος, τὰς πράξεις, ἐπιτηδεύσεις. Repetendus articulus τὰς ἐπιτ. aut καὶ ponendum.
Ib. ὅπως δὲ – ἐργαζόμεθα. Scr. ἐργαζώμεθα.
P. 63. εἰ γάρ τις τὸν οὐρανὸν δοκιμάσῃ. Fortasse δοκιμάσαι.
P. 64. τὰ πλεῖστα τούτων πειρᾶσθαι δεῖ πεσόντα αὐτῇ ἀποδεικνύναι. Heeren. emendavit παρόντα.Footnote 11
P. 65. οἱ δὲ καὶ μετόπωρον. ἦρ emendavit H. at haec forma poetis relinquenda. Scr. ἔαρ δὲ.
P. 66. τακτέον αὐτά· ταῦτα δὲ ἐφ’ἑκάστῃ καὶ τὰ τρία ταῦτα θεωρεῖται. Vera videtur editoris correctio κατὰ τρία ταῦτα, sed quod idem αὐτά ut natum ex ταῦτα delet, fallitur. Scribe: τακτέον. αὐτὰ ταῦτα δὲ – Fortasse servari poterit καὶ τὰ τρία. Potest enim commemorari frugum, quod unaquaeque regio profert, genus; tum etiam tria haec, tempus, quo gignuntur; earum qualitas, denique copia.
P. 66. ἢ χρόνῳ μὲν ἢ ἀκριβείᾳ, καὶ πλεῖστον τοῦ ἔτους χρόνον παραμένοντα. Fortasse scribendum: καὶ χρόνον μέν, εἰ ἀκριβείᾳ, γίνεται scil. fruges autem dicuntur nasci ἀκριβείᾳ, cum suo quaeque tempore, tum cum exspectantur, proveniunt. Fortasse tamen malis εἰ σὺν ἀκριβείᾳ.
Ib. ὠφέλειαν δὲ ἢ ταῖς αἰσθήσεσι τερπνηγενέσιν ὄψεσι καὶ ταῖς ἄλλαις.Footnote 12 In his recte editor ἡδονὴν δὲ correxit: nam ὠφέλειαν ex praecedentibus temere repetitur. Proxima minus bene tentavit, scribens: τερπνὰ γίνεται, ὡς ὄψεσι. Scribendum: ἡδονὴν δὲ εἰ ταῖς αἰσθήσεσι τερπνά, γεύσεσιν, ὄψεσι –
P. 67. ἐὰν μὲν τοίνυν ἠπειρωτικὸς εἴη, καὶ πλεῖστον ἀπέχῃ. Ad sententiam implendam H. de suo addidit ἀπὸ τῆς θαλάττης. Minore mutatione res poterit confici, si scripseris: ἐὰν – ἠπειρωτικὸς (ἠπειρωτικὴ?) ᾖ, ἢ ἁλὸς πλεῖστον ἀπέχῃ. Aut, quod non minus lene: ἢ καὶ πλεῖστον ἁλὸς ἀπέχῃ. Nam cum αολ scribatur per compendium, facile hoc ante απ′ negligi potuit.
P. 67. τὸ γὰρ τοιοῦτον μέρος ἀδύνατον περὶ στοιχείων διὰ τὸ ἄπειρον περιλαβεῖν στοιχείοις ex coniectura edidit H. Footnote 13 Sed fieri possit, ut rhetor scripserit: ἀδύνατον περαίνειν, στοιχείων διὰ τὸ ἄπειρον. Verbum περαίνειν et περαίνεσθαι enarrandi et recensendi significatione illustravit Wyttemb. Bibl. Gr. III, 2, p. 26.
Ib. ἐὰν δὲ παραθαλάττιος εἴη καὶ ἐπ’ αἰγιαλοῖς. Scr. ᾖ, ἢ καὶ – ut paulo ante sequitur: ὅτι ἀμφότερα ὑπάρχει τὰ ἀγαθά. Fortasse: ἀμφοτέρων, ut paulo post: τὰ δὲ ἀμφοτέρων ἀγαθὰ ἀνείληφεν.
P. 67. πρὸς μὲν τοίνυν τὴν περιοικίδα χώραν θεωρεῖται ἄν. θεωροῖτο ἄν legendum.
P. 68. καὶ ὅτι ἐντὸς τὴν αὐτὴν χώραν φυλάττει. αὑτῆς corrigit H. Rectius scribes: τὴν ἄλλην χώραν.
Ib. ἢ ὀμφαλὸς ἀσπίδος, ὥσπερ Ἀριστείδης εἶπε κατειληφώς, κεῖται ἀσφαλῶς Heer. corrigit, parum probabiliter. Videtur potius legendum: ἀσπίδος, ὥσπερ Ἀρ. εἶπε, ἄκρα κατειληφώς. Aristides in Panath. p. 99 hac imagine utitur, verbis tamen non nihil diversis.
P. 69. De urbe in montibus posita, campisque circumdata, dici poterit orator: ὅτι μέρος ἐστι πρὸς τοὺς ἀφικνουμένους, ὥσπερ ἀκρόπολις αὕτη κατείληφεν ἀφ’ ὑψηλοῦ πυρσεύουσα. Ob ultimum vocabulum Heeren. μέρος mutavit in φάρος, deinde ὅτι τὸ ὄρος inseruit ante ὥσπερ. Minore negotio rem confeceris scribens: ὅτι ὅρος ἐστὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἀφ., ὥσπερ ἀκρόπολις τὰ ὕψη κατειληφυῖα,Footnote 14 ἀφ’ ὑψηλοῦ πυρσεύουσα, quod quasi meta et terminus est advenis, tamquam arx summitatem tenens, inde a vertice splendens et (?) signum extollens. Hoc sensu ap. Dion. Chrys. Or. VII, p. 231, de Nauplio: καὶ γὰρ οἶμαι πυρσεύειν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῶν ἄκρων τοῖς πλέουσιν.
P. 70. in aquis laudandam esse praeter utilitatem et voluptatem, etiam copiam: πρὸς πλῆθος καὶ αὐτοφυγίαν. Heeren. ἀφθονίαν in textu posuit. Tu scribe καὶ αὐτοφυΐαν, quod sponte nascuntur, i. e. τὸ αὐτοφυές. Sic emendaveram, nec aliter esse in Cod. Paris. 1741 monuit Bast in Thes. Gr. L. IV, p. 10289, D, ed. Valp.
P. 71. εἰ δὲ πολὺ ἄδοξοι καὶ οὐκ ἐπιφανεῖς. Male Heeren. εἰ δὲ πόλεις. Cum certo certius scribendum sit: εἰ δὲ πάλιν ἄδοξοι, contra.
P. 72. αὕτη γὰρ τὰ καθ’ ἑκάστη(ν) σχήματα ὡς ἀδύνατος περιλαβεῖν. αὐτὰ γὰρ emendavit H. quod probarem, nisi sic penderet. Aliud itaque latet in ΑΥΤΗ. Fortasse ΔΗΛΟΝ, sed aliud requiro, quod sit lenius.
P. 72. καὶ πρὸς ἀσφάλειαν καὶ πρὸς ἡδονήν. Vera videtur Heerenii correctio ὠφέλειαν, quamquam urbs in monte posita etiam ob securitatem laudari possit. Sed semper iungit rhetor ὠφέλειαν et ἡδονήν, et in sequentibus quoque ὠφελείας momenta recenset.
P. 73. Urbs in campi aequore posita, laudanda: ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἀνώμαλος τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ὥσπερ σῶμα εὔρυθμον. Verba τοῖς ἀνθρ. deleta velit Heerenius. Emendanda sit potius. Scribe: τοῖς ἄρθροις, quo reposito proxima quoque sensum habent.
P. 73. ὅτι ὑπ’ ἀνδρείας ἀποπέφευγεν – negationem requiri intelligens H. οὐκ interposuit. Fortasse: οὐδ’ ὑπ’ ἀνδρείας.
P. 74. urbis parte in campo, parte in monte posita, dicere poteris ὅτι ἅπερ ἀμφότερα μόνη κέκτηται. Ad sensus integritatem requiri videtur, ut scribatur: ὅτι ἅπερ ἐν μέρει ἀμφοτέρα, μόνη κέκτηται. Certe ἀμφοτέρα mutato accento scribendum: quae campestris et montana urbs divisa habet, ea sola iunctim possideat.
P. 75. Portus εἰ αὐτοφυεῖς, ὅτι ἀπόχρωτοί εἰσι, διὰ τὸ αὐτοφυεῖς εἶναι. De εὔχρηστοι et ἀείχρηστοι cogitabat H., de ἀνοχύρωτοι Bast Ep. Cr. p. 24. Ipse ἀχείρωτοι tentabam. Sed nihil horum tale est, ut certum videri possit. Ap. Polluc. I, 100 inter epitheta portuum commemoratur ἀπόργητοι (?), sed hoc quoque vocabulum depravatum est, et in ἀπόῥῤητοι mutatur. Fort. ἀειχρόνιοι.Footnote 15
P. 75. κόλπους ἐπαινέσεις μέγεθος. Ut oratio constaret, H. εἰς inseruit ante μέγεθος. Certe εἰς facile omitti potuit praecedente εις′. Bene haberet etiam κόλπου ἐπαινέσεις μέγεθος. Sed cum sequatur εἰς εὐλιμενότητα, Heerenii correctio praeferenda. Quod vero idem εὐρυστομίαν posuit, non probo: εὐρυθμία enim in sinu maris optime habet locum.
P. 76. de arce, non in media urbe, sed in latere eius posita, ὅτι ἀκριβῶς κέλητι ἔοικε· μετὰ γὰρ πᾶν τὸ σῶμα κεῖται. Ineptam esse comparationem arcis cum equo et κεφαλῇ tentat sive κορυφῇ. Hoc longius abest, nec bene conspirat cum proximis. Caput enim vix dicatur μετὰ τὸ σῶμα κεῖσθαι. Verum arx,Footnote 16 ἐν πλαγίοις posita, comparetur cum pedibus, quibus corpus nititur, ut urbs arci. Nihil autem propius accesserit ad κέλητι quam πέλματι, plantae pedis, quae bene dicitur κεῖσθαι μετὰ τὸ σῶμα.Footnote 17
P. 76. Si arx in angusta posita est area, dicendum: ὅτι ὥσπερ ὄντων ὄντι ἅπαν ἀοίκητόν ἐστι. Heeren. tentat: ὥσπερ ἱερὸν παντὶ ἀοίκητός ἐστι, quod sententiae aptum est, non item verborum vestigiis. Fortasse scribendum: ὅτι ὡς παρόντων θεῶν τὸ πᾶν ἀοίκητον. De παρόντων vix dubites; θεῶν per compendium θν′ scriptum facile in ον depravari potuit. Iam his verbis optime concinunt sequentia: πλὴν ὅσα τοῖς κατέχουσι θεοῖς. Fortasse etiam in syllabis τι απαν latet λοιπὸν – quod sic etiam melius coit cum πλήν.Footnote 18
P. 77. De arce in aequali area possita, ὅτι θέσεως, ἕνεκα καὶ ῥᾳστώνης καὶ πόλει οἰκίσθη. Non video quid θέσις h. l. significet: Scr. ὅτι ἀνέσεως καὶ ῥ. Tum fortasse: παρὰ πόλει ᾠκίσθη, quod iucunditatis vitaeque fruendae causa in urbis vicinitate sit condita.
Cap. III, p. 79. ἐὰν δὲ ἄδοξος εἴη. Scr. ᾖ – Tum καὶ ἡ διαδοχὴ ἄδοξος. Non sunt, ut Heeren. vertit: ea, quae de eo dices, sed posteri. Hoc loco itaque cives urbis a obscuro conditore exstructae. In seqq. ἢ τὸ αἰσχρὰν ἔχειν δόξαν, ἢ τὸ μηδ’ ὅλως ἔχειν. H. bis posuit τῷ, fortasse recte. Bene haberet etiam διὰ τὸ αἰσχρ. εἶναι.
P. 80. Docendum esse, hominum genera, unde urbs sit condita, ἀρετήν τινα σχόντα, ἢ μίαν, ἢ πολλάς, ἢ πάσας, ἢ μάλιστα. Scr. ᾗ μάλιστα, aut omnes, quantum eius maxime potest. Cf. Matth. Gr. c. 461.
P. 81. De laude incolarum urbis: ὥσπερ εἰ λέγοιμεν – ἢ τῶν ἐν Kρήτῃ πόλεων. πόλεως καὶ ῾Ρόδου τοῦ ἀνδρικωτάτου. Hanc Aldinae lectionem ita interpolavit Heeren. ut ἢ περὶ τῶν scriberet, πόλεως deleret, post ῾Ρόδου autem ὅτι insereret. Sine ulla interpolatione licet legere: ἢ τῶν ἐν Kρήτῃ πόλεων ὁ λεὼς καὶ ῾Ρόδου, τοῦ ἀνδρικωτάτου, ad ἢ τῶν ex praecedentibus ὅτι supplendum.
P. 83. καὶ ὅτι μετὰ πλεόνων ὡς βελτιόνων ἐλπίδων οἰκεῖται. Non video quam vim ὡς h. l. habeat. Scr. καὶ βελτ.
P. 84. ὥσπερ ὅσας πρότερον κώμας οὔσας, ὅλως πόλεις πεποιήκασι βασιλεῖς. Comma removerim post ὅλως, nisi malis ὅλας πόλεις. In proximis autem οὐδ’ οὔσας κώμας, ὅλως πόλεις τινὲς ἀπέφηναν. Non dubito ὅλως pertinere ad οὐδ’, ut p. 83, ἢ ὅλως οὐκ οὖσα πρότερον. Incertum tamen hoc reddi nunc video. οὐδ’ οὔσας enim Heerenii debetur audaciae, sic corrigentis pro οὐδ’ ὅσον κώμας, quae genuina est lectio. Passim sic Aelianus. Iam quaeritur, an recte dicatur: οὐδ’ ὅσον κώμας ὅλως.
P. 84. μεταβολὴ δὲ περὶ ταύτας ἁπάσας γίνεται ἐπ’ ἐνίων. πολλάκις περὶ τὸ ὄνομα. Temere H. vocabulis περὶ τ. ἁπάσας uncos adhibuisse, ea cum ἐνίων non consistere posse existimans. Sed optime habent; modo verba, quae sequuntur post γίνεται usque ad ὀνομάζονται, ita accipias, ut scriptor reliquis mutationum generibus, unum etiam addat per parenthesin, de nomine; quod genus aut nihil aut raro ad laudem urbis conferre dicit. Quod si quid in his non satis integrum, hoc fuerit, quod malis legis: ἐπ’ ἐνίων πολλάκις περὶ τὸ ὄνομα μόνον.
P. 85. εἰ δὲ συνῳκισμένην πόλιν ἐπαινοίης, καὶ τὰ μέρη αὐτὰ καθ’ αὑτὰ μέγιστα ἀποφαίνῃς. Scr. ἀποφανεῖς.
Ib. ὅσῳ γὰρ μειζόνως ἐπαινοίης. αὐτὰ inseruit Heeren, quod fortasse non necessarium; potest enim ex praecedentibus suppleri τὰ μέρη. Haec verba autem usque ad ἐγκωμιάσεις pro parentheticis sunt habenda. Tum pergit in praeceptis: τὴν πρόφασιν τοὺς ἐνοικισμοὺς ἐξετάζειν τοὺς συνοικήσαντας ὅτι τινες ἦσαν. Quae verba H. a totius loci sensu aberrans, vario modo interpolavit. Praecepta h. l. ut etiam in aliis per asyndeta decurrentia, sic fortasse debent concipi: τὴν πρόφασιν τοῦ ἐνοικισμοῦ ἐξετάζεις, τοὺς συνοικήσανταςFootnote 19 ἔτι τίνες ἦσαν. Caussam et praetextum coniungendorum locorum explorabis, tum etiam quinam fuerunt cives in eandem urbem ex sedibus suis commigrantes.
P. 86. De urbe ex uno loco in alium translata: κἂν μὲν ἅπαξ ἢ δὶς ἐκ τόπου αὐτῆς πρότερον καταθέσθαι. Sententia loci non fugit acumen Herenii, veram tamen lectionem ab eo investigatam esse dubito. Fortasse scribendum: ὅτι ἡδεῖα ἐκ τόπου αὐτῆς προτέρου μετάθεσις. Postremum vocabulum per compendium sic scribitur μεταεθ aut etiam μθε unde crebra permutatio praepositionum μετὰ et κατά. Vid. Bast Comm. Pal. p. 825.
P. 86. εἰ δὲ ἡ πόλις – ἅμα οἰκοδομηθεῖσα καὶ πόλις ἢ γενομένη. Heeren. ex coniectura dedit ᾖ γεν. quod non recte copulatur cum εἰ. Tu scribe: εἰ – ἦν γενομένη.
P. 87. ἡ περὶ ταῦτα μέθοδος. Haec quoque interpolavit H. scribens: ἡ οὖν π. τ. μέθοδος αὕτη. Rectius scribes: αὕτη ἡ περὶ ταῦτα μέθοδος, ut p. 90, αὕτη μὲν δὴ ἡ πρώτη διαίρεσις, cf. p. 104.4.
P. 89. ἀνθρώπιναι δὲ ὁποῖαι περὶ Βαβυλῶνος λεγόμεναι, οἷον ΝίνονFootnote 20 ᾠκοδόμησεν, βασίλειαν εἶναί φησι. Plura hic H. novavit, quam res requirebat. Suffecerit correxisse: ὁποῖαι αἱ περὶ β. λεγόμεναι, ἣν, οἷον Νίνον, Σ. ᾠκ. βασίλειαν εἶναί, φασι, quam, ut traditur, Semiramis condidit, ut, sicut Nini urbs, pro regia esset. Herodot. I,178, τὸ δὲ ὀνομαστότατον καὶ ἰσχυρότατον (πόλισμα), καὶ ἔνθα σφι, Νίνου ἀναστάτου γενομένης, τὰ βασιλήϊα κατεστήκεε, ἦν βαβυλών.
P. 90. Urbes conditae ἐπ’ εὐφροσύνῃ et ἐπὶ πένθει. εὐφροσύνη μὲν γάμων γένεσιν ἀεὶ τοιούτοις. Mutila esse haec ex sequentibus apparet. Nam praeter nuptias victoriae quoque commemorandae erant, quod non fugit Heerenium; sed quod ille coniecit, εὐφροσύνῃ μὲν ὡς ἐπὶ γάμοις, νίκαις καὶ ἄλλοις τοιούτοις, non facile probabitur. Tale quid requiri videtur: εὐφροσύνη μὲν γάμων γένεσιν ἔδωκεν ἐνίαις, νικῶν ΔΕ ΠΛΕΙΣΤΑΙΣ. Sed in talibus locis tamquam in tenebris micandum.
P. 91. τὰ τελικὰ κεφάλαια versantur in argumentis de aequo et utili.Footnote 21 Vid. Ernesti Techn. rhet. Exemplum τοῦ δικαίου commemorat loci, Apollini consecrati; in qua re proprie quidem non aequitas sed pietas conspiciebatur. De qua autem historia agatur, incertissimum est. In Aldina editum: τοῦ μὲν τοίνυν δικαίου τὸ κατ’ ἀκρίβειαν ὅτι οἰκίσας αὐτὴν νομίμως ἀνέθηκε τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι· εὐσεβὲς γὰρ τὸ δυσσεβὲς δίκαιον. Speciosa est correctio Valesii in Em. I.23, p. 27, τὰ κατὰ ῾Ρηναίαν et ὁ Μίνως, sed incerta manebit, donec quis docuerit, Rhenaeam (?) a Minoe conditam fuisse, quod nemo veterum tradidit. Quod autem scripsit idem: τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι εὐσεβείᾳ· τὸ γὰρ εὐσεβὲς δίκαιον, id in contextu poni non debebat. Scribendum: τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι ἀνέθηκε· τὸ εὐσεβὲς γὰρ δίκαιον. Postrema haec caussam reddunt, cur hoc exemplum ad τελικά referatur, inter quae pietatis argumenta vulgo non censentur: nam quod pium idem et aequum et iustum. Duplex autem in codice, quem Aldus expressit, lectio: εὐσεβὲς sine articulo, et τὸ εὐσεβές, quibus coniunctis alterum in τὸ δυσσεβὲς est depravatum.
P. 92. ὡς κατὰ τὰς πόλεις τὰς κατὰ τὸν ποταμόν. ‘Ad τὸν ποταμὸν vel addendum vel subintelligendum est Ἴστρον’ Heeren. Scribendum: τὰς κατ’ Ἴστρον ποταμόν.
Sectio III, cap. I, p. 94. ὡς ἐν τοῖς κοκλείοις ὁ κράτης. ἐν τοῖς Νικοκλείοις ὁ Ἰσοκράτης emendavit Heeren. Sic ille Isocratis libellus non solet appellari. Inhaerendum esse litterarum vestigiis, quae eo ducunt, ut legatur: ὡς ἐν τῷ (τῶι)Footnote 22 Νικοκλεῖ ὁ Ἰσοκράτης.
P. 95. καὶ Ἀριστείδης ἐν τῷ ῾Ρωμαικῷ νόμῳ. Novissimam vocem, ab Heerenio mutatam in λόγῳ, Valesius p. 27 expungendam censebat, quem miror non vidisse legendum esse leni litterarum transpositione: ἐν τῷ ῾Ρώμης ἐγκωμίῳ (῾Ρώμ′ ἐγκωμίῳ), quo titulo illa Aristidis declamatio inscribitur.
P. 95. De laudibus ex civitatis forma petendis cum dixisset, καὶ τοῦτο δέ, ait, τὸ μέρος τῶν ἐπαίνων κινδυνεύει σχεδὸν ἀργὸν εἶναι· ὑπὲρ γάρ μοι αἱ ῥωμαϊκαὶ καὶ ἅπασαι διοικοῦνται πόλεις. Valesii huius loci correctionem non probandam esse, recte monuit Heeren; non magis tamen probandum, quod ipse coniecit: ὑπὸ γὰρ ἐμοῦ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ῥωμαϊκοὺς ἅπασαι δ. πόλεις. Una fortasse vocula restituta, paucisque litteris mutatis. Scribendum: εἴπερ γ’ ἁρμοῖFootnote 23 αἱ ῥωμαϊκαὶ καὶ ἅπασαι (an καὶ ἄλλαι πᾶσαι) δ. πόλεις. Ad rem confer p. 103,6; p. 106,7.
P. 96. τελειότητος δὲ ἕνεκεν. Hanc Heerenii correctionem probat Bast in Comm. Pal. p. 790.
P. 97. αἱ δὲ κατὰ τὰς δυνάμεις ἐπιτηδεύσεις, ῥητορικὴ καὶ ἀθλητική. ‘quid ars rhetorica ad corporis vires exercendas facit? Legendum duco ἡ γυμναστική’. Heeren. Scribo potius: θηραψτικὴFootnote 24 sive θηρευτική.
P. 97. Commemorandam esse praeter studia civium etiam totius civitatis institutionem, εἰ κοσμίως διοικεῖται ἡ πόλις. ἀνήκει δεῖ δὲ τὴν τῶν ἀνδρῶν καὶ τὴν τῶν γυναικῶν δίαιταν. Heeren. corrigit: ἀνήκειν δὲ δεῖ ἐπὶ τήν – vertens: pergat orator ad quotidianum civium victum. Male. Scribendum: ἀνήκει δ’ εἰς τὴν – Ex praecedentibus assumendum orationis subiectum: ὁ κόσμος s. ἡ κοσμιότης.
Cap. II, p. 99. τοὺς δ’ αὖFootnote 25 περὶ θεότητος, τὸ μὲν τί ἐστι φιλοθεότης ἐν λόγοις, τὸ δὲ τὶ ἐν ἔργοις. Vera videtur Heerenii correctio: τῆς δ’ αὖ φιλοθεότητος – error enim in vulgata natus ex διττογραφία. Reliqua idem minus bene administravit. Deleto enim vocabulo φιλοθεότης, reliqua bene habent: τὸ μέν τι ἐν λόγοις, τὸ δέ τι ἐν ἔργοις – De τὶ cum articulo exempla collegi in Lex. Gramm. p. 607.
P. 100. τὰς δὲ μεγίστας ὥσπερ Ἀθηνᾶ. καὶ ὅτι σῖτον αὐτοῖς ἐδωρήσαντο πλείσταις, ὥσπερ Ἀθηναίων. Recte H. videtur correxisse: ταῖς δὲ μεγίσταις, ὡς περὶ Ἀθηναίων – πλείσταις δέ … sed quod reliqua interpolavit, καὶ τοῦτο περὶFootnote 26 interferens, id non probandum. Fortasse suffecerit scripsisse: ὡς πάλιν Ἀθηναίων.
P. 101. Aegyptii deos sibi astrologiae et geometriae scientiam tribuisse dicebant: καὶ μάλιστα ὡς τὸ περὶ λόγων καὶ φιλοσοφίας· Ἀθηναίοις γὰρ μάλιστα ταῦτα ὑπάρξαι δοκεῖ. Prius μάλιστα quid velit, non perspicio. Fortasse scribendum: κἄλλα ἄλλοις ὡς – ubi syllaba omissa cum scriptum esset κ\ ΑΛΛΟΙΣ, hoc facile in ΜΑΛΙΣτα depravari potuit.
P. 101. οὕτως μὲν οὖν θεοφιλοτάτη ὠνόμασε τοὺς τεχνικοὺς ἕνεκα χρείας. θεοφιλότης ἡ ἀρετὴ ὠνομάσθη τῆς τεχνικῆς ἕνεκα χρ. emendavit Heeren. Non satis intelligo, qua ratione virtus nomen acceperit ob usum rhetoricum; neque tamen commodam difficultatis expediendae rationem invenio. Saltem tamen scribendum: θεοφιλοτς αὕτη ὠνομάσθη τοῖς τεχνικοῖς.
P. 102. In laude pietatis quaerendum,Footnote 27 εἰ τῶν πολιτῶν ἕκαστος τῆς περὶ τοὺς θεοὺς θεραπείας ἐπιμελεῖται, δημοσίᾳ δὲ κατὰ πολλοὺς τρόπους. Fortasse: κατὰ παλαιοὺς τρόπους. Hoc enim in populari religione laudari solet, si omnia accurate ad morem antiquitus constitutum observantur. Quamquam πολλοὺς quoque bene habet: plura enim publicae religionis instituta in proximis recensentur.
P. 102. ἀπὸ γὰρ τούτων αἱ τῶν πόλεων φιλοθεότητες ποιοῦνται. Recte observavit Heeren novissimum vocabulum ex superioris periodi fine male repetitum esse. Sed quod idem δηλοῦνται reposuit, minus recte fecit. Scribendum certa emendatione: ἐπαινοῦνται.
Ib. τῶν μὲν οὖν τῶν καθ’ ἕνα σπάνιον ἐν τοῖς χρόνοις εὑρεῖν. Depravata haec esse apparet. Nec Heerenii correctio vera est; nec ego nunc quidem aliquid reperio quod probare possim, nisi forte legendum: ἐν τουτοισὶ χρόνοις. Vid. Steph. Thes. Gr. L. in χρόνοι.
P. 103. εἰ γὰρ μὴ ξένους. Totum hunc locum bene et probabiliter restituit H. nisi quod vulgata lectio μὴ (scr. μηδὲ) τοὺς ἄλλους κακουργοῖεν servanda est. οἱ ἄλλοι oppositi τοῖς ξένοις cives sunt, nec omisso articulo ἀλλήλους scribendum.
P. 103. ὡς τὸ Ἀθήνῃσί ποτε ἡλίου ἀνίσχοντος. Fortasse πρὸ ἡλίου ἀνίσχ. Secundum legem Solonis ἐκφέρειν πρὶν ἥλιον ἐξέχειν. In proximis: καὶ θηρίοις νύκτωρ ἡ πρόθεσις. Heerenius corrigit: καὶ ἡ ἐν ταῖς θύραις νύκτωρ πρ., ubi minore molimine scripseris: κἀν θύραις νύκτωρ ἡ πρόθεσις.
P. 104. αὐτῆς τῆς δικαιοσύνης ἡ διαίρεσις αὐτῆς καὶ τῶν μερῶν. In hoc quoque loco constituendo rem bene peregit H. nisi quod sine verborum transpositione corrigere licet: αὕτη τῆς δ. ἡ διαίρεσις καὶ αὐτῆς καὶ τῶν μερῶν.
Ib. καὶ τὸν νοῦν τῶν πόλεων. τῶν πολιτῶν emendavit H. cuius correctionis necessitatem video nullam.
P. 105. σωφροσύνης μὲν οὖν ὁ νῦν διττὸς ἔλεγχος. Voculae ὁ νῦν ex praecedenti οὖν videntur natae.
Ib. ἐν αὐταῖς δὲ τῶν πόλεων. ἐν ἐνίαις emendavit H. Praecesserat πολλαὶ τῶν πόλεων, unde apparet legendum esse: ἐν ἄλλαις δὲ τῶν π.Footnote 28
P. 106. ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἰδίοις βίοις ἤδη καὶ ἐλάχιστα ἐν μοιχείᾳ, καὶ ἄλλα ἁμαρτήματα ἐν τῇ πόλει φαίνηται. εἰ δὴ scripsit H. et ἂν μοιχεία, quod minime probandum. Nam neque εἰ cum coniunctivo modo iunxisse videtur Menander, nec ἂν facile post εἰ scripsisset. Cur autem ἤδη mutetur, caussa non apparet. Scribendum videtur: ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἰδίοις βίοις ἤδη ἂν κατ’ ἐλάχιστον μοιχεία – φαίνηται. κατ’ ἐλάχιστον, quam minime, ut κατ’ ὀλίγον, κατὰ πολύ, κατὰ βραχύ et alia.
P. 108. ἡμῖν δὲ νῦν οὐ περὶ ἐπιχειρημάτων συγγράμματος ἔστι σοι ἡ περὶ ταῦτα ἔφοδος. Seiunxit haec H. σύγγραμμα scribens, et ἔστι οὖν σοὶ καὶ ἡ περὶ – Fortasse leniore remedio scribendum: σύγγραμμα τόδ’ ἔστιν. ἴση ἡ περὶ τ. ἔφοδος –
P. 108. Fit interdum, ut non tota urbs sed singulares eius partes laudentur, ut balneum et (?) c. καὶ ἐπὶ μέρους τινὸς τῆς πόλεως ἀνοικοδομηθέντος ἐπιπροφωνεῖ. Novissimo vocabulo uncos adhibuit H. delendum esse existimans. Scribendum: ἐπὶ προφανεῖ.
Ib. ἀλλὰ περὶ αὐτὸ μόνον τὸ προσταχθέν. Haec non coëunt cum praecedentibus. Scr. περὶ αὐτὸFootnote 29 τὸ πρ. Tum sequitur: ἄλλα δὲ ὡς βραχυτάτοις ἐπιδραμεῖν.Footnote 30
P. 109. ὅταν μηδεμίαν τοιαύτην πρόφασιν ἔχει. Scr. ἔχῃ.
P. 110. ἀπὸ δὲ τούτων. τόπων exhibuit H. Scribe potius: ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ τόπου, quod sic per compendium scriptum: τουτοπου.
Ib. Laudanda sunt festorum solemnia, ἀπὸ χρόνου. εἰ τούτους ἐν τῷ ὑγεινοτάτῳ καὶ ἡδίστῳ καιρῷ. Edidit H. εἰ τοῦτο referens pronomen ad ea, quae praecesserant. Sed certo certius scribendum: εἰ τοῦ ἔτους ἐν τῷ –
P. 110. ἀπὸ ὕλης δὲ παν αἱ πολυτελεῖς καὶ σεμναί. Lacuna est in Aldina, quam sic explet H.: πανηγύρεις ἐγκωμιάζονται εἰ πολ. Scripserim equidem: ἀπὸ ὕλης δ’ ἐπαινοῦνται αἱ πολυτελεῖς –
P. 112. ὅθεν δὲ ὁρῶντες οἱ συνίοντες. οἱ ὁρῶντες συνίασιν Heerenius, qui sana videtur tentasse, vitiosa reliquisse. Vitium est in ὁρῶντες. Scribe: ὅθεν δὲ ὁρμῶνται οἱ συνϊόντες. Iam optime conveniunt proxima de Pythicis: ὅτι ἐκ περάτων τῆς γῆς συνίασιν.'
This is where the manuscript attributed to Jacobs ends. In what follows, I offer a commentary and an assessment of all the notes made, both in the first part of the manuscript (edited already in RhM) and in the second, which I am editing here.
COMMENTARY
The manuscript notes (MS) and those already published (AS I and II) give the total number of passages corrected by F. Jacobs as 128 from the Treatise I attributed to Menander rhetor. Of these, more than half (67) were not published in AS or were published with some changes (10). The rest were published without changes in the manuscript and in AS. To make it easy to locate each passage, I give first the page number in Heeren's edition, and then, in parentheses, the location of the equivalent passage in the Russell-Wilson edition. I provide before the ] sign the text (either from the edition of Heeren or from the Aldine edition) on which Jacobs made his correction.
ABBREVIATIONS
AS I: Allgemeine Schulzeitung I (‘Variae lectiones, cap. IV’, no. 80 [1828], 649–53)
AS II: Allgemeine Schulzeitung II (‘Variae lectiones, cap. V’, no. 81 [1828], 657–62)
AS: Allgemeine Schulzeitung I and II
MS: manuscript attributed to F. Jacobs
GREEK MANUSCRIPTS
P: Paris. Gr. 1741, s. X
Z: Paris. Gr. 2423, s. XIII
W: Vatic. Gr. 306 (989), c.1300
M: Laur. 56.1, s. XIV
m: Laur. 81.8, s. XIV
A: Angelic. 54 (D.5.8), s. X ex.
b: Bodl. T.3.13, s. XV
C: Ambr. B 164 Sup. (158), s. XV
D: Palat. 66, s. XVI
E: Marc. 8.10 (1349), s. XV ex. – s. XVI in.
F: Paris. Gr. 1656, s. XV ex. – s. XVI in.
G: Gudian. 14, s. XV ex. – s. XVI in.
H: Palat. 277, s. XV ex. – s. XVI in.
I: Vindob. 60, s. XV
K: Ambr. 1.81 Sup. (465), s. XV ex. – s. XVI in.
Ma: Matrit. BN 4738, s. XV ex. – s. XVI in.
Sc: Scor. Σ.III.15 (114), s. XV ex.
N: Neap. II, E-4 (139), s. XV
R: Ross. 981, s. XV ex. – s. XVI in.
T: Vatic. Gr. 728 (854), s. XVI
v: Marc. 429 (861), s. XV
EDITIONS
Heeren = L. Heeren, Commentarius ‘De Encomiis’ (Göttingen, 1785).
Walz = C. Walz, Rhetores Graeci (Stuttgart-Tübingen, 1836), 9.127–212.
Spengel = L. Spengel, Rhetores Graeci (Leipzig, 1856 [repr. Frankfurt, 1966]), 3.331–67.
Bursian = C. Bursian, Der Rhetor Menandros und seine Schriften (Abhandlungen der Königl. Bayer. Akademie der Wissensschaften, 16.3) (Munich, 1882).
Russell-Wilson = D.A. Russell, N.G. Wilson (edd.), Menander Rhetor (Oxford, 1981).
P. 25 (= 331.8, ed. Russell-Wilson):Footnote 31 οὓς ἢ] οὓς δὴ (MS). This is also the reading adopted by Walz and accepted by Russell-Wilson in their edition, according to the testimony of some manuscripts which, it seems, Jacobs did not consult. Such cases will be repeated in other passages, as we shall see.
P. 26 (331.9–10): ὑπὲρ τούτων τῶν τριῶν … διδάσκουσιν] ὑπὲρ τοῦ <ἀπὸ> τὴν τρίτην (…) διδάσκειν (MS).
P. 26 (331.11): πρὸ ῥητορικῆς προσδόκα μόνον] ὑπὲρ ῥητορικῆς προσδόκα λόγον (MS).
P. 27 (332.1): ἢ τῷ λόγῳ γένει] ἢ τῷ ὅλῳ γένει (MS = AS I). The correction coincides with the reading of I. Sardianus.
P. 27 (332.4): ὅλοις] ὅλως (MS). Although the correction is attributed to Walz by Russell-Wilson, it already appears in Jacobs's manuscript notes and in the recentiores C R H Ma K Sc E b G, which Jacobs did not seem to know of; cf. 366.30.
P. 27 (332.6): ἐπειδὰν (…) διελοίμεθα] ἐπειδή (…) διελώμεθα (MS). Russell-Wilson attribute it to Spengel, but it can also be found in Jacobs's manuscript notes.
P. 28 (332.14): μάθωμεν] ἀφῶμεν ante corr. (MS) / μεθῶμεν post corr. (MS = AS I). The corrected form in the manuscript notes is the one that has been passed on in the published version in AS I, which is the one which Russell-Wilson consulted and adopted in their edition. μεθῶμεν is also the reading of the manuscripts W M, which Jacobs did not consult either.
P. 28 (332.21): Jacobs prefers to maintain the transmitted reading, ἀγνοῶν, instead of Heeren's correction, ἀγνοῶ (MS).
P. 29 (332.29): περιελειφέναι] περιειληφέναι (MS) is what we find in the Aldine edition. Jacobs does not cite the correction περιείληφεν from the edition of Walz (1836), which apparently he did not know about when he drew up the manuscript notes.
P. 30 (333.13): ἐτίμησαν] ἐν τιμῇ ἦσαν (MS = AS I). In the published version (AS I) another correction is added: ἐτιμήθησαν.
P. 32 (334.2): τοῦ μεκέτι ἐξεῖναι] τούτου μηδέν τι ἐξεῖναι ἢ (MS).
P. 32 (334.7): ὁ μὲν] ὁ μοῦ (MS = AS I), correction mentioned (and adopted) by Russell-Wilson, who apparently could only attribute to Jacobs the published corrections in AS I and II.
P. 32 (334.14): ἃ δ’ αὖ] ὁ δ’ αὖ (MS = AS I). This is the reading of manuscript P, of which Jacobs did not seem to be aware.
P. 33 (334.27–8): ἀνακαλεῖν] ἕλκειν (MS = AS I). In the published version (AS I) another proposal is added: ἐπικαλεῖν.
P. 34 (334.32): Jacobs maintains, pace Heeren, οὐ μόνον γε ἀλλά (MS = AS I).
P. 36 (335.25): post ἐκθέσθαι Jacobs add. σχήματά γε τὰ ἀνακλητικὰ ἁμόττοντα – ἅμα δὲ μήτε ὑπερβαίνωμεν τὸ μέτρον (MS).
P. 36 (335.28): Jacobs is not convinced by Heeren's correction, τούτοις pro αὐτοῖς, ‘neque tamen melius quid succurrit’ (MS), adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 36 (335.29): προστεθήκαμεν] προστεθείκαμεν (MS = AS I), adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 36 (335.29): ἐκ τῶνδε τῶν] ἐκ θείων vel ἱερῶν ante corr. (MS) / ἐκ τῶν καὶ τῶν post. corr. (MS = AS I). Again, it is the second correction of the manuscript which has been passed to the published version in AS; cf. 332.14.
P. 36 (335.30): κελέοιμι] καλέσαιμι (MS = AS I).
P. 36 (335.32): ὅτι ἡ] ὅτι ᾗ (MS = AS I).
P. 38 (336.10): Jacobs maintains ὀνομάζονται, pace Heeren (νομίζονται) (MS = AS I).
P. 39 (336.28): ψυχροτέροις] εὐψυχοτέροις (MS), closer to the proposal of Ernesti, ἐμψυχοτέροις, which Russell-Wilson adopt in their edition.
P. 40 (337.9): ἀναπτεροποιεῖ αὐτόν] κατάπτερον ποιεῖ αὐτόν (MS = AS I).
P. 40 (337.17): ὥσπερ οὖν] ὥσπερ δὲ (MS) / ὥσπερ κατὰ (AS I)
P. 40 (337.22): ἔχονται] μετέχονται (MS = AS I)
P. 41 (337.30): Jacobs does not believe it necessary to insert τοῦ, as Heeren proposed (MS).
P. 44 (338.26): There is no need to introduce ἐνείη, but to understand ἐστί (MS).
P. 44 (338.31–2): οὐκ ἀγνοῶ ὡσαύτως] οὐκ ἀγνοῶ, ὡς αὕτως (MS = AS I).
P. 45 (339.13): τοῦ διθυράμβου καὶ ἀποβεβηκυῖα] τοῦ διθυραμβικοῦ ἀποβεβηκυῖα (MS = AS I).
P. 46 (339.16 ff.): ἢ … μεγέθους … ἢ ἀπὸ … καὶ] καὶ … ἀήθους … ἀπὸ δὲ μᾶλλον ἢ (MS).
P. 47 (340.5): ὥστε σπανίως (…) τὸ γενεαλογικὸν] ὡς ἔστι σπανίως (…) ἐν ᾧ τὸ γενεαλογικὸν … (MS = AS I). Russell-Wilson attributed ἐν ᾧ to Heeren, but this is already in the Aldine edition.
P. 47 (340.8–9): οἱ τοῖς μυθικοῖς] ἢ τοῖς μυθικοῖς (MS), a correction that Russell-Wilson attributed to Spengel, but, as we can see, is already in the manuscript notes of Jacobs.
P. 50 (341.6): ὕστερον Πόρου] υἱὸς ἔρως Πόρου vel ὡς υἱὸς ἔρως Πόρου (MS).
P. 50 (341.10–11): τῆς μὲν περὶ φύσιν, τῆς δὲ περὶ γένος ἥκει] τῇ μὲν περὶ φύσιν, τῇ δὲ περὶ γένος ᾔδει (MS = AS I).
P. 51 (341.17): συνόψει] συνάψει (MS = AS I).
P. 51 (341.19): ἔχοιτε ἂν λέγειν] λίποιτο ἂν λέγειν (MS).
P. 51 (341.20): ἀπηρτημένους] ἀπηρτημένως. According to Russell-Wilson, ἀπηρτημένως is the reading of manuscript P, which Jacobs did not know about (MS = AS I).
P. 51 (342.3): ἦν μὲν γὰρ] εἰ μὲν γὰρ (MS). The proposal made by Jacobs in his manuscript notes coincides with the subsequent proposal of Russell-Wilson (‘nos’ in the critical apparatus of their edition).
P. 52 (342.7): ἀναπλάσαντες δαίμονά τινα θεὸν] ἀναπλάσαντες δαίμονά τινα νέον (only in AS I and not in the manuscript notes).
P. 52 (342.10): ἔστι] ἔτι (MS).
P. 52 (342.10–11) ἐνοῦσαν ἀρχαῖον καὶ ἐν ποιήσει] ἑνῶσαι ἀρχαῖον καὶ νέον, ἐν ποιήσει (MS = AS I).
P. 54 (343.6): καὶ ἀπευχὰς δικαίας [οὔσας] ] fortasse ἢ ὡς ἀπευχὰς ἀδικίας οὔσας (MS).
P. 54 (343.6): καὶ ἁπλῶς εἶναι] ἁπλῶς εὔχεσθαι (MS).
P. 54 (343.6): εἶναι δὲ ἁπλᾶς] εὐχᾶς δὲ ἁπλᾶς (MS).
P. 54 (343.10): ἐπιὼν τὰς αἰτίας εἰς τοὺς πολίτας] καὶ ποιητῶν τὰς λιτὰς (MS).
P. 55 (343.18): οἱ διηπόρησαν] εἰ διηπόρησαν (MS).
P. 55 (343.21–2): εἰ γε ἀνθρώπινα πράγματα καὶ διοικήσεις τεθεῖσαι] εἰ τὰ ἀνθρώπινα πράγματα κεῖται διοικήσει θείᾳ τεθεῖσαι (MS).
P. 55 (343.23): πᾶν ἀλλάττον τοιοῦτον ὕμνον] πᾶν· ἀλλὰ τὸν (MS = AS I).
P. 56 (344.2): οὐκέτι μοι ὡς] οἵους ὁμοίως (MS, sed suprascr. ἐτύμως) (MS = AS I). Although Russell-Wilson attribute ὁμοίως to Bursian, it already appears in the notes of Jacobs. In the published version in AS οἵους ἐτύμως is also proposed. As in other cases (cf. 332.14, 335.29, 346.6, 351.28), the second correction of MS is what was published in AS.
P. 58 (344.30): ὁρῶν] ὡρῶν (ὁ., ‘vitium esse videtur typographicum’) (MS).
P. 59 (345.7): Jacobs does not consider necessary Heeren's addition, δεῖ οὖν ἐπαινεῖν (MS).
P. 59 (345.12): καὶ δύο πεδίων] καὶ δὴ πεδίων (MS = AS II). The correction is already in manuscript Z, according to Bursian.
P. 59 (345.14): αὐτοῦ] ὑετῷ vel αὐτόθεν, ‘sed ἅτ’ οὐ in cod. Paris 2423 [Z], probante Bastio’ (MS).
P. 59 (345.19): ἐοικυῖα] ἐοικυῖαν (MS).
P. 60 (346.6): παιδίον] νηδυὶ ‘sed in cod. Par. 2423 γυναικὶ πολὺ παιδίον, unde Bast […] πολύπαιδι’ (MS), which was eventually published by Jacobs in AS II.
P. 61 (346.10): Jacobs maintains, pace Heeren, the reading transmitted in the manuscripts, τὰ δὲ ἄδοξα (MS), which is the same reading for which Livrea opts years later.Footnote 32
P. 62 (346.24): It is not necessary to introduce the verb χρὴ before ἐπαινεῖν (MS).
P. 63 (346.31): <τὰς> vel <καὶ> ἐπιτηδεύσεις (MS). Precisely τὰς appears in manuscript Z and is adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 63 (347.2): ἐργαζόμεθα] ἐργαζώμεθα (MS).
P. 63 (347.16): δοκιμάσῃ] δοκιμάσαι (MS).
P. 64 (347.21): πεσόντα] Heeren corrected παρόντα, but Jacobs proposes προσόντα (MS = AS II).
P. 65 (348.6): οἱ δὲ] Jacobs accepts Heeren`s correction, ἦρ δὲ, but with some modifications: ἔαρ δὲ (MS = AS II).
P. 66 (348.8): τακτέον αὐτά· ταῦτα δὲ] τακτέον· αὐτὰ ταῦτα δὲ (MS = AS II). It is the reading of P and other manuscripts (m W T), which Jacobs did not consult.
P. 66 (348.10): ἢ χρόνῳ μὲν ἢ ἀκριβείᾳ] καὶ χρόνον μὲν εἰ ἀκριβείᾳ vel εἰ σὺν ἀκριβείᾳ (MS). Russell-Wilson attributed the correction εἰ to Walz, but this already appears in the notes made by Jacobs.
P. 66 (348.13) ἢ ταῖς αἰσθήσεσι τερπνηγένεσιν [sic] ὄψεσι] εἰ ταῖς αἰσθήσεσι τερπνά, γένεσιν, ὄψεσι (MS = AS II).
P. 67 (348.20): ἠπειρωτικὸς εἴη, καὶ πλεῖστον ἀπέχῃ] ἠπειρωτικὸς (ἠπειρωτικὴ?) ᾖ, ἢ ἁλὸς πλεῖστον ἀπέχῃ vel ἢ καὶ πλεῖστον ἁλὸς ἀπέχῃ (MS). ἠπειρωτικὴ is precisely what is transmitted in manuscripts M m W T.
P. 67 (348.29): περὶ στοιχείων διὰ τὸ ἄπειρον] ἀδύνατον περαίνειν, στοιχείων διὰ τὸ ἄπειρον (MS).
P. 67 (348.30): ἐὰν εἴη καὶ] ᾖ, ἢ καὶ (MS = AS II).
P. 67 (348.31): ἀμφότερα] ἀμφοτέρων (MS).
P. 67 (349.5): θεωρεῖται ἄν] θεωροῖτο ἄν (MS = AS II).
P. 68 (349.8): τὴν αὐτὴν χώραν] τὴν ἄλλην χώραν (MS).
P. 68 (349.11): κατειληφὼς] ἄρα κατειληφὼς (MS).
P. 69 (349.22): μέρος (Φάρος Heeren) ἐστὶ] ὅρος ἐστὶ (MS).
P. 69 (349.22): αὕτη κατείληφεν] τὰ ὕψη κατειληφυῖα, ‘cf. Dion Chrys. VII, p. 231, de Nauplio’ (MS post. corr.).
P. 70 (349.29): αὐτοφυγίαν] αὐτοφυΐαν (MS = AS II) is the reading also present in manuscript P and is adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 71 (350.18): πολὺ ἄδοξοι] πάλιν ἄδοξοι (MS = AS II).
P. 72 (350.27): αὕτη γὰρ] δῆλον (ΔΗΛΟΝ pro ΑΥΤΗ, ‘sed aliud requiro, quod sit lenius’) (MS).
P. 72 (350.30): ἀσφάλειαν] ὠφέλειαν Heeren, probante Jacobs (‘vera videtur Heerenii correctio’; cf. 349.28: πρὸς ἡδονὴν καὶ ὠφέλειαν.
P. 73 (351.5): τοῖς ἀνθρώποις] τοῖς ἄρθροις (MS = AS II), reading already found in other manuscripts (P M m T W). Although published later in AS II, the correction does not include the abbreviation ‘Sch. Zeit’ in the manuscript margins.
P. 73 (351.7): ὅτι ὑπ’ ἀνδρείας] fortasse οὐδ’ ὑπ’ ἀνδρείας (MS).
P. 74 (351.16): ἅπερ ἀμφότερα] ἅπερ ἐν μέρει ἀμφοτέρα (MS).
P. 75 (351.28): ἀπόχρωτοι] ἀχείρωτοι, ἀπόρρητοι vel ἀειχρόνιοι (MS), sed in marg. add. ‘ἀποχρῶντες Bast ex Paris 2423’, an observation that will also appear in the published version (AS II).
P. 75 (352.7): κόλπους] κόλπου (MS).
P. 75 (352.8): εὐρυθμία] for Jacobs Heeren's correction, εὐρυστομίαν (MS = AS II), is not necessary.
P. 76 (352.19): κέλητι] πέλματι (MS).
P. 76 (352.23): ὅτι ὥσπερ ὄντων (…) ὄντι ἅπαν ἀοίκητον] ὡς παρόντων (…) τὸ πᾶν ἀοίκητον (vel -τι ἅπαν] λοιπὸν) (MS), but in AS II he proposes πανοίκητον.
P. 77 (352.29): ὅτι θέσεως] ὅτι ἀνέσεως (MS).
P. 77 (352.30): καὶ πόλει οἰκίσθη] παρὰ πόλει ᾠκίσθη (MS).
P. 79 (353.24): ἄδοξος εἴη] ἀ. ᾖ (MS). It is precisely the reading of the manuscripts W M m T, which Jacobs does not seem to know of.
P. 79 (353.24): ἢ τὸ αἰσχρὰν ἔχειν] διὰ τὸ αἰσ. εἶναι (MS).
P. 80 (354.8): ἢ μάλιστα] ᾗ μάλιστα (MS = AS II), adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 81 (354.19): ἢ περὶ τῶν (…) πόλεων καὶ ῾Ρόδον ὅτι τοῦ (…)] ἢ τῶν (…) πόλεων ὁ λεώς, καὶ ῾Ρόδου, τοῦ (…) (MS = AS II).
P. 83 (355.8): ὡς βελτιόνων] καὶ βελτιόνων (MS = AS II), adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 84 (355.21–3): ὅλως πόλεις] ὅλως, πόλεις (MS). In AS II Jacobs prefers the correction ὅλας πόλεις.
P. 84 (355.21–3): κώμας, ὅλως] κώμας ὅλως (MS = AS II), οὐδ’ ὅσον κώμας ‘genuina est lectio’, ‘οὐδ’ οὔσας Heerenii debetur audaciae’ (MS); however, in AS II Jacobs maintains οὐδ’ οὔσας without expressing such a negative judgement towards Heeren.
P. 84 (355.25): περὶ τὸ ὄνομα <μόνον> (MS).
P. 85 (356.8): ἀποφαίνῃς] ἀποφανεῖς (MS), the reading adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 85 (356.10): τοὺς ἐνοικισμοὺς (…) ὅτι τινες] τοῦ ἐνοικισμοῦ (…) ἔτι τίνες. Again the negative judgement towards Heeren appearing in MS (‘H. a totius loci sensu aberrans’) is removed in the published version in AS II.
P. 86 (356.17): ἢ δὶς … πρότερον καταθέσθαι] ἡδεῖα … προτέρου μετάθεσις (MS).
P. 86 (356.28): ἢ γενομένη] ἦν γενομένη (MS). In AS II Jacobs will accept ᾖ, proposed by Heeren.
P. 87 (357.1–2) : ἡ περὶ ταῦτα μέθοδος] αὕτη ἡ περὶ ταῦτα μέθοδος (MS = AS II). Russell-Wilson attributed the correction to Walz, but this already appears in the manuscript notes of Jacobs.
P. 89 (357.32): ὁποῖαι (…), οἷον (…) εἶναί φησι ] ὁποῖαι αἱ, ἥν, οἷον (…) εἶναί φασι (MS). Although Russell-Wilson attribute αἱ to Bursian, the correction again appears in the manuscript notes made by Jacobs.
P. 90 (358.6–7): γένεσιν ἀεὶ τοιούτοις] γένεσιν ἔδωκεν ἐνίαις, νικῶν ΔΗ ΠΛΕΙΣΤΑΙΣ [sic] (MS).
P. 90 (358.8): ‘ὥς φασι τὴν πέμψιν verissime coniecisse acumen Heerenii, Μέμφιν corrigentis’ (AS II). This time the judgement on Heeren published in AS is more positive. The correction is not in the manuscript version.
P. 91 (358.21): ‘speciosa est correctio Valesii in Em. l. 23, p. 27 τὰ κατὰ ῾Ρηναίαν et ὁ Μίνως’ (MS).
P. 92 (358.21–2): τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι· εὐσεβὲς γὰρ τὸ δυσσεβὲς δίκαιον] τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι ἀνέθηκε· τὸ εὐσεβὲς γὰρ δίκαιον (MS = AS II). Russell-Wilson attribute εὐσεβὲς again to Walz, but it is already present in the notes of Jacobs.
P. 94 (358.29): τὰς κατὰ τὸν ποταμόν] τὰς κατ’ Ἴσστρον ποταμόν (MS = AS II).
P. 94 (358.30): ὡς ἐν τοῖς Νικοκλείοις ὁ Ἰσοκράτης] ὡς ἐν τῷ Νικοκλεῖ ὁ Ἰσοκράτης (MS = AS II). Ἰσοκράτης is a correction of Heeren to ὁ κράτης transmitted by the Aldine edition. The correction was accepted by Jacobs, to whom it is attributed by Russell-Wilson.
P. 95 (360.5): ἐν τῷ ῾Ρωμαϊκῷ νόμῳ] ἐν τῷ ῾Ρώμης ἐγκωμίῳ (MS = AS II).
P. 95 (360.14–15): ὑπὲρ γάρ μοι αἱ ῥωμαϊκαὶ καὶ ἅπασαι] εἴπερ γ’ ἁρμοῖ κοινῶς αἱ ῥωμαϊκαὶ καὶ ἅπασαι (vel καὶ ἄλλαι πᾶσαι) (MS) / εἴπερ γε νόμοις ῥωμαϊκοῖς ἅπασαι (AS II).
P. 96 (360.15): τελειότητος δ’ ἕνεκεν, ‘hanc Heerenii correctionem probat Bast in Com. Pal., p. 790’ (MS).
P. 97 (361.2): ῥητορικὴ καὶ ἀθλητική] Jacobs accepts Heeren's correction γυμναστική (pro ῥητορική) and corrects θηρευτική (pro ἀθλητική) (MS = AS II).
P. 97 (361.6): δεῖ δὲ] The correction by Heeren, δὲ δεῖ, is already in manuscript G, and Jacobs's, δ’ εἰς, in T (MS = AS II).
P. 99 (361.22) Jacobs accepts the correction of Heeren, τῆς δ’ αὖ φιλοθεότητος pro τοὺς δ’ αὖ περὶ θεότητος (MS = AS II).
P. 100 (362.13): ὥσπερ Ἀθηνᾶ] ὡς πάλιν Ἀθηναίων (ὡς περὶ in Heeren) (MS).
P. 101 (362.19): μάλιστα] κἄλλα ἄλλοις ὡς (MS).
P. 101 (362.20): ἡ ἀρετὴ (…) τῆς τεχνικῆς] αὕτη (…) τοῖς τεχνικοῖς (MS).
P. 102 (362.25): κατὰ πολλοὺς τρόπους] fortasse κατὰ παλαιοὺς τρόπους (MS).
P. 102 (362.29): ποιοῦνται] ἐπαινοῦνται (δηλοῦνται in Heeren) (MS = AS II).
P. 102 (362.30): ἐν τοῖς χρόνοις] ἐν τουτοισὶ χρόνοις (MS).
P. 102 (363.8): ‘vulgata lectio μὴ scr. μηδὲ’ (MS).
P. 103 (363.18): ποτὲ ἡλίου ἀνίσχοντος] πρὸ ἡλίου ἀνίσχοντος (MS)
P. 103 (363.19): καὶ θηρίοις] κἀν θύραις (καὶ ἐν ταῖς θύραις in Heeren).
P. 104 (363.24): αὐτῆς τῆς δικαιοσύνης (…) αὐτῆς] αὕτη τῆς δικαιοσύνης (…) καὶ αὐτῆς (MS = AS II).
P. 104 (363.26): τῶν πόλεων] τῶν πολιτῶν Heeren, ‘cuius correctionis necessitatem video nullam’ (MS).
P. 105 (363.29): οὖν ὁ νῦν διττὸς] ‘voculae ὁ νῦν ex praecedenti οὖν videntur natae’ (MS) / ‘voculae ὁ νῦν fortasse natae ex οὖν’ (AS II).
P. 105 (364.2): ἐν αὐταῖς δὲ τῶν πόλεων] ἐν ἄλλαις δὲ τῶν πόλεων (MS = AS II), adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 106 (364.8): ἤδη καὶ ἐλάχιστα ἐν μοιχείᾳ] ἤδη ἂν κατ’ ἐλάχιστον μοιχεία (MS = AS II).
P. 108 (365.16): συγγράμματος ἔστι σοι ἡ] σύγγραμμα τόδ’ ἔστιν. ἴση ἡ (MS).
P. 108 (365.22): ἐπιπροφωνεῖ] ἐπὶ προφανεῖ (MS = AS II).
P. 108 (365.23): τὸ προσταχθέν] διατρίβειν τὸ προσταχθέν (MS) / τὸ προσταχθὲν διατρίβειν (AS II).
P. 108 (365.24): ἄλλα δὲ ὡς βραχυτάτοις] eras.: ‘ubi scribendum suspicor ἄλλα ἐν ὡς βραχυτάτοις’, precisely the reading that appears in manuscript Z.
P. 108 (365.25): ‘pro ἐπισημαίνασθαι legendum ἐπισημήνασθαι’ (AS II).
P. 109 (365.30): πρόφασιν ἔχει] πρόφασιν ἔχῃ (MS = AS II). The reading ἔχῃ is present in manuscripts M m T F, and is the one adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 110 (366.8): ἀπὸ δὲ τούτων] ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ τόπου (MS = AS II), adopted by Russell-Wilson in their edition.
P. 110 (366.11): εἰ τούτους] εἰ τοῦ ἔτους (MS = AS II), attributed to Jacobs by Russell-Wilson and accepted in their edition.
P. 110 (366.13): δὲ παν (lac.)] δ’ ἐπαινοῦνται (MS = AS II).
P. 112 (366.30): ὁρῶντες] ὁρμῶνται (MS = AS II). The correction proposed by Jacobs was already in the recentiores C R H Ma K Sc E b G, but he was not aware of this.
