A Textual Commentary on Ovid, Metamorphoses, Book XV 8417066411, 9788417066413

293 77 2MB

English Pages 163 Year 2017

Report DMCA / Copyright


Polecaj historie

A Textual Commentary on Ovid, Metamorphoses, Book XV
 8417066411, 9788417066413

Citation preview

ex mplaria C






Journal of Classical Philology Revista de Filolog fa Clasica














"' Z



O,i., ,i11s~"

'Sniversidad deHuelva



FoREWORD ...............................................................................................................


PREFACE ...................................................................................................................


COMMENTARY ........................................................................................................


SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................


ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017






Pape/ Estucado mate de 90 g/m'


Impreso en papel de bosque certificado


© Georg Luck


Encuadernaci6n Rustica, cosido con hilo vegetal


I.S.B.N.: 978-84-17066-41-3 EI.S.B.N.. 978-84-17288-06-8

Printed in Spain. lmpreso en Espana.

Dep6sito legal: H 300-2008



y maquetaci6n

Obra sometida al proceso de evaluaci6n de calidad editorial por el sistema de revision por pares. Publicaciones de la Univesidad de Huelva es miembro de UNE


Reservados todos los derechos. Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro puede reproducirse a transmitirse par ningun procedimiento electr6nico a mecanico, incluyendo fotocopia, grabaci6n magnetica a cualquier almacenamiento de informaci6n y sistema de recuperaci6n, sin permiso escrito del editor. La infracci6n de los derechos mencionados puede ser constitutivo de delito contra la propiedad intelectual. EL EBOOK LE PERMITE


Citar el libro


Navegar par marcadores e hipervinculos


Realizar notas y busquedas intern as

Volver al indice pulsando el pie de la pagina



I will never forget that day in July 2006 at the Baltimore train station. My family (Pura, Antonio, and Javi) and I were returning to the Princeton Institute for Advanced Studies. We had enjoyed the generous hospitality of Harriet and Georg for a few unforgettable days. While we were waiting for the departure of the Amtrak, I dared to ask Georg whether he would be interested in taking part in the research project that had begun in Huelva on the text of Ovid's Metamorphoses. Pura still remembers how his face lit up and how, as excited as a child, he replied that he would be delighted to be a member of the team project. Without a moment's hesitation, I asked him the second question regarding which book he would like to work on. And without losing a beat, he fired back: book XV. I was astounded that he, a first-rate scholar, thanked me for having offered him a part in the project, when it was I who was really surprised and grateful that such a master would become an equal of those of us who, in Huelva, felt ourselves to be, to a greater or lesser extent, his disciples. Several years later, after exchanging research material and multiple letters, he sent me a draft of his commentary on book XV. He had no time to polish it. Fate took Georg on the day of February 2013 on his eighty-seven birthday. I have preserved the manuscript these past few years among doubts about whether his manuscript should either be improved with specific data of manuscripts and editions or be left as is. This summer of 2017, I have decided to conserve the original version, albeit slightly corrected and with the addition of a select bibliography. The peace and tranquility that can be breathed in the Dehesilla de las Monjas (Barcarrota, Badajoz) have helped me to leave the original ready for printing. Georg Luck's commentary is the first of the project to be released on the presses. Previously, doc!oral theses have been developed on textual commentaries of books III (Angela Suarez del Rio), VII (Elena Murcia), X (Pere Fabregas) and XI (Samuel Diez Reboso). The commentaries of books VI (Antonio Ramirez de Verger) and XIII (Luis Rivero Garcia) are almost finished. Books II (Jose Antonio Bellido Diaz), IV (Juan Fernandez Valverde)

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017



and XII (Juan Antonio Estevez Sola) are to follow soon. The commentaries of books I (Juan Martos), V (Domingo Fernandez Sanz), VIII (Beatrice Larosa), IX and XIV (Jose Solis de los Santos) will appear, I hope, a little later. I would like to express my gratitude ex imo corde to Harriet Luck for authorizing the publication of Georg Luck's commentary in Huelva University Press (Annexes of Exemplaria Classica). The publication of G. Luck's Commentary is presented at the Ovid Symposium, held in Huelva (5-6 October, 2017), as an act of pietas towards one of the best Ovidians of the twentieth century.

Antonio Ramirez de Verger


ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017


Book XV has a peculiar textual tradition. The common ancestor of M. N and U, three of our most important witnesses, seems to have lost the end of the work: Mends with 14.830; N ends with 14.839 (but 840-51 and 15, 1-879 have been added by later hands); U ends with 15.493 (but 494-879 have been added by one or several later hands). In M, no attempt was made to supply the missing 23 lines of Book XIV and the 879 lines of Book XV. In N, several later hands are responsible for Book XV; they are designated by the siglum n in Anderson's Teubneriana, whereas Tarrant's Oxoniensis pays practically no attention to Nin Book XV, though he refers to N 3, his 'corrector Gothicus', in his note on v. 677, and uses the siglum nonce or twice. As far as U is concerned, the text of vv. 494-879 is also ascribed to a 'corrector Gothicus' (U 3) by Tarrant. Among the other main MSS. used by Tarrant, the following have book XV: BF GP T (only vv. 231-363; 430-91; 621-748). Anderson regulary cites BF PU W, and in addition e2 h kn p (only vv. 1-631) r sl s2 (not used by Tarrant). Among Tarrant's secondary witnesses, R has vv. 1.1-15.863,the others, notably b, 13(Laurentianus 36.10, s. XII), o, p2 (Parisinus lat. 8000, s. XII/XIII), are reported to be complete. Anderson (pp. XVI-XVIII) lists twelve witnesses which he says he consulted especially for Book XV; of these only seven have the complete text. He also lists seventeen witnesses, including Planudes' Greek translation (pp. XVIII-XX) which he consulted rarely; of these fourteen contain the complete text in one way or another. His Guelf. 4427, s. XIV (=123Gud. Lat. 2o), is Heinsius' 'Rottendorpianus'. His Bodl. F.4.30, s. XII in., containing 15, 1-7: 118-221;330-764; 873-9, is Heinsius' 'Fragmentum Boxhornianum'. Magnus (Berlin 1914)lists about thirty witnesses for Book XV. See also D. A. Slater, Towards a Text ... (Oxford 1927), pp.15-35. The catalogues of manuscripts made by Franco Munari as a preparation for an edition of the Metamorphoses which never appeared are still important. The first one was published in London (1957), as Sueppl. No. 4 of BICS (74 pp.); all the others are found in his Kleine Schriften (Berlin 1980), pp. 89-92; 98-114; 158-60; 217-26; 236-41. The additions and corrections made by F. T. Coulson and B. Munk Olsen are listed by Tarrant, p. vi, n., 3 of his edition.

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017




The 'Editiones veteres' have been neglected as witnesses in recent years, but they are important, for in some cases they preserve readings of lost MSS. and as a whole they reflect the judgement of their editors. I mention the 'Editio Princeps' of F. Puteolanus (Bologna 1471), the 'Romana' by Andreas (also 1471), the two 'Venetae' by Federicus de Comitibus (1472) and Calphurnius (1474), the edition of Bonus Accursius (Milan 1475). The notes of Raphael Regius (Venice 1493) contain a number of emendations. The first Aldina (Venice 1502) is not very good, but the second one, edited by Andreas Naugerius (Venice 1516)is excellent (see my articles in Exemplaria Classica 6, 2002, 1-40 and 9, 2005, 155-224). Some neglected Manuscripts should definitely be collated for book XV. There are many on the hard drive which Antonio Ramirez de Verger and his colleagues created and sent to the members of the team. I have looked at some of them and made a few notes. Heidelberge Bihl. Univ. Palat. Lat.1661, s. XIII/XIII= Mun. 115.Collated by Gruter, Heinsius (as 'alter Palatinus'), Bothe, Anderson, Tarrant. Book XV begins on p. 226 and ends with v. 631 on p. 238. Antverpiensis Plantinianus 51 (anc. 65), M 295, s. XIII once belonged to Theodor Pulmann. Book XV begins on p. 96 and ends on p. 103. Ariminensis Bihl. Civ. Gambalunga 4.A.IV.18, s. XVex-XVJin has book XV on pp. 222-240. The two Baltimorenses are at the Walters Art Museum, Baltimore, Maryland): W 77, s. XIII/XV) (Nr. 24 Munari) and W 162, s. XIV (Nr. 25 Munari). There are eight Basileenses listed by Munari. Some of them were known to Heinsius. His 'Primus Basileensis' is Basil Bihl. Puhl. et Univ. F 11.26, s XIII, Munari's Nr. 27. It was collated by Heinsius and later by E. C. Chr. Bach in: Seebode's Neues Archiv fur Philologie und Padagogik 4 (1829), Nr. 33, pp. 129ff. Heinsius' collation is extant in the Bodleian. Munari's Nr. 28 is Basil. F. II. 27, s. XIII. Heinsius' collation is extant in the Bodleian. Munari's Nr. 29 is Basil. F.11.28,s. XIII. Munari's Nr. 30 is Basil. F. 111.7,a.1466. Munari's Nr. 31 is Basil. F.V.26, a.1455. It was probably collated by Heinsius, but his notes have not been clearly i1entified. Later, it was collated for book XV by H. Magnus (Studien zur Uberlieferung .... (Programm 1893), pp. 5-15. Munari's Nr. 32 is Basil. V. VI.12, written before 1478. Heinsius' excerpts are in the Bodleian. Magnus published his collation, op. cit. Munari's Nr. 33 is Basil. 0.11.6, s. XVI. There are two Bernenses: Bihl. Civ. 345, s. XII, and 363, s. IX. The latter is a valuable witness, but it offers only exceprts from Book I. According to Munari, there are five Bononienses. Heinsius used three of them, and one of those (it is not yet clear which one) he considered a faithful copy of a much older manuscript. The three witnesses Heinsius used are: Primus Bonon. = Bonon. Bihl. Univ. 2278 (Frati 1141),s XIV. Secundus Bonon.


ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017


= Bonon. 2350 (Frati 1184),s. XIV. Tertius Bonon. = Bonon. 2315 (Frati 1159), s.XV. There is a Genevensis = Genev. Bihl. Puhl. et Univ. lat. 94, s. XIII. Heinsius' collation is extant in the Bodleian. There are eight Guelferbytani: Guelf. 123 Gud. Lat., s. XIV. This seems to be Heinsius' 'Rottendorpianus". It was consulted (as Nr. 4427) by Anderson. Guelf. 159 Gud. Lat., s. XIV. Guelf. 194 Gud. Lat., s. XIV. Guelf. 4.11 Aug. (prob. s. XI/XII). This was consulted by Tarrant (as Nr. 2942) who dates its. XII/XIII. Guelf. 5.4 Aug., s. XIII. Guelf. 13.9 Aug., s. XIII. Guelf. 13.10Aug., s. XIII/XIV. Guelf. 30.2, s. XV. The Herzog-August-Bibliothek in Wolfenbi.ittel also has 'very many' early edition. (I owe these informations to Dr. Christian Hogrefe, Wolfenbi.ittel). Laur. Plut. 36, 1, s. XV. Book XV begins on p. 158 and ends on p. 170. Laur. Plut. 36, 3 = Mun.122, a. 1406 was collated by Heinsius whose notes are preserved in Bodl. Auct. S. V .8. Book XV begins on p. 196 and ends on p. 210. The text does not seem to be very good. Laur. 36, 4, s. XIII, was collated by Heinsius whose notes are preserved Bodl. Auct. S. V. 8. Book XV begins on p. 166 and ends on p. 176. Laur. 36, 14, s. XIIex is Heinsius' "Quartus Mediceus'. The Lausannensis Bihl. Cant. et Univ. 403, s. XIIex was collated in parts by E. Paschoud and sporadically by Tarrant. Lips. Bihl. Civ., 44, s. XIIIex = Mun.149. Collated by J. Chr. Jahn and by M. Jahn for Bach. 9, 291-11, 456 (on pp.19-64) are missing. Book XV begins on p. 60 and ends on p. 64. Lips. Bihl. Civ. 45, s. XIII= 145 Mun. Collated by J. Chr. Jahn and by M. Jahn for Bach. Contains 2, 343-12, 288. Lips. Bihl. Civ. 48, s. Ixex = Mun.151. Contains only 3, 131-152. Lond. M. B. Add. 11967, s. X = Mun. 154. Has nothing after 6, 411. Was collated several times, e. g. by G. Gottlieb, WSt 13 (1891),pp.188ff. Lond. Add. 15733, s. XIV = 156 Mun. book XV begins on p. 176 and ends on p.189. Lond. Add. 17405, s. XV= 157 Mun. "Written carelessly" (Mun.) with copious notes. Lond. Add. 17416, s. XV. Not in Munari. Copious marginal notes. Book XV begins on p. 203 and ends on p. 219, with a spurious line after 879: sic

mihi perpetuum nomen sine fine manebit. Lond. Harl. 2673, s. XIV. Hie liber est Monasterii St. Epiphanii. Ends with 15.411. Lond. Harl. 2742, s. XIII= Mun. 169. Heinsius' 'Vossianus'. Collated by Magnus (for Book XV), Housman and Slater. Lond. King's 26, s. XII= Mun.172. Book XV begins on p.141 and ends on p.151. It was collated by Housman, Slater, Magnus and Anderson.

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017




Lucensis 1416, s. XV = Mun. 175. Book XV begins on p. 2795 and ends on p. 2817. Lucensis 1417, s. XIexvel XII= Mun. 176. Book XV begins on p. 2909 and ends on p. 2917. Collated by P. Fabbri for the Paraviana. Maceratensis Bihl. Civ. Mozzi 346, s. XV= Mun. 402. Book XV begins on p.181 and ends on p.198. The scholia are sometimes useful, but the text is not exceptionally good. Monacensis Clm. 29208 (olim 29207a + Cgm 4286) = Tegernseensis, s. XII. Not in Mun. Contains about 2000 lines from Books I, II, IV, VI, VIIIXV. Collated by Magnus, Anderson and Tarrant. The first preserved portion of Book XV, vv. 231-363, begins on p. 69, the last one, vv. 717-48 begins on p. 78. Neapol. Bihl. Naz. IV.F.62. Not in Mun. Book XV begins on p.1662 and ends on p. 1681. N orimb. German. Mus. 42553. Only Book VIII. Novariensis Bihl. Cap. 111(LXXXV), s. XV= Mun. 213. "Very fine Ms." (Mun.). Book XV begins on fol.156 v. and ends on fol. 168 v. Oxon. Bodl. Auct. C 138, s. XV = Mun. 230. Carefully corrected text. Book XV begins on p.167 and ends on p.180. Oxon. Bodl. Add. C 137, s. XV= Mun. 229. Book XV begins on p. 185 and ends on p.199. Sangallensis 864 (Nr. 309 Munari), s. XI contains only parts of Book II. Its relationship with the Bernensis 363 ought to be investigated. Sangallensis 866 (Nr. 310 Munari), probably s. XII, nots. XIII, as assumed before, has been collated by Bach and Tarrant, but their readings sometimes diverge. Turicensis Bihl. Centr. 413 (= Rhenovanus 46), s. XII (Munari Nr. 329) was collated by D. Hurter for Bach and inspected by Tarrant. Turicensis Bihl. Centr. 77, s. XV (Nr. 328 Munari) does not seem to have been collated. Turonensis 879, ca.1200, has been collated by Gabriel Martel, a student of Antonio Ramirez de Verger. See ExClass 14, 2010, 91-173. The Dertusensis Arch. Cap.134, s. XII/ XIII) has been collated by Miryam Libran Moreno. See ExClassica 10, 2006, 83-111; 11, 2007, 83-103; the collation of Book XV is in the second article, pp. 98-100. The readings not attested in any of the witnesses repported by Tarrant (2004) and Magnus (1914) are marked by an asterisk(*). As the author points out, De(rtusensis) agrees in Book XV with the Ambrosianus R 22 sup. (s. XI vel potius XII) in two passages: 52 Iapidis for Iapygis; 475 eludite for inludite (V P, but read includite BF GP T). It agrees with e (= Amplonianus prior Erfurtensis, s. XII vel XIII) in 190 rursusque est for rursus, with n (= various later hands of N) in 493 iam for enim. There is an agreement with Magnus' z (= Harleianus 2742 M. B., s. XIII) in 275 modo tecto (which is also hiding in modo toto


ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017


found in U 2 P n r and was accepted by Merkel and Kenney). De further agrees with the Ambrosianus S 32 sup. (s. XIII-XIV) in 836 suam for sancta. It also shares a reading with the Ambrosianus E 54 inf. (s. XIII-XIV) in 624 unda for alti (but read alvei with Heinsius). Moreover, there is agreement with the Ambrosianus B 18 inf. (s. XV) exhalare for exhalari. Miryam Libran Moreno also notes the agreements of De with the Ed. Romana a.1497 in 597 daturus for daturum, 626 involverat for vitiaverat and with the Ed. Veneta a. 1486 in 197 usquam for umquam. On the whole, De seems to represent a late, contaminated tradition with a few unusual errors on top of the more common ones. But it should also be mentioned, as pointed out by the author in her earlier article (p. 109), that De anticipates conjectures by Heinsius (5.223) and Bach (2.525). Another manuscript preserved in Spain, the Escorialensis S-III-19, s. XIIXIII has been collated by Elena Murcia Estrada (ExClassica 12, 2008, 69101). The collation of Book XV is found on pp. 94-7. It appears that vv. 637-879 are written by a second hand, probably 14th c., and the text here contains a relatively large number of singular errors, some of them fairly grotesque. Unless the second copyist was much more carless or ignorant than the first, it could be that the codex from which they worked had deteriorated considerably during the time that separates their activity. The Escorialensis agrees, in book XV, with Bin: 309 media for medio and in 421 alias for illas. It agrees with F in 768 iniustis for iustis. There is agreement with Gin 428 (omission of est). Finally, the author notes two readings the witness shares with P, both accepted by recent editors: 251 hie for hinc and 363 tabuerint for tabescunt. In her final assessment, the author states that this is a contaminated text which cannot be assigned to any family. She emphasizes some of the valuable readings it contains.

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017



1. Quis] qui Heinsius, Burman ex Oxoniensi aliisque, but cf. Her. 20.221 si tamen ut quaerat quis sim quantusque, uideto, but see also 9-10 infra. tantae pondera molis] Cf. 433 infra; Virg. Aen. 1.33 tantae molis erat Romanam condere gentem. 3-4. destinat ... fama] Cf. Tac. ann. 3.18.4 fama, spe, veneratione potius omnes destinabantur imperio quam quem future; 1.11.1 (see also 5 infra). praenuntia veri] Cf. infra 18; 670; Virg. Aen. 4.188 (fama) tam ficti prauique tenax quam nuntia veri. 4-5. cognosse ... ritus] Cf. am. 3.13.5 grande morae pretium ritus cognoscere; fast. 6.511fraude petit, sacrique parat cognoscere ritum.

5. animo ... capaci] Cf. 8.243 animi ad praecepta capacis; Tac. ann. 1.11.1 solam divi Augusti mentem tantae molis capacem (cf. supra 3-4). 8. penetraret ... ad urbem] Virg. Aen. 7.207 Phrygiae penetrarit ad urbes; 9.10 Corythi penetravit ad urbes. 9. Italicis] Italis VP o al. : Italiis Hs. dub. ex uno (sc. Bononiensi) : Ausoniis codd. nonn.; cf. infra 59 Italis in finibus; 14.17 litore in Italico (Italio Heinsius ex six codd.); Virg. Aen. 5.703 oblitus fatorum, Italasne capessere oras; Sil. 8.183 aeternumque Italis numen celebrare in oris. 10. e senioribus unus] Cf. 11.646 cunctis ... e fratribus unum; 14.310-11

una I quattuor e famulis. 11. non inscius] non nescius unus Leidensis : non immemor G al. But see Virg. Aen. 8.627 haud vatum ignarus venturique inscius aevi. On met. 8.66 we should probably read nisi nescius (Heinsius ex codd. ) for non inscius (0) or nisi inscius (v alii).

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017




12. See Casali on Her. 9.91-2. bubus] g 1, ed princ., Heinsius. Tarrant prints bobus 618 infra, but bubus in 14.3. OLD prefers bobus in Varro, L. L. 5.143; Hor. carm. 3.6.43 and elsewhere. See Heinsius on Her. 5.116where the more recent edd. print bubus.

15. nee inhospita tecta] Here, as often nee = et non. Cf. 1.218 et inhospita tecta. 17-8.See Bentley on Hor. serm. 1.5.92. 18. hie locus urbis erit] Cf. Virg. Aen. 3.393 is locus urbis erit, requies ea certa laborum (see also 16 supra). vera] Cf. supra 3; infra 879. fuerunt] fuere o : fuisse Heinsius, in analogy to 16 intrasse ... relevasse; 17 dixisse.

20. Myscelos] This form of the name has been restored by Scaliger and Micyllus; most MSS. have micilus vel sim.; Planudes offers M{KaAo£,the first Aldina prints Mycilus. Perhaps one should consider Mysscelus, because the name is explained as "mouse-leg" (pv~+ O'KeAo~). acceptissimus] Cf. 12.53 dis acceptus penetravit in aethera nidor.

21. super incumbens] Cf.11.657 lecto incumbens; see Reeson on Her. 11,59. pressum] mersum Ambros. S 32, s. XIII/XIV. gravitate soporis] Cf. infra 321 patitur mira gravitate sopo rem. 22-3. lapidosas Aesaris undas I i pete diversi; patrias age desere sedes] U F P offer this hysteron proteron which editors print as 'lectio difficilior'. Brc G h p alii, ed. Rom. a. 1471, Gruter, D. et N. Heinsius 'ex castigatioribus' have the logical order. For i pete Brc F G h al. have et pete, but i clearly corresponds to age; cf.12.475 i cape. We should probably omit the commas before and after i and age. Aesaris] codd. nonn., Planudes : Aeseris Q. diversi] = remoti. patrias ... sedes] Cf. infra 34-5 patrium ... transferre parabat I in sedes penetrale novas. 24. multa ac metuenda] Cf. infra 33 plura ac graviora.

25.post ea] postea VG P; but see ThLL 10, 2, 174, 15-6. In met. 6.139 post ea discedens the reading is fairly certain. 26. mente/ ... refert] Cf. infra 451 mente memor refero.


ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017

27. visa] iussa unus Heinsii, Planudes. We have the same variant infra 680. Votive inscriptions use both ex viso and ex iusso (Bomer on 21-2), but here, viso is probably right, because it refers to a dream vision that is fresh in his mind (recentia). pugnat ... sententia secum] Cf. Bentley on Hor. serm. 1.1.97 mea cum pugnat sententia mecum; see also infra 648 dissidet et variat sententia. 28. prohibent] in- n. Wrong prefix.

30. Candidus ... Sol] 6,49. Oceano ... I ... Nox] Cf. Virg. Aen. 2.250 ruit Oceano Nox; Markland on Stat. silv. 3.1.71. 31.sidereum] sideribus Laurent. 36.14, Bothe ex coni. Caput ... sidereum seems to be without a parallel, according to Bomer ad Zoe.,and densissima seems to need a qualification. This could be an old conjecture which was made again in the 19th c. extulerant ... sidera noctis (n) may also be a conjecture. 32. idem] sibi W 2 h n.

33. plura ac graviora] Cf. supra 24. Tarrant attributes ac to his group 8 (it is also found in W 2 h) and puts it into the text, following Riese and Edwards, but the lemma suggests that he wanted to keep et, the reading of the main tradition. graviora] maiora B. 34-5. pertimuit] extremuit 8 : extimuit 14, Novariensis, Bothe, Edwards : pertremuit Planudes, ut vid. The prefix is uncertain, as often in this tradition, and here we also have to decide between forms of timere and tremere. The reading of the main tradition, pertimuit, can be defended by 1.638; 641 pertimuit; 14.186; fast. 2.340. The testimony of 8 combined with Planudes, supports pertremuit which seems overly dramatic but may be justified by the more menacing threats of the god. patrium .. .I ... penetrale] the shrine of the household gods; cf. supra 23. simul]palam primus Moreti, Burman, Bothe, but this is not really supported by infra 37 patet and looks like an interpolation. Myscelus is afraid but, at the same time, determined to obey the god. 36-7. peracta est I causa] Cf. Her. 21.152 cum bene promissi causa peracta mei est.

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017




36. prior] viri Heinsius, but causa prior is the technical term for the first part of a trial (Bomer ad Zoe.). patet] patens Brc G. This would go with probatum est 8. The division between the readings is clear, but the division between the witnesses is not. Crimen sine teste probatum must be a technical term, like causa prior, but crimen patens is also a legal term. Still, the main tradition is probably right: It is clear that Myscelus has broken the law, and no witnesses are needed to condemn him. Patens ... probatum (n, Ehwald) seems less likely.

38. tollens] tendens V P n, quattuor Ciofani et unus Gifanii, but tollens is better with ora; cf. Sil. 6.466 palmas attollens et lumina caelo. When the face is not mentioned explicitly, tendere is more likely to be used, as in 11.397 manus tendens; 13.411tendebat ad aethera palmas; Virg. Aen. 2.688 caelo palmas cum voce tetendit; 3.177; 10.667. But it does not seem to be a strict rule, for Val. Fl. 8-68 combines, as it appears, manus and lumen: manus Colchis lumenque (Heinsius : crinemque codd.) intenderat astris. In a similar passage, infra 570 the MSS. give us a choice between oculos ... bracchia, manus ... lumina and oculos ... cornua with tollens. Cf. Ramirez de Verger (2019) on 6.279. 39. cui ius caeli] this brilliant emendation of ms. cuius caelum was made independently . it appears, by Muretus, Scaliger and Meursius. The variants listed by editors are bad conjectures. The corruption can be explained, in part, by haplography and wrong word division in 'scriptio continua' (CVI IVS became CVIVS), but also by a wrong ending (CAELI became CAELUM). Crispinus explain s: 'cui aperuerunt viam ad caelum.' Cf. fast. 6.23 ius tibi fecisti numen caeleste videndi; Burman on Epiced. Drusi 54; Heinze on Her. 12.73; Casali on Her. 9.17-18 (but he ignores the emendation). See Ramirez de Verger, Coll. Latomus, 2006, p. 325. 40. criminis] muneris V P al. The words look alike, and the idea that a god could demand a crime from a mortal may have been repugnant to a scribe who remembered the verse ending muneris auctor (e.g. 7.686), but see also Prop. 2.6.19 tu criminis auctor.

41. antiquus] antiquis V G P, Ciofani ex uno, but see Bomer ad Zoe.,Helzle on Pont. 2.5.43-4.

42. culpa] e2 l p v r, according to Anderson, while Tarrant (who omits "42" before the lemma) attributes the reading to his generic group cp.The accusative after absolvere (-am B F G h n, -as U) is wrong; the ablative (with or without a) can be defended by Hor. serm. 2.3.279 commotae crimine mentis absolves hominem, etc., the genitive (-ae d al., 'eleganter' Heinsius) by Sen. benef 4.2722, perhaps in analogy to Greek cbro1veiv 811c17~.


ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017

43. tum] tune VB al., not reported by Tarrant: nunc Heinsius ex uno, edd.

vett. Perhaps tune should be read in Ovid before quoque; cf. 1.339; 4.339; 11.743.Tarrant prints tum (seep. 499). tristis] As opposed to candida (47 infra), but apparently unparalleled with sententia. 47. numine] munere 'rectius' Heinsius ex primo Basil. et 10 al., but 6.443 magni mihi muneris instar is not a good parallel; in fact, Burman here replaced muneris by numinis, and Boissonade suggested nominis; cf. also Drakenborch on Sil. 8.233. The other passage cited by Heinsius, 14.594, 'estis ... caelesti munere digni .. .' does not prove anything, either, and here some witnesses have numine. The miracle which saves Myscelus requires divine power. Herculeo ... muners = munere Herculis would be possible grammatically, but it could also mean a gift of the living Hercules. 48. solvit = absolvit ('simplex pro composito'). Alemoniden] Heinsius 'ex castigatoribus'; cf. 19; 26; the patronym has been corrupted in the main tradition. parenti] potenti Bentley dub. (ex o?), accepted by Fuss, but Hercules pater is formulaic, and even though Ovid says nothing about Hercules being Myscelus' father, a close relationship is implied by the dream vision, the mission and the miracle.

49-50. aequor I navigat Ionium] Cf. Virg. Aen. 1.67 gens inimica mihil Tyrrhenum navigat aequor. 50-2. Some editors have tried to establish a plausible sequence for Myscelus' voyage, and various changes and transpositions have been suggested. We have the same type of problems as in the voyage of the holy Snake ( infra 695-728 ). To give an example, Riese, Ehwald, Edwards and others transposed Sallentinumque Neretum and Lacedaemoniumque Tarentum (50-1), while Korn deleted Lacedaemoniumque ... sinus. On Lac. Tar. cf. Hor. carm. 3.5.56. Ehwald also changed Thurinosque (52) to Sirinosque, identifying the Siris as the river near which the city of Heraclea was built. The name is uncertain in the tradition: Thu- F, Planudes, edd. pler.: Tu- 0: Tau- W v. If Ehwald is right, Myscelus touched the estuary of Heraclea, the city named after the god who sent him on his trip. What would Thurini sinus be? A bay near Sybaris? 51.Sybarin] This form has also been restored by Heinsius 'ex castigatioribus'. The MSS. have corrupted it variously. Neretum] Probably Nardo in Calabria. The 'Aldina prima' prints Neaethum which R. Regius apparently proposed as a conjecture.

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017




52. Nemesenque] This name is doubtful, too. The form printed by Tarrant is based only on n, to judge from Anderson's app., while U alii, Planudes support Temesenque; cf. infra 707 where Tarrant prints Temesenque, following G P. Temesenque was introduced by Hermolaus Barbarus (on Plin. nat. 14.6.69, ed. Pozzi II 1974, p. 730). Temese is a coastal town c. 90 km. west of Craton, but no city with a name like Nemese has been identified so far. Burman, followed by Edwards, conjectured Crimisenque, an Apulian city ea. 80 km north of Craton (see W. Kroll, RE 11, 1859). Either form is more plausible than Nemesenque. lapy gis arva] After Virg. Aen. 11.247 lapygis arvis (agris M PR). For arva, Baumgarten- Crusius tentatively suggested ora, thinking of a coastal town , possibly Capo Rizzato, ea. 21 km south of Craton; cf. infra 703. Arva is a v. 1. to ota in 54 infra (see note) and elsewhere. But since Iapyx is a legendary king or eponymous hero in Apulia, his territory is well described by the phrase lapygis arva. On the lapyges in Apulia see 14.458-9 ille (Diomedes) ... sub lapyge maxima Daunol moenia condiderat dotaliaque arva tenebat; 510.

53. litora] aequora Owen ex Planudes, Edwards ('fort. recte' Tarrant), but litora can mean 'the sea near the coast'; cf. 11.397 aperti litora ponti; Virg. Aen. 7.19 litora terrae; E. Lofstedt, Coniectanea I, pp. 84ff. On the other hand, terrae quae (qua h) spectant aequora is pratically identical to litora which might be a glossa. Crispinus paraphrases 'terris quae sunt versus litus'. The whole narrative gives the impression that Myscelus and his companions did land here and there and explored the unfamiliar countryside, just like Odysseus and his men. 54.Aesarei] The name was apparently restored by R. Regius (cf. supra 22); most MSS. have Aeserii (Esarii h 1). ora] arva n alii, probably because of v. 52, perhaps also because of Virg. Aen. 5.82 (see below on 58-9), but fluminis requires ora; cf. fast. 4.294; Val. Fl. 5.212 fluminis os pontusque. 58-9. T. Faber wanted to delete the two lines for no good reason. 59. Italis in finibus] !talus (adj.) is found only here in the Met., but often in Virgil, e. g. Aen. 5.82 finis Italos fataliaque arva, a passage Ovid may have had in mind. See above on v. 9.

60-480. In his whole grandiose monologue, Ovid's Pythagoras sounds sometimes like Lucretius' Epicurus; see, e. g. infra 63-4; 150, etc. See also Justin, Epit. 20.4; Waszink (1974) on Tertullian, anim. 28. Justin probably knew Ovid's work.


ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017

62-4. Apul. mund. 287 may have this passage in mind: nam cum homines mundum eiusque penetralia corpore adire (cf. infra 63) non possent, et e terreno domicilio illas regiones inspicerent (cf. infra 65), philosophiam ducem nacti eiusque inventis imbuto animo peregrinari ausi sunt per caeli plagas, etc.; cf. ibid. anima divinis oculis suis aspexit et agnovit. 62. isque licet caeli V P : isque animo caeli et F2: isque animo caelestique et B1 : is caelestiaque et Bv1 F G. For some reason, licet (=quamvis) or -que licet was admitted from one branch of the tradition, and the gap was filled with conjectures suggested by the immediate context. remotos Bv1F G g h 1r al., Heinsius : remotus V Bpc?Pal., 'fort. recte' Tarrant. regione is instrumental, it seems (cf. trist. 3.4b.73-4), as in 12.41 quamvis regionibus absit, which could speak for remotus. We should also consider that Pythagoras himself might have felt removed from his heavenly home through his incarnation as a human being; see Apul. mund. (cited above on 62-4). Remotos is more likely to have become remotus, because deos has to be anticipated from the next line. Cf. also Stat. Theb. 9.821 caeli ... in parte remota. 63-4. Cf. Pont. 1.8.34 mens oculis pervidet usa suis; Luer. 1.74 (of Epicurus) omne immensum peragravit mente animoque. 64. hausit] Virg. Aen. 4.661-2; 12.26; 945-6; Gibson on Stat. silv. 5.3.22. 65. perspexerat] prospexerat B, but cf. Hor. carm. 1.28.4-6 (of Archytas)

nee quidquam tibi prodest I aerias temptasse domos animoque rotundum I percurrisse polum. 66. discenda :perspecta s2, Bothe. Probably influenced by perspexerat (65). coetusque] VP, Heinsius ex 'plerisque vetustiorum' : coetumque B Gv: coetuque F. 67. magni ... mundi] Cf. Luer. 5.1204-5 magni caelestia mundi I temp la; Virg. geo. 2.475. primordia] Cf. Lucr.1.210 primordia rerum; 2.1062-3 magnarum rerum ... exordia. 68. rerum causas] Cf. supra 6 rerum natura; Virg. geo. 2.490 rerum cognoscere causas. quid F GP al.: quod V: quae B, but see on 69 below. We have to supply esset; cf. Bomer on 13.497; Galasso on Pont. 2.10.10.

69. quid F GP: quis VP, but see on 68 above; 14.2-3 arva ... Cyclopum, quid rastra, quid usus aratri I nescia. In a philosophical context, this

ExClass Anejo VIII, 2017




would correspond to,:{ cpu