The Jerusalem Palimpsest of Euripides: A Facsimile Edition with Commentary [Reprint 2011 ed.] 9783110831948, 9783110011937

Table of contents :
1. INTRODUCTION
A codicological description of the palimpsest
Material, constitution, measurements
The hands of H
Ruling type
Miscellanea
2. THE FACSIMILE
3. THE COLLATION
4. APPENDIX A: The relationship of H to mss ABMLPV
5. APPENDIX B: Observations on the scholia of H
6. ADDENDUM

Citation preview

THE JERUSALEM PALIMPSEST OF EURIPIDES A FACSIMILE EDITION WITH COMMENTARY

THE JERUSALEM PALIMPSEST OF EURIPIDES A FACSIMILE EDITION

WITH COMMENTARY BY STEPHEN G. DAITZ The Gty College of New York

WALTER DE GRUYTER & CO. BERLIN 1970

With 71 Collotype Plates

(Mit 71 Lichtdrucktafeln)

© 1969 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin 30 Printed in Germany Alle Rechte, insbesondere das der Ubersetzung in fremde Sprachen, vorbehalten. Ohne ausdrückliche Genehmigung des Verlages ist es auch nicht gestattet, dieses Buch oder Teile daraus auf photomechanischem Wege (Photokopie, Mikrokopie) zu vervielfältigen. Archiv-Nr. 3008701 Satz und Druck: Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin 30 Lichtdrucktafeln: Fa. Ganymed, Berlin 30, Lützowstraße 64—66

TO MY PARENTS TO MY WIFE TO MY C H I L D R E N

Preface The circumstances surrounding the publication of this book represent one of those unexpected and ironic twists of scholarly investigation. In the summer of 1965 I was in Europe to examine some of the most important manuscripts of Euripides' Hecuba in connection with a new critical edition of this play which I was preparing for the Teubner collection. Finding myself in Athens, I decided to continue on to Jerusalem in the remote hope of being able to extract a few more accurate readings from the lines of Hecuba preserved in the Jerusalem palimpsest. Upon arrival in Jerusalem, a face to face confrontation with the manuscript showed at once how vain this hope was. The Euripidean layer of writing had faded to the point where it was in many places illegible, in some places invisible to the naked eye. Photographs of the palimpsest were then taken by tungsten light and by infrared light. Both methods yielded unsatisfactory results. Ultraviolet light, which I had used successfully a few weeks earlier in my examination of a manuscript in the Vatican Library, was the next means sought. No ultraviolet lamp, however, could be discovered in what was then the Jordanian sector of Jerusalem where the manuscript is housed in the Greek Patriarchal Library. Finally, on the very day when I was required to leave the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan according to the conditions of my exit permit, an ultraviolet lamp was unearthed. For one brief but unforgettable hour the lamp shone on the palimpsest and I had the moving experience of participating in what can almost be described as a "resuscitation". As the lamp glowed, letters, words, and lines of Euripides which had been dimmed or invisible for over six hundred years gradually began to re-emerge from the parchment and to reveal their identity, seemingly coaxed or compelled by the ultraviolet light. Unfortunately, at this exciting juncture of events, it was, as stated, necessary for me to leave the country. Despite good will on all sides it subsequently proved impossible to arrange through correspondance for the ultraviolet photography of the palimpsest. And so the following summer of 1966, armed with all necessary photographic equipment and information concerning the techniques of ultraviolet photography, I returned to Jerusalem to attempt to recapture on film what I had seen with my eyes. There then followed a series of hopes, frustrations, incidents, and adventures which would more appropriately grace the pages of a novella than a scholarly preface, but which would not be unfamiliar to those acquainted with the shifting sands of the Middle East. The upshot of it all is that time for work on the palimpsest was severely limited. (The Greek Patriarchal Library, for example, is open from 9 a. m. to 11 a. m.) As a result, it was just barely possible to complete the ultraviolet photography (a delicate and lengthy procedure) of the entire Euripidean portion of the palimpsest. There was virtually no time for the subsequent codicological study of the palimpsest itself by ultraviolet light which I had intended as a safety check against the photographs. Fortunately, however, the main goal was achieved. A complete and usable set of photographs of one of the most important and inaccessible of Euripidean manuscripts is now made available to all. It is to be hoped that one day when calm has returned to the Middle East and when international scholarly cooperation becomes more solidly based, it will be possible to re-examine the Jerusalem palimpsest under laboratory conditions in the hope of clearing up the few remaining points of doubt. Until that day is reached I hope that these photographs will fruitfully serve the needs of scholarship. VII

In publishing a facsimile edition of the Jerusalem palimpsest, it seemed logical to unite in one volume the photographs, the collation of the text, and other related observations concerning the form and content of the manuscript.

It is a most pleasant duty to acknowledge debts of gratitude to those persons and institutions whose help has made possible the appearance of this volume. The late Monsieur A. Dain, perhaps the outstanding Greek paleographer of our time, literally taught me the alpha, beta, gamma of Greek paleography at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes in Paris, and subsequently gave me precious counsel when I began to investigate and to collate manuscripts. His pupil and now successor, Monsieur J. Irigoin, has, through correspondence, given me the benefit of his extensive explorations of Greek manuscripts. Also in Paris, at the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes, Monsieur l'abb£ Μ. Richard and his assistant, Mademoiselle G. Morize, were unstinting in their assistance. In the United States, Professor A. Turyn, whose fundamental work on The Byzantine Manuscript Tradition of the Tragedies of Euripides serves as the point of departure for all future studies of the Euripidean textual tradition, gave important advice as well as strong support to my project on the Jerusalem palimpsest. Mr. Hans Lippmann of the Photography Division of the Pierpont Morgan Library in New York City; Mr. H. L. Gibson of the Eastman Kodak Laboratory in Rochester, New York; Dr. S. Lewin and Mr. L. Majewski of the Institute of Fine Arts in New York City, all provided vital information concerning the various techniques of photography, including ultraviolet photography, which might be successfully applied to the Jerusalem palimpsest. It was the generous assistance, in the form of research grants, of the American Philosophical Society and the City College Research Fund which enabled me to travel twice to Jerusalem and to purchase necessary photographic equipment. The Fondation Hardt in Vandoeuvres, Switzerland and its kind hostess, the late Madame M. Rochat, provided cordial hospitality and a tranquil atmosphere in which part of the work on the palimpsest photographs could be achieved. Similar hospitality was extended by the Center for Hellenic Studies, Washington, D. C., and its Director, Professor B. M. W. Knox, while I was engaged in research on the palimpsest at the Library of Congress. In Jerusalem, Dr. P. Lapp, former Director of the American School of Oriental Studies, was particularly helpful in making preliminary arrangements for the photographing of the palimpsest, as were Dr. Yusef Saad, Curator, and Mr. N. Albina, photographer, of the Palestine Archaeological Museum. At the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate, where the palimpsest is kept, His Beatitude Benediktos, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, kindly gave permission for the palimpsest to be photographed. His Grace Vassilios, Chief Secretary of the Patriarchate, and His Grace Artemios, Archbishop of Neapolis and Librarian, provided unusual encouragement and conditions for the study of the palimpsest. From the negatives brought back from Jerusalem, Mr. Charles Passella, of the Photography Division of the Pierpont Morgan Library, made exceptionally clear contact prints from which the details of the palimpsest could be studied. In the preparation of this volume for publication, strong and welcome encouragement was received from Dean J. P. Elder and Professor W. Clausen of Harvard University and from Professor H. Lloyd-Jones of Oxford University. Finally, Dr. Kjeld Matthiessen of the University of Münster kindly contributed several keen observations on difficult readings in the palimpsest while Professor J. Stern of the City College of New York was of invaluable assistance in reading the proofs. The high degree of excellence in printing of Walter de Gruyter & Co. will immediately be apparent to all those who have occasion to use this book. The City College of New York, November 1969 VIII

S. G. D.

Contents 1. INTRODUCTION A codicological description of the palimpsest Material, constitution, measurements The hands of Η Ruling type Miscellanea 2. THE FACSIMILE

1 2 2 4 7 10 12

PLATES 1—71 (between pages 16 and 17) 3. THE COLLATION

17

4. APPENDIX A: The relationship of Η to mss ABMLPV

27

5. APPENDIX B: Observations on the scholia of Η

29

6. ADDENDUM

31

1. Introduction The Jerusalem palimpsest (ms. H) is probably the oldest extant manuscript to contain sizeable portions of the text of Euripides1. Fragments of six plays are represented: Hecuba, Phoenissae, Orestes, Andromacha, Hippolytus, and Medea. The total number of Euripidean lines is 1593. According to Papadopoulos-Kerameus, in the thirteenth century the manuscript was located in the monastery of Prodromos, near the Jordan River 2 . From there it passed to the nearby religious community (laura) of St. Sabba where it was seen in 1844 by the Russian Archimandrite Porphyry Uspensky3, in 1857 by the Oxford librarian, H. O. Coxe4, and finally by C. Tischendorf5. At some time before 1891 (the date of Papadopoulos-Kerameus' catalogue of the Jerusalem manuscripts) the palimpsest was incorporated into the Greek Patriarchal Library of Jerusalem6. The efforts of Coxe and Tischendorf to identify the Euripidean selections were greatly advanced by Papadopoulos-Kerameus, who also gave, at the end of his description of the manuscript, some of the variants he had found. Unfortunately, in the matter of variants, Papadopoulos-Kerameus' ambitions exceeded his accomplishment. Many of his readings are erroneous and misleading, giving the impression that Η was filled with gross mistakes. Hence the early references to Η by Wilamowitz, Wecklein, and Murray are understandably disdainful. Nearly forty years later, K. Horna, working from a set of photographs, attempted to give a more detailed description of the writing of H, to establish the relationship of its text to that of the other important manuscripts of Euripides, and to give an evaluation of some of the variants found in H 7 . In 1937 J . A. Spranger had a privately printed set of photographs of Η distributed to fifteen major

1

2

8

4

5 6

7

The date of the Jerusalem palimpsest (Hierosolymitanus Patriarchalis 36) is generally set at 10 — 11 century. A discussion of this and related questions will be found below in the section devoted to the codicological description of H. It is true that two of the most important manuscripts of Euripides, Μ (Marcianus gr. 471) and Β (Parisinus gr. 2713), generally dated 12 th century, are probably to be assigned to the 11th century. This view was held by T. W. Allen ( JHS 57 [1937], p. 109) and most recently by G. Zuntz (An Inquiry into the Transmission of the Plays of Euripides, Cambridge 1965, p. 35 note). However, even if Β and Μ are reassigned to the 11th century, it is probable that neither is as old as H. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Ίεροσολυμιτική Βιβλιοθήκη, Petrograd 1891, vol. I, p. 108. This catalogue of the manuscripts of the Greek Patriarchal Library in Jerusalem is still of basic importance. Volume I has seven photographs of the Euripidean palimpsest, much reduced in size. There is an inscription on p. 225 of Η attesting to this. Uspensky examined many manuscripts in his travels and apparently had the habit of bringing home sample pages cut or ripped from those manuscripts which he found interesting. For the benefit of future investigators, he often left some such note in the manuscript as "hie desunt duo folia". It is known that Uspensky removed eight leaves from the Jerusalem palimpsest and took them to St. Petersburg (Leningrad) where they are now in the Gosudarstvennaia Publichnaia Biblioteka (ms. grech. 261). These leaves were recently examined by the Abbe M. Richard of the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes, Paris, and he informs me that they contain no Euripidean text. H. O. Coxe, Report to Her Majesty's Government on the Greek Manuscripts yet remaining in the Levant, London 1858, p. 55, no. 22. F. C. Tischendorf, Anecdota Sacra et Profana2, Leipzig 1861, p. 273. Although the manuscript did come from the Laura of St. Sabba, it was placed in the main patriarchal (πατριαρχείου) collection as number 36. Hence any reference to the manuscript by one of the other collections of the Library, such as Sabae 36 (Spranger's designation) or Taphou 36 (Turyn's designation) is incorrect. On the occasion of my first visit to the Patriarchal Library, when I asked for the manuscript by the latter designations, the Librarian could not locate it for me. K. Horna, "Der Jerusalemer Euripides-palimpsest", Hermes 64 (1929), pp. 416—431. 1

Daitz, Palimpsest of Euripides

1

libraries in Europe and in the United States8. On the basis of these photographs, Spranger himself published in the following year the first full collation of the text of H9. In the same year, D. Page, working from independent photographs but in collaboration with Spranger, published his findings concerning the selections from Medea contained in H10. Most recently Η was described in brief by A. Turyn in his monumental work on the manuscripts of Euripides11.

Codicological Description of Η Material, Constitution, Dimensions As was stated in the preface, limitations of time prevented a detailed examination of Η in situ. The following description is therefore of necessity based more upon a study of the photographs in this volume than upon a study of the manuscript itself. The text of Η was written on parchment, originally of a sturdy and fairly good quality, but which has suffered considerable deterioration through time and the very process of being rewritten. In the present binding, which is of fairly recent date (perhaps the 19a century), the Euripidean text can be found on 17 leaves or 34 pages12. Each of these 34 pages contains two pages of the original Euripidean codex (68 pages in all), which are approximately half the size of the present page. The original Euripidean codex was obviously dismembered, the sheets of parchment flattened, washed, and trimmed to a somewhat smaller format. The holes and the fold of the inner binding of the Euripidean codex can be clearly seen in the photographs13. The more recent, upper layer of writing, which contains a commentary on the prophets of the Old Testament, was written approximately three hundred years after the Euripidean layer. The lines of the upper layer run perpendicular to those of the lower layer. The constitution of the original Euripidean codex was studied by Spranger14 who concluded that twenty-six quaternions had been used and that the original order of the plays in Η was Hecuba, Orestes, Phoenissae, Andromacha, Medea, Hippolytus. This hypothesis required, however, that there be a relatively large number of pages (6—11) either blank or unaccounted for, between each play. Neither the argumenta nor the scholia, as we know them, would justify these large intervals, nor can we assume that these pages of precious parchment simply remained empty. 8

8

10

11

12

18

11

2

J. A. Spranger, Euripidis quae in codice Hierosolymitano rescripto Patriarchalis Bibliothecae XXXVI servantur photographice inlustrantur, Florentiae 1937. These photographs, taken by tungsten or natural light, were excellent, considering the technical limitations. They have served as the principal means of study of the palimpsest for those scholars unable to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Yet, in many places they were, as Spranger himself stated, illegible. J. A. Spranger, "A New Collation of the Text of Euripides in the Jerusalem Palimpsest", CQ 32 (1938), pp. 197—204. This work will hereafter be referred to as Spranger, Collation. It is to be noted that Spranger made his collation with the Prinz-Wecklein edition of Euripides, an edition now out of print. The present collation is made with Murray's Oxford edition which, though occasionally inaccurate and incomplete (as was Prinz-Wecklein), is nevertheless today the most widely used text of Euripides. D. L. Page, ed., Euripides, Medea, Oxford 1938, pp. XLV—XLVI. The investigations of Spranger and Page have been of great significance in removing the false impressions concerning the "errors" of Η and in restoring it to its position of exceptional importance for the textual tradition of Euripides. A. Turyn, The Byzantine Manuscript Tradition of the Tragedies of Euripides, (Illinois Studies in Language and Literature: vol. 43) Urbana 1957, pp. 86 ff. The entire manuscript contains 556 pages, all of which are palimpsest. The original layer of the non-Euripidean pages apparently contains theological writings from various centuries. Cf. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, op. cit., p. 109. Each photograph in this volume represents a single Euripidean page, hence half of one of the present pages. The original inner binding can be seen either at the left or the right side of the photograph. Spranger, Collation (cf. note 9), p. 198.

Recently, W. Barrett suggested another order of the plays which completely eliminates the problems raised by Spranger's proposal16. Barrett's order of the plays is Hecuba, Phoenissae, Orestes, Andromacha, Hippolytus, Medea. Assuming an average of 25 lines per page, this order would require a total of fewer than twenty-three quaternions with the following distribution: Quaternion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Content (line numbers are approximate) Hec. Ree. Hec. Hec. Phoen. Phoen. Phoen. Phoen. Or. Or. Or. Or. Or. Andr. Andr. Andr. Hipp. Hipp. Hipp. Hipp. Med. Med. Med.

1-409 410-818 819-1223 1224—1295; 251—650 651-1050 1051-1450 1451—1766; 51-465 466-846 847-1250 1251-1650 1651—1693; 323-722 723-1122 1123—1288; 221-620 621-1020 1021-1436 1437—1466; 351—735 736-1125 1126—1419;

3 pages (argumenta); Phoen. 1 - 2 5 0

1% pages (argumenta); Or. 1 —-50

1 page (argumenta); Andr. 1 —322

1 page (argumenta); Hipp. 1 —220

% page (argumentum); Med. 1- 3 5 0

4 pages (contents unknown)

Whether the original codex contained other plays in addition to the six partial survivors is a question at present unanswerable. It is difficult to give the precise external dimensions of the original Euripidean page since it was in every case trimmed when it was reused for the present codex and the trimming was quite irregular. The range of these external dimensions, however, can be given as 170—180 χ 120—140mm. It can at once be seen that the original Euripidean codex was not a large, deluxe edition, but rather a small, handy text1®. Given these rather diminutive dimensions, it is only to be expected that the text of Euripides is written in a single column across the writing surface which is surrounded by scholia, variants, and glosses in the upper, lower, external, and internal margins. Each page generally contains the 15

16

W. Barrett, ed., Euripides, Hippolytos, Oxford 1964, p. 68 note 3. The signatures normally placed on each of the quaternions to identify and establish their order, and which axe so valuable in determining the constitution of a codex, have apparently disappeared from H. Undoubtedly they were clipped off when the original pages were trimmed for reuse. On p. 357 a (upper left) and on p. 533 a (upper left and upper right) appear illegible tracings, one or more of which may just possibly be remnants of the original signatures of H. Cf. the format of Marcianus gr. 258, manuscript of the ninth century: 188 χ 135 mm. (cited by J. Irigoin, "Pour une ötude des centres de copie byzantins". Scriptorium 12 [1958], p. 212). ι

3

text of Euripides written on 25 lines, although these lines do not always correspond, particularly in lyric passages, to the lineation of modern editions17. The dimensions of the writing surface for the text (in distinction to the scholia) can be given with greater precision than can the external dimensions. Yet, here, too, there is a complication. As will immediately be seen in some detail, the text of Η was written by three scribes, designated as ZH, 2H, 3H. The scribes Ή and 2 H generally employed a writing surface of 158 χ 97 mm., 3 H a surface of 145 χ 90 mm. In both cases there are slight variations from page to page. The Hands of Η There are, as just mentioned, three scribes or three distinguishable hands in Η which are responsible for the 68 pages of Euripidean text: 1 H, 2H, 3 H. These hands are not to be confused with and have no necessary connection with the hands of the corrections or variants added to the text 18 . Ή wrote the text of 52 of the 68 Euripidean pages19, i. e., all of the pages except those to be attributed to 2 H and 3 H. 2 H wrote the text of eight pages: 281a, 281b, 282a, 282b, 539a, 539b, 540a, 540b. S H also wrote the text of eight pages: 313a, 313b, 314a, 314b, 339a, 339b, 340a, 340b. Before attempting a detailed analysis of the three hands, it may be useful to present some general observations on their appearance. Ή and 2 H bear a strong resemblance to one another; they are obviously contemporaneous and derive from the same scriptorium. Both are specimens of or are closely related to what Lake calls the Stoudion hand20, and what Hunger describes as the Perlschrift21. Both closely resemble dated manuscripts of the late tenth century or early eleventh century. The writing is small, round, and flowing, although 2 H is generally somewhat closer to uncial writing in its fullness, regularity, and restraint. Although the pages written by 3 H are the most difficult to read (without ultraviolet light much of the writing is practically invisible), the hand of 3 H is clearly quite distinct from Ή and 2 H in form and time. Apart from the obvious difference of ruling type (to be discussed below), the writing of 3 H is smaller, more rigid, and less flowing than 1 H— 2 H, and contains formations of letters typical of a later period. It seems to resemble the writing of a number of manuscripts of the mid or second half of the thirteenth century22. In order to present as clearly as possible the specific characteristics of the three hands, the following table was drawn up wherein the similarities and differences of the hands can be compared side by side. 17

Of the 68 pages of Euripidean. text, 18 pages have the text written on more than or less than 25 lines. These pages are here listed with the number of lines on which the text is written given in parenthesis: 524b (24), 523b (22), 523a (23), 344a (24), 390a (27), 539b (24), 540a (24), 540b (24), 539a (24), 331a (26), 421a (26), 421b (26), 422a (26), 428b (26), 314b (23), 314a (24), 313a (26), 339b (26). 18 It is largely the greater clarity of the ultraviolet photographs which permitted the discovery of three distinct hands in H, a condition, to my knowledge, unobserved (and perhaps unobservable) to previous students of H. Cf. Horna (op. cit. p. 418): "Alles ist von einer Hand . . . geschrieben", and Spranger (Collation, p. 198): "As regards the hands of the scribe and the correctors . . . " Other scholars do not even mention the question. 19 X H also wrote most of the scholia preserved in H. This matter will be treated in greater detail below. The writing of 1 H can be most clearly seen on pp. 533a and 533 b which, for some unaccountable reason, were never burdened with a second layer of writing. 20 K. and S. Lake, Dated Greek Minuscule Manuscripts to the Year 1200, Indices, vols. I to X, Boston 1945, p. XIX. 21 H. Hunger, Studien zur griechischen Paläographie, Wien 1954, pp. 22 ff. 32 Cf. A. Turyn, Codices Graeci Vaticani Saeculis XIII et XIV Scripti, Bibliotheca Vaticana 1964, tab. 25, 26. This suggested date for the hand of 8 H, as well as that for 1 H— 2 H, was independently confirmed for the author in a letter from the French paleographer, J. Irigoin. Despite the relative stiffness of 8 H, the scribe occasionally expands his letters to abnormal proportions. Thus at the very bottom of p. 339 a the word οΐμοι practically shouts at the reader.

4

The Hands of H: Principal Distinctions 1

Writing Characteristic

2

H

3

H

H

1. Relationship of the writing to the ruled line

Letters generally written across, sometimes suspended from line

Similar to XH.

Letters always suspended from the line or (in the case of a vertical line) written after the line

2. Slant

To the right

To the right (somewhat less than XH)

Little or no slant

3. Letters angular or round ?

Round

Round

Round

4. Letters joined or separate ?

Joined

Joined

Joined

5. Thickness of line

Medium

Medium

Medium

6. Ratio of the height of the letters to the height of the lines

1:4

1:4

1:5

7. Uncial letters used: exclusively, more than, equally with, less than the equivalent minuscule letter? (important differences italicized)

Β Γ 6 Η θ Κ λ Ν C (0

8. Position of uncial letters

Scattered throughout the line

9. Distinctive ligatures (found in only one of the three hands)

(αν) c Hec H1 H2 Η1»0 Η2*« HYP Σ s. 1. i. m. • # α

The reading in the text of the ms. by the hand of the original scribe. Where no symbol appears in the collation, the reading which follows the colon is that of H. Η ante correctionem. Η post correctionem (no conclusion drawn about the author of the correction). A line drawn underneath a letter or group of letters indicates that only that letter or group of letters has been corrected. Η ex correctione where Hac is uncertain. The hand of the original scribe. Any hand other than H1. Η corrected by H1. Η corrected by H2. A variant in Η preceded by γρ (No conclusion drawn as to the hand in which the variant is written. When the hand is identifiable it is indicated Hlyp, H2yp.) The marginal commentary, supra lineam. in margine. An illegible letter. An illegible accent and/or breathing. An erasure or illegible area covering the space of one letter, The letter is probably, but not certainly a.

The reading which precedes the colon, even when followed by one of the above symbols, is always that of the Oxford edition (OCT) edited by Murray. Proper nouns and adjectives, however, are not capitalized in the collation. Collation ( a ) Hecuba 869—893 (ms. p. 282 b) 869 in religatione celatus legi nequit, at in codice ipso legere potui 870 γάρ ή ν : γάρ εΐ 873 οία Η»0 : τοΐα Η " ut videtur 875 τά δ' : τάδ' 877 ypoci? om. 879 TIS : τί 888 &s : ώς μέθες scripsit Η(3) (!) Many of these symbols axe adaptations of those used by A. Turyn (cf. above, Introduction, note 11) and R. Dawe, The Collation and Investigation of Manuscripts of Aeschylus, Cambridge 1964. The numbers of the footnotes to the collation are given in parenthesis in order to avoid confusion with the manuscript symbols. (2) Since we are dealing with a palimpsest where the reading of the original script frequently presents items of paleographical difficulty or significance, this collation will report variants which are ordinarily omitted from collations, e. g., its, and certain orthographical errors. There is, however, no attempt to present an exhaustive paleographical report. Thus a non-critical variant such as the omission of iota subscript/adscript will not normally be mentioned. Certain readings in Η will be reported, not as differing from Murray's text, but as a correction or addition to his apparatus criticus or to Spranger's collation (cf. Introduction, note 9). Spranger's reading will in such cases be cited in the notes to this collation. (8) Spranger μέθος. This is a misreading of the combination es (άτ) for os- Cf. on this page v. 879 ξυνέσται. 3

Daitt, Palimpsest of Euripides

17

Hecuba 894—920 (ms. p. 281 b) 894 έκείνης : εκείνου 897 δισσή μέριμνα : δισσώ μερίμνα ec (4> 898 εί H 899 τήνδε σοι scr. Η 901 όρώντ' εξ : όρώυτας 907 τοϊον scr. Η 910 στεφάναν : στεφάνων ut vid. 911 αίθάλου : αίθάλου καπνοϋ 912 οίκτροτάταν : οίκτροτάτα · κέχρωσαι Η ρ® : fortasse κέχρησθαι Η80 913 έμβατεύσω : έμβατεύω 915 έκ : δ' έκ ύπνος 1 2 0 om. Η add. Η 916 μολπδν : μολπάν χοροποιων : χαροποιών Η" χοροποιόν Η»0 ut (5) — vid . 918 θυσιαν : θυσίαν καταλύσας : καταπαύσας Hecuba 1125—1148 (ms. p. 281 a) 1125 in religatione celatus legi nequit, in codice ipso legere potui 1130 λ£γ' : λέγε 1131 κρίνω : κρινώ 1139 ξυνοικίση : συνοικίση H2ec 1141 άρειαν : αΐροιαν στόλον H iyp i. m. : δόρυ Η 1146 ήγαγ' : ή-yev 1147 φράσουσα : φράσσουσα 1148 τέκνοισί : —οις Hecuba 1149—1173 (ms. p. 282 a) 1149 in religatione celatus legi nequit, in codice ipso legere potui 1152 φίλω : φίλων 1153—4 θάκους . . . ηνουν : θάκουν . . . ήνουν θ' 1153 ήδωνής : ήδ— 1154 τούσδε . . . πέπλους Η>° ut vid.: τοϊσδε . . . πέπλοις Hao 1155 κάμακα : κάμακαν Η>° κάμακα Η»0 ut vid. 1158 επαλλον : επαλον 1159 γένοιντο : γίνec νοιντο διαδοχαις : —χαΐσιν χερών : χεροΐν H 1163 ξυναρπάσασαι : συν— τάς : τάς y ' 1165 έξανισταίην : έξανασταίην 1167 ήνυον : ήν**ον Phoenissae 811—829 (ms. p. 539 b) 814 δ H> : oO H>c 817 συναίμονος : —μον ές : είς 818 γαΐ' : γαΐ· 823 ήλυθον : ήλθον 826 δίρκα : —κας φ πεδίον : άμπεδίον Η10 ή πεδίον Η > s. 1. 828 ά κερόεσσα : άκερόεσσα Phoenissae 830—853 (ms. p. 540 b) 831 μεταμειβομένα : —μειμομέυα (sic) 832 εστακ* : εστακ' άρηΐοις scr. Η 836 ές : είς πέδον : πεδίον 838 τέ μοι : τ' έμοι 842 τις : τίς ή 'πίλοιπος : ήπίλοιπος ut vid. άστεως : —εος 843 ώς : ώστ' 845 σοϊς : —σι 846 έξώρμισαι : έξορμίσαι δ' om. 849 σπουδή : έν σπουδήι 852 παρεϊμαι : πάρειμι γοϋν : y'oöv Phoenissae 854—877 (ms. p. 540 a) 'τεκνώθη : τεκ— 871 έλλάδι : —δος

865 κλήσας : κληΐσας 866 σοΙ scr. Η 868 874 γέρα : —ρας 877 πρός Η 1 : παρ' Η2 s. 1. ut vid.

Phoenissae 878—899 (ms. p. 539 a) 878 τί οΰ δρών ποία Η 1 i. m. : τί δρών όποϊα Η 879 ές : είς Ιχθος Η : δχλον Hyp i. m. 881 νεκροίς : — ρούς 884 πόλι : —λει 885 (6) λόγοισι scr. Η ut vid. τΙς : τίς 888 κάνατρέψοντας : κάναστρέψαντας 896 αύτοϋ : αύ— μή 'πιλαμβάνου Η»« : μή τι λαμβάνου Hac 897 σ ' : δ' 898 φράσον : φράσσον 899 βούλη : —λει Phoenissae 1600—1625 (ms. p. 331 a) 1600 in religatione celatus legi nequit 1601 πεφυκέναι : δυσδαίμονα 1602 θανεΐν νιν : θανεΐνιν 1606 διώλεσ' : —σεν 1609 §ς : είς 1613 όμματ' : —τα ές : είς 1614 του scr. Η 1616 τυφλοϋ Η 1 i. m. : φίλου Η 1619

φεύγοις scr. Η 1687 πεσών Η : θανών H y p s. 1. όπου : om. Η 1690 ούκουν : ούκ ούν κάμε δει : δει κάμέ κακών : πόνων πρόσαγε νύν : vüv 1697 δέ : τέ τέ : δέ 1698 τώδ' : τώ δ' 1699 χειρ' : χέρ'

nequit 1684 εί δπα (10) 1689 μ' 1693 προσάγαγέ : άλλήλοιν : —λων

Orestes 105—129 (ms. p. 358 a) 105 έσβλέψαι : είσ— 107 πέμπεις : έκπέμ— 108 ες : είς 109 τεθνηκυία : τεθνηκυίη 111 πέμψομεν : πέμψομαι 114 κλυταιμήστρας : —μνήστρας 119 άργεΐον : άργείων πρευμενή : εύμ— 121 άπώλεσεν : —σε 122 έμέ : έμήν Orestes 130—154 (ms. p. 357 a) 131 θ' om. Η 1 add. Η 2 ut vid. 132 αΐδ' : Hao αίδ' H2pc 140 σίγα σίγα : σίγα σίγα λεπτόν : λ**κόν (λευκόν ?) H ac λεπτον H 2 » c 141 τίθετε : τιθεΤτε κτυπεΐτ' : κτυπεϊτε μηδ' εστω κτύπος 142 άποπρό βατ' : άπο προβδτ' έκεϊσ' scr. Η ( 1 1 ) 143 άποπρό μοι : άπόπρο μοι 145 δ δ scr. Η (12) 147 άτρεμαΐον : άτρεμαίαν ύπόροφον : ύπώροφον 154 ante hunc versum ή praef., non ante v. 155 Orestes 155—184 (ms. p. 533 b) 156 χο praef. (13) 158 όλεΐς : ώλεΐς 159 χάριν : χαράν 160—1 μέλεος . . . τάλας : ώ μέλεος . . . ώ τάλας 161—2 notam ή ante 162 praef. 162 άδικος : αϊ άδικος 171 είλίξεις : ελίξεις Η 1 corr. Η 2 173 ύπνώσσει : υπνώσει Η 1 corr. Η 2 174 Electrae continuat 175 πολυπόνων : πολυστόνων 179 άγαμεμνόνιον : —νειον 180 υπό γάρ : υπό τε γάρ 181 διοιχόμεθ' οϊχόμεβα : διοιχόμεσθ' οίχόμεσθα ante κτύπον nil praef. Η 1 ηλ praef. Η 2 ante ούχΐ ante σίγα nullam notam praef. Η 181—2 σίγα σίγα : σίγα σίγα 182 φυλασσομένα Heo Orestes 185—213 (ms. p. 534 b) 185 άνα : άνά 186 χάριν : χαράν (cf. v. 159) φίλα : ώ φίλα 188 θανείν semel άλλο : άλλο γ ' είπας (sic) 189 ούδέ : ουτε 190 δρ' : άρ 193 ματρός : ματέρος 194 nullam notam praef. Η 1 χ praef. Η 2 δίκα : δίκαια 194—5 2 1 ηλ non ante καλώς sed ante εκανες praef. Η nullam notam praef. Η ut vid. 199 τε om. Η 204 στοναχαϊσι : —νάχεσι ut vid. γόοισι : —σιν ut vid. 206 έπΐ δ ' scr. Η 207 ές : είς 208 παρούσα παρθέν' ήλέκτρα : παρούσ' ήλεκτρα παρθένε Orestes 313—337 (ms. p. 534 a) 314 νοσης : νοσήσης δοξάζης scr. Η 315 γίγνεται : γίν— 316 αίαϊ : αϊ αϊ ut vid. 321 μελάγχρωτες : —λαγχρώτες 322 άμπάλλεσθ' : άμπάλεσθ' Η 1 corr. Η 2 329 άπο φάτιν : άπόφασιν ό φοΐβος om. Η 330 ελακε : Ιλακε ?λακεν 331 μυχοί : μυχοί γάς 337 ές : εις δόμον : —ους Orestes 338—362 (ms. p. 533 a) 338 ό σ ' : δς 340 ού μόνιμος έν βροτοΐς scr. Η ( 1 4 ) 343 κατέκλυσεν : —σε 344 όλεθρίοισιν scr. Η 345—6 οίκον έτερον scr. Η 348 όδε : ώδε (*) Spranger πολλή στ corr. in πολλή τ ' . This is improbable since στ is generally written by means of the "stigma" combination ( T ) of which there is no sign here. Further, there is no trace of an original πολλή corrected to πολλή. If, however, an uncial predecessor had read TTOAAHCT (i. e. ττολλή 'στ'), this might have been misread as nOAAHCr, accounting for the apparent text of H. (10) Although the α is not clear, the space between the tt and the beginning of the next word μοι appears too narrow for the two letters ou and more appropriate for a. ( u ) Spranger έκεΐσε. (12) Spranger ά a. (13) Spranger ante vers, personae notae ? (14) Spranger ού μόνιμος Η : έν βροτοΐς add. Η^. 3»

19

δή Η ρ» : δει Η "

349 πολλή : πολύ δ'

352 όρμήσας Η2»0 : όρμησα* Η κ

358 είλιχθεΐσαν : είλιχθησαν άθλίως : άθλίοις 1 2 σίσχων : ττροσίσχω Η corr. Η

359 ούπώποτ' : ούπω π ό τ '

353 Is : eis 362 προ-

Orestes 363—387 (ms. p. 357 b) 364 γλαυκός : μάντις 365 τόδ' scr. Η 366 κατασταθείς scr. Η 368 δ ' om. Η 373 άλιτύπων : άλικτύπων 376 δείν' : δείν' 377 κλυταιμήστρας : —μνήστρας 378 έξέλεπτον : έξέλιπον Ιών : μολών 380 ό δ ' : ώδ' (cf. ν. 348) 381 (15) μηνύσω scr. Η 382 δέ scr. Η 384 ές : είς 385 λεύσσω : λεύσω Orestes 388—412 (ms. p. 358 b) 389 λεύσσεις : λεύσεις 390 μοι : με 391 ώ : ώ παρά λόγον : παράλογον σή scr. Η 392 φουεύς : σφαγεύς 394 δ ' om. Η ές : εϊς 395 τίς σ ' : τί σ ' ut vid. άπόλλυσιν : —σι 397 τοι scr. Η 400 μητρός : μητρός θ ' 405 τις : τίς 408 προσφερεΐς : περιφερείς 409 όνομάσαι : όνομάζειν 410 άπετρέπου : άποτρέπου 411 συγγενή φόνο ν : συγγενεΐ φόνω Orestes 565—588 (ms. p. 524b) 565 in religatione celatus legi nequit 566 ές : είς ήξουσιν : ηξουσι Θράσους : Θάρσ— 568 ές : είς 569 ούδέν αύταϊς ήν &ν : ούδέ ήν αύταΐς 571 δείν' ώς συ κομπεϊς : ώς σύ κομπεϊς δεινά 573 άπόντ' έκ δωμάτων : απόντα δωμάτων sc 574 γης ΗΡ° ut vid. ov (pro -—ων ut vid.) H 1 i. m. χρυσεοσάμβαλον Σ 1469 ές hie scr. Η 1472 λαιμών : —μόν 1473 ποϋ δ ' ή τ ' : ποϋ δήτ' δόμων : δωμάτων 1474 έκβαλόυτες : έμ— 1477 χεροΐν : χερσϊν 1481 πύλαις : —σι 1483 δή τότε διαπρεπείς τ ό τ ' : τότε δή τότε διαπρεπείς 1484 άρεως : —εος Orestes 1488—1508 (ms. p. 390 b) 1491 ετεκεν : —κε 1492 δραμόντε scr. Η(25) μενέλεως : —λαος 1507 βαρβάροισι : —οις προσπίτνων : —πίπτων

1501

Orestes 1509—1532 (ms. p. 371 a) 1510 μενέλεω : —εων 1514 ούτω : ούτ (utrum compendium supra τ significet ω an ως non lucet) 1515 αύτοΐς : —αι 1516 κτενώ : κτανώ 1518 σίδηρος : σίδαρος 1520 πέτρος He° είσιδών : ές— 1521 δ ' om. Η 1522 σ ' om. Η 1523 δούλος : δούλων 1524 έσω : είσω 1526 μεταβουλευσόμεσθα : —μεθα ut vid. 1528 άνδράσιν : —σι 1531 μευέλεων : —εον εσω : εΐσω Orestes 1533—1556 (ms. p. 372 a) 1534 θέλει : —λη 1535 τε om. Η 1536 δύο : δύο utvid. 1537αύοπι. Η ante w . 1539 et 1541 ήμante v. 1549xopraef. 1539 άγγέλλωμεν : άγγελλόμεν (sic) ές : είς 1540 έχωμεν : —ομεν 1545 βροτοίς : —σι 1546 όπα : όπα θέλη scr. Η 1548 επεσ' έπεσε : Ιπεσσεν έπεσσε 1549 λεύσσω : λεύσω Andromacha 80—103a (ms. p. 422 b) scr. Η ut vid. (2e) 92 δακρύμασι scr. Η (27)

86 σμικρόν : —ρά 91 νυν : νυν 100 γνώ praef. ut vid.

έγκείμεσθ'

Andromacha 103b—122a (ms. p. 421 b) 103b ού . . . άταν in religatione celatus legi nequit 2ec 104 έλέναν : έλάναν H 105 δηιάλωτον : δή άλωτόν 109 άγόμαν Η ut vid. : σγομαι Η 1 s. 1. Θαλάσσας : —σης 111 ελειπον : ελϊ— 113 ώμοι : ώι μοι 114 ύπο τειρομένα : ύποτειρομένα 119 άσιήτιδα : άσηΐτιδα ut vid. Andromacha 122 b—144 (ms. p. 421 a) 122 συνέκλησαν : συνεκλήϊσαν 123 τλάμον' : —να 124 έοϋσαν : ούσαν 128 έγγενέτησιν : εύγενέταισι 130 ποντίας : —ίου τί : τίς 131 άτυζομένα : —μέναν αίκέλιον : άεικ— 133 δέ σ ' έπεισι : δε σε πείσει 135 ΐθι : ΐσθι 138 πόλεος : —εως ut vid. τι ν' : τίν' 142 δεσποτών έμών φόβω δ ' : δεσποτών δ'έμών φόβω Andromacha 145—169 (ms. p. 422 a) 146 είδη : ίδή ut vid. 147 χλιδής Η : τρυφής Η 1 s. 1. 153 έδνοις : εδ— 154 τοΐσδ' : τοιοΐσδ* 161 κούδέν : και ούδέν 163 τίς σ ' : τίς 28) 167 χερί scr. Η< 169 χρυσός : —σος ει Andromacha 111—805 (ms. p. 446 a) 778 νίκαν : νίκαν 780 φθόνω Η2Ρ° : φόνω Η Μ 1 σφάλλει ν : τό σφάλει ν 784 αφανές supra versum scr. Η 785 ταύταν ήνεσα scr. Η (29) 790 ac 2 0 σύν : εν ut vid. σε : σε καϊ κενταύρων : κενταύροιν H —ροις Η » ut vid. 793 άξενον : άξει— 794 ποντιδν Συμπληγάδων : —τίαν •—γάδα 798 εύδόκιμον : —μος 800 εχου/τ' 0 ao Η® : εχωυ/τ H 801 εύρώπαν : —ώταν 802 θε praef. ut vid. Andromacha 806—830 (ms. p. 445 a) 809 άποσταλή Η>° : —λεΐ Η40 810 κτανεϊν : Οανεϊν 812 εΐργουσι : εΐρ—814 μεταλγεϊ : μέγ' άλγεΐ 816 είργουσ' : εΐρ— (cf. ν. 812) 819 εύπιΟέστεροι : εύπειθ— 822 στένει : σθένει Η-1

to s >-4

a

ο

Μ

ω in Ο rC -Μ Ό C d w tn

a

^

> ^

o . vo"

iS

cn"

CO

vo

^

s

lO

lO

NO

tn