No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
ARS ADEO LATET (OVID, METAMORPHOSES 10.252)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 July 2022
Abstract
The problems recently detected in the famous words ars adeo latet arte sua (Ov. Met. 10.252) can be resolved if the line is repunctuated on the basis of an unjustly neglected interpretation put forward by Byzantine and Renaissance scholars.
- Type
- Shorter Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association
References
1 Korenjak, M., ‘Ars adeo latet arte sua: what is art's art?’, CQ 70 (2020), 443–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 Korenjak (n. 1), 445.
3 On the character of the work and the autograph manuscript, see V. Kopanos, ‘Παρατακτικὰ ζεύγη στὶς μεταφράσεις τοῦ Μαξίμου Πλανούδη’, EEThess 13 (1974), 21–34; Tsavari, I., ‘Deux nouveaux autographes de Maxime Planude’, Dodone 16 (1987), 225–9Google Scholar; E.A. Fisher, Planudes’ Greek Translation of Ovid's Metamorphoses (New York and London, 1990); Fisher, E.A., ‘Planoudes’ technique and competence as a translator of Ovid's Metamorphoses’, ByzSlav 62 (2004), 143–60Google Scholar; Fisher, E.A., ‘Ovid's Metamorphoses, sailing to Byzantium’, CML 27 (2007), 45–67Google Scholar.
4 M. Papathomopoulos and I. Tsavari, Ὀβιδίου Περὶ Μεταμορφώσεων, ὃ μετήνεγκεν ἐκ τῆς Λατίνων φωνῆς εἰς τὴν Ἑλλάδα Μάξιμος μοναχὸς ὁ Πλανούδης (Athens, 2002), on Met. 10.247–53.
5 So as not to prejudice the matter, ars is here left untranslated: see Korenjak (n. 1), 444. Perhaps ars in this line means first ‘craft’ (i.e. there is no evidence of the arduous process of crafting, so perfect is the sculpture) and then ‘skill’ (Pygmalion is surprised by the quality of his own work when he looks at the result).
6 See ThLL 8.2.1065.75–82.
7 For ablative iustitia with miror, a usage also mentioned elsewhere in Priscian (Inst. 16 = GL 3.101.14 Hertz; 17 = 3.172.24 Hertz; 18 = GL 3.316.14 Hertz; 18 = GL 3.319.12 Hertz; 18 = GL 3.325.13 Hertz), see e.g. Yanes, E. Spangenberg, Prisciani Caesariensis Ars liber XVIII. Pars altera 2. Commento (Hildesheim, 2017), 216Google Scholar, Conington, J. and Nettleship, H., The Works of Virgil. Vol. III (London, 1875), 319Google Scholar: ‘the construction of miror with an abl. seems quite unexampled, in spite of Priscian's authority’.
8 Some examples are collected and discussed in Edmiston, H.J., ‘Diaeresis after the second foot of the hexameter in Lucretius’, TAPhA 34 (1903), lx–lxiGoogle Scholar, Huxley, H.H., ‘Significant diaeresis in Vergil and other hexameter poets’, Vergilius 33 (1987), 23–8Google Scholar, at 25.
9 Boissonade, J.F., Publii Ovidii Nasonis Metamorphosen libri XV Graece uersi a Maximo Planude (Paris, 1822), 435 n. 1Google Scholar.
10 R. Regius, P. Ovidii Nasonis Metamorphoseon libri XV (Venice, 1586 [first published in 1493]), 204; on this work, see the introduction to M. Benedetti (ed.), Raffaele Regio, In Ovidii Metamorphosin enarrationes, I (libri I–IV) (Florence, 2008).