Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-wvcvf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T21:41:10.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PROPERTIUS 3.10.17

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2013

Marc Dominicy
Marc Dominicy*
Affiliation:
Université libre de Bruxelles
*
mdomini@ulb.ac.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The vulgate text at Prop. 3.10.17–18 reads as follows:

      et pete, qua polles, ut sit tibi forma perennis
      inque meum semper stent tua regna caput.
    17–18om. N  17 polles T, uulgo: pelles FLP

Information

Type
Shorter Notes
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , May 2013 , pp. 439 - 442
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 The omission in N is due to the homoeoteleuton (caput) between 16 and 18. As pointed out by Fedeli, P., Properzio. Il libro terzo delle Elegie (Bari, 1985), 345–6Google Scholar, such word repetitions at the end of contiguous distichs occur quite frequently in Propertius and there are no compelling reasons for following Lachmann and some later scholars in considering the couplet to be spurious; see Smyth, W.R., Thesaurus criticus ad Sexti Propertii textum (Leiden, 1970), 103Google Scholar. A.E. Housman (in unpublished notes), E.A. Barber (dubitanter) and J.L. Butrica (‘Editing Propertius’, CQ 47 [1997], 176–208, at 196CrossRefGoogle Scholar) transpose it after 12 – its original omission resulting, for Butrica, from the homoeoteleuton between 11 and 17 (pennis–perennis). Heyworth, S.J., Cynthia: A Companion to the Text of Propertius (Oxford, 2007), 328–9Google Scholar convincingly argues against this proposal.

2 Sexti Properti Elegos (Oxford, 2007), xxxviGoogle Scholar.

3 See Riesenweber, T., Uneigentliches Sprechen und Bildermischung in den Elegien des Properz (Berlin, 2007), 87–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. At 2.5.28, the reading uerba of the manuscripts requires this form to be construed with leuis as an accusative of relation that seems both linguistically implausible and pointless in the context; see e.g. Fedeli, P., Properzio. Elegie. Libro II (Cambridge, 2005), 190Google Scholar. Heyworth (n. 1), 134 adopts Peiper's uerna in spite of the fact that this word never acquires a figurative meaning in elegy. I prefer uera because it underlines the conflict between Cynthia's external appearance and her real personality. For similar examples where uerus modifies a proper name, see Ov. Rem. am. 555, Petron. Sat. 126.18, Sen. Suas. 7.8, Ilias latina 824. For the easy confusion between uera and uerba, see the variance at Stat. Achil. 1.32 recorded by J. Méheust in his Budé edition (Paris, 1971), 7.

4 See Maltby, R., A Lexicon of Ancient Latin Etymologies (Leeds, 1991), 482Google Scholar.

5 See Alberto, P.F. (ed.), Eugenii Toletani Opera omnia (Turnhout, 2005), 402, lines 25–6Google Scholar.

6 Available at: http://www.kennydominican.joyeurs.com/LatinPatrology/BedeVitaSanctiCuthberti.htm.

7 Available at: http://www.benedictus.mgh.de/quellen/chga/chga_077t.htm.

8 Ed. W. Bulst [= MGH, Die Briefe der Deutschen Kaiserzeit 3] (Weimar, 1949), 34, line 18.

9 da Strumi, Andrea, Passione del santo martire milanese Arialdo, ed. Navoni, M. (Milan, 1994), 68Google Scholar.

10 Alvernus, Guillermus, Rhetorica diuina (Basle, c. 1492)Google Scholar; available at: http://tudigit.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/show/inc-i-36/.

11 Petrarch, Lettres familières, ed. Dotti, U. (Paris, 2002), 2.283.Google Scholar

12 Verardus, Carolus, Brant, Sebastian and Carmini, Leonardus, Historia Baetica (Basle, 1494)Google Scholar; available at: http://www.digital-collections.de/.

13 Machiavelli, Niccolò, Lettere, ed. Gaeta, F. (Milan, 1961), 350Google Scholar.

14 The example from Cicero (Cael. 36) mentioned by Heyworth is less relevant here: candor huius te et proceritas uoltus oculique pepulerunt.

15 See Dominicy, M., ‘De la métrique verbale à l’établissement du texte. Sur trois vers de Properce (iv,3,51; iv,7,85; iv,10,31)’, LEC 75 (2007), 227–48, at 236–7Google Scholar; id., ‘L’élégie iii, 22 de Properce. Propositions pour une nouvelle édition critique’, AC 79 (2010), 137–62, at 146Google Scholar.

16 On hexameters that exhibit a pyrrhic word after the penthemimeral caesura, see Tordeur, P., Deux études de métrique verbale (Brussels, 2007), 209–13Google Scholar. According to Viparelli Santangelo, V., L'esametro di Properzio: Rapporti con Callimaco (Naples, 1986), 78Google Scholar, Propertius has 82 such verses.

17 Examples: ripis > riuis (Hor. Epod. 2.25), uetet > petet (Hor. Carm. 3.27.15), uel > per (Hor. Carm. 4.4.43). See Friedrich, G., Catulli Veronensis liber (Leipzig–Berlin, 1908), 120 n. 1Google Scholar; Diggle, J. and Goodyear, F.R.D. (edd.), The Classical Papers of A.E. Housman (Cambridge, 1972), 1.102Google Scholar; Dominicy, M., ‘Propertius 3.1.27’, Mnemosyne 62 (2009), 417–31, at 428CrossRefGoogle Scholar; id., ‘Propertius, 4.5.19–21’, RhM 153 (2010), 144–87, at 173Google Scholar.

18 I am grateful to an anonymous referee for numerous suggestions.