Some manuscript traditions of the Greek classics
This novel was written in the 2nd century AD.
Three papyrus fragments are extant: POxy 1250 (=Π1), 4th century AD, now in the Bodleian; P.Schubart 30 (=Π2), 3rd century AD, now lost; P.Milan (=Π3), late 2nd century. POxy 1250 is a thousand years younger than the medieval codices and gives a better text. It also supports some readings in the medieval mss that had been questioned by scholars. But the order of the text is somewhat different, placing a portion of book 2 chapters 2 and 3 between chapters 8 and 9. Some slight differences in the transitional phrases adapt the text to support this. It is possible that this reflects an authorial change. Alternatively possibly a leaf fell out and was replaced in the wrong place in an early ancestor of the medieval copies, subsequent copyists making small changes to conceal the join. The latter seems most probable, but the text would not naturally flow straight from the end of II.1 to the end of II.3 without major changes, so there are difficulties either way.
There are 23 medieval manuscripts. These all derive from a different ancient copy of the text to that used for any of the papyri. The most important ones are as follows, all the others being copied from them.
M Venice, Marcianus graecus 409. Contains books I.1-VIII.16. Other mss copied from it exist. early (?) 13th century. W Vatican graecus 1349. Contains books I.1-VIII.19. Other mss copied from it exist. 12 D Vatican graecus 914. Contains book 1, and excerpts from books 2, 3 and 4. 14 V Vatican graecus 114. Contains books I.1-VIII.19. Other mss copied from it exist. 13 G Venice, Marcianus graecus 607. Contains books I.1-VIII.19. One ms copied from it exists. 15 T Tubingen M b 16. Contains book I.1-10. Other mss copied from it exist. 16 X Paris BNF graecus 2895. Contains book I.1-10. early 16 E Milan, Ambrosian graecus 394. Contains books I.1-VII.9. 15 or 16 F Florence, Laurenziana conv. soppr. 627. Contains books I.1-VIII.19. 13
MWD are family α; VGTXE are family β, which is generally a better text. F is a third possible family.
The text was first printed in a Latin translation by Annibale della Croce (Cruceius) only of books 5-8 at Milan in 1544, and of all 8 books at Basel in 1554. The first edition of the Greek text appeared at Heidelberg in 1601.
Bibliography
S. Gaselee (tr), Achilles Tatius. Harvard (Loeb) (1969), pp.xii-xvi. Checked.
The 20 letters of Aelian date from the 2nd century. They are preserved in two manuscripts:
A Milan, Ambrosian B 4 sup. Parchment. First used for an edition in 1901. 10th c. M Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, 4693 (63 in the catalogue of Iriarte). Paper. Written by Constantine Lascaris. f. 131r-135v. Not used for any edition prior to the Loeb. 1460-1465
The first printed text was by Marcus Musurus in Venice, 1499. He seems to have used a manuscript not now extant related to M, and his text formed the basis of all subsequent editions until the 20th century.
Bibliography
A.R.Benner (tr), The Letters of Alciphron, Aelian, and Philostratus. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), pp.344-6. Checked.
This work in 17 books was written in the early 3rd century AD. The manuscripts are:
A Munich Augustanus 564 14-15 B Berlin, Philipps 1522 16 C Paris BNF graecus 1695 16 D Vatican, Palatinus gr. 65 16 E Paris BNF graecus 1694 16 F Florence, Laurentianus 86, 8 15 G Rome, Barberinus II, 92. 16 H Vatican Palatinus gr. 260 14 L Florence Laurentianus 86, 7 13 M Munich 518 15 N Naples Biblioteca Nazionale III D 8 15 O Naples BN, III D 9 15 P Paris BNF graecus 1756 14 Q Vatican Palatinus gr. 267 15 R Venice, Marcianus gr. 518 15 S Vienna med. gr. 7 15 V Paris BNF suppl. gr. 352 (formerly Vatican graecus 997) 13 W Vienna med. gr. 51 14
Only seven have value; A, F, H, L, P, V, and W. The others are merely copies or derived from these seven.
The text was first printed in 1556 at Zurich by C. Gesner, with a Latin translation.
Bibliography
A. F. Scholfield (tr), Aelian, On the Characteristics of Animals. Harvard (Loeb) (1958), vol.1 pp.xxv-xxvi. Checked.
Fifty-three works of the second century orator Aelius Aristides (so-called to distinguish him from the 5th century figure) have been preserved, mostly speeches. But an enormous amount of his output is lost. Three dedicatory inscriptions by him have been found in Mysia: an elegiac couplet to Hera, a brief dedication to Dike and Nemesis, and another brief dedication to Serapis.
At least 200 manuscripts contain some or all of his works, with much cross-contamination. There is a wide variation in the order in which the orations appear. The following were used for the Loeb text:
P.Mich.inv.6651 These are the earliest fragments of Aristides, and contain a fragment from oration 1 (6th c.) and one from oration 3 (7th c.) In various places it is inferior to the parchment codices. 6-7th century T Florence, Laurentianus 60, 8. The earliest nearly complete ms. Omits the fragmentary orations 52 and 53, although clearly the ms from which it was copied contained or. 52. 11 Q Vaticanus graecus 1297 12 V Venice, Marcianus App. VIII, 7 11 A Paris (Bibliothèque nationale) graecus 2951. Commissioned by Archbishop Arethas of Caesarea, a pupil of Photius. Contains 42 orations, and is the only source for oration 53. 10 R Vaticanus graecus 1298. An inferior ms. M Marcianus graecus 423. An inferior ms. Best preserves the scholia for or. 1 and 3. E Paris gr. 2950. An inferior ms. of no independent value. U Urbinas gr. 123. An inferior ms. of no independent value. Vaticanus gr. 75. An inferior ms. of no independent value.
TQ form one family, with few scholia; VRA another family. Both descended from an ancient archetype O. All the oldest mss contain lacunae, which some of the more recent mss supplement with emendations.
Photius Bibliotheca codd. 246-248 is also a witness to the text of orations 1-4, but to a corrupt and inferior version of it.
The subscriptions to several orations (17, 22, 30, 34, 37, 40) preserve very valuable circumstantial evidence, probably going back to Aristides' own notes. In the 4th century Sopater of Antioch lectured on Aristides and composed and collected extensive scholia which survive for orations 1-15.
Bibliography
C. A. Behr (tr), Aristides. Harvard (Loeb) (1973), vol. 1, pp.xiv-xxvi. Checked.
A collection of ancient Greek military works has survived, which also includes Asclepiodotus and Onasander. The oldest writer in this is Aeneas Tacticus, who lived in the mid 4th century BC. His work survived in a single manuscript, of which various copies exist.
M Florence, Biblioteca Mediceo-Laurenziana 55, 4. Contains a collection of Greek military writers. Parchment, but damaged by damp after A and B were copied from it and illegible in places. Has also lost some leaves since then. Contains a large number of places where a critical mark is written above words thought to be corrupt and also has blank spaces where the original was defective or unreadable. The scribe was ignorant, but clearly copied very accurately. 10-11 A Paris BNF graecus 2435 16 B Paris BNF graecus 2522 15 C Paris BNF graecus 2443. Used for the first printed edition. Descended from B or a copy of B. Copied by Angelus Bergelius.
Julius Africanus quotes from Aeneas Tacticus in his Kestoi, and this represents a text several centuries older than the direct tradition.
The work also contains chapter headings. These must be more ancient than the 3rd century, as Africanus quotes them. They may not be authorial.
Bibliography
The Illinois Greek Club (tr), Aeneas Tacticus; Asclepiodotus; Onasander. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), pp.18-19. Checked.
The 123 literary letters of 'Alciphron' were written in the 2nd century AD as an example of historical fiction and purport to be from the 4th century BC.
The manuscripts are as follows. None is complete; most offer only a selection of letters.
The following mss all stand alone, unrelated to any other ms.
B Vienna phil. 342. Parchment. Folios 183r-200r. 12-13 Neap.b Naples, BN, III. AA. 14. Paper, ff. 219v seqq. 14 N Paris BNF, suppl. graec. 352. Bombycin. ff. 148r seqq. 13 Θ Paris BNF graecus 3054. Paper. Written by Janus Lascaris. ff. 133v sqq. 15
The first family consists of 3 manuscripts.
Harl. British Library Harleianus 5566. Paper. ff.141r-167v. 14 Ven. Venice, Marcianus VIII.2. ff.246v-264r. Closely related to Harl. 14-15 Neap.a Naples BN, III AA. 14. Paper. ff. 129v sqq. 14-15
The second family is 2 mss.
Γ Paris BNF, graecus 1696. Parchment. ff. 288r. 14 Vat.1 Vatican graecus 140. Paper. ff.273r-288r. 14
The third family is 4 mss:
Vat.2 Vatican graecus 1461. Parchment. ff. 242r-279v. 14 or 15 Flor. Florence, Laurentianus 59, 5. Parchment. ff.86v-106r. 15 Π Paris BNF, graecus 3021. Paper. ff.141r-171r. 15 Δ Paris BNF, graecus 3050. Parchment. ff.73r-101r, 161r sqq. 15
The first edition was published by Marcus Musurus at Venice (apud Aldum) in 1499. Over time the number of letters printed has grown as discoveries were made.
Bibliography
A.R.Benner (tr), The Letters of Alciphron, Aelian, and Philostratus. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), pp.18-21. Checked.
This work in three books is a valuable compendium of Greek mythology, traditionally ascribed to Apollodorus of Alexandria (ca. 180 BC) but today considered to be a production of the 2nd century AD.
The main text tradition is as follows. A fair number of manuscripts have always been known to exist, but all are late and incomplete, ending abruptly in the middle of Theseus' adventures on his first journey to Athens. All are derived from R.
R Paris, BNF, graecus 2722. 14 O Oxford Bodleian, Laudianus 55 15 Ra Paris BNF gr. 2967 15-16 P Vatican Palatinus 52 16 Rb Paris BNF gr. 1653 16 Rc Paris BNF gr. 1658 15 V Vaticanus graecus 1017 15 L Florence, Medici-Laurenziana 60,29 15 N Naples, BN, III. A 1 15 T Turin, C II. 11 15 Oxford Bodleian D'Orville X. I. 1, 1 16 British Library Harleian 5732. Well written. 16 Turin B IV. 5. Badly written. 16 Rome, Barberini palace, T 122. Badly written. 16
In 1885 R. Wagner discovered a new 14th century ms. in the Vatican library (Vaticanus gr. 950) which contained an epitome of the whole work, including most of the lost portion. It also contains part of John Tzetzes commentary on Lycophron. This epitome agrees with quotations made from Apollodorus in this work by Tzetzes, which suggests that he is also the author of the epitome.
In 1887 A. Papadopulos-Kerameus discovered fragments of another epitome in a Greek ms. in Jerusalem, formerly from the monastery of Mar Saba, now in the patriarchal library in Jerusalem (ms. 366).
The epitomes are independent of the main manuscript tradition, and often contain better readings. The two epitomes are very similar.
The first edition of the work was in 1555 by Benedictus Aegius in Rome, with a Latin translation. R. Wagner published a Teubner in 1894 making use of the epitomes for the first time.
Bibliography
J.G. Frazer (tr), Apollodorus: The Library. Harvard (Loeb) (1967), vol. 1, pp.xxxiii-xxxvii. Checked.
The Anabasis of Alexander was written in 7 books ca. 146 AD. The Indica is transmitted as book 8 of the work. The manuscripts on which the text is based are:
A Vienna. It was corrected later (=A2) 12-13 B Paris, gr. 1753. A copy of A; a lacuna in it corresponds exactly to one page of A 15 C Constantinople. Also a copy of A. 15 k Florence. Based on A2
Other mss exist.
Bibliography
E. Iliff Robson (tr), Arrian. Harvard (Loeb) (1967), vol. 1, pp.xix. Checked.
A collection of ancient Greek military works has survived, containing Aeneas Tacticus and Onasander, but also The Outline of Tactics by Asclepiodotus the Philosopher. He seems to have been a pupil of Poseidonius, so belongs to the 1st century BC.
The only manuscript of importance is F, which also contains Aeneas Tacticus, plus those derived from it. However A and B are important were F is now damaged or illegible.
F Florence, Biblioteca Mediceo-Laurenziana 55, 4. Contains a collection of Greek military writers. Parchment, but damaged by damp after A and B were copied from it and illegible in places. Has also lost some leaves since then. Contains a large number of places where a critical mark is written above words thought to be corrupt and also has blank spaces where the original was defective or unreadable. The scribe was ignorant, but clearly copied very accurately. 10-11 A Paris BNF graecus 2522. Copied from F. 15 B Paris BNF graecus 2435. Copied from F. 16 C Paris BNF graecus 2528. Copied by Salmasius. 17 D Paris BNF graecus 2447. 16 E Paris BNF Suppl. gr. Copied by P. D. Huet at Stockholm in 1642 17 V A copy of F made by Leo Allatius in the Bibliotheca Vallicellana in Rome. Angelo Mai printed chapters 1 and 2 of this ms. in Spicilegium Romanum vol. 4.
The Lexicon militare which appears as an annex to the Suda is also valuable, as it quotes from the text of Asclepiodotus as it was several centuries before F was written, although of course in some cases it too has become garbled. The work is of uncertain date, but pre-Byzantine.
A feature of F is a series of diagrams. These are referred to in the text and so must go back to the author. Copies also appear in A and B.
This work, like Aeneas Tacticus, comes with a set of chapter headings (kephalaia) at the front.
Bibliography
The Illinois Greek Club (tr), Aeneas Tacticus; Asclepiodotus; Onasander. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), pp.230, 240-243. Checked.
Like Phaedrus, Babrius collected a series of Aesopic fables. The work dates from the 1st century AD.
Before the discovery of codex A in 1844, only a prose paraphrase was known of Babrius, together with some fragments from the Suda, and similar sources.
A set of ancient wax tablets exists:
T Tabulae ceratae Assendeftianae. 13 fables were found on a schoolboy's wax tablets, which were discovered in a dig and are now in the library at Leiden. These contain 13 fables of Babrius, in a text which is very corrupt, full of errors, omissions and additions. 4 of the fables are not otherwise preserved in metrical form. They were published by D.C.Hesseling in the Journal of Hellenic Studies 13 (1893) 293-314. 3rd c.
Three papyri also exist. These are:
Papyrus Bouriant 1, containing 11 lines of the prologue of book 1. This corrects codex A for 3-4 lines. 4th c. Papyrus Amherst 26. Contains parts of fables 11, 16 and 17. late 3rd / early 4th c. Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 1249. Contains fragments of 16 lines of fables 42, 110, 118 and 25. mid 2nd c.
The medieval manuscripts are as follows:
A British Library, Additional 22087 (codex Athous). Contains fables 1-122. Corrections in the margins and above the lines by Demetrius Triclinus. 10th c. V Vatican graecus 777. Contains 30 fables of Babrius in choliambic verse, scattered about in a larger collection of prose fables. 12 of these fables are not in A. 15 B Oxford Bodleian, Auct. F.4.7 (once 2906). ff. 163r-192r. A prose paraphrase of 148 Babrian fables. As a paraphrase, it is of limited use for the text. 13 G New York, Pierpont Morgan library 397. Contains 31 fables on ff. 98r-112r. The ms. was once in the library of the monastery of Grottaferrata, but disappeared during the Napoleonic wars and remained in unknown private hands until bought by the Morgan library from a bookseller in Paris in 1908. The text has many orthographic errors, but otherwise shows evidence of having been copied very faithfully and literally from an manuscript written in uncials which had become illegible in some places. Includes 24 fables present in A, 3 in both A and V, and 4 not otherwise known. late 10th
A is the best version, produced from some ancient exemplar. GVB are closely related and represent a different ancient archetype to that of A, substantially unmodified in Byzantine times. This differs in the presence or absence of whole verses, the wording or meaning, and the order of the fables.
The differences in this text are usually intentional, and the result of experiments by ancient editors rather than the intervention or scribal error of the Byzantine period. Interpolations appear already in the wax tablets in the 3rd century. The Amherst papyrus text is a conflation of A and GVB.
As well as the Suda, Ps.Dositheus in the 18 fables in his Hermeneumata (written before 207 AD) alone supplied fable 140 and a complete text of fable 84, which is almost identical to that given by A. Natalis Comes in his Mythologia IX p.968 (1619) quotes part of fable 141, as does John Tzetzes Chiliades XIII 264-271, and this fable is not found in any other source. The British Library codex Harleianus 3521 (17th century) contains the text of fable 58, but adds nothing to A. A codex Gudianus cited by editors for fable 12 from the 16th century on likewise has no independent value.
Bibliography
B. E. Perry (tr), Babrius and Phaedrus. Harvard (Loeb) (1965), pp.lxvi-lxxi. Checked.
The best manuscripts for the speeches of Demosthenes are these:
S Paris 10 L Florence, Laurentianus. Generally agrees from S, being from the same archetype 13 A Munich, Augustanus (formerly at Augsburg). Of a different family to S and L 11 Y Paris. O Brussels P Florence, Laurentian library
YOP are of less importance.
Bibliography
J.H.Vince (tr), Demosthenes. Harvard (Loeb) (1930), vol. 1, pp.xix. Checked.
Also known as Dio Cocceianus, and mentioned as living by Pliny the Younger in a letter to the emperor Trajan, this orator composed 80 discourses, which have come down to us, as well as various philosophical and historical works which are all lost.
The following are the most important mss. of his works:
U Vatican Urbinas Graecus 124 11th c. B Paris Graecus 2958 14 V Vatican Graecus 99 11 M Meermannianus 67, in Leiden, Holland. A portion of this ms. belongs to a different family of mss. 16 P Vatican Palatinus gr. 117. Contains two copies of oration 65. 14-15 H Vatican graec. 91 13 E Florence, Mediceo-Laurenziana 81, 2 14 T Venice, Marcianus gr. 421 15 Y Venice, Marcianus gr. 422 15 C Paris gr. 3009 16 I Paris gr. 2924 15-16 W Vienna philos. graec. 168 ?
As composed, the works of Dio were originally in rolls. There are three families of manuscripts, where the rolls were copied into codices in different orders. The first class has them in the order in which Photius read them in the 9th century. The second class has them in the order in which they appear in the Loeb. The third class has only part of the text, in a third order. UB belong to the first class; VM to the second; PH to the third.
According to Fabricius Bibliotheca Graeca, a first edition was published by Dionysius Paravisinus in Milan in 1476. If so, no copy now remains. The first completed edition that exists is that of Franciscus Turrisianus, Venice 1551 (?).
The 11th oration was translated into Latin by Franciso Filefo in 1428, and this was printed in 1492 at Cremona. A complete Latin version by Naegeorgius was printed at Basel in 1555.
Bibliography
J.W.Cohoon (tr), Dio Chrysostom... in five volumes. Harvard (Loeb) (1956), vol. 1, pp.xxv. Checked.
This author composed a set of lives of eminent philosophers, probably some time in the 3rd century AD.
Numerous medieval manuscripts of this work exist. None are very early. The earliest and best is the Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, Graecus III. B. 29, also known as the codex Borbonicus (=B). This dates to around 1200, or perhaps a little earlier. The 'scribe' seems to have known no Greek, itacisms abound, accents and breathings are sometimes omitted, and word divisions are sometimes wrong.
Paris Graecus 1759 (known as P) was probably written about a century later, ca. 1300, and is the next best ms. However it has been amended with interpolations. Another ms (=Co) of the 13/14th century, from the library of the Old Seraglio in Constantinople, together with Vatican gr. 140 (=W) of the 14th century have been put forward as useful. These tend to follow P rather than B.
The Florence ms. Laurentianus Graecus plut. 69.13 (=F, sometimes L) is the final important ms. The agreement of BFP is the main witness for the text. All three were written between the 12th and 14th centuries.
Other mss. include Paris Gr. 1758 (=Q) which was copied from P before it was interpolated, and Laurentianus Gr. plut. 69, 28 (=G).
The first edition of the whole text was printed in 1533 at Froben in Basel from one of the less good manuscripts, which has been labelled Z and turned out to be the Raudnitz ms., in the Lobkowitz library. A Latin translation was made by Ambrosius Traversarius in 1431, copies made in manuscript and this was printed in Rome without a date and then at Venice in 1475, and then many times.
Bibliography
R.D.Hicks (tr), Diogenes Laertius: Lives of eminent philosophers. Heinemann (Loeb) (1966), pp.xxxii-xxxix. Checked.
This author wrote a Roman history in Greek in 20 books ca. 7 BC, and some critical essays and letters.
Books 1-9 survive, most of 10 and 11, and the remainder exists in extracts and a Byzantine epitome.
The following mss used for the Carl Jacoby edition (Tuebner, 1885-1905) contain books 1-10, apart from F which contains only 1-5. C and E also contain book 11.
A Chisanus 58 10th c. B Vatican Urbinas 105 10-11 C Paris, Coislin 150 16 D Paris, Reg. 1654 and 1655 16 E Vaticanus Graecus 133 15 F Vaticanus Urbinas 106 15
A and B are much the best; the others are all late and some, especially C and D, contain numerous interpolations.
Other mss. include Venice Marcianus 272. There are some fragments from an epitome in Ms. Milan Ambrosian Q 13 Sup, and its copy Milan Ambr. A 80 sup.
The first printed edition was by Robert Estienne (Stephanus), Paris, 1546. This was based on D.
Bibliography
Earnest Cary (tr), The Roman antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus . Heinemann (Loeb) (1968), pp.xxxviii-xxxix. Checked. For Mss. used for book 11 and the fragments of 12-20 (see vol. 7 of Cary's edition)
The Critical Essays and letters
The manuscripts are as follows, in order of importance:
Paris, BNF graecus 1741. Contains only part of the corpus, but is the oldest and most important. 11 F Florence, Laurentianus 59, 15. Contains many corrupt and some nonsensical readings. 12th c. M Milan, Ambrosian D 119 sup. 15 P Vatican, Palatinus gr. 85 15 A Paris, BNF graecus 1657. Derived from P. 15 B Paris, BNF graecus 1742 15-16 C Paris, BNF graecus 1800. 16 G Guelferbytanus 806. 16
MPB all seem to be derived from an older ms of equal value to F.
The text was first printed in Venice by Aldus Manutius (1502-8). The Stephanus editions of 1546 and 1554 also have critical value. A quotation from Gorgias' Epitaphios on Syrianus is also our only source for part of the Demosthenes.
There are many uncertainties in the text as it has reached us in these unsatisfactory witnesses.
Bibliography
Stephen Usher (tr), Dionysius of Halicarnassus: The critical essays. Heinemann (Loeb) (1974), vol. 1. pp.xxxviii-xxxix. Checked. Apparently vol.2 has some notes on mss for those works.
A voluminous medical writer of the 2nd century AD. Some 10% by volume of Greek literature before AD 300 is by him, according to a review in Science. His works were translated into Syriac by Sergius of Reshaina and Job of Edessa and into Arabic in the 10th century by Hunain ibn Ishaq, who wrote a list of them discussing where manuscripts could be found.
Among his works are:
On the Natural Faculties
The manuscripts are:
Paris, BNF graecus 2267 Venice, Marcianus gr. 275
There is an Arabic translation by Hunain ibn Ishaq. Manuscripts of it exist in the Escorial library in Spain and in Leiden at the university library.
Bibliography
A. J. Brock (tr), HGalen: On the Natural Faculties. Harvard (Loeb) (1953), pp.xli. Checked.
This author wrote a Roman history in the 3rd century AD.
The manuscripts are as follows. The first group is O:
A Codex Monacensis. 15 B Codex Vindobonensis. 15 V Codex Venetus 15
BV are often in agreement against A within this group. The next group is i:
g Codex Leidensis. Corrected in the 15th century. 11 l Codex Laurentianus. Not the text used by Politian. 15
The first printed edition (1503), Aldus, Venice derives from an unknown ms. of family i so has the value of a manuscript witness. A Latin translation was made by Angelo Politian from another i-class ms, now unknown. There are selections from Herodian in Macarius Chrysocephalus Ῥοδωνία, written in the 14th century and using an i-class ms. Finally John of Antioch in the 7th century wrote chronicles which use a manuscript of Herodian related to neither O- nor i-class mss. Unfortunately John's work is only preserved in 10th century excerpts.
The Basle edition of 1549 refers to a codex Tigurinus, probably fictitious. In the Paris 1581 edition Henri Stephanus refers to an 'old codex', but the readings given add little. Andreas Schottius provided Sylburg (1590) with readings from an otherwise unknown Spanish ms.
Bibliography
C. R. Whittaker (tr), Herodian. Harvard (Loeb) (1969), vol. 1. pp.lxxxiii-lxxxv. Checked. This doesn't give the shelfmarks and instead refers the reader to the praefationes of the editions of Mendelssohn (the most important) and Stavenhagen, and in J. Blaufuss, Ad Herodiani rerum Romanarum scriptoris libros V et VI.
The early historian Herodotus composed a history ca. 440 BC in the Ionic dialect of Greek.
For the text we can rely on manuscripts from the middle ages and the renaissance, papyri, and ancient quotations. Some of the quotations are valuable; many others suggest that the quoter was relying on his memory, which tends to make them of limited value.
The papyri are all fragments of a page and are as follows:
P.Oxy. 18. 3rd c. AD P.Oxy. 19. 2-3rd c. AD P.Oxy. 695. 3rd c. AD P.Oxy. 1092. 2nd c. AD P.Oxy. 1244 2nd c. AD P.Oxy. 1375 1st-2nd c. AD P.Oxy. 1619 End of 1st c. AD P.Oxy. 2095 2nd c. AD P.Oxy. 2096 End of 2nd c. AD P.Oxy. 2097 2nd c. AD P.Oxy. 2098 End of 2nd c. AD P.Oxy. 2099 Start of 2nd c. AD A Munich papyrus (Archiv für Papyrusforschung vol. 1, p. 471 f.) 1st-2nd c. AD A Rylands papyrus (Catalogue of the greek papyri in the John Rylands library, vol. 1, p. 180 f.) 2nd c. British Library 1109 (Greek papyri in the British Museum III p.57 = Milne, Catalogue of the literary papyri in the British Museum no. 102) 1st or 2nd c. AD British Librart (Milne no. 103) 4th c. AD No. 15 of the Russian and Georgian collections published by Zeretelli (Pap. Ross. Georg. fasc. 1, pp.95-101) 3rd c. AD Amherst papyri II, p. 3, no. 12. Contains some extracts of a commentary of Aristarchus on book 1 cc. 193, 194 and 215. 3rd c. AD
The principal manuscripts are these:
A Florence, Laurentian 70, 3. Carefully written by two scribes in succession. The text contains marginal summaries and the remains of scholia, copied from its exemplar. Also much later marginal notes, especially in book 1. 10th c. AD B Codex Angelicanus, so called from the library in Rome where it is held. Previously known as the Passioneus, after a previous owner, Cardinal Passionei. Very closely related to A. Contains the same summaries as A, but fewer of them. Lots of annotations in various hands of various dates, some scholia, just notes. The first quaternion, and most of the second, have been lost and replaced in the 14th century. 11th c. D Vatican graecus 2369. Comes from the library of Muret. Written by a single scribe, very carelessly in places, especially towards the end. Many leaves are missing. 12th or 11th c. R Vatican graecus 123. A composite manuscript, containing first two treatises of Dio Chrysostom and some sentences from the Greek Anthology, then Herodotus, except for book 5. Some summaries accompany the text, very numerous and similar to those in A and B for books 1-2, different for the rest and fewer and fewer as the work goes on. 14th c. S The "Sancroftianus", so called from its former owner Archbishop Sancroft. held in a college in Cambridge. 14th c. U Rome, Vatican Urbinas 88. 14th c. C Florence, Laurentian conventi soppressi 207. Written hastily. Folios 9-14 are in a different hand, probably of the 15th century. 11th c. E Paris, BNF suppl. 134. Contains extracts of Plutarch, Diogenes Laertius and Herodotus. Comparison with a manuscript of the same date from Mount Athos suggests that these were taken from a 10th century manuscript, and that the text of the exemplar was reproduced very faithfully for the first books, less so for the rest. 13th c. P Paris, BNF gr. 1633. A very beautiful manuscript. Contains in the margin and between the lines corrections and additions by the original scribe. 14th c.
These fall into two main groups; AB and DRSU. CE and P are somewhere in between. CE agrees usually with AB, but P does so very little. A is the best representative of AB; R of DRSU until the arrival of D. AB is rather better than DRSU.
The manuscripts and papyri do not give us information on all the forms of the text of Herodotus that were known in antiquity. This we can see from the quotations of the text in other ancient authors. A further proof appears in P.Oxy. 1092, where some lines of book 2 162 are given in a form almost identical to that of modern editions, and then notes a variation of a quite different form of the line. But the majority of the variants known today are all on the surface of the text; divergences of orthography, dialect, or word order. Some of these may be due to some ancient learned 'corrector' with his own ideas as to how the Ionic dialect worked. But the majority of errors are simply those of the accidents of copying, errors of eye and hand. The papyri, with the exception of P.Oxy.1092, contain few new variants and little that brings into question the value of the medieval text. Almost none of the fragments of papyri overlap; the only two that do, P.Oxy. 1244 (start of 2nd c.) and P.Oxy.18 (3rd c.), give an identical text. Both the manuscripts and papyri appear to derive from a common ancient edition which was widely circulated in the early centuries AD. Who made this is unknown, although the Amherst papyrus reveals that Aristarchus made a ὑπόμνενα or commentary: perhaps he also made an edition.
Bibliography
Ph.-E. Legrand (tr), Hérodote: Introduction. Paris: Les Belles Lettres / Budé (1932), pp.179-185. Checked.
The early poet Hesiod (ca. 700 BC?) is given as the author of 3 works; the Theogony, the Works and Days, and the Shield. The last of these is not in fact by Hesiod.
There are the remains of more than 50 ancient manuscripts of these works, fragments from papyrus or parchment rolls and ancient codices, dating from the 1st-6th century AD.
There are numerous medieval manuscripts. But only the following have a useful witness to the text.
S Florence, Laurentianus 32, 16. Contains all 3 works. 1280 AD B Paris BNF, suppl. gr. 663. Contains part of Th. and Shield. end of 11-start of 12th c. L Florence, Laurentianus conv. soppr. 158. Th. and Shield. 14th c. R Casanatensis 356. Th. and most of Shield. 13-14 J Milan, Ambrosian C 222 inf. WD and Shield. Partly from late 12th c. F Paris BNF graecus 2773. WD and most of Shield. 14 Q Vatican graecus 915. Contains Th. Just before 1311 AD K Ravenna 120. Contains Th. 14 C Paris BNF gr. 2771. Most of WD. 10-11 D Florence, Laurentianus 31,39. Contains WD. 12 E Messanensis. bibl. univ. F.V.11. Contains WD. End of 12 H Vatican graecus 2383. Contains WD. 1287 A Folio 75 of B contains lines 87-138 of the Shield written at the same time as B but by a different hand. As B.
The following lesser mss are also mentioned in the Loeb edition:
m Paris BNF gr. 2763 15 m Paris BNF gr. 2833 15 m Vratislaviensis Rehd. 35 15 m Moscow 469 15 n Venice, Marcianus IX. 6 14 n Salmanticensis 243 15 v Florence, Laurentianus conv. soppr. 15 14 v Panormitanus Qq-A-75 15 v Paris BNF suppl. gr. 652 15 u Madrid 4607 15 u Milan, Ambrosian D 529 inf. 15 u Vatican graecus 2185 15
Papyri are also used (but not listed in the Loeb) by editors.
Bibliography
Glenn W. Most (tr), Hesiod: Theogony, Works and Days, Testimonia. Harvard (Loeb) (2006), pp.lxix-lxxi. Checked. This refers the reader for more details of the tradition to M.L.West, Commentary on Theogony, pp.48-72. Commentary on Works and Days, pp. 60-86. Solmsen-Merkelbach-West, Hesiodi Theogonia, pp. ix-xxiii.
The medical works of Hippocrates date from the early 4th century BC.
The text comes to us from the following manuscripts:
Θ Vienna med. IV 10th c. A Paris BNF graecus 2253. An excellent ms. There are 4-5 correcting hands. 11 B Florence, Laurentianus 74, 7 11-12 V Vatican graecus 276 12 M Venice, Marcianus gr. 269 11 C' Paris BNF gr. 446 suppl. 10 D Paris BNF gr. 2254 14 E Paris BNF gr. 2255 14 F Paris BNF gr. 2144 14 H Paris BNF gr. 2142 13 I Paris BNF gr. 2140 14 J Paris BNF gr. 2143 14 K Paris BNF gr. 2154 14 S' Paris BNF gr. 2276 14 R' Paris BNF gr. 2165 16 B Rome, Barberini I. 5 15
The mss. from C' on are all inferior mss, and suffer from attempts to 'correct' Atticizms back to a supposed Ionic form of Greek. The earlier mss all give an Attic text with a small sprinkling of Ionic forms.
The collection was first published in a Latin translation at Rome in 1525 by Fabio Calvo. The Greek appeared in 1526 at Venice.
Bibliography
W.H.S.Jones (tr), Hippocrates. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), vol. 1. pp.lxii-lxv. Checked.
The epic poems of Homer date to around 730 BC.
There are a great many papyrus fragments of this work from antiquity. Those dating after the 2nd century BC reflect a standard text established by editors such as Aristarchus in Alexandria, who also divided the poems into 24 books; the earliest, which date to the 3rd century BC, show remarkable fluctuations from that text. The same is true in quotations of Homer in 4th century authors such as Plato.
MORE NEEDED FROM WEST AND ALLEN
There are around 200 medieval manuscripts, the earliest of which are 10th century AD. Of these only a limited number are generally used for the text. These reflect the standard text, and A contains also extensive scholia from the Alexandrian editors.
X Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery, inv. MΓ26. 12-13 folios of a codex. Has an interlinear prose paraphrase. Sutton labelled this p568. Second half of 9th century AD Z Rome, Biblioteca Nazionale graecus 6 + Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional 4626. (Ve1 Allen). The oldest manuscript of the D scholia. Mid to late 9th century. A Venice, Biblioteca Marciana, gr. 822 (once 454), often referred to as Venetus A. "Beautifully written and meticulously corrected, with careful attention to orthography and execution. The creation of this great book was no routine act of copying but a major scholarly enterprise." (West) It has the Aristarchean marginal symbols and rich scholia from several sources, including the D scholia. Parts have been lost and replaced by a 15th century hand, without scholia. There are usually 25 verses to a page, and it seems that the scribe was copying an ms. in the same format. 10 D Florence, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana 32. 15. No scholia, some interlinear and marginal glosses. The quires from A-Δ were replaced in the 12th century by a fresh copy, apparently made from the original, which had probably become difficult to read because of damp. Several other folios were replaced at various times; some in the 10-11th c., some in the 15th. The Catalogue of Ships is omitted. 10 B Venice, Biblioteca Marciana, gr. 821 (once 453), often referred to as Venetus B. Not later than 1050 according to Allen. A large, regular, dumpy script with adscript iotas. Some folios in a later hand, which also adds the Porphyrian commentary and corrects accents and the like. 11 E Escorial Υ.I.1 (291). A twin of B, written by the same hand and with virtually the same page layout. (E3 Allen) 11 F Escorial Ω.1.12 (509) Later than E according to Allen. (E4 Allen) 11 T British Library Burney 86 1059 AD Y Paris Bibliothèque Nationale, Supplément grec 663. Not used by Allen. A composite manuscript which includes extensive excerpts from the Iliad, written as if prose with the verses divided by the sign + and excerpts by the sign +++. Many pages are missing. Bad orthography, but copied from a good exemplar. Probably written on Mount Athos. 11 C Florence, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana 32, 3. Scholia. A rounded girlish hand. Inferior spellings. Late 11 / early 12 R Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. T. 2. 7 (Misc 207). Allen O5. The first pages are from around 1300. The Catalogue of Ships is omitted. Well written with scholia and occasional corrections. 12 W Vatican gr. 1319. V16 Allen. Written late in the 12th century by the grammarian Ioannikios in a fast untidy spidery hand with many compendia; sparse interlinear glosses, no scholia. Careful with orthography and accents. 12 G Geneva, Bibliothèque publique, 44. Also has interlinear line-by-line paraphrase. Catalogue of Ships is omitted. Preserves an important body of scholia which come from an ancient commentary and are related to the scholia found under the name of Ammonius in POxy 221 (2nd century). 12
There are many more.
The text was first printed in 1488 in Florence.
Bibliography
M. S. Silk , Homer: The Iliad: A student guide. Cambridge (2004). pp.6-7. Checked.
Martin L. West, Studies in the Text and Transmission of the Iliad. Leipzig (2001). p.139 f. Checked.
[I have seen briefly the Loeb of Murray (1988-ish) for the Iliad which listed 4 mss in Venice and a Syrian palimpsest as the authorities]
There are some 70 papyri of the Odyssey, as compared to 230 of the Iliad (both figures are long out of date -- 1924 -- but indicate relative proportion).
These are the papyri, as numbered by T.W.Allen:
Pap1 P.Oxy. 773. Unimportant variants, given by some medieval mss; omits verse 407 as do numerous mss. 2 Pap2 P.Oxy. 774 3 Pap3 Mus. Brit. 271 1 Pap4 P.Oxy. 565 2-3 Pap5 P.Oxy. 775 3 Pap6 Fayum Towns 7. Contains an excellent variant. 1 Pap7 P.Oxy. 778 2-3 Pap8 Fayum Towns 157 1-2 Pap9 P.Oxy. 569 2 Pap10 P.Oxy. 780 2 Pap11 Fayum Towns 310 1-2 Pap12 Berol. (Philol. 44. 585) ? Pap13 Amherst Papyri II 23 3-4 Pap14 Mus. Cair. 10397 2 Pap15 P.Oxy. 571 1-2 Pap16 P.Oxy. 782 3 Pap17 P.Oxy. 783 1st c. BC Pap18 P.Oxy. 572 3 Pap19 Hibeh Papyri 23 3rd c. BC Pap20 P.Oxy. 448 3 Pap21 Genev. (Rev. Phil. 18, 101) Pap22 Tebtunis tom. iii (unpublished) 2nd c. BC Pap23 P.Oxy. 953 2 Pap24 P.Oxy. 956 2-3 Pap25 Berolinensis 10568 4-5 Pap26 Lipsiensis 3 4 Pap27 Mus. Brit. 121 3 Pap28 John Rylands Library 53 3-4 Pap29 Societ. Ital. 1912 1 Pap30 Tebtunis 696 (unpublished) 2 Pap31 Inst. Pap. Paris (unpublished) 3 Schol. Am. Amherst papyri II 18 1-2
The majority of these fragments give us nothing not found in the medieval mss.
T.W.Allen identified the following manuscripts:
Be Berol. 182 (Phillips Meerman) 15 Br Brussells 11290 = 73 16 C Caesenas 27. 11 1311 AD Ca Corpus Christi College Cambridge 81 15 Cr Cryptoferratensis Za XXVI 15 H1 Harleianus 5658 1479 AD H2 Harleianus 5673 15 H3 Harleianus 5674 13 H4 Harleianus 6325 15 Ho Holkham Hall 265 15 J Vespasiani Gonzag. de Columna Sablonetae ducis K Cracoviensis 543 1469 AD L1 Florence, Laurentian 32, 4 15 L2 Florence, Laurentian 32, 6 1465 AD L3 Florence, Laurentian 32, 23 15 L4 Florence, Laurentian 32, 24 10-11 L5 Florence, Laurentian 32, 30 15 L6 Florence, Laurentian 32, 39 15 L7 Florence, Laurentian 91 sup. 2 13 L8 Florence, Laurentian conventi soppressi 52 11 L9 Riccardianus 78 15 L10 Florence, Magliabecchianus 9 16-17 M1 Milan, Ambrosian A 77 inf. (= 800) 1468 AD M2 Milan, Ambrosian B 99 sup. (= 121) 13 M3 Milan, Ambrosian E 89 sup. (= 299). Some pages are 15th century. 13-14 M4 Milan, Ambrosian Q 88 sup. (= 688) 15 Ma Madrid 4565 = 27 15 Mo Mutinensis 110 15 Mon Munich 519 B 14 Moscoviensis Bibl. S. Synodi 286 12 N Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale II F 4 15 O Oxoniensis Canonici 79 15 P1 Paris, BNF graecus 2403 13 P2 Paris, BNF graecus 2680 15 P3 Paris, BNF graecus 2688 16 P4 Paris, BNF graecus 2689 16 P5 Paris, BNF graecus 2769 15 P6 Paris, BNF graecus 2894 13 P7 Paris, BNF sup. gr. 164 16 P8 Paris, BNF sup. gr. 1001 15 Pal Palatinus 45 1201 AD Pe Perusinus D 67 15 R1 Vatican graecus 24 15 R2 Vatican graecus 25 15 R3 Vatican graecus 906 1422 AD R4 Vatican graecus 915 13 R5 Vatican graecus 1302 13-14 R6 Vatican graecus 1320 15 R7 Vatican graecus 1627 1477 AD R8 Vatican Palatinus 7 1436 AD R9 Vatican Palatinus 15 R10 Vatican Ottobuoni 57 15 R11 Vatican Ottobuoni 308 1486 AD R12 Vatican Reginensis 99 15 R13 Vatican Urbinas 125 13 R14 Vatican Urbinas 136 15 R15 Vatican Barberini I 31 16 R16 Vatican Barberini I 93 15-16 R17 Vatican Barberini I 153 15-16 T Hamburg 15 14 Va Vallicellianus F 16 15 U1 Venice 456 15 U2 Venice 457 15 U3 Venice 610 15 U4 Venice 611 15 U5 Venice 613 13 U6 Venice cl. ix. num. 4. The first part of this is a 15th century replacement. 13 U7 Venice cl. ix. num. 21 16 U8 Venice cl. ix. num. 29 15 U9 Venice cl. ix. num. 34 15 V1 Vienna philol. 5 15 V2 Vienna philol. 50 15 V3 Vienna philol. 56 15 (probably) V4 Vienna philol. 133 13 V5 Vienna philol. 307 16 W Wratislaviensis 28 15 W2 Wratislaviensis 29 15 Z Stuttgartensis 5 16
These divide into 18 families.
Bibliography
Victor Bérard, Introduction à L'Odyssée, Paris: Belles Lettres (Bude) (1924). p.11f. Checked.
The date at which these arose is unclear but certainly precedes the Hellenistic era. They were not widely read in antiquity.
Three papyri exist:
Π1 Berlin Papyrus 13044 1st c. BC Π2 P.Oxy.2379 3rd c. Π3 P.Oxy. (forthcoming) 3rd c.
In the middle ages the hymns were gathered into a collection consisting (in order) of the Orphic Argonautica and Hymns, the Hymns of Proclus, the Homeric Hymns, and those of Callimachus. The manuscripts preserve this collection in this order. At some point Proclus Hymn to Ares became displaced and was labelled as the 8th Homeric Hymn; all our manuscripts derive from a copy in which this had happened.
The manuscripts can be classified as follows:
M Leiden, University Library, BPG 33H. Written by Ioannes Eugenikos in Constantinople, probably after 1439. This ms. was discovered by Matthaei in Moscow in 1777. It is the only ms. to preserve the Hymn to Demeter. At one point it had the lost Hymn to Dionysius also, but a quinion fell out, leaving only the last few lines on the page on which the Hymn to Demeter begins. The manuscript was corrected by a learned man in the 16th century. 15 Ψ The lost archetype of three manuscript families f, p and x. It is thought to have been a paper codex, possibly one of the haul of mss brought from Constantinople in 1423 by Giovanni Aurispa. The original of the x family contained marginal variants from a ms of a different family to Ψ, which are reproduced in mss of that family. 13?
M and Ψ often diverge quite a bit up to 18.4, which is where M stops.
The text was first printed in Florence in 1488 by Demetrius Chalcondyles.
Bibliography
Martin L. West (tr), Homeric Hymns, Homeric Apocrypha, Lives of Homer . Harvard (Loeb) (2003), pp.20-23. Checked.
Isocrates was one of the 10 Attic orators of the early 4th century BC. 60 orations were known in Roman times. 21 reach us through the medieval manuscripts, and ancient copies of 3 (Ad Demonicum, Ad Nicoclem, and the Nicocles) were discovered recently in an ancient book found in excavations at Kellis in the Dakleh oasis in Egypt. Some letters have also come down.
121 manuscripts and 10 papyri were listed in the edition of Drerup. Most of the papyri are short fragments apart from these:
Papyrus London. Contains Peace from c.13 to the end. 1st c. AD Papyrus Massiliensis. Contains To Nicocles 1-30. 4-5th c. Papyrus Berlin. Contains To Demonicus from c.18 to the end. 2nd c.
The most important manuscripts are:
Γ Urbinas III. Contains all the orations except Against Callimachus, Against Euthynus, and contains all the letters 9-10th c. Δ Vatican graecus 936. Contains all the orations except Against Callimachus, Against Euthynus, On the span of horses, and contains all the letters. A descendant of Γ. 14 E Ambrosian O 144. Same contents as Δ. A descendant of Γ. 15 Θ Florence, Laurentianus 87, 14. Contains 11 orations. None of the letters. 13 Λ Vatican gr. 65. Contains all the orations, none of the letters. 1063 AD Π Paris BNF graecus 2932. Contains life, "hypotheses" of the orations, and 13 orations. 15 Z Scaphusianus 43. Contains 12 orations; especially valuable for the text of To Demonicus. 15
The papyri are helpful in assessing the relative value of the manuscripts. The latter fall into two main groups. The first group is Γ and its two descendants. The other is the mass of vulgate manuscripts, of which there are two main branches. The first branch is Θ only; the other is the rest.
Γ is the best of the mss. The best of the vulgate mss is the earliest, Λ, but the tradition of this group is quite contaminated by interlinear and marginal notes in some early manuscript of this group which crept into the text during copying. Γ was not so affected, allowing us to recognise these glosses and ignore them.
The text was first printed in Milan in 1493 by Demetrius Chalcondylas.
Bibliography
George Norlin (tr), Isocrates . Harvard (Loeb) (1966), vol. 1 pp.xlvi-xlviii. Checked.
Isaeus was one of the 10 Attic orators, although not an Athenian himself, and the teacher of Demosthenes. His orations have come down to us.
All the medieval manuscripts are derived from A:
A British Library, Burneianus 95 (=codex Crippsianus). This is a vellum manuscript containing Andocides, Isaeus, Deinarchus, Antiphon, Lycurgus, Gorgias, Alcidamas, Lesbonax and Herodes. This was first discovered in the library of the monastery of Vatopedi on Mt. Athos. It was then acquired by the Phanariot Greek Prince, Alexander Bano Hantzerli of Constantinople. John Marten Cripps bought it from him at the start of the 19th century. It then passed into the collection of Dr. Charles Burney, and thence with the rest of that collection by purchase into the British Museum in 1827. It also has two corrector's hands. The first is the original scribe correcting his work against the exemplar, with the occasional conjecture. The second may or may not involve the use of a different ms. 13th c. B Florence, Laurentianus. Derived from A L Venice, Marcianus. Derived from A 15 M British Library, Burney 96. Derived from A P Milan, Ambrosian A 99. Derived from A Z Vratislauiensis. Derived from A Q Milan, Ambrosian D 42 sup. Independent of A, but contains only orations 1-2. It contains words omitted by A, but is carelessly written and otherwise inferior to A.
The text was first printed by Aldus in Venice in 1513, based on L.
Bibliography
Edward Seymour Forster (tr), Isaeus . Heinemann (Loeb) (1962), pp.xiv-xvii. Checked.
The orator Libanius delivered his orations on the emperor Julian the Apostate in the 4th century AD.
These orations survive in varying numbers, depending on how popular various orations were with Byzantine copyists. So oration 12 survives in 27 mss; for #13 there are 48; for #14, 27; #15, 32; #16, 33; #17, 59 mss; #18, 49; and #24, 26. Sixteen mss are common to them all, of which the most important are:
C Chisianus R VI. 43 11/12th c. A Munich gr. 483 (once the Augustanus). 10, but part replaced in 13th c. P Vatican Palatinus gr. 282 14 U Urbinas 126 1316 V Vienna XCIII. Includes scholia. 12 I Venice, Marcianus Append. XCI. 2 14 M Venice, Marcianus gr. 437 15 B Rome, Barberinus II. 41 15
There are roughly two families, but mss sometimes have one oration from one family and another from the other. CAV show no admixture of tradition so are the most important. There also exist a codex Bodleian Barrocianus 219, from which oration 24 was first printed, and a codex in Wölfenbuttel.
The text was first printed at Ferrara in 1517 by Soterianus Capsalis.
Bibliography
A. F. Norman (tr), Libanius: Selected Works. Harvard (Loeb) (1969), vol. 1, pp.lv-lvii. Checked.
The manuscripts are:
Florence, Laurentianus 32, 16. Paper. The chief and most important ms. 1280 AD M Munich N Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale II F. 19. Paper. O Vatican, Ottobonianus 51. Paper. P Vatican, Palatinus. Paper 16th c. S Vatican, Reginensis 81. Paper 1551 AD.
The first printed edition used a now lost Codex Falkenburgi.
Bibliography
W.H.D.Rouse (tr), Nonnos, Dionysiaca. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), vol. 1, pp.viii. Checked.
Onasander was a Platonic philosopher, who dedicated his work to the Roman Veranius, who was a consul in 49 AD.
The manuscripts fall into three families.
F Florence, Biblioteca Mediceo-Laurenziana 55, 4. Contains a collection of Greek military writers, including Aeneas Tacticus, and Asclepiodotus. Parchment, but damaged by damp after A and B were copied from it and illegible in places. Has also lost some leaves since then. Contains a large number of places where a critical mark is written above words thought to be corrupt and also has blank spaces where the original was defective or unreadable. The scribe was ignorant, but clearly copied very accurately. 10-11 A Paris BNF graecus 2522. Copied from F. 15 B Paris BNF graecus 2435. Copied from F. 16 P Paris BNF gr. 2442 (family 2) 11 G Vaticanus gr. 1104 (family 2) 11 H Naples Biblioteca Nazionale III C 26 (family 2) 11 Vaticanus gr. 2201. Direct copy of Vat. gr. 1104. (family 2) Milan, Ambrosian. 139 (previously B 119). 3rd family. 10 or 11
Other mss exist.
Family 1 is F and its children A and B, and these are much the best. The second family is a markedly inferior text, but which probably circulated more widely, and was used for Leo's Tactica. The third family varies quite widely, and may be more a Byzantine paraphrase.
Bibliography
The Illinois Greek Club (tr), Aeneas Tacticus; Asclepiodotus; Onasander. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), pp.363-365. Checked.
The Description of Greece was composed in the 2nd century AD.
There are many mss, all late. They fall into three classes:
P Paris BNF gr. 1410 1 1491 AD Pd Paris BNF gr. 1411 1 Fa Florence, Laurentianus 56, 10 1 Fb Florence, Laurentianus 56, 11 1 L Leiden, University library 16 K 2 V Vienna 23 3 M Moscow 194 3 Vn Venice, Marcianus gr. 413 3 Lb Leiden, University library 16 L. 3
Groups 1 and 2 are closely connected, while group 3 is the 'vulgate' text. The main problem with the text is gaps, where no manuscript now preserves the text.
Bibliography
W.H.S.Jones (tr), Pausanias: Description of Greece. Harvard (Loeb) (1969), vol. 1, pp.xxvii. Checked.
The lyric poet Pindar lived in the first half of the 5th century BC.
During the 4th and 5th centuries, two editions of the epinikia odes came into being. The first is represented only by A; the other best by B and D. Both derive from a manuscript, probably of the second century, but differ, especially in the marginal notes (=scholia). Two lesser editions are the Paris and Gottingen families.
There are papyri. The first 6 listed below are the most important ones.
P.Oxy. 408. P.Oxy. 659. P.Oxy. 841 P.Oxy. 1604 P.Oxy. 1792 P.Oxy. 2450 Π1 P.Oxy. 13.1614 Π2 P.Oxy. 17.2092 Π22 PSI 1277 Π24 P.Oxy. 26.2439 Π39 P.Antinoupolis 2.76+3.212 Π41 P.Berlin 16367 Π42 P.Oxy. 31.2536
These are the principal manuscripts:
A Milan, Ambrosian C 222 inf Ambr. family ca. 1280 AD C Paris, BNF graecus 2774 Paris family ca. 1300 AD N Milan, Ambrosian E 103 sup Paris family late 13th c. O Leiden university library Q 4 B Paris family ca. 1300 U Vienna graecus 130 Paris family early 14th c. V Paris BNF graecus 2403 Paris family late 13th B Vatican graecus 1312 Vatican family late 12th D Florence Laurentian 32, 52 Vatican family early 14th E Florence, Laurentian, 32, 37 Vatican family ca. 1300 F Florence, Laurentian, 32, 33 Vatican family late 13th L Vatican graecus 902 Vatican family early 14th c. G Gottingen philologus 29 Gottingen family mid. 13th c. H Vatican graecus 41 Gottingen family early 14th
The text was revised in the late Byzantine period, and various interpolated mss exist.
The text was first printed by Aldus in Venice in 1513. The first Latin translation was by Lonicerus, Basle 1535.
Bibliography
William H. Race (tr), Pindar: Olympian odes; Pythian odes. Harvard (Loeb) (1997), pp.34-38. Checked. This refers the reader to J. Irigoin, Histoire du texte de Pindare (Paris, 1952).
There were a number of authors named Philostratus.
The 73 letters of Philostratus date from the early third century. They are extant in a number of manuscripts:
R Vatican gr. 140. (once 1030) Paper. ff.260r. Letters 1-58. 1a 14 r Vatican gr. 87 (once 99). Paper. ff. 516v. Letters 1-58. 1a 14-15 U Vatican Urbinas 127. Paper. Written by Michael Apostolius (d. 1480). ff.220r. Letters 1-64. 1a 15 v Vienna phil. 331. Paper. Letters 28-57. 1a π Paris BNF gr. 2885. Paper. Letters 1-47. 1a 16 (start) c Cambridge, "6697" (probably 6097 in the Barnard catalogue of 1697). Paper. Letters 1-47. 1a 16 p Paris BNF gr. 1696. Parchment. ff.282r, 306v. Letters 1-40. 1b 14 u Vatican Urbinas 110. Paper. A copy of Paris gr. 1696. Letters 1-40. 1b 14-15 uβ Vatican Urbinas 134. Paper. The portion containing the letters was written by a certain Phrancopulos. f. 124r-131v. Letters 1-39. 1b 15 Vatican Palatinus gr. 155. 1c 16 Coislinianus 321 1c 16 Paris suppl. gr. 352. Bombycin. 1c 13 d Paris 1657. Paper 1c 16 Vatican gr. 96. Paper. 2 13-14 fa Florence, Laurentian 55, 7. Paper. 2 15 fb Florence, Laurentian 58, 16. Paper. 2 15 l Leiden BPL 76 2 Paris BNF gr. 3026. Paper. Lacunose. 2 16 M Madrid, BN, 4693 (=63 Iriarte). Written by Constantine Lascaris 2 1460-1465 b Oxford, Bodleian. Barroci 50. Parchment 2 11 h Vatican Palatine gr. 129. Paper. Independent End of 15 Paris BNF gr. 2775. Paper. Letter 73 only. Independent 15 Florence, Laur. 59, 30. Paper. Independent 13
The manuscripts divide into two families, with a 3 independent mss. The first family subdivides into 3 groups. Of the 47 letters common to the two families, some appear in a shorter form in family 1. The longer form seems to be original.
Bibliography
A.R.Benner (tr), The Letters of Alciphron, Aelian, and Philostratus. Harvard (Loeb) (1962), pp.394-403. Checked.
About 25 manuscripts are known, although some are incomplete or contain only excerpts. All of them share a large number of errors, probably because they all derive from one copy. An error plainly due to copying from uncial indicates that a late antique exemplar had survived some centuries of neglect and then been copied, some time before the first extant witness.
f Florence, Laurentianus 69, 33 11 E Escorialensis Gr. 227 12 p Paris BNF graecus 1801 14
All the others are 14th century or later. The text was first printed in Venice by Aldus.
Bibliography
Christopher P. Jones (tr), Philostratus: the life of Apollonius of Tyana. Harvard (Loeb) (2005), books 1-4, pp.22-23. Checked. There is no proper edition but the best is that of C.L.Kayser in 1844 (not the Tuebner of 1870 which is a step back). Jones indicates that the first full English translation was made by Berwick in order to refute the insinuations of Gibbon about the work.
The philosopher Plotinus composed his Enneads in the 3rd century AD.
Manuscripts:
A Florence, Laurentianus 87, 3 E Paris BNF graecus 1976 B Florence, Laurentianus 85, 15 R Vatican, Reginensis gr. 97 J Paris BNF gr. 2082 U Vatican Urbinas gr. 62 S Berlin graecus 375 N Munich gr. 215 M Venice, Marcianus gr. 240 C Munich gr. 449 V Vienna philosophicus graecus 226 Q Venice, Marcianus gr. 242 L Milan, Ambrosian gr. 667 D Marcianus gr. 209. The oldest ms.
The archetype of all the manuscripts now extant represented Porphyry's edition of the works with remarkable accuracy, and was certainly written after the beginning of the 6th century and probably 9-10th century. No one ms. is the best; the consensus of the main manuscript of each of the four families (WXYZ) is the best guide. A fifth family is represented by D, but this is too fragmentary and faulty to be of much use. The Greek of Plotinus is idioscyncratic, and so is best not emended, especially considering the good grounds to believe in the accuracy of the archetype.
Bibliography
A. H. Armstrong (tr), Plotinus. Harvard (Loeb) (1966), vol. 1, pp.xxviii-xxxv. Checked. Refers the reader to the P.Henry and H.-R. Schweyer ediyion of 1951 and the prolegomena volumes of P. Henry in Études Plotiniennes (1941, 1948; vol 2 is Les Manuscrits des Ennéades) for details.
This author lived in the 2nd century AD.
The manuscripts of this collection of biographies are:
Sg Monastery of St. Germains-des-Prés, Departement de Loire. Parchment. Contains 15 of the Lives. 10th c. S Monastery of Seitenstetten, Austria. Parchment. Contains 16 lives. The best ms. Only known since 1870. 11th A Paris, BNF graecus 1671. Parchment. Contains all the Morals and the Lives. 13th C Paris, BNF graecus 1672. Parchment. Contains all the Lives. 13th D Paris, BNF graecus 1674. Parchment. Contains all the Lives. 16th Fa Paris, BNF gr. 1676. Derived from S, and used for the Stephanus edition. 15th
A and D relate to Sg while C relates to both S and Sg, and often can be used to correct AD.
The text was first printed in Florence in 1517, based on late Florentine manuscripts.
Bibliography
Bernadotte Perrin (tr), Plutarch's Lives. Harvard (Loeb) (1914), books 1, pp.xiv-xix. Checked.
Around half of this work is lost, large though it still is (78 essays). There are over a hundred manuscripts, most containing portions of the work.
A Paris, BNF graecus 1671. Parchment. Contains all the Morals and the Lives. 13th c. E Paris, BNF graecus 1672. Parchment. Also contains all the Lives. 13-14 D Paris, BNF graecus 1656. 11-12 B Paris, BNF graecus 1675. 15 C Paris, BNF graecus 1955 11-12 F Paris, BNF graecus 1957 11 Rome, Urbinas 97 10 Milan, Ambrosian 82 15 V1 Venice, Marcianus graecus 249 11-12 V2 Venice, Marcianus graecus 250 11 V4 Venice, Marcianus graecus 427 14 Vienna 148 (=phil. gr. 72). Probably the archetype of all the existing mss of the Symphosiacs. 11-12
The mss often show different value in different essays, and so no one ms can be relied on for all the texts. The Venetian manuscripts once belonged to Cardinal Bessarion.
There are extensive quotations from Plutarch in other writers which suggest that the text we have is generally trustworthy. Errors are generally of a minor sort (apart from actual omissions), and some seem to be due to confusion of uncial letters.
The text was first printed at Venice by Aldus in 1509, edited by Demetrius Ducas, a Greek from Crete.
Bibliography
Frank Cole Babbitt (tr), Plutarch's Moralia. Harvard (Loeb) (1927), books 1, pp.xix-xxvi. Checked.
This historian lived in the 2nd century BC and composed a history in 40 books, of which book 40 was a table of contents. Only books 1-5 have survived complete, but very extensive extracts of the remaining books exist.
The manuscripts are:
A Vatican graecus 124. Contains books 1-5. The best manuscript for these. 11th c. F Urbinas gr. 102. Contains excerpts of the lost books. 11 M Vatican gr. 73. A palimpsest. Contains excerpts of the lost books. 10
There are also extracts in the compilations of Constantine Porphyrogenitus.
Bibliography
W. R. Paton (tr), Polybius: The Histories. Harvard (Loeb) (1967), books 1, pp.xv-xvi. Checked.
The manuscripts of this philosopher (ca. 200 AD) are these:
L Florence, Laurentianus 81, 11. Contains all the works. 1465 AD M Munich gr. 439. Contains Pyrr. Hyp. Late 14th c. E Paris BNF graecus 1964. Contains all the works, plus the διαλέξεις. Late 15th c. A Paris BNF graecus 1963. Contains all the works, plus the διαλέξεις. 1534 AD B Berlin Phillipps 1518. Nearly a duplicate of A. 1542 AD
The last three are very closely related, giving us three lines of transmission; L, M and EAB.
There is also a Latin translation, preserved in Paris BNF latin 14700 (on foll. 83-132). This contains almost all of Sextus. The translation is 13th century and derived from an independent manuscript, equal in importance to all those above.
Bibliography
R. G. Bury (tr), Sextus Empiricus: Outlines of Pyrrhonism. Harvard (Loeb) (1967), vol. 1, pp.xliii-xlv. Checked.
The plays were composed in the 5th century BC. Between 338 and 326 BC, the orator Lycurgus carried a decree that an official copy of the works of the three great dramatists, including Sophocles, should be made and used as the basis for all performances (Ps.Plutarch, Life of Lycurgus 15). Galen records that Ptolemy II Eurgetes (247-222) 'borrowed' the official copies for his library in Alexandria, on payment of a huge deposit of 15 talents of silver, and then refused to return them (Galen, In Hippocratis Epidemias 3, 2, 4). Some time after the third century AD, someone made a selection of plays; 7 each by Aeschylus and Sophocles, and 10 by Euripides. The others then became rare. Only seven complete plays are now preserved.
There are at least 17 papyrus fragments. The earliest one belongs to the first century BC. The text is usually inferior to that preserved in the medieval manuscripts, except for P.Oxy. 2180, a second century ms., which has valuable new readings for Oedipus Tyrannus. Others are POxy 1615 (4th century AD); POxy 2093 (2-3rd century AD); P.Berol.21208 (5-6th century AD); P.Colon. 251 (2nd century AD); P.Antinoop.2,72 (6-7th century AD), P.Oxy.693 (3rd century); P.S.I.1192 (2nd c.); POxy.22+P.Lit.Lond.69 (4-5th c.) and POxy 1369 (5-6th c.).
There are two hundred or so medieval copies. The vast majority contain only three plays, the Ajax, Electra and Oedipus Tyrannus, selected from the seven above.
Only 3 mss come from the period between 800 and 1204 AD. The first of these is the Florence ms. codex Laurentianus 32.9. This contains Aeschylus (where it has the siglum M), Sophocles and Apollonius Rhodius (for both of which it is referred to as L). The next is a twin manuscript, Leiden, Bibliotheca Publica Graeca 60A. This is a palimpsest, and most of it can't be now read. Both were probably written soon after 950 AD. The third is Laurentianus 31.10 (K), which was written between 1150-1200 AD.
All the other mss post-date 1204. There are a number of families. The Roman family of mss (r) includes G (=Laurentianus CS 152), Q (Paris supp. gr. 109) and R (Vaticanus graecus 2291). The most important member of the Paris family (a) is Ms. Paris. Gr. 2712 (A); others include Naples II F.9 (=D), Vienna, phil. gr. 161 (=Xr), Vienna suppl. gr. 71 (=Xs) and Venice Marcianus gr. 616 (=Zr).
For the Antigone, Women of Trachis, Philoctetes and Oedipus at Colonus, a family called z sometimes contains useful textual data.
In the 14th century the Byzantine scholar Demetrius Triclinus created his own recension of the plays. This is preserved in Ms. Paris gr. 2711 (=T) and Venice Marcianus gr. 470 (=Ta).
A group of mss. written between 1261 and 1350 are known as the veteres (='old ones'). These include Paris.gr.2735 (=C); Laurentianus 28.25 (=F); Laurentianus 32.40 (=H); Madrid gr. 4677 (=N); Leiden Voss. gr. Q. 6 (=O); Heidelberg Pal. gr. 40 (=P); Vatican gr. 904 (=Pa); Vatican Urbin. gr. 141 (=S); Vatican graecus 468 (=V) and Milan Ambriosian E.103.sup (=Wa).
Other mss. include the Jenensis, Bos. q. 7 (=J), Vatican. gr. 1333 (=Zc).
Printed texts: The text was first printed in 1502 by Aldus Manutius in Venice. The Paris edition of Adrian Turnebus (1552-3) was based on the Triclinus edition of the text in ms. T. This unfortunately influenced subsequent printed editions. A Latin translation accompanied the Henri Stephanus edition (Paris, 1568). L was not collated and used until 1823.
Scholia and summaries: Ancient scholia exist on the plays. There are also ancient hypotheseis or summaries of the plot.
Bibliography
Hugh Lloyd-Jones (tr), Sophocles: Ajax, Electra, Oedipus Tyrannus. Harvard UP (Loeb) (1994), pp.15-18. Checked. This states that a fuller account can be found in the preface to the Oxford Classical Text, ed. H.Lloyd-Jones and N.G.Wilson (1990). That edition omits by mistake the ancient summaries, but these can be found in Pearson's previous Oxford Classical Texts edition.
Strabo composed his Geography at Rome in the reign of Augustus, just a little BC.
The most important manuscripts are:
Paris BNF graecus 1397. Contains books 1-9. Vatican graecus 1329. Contains books 10-17. Venice, Marcianus 640. Epitome Vaticana (based on a manuscript that still contained the end of book 7). end of 10th c. Paris BNF gr. 1395. A poor ms. used for the Aldine edition.
All the manuscripts share the same mistakes, changes and lacunae, particularly the big gap at the end of book 7.
The text was first printed by Aldus in Venice in 1516. An excellent Latin translation by Guarinus Veronensis (books 1-10) and Gregorius Tifernas (the rest) appeared in 1472, from better manuscripts than that used for the Aldine, but which have since disappeared.
Bibliography
Horace Leonard Jones (tr), The geography of Strabo. Harvard UP (Loeb) (1959), vol. 1, p.xxxiv. Checked.
The author of the Enquiry into plants (in 9 books) and De causis plantarum (in 6 books), and the Characters lived in the 4th century AD.
The Characters
The papyri are:
P. Hamb. 143. Contains Characters 7-8. See ZPE 35 p.21. 1st c. BC P. Herculaneum 1457. Contains Philodemus on flattery, citing Character 5 1st c. BC P. Oxy. 699. An epitome of Characters 25-6. 3rd c. AD
The manuscripts are:
A Paris BNF graecus 2977. Contains Characters 1-15. 11 B Paris BNF graecus 1983. Contains Characters 1-15. 10-11 V Vatican graecus 110. Contains Characters 16-30. The only one to contain 29-30.5, which were edited from it for the first time in 1786 by Amaduzzi. 13 M Munich graecus 505. An epitome of 1-21. 15 A family of 7 manuscripts containing 1-28 15-16 A family of 6 manuscripts containing 1-23. 14-16 A family of 32 manuscripts which never contained more than 1-15. 13-16
AB contain also a proem (clearly spurious) and a table of contents for 1-15. In both mss. the text of Character 30.5-16 is wrongly appended to Character 11. Because AB and V overlap in 30.5-16, we can tell that AB is often a shorter text, but also a better one than V. It would appear that at an early stage the text was divided into two halves, which were transmitted separately, with some recombination later.
Every manuscript is derived from collections of treatises on rhetoric, and probably owes its survival to this. The earliest papyri show very much the same kind of text as the medieval mss.
De causis plantarum (CP)
There are 8 Greek manuscripts which contain CP:
U Vatican, Urbinas graecus 61. A very incorrect manuscript; accents and breathings are often omitted or interchanged, and Byzantine homophones are constantly confused. The ms. was corrected in the 15th century in Italy, but none of the corrections are from an independent manuscript. Contains both CP and HP. 11th c. N Florence, Laurentian, desk 85, 22. Contains CP and HP, and ps.Aristotle, De plantis. 15th v Venice, Marcianus gr. 274. A copy of N. Jan. 3rd 1443 AD. M Florence, Laurentian, desk 85, 3. An emended copy or descendant of N. Contains CP and HP, and ps.Aristotle, De plantis. 15th C Oxford, Corpus Christi College 113. Contains CP and HP, and ps.Aristotle, De plantis, plus other texts. For CP and HP it is a copy of M. 15th H Harvard college library 17. The Aldine edition of Aristotle was printed from this when it was intact. It has now lost various leaves and others have been misbound. Currently it contains CP and HP. 15th P Paris, BNF gr. 2069. Contains CP and HP, and ps.Aristotle, De plantis. 15th B Vatican graecus 1305. One of the two manuscripts in this volume is a copy of P. Contains CP and HP, and ps.Aristotle, De plantis. 15th
U is the only source; the others contain merely conjectures or mistakes, and need be consulted only where U has become illegible.
A Latin translation of CP and HP was made by Theodore of Gaza in 1451 and printed at Treviso (Tarvisium) in 1483, in an edition full of misprints. Seven manuscript copies of the translation also exist. It is valuable because it was made from a manuscript of a different family to any now known. But it doesn't seem to have been a better manuscript, and Theodore felt able to adapt the text freely using readings from Pliny the Elder or his own conjectures.
The manuscripts of the περὶ φυτῶν ἱστορία fall into two classes. (Some of the mss are described more fully above)
U Vatican, Urbinas 1 P2 Paris BNF. Contains "considerable extracts". Other collections of extracts exist; one at Munich is named after Pletho. 1 M Florence, Laurentian. Two mss, which agree so closely that they may be considered as one. 2 P Paris BNF. Inferior to M and V. Contains marginal readings and emendations, as a note in the margin states. 2 V Vienna. Contains books 1-5 and 2 chapters of book 6. Closely resembles M in style and readings. 2
In addition the first printed edition, by Aldus in Venice in 1495-8, is also based on a manuscript not now known, but probably inferior to any of these, and also to that used by Theodore of Gaza for his Latin translation.
Bibliography
B. Einarson and G.K.K.link (tr), Theophrastus: De causis plantarum. Harvard UP (Loeb) (1976), vol. 1, p.lix-lxiii. Checked.
Arthur Hort (tr), Theophrastus: Enquiry into plants and minor works. Harvard UP (Loeb) (1916), vol. 1, p.xiii-xv. Checked.
Jeffrey Rusten (tr), Theophrastus: Characters; Herodas, Mimes; Sophron and other mime fragments. Harvard UP (Loeb) (2002), pp.25-41. Checked. Refers the reader to the Immisch edition of the Philological Society of Leipzig. See also N.G.Wilson in Scriptorium 16 (1962) 96-8 for extra mss.
The History of the Peloponnesian War was written at the end of the 5th century BC.
A Paris suppl. graecus 255 (once the Cisalpinus or Italicus) 11-12th c. B Vatican gr. 126. Parchment 11th c. C Florence, Laurentian 69, 2. Parchment. 11 E Heidelberg library, Palatinus 252. Parchment. 11 F Munich, Augustanus 430. Parchment. 11 G Munich gr. 228. Paper. 13 M British Library 11727. Parchment. 11
These divide into two families, CG and ABEF. C and B are the best in each family. M is mid-way between the two families.
The text was first printed by Aldus in Venice in 1502; the scholia were printed in 1503.
Bibliography
Charles Forster Smith (tr), Thucydides. Harvard UP (Loeb) (1969), vol. 1, p.xxi. Checked.
This soldier and statesman lived in the 4th century BC.
There are papyri of this work.
There are two families of manuscripts, f and c, of which the chief representatives are:
F Vatican gr. 1335 f 10-11th c. M Venice, Marcianus graecus 590 f 12-13 C Paris, BNF gr. 1640 c 9-10
In the past preference has been given to the c manuscripts, but study of the papyri fragments has suggested that each reading needs to be assessed on its merits, rather than preferring one family.
Bibliography
Carleton L. Brownson (tr), revised J. Dillery, Xenophon: Anabasis. Harvard UP (Loeb) (n.d), pp.35-37. Checked. He says that there is a complete list of all Xenophon papyri in J. Dillery and T. Gagos, "P.Mich. Inv. 4922: Xenophon and an Unknown Christian Text with an Appendix of all Xenophon papyri", XPE 93 (1992), 187-89; corrections to this in M. E. van Rossum-Steenbeck, "Four notes on the list of Xenophon papyri", ZPE 99 (1993), 17.
There is a papyrus fragment in the National library in Vienna, of the 3rd century. This confirms the basic soundness of B and preserves some correct readings where all the mss are in error. It preserves portions of the first book and is labelled Π.
There are numerous manuscripts. Six of these are pre-eminent, in the following order:
B Paris BNF graecus 1738. Start of 14th c. M Milan, Ambrosian A 4. 1344 AD D Paris BNF graecus 1642 15th c. V Venice, Marcianus gr. 368. 14 or 15 C Paris BNF gr. 2080 Start of 15th c. F Leiden university library, Perizonianus 6 1456
The text was first printed at Florence in 1516 by E. Boninus at the Junta press.
Bibliography
Carleton L. Brownson (tr), Xenophon: Hellenica. Harvard UP (Loeb) (1968), pp.35-37. Checked.
Constructive feedback is welcomed to Roger Pearse. Corrections and additions are very welcome.
This page has been online since 20th June 2008
Return to the Manuscripts Pages Return to Roger Pearse's Pages