Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Some Emendations and Non-Emendations in the Third Edition of Corpus Tibullianum

Some Emendations and Non-Emendations in the Third Edition of Corpus Tibullianum SOME EMENDATIONS AND NON-EMENDATIONS IN THE THIRD EDITION OF CORPUS TIBULLIANUM BY G. K. GALINSKY When I took over the work on Friedrich Lenz' third edition (Leiden 1971) of the Tibullan Corpus I was aware that he had been characterized, and in some quarters even criticized, for being 'conservative' in his approach to the text. It is clear that a tradition as miserable as that of the Corpits Tibullianum invites more than the usual share of emendations and conjectures, and one could easily make a name for oneself by offering a great number of what H. D. Jocelyn calls "original contributions of his own" 1). Whether the adoption of this principle would be a genuine improvement of the Tibullan text rather than emendatory one-upmanship is open to question. Some of the following examples may illustrate that such emendations often are not the result of a careful study of the poetic context of a given passage, but the result of that schematic analogy- hunting which J. Whatmough in his Sather Lectures singled out for criticism 2) . Here as elsewhere, the use of the term `conservative' only obscures the issue. Nor do I see any harm Tibullum ex Tibullo http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Mnemosyne Brill

Some Emendations and Non-Emendations in the Third Edition of Corpus Tibullianum

Mnemosyne , Volume 26 (2): 160 – Jan 1, 1973

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/some-emendations-and-non-emendations-in-the-third-edition-of-corpus-uWzhtJGqC7

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 1973 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0026-7074
eISSN
1568-525X
DOI
10.1163/156852573X00396
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

SOME EMENDATIONS AND NON-EMENDATIONS IN THE THIRD EDITION OF CORPUS TIBULLIANUM BY G. K. GALINSKY When I took over the work on Friedrich Lenz' third edition (Leiden 1971) of the Tibullan Corpus I was aware that he had been characterized, and in some quarters even criticized, for being 'conservative' in his approach to the text. It is clear that a tradition as miserable as that of the Corpits Tibullianum invites more than the usual share of emendations and conjectures, and one could easily make a name for oneself by offering a great number of what H. D. Jocelyn calls "original contributions of his own" 1). Whether the adoption of this principle would be a genuine improvement of the Tibullan text rather than emendatory one-upmanship is open to question. Some of the following examples may illustrate that such emendations often are not the result of a careful study of the poetic context of a given passage, but the result of that schematic analogy- hunting which J. Whatmough in his Sather Lectures singled out for criticism 2) . Here as elsewhere, the use of the term `conservative' only obscures the issue. Nor do I see any harm Tibullum ex Tibullo

Journal

MnemosyneBrill

Published: Jan 1, 1973

There are no references for this article.