University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
The State of Wisconsin Collection

Page View

Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters
volume VIII (1888-1891)

Van Cleef, F. L.
The pseudo-Gregorian drama Christus Patiens in its relation to the text of Euripides,   pp. 363-378 PDF (5.7 MB)

Page 371

The Pseudo-Gregorian Drama Christus Patiens.
            he made an arbitrary change in the Euripidean text. The
            latter seems to be the reason in this case. As th(
            next line in the Xp. I. ends with xV'cov, its author appar,
            ently desired to avoid the simularity of endings and so
            changed the order of words in this line. There seems to
            be no reason for preferring with Nauck the reading x;tviow
            3oy cov.
   5. 14. The line is lacking in C. P. and Strabo I. 27 and XV. 687 read
            11epdoGV 6', which Elmsley wished to emend to &' and
            Wecklein, who in 16 reads   ri-1?Oov for e'iUr0cV from
            Strabo XV. 687 (although Str. 1. 27 gives AtzROCGV), drops 0'
            altogether. Wecklein however says nothing of the testi-
            mony of the Xp. 17. 1588, which also omits 0' but preserves
            the participle in verse 16, though changed to rcap60 iOV.
   6. 20. P. and C. zo'A ii. But Xp. 11. 1595 X067a which Schenkl and
            Wecklein have taken into text, who also place verse 20
            after 22. In the order of lines preserved by our MSS.
            the similar endings of 19 & 20, zrO;ez5 and o'Xzi, seem ob-
            -3ectionable. But if the order be changed th'-+ iection is
            removed.                                        Q
  We mcay also include under this head those cases in which the cita-
tions from the Xp. 1I. agree with one of the MSS. and not with the other.
They are as follows:
  1. 75. P. Ozcaddeveraz. But C. and the Xp. i1. 1141 Ozacev'sraz.
            This statement rests upon Bruhn's Kritischer Apparat.
            Wilamowitz in his Analecta Euripidea does not note this
            variance of the MSS., so that it seems at least questionable.
 2.46. P3  zo1VSa  with which the Xp. IT1571agrees.    JXC$wo5.
 3. 56. P. 5vvseuO.npov5h C. and the Xpo. 11. 1603 6vr'8,UzcIpov5. All
            editors follow MS. P.'
 4. 314. 1P2 with Stobaeus Flor. 5.15 and 74.8 read Add6 opovyel.
            P. C. and the Xp. 11. 262 dwqporEZ8v without yij.
 In the following passage the thought rather than the word of the Xp. 11.
 has furnished Hartung (whom Schoene & Bruhn have followed) with a
 plausible correction of MS. P. 1090-1 17ddove5 11 * 8EXOV6az certainly
 cannot stand. Kirchhoff, following Heath, reads for '66ovse5 n'66oy'a
 and retains 8Xovdaz. Weeklein prefers to bracket 1091. The three
 * 'In 443 - Xp. 11. 1385 and 1928 the MSS. of Euripides read xS5,
 6vy 'p ada5: Xp. 11. 1385 ow' dvv- but 1928 ov' tvr- Such a point is
 entirely beyond the evidence of late MSS., as seems also the case under
 consideration. It is only given to give the benefit of the doubt to the
 X,. 11. A similar question is that of S5 and e15. Cf. 450- Xp. 117. 1655;
 1073 = 662. Likewise -? or -ez in second person singular middle of the
verb. Cf. 787 =2277 and 2286; 960-1522. So also the z subscriptum in
the verb 6CZo; of. 1050 = 678: and the accent of d6ya; cf. 1084 - 2260.

Go up to Top of Page