University of Virginia Library

Search this document 


  

expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 
expand section 

expand section 

Notes

 
[1]

Pierre Daniel, Pub. Virgilii Maronis Bucolicorum Eclogœ X, Georgicorum Libri IIII, Aeneidos Libri XII, et in ea Mauri Servii Honorati Grammatici Commentarii, ex Antiquiss. Exemplaribus Longe Meliores et Auctiores (Paris, 1600).

[2]

"The Manuscripts of the Commentary of Servius Danielis on Virgil," Harvard Studies in Classical Philology XLIII (1932) 77-121.

[3]

Servianorum in Vergilii Carmina Commentariorum Editio Harvardiana, vol. II (Lancaster, Pa., 1946).

[4]

Georg Thilo, Servii Grammatici Qui Feruntur in Vergilii Carmina Commentarii, vol. 1 (Leipzig, 1881), praef. III-XLVIII.

[5]

Notably by Karl Barwick, "Zur Servius-frage," Philologus LXX (1911), 106-145.

[6]

"Donatus and the Scholia Danielis: A Stylistic Comparison," H.S.C.P. LIII (1942), 157-169.

[7]

Barwick, op. cit., and E. K. Rand, "Is Donatus's Commentary on Virgil Lost?" Classical Quarterly X (1916), 158-159.

[8]

For an exhaustive study of this manuscript, see J. J. H. Savage, "The Scholia in the Virgil of Tours, Bernensis 165," H.S.C.P. XXXVI (1925), 91-164.

[9]

Op. cit., prœf. LXI.

[10]

Servius Danielis Manuscripts, 105.

[11]

Hermann Hagen, Scholia Bernensia ad Vergili Bucolica atque Georgica (Leipzig, 1867), pp. 689-690.

[12]

Gino Funaioli, Esegesi Virgiliana Antica (Milan, 1930), pp. 14-16.

[13]

For a summary, see Savage, Virgil of Tours, 92-95; also later works by the same author, "More on Donatus' Commentary on Virgil," Classical Quarterly XXXIII (1929), 56-59, and "Was the Commentary on Virgil by Aelius Donatus Extant in the Ninth Century?" Classical Philology XXVI (1931), 405-411.

[14]

Photographs for Aeneid IV are in the possession of my friend and collaborator on Volume III of the "Harvard Servius," Professor Albert H. Travis, of the University of California. They could not be borrowed without serious interference to his work on another phase of the Servius problem.

[15]

Ca. Aen. III, 90-452.

[16]

Servius Danielis Manuscripts, 96-105.

[17]

Catalogus Codicum Bernensium (Bibliotheca Bongarsiana), Bern, 1875.

[18]

Scholia Bernensia, 689.

[19]

There are occasional omissions, probably inadvertent, e. g., scholia on A. III, 547 (Th. 435, 10); A. V, 107 (Th. 605, 4); A. V, 209 (Th. 614, 2); A. V, 300 (Th. 619, 17).

[20]

E. g., in the binding over fol. 81v (Aen. III, 93-125) and fol. 88r (Aen. III, 522-554), all the DS found in F from "cognomines fecisse" (Th. 361, 19) through "credidisse" (Th. 365, 25), 41 lines in F.

[21]

E. g., at A. III, 20 (Th. 339, 23) G omits "nisi in patriis . . . cœptorum (Th. 339, 26) and the 19 lines of DS comment that follow in the left margin of F, to MVLTA MOVENS ANIMO (A. III, 34; Th. 342, 7). Such breaks are found also beginning at Th. 353, 18 (42 lines of F), Th. 376, 8 (17 lines of F), Th. 381, 11 (19 lines of F), et alibi.

[22]

On A. V, 413; A. V, 415; and A. V, 416 ("GEMINIS duobus," wrongly printed by Thilo with A. V, 415).

[23]

We are not concerned at this point with omission of whole scholia (cf. f.n. no. 19, above) or more extensive omission seemingly resulting from the inability of G to crowd onto his page everything that is in the left margin of F, ad loc. (cf. f.n. no. 21, above.)

[24]

E. g., A. III, 321 (Th. 398, 12) inmanior . . . alios] F om. G A. III, 330 (Th. 399, 21) post a Menelao . . . desponsatam (23)] F om. (mg. suppl.) G A. III, 506 (Th. 430, 1) nominati . . . altitudinem] F om. (mg. suppl.) G A. V, 64 (Th. 598, 22) novendiales . . . sepeliebantur] F om. G

[25]

E. g., on A. III, 332 (Th. 401, 2); A. III, 426 (Th. 418, 18); A. III, 500 (Th. 428, 24); A. V, 105 (the whole note); A. V, 208 (Th. 618, 17), A. V. 296 (Th. 619, 8); A. V, 484 (Th. 629, 2), and A. V, 613 (Th. 637, 17).

[26]

Cf. A. V, 241 (Th. 615, 12) autem] F aut G A. V. 565 (Th. 634, 26) aut] F autem G

[27]

Vid. infra, p. 140. F and G share errors that derive from similar confusion, e. g., A. III, 104 (Th. 359, 12) Electræ] electrace F G A. III, 113 (Th. 363, 21) strictis] stratis F G

[28]

Cf. A. III, 517 (Th. 431, 9), "serenitas," where it is G which interprets the letter correctly (p. 138, above). F and G share errors of this type also: A. III, 332 (Th. 400, 17) numinis] ruminis F G A. III, 657 (Th. 448, 29) meminit] memirit F G