NOTES ABOUT THE TEXT OF THE SPEECH IN NEERAM WITHIN THE

MANUSCRIPT HISPALENSIS 330-155-1

Mª ISABEL CONDE MORENO – FELIPE G. HERNÁNDEZ MUÑOZ

ABSTRACT: We present the first results of the collatio made on the text of the speech In
Neeram in the manuscript Hispalensis 330-155-1, never used before in the edition of this
speech.

The manuscript Hispalensis 330-155-1 (H) is the only one among those preserved in
Spain, which transmits us some of the private speeches attributed to Demosthenes. Among
those speeches it is the no. 59, In Neeram, very interesting by the information it conveys
about the legal issues of women in the Athens of the IVth century, and by the problems
related to its authorship. At the present time it doesn't seem from Demosthenes, but from
Apollodorus, the "eleventh orator" of the canon. The manuscript was copied in the second
half of the XVth century by a greek man from Crete, Thomas Bitzimanos 1, who worked at
the workshop of Michel Apostoles and in the circle of Aldus Manutius. The manuscript is
now deposited in the Library at the University of Sevilla.

According to our information, this manuscript, which was already listed in the
Inventario of L. Canfora of 19612, was never before used in the editions of this speech,
neither in the most complete edition of them, published by K. A. Kapparis in 19993, nor in
the more recent work of M. Dilts, within the IVth volume of his edition of Demosthenes in
Oxford, 20094. Thus, the main purpose (goal?) of our work is trying to locate the
manuscript genealogically, and to highlight some of its peculiarities from the textual point
of view5.

Until relatively recent times we only knew barely nothing about the text contained
in our manuscript. R. Passweg6 (1975), in her study of the manuscript tradition of the
speech In Timocratem, mentioned the manuscript of Sevilla. She thought it was copied
directly from Y (together with the Brussel. 11294-5). P. Leganés Moya7 (2003) studied the
manuscript in his doctoral dissertation on Hispanic manuscripts of demosthenic speeches

1 On this copyist, connoisseur as well of the work of Aristotle, cf. E. Gamillscheg - D. Harlfinger,
Repertorium der griechischen. Kopisten. 800-1600, I, Wien 1981, 141
2 Inventario dei manoscritti greci di Demostene, Padua 1968.
3 Apollodoros 'Against Neaira' [D. 59], Berlin-New York 1999.
4 Demosthenis orationes, t. IV, Oxford 2009. It is mentioned in the conspectus siglorum, but its testimony
never appears in the critical apparatus.
5 Our work is inserted into the framework of the project " Greek orators in the Spanish manuscripts (III)"
(FFI2008-01087) and "The Greek manuscripts in Spain and its European context" (FFI2011-25805)
6 The manuscript tradition of Demosthenes, Oration 24, New York 1975
7 El texto de Demóstenes en los manuscritos españoles: los discursos In Midiam y De falsa legatione,
Tesis UCM, Madrid 2003.
In Midiam and De falsa legatione: according to the stemma codicum (416 ss.), H would come
clearly from Y, through the intermediary Af (Ambros. Gr. 235) in case of the speech In
Midiam, but showing "contamination" with other manuscripts. The manuscript was used
by this author and F. Hernández Muñoz in their edition of the speech In Midiam in 20088.
(In??) the same year Hernández Muñoz used the testimony of the Hispalensis in his
translation of the demosthenic speeches to the Assembly, placing the manuscript in the
sphere of the veteres FY, such as most of the Hispanic recentiores (except Matrit. BN 4647
and Escor. S.III.12, which sometimes differ from FY and coincide as well with the vetus A)
and the Aldine editions (51 ss.)9.

As we indicated above, the testimony of the Hispalensis doesn’t seem to have ever
been used in the edition of In Neeram. We’ll try, therefore, to make a first assessment of its
text. To do so, we’ll numerate the data we consider more relevant in different sections (1.,
2., etc.), guided by the epigraphs and key passages held (written) by Kapparis in his
Introduction10 to establish the relationships among the manuscripts he used
(compared/collated). We’ll take as well his edition and its numeration as basal
(referential/ground) text for our work.

Conspectus siglorum:
S: Paris. Gr. 2934, s. IX-X
F: Marcian. Gr. 416, s. X
Q: Marcian. Gr. 418, s. XI
Y: Paris. Gr. 2935, s. X
R: Paris. Gr. 2936, s. XIV
D: Ambros. 112, s. X-XI
Af. Ambros. Gr. 235, s. XIII-XIV
V: Coislin. 339, s. XV
Vc: Vatic. Gr. 69, s. XIII
Vd. Vatic. Gr. 70, s. XIV
Vk: Vatic. Gr. 1407, s. XIV
H: Hispal. 330-155-1
Ald.: Editiones Aldinae (Venetiis 150 and ca. 1520)11

MANUSCRIPT S
1. H (and other manuscripts) coincide with the corrections of S (Sc) and not with the
readings of S before the correction (Sa)12:

8 Demosthenis In Midiam, Universidad de León 2008.

9 Demóstenes, Discurso ante la Asamblea, Madrid 2008.
10 "Manuscripts and Printed Editions", 60 ss.
11 There were two aldine editions of the works attributed to Demosthenes. In some speeches (specially
politicians), there are a few textual changes between them, but in the speech In Neeram there are barely
few (almost no) changes, only (just some) typographic errata, more frequent in the second edition than
in the first one, cf. infra. We alluded to them in former works, respectively naming Ald1 and Ald2, but
the lack of changes in this speech lets us to mention only Ald. to refer jointly the two aldine editions.
12 In the examples of each paragraph, the abbreviations are spread - if nothing is said to the contrary - as
indicated in the very first example: first the reading which doesn´t follow to H and secondly the shared by
1 μὲν Sa : με ScH cett.
3 κεκομείσθαι : κεκομίσθαι poner acento circunflejo
30 καὶ μεταπέμπεται : μεταπέμπεται
50 Φράτορα : Φράστορα
83 Ἀρεοπαγεῖται : Ἀρεοπαγῖται
Nevertheless, there are some isolated coincidences between Sa and the rest:
107 ἐάσατε SaH : ἐάσετε Ss.l. cett.

2. In the case of the "-ν movable", S maintains it, while H and the rest of manuscripts skip
it:
42 ὑπῆρχεν S : ὑπῆρχε FQYRDH
62 ἐστίν : ἐστί
82 ἐστίν : ἐστί
MANUSCRIPTS FQ
3. When F splits (is taken apart) from Q and the rest of manuscripts, H (uses to coincide)
coincides with the right (¿correct?) reading of the rest of manuscripts:
62 ὑποδεικνύω F : ἐπιδεικνύω SQYRDH
73 ἀκοῦσαι : ἀκοῦσαι πᾶσιν
92 ἕτερός τις : ἕτερός ἐστιν
Nevertheless, sometimes H coincides with the reading of F:
64 τῆς Νεαίρας FH : τὴν Νεαίρας SQYRD

4. When FQ are the manuscripts which split from the rest (SYRD), the reading of FQ
uses to be wrong and H follows to SYRD:
87 λαβὲ τὸν νόμον FQ : λαβέ SYRDH
99 ἐγίγνετο : ἐγένετο
107 ἀτιμώρητον εἶναι : ἀτιμώρητον
However, sometimes (¿Occasionally?) the reading of FQ seems to be more correct,
H stills coinciding with SYRD:
15 Στεφάνου τοτουὶ : Στεφάνου τούτου SYRDH
20 ἠλευθερώθησαν : ἠλευθέρωσαν
93 Στέφανός τε οὑτοσὶ : Στέφανος οὑτοσὶ
110 ὑπὲρ : περὶ
125 ἃς ἐγὼ : ἐγὼ δ’
H coincides as well with SYRD against (¿and splits from?) FQ when both readings
seem to be correct:

4 ὁπόταν FQ : ὅταν SYRDH

27 τῇδε τῇ βοηθείᾳ : τῇ βοηθείᾳ
There are some passages where (¿at some passages?) H coincides with the right
reading of FQ against the rest:

H and other manuscripts.

115 διαδικάζεσθαι FQH (cum Yc) : δικάζεσθαι cett.
The omission (per homoetel.) of the section taken from τὰ ἱερὰ in 87 to τὰ ἱερὰ in
88 which we find in SYa (y en Vd, Vk, Af, V) is not present in the rest of manuscripts, H
included.
H coincides with SY, against the rest in:
44 καταπεφρόνηκεν SYH : καταπεφρόνηκε cett.
44 αὑτὸν : αὐτὸν

MANUSCRIPT Y
5. H presents coincidences with the manuscript Y against the rest:
3 ὁ Ἀπολλόδωρος YH : Ἀπολλόδωρος
3 καιροῦ τῇ πόλει τοιούτου : τῇ πόλει καιροῦ τούτου vel καιροῦ τοιούτου τῇ πόλει
52‐55 εἰσοδεῖον : εἰσόδιον vel alia
101 Μιλιεῦσι (cum Va) : Μηλιεῦσι vel Μιλιαίοις
73 ἀλλ’ ἡ : ἀλλ’ ἢ ἡ
Sometimes the coincidence is with the reading of the Ys.l.:
31 Τιμανορίδης Ys.l.H : Τιμανορίδας

MANUSCRIPT R
6. When R moves away from SFQYD, H uses to be within SFQYD both in the right and
wrong readings, order of words and "-ν movable":
27 δησμωτήριον R : βουλευτήριον SFQYDH
30 ἔλαττόν τ’ ἀργύριον : ἔλαττόν τε τ’ ἀργύριον (τε <καὶ> in H)
55 τῇ ἀσθενείᾳ : τῇ ἀσθενείᾳ τῇ θεραπείᾳ
59 γεννητὸς : γεννητὴς vel γεννῆται
61 Ἀάλης : Εὐάλκης
67 τε ποτέ : τε ὁπότε
71 Στέφανον γραφὴν : γραφὴν Στέφανον
72 οὑτωσίν : οὑτοσί
81 ἔλαβε : ἔλαβεν
99 οὐκ εἶδον : εἶδον
109 φήσετε καλὸν : καλὸν φήσετε
109 ἠσέβηκε : ἠσέβηκεν
109 ταύτης ἦν : ταύτης ἂν ἦν
109 αὐτοί : αὐτῇ
Sometimes the coincidence is with/to R against the reading offered by the rest of
manuscripts:

53 τοῦτον RH : τούτων SFQYD

63 ἐπειδὴ : ἐπεὶ
76 εἰδῶσι : εἰδῶσιν

MANUSCRIPT D
7. The corrections of D which seem interventions of a philologist don´t use to be in H and
the rest of the manuscripts:
72 οὐκ ἐτόλμησε D (et mox Reiske) : οὗτος ἐτόλμησε SFQYRDH
74 εὐσεβείας (et mox Taylor) : εὐλαβείας
90 om. πολίτην
105 ἀναγράφειν : ἀναγραφῆναι
116 ἐκείνου (et Athenaios) : ἐκείνης
If ?? there is coincidence in 31 συνάγουσα DH (cum Ya) : συλλέγουσα vel
εἰσάγουσα No da sentido?

TWO MAIN GROUPS: SFQ / YRD (H)

8. When the tradition gets divided into two groups (SFQ / YRD), H uses to be with YRD,
both in a correct text:
2 καὶ κοινωνεῖν SFQ : κοινωνεῖν YRDH
10 οἶδεν : εἶδεν
13 ἀφῄρητο : ἀφῃρεῖτο
40 Εὐροιάδην : Ἐροιάδην
and incorrect:

5 μάρτυρας παρασχόμενος SFQ : μαρτυρίας ὑποσχόμενος YRDH

22 φίλον αὐτῷ : φίλον ἑαυτῷ
23 τούτων : τοῦτον
40 παραλαβὼν : λαβὼν
66 δόξῃ ἀδίκως : ἀδίκως δόξης
78 γεραίρας : γεραρὰς
H uses to follow to YRD in the order of words, as well:

5 καὶ νῦν ἔτι SFQ : ἔτι καὶ νῦν YRDH

13 ποιοῦντα τὸν δῆμον : τὸν δῆμον ποιοῦντα
21 ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς ἀναλώσῃ : ἀναλώσῃ ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς
Other examples (¿Another kinds?) of coincidence YRDH against the rest (SFQ and
Aldine editions) are:

8 ὥστε καὶ YRDH : ὥστε SFQ Ald

12 om. ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ
13 ἑταιρῶν (cum Fs.l.) : ἑτέρων
22 αὐτῇ : αὕτη
23 τοῦτον : τούτων
32 νυνὶ : νῦν
36 μὲν γὰρ Μεγαρεῖς ἀνελεύθεροι : Μεγαρῆς δ’ ἀνελεύθεροι
37 ταύτῃ : αὐτῇ
40 λαβὼν : παραλαβὼν
42 παιδία : παιδάρια
49 om. τουτονί
49 παιδίον : παιδάριον
50 παρὰ ταύτῃ : παρ’ αὐτῇ
59 φράτορας (cum Fs.l.) : φράτερας
62 ἀδίκως δόξῃ : δόξῃ ἀδίκως
65 Θεσμοθέτην : Θεσμοθετήσαντα
67 om. αὐτὴν
73 γεραρὰς : γεραίρας
98 om. οἱ
123 Δεινομένης : Διομένης
Sometimes the coincidence of H is only with YRH:
4 λέγον YRH : λέγων cett.
10 ἀπέκτεινεν : ἔκτεινεν
35 ἐπὶ τῆς : ἐκ τῆς
47 διήλλαξαν αὐτούς : διήλλαξαν
56 ἐπείσθη δὴ : ἔπειθ’ ἤδη vel ἐπείσθη
78 ἰοβακχεῖα : ἰοβάκχεια
or with RD:
70 εἴποιεν (cum Yγρ.) : εἴπειεν vel εἶπεν
98 χρήσονται : χρήσωνται (χρήσαιντο Herwerden)

CONTAMINATION SFQ -YRD

9. The existence of some principal groups does not preclude to be (exist)“contamination”
among them:
SYRDH (/FQ):
16 ἔστω δὲ SYRDH: ὡσαυτως δὲ FQ poner acento
19 ἠλευθέρωσαν: ἠλευθερώθησαν
61 om. τοὺς παρόντας ante Βρυτιδῶν
105 παρὰ : πρὸς
110 περὶ : ὑπὲρ
SQRYDH (/F):
86 αὐτῶν SQYRDH (cum Fs.l.): αὐτοῦ F (cum Qs.l.)
SFQYDH (R):
61 Εὐάλκης SFQYDH: Ἀάλης R
SFQYH (/RD):
84 ἐπεὶ δὲ SFQYH: ἐπειδὴ δὲ RD
FQYRDH (/S):
41 εἰργάζετο FQYRDH: ἠργάζετο S
FQYDH (/SR):
85 οὐκέτ’ FQYDH: οὐκ SR
59 γεννητὴς: γεννῆται vel γεννητὸς
73 ἦλθε: ἦλθεν

LATER MANUSCRIPTS
10. As for the "later manuscripts" identified by Kapparis, H doesn´t contain (¿exhibit?) the
characteristic mistakes of Vc (copy of F):
15 τῆς ἀληθείας, τὴν ἀλήθειαν Vc : τῆς ἀληθείας, τὴν ἀκρίβειαν FH cett.
30 μεταπέμπετε : μεταπέμπεται
34 κληρωθῆναι : κληθῆναι
53 αἰσχάταις : ἐσχάταις
86 ὑβρισθείσας : ὑβρισθείσαν
H presents neither the omission of Vc in 34 (αἰσθάνεσθαι...Νέαιραν), nor (¿and, en
lugar de nor?) in 50 (τουτονὶ..μικρόν), nor the mistakes of Vd (copy of the Vatic. 68, which
was copied from Y):
16 εἰς Vd : εἰσέρχεται εἰς YH cett.
58 μὲν ἀστὴν : γυναῖκα ἀστὴν
76 καταλίπων : καταλείπων
96 οὐκ ἦγεν ἁπλότετι : οὐκ ἠγάπα ¿no sería con η?
H has neither the omissions of Vd in 73 (τοὺς θεοὺς...ἀπόρρητα), in 86
(ἔδωκεν...θανάτου), in 87-88 (δεμοτελῆ...τὰ ἱερὰ, omitted as well in Vd, Vk, Af, V)
nor the mistakes of AF (copied as well (¿also copied?) from Y):
42 ἀπῆλθεν Af : ἅ ἦλθεν YH cett.
50 δῆθεν : δ’ἦλθεν
98 αὐτὸν : αὐτοῖς vel αὐτοὺς
nor those of V (manuscript depending on F):
1 πρότερον V : πρότερος YF cett.
6 διαπράξασθαι ἐδόκει : ἐδόκει διαπράξασθαι
27 ἀντίπας : ἀντείπας

ALDINE EDITIONS

11. The Aldine editions often coincide with the group where F is (stands) (and H as well),
as it is evidenced, for example, by the omission of 5: ῥοτόνησεν...χρῆσθαι. However, it
apparently offers/presents its own variants:
1 οὔτε ἔργῳ οὔτε λόγῳ Ald. (pro οὔτε λόγῳ οὔτε ἔργῳ)
11 <οὐ> ἐρχησάμην
13 τῶν νόμων (pro τοὺς νόμους)
From (¿Considering?) both aldine editions, the second one has more (¿a higher number
of?) errors than the first one, for example (¿instance?):
23 ἐπεθημήσαμεν (sic)
29 ἀναλόματα
33 ἤλθεν
43 γνόμαις

INDIVIDUAL (¿PARTICULAR?) READINGS OF H

12. Some readings of H according to our information, only appear within it, among (.
Any?? Some?? of) them:
16 om. ὑμῖν
27 φρατόρων (pro φρατέρων, cf. 59, 118)
30 τε <καὶ> ἀργύριον Η
32 νυν<ί>
38 φησήσας (pro φυσήσας) et ἀδικήσοι (pro ἀδικήσει)
40 αὐτὸν <ὑμῖν>
47 ἀλλάξαι (pro διαλλάξαι)
48 συνιόντας (pro συνόντας) (παρόντας in Fγρ. Qγρ.)
59‐60 om. εἰς σφᾶς...αὐτοῦ (per homoetel. αὐτὸν...αὐτοῦ)
60 <τὸν> υἱόν
63 γυναῖκα <καὶ> ἀστὴν
66 om. εἱρχθῆναι...καὶ (per homoetel. ἀδίκως...ἀδίκως ¿espíritu áspero?
73 ἐξώρμησε (pro ἐξώρκωσεν) )
93 om. τε (post Στέφανος)
94 Βοιωτικὰς (pro Βοιωτίας)
98 καταβαλεῖν (pro καταλαβεῖν)
100 om. αὐτῶν (post χώραν)
We got as well a modern correction confirmed in H:

103 αἰσθόμενοι H (Blass), pro προαισθόμενοι

In conclusion, H seems to be located genealogically in the YRD group, with a non-

negligible number of individual readings, some of which deserve to be included in the
critical apparatus of future editions of this speech, as well as some anticipation of
subsequent correction.