Revue belge de philologie et

d'histoire

P. Ovidii Nasonis Halieuticon, I. Introduzione e testo ; II.

Commentario, a cura di Capponi (F.)
A.W.J. Holleman

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Holleman A.W.J. P. Ovidii Nasonis Halieuticon, I. Introduzione e testo ; II. Commentario, a cura di Capponi (F.). In: Revue
belge de philologie et d'histoire, tome 55, fasc. 1, 1977. Antiquité — Oudheid. pp. 225-226;

https://www.persee.fr/doc/rbph_0035-0818_1977_num_55_1_5442_t1_0225_0000_3

Fichier pdf généré le 14/04/2018

 CHRONIQUE 225

Gùntzschel (D.), Beiträge zur Datierung des Culex, Munster en Westphalie, Aschen-
dorff, 1972, 264 p. (Orbis Antiquus 27) ; 48 DM. — This dissertation, presented to the
University of Münster, is a really useful one. The first part of it, "Kriterien und Methoden
zur Datierung des Culex", of course leads up to no results, and ends in suggesting that
"Imitation" may help; i.e. "die Methode, Parallelstellen mit zeitlich fixierten Werken auf
ihre Priorität hin zu untersuchen" (43). G. acquits himself of this task is a cautious and
judicious way. Ovid in particular turns out to be promising (57-120). The conclusion is:
"Die wahrscheinlichste Antwort auf unsere Frage lautet also so : Der Culex ist wahrend der
Regierung des Kaisers Tiberius entstanden" (155). In an excursus poets from Seneca to the
times of Juvenal are treated in the same way. The author finds that his conclusion is
corroborated.
Of special interest is, beside the extensive and perhaps exhaustive bibliography (484 nrs),
the chronological table of all modern authors on the question whether or not Virgil must be
the author of the Culex, running from 1572 (J. Scaliger, saying yes) till 1971 (Lyne, saying
no). — A. W. J. Holleman.

Dorrie (H.), Untersuchungen zur Überlieferungsgeschichte von Ovids Epistulae fferoi-

dum, Teil III, Gottingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972, p. 279-386 (Nachrichten Ak.
Wiss., I phil.-hist. Klasse). — This part of Dorrie's Untersuchungen, which he started in
1960 — afterwards procuring the text-edition — contains pp. 279-386 ; i.e. Abschnitt F on
"Ergänzungen und Berichtungen zur Bestandsaufnahme der Handschriften", and other new
observations on the MSS. ; G on apocryphal verses ; H on the most frequent "Fehler-
Typen" ; I : "Beiträge zu Erklärung und Emendation".
It would seem unnecessary to say that D. displays again his appreciable sense of humour.
Most enlightening is his treatment of the "Fehler-Typen", one of which is to be sought in
prudery (319), while haplography is common. This section shows fully the sagacity of the
author in this particular technique. The fascicle is rounded off by a Verzeichnis der
behandelten Stellen, which includes also the parts I and II (1960). The three parts of the work
must be considered as indispensable not only to future workers in the field but also for
editorial work in general. — A. W. J. Holleman.

P. Ovidii Nasonis Halieuticon, I. Introduzione e testo ; II. Commentario, a cura di Cap-

poni (F.), Leiden, Brill, 1972, xxv-615 p. in-8°, 9 pi. DGId. 120. (Coll. Roma Aeterna).
— The number of pages of Capponi's treatment of the less than 136 verses which the
fragment contains gives away that the author is a real authority on Roman ichthyology.
Accordingly, the commentary (225-582) is a mine of information about all the fishes
mentioned in the poem, a most reliable guide — so it seems — on the subject, arranged thus :
Identiflcazione — Nomenclatura antica — Classiflcazione antica — Morfologia — Biologia
— Vaiore economico — Distribuzione — Deflnizione — Bibliografia — as far as the items
were tracaUle. The work, therefore, is simply encyclopedical in its scope.
Vol. I contains, besides the text and translation, an introduction on the Autenticità as a
poem by Ovid, extensive for analyzing the poet's style and versification. Of course C.
acknowledges this authenticity, in an elaborate discussion with modern authors on the sub-
226 KRONIEK

ject (cf. the Bibliography : p. xiii-xxvi). There is an Index nominum et verborum (I 215-
223), and an admirable reproduction of the entire MSS. Vindobonensis 277 and Parisinus
8071 closes the volume.
Vol. II contains the Index piscium and Index locorum. It may be clear that this edition
will be the standard work for a long time to come, well worth its price. If there should be any
remark of criticism to be made it would be only that in the commentary proper the
philological notes turn out to be anything but concise, some of them even somewhat
overdone. Ovid's versification seems to be of a special liking to the author. — A. W. J.
HOLLEMAN.

P. Ovidius Naso, Tristia, herausgegeben, übersetzt und erklärt von Luck (Georg), Band
II : Kommentar — Lieferungen 1 und 2, Heidelberg, Carl Winter, 1968-1972, 160 p. —
Since the re-valuation of Ovid as a poet, and particularly as a result of the many studies on
his poems in and after 1958, the collection of the Tristia is no longer dealt with as a
monotonous series of mostly insincere lamentations. Still, Luck in his appraisal of the poems
does not wholly force an open door. In his introduction he states : "Ovid hat scheinbar den
dichterischen Wert der Exildichtungen sehr gering eingeschätzt, und die meisten Philologen
haben Ovids Selbstkritik zum Teil wortlich übernommen und sich dadurch den Weg zum
Verstandnis verbaut" (4). The commentary proper furnishes many a proof of the genius that
was Ovid of the Tristia. Of course the comments deal, beside text-criticism, mostly with
matters of language and versification. But also L.'s interpretations are always interesting, or
even fascinating. About Tr. II 521-538, rightly taken as a section, he has excellent things to
say, but the interruption of literary analogies by "Beispiele aus der Malerei", which ends in
referring to the works of Virgil, must have more point than L. is inclined to find out : I
think, Ovid intended to suggest that "the fortunate poet of your own Aeneid" (Owen) drew
his inspiration for the illicit love-affair of his hero from pictures in the emperor's own house.
L. himself knows best that the collection of the Tr. is full of reproaches, or worse, to
Augustus and His Divinity (read : Hypocrisy) : cf. p. 6-7.
The two fascicles — apart from the Einleitung — treat of Tr. I and II. The text-edition
was published in 1967. One looks forward to the reamining parts of this commentary. — A.
W. J. HOLLEMAN.

Blueher (Karl Alfred), Seneca in Spanien. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Seneca-
Rezeption in Spanien vom 13. bis 17. Jahrhundert, Berne-Munich, Francke, 1969, 503 p. in-
8° ; Sfr. 108. — Dès l'Antiquité, les jugements portés sur Sénèque par ses pairs sont loin
d'être positifs : reproches faits à l'écrivain, reproches faits au moraliste ; un Dion Cassius,
par exemple, se montre très sévère.
Chose remarquable, tout le Moyen Age ignorera ces jugements négatifs. Pour la simple
raison que les sources principales qui les contenaient ne furent pas accessibles avant
l'humanisme italien des xiv' et xve siècles. Et c'est l'Antiquité chrétienne, ce sont les Pères,
qui traceront de Sénèque une image idéale, fondée en grande partie sur la prétendue
correspondance échangée entre Sénèque et Paul de Tarse.