Thanks to Prof. Leo and to Prof. Lindsay , we know now two important things about this corrupt trochaic line, Simul huic nescio qui turbare qui hue it decedamus. First, that the line announces the coming of the chorus, although this chorus utters no words . Secondly, that instead of turbare the true reading is turbae , a dative which designates the band of the approaching choreutae. We may guess that the archetype of BCD had turbare, the fault turbre having (...) sprung from an old TVRBAE, in which A had been read R . The restitution of turbae involves two other emendations; the preceding qui is to be corrected into quoi , and the following qui into quae. (shrink)

Thanks to Prof. Leo and to Prof. Lindsay, we know now two important things about this corrupt trochaic line, Simul huic nescio qui turbare qui hue it decedamus. First, that the line announces the coming of the chorus, although this chorus utters no words. Secondly, that instead of turbare the true reading is turbae, a dative which designates the band of the approaching choreutae. We may guess that the archetype of BCD had turbare, the fault turbre having sprung from an (...) old TVRBAE, in which A had been read R. The restitution of turbae involves two other emendations; the preceding qui is to be corrected into quoi, and the following qui into quae. (shrink)

Les éditions et traductions représentent une part très importante du travail des philosophes français du XIXe siècle. Loin d’être envisagées comme des tâches subalternes, celles-ci sont comprises par leurs auteurs comme des œuvres elles-mêmes philosophiques. Dans cet article, nous montrons que pour pouvoir les considérer comme telles, il faut pouvoir identifier les raisons qui poussent l’auteur à s’intéresser à celui qu’il édite ainsi que les effets qu’il attend de sa publication dans le champ philosophique. En nous concentrant sur le cas (...) de Blaise Pascal dans la seconde moitié du XIXe siècle, nous mettons en évidence la manière dont la question de son intégration au « canon » de la philosophie a conduit des philosophes étrangers, voire hostiles à sa pensée, à l’éditer : Ernest Havet et Léon Brunschvicg. Alors, il ne s’agissait pas pour eux de se déclarer « contre » Pascal, mais d’intégrer, en en pensant les spécificités, une édition de ses textes à leur propre projet philosophique. (shrink)

Pascal semble toujours s’être tenu dans les marges de l’historiographie philosophique. Cette situation tient d’abord à la méfiance explicite qu’il nourrit à l’égard des « philosophes ». Mais elle s’explique aussi par l’influence d’un acteur décisif dans l’institutionnalisation de la discipline : Victor Cousin. Pour le montrer, nous étudions les effets produits sur le long terme par la construction d’une « figure philosophique » qui articule, sous le nom de Pascal, des textes et un contenu philosophique spécifique, en se focalisant (...) sur sa réception chez Havet, Brunschvicg et Heidegger. Un tel retour historique permet de mettre en évidence des points aveugles dans notre interprétation de ce que peut être la philosophie de Pascal, voire dans notre conception de ce qui constitue l’en dehors de la philosophie en général. Il offre en outre un éclairage original sur les opérations de sélection qui ont présidé à la constitution de ce que nous appelons notre « modernité » philosophique. (shrink)

The most reliable manuscript of Statius' Achilleid is the Puteaneus , and its authority, against the group QKC, is frequently upheld only by the Codex Etonensis . The readings of this manuscript , which contains, apart from the Achilleid, Maximian, Ovid's Remedium Atnoris and other poems, were collated by C. Schenkl, Wiener Studien, iv , 96 ff., and were used by H. W. Garrod for the O.C.T. of Statius: Klotz in the Teubner 2nd edition merely notes the readings of Schenkl (...) and of the Oxford text. Unfortunately these are neither complete nor always accurate; and the latter should be corrected as follows: 1. In three passages the Oxford text differs from the reading of PEKQ without noting the fact: Ach. i. 145 Non superant is not, as implied, the MS. reading, but Havet's conjecture: PEKQ have nam superant. 306 PEKQ have impulsam , not impulsum. 680 PEKQ ibi, not ubi. (shrink)

The MS. hie tunc of V. 6 has no friends. L. Mueller's hoc tunc is weak and flat, and L. Rank, Mnemosyne 40. 51, is justly dissatisfied with the hietans of M. Havet's larger and smaller editions, to which the hians of Verg. Aen. 12. 754 lends no sufficient support, as there the dog is opening its mouth before it bites. Add to this that it is by no means certain that Phaedrus would either have used the word or used (...) it in the simple sense of opening the mouth. Rank's own proposal, ‘heu’ tunc, fails also to carry conviction. There is however a word which belongs to our author's vocabulary and is as near to the manuscripts as either of the above, and which hits the sense at which hietans aims. This is rictus. The word is often used of the opened mouths of dogs, Lucr. 5. 1064, Ovid Met. 13. 568. Juvenal 10. 271 sq. ‘canino latrauit rictu,’ and of other animals. That it is appropriate with dimisit ‘let go’ may be seen from the counterpart expression of Martial 1. 48. 1 ‘rictibus his tauros non eripuere magistri.’. (shrink)

The MS. hie tunc of V. 6 has no friends. L. Mueller's hoc tunc is weak and flat, and L. Rank, Mnemosyne 40. 51, is justly dissatisfied with the hietans of M. Havet's larger and smaller editions, to which the hians of Verg. Aen. 12. 754 lends no sufficient support, as there the dog is opening its mouth before it bites. Add to this that it is by no means certain that Phaedrus would either have used the word or used (...) it in the simple sense of opening the mouth. Rank's own proposal, ‘heu’ tunc, fails also to carry conviction. There is however a word which belongs to our author's vocabulary and is as near to the manuscripts as either of the above, and which hits the sense at which hietans aims. This is rictus. The word is often used of the opened mouths of dogs, Lucr. 5. 1064, Ovid Met. 13. 568. Juvenal 10. 271 sq. ‘canino latrauit rictu,’ and of other animals. That it is appropriate with dimisit ‘let go’ may be seen from the counterpart expression of Martial 1. 48. 1 ‘rictibus his tauros non eripuere magistri.’. (shrink)

Readers of Phaedrus will have noticed that the rhythm of III. Ep. 34, Palam muttire plebeio piaculum est is unique. Nowhere else does he admit a molossus-word before the final metron of the iambic senarius, and he only admits it here because he is quoting a line from the Telephus of Ennius. Since a scholar whose opinion deserves respect proposes to introduce this rhythm into a reconstruction of a fragment of Laberius it seems worth while to examine its history in (...) order to see how and why it was used, before it was finally banned. For Seneca, like Phaedrus, banns it entirely. The question has already been considered by Klotz, Grundzüge Altrömischer Metrik, pp. 324 sqq.; W. M. Lindsay, Captiui , p. 66; Havet, Métrique, 276 ; and by T. Hingst in his inaugural dissertation De Spondeis et Anapaestis in antepaenultimo pede uersuum generis duplicis Latinorum, Leipzig, 1904. (shrink)