codex Montepessulanus, because it is now in the library of the Medical School at Montpellier (number 125).' This Ms., written in the early part of the ninth century, contains Persius as well as Juvenal, and is furnished with both scholia and glosses.' Corrections were made and variant readings added by several different hands from the ninth to the eleventh century; all these are indicated by the letter p. It is probable that P once contained the whole of the last satire; for 16, 60 is the last line of the tenth and what is now the last quire, and, according to F. Buecheler, no one who has handled the Ms. can doubt that it has been mutilated." The surpassing authority of P, which was first shown in Jahn's edition of 1851, rests on the fact that in many passages it alone has preserved the correct reading and that, apart from the changes introduced by p, it is tolerably free. from corruptions. It contains, moreover, the best selection from the ancient commentaries.* 29. Aarau fragments. Five leaves of a Ms. which in external appearance closely resembled P were discovered about twenty-five years ago by J. Wirz at Aarau, Switzerland, in the bindings of old books. These fragments not only represent the same recension of the text, but they are like P in containing twenty-nine lines to the page, and even in having the same passages as the corresponding pages of the complete Ms. 30. Bobbio palimpsest. Another fragment which may be mentioned here consists of two leaves of a palimpsest A history of this Ms. from the ninth century is given by Th. Gottlieb, Eranos Vindob., 1893, pp. 145 ff. ? These glosses were edited for the first time by E. Lommatzsch, Fleckeisen's Jahrb., Suppl. XXII, 1896, pp. 391-505. For a brief account of the scholia, see § 34. In the edition of Friedl., p. 114. ♦ A detailed account of P with a facsimile of fol. 13 b (= Sat. 1, 1-29) is given by R. Beer, Spicilegium Iuvenalianum, Leipzig, 1885; a facsimile of another page may be seen in the series of Chatelain, pl. cxxvII (= Sat. 6, 603-631). Cf. also F. Buecheler, edition of 1893, pp. xiii ff., and in Friedl., pp. 113 ff. • Hermes, xv, 1880, pp. 437 ff.; R. Beer, l. l. pp. 24 ff. These leaves, indicated by the letter A, contain parts of the second, third, sixth, and seventh satires. from Bobbio, now number 5750 in the Vatican Library.' It is written in capitals and contains one hundred and four verses from Juvenal and Persius. This Ms., in the important passage 15, 27, agrees with P in giving the consul's name as Iunco. 31. A florilegium of St. Gall,' number 870, contains selections from Juvenal to the extent of two hundred and eighty-two verses, and is in general agreement with P. By the aid of this Ms. and of the scholion on 8, 157, Buecheler restored the true reading mulio consul in 8, 148. 3 32. Inferior Mss. All other Mss. of Juvenal, too numerous to be mentioned here in detail, form what may be called the inferior or interpolated class (w), of which none is earlier than the ninth century, and almost all are later. These Mss., differing more or less widely one from another, offer a text decidedly inferior to that of P, though in agreement with P sufficiently often to render any clear-cut distinction from the better Ms. impossible." In the codex Laurentianus, XXXIV, 42, of the eleventh century, at the end of the first book, and in the codex Leidensis, 82, of the same century, at the end of the second book, we find the notice Legi ego Nicaeus apud M. Servium Romae et emendavi. If this Servius is the well-known grammarian and author of the commentary on Vergil, the recension of his pupil Nicaeus must be placed about the end of the fourth century.' All the Mss. of the inferior class go back to this Nicaean recension; PA alone, 1 G. Goetz, Iuvenalis et Persii fragmenta Bobiensia, Jena, 1884; a facsimile may be seen in Zangemeister-Wattenbach, Exempla Cod. Lat., tab. v. 2 C. Stephan, Rhein. Mus., XL, 1885, pp. 263-82. The same Ms. contains also scholia on Juvenal; cf. § 34. 3 Cf. his note on the passage. 4 C. Hosius, Apparatus Criticus ad Iuvenalem, Bonn, 1888, gives a collation of seven Mss. of this class and of four florilegia which contain portions of Juvenal. 5 Cf. Buecheler, in Friedl., p. 117. • A facsimile of the pages concerned is given by Chatelain, pl. cxXXIV. 7 See Hosius, l. l. pp. 54 ff.; and Lommatzsch, l. l. pp. 385 ff. For the recension of Epicarpius see O. Keller, Neue Jahrb., CXXXI, 1885, p. 576, and Chatelain, pl. cxxxv, which presents a page of the codex Parisinus, 9345, of the,eleventh century. Here at the end of the second book we read the notice legente aepicarpio scrinbentis (?) exuperantio servo. together with the Bodleian additions mentioned in the following section, may be supposed to have come from an earlier archetype.' are 33. Codex Bodleianus. One of the Mss. of the inferior class deserves more extended notice, because of certain features which make it unique among the sources of the text of Juvenal I refer to the Bodleian Ms. (Canonicianus XLI) of the eleventh century, brought to light by E. O. Winstedt, who published the first collation in May, 1899. This codex, though decidedly one of the w-class, oftener, perhaps, than any other of its fellows is in agreement with P, and at the same time offers some readings which are quite new and well worth consideration.' Its most important features, however, that it is written in a Lombardic hand, though PApo are in Caroline minuscules, and that it makes two additions to the traditional text of Juvenal, one of two verses, the other of thirty-four verses, both in the body of the sixth satire." If the verses are Juvenal's-and no one but Buecheler has expressed a doubt of their genuineness-it seems probable that the parent of the Bodleianus, which itself came from a common archetype with w, received the additions from some Ms. not only earlier than P, but earlier than the recension of Nicaeus. 1 Buecheler (7.7.), however, believes that all the extant Mss. are derived from the Nicaean recension, and tries to account for the fact that P has not preserved the subscription of Nicaeus. 2 Class. Rev., XIII, 1899, pp. 201-5. See, for example, notes on 1, 114; 7, 193. 46 A after 6, 365 and 6 в after 6, 373; for criticism and interpretation of these passages see H. L. Wilson, The Bodleian Fragments of Juvenal, in Am. Jour. Phil., XXII, 1901, pp. 268-82, and literature there cited. No trace of the newly discovered verses is yet reported from any other Ms.; Max Maas (A.L.L. XI, 1899, p. 420) examined sixteen in Munich, and E. O. Winstedt more recently fifty-nine in the British Museum for this purpose (Class. Rev., XVI, 1902, pp. 40-6). 5 P. v. Winterfeld, in Gött. gel. Anz., 1899, p. 896, has shown how this may have taken place. The scribe of the archetype of the Bodleianus placed the shorter addition of two verses on the margin; but, not having room for the longer passage, inserted a leaf to contain it, making the necessary indications to show its place in the text (after v. 345). But the copyist of the Bodleianus, not observing the sign, finished the page (to v. 365) and then added the thirty-four verses from the inserted leaf. This would account for the position of the verses in the Ms. Pithoeana, 34. Scholia The oldest commentary on Juvenal of which we have any knowledge seems to have been written in the latter part of the fourth century.' This was probably the commentary quoted by G. Valla, in his edition of Juvenal published at Venice in 1486, though the Ms. used by him is no longer extant. In this Ms., which ended abruptly at Sat. 8, 198, the author of the commentary was called Probus,' and is now usually referred to as the Probus of Valla, inasmuch as he is known only by the copious quotations in Valla's edition. A comparison of these extracts with the scholia preserved in P and also, without the text, in a Ms. of St. Gall (n. 870) shows that both come from the same good old source, though less valuable additions have been made in the latter. These annotations, now known as the Scholia Pithoeana, have transmitted much useful information, especially in regard to persons and places mentioned in Juvenal, and they are of the highest importance for the constitution of the text, preserving, as they sometimes do, readings which antedate all of the extant Mss.' 35. Scholia of Cornutus. Far more voluminous and for the most part of little value are the scholia traditionally attributed to one Cornutus. This commentary, which is found with little variation in the inferior Mss. from the ninth century onward, now and then offers a good explanation, but, on the whole, abounds in absurdities, and in dealing with Roman life, literature, and antiquities often displays the grossest ignorance." 1 This date depends on the schol. on 10, 24, in which is mentioned Neratius Cerealis, praefectus urbi in 352–3. 8 This Probus must, of course, not be confounded with M. Valerius Probus, the famous grammarian of the first century, whose career is sketched by Sueton. De Gram. 24. Cf. R. Beer, l. l. pp. 41 f., and Chr. Stephan, De Pithoeanis in Iuvenalem scholiis, Bonn, 1882. These scholia were edited by Jahn, 1851, and in selections by Buecheler, 1893. • Of course, not L. Annaeus Cornutus, the friend and teacher of Persius. ⚫ E. Lommatzsch, l. l. p. 376, n. 1, points out where these scholia are edited. Add to his references W. Hoehler, Fleckeisen's Jahrb., Suppl. XXIII, 1897, pp. 379-442. The Style of Juvenal 36. The work of few poets presents at the same time such high excellence and such glaring imperfection as that of Juvenal. His extraordinary gift for the lifelike presentation of details was reinforced and displayed to the best advantage by a style whose rhetorical brilliance was due partly to his own nature and training and partly to the tendencies of his time. No one who has read the first satire, for example, can ever forget the picture of Crispinus with his Tyrian cloak and massive ring, of the young sport showing off his fast horses. to his sweetheart on the Flaminian Way, or of the distribution of the dole in the early morning to a motley crowd.' But this command of details and mastery of brilliant phrase is counterbalanced by an almost complete lack of the sense of proportion and an utter disregard for harmonious structure." The third satire is perhaps the only one which is not open to objection from this point of view. None of these poems, then, has held its place in the world's literature because of its literary form as a whole, but rather because of the excellent description and portraiture and the skilful presentation of details. 37. One of the results of Juvenal's rhetorical training was his extensive use of sententiae. Many verses and brief passages which are of the most striking character contain statements of such general application that they may be separated from the context without losing their force.' One might quote, for example, the following: crescit amor nummi, quantum ipsa pecunia crevit. rara in tenui facundia panno. 2 For examples see introductory remarks to Satires 1, 4, 7, and 11. A considerable number of such verses, which do not seem to be required by the context, were once regarded by some critics as notes introduced from the margin; now, however, they are accepted by all as genuine. |