Заметки о Плинии Старшем

Аристей. Aristeas: Вестник классической филологии и античной истории. 2023. Т. 27. С. 59–69.

Shumilin M.

In the notes a set of conjectural solutions to the textual problems in three
passages of Pliny the Elder’s Natural history is porposed (Plin. NH praef. 4, 7.1 and
7.16). Several factors contribute to the need to reconsider the standard text in these
places: the number of scholars who set to look for new textual solutions in Pliny was
historically limited; many modern editions are hyperconservative; their text is often
based on inaccurate informations on the manuscript readings; none of them takes into
account the conclusions on the relations of the manuscripts made by Michael Reeve
in his 2021 monograph, the most important of which is that in many parts of the texts
a branch of the manuscript tradition is extant which has not been used so far (its
primary representative is ms. Prague Univ. XIV A 12, P in Reeve’s sigla codicum). In
Plin. NH praef. 4, I propose to read itaque quom ceteris instead of itaque cum ceteris,
basing on the reading of P, itaque qūo (= quoniam) ceteris. In Plin. NH 7.1, I propose
to replace the word insignia, traditionally considered problematic, with <horum>
insignia, basing on the already signaled parallel in Cic. ND 1.100; I also suggest that
a word might also be missing in the following part of the list. In Plin. NH 7.16, I
propose to read <in>pubes instead of puberes, basing on the corrected information
on the manuscript readings. The sense of the transmitted text has also been doubted
by commentators there, which in particular led Beatus Rhenanus to propose a similar
emendation <in>puberes.

Keywords: магия, текстология, textual criticism, magic, manuscript tradition, рукописная традиция, Pliny the Elder, Плиний Старший, conjecture, конъектура