Resumen de Four Notes on Lucretius and a Note on Manilius
This article consists of four notes on the text of Lucretius and a note on the text of Manilius. The common denominator of these notes is the use of intertextuality as a text critical tool. In Lucr. v 396, intertexts provide arguments in favor of the variant reading ambiens of ms. L, clarifying the vague expression multa perussit as an allusion to the origin of the Milky Way. In Lucr. v 1214, intertextual links allow rejection of Bentley’s emendation solliciti motus in order to accept Romanes’ tam taciti motus. In Lucr. i 1085-1086, intertexts seem to confirm Marullus’ inversion, saving v. 1085 from athetesis. Moreover, they provide a new explanation of v. 1086 as an expression borrowed from the juridical vocabulary. In Lucr. ii 1173-1174, intertextuality supplies new arguments in favor of Voss’ conjecture ire ad capulum against the transmitted text ire ad scopulum. In the end, it also helps to solve a textual problem in Manilius (i 895), accepting the transmitted text novum sepulcrum instead of van Wageningen’s emendation (hominum sepulcrum).
