Manilius: Astronomica

Furthermore, he used reddish ink, with small, rounder letters. Rarely, a third hand from the 15th century occurs, which wrote scholia of no value in the margin.

In the upper margin of the Madrid book, one reads in a hand of the 17th century (Löwe): 'Manilii Astronomicon — Statii Papiniani syluae — Asconius Pedianus in Ciceronem — Valerii Flacci nonnulla' Manilius’s Astronomicon — Statius Papinianus’s Silvae — Asconius Pedianus on Cicero — some works of Valerius Flaccus. The last words, crossed out with small lines, attest that Asconius and Valerius Flaccus were also contained in this volume, which are now held in Madrid Nat. X. 81. In fact, Poggio found these four (among others) at Constance in 1417, which he himself taught us in his own hand at the end of Madrid X. 81 fol. 94 r: hec sors hec amycu tandem manus arguit ausis. | C. ualeri flacci argonauticon. Hoc fragmentu repertu est | in monasterio sancti galli prope constantia. XX milib. passuu una cu | parte Q asconii pediani. deus concedat alteri ut utruque opus | reperiat perfectu. Nos quod potuimus egimus. — Poggius floren- tinus. This fate, this friend, finally proves the hand through daring deeds. C. Valerius Flaccus’s Argonautica. This fragment was found in the monastery of Saint Gall near Constance, twenty miles away, together with a part of Q. Asconius Pedianus. May God grant to another that he might find both works perfect. We have done what we could. — Poggio the Florentine. — G. Loewe made an exact description and inserted it into his collation (cod. Philol. 139 library of Gottingen). Now the Madrid manuscript M. 31 has 114 folios; of which folios 1 r—54 v contain Manilius, folios 55—63 r are empty; at f. 63 v it reads in a hand of the 15th century: 'continet folia L' contains 50 folios: indeed, folios 64—114 exhibit Statius. But folio 1 r begins with verse 83 of Manilius Book I: 'et quodcumque sagax temp- tando repperit usus' and whatever wise practice has discovered by testing — for one folio with the title and verses 1—82 has been cut away. — G. Loewe had persuaded himself that this book is not different from the codex that Poggio found at Constance and testifies to this in several places in the Gottingen collation (at vs IV. 569 in the margin: 'NB. l₁ V₂ and Poggio seem also to form a family'). Since he reports that three correcting hands of the 15th century were active in the first book up to verse 801, the corrections of which the note M₂ (second hand) indicates, he judged, if I am not mistaken, that the book itself was written before the 15th century. *) Cf. Wochenschr. f. klass. Philol. Berol. 1893. 35. Ellis, Clark, and Housman disagree with him. And Ellis indeed (Hermathen. XIX. 263 1893), because it almost everywhere agrees with the Vossianus 2, judges the Madrid codex to be a copy (he does not say which was copied from the other). But the judgment of Clark relies on the Poggian letter discovered by himself, which was sent to Francesco Barbaro in Rome (?) from Constance at the end of 1417 or the beginning of 1418 **) A. C. Clark, the literary discoveries of Poggio -- The Classical Review Vol. XIII. London 1899 n. 119—120., a part of which I append: Poggio sends greetings to Francesco Barbaro