Manilius: Astronomica

Many examples teach that the readings of the uncorrected Leipzig codex recur for the most part in the Madrid codex, those of the corrected one in the Cusanus *) See the memorable example at III 399, where c notes in the margin that the order of the verses is disturbed. He described these from the margin of the Leipzig manuscript in such a way that he did not even correct the number of the folios. It is not six, but two folios of the Cusanus that have verses 280., and that the Gembloux manuscript sometimes agrees with the Cusanus, a few of which I bring forward; lib. II 168 ius mirantur they admire the right, exterminantur l, exterminantur m, exterius mirantur g c — 439 fer bring l, fert g c, fers m — + curat cares, curret l, curat g c, curret m. lib. III 324 + ab from, ad extremos tenet l, + o ad + temet extremos tenet m, ab extremo temet g c (ad extremos temet) — 345. efficiunt l, officiunt c, efficiunt g m (effugiunt) — 369 uersetur l, uersatur g c, uersetur m (uisetur) — IV. 200 bonas ut l, bonus ut g c, bonas inteneros m v₂ [inteneros om. u] (bona: sed teneros) 245 a eget l, agit g c, eget m (eget) — 251 frigor l, frigora g c, frigore m (frigora) — 759 potiri l, potiris c, potiri g m (potiri) — V 87 per vadit goes through, quos labit equos l, per quos uadit equos c, per quos labit equos g, per quo labite quos m (perque uolabit equos) — 351 agitavit shook, aut omis l, agit aut omis g c, agitauit onus m [u₁ u₂ v₂] (agitabit onus) — 692 quod que erit l, quodq erit g, qd qrit o, quod erit m (quo perit). — Similar examples are available in plenty and will occur to you on every page of the critical apparatus: moreover, I pass over the fact that the Leipzig codex generally exhibits accusatives of the third declension ending in -īs with a superscript correction to -ēs (just as IV. 76 omnīs l, omnis g m, omnes c): so much so that in such a consensus of the codices l, g, m, I would have granted the ending in -īs to adjectives, but because the books prefer the ending in -ēs in substantives, I did not dare to do the same. — From these examples, I conclude that the Madrid codex and the uncorrected Leipzig codex faithfully preserve both the virtues and the vices of the ancient copy, that the corrections of the Leipzig and the readings of the Cusanus are to be referred to a younger family, and that the Gembloux manuscript is left almost in the middle. — Now I must explain in a few words concerning the followers of both the Cusanus and the Madrid manuscripts. And the Cusanus, just as it very rarely has anything sound alone, so it is the leader of a family distinguished both in number and corruption: for it descends through Vossianus 1, the former part of Vossianus 2, the Florentine, two Vaticans, the Parisian, to the Monacensis, which I believe is the most corrupt of all, from which the oldest editions have flowed. — Concerning both Vossiani, cf. Jacob in the preface and Ellis (Hermathen. page 265 sqq.); concerning the Florentine (F), cf. Bechert in the preface of his edition. Vatican No. 3090 (Vat. 1) paper, pro-