Allessandra Peri (ed.), M. Cornelii Frontonis Opuscula I: Arion - De feriis Alsiensibus, edizione critica e commento, Cassino 2004 (Collana Scientifica 04 Studi archeologici, artistici, filologici, letterari e storici) Edizioni dell' Università degli Studi di Cassino, ISBN 88-8317-022-9; XXVI,172 pp. [distribuzione: Viella Libreria Editrice, Roma (viella@flashnet.it)] Text published in: Mnemosyne 60, 2007, 675-676
One
year earlier, another book was published concerning Fronto and his writings, in
a series of studies published by the university of Cassino. The volume edited by
Alessandra Peri focuses on textual criticism and on philologiocal explanations
of Fronto's text. It contains a new critical edition of two, relatively short
sections of the correspondence that may be considered rhetorical 'opuscula
minora' by Fronto: the so called 'Arion', most likely a model text written for
the young Marcus Aurelius, teaching him how to tell a good story in a terse
style, and 'De feriis Alsiensibus 3', a letter to Marcus which takes the form of
what is generally considered to be a programmatic speech in favour of literary
studies, meant as an alternative for Stoic philosophy, that became ever more
appealing to the young prince. Fronto's
letters are notoriously difficult to refer to, in the absence of one universally
accepted system of numbering and subdivision. For the sake of convenience, I add
the corresponding references to the edition of Van der Hout and to the widely
used Loeb edition by Haines. The first fragment is Van den Hout p.241,1-242,10
(Haines I, p.54-59), the second Van den Hout p.227,5-233,17 (Haines II, p.4-19). After
a short introduction, which mainly deals with the history of the text of Fronto,
transmitted in just one codex (Ambrosianus E 1476 sup., a palimpsest), and the
aims of the present edition, Peri provides new critical texts of both fragments
(p.5-29). Each page presents roughly 5 to 10 lines of Latin, followed by a
double apparatus criticus. The first of these has readings presented by
scholars who personally saw the palimpsest and reported the text of its first
and second hands; the second apparatus contains only corrections and conjectures
by later editors and commentators. The rest of the volume is devoted to a line
to line commentary (p.33-163) and two short indexes (p.167-172). The notes are
largely devoted to matters of textual criticism, and to lexicographical,
syntactical, stylistical and historical details, interspersed with some
observations on rhetorical strategy and literary aims. The
volume shows that a fresh look at the manuscript evidence of an ancient text is
always worthwhile and can help to clarify difficult places in the traditional
text. Peri has a keen eye for Fronto's partly eccentric style, and prints a text
that shows some morphological particularities that tend to be smoothed away or
avoided by other editors. To the average reader of Fronto, however, these
textual minutiae will seem of relatively little relevance. I am not
convinced that Peri's accurate and even painstakingly detailed approach (the
texts in question have been subjected to a threefold process of
collation) produces a Fronto text that is fundamentally better than any of the
new editions mentioned above. Due to the special problems involved with the
palimpsest and the damage it has incurred since it was first discovered in the
19th century, the constitution of Fronto's text will inevitably be a matter of
debate forever. The
volume looks like a preliminary study that will ultimately lead to more editions
of Frontonian texts. Given the quality of recent editions, it remains a question
if all of Fronto is to be redone. By all means, a full edition along the lines
of Peri's approach will be the scholarly work of a lifetime. But if new volumes
are indeed to follow, the editor might consider adding translations of the
Latin, as a practical tool for readers.
latest
changes here:
30-07-2012 16:01 |
|