Page:Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus 2.djvu/29

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread.
Codices Prisciani.

p. 249b [marg. inf.] spiritui sancto semper dignissima gloria. For sigla scattered through the manuscript see Nigra, Rel. Celt. 27. Two Irish quatrains and one poem written on the margin are printed below, p. 290. For the Latin poems in the codex, one of which is in praise of Bishop Gunthar of Cologne, see Nigra, Rel. Celt. 6 sq., Traube, Roma Nobilis 51 (347), Poet. Carol. iii. 238 sq.

As we have seen, the codex was probably written about the middle of the ninth century. The date of the Irish glosses has been much disputed; sometimes they have been considered earlier, sometimes later than Ml., and opinions have varied according as attention has been directed to one point or another[1]. The explanation of the fluctuation of opinion is that the collection of glosses is not homogeneous, but comes from various sources and is of a varying antiquity[2].

With regard to the relation of the Irish glosses to the Latin text it is important to note a large number of instances in which the Irish clearly explains the corrupt Latin of the manuscript. Such are libralibus 1a 1, auctori 7b 11, pudicitia Penelopae 29a 8, ciclasias 32b 12, capsa 36a 8, curta 57a 6, aut amatoriae 63b 7, teretes 66a 22, excipiuntur 67a 12, abriza 73a 4, causdico 138a 12, uisionem 149b 5, nomina 156b 6, opheogenistum 181a 4, potest 189b 3, retransit quae 199b 1, passeris 203a 20, pasiua—liquefiunt 209b 19–21. At 155a 1 it would seem as though the glossator had knowledge of a reading αἰτοπάθειαν. At 191a 3 he was apparently acquainted with the true reading.

Instances of misinterpretation of the Latin will be found at 15b 11, 17b 13, 20a 4, 24a 9, 13, 36b 4, 38a 6, 49b 8, 57a 7, 8, 9, 59b 14, 60a 4, 62b 8, 64a 18, 67a 5, 92a 1, 95a 6, 139a 1, 144a 3, 146b 7, 154b 1, 185b 7, 188b 1, 217b 3.

The authority most frequently cited is Isidore, 13b 2, 47b 7, 49b 16, 20, 52a 11, 53a 12, 20, 95a 1, 96a 3, 96b 2, 106b 12, 111b 5, 152a 2, 159a 7. Others are Cicero[3] 7b 15, 73a 4, 92b 1, 102a 2a, 106b 14, 107a 3, Beda 35a 12, 49b 8, 124b 6, Orosius 23b 4, 57a 8, 95a 7 (?), Virgilius 106b 13, 143b 7, 152b 1, Ambrosius 96b 7, Boeotius 57a 7, Cassianus 41a 1, 131b 1, C˘[4] 8b 5, 190b 3, Com˘ 100b 2, Dionysius Thrax 18a 4, Gaudentius 70a 15, Hieronymus 62b 2, Hono˘ 7b 14, Lactantius 22a 2, Maximianus 136a 2, in libro Niciae 65b 16, Papirinus 4a 9, Polibius Medicus 49b 22, Probus 155b 2, …pho˘ 47b 6. Two Irish ‘erratici’ are mentioned in abbreviation Mael˘ and Cua˘ 31b 12, and probably a Mail Gaimrid 183b3[5]. A manuscript called the Liber Romanus is referred to 4a 12[6].

  1. Cf. Thurneysen Rev. Celt. vi. 318; Pedersen, KZ. xxxv. 316; Strachan, Trans. Phil. Soc. 1899–1901, pp. 47, 57, Rev. Celt. xx. 304 sq.; Zimmer, KZ. xxxvi. 471; Thurneysen, KZ. xxxvii. 55.
  2. For a detailed proof of this from linguistic evidence see Celt. Zeitschr. iv. 470 sq.
  3. Probably the obscure grammarian cited frequently by Vergilius Maro: possibly (as Prof. Goetz of Jena suggests) the author of the so-called Synonyma Ciceronis, ed. Mahne, Leiden, 1850.
  4. We have not been able to verify the references, so that the name is doubtful.
  5. Cf. vol. i. p. xviii.
  6. Cf. Hertz I. xv.