Propertius 3.1.27

in Mnemosyne
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


The paradosis of Propertius 3.1.27:

Idaeum Simoenta Iouis (cunabula parui)

is either lacunose (N) or nonsensical (all other manuscripts). Gustav Wolff 's celebrated. . .

cum prole Scamandro

runs against objections in terms of paleographical verisimilitude, intertextual relevance, and conformity with elegiac diction. This paper provides arguments in favor of. . .

ruisse in pabula parta

, which echoes two Homeric passages (


. 5.773-7, 12.19-22) while pointing, intertextually, to Lucretius and the archaic forms of epic poetry. Paleographically,

ruisse in pabula parta

can easily have yielded

Iouis cunabula parua

. Moreover, Petrarch's use of

cunabula parua

in 1342 suggests that his (lost) copy of Propertius, and the (now incomplete) manuscript A from which it was made in 1333, bore


. If


is a later correction, the standard theory, according to which the manuscript tradition of Propertius divides into the N and A families, is vindicated against the alternative theory recently put forward by James L. Butrica and Stephen J. Heyworth.

Propertius 3.1.27

in Mnemosyne

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 2 2 1
Full Text Views 3 3 3
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0