VARRONIANA

Marcus Terentius Varro was born in 116 B.C., probably at Reate in the Sabine country, where his family, which was of equestrian rank, possessed large estates. He was a student under L. Aelius Stilo Praeconinus, a scholar of the equestrian order, widely versed in Greek and Latin literature and especially interested in the history and antiquities of the Roman people. He studied philosophy at Athens, with Antiochus of Ascalon. With his tastes thus formed for scholarship, he none the less took part in public life, and was in the campaign against the rebel Sertorius in Spain, in 76. He was an officer with Pompey in the war with the Cilician pirates in 67, and presumably also in Pompey 's campaign against Mithradates. In the Civil War he was on Pompey 's side, first in Spain and then in Epirus and Thessaly. He was pardoned by Caesar, and lived quietly at Rome, being appointed librarian of the great collection of Greek and Latin books which Caesar planned to make. After Caesar's assassination, he was pro- scribed by Antony, and his villa at Casinum, with his personal library, was destroyed. But he himself escaped death by the devotion of friends, who concealed him, and he secured the protection of Octavian. He lived the remainder of his life in peace and quiet, devoted to his -writings, and died in 27 B.C., in his eighty-ninth year. Throughout his life he wrote assiduously. His works number seventy-four, amounting to about six hundred and twenty books ; they cover virtually all fields of human thought : agriculture, grammar, the history and antiquities of Rome, geography, law, rhetoric, philosophy, mathematics and astronomy, education, the history of literature and the drama, satires, poems, orations, letters. Of all these only one, his De Re Rustica or Treatise on Agriculture, in three books, has reached us complete. His De Lingua Latina or On the Latin Language, in twenty-five books, has come down to us as a torso.; only Books V. to X. are extant, and there are serious gaps in these. The other works are represented by scattered fragments only. The grammatical works of Varro, so far as we know them, were the following : De Lingua Latina, in twenty-five books, a fuller account of which is given below. De Antiquitate Litterarum, in two books, addressed to the tragic poet L. Accius, who died about 86 b.c. ; it was therefore one of Varro 's earliest writings. De Origine Linguae Latinae, in three books, addressed to Pompey. Ylzpl XapaKTrjpuv, in at least three books, on the formation of words. Quaestiones Plautinae, in five books, containing interpretations of rare words found in the comedies of Plautus. De Similitudine Verborum, in three books, on regularity in forms and words. De Utilitate Sermonis, in at least four books, in which he dealt with the principle of anomaly or irregularity. De Sermone Latino, in five books or more, addressed to Marcellus, which treats of orthography and the metres of poetry. DiscipUnae, an encyclopaedia on the liberal arts, in nine books, of which the first dealt with Grammatica. The extant fragments of these works, apart from those of the De Lingua Latina, may be found in the Goetz and Schoell edition of the De Lingua Latina, pages 199-242 ; in the collection of Wilmanns, pages 170-223 ; and in that of Funaioli, pages 179-371 (see the Bibliography). Varro's treatise On the Latin Language was a work in twenty-five books, composed in 47 to 45 B.C., and published before the death of Cicero in 43. The first book was an introduction, containing at the outset a dedication of the entire work to Cicero. The remainder seems to have been divided into four sections of six books each, each section being by its subject matter further divisible into two halves of three books each. Books II.-VII. dealt with the impositio vocabulorum, or how words were originated and applied to things and ideas. Of this portion, Books II. -IV. were probably an earlier smaller work entitled De Etymologia or the like ; it was separately dedicated to one Septumius or Septimius, who had at some time, which we cannot now identify, served Varro as quaestor. Book II. presented the arguments which were advanced against Etymology as a branch of learning ; Book III. presented those in its favour as a branch of learning, and useful ; Book IV. discussed its nature. Books V.- VI I. start with a new dedication to Cicero. They treat of the origin of words, the sources from which they come, and the manner in which new words develop. Book V. is devoted to words which are the names of places, and to the objects which are in the places under discussion ; VI. treats words denoting time-ideas, and those which contain some time-idea, notably verbs ; VII. explains rare and difficult words which are met in the writings of the poets. Books VIII.-XIII. dealt with derivation of words from other words, including stem-derivation, declension of nouns, and conjugation of verbs. The first three treated especially the conflict between the principle of Anomaly, or Irregularity, based on consuetude* ' popular usage,' and that of Analogy, or Regularity of a proportional character, based on ratio ' relation ' of form to form. VIII. gives the arguments against the existence of Analogy, IX. those in favour of its existence, X. Varro 's own solution of the conflicting views, with his decision in favour of its existence. XI.-XIII. discussed Analogy in derivation, in the wide sense given above : probably XI. dealt with nouns of place and associated terms, XII. with time-ideas, notably verbs, XIII. with poetic words, Books XIV.-XIX. treated of syntax. Books XX.- XXV. seem to have continued the same theme,

but probably with special attention to stylistic and rhetorical embellishments. Of these twenty-five books, we have to-day, apart from a few brief fragments, only Books V. to X., and in these there are several extensive gaps where the manuscript tradition fails. The fragments of the De Lingua Latina, that is, those quotations or paraphrases in other authors which do not correspond to the extant text of Books V.-X., are not numerous nor long. The most considerable of them are passages in the Nodes Atticae of Aulus Gellius ii. 25 and xvi. 8. They may be found in the edition of Goetz and Schoell, pages 3, 146, 192-198, and in the Collections of Wilmanns and Funaioli (see the Bibliography). It is hardly possible to discuss here even summarily Varro's linguistic theories, the sources upon which he drew, and his degree of independence of thought and procedure. He owed much to his teacher Aelius Stilo, to whom he refers frequently, and he draws heavily upon Greek predecessors, of course, but his practice has much to commend it : he followed neither the Anomalists nor the Analogists to the extreme of their theories, and he preferred to derive Latin words from Latin sources, rather than to refer practically all to Greek origins. On such topics reference may be made to the works of Barwick, Kowalski, Dam, Dahlmann, Kriegshammer, and Frederik Muller, and to the articles of Wolfflin in the eighth volume of the Archiv fur lateinische Lexikographie, all listed in our Bibliography. The text of the extant books of the De Lingua Latina is believed by most scholars to rest on the manuscript here first listed, from which (except for our No. 4) all other known manuscripts have been copied, directly or indirectly. 1. Codex Laurentianus li. 10, folios 2 to 34, parchment, written in Langobardic characters in the  eleventh century, and now in the Laurentian Library at Florence. It is known as F. F was examined by Petrus Victorius and Iacobus Diacetius in 1521 (see the next paragraph) ; by Hieronymus Lagomarsini in 1740 ; by Heinrich Keil in 1851 ; by Adolf Groth in 1877 ; by Georg Schoell in 1906. Little doubt can remain as to its actual readings. 2. In 1521, Petrus Victorius and Iacobus Diacetius collated F with a copy of the editio princeps of the De Lingua Latina, in which they entered the differences which they observed. Their copy is preserved in Munich, and despite demonstrable errors in other portions, it has the value of a manuscript for v. 119 to vi. 61, where a quaternion has since their time been lost in F. For this portion, their recorded readings are known as Fv ; and the readings of the editio princeps, where they have recorded no variation, are known as (Fv). 3. The Fragmentum Cassinense (called also Excerptum and Epitome), one folio of Codex Cassinensis 361, parchment, containing v. 41 Capitolium dictum to the end of v. 56 ; of the eleventh century. It was probably copied direct from F soon after F was written, but may possibly have been copied from the archetype of F. It is still at Monte Cassino, and was transcribed by Keil in 1848. It was published in facsimile as an appendix to Sexti Iulii Frontini de aquaeductu Urbis Romae, a phototyped reproduction of the entire manuscript, Monte Cassino, 1930. 4. The grammarian Priscian, who flourished about a.d. 500, transcribed into his De Figuris Numerorum Yarro's passage on coined money, beginning with multa, last word of v. 168, and ending with Nummi denarii decuma libella, at the beginning of v. 174. The passage is given in H. Keil's Grammatici Latini iii. 410-411. There are many manuscripts, the oldest and most important being Codex Parisinus 7496, of the ninth century. 5. Codex Laurentianus li. 5, written at Florence in 1427, where it still remains ; it was examined by Keil. It is known as^*. 6. Codex Havniensis, of the fifteenth century; on paper, small quarto, 108 folia ; now at Copenhagen. It was examined by B. G. Niebuhr for Koeler, and his
records came into the hands of L. Spengel. It is known as H. 7. Codex Gothanus, parchment, of the sixteenth century, now at Gotha ; it was examined by Regel for K. O. Mueller, who published its important variants in his edition, pages 270-298. It is known as G. 8. Codex Parisinus 7489, paper, of the fifteenth century, now at Paris ; this and the next two were examined by Donndorf for L. Spengel, who gives their different readings in his edition, pages 661-718. It is known as a. 9- Codex Parisinus 6142, paper, of the fifteenth century ; it goes only to viii. 7 declinarentur. It is known as b, 10. Codex Parisinus 7535, paper, of the sixteenth century ; it contains only v. 1-122, ending with dictae. It is known as c. 11. Codex Vindobonensis lxiii., of the fifteenth century, at Vienna ; it was examined by L. Spengel n 1835, and its important variants are recorded in the apparatus of A. Spengel's edition. It is known as V. 12. Codex Basiliensis F iv. 13, at Basel; examined by L. Spengel in 1838. It is known as p. 13. Codex Guelferbytanus 896, of the sixteenth century, at Wolfenbiittel ; examined by Schneidewin for K. O. Mueller, and afterwards by L. Spengel. It is known as M. 14. Codex B, probably of the fifteenth century, now not identifiable ; its variants were noted by Petrus Victorius in a copy of the Editio Gryphiana, and either it or a very similar manuscript was used by Antonius Augustinus in preparing the so-called Editio Vulgata. These are the manuscripts to which reference is made in our critical notes ; there are many others, some of greater authority than those placed at the end of our list, but their readings are mostly not available. In any case, as F alone has prime value, the variants of other than the first four in our list can be only the attempted improvements made by their copyists, and have accordingly the same value as that which attaches to the emendations of editors of printed editions. Fuller information with regard to the manuscripts may be found in the following : Leonhard Spengel, edition of the De Lingua Latina (1826), pages v-xviii. K. O. Mueller, edition (1833), pages xii-xxxi. Andreas Spengel, edition (1885), pages ii-xxviii. Giulio Antonibon, Supplemento di Lezioni Varianti ai libri de lingua Latina (1899) 3 pages 10-23. G. Goetz et F. Schoell, edition (1910), pages xi-xxxv. Manuscript F contains all the extant continuous text of the De Lingua Latina, except v. 119 trua quod to vi. 61 dicendojinit ; this was contained in the second quaternion, now lost, but still in place when the other manuscripts were copied from it, and when Victorius and Diacetius collated it in 1 521 . There are a number of important lacunae, apart from omitted lines or single words ; these are due to losses in its archetype. Leonhard Spengel, from the notations in the manuscript and the amount of text between the gaps, calculated that the archetype of F consisted of 16 quaternions, with these losses : Quaternion 4 lacked folios 4 and 5, the gap after v. 162. Quaternion 7 lacked folio 2, the end of vi. and the beginning of vii., and folio 7, the gap after vii. 23. Quaternion 11 was missing entire, the end of viii. And the beginning of ix. Quaternion 15 lacked folios 1 to 3, the gap after x. 23, and folios 6 to 8, the gap after x. 34. The amount of text lost at each point can be cal-  tJber die Kritik der Varronischen Bucher de Lingua  Latina, pp. 5-12,  calculated from the fact that one folio of the archetype held about 50 lines of our text. There is a serious transposition in F, in the text of Book V. In § 23, near the end, after qui ad humum, there follows id Sabini, now in § 32, and so on to Septi- viontium, now in § 41 ; then comes demissior, now in § 23 after humum, and so on to ab hominibus, now in § 32, after which comes nominatum of § 41. Mueller," who identified the transposition and restored the text to its true order in his edition, showed that the alteration was due to the wrong folding of folios 4 and 5 in the first quaternion of an archetype of F ; though this was not the immediate archetype of F, since the amount of text on each page was different. This transposition is now always rectified in our
printed texts ; but there is probably another in the later part of Book V., which has not been remedied because the breaks do not fall inside the sentences, thus making the text unintelligible. The sequence of topics indicates that v. 115-128 should stand between v. 140 and v. 141 6 ; there is then the division by topics : General Heading v. 105 De Victu v. 105-112 De Vestitu v. 113-114, 129-133  De Instrument v. 134-140, 115-128, 141-183 a In the preface to his edition, pp. xvii-xviii. The disorder in the text had previously been noticed by G. Buchanan, Turnebus, and Scaliger, and discussed by L. Spengel, Emendationum Varronianarum Specimen I, pp. 17-19. 6 L. Spengel, Emendationum Varronianarum Specimen I, pp. 13-19, identified this transposition, but considered the transpositions to be much more complicated, with the following order: §§105-114, §§ 129-140, § 128, §§ 166-168, §§118- 127, §§ 115-117, §§ 141-165, § 169 on. Then also vi. 49 and vi. 45 may have changed places, but I have not introduced this into the present text ; I have however adopted the transfer of x. 18 from its manuscript position after x. 20, to the position before x. 19, which the continuity of the thought clearly demands. The text of F is unfortunately very corrupt, and while there are corrections both by the first hand and by a second hand, it is not always certain that the corrections are to be justified.  The orthography of F contains not merely many corrupted spellings which must be corrected, but also many variant spellings which are within the range of recognized Latin orthography, and these must mostly be retained in any edition. For there are many points on which we are uncertain of Varro's own practice, and he even speaks of certain permissible variations : if we were to standardize his orthography, we should do constant violence to the best manuscript tradition, without any assurance that we were in all respects restoring Varro's own spelling. Moreover, as this work is on language, Varro has intentionally varied some spellings to suit

his etymological argument ; any extensive normalization might, and probably would, do him injustice in some passages. Further, Varro quotes from earlier authors who used an older orthography ; we do not

know whether Varro, in quoting from them, tried to use their original orthography, or merely used the orthography which was his own habitual practice. I have therefore retained for the most part the

spellings of F, or of the best authorities when F fails, replacing only a few of the more misleading spellings by the familiar ones, and allowing other variations to remain. These variations mostly fall within the following categories : 1. EI : Varro wrote EI for the long vowel I in the nom. pi. of Decl. II (ix. 80) ; but he was probably not consistent in writing EI everywhere. The manuscript testifies to its use in the following: plebei (gen. ; cf. plebis vi. 91> in a quotation) v. 40, 81, 158, vi. 87 ; eidem (nom. sing.) vii. 17 (eadem F), x. 10 ; scirpeis vii. 44 ; Terentiei (nom.), vireis Terentieis (masc), Terentieis (fem.) viii. 36 ; infeineiteis viii. 50 (changed to infiniteis in our text, cf. (in)finitam viii. 52) ; i(e)is viii. 51 (his F), ix. 5 ; iei (nom.) ix. 2, 35 ; hei re(e)i fer(re)ei de(e)i viii. 70 ; hinnulei ix. 28 ; utrei (nom. pi.) ix. 65 (utre.I. F ; cf. utri ix. 65) ; (B)a(e)biei, B(a)ebieis x. 50 (alongside Caelii, Celiis). 2. AE and E : Varro, as a countryman, may in some words have used E where residents of the city of Rome used AE (cf. v. 97) ; but the standard ortho-

graphy has been introduced in our text, except that E has been retained in seculum and sepio (and its compounds : v. 141, 150, 157, 162, vii. 7, 13), which always appear in this form. 3. OE and U : The writing OE is kept where it appears in the manuscript or is supported by the context : moerus and derivatives v. 50, 141 bis, 143, vi. 87 ; moenere, moenitius v. 141 ; Poenicum v. 113, viii. 65 bis ; poeniendo v. 177. OE in other words is the standard orthography.

4. VO UO and VU UU : Varro certainly wrote

only VO or UO, but the manuscript rarely shows

VO or UO in inflectional syllables. The examples

are novom ix. 20 (corrected from nouum in F) ; nomina-

tuom ix. 95, x. 30 (both -tiuom F) ; obliquom x. 50 ;

loquontur vi. 1, ix. 85 ; sequontur x. 71 ; clivos v. 158 ;

perhaps amburvom v. 127 (impurro Fv). In initial

syllables VO is almost regular : volt vi. 47, etc. ;

volpes v. 101 ; volgus v. 58, etc., but vulgo viii. 66 ;

Folcanus v. 70y etc. ; volsillis ix. 33. Examples of the

opposite practice are aequum vi. 71 ; duum x. 11 ;

antiquus vi. 68 ; sequuntur viii. 25 ; confiuunt x. 50.

Our text preserves the manuscript readings.

5. UV before a vowel : Varro probably wrote U and

not UV before a vowel, except initially, where his

practice may have been the other way. The examples

are : Pacuius v. 60, vi. 6 (catulus (Fv)), 94, vii. 18, 76,

and Pacuvius v. 17, 24, vii. 59 ; gen. Pacui v. 7, vi. 6,

vii. 22 ; Pacuium vii. 87, 88, 91 , 102 ; compluium,

impluium v. 161, and pluvia v. 161, compluvium v. 125 ;

simpuium v. 124 bis (simpulum codd.) ; cf. panuvellium

v. 114. Initially : uvidus v. 24 ; uvae, uvore v. 104 ;

uvidum v. 109-

6. U and I : Varro shows in medial syllables a

variation between U and I, before P or B or F or M

plus a vowel. The orthography of the manuscript

has been retained in our text, though it is likely

that Varro regularly used U in these types :

The superlative and similar words : albissumum

viii. 75 ; fnigalissumus viii. 77 ; c{a)esi(s)sumus viii.

76; intumus v. 154; maritumae v. 113; melissumum

viii. 76 ; optumum vii. 51 ; pauperrumus viii. 77 ;

proxuma etc. v. 36, 93, ix. 115, x. 4, 26 ; septuma etc.

ix. 30, x. 46 ler ; Septumio v. 1, vii. 109 5 superrumo

vii. 51 ; decuma vi. 54. Cf. proximo, optima maxima

v. 102, minimum vii. 101, and many in viii. 75-78.

Compounds of -fex and derivatives : pontufex v. 83,

pontufices v. 83 (F 2 for pontifices) ; artufices ix. 12 ;

sacrujiciis v. 98, 124. Cf. pontifices v. 23, vi. 54, etc. ;

artifex v. 93, ix. Ill, etc. ; sacrificium vii. 88, etc.

Miscellaneous words : monumentum v. 148, but

monimentum etc. v. 41 , vi. 49 bis ; mancupis v. 40, but

mancipium etc. v. 163, vi. 74, 85 ; quadrupes v. 34,

but quadripedem etc. vii. 39 bis, quadriplex etc. x. 46

etc., quadripertita etc. v. 12 etc.

7. LUBET and LIBET : Varro probably wrote

lubet, lubido, etc., but the orthography varies, and the

manuscript tradition is kept in our text : lubere

lubendo vi. 47, lubenter vii. 89, lubitum ix. 34, lubidine

x. 56 ; and libido vi. 47, x. 60, libidinosus Libentina

Libitina vi. 47, libidine x. 61.

8. H : Whether Varro used the initial H according to the standard practice at Rome, is uncertain. In the country it was likely to be dropped in pronunciation ; and the manuscript shows variation in its use.

We have restored the H in our text according to the

usual orthography, except that irpices, v. 136 bis, has

been left because of the attendant text. Examples

of its omission are Arpocrates v. 57 ; Ypsicrates v. 88 ;

aedus ircus v. 97 ; olus olera v. 108, x. 50 ; olitorium

v. 146 ; olitores vi. 20 ; ortis v. 103, ortorum v. 146 bis,

orti vi. 20 ; aruspex vii. 88. These are normalized in

our text, along with certain other related spellings :

sepulchrum vii. 24 is made to conform to the usual

sepulcrum, and the almost invariable nichil and

nichili have been changed to nihil and nihili.

9. X and CS : There are traces of a writing CS for

X, which has in these instances been kept in the text :

arcs vii. 44 {ares F) ; acsitiosae (ac sitiose F), acsitiosa

(ac sitio a- F) vi. 66 ; dues (duces F) x. 57.

10. Doubled Consonants : Varro's practice in this

matter is uncertain, in some words. F regularly

has littera (only Uteris v. 3 has one T), but obliterata

(ix. 16, -atae ix. 21, -at-trf v. 52), and these spellings

are kept in our text. Communis has been made

regular, though F usually has one M ; casus is in-

variable, except for de cassu in cassum viii. 39, which

has been retained as probably coming from Varro

himself. Iupiter, with one P, is retained, because

invariable in F ; the only exception is Iuppitri viii. 33

(iuppiti F), which has also been kept. Numo vi. 61,

for nummo, has been kept as perhaps an archaic

spelling. Decusis ix. 81 has for the same reason been

kept in the citation from Lucilius. In a few words

the normal orthography has been introduced in the

text : grallator vii. 69 bis for gralaior, grabatis viii. 32

for grabattis. For combinations resulting from pre-

fixes see the next paragraph.

11. Consonants of Prefixes : Varro's usage here

is quite uncertain, whether he kept the unassimilated

consonants in the compounds. Apparently in some

groups he made the assimilations, in others he did not.

The evidence is as follows, the variant orthography

being retained in our text :

Ad-c- : always acc-, except possibly adcensos vii.

58 (F 2 , for acensos F 1 ).

Ad-f- : always off-, except adfuerit vi. 40.

Ad-l- : always all-, except adlocutum vi. 57, adlucet

vi. 79, adlatis (ablatis F) ix. 21.

Ad-m- : always adm-, except ammonendum v. 6,

amministrat vi. 78, amminicula vii. 2, amminister vii. 34

(F2, for adm- F*).

Ad-s- : regularly ass-, but also adserere vi. 64,

adsiet vi. 92, adsimus vii. 99? adsequi viii. 8, x. 9> a^-

significare often (always except assignificant vii. 80),

adsumi viii. 69, adsumat ix. 42, adsumere x. 58.

Ad-sc-, ad-sp-, ad-st- : always with loss of the D,

as in ascendere, ascribere, ascriptos (vii. 57), ascriptivi

(vii. 56), aspicere, aspectus, astans.

Ad-t- : always a#-, except adtributa v. 48, and

possibly adtinuit (F 1 , but a^- F 2 ) ix. 59-

Con-l-, con-b-, con-m-, con-r-: always coll-, comb-,

comm.-, corr-.

Con-p- : always comp-, except conpernis ix. 10.

Ex-f- : always eff-, except exfluit v. 29.

Ex-s- : exsolveret v. 176, exsuperet vi. 50, but

exuperantum vii. 18 (normalized in our text to

exsuperantum).

Ex-sc- : exculpserant v. 143.

Ex-sp- : always expecto etc. vi. 82, x. 40, etc.

Ex-sq- : regularly Esquiliis ; but Exquilias v. 25,

Exquiliis v. 159 (Fv)i normalized to Esq- in our text.

Ex-st : extol v. 8, vi. 78 ; but exstat v. 3, normalized

to extat in our text.

In-l- : usually ill-, but inlicium vi. 88 bis, 93 (illici-

tum F), 94, 95, inliceret vi. 90, inliciatur vi. 94 ; the

variation is kept in our text:

In-m- : always imm-, except in (i?i)mutatis vi. 38,

where the restored addition is unassimilated to indi-

cate the negative prefix and not the local in.

In-p- : always imp-, except inpos v. 4 bis (once

ineos F), inpotem v. 4 (inpotentem F), inplorat vi. 68.

Ob-c-, ob-f-, ob-p- : always occ-, off-, opp-.

Ob-t- : always opt-, as in optineo etc. vii. 17, 91 >

x. 19, optemperare ix. 6.

Per-l- : pellexit vi. 94, but perlucent v. 140.

Sub-c-, sub-f-, sub-p- : always succ-, suff-, supp-,

except subcidit v. 116.

Subs- and subs- + consonant : regularly sus- + con-

sonant, except subscribunt vii. 107.

Sub-t- : only in suptilius x. 40.

Trans-l- : in tralatum vi. 77, vii. 23, 103, x. 71 ;

tralaticio vi. 55 (tranlatio Fv) and translaticio v. 32,

vi. 64- (translatio F, tranlatio Fv), translaticiis vi. 78.

Trans-v- : in travolat v. 118, and transversus vii. 81,

x. 22, 23, 43. '

Trans-d- : in traducere.

12. DE and DI : The manuscript has been followed

in the orthography of the following : directo vii. 15,

dirigi viii. 26, derecti x. 22 bis, deriguntur derectorum

x. 22, derecta directis x. 43, directas x. 44, derigitur

x. 74 ; deiunctum x. 45, deiunctae x. 47.

13. Second Declension : Nora. sing, and acc. sing,

in -uom and -uum, see 5.

Gen. sing, of nouns in -ius : Varro used the form

ending in a single I (cf. viii. 36), and a few such forms

stand in the manuscript : Muci v. 5 (muti F) ; Pacui

v. 7, vi. 6, vii. 22 ; Mani vi. 90 5 Quinti vi. 92, Ephesi

viii. 22 (ephesis F), Plauti et Marci viii. 36, dispendi

ix. 54 (quoted, metrical ; alongside dispendii ix. 54).

The gen. in II is much commoner ; both forms are

kept in our text.

Nom. pi., written by Varro with EI (cf. ix. 80) ;

examples are given in 1 , above.

Gen. pi. : The older form in -um for certain words

(denarium, centumvirum, etc.) is upheld viii. 71,

ix. 82, 85, and occurs occasionally elsewhere :

Velabrum v. 44, Querquetulanum v. 49, Sabinum v.

74, etc.

Dat.-abl. pi., written by Varro with EIS (cf. ix. 80) ;

examples are given in 1, above, but the manuscript

regularly has IS.

Dat.-abl. pi. of nouns ending in -ius, -ia, -turn, are

almost always written IIS ; there are a few for which

the manuscript has IS, which we have normalized to

IIS : Gabis v. 33, (Es)quilis v. 50, kostis v. 98, Publicis

v. 158, Faleris v. 162, praeverbis vi. 82 (cf. praeverbiis

vi. 38 bis), mysteris vii. 34- (cf. mysteriis vii. 19) 5 miliaris

ix. 85 (inilitaris F).

Deus shows the following variations : Nom. pi.

de{e)i viii. 70, dei v. 57, 58 bis, 66, 71, vii. 36, ix. 59,

dii v. 58, 144, vii. 16 ; dat.-abl. pi. deis v. 122, vii. 45,

diis v. 69, 71, 182, vi. 24, 34, vii. 34.

 

14. Third Declension : The abl. sing, varies

between E and I : supellectile viii. 30, 32, ix. 46, and

supellectili ix. 20 (-lis F) ; cf. also vesperi (uespert- F)

and vespere ix. 73.

 

Nom. pi., where ending in IS in the manuscript, is

altered to ES ; the examples are mediocris v. 5 ; partis

 

v. 21, 56; ambonis v. 115; urbis v. 143; aedis v. 160;

compluris vi. 15 ; Novendialis vi. 26 ; auris vi. 83 ; dis-

parilis viii. 67; lentis'vs.. 34; omnis ix. 81; dissimilis

ix. 92.

 

Gen. pi. in UM and IUM, see viii. 67. In view

of dentum viii. 67, expressly championed by Varro,

Veientum v. 30 (uenientum F), caelestum vi. 53, Quiritum

 

vi. 68 have been kept in our text.

 

Acc. pi. in ES and IS, see viii. 67. Varro 's dis-

tribution of the two endings seems to have been

purely empirical and arbitrary, and the manuscript

readings have been retained in our text.

 

15. Fourth Declension : Gen. sing. : Gellius,

Nodes Atticae iv. 16. 1, tells us that Varro always used

UIS in this form. Nonius Marcellus 483-494 M. cites

eleven such forms from Varro, but also sumpti. The

De Lingua Latina gives the following partial examples

of this ending : usuis ix. 4 (suis F), x. 73 (usui F), casuis

x. 50 {casuum F), x. 62 (casus his F). Examples of

this form ending in US are kept in our text : fructus

 

v. 34, 134, senatus v. 87, exercitus v. 88, panus v. 105,

domus v. 162, census v. 181, mofws vi. 3, sonitus vi. 67

 

sensus vi. 80, wjms viii. 28, 30 c

manus ix. 80.

 

Gen. pi.: For the variation between UUM and

UOM see 4, above. The form with one U is found

in tribum v. 56, orium v. 66, manum vi. 64 (nianu F),

magistratum viii. 83 F), declinatum x. 54 ; these

have been normalized in our text to UUM (except

manum, in an archaic formula). Note the following

forms in the manuscript : cornuum v. 117, declinatuum

 

vi. 36 (-tiuum Fv), x. 31, 32, 54, sensuum vi. 80 ; tribuum

vi. 86 ; fructuum ix. 27 ; casuum ix. 77, x. 14, 23, manuum

ix. 80, nominatuom (-tiuom F) ix. 95, x. 30, nomina-

tuum x. 19-

 

16. Heteroclites : There are the following : gen.

sing, plebei v. 40, 81 , 158, vi. 87, and plebis vi. 91 ; nom.

sing, elephans and acc. pi. elephantos vii. 39 ; abl. sing.

Titano vii. 16 ; abl. pi. vasis v. 121 , poematis vii. 2, 36,

viii. 14, and poematibus vii. 34.

 

17. Greek Forms : There are the following : acc.

sing, analogian ix. 1, 26, 33, 34, 45, 49, 76, 79, 105,

113, 114, but also analogiam ix. 90, 100, 110, x. 2, and

analogia(m) ix. 95, 111. Acc. sing. Aethiopa viii. 38

(ethiopam F). Nom. pi. Aeolis v. 25, 101, 102, 175,

Athencits viii. 35.

 

18. Forms of IS and IDEM : The forms in the

manuscript are kept in our text ; there are the follow-

ing to be noted :

Nom. sing. masc. : idem often ; also eidem vii. 17

(eadem F), x. 10.

 

Nom. pi. : it v. 26, ix. 2 ; iei ix. 2, 35 ; idem ix. 19.

Dat.-abl. pi. : eis vi. 18, vii. 102, ix. 4, x. 8 ; ieis

 

viii. 51 (his F, but assured by context), ix. 5 ; is vii. 5

(efo .F) ; iisdem vi. 38 ; isdem vii. 8 (hisdem F), viii. 35

 

(hisdem F).

 

19. QUOM and CUM etc. : Varro wrote quom,

quor, quoius, quoi, and not cum, cur, cuius, cui, though

the latter spellings are much commoner in the manu-

scripts, the readings of which are kept in our text.

Quom is not infrequent, being found vi. 42, 56, vii. 4,

105, viii. 1, x. 6, and in other passages where slight

emendation is necessary. Quor is found only cor-

rected to cur, viii. 68, 71, and hidden under quorum

corrected to quod, viii. 78. Quoius is written viii. 44,

 

ix. 43, x. 3, and in other passages where emendation

is necessary. Quoi nowhere appears, unless it should

be read for qui vi. 72, and quoique for quoque ix. 34,

adopted in our text.

 

Both qui and quo are used for the abl. sing, of the

relative, and quis and quibus for the dat.-abl. pi., and

similar forms for quidam. In quo is used with a plural

antecedent of any gender : v. 108, vi. 2, 55, 82, vii. 26,

viii. 83, ix. 1, x. 8, 41.

 

20. ALTER and NEUTER : Gen. alii ix. 67 is

found as well as alierius ix. 91 ; neutri ix. 62, neutra(e)

 

x. 73, as well as neutrius ix. 1 ; dat. fern, aliae x. 15.

 

21. Contracted Perfects : Only the contracted

perfects are found, such as appellarunt v. 22 etc.,

declinarit v. 7, aberraro v. 13, appellassent ix. 69, curasse

vii. 38, consuerunt consuessent ix. 68, consuerit ix. 14 bis ;

exceptions, novissent vi. 60, auspicaverit vi. 86 (quoted),

nuncupavero vii. 8 (quoted), vitaverunt x. 9-

Similarly, the V is omitted after I, as in praeterii

ix. 7, prodierunt v. 13, expediero viii. 24, etc. ; excep-

tion, quivero v. 5 (F 2 , for quiero F 1 ).

 

22. PONO in Perfect : The text always has posui

and its forms, except twice, which we have standard-

ized : imposiverunt viii. 8, imposierint ix. 34.

 

23. Gerundives : Varro used the old form of the

gerundive and gerund with UND in the third and

fourth conjugations, but the forms have mostly been

replaced by those with END. The remaining ex-

amples of the older form are ferundo v. \Q\,ferundum

m. < 2Q,faciundo vii. 9, quaerundae vii. 35, reprehendundi

ix. 12, reprehendundus ix. 93.

 

24. VERSUS : The older forms vorto, vorti, vorsus

are not found in the manuscript. The adverbial

compounds of versus have (with one exception) been

retained in our text as they appear in the manuscript :

susus versus v. 158, susum versus ix. 65; deorsum, susum

v. 161 ; rursus vi. 46, 49, ix. 86 ; deosum versus ix. 86 ;

prostis and rustis (rosus F) x. 52.

There are the following printed editions of the De

Lingua Latina, some of which appeared in numerous

reprintings :

1. Editio princeps, edited by Pomponius Laetus ;

without statement of place and date, but probablv

printed at Rome by Georgius Lauer, 1471. It rests

upon a manuscript similar to M.

A second printing, also without place and date, but

probably printed at Venice by Franc. Renner de

Hailbrun, 1172, was used by Victorius and Diacetius

in recording the readings of F, and this copy was used

by L. Spengel for his readings of and of Laetus ; as

compared with the 1471 printing, it shows a number

of misprints.

2. Editio vetustissima, edited by Angelus Tifernas

with but slight variation from the edition of Laetus ;

probably printed at Rome by Georgius Sachsel de

Reichenhal, 1474.

 

3. Editio Rholandelli, edited by Franciscus Rholan-

dellus Trivisanus ; printed at Venice, 1475. It shows

improvement over the edition of Laetus, by the

introduction of readings from relatively good manu-

scripts.

 

4. Editio Veneta, similar to the preceding, but in

the same volume with Nonius Marcellus and Festus ;

first printed in 1483, and reprinted in 1492 by Nicolaus

de Ferraris de Pralormo (L. Spengel's Editio Veneta

I), and in 1498 by Magister Antonius de Gusago

(Spengel's Veneta II).

 

A Venice edition of 1474, printed by Ioh. de Colonia

and Ioh. Manthem de Gherretzen, was used by Goetz

and Schoell and cited as Ed. Ven. in their edition.

 

5. Editio Baptistae Pii, edited by Baptista Pius, an

eclectic text based on previous editions, but with

some independent emendations ; printed at Milan

by Leonardus Pachel, 1510.

 

6. Editio Aldina, edited by Aldus Manutius after

the edition of Pius, but with some changes through

his own emendations and in accordance with manu-

script testimony, possibly including that of F ; printed

at Venice by Aldus, 1513. The volume includes the

Cornucopia Perotti, the De Lingua Latina, Festus, and

Nonius Marcellus ; it was reprinted at Venice by

Aldus in 1517 and 1527, and at Basel and Paris several

times, up to 1536. The 1527 printing shows some

improvements (see 7).

 

7. Editio Parisiensis, edited by Michael Bentinus,

and essentially following the Aldine of 1527, for which

Bentinus collated a number of manuscripts and used

their readings ; it includes also the Castigationes or

Corrections of Bentinus, a series of critical and ex-

planatory comments. It was printed at Paris by

Colinaeus, 1529*

 

8. Editio Gryphiana, similar to the preceding,

including the Castigationes of Bentinus, and the frag-

ments of the Origines of M. Porcius Cato ; for its

preparation, Petrus Victorius had transcribed the

readings of B as far as ix. 74. It was published at

Lyons by Sebastian Gryphius, 1535.

 

9. Editio Vulgata, edited by Antonius Augustinus,

with the readings of B (received from Petrus Vic-

torius) and the help of Angelus Colotius, Octavius

Pantagathus, and Gabriel Faernus ; it was printed at

Rome by Vine. Luchinus in 1554- and again by Antonius

Bladus in 1557.

 

The text of the De Lingua Latina has been re-

garded as greatly corrupted in this edition, since

Augustinus based it on a poor manuscript, introduced

a great number of his own emendations, and

attempted a standardization of the orthography,

notably in writing quom and the like, and in using EI

for long I in endings {e.g., dat.-abl. pi. heis lihreis, acc.

pi. simileis, gen. sing, vocandei). Despite -his errors,

he has made a number of valuable emendations, as will

be seen from the citations in our apparatus criticus.

 

The text of this edition was rather closely followed

by all editors except Vertranius and Scioppius, and

Scaliger in his emendations, until the edition of Leon-

hard Spengel in 1826.

 

10. Editio Vertranii, edited by M. Vertranius

Maurus, following the edition of Augustinus, but

discarding the spellings of the type quom and the use

of EI for long I, and making a large number of his

own conjectural emendations ; printed at Lyons by

Gryphii Heredes, 1563.

 

1 1 . Coniectanea in M. Terentium Varronem de Lingua

Latina, by Josephus Scaliger ; not an edition, but

deserving a place here, as it contains numerous textual

criticisms as well as other commentary ; written in

1564, and published at Paris in 1565. Both these

Coniectanea and an Appendix ad Coniectanea (the

original date of which I cannot determine) are printed

with many later editions of the De Lingua Latina.

 

12. Editio Turnebi, edited by Adrianus Turnebus,

who used a manuscript very similar to p and made

numerous emendations ; printed at Paris by A.

Wechelus, 1566 (Turnebus died 1565).

 

13. Opera quae super sunt, with Scaliger 's Coniectanea,

printed at Paris by Henr. Stephanus, 156$: —

 

14. Edition of Dionysius Gothofredus, containing

only an occasional independent alteration ; in Auc-

tores Linguae Latinae in unum corpus redacti, printed at

Geneva by Guilelmus Leimarius, 1585.

 

15. Edition, with the notes of Ausonius Popma ;

printed at Leiden ex officina Plantiniana, 1601.

 

16. Editio Gaspari Scioppii, edited by Gaspar Sciop-

pius, who relied on data of Gabriel Faernus and on

collations of Vatican manuscripts by Fulvius Ursinus ;

it contains many valuable textual suggestions, though

perhaps most of them belong to Ursinus rather than

to Scioppius (who expressly gives credit to Faernus,

Turnebus, and Ursinus). It was printed at Ingolstad

in 1602 ; reprinted in 1605.

 

17. Editio Bipontina, in two volumes, the second con-

taining a selection of the notes of Augustinus, Turne-

bus, Scaliger, and Popma ; issued at Bipontium

(Zweibriicken in Bavaria), 1788.

 

18. M. Terenti Varronis de Lingua Latina libri qui

supersunt, edited by Leonhard Spengel of Munich ;

the first scientific edition, resting on readings of F

(but only as represented by Fv), H, B, a, b, c, and a

comparison of all, or almost all, the previous editions.

It was printed in Berlin by Duncker und Humbloth,

1826.

 

19. M. Terenti Varronis de Lingua Latina librorum

quae supersunt, edited by Karl Ottfried Mueller, who

added the readings of G to his critical apparatus.

Mueller has the merit of setting the paragraphs of

v. 23-41 in their proper order, and of placing brief but

valuable explanatory material in his notes, in addition

to textual criticism. This edition was printed at

Leipzig by Weidmann, 1833.

 

20. M. T. Varronis librorum de Lingua Latina quae

supersunt, reprinted after Mueller's edition with a

very few textual changes by A. Egger ; issued at

Paris by Bourgeois-Maze, 1837.

 

21. Varron de la Langue Latine, a translation into

French by Huot, accompanied by Mueller's text ; in

the Collection des Auteurs Latins avec la traduction en

francais, directed by Nisard, printed at Paris by

Firmin Didot Freres and issued by Dubochet et

Cie., 1845.

 

22. Libri di M. Terenzio Varrone intorno alia lingua

latina, edited and translated with notes by Pietro

Canal ; in the Biblioteca degli Scrittori Latini with

translation and notes ; printed at Venice by Gius.

Antonelli, 1846-1854. It was reprinted in 1874, with

addition of the fragments, to which notes were

attached by Fed. Brunetti.

 

This edition is little known, and deserves more

attention than it has received, although Canal was

very free with his emendation of the text ; but he

used a number of additional manuscripts which are in

the libraries of Italy.

 

23. M. Terenti Varronis de Lingua Latina libri, edited

by Andreas Spengel after the death of his father

Leonhard, who had been working on a second edition

for nearly fifty years when he died ; printed at Berlin

by Weidmann, 1885.

 

This edition is notable because of the abundant

critical apparatus.

 

24. M. Terenti Varronis de Lingua Latina quae

supersunt, edited by Georg Goetz and Friedrich

Schoell ; printed at Leipzig by Teubner, 1910.

 

This edition is very conservative, many corrupt

passages being marked with a dagger and left in the

text, while excellent emendations for the same are

relegated to the apparatus criticus or to the Annota-

tiones at the end of the volume ; but it has great value

for its citation of abundant testimonia and its elabor-

ate indexes.

 

Two errors of earlier editors may be mentioned at

this point. Since Varro in v. 1 speaks of having sent

three previous books to Septumius, our Book V. was

thought to be Book IV. ; and it was not until Spengel's

edition of 1826 that the proper numbering came into

use. Further, Varro 's remark in viii. 1 on the subject

matter caused the early editors to think that they had

De Lingua Latina Libri Tres (our v.-vii.), and De

Analogia Libri Tres (our viii.-x.) ; Augustinus in the

Vulgate was the first to realize that the six books

were parts of one and the same work, the De Lingua

Latina.

 

It is convenient to list here, together, the special

treatments of the passage on the city of Rome, v.

41-56, which is given by the Fragmentum Cassinense :

 

H. Keil, Rheinisches Museum vi. 142-145 (1848).

 

L. Spengel, Uber die Kritik der varronischen Biicher

de Lingua Latina ; in Abhandl. d. k. bayer. Ak. d. JViss.

7, 47-54 (1854).

 

B. ten Brink, M. Terentii Varronis Locus de Urbe

Roma ; Traiecti ad Rhenum, apud C. Van der Post

Juniorem, 1855.

 

H. Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom im Alterthum

ii. 599-603 (Berlin, 1871).

A bibliography of editions, books, and articles, for

the period 1471-1897, is given by Antonibon, Supple-

mento di Lezioni Varianti, pages 179-187 ; but there

are many misprints, and many omissions of items.

Bibliographical lists will be found in the following :

Bibliotheca Philologica Classica, supplement to Pkilo-

logus.

 

Dix annees dephilologie classique 1914-1924, i. 428-429,

 

edited by J. Marouzeau (1927).

U Annee philologique i. for 1924-1926 ; ii. for 1927, etc.,

 

edited by J. Marouzeau (1928 ff.).

 

Critical summaries of the literature will be found

as follows :

 

1826-1858 : Philologus xiii. 684-751 (1858), by L.

Mercklin.

 

1858-1868 : Philologus xxvii. 286-331 (1868), by A.

Riese.

 

1867-1876 : Philologus xl. 649-651 (1881), merely

listed.

 

1877-1890 : Bursians Jahresberichte iiber den Fortschritt

der klassischen Philologie lxviii. 121-122 (1892),

by G. Goetz.

 

1891-1901 : Bursians Jrb. cxiii. 116-128 (1901), by

P. Wessner.

 

1901-1907 : Bursians Jrb. cxxxix. 85-89 (1908), by

 

R. Kriegshammer.

1901-1920 : Bursians Jrb. clxxxviii. 52-69 (1921), by

 

P. Wessner.

 

1921-1925 : Bursians Jrb. ccxxxi. 35-38 (1931), by

F. Lammert.

 

For the period before the edition of L. Spengel

in 1826, it is unnecessary to do other than refer to

the list of editions ; for other writings on Varro were

few, and they are mostly lacking in importance,

apart from being inaccessible to-day. The following

selected list includes most of the literature since 1826,

which has importance for the De Lingua Latina, either

for the text and its interpretation, or for Varro 's style,

sources, and method ; but treatises dealing with his

influence on later authors have mostly been omitted

from the list :

 

Antonibon, Giulio : Contributo agli studi sui libri de

Lingua Latina ; Rivista di Filologia xvii. 177-221

(1888).

Antonibon, G. : De Codice Varroniano Mutinensi ;

 

Pkilologus xlviii. 185 (1889).

Antonibon, G. : Supplemento di Lezioni Varianti ai

 

libri De Lingua Latina de M. Ter. Varrone ;

 

Bassano, 1899-

 

Barwick, K. : Remmius P alamort und die rdmische Ars

grammatica ; Leipzig, 1922 (Philologus, Suppl.

xv. 2).

 

Bednara, Ernst : Archiv fur lateinische Lexikographie

 

xiv. 593 (1906).

Bergk, Th. : Quaestiones Lucreiianae ; Index Lec-

 

tionum in Acad. Marburg. 1816-1847.

Bergk, Th. : De Carminum Saliarium Reliquiis ; Index

 

Lectionum in Acad. Marburg. 1847-1848.

Bergk, Th. : Quaestiones Ennianae ; Index Scholarum

 

in Univ. Hal. 1860.

Bergk, Th. : Varroniana ; Index Scholarum in Univ.

 

Hal. 1863.

 

Bergk, Th. : De Paelignorum Sermone ; Index Scho-

larum in Univ. Hal. 1864.

 

Bergk, Th. : Zeitschrift fiir die Altertumsivissenschaft

ix. 231 (1851), xiv. 138-140 (1856).

 

Bergk, Th. : Philologus xiv. 186, 389-390 (1859), xxx.

682 (1870), xxxii. 567 (1873), xxxiii. 281, 301-302,

311 (1874).

 

Bergk, Th. : Jahrbucher fiir classische Philologie

 

lxxxiii. 317, 320-321, 333-334, 633-637 (1861);

 

ci. 829-832, 841 (1870).

Bergk, Th. : Rheinisches Museum xx. 291 (1865).

Bergk, Th. : Kleine Philologische Schriften (Halle,

 

1884) ; passim, reprinting most of the articles

 

listed above.

Birt, Th. : Rheinisches Museum liv. 50 (1899).

Birt, Th. : Philologus lxxxiii. 40-41 (1928).

 

Boissier, Gaston : Etude sur la vie et les outrages de

 

M. T. Varron ; Paris, 1861, 2nd ed. 1875.

Boot, J. C. G. : Mnemosyne xxii. 409-412 (1894).

Brakmann, C. : Mnemosyne lx. 1-19 (1932).

ten Brink, B. : M. Terentii Varronis Locus de Urbe

 

Roma ; Traiecti ad Rhenum, 1855.

Brinkmann, A. : Simpuvium — simpulum ; Arckiv fur

 

lateinische Lexikographie xv. 139-143 (1908).

Buecheler, F. : Rheinisches Museum xxvii. 475 (1872).

Buecheler, F. : Archiv fur lateinische Lexikographie

 

ii. 119, 619-624 (1885).

 

Christ, Wilhelm : Philologus xvi. 450-464 (1860),

 

xvii. 59-63 (1861).

Christ, Wilhelm : Archiv fiir lateinische Lexikographie

 

ii. 619-624 (1885).

 

Dahlmann, Hellfried : Varro und die hellenistische

Sprachtheorie ; Berlin, 1932 (Forschungen zur

klass. Phil. v.).

 

Dahlmann, Hellfried : M. Terentius Varro, article in

Pauly-Wissowa's Real-Encyc. d. class. Altertums-

wiss. Suppl. vol. vi. 1172-1277 (1935).

 

Dam, R. J. : De Analogia, observationes in Varronem

grammaticamque Romanorum ; Campis, 1930.

 

Ellis, Robinson : Journal of Philology xix. 38, 178-179

(1891).

 

Ellis, Robinson : Hermathena xi. 353-363 (1901).

 

Fay, Edwin W. : Varroniana ; American Journal of

 

Philology xxxv. 149-162, 245-267 (1914).

Foat, W. G. : Classical Review xxix. 79 (1915).

Fraccaro, Plinio : Studi Varroniani ; Padova, 1907.

Funaioli, Hyginus : Grammaticae Romanae Fragmenta ;

Leipzig, 1907.

 

Galdi, M. : Rivista Indo-Greco-Italica xi. 3-4, 21-22

(1927).

 

Georges, K. E. : Philologus xxxiii. 226 (1874).

Goetz, Georg : Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift,

 

1886, 779-783.

Goetz, Georg : Quaestiones Varronianae ; Index

 

Scholarum, in Univ. Ienensi, 1886-1887.

Goetz, Georg : Aelius Stilo, article in Pauly-Wissowa's

 

Real-Enc. d. cl. Altrv. i. 532-533 (1894), Suppl.

 

vol. i. 15 (1903).

Goetz, Georg : Gbtiingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1908,

 

815-827.

 

Goetz, Georg : Zur Wiirdigung der grammatischen

Arbeiten Varros ; Abhandl. der kon. sacks. Gesell-

schaftd. Wiss. xxvii. 3, 67-89 (1909).

 

Goetz, Georg : Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift,

1910, 1367-1368.

 

Groth, Adolfus : De M. Terenti Varronis de Lingua

Latina librorum codice Florentino ; Argentorati,

1880.

 

Haupt, Moritz : Hermes i. 401-403 (1866), iii. 147-

 

148 (1869), iv. 332-334 (1870).

Haupt, Moritz : Opuscula (3 vols., 1875, 1876, 1876),

 

ii. 192-195, iii. 355-357, 477.

Heidrich, Georg : Der Gebrauch des Gerundiums und

 

Gerundivums bei Varro ; Jahresbericht, Gymn.

 

Melk, 1890.

 

Heidrich, Georg : Bemerkungen iiber den Stil des Varro ;

 

Jahresbericht, Gymn. Melk, 1891.

Henry, Victor : De sermonis humani origine et natura

 

M. Terentius Varro quid senserit ; Insulis, 1883.

Hertz, M. : Jahrbiicher fur classische Philologie cix.

 

249-255 (1874).

Hirschfeld, O. : Hermes viii. 469 (1874).

Hultsch, Fr. : Philologus xxii. 346 (1865).

Hultsch, Fr. : Metrologicorum Scriptorum reliquiae

 

ii. 49-51 ; Leipzig, 1866.

 

Jacobs : Varietas lectionum in Varronis libris de Lingua

Latina ; Beitrage zur alteren Litteratur ii. 217-222

(1836).

 

Jahn, Otto : Hermes ii. 246-247 (1867).

 

Jeep, J. W. L. : Zur Geschichte der Lehre von den

 

Redeteilen bei den lateinischen Grammatikern ;

 

Leipzig, 1893.

Jonas, Richard : Zum Gebrauch der Verba frequenta-

 

tiva und intensiva in der alteren lateinischen Prosa ;

 

Gymn. Posen, 1879.

Jordan, Heinrich : Hermes ii. 83, 89 (1867), xv. 118-

 

121 (1880).

 

Jordan, Heinrich : Topographie der Stadt Rom ivi

Alterthum, vol. i. 1, 1878 ; i. 2, 1885 ; i. 3, revised

by Ch. Huelsen, 1907; vol. ii. 1871, especially

pages 237-290, 599-603 ; Berlin.

 

Jordan, Heinrich : Kritische Beitrage zur Geschichte

der lateinischen Sprache, Berlin, 1879 passim,

esp. pages 90-91, 96-103, 131, 138, 224, 321.

 

Keil, Heinrich : Das Fragmentum Casinense des Varro

de Lingua Latina ; Rheinisches Museum vi. 142-

145 (1847).

 

Kent, R. G. : On the Text of Varro, de Lingua Latina ;

 

Trans. Am. Philol. Assn. lxvii. 64-82 (1936).

Kowalski, G. : Studia Rhetorica ; Eos xxxi. 141-168

 

(1928).

Kriegsharumer, Robert : De Varronis et Verrii Fonti-

bus quaestiones selectae ; Leipzig, 1903.

 

Krumbiegel, Richard : De Varroniano Scribendi

Genere quaestiones ; Leipzig, 1892.

 

Lachmann, Karl : Rheinisches Museum vi. 106-125

(1839) ; new series, ii. 356-365 (1842), iii. 610-611

(1845) : reprinted in Kleinere Schriften ii. 162-

187 (1876).

 

Lachmann, Karl : In T. Lucretii Cari de Rerum Natura

 

libros Commentarius (1850), passim ; 4th ed.,

 

1882, with index.

Lahmeyer, Gustav : Philologus xxii. 100-105 (1865).

Lersch, Laurenz : Die Sprachphilosophie der Alten i.

 

117-127 (1838), ii. 143-153 (1840), iii. 169-172

 

(1841) ; Bonn.

Lobeck, Chr. Aug. : Aglaophamus ii. 1002-1004 ;

 

Konigsberg, 1829-

Luebbert, Ed. : Commentationes Pontificates ; Berlin,

 

1859.

 

Madvig, J. N. : Adversaria Critica i. 178, ii. 166-178 ;

 

Copenhagen, 1871 and 1873.

Mercklin, Ludwig : De Junio Gracchano commen-

 

tatio ; particulae duae, Dorpat, 1840, 1841.

Mercklin, Ludwig : Quaestiones Varronianae ; Index

 

Scholarum in Univ. Dorpat. 1852.

Mercklin, Ludwig : De Varronis tralaticio scribendi

 

genere quaestiones ; Index Scholarum in Univ.

 

Dorpat. 1858.

Mette, H. J. : De Cratete Mallota seu Pergameno ;

 

Berlin, 1931.

 

Mette, H. J. : Varroniana (supplement to preceding);

Berlin, 1931.

Mueller, August : De Priscis Verborum Formis Var-

 

ronianis ; Halle, 1877.

Mueller, C. F. W. : Zeitschrift fur das Gymnasial-

 

wesen xix. 421-424, 792-800, 867-874 (1865).

Mueller, K. O. : Zur Topographie Roms : Uber die

 

Fragmente der Sacra Argeorum bei Varro, de Lingua

 

Latina V (IV), 8 ; in Bottiger, Archaologie und

 

Kunst i. 69-94 ; Breslau, 1828.

Mueller, K. O. : Sextus Pompeius Festus, edition, page

 

xliv ; Leipzig, 1839.

Mueller, Lucian : Jahrbiicher fur classische Philologie

 

xcvii. 427 (1868).

Mueller, Lucian : Rheinisches Museum xxiv. 553-557

 

(1869).

 

Muller Jzn, Fridericus : De veterum imprimis Ro-

manorum studiis etymologicis, pages 115-248 ;

Utrecht, 1910.

 

Nettleship, H. : Latin Grammar in the First Century ;

 

Journal of Philology xv. 189-214 (1886).

Neukirch, J. H. : De Fabula Togata Romanorum,

 

pages 71, 83, 89, 96, 99, 122, 188, 278 ; Leipzig,

 

1833.

 

Norden, Eduard : Rheinisches Museum xlviii. 348-354

(1893).

 

Norden, Eduard : De Stilone Cosconio Varrone gram-

maticis commentatio ; Index Scholarum in Univ.

Greifswald. 1895.

 

Norden, Eduard : Die antike Kunstprosa vom VI.

Jahrhundert vor Christus bis in die Zeit der Renais-

sance i. 194-200 ; Leipzig, 1898.

 

Oxe, C. E. L. : De M. Ter. Varronis etymis quibusdam

commentatio ; Gymn. Programm, Kreuznach,

1859.

Oxe, C. E. L. : Af. Terenti Varronis librorum de lingua

Latina argumentum ; Gymn. Program m, Kreuz-

nach, 1871.

 

Pape, Wilhelm : Lectiones Varronianae ; Berlin, 1829-

Plasberg, O. : Rheinisches Museum liii. 70, 75-76

(1898).

 

Reiter, Hugo : Quaestiones Varronianae grammaticae ;

 

Konigsberg, 1882.

Reiter, Hugo : Observationes criticae in M. Terenti

 

V arronis de lingua Latina libros ; Jahresbericht,

 

Gymn. Braunsberg, 1884.

Reitzenstein, R. : M. Terentius Varro und Johannes

 

Mauropus von Euchaita ; Leipzig, 1901.

Ribbeck, Otto : Die Composition der Varronischen

 

Bilcher V-VII de lingua Latina; Rheinisches

 

Museum xli. 618-626 (1886).

Riese, Alexander : Philologus xxvii. 305-306 (1868).

Ritschl, Fr. W. : Jahrbiicher fiir classische Philologie

 

xcvii. 341-343 (1868).

Roehrscheidt, K. : review of Reitzenstein ; Got-

 

tingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1908, 791-814.

Roessner, Otto : De praepositionum ab de ex usu Var-

 

roniano ; Halle, 1888.

Roth, K. L. : Uber das Leben des M. Terentius Varro ;

 

Gymn. Programm, Basel, 1857 (also separately

 

issued).

 

Roth, K. L. : Philologus xvii. 175-176 (1861).

 

Samter, Ernest : Quaestiones Varronianae ; Berlin,

1891.

 

Schwabe, L. : Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie ci. 350-352

(1870).

Sitzler, Johann : Uber den Kasusgebrauch bet Varro ;

 

Beilage zum Gymn. Programm, Tauberbischofs-

 

heim, 1889.

Skutsch, F. : Hermes xxxii. 96-97 (1897).

Skutsch, F. : Rheinisches Museum lxi. 603-609

 

(1906).

 

Spengel, Andreas : Bemerkungen zu Varro de lingua

 

Latina ; Sitzungsber. d. /con. bayer. Akad. d. JViss.,

 

pkil.-hist. CI. 1885, 243-272.

Spengel, Leonhard : Emendationum Varronianarum

 

Specimen I; Munich, 1830.

Spengel, L. : review of Mueller's edition ; Jahrbiicher

 

fur Philologie xi. 1-20 (1834).

Spengel, L. : Zeitschrift fiir die Altertumsivissenschaft

 

iv. 142-144 (1846).

Spengel, L. : Uber die Kritik der Varronischen Biicher

 

de Lingua Latina ; Abhandl. d. kon. bayer. Akad.

 

d. Wiss. vii. 2. 1-54 (1854).

Spengel, L. : Commentatio de emendanda ratione lib-

 

rorum M. Terentii Varronis de lingua Latina ;

 

Munich, 1858 (to F. Thiersch, on semicentennial

 

of the doctorate).

Spengel, L. : Philologies xvii. 288-306 (1861).

Spengel, L. : Die sacra Argeorum bet Varro ; Philo-

 

logus xxxii. 92-105 (1873).

Stieber, G. M. : Varroniana : Die griechischen Fremd-

 

worter bei Varro de Lingua Latina, Orthographie,

 

Lautlehre, Index der bei Varro befindlichen Fremd-

 

ivorter ; typed dissertation, Wiirzburg, 1921.

Stowasser, J. M. : Wiener Studien, vii. 38-39 (1885).

Stroux, Johannes : Antidoron, Festschrift Jacob Wacker-

 

nagel 309-325 ; Gottingen, 1924.

Stuenkel, Ludwig : De Varroniana verborum forma-

tions, Strassburg, 1875.

• Usener, H. : Ein altes Lekrgebaude der Philologie ;

Sitzungsber. d. k'dn. bayr. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Miinchen,

phil-Mst. CI 1892, 582-648.

 

van der Vliet, J. : Mnemosyne xx. 416 (1892).

Voigt, Moritz : Rheinisches Museum xxiv. 332-335

(1869), xxxiii. 150 (1878).

 

W — j H. : Jahrbiicher filr classische Philologie lxxxvii.

 

740 (1863).

Wackernagel, J. : Hermes lviii. 460 (1923).

Walter, Fritz : Philohgus lxxv. 484-485 (1919).

Walter, F. : Philologische Wochenschrift 1. 827 (1930).

Weber, Julius : Quaestionum Grammaticarum Speci-

men ; Jena, 1914.

Wilmanns, August : De M. Terenti Varronis libris

 

grammaticis particula ; Bonn, 1863.

Wilmanns, August : De M. Terenti Varronis libris

 

grammaticis ; Berlin, 1864 (the preceding, -with

 

addition of the fragments).

Wolfflin, Eduard : Archiv fur lateinische Lexiko-

 

graphie ii. 5, 89, 324 (1885), viii. 411-440, 563-585

 

(1898).

 

Zander, K. M. : Versus italici antiqui, page 24 ;

Lund, 1890.

 

Zippmann, A. : De loco Varroniano qui est de Lingua

Latina viii. 44 ; Gymn. Programm, Scheidemiihl,

1869-

 

Zumpt : review of L. Spengel's edition ; Jahrbiicher

fur rvissenschaftliche Kritik, 1827, 1513-1527.

 

 

When a text is to be confronted by a translation,

that text must be presented in an intelligible wording,

with emendations of corrupt passages and the filling

up of the gaps. It happens that while some of the

corrupt passages in this work are quite desperate,

many can be restored, and many gaps can be filled,

with some degree of confidence, since Festus, Nonius

Marccllus, and others have quoted practically ver-

batim from Varro ; with the aid of their testimonia,

many obscure passages can be restored to clarity.

This has been the procedure in the present volumes ;

if any departures from the manuscript authority

seem violent, they are required as a basis for a transla-

tion. Yet the present text is throughout as conserva-

tive as is consistent with the situation.

 

The text has in fact been so arranged as to show,

with least machinery, its relation to the best tradition.

With the use of italics and of pointed brackets, and the

aid of the critical apparatus, any reader may see for

himself exactly what stands in the manuscript. The

use of symbols and the like is explained on pages

xlix-1.

The critical apparatus is intended to show how the

text is derived from the best manuscript tradition,

namely F, or where F fails, then Fv or other good

codices.

 

In each item, there is given first the name of the

scholar making the emendation which is in the text,

after which the reading of F is given. It is therefore

not necessary to name F except in a few places where

there might be confusion ; if the reading is not that

of F, then the manuscript is specified. Where the

emendation of a scholar has been anticipated by a

copyist of some manuscript, the reference to this

manuscript is commonly given. If several successive

emendations have been necessary to reach the best

reading, the intermediate stages are given in reverse

order, working back to the manuscript. For ease of

typography, manuscript abbreviations are mostly

presented in expanded form.

 

The reader may therefore evaluate the text which

is here presented ; but the present editor has made no

attempt to present the almost countless emendations

which have been made by scholars and which have

not been adopted here.

The translation of the De Lingua Latina presents

problems which are hardly to be found in any other

of the works translated for the Loeb Classical Library.

For the constant (and inevitable) interpretations of

one Latin word by another, which Varro had to

present in order to expound its origin, requires

the translator to keep the Latin words in the

translation, glossed with an English equivalent. In

this way only can the translation be made intellig-

ible.

 

Because of the technical nature of the subject it

has been necessary to follow the Latin with some

degree of closeness, or the points made by Varro will

be lost. If the translation is at times difficult to

understand, it is because most of us are not accus-

tomed to dealing with matters of technical linguistics;

and even though Varro lacks the method of modern

scholars in the subject, he has his OM r n technique and

must be followed in his own way.

 

The numerous metrical citations which Varro gives

from Latin authors are translated in the same metre,

though sometimes the translation is slightly shorter

or longer than the Latin.

 

There are only two translations of the De Lingua

Latina into a modern language : that of Huot into

French, a mere paraphrase which often omits whole

sentences, and that of Canal into Italian (Nos. 20 and

21 in our list of Editions). There is no translation

into German, nor any into English before the present

volumes.

The notes are planned to give all needed help to

the understanding of a difficult subject matter ; they

cover matters of technical linguistics, historical and

geographical references, points of public and private

life. They explain briefly any unusual word-forms

and syntactical uses, and label as incorrect all false

etymologies (of which there are many), either ex-

plicitly or by indicating the correct etymology. They

state the sources of quotations from other authors

and works, giving references to a standard collection

of fragments if the entire work is not extant. They

name the metres of metrical quotations, if the metre

is other than dactylic, or iambic, or trochaic.

 

The fragments of Greek and Latin authors are

cited in the notes according to the following scheme :

 

Festus (and the excerpts of Paulus Diaconus), by

page and line, edition of K. O. Mueller, Leipzig,

1839.

 

Grammatici Latini, by volume, page, and line, edition

 

of H. Keil, Leipzig, 1855-1880.

Nonius Marcellus, by page and line, edition of

 

J. Mercier, 1589 ; 2nd ed., 1614 ; reprinted

 

1825.

 

For the following authors :

Accius : see Ribbeck and Warmington, below.

Ennius : see Vahlen and Warmington, below.

Lucilius : C. Lucilii Carminum Reliquiae, ed. F. Marx,

 

2 vols., Leipzig, 1904-1905. *

Naevius : see Ribbeck, Warmington, Baehrens, Morel,

below.

 

Pacuvius : see Ribbeck and Warmington, below.

Plautus, fragments : edition of F. Ritschl, Leipzig,

 

1894 ; the same numbering in G. Goetz and

 

F. Schoell, Leipzig, 1901.

 

von Arnim, J. : Stoicorum Veterum Reliquiae ; Leipzig,

1903.

 

Baehrens, Emil : Fragmenta Poetarum Romanorum ;

 

Leipzig, 1886.

Bremer, F. P. : Iurisprudentiae Antehadrianae quae

 

supersunt; Leipzig, 1896-1901.

Bruns, Georg : Fontes Iuris Romani Aniiqui ; revised

 

by Th. Mommsen ; 7th ed., revised by O.

 

Gradenwitz, Tubingen, 1909-

Buettner, Richard : Porcius Ldcinus und der litterarische

 

Kreis des Q. Lutatius Catulus ; Leipzig, 1893.

Funaioli, Hyginus : Grammaticae Romanae Frag-

menta ; Leipzig, 1907.

Hultsch, Friedrich : Polybii Historiae ; Berlin, 1867-

 

1872.

 

 

 

Huschke, I\ E. : Iurisprudentiae Anteiustinianae Reli-

quiae ; 6th ed., revised by E. Seckel and B.

Kuebler, Leipzig, 1908.

 

Jordan, Heinrich : M. Catonis praeter librum de re

rustica quae extant ; Leipzig, 1860.

 

Kaibel, G. : Comicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, vol. i.

Part I ; Berlin, 1899-

 

Maurenbrecher, Bertold : Carminum Saliarium reli-

quiae ; Jahrbucher fur classische Philologie, Suppl.,

vol. xxi. 313-352 (1894).

 

Morel, Willy : Fragmenta Poetarum Latinorum ; Leip-

zig, 1927.

 

Mueller, Karl, and Theodor Mueller : Fragmenta

Historicorum Graecorum ; Paris, 1841-1870.

 

Nauck, August : Aristophanis Byzantii Grammatici

Alexandrini Fragmenta ; Halle, 1848.

 

Peter, Hermann : Historicorum Romanorum Frag-

menta ; Leipzig, 1883.

 

Preibisch, Paul : Fragmenta Libronim Pontificiorum ;

Tilsit, 1878.

 

Regell, Paul : Fragmenta Auguralia ; Gymn. Hirsch-

berg, 1882.

 

Ribbeck, Otto : Scaenicae Romanorum Poesis Frag-

menta : vol. i., Tragicorum Romanorum Fragmenta,

3rd ed., Leipzig, 1897 ; vol. ii., Comicorum

Romanorum Fragmenta, 3rd ed., Leipzig, 1898

(occasional references to the 2nd ed.).

 

Rose, Valentin : Aristotelis qui ferebantur libronim

fragmenta ; Leipzig, 1886. Rowoldt, Walther : Librorum Pontificiorum Romanorum de Caerimoniis Sacrificiorum Reliquiae; Halle, 1906. Schneider, Otto : Callimachea ; Leipzig, 1870. Schoell, Rudolph : Legis Duodecim Tabularum Reliquiae ; Leipzig, 1866. Usener, Hermann : Epicurea ; Leipzig, 1887. Vahlen,J. : Ennianae Poesis Reliquiae, 2nd ed., Leipzig. 1903 (the 3rd ed., 1928, is an unchanged reprint). Warmington, E. H. : Remains of Old Latin, in the Loeb Classical Library ; vol. i. (Ennius, Caecilius), 1935; vol. ii. (Livius Andronicus, Naevius, Pacuvius, Accius), 1936 ; Cambridge (Mass.) and London. Letters and w ords not in the manuscript, but added n the text, are set in < >, except as noted below. Letters changed from the manuscript reading are printed in italics. Some obvious additions, and the following changes, are sometimes not further explained by critical notes : ae with italic a, for manuscript e. oe, with italic o, for manuscript ae or e. italic b and v, for manuscript u and b. italic f andpA, for manuscript ph andf. italic i and y, for manuscript y and i. talic h, for an h omitted in the manuscript. The manuscripts are referred to as follows ; readngs without specification of the manuscript are from F : F=Laurentianus li. 10 ; No. 1 in our list. F 1 or m 1 , the original writer of F, or the first hand. F 2 or m 2 , the corrector of F, or the second hand. Fv = readings from the lost quaternion of F, as recorded by Victorius ; our No. 2. Frag. Cass. = Cassinensis 361 ; our No. 3. f= Laurentianus li. 5 ; our No. 5. H= Havniensis ; our No. 6. G = Gothanus ; our No. 7. a = Parisinus 7489 ; our No. 8. 6 = Parisinus 6142 ; our No. 9- c=Parisinus 7535 ; our No. 10. V= Vindobonensis lxiii. ; our No. 1 1 . p = Basiliensis F iv. 13 ; our No. 12. M= Guelferbytanus 896 ; our No. 13. B = that used by Augustinus ; our No. 14. The following abbreviations are used for editors and editions (others are referred to by their full names) : Laetus = editio princeps of Pomponius Laetus. Rhol. = Rholandellus, whose first edition was in 1475. Pius = Baptista Pius, edition of 1510. Aug. = Antonius Augustinus, editor of the Vulgate edition 1554, reprinted 1557. Sciop. = Gaspar Scioppius, edition of 1602, reprinted 1605. L. Sp. = Leonhard Spengel, edition of 1826 (and articles). Mue. = Karl Ottfried Mueller, edition of 1833. A. Sp. = Andreas Spengel, edition of 1885 (and articles). GS. = G. Goetz and F. Schoell, edition of 1910.