previous next

Archetype written in early Caroline minuscules

If we look at the letters commonly confused in what were probably the three direct copies of the archetype: (1) B (last twelve plays); (2) the original of CD (last twelve plays); (3) the original of BD (first eight plays), we find some reason to believe that this archetype was written in early Caroline minuscule. Such a type of writing is indicated by confusions like:

u and a: Poen. 876 mutae edd., mulae B, malae CD.

Pseud. 334 satias A edd., sacias B, satius CD.

s and f: Bacch. 156 fuam B D2 edd., suam C D1.

n and r (?): Mil. 641 amoenis edd., amenis B, amoris CD.

i and l: Mil. 1189 illam AB, nihil iam CD.

Suprascript a, a feature of early minuscule, may be the origin of mistakes like adabit (original of CD) for dabit (AB） in Mil. 208; adre (original of CD) for dare (AB) in Mil. 71. Another feature of early minuscule, the ligature ex, has been over and over again mistaken by the copyists of the archetype for et, e.g. Aul. 766, Capt. 924. The ligature for -nt may conceivably have stood in Merc. 716 delinquont (delinquon B, delinqunt C, delinquunt D).

An Introduction to Latin Textual Emendation Based on the Text of Plautus. W. M. Lindsay. Anne Mahoney. edited for Perseus. London. Macmillan. 1896.

Tufts University provided support for entering this text.

This text was converted to electronic form by professional data entry and has been proofread to a high level of accuracy.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: