Abstract

This paper reconsiders Horace, Carm. 3. 30. 1 in relation to Isocrates, Antid. 7 and Ennius, Ann. 567 Vahlen2 (= 579 Skutsch), three texts which contain the idea of the work of an ancient author as a "monument". But both Isocrates' section and Ennius' line have had a peculiar textual history which has for a long time prevented scholars from recognizing the similarity of these texts to Horace's exegi monumentum aere perennius. The passage of Isocrates was in fact damaged by a lacuna and the line of Ennius was preserved in a corrupt form by a late grammarian. It was only at the beginning of the 19th century that the rediscovery of Isocrates manuscripts revealed a complete text of Antid. 7, while the line of Ennius was restored brilliantly by conjecture in the middle of the 20th century, thus enabling scholars to rethink the mutual relations among the three authors. The examples here discussed show, once again, how classical scholarship has been affected by the time and process by which ancient texts were recovered.

Autore Pugliese

• Pinto Pasquale Massimo

Tutti gli autori

• PINTO P.M.

Titolo volume/Rivista

Non Disponibile

Anno di pubblicazione

2010

ISSN

0031-7985

ISBN

Non Disponibile

Numero di citazioni Wos

Nessuna citazione

Ultimo Aggiornamento Citazioni

Non Disponibile

Numero di citazioni Scopus

1

Ultimo Aggiornamento Citazioni

Non Disponibile

Settori ERC

Non Disponibile

Codici ASJC

Non Disponibile