Infimarum o infirmarum. Paradosi e testo di Mart. i epist. 3
Author(s)
Date Issued
2023
Type
article
Volume
75
Issue
1
Start Page
172
End Page
178
Journal
Abstract
The paper deals with a case of misrepresentation of paradosis in Martial’s critical
editions. In i epist. 3 all modern editors print infimarum. Lindsay’s apparatus bears the
variant infirmarum, which the British scholar assumes was present in the archetype of the
second family (BA), before it was corrected to infimarum. All subsequent editors (with the
exception of Citroni’s edition of the first book) report nothing in the apparatus, leaving
readers with the impression that infimarum is the only lesson handed down by manuscripts.
A new collation of all the principal manuscripts in digital format, which confirms the one
already carried out by Citroni for his edition (with commentary) of Book i, returns a very
different picture, revealing that infirmarum is the lesson of the entire tradition, corrupted
in some manuscripts into infimarum. A close examination of the passage in question,
revealing the use of a hitherto undetected legal lexicon, provides further elements in favour
of infirmarum, which should be put to text.
Subjects