2 VALÉRY BERLINCOURT
pays great attention to the manuscripts: we know that he consulted at
least eleven for this edition;^3 those which have been identified range
mostly from the tenth to the twelfth century, and some have been used
in modern editions.^4 The place given to conjecture, though clearly
subordinate, is by no means negligible. These notes often involve
other aspects as well: Gronovius’ broad conception of emendation
leads him to tackle various questions, whenever they lend support to
his views. This combination of evidence of all kinds is typical of his
approach, as defined in a famous letter to Nicholas Heinsius:^5 in his
eyes, the dignity of critical studies does not lie in emendation itself,
but in the comprehensive knowledge of ancient languages and cultures
in which emendations should always be grounded; such knowledge
enables the scholar to get into the author’s genius and thus restore the
text from inside.^6
- Daum and Reinesius on Gronovius... and Barth
‘In pondere non magno satis ponderosae...’ These words have long
been familiar to readers of the Thebaid: they were quoted, indeed, in
J.A. Fabricius’ Bibliotheca latina, first published in 1697, and from
the new edition of this bibliographic handbook published in 1773–
by J.A. Ernesti they made their way into the printed tradition of the
poem through the famous editio Bipontina (Zweibrücken 1785). They
are part of a letter that Gronovius’ contemporary, Christian Daum,
sent to the German doctor and polyhistor Thomas Reinesius (1587–
1667) on February 21st, 1654—not (as described in these and other
early modern sources) part of a letter sent to Daum by Reinesius^7.
3 Ad 11.191, where the language used suggests that this is the overall number of
the manuscripts he consulted himself: “Neges urnaque reponas] In scriptis undecim
reperi: Alitibus fratrique tegas urnamque reportes. Et invenerunt in suis alii. Quam
conspirationem, qui spernere ausim? [...]”
4 Leiden, Gronov.70 = g [Anderson 2000, ms. 244], s.XI, which Gronovius ad
11.429 calls “mearum omnium membrana vetustissima”; London, British Library,
Royal 15.C.X = r [ms. 307], s.X/XI; Oxford, Magdalen College Library, MS. Lat. 18
= O [ms. 424], s.XII.
5 Gronovius to N. Heinsius, The Hague, Postrid. Id. Mart. 1637 [= Burmann
1727, III 15–6, n° 12], quoted and discussed in Lomonaco 1990, 56–60.
6 For Gronovius’ characteristic insistence on considering together both form and
content, see Bugter 1980, 151–5.
7 Correct attribution in Hand (n. 45); cf. Kohlmann Achilleis BT 1879, VIII.