Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

To users of ProQuest and Acta Sanctorum

2 views
Skip to first unread message

keyu...@navy.plala.or.jp

unread,
Apr 27, 2008, 8:52:14 AM4/27/08
to
In the edition which I use, there is one place of mistake in Daniel
Papenbroeck,Propylaeum antiquarium circa veri ac falsi discrimen in
vetustis membranis,pars II, caput II,sec. 18.

"Ipsi deinde positioni lapidis non dicuntur adfuisse, qui primi
solebant in Actibus publicis adesse Episcopo, "Archipresbyter,
Archidiaconus, Primicerius", quique reipsa primi subscripsere
diplomati Episcopi Speciosi: sed gesta res dicitur "praesentibus
Mauritio, Cionio", etc. "omnibus Eccl. Florentinae Presbyteris";ubi et
lo "omnibus" novitatem phrasis maximam indicat, et "Ardingus a S.
Geminiano" nominatur tanto prius quam oppidum illud aedificaretur,
quod solum anno "DCCLVIII" factum sub Desiderio Rege notavit
Reverendissimus Eugenius Gamurrini, Ordinis Cassinensis Abbas, et
Magni Hetruriae Ducis familiaris Theologus, Historia Genealogica
illustrium familiarum Hetruriae atque Umbiae feliciter elucidata
clarissimus.

I think that the phrase "ubi et lo" or "ubi et to" is mistaken.Would
you please teach me the correct spelling of this phrase ?

Ed Cryer

unread,
Apr 27, 2008, 10:14:20 AM4/27/08
to

<keyu...@navy.plala.or.jp> wrote in message
news:2a936543-d37a-4561...@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...

I haven't got a copy of the thing, but I have some ideas which might be
worth expressing.

Firstly, it seems to read just fine without the "lo". Where both
"omnibus" displays extreme strangeness of phrasing, and "Ardingus a S.
Geminiano" is named such a long time before that town was built.
Secondly, "lo" would be acceptable in a Spanish document; lo "omnibus"
meaning "the 'omnibus' ". Unless, of course, it's just random marks from
the press; or even "ten" as an annotation.


Ed

Ed Cryer

unread,
Apr 28, 2008, 12:22:00 PM4/28/08
to

"Ed Cryer" <e...@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote in message
news:fv21ol$2uv$1...@aioe.org...

Another thought. Does Daniel Papenbroek ever use Greek words in his
book? To (το) = Spanish lo.

Ed

Will Parsons

unread,
Apr 29, 2008, 7:05:15 AM4/29/08
to
> Another thought. Does Daniel Papenbroek ever use Greek words in his
> book? To (??) = Spanish lo.

Good thought. I've seen "to" used elsewhere to supply an article in late
Latin, and if the old "long" form of tau were used (written with a single
stroke from top to bottom), it would look very similar to "lo".

--
Will

0 new messages