And on Gallus Fr. 2.6-9 - with a query

[falmouth]

   Peierides] ṭaṇdem fecerunt c̣[ar]mina Musae 5

    quae possem domina deicere digna mea. 

   uni si qua prob]atur idem tibi, non ego, Visce

     quae canit ulla] Kato, te iudice, vereor.

Do the supplements in lines 8-9 make sense? It is mainly the suggested supplement in line 8 which I am interested in - line 9 being a suggestion of Courtney and is there for exempla gratia.

The sense I want is 

'If the same is proved to you alone in any way, I do not, Viscus

   fear anything which Cato might sing, with you as judge.'

The attraction of the supplement to me is 'probatur' sharing the quasi-legal 'iudex'. The structure is informed by Ecl. 4.58-9

Pan etiam, Arcadia mecum si iudice certet

Pan etiam Arcadia dicat se iudice victum

Ecl. 4.58-59

Which seems to suggest that Viscus and Cato are not both vocatives. I fancy the possibility that Pan here and the acorn-eating Pan at Ecl. 10 are essentially a mask for the characterically indigent Valerius Cato.

The imitation at Prop. 2.13a.11-4 also uses 'probo'.

me iuvet in gremio doctae legisse puellae

  auribus et puris scripta probasse mea.

haec ubi contigerint, populi confusa valeto

  fabula: nam domina iudice tutus ero.

Prop. 2.13a.11-4

And the supplement in line 8 is essentially modelled on 

non illis studium fuco conquirere amantes:

  illis ampla satis forma pudicitia.

non ego nunc vereor ne sis tibi vilior istis: 25

  uni si qua placet, culta puella sat est;

Prop. 1.2.23-26

As to line 9, I would quite like to have 'quadrupla' or 'dupla' instead of 'ulla' - for two reasons (i) the contrast with 'uni' in line 8, and (ii) the hint of 'placato' in 'dupla Kato'.

[falmouth]

As I wrote the above, a 'brainwave' occurred:

Peierides] ṭaṇdem fecerunt c̣[ar]mina Musae 5

    quae possem domina deicere digna mea. 

   uni si qua prob]atur idem tibi, non ego, Visce

     quae canit ampla] Kato, te iudice, vereor.

I.e. 'ampla' referring to Cato's Lydia, that is to say, the 'fat girl' which was Antimachus' Lyde: Call. Fr. 398 'Λυδη και παχυ γραμμα και ου τορον' - cf. Prop. 1.2.24: 'ampla satis forma'.

[falmouth]

I have 'plumped' upon (awful pun intended...!)

Peierides] ṭaṇdem fecerunt c̣[ar]mina Musae 

    quae possem domina deicere digna mea. 

uni si qua prob]atur idem tibi, non ego, Visce

    quae petit am]pla Kato, te iudice, vereor.

That is to say, 'I do not fear, Viscus, any further prosecution of Cato's case, with you as judge' (see 'non petit ampla' in OLD for the legal meaning) secondarily, I do not fear, Viscus, Cato who goes after a fat girl / fat girls.'. 

Does this work?

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

Don't you mean 'quae petit ampla' is the fat girl who goes for--whom?

Leofranc Holford-Strevens
67 St Bernard's Road
Oxford
OX2 6EJ

                                                         usque adeone
scire MEVM nihil est, nisi ME scire hoc sciat alter?

---

From: mant...@googlegroups.com [mant...@googlegroups.com]
Sent: 26 February 2016 14:54
To: Mantovano
Subject: VIRGIL: Re: And on Gallus Fr. 2.6-9 - with a query

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mantovano" group. To post, send email to mant...@virgil.org. To unsubscribe, send email to mantovano-...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit http://groups.google.com/group/mantovano?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mantovano" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mantovano+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[falmouth]

No, I mean, the fat girl is only suggested secondarily (i.e. not syntactically) - the literal meaning is the 'quae petit ampla Cato' - lit. 'the full things which Cato seeks' (i.e. with the legal idiom, prosecuting his 'case' further (I should have said this is under 'ampla' in Lewis and Short and with the dislocated word order which Courtney seems to think would be fine. 'quae petit ampla' would, I think, be enough to evoke the Lyde - 'fat things' (cf. Ticidas applying it to both book and girl (through cura - kore). Cowan (2012) convincingly shows that Ticidas 2 relates to Callimachus 398 (and possibly Aetia Fr. 1.12) which seems to make it clear that Valerius Cato's Lydia was equated to Antimachus' Lyde - both being fat / thick girls/books. The article is on Academia https://www.academia.edu/1905567/Valerius_Cato_Callimachus_and_the_Very_Large_Girl_Ticida_fr_103_FRP_

It would be extremely attractive if Gallus were here basically repeating Callimachus Aetia Fr. 1 - cf. the thrust of Fr. 2.6 and the near certainty that he somewhere treated the Aetia prologue, by using Cato as his foil, in place of Callimachus' Aetia (and indeed, Viscus, as corresponding roughly to the Telchines).

But if you could recast the supplement to better keep both meanings, that would be even better! 

By the way, does my proposed supplement to Fr. 2.8 make sense. 

[falmouth]

It would be extremely attractive if Gallus were here basically repeating Callimachus Aetia Fr. 1 - cf. the thrust of Fr. 2.6 and the near certainty that he somewhere treated the Aetia prologue, by using Cato as his foil, in place of Callimachus' Antimachus (and indeed, Viscus, as corresponding roughly to the Telchines).

(that should have read)

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

Quae petit ampla Kato can mean 'the ample things that Cato seeks', but the fat girl cannot muscle or bulk her way in; grammar forbids/

[falmouth]

Thanks, as always, Leofranc - I've developed the suggestion into a note - https://www.academia.edu/s/ff4ff537f7

Further comments, suggestions gratefully received.

[falmouth]

Thanks again, is the supplement in line 8 sufficient to make it clear that it is lycoris' approval which is referred to - who is referred to in the third person with domina? Or would this 'tibi' be read as referring to Viscus. If the latter can you suggest a supplement keeping 'probatur' which would make it clear that it is lycoris' approval that is referred to in the relative clause?

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

Tibi must refer to Viscus, and te to Cato: provided Viscus approves, 'I' do not care what Cato thinks.

[falmouth]

What about

Peierides] ṭaṇdem fecerunt c̣[ar]mina Musae 5
quae possem domina deicere digna mea.

Curaque, si qua prob]atur idem tibi, non ego, Visce
quae petit ampla] Kato, te iudice, vereor.

Would this mean - if this is proved to you at all, darling, I do not fear what fat things kato seeks, with you viscus as judge? The fat girl can squeeze in perhaps as alternatively read as a vocative paralleled by cura? Ie secondary meaning 'What, fat girl, things kato seeks?

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

No. Mea cura, vocative, is fine for 'darling', but 'curaque' can be only 'and care', nominative. Nor is the sudden switch of reference beween tibi and Visce attractive. Facessat Lycoris.

[falmouth]

What about

plā́cătă sī́ quă prŏbā́tŭr ĭdḗm tĭbĭ, nṓn ĕgŏ, Vī́sce

I.e. placata as a vocative? I take the point re 'tibi' but 'non ego' is quite a strong break, enough to separate the 'tibi' from what follows?

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

Doesn't scan: the second a of placata is long.

[falmouth]

Cursed by metrical incompetence...! Thank-you.

So?

si, placata, prob]atur idem tibi, non ego, Visce

[falmouth]

I hope - without any confidence - that the 'a' of 'placata' can remain short before 'probatur'

If this works, it produces quite a nice responsion:

'.... *placata, probatur*
.... am*pla kato iudice*.....'

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

Leofranc Holford-Strevens
67 St Bernard's Road
Oxford
OX2 6EJ

usque adeone
scire MEVM nihil est, nisi ME scire hoc sciat alter?

________________________________________
From: mant...@googlegroups.com [mant...@googlegroups.com]
Sent: 28 February 2016 21:06
To: Mantovano
Subject: RE: VIRGIL: Re: And on Gallus Fr. 2.6-9 - with a query

--

[falmouth]

Leofranc, your last post came out as blank - I am sure there was more to it than that!

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

I re-sent it: 'It would, but the sudden switch into the vocative is simply not credible'

[falmouth]

OK - thanks. So if I want the conditional clause to refer to Lycoris' approval, I need a deponent verb to complete the -atur?

I.e. something like Nisbet's 'quae si iam testatur idem tibi'?

You cannot think of any way to complete the line using 'probatur' but still having it refer to Lycoris' approval?

[Leofranc Holford-strevens]

No, and (though in the 40s BC this would count for less than later) 'testatur' is rhythically far superior to 'probatur'.

[falmouth]

Thanks, again, I've posted a note here, if you are interested (advisedly abandonning the trying to recast Fr. 2.8 with 'probo' and rather adopting Nisbet's 'testatur'). https://www.academia.edu/s/bea660e67e

[falmouth]

And if you're interested a note on Callimachus Fr. 93 (the Theodotus aetion).

https://www.academia.edu/22662131/Callimachus_Fr._93_Pf_Not_Humans_but_Asses

The thrust of which is my conclusion 'I suggest that the episode described by Aetia Fr. 93 comprised a story whereby the Etruscans promised to sacrifice to Apollo ‘the strongest of the Liparensians’. Apollo accepted the promise and assisted the Etruscans in defeating the Liparensians. The Etruscans misinterpreted their promise and sacrificed Theodotus to Apollo, a sacrifice which was wholly unwelcome. What Apollo had wanted was his favourite gourmet sacrifice, a fatty (and strong) donkey, donkey bones also being the best material for making flutes, that is something exceptionally pleasant to bring to the lip.'

If you (or anyone else) can help in suggesting supplements to the text which would accommodate this, I'd be very interested.

In line 1 - presumably, Νέκταρος α̣[. ὄνω]ν γλύκιον γένος η ρα πεδ̣ο[θεν (vel. sim.)
In line 5 - perhaps ἄ̣υ[λον not ἄ̣υ[ον

The general thrust of the opening lines being

'Race of donkeys, the sweetest from the ground, sweeter than nectar
and ... ambrosia
You the earth brings up, the most pleasant of all
who pass the tongue beyond sweet must
Wretches, a little further than the edge of the lip [or a little further than a flute]
[is brought up] to the lip , although refusing,
a man ...

I.e. 1-4 refers to donkeys (Apollo's gourmet favourite); lines 5-8ff look like they are still referring to donkeys (playing off the especial suitability of donkey bones for flutes), until - emphatic ἀνδρὸς where it becomes clear that these lines refer to Theodotus, i.e. human sacrifice and possibly anthropophagy.