Abstract
In 294 most modern scholars either accept rapidique or adopt Lachmann's rapideque. An exception is Romanes, who oddly favours rapidisque, which he takes with impetibus crebris, placing a comma after corripiunt. If rapidique is read, one has to assume that Lucretius is writing as though venti, not flamina, were the subject. There are parallels for this kind of grammatical irregularity (e.g. 1.190, 352, if the text is sound), but there is no need to assume an irregularity here, for, as E. J. Kenney has pointed out to me, the right reading is almost certainly rapidoque. rapidoque was favoured by Lambinus, but did not originate with him. He notes ‘ex libris scriptis alii habent, rapidoque rotanti, alii rapidique rotanti’, and Pius (1511) knew rapidoque, which is printed in the ed. Juntina (1512). rapido…turbine is strongly supported by 1.273 rapido…turbine and 6.668 rapidus…turbo, also by subito…turbine in 1.279, a line which, as we shall see, is to be closely compared with 1.294.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Literature and Literary Theory,Philosophy,History,Classics
Reference10 articles.
1. Some Problems of Punctuation in the Latin Hexameter
2. The Italian Manuscripts of Lucretius. Part II: Variant Readings;Merrill;University of California Publications in Classical Philology,1926