Friday, September 23, 2005



Robert Renehan, Greek Textual Criticism: A Reader (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969), p. 134, on Euripides, Orestes 665-667:
Cicero somewhere has written of the scientia iuris: res enim sunt parvae, prope in singulis litteris atque interpunctionibus verborum occupatae. Delete the prope and you have a fair description of the matter of textual criticism. Whether Euripides wrote δεῖ or χρή in a given passage is hardly of metaphysical import. But we must assume that he made a choice between them. This is sufficient justification for concerning ourselves with the problem. It made a difference to the poet; it should make a difference to us. This planet, I do not doubt, shall never want for people to despise such problems and those who try to resolve them. Such contempt is founded upon the remarkable premise that one who manifests a concern for minutiae must of necessity be both indifferent to and unequal to profound problems. The Greeks, on the contrary, in their simplicity had contrived a word to express this reverence before even the smallest truth; and that word is φιλαλήθεια. The sacred writer speaks not idly when he reminds us that ὁ ἐξουθενῶν τὰ ὀλίγα κατὰ σμικρὸν πεσεῖται.

  1. Scientia iuris = knowledge of the law
  2. The Cicero quotation is from Pro Murena 25 (tr. C.D. Yonge): For they are but small matters, conversant chiefly about single letters and punctuation between words.
  3. Prope = chiefly
  4. δεῖ (deî) = one ought
  5. χρή (chré) = one must
  6. φιλαλήθεια (philalétheia) = love of truth
  7. The sacred writer is Sirach 19.1: He that contemneth small things shall fall by little and little.

<< Home
Newer›  ‹Older

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?