Nota ecdotica a [Eur.] Rh. 972

Abstract

At [Eur.] Rh. 972, the vast majority of editors printed August Matthiae’s DE!./ against the
corrupt qa?/ transmitted by mss. VaLPac. The editorial consensus around this emendation
has sensibly increased after the publication of an article by James Diggle (1987), who offered
a meticulous examination of the textual tradition of the passage, along with a defence of the
plausibility of Matthiae’s correction. This article aims at offering a positive re-evaluation
of a variant reading attested in the medieval manuscripts ADE!?/!QPpc), better clarifying its
stemmatic assessment and arguing that it is tenable for its linguistic plausibility, making any
alteration of the transmitted text unnecessary.

Key-words: Rhesus, Lycurgus, manuscripts, variants, textual criticism.