Catullo, Sabellico (e dintorni) e ... Giorgio Pasquali. «Recentiores non deteriores»

Even though the critical apparatuses of Catullus’ editions often attribute emendations (sometimes accepted and sometimes rejected) to humanists, many of these attributions should be reconsidered. Through a close examination of selected examples, it is argued here that the emendation cinna est caius (OGR read cuma est gravis at 10,30), which has always been attributed to the Parmensis, and thus to Puteolanus, can actually be read in older manuscripts (Pal. lat. 1652, Vat. lat. 3272, Oliv. 1167, Casanat. 15). Similarly, the division between poems 2 and 3, unanimously attributed to Sabellico, is also attested by the Barb. Lat. 34, a manuscript that needs further study and that could even be older than Sabellico. Another example that the present paper discusses is fletu at 66,63: all Catullan editors print it in their apparatuses as a conjecture attributed to Palladio, even though according to Avanzi fletu is a lectio that he was able to read in a manuscript that he described as antiquus. It is the antiquity of this manuscript, most likely deperditus, that could give new life to the fundamental and extremely delicate discussion initiated by Giorgio Pasquali’s recentiores non deteriores.