Repertorium der Konjekturen in den Seneca-Tragödien (review)

There has been a remarkable renaissance of interest during the past few decades in Seneca Tragicus. He is no longer dismissed, as he was to me as a student in the fifties at Harvard, as a muddled and ignorant imitator of his “sublime” Greek predecessors, as Longinus would call them; of value only because his Thyestes provides hints as to how Sophocles may have treated the tale. We now have new critical texts, commentaries, translations, as well as historical and literary studies that elucidate Seneca on his own terms.

Margarethe Billerbeck, famed already among Senecan enthusiasts for her exemplary commentary on Hercules Furens, and her Freiburg team have worked together for ten years to provide us with an invaluable and permanent contribution to scholarship, an indispensable tool for understanding the Latin text of the nine tragedies plus Pseudo-Seneca, Octavia. They have collected every emendation ever made on Seneca’s plays from the editio princeps of 1514 to 2007. Even unpublished American dissertations are covered. This book will be repeatedly consulted by everyone who wishes to understand the ancient text precisely. An informative introduction is written in four languages, German, English, French, and Italian. An international readership is rightly expected. Precise references to emendations, whether in an edition, a secondary work, Festschrift, or article, are provided. That is a great help. It will save countless scholars from the embarrassment of having been “anticipated,” although if two informed scholars independently advance the same emendation, the likelihood of its accuracy increases. But there always remains the nasty suspicion of theft. A lengthy bibliography of sources precedes the collection. The emendations are listed by verse after Zwierlein’s OCT of 1986. It is a pity the plays were not presented alphabetically by title rather than in their ancient order, which would have eased consultation. An appendix gathers over 200 emendations in Giardina’s edition of 2007, which appeared too late for inclusion in their correct place. Two essays on the editions of Jodocus Badius Ascensius (1514) and Avanzi’s Aldine of 1517 conclude the book. The accuracy is remarkable and I have detected no omission.

Urge your library to purchase a copy of this volume before it goes out of print. It is a fine investment, what Thucydides would call “a book to keep.” I only hope that its usefulness may inspire imitations for other authors.