act 3

Question 1

line 382

Answer 1

Boyle asks whether ‘entheos’ here may be a nominative as in E it is written as ‘pentheos’ but more likely to be a Greek adjective simply agreeing with ‘gressus’. Greek used here as a marker of strangeness/ foreignness

Question 2

line 384

Answer 2

‘nivalis’ in E - makes perfect sense and. ‘iugalis’ in A is an anticipation error of ‘iuga’ at the end of the line

Question 3

line 385-6

Answer 3

Richter suggests they swap over. However it is not uncommon in seneca for similes tho work in the transmitted way

Question 4

line 389

Answer 4

question over what force of ‘capit’ is - what it cannot mean is ‘she contains’ an example of every emotion - but Tobias thinks instead ‘she acquires’ or ‘she contracts’ - would make it a quasi-medical idea

Question 5

line 390

Answer 5

zwierlein has a colon after ‘haeret’ but you might equally read it as one line. Possible that 390 could come before 389 which seems very probable

Leo things having 390 after 391 but this doesn’t see, very logical

Question 6

line 396

Answer 6

could capitalise ‘furor’ (zweirlein does) - roman authors don’t capitalise proper names, have to choose whether we are personifying the idea or not

Question 7

line 396

Answer 7

Heinsius change ‘fallant’ to ‘fallat’ or ‘pellant’

Question 8

line 398

Answer 8

is ‘imitare’ really the idea we want? would have to mean something like ‘imitate to a degree’. Heinsius suggested ‘metire’ which is much closer to sense of calibration. Giardina cites Phaedra 255 and suggests ‘moderare’ but Tobias is seriously unconvinced. Steve thinks ‘imitare’ is fine. Costa has a good explanation for what the ‘ut’ is doing in the second half (a repudiating subjunctive)

Question 9

line 403-404

Answer 9

Giardina suggests ‘soles diem’ for ‘solem dies’ but the plural of ‘soles’ is slightly contrived and so you could instead have ‘noctes diem’

Question 10

line 406

Answer 10

‘in poenas’ in all manuscripts, but Giardina would amend to ‘impensus’, Tobias doesn’t like this conjecture either (calls it ‘one of giardina’s less successful moments’)

Question 11

line 408

Answer 11

‘ausonium’ in E (the sea we want) and ‘ionium’ in A - a more familiar sea

Question 12

line 409

Answer 12

‘quaeve’ in E, ‘quaeque’ in A - no material difference between the two

Question 13

line 410

Answer 13

‘fervebit’ is transmitted, but ‘feruescit’, ‘feruescet’, ‘ferbuit’ and ‘ferbuerit’ have been suggested

Question 14

line 413

Answer 14

‘inhibere’ is transmitted but larger context would suggest a different verb is better. Leo has suggested ‘imitare’ but Fitch has suggested ‘aequare’ which Tobias is persuaded by. If ‘inhibere’ is correct it is deliberately paradoxical and it’s difficult to see how ‘inhibere’ is brought about by ‘aequare’

Question 15

line 417

Answer 15

concessive in force; ‘cessarit’ is transmitted by A but ‘cesserit’ in E is right

Question 16

line 419

Answer 16

Bentley proposed ‘socer’ for ‘ferox’ - ‘ferox’ doesn’t quite mean brave man/hero as we might want. Tobias suggests something like ‘bonus’ but less bland might be better - glossed to ‘ferox’ to mean hero incorrectly

see line 437 - Jason using medea-esque language to refer to himself, deliberately out of character / word not meaning what we would expect it to here because it channels the perspective and opinions of Medea

Question 17

line 423

Answer 17

is ‘faciet…faciet’ suspicious for its repetition? ‘multum patebit’ doesn’t seem very strong either. No clear answer. maybe something mundane like ‘festus’ for the first ‘faciet’

Question 18

line 425

Answer 18

Richter suggested ‘reprime’ for ‘recipe’, Giardina suggests ‘retina’ (comparing with phrases like ‘retina impetum’) - but that seems a stretch

Question 19

line 428

Answer 19

deleted by Kirsten - substantially similar to the line before. ‘cum pereas’ suspicious, repetition of ‘mecum’ also seems unlikely - delete line

Question 20

line 431

Answer 20

Bentley wonders is ‘vita tempore’ had been displaced by the more erratic ‘semper’ - Tobias thinks having an adjective here would be slightly unusual

Question 21

line 432

Answer 21

‘malam’ in A, ‘mala’ in E - latter definitely wrong (check if scans differently but more transparently does not correspond with anything)

Damste - suggests ‘mala est’ - worth considering but ultimately over complicates the situation - minims easily lost or abbreviation mark easily missed

Question 22

line 434

Answer 22

Gronouius - suggests ‘vicem’ over ‘fidem’ meaning reciprocate. Perhaps the repetition of ‘fide/fidem’ in Jason’s speech makes sense for his character, but thematically the change is quite appealing

Question 23

line 435

Answer 23

is ‘fuit’ correct, ‘si vellem’ would be a conditional for the imperfect/present. May have replaced ‘mihi’

Question 24

line 437

Answer 24

‘virum’ replaces ‘fidem’ in A - steve likes. Would resolve the repetition issue in line 434 - interesting if here Jason would refer to himself using Medea-esque adjectives - compound the power she has over him, even in his oratory and self-definition

If ‘ferox’ is correct, this would be a response to it - using medea-esque language

the error could go either direction with the proclivity for ‘fidem’ but also ‘vincit’ in same line

Question 25

line 442

Answer 25

Bentley proposed ‘corda’ or ‘colla’ for ‘corde’ - so accusatives of respect to replace an ablative of respect

Question 26

line 446

Answer 26

‘totus in vultu est dolor’ also appears in the Agamemnon, very symbolic of Stoic Physiogonomy - fits well here so no reason to suspect interpolation

Question 27

line 447 EXPAND ON THIS FROM MY OWN NOTES

Answer 27

if the second ‘fugimus’ is perfect, can ignore the ‘hoc’ (as printed by strzelecki) - but metrically unusual for there to be three shorts in one word as there would them have to be in the first ‘fugimus’ consider what the issues with hoc as a particle here might be and expand

Question 28

line 450

Answer 28

Damste suggests ‘ecce ego’ for ‘exeo’ -> would be very strange to have that at the end of a line could swap the line endings of 449 and 450 but changing ‘quam’ to ‘iam’ as it is, the sequence in line 450 doesn’t seem very pointed, actually quite weak. Made attractive by the ‘fugere’ and ‘profugere’ at the midpoint of both lines

Question 29

line 451

Answer 29

leo suggests ‘at quo?’ for ‘ad quos?’ ‘at quo’ does not appear in Seneca Giardina cites line 459 - ‘quo me remittis?’ at to ad is simply orthographical

Question 30

line 457

Answer 30

‘parvamne’ in all manuscripts but odd with ‘iolcon’ according to many scholars. Steve, prompted by Fitch would introduce ‘a tuamne’ with is only one letter difference in standard abbreviation. Seneca does begin iambic trimeters with ‘tus’ elsewhere in the Medea, and it works in terms of sense

Question 31

line 459

Answer 31

Usener proposes exulem?

Question 32

line 462

Answer 32

Giardina proposed ‘plagis’ citing Oed 346 - Tobias dismisses as too concrete

Question 33

line 465

Answer 33

the ‘o ingratum’ in A is a supralineal intrusion

Question 34

lines 467-468

Answer 34

leo would delete on the basis of repetition of ideas. Bentley would remove second half of 466 and first half of 467 - steves preferred idea Metus does not work entirely with the genitive, if just metus corrupt, then ‘minas’ could replace it, or ‘saevas gentis’ and ‘imdomitae’ (basically anything blandly to do with the earth)

Question 35

line 471

Answer 35

deleted by Zwierlein losing the verb ‘advice’ and sending things back to ‘revolvat’. The fleece has been brought in somewhat gratuitously and there is a metrical anomaly between ‘phrixei’ and ‘arietis’ with ‘arietis’ being trisyllabic with the ‘i’ as a consonant to fit in as done by Virgil. Zwierlein worried by elision but in Ennius’ Medea (Jocelyn, 213, line 6 of preface) - there is elision with the word ‘arietis’ in the same position

Question 36

line 475

Answer 36

‘iussasque’ in the manuscripts but Heinsius suggested ‘aususque’ quite rightly according to Tobias

Question 37

line 477

Answer 37

deleted by Zwierlein on account of it being syntactically isolated. also idea Medea was SEEKING a foreign kingdom is not accurate to the myth or Medea’s argument Tobias suggests moving it to after 482 to set up list of huge wealth of other kingdoms Steve thinks simple interpolation rather than transposition

Question 38

line 483-489

Answer 38

deleted by Hubner as it repeats ideas mentioned above and introduces new justifications for Medea’s actions. Tobias says that this newness is a compelling enough reason to keep it. line 488 does simply restate line 487 - tobias would delete that one also interrupts the anaphora - steve would delete the anaphora between the ‘quas’ completely and print ‘ex opibus illis (483) vix domus gazas capit (485)’ ‘agunt’ not natural use here either - no obvious interpolation though - really want to keep ‘give me back my brother’s limbs’ (487) as an end to the speech so not willing to scrap everything

Question 39

line 496

Answer 39

‘amores’ in A, ‘mores’ in E ‘amores’ has various attractions - nicely ambiguous as Jason means his love for Creusa, but Medea deliberately understands his love for her. slightly unusual because of ‘amoves’ and ‘amores’ in 495-6

Question 40

line 501

Answer 40

Bentley suggests ‘coniugem’ has replaced ‘sontem et’ or ‘colchidem’ assuming a bland word has replaced a place is a common theme in Bentley. Transmitted text is more attractive

Question 41

line 502-505

Answer 41

both lines end in ‘pudet’, Giardina wonders if ‘piget’ was displaced in 504 theme of ‘pudet’ and shame comes back in 510 and 512 when Medea invokes the impression of Jason’s new house. In Ennius there is a ‘pudet’ followed by a ‘piget’

Question 42

line 506

Answer 42

Tobias thinks ‘doma’ is protected by ‘placare’, although it is the only ‘quin’ with an imperative in Seneca - common in Plautus though

Question 43

line 512

Answer 43

deleted by Richter. Deleted - Medea and Jason more closely match eachother’s lines. Word order of 511 to 512 is mutually supportive but unusual to have an iambic 5th foot and there is another instance fairly soon after. Sort of comment an interpolation might supply as it spells out something Medea hints at. perhaps ‘pro nepotes’ might have been written to give the double short we might expect. Greek names might be infecting his style and causing the break (even though the greek names are not directly the problem)

Question 44

line 513

Answer 44

‘exitium’ suggested by Avantius but all manuscripts have ‘exilium’. Not an implausible gloss, incredibly easy to- look at what the value would be an amend this card

Question 45

line 514b

Answer 45

medea’s reference to Creon is not immediately picked up by Jason, suggesting problems with transmission in next section. This may be saying something about their relationship, ie: breakdown in communication, misunderstanding but I still think it’s strange as the moments immediately following pick up on each other fine

Question 46

line 515

Answer 46

Bothe wonders if ‘pro me’ should be a question

Question 47

line 516-520

Answer 47

leo deleted on the basis that it seems as though the two kings are hostile to eachother where later they seem to collaborate (525-526). But if 515b suggests not that they are enemies but merely two powerful forces

Question 48

line 517

Answer 48

‘nos confligere’ - fairly rare crux in Zwierlein. Avantius suggests ‘conflige’ which restores the line but not clear what that would mean, perhaps collide with us. Axelson thinks ‘confligere’ is an intruded gloss intended to explain a synonym of a completely different line. Instead of ‘confligere’ maybe ‘contricta’ - ‘let us fight WITH eachother’

Question 49

line 516

Answer 49

‘his’ in E, ‘hic’ in A Tobias takes ‘his’ as it is an appropriately feminine statement

Question 50

line 518

Answer 50

‘defessus’ is an admission of weariness, ‘devictus’ (suggested by Giardina) would be too straight forward an admission of defeat

Question 51

line 529a

Answer 51

‘sceptra’ as a reference to power/the king. Another word that commonly does this is throne - which is more likely to be referred to as ‘alta’ perhaps ‘alta’ is in fact something like ‘lauta’

Question 52

line 532

Answer 52

Heinsius amends ‘dextram, vindices’ to ‘dextra vindice’ - but doesn’t make enough material difference to warrant the change Giardina changes ‘para’ to ‘iace’ - but the question is more about preparation than action so not necessary even if more powerful/strident

Question 53

line 533

Answer 53

‘ruptis nubibus’ - standard ancient meteorological understanding was that clouds bumping into eachother caused thunderstorms

Question 54

line 534

Answer 54

‘di’ in the manuscripts, Ascensius suggested ‘deligenti’ to fix the mistake Heinsius proposes ‘dirigente’ instead which goes better with the A transmission of the next line. ‘dirigente’ takes ‘tela’ as the object but it would also be the subject of something else - not impossible as double syntax but certainly less likely

Question 55

line 544

Answer 55

Giardina replaces ‘parere’ with ‘favere’ which smooths out an unusual but not implausible understanding

Question 56

line 548

Answer 56

‘levamen’ as an abbreviation looks very similar to the abbreviation for ‘levamur’

Question 57

line 549b-550

Answer 57

Medea makes an aside

Question 58

line 553

Answer 58

Giardina punctuates ‘gratum est’ very strongly and also amends to ‘votum est’ Is gratum est not just good stage directions conveyed by speech?

Question 59

line 554

Answer 59

Giardina suggests ‘rabidus’ for ‘dubius’ and cites parallels. ‘dubius’ is not a strong enough dismissal of her ‘dolor’ but ‘rabidus’ is not quite right either - doesn’t convey the correct sense

Question 60

line 564

Answer 60

Giardina corrects ‘putare’ to ‘curare’ steve changes ‘nullum’ to ‘nihil’

Question 61

line 565

Answer 61

‘hac’ would be ‘by that route’

Question 62

line 566

Answer 62

‘nunc’ is transmitted. ‘cuncta’ suggested by Heinsius and this kind of chance (adverb into nunc) occurs elsewhere Nunc is attractive as part of the group of imperatives - more emphatic

Question 63

line 567

Answer 63

playing with her name, E omits her name which makes the rest of the line more matching. Discomfort from scribe may have led to the omission

Question 64

line 570

Answer 64

‘aetherium’ is a greek word and so confuses the scribes