HKB
manuscripts to see what readings they offered in some particularly vexed portions of the poems; I have similarly indicated when I am obliged to him for information on a manuscript.
The excerpta Scaligeri mentioned at xiii 27 I know of through Heinsius' notes as printed in Burman's edition; according to M. D. Reeve (RhM CXVII [1974] 163), the original excerpts are still extant in Diez 8° 2560, a copy of the editio Gryphiana of 1546. Reeve also gives identifications of certain of Heinsius' manuscripts; when citing Heinsius' codices, I give the modern name when the manuscript has been identified and is still extant.
The greater number of the manuscripts dealt with have been corrected, some heavily. In my apparatus B1 means "the original hand in B" and B2 means "a correcting hand in B". B2ul indicates that the reading of B2 is clearly marked as a variant reading. B2gl indicates that the entry is marked in the manuscript as a gloss; B2(gl) indicates a gloss not marked as such. I have reported glosses where they contribute to the understanding of a textual problem.
If different correctors have been at work in different passages, both are called B2. If a later hand has made a correction after B2, the later hand is called B3. When I place B1 in an entry but do not report B2, it can be assumed that B2 has the lemma as its reading.
Sometimes a corrector has altered the original text so much (without however erasing it entirely) that only the altered reading can be made out. In such cases I have used the siglum B2c. Where a corrector has inserted or altered only certain letters of a word, I have indicated this in the HTML version of this edition by underlining the letters involved. In the Text version, these letters are capitalized.
Where the correction is apparently by the original scribe, Bac indicates the original reading, and Bpc the correction.
The asterisk is used to indicate illegible letters, and the solidus (/) erasures.
When reporting variants, I have tried to indicate the spellings actually found in the manuscripts, but since mediaeval spellings do not in themselves constitute variant readings, they have not usually been reported when the text is not otherwise disturbed. I have been more generous with proper names, but have often excluded confusions of ae, oe, and e, of i and y, of ph and f, of c and t, the doubling of consonants, and the loss or addition of the aspirate.
The apparatus is intended to include a comprehensive listing of all conjectures proposed. When the author of a conjecture is not a previous editor of the poems, I have given a reference either to the publication where the emendation was first proposed, or to the earliest edition I have consulted which reports the emendation. Conjectures of Bentley are from Hedicke's Studia Bentleiana. Conjectures of Professor R. J. Tarrant, Professor J. N. Grant, and Professor C. P. Jones were communicated to me by their authors.
Printed editions
The first editions of the works of Ovid were printed in 1471 by Balthesar Azoguidus at Bologna and by Conradus Sweynheym and Arnoldus Pannartz at Rome. The Bologna edition was edited by Franc. Puteolanus, and the Rome edition by J. Andreas de Buxis. Lenz's edition gives numerous readings from both editions; to judge from his reports, their texts of the Ex Ponto were derived from late manuscripts of no great value. The Roman edition, however, contained the elegant correction of iactate to laxate at ix 73.