Page 53 [53]
OCR
According to current records, Iulius Obseguens is the only one who has not been mentioned by any other sources in relation to the Corvina — neither accepted nor found to be wrong.”” Does this mean that it is worth reading the paratextus of the editions of the only surviving work (De prodigiis liber) by the 4th century author, to see if any of the authors might indicate that they know of a manuscript connected with the Corvina? When analysing the words used by the author, Sylvana Rocca reviewed the publication history of the work from Aldus Manutius’s editio princeps of 1508 to the Teubner series considered the first critical edition (Otto Rossbach, 1910), but does not mention Buda. The 1772 edition?” repeats the most important and detailed preambles (Konrad Lycosthenes (1518-1561), Johann Scheffer (1621-1679), Frans van Oudendorp (1697-1761), Johann Erhard Kapp (1696-1756)). Kapp specifically describes the manuscripts used by Aldus Manutius in 1508 and Robertus Stephanus (1503-1559) in 1544. A second reading of these prefaces and recommendations did not reveal any possible Hungarian connections. Authors of 16th and 17th century editions of classical and medieval authors often mention that they worked from manuscripts once kept in Buda, or that they know of manuscript versions preserved there. The compendiums prepared alongside the texts, whether dictionary-like (e¢ymologiae) or philosophical discussions, often refer to not only the author, the work, and the edition, but also that the text was in Matthias’s library as well. I will mention only two examples here. A Greek codex containing the texts of Polybius, Herodianus, and Heliodorus is now in the Bavarian State Library in Munich.*™ The editio princeps of Heliodorus’s work with the title Historiae Aetiopicae libri decem is known from Vincentius Obsopaeus (+1539), who published it in Basel with Johann Herwagen the Elder (1497-1558) in 1534.?* In his recommendation to the Nuremberg councillors, the publisher explains how the codex from Buda came into his hands. „Deuenit ad me seruatus ex ista clade Vngarica, qua serenissimi quondam regis Matthiae Coruini Bibliotheca omnium instructissima superioribus annis a barbarie asiatica uastata est. Hunc cum alijs nonnullis miles quidam plane gregarius et ab omnibus tam graecorum quam latinorum disciplinis abhorrentissimus, iam apud nos tinctorem agens, tum uero illustrissimum principem Casimirum Merchionem Branden232, Autus Gellius: Csapop1 1973, 230-231 (Nr. 293-294.); one of the Plinius: Csapon1 1973, 323-324 (Nr. 514-518.); Caius Iulius Solinus: Csapopr 1973, 356 (Nr. 604.); Terentius Varro: Csaponi 1973, 388 (Nr. 689.); Valerius Maximus: Csapopı 1973, 386 (Nr. 684.) does not consider the described codex to be part of Matthias’s library. 233, OBSEQUENS 1772. 34 Con. Graec. 157. Csapopı 1973, 329-330 (Nr. 539). A modern description, with a summary of the history of the codex and the publication history of the texts: Haypt 2008, 30-40. HAJDU DOES NOT DEAL WITH THE AFTERLIFE OF PUBLICATIONS. 255 Herioporus 1534. 51
