Ambrosian Palimpsest in capitals
There is still another feature of the Plautine text
which makes a study of it peculiarly valuable training
for textual emendation. Unlike the texts of most Latin
authors, it is not dependent on minuscule MSS. alone,
but has for a considerable part of the plays (for almost
the whole indeed of four plays, the
Persa, Poenulus,
Pseudolus, and
Stichus) a MS. in capital letters of the
fourth century, the famous Palimpsest of the Ambrosian
Library at Milan. All minuscule MSS. have, of course,
originally come from capital or uncial texts; and a
comparison of the minuscule and majuscule texts of
these four plays shows us the nature and extent of the
corruptions which a text would commonly suffer in its
transmission from majuscule to minuscule form. Thus
from a variety of reasons the MSS. of Plautus are
capable of teaching us more about Latin textual
criticism than those of almost any other Latin
author.
It was the discovery of this ancient MS. of Plautus,
the Ambrosian Palimpsest, which opened the way to
the scientific study of the Plautine text, as at present
conducted on the lines laid down by Ritschl. Before
it appeared on the scene such corruptions as were
shared by all the minuscule MSS. had the credit of
being genuine readings, because every known codex
agreed in exhibiting them. Against a “consensus” of
MSS. textual criticism was powerless. By the help of
the Palimpsest, however, which offered a new reading
in many of these corrupt passages, Ritschl was able to
prove that all that this “consensus” of MSS. implied
was that, with the exception of the newly-discovered
codex, all our MSS. belonged to one and the same
“family”—in other words, were derived ultimately
from one and the same archetype or original MS.
From an examination into their peculiarities this lost
original has been assigned to the eighth or ninth
century—no very early date. The readings, therefore,
which Ritschl's predecessors had not ventured to alter
appear to be nothing else than the corrupt readings of
a single minuscule MS. of Charlemagne's time or later.
The value of a “consensus” of MSS. receives thus a
convenient illustration from the MSS. of Plautus; for
the agreement of a mere pair—namely, the Ambrosian
with any one of the others—is of far more importance
than the agreement of all the minuscule codices that
we possess.
