7/28/2019 747-4557-1-PB_Timee

1/4

ExClass 14, 2010, 407-409 ISSN 1699-3225

Maddalena Bonelli, Time le Sophiste, Lexique platonicien. Texte,traduction et commentaire par Maddalena Bonelli, avec une introductionde Jonathan Barnes. Philosophia Antiqua 108, Leiden-Boston: E. J. Brill,2007, pp. xiii + 668, ISBN 9789004158870.

Almost nothing is known with certainty about Timaeus the Sophist, theapparent author of a Platonic lexicon (in which the entries are chiey, but notentirely, from Plato). Preserved in a single manuscript, the Coislinianus 345,tenth century, it is the only lexicon to Plato to come down to us. Others areknown but survive only in fragments. For Clement and Boethus see pp. 35-42.

(For two eighteenth century copies of the Coislinianus see pp. 9.) There is adedicatory epistle but even the name of the dedicatee is uncertain because ofmanuscript corruption. The dates of Timaeus himself are unknown. ( Perhapsroughly some time between 200 and 400 AD?) These are just a few of the manyuncertainties surrounding this lexicon. With the appearance of the work underreview--a work almost seven hundred pages in length--we are in a much betterposition to understand some of these uncertainties, indeed to understand thenature of Greek lexicography as practiced by our ancient colleagues.

I begin with the introduction of Jonathan Barnes. Some 125 pages in length,it really is much more than a perfunctory introduction; it is a monograph in its

own right, and an impressive one. Here are the titles of some of the sections:The manuscripts of the Lexicon; Timaeus the Sophist; The Date of theLexicon; The Colleagues of Timaeus; Lexicography in Antiquity; Somenon-Platonic Entries; Lost Entries. But one must read the discussions them-selves to appreciate the richness of Barnes contribution to this work. One of hisvirtues is a willingness to pronounce a non liquet when the evidence doesnt re-ally permit us to go beyond such a pronouncement. In dealing with a work suchas this, such a virtue is welcome.

After the Introduction come the text and (French) translation (pp. 12975)followed by a brief Note on the apparatuses (pp. 17680), which are 1) appa-

ratus to the scholia, 2) apparatus of loci Platonici, 3) apparatus of loci similes,and 4) a traditional apparatus criticus.

Then comes the Commentary proper. Some four hundred and fty pages inlength (pp. 183632), it is a commentary on the grand scale. Some may feel itis on too grand a scale. I think not. (See below.) The quality of the scholarship isvery high indeed and often illuminating. And one must keep in mind that thereare precious few earlier editions of the Lexicon and not much by way of previouscommentary. There can and will be occasional dierences of opinion about par-ticular readings and comments. This is as it should be and hardly detracts fromthe value of the work as a whole. Herewith a few specimen passages, merely

exempli gratia. (The numbers refer to the entry number.)

7/28/2019 747-4557-1-PB_Timee

2/4

ExClass 14, 2010,407-409

408 R. Renehan: M. Bonelli, Time le Sophiste, Lexique platonicien

4. . Bonelli (henceforth B.) pro-nounces this entry as bizarre, partly on the grounds that Timaeus glosses thelemma (celle qui mendie) with (celle qui erre).But these two verbs are sometimes used as approximate synonyms. The thoughtsequence is as follows: can, in the appropriate context, mean I goabout (sc. begging) and similarly can mean (sc. going about) I collectmoney. The words in parentheses are easily supplied mentally. These are noinventions of mine but usages fully recognized by LSJ. See II.2: col-lect by beggingabs.,collect money for the godsabs., go about begging I.1: go about like a beggar See also LSJ s.v. :wander, roam about, like a beggar B. does seem correct however in assum-ing that the entry has been abridged.

6. T . celui qui conduit quelqu un. B. printsRuhnkens conjecture for of the MS. Ruhnken compared Pl. Cra.394C: (sc. ), . But the singular makes a reference to a general or militaryleader in command doubtful: who (or what) is the someone (singular!) ? Thelemma is clearly corrupt, but does not seem to be the solution. Iwould print and place the obelus beside it.

21. . B. states in her commentary adloc. that the verb occurs only in Aeschylus, Plato and the comic poetPlato. That this word occurred in Plato Comicus is doubtful. See LSJ Suppl.s.v.

and, especially, Plato Comicus, fr. 303 Kassel-Austin (VII 548). Theyprint it among the spuria.( I note that here, and elsewhere, B. prints the presentinnitive of contract verbs in with a iota subscript. This practice is wrongand long since superseded. For other examples of this curious orthography sees.vv. , .)

218. . marionnettes. The MS has , which is clearly nonsense,and Ruhnken corrected to . B. conjectures, and prints, , an obvi-ous improvement which convinces immediately. is unattested,

occurs elsewhere in the correct sense. (B. compares X. Smp. 4.55;compare also Hdt. 2.48.)

There are a number of typos, especially in the Greek. Most are easily cor-rected but some can confuse. For instance, commentary to 410 on p. 578: . What to make of that? Theanswer is that the gloss belongs not to 410, but to the precedinglemma, 409, , which itself has the false gloss (p. 577) , which actually belongs to lemma 408 !

7/28/2019 747-4557-1-PB_Timee

3/4

409

ExClass 14, 2010, 407-409

Reviews/Reseas

To summarize: This is a work of high quality and impressive philology. Onecan learn from it a good deal about early Greek scholarship in general and an-cient Greek lexicography in particular. There are many instructive observationsand exegeses sprinkled throughout the work; it well repays the eort of carefulstudy. Indeed, for anyone interested in learning something about the nature andpractices of the early lexicographers this can, mutatismutandis, serve as anexcellent introduction. And for those who profess no interest in such studies,well perhaps they should rethink their attitudes. Granted that not everyone isenthralled by such dry studies, still every classical scholar can prot by acquiringsome familiarity with the classical scholarship of antiquity. It is thus not reallya question of studying Timaeus for his own sake but rather for what we maylearn from him about the scholarly practices of his time.

R. Renehan

University of California, Santa Barbararenehan@classics.ucsb.edu

7/28/2019 747-4557-1-PB_Timee

4/4