The same scholar has traced all the MSS. back to a common parent from
which three main families are derived (M had a separate descent and is
not included in any family):—
x1 = E, T
x2 = L, Π,(and more remotely) At, D, S, H, J, K.
y = E, L, Π, T (marginal readings).
p = A, B, C, Γ, G, L2, L3, N, O, P, Q, R1, R2, V, Mon.
_Editions of the Homeric Hymns_, &c.
Demetrius Chalcondyles, Florence, 1488 (with the _Epigrams_ and the
_Battle of the Frogs and Mice_ in the _ed. pr._ of Homer).
Aldine Edition, Venice, 1504.
Juntine Edition, 1537.
Stephanus, Paris, 1566 and 1588.
More modern editions or critical works of value are:
Martin (Variarum Lectionum libb. iv), Paris, 1605.
Barnes, Cambridge, 1711.
Ruhnken, Leyden, 1782 (Epist. Crit. and _Hymn to Demeter_).
Ilgen, Halle, 1796 (with _Epigrams_ and the _Battle of the Frogs and
Mice_).
Matthiae, Leipzig, 1806 (with the _Battle of the Frogs and Mice_).
Hermann, Berling, 1806 (with _Epigrams_).
Franke, Leipzig, 1828 (with _Epigrams_ and the _Battle of the Frogs and
Mice_).
Dindorff (Didot edition), Paris, 1837.
Baumeister (_Battle of the Frogs and Mice_), Göttingen, 1852.
Baumeister (_Hymns_), Leipzig, 1860.
Gemoll, Leipzig, 1886.
Goodwin, Oxford, 1893.
Ludwich (_Battle of the Frogs and Mice_), 1896.
Allen and Sikes, London, 1904.
Allen (Homeri Opera v), Oxford, 1912.
Of these editions that of Messrs Allen and Sikes is by far the best:
not only is the text purged of the load of conjectures for which the
frequent obscurities of the Hymns offer a special opening, but the
Introduction and the Notes throughout are of the highest value. For a
full discussion of the MSS. and textual problems, reference must be
made to this edition, as also to Dr. T.W. Allen’s series of articles in
the _Journal of Hellenic Studies_ vols. xv ff. Among translations those
of J. Edgar (Edinburgh), 1891) and of Andrew Lang (London, 1899) may be
mentioned.
_The Epic Cycle_.
The fragments of the Epic Cycle, being drawn from a variety of authors,
no list of MSS. can be given. The following collections and editions
may be mentioned:—
Muller, Leipzig, 1829.
Dindorff (Didot edition of Homer), Paris, 1837-56.
Kinkel (Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta i), Leipzig, 1877.
Allen (Homeri Opera v), Oxford, 1912.
The fullest discussion of the problems and fragments of the epic cycle
is F.G. Welcker’s _der epische Cyclus_ (Bonn, vol. i, 1835: vol. ii,
1849: vol. i, 2nd edition, 1865). The Appendix to Monro’s _Homer’s
Odyssey_ xii-xxiv (pp. 340 ff.) deals with the Cyclic poets in relation
to Homer, and a clear and reasonable discussion of the subject is to be
found in Croiset’s _Hist. de la Littérature Grecque_, vol. i.
On Hesiod, the Hesiodic poems and the problems which these offer see
Rzach’s most important article “Hesiodos” in Pauly-Wissowa,
_Real-Encyclopädie_ xv (1912).
A discussion of the evidence for the date of Hesiod is to be found in
_Journ. Hell. Stud._ xxxv, 85 ff. (T.W. Allen).
Of translations of Hesiod the following may be noticed:—_The Georgicks
of Hesiod_, by George Chapman, London, 1618; _The Works of Hesiod
translated from the Greek_, by Thomas Coocke, London, 1728; _The
Remains of Hesiod translated from the Greek into English Verse_, by
Charles Abraham Elton; _The Works of Hesiod, Callimachus, and
Theognis_, by the Rev. J. Banks, M.A.; “Hesiod”, by Prof. James Mair,
Oxford, 19081203.