The Companion Continued

Addenda et corrigenda

p. 15 n. 13: replace ‘Montzamir (forthcoming)’ with ‘Montzamir (2017)’.

p. 18 list point 5. Now add: ‘In their new Fragmentary Latin Histories of Late Antiquity (AD 300-620): Edition, Translation and Commentary, Cambridge: CUP, 2020, in a chapter on Nicomachus Flavianus (pp. 36-58), on pp. 50-53, Lieve Van Hoof and Peter Van Nuffelen argue that the supposed Latin Life of Apollonius is a spurium, concluding that it must have been a Greek manuscript that Sidonius copied.’

p. 27 l. 2: Galliatum > Galliarum.

p. 59 3rd para: ‘Likewise, in 474 Sidonius spoke …’ is to be reformulated in light of the full quotation: pro iure vel sanguinis vel aetatis reverenda familiaritate complector (5.6.1), accidentally truncated in the footnote (cited correctly in the lemma Thaumastus of Vienne on p. 123). Thaumastus belonged to the same generation as Sidonius or perhaps even to an older generation.

p. 128 Anonyma 7 is the wife, not the mother, of Thaumastus of Vienne (5.6.1 caelibatu).

p. 172 l. 4 ‘in twenty elegiacs’ > ‘in ten elegiacs’.

p. 201 2nd para, line 11: lose ‘would’.

p. 234 n. 158: curulis > curuli.

p. 267 1st para, line 5 from below: close up space between left parenthesis and Carm. 41.

p. 295‒6 cocta Babylon, possibly, rather than from Martial, from the story of Pyramus and Thisbe ubi dicitur altam / coctilibus muris cinxisse Semiramis urbem (Ov. Met. 4.58) (suggestion Daniël den Hengst; ‘really persuasive’, Isabella Gualandri 19.02.2021).

p. 308 Add to biblio for ‘a coming together of influences’ and ‘a patchwork of references’: J.J.L. Smolenaars, Statius Thebaid VII: A Commentary, Leiden, 1994, and idem, ‘Statius Theb. 2.496‒523: The Poet at Work’, in A.P. Orbán and M.G.M. van der Poel (eds), Ad litteras: Latin Studies in Honour of J.H. Brouwers, Nijmegen, 2001, 241‒57, for his theory of combinatorial imitation (suggestion Daniël den Hengst).

p. 331 l. 12 and n. 110 prosopopeia/e > prosopopoeia/e.

p. 335 n. 159 Venustas > Vetustas.

p. 412 3rd para, last line: Carm. 23.25‒6 > Carm. 13.25‒6.

p. 414 n. 89: 104 should be 105.

p. 418 1st para, l. 11: closing quotation mark before ‘to show …’ should be opening mark.

p. 431 4th para with n. 32: drop letter 5.10 as an example of tu/vos, as vos and vestra in 5.10.4 are real plurals, referring to the addressee Sapaudus and his friend Pragmatius (signalled by Giulia Marolla in ‘Sidonius Apollinaris, Letters Book 5 (Epp. 1–10)’, p. 325 n. 4 – correctly [JvW]).

p. 442 Add another example of metrical licence: Carm. 34.47 (in Ep. 8.9) stipendiali (short i), whereas in Carm. 7.449 stipendia (long i) is correct; there is one other known instance of short i: Anth. Lat. 649.25 famosa stipendia linguae.

p. 511 Brussels, BR, 10020‒21, 2nd para: Ortesius > Ortelius.

p. 520 #31. Montpellier, BU Méd., H 541: replace URL –>

p. 538 #91*. Montpellier, BU Méd., H 145: replace URL –>

p. 584 Pelttari (2016): add fn.: ‘For a different view, see below, sect. 3.8, Mratschek (2017), who argues that Sidonius does adopt the Horatian rules as the poetic programme for his correspondence, stressing its coherence and inner unity of poetry in prose, and distancing himself from Prudentius’ professed diversity.’

p. 601, section 3.8: add: ‘Mratschek (2013). Sigrid Mratschek outlines Sidonius’ central preoccupation in the letter collection of creating identity from the past, exemplified by his treatment of the Fall of Clermont in Ep. 7.7.’ Also add fn.: ‘See also below, sect. 3.8.7 Letter 7.7.’

p. 601 Mratschek (2017): add: ‘Sidonius’ various partial collections, separately and combined, publicised his poetic expertise. Together with his shifting roles used for self-promotion – from politician to bishop to the poet as a craftsman – his inserted poems transform the letter collection into “poetry in prose” and prove to be a tool for creating poetic authority.’ Also add fn.: ‘See also below, sect. 3.8.9 Letter 9.16 and Carm. 41.’

p. 608 Mratschek (2013): add: ‘… exploiting epic patterns and ancient history to make past voices relevant for the present.’ Also add fn.: ‘See also above, sect. 3.8 Studies on the Epistulae.’

p. 611, section Letter 9.16 and Carm. 41: add: ‘Mratschek (2017). Sigrid Mratschek argues that Sidonius here offers the key to understanding the overall concept of his letter collection: poetry in prose – embracing Horatian unity and rejecting the diversity praised by Prudentius (Perist. Epil. 7-30).’ Also add fn.: ‘See also above, sect. 3.3, Pelttari (2016), and sect. 3.8, Mratschek (2017).’

p. 732 n. 7 p. 000 > p. 4‒5.

p. 757 heading Gibson, R.K.: the entry:
—– and R.D. Rees (eds) (2013) Pliny in Late Antiquity, Arethusa 46,
should read, under a different head:
Gibson, B.J., and R.D. Rees (eds) (2013) Pliny in Late Antiquity, Arethusa 46.

p. 765 insert: Kitchen, T.E. (2010) ‘Sidonius Apollinaris’, in: R. Corradini et al. (eds), Ego Trouble: Authors and their Identities in the Early Middle Ages, Vienna, 53-66.

p. 776 replace [Montzamir, P.] (forthcoming) ‘Du nouveau sur l’épitaphe attribuée à Sidoine Apollinaire’ with:
—– (2017) ‘Du nouveau sur l’épitaphe attribuée à Sidoine Apollinaire’, Bulletin de l’Association pour l’Antiquité Tardive 26, 45-53.