219Kommentierung römischer Klassiker vom Mittelalter zur Frühen Neuzeit

The canon of authors commented on by ancient grammaticiremained remarkably stable until the early modern period, even while expanding to include new interests, e.g. philosophical writings, technical texts and historiography, and newly rediscovered authors. Moreover, forms of commentary also shifted over time, usually in response to changes in media, from lemma commentary to glossing and back again, so that late antique material was handed down, even if in an often reduced form. Any assessment of the originality and aims of medieval and early modern commentaries must therefore take account of this long tradition, identify intended audiences, and reconstruct the relevant didactic and scholarly settings. Two case studies serve to illustrate these contentions. The first example will explore the evolution of the exegesis on Seneca’s tragedies. With rare exceptions, later commentaries depend on the Oxford Dominican Nicholas Trevet (c. 1317), though criticisms of his reading surface sporadically. Here, university and schoolroom commentaries will be surveyed for evidence of lost exegeses and for innovations up to the late fifteenth century, revealing a growing humanistic interest in Seneca’s person and works. The second case study will investigate a form of commentary distinctive to classical texts: marginaliain printed editions. This discussion will be based on two 16th-century examples, both centred on Catullus: the first Francesco Pucci’s notes, which focus on textual criticism; and second, Piero Vettori’s exegetical glosses on Catullus 64.