Textus Originalis
Wess. vol. I. p. 329
Τάδε ἔνεστιν ἐν τῇ πέμπτῃ τῶν Διοδώρου βίβλων.
Περὶ τῶν μυθολογουμένων κατὰ τὴν Σικελίαν καὶ τοῦ σχήματος καὶ μεγέθους τῆς νήσου. Περὶ Δήμητρος καὶ Κόρης καὶ τῆς εὑρέσεως τοῦ πυρίνου καρποῦ. 5 Περὶ Λιπάρας καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῶν Αἰολίδων καλουμένων νήσων. Περὶ Μελίτης καὶ Γαύλου καὶ Κερκίνης. Περὶ τῆς Αἰθαλίας καὶ Κύρνου καὶ Σαρδόνος. Περὶ Πιτυούσσης καὶ τῶν νήσων τῶν Γυμνησίων, ἃς τι- 10 νες Βαλιαρίδας ὀνομάζουσι. Περὶ τῶν ἐν ὠκεανῷ νήσων τῶν πρὸς ἑσπέραν κειμένων. Περὶ τῆς Πρεττανικῆς νήσου καὶ τῆς ὀνομαζομένης Βα- σιλείας καθ᾿ ἣν τὸ ἤλεκτρον γίνεται. Περὶ Γαλατίας καὶ Κελτιβηρίας, ἔτι δ᾿ Ἰβηρίας καὶ Λι- 15 γυστικῆς καὶ Τυρρηνίας, καὶ τῶν ἐν ταύταις κατοικούντων, τίσι χρῶνται νομίμοις. Περὶ τῶν κατὰ τὴν μεσημβρίαν ἐν ὠκεανῷ νήσων, τῆς τε Ἱερᾶς ὀνομαζομένης καὶ τῆς Παγχαίας, καὶ τῶν ἐν αὐταῖς ἱστορουμένων. 20 Περὶ Σαμοθρᾴκης καὶ τῶν ἐν αὐτῇ μυστηρίων. Περὶ Νάξου καὶ Σύμης καὶ Καλύδνης. Περὶ ῾Ρόδου καὶ τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτὴν μυθολογουμένων. Περὶ Χερρονήσου τῆς ἀντιπέραν τῆς ῾Ροδίας κειμένης. Περὶ Κρήτης καὶ τῶν ἐν αὐτῇ μυθολογουμένων μέχρι 25 τῶν νεωτέρων καιρῶν.
7 Γαύδου G, γλαύκου D 9 Πιτυούσης v. 11 τῶν πρὸς] πρὸς D 12 Βρεττανικῆς v. 24 τῶν μυθ. ἐν αὐτῇ v.
Traduzione
English — scholarly
ARETHE Knowledge Engineering DivisionMany desire an edition of Diodorus in which the events handed down by him are examined and clearly explained. I wish them to know that, in such great scarcity of books and leisure, I have neither undertaken nor will undertake that immense work. For the present, I strive that, after weighing the manuscripts from which editions have so far been derived, and employing others as far as possible, and taking into account both Diodorus' style and those writers who agree verbatim with Diodorus, the words of this author may be restored as purified as possible. Afterwards, if strength and years permit, I will discuss separately the genius of the writer himself. Therefore, it will happen neither against my will nor with envy that others undertake that more difficult task.
Nuremberg, Aug. 1890. Fr. Vogel.
Concerning the manuscripts which together with the earlier books of Diodorus contain the fifth, I have treated in the first volume (pp. IV—XXI); to those words the following are to be added: 1. I misinterpreted codices O and P, deceived by the obscure words of Wesseling. E. Bethe informed me by letter that the letter O is to mean the Vatican codex 995 of the 15th century, which, alone among the Vatican books, breaks off after the word κατέσχε (V 84, 1). The letter P, however, corresponds to Vatican 996 of the 16th century (not to Vatic. 900, as in Wesseling).
Commentario Arethe
Fr. Vogel
Friedrich Vogel, based in Nuremberg (Norimbergae), signed this preface in August 1890. His modest disclaimer — that he will not undertake a full historical commentary but only a textual recension — is a hallmark of 19th-century German Wissenschaft: the division between textual criticism (constitutio textus) and historical interpretation (Sachkommentar). Vogel positions himself firmly as a textual critic in the tradition of Karl Lachmann.
codicibus... ponderatis aliisque... adhibitis ac ratione habita et Diodori sermonis et eorum scriptorum, qui ad verbum cum Diodoro consentiunt
Vogel's method in a nutshell: (1) Weigh existing manuscripts against each other (recension/collation), (2) bring in new manuscripts where possible, (3) attend to Diodorus' own style (usus scribendi), and (4) use parallel passages from authors who copied Diodorus verbatim (e.g., Eusebius, Syncellus). This four-pronged approach is classic Lachmannian method. The phrase 'ad verbum consentiunt' refers to ancient authors who drew on Diodorus as a source — their quotations serve as independent witnesses to Diodorus' text.
Codices O et P perverse interpretatus sum... E. Bethe informed me by letter
Vogel corrects his own earlier error from Vol. I: he misidentified codices O (Vaticanus 995, 15th c.) and P (Vaticanus 996, 16th c.) due to Wesseling's ambiguous descriptions. The correction came from Erich Bethe (1863–1940), later famous for his work on the Ilias cycle. This self-correction — publicly admitting an error in the very preface of a major edition — exemplifies the intellectual honesty expected in the German philological tradition. Note: these O and P should not be confused with the Patmius codex P discussed later, which is the star witness for Books XI–XII.