Page 684 [684]
634 APPENDIX XIII
Indeed miswritings in the letters are not uncommon, many of them
being very rapidly written; so that it is not surprising to find the
printed version sometimes at fault.
In the two cases (ff. 184, 217) where we have the opportunity of
comparing the rough drafts with the fair copies actually sent, it is
noticeable that the secretary was not scrupulously accurate in his
copying, as we have seen already with Ep. 326 ; writing for instance
cum for tum, quum for cum, besides -ae for -e and making occasional
differences of punctuation and order.
The manuscript volume presents us with ample material for an
examination of Erasmus” orthography. It appears that he uses the
form -e far more commonly than -ae; which rarely occurs except
as -ẹ; In a few cases (ff. 213, 214, 219 v°.) in revising Erasmus adds
a cedilla to an -e; but this is quite exceptional. The form aeditio,
which with its kindred words is regularly printed by the Froben
press, has hardly any authority in this manuscript, editio being
Erasmus’ almost invariable usage; though aed- occurs thrice, on
ff. 160-1, and an improving hand, not Erasmus’, has added a cedilla
once, on f, 209. Again lifterae—one of the words about which it is
difficult to collect evidence, because in manuscript it is so frequently
contracted—is almost always found instead of literae. Pre occurs
only rarely, as also pre, the contracted form being usually adopted.
Sometimes it is quite impossible to determine certainly what
Erasmus wrote. The vowels are often so alike that the only guide
is in the sense, and where this fails there is no arbiter. The same
word, for example, might not infrequently be read either possum,
possim or possem ; nolim or nolwi; and the terminations -is and -ius
are often indistinguishable.