I'm working through sections of Klingner's 1921 commentary on Boethius. It is itself written in quite florid and (I suspect) Renaissance-inspired Latin, and is certainly not easy going in parts -- more difficult on average, I would say, than the text it seeks to comment upon. However, it has been rather influential in the field and so there's no avoiding it. Anyway, I will post little bits here and ask for help as needed.
Here's one -- which feels like it shouldn't be difficult; but I can't figure out quite what he means by inde and egregia interpretes protulissent (the "distinguished things", i.e. aspects, of the poem had brought forth "interpreters", or vice versa?)
De eo carmine [IIIm9] non facili intellectu cum inde a saeculo decimo egregia interpretes protulissent, Renatus Vallinus exstitit, vir bene de Boethio meritus, qui istos versiculos veluti quandam "epitome" primae partis Timaei esse dixit.
Here's one -- which feels like it shouldn't be difficult; but I can't figure out quite what he means by inde and egregia interpretes protulissent (the "distinguished things", i.e. aspects, of the poem had brought forth "interpreters", or vice versa?)
De eo carmine [IIIm9] non facili intellectu cum inde a saeculo decimo egregia interpretes protulissent, Renatus Vallinus exstitit, vir bene de Boethio meritus, qui istos versiculos veluti quandam "epitome" primae partis Timaei esse dixit.
