T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex

12쪽

publishod tho first odition of his Lucrotius; and Doui that day tothis nothing noW and systematical, nothing that displays palus

and rosoaroli has boon dono for the olucidation of our author. Transcendant as aro the meriis of that illustrious scholar, What

THE EDI R.

14쪽

lineamenta. '

15쪽

like certain or even very speciOHS correction.

My lamontod friend Professor Conington publishod a lecturo on thostylo of Lucretius and Catullus Whicli has been reprinted among his Miscellaneous Wortis. This locture, Writton in a tono of the Lindost courtesy, is for the most pari a criticism oi a single para aph in thointroduction to my explanato notes ; and, so far as Catullus is concerned, almost os a Single Sentence. This par raph I havo no omitted: justico could bo dono neither to him nor to mysoli mithintho limits that could bo permitted here. Ii I should over venturoon any reply, Some other place and opportuniu must be iound for it.

16쪽

ΤΠΕ prosent odition is dividod into threo volumes, tho Gst containing tho texi and critical notes, the second tho commentary and generat index, the third the translation. Tho texi is practicatly the samo res in the last edition: in oneplace oesy I 412ὶ a neW reading is printed, und that was only omitted beiore through accidunt as Was explainod ut the end of tho index.

TRINITI COLLEGE, CAMBRIDIE, FEB. 18, 1886.

17쪽

LUCRETIUS

Vienna. These manuscripis and at least one more must have lain torcenturies in the monasteries of France or Germany, Where they found nidisserent perio is severat correctors, more or less competent. It is to bepresumed then that they had somo rundors. though feW ii any fraces of them are to bo m0t With in tho voluminous litoraturo of the middie ag0s. In my prerious editions I suid that my triend Professor Mayor hadgi Ven me a referetice to Honorius of Autun in tho bibliotheca maxima Patiram XX p. 100l, Who is there mado to quoto II 888 in this Way, Eae insensilibus me credas sensile gigni, the contexi proving that he meant m Say rid, nos me; and asked whether this writer Who flourished in tho

18쪽

1NTRODUCTION

What tollows irona Barthius' very lonrnod noto on Stat. Silv. II 7 76: nec vero caduntibus aut collapsis iam rebus Romanis auctoritatem suam amisit Lucretius noster, ut videre potes apud Magnentium Rhabanum prauitatione Ibnudum Daedalarum Crucis, Gulielmum Hirsau 0nsem in Institutionibus Philosophicis et Astrologicis, Honorium Augustodunen-

vol. 8 p. 332, it is suid that in Brit. Mus. nas. 377 l3th centu ) oi Daniol do Morini's Philosophia, in p. 90 a, Lucretius is quote l.

19쪽

TO NOTES I

octavo septembris calen. octobris'. It was printed ii Om a uis. olosely r

20쪽

4 INTRODUCTIONoi titile, others of greater importaneo; ior example IV 125-l 90 arowanting in tho orona, but not in the Venie0. The reason wlty Idw6ll on this inci mill repperer presently. In Doeombor 1500 Aldus publisliud his fit si odition Oi our poena, thosrst systematio endoavour to mulie it intelligibio throughoui. The oditor inus Hieronymus Avuncius of Verona, Who datos his dodication Kalendis Martii. M.1D', old style I presume, and reatly theroforo l500: an intorvat of tw0My-tWo monilis belWeen the two datus Would not bo easylo understand. AVancius iS knoWn by other mortis also, especialty tho Aldino odition Oi Catullus. A slight inspuetion will sh0 that ho tookeillior the Vorona or the Venice edition, upon Which to torin his toxt; amoro caroiul examination mill prove that it must havo boon the latior. My critical notos mill iurnish many other instanees; tot me here onlymontion that in 111 991 ho and Ven. have torpedine tor cuppedine, Whilo Vor. reails turpidine; I0li ho talios irom Ven. iis remari ablo rea lingestenus, Whicli Lachmann adopis and Wrongly assigns to Marullus: Ver. tollows tho L0yden and nil other known mss. in rea ling egestres , I 0 i5 hoand Ven. have tho absurd reading numela ior mella, Where Ver. has thoequatly unmenning Mela. Ven. thereiore is the ante impressus ' spolienos by Aldus. Avaticius' prolaeo fhews that ior his day he was a goodand w0ll-r0ad Latin scholar, and had studiod Priscian Nonius and M, crobius ior tho illustration of his author. Aldus in his prolatory lettorto Albortus Pius confirms this, and says that he kns Lucretius byh0ar ut digitos unguesque suos'. AVnneius in his preface asseris much the fame; and tho ieW critical ruinariis ho there inseris stlow that this mus true at least to a certain extent. At the sume timo ho admits With a suoming candour that o wing to the immenso dissiculty oi thowork ho has teit much ior Othors to do. Mucii ind00d he has luit un-done; and it would have been a herculean fasti for one man fully to corruet tho desperately corrupi Venice estition, especialty in those daysWhen there mere but te extraneolas aids and the urt oi systematic criticism Was stili in iis iniuncy, two generations having yet to elapsu, beiorisit roached iis tuli growth in tho hands of the illustrious schoot oi Fronchorities. What he has dono however is very great and sentitius him folligit praiso, ii it is indued his own. But this stiali bo considered presently. Tho noxi odition is that of the w0ll known scholar Ioannes Baptista fius, published l5ll kal. Maii' in his nativo Bologna. Lucretius' texi is embedded in an enorm ous commentary Whieli displays anaid muchcumbrous learning no Stight nequaintance With the Latin poets, severatoi whieli ho odited boloro and alter his Luci otius. He thus describes What he has dono: contulimus non sine aerumnis vigiliisque diutinis codicem veneti Hermolai: et Pomponi romani: codicemque non omnino malum : qui servatur Mantuae in bibliotheca quadam suburbana : quiluit viri non indocti gentis clarissimae Strotiorum. non defuit Philippi