장음표시 사용
31쪽
and a linis to his brilliant odition Oi tho Wholo oi Cicero: and probablydid not spen i many more monilis on his Lucretius than Lachmann spe years. Nor Was it possibio in that age even ior a Lambinus to appro-h0nd tho true relation of the mss. oi Lucretius to one another. His copious eXplanato and illustrative commentary hoWever calis for un
as his reading is as vast as it is accurate, and iis resulis are suen in astylo of unsurpassed clearness and beauty. His notes observe the mean
ine ms. notes Oi Marullus in the old Venido ed. ivlly spolien os a bovo; for the emundations and ron lings of Antonius Goldingamus homo Anglus, Which he spealis of in his proinde, and tho veteres libri and tholiko whieli occur throughout his book aro muro blinds to concent his thoici irom Lambinus. Tho WV in whicli ho contrives ut onee to besto em P pruise on this scholar and yet to sextenuate his mortis and put him
32쪽
iere quae in eo Lucretio recta Sunt, mea Sunt; quae tamen iste aut silentio praetormittit aut maligno laudat aut sibi impudenter arrogat'. Yset so great was tho si ill with Whieli nil this mas dono that ho dreuiuod many and was thought to be a rival Worthy oi Lambinus. Contrary to inlitat many bolievo, the rege loved bri ei notes; and his more brisei, thoother's copious. Even the great critic of that generation Josopli Scali ger, Who weli lineW the character of tho man und accused him ot grossdecuit towariis himself, SVA Gilanius estoit docte, son Lucrheo est trhs- boti'. Lambinus homover lineW the truth, and his Wrath was as signatas the provocation. In I 570 he brought out a third edition groatly improved and enlarged; much oi the additionat mattur lio ovor consisis in invectives against the aggressor. In a long preiace ot great poWor undboauty oi style he states his Wrongs. There and throughout his commentary tho whole Latin langu age, ricli in that depariment, is ransackod for
drod dissurunt si apses mitti curious copiousness and variety oi expression. Gitanius With consistent cunning attempted no public reply to nil this. Many years alterWarda, When Lambinus had long been dered, a nem edition oi tho other's book was brought out at L0ydon in l595, in Whichmany additions are made to tho bries notes, but nos a Word is salit oi thecli arges brought against him by Lambinus. He Was remurdod ior his reticenee, und ior a century or more opinion Was dividod as to Whothorho or Lambinus did more ior Lucretius. In private he correspondedwith the cankered and utiliappy Muretus: the two exchangod futile chargos ot dishonesty against the dead critic, Who Was iar too genuine a scholar to be captable ol being a plagiary. Lachmann so stern With Avuncius has nothing to say of this much more flagitious ense: qui quo iure' ho observes aut Lambinum aut alios compilasse dictus esset non qua0sivi'. Glianius had no husiness Whatover to edit a poet: he was Without poetical taste and grossty ignorant of metre. For a century niter Lambinus nothing was dono tor Lucretius: tho
irom Lambinus: as weli as tho most usuiui si his illustrations: his corrections of the texi aro ulmost Without excoption Worthless. In the li incentury severat distinguished scholars, Salmasius J. F. Gronovius Nic.
33쪽
and supercilious temper. The texi is nearly alWays a reproduction ofone or other of the editions of Lambinus: such criticism indoed he seems in his profaeo to look upon res unWorthy oi him. His notes are in most cases mero abridgements of those of Lambinus or copiod irom Faber, and his illustrations are usualty horroW0d irom tho tormer. Ad this hodoos as ii it Wero a multer of courso, not thini ing it nocessary either toavow or concent his obligatioris. His interpretatio is his own : ho farit is ot assistance to a student must dopend upon What he seolis for init. His Lucretius hoWever oWing to tho olearness and brevity of thonotes has continued to bo the popular ono froin that time to the present.
34쪽
and that in tho Bodleian whicli it did tho London bookseller credit to
X are one and the fame Bodleian in s. so that Wo have this ludicrous result, that the Same ms. is cited tWice over as two independunt authorities. His Various readings are thereiore not only cumbrotastyinane, hut are a snare and delusion, and havo ted astray thosu Who
36쪽
INTRODUCTIONilio last of his 1200 quarto pagos thero is not a single explanation of tho Words or philosophy oi his author for Whicli a schoolboy Would thankhim : so incurably inaccurato and illogical Was liis utind. Yet oming totho boldness With whieli ho assertod his protensions he Was thought evenby scholars to havo done Something great for his author: ho receivod complimetitvry tollers irom Heyne and Jacobs, hominibus modossis ot ab omni iudieii subtilitato abhorrentibus'; and moro than thirty years alterwards Forbiger in preparing his compilation ior tho usu of thogonorat publio took him for his supreme authori . Evon lator than thalso great a scholar res Ph. Wagner Oiten apponis to him in his notes to Virgil. But though long in coming the avenger Was to he. Alr6ady in 1832 Madvig in a stiori academicat program, alterWards republished among his opuscula, exposud tho futility of Wakofiold's criticism and gave somo intimations of the right coui se to pursue. ti mulatod by his example more than one scholar followed up the attach. The most important contribution Oi this hind was mado by JadobBernnys in an articie printed in tho Rhonisii Musuum of 1847. Thisable paper Would have produced a greatur OGet than is did, ii it had
37쪽
twico lost Wo, nos he, be in fauit. His deiecis hoWover must nos bopassed over. Wlille tho most essentiat part oi his Work, tho collationoi the tWo Leyden mss., has boon performed With admirabio skill and indust , he has not been so happy in the use of secondary evidoneo, thatoi tho Italian mss. and the oldor editions. Mucii he has talion on truston insuffciunt evidendo, and much that he had buforo him ho has notalWays accurately used. Somo proois of this have been GVen, more Willbe sepia bolo . But a stili moro serious defeci must be tol l : ho meanthis book to bo a critical rovision of the texi, and len to Othors the taskoi explaining and illustrating the meaning. So far good: hut res thotoxt oi an author in tho condition of that oi Lucretius cannot be niWays rightly constructed Without a sussicient knowledge of his system andiis literature, he has not unirequently strangely btundet sed and grosslycorrupted the poeUs Words: ior exaniplos of this seo 1 599 631 11 522 529 1010 loll. v 513 516. His consummato linowledge of the Latintnngunge as Weli as of the manner of Lucretius in particular onubios himoiton to amend his author With great success. As he Wishes too to produce, Whero it is possibio, an intelligibie texi, many of his corrections hemiast himsoli have lookod upon res only provisional. Yet his greatest admirers must concedo that he has nos Madvig's curiosa felicitas' inemendation. He has hoW0ver achiouod a mork Whicli mill be a land- marti ior scholars as long res the Latin langunge continues to be studiest, a Work, perfiliae quod post nulla arguet aetas.
is otten Very successivi. Hud he prepared a more elaborate edition, a S
38쪽
INTRODUCTIONho appears to have onoe had thoughts of doing, thero is no doubi that Lucretius would have owed him much. Tho impulso given by Lachmannio the study oi our poet has called torta numerous pnpers either insertodin tho German philological reviems or published by thenaseives. Some
bosin indobtod to them. Ono Englisti publication os eminent merit, asit criticisos nos tho texi of tho posim, but iis matter and poeticul
39쪽
this Wo aro told in tho learned Melius' preiaco to his life oi Travorsarius p. L. As he studiod so many oi Niccoli's manuscript letters, he musthavo known his wrifing bellor than a body else. There are many com rections in a much later haud, but Niceoli himsel f seonis on tho Wholo toliave copiod Pomio's ms. faithiully, and nos to haVe made many changes. His ms. thereiore, as Will bo seon in notes 1, is of great valuo in docidingbotw00n A and B. It is uniortunate that Lachmann could malle no usooi it: I collated it With somo care in tho summor of 185l : tho old Verona and Venice editions have a texi closely resembling Niccoli's. 31 is nori in importando to 30, but of a Widely different character, hav-ing a texi much more corrected than Niccoli's or even Ver. and Ven. Itis clearly Written and in excellent preservation, and much resembles in generat character the manuscript in Our public library Whicli I had open bolore me ali the timo I Was composing notes 1, and Whicli is res Woli preserved and res distinctly writton as the other. It excels the Cam-bridg0 on the whole, though tho lalter has many good corrections uot in
40쪽
INTRODUCTIONtho other. Theso tWo thoreiore I have used as good examples ot corrected codices. From Whom como the many excellent emendations comta ined in theso mss. is quite unknown. Lachmann uSed a not Very
completo collation os Flor. 31, und to it ho attributes the corrections Whicli it has for the most part in common With tho Cambridge unddoubfless some other mss. Having been tolli too by II. Keil irom Whomhe got tho collation that it was Written by Antonius Marii filius, ho filis his commentary irom ono end to tho other With tho name of this WorthyFlorentino notary. I can only say that I compare i it With ten or mors Voluminous mss. Written in magnificent stylo and signed by this manbet 0on 1420 and 145l in closely resembling eaeli other ; and notther in generat app0arance nor in tho torm oi particular lottors nor in thoirabbreviations havo they any resemblanco to tho ms. of Lucrosius. This scribo's namo thereiore I have excluded irom my notos. Oi tho other Lauron an mss. 29 is to be noticod for the marginal annotations olAngelo Politian spolion Oi abovo and osten referi sed to in notos 1: it twico over has this noto cliber conuontus Sancti Marci do Florontia ordinis Praedicatorum habitus a publicis sectoribus pro libris quos sibi ab eodem conventu commodatos Angelus Politianus amisit seu qui in morte Angeli Politiani amissi sunt'. 32 has some learned marginal remariis on thosrst book irom Whicli I have derived some facts rebout Marullus. Thosix mss. of the Vatican I collatsed as long ago as the nutumn of 1819, butnot With much care or stilli; yet it mill bo s00n irom notos 1 that th0yhave been Oi considerable service to me: their martis are as follows, 3275
pleto collation Oi A nil through, oi B in the first iour books, and of tho
Gottorpian fragment. It contains too a complete collation of the codex Modii, Which Heinsius denotos my s : ho says oi it variantes lecti nos xcerptae sunt ex libello edito Paris. an. 1565 quem Fr. Modius cum ms. suo contulit, ut ipso testatur sine lib. I inquiens : Collatus cum ms. meo
26 Iunii 1579 Coloniae': it was lent to Hei ius by Liraeus; Lirneus had it irom Grutor, Grutor irom Nausius, Nansius from Modius himselfH0insius says codex Modii non est idem cum B VOSSiano, nam pag. 8 1 227J ubi ex Modiano notatum ad lumina, Vossianus in '. Heinsius speretis I prosumo oi tho smali 2nd ed. oi Lambinus, as tho one Whicli Modius used: it has like othors in lumina: ii thon Modius' codox is B, eithor lio or Heinsius has uinde a gross mistulio. I have notieed severatother instuncos, where s is mado to disser irom B; but in theso cases Lambinus' 2nd ed. has the reading Which Heinsius gives to s, so that