The Tusculanan disputations. Book first. The dream of Scipio ..

발행: 1851년

분량: 240페이지

출처: archive.org

분류: 미분류

11쪽

DISCIPULUS

13쪽

PRE FACE.

TOGETHER illi ho firs book of tho Tusculari Disputations the editor has hero profonte Itho omnium Scipionis, and extractes rom tho dialogues e Senectute undDe Amicitia olius combining ut the passages in thework of Cicoro in hieli ho questionis tho Immortalityof tho oui is discussod Besidos tho intrinsio interestandisalue os these realises a containing the matureSt decision os id philosophympon a questionis univerSulund neareS concern the are adorne With a grace of

Style and appines of illustration characteristi os their author und worth of thoi subjeci. Non of the philosophica work of Cicero oldsi highor rank thun the Tusculari Disputations for beaut os langua gerund eleVR-tionis sentiment in tho reum os Scipio the livel narrative and poeti coloring enhanc the admiration hichtho ostinos of iis viows cannot sal to exciteri and the dialogues on id Age undirientishil have alway been regariled as rea Suries of though und modet os composition. illi ho exception of the omnium Scipionis,

Such was the admiration in hich Erasmus sel theseworks that he pronounce thei author inspired frommeaven. His Ord are thes Sacris quidom litteris ubique prima debetur auctoritas; sed tamen ego nonnunquam Offendo quae dum

14쪽

theso are the fruit os Cicero' ripost ear and that delightim episodo us Woli us iis compunion in his volume, is the pro luet os a mini enriched by the largest culture und udo is by a varieti Xperienee. In the proparationis his orti, the editor has oughtto avult himself of the best rosulis of modern Seholarship.

Tho tox of th book of tho Tusculari Disputations is solande chio Dympon the admirabio oditioris of Moser anil ulinor ut hos of relli, Nobbo, and Ti-

ve dicta a veteribus, si scripta ab ethnicis, etiam poetis, tam Caste, tam sancte, tum divinitus, ut mihi non possim persuadere, quin pectus illorum, quum illa scriberent, numen aliquod bonum agitaverit. Et fortasses latius se fundit spiritus Christi, quam nos interpretamur. Et multi Sunt in Consortio Sanctorum, qui non sunt apud nos in catalogo Fateor affectum meum apud amicos : non possum legere librum Ciceronis de Senectute, de Amicitia, do iliciis, do Tusculanis Quaestionibus, quin liquoties XOSculer Odicem, ne veneror Sanctum illud pectus, amatum caelesti numine. Contra, quum hos quosdam recentiores lego de re publica, oeconomia, aut ethica praecipienteS, Deum immortalum i quam frigent prae illis, immo quam non videntur sentire quod scribunt ut ego citius patiar perire totum Scotum, cum aliquot sui similibus, quam libros unius Ciceronis, aut Plutarchi non quod illos in totum damnem, sed quod abJhis sentiam me reddi meliorem quum ex illorum lectione Surgam, nescio quomodo frigidius affectus erga veram Virtutem, sed irri

15쪽

PREFACE. IX

various id edition consultod in dotabis ut enses. Whoro such scholars as Orolli, Moser, anil illiner are ut vari-ance, the editor has sol a libertyrio seleel that ouilingwhicli est commende Litself to his own judgment, particular eight ein gi ven to the Buthori ty of the manuscript of highest reputo. The mos importunt urin-tions os rendin ure mentione d in the notes. In the Somnium Scipionis tho textis Moseri has been adopted, and in tho Cato Major anil Laelius that os orolli. For the mos vulvable par of the annotationes theoditor is indobtod to tho labor os German ScholarS.

orelli' spo in edition of the Tusculai Disputations furnishod hi in illi ho Tortesungen of that illustrious criti an manis genius F. A. Wolf, illi ho valvabis additions os relli iniself the elaborato edition os Mosor Sorded a large body of Xcellent notes, illi ucopiolas digestis the annotation os precedin Commentatores; iselier es concise and uiliolous explanations Were os great Service ; and aboVe nil moSt important assistanee a derived rom Kdhner, hos edition is indoed a modolis olearnes an dispineS of illustration, and ound discriminution in the choice of topic t bodiscussed For the id received rom theSe Ources, care has been alien to give fuit credit. The notos are designe to eat attention to the ost

Among om sist ΜSS. hicli illine enumerates, hogive tho preseretice to the Si solio ing the Regius, a Paris, of the nitith century the Vaticanus the Gudianti primus, ut Wolsonbuttul, of the ninth or tentii centur the Pithoeantis; the Gryphianus and the Bernensis, a Berne, of the fift00nth

16쪽

X PREFACE.

important peculiarities of Construction, an to Xplaintho mos serious dissiculties os syntacunil interpretation, Without tho injustico to tho studon os obbin himentirEly of the leaSure und advantage of Surinountingobstacles' his own una idod emori. Particula nitentior has poli givon to the illustration of the subjunctive

made in the notos. The derivation nil fore of the partiele - potnt hos elucidation is os ardi iussimportuno than that of the subjunctive so a correctundorstandin os the langunge inve uiso received attentiora, particularly in the notos on the omnium Scipionis, Cato Major, an Laelius. Copioia eXtractS have been made rom that invaluabio reatis iapon Latinparticles, Hand 's ursellinus and the secon par of T. K. Arnold' Introduction to Latin Pros Composition

ica note are designe rather a guide to the lassical

17쪽

Dictionary than completo deseription they are derived chiosy froni milli' Dictionuries, and various editiones of the Tusculun Disputations. Frequent reserene hasbeen made to Zumps Grammar, - Work Containing the garriere trensures os a lis time os enthusiastic devotion to classica studies, - to the admirabio realiseon Latin Syntax by r. Beck - and to the Grammaro Androws an Stoddard and the recent publicationos an excellent American translation has authorized occasional reserenoes to the Lexiconis Freund. Tho high character of many of tho odition Os Grophand Roman authors hioli avo lately appenred romtho American press indiente the rupid progreS Ofclassica scholarshil in his countr in the last fowyears The light recent philologica investigations have Ahedipon the history, structure, and Significa ne of the ancient angvages, and thus pon the ciene os ungvage itSelso language, hieli S at nee the reat instrumentis though und the nobi est productis minii,

in tho fruits of thoi labors, eigh and combine their decisions illi an independent uliginent, an persorma usos ut though Comparati vel humble Service, in applying them to inciuas the value ani efficienc os classical studies uso means of mentat ruining Tho

18쪽

XII PREFACE.

19쪽

INTRODUCTIO N.

TH apparent inconsistencios in the angvage os Cicero ondisserent occasion S, illi referunce to the doctrine of the immortalit of the oul, have excited ome do ubi and discus- Sion in regard to the view reatly entertui ne by himiri that Subjeci. A correct appreciation of hi sentiment On his question cannot be Ormed ithout considering firSt, hal vere his genera philosophical principies in regar to thedugre os certaint with whiuli truth ante alta ined, and See-ondly, hat was hi immediate object in the varion writings in hielia alludus to the conditionis the oui aster eath. On th sirsi potnt, Cicero' view were Similar O those h0ld by tho Ne Academ'. He enteria inedis moderate Scepticism in philosophy, congenia i lii Own menta character, and naturali resulting rom hi education and tho isndles an inextricabie disputes of the different sucis whos doctrines he studied in his earch sor truth. Disgustodat tho confidone and dogmatism illi hicli different schoolshad promulgated thoi decision upora thean attieSt queStioris, and with his Sensitive nature, readin to offendolis judg-ments or rejudice of ther by a tuo poSitive assertion os disputed potnt S , he proseSSed noto arrive at certaint in his SpeculationS, ut ni to incline to that opinion hicli appenred mos probabie Accordingly, in his philosophical trestises se adopted the method of the Academius, cautiousi abstaining, V say Imiter, drom advancin his own

20쪽

opinion to decidedly, refusing to e bound by an author-ity, and at the Same time neve attemptin to Stablisti his

In regar to the ecorid Oint, in non os the realises in whieli Ciooro allude to the immortalit of the oui unleSS e except the omnium Scipionis, a Scit his immediate object toasser the truth of that doctrine. In that beautis ut Vision this truth is maintainud with a direcineSA that admit Ofi ques

deed S, ut also by a participation in the immorta glories of the futuro lis and there is no in the whol the lightest intimation of a do ubi in regarit ora aut, hicii indeed i preSup- posed by the ver sorm of the compoSition. The purp0Se filio irs book of tho Tusculari Disputation is simplyn Showthat deat is no an evit, ei the to the dea O to thOSe et

to the defence of the proposition to e stablished. Catocould stili maintain that the ear of dissolution ought notrio embliter ur declining years, and Laelius that it ad onoweli illi his departe friend even is eath Uere granted to

SEARCH

MENU NAVIGATION