4. Diogenianus, Straton, and Diogenes Laërtius. —Shortly after Philip, in the reign of Hadrian, the learned grammarian, DioGENIAN Us of Heracleia, compiled an Anthology, which is entirely lost. It might perhaps have been well if the same fate had befallen the very polluted, though often beautiful collection of his contemporary, STRAtoN of Sardis, the nature of which is sufficiently indicated by its title, Moûga trauðuká. About the same time Diogenes Laërtius collected the epigrams which are interspersed in his lives of the philosophers, into a separate book, under the title of i Táuuetpos. [DioGENEs LAERTIUs.) This collection, however, as containing only the poems of Diogenes himself, must rather be viewed as among the materials of the later Anthologies than as an Anthology in itself.

5. Agathias Scholasticus. – During the long period from the decline of original literature to the era when the imitative compositions of the Constantinopolitan grammarians had reached their height, we find no more Anthologies. The next was the Kūkxos émiypaundtav of AGAthlAs SchoLASTICUs, who lived in the time of Justinian. It was divided into seven books, according to subjects, the first book containing dedicatory poems; the second, descriptions of places, statues, pictures, and other works of art; the third, epitaphs; the fourth, poems on the various events of human life ; the fifth, satiric epigrams; the sixth, amatory; the seventh, exhortations to the enjoyment of life. This was the earliest Anthology which was arranged according to subjects. The poems included in it were those of recent writers, and chiefly those of Agathias himself and of his contemporaries, such as Paulus Silentiarius and Macedonius. [AGATHIAs.]

6. The Anthology of Constantinus Cephalas, or the Palatine Anthology. – Constantinus Cephalas appears to have lived about four centuries after Agathias, and to have flourished in the tenth century, under the emperor Constantinus Porphyrogenitus. The labours of preceding compilers may be viewed as merely supplementary to the Garland of Meleager; but the Anthology of Constantinus Cephalas was an entirely new collection from the preceding Anthologies and from original sources. As has been said above [CEPHALAs) nothing is known of Constantine himself. Modern scholars had never even heard his name till it was brought to light by the fortunate discovery of Salmasius. That great scholar, when a very young man, visited Heidelberg about the end of the year 1606, and there, in the library of the Electors Palatine, he found the MS. collection of Greek epigrams, which was afterwards removed to the Vatican, with the rest of the Palatine library (1623), and has become celebrated under the names of the Palatine Anthology and the Vatican Codea of the Greek Anthology.” Salmasius at once saw that it was quite a different work from the Planudean Anthology. He collated it with Wechel's edition of the latter, and copied out those epigrams which were not contained in the latter. The work thus discovered soon became known among the scholars of the day as the Anthologia inedita codicis Palatini. The MS. is written on

* The MS. was transferred to Paris, upon the peace of Tolentino, in 1797; and, after the peace of 1815, it was restored to its old home at Heidelberg, where it now lies in the University library.

parchment. of a quarto form, though somewhat longer than it is broad, and contains 710 pages, without reckoning three leaves at the commencement, which are stuck together, and which are also full of epigrams. The writing is by different hands. The index prefixed to the MS. and the first 453 pages are in an ancient handwriting; then follows a later hand, up to p. 644; then again an older handwriting to p. 705. The rest is by a hand later than either of the others, and in the same writing are some additions in the other parts of the work, the leaves which are stuck together at the beginning, and some pages which had been left vacant by the former writers. The numbers of the pages are added by a still later hand, and the first three leaves are not included in the numbering. The most ancient handwriting is supposed to be of the eleventh century. The time of the others cannot be fixed with any certainty. But not only is it thus evident that the MS. was written by different persons and at different times, but it is also quite clear that the original design of the work has been materially altered by the successive writers. There is an index at the beginning, which states the contents of each book of the collection, but, as the MS. now stands, its actual contents do not agree with this index. (The exact amount of the discrepancies is stated by Jacobs, who prints the index in his Prolegomena, p. lxv.) The inference drawn from these variations is that the present MS. is copied from an older one, the contents of which are represented by the index, but that the copyists have exercised their own judgment in the arrangement of the epigrams, and in the addition of some which were not in the older MS. It may further be pretty safely assumed that the older MS. was the Anthology as compiled by Constantinus Cephalas, the contents of which the index represents. But even in the index itself there are discrepancies; for it consists of two parts, the first of which professes to give the contents of the book, and the second their arrangement; but these parts disagree with one another, as well as with the contents of the MS. itself. The order given in the index is as follows (we give the titles in an abbreviated form):—

a. td Töv Xploriavóv.

B. td Xpuatoãapov too Omēafov.

7. épartiká čtiypáuuata.

6. dva6 nuatuká.

e. étritisuéa.

s. éttöektukù.

{. trporpettuká.

m. a kamtiká.

0. Stoatavos toū Sapātavos.

1. 81aq).jpwv uétpwv Štápopa roypáuuata.

ta. Öpitumtiká kal Ypsipa ovuuixta.

16. 'Iwdvvov Ypauwatukov Tāons ékopparis.

ty. Xupuyè Qeokpitou kal mtépuyes Xuatov.

Awardöa Bauds. Bogavtivov dov kal reAékus. 18. 'Avakpéovros Tutov. te. TPeyopiou kNoyal, k.T.A.

The actual contents, however, are as follows:– Pauli Silentiarii Ecphrasis, to p. 40; S. Gregorii Eclogae, to p. 49 : Epigrammata Christiana, to p. 63; Christodori Ecphrasis, to p. 76; Epigrammata Cyzicena, to p. 81 ; Prooemia Meleagri, Philippi, Agathiae, to p. 87; Amatoria, to p. 140; Dedicatoria, to p. 207; Sepulcralia, to p. 326 ; Epigrammata S. Gregorii, to p. 357; 'Erlöeuktuká, to p. 488; Ilpot pertiká, to p. 507; >vurotiká, to p. 517; Xkwrtiká, to p. 568; Stratonis Musa Puerilis, to p. 607 : Epigrammata variis metris conscripta, to p. 614; Problemata arithmetica et aenigmata, to p. 643; Joannis Gazae Ephrasis, to p. 665; Syrin.r Theocriti, &c. pp. 670–674; Anacreontis Carnina, to p. 692; Carmina quaedam Gregorii et aliorum, to p. 707; Epigrammata in Hippodromo Constantinopolitano, to p. 710. These contents are divided into fifteen books, which do not however include the first two heads of the above list, pp. 1–49 of the MS.; but the first book begins with the Christian Epigrams, on p. 49. In this respect, as well as in the number of books, the actual arrangement is the same as that of the index given above ; but the titles of the books are not the same throughout, as will be seen by the following table, which represents the contents of the fifteen books of the Palatine Anthology, and the number of epigrams in each of them, and the pages of the MS., as printed in Jacobs's edition:—

[ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors]

Jacobs supposes that the chapter containing the wooga trauðukň of Straton was the last in the Anthology of Cephalas, and that the remaining parts were added by copyists, excepting perhaps the section which contains the epigrams in various metres. His reason is, that these latter portions of the work are without prefaces.

Of the compiler, Constantine, and his labours, the only mention made is in the MS. itself. In one passage (p. 81) a marginal scholion states that Constantine arranged the Garland of Meleager, dividing it into different chapters; namely, amatory, dedicatory, monumental, and epideictic. The work itself, however, shows that this is not all that Constantine did, and that the mention of Meleager and of the titles of each section are only given by way of example. There are also prefaces to each book or section, in which the copyist quotes Constantine (sometimes by name, sometimes not) as explaining the character and design of the work (pp. 141, 207, bis, 358, 439, 507, 517). In one of these passages he is called 6 uakáptos ral detumatos kai tpiróðmtos évépatros. There are also three passages, in which an unknown person of the

name of Gregory is mentioned (if the meaning is rightly interpreted) as having copied inscriptions which Cephalas received from him and included in his work (pp. 254, 255). Another mention of Gregory furnishes an indication of the age of Cephalas. It is this: — p. 273, toàro to 'Ems7pauwa 3 Kepaxás is poeëáAeto èv to axox; Tijs Néas Ekkamaias inl tow uakaptov Tomyoptov too Maytaropos. Now, this New Church was built by the emperor Basilius I. Macedo, who reigned from 867 to 886 A. D. lt could not, therefore, have been till towards the end of the 9th century that Cephalas frequented this school. Now, at the beginning of the 10th century, literature suddenly revived under Constantinus Porphyrogenitus, who devoted especial attention to the making of abridgements and extracts and compilations from the ancient authors. This, therefore, seems the most probable time, to which the Anthology of Cephalas can be referred. The conjecture of Reiske, that Cephalas was the same person as his contemporary Constantinus Rhodius, has really no evidence for or against it, when we remember how common the name of Constantine was at this period. The Anthology of Cephalas seems to have been compiled from the old Anthologies, as a basis, with the addition of other epigrams. He appears to have extracted in turn from Meleager, Philip, Agathias, &c., those epigrams which suited his purpose, and his work often exhibits traces of the alphabetical order of the Garland of Meleager. With respect to arrangement, he seems to have taken the Kūkaos of Agathias as a foundation, for both works are alike in the division of their subjects, and in the titles prefixed to the epigrams. The order of the books, however, is different, and one book of Agathias, namely, the descriptions of works of art, is altogether omitted by Constantine. It is also to be observed that the Palatine Anthology contains ancient epigrams, which had not appeared in any of the preceding Anthologies, but had been preserved in some other way. For example, Diogenes Laërtius, as above mentioned, composed a book full of epigrams, and the same thing is supposed of Palladas and Lucillius. These writers were later than Philip, but yet too old to be included among the “recent poets” of Agathias. Their epigrams are generally found together in the Vatican Codex. There remains to be mentioned an interesting point in the history of the Vatican Codex. We learn from the Codex itself (pp. 273, 274) that a certain Michael Maximus had made a copy of the book of Cephalas, and that this copy was followed in some parts by the transcriber of the Vatican Codex. All other important details respecting the Vatican Codex, with a careful estimate of its merits, and a proof of its great excellence, will be found in Jacobs's Prolegomena, and in the preface to his edition of the Palatine Anthology. 7. The Anthology of Planudes is arranged in seven books, each of which, except the fifth and seventh, is divided into chapters according to subjects, and these chapters are arranged in alphabetical order. The chapters of the first book, for example, run thus : — 1. Els 'A'yajvas, 2. Eis dutrexov. 3. Eis dvathiuata, and so on to 91. Eis &pas. The contents of the books are as follows:– 1. Chiefly twoetxturé, that is, displays of skill in this species of poetry, in 91 chapters. 2. Jocular or satiric (akartiká), chaps. 53. 3. Sepulchral (éritisusta), chaps. 32. 4. Inscriptions on statues of athletes and other works of art, descriptions of places, &c. chaps. 33. 5. The Ecphrasis of Christodorus, and epigrams on statues of charioteers in the Hippodrome at Constantinople. 6. Dedicatory (āvatomuatiká), chaps. 27. 7. Amatory (épartiká). It should be observed that this division is altogether different from the seven books of the Anthology of Agathias, with which that of Planudes has sometimes been confounded. The opinion of Reiske, that Planudes collected chiefly those ancient epigrams which had been overlooked by Cephalas, is at once contradicted by a comparison of the two Anthologies, and can only have arisen from the circumstance that Reiske mistook the Leipzig copy of the Palatine Anthology for the complete work, whereas that copy only contains the epigrams which are not found in the Planudean Anthology. The true theory seems to be that of Brunck and Jacobs, namely, that Planudes did little more than abridge and re-arrange the Anthology of Constantinus Cephalas. Only a few epigrams are found in the Planudean Anthology, which are not in the Palatine. With respect to the fourth book of the Planudean, on works of art, &c., which is altogether wanting in the Palatine, it is supposed by Jacobs that the difference arises solely from the fact of our having an imperfect copy of the work of Cephalas. Jacobs has instituted a careful comparison between the contents of the two Anthologies (Proleg. pp. lxxxiii. — lxxxvii.), which places Brunck's theory beyond all doubt. From the time of its first publication, at the end of the 15th century, down to the discovery of the Palatine Anthology in the 17th, the Planudean Anthology was esteemed one of the greatest treasures of antiquity, and was known under the name of The Greek Anthology. Planudes, however, was but ill qualified for the duties of the editor of such a work. Devoid of true poetical taste, he brought to his task the conceit and rashness of a mere literatus. The discovery of the Palatine Anthology soon taught scholars how much they had over-estimated the worth of the Anthology of Planudes. On comparing the two collections, it is manifest that Planudes was not only guilty of the necessary carelessness of a mere compiler, but also of the wilful faults of a conceited monk, tampering with words, “expurgating" whole couplets and epigrams, and interpolating his own frigid verses. He reaped the reward which often crowns the labours of bad editors who undertake great works. The pretensions of his compilation ensured its general acceptance, and prevented, not only the execution of a better work, which in that age could scarcely be hoped for, but, what was far more important, the multiplication of copies of the more ancient Anthologies; and thus modern scholars are reduced to one MS. of the Anthology of Cephalas, which, excellent as it is, leaves many hopeless difficulties for the critic.


a. The Anthology of Marimus Planudes.

1. There are several codices of the Planudean Anthology (Fabric. Bill. Graec. vol. ii. pp. 430–

437). The first printed edition was published about 150 years after the compilation of the work by Planudes, under the following title ;-'Av60A07ía 5taqāpav Šminpaupérwy, doxalois avvrebetuévov oroqois, éti Suaq,6pots wrotéveauv, pumveias éxávrww insteigw kal Trpayuárwv i yewouévar, fi as Yevouévav dopii) mauv. Ampuévov 6: eis étá Tuijuara toû BiéAtov kal towtwweis kepāAala kaid ortoixetov Šléktebeiuévov, 7.45e répuéxei sporovEis dyāvas –then follow the epigrams: it was edited by Janus Lascaris, and printed at Florence, 1494, 4to.; it is printed in capital letters. This Editio Princeps is by far the best of the early editions; the errors of the press are much fewer than in the Aldine and Wechelian editions; and the text is a faithful representation of the MS. from which it is printed. At the end of the work is a Greek poem by Lascaris, and a Latin letter by him to Pietro di Medici, occupying seven pages, which are wanting in several of the still existing copies of this rare work: these seven pages were reprinted by Maittaire, in his Anal. Typ. vol. i. pp. 272—283. 2. The first and best of the Aldine editions was printed at Venice, 1503, 8vo., under the title: Florilegium dirersorum Epigrammatum in Septem Libros —'Av6oxoyia 5taqāpwv 'Eniypauluárwv, and so on, nearly as in the title of Lascaris. The text is a reprint of the edition of Lascaris, but less accurate. It contains nineteen additional epigrams; but its great value consists in an appendix of various readings from MS. codices. Reprints of this edition in 1517 and 1519 are mentioned by some bibliographers, but it is very probable that the dates are erroneously given, and that the edition of 1503 is the one meant to be described. 3. The next edition was the Juntine, 1519, under the title: Florilegium diversorum Epigrammatum, &c., as in the Aldine: and at the end, Impressum Florentiae per heredes Philippi Juntae Florentini. Anno a Virginis nuntio dair. supra mille. It is a mere reprint of the Aldine, with some differences of arrangement, and with more misprints. 4. Two years later, Aldus himself published a second edition: Florilegium, &c. Solerti nuper repurgatum cura. MDxxi. 8vo. The title-page goes on to state that the errors of the former edition were corrected in this: but the fact is that this is a still more inaccurate reprint of the former edition, with a few variations, especially the reception into the text of some very bad various readings from the Appendix to the first edition. 5. The edition of Badius or the Ascensian, Paris, 1531, 8vo., is an inaccurate reprint of the second Aldine. It is very scarce. 6. A few years later, the first attempt at a commentary on the Anthology was made by Vincentius Opsopoeus, in his work entitled : In Graecorum Epigrammatum Libros quatuor Annotationes longe doctissimae quam primum in lucem editae. Vincentio Opsopoeo Auctore. Cum Indice. Basil. 1540, 4to. Its value is very small. 7. A much better commentary accompanied the edition of Brodaeus: Epigrammatum Gruecorum Libri VII. annotationibus Joanni Brodaei Turomensis illustrati, quibus additus est in calce operis rerum as vocum eaplicatarum Inder. Basil. 1549, fol. 8. A very accurate reprint of the second Aldine edition, with new Indices, appeared at Venice, ap. Petrum et Jo. Mariam Nicolenses Salienses, 1550. 8vo. It is extremely rare: Jacobs even states in his Proleyomena that he had not seen it: Brunck, however, used a copy of it. 9. About the same time the third Alline edition was printed by the sons of Aldus, Venet. 1550– 1551, 8vo. It is the fullest, and the most sought after of the Aldine editions, but not the best. Though some of the errors of the second Aldine edition are corrected, those of the first are generally retained, and a new source of the worst sort of errors is supplied by numerous conjectural emendations. The additions are very trifling. Stephanus calls the edition rich in nothing but faults, of which, he says, there are many thousands. 10. The next and the best known of the old editions is that of H. Stephanus, 1566 : 'Avôoxoysa 3.a46pav Čiriypauud row traxaičv eis ém'rd Biêxia biopmuévn. Florilegium dirersorum epigrammatum reterum, in septem libros dirisum, magno epigrammatum numero et duobus indicibus auctum. Anno M.D.LY VI. Ercudebat Henricus Stephanus, 4to. The distich which Stephanus inscribed on his titlepage, “Pristinus a mendis fuerat lepor ante fugatus: Nunc profugae mendae, nunc lepor ille redit,”

gives a higher estimate of the value of his labours than modern critics have been able to assign to them. Its excellencies consist in the addition of a large number of epigrams, not contained in any of the former editions, of the Scholia of Maximus Planudes, and of a commentary by Stephanus himself. Its chief faults are the arbitrary alterations in the arrangement of the epigrams, many rash conjectural emendations of the text, and the imperfections of the notes, which, though confessed by Stephanus himself to be brief, contain, on the other hand, much irrelevant matter. This work stands at the head of what may be called the third family of editions of the Anthology: the first comprising that of Lascaris, the first Aldine, and the Juntine; and the second, the second Aldine and the Ascensian. 11. The Wechelian edition (Francofirti apud Claudium Marnium et Jo. Aubrium, 1600, fol.) is, in the text, a mere reprint of that of Stephanus, with few of its errors corrected, and many new ones introduced. It is, however, of considerable value, as it contains, besides some new Scholia, and the notes of Opsopoeus and Stephanus, the whole of the excellent commentary of Brodaeus. In spite of its faults, it remained for nearly two centuries, until the publication of Brunck's Analecta, the standard edition of the Greek Anthology. 12. The Commelinian edition, 1604, 4to. (reprinted at Cologne, 1614), only deserves mention on account of the literal Latin version, by Eilhard Lubinus. 13. The last and most perfect of the editions of the Planudean Anthology is that which was commenced by Hieronymus de Bosch, and finished, after his death, by Jacobus Van Lennep, in 5 vols. 4to. Ultraj. 1795, 1797, 1798, 1810, 1822. This splendid edition (at least as to its outward form) is not only useful for those who wish to read the Greek Anthology in the form in which it was compiled by Planudes, but it is valuable on account of the large mass of illustrative matter which it contains, including the notes of Huet, Sylburg, and other scholars; but above all for the metrical Latin versions of Hugo Grotius, which are esteemed

by far the best of his productions in that department of scholarship, and which have never been printed except in this edition. The Greek text, however, is only a reprint of the Wechelian edition, with many of its worst errors uncorrected. It is now necessary to go back to the period when the discovery of the Palatine Codex placed the Greek Anthology in an entirely new light.

b. Editions of the Palatine Anthology.

It is a curious fact that, for more than two hundred years from the discovery of the Palatine Anthology by Salmasius, every project for publishing a complete edition of it was left unfinished, and this important service to literature was only performed about thirty years ago, by the late Frederick Jacobs. l. Salmasius, as might naturally be expected from the discoverer of such a treasure, continued to devote the utmost attention to the Anthology, so that, his biographer tells us, he scarcely spent a day without reading and making notes upon it. By other avocations, however, and by quarrels with the Leyden printers, who refused to publish the Greek text without a Latin version, and with Walesius, who would not assist in the labour except on the condition of having his own name prefixed to the work, Salmasius was prevented from completing his intended edition. He left behind him, however, a large mass of notes and of unedited epigrams, which were only discovered by Brunck in the year 1777, after he had published his Analecta. We believe they have never been published; but they were used by Jacobs in his Notes. 2. After the repeated delay of the promised edition of Salmasius, Lucas Langermannus undertook, at the instance of Isaac Vossius, a journey to Rome, for the purpose of making a new collation of the Vatican MS. with the Planudean Anthology; and Fabricius states (Bibl. Graec. vol. iv. p. 440) that he saw at Hamburg the copy of the Anthology which contained the MS. notes of Langermannus. The whole scheme, however, which seems to have been formed by Vossius in a spirit of rivalry to Salmasius, was abandoned on the death of the latter in 1653. 3. Meanwhile several MS. Copies of the Vatican Codear were made, all of which were founded on the collations of Salmasius, Sylburg, and Langermann, and all of which were superseded by the transcript made by the Abbate Joseph Spalletti, in 1776. This precious MS., the excellence of which is so great that it almost deserves to be called a sacsimile rather than a copy, was purchased from the heirs of Spalletti by Ernest II. Duke of Gotha and Altenburg, for the library at Gotha, and formed the basis of Jacobs's edition of the Palatine Anthology. Referring the reader to the Prolegomena of Jacobs for an account of the labours of D’Orville, Jensius, Leich, Reiske, Klotz, and Schneider, we proceed to mention those works which have superseded all former ones.

c. The Editions of Brunck and Jacols.

1. In the years 1772–1776, appeared the Analecta Veterum Poetarum Graecorum. Editore Rich. Fr. Ph. Brunck. Argentorati, 3 vols. 8vo., which contains the whole of the Greek Anthology, besides some poems which are not properly included under that title. The epigrams of the Anthology were edited by Bruck, from a careful comparison of the Planudeaul Anthology with various copies of the Vatican Codex; and they now appeared for the first time revised by a scholar competent to the task. Brunck also adopted a new arrangement, which certainly has its defects, but yet is invaluable for the student of the history of Greek literature: discarding altogether the books and chapters of the early Anthology, he placed together all the epigrams of each poet, and arranged the poets themselves in chronological order, placing those epigrams, the authors of which were unknown, under the separate head of d660 mora. Important as Brunck's edition was when it was published, it is now unnecessary to give any further account of it, as it has been entirely superseded by the edition of Jacobs, who gives, in his Prolegomena, an elaborate criticism on the labours of his predecessor, and of the few contributions which were made by other scholars to the emendation or explanation of the Anthology between the publication of Brunck's edition and of his own. The Lectiones of Brunck are an indispensable supplement to the Analecta. 2. The original plan of Jacobs was only to form a complete commentary on Brunck's Analecta, but the scarceness of copies of that work induced him to reprint it, omitting those parts which do not properly belong to the Greek Anthology, and carefully re-editing the whole. The result of his labours was a work which ranks most deservedly as the standard edition of the Greek Anthology. It is in 13 vols. 8vo, namely, 4 vols. of the Text, one of Indices, and three of Commentaries, divided into eight parts. The titles and contents are as follow:—Wols. 1–4. Anthologia Graeca, sire Poetarum Graecorum Lusus. Ear Recensione Brunckii. Indices et Commentarium adjecit F. Jacobs, Lips. 1794, 4 vols. 8vo. ; Vol. 5. Indices in Epigrammala quae in Analectis Veterum Poetarum a Brunckio editis reperiuntur, Auctore F. Jacobs, Lips. 1795, containing (l) an alphabetical index of the first lines of the epigrams in Brunck's Ana. lecta, in the Planudean Anthology, in the Miscellanea Lipsiensia, and in the Anthology of Reiske ; (2) An Index to the Planudean Anthology, with references to the pages of Stephanus, Wechel, and Brunck ; (3) An Index to Klotz's Edition of the Musa Puerilis of Straton, with references to the pages of Brunck ; (4) a similar Index to the Anthologies of Reiske and Jensius; (5) Geographical Index to the Analecta; (6) Index of Proper Names ; (7) Arguments of the Epigrams. Vols. 6—13. F. Jacobs Animadversiones in Epigrammata Anthologiae Graecue secundum ordinem Analectorum Brunckii, vol. i. partes i. ii. Lips. 1798, containing the Preface, Prolegomena in quibus Historia Anthologiae Graccae narratur, and the Notes to the Epigrams in vol. i. of the Analecta ; vol. ii. partes i. ii. iii. Lips. 1799–1801, containing the Notes on vol. ii. of the Analecta ; vol. iii. partes i. ii. Lips. 1802-3, containing the Notes on vol. iii. of the Analecta, p. iii. Lips. 1814, completing the Addenda et Emendanda, and containing the following Induces: (1) Graecitatis; (2) Poetarum et capitum in Anthologia; (3) Verborum quae in Animadv. eaplicantur ; (4) Rerum in Animadv. illust. , (5) Scriptorum in Animadv. illust. ; with the following most important Appendices : (1) Paralipomena er Codice Palatino, or Mantissa Epigrammatum Vaticani Codicis, quae in Brunckii Analectis desiderantur ; (2) Epigrammula ex Libris cduis et Marmoribus collecta ;

(3) Catalogus Poetarum qui Epigrammata scripserunt, which contains, not a mere list of names, but a full account of each of the writers." 3. In editing his Anthologia Graeca, Jacobs had the full benefit of the Palatine Anthology. Not content with the almost perfect copy of Spalletti (the Apographum Gothanum), he availed himself of the services of Uhden, then Prussian ambassador at Rome, who collated the copy once more with the original codex in the Vatican. The important results are to be found in Jacobs's emendations of Brunck's text, in his corrections of many of Brunck's errors in the assignment of epigrams to wrong authors, and in his Appendix of 213 epigrams from the Vatican MS. which are wanting in the Analecta. In the mean time he formed the design of rendering to scholarship the great service of printing an exact and complete edition of this celebrated Codex. In the preface to his Anthologia Palatina, he gives a most interesting account of his labours, and of the principles on which he proceeded. It is enough here to state that he followed the rule (always a good one, but absolutely essential where there is only one MS.), to represent exactly the reading of the MS., even if it gave no sense, unless the necessary correction was clear beyond all doubt, placing all doubtful and conjectural emendations in the margin. After the printing of the text was completed, the unlookedfor restoration of the MS. to the University Library at Heidelberg afforded an opportunity for a new collation, which was made by A. J. Paulssen, who has given the results of it in an Appendix to the third volume of Jacobs's Antho!ogia Palatina. This work may therefore be considered an all but perfect copy of the Palatine Codex, and is therefore invaluable for the critical study of the Anthology. The following is its title: Anthologia Graeca, ad Fidem Codicis Palatini, nunc Parisini, ea Apographo Gothano edita. Curavit, Epigrammata in Codice Palatino desiderata et Annotationem Criticam adjecit, F. Jacobs. Lips. 1813—1817, 8vo. ; in 3 vols., of which the first two contain the text of the Palatine Anthology, with an Appendix of Epigrams which are not found in it, including the whole of the fourth and parts of the other books of the Planudean Anthology,

* This is the edition of the Anthology to which the references in the Dictionary are generally made ; but the references are for the most part to the pages of Brunck, which are given in the margin, and which are those always referred to by Jacobs himself in his Notes and Indices. The practice of writers is diverse on this point, some quoting the Analecta, and some the books and numbers of the Palatine Anthology. The latter practice has its advantages, especially as Tauchnitz's cheap reprint of Jacobs's Anthologia Palatina is probably the form in which most persons possess the Anthology; but the Anthologia Graeca of Jacobs is so much the most valuable edition for the scholar, that this consideration is enough to determine the mode of reference. It is to be most earnestly hoped that, in any future edition of the Anthology, the arrangement of Brunck will still be preserved, and his pages be given in the margin, and that a great defect of Jacobs's edition will be supplied, namely, a comparative index of the pages of Brunck and the chapters and numbers of the Palatine Authology.

« 前へ次へ »