صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

est, memoriam ipsam abolevit. Nam fuit quoddam tempus tenebricosum et barbarum, quo Longobardis Italiam tenentibus, romano que imperio per socordiam principium et fortunæ inconstantiam. deleto, omnis bonarum artium lux, omnis litterarum gloria extincta est. Tunc etiam in illa pretiosa volumina, quæ tot eruditorum hominum manus elaboraverunt, ubi tot ingeniorum divitiæ latebant, miserrima cæde, sævitum est. Rapidis urebantur flammis litteratorum longæ vigila, situ tenebrisque marcebant clarissima artium lumina, ad tabernas denique et deterrimos usus doctissimæ membranæ veniebant. O conditiones miseras regnorum atque nationum! Illi scilicet Itali, quibus summam copiam ingenii, facultatemque dicendi natura largita est.'

These commiserations and regrets were to be expected from a scholar with the defaced and mutilated manuscripts of the Ambrosian library before him. Every circumstance which impairs the means of knowledge, is to be deplored as an evil, since mankind cannot find the level which is suitable to their nature, in ignorance and barbarism. The loss, therefore, of books, which are the lights of the world, must be regarded by every friend to the improvement of the human, species, as a calamity. But all the books which Maius deplores as lost to Italy, were not lost to the world many of them were dispersed through other parts of Europe, and only waited the invention of an art which has so multiplied copies, and provided the means of preserving them, that neither Goths nor Monks are likely to restore the reign of ignorance and barbarism.

Among the causes which have deprived us of many of the literary treasures of antiquity, there is one that must particularly excite our regret. From the accidental losses of this kind, occasioned by the fury of fire, or the rage of barbarians, or the slow-consuming hand of time, it might not have been possible to rescue those valuable articles; but when we learn, that by the very persons who undertook to be the preservers of literature, many of the injuries which it has sustained, have been produced, we must deplore the negligence or the avarice which induced them to transcribe the writings that they copied, in such a manner as proved destructive to those of more value. Either from the actual inability to procure fresh materials, or from an ill judged frugality, and probably, in but too many instances, from mere. carelessness, the copyists of ancient manuscripts were accustomed to erase or wash out the writing which they contained, that they might use the parchment for writing out some new work. Thus, a drama of Euripides, or an oration of Cicero was, ohliterated for ever, to be substituted by a legend of Saint Anthony or Saint Ursula. This practice had commenced among the Latin scribes so early as the seventh century: the Greek copyists appear to have been much later in adopting it. To manuscripts of this kind, the term Palimpsesti is applied by the Greeks, and

that of Rescripti by the Latins. The Codex Ephrem, one of the oldest and most valuable of all the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, is a Codex Rescriptus, the ancient writing having been defaced for the purpose of the works of Ephrem the Syrian, a writer of the fourth century, being inserted. The Manuscripts from which Maio has published these Fragments, are of the same description, having been used a second time to write on, after the original writing had been discharged.

The Ambrosian library, in which these documents had been lurking for ages in dust and darkness, was founded by Cardinal Federigo Borromeo, nephew of the celebrated Sir Charles Borromeo, Archbishop of Milan, in the seventeenth century. Among the treasures with which it was enriched by the munificent Cardinal, were the manuscripts which had belonged to a monastery at Bobbio, a small town of Upper Italy, founded in the year 812, by Columbano, and which, it appears, had been at least in part, collected by its president, Gerbert Gallus, afterwards Silvester II. On examining one of those manuscripts, Maio, Curator of the Ambrosian library, was agreeably surprised by discovering a twofold writing, one series of letters being inscribed across the other, and bearing indisputable marks of an early age. The less ancient writing contained the works of Sedulius, a Christian poet of the fifth century, and is supposed to be as old as the seventh or eighth whilst the original letters of the manuscript were, on close inspection, pronounced by Maio to contain some Fragments of Orations which he ascribed to Cicero. The pleasure afforded to the worthy Curator of the Ambrosian library by this discovery, if we may judge from his expressions, was truly exquisite. O Deus immortalis, repente sustuli, quid demum video! En Ciceronem, en lumen romanæ facundiæ indignissimis tenebris circum'septum!' And certainly, his gratitude on the occasion, if it may be assumed as a specimen of the manner in which his piety manifests itself for the favours dispensed to him, indicates a high sense of the privileges conferred upon him as the restorer in part of Cicero. Nostræ potius gratulemur ætati, cui Deus optimus maximus hanc laudem contulit, ut hi præstantissimi. • humanæ mentis fœtus ab oblivionis latebris nunc demum emergerent.' The classical remains thus brought to light, consist of Orations, supposed to be those of Cicero, pro Scauro, pro Tullio, and pro Flaccho. The first of these is the most considerable, and is accompanied by the notes of some ancient Scholiast.

Continuing his researches in the Ambrosian library, the Editor was fortunate enough to discover a manuscript Latin version of the acts of the Council of Chalcedon. This too was a Codex Rescriptus, the ancient writing of which was found to contain

fragments of three other Orations of Cicero, with a Commentary which is attributed by Maio to Asconius Pedianus, whom he endeavours to shew to have been the contemporary of Virgil and Livy. Of these three Orations, the first is In P. Clodium et Curionem,' and relates to a violation of decorum committed by Clodius in the house of the Pontifex Maximus, C. Carsar, at the time that Pompeia, C. Cæsar's wife, was celebrating the rites of the Dea Bona. The second is De ære alieno Milonis,' and was pronouneed on the occasion of Milo's offering himself as a candidate for the consular dignity. The third is entitled De Rege Alexan'drino,' and relates to the establishment of Ptolemy Auletes in the kingdom of Egypt. In addition to these, the Commentary comprises illustrations of some of Cicero's Orations as included in the printed editions, namely, pro Archia, pro Sylla, pro Plancio, in Vatinium, in Catalinam IV, pro Marcello, pro Ligario, and pro Rege Deiotaro. The portions preserved of the last four, are very limited, containing only a few lines of the Orations, with the commentary annexed.

[ocr errors]

The Manuscripts from which the Fragments have been printed, are described in two separate dissertations, and two engravings, containing fac-similies of the writing, are annexed. The value of his discoveries, is rated considerably high by the Editor, whose enumeration of the benefits conferred by them upon classical literature, scarcely supports, however, the expressions which he has employed in reference to them. The speech De ære alieno Milonis,' was not previously known to have existed, no trace or mention of it any where occurring. From the Commentary, we learn the titles of two lost works of Cicero, Edictum P. Racili Tribuni Plebis, quod sub nomine ipsius Cicero incripsit. In Invectionem P. Clodi.-and, Epistola ad in'star voluminis de Consulatu suo ad Pompeium.' It also preserves a very small fragment of an oration of the Tribune C. Gracchus. The volume is throughout illustrated with the notes of the learned Editor. We shall lay before our reader a specimen or two of its contents.

[ocr errors]

From the Fragment pro Scauro.

Venio nunc ad testes, in quibus docebo non modo nullam fidem et auctoritatem, sed ne speciem quidem esse aut imaginem testium. Etenim, fidem primum ipsa tollit consensio, quæ late facta est compromisso Sardorum et conjuratione rogitata. Deinde illa cupiditas quæ suscepta est spe et promissione præmiorum. Postremo ipsa Natio, cujus tanta vanitas est, ut libertatem a servitute nulla re alia, nisi mentiendi licentia distinguendam putet. Neque ego Sardorum querellis moveri nos numquam oportere aio. Non sum aut tam inhumanus, aut tam alienus a Sardis, præsertim cum Frater meus nuper ab his decesserit, cum rei frumentaria Gn. Pompei missu præfuisset.'

!'Addo aio, quod deest in codice.'

In addition to this specimen of the text of Cicero, we shall subjoin the following sample of the Commentary published by Maius as the work of Ascanius Pedianus, In P. Clodium et Curionem,'

< Cum Calautica Capiti accomodaretur. "Operimenti genus, quo feminæ capita velabant hoc nomine ferebatur, Et Afranius meminit in Consobrinis ita dicens: "Cum Mithris, Calauticis." Inpudico igitur habitu erubescendi decoris quædam figura describitur. Atque ita se et in historia temporis huius commemoratio habet. C. Cæsaris Pontificis Maximi Prætoris domi sacrificium sollemne quod introierat, sacrificium instauratum est. Res ad senatum delata est. Patres Conscripti decreverunt, ut de ea re non alitur quam de incestu quæreretur. Eo crimini reus factus est. P. Cl. Pulcher, delatore L. Lentulo, qui cansul fuit post cum M. Marcello: subscribentibus. Gn. et L. Lentulis. Aurelia Cæsaris mater testis in iudicium accita est". Éa pro testimonio dixit, suo iussu eum esse dimissum. Idem dixit Iulia soror Cæsaris. Et tamen post hæc absolutus est.'

Calautica non Calantica hîc et inferius habet Codex noster antiquissimus. Et quidem ita etiam Ulpianus in Digestis Florentinis. Vide Vossium in Etymol. et Vinetum in notis ad Auson. Perioch. v. Odysseæ. Porro Glossarii veteris expositio calautica, ut sit des Cwns, plane refellitur a postro Commentario, ubi feminæ dicuntur hac relavisse capita.

[ocr errors]

Spatium est in Codice, quod replendum putavimus vocabulo operimenti, vel, si quis malit, ornamenti, aut voce aliqua Græca.

e Afranius Terentii pæne æqualis, elegantissimus fuit Togatarum scriptor. In eius fragmentis quæ supersunt, laudantur aliquot loci ex Consobrinis: verum hic erat adhuc ineditus. Codex autem evidenter habet mithris, non mitris.

• Cod. In iudicio ita est. Forte igitur scribendum: "Aurelia Cæsaris mater testis in iudicio, ita est, dixit pro testimonio, &c."'

Of the genuineness of these Fragments, the Editor appears to be fully confident; and the whole of the circumstances which relate to them, are certainly calculated to make a strong impression on the mind of the learned reader, in favour, not only of their antiquity, which can scarcely be questioned, but of their really being remains of the Roman Orator. Suspicions of their being spurious compositions have, however, already been thrown out, and the whole of the present publication will probably be subjected to a rigid examination. We know too well the figure which in the history of classical controversy some of Cicero's orations and letters have made, to expect that the Editor of the Fragments should receive the suffrages of every scholar in confirmation of his own opinion. If a determination of the question of genuineness, in its application to these remains, is to be formed from a particular example, the authorship of the Orations will be attributed to Cicero, or denied, as the parties may have already made up their minds in a particular instance. The speech for Marcellus is included in these Fragments, and assum

ing the genuineness of that speech, Maio in course will infer from its connexion with the other orations, parts of which are preserved in the same manuscript Commentary, the genuineness of the latter. The speech for Marcellus, has, however, been struck out by more than one accomplished scholar, from the list of Cicero's genuine Orations: and if any part of these fragmenta is to follow in the line of that decision, it is at the expense of the claims which their advocates may assert in their favour. The question can scarcely be determined from external evidence. And it cannot be surprising that, with the recollection of the controversy between Tunstall and Middleton on the Epistles to Brutus, and that in which Markland impeached, and Gesner defended, the authenticity of the four 'Orations, Ad Quirites post Reditum, Post Reditum in Senatu, Pro Domo sua ad Pontifices, and De Haruspicium Responsis, the fate of these Fragments should be dubious. Those persons who, on the strength of Markland's and Wolf's arguments, class those speeches, and the oration for Marcellus, with spurious imitations of Cicero, will probably be disposed to attribute the writing of the manuscripts of the Ambrósian Library, to the pen of some unknown but tolerably successful imitator of the style of the Roman Orator.

[ocr errors]

Art. III. An Historical and Literary Account of the Formularies, Confessions of Faith, or Symbolic Books, of the Roman Catholic, Greek, and principal Protestant Churches. By the Author of the Hora Biblica, and intended as a Supplement to that Work, and to the Sylloge Confessionum sub tempus Reformanda Ecclesiæ editarum, printed in 1804 at the Clarendon Press. pp. 215. 8vo. Price 7s. 6d. 1816.

MR. Butler has not informed us, with what precise view he has published the present work. He indeed states in the preface, that the object of these pages, is, to give some account of the principal Formularies' of Religion as mentioned in the Title to the Volume. We can scarcely be satisfied, however, that this was exclusively his object. It would seem to us, from the concluding remarks, that the Author intended this Historical Account as an instrument for preparing the way towards an assumption of more enlarged authority by the Holy Catholic Church of Rome; and we should not hazard much of our credit for sagacity, were we to venture the conjecture, that Mr. Wix is indebted to Mr. Butler's work for some part of the stimulus which impelled him to propose the grand measure of a General Council to settle the differences between the Church of England and the Church of Rome. Mr. Butler, however, appears to be a much more truly liberal man than Mr. Wix, and would have no objection to extend the limits of his 'tolerant principles to an extent far beyond the Divine, whose

« السابقةمتابعة »