4 A HISTORY OF CLASSICAL SCHOLARSHIP I 2Lont)cm: C. J. CLAY and SONS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE. ffilaegoh): 5°. ILeipjtg: F. A. BROCKHAUS. lorfe: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 33ombag anti (Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd. [All Rights reserved .] SCENES FROM THE SCHOOLS OF ATHENS EARLY IN THE FIFTH CENTURY B.C. Vase-painting by Duris on a Cylix, with red figures on black ground, found at Caere, and now in the Berlin Antiquarium. Frontispiece , described on p. 42. A HISTORY OF CLASSICAL SCHOLARSHIP FROM THE SIXTH CENTUR Y B.C. TO THE END OF THE MIDDLE AGES BY JOHN EDWIN SANDYS, Litt.D., PHI| FELLOW AND LECTURER OF ST JOHN S COLLEGE, AND PUBLIC ORATOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, D. DUBLIN S a S'/ CAMBRIDGE AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 1903 BOOK m SI ■ 5 $ ficn Quid est aetas hominis, nisi ea memorid rerum veterum cum superiorum aetate contexitur ? Cicero, Orator, § 120. O ' WEIZi . Library boston college PREFACE. HE present work owes its origin to the fact that, some nine JL years ago, at the kind suggestion of my friend Professor Jebb, I was invited by the editor of Social England to prepare a brief survey of the History of Scholarship, which was included in the volumes published in 1896 and 1897. In course of time I formed a plan for a more comprehensive treatment of the History of Classical Scholarship in general, which should begin with its birth in the Athenian age, should trace its growth in the Alexandrian and Roman times, and then pass onwards, through the Middle Ages, to the Revival of Learning, and to the further developements in the study of the ancient Classics among the nations of Europe and in the English-speaking peoples across the seas. I was already familiar with the Outlines of the History of Classical Philology by Professor Gudeman of Philadelphia; and I may add that, if, in place of the eighty pages of his carefully planned Outlines , the learned author of that work had produced a complete History on the same general lines, there might have been little need for any other work on the same subject in the English language. But, in the absence of any such History, it appeared to be worth my while to endeavour to meet this obvious want, and, a few years ago, my proposal to prepare a general History of Classical Scholarship was accepted by the Syndics of the University Press. My aim has been, so far as practicable, to produce a readable book, which might also serve as a work of reference. I confess that the work has grown under my hands to a far larger bulk than VI PREFACE. I had ever contemplated; but, when I reflect that a German ‘ History of Classical Philology which does not go beyond the fourth century of our era, fills as many as 1900 large octavo pages, I am disposed to feel (like Warren Hastings) ‘ astounded at my moderation ’. I had hoped to complete the whole of my task in a single volume, but this has proved impossible, owing mainly to the vast extent and the complexity of the literature connected with the history of classical learning in the West of Europe during the eight centuries of the Middle Ages. In studying this part of my subject, I have found myself compelled to struggle with a great array of texts, in various volumes of the Rolls Series, the Monumenta Germaniae Historica , and Migne’s Patrologia Latina; and to master the contents of a multitude of scattered mono¬ graphs in French, German and Italian, as well as English, publi¬ cations. With these and other resources I have endeavoured to trace the later fortunes of the Latin Classics, to deal with all the more important indications of the mediaeval knowledge of Greek, and to give an outline of the Scholastic Philosophy. Without taking some account of the latter, it is impossible to have an adequate understanding of the literature of the Middle Ages. And it is a necessary part of my subject, in so far as it arose out of the study of translations of Greek texts, and was inextricably bound up with the successive stages in the gradual expansion of the mediaeval knowledge of the works of Aristotle. But, in tracing the general course of a form of philosophy, which, however valu¬ able as a kind of mental gymnastic, was on the whole unfavourable to the wide and liberal study of the great masterpieces of Classical Literature, I have mainly confined myself to the points of immediate contact with the History of Scholarship; and thus (if I may give a new turn to a phrase in Seneca), quae philosophia fuit, facta philologia est \ In the work in general I have studied the History of Scholarship in connexion with the literary, and even, to some slight extent, the political history of each period. But the treat- 1 Ep. 108 § 23 . PREFACE. Vll ment of the principal personages portrayed in the course of the work has not been on any rigidly uniform scale. Thus, among the three great authors of far-reaching influence, who stand on the threshold of the Middle Ages, there is necessarily far less to be said about the personality of Priscian than about that of Boethius or of Cassiodorus. Many names of minor importance, which are only incidentally mentioned in the text, have been excluded from the final draft of the Index, and space has thus been found for the fuller treatment of more important names, such as those of Aristotle and Plato, Cicero and Virgil. The study of the subject will, I trust, be further facilitated by means of the twelve chrono¬ logical tables. A list of these will be found on page xi. Of the twelve divisions of my subject (set forth on page 14), the first six are included in the present volume, which aims at being complete so far as it extends, and, in point of time, covers as many as nineteen of the twenty-five centuries, with which those divisions are concerned. In continuation of this work, I hope to produce, at no distant date, a separate volume on the History of Scholarship from the time of Petrarch to the present day. The first draft of a large part of that volume has already been pre¬ pared, and, in the Easter Vacation of last year, I was engaged in the further study of the literature of the Renaissance, as well as of certain portions of the Middle Ages, in the hospitable libraries of Florence. In the spring of the present year I visited the homes of mediaeval learning on the Loire, and also studied the sculptured and the written memorials of the mediaeval system of education, which still survive as a visible embodiment of the influences that moulded the mind of John of Salisbury in ‘the classic calm of Chartres \ It is a pleasure to conclude this preface by offering the tribute of my thanks to all who in any way have helped towards the completion of what has unavoidably proved a very laborious undertaking. My gratitude is due, in the first place, to the Syndics of the University Press, and to the staff of the same, Vlll PREFACE. not forgetting the ever-attentive Reader, who (besides more important corrections) has endeavoured to reduce the spelling of mediaeval names to a uniformity little dreamt of in the Middle Ages themselves. If, in the next place, I may here record my thanks to those under whose influence this volume has been prepared, I cannot forget the friend who (as I have stated in the opening words of this preface) gave the first impulse which led to the ultimate production of the present work. If, again, I may give a single example of all that I owe to two other scholars— one of whom I have happily known for forty years, the other, alas ! for too few—a hint from the late Lord Acton gave me my first clear impression of the erudition of Vincent of Beauvais; a word from Professor Mayor set me at work on Joannes de Garlandia. Among the Fellows of Trinity, Dr Henry Jackson has been good enough to supply me with a clear statement of his views on Plato’s Cratylus , and Mr James Duff has kindly tested and confirmed my opinion as to a point connected with the mediaeval study of Lucretius 1 . The College catalogues and other works of Dr James have brought to my knowledge not a few points of interest in the mediaeval manuscripts of Cambridge. I have thus been led to include among the facsimiles an autograph of Lanfranc, an extract from a copy of the works of John of Salisbury, which once belonged to Becket, and the colophon of an early transcript of a translation by William of Moerbeke. Four of the facsimiles are here published for the first time. To Sir Edward Maunde Thompson, and to his publishers, Messrs Kegan Paul and Co., I am indebted for the use of five of the many facsimiles which adorn his well-known Handbook of Greek and Latin Palaeography. I have also borrowed two short extracts from the three hundred facsimiles in Chatelain’s Paleographie des Classiques Latins , and one from those in Wattenbach and von Velsen’s Exempla Codicum Graecorum. I have to thank the Registrary of the University for the use of a single illustra- 1 p. 515 n. 3. PREFACE. IX tion (and the offer of more) from his important volume on the Care of Books; and I gratefully recall the trouble taken on my behalf by the Librarian and the staff of the University Library; by the Librarians of Peterhouse, Gonville and Caius, Corpus Christi, Magdalene, and Trinity Colleges ; by the Librarian and Assistant Librarian of my own College ; and by one of my former pupils, Professor Rapson, of the British Museum. My debt to the published works of scholars at home and abroad is fully shown in the notes to the following pages. J. E. SANDYS. Merton House, Cambridge, October , 1903. S. b . - * - -v' : . CONTENTS. List of Illustrations. Titles of Certain Works of Reference Abbreviations. Addenda and Corrigenda. Outline of Principal Contents of pp. i—650 Index . Greek Index . PAGE xii XV xviii xviii xix 651 672 CONSPECTUS OF CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES. Greek Literature &rc. page c . 840— 300 b.C. 18 c. 300 — 1 b.C .104 I— 300 A.D .262 300— 600 A.D. 340 600 —IOOO A.D. 378 IOOO— 1453 A.D .4OO Latin Literature Lfc. * page c. 300— 1 B.C .166 1— 300A.D.,....186 300— 600 A.D.204 600— IOOO A.D .430 IOOO —1200 A.D .496 1200—I4OO A.D. ..538 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. (1) Scenes from the Schools of Athens, early in the fifth century B.C., from a vase-painting by Duris on a Cylix with red figures on a black ground, found at Caere in 1872 and now in the Berlin Antiquarium (no. 2285). Reproduced partly from the large coloured copy in Monumenti del Institute ?, ix (1873), pi. 54, and partly from the small lithographed outline in the Archdologische Zeitung , xxxi (1874), 1—14. The central design is from the inside, the rest from the outside of the Cylix . . Frontispiece , described on p. 42 (2) Masks of Comedy and Tragedy. British Museum . . 51 (3) Seated figure of ‘ Aristotle ’. Spada Palace , Rome . . 66 (4) From the earliest extant ms of the Phaedo of Plato; Petrie papyrus in the British Museum . . . . . . . . . 87 (5) Portrait of Alexander the Great; on a silver tetradrachm of Lysimachus, king of Thrace. British Museum . . . . . . . 102 (6) Portraits of Ptolemy I and II, Founders of the Alexandrian Library; on a gold octadrachm of Ptolemy II and Arsinoe II. British Museum 143 (7) Portrait of Eumenes II, Founder of the Pergamene Library; on a silver tetradrachm in the British Museum . . . . . 164 (8) From Codex Sangallensis 1394 (Century iv or v) of Virgil. St Gallen ............ 185 (9) From Codex Laurentianus xlvi 7 (Century x) of Quintilian. Laurentian Library, Florence .......... 203 (10) From Codex Laurentianus lxiii 19 (Century x) of Livy. Laurentian Library , Florence .......... 236 (n) From the Biblical Commentary of Monte Cassino, written before 569 B.C. Monte Cassino ......... 260 (12) From the Codex Parisinus (914 a.d.) of Clemens Alexandrinus. Bibliothcque Nationale, Paris .326 (13) From a Paris manuscript (1223 a.d.) of a student’s copy of David the Armenian’s Commentary on Porphyry’s Introduction to Aristotle’s Categories. Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris .. 338 (14) Beginning of the last Dialogue in the Bodleian Plato (895A.D.). Reproduced from a photograph taken from the Leyden Facsimile of the original MS in the Bodleian Library, Oxford . . . . 376 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Xlll (15) End of Scholia on Hesiod’s Works and Days by Manuel Moschopulus, in the handwriting of Demetrius Triclinius, finished on Aug. 20, IvSiktiuvos 15 £tov s jS’wkS' (6824 A.M. of the Byzantine era= 1316 A.D.). Biblioteca Marciano,, Venice . . . . . . . . 428 (16) From Cambridge University MS (Century Xi) of ^Elfric’s Latin Grammar. Reproduced from a photograph taken from the original in the University Library , Cambridge . . . . . . . . 495 (17) Specimens of Christ Church, Canterbury, hand ( c . 1070-84) from near the end of a ms of Decretals and Canons bought by Lanfranc from the abbey of Bee and given by him to Christ Church, Canterbury. The first of the two specimens is almost certainly in the hand-writing of Lanfranc: — Hunc librum dato precio emptum ego Lanfrancns archiepiscopus de Beccensi cenobio in Anglicam terrain deferri feci et Ecclesiae Christi dedi. Si quis eum de iure praefatae Ecclesiae abstulerit, anathema sit . The second is a copy of the first of five letters addressed to Lanfranc by the Antipope ‘Clement III’ (1084— 1101), beginning Clemens episcopus, servus servorum Dei, Lanfranco Cantuar- beriensi archiepiscopo salutem et apostolicam benedictionem, and ending omnesque coepiscopos fratres nostros ex nostra parte saluta, et ad honorem et utilitatem sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae studio sanctitatis fraterne hortare (in line 4 there must be a lacuna after exoptamus). Reproduced from a photograph taken from the original in Trinity College Library, Cambridge . . . 503 (18) From a MS of John of Salisbury’s Policraticus and Metalogicus (1159), formerly in the possession of Becket. Reproduced from a photograph taken from the original in the Library of Corpus Christi College , Cambridge . 516 (19) Philosophy and the Liberal Aids, versus the Poets. From the Hortns Deliciarum of Herrad von Landsperg (d. 1195), destroyed at Strassburg in 1870. The inscriptions are as follows. On the outer circle :—Haec exercicia quae mundi philosophia | investigavit, investigata notavit, | scripto firmavit et alumnis insinuavit. || Septem per studia docet artes philosophia. \ Haec elementorum scrutatur et abdita rerum. || On the inner circle :—Arte regens omnia quae sunt ego philosophia | subjectas artes in septem divido partes. Above the Seven Arts (Grammar with scopae), Per me quivis discit, vox, litter a, syllaba, quid sit. (Rhetoric with stilus and tabula) Causarum vires per me, rhetor alme , requires. (Dialectic with caput canis) Argumenta sino concurrere more canino. (Music with organistrum, cithara and lira ) Musica sum late doctrix artis variatae. (Arithmetic) Ex numeris consto, quorum discrimina monstro. (Geometry) Terrae mensuras per multas dirigo curas. (Astronomy) Ex astris nomen traho, per quae discitur omen. In the upper half of the inner circle:— Philosophia, with her triple crown of Ethica, Logica and Physica, displays a band, bearing the inscription :—Omnis sapientia a Domino Deo est; soli quod desiderant facere possunt sapientes. Below this are the words :—Septem fontes sapientiae fluunt de philosophia, quae dicuntur liberales artes. Spiritus Sanctus inventor est septem liberalium artium, quae sunt Grammatica , Rhetorica, Dialectica , Musica, Arithmetica, Geometria, Astronomia. In the lower half of the same circle and above the philosophi , XIV LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Socrates and Plato, runs the line:— Naturam universae rei quern docuit Philosophia. To the left of Socrates :— Philosophi primum Ethica, postea Physica , deinde Rhetoricam docuerunt, and to the right of Plato:— Philosophi sapientes mundi et gentium clerici fuerunt. Outside and below the two circles are four Poetae vel Magi, spiritu immundo instincti, with the following ex¬ planation:— Isti immundis spiritibus inspirati scribunt artem magicam et poetriam i.e. fabulosa commenta . . . . . . . . 537 (20) Altar-piece by Francesco Traini (1345) in the Church of S. Caterina, Pisa. From the ‘ Christ in Glory’ a single ray of light falls on each of the six figures of Moses and St Paul and the four Evangelists, here represented as bending forward from the sky, and holding tablets inscribed with passages from the books of the Scriptures which bear their names. In addition to the rays that proceed from each of these figures, three from the ‘ Christ in Glory ’ may be seen descending on the head of the seated form of St Thomas Aquinas, who displays an open book with the first words of his Summa contra Gentiles '.— Veritatem meditabitur guttur meum , el labia mea detestabuntur impium (Proverbs, viii 7), while some of his other works are lying on his lap. The figure is stated by Vasari to have been copied from a portrait lent by the abbey of Fossanuova (North of Terracina), where Thomas Aquinas died in 1274. Two other rays are represented as coming from the open books dis¬ played by Aristotle on the left and Plato on the right, and described by Vasari as the Ethics and Timaeus respectively. Another ray, not a beam of illumina¬ tion, but a lightning-flash of refutation, falls from the Summa contra Gentiles , striking the edge of a book lying on the ground beside the writhing form of its author, Averroes. Many other rays may be seen descending from the several works of St Thomas on the two crowds of admiring and adoring Dominicans below. In the original, among the rays on the left, may be read the text, hie adinvenit omnem viam disciplinae (Baruch, iii 32), and, among those on the right, doctor gentium in fide etveritate (1 Tim. ii 7). Cp. Vasari, Vite, Orgagna , ad fin., i 612 f Milanesi; Rosini, Storia della Pittura Italiana (1840), ii 86 f, 93; Renan, Averroes, 305-8 4 ; Hettner, Italienische Studien (1879), io2 ~8 > and Woltmann and Woermann, History of Painting, i 459 E.T. facing p. 560 (21) Colophon of the ‘Theological Elements’ of Proclus, from a xm century copy of the translation finished at Viterbo by William of Moerbeke, 18 May, 1268. Procli Dyadochi Lycii , Platonici philosophi , elementatio theo- logica explicit capitulis 211. Completa fuit translatio hujus operis Vilerbii a fratre G. de Morbecoa ordinis fratrum praedicatorum xv Kalendas Junii Anno Domini M°c°c° sexagesimo octauo. Reproduced from a photograph taken from the original in Peterhouse Library , Cambridge .566 (22) Grammar and Priscian, from the figures of the Seven Liberal Arts and their ancient representatives in the right-hand doorway of the West Front of Chartres Cathedral ......... 645 For the sources from which this and certain of the other cuts are derived, see letterpress under the several cuts. TITLES OF CERTAIN WORKS OF REFERENCE. The following list is limited to those works of reference which are most frequently quoted in the present volume, either by the author’s name alone, or by a much abbreviated title. It has no pretensions to being a complete bibliography of the subject, or indeed of any part of it. The leading authorities on all points of importance are cited in the notes, e.g. on pp. 504, 640. For the bibliography in general, the best book of reference is that of Hiibner, which is placed at the head of the list. In the case of literature later than 1889, this may be supplemented from other sources, such as Bursian’s Jahresbericht , the Bibliotheca Philologica Classica , and the summaries in the principal Classical periodicals of Europe or the United States of America. Hdbner, E. Bibliogi'aphie der klassischen Alterthumswissenschaft; Grundriss zu Vorlesungen iiber die Geschichte und Encyklopddie der klassischen Philologie, ed. 2, 8vo, Berlin, 1889. On the Athenian , Alexandrian or Roman Ages. Christ, W. Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur bis auf die Zeit Jus- tinians (1889 1 , 1890 2 ); ed. 3, pp. 944; large 8vo, Munchen, 1898. Croiset. Histoire de la Litterature Grecque , in five vols. (1887-99), esp. vol. v pp. 1—314 (Periode Alexandrine) by Alfred Croiset; and pp. 315—1067 (Periode Romaine) by Maurice Croiset; 8vo, Paris, 1899. Egger, L Essai sur VHistoire de la Critique chez les Grecs (1849); ed. 3, pp. 588; small 8vo, Paris, 1887. Grafenhan, A. Geschichte der klassischen Philologie im Alterthum , to 400 A.D. ; four vols., pp. 1909; large 8vo, Bonn, 1843-50. NETTLESHIP, H. (i) Lectures and Essays on subjects connected with Latin Literature and Scholarship , pp. 381; and (ii) Lectures and Essays, pp. 269; crown 8vo, Oxford, 1885-95. XVI TITLES OF CERTAIN WORKS OF REFERENCE. Saintsbury, G. A History of Criticism and Literary Taste in Europe from the earliest texts to the present day, vol. I pp. xv + 499 (Classical and Mediaeval Criticism); 8vo, Edinburgh and London, 1900. Schanz, M. Geschichte der Romischen Litteratur bis zum Gesetzgebung des Kaisers Justinian ; two editions of parts i and ii, in three vols., and one ed. of part iii, large 8vo, ending (at present) with 324 A.D. Miinchen, 1890—1901. Steinthal, H. Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft bei den Griechen und Romern (1863), 2 vo ^ s * 8vo ed- 2 > Berlin, 1890-1. Susemihl, F. Geschichte der griechisclien Litteratur in der Alexandriner- zeit , two vols. 8vo, pp. 907 + 771; Leipzig, 1891-2. Teuffel, W. S. History of Roman Literature (to about 800 A. D.), revised and enlarged by L. Schwabe, translated from the fifth German ed. (1890) by G. C. W. Warr, 2 vols. 8vo, pp. 577 + 615; London and Cambridge, 1900. On the Middle Ages. Bursian, C. Geschichte der classischen Philologie im Deutschland , 2 vols. 8vo, vol. I pp. 1—90, Miinchen, 1883. Cramer, < Joannes > Fredericus. De Graecis Medii Aevi Studiis, sc. De Graecis per Occidentem Studiis (1) usque ad Carolum Magnum, pp. 44; (2) usque ad expeditiones in Terrain Sanctam susceptas, pp. 65 (the pages in both cases are those of the complete editions), small 4to pamphlets, Sundiae (Stralsund), 1849-53. Ebert, A. Geschichte der Literatur des Mittelalters im Abendlande bis zum Beginne des XI Jahrhunderts\ 3 vols. 8vo, 1874-87; ed. 2 of vol. 1, Leipzig, 1889. Gidel, C. Les Etudes grecques en Europe (fourth cent.— 1453), pp* 1 — 289 of Nouvelles Alludes, 8vo, Paris, 1878. Gradenigo, G. Ragionamento Istorico-Critico intorno alia Letteratura Greco-Italiana, pp. 176, 8vo, Brescia, 1759. Graf, Arturo. Roma nella Memoria e nelle Immaginazioni del Medio Evo , two vols. small 8vo; esp. vol. 11 153—367 (quoted in notes to pp. 606- 27); Torino, 1882-3. Haur£au, B. La Philosophie Scolastique (1850); ed. 2, vols. I, and II (parts i and ii), 8vo, Paris, 1872-80. Heeren, A. H. L. Geschichte der classischen Litteratur im Mittelalter, 2 vols. small 8vo; vol. I, Book i, pp. 10 — 170 (c. 330 — 900A.D.); Book ii, pp. 171—376 (900 — 1400 a.D.), Gottingen, 1822. Histoire Literaire de la France , begun at Saint-Germain-des-Pres by the Benedictines of the Congregation of Saint-Maur (vols. 1— XII, 1733-63); and continued, as the Hist. Litteraire etc. (vols. xm—xxxil, 1814-98) by the Institut of France. (Victor Le Clerc’s survey of cent, xiv in vol. XXIV 1—602 is quoted from the separate 8vo ed. of 1865.) 4to, Paris, 1733—1898. Jourdain, Amable. Recherches critiques sur I'dge et lorigine des traduc¬ tions latines d’Aristote, et sur les commentaires grecs ou arabes employes par les docteurs scolastiques (1819); ed. 2 (Charles Jourdain), 8vo, Paris, 1843. TITLES OF CERTAIN WORKS OF REFERENCE. XVll KORTING, G. Die Anfdnge der Renaissance-litteratur in Italien, nominally vol. Ill but really introductory to vols. i (Petrarch) and n (Boccaccio) in the unfinished Geschichte der Litteratur Italiens im Zeitalter der Renaissance (1878-80); 8vo, Leipzig, 1884. Krumbacher, K. Geschichte der byzantinischen Litteratur von Justinian bis zmn Ende des Ostromischen Reiches (527—1453 A.D.), ed. 1, pp. 495, 1890; ed. 2, pp. 1193; large 8vo, Miinchen, 1897. Leyser, Polycarp (of Helmstadt). Historia Poetarum et Poematum Medii Aevi (400—1400 A.D.), pp. 1132; small 8vo, Halle, 1721 and (with new title- page) 1741. Maitland, S. R. The Dark Ages (1844), ed- 35 8vo, London, 1853. Maitre, Leon. Les Ecoles Episcopates et Monastiques (768—1180A.D.); 8vo, Paris, 1866. Migne, L’Abbe J. P. Patrologiae Cursus Completus; Series Latina; 217 vols. royal 8vo, including a large part of the poetic, epistolary, historical and philosophical (as well as the ‘ patristic ’) Latin literature of the 2000 years from Tertullian (d. 240) to Innocent III (d. 1216), Paris, 1844-55; followed by four vols. of Indices, 1862-4. Monumenta Germaniae Historical folio series of Scriptores etc, edited by Pertz and others (Hanover), 1826-91; continued in quarto series, the latter including (for the later Roman Age) the best editions of Ausonius, Symmachus, Sidonius, and the Variae of Cassiodorus, and (for the Middle Ages) Gregory of Tours, the Letters of Gregory the Great, and the works of Venantius Fortunatus, with four vols. of Poetae Latini, vols. 1 and 11 edited by Diimmler, Hi by Traube, and iv i by Winterfeld. Berlin, 1877- (in progress). Mullinger, J. B. The Schools of Charles the Great (quoted mainly in chap, xxv), pp. xx+193; 8vo, London, 1877. Mullinger, J. B. History of the University of Cambridge, vol. I, esp. pp. 1—212 (containing the introductory chapters on the Middle Ages); pp. 686; 8vo, Cambridge, 1873. Norden, E. Die Antike Kunstprosa vom VI Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance ; two vols. 8vo, pp. 969; esp. pp. 657—763 ( Das Rlittelalter...). Leipzig, 1898. Poole, Reginald Lane. Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought, pp. 376; 8vo, London, 1884. Prantl, Carl von. Geschichte der Logik im Abendlande , esp. vol. II (1861); ed. 2, Leipzig, 1885; four vols. Leipzig, 1855-70. Rashd all, Hastings. Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages , vol. 1, and 11 (in two Parts); 8vo, Oxford, 1895. Renan, E. Averroes et VAverroisme (1852); ed. 4; 8vo, pp. 486, Paris, 1882. 1 Rolls Series '; Rerum Britannicarum Medii Aevi Scriptores , or Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages , published under the direction of the Master of the Rolls, 244 vols. royal 8vo. The vols. quoted are mainly those containing the works of William of Malmesbury, XV 111 ABBREVIATIONS. ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA. Alexander Neckam, Giraldus Cambrensis, Grosseteste, Matthew Paris, Roger Bacon and the ‘Satirical Latin Poets of cent. Xii’, I and II. London, 1858-96. Tiraboschi, G. Storia della Letteralura Italiana 1, Modena, 1772- ); esp. vols. in—v (476-1400 A.D.) of ed. 2, Modena, 1787-94. Tougard, L’Abbe A. VHellenisme dans les Ecrivains du Moyen-Age du septibne au douzieme siecle, pp. 70; large 8vo, Paris, 1886. Ueberweg, F. Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophic , vol. 1 (1864); ed. 8 Heinze, 1894; E. T. London, 1872 etc. Wattenbach, W. Das Schriftwesen irn Mittelalter (1871); ed. 2 (used in this vol.), 1875; ed. 3, Leipzig, 1896. Wattenbach, W. Deutschlands Geschichlsquellen im Mittelalter, ending c. 1250 (ed. 1, 1858); ed. 6, Berlin, 1893-4. The latest survey of Mediaeval Latin Literature from 550 to 1350A.D. is to be found in Grober’s Grundriss der Romanischen Philologie , ii 97—432, Strassburg, 1902. That of Italy is very briefly sketched in Gaspary’s Italian Literature , i 1—49, E.T. 1901. ABBREVIATIONS. In the notes and index MA stands for Mittel-Alter , and for Middle Ages. A smaller numeral added to that of the volume or page, e.g., ii 2 or 123 4 , denotes the edition to which reference is made. ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA. p. 249 1 . 25 and n. 7; for Einsiedlen, read Einsiedeln. p. 256 n. 3 1. 5; for 1800, read 1880. p. 303, head-line; for aureli, read aurelius. p. 334 n. 3 (Alexander of Aphrodisias on Aristotle De Sensu ); add ed. Wendland (1901). p. 342 n. 1; after Fotheringham, add announced, but not yet published. n. 3; after E. H. Gifford, add published in 1903. p. 346 n. 2; add Themistius on Aristotle, De Caelo , ed. Landauer (1902). p. 365 n. 2 (Syrianus on the Metaphysics); add ed. Kroll (1902). p. 403 n. 7 (Michael of Ephesus); add, on Ethics v, ed. Hayduck (1901). p. 430 col. 4; add Ekkehard II d. 990; and, in col. 5, for 651-90 Aidan (where -90 is accidentally repeated from next item), read 651 d. Aidan. p. 462 1 . 2; for Osnabruck, read Osnabrlick, and see Index, p. 465 1 . 18; for (emp. Lothair) d. 869, read d. 855. p. 507 n. 5 1. 3; for 1817, read 1819. OUTLINE OF PRINCIPAL CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Definition of ‘Scholar’ and ‘Scholarship’; ‘Scholarship’ and ‘ Philology ’. iXoXo*yos a rjs re /cat avayvdxreui oi ypappaTiaraL, cp. Protag. 326 D, Laws 812 A. 8 Suetonius, De Grammaticis 4. rPAMMATIKOS. 7 In the earlier time ypa^ara seldom means ‘ literature ’ 1 ; but it is to this sense of the word that we owe the new meaning given to its derivative ypap.p.aTu<6<; in the Alexandrian age. That new meaning is a ‘ student of literature ’, especially of poetical litera¬ ture ; and similarly ypapcpanKyj now comes to mean the ‘ study of literature ’, especially of poetry. ypapi/zaTifoy in this new sense of the term is sometimes said to have begun with Theagenes of Rhegium (f. 525 b.c.), who was the earliest of the allegorical interpreters of Homer 2 . When Plato is described as the first who speculated on the nature of ypap.p.aTLKij 3 , we may assume that the reference is to the Cratylus , a dialogue in which he discusses the nature of words. Aristotle is similarly described as the founder of the art of ypapparLK-tj in that higher sense which implies the learned study of poetic literature 4 . But this is only the language of later writers, and we may be sure that neither Theagenes nor Plato nor Aristotle would have described himself as ypap,pum/av KXrjObvriov, rrpoTepov 8 b up itikuv, Kal Sr] Kal avrbs b ’ kpL7rovcr6' ol Tavrrjs paOrjral t UeiaiarpaTos, > cos (prjai Aievx^as ev 7r^cc7rry Meyapudov. On the date of Dieuchidas, cp. Wilamowitz, l. c., p. 240 f. 2 Jebb’s Ho?ner pp. 114 f. It is accepted in this sense by Ritschl, but rejected altogether by Ludwich, Wilamowitz and Flach. It had been accepted by Wolf and Lachmann, both of whom regard the written Homer as dating from Peisistratus. This view has recently been gaining ground. Dr Leaf (/. c. p. xix) now believes that ‘ an official copy of Homer was made in Athens in the time of Solon and Peisistratus \ 3 Lycurgus c. Leocr. 102, ourco yap virlXafiov vfxCov oi irarlpes airovdaiov elvai TroirjTrjv, c ocrre v 6 p.ov Zdevro Kad' eKdar'qv Trevrerriplda p, 6 vov t&v aXAcoj/ papipbeladai ra girt]. 4 Scholiast on Aristeides Panath. p. 323 Dindorf. The athletic contests of the Great Panathenaea had however been instituted in 566 B.c. (Busolt, Gr. Gesch. ii 2 344), six years before Peisistratus became tyrant. 5 [Plato], Hipparchus 228 D, rjvayKaae roi>s papipdovs IlavadrjpaLois e£ viroXifipeus iv AAwv yeveij, roiySe kcll dj/Spwv 2 . There are some dubious stories of early interpolations in the Early inter- Homeric poems. Thus Peisistratus is said to have poiations introduced into the Odyssey a line in honour of the Attic hero, Theseus 3 ; and both Solon and Peisistratus are credited with the insertion of a line referring to Ajax, for the supposed purpose of proving that Salamis was an ancient possession of Athens 4 ; but, as the recovery of Salamis took place in Solon’s time, while Peisistratus was still a boy, Solon alone should have been mentioned in this connexion 5 . Onomacritus, who is said to have been one of the four who put together the Homeric poems under the authority of Peisistratus 6 , was, according to Herodotus, caught in the act of interpolating the oracles of Musaeus, and was banished by the tyrant’s son, Hipparchus 7 . Meanwhile, Homer had been frequently imitated by Hesiod (fl. c. 720? b.c.), had been described by the early HomeTon 6 ° f elegiac poet Callinus {c. 690) as the author of an early Greek epic called the Thebais 8 , and had been copied in various ways by the earliest of the iambographers, Archilochus (JZ. 650), whom ‘Longinus’ (c. 13 § 3) describes as 1 ib. 228 c, and Aristotle’s Constitutiojt of Athens , c. 18 § 1, where Hipparchus is also called (fnXdnovaos. 2 Iliad vi 148. 3 Od. xi 631, Qrjata Uetpidoov re, de&v epiKvdta t£kvo.. Plutarch, Theseus 20; cp. Flach, p. 27. 4 II. ii 558, (TTTjcre d’ dyuv, tv' 'Adrjvaiwv 'icrravTO iirl HeKncrTparou ffvvdtvTu)v t'ov "OpLTjpou. Cp. La Roche, Horn. Textkr. p. 10, and Jebb’s Homer p. 115 11 . 7 Her. vii 6. 8 Pausanias ix 9, 5. II.] HOMER AND PINDAR. 23 ‘most Homeric’, and by melic poets such as Aleman (about 657), and Stesichorus (640-5 5 5) \ In the age succeeding the expulsion of the Peisistratidae, Pindar, with a conscious reference to the origin of Pindar the word Rhapsodos 1 2 , describes the Rhapsodes as ‘the sons of Homer, singers of deftly woven lays’ 3 . He also alludes to the laurel-branch that they bore as an emblem of poetic tradition. Homer himself (he tells us) had ‘rightly set forth all the prowess of Ajax, leaving it as a theme for other bards to sing, by the laurel-wand of his lays divine’ 4 . Pindar’s praise of Amphi- araus is a clear reminiscence of a Homeric line in praise of Agamemnon 5 . He describes the ‘ fire-breathing Chimaera ’ in a phrase like that of Homer 6 , but differs from him in minor details as to Bellerophon, Ganymede and Tantalus 7 . He shows a similar freedom in giving a new meaning to a phrase borrowed from his own countryman the Boeotian poet, Hesiod, by applying to the athlete’s toilsome training a proverbial admonition originally referring to the work of the farm 8 . In the age of Pindar, and in the Athenian age in general, the poet and his audience were alike saturated with the study of the old poets, Homer and Hesiod, and a touch alone was wanted to awaken the memory of some long- familiar line. 1 Mahaffy, Gr. Lit. i 31, cp. for Hesiod, Christ, § 65 s ; for Archilochus and Stesichorus, Bergk ii 191 and 293, and (in general) i 483. 2 pa\J/(p 5 o$, from pairreiv doibiqv (Hesiod, frag. 221), contexere carmen, pan- %ere versus. Cp. Bergk, Gr. Lit. i 490. 3 Nem. ii 1,'OfirjpLbai, pairTwv (lit. ‘stitched’) eirluv aoidol. 4 Isth. iii 55 , "Opn]pos...Tra(rav dpdwacus aperdv Kara pafibov Hcfrpaaev dearre- lXXet. 24 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. The Tragic poets The influence of the Homeric poems on the tragic poets of Athens was very considerable. Notwithstanding Aristotle’s statement that ‘ the Iliad and the Odyssey each furnish the theme of one tragedy, or of two, at the most’ 1 , we find that they supplied Aeschylus with the theme of at least six tragedies and one satyric drama, Sophocles with that of three tragedies ( Nausicaa , and the Phaeacians , and possibly the Phrygians ), and Euripides with that of one satyric drama, the Cyclops. The unknown author of the Rhesus derived his theme from the Iliad; and Achilles and Hector, with Laertes, Penelope and her Suitors, were among the themes of the minor tragic poets of the fifth and fourth centuries. Aristotle’s statement is practi¬ cally true of Sophocles and Euripides, but not of Aeschylus, whom he almost ignores in his treatise on Poetry. It is however the fact that, among the tragic poets in general, a far larger number of their subjects were suggested by other poems of the Epic Cycle, namely the Cypria , the Aethiopis, the Little Iliad, the Iliupersis , the Nostoi and the lelegonia 2 . Aeschylus himself probably regarded ‘ Homer ’ as the author of all the poems of the Epic Cycle, when he described his dramas as ‘ slices from the great banquets of Homer 3 ’. In the Frogs of Aristophanes, he is made to confess that it was from ‘ Homer the divine ’ that his mind took the impress of noble characters like those of the ‘ lion-hearted’ heroes, Teucer and Patroclus 4 . The influence of Homer shows itself in many of his picturesque epithets, and in the use of not a few archaic nouns and verbs, as well as in Homeric phrases and expressions, and Homeric similes and metaphors 5 . Sophocles is described by Greek critics as the only true disciple of Homer, as the ‘tragic Homer’, and as the admirer of the Epic poet 6 . His verbal indebt- Aeschylus Sophocles 1 Poet. 23 § 4. 2 See Nauck, Tragi corum Graecorum Pragmenta, pp. 963—8, or Haigh, Tragic Drama of the Greeks , p. 473—6. 3 Athen. 347 E, tc/j,&xv rQu'Ofiripov /meyaXiov SeLirvcju. 4 Frogs , 1040. 6 For details, see Haigh, l.c. p. 85. 6 Ion, in vita Sophoclis, p.ovov ...'Op.r)pov p.adrjTr]v. Polemo, ap. Diog. Laert. iv 20, "Op,r]pov rpayiKdv. Eustathius on Iliad, pp. 440, 605, 851, 902 II.] HOMER AND THE TRAGIC POETS. 25 Euripides edness to Homer is less than that of Aeschylus, though, like other dramatists, he borrows certain epic forms and epithets, as well as certain phrases and similes. His dramas reproduce the Homeric spirit. He is also Homeric in the ideal, yet human, conception of his characters ‘, and in the calm self-control, which characterises him even in scenes of violent excitement. Here, as elsewhere, ‘ he has caught the impress of Homer’s charm ’ 2 . While very few of his dramas were directly suggested by the Iliad or Odyssey, he is described as ‘ delighting in the Epic Cycle ’ 3 . The extant plays connected with that Cycle are the Ajax and Philoctetes. Of the extant plays of Euripides, the Cyclops alone is directly taken from Homer’s Odyssey, while the Epic Cycle is represented by the Iphigeneia in Aulide, Hecuba, Troades, Andromache, Helen, Electra, Iphigeneia in Tauris and Orestes. The plot of no extant play that was certainly written by Euripides is inspired by the Iliad, but the opening scene of the Phoenissae, where Antigone and her aged attendant view from the palace-roof the movements of the Argive host outside the walls of Thebes, is clearly a reminiscence of the memorable scene in the Iliad, where Helen and Priam watch the Greek heroes from the walls of Troy 4 . Turning from the tragic poets to the historians, we fijid Herodotus speculating on the date of Homer. He places Hesiod, as well as Homer, about four hun¬ dred years before his own time, i.e. about 400 years (or exactly 12 generations) before 430 b.c . 5 He assumes that other poems beside the Iliad and Odyssey were generally attributed to Homer, namely the Cypria and the Epigoni. He doubts the Homeric authorship of the Epigoni 6 , and denies that of the Cypria 1 \ but Herodotus etc., Schnei- dewin’s Sophokles p. 27; Bergk, Gr. Litt. i 830, iii 369 f; and Haigh, l.c., p. 202 f. 1 Arist. Poet. 3 § 2. 2 Vita Soph. 'OpripiKpv eKp.aTT 6 p.evos x^P LV ’ 3 Athen. 297 D, £ x aL P € --- T (p eiriKtp KVK\(p. Cp. Christ, Gr. Litt. § 175 p. 250 3 . 4 II. iii 139—244. 5 Her. ii 53. 6 Her. iv 32. 7 Her. ii 117. 2 6 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. Thucydides his denial of the latter is founded on the fact that, in the form in which he knew the poem, it implied that Paris, on leaving Sparta, sailed for Troy, and not for Sidon as stated in the Iliad'. As Professor Jebb has aptly observed, ‘this suggests how little these attributions probably regarded the evidence of style, language, or spirit. Unless there was some contradiction on the surface, the attribution could pass current, or could be left an open question’ 1 2 . Thucydides regards the Phaeacians as a historical people and the Homeric catalogue as a historical document 3 . But he makes the story of the siege of Troy a theme for rationalising criticism. In this spirit he suggests that the Greek chiefs were compelled to go to Troy, not by the obliga¬ tions of their oath to Helen’s father, but by the superior power of Agamemnon; and that the long duration of the siege was due to the Greeks being forced to spend part of their time in keeping up their supply of provisions 4 . In a far different spirit to that of the earlier age which interpolated lines in Homer to the credit of Athens, he makes Pericles proudly declare in his funeral oration that Athens needs no Homer to praise her 5 . Among the earliest treatises on Homer was that ascribed to Democritus (460-357 b.c.), though we know nothing of its purport 6 . But, if he really wrote such a work, it may have contained some of the sayings on Homer attributed to him by later writers, who quote Democritus as speaking of Homer’s divine genius, the varied beauty of his epic verse, and the happy union of order and variety which marked the com¬ position of his poems 7 . It was possibly his study of Homer that inspired him with the lofty and often poetical language for which he is eulogised by Cicero 8 . For the three centuries between 600 and 300 b.c. the Homeric Democritus 1 II. vi 290. 2 Homer, p. 86. 3 ib. p. 85. 4 Thuc. i 9 and n. 5 ii 41, 4. 6 Diog. Laert. IX vii 13 § 48, 7 repl ' Ofirjpov rj (?) dpdoeTelrjs Kal yXcbaaewp. Cp. Egger, l.c., p. 107 3 , and Saintsbury’s History of Criticism, i 15. 7 Dion Chrysostom, Or. 53 init., "O/JLrjpos (pbtreojs Xax&p deafovcrrjs errtwv k6ie v into the infinitive SiSo/acv in the words St So/jLev Se ot ev^os apeo-^at, 1 we grant him to obtain his prayer’, which appear to have been introduced from Iliad xxi 297 in place of the words Tpoieo-o-i Se Krj&e l^rjirTai occurring thrice in Iliad ii 15, 32, 69. The objection to the indicative is that it implies that Zeus himself was intentionally deceiving Agamemnon in sending the Dream-god on his errand to the hero, but the infinitive only removes the charge of deception one step further, as the Dream-god, who is prompted to deceive the hero, is un¬ doubtedly sent by Zeus. The difficulty, such as it is, seems only to have been founded on a mistake, as it is only by misplacing the phrase of Iliad xxi that any difficulty arises. In the other passage {Iliad xxiii 328) an ambiguous ov is supposed to have been mis¬ understood as ov, ‘of it’, in which case the lines in question would have run as follows :— r earrjKe ivXov avov , oaov r opyvi, virep car 79, rj 8 pvos rj 7ren/oys* to p.kv ov kclt airv 9 erat op-fipio. * There stands a withered trunk, some six feet high, Of oak, or pine, half- rotted by the rain ’ 2 . Hippias appears to have proposed to change ov into ov (‘ half- rotted’ into ‘^-rotted’), which is the reading in our present text 3 . Lastly, Gorgias ( c . . 485-380 b.c.) probably composed a Eulogy of Achilles 4 . He is the author of two extant speeches connected with the tale of Troy, 1 Od. xviii 84; see Argument to Soph. O. T '., and cp. Friedel, De Hippiae Sophistae studiis Homericis, Halle, 1872, and De Sophistarum studiis Homericis in Dissert. Philol. Halenses , i (1873) pp. 130—188. 2 Lord Derby’s rendering, except so far as ‘ half-rotted ’ is here substituted for his translation of the ordinary text, ‘ unrotted’. 3 Aristotle, Poet. c. 25 § 11 and De Soph. El. iv 8, with Wolf’s Proleg. ad Homerum , c. xxxvii p. 102 Wagner, and Vahlen’s Beitrdge zu Aristoteles Poetik, iii 368. On the other hand, Ritter on Poet. l.c. supposes that ov was the old text, read by Hippias as ov. 4 Aristot. Rhet. iii 17. Gorgias II.] HOMER AND THE ALLEGORISTS. 29 namely the ‘ Encomium of Helen 5 and the ‘ Defence of Pala- medes’. Among the pupils of Gorgias, Licymnius may perhaps be identified with an expositor of Homer mentioned in the Homeric scholia while Alcidamas appears to have written a declamation on the Odyssey , which he describes as ‘a fair mirror of human life’ 1 2 . The Homeric representations of the gods roused a protest on the part of the founder of the Eleatics, Xenophanes IP rote st s of Colophon (ft. 540-500 B.C.), who says that against the ‘ Homer and Hesiod have imputed to the gods all Ho ™ e P c that is blame and shame for men’ 3 . It was on other grounds that his contemporary, Heracleitus, declared that ‘Homer and Archilochus deserved a sound thrashing’ 4 , nor did he spare Hesiod. He apparently held that the first two poets were wrong in regarding happiness as dependent on the will of Heaven, and the third in distinguishing between lucky and un¬ lucky days 5 . Another great contemporary, Pythagoras, is said to have descended to the world below, and to have seen the soul of Hesiod bound to a brazen column, squeaking and gibbering; and that of Homer hanging from a tree and encircled by serpents, in punishment for all that he had said concerning the gods 6 . In reply to protests such as these, some of the defenders of Homer maintained that the superficial meaning of his myths was not the true one, and that there was a deeper sense lying below the surface. This deeper sense was, in the Athenian age, called the ■ 7 and the vttovouu of this age assumed the name of Homer defended by allegorical interpretation Virovoia ‘allegories’ in the times of Plutarch 8 . Theagenes of Rhegium (Jl. 525 b.c.), who suggested a two-fold form of allegory, moral 1 On II. ii 106. 2 Aristot. Rhet. iii 3 § 4; cp. §§1,3. 3 Sextus Emp., Math, ix 193, 7 ravra deois avldrjKav "Opcypos Q' 'H i\o/jir)po 7 P- 339 (Smyth, pp. 54, 309). III.] SIMONIDES AND PINDAR. 45 tedious and hypercritical arts of interpretation which prevailed in his own day’ 1 . His elegiac epigram on those who fell at Marathon is quoted by Lycurgus 2 , who also quotes one of his two epigrams on the heroes of Thermopylae, both of which are quoted by Herodotus 3 . In none of these cases is the name of the author mentioned, though the epigram on the seer Megistias is expressly ascribed to Simonides. The opening line of his ode in honour of the victory in the mule-race won by Anaxilas of Rhegium, or possibly by his son, is quoted by Aristotle as an example of the use of epithets to lend elevation to a subject:— 44 When the victor in the mule-race offered him a small fee, he declined to compose the ode in honour of the victory on the ground that he was shocked at the thought of writing on the subject of semi-asses; but when the victor actually gave him sufficient pay, he wrote :— i Hail to the brood of the storm-footed coursers’ 4 .” The Theban Pindar (poveovTL awera yapvw). In Aristotle’s treatise on poetry (1 § 2), mention is made of ‘dithyrambic poetry’, and ‘the music of the flute and the cithara ’; but in that treatise, in its present form, lyric poetry is never discussed. The author, however, was not necessarily unsym¬ pathetic towards this kind of composition. We still possess a grave and dignified ode to Virtue written by Aristotle him¬ self 1 2 . The lyric poetry of Greece may be conveniently regarded as including not only the ‘melic’ but also the ‘elegiac’ and ‘iambic’ poets. All alike were associated with song, and were generally accompanied by music, the instrument, in the case of ‘ melic ’ poets, being the lyre or the cithara, and in the case of ‘ elegiac ’ 1 Milton, Sonnet 8; cp. Pliny vii 109; Aelian, Var. Hist, xiii 7. 2 ap. Athen. 695 A (Smyth, pp. 142, 468). 48 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. Elegiac poets. Tyrtaeus Mimnermus and ‘iambic’ poets the flute 1 . Of the elegiac poets, one of the earliest (in the ordinary view) is Tyrtaeus ( fl . 685- 668 b.c.). His poem on Good Government (Eu- nomia) is specially mentioned by Aristotle, while not less than thirty-two lines from his spirited and stirring Exhortations are quoted in court by the orator Lycurgus. Two other portions of the same poem are embodied in passages in the Laws of Plato, where their author is called a ‘ most divine poet ’, though Plato regrets that personal bravery in battle is the only kind of virtue that wins his praise 2 . Mimnermus of Smyrna ( fl . 620 b.c.) is partly a political and still more a sentimental poet. He sighs as he prays:—‘Ah! that from sickness safe and bitter cares, Death may o’ertake me, e’en at sixty years ’ (frag. 6). The sentiment meets with a protest from the sturdy good sense of Solon who, addressing Mimnermus, says:—“ But, if, even now, you will take my advice, erase this; nor bear me any ill-will for having thought on this theme better than you; emend the words, Ligyastades, and sing: ‘ May death o’ertake me, e’en at eighty years ’ ” (frag. 20). In Solon’s case, the prayer was apparently answered, for he seems to have died at the age of eighty (c. 639-559). In his poems elegiac and iambic verse are alike represented. Among his elegiacs are some forty lines of a vigorous and patriotic poem on Athens, which Demosthenes calls upon the clerk of the court to read aloud in the course of the speech for the prosecution of Aeschines, and also two or three passages, probably from the same poem, which Aristotle quotes in his Constitution of Athens, together with thirty-five iambic lines on his political reforms, and nine trochaic lines on the same topic. In his Rhetoric he quotes a single line of admonition to Critias. Plato cites a couplet in the Lysis , without the author’s name, and elsewhere mentions Solon and his contemporaries 3 . In the Titnaeus in particular Critias (who died in 404 b.c.) Solon 1 Cp. Jebb’s Growth and Influence of Classical Greek Poetry , pp. 108, 117, 122. 2 Arist. Pol. v 6, 2; Lycurg. Leocr. 107; Plato, Laws 629 a, e, 660 E. 3 Dem. 19 § 255; Arist. Const. Ath. c. 5 and 12; Rhet. i 15; Plato, Lys. 212 E, Charmid. 157 F, Tim. 20 E and esp. 21 B—c. III.] ELEGIAC POETRY. 49 recalls an incident which happened when he was a boy of about ten years of age. It was on the day of the Apaturia set apart for the registration of boys; and, in accordance with the custom of that festival, parents gave prizes for recitation (pai/^wSm), many poems were recited, and among them £ many of us boys sang the poems of Solon, which were new at the time ’ (i.e. recently introduced into public recitations). Someone said to the boy’s grandfather, a contemporary and relation of Solon’s, that, in his judgment, Solon was ‘ not only the wisest of men, but also the noblest of poets ’. The old man smiled and said that, ‘ if Solon had only made poetry the business of his life,...he would have been as famous as Homer or Hesiod, or any poet ’. The elegiac epigrammatists Demodocus of Leros and Phocylides of Miletus ( jtl . 537 b.c.) are cited by Aristotle in phocylides. the Ethics (vii 9) and Politics (iv 11, 9) respectively, The °s ms the former passage describing the character of the Milesians, and the latter the advantage of belonging to the middle classes. Theognis of Megara { fl . 540 b.c.) is commended in Plato’s Laws for eulogising political loyalty, and is paraphrased in the Meno , while his proverbial sayings are quoted by Xenophon and Aris¬ totle 1 . Most of his verses are of a political, and indeed intensely aristocratical, type, and they could hardly be expected to be popular in democratic Athens. The only evidence adduced to show that he was one of the standard school-authors is the proverbial line:—‘ 7 'hat indeed I knew before Theognis was born ’ 2 . All that this proves is that his moral maxims were often quoted and had long been very trite. They seem to have inspired much of the worldly wisdom of Isocrates, who names Theognis (with Hesiod and Phocylides) as a wise counsellor who was neglected in comparison with the comic poets of the day (2 § 43). His lighter verses were expressly meant to be sung at the sy?nposium to the strains of flutes, and a phrase from one of them has actually been found inscribed on a wine-cup of Tanagra 3 . 1 Plato, Laws 630, Meno 95 E; Xen. Mem. i 2, 20, Symp. ii 5; Arist. Eth. i 8, x 9. 2 tovt'l flew ydeiv irpiv Qtoyviv yeyovtvcu (Dousa ad Lucil. frag, incert. 102, quoted by Grafenhan, i 71); Plut. Mor. ii 777. Cp. Schomann, Op. iv 25 f. 3 1365, w 7 raiduv KaXXiare, cp. 241 {; Christ, Gr. Litt. § 90 1 , § 100 3 . 4 s. 50 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. The foremost of the early iambic poets, Archilochus of Paros ( fl. 650), though ranked with Homer by the Archilochus tS ancients, is described by Pindar, at a distance of two centuries, as ‘ the bitter-tongued Archilochus, who fell full often into distress by battening on virulent abuse of his enemies’ ( Pyth . ii 55). Pindar also mentions ‘the chant of Archilochus, vocal at Olympia, even the song of victory, swelling with its thrice-repeated refrain ’, which, in the absence of any special ode, was sung as the ancient counterpart of our modern strain of victory :—‘ See the conquering hero comes Archi¬ lochus is twice imitated by Aristophanes 1 , twice quoted by Aristotle 2 , and twice in the Platonic dialogues 3 . His poems were recited by rhapsodes, and sung to music like those of Homer and Hesiod, Mimnermus and Phocylides 4 . The other ‘iambic’ poets, Semonides of Amorgos and Hipponax of Ephesus, are not quoted in the Athenian age. The ‘ iambics ’ of Solon have been already noticed (p. 48). It must not be inferred from the limited range of the quo¬ tations from the elegiac, iambic and melic poets in the Athenian age, that those poets were comparatively unknown. Almost all of their poetry was ‘ occasional ’; much of it was ephemeral; and few besides Pindar could say:—‘longer than deeds liveth the word’ ( Nem . iv 6). Many however of their poems played a part in the private life of Athens, either in the school, or at the symposium , or both. Elegiac poetry lasted for sixteen cen¬ turies, beginning with Callinus ( c . 690 b.c.) and ending with the Greek Anthology of Constantinus Cephalas ( c. 920 *a.d.). In the Greek drama this metre is only used once, in the lament of Andromache (Eur. Andr. 103-116); but iambic poetry found a fresh lease of life in the dialogue, and melic in the chorus of the drama; while the epic poetry of narration survived in the mes¬ senger’s speeches of Greek tragedy. The canon of Greek lyric poetry closes in 452 b.c., the date of the last known odes of Pindar and Bacchylides. Meanwhile the personal and reflective 1 Ranae 704, Pax 603. 2 Pol. vii 6, 3, Rhet. iii 17. 3 Rep. 365 c, Eryx. 397 E. 4 Athen. 620. III.] IAMBIC POETRY. 51 interest, which lyric poetry had excited in the individual, had begun to abate in the presence of the public enthusiasm aroused in vast audiences by the drama. Aeschylus had won his first tragic prize in 484 b.c. ; Sophocles in 468, about the time of the death of Simonides; and Euripides in 442, about the time of the death of Pindar; while the year 450 is the approximate date of the successes gained in the Old Attic Comedy by Crates and Cratinus, and also of the birth of Aristophanes. Masks of Comedy and Tragedy. (From the British Museum.) 4—2 CHAPTER IV. THE STUDY AND CRITICISM OF DRAMATIC POETRY. Dramatic poetry and literary criticism Literary criticism was promoted at Athens not only by the epic recitations of the rhapsodes (p. 20), but also by the contests for the prizes offered for lyric, and much more by those for dramatic poetry. But such criticism was purely of a popular and unprofessional kind. The contests of the drama were at first decided by acclamation, and the voice of the people awarded the prize. Sub¬ sequently the decision was made by five judges in comic, and probably the same number in tragic, contests. This small number of judges was appointed by lot, out of a large preliminary list elected by vote. It speaks well for the general competence of the judges that Aeschylus and Sophocles were usually successful; but, strange to say, at the presentation of the Oedipus Tyrannies, Sophocles was defeated by a minor poet, Philocles, a nephew of Aeschylus. Euripides won the prize on five occasions only, while Aeschylus is credited with thirteen victories, and Sophocles with at least eighteen. The decisions pronounced by the judges on such occasions were not without their effect in leading to the improvement of plays which were unsuccessful at their first presentation. The revision and repro¬ duction of unsuccessful plays was not an uncommon practice 1 . Dramatic criticism occasionally found its w r ay into the plays themselves. Euripides, in his Eledra ( 1 . 522-544), openly criti¬ cises the means adopted by Aeschylus in the Cho'ephoroe for 1 Egger, Hist, de la Critique , p. 26 f. CHAP. IV.] CRITICISM IN ATTIC COMEDY. 53 bringing about the recognition of Orestes by his sister. Such criticism, singularly out Qf place in tragedy, was more frequent and more appropriate in comedy. Atti^Comedy More than sixty years after the memorable occasion, when the contest between Aeschylus and Sophocles had been decided for the first time in favour of the latter by the verdict of Cimon and his colleagues (468 b.c.), the comic poet, Phrynichus, represented the nine Muses 0 f T phrynichus themselves as assembled in court to decide on the respective merits of the tragic poets, and passed an encomium on the dramatic career of Sophocles 1 . On the above occasion the Muses of Phrynichus competed with the play familiar to ourselves under the name of the Frogs of Aristophanes (405 b.c.). In that Aristophane^ play, it will be remembered that Sophocles takes no part in the contest for the throne of Tragedy. Aeschylus and Euripides enter the lists and criticise passages in one another’s plays. These criticisms extend over nearly three hundred lines (1119-1413), but a very brief analysis will here suffice. Euripides begins by taking Aeschylus to task for his bombastic style, while Aeschylus criticises his rival’s prologues. Euripides next claims credit for making Tragedy more familiar, more domestic; Aeschylus, for inspiring his countrymen with a patriotic spirit by means of martial plays, such as the Seven against Thebes and the Persae. He also taunts his opponent with bringing on to the stage not only women with strange passions, but also fallen kings in rags and tatters. Thereupon Euripides attacks the opening lines of the Cho'ephoroe , finding fault (among other things) with one or two tautological phrases, ‘listen’ and ‘hear’, and ‘I have come’ and ‘I revisit’ 2 . In the latter case Aeschylus triumphantly retorts that the second verb is rightly added, being particularly appropriate to return from exile. Aeschylus rejoins with an attack on Euripides for the monotony of his prologues, and ridicules the too frequent recurrence of the pause after the fifth syllable of the iambic line, adding to all the verses in which this pause occurs, and in which the gram¬ matical construction allows, a burlesque and trivial conclusion,—‘lost his little flask of oil ’ ( Xr)KvOiov curuXeoev), by which the poet’s tragic phrase 1 Egger,/. c. p. 38 f; cp. Fragmenta Comicorum Graecorum ii 592 Meineke, p.a yap els yijv rrjvde Kal Kartpxoiaai. 54 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. is made to end in bathos. Euripides in reply attacks the choruses of Aeschylus, stringing together a number of pompous phrases, and criticising their obscurity, their ponderous metres, and their monotonous refrains. Aes¬ chylus returns the compliment with a series of affectedly pretty verses from the choruses of Euripides, exemplifying (among other things) his innovations in choral music and metre. He next parodies his rival’s monodies, in choral lines combining the false sublime with the vulgar pathetic, and both with impertinent appeals to the help of Heaven. Lastly, the two poets put their verses to the test of the balance. A large pair of scales is produced; Aeschylus stands beside one of the scales and Euripides by the other; each in turn repeats a single line from one of his own plays, and the scale is supposed to rise or fall, according as the sense of the line is light or heavy. In the end Aeschylus, weary of competing line against line, challenges Euripides to a final and comprehensive contest. With the challenge he combines a sly allusion to the help that Euripides was supposed to derive from his slave Cephisophon in the composition of his plays, and to the book¬ learning already noticed in a line describing him, as ‘ from learned scrolls distilling the essence of his wit’ (943) :— Come ! no more line for’ line ! Let him bring all ,— His wife, his children, his Cephisophon, And mount the scale himself, with all his books. I shall outweigh them with two lines alone. Dionysus, the arbiter of this conflict of wits, finally decides in favour of Aeschylus, who is accordingly brought back to the upper world. In the ensuing chorus (1482-1499) Aristophanes dwells on the triumphant recall of Aeschylus as a tribute to the good taste and sound sense characteristic of the true poet, while the fate of Euripides is a warning that it is not well to sit and chatter with Socrates, denouncing the art of poetry and neglecting the noblest aims of the tragic art. The passing attack on Socrates does not fairly apply to the Socrates whom we know in Plato ; but, in the controversy as a whole, we feel that, although the author is clearly prejudiced against Euripides, the points selected for criticism on both sides are both interesting and instructive. The criticism of Aris¬ tophanes (as has been well observed) “ rests upon a reasoned view of art and taste as well as of politics and religion. He disapproves the sceptical purpose, the insidious sophistic, the morbid passion of his victim; but he disapproves quite as strongly the tedious preliminary explanations and interpolated narratives, the ‘ precious ’ sentiment and style, the tricks and the trivialities”. Yet he ‘is far too good a critic and far too IV.] CRITICISM IN ATTIC COMEDY. 55 shrewd a man not to allow a pretty full view of the Aeschylean defects, as well as to put in the mouth of Euripides himself a very fairly strong defence of his own merits \ Notwithstanding this signally effective dramatic example of the ‘direct criticism of actual texts ’, it is remarkable that ‘ formal criticism in prose ’ was long in making its appearance, and when it appeared showed ‘much less mastery of method’ 1 . The traces of literary criticism preserved in the fragments of Attic Comedy are neither very numerous nor very trustworthy. Hesiod was quoted and parodied in the Cheiron of Pherecrates, a play in which Music complains of the maltreatment she has received from some of the lyrical composers of the day 2 . In the Hesiodi of Telecleides we have some references to contempo¬ rary poets, and a passage on Euripides, referring to his being aided in his tragedies by Mnesilochus and Socrates, possibly comes from this play 3 . Other plays of the Old Comedy, like the Ti'agedians of Phrynichus and the Poets of Plato, were possibly concerned with literary criticism. The lovers of Euripides were satirised in the Phileuripides of Axionicus 4 , and of Phi- lippus or Philippides 5 . Sappho was the title of six plays; of four of these we know next to nothing; but in that of Antip'hanes 6 she was represented as propounding and solving riddles; and' in that of Diphilus 7 , as having among her admirers Archilochus, who flourished forty years before her time, and Hipponax, seventy years after it. In the case of Sappho in particular, any inference that we may draw from the mere titles of such plays, must necessarily be uncertain. There is a passage in the comic poet Timocles, humorously describing the consolations enjoyed by the spectator of a tragedy who finds his own troubles lightened by the contemplation of 1 Saintsbury’s History of Criticism, i p. 2 2 f. See also Jebb’s Classical Greek Poetry , pp. 230—3. The terseness of Euripides was appreciated by Aristophanes (frag. 397 d). 2 Athen. 364 a, b; Plut. De Musica, § 30; cp. Meineke, Fr. Com. Gr. II 334 f; Egger, /. c., 39. 3 Meineke, 1 88, 11 371. 4 Athen. 175 B (Meineke, 1 417). 5 Meineke, 1 341, 474. 6 ib. 277 f. 7 ib. 447. 56 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. the troubles of others in the play. There is also a passage from the Poiesis of Antiphanes, insisting that Tragedy is far easier to write than Comedy because in Tragedy the story is already familiar to the audience 1 . But neither of these passages really contains any literary criticism. It is far otherwise with the very striking fragment ascribed to Simulus (a comic poet about 399 b.c.), which is welcomed with enthusiasm by an excellent judge of literary criticism, as advancing ‘ not only a theory of poetry and poetical criticism, but one of such astonishing completeness that it goes far beyond anything that we find in Aristotle, and is worthy of Longinus himself at his very happiest moment’ 2 . I offer the following rendering: Nature of Art bereft will not suffice For any work whate’er in all the world; Nor Art again, devoid of Nature’s aid. And, e’en if Art and Nature join in one, The poet still must find the ways and means, Passion, and practice; happy chance and time; A critic skilled to seize the poet’s sense. For, if in aught of these he haply fail, He cannot gain the goal of all his hopes. Nature, good will, and pains, and ordered grace Make poets wise and good, while length of years Will make them older men, but nothing more 3 . i The philosopher Xenocrates, when attacked by Bion, declined to defend himself; ‘Tragedy’ (he said), ‘when satirised by Comedy, 1 Athen. vi 222 A, 223 B. 2 Saintsbury’s History of Criticism, i 25. 3 Stobaeus, 60, 4, otfre (pvais iravyj yiyverai t£x v V* are/j | irpos ovSev eiriT-rj- 8 evpa rrapdirav ov 8 evL, | oiire iraXi Tiyyi j po 7 (pvaiv KeKrrjpfrirj. \ toijtuv opolws t&v Svoiv avvrjypfriov | eis ravrov, fri 8 ei 7 rpoaXafteiv x°PV7' Lav i I fywra, peXfrrjv, Kcupov €uv 8 £ tol \ apLdpb s ov 8 kv aXXo ttXtjv yijpas iroLei. In 1 . 6—7 Meineke on Stob. (omitting xp^ vov as superfluous) aptly suggests raipov, ev kcuvu>v eirGsv lavrjTa Kal p-ogbevra. 3 Fritzsche on Ar. Ranae, 1206. 4 Introd. to my ed. of Eur. Bacchae , p. xliii. 5 [Plutarch], Lives of the Ten Orators , p. 841 F, ras rpayipdias avruv ev 58 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. included only those of the plays which continued to be acted after their authors’ death. It is said to have been this manu¬ script that was borrowed for the Alexandrian Library by Ptolemy Euergetes (247 or 146 b.c.), who deposited the sum of fifteen talents as a pledge for its safe return, but instead of returning it, forfeited his pledge, kept the original, and sent the Athenians a sumptuous copy in its place 1 . If it ever reached Alexandria at all, it does not appear to have been regarded as a final authority. Other¬ wise we should not find mere conjectures on the part of the Alexandrian critic, Aristophanes, mentioned in the Scholia on the Tragic poets. It is probable that the object of Lycurgus was not so much to restore the original text of the plays, as to record the current acting-version, so as to prevent unauthorised departures from the form which long experience had approved. The official copy thus supplied a test for rejecting alterations due to actors of later date than the time of Lycurgus 2 . The leading tragic poets are quoted as authorities by orators Quotations an d ( not w ^^ out occasional criticism) by philoso- from tragic phers. Lycurgus cites no less than 55 lines from poets the Erechtheus of Euripides, with two shorter pas¬ sages from unnamed tragic poets 3 ; Aeschines (1 § 154) two short passages from Euripides, and Demosthenes (19 § 247) 16 lines from the Antigo?ie of Sophocles (175-190), as illustrating maxims of political conduct which Aeschines had violated. Plato quotes from Aeschylus three passages of the Septern Contra Thebas 4 , but protests against the language respecting Apollo, which, in another play, the poet puts in the lips of Thetis 5 . He never quotes a line from Sophocles, while he ascribes to Euripides a line which also KoivCp ypa\p ap.lv ovs (f>v\dTT€tv, Kal rbv rijs 7 r 6 Aews ypapparta 7rapavayiyvu) abras (at. aAAws) viroKplveadai. 1 Galen, in Hippocratis Epidem. in 2. See below, p. m. 2 p. 15 of Korn, De publico Aeschyli Sophoclis Euripidis fabularum exem¬ plar i Lycurgo auctore confecto , Bonn (1863) pp. 34; cp. Wilamowitz in Hermes xiv 151 and in Eur. Herakles i 130. 3 Leocr. §§ 100, 92, 132. 4 S. C. T. 1 ( Euthyd. 291 d), 451 (Rep. 551 c), 592 f (Rep. 361 B, 362 a). 5 Rep. 383 B. Cp. 380 a, 563 c, Phaedo 180 A, Symp. 383 B. IV.] THE STUDY OF THE DRAMATISTS. 59 occurred in the Aias Locrus of the former 1 . In this connexion he says that ‘people regard tragedy on the whole as wise, and Euripides as a master, therein He also quotes Euripides twice in the Gorgias 2 . Of Aristotle it is enough to say that his citations from Aeschylus are very few, those from Sophocles more numerous, while those from Euripides are taken from as many as ten of his extant plays, not to mention fourteen others 3 . Aristophanes is one of the persons who take part in Plato’s Symposium , but the language of the comic poets is very rarely quoted by the philoso¬ phers, and never by the orators. To the Athenian the theatre was mainly a place of amuse¬ ment, but it was also to some extent a means of education. Aristophanes makes Aeschylus say to thl^ramatists Euripides: ‘ What the master is to childhood, the poets are to youth; therefore we poets are bound to be strictly moral in our teaching’ ( Frogs , 1055). The teaching of Euripides may not have been entirely sound, but it was widely popular. His popularity throughout the Greek world is partly attested by Plutarch. In the Life of Nicias (29), we are told that, at the disastrous close of the Sicilian expedition (413 b.c.), some of the Athenian prisoners at Syracuse owed their liberty to the fact that they were able to recite passages from Euripides; and that, at Caunus, on the Carian coast, opposite to Rhodes, a vessel pursued by pirates was not allowed to enter the port, until it was found that some of those on board knew by heart the songs of Euripides, —stories which have supplied Browning with the theme of Ba/austiods Adventure. Similarly, in the Life of Lysander (15), we learn that, nine years later, when Athens had been conquered by Sparta, and a Theban proposed that the city should be destroyed and its site left desolate, the Spartan captains were deeply moved by a Phocian who sang before them the opening chorus of the Electra of Euripides. But, whatever compunction may have been caused by this pathetic incident, the walls were undoubtedly demolished, though, to the fancy of Milton, 1 ao(poi Tijpavvoi tusv ■'-'•—) for the end of a sentence. It is best to end with a long syllable; and the conclusion must be made clear, not by the transcriber or by any marginal mark of punctuation (• Trapaypcuprj ), but by the rhythm (c. 8). Prose style may either be the continuous style (X^rs eipop-tv-rj), which runs on' with a continuity supplied by connecting particles alone, a style like that of Herodotus, or the compact and pei'iodic style (X^is KareaTpafA/x^v 77). The period must be neither too short nor too long ; if it consists of several clauses, it must be easily pronounced in a single breath. The clauses may either be simply parallel to one another, or antithetically contrasted ; ten examples of these are added from the Pci 7 iegyric of Isocrates. Besides avrideais or ‘contrast of sense’, there is also irapiawais, where the two parallel clauses are equal in length, and vapopLOLuais, where there is a resemblance either in the beginning or in the end of the contrasted words (c. 9). Among graces of style may be mentioned ‘ metaphor’ (c. 10) and vivid personification (c. n). The written style is different from the style of debate, whether deliberative (i.e. parliamentary) or forensic. The written style is precise ; that of debate lends itself to effective delivery. Delivery must not be monotonous, but appropriately varied. Deliberative speaking is like scene- painting : before a large audience minute details are useless. The forensic style is more precise. The ‘ epideictic ’ style (that of encomium) lends itself best to writing ; its aim is to be read ; next to this is the forensic.—The rest of the book is concerned with the arrangement of the several parts of the speech:—exordium (7 rpooL/xiov, c. 14), narrative (dnfiyrja is, c. 16), proofs (■jTLareis, c. 17), and peroration (iiriXoyos, c. 19). Aristotle was born at Stageirus in 384, lived at Athens from 367 to 347, was tutor to Alexander from 343 to 340, returned VI.] ARISTOTLE’S RHETORIC. 8l to Athens from 335 to 323, and died at Chalcis in 322. The Rhetoric was not completed before 338 b.c. (ii 23, 6), probably not before 336 (ii 23, 18). If 336 was the date of its completion, the author was then 48 years of age, re\sLtionsto S and a new interest is added to his own statement Isocrates and ... . Demosthenes that the mind is in its prime ‘ about the age of 49’ (ii 14, 4). Possibly, while writing these very words, the author was himself conscious for a moment that he had approxi¬ mately reached the prime of his own intellectual life. The year 338 b.c. is the date not only of the battle of Chaeroneia, but also of the death of ‘that old man eloquent’, Isocrates, who eight years previously had urged Philip to levy war on Persia ( Or . 5 ; 346 b.c.); and, after the battle, wrote to the victor rejoicing that many of his own hopes were already fulfilled. Notwithstanding the traditional feud between Isocrates and Aristotle, which has been assigned to the latter part of Aristotle’s first residence in Athens, both were inspired with Macedonian sympathies. More¬ over, the artificial style of Isocrates lent itself readily to citations illustrating rhetorical forms of expression. Hence we are not surprised to find that there is no author from whom Aristotle quotes more frequently in the Rhetoric ; there are as many as ten citations from him in a single chapter (iii 9). While Isocrates was 52 years older than Aristotle, Demosthenes was his exact contemporary. But, although Aristotle was at Athens during the delivery of the First Philippic (351) and the Three Olynthiacs (349), he never illustrates a single rule of rhetoric from any of the speeches of the great orator. To Demosthenes he ascribes an isolated simile, which is not to be found in his extant speeches (iii 4, 3), while he cites the saying of a minor orator, that the policy of Demosthenes was the cause of the disasters of Athens, as an example of fallacious reasoning (ii 24, 8). He mentions the ‘orators at Athens, and Isocrates’ (iii 17, 10), and (in a passage open to suspicion) describes hyperbole as a favourite figure with the ‘Attic orators’ (iii 11, 16). He quotes striking metaphors from speakers such as Iphicrates, Leptines, Cephiso- dotus, Peitholaiis, Moerocles and Polyeuctus, but his quotations are apparently not derived from any published works, being rather of the nature of ‘ parliamentary ’ anecdotes from the every- S. 6 82 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. day talk of the Lyceum 1 . He illustrates the metaphorical use of fiorjcrcu from an obscure contemporary of Demosthenes (iii io, 7), though he might have illustrated it better from Demosthenes himself (19 §§ 92, 129). It is not entirely fanciful to suppose that Aristotle, who lived as a foreigner at Athens, and had close relations with Philip and Alexander, may have felt a sense of delicacy in exemplifying the precepts of rhetoric from the speeches of the great opponent of Macedonia. He never quotes the other anti-Macedonian orators, Lycurgus and Hypereides, but he also makes no mention of the Macedonian orator, Aeschines. In relation to the foreign policy of Athens, he apparently deemed it best, as a foreigner, to remain neutral. Of the Ten whom a later age recognised as the ‘Attic orators’, Isocrates is the only one whom he quotes by name; while a passage, which has come down to us in the funeral oration wrongly ascribed to Lysias (2 § 60), is quoted by Aristotle without the name of any author whatsoever ( Rhet . iii 10, 7), being probably written by an un¬ known imitator of Isocrates. The study of the style of prose in the Athenian age was mainly connected with the study of rhetoric. The rhetoric to“ ° f P rose ° f P ublic s P eech waS the firSt t0 attain an prose in artistic form, but other kinds of prose had a closer generai connexion with it than they have in modern times. In the domain of history, the style of Thucydides shows the influence of the Sicilian rhetoric; and the historian readily resorts to speeches as a means of expressing the political opinions of the day, while he employs the medium of a dialogue to give a dramatic representation of the controversy between Athens and Melos. In the next century, two prominent historians, Ephorus and Theopompus, were both of them pupils of that trainer of rhetoricians, Isocrates. The criticisms in the Rhetoric are not confined to the criticism of speeches. A particular kind of prose- style is there (iii 9, 2) exemplified from Herodotus, while many of the precepts apply to prose in general, and not a few to poetry as well. From the time of Aristotle downwards literary criticism forms part of the province of rhetoric. 1 Cp. Wilamowitz, Aristoleles und Athen , i 350. VI.] THE STUDY OF PROSE AUTHORS. 83 The earliest complete work in Greek prose now extant is that of Herodotus (484 -c. 425 b.c.), who, according to the Chronicle of Eusebius, read his ‘ books ’ aloud The study of to the Council at Athens about 446-4 b.c. Ac- proseauthors cording to Lucian ( A'etion , 1), he recited his history to an enraptured audience at Olympia, and his books, which were nine in number, were thenceforth known by the names of the nine Muses. . The biographers of Thucydides have added that the future historian of the Peloponnesian war was himself present and was moved to tears by the recital; but the story is generally regarded as unworthy of credit 1 . Some of the statements of Thucydides on early Greek navies may have been derived from Herodotus, whom he appears to be tacitly correcting in his account of the affair of Cylon (Thuc. i 126) and the prerogatives of the Spartan kings (1 20). He claims that his own conclusions on the early state of Hellas are more trustworthy than those derived from his predecessors, whether ‘poets’ or ‘writers of prose (i 21), but the only historian whom he mentions by name is Hellamcus (i py) 2 . Similarly the only historian named by Herodotus is Hecataeus (ii 143 etc.), who had already been criticised by Heracleitus in the celebrated saying: ‘much learning does not teach sense; else it would have taught He¬ siod and Pythagoras, and also Xenophanes and Hecataeus’ (frag. 16). Thucydides in turn was studied by Demosthenes, as is clear from the style 3 as well as from the matter 4 of his speeches, however little we may credit Lucian’s statement that the orator transcribed the work of the historian eight times over (adv. Indoctum , 4). The style of Demosthenes, again is studied and criticised by Aeschines (hi 166), who quotes a senes of harsh metaphors, which he ascribes to his opponent. Lastly, the dialogues of Plato were studied and quoted by his great pupil, Aristotle. The citations fall under four heads: either ( a) the name of Plato, or Socrates, is added to the title of P- * ^ ahl ™ ann ’ s Life of Herodotus (G. V. Cox, 1845); and Stein’s ed., p. xxi. On Prose Writings in Thucydides’ time,’ see Thuc. i, ed. Forbes xll—lxxx. ’ 3 4 Dion. Hal. Thuc. 53, 54 (Dem. 14 § 13) ; C p. Blass Atl. Ber. 111 i 2 m o 7 Phil, m 47—51, 01 . iii 21, Lept. 73. 6—2 8 4 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. Place of Prose in education the dialogue; or ( b ) the title alone is given; or (e) the name of Plato is mentioned without specification of any particular work; or (d) the reference is in general terms and in the plural number, introduced by phrases such as ‘certain persons say’ or ‘think,’ where some particular work of Plato’s is either certainly or probably meant 1 . The evidence of these citations is of some importance in determining the genuineness of the dialogues ascribed to Plato 2 . While the place of poetry in Athenian education was due partly to a belief in the poet as a teacher and as an inspired being, partly to the fact that poetry attained an artistic form at an earlier date than prose (besides being easier to commit to memory), the place of prose was distinctly subordinate. In elementary education prose appears to have been partly represented by the traditional fables of Aesop (Ar. Birds 471). In Plato’s Phaedrus (274 c) Socrates is described as disparaging reading and writing in comparison with talking and memory; but in Xenophon’s Memorabilia (i 6, 14) we find him unrolling and perusing, with his friends, ‘ the treasures of the wise men of old, which they wrote down in books and left behind them.’ As a young man, he had ‘ heard someone reading aloud ’ a book of Anaxagoras, and hastened to obtain it (. Phaedo 97 b). ‘Strains written in prose,’ and ‘compositions in prose, without rhythm or harmony,’ are discussed, as well as poetry, in the scheme of education in Plato’s Laws (809 b, 810 b), but the ‘ works handed down by many writers of this class ’ (whether in prose or verse) are deemed ‘dangerous,’ while a discourse like that in the Laws is described as ‘ inspired of heaven ’ and ‘ exactly like a poem,’ and as in fact an appropriate pattern for other discourses to be used in the education of youth (811 c-e). After the death of Plato the original manuscripts of his dialogues were possibly preserved in the school of the Academy. For eight years the school was under the care of his nephew and successor, Speu- sippus, and afterwards for twenty-five under that of Xenocrates, who was succeeded by Polemon and others. 1 See the Index of Bonitz, and of Heitz. 2 Zeller’s Plato, 54—77. Early trans¬ mission of the works of Plato and Aristotle VI.] MSS OF PLATO AND ARISTOTLE. 85 Copies of the original mss were doubtless made at an early date, and some of these may have been transmitted from Athens to Alexandria, possibly through the agency of Demetrius of Phaleron h The earliest extant ms of any part of Plato has been found in Egypt. It is the Petrie papyrus from Gurob in the Faiyftm, containing about 12 columns of the Phaedo , being portions of a neatly written trade-copy assigned to the middle of the third century b.c . 1 2 On the death of Aristotle, the school of the Lyceum, with the library of its founder, remained for more than 34 years under the control of his successor Theophrastus. During this time Aristotle’s pupil, Eudemus of Rhodes, wrote to Theophrastus for a transcript of a passage in the Physics which was missing in his own copy of that work 3 , and doubtless other copies of the master’s manuscripts were in circulation during his successor’s life-time 4 . Theophrastus, on his death in or about 287 b.c., left his own library and that of Aristotle to his pupil Neleus, who removed it to his home at Scepsis in the Troad. A few years later the town passed into the possession of the Kings of the Attalid dynasty, who from about 230 b.c. began to found a great Library at Pergamon to vie with that of the Ptolemies at Alexandria. The heirs of Neleus prudently concealed the mss in a cellar, awaiting an opportunity for sending them safely out of the country. The mss had thus remained in their possession for more than 150 years, when, about 100 b.c., they were bought by Apellicon of Teos, and restored to Athens. After the capture of Athens by Sulla in 86 b.c., they were transported from Athens to Rome, where they were consulted by scholars such as Tyran- nion, Andronicus 5 , and others; but, owing to long neglect, many 1 Grote’s Plato, i 122, 135, 169; criticised in Zeller’s Plato , 51—3, and esp. in Gomperz, Platonische Aufsdtze, ii 1899. 2 Mahaffy’s Petrie Papyri (1891) pi. viii—x; E. M. Thompson’s Palaeo¬ graphy , p. 120; and Kenyon’s Palaeography of Gk papyri , p. 59—63. Exhibited in the British Museum ; Case A, 1. See p. 87. 3 Zeller’s Aristotle, i 136; Grote’s Plato , i 140. 4 Stahr, Aristoielia, ii 1—166, 294 f; Susemihl, Gr. Litt. Alex., ii 299 f, note 324. 8 Added in Plutarch’s Sulla, 26. 86 THE ATHENIAN AGE. [CHAP. of them had become illegible, and the copies made after they had passed into the hands of Apellicon were disfigured with unskilful conjectures and restorations. The above story of their fortunes is told us by Tyrannion’s pupil, Strabo, who adds that Aristotle was the first to ‘collect books/ thus setting ‘an example after¬ wards followed by the Kings of Egypt 1 .’ The story is partly confirmed in one passage of Athenaeus (214 d e), but contradicted in another (3 b), carelessly asserting that all the books of Aristotle in the possession of Neleus were purchased for the Alexandrian library by Ptolemy II, who is elsewhere described as possessing more than 1000 books or rolls of the Aristotelian writings 2 . The earliest extant manuscript of any of the Aristotelian writings is the papyrus containing Aristotle’s Constitution of Athens, found in Egypt in 1890 and ascribed to about 100 a.d . 3 4 Apart from Aristotle’s library we hear of no important collec¬ tion of books in the Athenian age, though books are said to have been collected by Polycrates of Samos, by Peisistratus and Euripides (Athen. p. 3), and by a pupil of Plato and Isocrates, the ‘tyrant’ Clearchus who founded a library at the Pontic Heraclea in Bithynia before 364 b.c. (Photius Bibl. 222 b), while in 400 b.c. ‘many books’ are mentioned by Xenophon (Anab. vii 5, 14) as found in the cargo of some vessels wrecked on the coast of the Euxine. In or after the first century b.c. an incomplete title of a speech of Demosthenes and of certain portions of Hellanicus appears by the side of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Crates, Diphilus, and the Meleager and Alcmaeon of Euripides, in an inscription conjecturally supposed to contain a list of books presented by Athenian youths to the library of their gymnasium *. We know for certain that 100 volumes were annually presented by the youth of Athens to the library of the gymnasium called the Ptolemaion , which was founded at Athens early in the Alexandrian age (probably by Ptolemy Philadelphus) and was visited in the 1 Strabo, pp. 608—9 ; Grote’s Plato, i 138 f. 2 Schol. Arist. 22 a 12. Cp. Zeller’s Aristotle , c. iii, and Shute’s History of the Aristotelian Writings , pp. 29—45. 3 Complete facsimile edited by Kenyon (1891) ; specimen given by E. M. Thompson /. c. p. 140. 4 C. I. A. ii 992. VI.] LIBRARIES. 87 Roman age by Cicero 1 and Pausanias 2 . But in the Athenian age itself, it was not so much the books that the Athenian read as the words that he heard, in the theatre, in the law-courts, in the groves of Academe and in the walks of the Lyceum, that served to complete his education. In the language of John Henry Newman, ‘it was what the student gazed on, what he heard, what he caught by the magic of sympathy, not what he read, which was the education furnished by Athens 3 .” 1 De Finibus v 1, 1. 2 i 17, 2 (with Frazer’s note). Cp. C. /. A. ii 465, 468, 478, 480, 482, gdocrau Kal / 3 ij 3 \la els ttjv UToXe/xalip ( 3 i( 3 \iodr]Kr]v, and Dittenberger, De Ephebis , p. 51 ; Curtius, Stadtgeschichte von A then, lxxxii 238, 282 ; and P. Girard, VEducation Athiniemxe, p. 159 f. 3 Historical Sketches, p. 40. ft*- ni r* e/tf Af rrc°A[ Aa J0|xrC0A[r-rApA'K5 From the earliest extant ms of the Phaedo of Plato, p. 83 a (c. 250 B.C.). (E. M. Thompson’s Palaeogi'aphy , p. 120.) ccuadrjxreojv TceiBovaa. de eK tovtu/j. v avaxupeiv oao/ut. /xrj avayKT] XP")iai avT-qv 5 ’ eis eavrrjv av\- \eyeix 9 ai koli adpoi^ecrdou 7rapa/ce- \evecra.i Triareveiv Se fxvbevi aWwi CHAPTER VII. THE BEGINNINGS OF GRAMMAR AND ETYMOLOGY. We are told by Herodotus (v 58) that the Phoenicians who came with Cadmus brought with them the letters of Herodotus . ° the Phoenician alphabet, and that in course of time they adapted the method of writing them to the requirements of the Greek language. In the temple of the Ismenian Apollo at Thebes, Herodotus had himself seen three tripods inscribed with ‘ Cadmeian ’ letters, ‘ for the most part resembling those of the Ionians \ He assigns the three inscriptions to the age of Lai'us in the third, and to those of Oedipus and Laodamas in the fourth and sixth generations from Cadmus (v 59-61). We are also told by Herodotus that the Ionians who lived nearest to the Phoe¬ nicians (e.g. in Cyprus and Rhodes) borrowed the Phoenician alphabet, with a few changes, and that they habitually called them the ‘Phoenician’ letters (v 58),—a statement confirmed by an inscription found near the Ionian town of Teos 1 . Spelling was taught by means of a series of syllables combining the consonants with all the vowels in succession. Fragments of a tile have been found in Attica bearing the syllables a p /3ap yap Sap, ep (3ep yep Sep etc. 2 The comic poet Callias wrote a ‘ letter- play ’ (ypapLpLaTLKr) rpaywSia) in which the dramatis personae were the letters of the alphabet, all of which were enumerated in the prologue, with a separate enumeration of the vowels at a later point. The play included a spelling-chorus, ftf/ra a\a /3a etc., and some of its choral arrangements are said to have been 1 C. I. G. 3044 — I. G. A. 497 B 37 ( c . 475 B.C.), 5 s cLv...oiviKr]ia iKKbyJ/eL (Roberts, Greek Epigraphy , p. 170). 2 Philistor, iv 327. CHAP. VII.] THE GREEK ALPHABET. 89 imitated in the Medea of Euripides (431 b.c.),— a statement of no value except as an indication of the probable date of the play 1 . In the Theseus of Euripides a slave who could not read was represented as describing the shape of each of the characters in the name of 0 H 2 EY 2 , and the same device was adopted in the case of the same name by Agathon and Theodectes, while Sophocles is said to have represented the shapes of various letters of the alphabet, in one of his satyric dramas, by means of the attitudes assumed by a dancer (Athen. p. 453-4). In the archonship of Eucleides (403 b.c.) it was ordered at Athens on the proposal of Archinus that all public documents should be written in the Ionic characters 2 ; and the ‘treaty with the barbarian’ (commonly called the ‘peace of Cimon’ or ‘Callias’, after 466 or 449 b.c.) is denounced by Theopompus as a fabrication, on the ground that the characters used in the inscription recording it were those of the Ionic instead of the Attic alphabet 3 . The fact that Euripides, who died three years before the archonship of Eu¬ cleides, recognises H as the second letter of ‘ Theseus ’ (as above noticed) is part of the proof that the Ionic alphabet was in literary and private use at Athens before 403 b.c. The current division of letters (crrot^eta), as may be inferred from three passages of Plato, was as follows: (1) ‘voiced’ or ‘vocal’ letters ((i)va kcu 0oyya), our ‘ mutes ’; and (b) letters that are ‘ not vocal ’, but ‘ not without sound ’ (cfxavrjevTa fxkv ov, ov /xivTQL ye a0oy ya), i.e. A, /x, v, p, 9, afterwards known as ‘semivowels’ (r}fXLa and O (not omega) are recognised in the best mss of the Greek Testament, ly to et/xt to dA<£a /cat to <3 (Rev. i 8), and in Prudentius :—‘ a\a et to cognominatus ’\ The earliest trace of any classification of words is to be found in Plato. ‘ Grammar ’ was at first regarded mainly as the art of reading and writing (p. 6); but it also included the theory of the nature of sounds and of accent, with questions of quantity and rhythm, and in these respects it was closely connected with Music. With the classification of words grammar entered on a new stage. It is traditionally held that Plato was the first to distinguish between the Noun and the Verb, calling the former ovofxa and the latter prjp,a. But the correspondence between these terms is incomplete 1 2 , and the distinction drawn by Plato between ovo/xa and p-^/xa does not answer to the grammatical distinction between Noun and Verb, but to the logical distinction between Subject and Predicate 3 . This is true even of the passage in the Sophistes (261 e), which is the main support of those who ascribe to Plato the first distinction between Noun and Verb as parts of speech. He there says :—‘ There are two kinds of inti¬ mations of being which are given by the voice’, ‘one of them called ovo/juiTa and the other prjpaTa ’; ‘ that which denotes action we call prjp.a ’, ‘ the articulate sign set on those who do the actions we call ovo/xa’; ‘a succession of 6 vop.ara or pyj^ara alone is not discourse’; ‘it is only when they are mingled together that language is formed ’ 4 . prjpa in Plato includes every kind of 1 Mayor’s First Greek Reader , p. lii; Blass, Pronunciation of Ancient Greek , p. 20. 2 Classen, De Gram. Gr. primordiis (1829), p. 45 f. 3 Deuschle, Die Plat. Sprachphilosophie (1852), p. 8 f. 4 Cp. Theaet. 206 D, Symp. 198 B, 199 B, Rep. 340 E, 462 C, 464 A, 474 A, 562 c, Tim. 49 e; also Crat. 425 A, 431 B (Deuschle, p. 9). VII.] THE BEGINNINGS OF GRAMMAR. 91 predicate. Thus, in the Cratylus (399 b), A a <£i'A.os (being predicated of a person) is called a pyj/^a, while its derivative Am^iAo? is an ovofxa. In later times Plato’s ovop.a and prj/xa were regarded as grammatical parts of speech, and the question whether this division was meant by Plato to be exhaustive, or whether the other parts of speech were only omitted because they were com¬ paratively unimportant, was discussed by Plutarch in his Platonic Questions (Moralia ii 1008), and decided in the latter sense. In Plato we find suggestions of the distinction afterwards drawn in grammar between the Substantive and the Adjective (cp. i™- wp-ia in Parm. 131 a, Soph. 225 d, Phaedr. 238 a); he also recognises Number (Soph. 237 e), Tenses of Verbs (Parm. 151 e, 156 a; Soph. 262 d), and ‘Active and Passive’ (Soph. 219 b; Philebus 26 e) 1 . Moods are not yet mentioned, but Protagoras had already distinguished in rhetoric some of the various modes of expression which correspond to the Moods of grammar (p. 27). He had also divided nouns into three classes, male, female, and inanimate (trKevrj), a classification apparently founded on a real or natural, and not on a grammatical basis, ‘ male ’ and ‘ female ’ nouns denoting male and female persons, or distinctions in sex, whether in mankind or among animals in general, and things inanimate including the names of all other objects, natural and artificial, real and abstract. This last class contains many words which are grammatically masculine or feminine, but the classification of Protagoras can hardly be identified with a classification of nouns as masculine, feminine and neuter. Protagoras uses in the sense of ‘ classes ’ the same term (yevrj), which was afterwards adopted in grammar to denote ‘ genders ’ 2 . In the earlier Greek philosophers we find a few traces of speculation on the origin of language. Thus Pythagoras (fl. 540- 510 b.c.) held that, next to ‘number’, the highest wisdom belonged to ‘him who gave things their names’ 3 . Heracleitus 1 Deuschle, pp. 10, 17, 18 ; cp. Schomann, Die Lehre von den Redetheilen (1862), p. 2 ; and Steinthal, Sprachwissenschaft, i 2 137 f. 2 Cope in Journ. of Cl. and S. Phil, iii 48 f., and on Arist. Rhet. iii 5, 5 and Introd. p. 293. Ar. Clouds 659 ff. may be a satire on Protagoras. 3 6 tcl dvdfxara tois Trpay/j.ao}va and acfxDva); a noun, a verb, and a ‘connecting word ’ (o-wSeoT-tos) are also defined; and ‘ inflexion ’ (tttwo-is) is described as belonging to the noun and the verb, and expressing ‘ of ’, ‘ to ’, or the like, or the relation of number, or that of ‘ mode of address’ 1 . In the De Jnterpretatione the verb in the present tense is the prjp.a, and the other tenses are its 7nweis, and else¬ where the 7n7weis of a noun include even adjectives and adverbs. In contrast with m-wcns, the nominative is called kA.^ T ^ v j 3 av pLeTexovnov tov Movcrelov (!) \f/ev8u>s eireytypaTTTO avyypap.p.a' Xap./3dveiv 5’ ap^apie voju pucrdov tQv KOpu£op.tvuJi> avrois crdyypa/ap.a rraXaLOv tlvos av8pbs, ovtus rfS?) TroXXa \pev8Qs ernypacpovres eKopa^ov, and ib. p. 109. 2 David (or Elias) in Schol. on Aristot. 28 a 13 f (Susemihl, ii 413, note 367)- 3 Strabo, 609 (Susemihl, ii 667 f). 4 Caesar, B. C. iii in. 5 Orosius, vi 15, 31, quadraginta milia librorum proximis forte aedibus condita exussit. 6 Parthey, Museum Alex. p. 32. VIII.] FATE OF THE ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY. 113 the stores of corn and of books as having perished in the flames; but these accounts seem less probable than the suggestion that it was not the Library itself, but only those of the books which had been transferred to buildings near the harbour, that suffered destruction. The Court Journals at Alexandria were consulted not only by Diodorus Siculus (iii 38), before Caesar’s visit, but also by Appian (Praef. 10) long after (c. 160 a.d.). The story of the burning of the Library is not mentioned either by Cicero, who shortly afterwards induced Cleopatra, during her stay in Rome, to promise to get him some books from Alexandria 1 , or by Strabo, who visited Alexandria only 22 years later. The earliest mention of the disaster which befell the mss is in Seneca 2 . ‘The Per- gamene Libraries’, containing 200,000 separate volumes, were presented to Cleopatra by Antonius in 41 b.c. (Plut. Ant. 58), and Domitian is said to have supplemented the deficiences of the libraries in Italy by means of transcripts from the Alexandrian mss (Suet. Dom. 20). In the time of Aurelian (272 a.d.) the larger part of the region of Alexandria in which the Library was situated was laid waste (Amm. Marc, xxii 16, 5), and it may be conjectured that this was the date when the Library suffered most damage; for, late in the following century, we find a rhetorician of Antioch, Aphthonius, assigning a special importance to another Library, identified as that of the Serapeum 3 . Under Theodosius I (391 a.d.) the temple of Serapis, which had been partly burnt in 183 a.d., was demolished, and transformed into a church and monastery, by Theophilus, the patriarch of Alexandria, and the lesser Library of the Serapeum can hardly have survived this destruction. Orosius, at the time of his visit, saw only empty book-cases in ‘the temples’ of the city 4 , but his evidence is very vague 5 . In 642 a.d., when Amrou, the general of Omar, Caliph of the Saracens, captured Alexandria, it is stated that Johannes 1 Ad Att. xiv 8, xv 15 (Mahaffy, l.c., 461). 2 De Tranq. An. 9, quadraginta milia librorum Alexandriae arserunt. 3 Aphthonius, quoted on p. 108. 4 Orosius, vi 15, 32, quamlibet hodieque in templis exstent, quae et nos vidimus, armaria librorum, quibus direptis exinanita et a rusticis hominibus nostris temporibus memorant, etc. 5 Bury’s Gibbon, iii 495. S. 8 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. 114 Philoponus, the commentator on Aristotle, asked the conqueror for the gift of the Alexandrian Library, that the conqueror felt constrained to consult the Caliph, and that the Caliph made the well-known reply:— £ if these writings of the Greeks agree with the book of God, they are useless and need not be preserved; if they disagree, they are pernicious and ought to be destroyed \ It is added that the contents of the Library were consigned to the flames, and that they served for six months as fuel for the 4000 baths of Alexandria. The authority for this story is Abul- pharagius 1 ; but it has been urged by Gibbon (c. 51) that his account, written in a distant province six centuries after the event, is refuted by the silence of two annalists of an earlier date and of a direct connexion with Alexandria, the more ancient of whom, the patriarch Eutychius, has minutely described the destruction of the city. The destruction of books, the historian adds, is contrary to the principles of Mohammedanism. In any case it may well be doubted whether any large number of ancient mss were still to be found in Alexandria at the date of its capture by the general of the Saracens 2 . The first four Librarians of Alexandria were Zenodotus ( c . 285-r. 234 b.c.); Eratosthenes ( c. 234-195); Aristophanes of Byzantium (195-180); and Aris¬ tarchus (180 or 172-146). It has sometimes been supposed that Callimachus was Librarian between the time of Zenodotus and that of Eratosthenes ; and Apollonius Rhodius, between that of Eratosthenes and Aristophanes; but chrono¬ logical considerations make this view improbable 3 . Nearly a century after the appointment of Aristarchus, an inscription from Paphos shows that the office was given, after 89 b.c., to a kinsman and priest of Ptolemy Soter II (Lathyrus), named Onesander, who is otherwise unknown 4 . The Librarians 1 Dynast, p. 114, vers. Pocock (cp. Bury’s Gibbon, v 453, 515). 2 Cp. Susemihl, i 344. The modern writers agreeing or disagreeing with Gibbon on this point are quoted by Parthey, A/us. Alex. p. 106. Cp. notes in Bury’s Gibbon, v 454, and 452 (where it is observed that Philoponus lived more than a century before the conquest of Alexandria). 3 Busch, De bibliothecariis Alex, qui feruntur primis, 1884; Dziatzko in Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Bibliotheken , p. 412. 4 Journ. Hell. St. ix 240. VIII.] ALEXANDRIAN LITERATURE. 1 15 Of the names above mentioned Callimachus and Apollonius Rhodius are celebrated in the history of Literature as well as in that of Scholarship; we may therefore cast a passing glance on the literature of the Alexandrian age before giving a more detailed account of the representatives of Scholarship in the same period. The literature of this age was slavishly imitative rather than spontaneously creative; it was inspired not by the immediate impulse of true genius, but by the ligature 1 ” 3 " reflected reminiscences of a golden age that was gone for ever; it appealed not to the general body of free citizens, but to the cultivated few, who formed a separate class of men of learned and critical tastes, either actually enjoying or attempting to attract the favour of the court, amid the multitudinous popula¬ tion of a vast commercial city. In this age Parody and Satire are represented by Timon of Phlius (a 315-c. 226), who lived at Calchedon and Athens, cultivating his garden to the age of nearly ninety, and using the vehicle of hexameter verse for those criti¬ cisms on the dogmatic schools of philosophy, which incidentally supply us with an early satirical allusion to the Alexandrian Museum (p. 103). Pastoral Poetry is represented by Theocritus of Syracuse (fl. 272 b.c.). Of his idylls, the 17th (273-1 b.c.) is an encomium on Ptolemy Philadelphus, celebrating his extensive empire, his extraordinary wealth, and his generosity towards priests and poets; the'i4th (after 269 b.c.) is on the soldiers in his service; the 15th, the Adoniazusae (before 270 b.c.), paints a graphic picture of the thronging crowds of Alexandria at a festival attended by two ladies from Syracuse; while his bucolic poems in general must have charmed the dwellers amid the dust and din and glare of Alexandria with glimpses of the idyllic life of shepherds and herdsmen resting beside the fountains beneath the plane-trees, or amid the pine-woods and the upland pastures that look down on the Sicilian sea. With Theocritus we associate the two other bucolic poets, Moschus of Syracuse, the author of the Runaway Eros ( c . 150), and Bion of Smyrna, the author of the Lament for Adonis ( c . 100 b.c.). The recently recovered Mimes of Herondas may be as early as the latter part of the reign of Philadelphus. Theocritus and Herondas alike found a model in 8—2 116 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. the Mimes of Sophron, which must have remained in existence till late in the first or early in the second century a.d., as the label of a ms of that date has been found in Egypt 1 . Didactic Poetry is represented by Aratus of Soli, who lived at the court of Pella (276 b.c.), and imitated Hesiod in his extant astronomical poem entitled the Phaenomena , paraphrased from Eudoxus, concluding with Prognostics of the Weather , paraphrased from Theophrastus. It was a work that won the praises of Calli¬ machus ( Anth . ix 507), and, in the Roman age, the compliment of repeated translation by Varro Atacinus, Cicero, Germanicus and Avienus. Didactic poetry is also represented by the extant epics on venomous bites ( Theriaca ) and on antidotes ( Alexi- pharmaca) composed by Nicander (150 b.c.), one of whose lost poems was imitated in the Metamorphoses of Ovid. Other learned types of verse are represented by the elegiac Hymns and Epigrams of Callimachus (c. 310 -c. 235), by the epic poem of Apollonius Rhodius (f. c. 250-200) on the Argonauts, and by the iambic drama of Lycophron (c. 295). In the same age mathema¬ tical and other kindred sciences were represented by Euclid (f. 300 b.c.) 2 , and Archimedes of Syracuse (c. 287-212 b.c.); by those masters of Mechanics, Heron of Alexandria and Philon of Byzan¬ tium ; by the earliest writer on Conic Sections, Apollonius of Perga, and by the astronomer, Hipparchus of Nicaea; Geography, by Eratosthenes; the Chronology of Chaldaea by Berosus (280), that of Egypt by Manetho (277), and that of Greece by the unknown author of the Parian Marble, now in Oxford, with its summary of Greek history beginning from the earliest times and originally ending with 264 b.c . 3 The important trilingual inscriptions, in hieroglyphic and demotic Egyptian and in Greek, which are known as the ‘decree of Canopus’, discovered by Lepsius in 1 Oxyrhynchus Papyri , ii p. 303. 2 It was Ptolemy I who was informed by Euclid that there was no royal road to geometry (Proclus in Eucl. p. 68). 3 ed. Flach, 1884. The fall of Troy is here assigned to 1208 B.c. It had previously been assigned to 1171 B.c. by Sosibius, a member of the Alexan¬ drian Museum under Ptolemy II, and the author of a chronological work, in which Homer is described as having flourished c. 865 B.c. The fall of Troy was afterwards placed by Eratosthenes in 1184, and this has become the traditional date. VIII.] ALEXANDRIAN LITERATURE. II 7 1865, and the ‘ decree of Memphis 5 or the ‘ Rosetta Stone 5 , found by the French near the Rosetta mouth of the Nile in 1798, belong to the years 238 and 196 respectively 1 . The ‘Rosetta Stone 5 was placed in the British Museum in 1802, and the Greek text restored by Porson early in the following year; it afterwards supplied Young and Champollion with the key to the deciphering of Egyptian hieroglyphics. The great age of Alexandrian criti¬ cism is drawing to its end with the death of Aristarchus about 145 b.c., when we reach an important representative of History in the person of Polybius ( c . 205-c. 123), who in 146 b.c. witnessed the destruction of Carthage and the burning of Corinth, closing with that year his record of Roman conquest, which throws light on the history of Egypt, especially between the accession of Ptolemy Philopator (222 b.c ) and that of Ptolemy Physcon (146). Though he is the first great historian since Herodotus and Thucydides, he is little interested in the earlier Greek literature, quoting Herodotus only twice, and Thucydides and Xenophon only once. His historic vision rests far less on Alexandria than on Rome; and, in the history of Scholarship, his work is mainly interesting as the earliest and best example, now extant, of the ‘common dialect 5 , founded on Attic Prose, which prevailed in the Greek world from about 300 b.c. In the century after Polybius we find in Diodorus Siculus ( c . 40 b.c.) a historian who took Ephorus, the pupil of Isocrates, for his model, and who, in compiling a history which ended with Caesar’s Gallic Wars, consulted the Libraries and the public archives of Rome, visited Alexandria and parts of Upper Egypt about 60 b.c., and, in relating the early history of Egypt, paused over the name of the ancient king, Osymandyas, who placed above the portal of a library of sacred books in Thebes an inscription describing it as a ‘ sanatorium for the soul 5 2 . Of Alexandria at the date of his own visit he tells us, as an eye-witness, that a Roman who had accidentally killed a cat was mercilessly put to death by the populace (i 14). The incident is of some importance for our present purpose. It proves that the mob of Alexandria 1 Texts in Mahafify, /. c., pp. 226—239, and 316—327. 2 Diod. Sic. i 49, 3, if/vxvs larpeiov. The king has been identified with Ramses (II) Miamun (cent. 14 b.c.). ii 8 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. was ‘no longer Greek, as it professed to be’, but was ‘deeply saturated with Egyptian blood 51 , thus showing that, towards the close of the Alexandrian age, as at the beginning, Greek civilisa¬ tion in Alexandria was confined to a very limited circle. The Alexandrian age is in the main an age of erudition and criticism. Even its poets are often scholars. The Philetas , earliest of the scholars and poets of this age is Philetas of Cos 1 2 (c. 340— c, 285-3), the preceptor not only of Ptolemy Philadelphus (about 295-2 b.c.), but also of Zenodotus and of the elegiac poet Hermesianax. He was remarkable for the extreme delicacy of his frame; it is even stated that he was compelled to wear leaden soles to prevent his being blown away by the wind 3 . He was the author of a glossary of unusual poetic words, quoted as araKra or a tolktoi yA-djcrcrcu or simply yX.(vcraaL 4 . The readings which he preferred in the Homeric text are noticed in several of the scholia 5 , and he was criticised by a greater Homeric scholar, Aristarchus, in a work entitled 7 rpos ^lX^tolv. About 292 he returned to Cos, where he apparently presided over a brotherhood of poets including Theocritus and Aratus 6 . Cos had been ‘liberated 5 from Antigonus by Ptolemy Soter in 310; in that island his son Philadelphus had been born in 308; and from this time onwards it was closely connected with Alexandria. It was a place of safety for royal exiles; and, with its lofty mountains and its verdant slopes, it was also a favourite retreat for men of letters weary of the heat and turmoil of the great commercial city 7 . It is doubtful whether it was a ‘place of education for royal princes 5 ; it seems more probable that Philetas was summoned to Alexandria than that Philadelphus 1 Mahaffy, l.c. 440. 2 Strabo, 657 ult., TroirjTTjs a/na kclI xpirucds. 3 Athen. 552 b ; Aelian, V. H. ix 14. 4 Cp. Athen. 383 B. 5 //. ii 269, xxi 126, 179, 252 (Susemihl, i 179, n. 26). 6 Susemihl, i 175, and in Philologus, 57 (1898). The identification of Aratus the friend of Theocritus (Id. vi) with the astronomical poet is doubtful (cp. Wilamowitz in Gottingen Nachrichten , 1894, quoted in Cholmeley’s Theocritus , p. 17). 7 Mahaffy, /. c. 54. Cos is the scene of the second poem of Herondas. It was off Cos that Philadelphus was defeated by Antigonus c. 258, thus losing for a time the mastery of the sea which he recovered off Andros in 247 (id. 150). VIII.] PHILETAS. ZENODOTUS. 119 Zenodotus was sent to Cos. As a poet, Philetas was a writer of amatory elegiacs of simple form, but without any special power. At Alexandria his fame was soon superseded by that of Callimachus, though Roman writers regard them as nearly equal in repute. They are linked together in a well-known couplet of Propertius (iv 1, 1) ‘Callimachi manes et Coi sacra Philetae, in vestrum, quaeso, me sinite ire nemusV His pupil Zenodotus of Ephesus (>c . 325-c:. 234 b.c.) was made the first Librarian of the great Alexandrian Library early in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. As Librarian, Zenodotus classified the epic and lyric poets, while Alexander Aetolus dealt with the tragic and Lycophron with the comic drama 2 . He compiled a Homeric glossary, in which he was apparently content with merely guessing at the meaning of difficult words 3 . Shortly before 274 he produced the first scientific edition of the Iliad and Odyssey. It was about that date that Timon of Phlius, when consulted by the poet Aratus about a proposed edition of Homer, replied that it must be founded on ancient mss and not on those that had already been revised (toIs 17877 8iwp#oo/xeWs) 4 . Zenodotus is described as the earliest editor (SiopOwryjs) of Homer 5 ; his edition was founded on numerous mss ; each of the two poems was now for the first time divided into 24 books, and spurious lines marked with a marginal obelus. His reasons for condemning such lines were mainly because he deemed them inconsistent with the context, or unsuited to the persons, whether deities or heroes, whose action is there described. Thus he rejected Iliad iii 423-6 on the ground that it was unbecoming for Aphrodite to ‘carry a seat’ for Helen; and similarly he altered a passage in iv 88, because it is out of 1 Cp. iii 26, 31; iv 3, 52; v 6, 3 ; Quint. X 1, 58. 2 Scholium 11 of Tzetzes on Greek Comedy: § 19 in Studemund’s article in Philologies 46 (1888) p. 10, iarbov 8 tl ’ AXb^avSpos 6 AlrwAds /cal AvKocppiov 6 XaX/a5eus vvo UroXe/xaiov rov $i\a8b\wi (3d person), vwl (Nom. and Acc.) and vahv (Gen. and Dat.) 2 , makes the dual interchangeable with the plural, regards -arat as a singular as well as a plural termination, and -no instead of -uov as a termination of the Comparative; but he rightly recognises the fact that eos is not confined to the third person, and the readings preferred by him are not unfrequently important 3 . He is sometimes right, when his great successors, Aristophanes and Aristarchus, are wrong 4 . His recension of Homer was the first recension of any text which aimed at restoring the genuine original. It was succeeded by a recension executed with taste and judgement by the epic poet Rhianus 5 . Zenodotus also produced a recension of Hesiod’s Theogony , and possibly one of Pindar and Anacreon 6 . His merits as a Homeric critic are well summed up by Sir Richard Jebb. ‘In the dawn of the new scholarship, he appears as a gifted man with a critical aim, but without an adequate critical method. He insisted on the study of Homer’s style; but he failed to place that study on a sound basis. The cause of this was that he often omitted to distinguish between the ordinary usages of words and those peculiar to Homer. In regard to 1 Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis Homericis, p. 333 s ; cp. Cobet, Mi sc. Crit. 225 — 39 (esp. 227, 234) and 251. 2 Cobet, /. c. 250. 3 See Index to Dr Leaf’s Iliad , s.v. Zenodolus. 4 Romer in Abhandl. Munch. A had. I Cl. xvii 639—722. 5 MayhofF, De Rhiani Crelensis Studiis Homericis , 1870, ap. Susemihl, i 399 f- 6 Diintzer, De Z. Studiis Homericis , 1848; Romer, /. c.; Christ, § 428*; Susemihl, i 330—4, and Hiibner’s Bibliographie, § 7. VIII.] ALEXANDER AETOLUS. LYCOPHRON. 121 dialect, again, he did not sufficiently discriminate the older from the later Ionic. And, relying too much on his own feeling for Homer’s spirit, he indulged in some arbitrary emendations. Still, he broke new ground; his work had .a great repute; and to some extent, its influence was lasting ’ \ Alexander Aetolus (born c. 315, fl. 285-276 b.c.) was responsible for the classification of the tragic and satyric dramas in the Alexandrian Library. It is Aetolus"^ probably owing to this fact that he is called a ypa/x/xartKos by Suidas. His work at Alexandria lasted from c. 285 to 276 b.c., at which date he withdrew to the Macedonian capital of Antigonus Gonatas. In his youth he was probably a companion of Theocritus and Aratus in Cos, and he was also associated with the latter in Macedonia. As a tragic poet, he was included among the seven known as the Alexandrian Pleias. He also wrote in epic verse, and in anapaestic tetrameters. Among the latter were some notable lines on Euripides:— 6 8 ’ 'Auai-ayopov rpocpipos x aL °v (TTpupvos pev ’Ipoiye irpoaenrelv, kclI puroylXios, Kal TwOa£eiv ou8b Trap ’ olvov pepadrjKibs, aXX' 0 tl ypaxf/ai, tout’ cLv pIXltos Kal creiprjviov erereuxei 1 2 . Lycophron of -Chalcis in Euboea (born c. 330-325 b.c.) was summoned to Alexandria c. 285 b.c., and entrusted ... r , . . . Lycophron with the arrangement 01 the comic poets in the Alexandrian Library. About ten years previously ( c . 295) he had written his Alexandra , a very lengthy tragic monologue consisting of a strange combination of mythological, historical and linguistic learning, grievously wanting in taste and deliberately obscure in expression. He was one of the tragic Pleias of Alexandria. He also wrote the earliest treatise on Comedy in at least eleven books, the extant fragments of which give an un¬ favourable impression of his attainments as a scholar 3 . Callimachus of Cyrene (c.^io-c. 235), and his somewhat earlier contemporary Aratus, studied at Athens under the Peripatetic 1 Jebb’s Homer , p. 92 f. 2 ap. Gellius xv 20, 8. Cp. Meineke, Analecta Alexandrina , 215—251; Couat, Poesie Alex. 105—no; Susemihl, i 187—190. 3 Strecker, De Lycophrone etc., ap. Susemihl, i 274; Lycophron’s Alex¬ andra , ed. Holzinger, 1895; and Hiibner, Bibliographie , § 7. 122 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. Praxiphanes (p. ioo). In his youth he was invited to Alexandria, where he spent the rest of his life. His Coma Callimachus ... , , , . Berenices, written m 246 b.c., and only preserved in the translation by Catullus, incidentally refers to the famous sister and second wife of Ptolemy Philadelphus, Arsinoe II, who died in 270 b.c. (p. 106), and was worshipped as Aphrodite Zephyritis, while the poem as a whole is intended as a compliment to Berenice, the newly-wedded queen of Ptolemy Euergetes I. His literary feud with Apollonius Rhodius ( c . 263 b.c.) has left its mark on the poems of both 1 . Even in his old age he was still conscious of this feud, when he described himself as having ‘ sung strains which envy could not touch ’, o 8’ Kpeacrova (3a- (TKavLrjs 2 . In contrast to the vast and diffuse epic of Apollonius, he preferred composing hymns and epigrams, and treating heroic themes on a small scale, expressing his aim in a phrase that has become proverbial :—/xeya (3l(3X.lov pteya Kaxov 3 . He is sometimes supposed to have succeeded Zenodotus as head of the Alex¬ andrian Library. Whether he actually held that official position or not, he was certainly a most industrious bibliographer. He is said to have drawn up lists of literary celebrities in no less than 120 volumes described as 7riVa,K€q t<2v iv 7racr rj vaiSe/a SiaXafxxf/dvTWv Kal wv crvvtypaifrav. This vast work was far more than a mere catalogue. It included brief lives of the principal authors, and, in the case of the Attic drama, the dates of the production of the plays. It was divided into eight classes :—(1) Dramatists, (2) Epic poets etc., (3) Legislators, (4) Philosophers, (5) Historians, (6) Orators, (7) Rhetoricians, (8) Miscellaneous Writers. In the Drama, the order was that of date; in Pindar and Demosthenes, that of subject; in Theophrastus and in the Miscellaneous Writers, the order was alphabetical. If the authorship was disputed, the various views were stated. In these lists, as well as on the label (o-tAA.u/?os) attached to each roll in the Library, 1 Apollonius in Anth. Pal. xi 275, KaXX^axos' rb nadappa, to iraiyvLov, b £vXi vos vov s. | a’LTLos’ b ypapas ‘ atria Ka Wi.pi.dxov' (Croiset, Lift. Gr. v 211), Argonautica , iii 932 f; and Callimachus in Hymn to Apollo, 105—114. 2 Epigr. 21, 4. 3 Athen. 72 A, KaXXfyia%os 6 ypapt-pariKbs rb pty a j3i/3\lov itrov ZXeyev elvac Tip p.eya\(p Kaicip. VIII.] CALLIMACHUS. ERATOSTHENES. 123 the opening words and the number of lines contained in each work were given, in addition to the author and the title 1 . Legends of the origin and foundation of various cities were included not only in the four books of his poem known as the Aina, but also in one of his prose-works. Among the latter was a list of the writings and of the provincialisms of Democritus. His works in prose and verse extended to over 800 volumes 2 . To his school belonged some of the most celebrated scholars and poets, such as Eratosthenes, Aristophanes of Byzantium, his own rival Apollonius Rhodius, with Hermippus, Istrus, and Philostephanus of Cyrene. His monograph on the different names given to the same thing in different nations, and a work on dialects by Dionysius Iambos, had a considerable effect on linguistic research in the next generation. This may be traced not only in the remains of Aristophanes and Istrus, but also in those of Neoptolemus of Parion and Philemon of Athens. Neoptolemus wrote on ‘ glosses ’, and also composed a treatise on poetry, which was one of the authorities followed by Horace in his Ars Poetica 3 ; while Philemon wrote on ‘Attic nouns and glosses’, and was the precursor of the purists who in later times maintained the integrity of Attic Greek against foreign corruption 4 . While the evidence in favour of describing Callimachus as head of the Alexandrian Library is very far from conclusive, and indeed depends mainly on a priori probabilities, it is certain that that high office was actually filled by his pupil and fellow-country¬ man, Eratosthenes of Cyrene, who is now generally regarded as the second of the Alexandrian Librarians. Eratosthenes ( c . 276— c . 196-4 b.c.) spent some years in Athens, whence he was recalled to Alexandria by Eratosthenes Ptolemy Euergetes (c. 235 b.c.), and placed at the head of the Library. He remained in that important position during the reigns of Ptolemy Euergetes (d. 222 b.c.), and Philo- pator (222-205). The tastes of the former were scientific, those 1 O. Schneider’s Callimachea , ii 297—322; Susemihl, i 337—340. 2 On Callimachus, see Couat, Podsie Alex, in —284; Christ, § 349 s ; Susemihl, i 347—373 ; and Hiibner’s Bibliographic , § 8. 3 Porphyrion, ap. Susemihl, i 405. 4 Susemihl, i 372—3. 124 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. of the latter literary and aesthetic. Philopator was not only the author of a tragedy, but also honoured the memory of Homer by building a temple which was adorned with a seated statue of the poet, surrounded by statues of the cities which claimed his birth 1 . The building of this temple has been regarded as an indication of a change of attitude towards Homer. While Zenodotus had allowed his personal caprice to introduce fanciful alterations into the poet’s text, the influence of Callimachus and Eratosthenes inspired a feeling of greater reverence for Homer as the Father of Greek poetry, and also led to a more sober treatment of his text by Aristophanes and Aristarchus, as well as to a careful imitation of his manner in the epic poems of Rhianus 2 . Eratosthenes bore among the members of the Museum the singular designation of pyra, which is supposed to be due either to some physical peculiarity (such as the bowed back of old age) or (far more probably) to his attaining the second place in many lines of study 3 . The more complimentary designation of 7revT- aO\os 6 x^vradXos. VIII.] ARISTOPHANES OF BYZANTIUM. 125 systematic and scientific manner 1 . He also wrote on Mathe¬ matics, Astronomy and Chronology, and, in connexion with the latter, we may mention his work on the Olympian victors. But the masterpiece of his many-sided scholarship was a work in at least twelve books, the first of its kind, on the Old Attic Comedy (7 repl Tr/s dp^atas Kw/xwStas). He there corrected his predecessors, Lycophron and Callimachus, dealing with his theme, not in the order of chronology, but in a series of monographs on the author¬ ship and date of the plays, and on points of textual criticism, language and subject-matter. He was less strong in his know¬ ledge of Athenian antiquities 2 than in that of the Attic dialect in its historical development. His encyclopaedic learning was not incompatible with poetic taste. In opposition to the prosaic opinion that the battles of the warriors in the Iliad, and the wanderings of the hero of the Odyssey , were a precise description of actual events, he maintained that the aim of every true poet is to charm the imagination and not to instruct the intellect 3 . ‘The scenes of the wanderings of Odysseus will be found ’ (said Erato¬ sthenes), ‘when you find the cobbler who sewed up the bag of the winds, and not before ’ 4 . His successor as Librarian (c. 195 b.c.) was Aristophanes of Byzantium (e. 257 -c. 180), the pupil of Zenodotus, Callimachus and Eratosthenes. He was the first 0 fByzantium S of the Librarians who was not a poet as well as a scholar; but in Scholarship he holds, with Aristarchus, one of the foremost places in the ancient world. He reduced accentuation and punctuation to a definite system. Some sort of punctuation had already been recognised by Aristotle (p. 97). To Aristophanes are attributed the use of the mark of elision, the short stroke (v7roSiaoToA.>7) denoting a division in a word (such as the end of a syllable), the hyphen (^ below the word), the comma {yTroaTLyixrj), the colon (fxecrr] CTTiyfJLrj ) and the full-stop (TcXcta a-TLyfxrj); also the indications of quantity, for ‘ short ’ and — for 1 Tozer’s History of Ancient Geography , p. 182. 2 p. 160 ult. 3 Strabo, p. 7, 71-007x77$ vois crox^^TaL y/vyayioyLas, ov didaoKctXlas (an opinion criticised by Strabo). 4 ib. p. 24. On Eratosthenes, cp. Christ, § 429 s , Susemihl, i 409—428; and Hiibner’s Bibliographic, § 9. 126 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. ‘ long ’, and lastly the accents, acute grave \ and circumflex A or "T These accents were invented with a view to preserving the true pronunciation, which was being corrupted by the mixed populations of the Greek world. Aristophanes was certainly the originator of several new symbols for use in textual criticism. To the short horizontal dash called the o/ 3 cAos or ‘spit’ —, which had already been used by Zenodotus to denote a spurious line, he added the asterisk $ to draw attention to passages where the sense is incomplete, and, in lyric poets, to mark the end of a metrical k< 2 Xov ; also the Ktpavviov T, to serve as a collective obelus where several consecutive lines are deemed to be spurious; and, lastly, the avricnyixa, or inverted sigma, D, to draw attention to tautology 2 . These symbols were used in his edition of the Iliad and Odyssey , which marked an advance on that of Zeno¬ dotus and the next editor, Rhianus. He agreed with Zenodotus in obelising many lines, but he also reinstated, and obelised, many which had been entirely omitted by his predecessor. Thus he appears to have had some regard for manuscript evidence, or at least for the duty of faithfully recording it, even if he dis¬ approved it. In rejecting certain lines, he acted on independent grounds; in this he showed considerable boldness, but was often right. A good example of his acuteness is his rejection of the conclusion of the Odyssey , from xxiii 296 to the end 3 . Like Zenodotus, however, he is apt to judge the picture of manners presented in the Homeric poems by the Alexandrian standard, and to impute either impropriety, or lack of dignity, to phrases that are quite in keeping with the primitive simplicity of the heroic age 4 . 1 Pseudo-Arcadius, pp. 186—190, ap. Nauck, Aristophanis Byz. frag. (1848) p. 12 f; this epitome of Herodian has been ascribed to Theodosius (end of cent. 4, Christ, p. 83s 3 ). Cp. Steinthal, l.c., ii 79 n. See also Blass on Gr. Palaeogr. in Iwan Muller’s Handbuch, vol. i, C § 6. It is contended by K. E. A. Schmidt, Beitrdge zur Gesch. d. Gr. p. 571 f, that accents and marks of punctuation existed before Aristophanes. The account in Pseudo- Arcadius may possibly have been fabricated by Jacob Diassorinus (cent. 16; see Cohn in Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Arkadios ). Cp. Lentz, Herodiani rell. 1 xxxvii. 2 Nauck, l.c., pp. 16—18; Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis dJomericis, p. 332 3 , note 240; Reifferscheid, Suetoni Reliquiae , p. 137—144. 3 Nauck, l. c., p. 32. 4 Od. xv 19, 82, 88; xviii 281 etc., quoted by Cobet, Misc. Crit. 225—7. VIII.] ARISTOPHANES OF BYZANTIUM. 127 Besides his Homeric labours, he edited the Theogony of Hesiod, and the lyric poets, Alcaeus, Anacreon and Pindar. In the case of Pindar he produced what was probably the first collected edition. He divided the odes into sixteen books, eight on divine, and eight on human themes (ek Ocovs and ck av- OpioTrovs). Each of these groups had further subdivisions, viz. 1 (on divine themes), hymns , paeans, dithyrambs , prosodia, parthenia (the last three in 2 books each); 11 (on human themes), hypor- chemata (in 2 books), encomia , threnoi, epmikia (in 4 books). A book of ceremonial odes was added to 1 as an appendix to the parthenia (ra Ke^coptcr/xcVa tr)(n xpos dvriOTpocpas. 4 Wilamowitz, /. c., p. 142 f. 5 Lehrs, De Aristarchi Stud. Horn. p. 352 3 , quoted in Jebb’s Homer, p. 93. The authority for the views of Zenodotus and Aristophanes on this point is the 128 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. It may fairly be inferred from the scholia on Euripides and Aristophanes that he prepared a recension of both of those poets. It is probable that he also edited Aeschylus and Sophocles. He wrote introductions to the plays of all the three tragic poets, as well as to Aristophanes, and these have survived in an abridged form in the Arguments {viroOiaetf) prefixed to their plays 1 , which are ultimately founded on the researches of Aristotle and others of the Peripatetic School 2 . Aristophanes also divided the works of Plato into trilogies, viz. (i) Republic, Timaeus, Critias; (2) Soph isles, Politicus, Cratylus; (3) Laws, Minos, Epinomis; (4) Theaetetus, Euthyphron, Apologia ; (5) Crito , Phaedo, LetteiP ; but an arrangement which separates the Crito and Phaedo from the Apologia cannot be regarded as satisfactory. He further compiled an important lexicographical work entitled A.e£eis 4 , in the course of which he treated of words supposed to be unknown to ancient writers, or denoting different times of life, forms of salutation, terms of relationship or civic life or of Attic or Laconian usage 5 . The work showed a wide knowledge of dialects, and marked a new epoch by tracing every word to its original meaning, thus raising ‘ glossography ’ to the level of lexicography 6 . He probably wrote a work on Analogy or gram¬ matical regularity, as contrasted with Anomaly or grammatical irregularity 7 . In this work he apparently endeavoured to de- scholium of Didymus on Pindar, 01 . iii 29 = 52, XP Vov d^Ket-av (identified as a reindeer by Professor Ridgeway, Early Age of Greece, i 360—3). 1 Schneidewin in Abhdl. d. Gott. Ges . vi 3—37. 2 Wilamowitz, p. 144 f (see supra , p. 64 f). 3 Diog. Laert. iii 61, ap. Nauck, l. c., p. 250; cp. Christ, p. 429 s , and Platon. Stud. p. 5 f. 4 A fragment of this work, preserved in a MS of Mount Athos, is published in Miller’s Alelanges, 427—434 ; cp. Cohn, in Jahrb. f. Phil., Suppl. xii 285, and Fresenius, De \ti-ewv...excerptis Byzantinis, Wiesbaden, 1875. 5 His articles on "irpb^evoi, idib^evoi, dopb^euoL and t-evot are clearly the source of the 3rd scholium on Lucian’s Phalaris, ii 1. 6 Nauck, pp. 69—234 ; Susemihl, i 439 f. 7 Varro, L. L. x 68, tertium (analogiae) genus est illud duplex quod dixi, in quo et res et voces similiter proportione dicuntur, ut bonus nialus, boni mali ; de quorum analogia et Aristophanes et alii scripserunt; and ix 12, Aristophanes ...qui potius in quibusdam veritatem (=analogiam) quam consuetudinem secutus. Cp. Nauck, pp. 264—271 ; Steinthal, ii 78—82 ; Susemihl, i 441. VIII.] THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON. 120 termine the normal rules of Greek declension, by drawing attention to general rules of regular inflexion rather than irregular and exceptional forms. Among his other works was a great collection of proverbs, an article on a phrase in Archilochus (axyvficvr) s KaWt.pi.dxov irivaKas , and 336 E, avaypcupr) dpapL&Tiov. 3 Hist. Crit. Orat. Gr., pp. 94—100 = Opusc. i 385—392; cp. Wolf’s Kleine Schriften, ii 824. 4 Gr. Litt. i 4 185—8. 5 Brzoska, De canone decern oratorum Atticorum , 1883. 6 Suidas mentions among his works x a P aKT VP € s T uv i pTjrbpuv. Cp. Meier, Opusc. i 120 f, esp. 128; P. Hartmann, De canone decei?i oratorum , 1891 ; Susemihl, i 444 , 521, ii 484 and esp. 694 f; and Kroehnert, Canonesne poet arum scriptorum artijicum per antiquitat em fuerunt ? 1897; also Heyden- reich’s Erlangen Dissertation , 1900. S. 9 130 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. the friend of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Between the age of Aristarchus and that of Strabo, Philetas and Callimachus were added to the canon of the elegiac, and Apollonius, Aratus, Theocritus and others, to that of the epic poets. The most important document bearing on the Alexandrian canon is a list published by Montfaucon from a ms of the tenth century from Mount Athos, and (with some variations) by Cramer from a late ms in the Bodleian. The following are the names included in this list, as revised by Usener 1 , who omits late additions. The last in the list is Polybius, who died more than 50 years after Aristophanes of Byzantium. {Epic) Poets (5): Homer, Hesiod, Peisander, Panyasis, Antimachus. lambic Poets { 3): Semonides, Archilochus, Hipponax. Tragic Poets (5): Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Ion, Achaeus. Comic Poets , Old (7): Epicharmus, Cratinus, Eupolis, Aristophanes, Pherecrates, Crates, Plato. Middle (2): Antiphanes, Alexis. New (5): Menander, Philippides, Diphilus, Philemon, Apollodorus. Elegiac Poets (4): Callinus, Mimnermus, Philetas, Callimachus. Lyric Poets (9): Aleman, Alcaeus, Sappho, Stesichorus, Pindar, Bacchy- lides, Ibycus, Anacreon, Simonides. Orators (10): Demosthenes, Lysias, Hypereides, Isocrates, Aeschines, Lycurgus, Isaeus, Antiphon, Andocides, Deinarchus 2 . Historians (10): Thucydides, Herodotus, Xenophon, Philistus, Theo- pompus, Ephorus, Anaximenes, Callisthenes, Hellanicus, Polybius 3 . Aristophanes of Byzantium was probably nearly 60 when he , . , counted among his pupils his successor Aristarchus of Samothrace (c. 217-5—145-3 B - c *)> who lived in Alexandria under Ptolemy Philometor (181-146), and, on the murder of his pupil Philopator Neos and the accession of Euergetes II (146), fled to Cyprus, where he died soon after. His continuous commentaries (v7rofxvy/xaTa) filled no less than 800 volumes, partly as notes for lectures, partly in finished form. These were valued less highly than his critical treatises (avyypdfi- 1 Dion. Hal. de Imitatione, p. 130. 2 Deinarchus, omitted by Usener, is restored by Kroehnert. 3 On the Canon, see Steffen, De canone qui dicitur Aristophanis et Aristarchi, 1876; Kroehnert, /. c. (who rejects all ‘ canons’ except that of the Orators); and Susemihl, i 444—7 ; and on Aristophanes in general, ib. i 428— 448; Christ, § 435 s ; Cohn s.v. in Pauly-Wissowa; and Hiibner’s Bibliogra¬ phic, § 11. VIII.] ARISTARCHUS. 131 fiara) on such subjects as the Iliad and Odyssey , on the naval camp of the Achaeans, and on Philetas and on Xenon (one of the earliest of the chorizontes, who ascribed the Iliad and the Odyssey to different poets). As a commentator he avoided the display of irrelevant erudition, while he insisted that each author was his own best interpreter. He also placed the study of grammar on a sound basis; he was among the earliest of the grammarians who definitely recognised eight parts of speech, Noun, Verb, Participle, Pronoun, Article, Adverb, Preposition and Conjunction 1 . As a grammarian he maintained the principle of Analogy, as opposed to that of Anomaly. He produced recensions of Alcaeus, Anacreon and Pindar; commentaries on the Lycurgus of Aes¬ chylus, and on Sophocles and Aristophanes; and recensions, as well as commentaries, in the case of Archilochus and Hesiod. He had a profound knowledge of Homeric vocabulary, and was the author of two recensions of the Iliad and the Odyssey, with critical and explanatory symbols in the margin of each. These symbols were six in number: (1) the obelus — to denote a spurious line, already used by Zenodotus and Aristophanes (p. 126); (2) the diple (8t.7rA.17) >, denoting anything notable either in language or matter; (3) the dotted diple (SnrA.?/ Tripua-nypLlvy]) >, drawing attention to a verse in which the text of Aristarchus differed from that of Zenodotus ; (4) the asterisk (ao-rcpio-Kos) Jjc-, marking a verse wrongly repeated elsewhere; (5) the stigme or dot ((TTLyp-tj), used by itself as a mark of suspected spuriousness, .and also in conjunction with (6) the antisigma D, in a sense differing from that of Aristophanes, to denote lines in which the order had been disturbed, the dots indicating the lines which ought immediately to follow the line marked with the antisigma {cp. p. 140) 2 . 1 ovo/ia, prjfw., /xeroxVi dvTUW/iLa, dpdpov, eirippruxa , 7 rp 60 €ais, abvdea/ios (ovo/xa included the Adjective). Quint, i 4, 20, alii ex idoneis...auctoribus octo partes secuti sunt, ut Aristarchus. 2 Lehrs and Reifferscheid, quoted on p. 126; Ludwich, Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik , pp. 19—22 ; and Jebb’s Homer , p. 94. Similar sym¬ bols were used in an edition of Plato (Diog. Laert. iii 66) sometimes identified with that of Aristophanes of Byzantium, mentioned on p. 128 (Gomperz, Plat. Aufsatze, ii). On Aristarchus see also Wilamowitz, Eiir. Her. p. 138 1 ; P. Cauer’s Grundfragen, 11—35; Susemihl, i 451—463; Cohn s.v. in Pauly- Wissowa; and Hiibner’s Bibliograpkie , § 12. 9—2 132 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. In his criticisms on Homer three points have been noticed, (i) His careful study of Homeric language. Thus he observes that in Homer coSe never means £ here ’ or ‘ hither but always ‘ thus ’; that / 3 a\\eiv is used of missiles, ovra&Lv of wounding at close quarters; <£o/Jos of £ flight ’, and 7 tovoeiv. 6 v 18 §§ 9, 12, on the use of ’AxeXcpos for water in general. 140 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. with the help of transcripts together with such evidence as could be derived from the critical monographs and the continuous commentaries of Aristarchus. At the end of each book of the Iliad in the Venice ms of Homer known as A, Didymus is mentioned, together with his younger contemporary, Aristonicus, and Herodian, the author of a treatise on the prosody and accentuation of the Iliad (c. 160 a.d.), and Nicanor, the writer on Homeric punctuation (< c . 130 a.d.), as one of the sources of the scholia in that ms. The following is a simple example of a scholium on II. x 306, in which the readings preferred by Zenodotus, Aristophanes and Aristarchus are all recorded:— Sojctw ■yap 8ipov tc 8v» r* 4piav)(€vas lirirovs, ol' K€V apUTTCVtoKTl 0OT)IS €TtI VT|Voptovo iv ap.vp.ova Hr)\ei(t)va (cp. 1 . 323)' ’ ApL, 3 KetcreTai ovtt)0€is, iroXees 8* ap4> 5 avrov eratpoi, • rjeXiov aviovros 4$ avpiov. el ycilp 4y«v a>$ • elr]v adavaros Kal ayi^pus Tjpara iravra, • Tioiprjv 8’ w$ tUt* *A0T]va£Tj Kal ’AthSXXcdv, «S vvv ^pe'pt] T)8e KaKov 4> € p €l ’Apyei'oio-iv. otl fj toijtovs Set rods rpeis orlxovs plveiv, oh to avrltnypa irapdiKeirai , rj rods e£?}s rpeh, oh al ariypal irapaKeivTaC els yap ttjv avrrjv yeypapplvoi eici Siavoiav. eyev. to. aura 54 X 4 yet irepi tuiv 7 la-ropia), on the birthplace of Homer, on the death of Aeneas, on Anacreon and Sappho 3 , on the lyric poets, on the amoves of Solon 4 , on proverbs, and even on the De Republica of Cicero. Notwithstanding his restoration of the Aristarchic recension of Homer, he appears to have had an imperfect sense of the re¬ quirements of systematic textual criticism. His younger contem¬ porary, Aristonicus of Alexandria, wrote a treatise on the critical signs used by Aristarchus; and, wherever the views of Didymus differ from those of Aristonicus, the latter are as a rule to be preferred 5 . The work of Aristonicus was probably written before that of Didymus on the same general subject 6 , and appears to have given a more complete account of the passages criticised by Aristarchus 7 . In the comments of Didymus on Pindar and Aristophanes, and on Sophocles and Euripides, there is little 1 Symmachus Ji. too B.c. (Wilamowitz, Eur. Her. i 179); cp. O. Schneider, De veterum in Ar. scholiomm fontibus, pp. 59—63. 2 Susemihl, ii 203, note 314. 3 Seneca, Ep. 88 § 37. 4 Plut. Solon , 1. c Cp. Christ, § 443 3 , p. 612; Wilamowitz, /. c., 161. 6 Lehrs, /. c ., 28 s ; Ludwich, Aristarchs Ho?nerische Textkritik 7iach den Fragmenten des Didymos , i 51. 7 Ludwich, i 60 f. 142 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. Tryphon trace of any exceptional acumen; but he deserves our gratitude for gathering together the results of earlier work in criticism and exegesis, and transmitting these results to posterity. The age of creative and original scholars was past, and the best service that remained to be rendered was the careful preservation of the varied stores of ancient learning; and this service was faithfully and industriously rendered by Didymus 1 . Among the younger contemporaries of Didymus was a specialist in grammar and pure scholarship, who flourished under Augustus, named Tryphon, son of Ammonius, probably not the pupil of Aristarchus bearing that name (p. 136). Fragments of his works are preserved by writers such as Apollonius Dyscolus, Herodian, Athenaeus, and a third Ammonius (< c. 389 a.d.) who abridged a work on Synonyms by Herennius Philo (c. 100 a.d.). It appears from these fragments that, besides dealing with points of orthography and prosody, and with various parts of speech, he wrote on purity of Greek, on ancient style, on terms of music, and on names of plants and animals. Late abridgements of his works on letter-changes and on tropes and metres are still extant, but many of them now survive in their titles alone, e.g. those on the dialect of Homer and the lyric poets, and on Doric and Aeolic Greek. The titles of several show that he was a strict adherent of 1 Analogy ’ 2 . Theon the ‘ grammarian ’, of Alexandria, who flourished under Tiberius, wrote a commentary on the Odyssey, and possibly also on Pindar; and, like Didymus, he compiled a lexicon of comic diction. Besides completing the commentary of his father, Artemidorus, on the Ama of Calli¬ machus, he was himself a commentator on Lycophron, Theo¬ critus, Apollonius Rhodius, and Nicander. To the poets of the Alexandrian age he stood in the same relation as that of Didymus to the great writers of the classical age of Athens. He has Theon 1 Wilamowitz, Eur. Her. i 157—166; cp. Christ, § 443 s ; Susemihl, ii 195—210; M. Schmidt, Did. fragtn. (1854); and Hubner’s Bibliographic , § 14, p. 22. 2 Christ, § 554 s ; Susemihl, ii 210—3; Fragments collected by Velsen (Berlin) 1853. VIII.] TRYPHON. THEON. 143 accordingly been aptly described as 4 the Didymus of the Alexandrian poets 5 x . In this brief notice of Tryphon and Theon, we have already passed the chronological limits of this Book. Later Alexan¬ drians, beginning with Pamphilus and Apion, are reserved for the Roman age. 1 Christ, § 555 3 ; Susemihl, ii 215—7. Cp. Maass in Phil. Uni. iii 33, and cp. Wilamowitz, /. c., i 156, 161, 186. Ptolemy I Ptolemy II and Berenike I. and Arsinoe II. Gold Octadrachm of Ptolemy II and Arsinoe II inscribed OEflN AAEA4>nN. (From the British Museum.) For other portraits of Ptolemy I, Berenike I and their son Ptolemy II see the sard from the Muirhead collection figured in Mr C. W. King’s Antique Gems atid Pings , I p. ix and II pi. xlvii 6, and supposed by Mr King to have been engraved for the Signet of Ptolemy II. CHAPTER IX. THE STOICS AND THE SCHOOL OF PERGAMON. Grammar was studied by the Stoics, not as an end in itself, but as a necessary part of a complete system of The dialectics. Much of their terminology has become Grammar of . the stoics a permanent part of the grammarian s vocabulary, and some of their views on matters of language may seem to the modern reader very far from novel. They distinguished between the inarticulate cries of animals, and the articulate voice of man (<£w vrj evapOpos). The latter might be either reduced to writing (eyypa/z/zos) or not (aypap,/zos). When reduced to writing, it became a Ae£is, having for its elements the 24 letters. They further distinguished between the sound (o-roi- ov) of the letter, and its written character (^apa/cr^p tov €pecrdcu was merely the utterance of a sound. Speech might be either in Prose or Verse; it was also of a twofold nature, appealing to the ear and to the mind 1 . While the earlier Stoics recognised four parts of speech, ovop.a , prjp.a, crvv 8 eo-p.os, apOpov, Chrysippus distinguished between ovo/za as ‘ a proper name ’ (e.g. SwKpar^s), and ovo/za 7 rpoarrjyopLKov, no men appellatimi 7 n (e.g. avOpuyiros). Under 1 Diog. Laert. vii 55—58; cp. R. Schmidt, Stoicorum Grammatical p. 18 f; Grafenhan, Gesch. der Philologie, i 441, 505; Steinthal, Sprackwissenschaft, i 2 291—3, and Egger, l.c., p. 349 f. CHAP. IX.] THE GRAMMAR OF THE STOICS. 145 apOpov was included the pronoun as well as the article, and it was noticed that, while the apOpov was inflected, the o-wSeoyios was not. The definition of the prjp.a is identical with that of the KaTriyoprjfxa, or predicate. Predicates may be active (SpOa ), passive (v7rria), or neuter (ovSeVcpa). A special variety of the verbs passive in form, but not in sense, are the ‘reflexive causative’ verbs {avramrovOoTa) now generally called ‘ middle ’. The term 7nwis or * inflexion ’ is applied by the Stoics to the noun and the a pOpov (pronoun and adjective), not to the verb. While Aristotle calls the nominative ovop.a, and the oblique cases 7TTGxr€i5, the Stoics apply -n-Ttoau; to the nominative as well, but they do not (like Aristotle) call an adverb a ^two-is of the corresponding adjective 1 . In fact they confine tttwo-is to the four cases, the nominative (opOrj nrt or evOela, casus rectus) and the three oblique cases (tttwo-ci? 7rAdyiai), the genitive (yevi>07), the dative (SorLK-ij) and the accusative (an-ian/o)). The original meaning of these oblique cases was soon forgotten ; the accusative did not originally mean the case that denotes the object of an accusation, but the case that denotes the effect of (to alriarov, ‘ that which is caused by ’) an action; so that its original meaning is best expressed by the epithet effectivus or causativus. Again, yeviKT] to the Stoics could only mean the case that denotes the ycVos or kind or class (as in the ‘partitive’ genitive), although Priscian afterwards translated it by generalis 2 . A verb, when used with a nominative subject, is called by the Stoics a (rvp./ 3 ap.a (e.g. 7r€pt7rar€t); when used with an oblique case a 7rapav ra irpaypara nad’ c ov ra ovopara, Kadb kcu (TTOixCia TLva ervpoXoyias elcrayovcnv. 3 Principia Dialecticae, c. 6, haec quasi cunabula verborum esse credide- runt, ut sensus rerum cum sonorum sensu concordarent. 4 De Platonis et Hippocr. Dogm. ii 2, a\a£d>v eon paprvs 77 iTvpoXoyia ..., (Chrysippus appeals to the evidence of poets and) rr)v j3eXrloTT]v irvpoXoyiav tl a Wo tolovtov, a 7r epalvet pkv ovbtv, avaXioKei de Kal Kararpi^ei part] v ijpQu rbv xpbvov. — On the subject in general cp. R. Schmidt, Stoicorum Grammatica , 1839; also Steinthal, i 271—374; Christ, § 426 s , and Susemihl, i 48—87. 5 Steinthal, i 293 f; Teuffel, Rom. Lit., § 440, 7 Schwabe. 6 Varro, L. L. v 9, non solum ad Aristophanis lucernam, sed etiam ad Cleanthis lucubravi. 7 A. C. Pearson, Fragments of Zetio and Cleanthes , pp. 27, 81, 82. IX.] ZENO. CLEANTHES. CHRYSIPPUS. 147 ‘ poetry \ together with five books on ‘ Homeric problems ’, full of allegorical interpretations, which were justly attacked by Aris¬ tarchus 1 . Like Aristotle, he accepted the Margites as a work of Homeric authorship, and in Od. iv 84 he introduced by emen¬ dation a reference to the ‘ Arabians ’ 2 . He regarded Zeus, Hera and Poseidon as representing aether, air and water respectively; and, in interpreting Hesiod’s Theogony , he gave free play to his etymological fancy 3 . The allegorical interpretation of myths in general, and of the Homeric poems in particular, was in fact one of the characteristics of the Stoic school 4 * . Zeno’s successor, Cleanthes of Assos (331-232), wrote on grammar, and was the first of the Stoics to write on . , t 1 • . Cleanthes rhetoric . In his work irepi tov Troi-pjov he treated of Homer, applying playful etymologies and fanciful allegories to the interpretation of the poet. In the allegorical sense which he applies to the herb ‘ moly ’ we find the earliest known example of the word dXX^yopiKws 6 . With Cleanthes ‘the Eleusinian mys¬ teries are an allegory; Homer, if properly understood, is a witness to truth; the very names given to Zeus, Persephone, Apollo, and Aphrodite are indications of the hidden meaning which is veiled but not perverted by the current belief, and the same is true of the myths of Heracles and Atlas’ 7 . He described poetry as the best medium for expressing the dignity of divinity 8 ; and his grave and dignified Hymn to Zeus is still extant 9 . As a representative of the grammatical as well as the general teaching of the Stoics he was less famous than Chry- sippus (< c. 280— c. 208-4), who is proverbially known as the Pillar of the Stoic Porch 10 , el /jltj -yap rjv X-pvaimros, ovk av rjv Srod 11 . He showed his independence of character by de- Chrysippus 1 Diog. Laert. vii 4; Dion Chrys. Or. 53, 4. 2 Pearson, /. c. , pp. 31, 218, 219. 3 Pearson, t.c., pp. 13, 155. 4 Zeller’s Stoics , 334—348. 5 Cic. de Fin. iv 7; Quint, ii 15, 35; Striller, De Stoicorum studiis rhe- toricis. 6 Pearson, pp. 287, 293. 7 ib. p. 43. 8 Philodemus, De Musica, col. 28; cp. Seneca, Ep. 108, 10 (ib. p. 279 f). 9 Stobaeus, Eel. i 1, 12 (ib. p. 274). 10 Cic. Acad, ii 75, qui fulcire putabatur porticum Stoicorum. 11 Diog. Laert. vii 183. IO —2 148 THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. dining an invitation to the court of Alexandria, and by never dedicating to royalty any of his numerous works. They exceeded the number of 700, and it was said of him that no one ever was a clearer dialectician or a worse writer 1 ; accordingly his writings have not survived. Himself a native of Soli in Cilicia, he wrote several works on ‘ Solecisms ’, a term which then had no con¬ nexion with the dialect of the inhabitants of Soli, but implied faults of logic, as well as offences against good taste and correct pronunciation 2 . He also wrote a series of works on ‘ambiguity’ (afjL, ix i (Susemihl, ii 8). 5 Lersch, Sprachphilosophie, i 51. IX.] PERGAMON AND ITS RULERS. 149 to his care, and bequeathed his power to his nephews Eumenes I (263-241) and Attalus I (241-197). Eumenes I was not only a generous patron of Arcesilaus, a native of the neighbouring town of Pitane, the first president of the Middle Academy at Athens, and the writer of epigrams in honour of Attalus I; he also invited to his court the Peripatetic philosopher, Lycon 1 . His famous successor Attalus I claimed the title of king after his early victories over the Gallic invaders, and celebrated those victories by a splendid series of sculptures in bronze, the most famous of which is familiar to us in the marble copy now known as the ‘ Dying Gaul ’ of the Capitoline Museum. Among the sculptors employed on these works was Antigonus, who also wrote treatises on the toreutic art and on famous painters, and is once called Antigonus of Carystos 2 . The sculptor and writer on art has accordingly been identified with the author of that name and place, who died later than 226 b.c., after writing lives of philoso¬ phers founded on his personal knowledge and frequently quoted by Diogenes Laertius, and also a work on the wonders of nature, which is still extant. In literature he is the leading representative of the earlier Pergamene School 3 . Attalus I was himself an author, and his description of a large pine-tree in the Troad is preserved in Strabo (p. 603). He invited to his court Lacydes, the successor of Arcesilaus, as the head of the Academy at Athens, but Lacydes declined with the apt reply that pictures should be seen from a certain distance. He nevertheless laid out for Lacydes a special garden in the grounds of the Academy 4 . He was more successful in inviting the future historian of his reign, the younger Neanthes, and the eminent mathematician, Apol¬ lonius of Perga, who dedicated to the king his celebrated work on Conic Sections. It was probably under his rule that books began to be collected for the Pergamene Library, but the credit of actually building the fabric is expressly assigned by Strabo (p. 624) to his successor Eumenes II The Library 1 Diog. Laert. iv 30, 38. 2 Zenobius, Paroem., v 82. 3 Cp. the brilliant and suggestive work of Wilamowitz, Antigonos von Karystos, in Phil. Unt. iv; also Christ, § 430 3 ; and Susemihl, i 468 f. 4 Diog. Laert. iv 60. THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. [CHAP. 150 (197-159 b.c.), the elder son of Attalus I by Apollonis, whose beautiful head may still be seen figured on the coins of Cyzicus 1 . Eumenes II strove to bring the Library to the same level as that of Alexandria, and apparently endeavoured to induce Aristophanes of Byzantium to leave Alexandria for Pergamon 2 . He adorned his capital with magnificent structures, including a great altar of Zeus. The frieze represented the battle of the Gods and Giants in a perfect pantheon of highly animated mythological figures, whose varied attributes possibly owed part of their inspiration to the learned mythologists of the Pergamene Library 3 . The altar has been assigned to about 180-170 b.c., and our knowledge of its sculptures, as well as of the architecture and topography of Pergamon in general, has been vastly increased by the German excavations of 1878 to 1886 4 . Along a lower level than the precinct of the altar, ran the vast terrace of the theatre, with the theatre itself above it, to the left of the altar. Above the theatre and the altar was the precinct of the temple of Athena Polias Nicephorus, with the acropolis rising beyond it, 1000 feet above the level of the sea. The precinct of Athena, a quadrangle of about 240 feet by 162, was bounded on the east by a single colonnade, about 19 feet in breadth, and by a double colonnade, twice as broad, to the north. These colonnades were in two stories, and to the north of the upper storey of the double colonnade the remains of four large rooms have been discovered. The largest of these is 42 feet in length and 49 in width; the rest vary in length, and are 39 feet wide. Along the eastern, northern and western sides of the largest room are the foundations of a narrow platform or bench, and in the centre of the northern side a mass of stonework identified as the pedestal of a statue. In front of this pedestal, and facing the south-east entrance, was found a colossal statue of Athena, the tutelar divinity of libraries 5 ; and, in adjacent portions of the ruins, pedestals of statues bearing 1 Head’s Coins of the Ancients, Plate 48, 6. For portrait of Eumenes II, see p. 164 infra. 2 Sui'das ( s.v . ’Aptov €?). In xi 754 he preferred 81a o-7ri8eo<; to 81’ d00 First Macedon- j ian War 200—197 195 Cato 195 Cato Syrian War 179 Caecilius 234—149 234—149 192 - I9O d. 168 Second Mace- Cato, De Agri Pacuvius 167 L. Aem. donian War Cultura , the 220-I32 Paulus 171—168 earliest extant 147 Scipio Afri- work in Latin 166 Terence canus minor 168 Crates of Third Punic Prose 185—159 151 A.Postumius 144 Ser. Sulp. Mallos visits War 149—146 161 expulsion of Albinus^" Galba Rome Numantine War Greek rheto- Lucilius 142 C. Acilius^" 140 C. Laelius i43—!33 ricians and 180—103 137 M. Lepidus - | philosophers L. Accius Pcrcina 155 Critolaus, 170— c. 90 133 Tib. Grac- 133 Valerius So- 123 Leges Sem- Carneades and chus 163—133 ranus b. c. 154 proniae Diogenes at 123 C. Gracchus Porcius Licinus Cimbrian War Rome 154—121 Volcatius Sedi- 1 113—102 115 L. Coelius 115 M. Aemilius gitus Jugurthine War Antipater Scaurus 100 L. Ael. Stilo ;l hi—106 105 P. Rutilius c. 154 —c. 74 Rufus i no JLUU Marsian War Laberius 99 M. Antonius Servius Clodius 1 90—88 105—43 i43— 8 7 d. 60 82 Sulla dictator 92 schools of Lucretius Cl. Quadri- 95 L. Licinius Staberius Eros Latin rhetoric 97—53 garius Valerius Crassus Varro 116—27 closed Catullus Antias I4O-9I Orbilius c. 88 school of c. 84—54 78 Sisenna 88 P. Sulp. Ru- 114 — c. 17 Latin gram- Bibaculus 73 Macer Corn. fus 124—88 Atticus 109—32 60 First trium- mar opened c. 83— c. 24 Nepos 99—54 c. 85 auctor ad Santra virate by Sevius Ni- Varro Atacinus Sallust 86—34 Herennium Tiro Gallic War canor, and of 82—37 A. Hirtius d. 43 75 C. Aur. Cotta c. 104 — c. 4 58—51 Latin rhetoric 124—74 Valerius Cato Civil War by L. Plotius 69 Hortensius b. c. 100 49—45 Gallus 114—50 58 Nigidius Fi- 44 d. of Caesar 45 Publ. Syrus 63 Cicero gulus 98—45 || 43 Second trium- 39 first public Gallus 70—27 106—43 Ateius Praetex- virate library found- Virgil 7c—19 59 Caesar tatus ed by Pollio Horace 65 — 8 IOO- 44 28 Hyginus ji 28 bibliotheca Tibullus 54 — 19 Calvus 82 — 47 64 B.C.— 17 A.D. Palatina Propertius 40 Pollio Fenestella 31 battle of Ac- 22 Aen. ii, iv 49—15 76 B.C.— 5 A.D. 52 B.C.— 19 A.D. ! tium and vi recited Ovid 31 Messala 12 Q. Caecilius 30 Augustus 18 Carmen Sae- 43 B.C.— 18 A.D. 64 B.C.— 8 A.D. Epirota • 63 B.C.- 14 A.D. culare 10 Verrius 14 Vitruvius De Livy Flaccus 1 A rchitectura 59 B.C.— 18 A.D. 9 close of Livy’s History S denotes historians who wrote in Greek . CHAPTER X. LATIN SCHOLARSHIP FROM THE DEATH OF ENNIUS (169 B.C.) TO THE AUGUSTAN AGE. The Latin alphabet was (either directly or indirectly) borrowed at an early date from the Greek colonists of Magna Greek influ- Graecia; and Latin literature, which is best regarded ence before 169 as beginning with the close of the First Punic War (241 k.c.), was founded mainly on Greek models. Its earliest writers were not natives of Rome ; they were not even natives of Latium. Thus the first of Latin poets was the Greek Andro- nicus (c. 284— c. 204), afterwards known as L. Livius Andronicus, who taught Greek and Latin in Rome, and produced in rude Saturnian verse a rendering of the Odyssey which was still in use as a text-book in the youth of Horace (. Ep . ii 1, 65). He also translated Greek plays into Latin, in metres approximating to those of the Greek originals, and with a special preference for plays connected with the tale of Troy. The first of these plays was exhibited about 240 b.c. Next in order is Naevius ( c . 264— 194), a native of Campania, but of Latin descent, who exhibited in 235 b.c. the first of many plays of Greek origin. Late in life he produced in the old Saturnian measure an important poem on the First Punic War, parts of which were imitated in the Aeneid of Virgil. In the four Saturnian lines of his epitaph, he is so conscious of his position as a Latin poet, and so forgetful of his debt to Greece, that he describes his loss as lamented not by the foreign ‘ Muses ’ but by the native Italian Camenae, adding THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. 168 that on his death the old Latin tongue ceased to be spoken in Rome. ‘Mortales immortales flere si foret fas, Flerent Divae Camenae Naevium poetam; Itaque, postquam est Orcino traditus thesauro, Obliti sunt Romai loquier Latina lingua’ 1 . Naevius is followed by Ennius (239—169), the native of a small town in Calabria, who was as familiar with Greek and Oscan as with Latin 2 . By a curious irony of fortune it was Cato, the pertinacious opponent of Greek influence, who prompted Ennius to settle in Rome (204 b.c.), where he gave lessons in Latin and Greek. In his tragedies he was largely indebted to Greek originals. In his great epic poem on the history of Rome, known as the Anna/es, he discarded the old Saturnian measure for the Greek hexameter, casting contempt on the rude versifica¬ tion of his predecessors :— Others have told the tale In verses sung of yore by Fauns and Bards, Ere my own time, when none as yet had climbed The Muses’ cliffs or learnt the lore of song 3 . The new metre was further elaborated by Lucretius, who pays his predecessor the noble tribute of having been ‘the first to bring down from lovely Helicon a crown of leaf unfading, destined to flourish in fame amid the nations of Italy’ 4 ; and it was tuned to new harmonies of cadence by Virgil, who in his Aeneid not merely borrows here and there from the earlier poet, but is also imbued throughout with his national spirit. It was characteristic of Ennius to write an inscription for his own bust, not in the Saturnian measure of old Rome but in the elegiac couplet lately imported from Greece. ‘Nemo me lacrimis decoret, nec funera fletu Faxit. Cur? Volito vivu’ per ora virum’ 5 . The poet who had done Latin literature the great service of supplying it with a new epic metre, also took an interest in minor points of scholarship, such as grammar and spelling, and is said to 1 Gellius, i 23. 3 Cic. Brutus 71, 76; Orator 171. 5 Cic. Tusc. Disp. i 34. 2 ib. xvii 17. 4 Lucr. i 117. X.] GREEK INFLUENCE IN LATIN LITERATURE. l6g have invented a system of shorthand 1 . All the three early poets above mentioned, Andronicus, Naevius and Ennius, wrote comedies as well as tragedies, but their comedies were exclusively of the kind called palliatae , plays ‘ dressed in the Greek mantle \ The school of Ennius claims Pacuvius, his sister’s son, the author of twelve tragedies founded on the legends of Greece, and modelled in one case on Sophocles and in another on Euripides. Greek originals belonging to the New Attic Comedy of Philemon, Di- philus and Menander, were the models followed by Plautus (254— 184) and by Terence (185—159). Intermediate in time between Plautus and Terence is Caecilius, who died in 168 b.c. (one year after the death of Ennius, and two years before the production of the Andria ), leaving to the literature of his country some forty comedies, the titles of all of which are suggestive of Greek originals. The debt of Latin literature to Greek in epic and dramatic poetry was also extended to history. The earliest of Roman historians, Q. Fabius Pictor (born c. 254 b.c.), who belonged to the age of Naevius and Ennius, wrote in Greek, and the same is said (whether truly or not) of his younger contemporary, L. Cincius Alimentus (praetor in 210 b.c.) 2 . Greek was certainly the lan¬ guage in which A. Postumius Albinus wrote the History of Rome which he dedicated to Ennius 3 . Foremost among the Roman nobles in the study of Greek was C. Sulpicius Galus, who pre¬ sided as praetor at the performance of a play of Ennius in the year of the poet’s death 4 , and who fought in the battle of Pydna and predicted the eclipse of the moon which immediately pre¬ ceded it 5 . The defeat of the Macedonian king, Perseus, by Lucius Aemilius Paullus at the battle of Pydna (168 b.c.) marks the 1 Teuffel’s History of Roman Literature , ed. Schwabe, trans. by G. C. W. Warr, ed. 1900, p. 127 and § 104, 5. Two books de litteris syllabisque and de metris are attributed to a later Ennius (Suet. Gram. 1), who may also be the author of the system of shorthand mentioned by Isidore, Orig. i 22, vulgares notas Ennius primus invenit. Cp. M. Schanz, Geschichte der Romischen Litte- ratur (in I wan Muller’s Handbuch), § 39 ult. 2 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. i 6 (cp. H. Nettleship, Essays, i 341, and Mommsen, Hist, of Ro?ne , Book III c. xiv note). 3 Teuffel, § 127, 1. 4 Cic. Brutus 78. 5 Liv. XLIV 37. THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. 170 beginning of a new epoch, and several incidents of literary interest are connected with that event. The conqueror of Pydna, on his visit to Olympia, standing before the Zeus of Pheidias, knew enough of the Homeric poems to declare that the sculptor must have derived his inspiration from Homer; and Aemilius Paullus was apparently the theme of the only truly Roman play mentioned among the works of Pacuvius (220—132), the nephew of Ennius. Again, the battle of Pydna and the consequent predominance of Rome in the Greek world led to the expatriation of 1000 men of mark among the Achaeans, who were scattered among the Etrus¬ can towns. After dwindling in seventeen years to 300, they were restored to their native land with Polybius, the foremost of the exiles, who afterwards returned to Rome to renew his friendship with the younger Scipio, and ultimately to tell the story of the conquests of Rome from the beginning of the Second Punic War to the fall of Carthage and of Corinth in 146. Further, the Greek library of the king defeated at Pydna was reserved for the use of the conqueror’s sons, the second of whom was the future con¬ queror of Carthage, famous in literature as the centre of the £ Scipionic circle ’. And, finally, the victory of Pydna led to a further expansion of Greek influence in Latin literature by bring¬ ing to Rome in the person of Crates of Mallos, and probably in the train of those who came to congratulate the Romans on their victory, the foremost representative of the school of Pergamon. Our authority for the visit of Crates and its consequences is the treatise of Suetonius De Grammaticis. He begins that treatise with the remark that in earlier times, while Rome was still uncivil¬ ised and engrossed in war, and was not yet in the enjoyment of any large amount of leisure for the liberal arts, the study of literature (. grammatica) was not in use, much less was it in esteem. The beginnings of that study, he adds, were unimportant, as its earliest teachers, who were poets and half-Greeks (namely Livius Andronicus and Ennius, who were stated to have taught in both languages at Rome and elsewhere), limited themselves to trans¬ lating Greek authors or reciting anything which they happened to have composed in Latin. After adding that the two books on letters and syllables and also on metres ascribed to Ennius were justly attributed to a later writer of the same name, he states that, X.] ACCIUS. LUCILIUS. 171 Accius in his own opinion, the first to introduce the study of literature into Rome was Crates of Mallos, who, during his accidental detention in Rome, gave many recitations and lectures which aroused an interest in the subject 1 . We are further informed that the example set by Crates led to the publication in seven books of a new edition of the epic of Naevius on the First Punic War, and to the public recitation of the Annals of Ennius; and also (two generations later) to the recitation of the satires of Lucilius. The text of Ennius was emended not long after his death by Octavius Lampadio 2 . The death of Ennius and the visit of Crates were immediately preceded by the birth of L. Accius (170 b.c.), who was among the first of the Romans who travelled in Asia Minor, and was also famous as the author of numerous tragedies on the tale of Troy. In the history of Scholarship he concerns us only as the author of a history of Greek and Roman poetry, especially that of the drama, written in Sotadean verse, under the name of Didascalica , a title probably suggested by the 81 SacTKaXcaL of Aristotle 3 . He was the first to discuss the genuine¬ ness of certain plays wrongly assigned to Plautus 4 . Among the peculiarities of his orthography we are told that he never used the letters Y and Z, and that, when A and E and U were long, he denoted the fact by writing them double 5 . His interest in these subjects is proved by the fact that Varro dedicated to him the treatise de antiquitate litterarum *. The innovations in language and spelling introduced by Accius are ridiculed by Lucilius (180—103 b.c.), who, besides discussing points of orthography and prosody, satirises the bombastic language of the Latin tragedians, criticises even Homer and Euripides, and takes his contemporaries to task for their provincialisms and also Lucilius 1 See p. 157. It is assumed by Mommsen (Bk iv c. 12) that the Homeric poems were the theme of these lectures. On this there is no evidence, but Homer was certainly a main subject of the literary studies of Crates. 2 Gellius, xviii 5, n. 3 Madvig, Opusc. i 87 f (p. 70 f, ed. 1887); Hermann, Opusc. viii 390; Lachmann, Kl. Schriflen ii 67. 4 Gellius, iii 3, 9. 5 Mar. Viet. Gram. Lat. 6 , 8; Ritschl, Opusc. iv 142. 6 Teuffel, § 134, 7 and 11; Schanz, §§ 49, 50. 172 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. for their affected imitation of Greek phraseology 1 . Lucilius was succeeded by an epigrammatic poet less known to fame, Porcius Licinus, the author of a trochaic poem on the history of Roman literature, in the course of which he insisted on the lateness of the origin of Roman poetry in the oft-quoted lines : ‘Poenico bello secundo Musa pinnato gradu Intulit se bellicosam in Romuli gentem feram’ 2 . Among the younger contemporaries of Accius and the pre¬ cursors of Varro was Q. Valerius of Sora (born c. 154), a man of distinction in linguistic and antiquarian research. When Varro was asked the meaning of favisae Capitolinae, he admitted that he knew nothing of the origin of the word favisae and took refuge in quoting the opinion of Valerius to the effect that favisae was a corruption of flavisae an/d meant the same as thesauri 3 . The foremost scholar of this age was L. Aelius Stilo Praeco- ninus ( c . 1=54— c. 74 b.c.) of Lanuvium, a Roman Stilo \ 1 ^ / knight, who read the plays of Plautus and others with younger men such as Varro and Cicero. He owed the name of Praeconinus to his father’s occupation as a praeco, and that of Stilo (or ‘Penman’) to his skill in writing speeches for members of the Roman aristocracy 4 . We find him designated litteris orna- tissimus by Varro, as quoted by Gellius (i 18, 2), who himself describes him as doctissimus eorum temporum , adding that Varro and Cicero followed his example in refraining from the use of novissimum in the sense of extremum (ih. x 21, 2). He is charac¬ terised by Cicero in the Brutus (205) as a man of the profoundest learning in Greek and Latin literature, and as an accomplished critic of ancient writers and of Roman antiquities in their intel¬ lectual as well as in their historical and political aspects. His legal and antiquarian pursuits are noticed in the De Oratore h . His grammatical and especially his etymological inquiries were partly inspired by his devotion to the Stoic philosophy. He appears to have been an industrious writer, and much of his lore passed into the pages of Varro and of Verrius Flaccus, of Pliny the elder and of Gellius. His writings included a 1 Teuffel, § 143, 7. 2 Gellius, xvii 21, 45. 3 ib. ii 10, 3 (Teuffel, § 147, 1). 4 Suet. Gram. 3. 5 i 193, Aeliana (Madvig for aliena) studia. X.] Q. VALERIUS. STILO. VARRO. 173 commentary on the Carmina Saliorum 1 ; a critical list of the plays of Plautus, in which he recognised 25 plays as genuine, and in connexion with which he possibly passed the encomium on the style of Plautus quoted by Varro, to the effect that, had the Muses wished to speak in Latin, they would have used the language of Plautus 2 . He also wrote a treatise on axiomatic statements (77 -epl a^iw^cnw) apparently connected with the Syntax of the Stoics, which Gellius (xvi 8, 2) found after diligent search in the Library in the temple of Peace; an edition of the works of Q. Metellus Numidicus, whom he accompanied into exile in 100 b.c. ; probably also an antiquarian work on the laws of the XII Tables, and lastly a glossary including articles on etymo¬ logical, antiquarian and historical subjects 3 . The Satires of Lucilius and the Annals of L. Coelius Antipater were dedicated to Stilo. Among the scholars who succeeded Stilo 4 were L. Plotius ! Gallus and Saevius Nicanor, early teachers of Latin rhetoric and literature respectively; Aurelius Opilius, a student of Plautus; Antonius Gnipho, a commentator on the Annals of Ennius; M. Pompilius Andronicus, who wrote criticisms on the Annals, published by Orbilius ; Servius Clodius, who married the daughter and stole some of the papers of Stilo, and is described as the author of a catalogue of the genuine plays of Plautus 5 ; and lastly Staberius Eros, the instructor of Brutus and Cassius, whom Pliny the elder 6 calls with some exaggeration cotiditor grammaticae. Stilo’s most famous pupil, M. Terentius Varro (116—27 b.c.), is characterised by Cicero 7 as diligent is simus investi¬ gator antiquitatis , by Quintilian 8 as vir Romanorum eruditissimus , and by St Augustine as one who had read so much 1 Varro, Z. Z. vii 2; cp. Festus s.v. manuos, mo lucrum ,, fescia, quoted by Suringar, Historia Critica Scholiastarum Latinorum , i 29. 2 Quint, x I, 99. 3 Goetz in Pauly-Wissowa, i 532 f. Cp. Mommsen, Hist, of Rome , Bk iv c. 12 and 13; Teuffel, § 148; Schanz, § 76. 4 Suet. Grain. 3, 5—8 etc. Teuffel, § 159; Schanz. §§ 194—6. 5 Gellius, iii 3, 1. Cp. Cic. ad Fam. ix 16, 4 (to Paetus), Servius, frater tuus, quern litteratissimum fuisse iudico, facile diceret ‘hie versus Plauti non est; hie est’, quod tritas aures haberet notandis generibus poetarum et consue- tudine legendi. 6 xxxv 199. 7 Brutus 60. 8 x 1, 95. 174 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. that one wondered he had any time left for writing, and had written so much that one might well believe that scarcely any one could have read the whole of his works 1 . His books numbered as many as 620, belonging to 74 separate works. They included xli books Antiquitatum rerum humanarum et divinarum, with other antiquarian works de vita and de gente populi Romani , a book of ‘origins’ called Aetia (like the Ama of Callimachus), and a treatise on Trojan families and on the Roman tribes. His writings on literary history comprised works on Plautus 2 and on the drama, on poetry and on style, with three books on Libraries; but unhappily they have not survived, and there is nothing to show that they were seriously concerned with literary criticism. His grammatical writings included xxv books de Lingua Latina, of which v—x (published before 43 b.c.) are extant; 11—vn were on etymology; vm—xvi on inflexion, analogy and anomaly; and xvn—xxv on syntax; also a book on the origin of the Latin language, three books on analogy {de similiiudine verborum), and four de utilitate sermonis. Further he was the author of the first encyclopaedic work in Latin on the ‘liberal arts’. Under the name of disciplinarmn libri novem , it comprised (1) grammar, (2) logic, (3) rhetoric, (4) geometry, (5) arithmetic, (6) astronomy, (7) music, (8) medicine, (9) architecture, the first seven of which were the seven liberal arts of Augustine 3 and Martianus Capella, afterwards represented by the trivium and the quadrivium of the educational system of the Middle Ages. His poetical works in¬ cluded certain saturae Menippeae , of which fragments remain. Lastly there were his three books de Re Rustica 4 . A large • — 1 De Civ. Dei, vi 2. Much the same was afterwards said of St Augustine by Isidore (vii 179 ed. 1803), ‘mentitur qui te totum legisse fatetur’. 2 The 21 plays recognised by Varro were called the Fabulae Varronianae (Gellius iii 3, 3), which may safely be identified with the 20 extant plays and the Vidularia, of which fragments only have survived in the Ambrosian Palimpsest (cent. v). 3 Retract, i 6, where however ‘philosophy’ is substituted for ‘astronomy’. 4 Teuffel, §§ 164—9. Cp. Ritschl, Opusc. iii 419—505; Mommsen, Hist, of Rome , Bk v c. 12 ; Wordsworth’s Early Latin , pp. 356—8; and Nettleship, ii 146 f; also Schanz, §§ 183—193; Wilmanns, De Varronis libris gramma- ticis, pp. 226, 1864; and Reitzenstein, Varro u?id Johannes Mauropus von Euchaita, eine Studie zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft , pp. 97, 1901. X.] ANALOGY AND ANOMALY. 175 portion of this varied literary activity is the theme of Cicero’s glowing eulogy in the Academica (1 § cj). But (apart from fragments) the only works which have survived are the books de Re Rustica , and six books de Lingua Latina. Books v—xxv of the latter were dedicated to Cicero, who had waited impatiently for the fulfilment of Varro’s promise to dedicate to him an important work, and who thus received a recognition of the handsome compliment paid by himself in dedicating to Varro the second edition of his Acadetnica (45 b.c.). Varro’s treatise is the earliest extant Roman work on grammar. The first three of the surviving books are on Etymology, book v being on names of places, vi on terms denoting time, and vn on poetic expressions. To ourselves the value of these books lies in their citations from the Latin poets, and not in their marvellous etymologies. But Varro is right in regarding meridies as standing for medius (and not menus ) dies, and in connexion with this word he records the interesting fact that he had himself seen the form in D carved on a sun-dial at Praeneste 1 . The next three books are concerned with the controversy on Analogy and Anomaly: vm on the argu¬ ments against Analogy, ix on those against Anomaly, and x on Varro’s own view of Analogy. In the first of these books we have arguments and illustrations in favour of the charms of variety: ex dissimilitudine plus voluptatis, quarn ex similitudine , saepe capitur; hence it may be inferred verbo- . Anal ° gy . and , . . . Anomaly in rum dissimilitudinem , quae sit in co/isuetudine, non esse vitan- Varro dam (31-32). In speech, it is urged by the anomalist, there is no rule; the inflexions of similar words are sometimes similar, as, from bonurn and malum , bono and malo; sometimes dissimilar, as, from lupus and lepus , hipo and lepori; again the inflexions of dissimilar words are sometimes dissimilar, as Priamus , Paris , and Priamo, Pari; sometimes similar, as Iuppiter , ovis, and Iovi, ovi. If analogy is not universal, argues the anomalist, there is no such thing as true analogy. The book ends with many examples of irregularity in declension, in the degrees of comparison, and in diminutives and proper names. The next book (ix), in arguing against anomaly, begins with the suggestion that that nobilis grammaticus, Crates, in accepting the view of Chrysippus, and in attacking that of Aristarchus, had misunderstood both. When Chrysippus wrote on anomaly, he meant to show that similar things are often denoted by dissimilar words, and dissimilar things by similar words, which is true. Again, when Aristarchus wrote on analogy, he held that we must accept the inflexion or derivation of certain words as a pattern (or 1 L. L. vi 4. 176 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Cicero paradigm) for the rest, so far as custom admits (§1). Varro is probably wrong in describing Crates as having mistaken the meaning of Chrysippus and Aristar¬ chus, and, when he himself admits the claims of consuetudo , he virtually gives up the case for strict analogy. All that the anomalist maintained was that analogy very often broke down, and he accordingly concluded that it was not analogy but consuetudo that was the guiding principle of language. As Varro was reluctant to call himself an anomalist, he takes refuge in the expedient of bringing forward a third party, consisting of those who in loquendo partim sequi iube 7 it nos consuetudinem , partim rationem. So long as partim remains undefined, this description comes to nothing, as either of the two contending parties might claim it as representing their views. Varro regards this third party as approximating to his own view of analogy; at the same time he regards that party as open to the same objection as the anomalists:— consuetudo et analogia coniunctiores sunt inter se, quarn ii credunt (ix 2) 1 . Cicero’s view agrees with that of Varro. He is an analogist, who never¬ theless respects consuetudo. As a practical orator it would have been impossible for him to disregard it. So he keeps to himself his knowledge of the scientifically correct forms, and is content to follow popular usage. He knew that in earlier Latin there had been no aspirate in pulcros , Cetegos, triumpos , Kartaginem, but he followed popular usage in introducing the aspirate ( Orator , 160). He uses confidens in the sense of ‘shameless’, although he knows it is wrong ( Tusc . Disp. iii 14); he finds no fault with scripsere , although he holds that scripserunt alone is right ( Orator , 157). Usum loquendi populo concessi , scientiam mihi resei~vavi [ib . 160). Cicero does not follow euphony for its own sake, but simply as part of popular usage: consuetudini auribus indulgenti libenter obsequor [ib. 157) 2 . Analogy was the theme of a work by Caesar, written while he was crossing the Alps 3 , probably in 55 B.c. It was dedicated to Cicero 4 , and consisted of two books (r) on the alphabet and on words, and (2) on irregularities of inflexion in nouns and verbs. It was in this work that Caesar laid down the memorable rule : ut tamquam scopulum , sic fugias inauditum atque insolens verbum b . He thus admitted the claim of consuetudo even in a work characteristic of his ruling passion for reducing everything to law and order and uniformity. Similarly the decay and the revival of words is made by Horace to depend on us us, quern penes arbitrium est et ius et norma loquendi [A. P. 71 f). The conflict between the analogists and the anomalists continued beyond the limits of time assigned to this chapter. To complete our survey of the subject, it may here be added that Pliny the elder (25 — 79 A.D.), among whose works were dubii sermonis libri octo 6 > was an analogist, but he allowed consuetudo its full rights [consuetudini et Caesar Pliny 5 an analogist, but ne allowed consuetudo its lull rignts yconsuemair 1 Steinthal, Sprachwissenschaft , ii 130—136 2 . Cp. Reitzenstein, l.c. -65. 2 Steinthal, ii 154. 5 0 ' ^ " 4 Brutus 253; Gellius, xix 8, 3. 6 Plin. Ep. iii 5, 5. 44—65. 3 Suet. Caes. 56. 5 Gellius, i 10, 4 X.] LITERARY CRITICISM. 177 Quintilian suavitati aurium censet summam esse tribuendam ), holding esse quideni rationem , sed tnulta ia? 7 i consuetudine superari x . Although originally language may have been entirely guided by analogy, consuetudo is the natural enemy of ratio and often drives it from the field. Pliny thus recognises the rights of consuetudo far more openly than Varro. He also recognises the force of authority , and accepts forms sanctioned veteri dignitate. Authority and antiquity are the constant allies of anomalous consuetudo , and against these three forces analogy must struggle in vain". Quintilian (c . 35—95 A.D. ) is also an analogist, but he limits the province of analogy to deciding in cases of doubt (i 6, 4). With Quin¬ tilian analogy rests not on reason but on precedent; it does not legislate on language, but simply observes and notes its laws (ib. 16). A century later in Greek literature the sceptical physician, Sextus Empi¬ ricus, who flourished between 180 and 200 A.D., was a spirited champion of anomaly. He ridicules the extreme analogists of Empiricus his day as ‘scholars who, although scarcely able to string two words together, wanted to convict of barbarism all the ancient writers who were conspicuous for correctness of language (eixppade 1a) and excellence of Greek (EWrjvKriuos), e.g. Thucydides, Plato and Demosthenes 5 ( adv. Math . i 98). The struggle, however, between the two principles was mainly limited to rather more than one century before and one century after our era. Under the influence of the Aristarchic school of analogists, grammatical forms were in¬ vestigated with great accuracy. The paradigms of grammar were the result of this struggle, which gave ‘ the necessary impulse to a complete analysis of the forms of language’ 3 . In the first effort to reduce the facts of the Greek language to order, the observation of the vast mass of regular forms led to their classification, and tempted the grammarian to endeavour to reduce all irregularities into agreement with the normal types. Such was the work of the earlier analogists. We may say of them that they held a brief for the ‘rule’; while the anomalists showed cause for the ‘exception’. The net result of the struggle was the ultimate recognition of the fact that in the realm of language, as in the world of nature, uniformity and variety are inextricably intermingled with one another. Literary criticism in the Roman age was partly borrowed from Greek sources such as the Poetic and Rhetoric of Aristotle, and the lost treatise On Style by Theo- criticism 7 phrastus. It may also have been influenced by critics such as Aristophanes and Aristarchus, the reputed founders of the Alexandrian ‘canon’ (p. 129 f), while the Ars Poetica of S. 1 Charisius, i p. 99. 2 Steinthal, ii 155. 3 Cp. J. Wordsworth’s Early Latin , pp. 653—4. 12 i;8 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Horace included among its sources of inspiration a lost treatise on poetical composition by Neoptolemus of Parium 1 , whose date is probably between that of Callimachus and Aristophanes 2 . Early in the first century b.c. we find a ‘ canon ’ of ten Latin comic poets drawn up by Volcatius Sedigitus; the names included are Caecilius, Plautus, Naevius, Licinius, Atilius, Terence, Turpi- lius, Trabea, Lucius and Ennius 3 . A threefold variety of style was recognised by Varro (as by Theophrastus); and Pacuvius was taken by him as a type of ubertas , Lucilius of gracilitas , Terence of mediocritas in the good sense of the term 4 . Literary criticisms also appeared incidentally in his saturae , where he says, in one passage, that the palm is claimed by Caecilius for his plots, by Terence for his delineation of character, and by Plautus for * his dialogues; and, in another, that truth to character is the special merit of Titinius, Terence and Atta; while the excitement of the emotions is that of Trabea, Atilius and Caecilius 5 . The criticisms on ancient poets current in the youth of Horace 6 have been attributed to Varro 7 . Literary criticism in Cicero (106—43 b.c.) has a conventional and borrowed element, as in the frequent comparison between literature and the arts of painting and sculpture 8 . In this he had been preceded by Neoptolemus and he was succeeded by Dionysius 9 and Quintilian 10 . The late Greek criticism also produced many new technical terms, several of which passed into the Latin of the Ciceronian and Augustan ages 11 . The critical vocabulary of the Latin language was largely extended by Cicero, who shows a special fondness for discriminat¬ ing between varieties of style by means of metaphors borrowed either from moral qualities or from the physiology of the human 1 Porphyrion discussed by Nettleship, Essays , i 173, ii 46—48. 2 Susemihl, i 405. 3 Gellius, xv 24. 4 ib. vi (vii) 14, 8. 5 Nettleship, ii 50—3; cp. Saintsbury’s History of Criticism , i 240 f. 6 Ep. ii 1, 55. 7 Nettleship, ii 52. 8 Brutus 70, 75, 228, 261, 298; Orator 36 (with the present writer’s Intro¬ duction , pp. lxxi—lxxiii). 9 De Comp. 21, De Isocr. 2, De Isaeo 4. 10 xii 10, 1—10. 11 Nettleship, ii 56. X.] LITERARY CRITICISM IN CICERO. 179 body 1 . Whenever he is original in his criticisms on poetry, he has a marked preference for the grand and free style of the older poets, such as Accius, Ennius and Pacuvius. In his criticisms on oratorical prose, in the Brutus and the Orator, he vindicates his own literary principles against a new school, that of the Roman Atticists, comprising orators like Calvus, whose models were Lysias and Thucydides. As a test of the truth of these divergent views he lays down the principle that, ‘given time and opportunity, the recognition of the many is as necessary a test of excellence in an artist as that of the few’ 2 . A great style must therefore ‘com¬ bine all the elements of excellence ’ 3 . Cicero’s genius as a critic is revealed in his review of the styles of Galba and Gaius Gracchus, of Antonius, Crassus and Scaevola, of Cotta and Sulpicius; of Caesar, Calidius and Hortensius 4 . In a few terse phrases he summarises the literary qualities of the speakers whom he passes in review, displaying a fulness of insight, a perfect mastery of thought, and a power of self-controlled expression standing in strong con¬ trast with his usual prolixity. In the De Legibus (i 5), as in the De Oratore (ii 51 f), history, in accordance with the traditional Greek view dating from the time of Ephorus and Theopompus, the pupils of Isocrates, is regarded as a branch of oratory. The idea of a painful study of authorities undertaken with the simple purpose of ascertaining the truth, is unfamiliar to his age. It might have been developed among the philosophers or the scholars of the time, but philosophy turned towards ‘ problems of speculative ethics, while scholarship satisfied itself with verbal and textual criticism’ 5 . In the De Republica (iv 13) Cicero happily describes Comedy as the imitatio vitae , the speculum consuetudinis , the imago veritatis. In the De Oratore (iii 27 f) he touches on the varied excellences of Greek and Roman poets and orators, and (ib. 149—207) unfolds a detailed theory of beauty of speech depending either on words themselves and their combinations or on figures of speech and 1 Cp. the present writer’s notes on Cic. Orator , §§ 25, 76; also Causeret’s Ptude (1886), pp. 155—8, and Saintsbury, i 220. 2 Brutus 183 f (Nettleship, ii 58 f). 3 De Or. iii 96 f, ior. 4 Brutus §§ 93, 125, 139, 143, 148, 201, 261, 274, 301. 5 Nettleship, ii 56—68. 12—2 i8o THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. thought. In the Pro Archia he shows a personal interest in eulogising literature in the presence (as we know from the scholiast) of his brother Quintus. He also supplies us with valuable evidence as to the state of Greek culture in Southern Italy, and also in Latium and Rome, shortly before 102 b.c. 1 In the Letters the only important piece of literary criticism is the much discussed phrase in which Cicero expresses his agreement with his brother as to the ‘ poems ’ of Lucretius :—‘ Lucretii poemata, ut scribis, ita sunt; multis luminibus ingenii, multae tamen artis’ (ad Quintum , ii n), where it has (perhaps unneces¬ sarily) been proposed to insert a non either before multis or before multae 2 . It is disappointing to find in Cicero so vague a criticism of the merits of a poet who had done him the honour of studying and imitating his own translation of Aratus 3 . The Orator , which supplies some of the best examples of Cicero’s taste as a literary critic, also affords us valuable evidence as to the nature and extent of his knowledge of the philology of the Latin language. In the course of an excursus on the proper collocation of words, in accordance with the laws of euphony (§§ 146—162), we find him regarding vexillum as the earlier form of velu?n (§ 153) instead of being a diminutive of it; capsis as standing for cape si vis (§ 154), an opinion rightly rejected by Quintilian; and the compound words ignoti , ignavi and ignari, as preferred for reasons of euphony to innoti, innavi and innari (§ 158), whereas gnoti, gnavi and gnari are obviously the original forms of the simple words. Asinius Pollio (76 b.c.—5 a.d.) wrote a severe criticism on the archaisms of Sallust 4 , who in this respect was regarded as having imitated and even plagiarised from the elder Cato 5 . On the other hand he expressed a very high opinion of Cicero :—‘ huius viri tot tantisque operibus mansuri in 1 Pro Archia 5, erat Italia turn plena Graecarum artium ac disciplinarum, studiaque haec et in Latio vehementius turn colebantur quam nunc isdem in oppidis, et hie Romae propter tranquillitatem rei publicae non neglegebantur. 2 Introd. to Munro’s Liter, vol. i pp. 313—5, ed. 1873; cp. Saintsbury, pp. 214—7. 3 Munro on Lucr. v 619; cp. Mackail’s Latin Literature, p. 50. 4 Suet. Gram. 10. 5 Suet. Aug. 86; Quintilian viii 3, 29. X.] CONTEMPORARIES OF CICERO. 181 omne aevum praedicare de ingenio atque industria supervacuum est ’ \ An account of the consulship of Cicero was written in Greek during his life-time by his friend Atticus 1 2 (io9—32), whose liber annalis , a chronological work covering Tito tlCUS and seven centuries of Roman history 3 , is probably the source of the Fasti Capitolini and of the ‘ Chronograph ’ of 354 a.d. 4 He also played an important part in literature as the head of an establishment of learned slaves engaged as copyists 5 . We still possess the Life of Atticus by Cornelius Nepos, while that of Cicero is unfortunately lost. Cicero’s Life was also written by his freedman Tiro, and it is to Atticus and Tiro that we are doubtless mainly indebted for the survival of his works. Tiro is specially named in connexion with the Letters and the Speeches 6 . He wrote several works on the Latin language 7 , and invented a system of shorthand, which was carried further by Philargyrus, a freedman of Agrippa, and Aquila, a freedman of Maecenas, and also by Seneca 8 . After flourishing in the Carolingian age, it became less common at the beginning of the tenth century, and vanished after the twelfth 9 . Among the younger contemporaries of Cicero, the Neo- Pythagorean P. Nigidius Figulus ( c . 98—45 b.c.), the praetor of 58 b.c., was ranked by a later age pigufis 1US as second to Varro in learning 10 . His commentarii grammatici dealt with grammar in general, and especially with orthography, synonyms, and etymology. They are often quoted by Gellius, who complains of then* being more obscure and less popular than the corresponding works of Varro 11 . He was perhaps 1 Seneca, Suas. vi 24. 2 Ad Att. ii 41; Nepos, Atticus, 18. 3 Nepos, l.c.; Cic. Orator 120, Brutus 14, 19. 4 Schanz, §116. 5 Nepos, l.c., 13, 3 ; Cic. ad Att. xiii 21, 3 ; 44, 3; Fronto, Ep. 10. Hul- leman’s Atticus, p. 173. 6 Ad Att. xvi 5, 5; Gellius, i 7, 1; xiii. 21, 16; cp. Quint, x 7, 30. 7 Gellius, xiii 9, 2. 8 Isidore, Orig. i 21. 9 Schanz, § 178, ult. 10 Gellius, iv 9, r. 11 xvii 7, 5; xix 14, 3. 182 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. L. Ateius Praetextatus Valerius Cato Grammatical terminology the inventor of the method of denoting the long vowel by an apex 1 . L. Ateius Praetextatus, who was born at Athens and became a Roman freedman, assumed (like Erastosthenes) the name of Philologus. He was a student of style and of Roman history, and a friend of Sallust and Asinius Pollio 2 . Valerius Cato, who had a great reputation as a teacher of young noble¬ men with a taste for poetry, closed his life in extreme poverty; but even the satirical lines of Bibaculus unconsciously do him honour by comparing him as a summits grammaticus with the scholars of Alexandria and Pergamon :— en cor Zenodoti, en iecur Cratetis 3 . Latin grammar owes its terminology, in the first instance, to Varro; and, in the next, to Nigidius Figulus. In the middle of the first century b.c. the Gender or genus of a noun or nomen substantivum was distin¬ guished by the terms virile , muliebre and neutrum (masculinum and femininum not occurring earlier than the second century a.d.) 4 . The Number or numerus was described by Varro as either singularis or multitudinis , while pluralis is found later in Quintilian (who represents the teaching of Remmius Palaemon), and plurativus in Gellius. A Case (as with the Stoics) might be either rectus or obliquus; the casus rectus was also known to Varro as the casus nominandei or nominativus; the Genitive was called by Varro the casus patricus, by Nigidius the casus interi'ogandi; the Dative was described by both as the casus dandi , while gene- tivus and dativus occur in Quintilian; the Accusative is in Varro the casus accusandei or accusativus; the Vocative the casus vocan- dei , while vocativus is found in Gellius; the Ablative, recognised by Quintilian, possibly owes its name to Caesar, Varro’s name for it being the sextus or Latinus casus , as it was not found in Greek. The Declensions and Conjugations are unrecognised by Varro. He divides each of the three times, past, present and future, into 1 Teuffel, § 170; Hiibner, Romische Litt. § 45 s (p. 44 Mayor); Mommsen, Hist, of Rotfie, Bk V c. 12 ; also Schanz, Rom. Litt., § 181. 2 Suet. Gram. 10; Schanz, § 195, 5. 3 ib. 11; Teuffel, § 200. 4 First found in Caesellius Vindex (Gellius vi (vii) 2). X.] GRAMMAR. LITERARY CRITICISM IN HORACE. 1 83 a tempus infectum and a tempus perfectum ; but he knows nothing of any technical sense of modus \ The earliest of the literary criticisms of Horace (65—8 B.c.) are those of the fourth and tenth of his first book Literary of Satires (35 b.c.). He there asserts his own prin- criticism in • • • • • • Horscc ciples under the guise of a polemic against Lucilius. His predecessor’s style, he says, is too hasty and too slovenly, while the Old Attic Comedy is too narrow in its scope to serve as a model for his own satura. Poetry, he insists, is not a matter for the crowd; it is the gift and privilege of the few 1 2 . About 19 b.c. we have the criticisms of his Ars Poetica , founded in part on Greek originals and prompted apparently by a desire to recall his countrymen from the critical principles of the Ciceronian and the Alexandrian ages, to those on which the great works of Hellas were founded. Mr Saintsbury, who justly describes it as ‘the only complete example of literary criticism that we have from any Roman ’, criticises its desultoriness and its arbitrary convention¬ ality, while he fully recognises its brilliancy, its typical spirit, and its practical value 3 . In the two Epistles of the Second book Horace discards the framework of Greek works and Greek texts, and relies on his own genius. In poetry he insists on the worth¬ lessness of mere antiquity, and on the importance of perfect finish. The older Latin poets, admired by Varro and Cicero, are more coldly regarded by Horace, while they meet with a warmer appre¬ ciation in Ovid 4 . Virgil and Horace became classics soon after their death, driving out the taste for the older poets, and finding admirers and imitators in Lucan and Persius respectively. While Virgil’s Eclogues and Georgies were published during his life-time, the Aeneid was first edited by Varius and Tucca after his death (19 b.c.). He was attacked orvirgii StUdy by Carvilius Pictor in his Aeneidomastix; his vitia , or supposed faults of style, were collected by Herennius; his 1 Cp. Lersch. Sprachphilosophie, ii 223—256; Grafenhan, ii 291—306; and L. Jeep, Zur Geschichte von den Redetheilen bei den Lateinischen Gramma- tikern, pp. 124—259. 2 i 4, 40 and 71 : Nettleship, ii 70. 3 Hist, of Criticism, i 221—8. 4 Amores, i 15—19, Tristia , ii 423; Nettleship, ii 70—73. 184 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. furta, or alleged plagiarisms, by Perellius Faustus; and his trans¬ lations from the Greek, by Octavius Avitus; while his detractors were answered by Asconius, better known as the earliest commen¬ tator on Cicero 1 . The first to expound Virgil in the schools of Rome was a freedman of Atticus, named Q. Caecilius Epirota, who opened a school after the death of his second patron, the poet Cornelius Gallus (27 b.c.) 2 . Virgil was criticised by Hygi- nus, the librarian of the Palatine Library, and by Cornutus, the friend of Persius. In the time of Quintilian 3 and Juvenal 4 he shared the fate, which Horace 5 had feared for himself, of being a textbook for use in schools. The first critical edition of Virgil was that of Probus in the time of Nero. Among his interpreters were Velius Longus, under Trajan.; Q, Ter. Scaurus, under Hadrian; Aemilius Asper (towards the end of the 2nd century); and Aelius Donatus (yf. 353 a.d.). The earliest exta?it commen¬ taries are those in the Verona scholia , including quotations from Cornutus, Velius Longus, Asper, and Haterianus (end of 3rd cent.); that on the Eclogues and Georgies bearing the name of Probus (fl. 56—88 a.d.) ; that on the Aeneid by Tib. Claudius Donatus (end of 4th century), which is simply a prose paraphrase exhibiting the rhetorical connexion of the successive clauses; and that on the whole of Virgil by Servius (late in 4th century), which includes references to the lost commentary by Aelius Donatus, who appears to have been deficient in knowledge and judgement and far too fond of allegorising interpretations, and in these respects inferior to the learned and sober Servius 6 . The earliest mss of Virgil belong to the 4th or 5th centuries. The first critical edition of Horace was that of Probus; the first commentary that of Q. Terentius Scaurus, of^iorace Udy followed (late in the 2nd century) by Helenius Aero, who also expounded Terence and Persius. The only early commentaries now extant are the scholia collected by Pomponius Porphyrio (3rd cent.), and by Pseudo-Aero, and those compiled for various mss by Prof. Cruquius of Bruges. It 1 Nettleship in Conington’s Virgil, i 4 pp. xxix—cix. 2 Suet. Gramm. 16. 3 i 8, 5—6. 5 Ep. i 20, 17. 4 vii 226 f. 6 Nettleship, l.c.; cp. Schanz, § 248. X.] EARLY STUDY OF VIRGIL AND HORACE. 1 85 is only through Cruquius (1565) that we know anything of the codex antiquissimus Blandinius, borrowed from the library of a Benedictine monastery near Ghent, and burnt with the monastery after it had been returned to the library. It represented a recen¬ sion earlier than the date of Porphyrio, as, in Sat. i 6, 126, instead of fugio rabiosi te?npora signi (recognised by Porphyrio), it had the true text :— ; fugio campum lusumque trigonem . The only ms which retains the latter is the codex Gothanus (cent. 10). In this, and seven other mss, we find a record at the end of the Epodes showing that, at the close of the Roman age, there was a recen¬ sion of Horace produced, with the assistance of Felix, orator urbis Romae , by Vettius Agorius Basilius Mavortius (the consul of 527) 1 . The earliest extant ms belongs to the eighth or ninth century. In the next chapter we shall turn to the Grammarians and Scholars of the Augustan age. Cp. Schanz, §§ 263—5; and Teuffel, § 240, 6 and 477, 3. IDALIAELVCOS VBIM FLOM BVSETDVLCl AD IAMQJ BATD1CTOPAA From Codex Sangallensis 1394 (Century iv or v) of Virgil ( Aen. i 693 f). (E. M. Thompson’s Palaeography, p. 185.) Conspectus of Latin Literature, &c., i—300 A.D Roman Emperors A.D. 14 Tiberius 37 Caligula 41 Claudius 54 Nero 68 Galba 69 Otho 69 Vitellius 69 Vespasian 79 Titus 81 Domitian 96 Nerva 98 Trajan 100 - Poets Germanicus 15 b.c.— 19 A.D. c. 14 Manilius 30-40 Phaedrus L.Ann.Seneca II 4 b.c. —65 A.D. 54 Calpurnius Persius 34—62 Lucan 39—65 Valerius Flaccus d. c. go Statius d. c. 95 Silius 25—101 Martial c. 40—104 117 Hadrian 138 Antoninus Pius 161 M. Aurelius (161-9 L. Verus) 180 Commodus 193 Pertinax 193 Julianus 193 Septimius Severus poetae neoterici 200 - hi Caracalla 117 Macrinus 118 Elagabalus >22 Alexander Severus >35 Maximin >38 Gordian I, II o JPupienus ! 3 ° \Balbinus 238 Gordian III 244 Philippus 249 Decius 251 Gallus 253 Aemilianus 253 Valerian & Gallienus 268 Claudius II 270 Aurelian 275 Tacitus 276 Florianus 276 Probus 282 Carus 283 Carinus & Numerian 284 Diocletian [286 Maximian) Juvenal c. 5 5 or 60- -140 249 Commodia- nus Historians, Biographers 9 Pompeius Trogus 30 Velleius Pat¬ erculus 31 Valerius Maximus 41 Q. Curtius Orators, Rhetoricians L. Ann. Seneca I 54 b.c. 39 a.d. P. Rutilius Lupus Scholars, Critics, &c. Other Writers of Prose Tacitus c. 55 — 120 120 Suetonius c. 75—160 137 Florus Justin 284 Nemesianus 68-88 Quintilian 35—95 100 Younger Pliny 61—105 35-70 Palaemon 54-7 Asconius 3—88 56—80 Probus 76 Elder Pliny 23—79 c. 14 Celsus 43-4 Pomponius Mela L. Ann. Seneca II 4 B.C. —65 A.D. Petronius d. 66 64-5 Columella 143 Fronto c. 90—168 158 Apuleius 223 Marius Maximus 250 Junius Cor- dus Spartianus Capitolinus Vulcatius Galli- canus TrebelliusPollio Aquila Romanus 295 Arnobius 297 Eumenius Lactantius L. Caesellius Vindex Q. Ter. Scaurus Velius Longus c. 150 C. Sulp. Apollinaris d. c. 160 169 Gellius b. c. 130 Aemilius Asper Flavius Caper Statilius Maximus Terentianus Maurus Helenius Aero Festus 70-97 Frontinus d. c. 103 Porphyrio C. Julius Romanus 238 Censorinus Gaius no—180? Tertullian c. 150—230 218 ? Solinus Cyprian c. 200—255 Mar. Plotius Sacerdos CHAPTER XI. LATIN SCHOLARSHIP FROM THE AUGUSTAN AGE TO 300 A.D. The Temple of the Palatine Apollo, founded in memory of the victory of Actium, was dedicated by Augustus in 28 a.d. Like the Temple of the ‘Victorious Athena’ at Pergamon, it was surrounded by colonnades giving access to a Library. The Library consisted of two apartments, one for Greek and the other for Latin books, with a spacious hall between; and we are informed that the books were collected by Pompeius Macer 1 , and that the Head Librarian was C. Julius Hyginus 2 . Hyginus (c. 64 b.c. —17 a.d.), the pupil of Alexander Poly- histor (p. iso) and the friend of Ovid, was one of , . Hyginus the foremost scholars of the Augustan age. In his studies he followed the traditions of Varro as well as those of Nigidius Figulus. Among the most important of his multifarious works were (1) his commentary on Virgil, and (2) his treatise on the Urbes Italiae , repeatedly cited by Servius 3 . Hyginus was succeeded by his own freedman Modestus, who is mentioned in Quintilian (i 6, 36) and Martial (x 21, 1); and by M. Pomponius Marcellus, who began life as a boxer and ended it as a pedant. During a discussion in court as to whether a word used by the emperor Tiberius was good Latin or not, he had the courage to say to the emperor: ‘ civitatem dare potes hominibus, verbo non 1 Suet. Caesar 56. 2 Suet. Gram. 20. 3 Teuffel, § 262 ; Schanz, §§ 342—6; he is not the author of the extant works on Astronomy and Mythology which bear his name (Schanz, §§ 347— 350). For most of the scholars mentioned in this chapter and the next, cp. Grafenhan, iv 57—94. 188 THE ROMAN AGE. v. [CHAP. potes’ 1 . Varro was the model set up by Fenestella (52 b.c. —19 a.d.), the author of more than 22 books of Annals, which Fenestella ... .. became the source of a vast variety 01 later erudi¬ tion connected with Roman antiquities and literary history. He is described by Lactantius as a ‘ diligentissimus scriptor’ 2 . In the same age Verrius Flaccus (Jl. 10 b.c.) produced his Filccus S great work De Verborum Significatu, the first Latin lexicon ever written. This survives in the incom¬ plete and fragmentary abridgement by Pompeius Festus (2nd cent. a.d.), which in its turn was further abridged by Paulus, who dedicated his epitome to Charles the Great. We learn from Suetonius that Verrius Flaccus introduced among his pupils the principle of competition. He was made tutor to the grand¬ children of Augustus and died as an old man in the reign of * Tiberius. The remains of his work may still be traced in Quintilian, Gellius, Nonius, Macrobius and other writers 3 . It appears to have been of the nature of an encyclopaedia, including ‘ not only lexicographical matter, but much information on points of history, antiquities, and grammar, illustrated by numerous quotations from poets, jurists, historians, old legal documents, and writers on religious or political antiquities’ 4 . Much of his treatise De Orthographia can be recovered from the works on the same subject by Terentius Scaurus and Velius Longus, who wrote under Trajan and Hadrian, and from Quintilian i 4 and 7 s . At Praeneste, a statue was erected in his honour with a semi¬ circular marble recess inscribed with his Fasti 6 , partially preserved in the Fasti Praenestinf. A name of note in the history of Latin Grammar is that of Q. Remmius Palaemon (y£ 35-70 a.d.) of Vicentia. By birth a slave, and by trade a weaver, he learnt the elements of literature, while accompanying his master’s son on his way to school; and, after obtaining his freedom, he held the foremost place among teachers of Grammar in Rome. He Palaemon 1 Suet. Gram. 22. 2 Inst. Div. i 6, 14, ap. Teuffel, § 243, 2. Cp. Schanz, § 331. 3 Nettleship, i 201—247. 4 ib. p. 205. 5 ib. ii 151—8. 6 Suet. De Gram. 17. Teuffel, § 74, 3. 7 Teuffel, § 74, 3 and § 261 ; Schanz, §§ 340—1. XI.] VERRIUS FLACCUS. 189 was born towards the end of the reign of Augustus, and lived under Tiberius and Claudius, both of whom declared that morally he was the last man to whom the education of youth ought to be entrusted. His popularity was due to his marvellous memory, his readiness of speech, and his power of improvising poetry. His Ars Grammatical probably published between 67 and 77 a.d., was the first exclusively scholastic treatise on Latin Grammar. We infer from Juvenal (vi 452 f, vii 215) that it contained rules for correct speaking, examples from ancient poets, with chapters on barbarism and solecism. The scholia on Juvenal (vi 452) inform us that Palaemon was the preceptor of Quintilian, and it is highly probable that (in i 4 and 5 §§ 1—54) Quintilian is paraphrasing from his preceptor’s treatise. He was the first to distinguish four declensions; and part of his grammatical teaching is preserved by Charisius (4th century). Palaemon humorously regarded his own advent as an arbiter of poetry as predicted by Virgil in the phrase, venit ecce Palaemon; and he vain-gloriously asserted that letters had been born at his birth, and would die at his death 1 . The elder Seneca, L. Annaeus Seneca of Corduba ( c . 54 b.c.— 39A.D.), is a link between the republican and the imperial times. In the first half of his life he was eider^ 3 the an admirer of the style of Cicero and of Pollio and Messala, while in his old age he recorded his earlier recollections in works which illustrate the history of oratory under Augustus and Tiberius, and are interesting in connexion with matters of rhetorical criticism 2 . He mentions Apollodorus of Pergamon (who included Augustus among his pupils), and he supplies some reminiscences of Ovid as a declaimer 3 . In the latter part of his life we may place P. Rutilius Lupus, the author of an abridgement of a work on the figures of speech by the younger Gorgias (44 b.c.) containing well-chosen examples translated from speeches of Attic orators which are no longer extant 4 . 1 Suetonius, Gram. 23 ; Teufifel, § 282 ; Nettleship, ii 149, 163—9 ; Schanz, § 475 ; also K. Marschall, De Q. Remrnii Palaemonis libris grammaticis, 1887; Bursian’s Jahresb. vol. 68 (1891 ii), p. 132 f; and Jeep’s Redetheile , p. 172 f. 2 Cp. Saintsbury, i 230—9. 3 Controv. ii 2, 8. 4 Teufifel, § 270 ; Schanz, § 480; Halm, Rhet. Lat. Min., 3— 21. THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. 190 Seneca the younger The younger Seneca 1 (< c . . 4 b.c.— 65 a.d.) is absorbed in the philosophy of the Stoics, but does not share their interest in Grammar. He criticises Cicero and Virgil for their admiration of Ennius 2 , and notes the obsoleteness 3 of the language of Ennius and Accius, and even of that of Virgil, whom he nevertheless cites very frequently, calling him a ‘vir disertissimus’ 4 and a ‘maximus vates’ 5 . He quotes Horace occasionally, especially the Satires , and Ovid far oftener, especially the Metamorphoses, describing their author as ‘poetarum ingeniosissimus, ad pueriles ineptias delapsus’ 6 . He casts contempt on those who are wholly engaged in the study of ‘useless letters’, and satirises the craze of the Greeks for inquiring as to the number of the oarsmen of Ulysses, and whether the Iliad was written before the Odyssey, and whether the same poet was the author of both 7 . In the 88th of his Letters, he sneers at the ‘ grammatici ’ (§ 3); he justly ridicules the attempts to make out Homer to have been a Stoic, an Epicurean, a Peripatetic or a Platonist (§ 5); he does not even care to inquire whether Homer or Hesiod was the earlier poet (§ 6); and he pities the ‘ super¬ fluous ’ learning contained in the 4000 volumes of Didymus, with their discussions on the birthplace of Homer, and the moral character of Sappho and Anacreon (§ 37). In his 108th Letter he complains that the spirit of disputatiousness has turned ‘philo¬ sophy’ into ‘philology’ (§ 23), and also points out that the ‘grammarian’ examines Virgil and Cicero from a point of view different from that of the ‘philologer’ or the ‘philosopher’ (§§ 24—34; supra p. 9). He is almost afraid of taking an undue interest in such matters himself (§ 35), though elsewhere he is generous enough to describe the ‘ grammarians ’ as the custodes Latini sermonis (Ep. 95 § 65). Lastly, in making the earliest mention of the alleged destruction of 40,000 mss at Alexandria (p. 112 f), he leaves it to Livy to praise the Alexandrian Library as ‘a noble monument of royal taste and royal foresight’, himself 1 Cp. Saintsbury, i 246 f; Teuffel, §§ 287—290 ; Schanz, j 2 Gellius, xii 2 (Seneca, Frag. 110—3) and Dial, v 37, 5. 3 Ep. 58, 1—6. 4 Dial viii 1, 4. 5 ib. x 9, 2. 6 Nat. Q. iii 27, 13. 7 Dial, x 13, 1—9; cp. Nat. Q. iv 13, 1. 45 2 — 47 2 - XI.] SENECA. PETRONIUS. PERSIUS. 191 Petronius regarding it as a monument of learned extravagance, and even withdrawing the epithet ‘ learned ’; for the books (he maintains) had been bought for mere show and not for real learning {Dial. ix 9 , 5 ). Much more interest in literature seems to be shown by another victim of Nero, a far less moral writer, Petronius (d. 66 a.d.). His extant work is in form a satura Menippea, in which prose is interspersed with verse in various metres parodying the style of Seneca, Lucan and Nero 1 . Literary criticism is here incidentally represented in the opening protest against the bombastic language which results from the practice of declamation (§§ 1, 2). It is also exemplified in a later passage warning the poet against allowing any particular sentence to be too obtrusive for its context, insisting on the use of choice language and the avoidance of vulgarity, and justifying this view by appealing to Homer and Virgil, as well as the Greek Lyric poets, and Horace with (what Petronius happily describes as) his curiosa felicitas (§ 118) 2 . Literary criticism also finds its place in the Satires of Persius (34-62 a.d.), who touches on the interest felt by the descendants of Romulus for the after-dinner discussion of literary topics (i 31). His highly satirical and allusive prologue is followed by a satire on the professional poet and on the mania for poetic recitation, with parodies of the ‘ precious ’ style affected by the poetasters of the day. There is also a critical element in the opening passages of the fifth and sixth Satires, his general attitude being a protest against a fantastic pursuit of Greek themes, and a preference for a manly Roman style 3 . One of the most competent commentators of the first century was Q. Asconius Pedianus {c. 3-88 a.d.), who was certainly acquainted with Livy, and was probably, like Livy, born at Patavium. He was the author of a lost work in vindication of Virgil 4 , but is best known as the writer of a learned historical commentary on Cicero’s speeches. All that has survived is certain portions of the commentary on the Speeches in Piso?ie?n , Persius Asconius 1 Teaffel, § 305, 4; Schanz, §§ 393—6. 2 Saintsbury, i 242—5. 3 ib. i 248—253. 4 Contra obtrectatores Vergilii, quoted by Donatus in his Life of Virgil. 192 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Pliny the elder pro Scauro , pro Milone , pro Cornelio , and in toga Candida. It abounds in historical and antiquarian lore, and shows familiarity with even the unpublished works of Cicero, and the speeches of his partisans and his opponents. It was composed about 55 a.d., and is only preserved in transcripts of the ms found by Poggio at St Gallen in 1416 \ Grammar was one of the many subjects which attracted the attention of the elder Pliny (23-79 a.d.), who, in the Preface to his Naturalis Historia (§ 28), men¬ tions what he modestly calls certain libelli which he had written on this subject. His nephew, Pliny the younger (iii 5, 5), names in the list of his uncle’s works eight libri on dubius sermo (or Irregularities in Formation), written in the time of Nero. It is probably this work that is the source of a large part of Quintilian i 5, 54 to i 6, 287 s . It is also probably the same work that is meant by the Ars Grammatica attributed to Pliny by Priscian and by Gregory of Tours. Pliny, as we have already noticed (p. 176), is an analogist. Little else is known of his views, but there is reason to believe that the work by Valerius Probus de nomine is founded on the grammatical writings of the elder Pliny 3 . The books of his encyclopaedic Naturalis Historia which deal with Ancient Art are (with all their imperfections) the foundation of our knowledge of that subject. The work has sur¬ vived in many mss, having been very popular in the Middle Ages. Extracts from the geographical portions appear in Solinus, and other excerpts in the Medicina Plinii. M. Valerius Probus of Beyrut (fl. 56-88 a.d.) was the foremost grammarian of the first century a.d. Weary of the career of a soldier, he resolved on becoming a scholar. His interest in literature was first excited by certain ancient Latin authors which he had read before arriving in Rome, and here he continued his studies and gathered round him a num- Probus 1 Madvig (1828) ; Teuffel, § 295, 2—3; Wissowa in Pauly-Wissowa s.v.\ ed. in Orelli’s Cicero v 2 pp. 1—95, and by Kiessling and Scholl (1875). Cp. Suringar, Hist. Critica , i 117—146; also Schanz, § 476, esp. p. 431 1 2 ad fin. 2 Nettleship, ii 158—161. 3 O. Froehde, Valerii Probi de nomine libellum Plinii Secundi doctrinam continere demonstratur, 1892; cp. Nettleship, ii 146, 150; Schanz, § 494, 5. XI.] ASCONIUS. PLINY. PROBUS. 193 ber of learned friends, with whom he spent several hours a day in discussing the Latin literature of the past 1 . Martial, in sending into the world his third book of epigrams, bids it farewell with the words: nec Probum timeto (iii 2, 12). Gellius, among several eulogistic references, describes him as an ‘ illustrious grammarian 5 (i 15, 18), and Sidonius Apollinaris calls him ‘a pillar of learning’ ( Carm. ix 334). He published a few unimportant criticisms, besides leaving behind him a silva observationum sermonis antiqui. Speci¬ mens of his conversational teaching on this subject are preserved by Gellius, who cites at second-hand his remarks on Plautus, Terence, Virgil, Sallust and Valerius Antias, mentions some of his writings, e.g. on the Perfect form occecurri , and also states that he made the penultimate of the Accusative of Hannibal and Hasdru- bal long, on the ground that it was so pronounced by Plautus and Ennius (whose pronunciation of these forms has not been followed by Horace or Juvenal). He produced recensions of Plautus (?), Terence, Lucretius, Virgil, Horace and Persius, with critical symbols like those used by the Alexandrian Scholars. These symbols, which were 21 in number, had already been used by Vargunteius and by Aelius Stilo 2 . He also wrote a work on the ancient contractions used in legal Latin. In settling the text of Virgil, he went back to the earliest authorities. We are told that he had himself examined a ms of the First Georgic corrected by Virgil’s own hand 3 * , and traces of some of his critical signs survive in the Medicean ms of Virgil, while we may ascribe to him the nucleus at least of the extant commentary on the Bucolics and Georgies, which bears his name. Among the grammatical works assigned to Probus is one on anomaly (de inaequalitate consuetudinis ), another on tenses, and on doubtful genders. Two treatises have come down to us under his name: (1) Catholica , dealing with the noun and the verb; (2) a prolix and feeble treatise on Grammar (to which the title Instituta Artium has been given) with an appendix de differentiis and de nomine excerpta. It is supposed that these are ultimately founded 1 Suet. De Gram. 24. 2 Reifferscheid, Suetoni Reliquiae , p. 137 f. Teuffel, § 41, 2. Grafenhan, iv 372, 380. 3 Gellius, xiii 21, 4. S. 13 194 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. on the remains of the teaching of Probus which may have been reduced into the form of a textbook in two parts:—(i) the Insti- tuta Artium, dealing with letters, syllables and the eight parts of speech; and (2) the Catholica , dealing with nouns and verbs 1 . Pliny and Probus are probably responsible for most of the remarks on irregularities of declension and conjugation found in the later grammarians. To these two writers, and to Palaemon, may be ascribed the main outlines of the traditional Latin Grammar 2 . From Probus we turn to a name of far greater note. Fabius Quintilianus (c . 35-95 a.d.), born at Calagurris on the Ebro, was the pupil of Palaemon and the preceptor of Tacitus and the younger Pliny. His father was a teacher of rhetoric in Rome, where he himself passed the greater part of his life as a pleader in the law-courts and- as a professor of rhetoric. In 88 b.c. he was placed at the head of the first State-supported school in Rome, and probably three years afterwards he began his great work, the Institutio Oratoria. The study of literature {de grammatica ) is the theme of chapters 4—8 of his first book, while c. 9 is de officio grammatici. There is reason to believe that c. 4 and c. 5 §§ 1—54 are founded on Palaemon; c. 5 § 54 to c. 6 § 27 on Pliny, and c. 7 §§ 1—28 on Verrius Flaccus 3 . In the controversy between analogists and anomalists, Quintilian, as we have seen, was on the side of the former without adhering to them very strictly (p. 177). In the first chapter of the tenth book he suggests a course of reading suitable for the future orator, including (1) the Greek and (2) the Latin classics arranged under the heads of poetry, the drama, history, oratory and philosophy. In (1) he virtually admits that he is giving the criticism of others, not his own. These criticisms have so much in common with those of Dionysius of Halicar¬ nassus that it is practically impossible to dispute Quintilian’s indebtedness to that author, though an attempt has been made to show that the identity is due to both having borrowed from the same earlier authority 4 . In part of his criticisms on the Greek 1 Teuffel, § 300; Schanz, §§ 477—9. 2 Nettleship, ii 170 f; Schanz, §§ 494—5. 3 Nettleship, ii 169. 4 Usener, Dion. Hal. de Imitatione , p. 132. Heydenreich, De Quintiliani ...libro X (1900), maintains that Quintilian was directly indebted to Dionysius. XI.] QUINTILIAN. TACITUS. YOUNGER PLINY. 195 Tacitus poets, historians and philosophers, he appears to be indebted to Theophrastus and the Alexandrian critics, such as Aristophanes and Aristarchus 1 . In (2) his aim throughout is to make canons of classical Latin authors corresponding as closely as possible with the canons of Greek authors. He gives no independent opinion on Pacuvius and Accius, and hardly notices Plautus, Caecilius, and Terence; he misconceives Lucretius; and although his criticisms on post-Ciceronian writers are sound and well-expressed, they are generally brief. It is clear that literature before and after Cicero has comparatively little attraction for Quintilian. His refined and carefully written criticism on Cicero is a monu¬ ment of trained insight, grounded on manly and sober sense. While Quintilian is concerned with the literary and professional aspects of the question as to the reading which is best suited for the formation of a good oratorical style, Tacitus (< c . 55-120 a.d.) in his Dialogue De Oratoribus (81 a.d.) takes a loftier view, seeing clearly that literature must be ‘judged as the expression of national life, not as a matter of form and of scholastic teaching’ 2 . The doubts as to the Tacitean authorship of the Dialogue have been partly met by the fact that a phrase there found (9 and 12) 3 is mentioned as expressing the opinion of Tacitus in a letter addressed by Pliny the younger (61-105 a.d.) to Tacitus himself (ix 10, 2) 4 . The criticism of oratory has also an attraction for the p^ny younger younger Pliny. He writes a long letter to Tacitus, in the course of which he refers to the typical orators in Homer, and quotes the ancient eulogies on the style of Pericles (i 20). He also refers to the De Corona and the Meidias of Demosthenes (ii 3 10; vii 30, 4), and quotes several passages from his public speeches as examples of happy audacity of phrase (ix 26, 8—12) 5 . 1 Nettleship, ii 76—83 ; and Peterson’s Quintil. X, pp. xxviii—xxxvii. 2 Nettleship l.c. p. 87 ff. Teuffel, § 325 (Quintilian); § 334 (Tacitus); cp. Schanz, § 483 f and § 428. For a facsimile from a MS of Quintilian (x 1, 87), see p. 203. 3 in nemora et lucos; nemora et luci. 4 poemata...quae tu inter nemora et lucos commodissime perfici putas. 5 Teuffel, § 340 ; Schanz, § 444 b Literary criticism in Pliny, Tacitus and Quintilian is fully treated by Saintsbury, i 270—321. 13—2 196 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Juvenal Pliny was born in about the same year as Juvenal, and died in about the same year as his earlier contemporary Martial . J J Martial. Of these two poets, Martial { c . 40— c . 102-4 a.d.) shows a high appreciation of Catullus (x 78 etc.) who was beyond the reach of the flattery which he lavishes on his own contemporary Silius Italicus (iv 14; vii 63). In criticising another contemporary, whose verses were so obscure as to call for a scholiast, he expresses a hope that his own poems may give pleasure to grammarians, but may be intelligible without their aid 1 . In many other epigrams, as has been fully shown by Mr Saintsbury 2 , ‘we have a very considerable number of pro¬ nouncements on critical points or on points connected with criticism ’. In Juvenal (c . 55-60 — 140 a.d.) there is much mention of literature, but literary criticism is hardly to be found. He satirises the learned ladies who prefer talking Greek to Latin (vi 185—7), and weigh the merits of Homer and Virgil (435—6). In the seventh Satire he describes the ideal poet, and pays a passing compliment to Quintilian (53 f, 186 f); in the tenth (114—132) he ‘points a moral’as to the perils of a political career by referring to the fate of Demosthenes and Cicero, but he does not permit any of these themes to tempt him into the criticism of literature 3 . Juvenal is the only contemporary of Statius ( c . 40 — c . 96 a.d.) who mentions that poet 4 , and there are some fine touches of criticism in the poem by Statius on the birthday of Lucan, where Ennius and Lucretius (amongst others) are briefly characterised :— ‘ Cedet Musa rudis ferocis Enni, Et docti furor arduus Lucreti’ 5 . Statius From this group of poets we turn to the name of a writer of prose, who is our main authority on the history of Latin Scholarship from 168 b.c. to the time of Probus, and whose varied erudition made him a favourite author in the early Middle Ages. C. Suetonius Tranquillus (c. 75-160 a.d.), who was an advocate under Trajan, and private secretary to Hadrian, spent the latter part of his life in preparing 1 x 21, grammaticis placeant, sed sine grammaticis. 2 i 256—268. 3 ib. 253—6. 4 Juv. vii 82—7. 5 Silvae, ii 7, 75 f; cp. Saintsbury, i 268 f. XI.] MARTIAL. JUVENAL. STATIUS. SUETONIUS. 197 encyclopaedic works on the history of language and literature. Apart from his extant work de vita Caesarum , he wrote a series of biographies entitled de viris illustribus under the headings of ‘poets’, ‘orators’, ‘historians’, ‘philosophers’, ‘scholars’ (gratn- matici), and ‘rhetoricians’. Of the early part of this work we possess excerpts alone. From the book on ‘poets’, we have short lives of Terence, Horace, Lucan, Virgil and Persius, and some remnants of the life of Lucretius from that on ‘historians’, a few remains of a life of the elder Pliny. Of his 36 biographies of ‘scholars and rhetoricians’, no less than 25 have survived. He also wrote a work on Roman institutions and customs. It was probably in another lost work entitled Pratum or Prata that (among many other topics) he treated of various notations of time in connexion with the Roman year, being one of the authorities followed on this point by Censorinus and Macrobius 1 2 , besides being one of the main sources of the erudition of Isidore of Seville. The works of Suetonius included a defence of Cicero against the attacks of the Alexandrian Scholar, Didymus, and a treatise on the critical signs used in the margins of mss 3 . Most of our knowledge of the meanings of these symbols is due to Suetonius 4 . Among the Scholars of the second century a.d. were Caesellius Vindex, a learned analogist 5 ; Q. Terentius Scaurus, who wrote on orthography as well as Grammar and vei?us'Emeus Poetry, and was also a commentator on Plautus and Virgil, and probably on Horace 6 ; Velius Longus and Flavius Caper 7 , both of whom wrote on orthography; and Aemilius Asper, the learned and acute commen¬ tator on Terence, Sallust and Virgil 8 . A special interest attaches 1 J. Masson in Jotirnal of Philology, xxxiii 220—237. 2 Reifferscheid, Suetoni Reliquiae , p. 149 f. 3 7 r epi rrjs KiKepwvos 7 roXirelas, and Trepl t&v iv rots /3ift\Loi.s with a ‘scriptor proletarius ’ 2 , obviously deriving his metaphor from the division of the Roman people into classes by Servius Tullius, those in the first class being called classici 3 , all the rest infra classem , and those in the last proletarii. As infra classem and classici testes are explained by Paulus 4 in his abridgement of Festus (the epitomiser of Verrius Flaccus), it is probable that Verrius is also the authority followed by Gellius. In any case it is from this rare use of classicus that the modern term ‘ classical ’ is derived. To the close of the 2nd century may be assigned Terentianus ^ . Maurus, the writer of a manual in verse on ‘ letters, Aero. Festus. syllables and metres’, the metrical portion of which Porphyno j g f ounc i e d on a work by Caesius Bassus, the friend of Persius 5 ; also Aero, the commentator on Terence and Horace; and Festus, the author of the abridgement of Verrius Flaccus just mentioned. Porphyrio, whose scholia on Horace are still extant, probably belongs to a later date than Aero, whom he quotes on Sat. i 8, 25, and whose name is wrongly given to a number of 1 Acad, ii 73. 2 xix 8, 15, classicus adsiduusque scriptor, non proletarius. 3 vi (vii) 13, 1 where Cato is quoted. 4 pp. 113 and 56 (Nettleship, i 269). 5 Teuffel, § 373 a ; Schanz, § 514. XI.] AULUS GELLIUS. ACRO AND PORPHYRIO. 201 miscellaneous scholia on Horace founded partly on Aero and Porphyrio with some additions from the Roma of Suetonius 1 . Statilius Maximus is known to have revised a ms of the Second Agrarian speech of Cicero with the aid of the text edited by Cicero’s freedman, Tiro 2 , whose libri Tironiani are mentioned by Gellius (i 7, i; xiii 21, 16) in connexion with the Verrine orations. Statilius, who is also known to have commented on peculiarities in the diction of Cato, Sallust and Cicero, falls between the time of Gellius, who never quotes him, and that of Julius Romanus, who quotes him repeatedly. The Scholars of the 3rd century include the learned gram¬ marian, C. Julius Romanus, extensively quoted by Charisius 3 ; and the writer of several grammatical works, Censorinus 4 , . Censorinus whose extant but incomplete treatise De die natali (238 a.d.), mainly compiled from a lost work of Suetonius, contains much valuable information on points of history and chronology. In the second half of this century we may place Aquila Romanus, the author of a work on figures of speech, adapted from Alexander Numenius 5 ; and Marius Plotius Sacerdos, the author of an Ars Grammatica in three books, the second of which is mainly iden¬ tical with the Catholica ascribed to Probus ( supra , p. 193) 6 . A characteristic product of this age is the epitome of Pliny bearing the name of Solinus, which afterwards became popular in a new form and under the pretentious title of Polyhistor. Just before the last quarter of this century the emperor Tacitus (275-6) provided for the preservation of the works of his ‘ ancestor ’ the historian by causing a copy to be placed in each of the public libraries and by arranging for the transcription of further copies in the future 7 . As we glance over the three centuries from the age of Augustus to that of Diocletian, which have been rapidly traversed in this 1 Teuffel, § 374; Schanz, § 601—2. 2 Statilius Maximus rursus emendavi ad Tyronem etc. (A. Mai, Cic. cod. Ambros., p. 231, ap. Jahn, Sachs. Bei-ichte, 1851, 329). 3 ib ' § 379 » 1 ; Schanz, § 603. 4 id. 6—8; Schanz, § 632. 5 d. § 388 ; Halm, Rhet. Lat. Min. 22 f. 6 Teuffel, § 394; Schanz, § 604 f; Jeep, Redetheile , pp. 73—82. 7 Vopiscus, Tac. 10. 202 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. chapter, we are bound to recognise that, in the first century a.d., grammatical studies are more systematic, but at the same time more narrow, than in the last century of the republic. The preparation of practical manuals for educational purposes has superseded the scientific and learned labours of a Varro, and has ultimately led to the actual loss of the greater part of his encyclopaedic works; but we may well be thankful to the grammarians of the first century for all the lore that they have preserved 1 , and we cannot forget that in that century learned comment on Cicero, who is already a Classic, is represented by the sober sense of an Asconius, and literary criticism by the sound judgement and good taste of Cicero’s admirer, Quintilian. The second century, in which Suetonius with all his varied learning must be regarded as little more than a minor counterpart of Varro, was in matters of Scholarship an age of epitomes and compilations. Learning became fashionable, but erudition often lapsed into triviality, and the ancient classics were ransacked for phrases which ill assorted with the style of the time. In the domain of Scholarship the most interesting personalities in this century are those of Cornelius Fronto and Aulus Gellius. It is characteristic of this age that, when Gellius calls to inquire after Fronto, who has been kept at home by the gout, the question as to the ‘approximate’ cost of the construction of a new bath for the relief of the learned patient leads to a scholarly discussion, in the course of which it is shown that the supposed vulgarism praeter- propter (‘thereabout’, ‘more or less’) was actually used by Varro and Cato and was really as old as Ennius 2 . In the third century the only scholar worthy of consideration has been Censorinus, yet even he owes his learning mainly to Suetonius, the inheritor of the traditions of Varro. But while Varro, who did not condescend to sacrifice to the Graces, has been punished for his lack of style and for his prolixity by the loss of by far the larger part of all his learned works, and while Suetonius, with his wide range of scholarly research, scarcely survives except in his biographies, the diminutive work of Censorinus, a mere birthday gift with its borrowed erudition, 1 Nettleship, ii 171. 2 Gellius, xix 10. XI.] CENSORINUS. 203 and its citations from authors, many of which the writer never saw, has succeeded in descending to posterity, thanks in part to its brevity and perhaps to its saving grace of style. The great argosies have foundered, but the tiny skiff has suffered little damage in drifting down the stream of time. tc yov&mapl cccen cmf Icngzr fZciuctv mrjttx mxcerxt IwcrmWU&meruli qwdc.yn ur yw r fHn. ide* ccnyuTdo qucrmer fosuittc.legxnccr tnfux diet' afeer hxntxnsf dker cuf mhtTgqae-M rri c ad /JctrtuT imptxT o-pcrirAhenif' tv {yerncndxtT quidd.vxrnf cuiqrnJS facahzccc dicendi yarn Iccuylcx&n • From Codex Laurentianus xlvi 7 (Century x) of Quintilian (x i, 87). (Chatelain’s PaUographie des Classiques Latins , pi. clxxvii.) ( dequalita)te pensamus. ceteri omnes longe sequentur. nain Macer et Lucre¬ tius legendi quidem, sed non ut phrasin, id est corpus eloquentiae faciant; elegantes in sua quisque materia sed alter humilis alter difficilis. Atacinus Varro in his, per quae nomen est adsecutus , interpres operis alieni, non sper- nendus quidem , verum ad augendam faadtatem dicendi parum locuples. Conspectus of Latin Literature &c., 300—600 A.D Roman Emperors 305 Constantius I 306 Constantine I 337 . -40 Constan- J tine II -61 \ Constan¬ tius II -50 v Constans I 361 Julian 363 Jovian 364-75 Valenti- nian I 367-83 Gratian 375 Valenti- nian II 392 Theodosius I 395 Honorius 400 - 423 John 425 Valenti- nian III 5 Petronius Maximus 5 Avitus 7 Majorian 1 Libius Severus 7 Anthemius 2 Olybrius 3 Glycerius ) UUU3 X^ —6 Romulus Augustulus Gothic Kings 476 Odoacer 493 Theodoric 500 526 Athalaric 534 Theodahad 536—9 Vitiges 541—52 Totila 527 Justinian I 565 Justin II 578 Tiberius II 582 Mauricius 600 Poets Historians & Biographers Orators and Rhetoricians Vopiscus Lampridius 330 Juvencus 350 Avienus 360 Aurelius Victor 363 Eutropius 362 Claudius Mamertinus 379 Ausonius c. 310— c. 393 395—404 Claud ian 390 Ammianus c. 330—400 389 Pacatus 391 Symmachus 345—405 404 Prudentius 348—^. 410 409 Paulinus 353—431 416 Namatianus Cl. Marius Vic¬ tor, d. 425-450 435 Merobaudes c. 440 Sedulius Vegetius Sulp. Severus c. 3657-425 417 Orosius b. c. 390 439—451 Salvian Chirius Fortu- natianus C. Julius Victor 455 Prosper c. 400—463 470 Apollinaris Sidonius c. 430—480 484—96 Dra- contius 490 Avitus 460— c. 525 Gennadius Cyprianus fxyfhv From Codex Laurentianus lxiii 19 (Cent, x) of Livy viii ult. (Chatelain’s Paleographie des Classiques Latins , pi. cx.) See p. 215 f. CHAPTER XIII. LATIN SCHOLARSHIP FROM 5OO TO 53O A.D. In the first quarter of the sixth century, which is the close of the Roman period and the prelude of the Middle . . Boethius Ages in the West, no name is more eminent in Latin literature than that of Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius (c. 480—524). He was the head of the noble Anician house, which had been famous for six centuries; of his four names, the second recalled a hero of the Roman Republic, and the third a saintly hermit of Noricum 1 ; while his wife was the daughter of the senator Symmachus, the great-grandson of the orator of that name (p. 214). A student from his early years and renowned for the wide range of his learning, which included an intimate knowledge of Greek, he formed the ambitious resolve of rendering and expounding in Latin the whole of Plato and Aristotle, with a view to proving their substantial agreement with one another 2 . Though only a part of this vast scheme was completed, his success in that part was immediately recognised. One of his correspon¬ dents, Ennodius, bishop of Pavia, assured him that ‘ in his hands the torch of ancient learning shone with redoubled flame’ ( Ep . vii 13); while Cassiodorus, writing about 507 a.d., as the secretary of Theodoric, paid homage to his high services as an interpreter of the science and philosophy of Greece :— 1 through him Pythagoras the musician, Ptolemy the astronomer, Nicomachus the arithme¬ tician, Euclid the geometer, Plato the theologian, Aristotle the logician, Archimedes the mechanician, had learned to speak the 1 Bury, Later Roman Empire, i 285 f. 2 Boethius on Aristotle, De Interpr . ii 2, 3 p. 79 Meiser (=Migne, lxiv 433)* 238 THE ROMAN AGE. V. [CHAP. Roman language’ 1 . So varied were his accomplishments that he was requested by Theodoric to construct a sundial and a water- clock for the king of the Burgundians ( Var. i 45), to nominate a musician for the court of Clovis (ii 40), and to detect a fraud in the currency of the realm (i 10). When he received these requests he already bore the designation of illustris and patricius. He became sole consul in 510, and, even in the year of his consul¬ ship, he was inspired by patriotic motives to continue to instruct his fellow-countrymen in the wisdom of Greece 2 . He reached the height of his fame in 522, when the consulship was held by his two sons, and their father pronounced in the Senate a panegyric on Theodoric. Not long afterwards, he and his father-in-law, Symmachus, were charged with the design of liberating Rome from the barbarian yoke. The grounds of the charge are obscure 3 ; he was condemned by the Senate unheard; and the student of philosophy, who had unfortunately been prompted by Plato to take part in the affairs of the State, found himself com¬ pelled to bid farewell to the scene of his studies, leaving his library, with its walls adorned with ivory and glass 4 , for the gloom of a prison between Pavia and Milan, where, after some delay, he was put to a cruel death in 524. His fate was shared in the following year by Symmachus; and, a year later, the dying hours of Theodoric are said to have been troubled with remorse for these deeds of wrong (526). In 722 a tomb was erected in his memory by Luitprand, king of the Lombards, in the same cen¬ tury he was venerated as a ‘martyr 5 , and in 1884 canonised as a ‘ saint \ Boethius holds an intermediate position between the ancient world and the Middle Ages. He was the last of the learned Romans who understood the language and studied the literature 1 Variae , i 45 (Milman, Hist. Lat. Christ, i 413, ed. 1867). 2 Comm, in Ar. Categ. ii (Migne, lxiv 201), Etsi nos curae officii con- sularis impediunt quominus in his studiis omne otium plenamque operam consumamus, pertinere tamenvidetur hoc ad aliquam reipublicae curam,...cives instruere etc. 3 His own account of the charge is given in Phil. Cons, i 4 prose 66 , senatum dicimur salvum esse voluisse etc. The whole question is discussed in Hodgkin’s Italy and her Invaders , III iv c. 12. 4 Phil. Cons, i 5 pr. 20, bybliothecae comptos ebore ac vitro parietes. XIII.] BOETHIUS. I 239 of Greece; and he was the first to interpret to the Middle Ages the logical treatises of Aristotle. His philosophical works 1 include a commentary on Porphyry’s Introduction to the Categories as translated by Victorinus; a translation of that Introduction by Boethius himself, with a still more extensive commentary; a translation of the Categories, with a commentary in four books (510A.D.); a translation of the De Interpretation , with a com¬ mentary in two, and another in six (507-9 a.d.); renderings of the first and second Analytics , the Sophistici Elenchi and the Topics of Aristotle; fragments of a commentary on the Topics of Cicero, with several original works on division, definition, and on various kinds of syllogisms. We also possess his treatise on Arithmetic (which is highly esteemed), on Geometry (a Latin transcript from parts of Euclid), and on Music (which is held to have even retarded the scientific development of the art by re¬ verting to the Pythagorean scale 2 ). In the history of Scholarship the main importance of Boethius lies in the fact that his philosophical works on Aristotle gave the first impulse to a problem which continued to exercise the keenest intellects among the schoolmen down to the end of the Middle Ages. The first signal for the long-continued battle between the Nominalists and the Realists was given by Boethius. Porphyry, in his ‘ Introduction to the Categories ’, had propounded three questions : (1) ‘ Do genera and species subsist’, i.e. really exist, ‘or do they consist in the simple conception of the subject?’ (2) ‘If they subsist, are they corporeal or incorporeal?’ (3) In either case, ‘are they separate from sensible objects, or do they reside in these objects, forming something coexistent with them?’ 3 . These questions Porphyry had set aside as requiring deeper investigation. Boethius in his first commentary on Porphyry, in which he had accepted the translation by Victorinus, stated that it was impossible to doubt the real existence of genera and 1 Migne, lxiv 1—1215. 2 Macfarren in Enc. Brit, quoted by Hodgkin, iii 529. 3 In Porph. Comment, i 82 Migne (de generibus et speciebus), sive subsistant, sive in solis nudis intellectibus posita sint, sive subsistentia corporalia sint an incorporalia, et utrum separata a sensibilibus an in sensibilibus posita. Cp. Haureau, Histoire de la Philosophic Scolastique , i 47—52, wjth H. F. Stewart’s Boethius , c. vii, esp. p. 248 f. 240 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. species *; but, towards the close of the first book of his second commentary, founded on his own translation of Porphyry, we find him weighing and comparing the opinions of Plato and Aristotle:— ‘according to Plato, genera and species are not merely conceptions, in so far as they are universals; they are real things existing apart from bodies; according to Aristotle, they are conceived as in¬ corporeal, in so far as they are universals, but they have no real existence apart from the sensible world’ 2 . He now inclines towards the opinion of Aristotle, whereas formerly he had pre¬ ferred that of Plato; but, like Porphyry himself, he leaves the question undetermined, deeming it unbecoming to decide be¬ tween Plato and Aristotle. A rhymer of the twelfth century, Godefroi de Saint Victor, has happily described Boethius as remaining silent and undecided in this conflict of opinions:— ‘Assidet Boethius, stupens de hac lite, Audiens quid hie et hie asserat perite, Et quid cui faveat non discernit rite, Nee praesumit solvere litem definite’ 3 . But this vacillating judgment could not satisfy the keen intellects of the schoolmen, and we find the Aristotelian tradition resolutely maintained in the eighth century by Rabanus Maurus, and as resolutely opposed in the ninth by John Scotus Erigena, the champion of Plato and Realism, and the opponent of the vaguely Aristotelian teaching of Boethius 4 . The conflict continued in various forms (in discussions whether universals are realia ante rem , or nomina post rem , or realia in re) down to the end of the Middle Ages. The interests of Boethius were primarily philosophical and secondarily theological; and his study of dialectic was combined with some attention to abstruse points of theoretical theology. The mss credit him with five brief theological treatises 5 , and the question whether they can be ascribed to the same authorship as the Philosophiae Consolatio has long been debated. A fragment 1 Migne, lxiv 19 c, si rerum veritatem atque integritatem perpendas, non est dubium quin verae (vere?) sint. Cp. F. D. Maurice, Mediaeval Philosophy , p. 11. 2 Migne, lxiv 86 a; Stewart, p. 253. 3 Fons Philosophiae (Haureau, i 120). 4 Haureau, i 144, 173. 5 Migne, lxiv 1247—1412. XIII.] BOETHIUS. 241 of Cassiodorus discovered in 1877 supports the genuineness of four of the five, including the De Trinitate addressed to his father-in-law Symmachus. All the four treatises appear to belong to his early life, and his interest in his theme is mainly dialectical 1 . While his translation of the Categories did not supersede ‘ St Augustine’s’ until the end of the tenth century 2 , and his renderings of the Analytics , Topics and Sophistici Elenchi were apparently unknown until the twelfth 3 , his theological treatises were familiar to Alcuin (734—804) and to Hincmar, bishop of Rheims (850). The fact that they were expounded by Gilbert de la Porree, bishop of Poitiers from 1141, is another link connecting Boethius with the Middle Ages. The crowning work of his life, the Philosophiae Consolatio , was composed in prison not long before his death. It is in the form of a dialogue, and includes 39 short poems in 13 different metres, intermingled with prose after the Menippean manner, which had been applied to lighter themes by Varro, by Seneca and Petronius, and by Martianus Capella, but is here raised to a far higher dignity. The work begins with an elegiac poem inspired by the Muses who are described as actually present in the prisoner’s cell, when the queenly form of Philosophia appears, and, bidding them depart, herself consoles the prisoner’s sorrows. In the phraseology of the poetical passages Seneca is the author mainly imitated, but there are some reminiscences of Virgil and Horace, Ovid and Juvenal 4 . One of the poems (iii 11) ends with the Platonic doctrine of reminiscence; another (iii 9) is entirely inspired by Plato’s Timaeus , which is repeatedly quoted in the prose passages, with obvious echoes of the Gorgias (iv 2 and 4). There are also indications of indebtedness to the lost Protrepticus of Aristotle 5 ; and direct quotations from Aristotle’s Physics and De Caelo, and from the De Divinatione and the Somnium Scipionis of Cicero. As an eclectic philosopher, the author also borrows from the Stoics. Throughout the work there is no 1 H. Usener on the Anecdoton Holderi (Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Boethius , p. 600). Cp. Hodgkin’s Cassiodorus , pp. 73—84, and Stewart, pp. 11—13, 108—159. 2 Haureau, i 97. 3 Prantl, Gesch. der Logik , ii 4. 4 Pp. 228—231 ed. Peiper. 5 Bywater in Journ. Phil, ii 59. 16 s. 242 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. evidence of distinctively Christian belief, but there are a few phrases of apparently Christian origin. Neo-platonism and Christianity are respectively implied in the mention of human destiny as influenced either daetnonum varia sollertia , or angelica virtute (iv 6 pr. 51). The utterances of Philosophia are described as veri praevia luminis (iv 1); the world is under the beneficent rule of a rerum bonus rector (ib.); the writer regards heaven as his 1 home’, his do?nus (ib.) and his patria (ib. and v 1), and as the realm where the sceptre is held by the dominus regum and all tyrants are banished. Biblical reminiscences are suggested by passages such as the description of the summum bonum, quod regit cuncta fortiter , suaviterque disponit (iii pr. 12 and Wisdom viii 1), by vasa vilia et vasa pretiosa (iv pr. 1) and by hue omnes pariter venite (iii m. 10). But the absence of all reference to the consolations of religion is much more remarkable than the presence of a few phrases such as these. The author’s belief in prayer and in providence implies that his mind was tinged by Christian influence, and is probably due to a Christian education. In fact he could hardly have held public office in this age without having been a Christian, at least by profession. He does not oppose any Christian doctrine, but his attitude is that of a Theist and not that of a Christian. He supplied the Middle Ages with an eclectic manual of moral teaching severed from dogma and endued with all the charm of exquisite verse blended with lucid prose; and, as the latest luminary of the ancient world, he remained long in view, while the sources of the light which he reflected were forgotten. The masterpiece which was his last legacy to posterity was repeatedly translated, expounded and imitated in the Middle Ages, and these translations were among the earliest literary products of the vernacular languages of Europe,—English, French, German* Italian and Spanish, among the translators being names of no less note than king Alfred, Chaucer and Queen Elizabeth. It was also translated into Greek by Maximus Planudes (d. 1310). The emperor Otho III, who died in 1002, a hundred years after Alfred, placed in his library a bust of Boethius, which was celebrated by the best Latin poet of the age, the future pope Silvester II \ Three centuries later, he is quoted 1 Peiper’s Boethius , p. 40. XIII.] BOETHIUS. 243 more than 20 times in the Conviio and elsewhere by Dante 1 , whose best-known lines, A T essun maggior dolore Che ricordarsi del tempo felice Nella miseria ( Inf. v 121), are a reminiscence of Boethius (11 iv 4):— in omni adversitate fortunae infelicisswium est genus infortunii fuisse felicem 2 . Dante places him in the Fourth Heaven among the twelve ‘ living and victorious splendours ’ which are the souls of men learned in Theology ( Paradiso , x 124):— Here in the vision of all good rejoices That sainted soul, which unto all that hearken Makes manifest the treachery of the world. The body, whence that soul was reft, is lying Down in Cieldauro 3 , but the soul from exile And martyr’s pain hath come unto this peace. Two hundred years after Dante, the book of Consolation com¬ posed by Boethius in the ‘Tower of Pavia’ brought solace to Sir Thomas More in the Tower of London. It has since won the admiration of the elder Scaliger 4 and Casaubon, and has been described as a ‘ golden volume ’ by Gibbon, who eulogises its author as ‘the last of the Romans whom Cato or Tully could have acknowledged for their countryman’ 5 . 1 Moore’s Studies , i 282—8. 2 Boethius had been anticipated by Synesius, Ep. 57, lxvi 1392 Migne, avvemrideTaL dr] [xol rrj iriK^q. tCjv vapdvTCjv aiadrjaeL p.V7ip.r] tu>v tt apekdovriov ayaduv, oiW &pa ev olois yeyovap.tv. 3 The (now desecrated) Church of St Peter’s of the Golden Ceiling , in Pavia. 4 Poetces liber vi , Quae libuit ludere in poesi divina sane sunt; nihil illis cultius, nihil gravius, neque densitas sententiarum venerem, neque acumen abstulit candorem. Equidem censeo paucos cum illo comparari posse. Id. Hypercriticus , ap. Migne, lxiii 573, where Lipsius and G. J. Vossius are also quoted. 0 Bury’s Gibbon iv 197—204 (c. 39). Cp. also Hodgkin’s Italy and her Invaders, in iv c. 12; A. P. Stanley in Smith’s Diet .; Hartmann in Pauly- Wissowa; Teuffel, § 478; Ebert, i 2 485—497. Boethii Opera in Migne, vols. lxiii, lxiv; Comm, in Arist. irepi eppurjveLas, ed. Meiser (1877—80); Philo- sophiae Consolationis libri V, ed. Peiper (1871); Anglo-saxon trans. by King Alfred, ed. Sedgefield (1899 f); best English trans. H. R. James (1897). On mediaeval translations, and on Boethius in general, cp. H. F. Stewart’s (Hulsean) Essay (1891). On his relation to Christianity, Nitzsch (i860); Hildebrand (1885); Usener’s Holderi Afiecdoton (1877); and, on his relation to the Middle Ages, Haureau, Histoire de la Philosophie Scolastique, i 112 f (1872); Prantl’s l6—2 244 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. While the life of Boethius was prematurely cut short by a violent death, that of his contemporary Cassiodorus, Cassiodorus . J the skilful and subservient Minister of the Ostro- gothic dynasty, was prolonged beyond the age of ninety. He was born between 480 and 490 b.c. at Scyllacium ( Squillace) in southern Italy. His full name was Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator , the last of these names alone being used by himself in his official correspondence. Cassiodorus is there the designation of his father, and is not applied to the son before the eighth century, when it is found in Paulus Diaconus 1 , and also in Alcuin’s list of the library at York:—‘ Cassiodorus item, Chryso- stomus atque Ioannes’ 2 , a line supplying evidence against the form Cassiodorius , which once found favour with certain scholars. His father, as Praetorian Praefect in 500, conferred on him the post of Consiliarius, or Assessor in his Court. A brilliant oration in honour of Theodoric led to his being appointed Quaestor, and thereby becoming, in accordance with the new meaning of that office, the Latin interpreter of his sovereign’s will and the drafter of his despatches. The duties of the office are thus described in the ‘ Formula of the Quaestorship ’ drawn up by himself:— £ the Quaestor has to learn our inmost thoughts, that he may utter them to our subjects...He has to be always ready for a sudden call, and must exercise the wonderful powers which, as Cicero has pointed out, are inherent in the art of an orator...He has to speak the King’s words in the King’s own presence ’. He has to set forth every subject on which he has to treat, ‘ with suitable embellishments ’. He has to receive and to answer the petitions of the Provinces 3 . The extant letters written by Cassiodorus as Quaestor extend from 507 to 511 a.d. Like his father, he became governor of Lucania and the region of the Bruttii, the land of his birth. He was sole consul in 514, published his Geschichte der Logik, ii 4; Mullinger’s Univ. of Cambridge i 27—9; and H. O. Taylor’s Classical Heritage of the Middle Ages, 51—6. 1 Hist. Langob. i 25 (Justiniani) temporibus Cassiodorus apud urbem Romam tam saeculari quam divina scientia claruit. 2 Migne, ci 843. 3 Variae, vi 5, p. 300 f of Hodgkin’s (condensed translation of the) Letters of Cassiodorus. XIII.] CASSIODORUS. 245 Chronicon in 519, and, at the death of Theodoric in 526, was holding (probably not for the first time) the high position of Magister Officiorum, or ‘ head of the Civil Service ’, which he continued to hold as virtually Prime Minister to Theodoric’s daughter, Amalasuentha, while she acted as regent for her son Athalaric. Though formally Magister only, he also acted as Quaestor:— erat solus ad universa sufficie?is (ix 25, 7); ‘when¬ ever eloquence was required, the case was always put into his hands’ (ix 24, 6). Between 526 and 533 he wrote his History of the Goths. From 533 to 536, under the three short-lived suc¬ cessors of Theodoric, he was Praetorian Praefect, as his father had been before him; and we still possess the Letter in which he informs himself of his own elevation to that high office (ix 24). At the end of 537 he published, under the title of Variae , the vast collection of his official Letters. In 540, when Belisarius, the victorious general of the ungrateful Justinian, entered Ravenna, Cassiodorus had apparently already withdrawn from the world and had returned to spend the evening of his days on his an¬ cestral estate among the Bruttii. He there wrote an account of his ancestors and a treatise On the Soul. He also founded two Monasteries, and, for the instruction of ‘ his monks wrote an exceedingly lengthy Commentary on the Psalms ; a comparatively short Commentary on the Epistles ; an ecclesiastical history (from 306 to 439) called the Historia Tripartita , combining in a single narrative the translations of the Greek historians Socrates, Sozomen and Theodoret, executed at his request by Epiphanius; and an educational treatise entitled the Institutiones Divinarum et Hu- manarum Lectionum (begun about 543). In the 93rd year of his age his monks surprised him by asking for a treatise on spelling: he accordingly produced a compilation De Orthographia, borrowed from the works of twelve grammarians, beginning with Donatus and ending with Priscian. He survived the final fall of the Ostrogothic kingdom in 553, and even the invasion of Italy by Alboin, king of the Lombards, in 568; and died between 575 and 585, in the 96th year of his age 1 . 1 Trithemius, De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, 1494, f. 35, claruit temporibus Iustini senioris [518—527] et usque ad imperii Iustini iunioris paene finem [565—578], annos habens aetatis plus quam xcv anno domini DLXXV. 246 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. The Chronicon x of Cassiodorus, which closes its abstract of the history of the world with 519 a.d., is mainly an inaccurate copy of Eusebius and Prosper, while towards its close it is unduly partial to the Goths. The charge of partiality has also been brought against his Gothic History , in which he had aimed at giving an air of legitimacy to the dominion of the Goths in Italy. It only survives in the abridgement by Iordanes 2 . The Com¬ mentary on the Psalms and the Historia Tripartita were widely known in the Middle Ages. His other works have points of contact with our present subject. His official Letters, arranged in twelve books, to which he gave the name of Variae , are undoubtedly addressed to a vast variety of persons, from the emperor Justinian down to the chief of the shorthand writers; but, so far from being marked by the corresponding variety of style which their writer claims for them 3 , they are apt to strike a modern reader as almost uniformly inflated, florid, tawdry and unduly grandiloquent 4 . A certain degree of elevation of manner may fairly be expected of a minister who proudly recalls his protracted conversations with his king,—those gloriosa colloquia b , in which, besides discoursing on affairs of State, the monarch would inquire concerning the sayings of wise men of old 6 ; but it must be confessed that, in the Letters in general, the thought is ‘often a piece of tinsel wrapped up in endless folds of tissue- paper’ 7 . He is specially fond of beginning and ending his letters with ‘wise saws’, and interspersing them with ‘modern instances’. There is often a ‘lack of humour’ 7 in the incongruous way in which documents otherwise not deficient in dignity are studded with stories about birds, such as thrushes, doves and partridges, storks, cranes and gulls, hawks, eagles and vultures; or beasts, like the chameleon, the salamander and the elephant; or fishes, 1 Migne, lxix 1214—48; first edited by Cochlaeus, who dedicated it (in 1528) to Sir Thomas More, while he dedicated to Henry VIII the first ed. of some of the Variae (1529). 2 Ed. Mommsen, 1882 {Mon. Germ. Hist.). 3 Praef. § 15. 4 Cp. R. W. Church, Miscellaneous Essays, p. 169 f, 191—8, ed. 1888; Bury, Later Roman Empire, ii 187. 5 Praef. § 8. 7 Hodgkin’s Cassiodorus, p. 17. 6 ix 24, 8. XIII.] CASSIODORUS. 247 for example, the sucking-fish and torpedo, the pike and the dolphin, the murex with its purple dye, and the echinus , ‘that dainty of the deep’. ‘The wandering birds love their own nests; the beasts haste to their own lodgings in the brake ; the vo¬ luptuous fish, roaming the fields of ocean, returns to its own well-known cavern : how much more should Rome be loved by her children! ’ 1 This last is actually from a letter on the em¬ bellishment of Rome. Elsewhere we read of the repair of its walls, its temples and its aqueducts 2 , and of the structure, as well as the factions, of the Circus Maximus 3 . In the diploma for the appointment of a public architect in Rome, some of the future characteristics of Gothic architecture, the ‘ slender shafts of shapely stone’, compared by Sir Walter Scott to ‘bundles of lances which garlands had bound ’, seem almost to be anticipated in the graceful phrases of the secretary of the Ostrogothic dynasty :— quid dicamus columnarum iunceam proceritatem ? moles illas sublimissimas fahricarum quasi quibusdam erectis hastilibus contineriC Marbles and mosaics are ordered for Ravenna 5 ; in a letter of 537 we have the first historic notice of Venice 6 ; we also come across delightful descriptions of Como, of the baths of Bormio, Abano and Baiae 7 , and of the milk-cure for consumption among the mountain-pastures south of the Bay of Naples 8 . We read of a present of amber from the dwellers on the Baltic 9 , and of the arrival at Rome of a water-finder from Africa 10 . An order for the supply of writing-material for the public offices transports us to the Nile, and prompts a discourse on the invention of paper, ‘which has made eloquence possible’ 11 . To the historian the great interest of the letters of ‘this last of Roman statesmen’ 12 lies in the way in which they illustrate in detail the working out of the broad principles of law and administration embodied in the Edict of Theodoric 13 , and the promotion of peaceful, orderly and 1 i 21 (p. 156 Hodgkin). 2 i 25, 28; ii 34; iii 31. 3 iii 51 etc. 4 vii 15, 3, and Scott’s Lay , ii 9 and 11. 5 i 6; iii 9. 6 xii 24. 7 xi 14; x 29; ii 39; ix 6. 8 xi 10. 9 v 2. 10 iii 53. 11 xi 38. 12 Ugo Balzani’s Early Chronicles of Italy, p. 12. 13 R. W. Church, Miscellaneous Essays, p. 158, ed. 1888; Hodgkin’s Italy and her Invaders , iii 280. 248 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. civilised relations between his Gothic and his Roman subjects 1 . They justify the ascription to the king of the high merits of wisdom 2 and toleration 3 , and the noble resolve implied in the phrase:— nos quibus cordi est in melius cuncta mutare. They describe the Burgundians 4 and Pannonians 5 as barbarians in comparison with the Goths. In a document drawn up for the successor of Theodoric, which is interesting to scholars as well as to historians, a broad distinction is drawn between the barbarian kings and the legitimate Gothic lords of Italy. The subject is the increase of the salaries of grammarians. ‘ Grammar is the noble foundation of all literature, the glorious mother of eloquence.The grammatical art is not used by barbarous kings : it abides peculiarly with legitimate sovereigns. Other nations have arms: the lords of the Romans alone have eloquence...The Grammarian is a man to whom every hour unemployed is misery, and it is a shame that such a man should have to wait the caprice of a public functionary before he gets his pay’...Such men ‘are the moulders of the style and character of our youth. Let them..., with their mind at ease about their subsistence, devote themselves with all their vigour to the teaching of liberal arts’ 6 . Cassiodorus recommends Felix, a native of Gaul, for the consulship of 511 on literary as well as other grounds, because he is a verborum novellus sator^ . He cannot refer to Rhegium without reminding the recipients of a State-document that the place is ‘so called from the Greek prjyi'v/u’ 8 . He oddly supposes that Cir- censes stands for circum and enses 9 . Writing to one of his subordinates in the law-court, the holder of the then very humble office of Cancellarius , he makes the following interesting reference to the origin of the name :— Remember your title, Cancellarius. Ensconced behind the lattice-work ( cancelli ) of your compartment, keeping guard behind those windowed doors, however studiously you may conceal yourself, it is inevitable that you should be the observed of all observers 10 . It is only once (in his Preface) that he alludes to Horace 1 On civilitas (defined in Mommsen’s Index as status reipublicae iustus ) see Hodgkin’s Cassiodorus , p. 20 and index. 2 xi 1, 19 sapientia ( v.l . patientia). 3 ii 27, nemo cogitur ut credat invitus. 4 i 45 f. 5 iii 23f. 6 ix 2i, p. 406 Hodgkin. 7 ii 3. 8 xii 14. 0 iii 51. 10 xi 6, pp. 112, 463 Hodgkin. XIII.] CASSIODORUS. 249 ( nonumqueprematur in annum); but he has several reminiscences or adaptations of Virgil, including the phrase often cited since in speeches of eulogy :— primo avulso non deficit alter aureus\ He quotes Cicero’s rhetorical works alone 1 2 , and Tacitus solely to inform the dwellers on the Baltic of the supposed origin of amber 3 . Throughout the Letters he exhibits (though in an infinitely lower degree) ‘ the encyclopaedic culture of a Cicero or the elder Pliny’ 4 . In the last book of the Variae, he paints a pleasant picture of the first city of the Bruttii, Scyllacium, the place of his birth. He describes it as ‘hanging like a cluster of grapes upon the hills, basking in the brightness of the sun all the day long, yet cooled by the breezes from the sea, and looking at her leisure on the labours of the husbandmen in the cornfields, the vineyards, and the olive-groves around her’ 5 . Such was the region to which he withdrew, after spending thirty years in the service of the Ostro- gothic dynasty, there to devote himself for the rest of his long life to a work destined to have a lasting influence on the learning of the Middle Ages. He had already been corresponding with Agapetus, the Pope of 535-6, on a scheme for founding by subscription at Rome a theological school on the model of those of Alexandria and Nisibis 6 . Agapetus selected a house on the Caelian hill, afterwards connected with the Church of San Gregorio Magno, and there built a library:—a line from an inscription, seen in the ninth century by a pilgrim from Einsiedlen, says of this Pope:— codicibus pulchrum condidit arte locum 7 . The wider scheme for a theological school at Rome had been rendered impossible by the conflicts which arose on the invasion of Italy by Belisarius; but Cassiodorus was now able to carry out his plan on a suitable site in the region of his birth. While he w r as still Praetorian Praefect, he had formed a series of vivaria , or preserves for fishes, at the foot of the Moscian mount overlooking the bay 1 Var. v 4; cp. ii 40, 7; v 21, 42 § ir, and xii 14 ( intuba is not amara among the Bruttii). 2 De Or. i 30; Brutus 46. 3 Germ. 45 ( Var. v 2). 4 R. W. Church, l.c., p. 160. 5 xii 15, p. 8 Hodgkin. 6 Inst. Praef. Migne lxx 1105!; cp. Hodgkin p. 56. 7 Einsiedlen MS (De Rossi, quoted in J. W. Clark’s Care of Books, p. 44). 250 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. of Squillace 1 ; and here he founded one of his two monasteries, which (like the modern College of Fishponds near Bristol) obtained from these vivaria the name of the monasterium Vivariense 2 . We read of its well-watered gardens, and its baths for the sick by the banks of the neighbouring stream of Pellena 3 , while ‘ at the foot of the hills and above the sand of the sea’ there was a ‘fountain of Arethusa’, fringed with a crown of rustling reeds, making a green and pleasant place all round it 4 . For those who preferred a more unbroken solitude, there was another monastery, or rather hermitage, in the ‘charming seclusion of the Castle Hill ’, a lonely spot surrounded by ancient walls, possibly of some deserted fort 5 6 . Such are the descriptive touches preserved mainly in his Institutiones , a partly theological and partly encyclopaedic work which he composed for the benefit of ‘ his monks ’ between 543 and 555 s . In the first part of this work, bearing the separate title De Institutione Divinarum Litterarum , he describes the contents of the nine codices which made up the Old and New Testaments; warns his monks against impairing the purity of the sacred text by merely plausible emendations ; only those who have attained the highest learning in sacred and secular literature can be allowed to correct the sacred texts. Revisers of other texts must study the works of the ancients, libros priscorum (1130 b ), and correct those texts with the aid of those who are masters in secular literature. He notices the Christian historians, and some of the principal Fathers, incidentally mentioning as a colleague in his literary labours the monk Dionysius (Exiguus), who settled the date of the Christian era, the earliest use of which occurs in 1 Var. xii 15, 14. ‘ 2 Mr A. J. Evans places the Roman Scyllacium at Roccella, 6 miles N.E. of the modern Squillace , and the monastery between Squillace and the shore, Virgil’s navifragum Scylaceum (Hodgkin, pp. 9, 68—72). Roccella is described as ‘a little world of scenic splendour’ and is the subject of a fine illustration in Lear’s Calabria , p. 104. 3 Inst, i 29. 4 Var. viii 32 (p. 380 Hodgkin). 5 Inst, i 29, montis Castelli secreta suavia...muris pristinis ambientibus inclusa. 6 Mommsen’s Pref. to Variae, p. xi. A later revision is implied in the reference in c. 17 to the end of Justinian’s reign (565). XIII,] CASSIODORUS. 251 the year 562 a.d. 1 He urges his monks to cultivate learning, not however as an end in itself, but as a means towards the better knowledge of the Scriptures 2 . After dealing with secular literature and recommending the study of the Classics, he exhorts those of his readers, who have no call towards literary work, to spend their efforts on agriculture and gardening; and in this connexion to read the ancient authors on these subjects:— Gargilius Martialis, Columella and Aemilianus Macer, manuscripts of which he had left for their perusal 3 . It has been surmised that, but for Cassiodorus, the treatise of Cato De Re Rustica would have perished 4 ; but it may be remarked that he does not actually mention that work. He spent large sums on the purchase of mss from northern Africa and other parts of the world 5 , and encouraged his monks to copy them with care. He mentions a certain division of the books of the Bible found in codice grandiore lit ter a grandiore (clariore ?) conscripto containing Jerome’s version. This ms he had presumably brought from Ravenna, and it has been conjectured that part of it survives in the first and oldest quaternion of the codex Amiatinus of the Vulgate, now in the Laurentian Library in Florence. The frontispiece of the latter represents Ezra writing the Law, and the press with open doors in the background has a general resemblance to that containing the four Gospels among the mosaics of the mausoleum of Galla Placidia at Ravenna (440) 6 . The books in the monastic library of Cassiodorus were preserved in presses (armaria), nine of which contained the Scriptures, and works bearing on their study, the few Greek mss being in the eighth armarium. The arrangement in general was not by authors but by subjects. The biographical works of St Jerome and Gennadius were combined in a single codex , and similarly with certain rhetorical works of Cicero, Quintilian and Fortunatianus 7 . 1 Computus Paschalis in Migne, lxix 1249, first ascribed to Cassiodorus by Pithoeus. 2 Inst, i 28, p. 1142 a—B. 3 ib. p. 1142—3. 4 Norden’s Kimstprosa, p. 664. 5 Inst, i c. 8. 6 H. J. White, in Studia Biblica , 1890, ii 273—308; J. W. Clark’s Care of Books , frontispiece, and pp. 39—41. 7 i 8, 17; ii 2. Franz, Cass. pp. 80—92, gives a list of books either certainly or probably included in the Library. 252 THE ROMAN ACxE. [CHAP. He is specially interested in those of his monks who are careful copyists. In describing the scriptorium he dwells on the special privileges of the antiquarius , who, 1 by copying the divine precepts, spreads them far and wide, enjoying the glorious privilege of silently preaching salvation to mortals by means of the hand alone, and thus foiling with pen and ink the temptations of the devil; every word of the Lord written by the copyist is a wound inflicted on Satan’ 1 . The art of the copyist had been practised by the younger monks alone in the monastery of St Martin’s at Tours 2 ; and, in the rules laid down by Ferreolus in Gaul, c. 550 a.d., reading and copying were considered suitable occupations for monks who were too weak for severer work 3 . But these arts receive a far stronger sanction from Cassiodorus. He himself set the example of making a careful copy of the Psalms, the Prophets and the Epistles 4 . Some precepts of spelling are included in the Institutiones, from which it appears that Cassiodorus approved of in in compo¬ sition being assimilated to the following consonant for the sake of euphony 5 . For the same reason he prefers quicquam to quidquam. To avoid mistakes the copyist must read the works of ancient authors on orthography, Velius Longus, Curtius Valerianus, Papyrianus, * Adamantius Martyrius ’ on V and B, Eutyches on the rough breathing, and Phocas on genders. These works he had himself collected to the best of his ability. He adds that biblical mss should be bound in covers worthy of their contents, and that he had supplied a pattern volume, including specimens of different kinds of binding. For use by night he had provided lamps so skilfully contrived that they never ran short of oil and never needed trimming, while he had also constructed a sundial for bright days and a water-clock for the night and for days that were overcast 6 . In the ninth century, the first part of the Institutiones was * 1 Inst, i 30. 2 Sulp. Severus, Vita S. Martini , c. 7. 3 c. 28, paginam pingat digito, qui terram non praescribit aratro (Franz, Cass. p. 56). 4 Praef. p. 1109B. 5 i 15 (p. 1129 a, Migne), multa etiam respectu euphoniae propter subse- quentes litteras probabiliter immutamus, ut illumination irrisio, immutabilis, impius, improbus. 6 i 30. XIII.] CASSIODORUS. 253 imitated by Rabanus Maurus in his treatise De Institutione Clericorum, and was used as a text-book at the monastery of Reichenau 1 . In the second part, which is a brief manual De Artibus ac Disciplinis Liberalium Litterarum 2 , Cassiodorus gives a succinct account of the seven liberal arts, half the work being devoted to Dialectic alone, and the rest about equally divided between the six other arts, with a somewhat fuller treatment of Rhetoric in particular. The allegory of Martianus Capella on the liberal arts is not mentioned by Cassiodorus, but it can hardly be doubted that, by emphasizing the sanctity of the number ‘ seven by giving a new meaning to the saying that ‘Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars ’, and by connecting the seven arts with the education of his monks, he unconsciously increased the popularity of that pagan work 3 . The short chapter on Music mentions a work by Albinus, which the author remembers reading in Rome, but it had possibly been lost, gent Hi incursione sublatus. The long chapter on Dialectic includes an abstract of a large part of the Organon of Aristotle, in the course of which the reader is referred to Porphyry’s Introduction, and to the six books of the commentary on the De Interpretatione by Boethius (viro magnifico ), a ms of which is left to the monks. The quaint saying that Aristotle, in writing the De Interpretatione , calamum in mente tingebat , is here quoted. A chapter on logical fallacies is added, besides some matter more closely connected with Rhetoric than Dialectic. At the close of this part of the work, Plato and Aristotle are oddly described as opinabiles magistri saecularium litterarum , a phrase which, considering the author’s powers of rhetorical expression, is faint praise indeed. It may be noticed, however, that the highly artificial style of the Variae is somewhat simplified in the Institutiones , where (in the author’s own language) plus utilitatis invenies quam decoris (p. 1240 c). Erasmus, while fully appreciating the high character and the piety of Cassiodorus, does not approve of his attempting 1 Franz, Cass. p. 124. 2 Migne, lxx 1150—1213. 3 H. Parker, in Historical Review , v 456. ‘The old pagan learning was never destroyed, notwithstanding the complete victory of Christianity’; and Cassiodorus was one of those who, * by Christianizing it to a certain extent, made it more popular to later generations’ (Ugo Balzani, p. 5). 254 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. in the Institutiones to cover the whole field of sacred and secular learning 1 . But the work was doubtless useful to the unlearned monks for whom it was mainly intended. The chapter on Rhetoric was imitated by Isidore of Seville, and by Alcuin, who also owes much to that on Dialectic 2 . The treatise De Orthographia gives rules of spelling to enable the copyist to avoid certain common mistakes. The four chapters extracted from the treatise of ‘Adamantius Martyrius’ on V and B, show that those letters must have been constantly confounded in the pronunciation of imperfectly educated persons, who drew little (if any) distinction between vivere and bibere 3 . Among the lost works of Cassiodorus were some compilations from Donatus and Sacerdos (p. 1123 d). By his careful attention to the training of copyists he did much towards preventing the earlier Latin literature from perishing. He knew Greek, but preferred to read Greek authors in Latin translations 4 . He caused a Latin rendering to be made of the Jewish Antiquities of Josephus 5 . St Jerome in his cell at Bethlehem had set the first great example of isolated literary labour. Cassiodorus appears to have been the first to have applied this principle in a wider and more systematic manner to the organisation of the convent. As has been well observed by Dr Hodgkin, ‘the great merit of Cassiodorus, that which shows his deep insight into the needs of his age and entitles him to the eternal gratitude of Europe, was his determina¬ tion to utilise the vast leisure of the convent for the preservation of Divine and human learning, and for its transmission to later ages \ Similarly it has been remarked by Prof. W. Ramsay that ‘the benefit derived from his precepts and example was by no means confined to the establishment over which he presided, nor to the epoch when he flourished. The same system was gradually introduced into similar institutions, the transcription of ancient works became one of the regular and stated occupations of the 1 Ep. 1038. 2 Franz, Cass. p. 125. 3 p. 1261 C, bibo...2c vita per v, a potu per b scribendum est. Mistakes, such as vibanius for bibamus , and fobeas for foveas , actually occur in mss of the Vulgate (Franz, Cass. p. 61). 4 Praef. 1108 A, dulcius enim ab unoquoque suscipitur, quod patrio sermone narratur. 5 Inst, i 17. XIII.] CASSIODORUS. 255 monastic life, and thus, in all probability, we are indirectly indebted to Cassiodorus for the preservation of a large proportion of the most precious relics of ancient genius’ 1 . In fact it is generally agreed that the civilisation of subsequent centuries, and, in particular, the institution of monastic libraries and monastic schools, where the light of learning continued to shine in the ‘ Dark Ages ’, owed much to the prescience of Cassiodorus 2 3 . Boethius and Cassiodorus have been happily described as the ‘great twin-brethren 5 , and have been compared to a ‘double¬ headed Janus 53 . While the gaze of Boethius looks back on the declining day of the old classical world, that of Cassiodorus looks forward to the dawn of the Christian Middle Ages ; but both alike, in their different ways, prevented the tradition of a great past from being overwhelmed by the storms of barbarism. Cassiodorus, who had devoted the first half of his life to Politics, and the second to Religion, stands in more than one sense on the confines of two worlds, the Roman and the Teutonic, the Ancient and the Modern. It has even been observed that the very word modernus is first used with any frequency by Cassiodorus 4 . Apart from the Institutiones he does not appear to have drawn up any written Rule for the guidance of his monks, and we know nothing of the fortunes of his monastery after the death of the founder. He recommends his monks to read the Institutes of Cassian, the founder of Western Monasticism; while he warns them against that writer’s views on free will 6 . Of Benedict and the Benedictine Rule we have no mention in his extant writings. His precepts are indeed consistent with that Rule, but there is nothing to show that they were suggested by it. He is first claimed as a Benedictine by Trithemius (d. 1516) 6 , but the 1 W. Ramsay in Smith’s Diet. Biogr. s.v. 2 Cp. Ebert, i 500 2 , and Norden’s Kunstprosa , p. 663—5. 3 Ebert, i 486 s , einen Januskopf bildet dieses Dioskurenpaar. 4 Hodgkin, pp. 1—2. Cp. Var. iv 45 (Symmachus) antiquorum diligentis- simus imitator, modernorum nobilissimus institutor; iii 5, 3, modernis saeculis moribus ornabatur antiquis; 8, 1 ; 31, 4; viii 14, 2; 25, 1; xi 1, 19. The word is found in Cassiodorus’s slightly older contemporary, Ennodius, lxiii 54 a, 232 b, and in a diploma of 499 (Wolfflin, Rhein. Mus. xxxvii 92). 5 Inst, i 29. 6 De viris Ulus tribus ord. Ben. i c. 6 and iii c. 7. THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. 256 silence of Cassiodorus is considered by Baronius 1 to be a sufficient reason for rejecting this claim, and Baronius is not really refuted by Garet in his lengthy dissertation on this subject (1679) 2 . The Benedictine monastery on Monte Cassino was founded in 529, more than ten years before that of Cassiodorus on the bay of Squillace; but it was the latter which set the first example of that devotion to literary labour which afterwards became one of the highest distinctions of the Benedictine order 3 . Benedict, who belonged to the same Anician gens as Boethius, was born at Nursia, north of the old Sabine region, Benedict . \ . 6 ’ in 480, the year (either actually or approximately) of the birth of Boethius and Cassiodorus. Among those whom he gathered round him, when, despectis litterarum studiis 4 , he had fled from the delights and the dangers of Rome to the solitudes near Subiaco, was the young Roman noble, Maurus, afterwards known as St Maur. After a time he went some 50 miles south¬ ward to Monte Cassino, where a temple of Apollo was still standing with a sacred grove which was a centre of superstition among the surrounding peasants. The people were persuaded to destroy the altar and burn the grove 5 ; and higher up the hill the last stronghold of paganism was superseded in 529 by a monastery, which, notwithstanding many changes, still looks down from a height of more than 1700 feet on a wild mountain district to the north, on the rocky summits of the Abruzzi to the east, and to the west and south on the long reaches of the silent stream that winds through the broad valley of the Garigliano,— the rura , quae Liris quieta mordet aqua taciturnus amnis. Near the foot of the hill were the ruins of a Roman amphitheatre, and hard by was the site of the villa of ‘that pagan Benedictine’ 6 , 1 Annales, ad ann. 494 (no. 77). 2 Migne, Ixix 483—496. 3 Cassiodori Opera in Migne, lxix, lxx; Variae, ed. Mommsen (in Mon. Hist. Germ.) 1894; Hodgkin’s Italy and her Invaders , 1885, iii 274—7, 310— 328, and Letters of Cassiodorus , 1886, with the literature there quoted, esp. A. Franz, M. Aur. Cassiodorus Senator , pp. 137, 1872, and R. W. Church, in Ch. Quarterly , 1800 ( Misc. Essays , 1888, pp. 155—204); also Bury’s Gibbon, iv i8of, 522. 4 Gregorii Dialogic ii init. 6 ib. ii 8; cp. Dante, Paradiso, 22, 37—45. 6 Montalembert, Monks of the West , i 434, ed. 1896. XIII.] BENEDICT. 257 Varro. The three virtues inculcated in the Benedictine discipline were silence in solitude and seclusion, and humility and obedience; - the three occupations of life which were enjoined, the worship of God, reading, and manual labour. Chapter 48 of the ‘ Rule of St Benedict’ after declaring that ‘idleness is the enemy of the soul’, prescribes manual labour, combined with the setting apart of certain hours (nearly two hours before noon in summer, and until 8 or 9 a.m. in other parts of the year) for sacred reading, lectio divina. During Lent each of the monks is to receive a book from the library and to read it straight through. One of the monks is also chosen in each week to read aloud to the rest during their meals (c. 38). None are to presume to have either a book or tablets, or even a pen (, graffium ) of their own (c. 33) L Thus the learned labours of the Benedictines were no part of the original requirements laid down by the founder of their order. Before the death of the founder (c. 542), his faithful disciple, Maurus, had crossed the Alps; had been welcomed at Orleans; and at Glanfeuil on the Loire, near Angers, had founded the first Benedictine monastery in France, on the site afterwards known as St Maur-sur-Loire 2 . The name of St Maur still survives in the English surname of Seymour; and it is associated for ever with the learned labours of the French Benedictines of the ‘Congregation of St Maur’, whose headquarters from 1630 to the French Revolution were the Abbey of Saint Germain-des-Pres in the south of Paris 3 . It is said that, late in life, Benedict foresaw that the lofty buildings of Monte Cassino would fall in ruins before the ravages of the spoiler 4 , a foreboding fulfilled by the Lombards in 583, and the Saracens in 857. Towards the end of 542 he was visited by Totila, king of the Goths, who came not to destroy the fabric but to consult its founder, and to depart impressed with the lessons of humanity which he had learnt from Benedict 5 . It is also said 1 Benedicti Regula Monachorum , ed. Wolfflin, 1895. Cp. Hallam’s Lit. of Europe, i 4; Harnack’s Monchtum , 42L Norden, p. 665, note. 2 Mabillon’s Acta Sanctorum Ordinis S. Benedicti, i 290. 3 Plans showing site of library in J. W. Clark’s Care of Books, pp. 115 f. 4 Gregorii Dialogi, ii 17 (with Preface of Mabillon, l.c.). 5 ib. ii 15; Mrs Jameson’s Monastic Orders, i 7—13, and Milman’s Lat. Christianity, ii 80—96. Cp. Hodgkin’s Italy and her Invaders , iv 462—498. s. 17 258 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. that the closing years of the founder’s life were brightened with a vision of the splendid future which awaited his Order. Such at least was the interpretation which tradition assigned to the story of his once seeing the darkness of the dawn suddenly dispelled by a light more dazzling than that of day 1 . The fulfilment of his hopes, so far as it is connected with our immediate subject, will attract our attention at later points in this work. The last of the grammarians from whom Cassiodorus compiled his treatise De Orthogrciphia was Priscian, qui Priscian nostro tempore Constantinopoli doctor fuit (c. 12). Almost all that is known of his date is that he composed (about 512) a poetic panegyric on Anastasius, emperor of the East from 491 to 518 2 ; and that a transcript of his great work on grammar was completed at Constantinople by one of his pupils, the calligrapher Theodorus, in 5 26-7 3 . Three of his minor works, (1) on numerals, weights, and measures, (2) on the metres of Terence, and (3) some rhetorical exercises, are almost entirely derived from Greek originals. They were dedicated to Sym- machus (possibly the consul of 485), who was known to the author by his high repute before he met him (probably on some occasion, otherwise unknown, when Symmachus visited Constan¬ tinople). Priscian was a native of Caesarea in Mauretania, and there is no proof that he ever lived in Rome. His Grammar is divided into xvm books; 1—xvi on Accidence; xvn and xvm on Syntax. In the dedication he states that he proposes to translate from the Greek of Apollonius (Dyscolus) and Herodian; but that his work would be of small extent compared with the spatiosa volumina of the former and the pelagus of the latter. He follows Apollonius very closely, as may be seen from those portions of his work in which the corresponding books of Apollonius are almost completely preserved, viz. the parts on the Pronoun, Adverb, and Conjunction, and on Syntax. Most of Priscian’s Latin learning comes from Flavius Caper; much is also 1 Gregorii Dicilogi, ii 34; Montalembert, l.c ., i 435 f. 2 Bahrens, Poet. Lai. Min. v 264. 3 ...scripsi artem Prisciani eloquentissimi grammatici doctoris mei manu mea in urbe Roma ( v.l. Romana) Constantinopoli...Olybrio v. c. consule, i.e. Mavortio Olybrio, cons. 526-7 (Jahn, Sacks. Berichte , 1851, p. 354). XIII.] PRISCIAN. 259 due to Charisius, Diomedes, Donatus (with Servius on Donatus), and Probus; and to an earlier list of grammatical examples from Cicero. The work is remarkably rich in quotations from Cicero and Sallust; also from Plautus, Terence, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Lucan, Persius, Statius and Juvenal. There are fewer from Cato, and from Accius, Ennius and Lucretius; very few from Catullus and Propertius, Caesar, and the elder Pliny; and none from Tibullus and Tacitus. The Greek examples are mainly from Homer, Plato, Isocrates and Demosthenes. His own style is very prolix, and he seems to have little consciousness of the importance of the order of words in Latin prose. His fame in after times was great. His pupil, Eutyches, calls him ‘ Romanae lumen facundiae’ and ‘ communis...hominum praeceptor’. A ms of Priscian had reached England in the life of Aldhelm (d. 709). He is quoted by Bede, and is described as ‘ Latinae eloquentiae decus ’ by Alcuin, who mentions his name in the list of the library at York. He is copied in a grammatical treatise by Alcuin’s pupil, Hrabanus Maurus, and minutely studied by the latter’s pupil, Servatus Lupus (d. 862). His grammar was one of the great text-books of the Middle Ages and is accordingly still represented by more than 1000 mss. Early in the Renaissance, in a poem on the reported death of Petrarch, Priscian appears as the foremost representative of Grammar (1343 ) 1 m , and, after the middle of the fourteenth century, it was either Priscian or Donatus whose portrait was placed beneath the personification of Grammar among the Seven Earthly Sciences in the chapter-house (after¬ wards called the Spanish chapel) of Santa Maria Novella at Florence, while among the representatives of the Seven Heavenly Sciences, the central figure has sometimes been identified as Boethius ( c . 1355). It was only two years after Boethius was consul in Rome (510) that Priscian eulogised an emperor of the East in Con¬ stantinople (512). Between these dates is the death of Clovis (511) , for whom Boethius had some seven or eight years previously 1 Antonio Beccaria, Grammatica era prima in questo pianto | E con lei Pnsciano (Priscian, 1 xxxi Hertz).—Best ed. of Priscian, that of Hertz (with minor works by Keil), 1855—9. Cp. Teuffel, § 481; and Jeep’s Redetheile , 89—97. 17—2 26 o THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. XIII. selected a skilled harper at the request of Theodoric’s minister, Cassiodorus. Two years after the death of Boethius (524) falls the death of Theodoric (526), and within a year of that event the copy of Priscian’s Grammar, from which all our extant mss are ultimately descended, was being transcribed in Constantinople. The close of the Roman age is marked by the death of Boethius; and the fact that the great work of Priscian was copied by his pupil, not in Rome, but in Constantinople, foreshadows the beginning of the Byzantine age of scholarship. Two years after the archetype of Priscian had been transcribed, the Schools of Athens were closed in the early part of the reign of Justinian, probably at the very time when in the West the monastery of Monte Cassino was rising above the ruins of the altar of Apollo. As we pass in fancy from the ruins of Apollo’s altar to the Castle Hill that looks down on the Vivarian monastery and the bay of Squillace, and think of Cassiodorus spending the last thirty-three years of his life among his monks, training them to become careful copyists, and closing the latest work of his long life by making extracts for their benefit from the pages of Priscian, we feel that we have left the Roman age behind us, and that we are already standing within the confines of the Middle Ages. ci hoi et'er- Natru fer^oe acquaepmn)umpcceo- ci>eaiM;‘cquicLpei>eiM>o rnoixcu ouj rfernperMN From the Biblical Commentary of Monte Cassino written before 569 B.c. (E. M. Thompson’s Palaeography , p. 202.) BOOK IV GREEK SCHOLARSHIP IN THE ROMAN AGE Vos exemplaria Graeca Nocturna versate manu , versate diurna. Horace, Ars Po'etica , 268. 6 koP 77/A as T^/ooVos. ..a 7 T€ 8 a)K€ Trj pccv apyaia kcu crwcfipovL prjTopiKrj TT)V SlKOLLOLV TipCtjv, TjV KCU 7 TpOTtpOV Kd\(J) 9poos rjev r)XV €l s' 5 eogoi) were recognised by ‘ Theodectes and Aristotle’. The article {&pdpov) was added by the Stoics. Later writers successively separated the adjective (to vpoarjyopLKdv) and the pronoun (avrw- vvp.La) from the noun; the adverb ( 4 irippypa) from the verb; the preposition [irpbdeoLs) from the connecting-particle; the participle ( p-eroxv ) from the adjective, and so on. The proper combination of these parts of speech makes a ku>\ov, and the proper combination of /cw\a makes a ‘period’ (c. 2). The art of arrangement inverse and prose is next illustrated (c. 3) from Homer (Od. xvi 1—16) and Herodotus (i 8—10), and shorter passages in both are re¬ written to show the superiority of their original form. Among those who had neglected the art, were Polybius, Hegesias and Chrysippus (c. 4). At a later point, the due arrangement of words and clauses and figures of thought are discussed (c. 6 — 9). Beauty (or ‘nobility’) of style (r6 /caX6v) is exemplified by 1 Ad Ammaeum , i 2 (W. Rhys Roberts, p. 41). XV.] DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS. 275 Thucydides and Antiphon; charm of style (17 ijdov'rj) by Ctesias and Xenophon; and both by Herodotus (c. 10), for whom his countryman, the Halicarnassian critic, has an unbounded admiration. These results are mainly attained by means of melody, rhythm, variety, and propriety (rb TTpeirov). In connexion with melody we have an examination of a few lines of the Orestes (c. 11). But, in the use of all these means, much must depend on tact ( iccupbs ), and no manual of tact had been hitherto mapped out by any rhetorician or philosopher (c. 12) 1 . Euphony (as an element of ‘melody’) is next illustrated by the sounds of the letters of the alphabet, here divided into vowels (s S to *808, when Amati pointed out that in a Vatican ms it was ascribed to ‘ Dionysius or Longinus’. The same alternative is offered in the index to two Paris mss ; but, in the superscription of this treatise in both, the two names are set side by side, with a considerable space between them. Lastly, a Florence ms of the treatise bears the inscription avuivvfjiov TT€pl vif/ovs. In this last description we must for the present acquiesce, as there are very grave difficulties in ascribing the treatise either to Dionysius of Halicarnassus or to Cassius Longinus (d. 273), or to any other known author, such as Plutarch or Theon of Alexandria. The latest writers quoted in the treatise itself are Amphicrates (pi. 90 b.c.), Cicero, Caecilius and Theodorus (pi. 30 b.c.), and it may very well be assigned to the first century of our era 1 . In any case it is convenient to notice it here in close connexion' with Dionysius and his friend Caecilius, whose own work on the same subject appears to have . prompted its publication. Its general aim is to point out the essential elements of an impressive style, which, avoiding all tumidity, puerility, affectation and bad taste, finds its inspiration in grandeur of thought and intensity of feeling, and its expression in nobility of diction and in skilfully ordered composition. It deals not merely with ‘ the Sublime ’; it is a survey of literary criticism in general, with special reference to the elements which invest style with a certain elevation or distinction. (In the following abstract the few lacunae in the text are indicated by asterisks.) After noticing the defects of the treatise of Caecilius on the same subject (supra, p. 28r), the author defines ‘the Sublime’ as consisting in ‘a certain distinction and excellence of language’ (c. 1) ; and, in answer to the inquiry whether there is such a thing as ‘an art of the Sublime,’ he replies that a lofty type of style may be the gift of Nature, but it is controlled by Art (c. 2). * * * 1 See esp. the Introduction to the ed. by W. Rhys Roberts, pp. 1—17. XV.] THE TREATISE ON THE SUBLIME. 283 The faults of style which are inconsistent with the Sublime, are (1) tumidity, (2) puerility, (3) misplaced emotion, and (4) bad taste (rb \pvxpbv). These faults are described : tumidity is exemplified from Aeschylus, and bad taste from Timaeus (c. 3—4). They are all caused by the fashionable craze for novelty of expression (c. 5). To avoid these faults we must acquire a clear knowledge of the true Sublime; This is difficult owing to the fact that a just judgement on style is the Jinal fruit of much experience (r/ t&v Xoyoju k plats 7 roXXrjs eart irdpas rdKevraiov imylvvrjiijta). The true Sublime is that which pleases all and always (c. 6—7). It has five sources: (1) grandeur of conception, (2) intensity of emotion, (3) appropriate employment of figures of thought and speech, (4) nobility of verbal expression, and (5) dignity and elevation of composition (c. 8). The first of these holds the foremost place, and can only be attained by (so far as possible) ‘nourishing a soul sublime’ (ras tpoyots avotTplcpeiv trpbs ra /uteyldr}). ‘ Sublimity ’ (as I have said elsewhere) is the echo of greatness of soul (vxf/os pteya\o(ppoal)V 7 ]s arrrixypia.)- This is illustrated from Homer, in contrast with Hesiod; also from ‘the legislator of the Jews’..., who wrote in the begin¬ ning of his Laws, ‘ God said, Let there be light, and there was light; let there be land, and there was land.’ As compared with the Iliad , the Odyssey , which was clearly the author’s later work, shows a decline in several respects, in its love of the marvellous and in its subordination of action to narrative and to delineation of character. The Homer of the Odyssey is like the sinking sun, which is still a glorious orb, but is less intense in its brightness; it is also like the ebbing-tide of greatness, drawing us into a region of shallows strewn with myth and legend. ‘If I am here speaking of old age, it is still the old age of Homer ’ (c. 9). Grandeur of conception is also shown in choosing the most striking points, and in grouping them into a consistent whole. This is best exemplified in Sappho’s Ode (to Anactoria), where the most varied sensations are combined in one perfect picture (c. 10). It is also shown by Amplification (c. 11) as is seen in Demosthenes, as compared with Plato and with Cicero. Plato has less of ‘the glow of a fiery spirit’ than Demosthenes. Demosthenes again is like a sudden tempest, or a thunderbolt, while Cicero resembles a widespread conflagration, fed by a vast and inexhaustible store of flame (c. 12) h It is further attained by imitating great writers of prose or poetry, even as Homer was imitated by Archilochus, Stesichorus, Herodotus and Plato. In composing anything that calls for loftiness of thought or language, it is well to ask ourselves how the same thought would have been expressed by Homer or Thucydides or Plato or Demosthenes; or how our own sayings would be 1 Cp. Tacitus, Dial . 36, ‘magna eloquentia, sicut flamma, materia alitur et motibus excitatur et urendo clarescit’, and Pitt’s famous rendering: ‘It is with eloquence as with a flame; it requires fuel to feed it, motion to excite it, and it brightens as it burns’ (Samuel Rogers’ Recollections , and Stanhope’s Life of Pitt , iii 413). 284 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. likely to strike Homer or Demosthenes in the past, or each succeeding age in the future (c. 14). It is also produced by vivid imagery which stirs the emotions, as in Euri¬ pides, who spends the utmost pains on giving a tragic effect to the emotions of love and madness, besides invading all the other regions of the imagination. Images of a fine type are found in Aeschylus and Sophocles, and in Demo¬ sthenes and Hypereides (c. 15). ‘ Intensity of emotion ’ is here left untouched, as it is reserved for another treatise. The true Sublime also finds expression in Figures of speech, such as Adjuration , which is well illustrated by the famous oath in Demosthenes, by those who fell at Marathon, Salamis, Artemisium and Plataea ( De Cor . 208), where the orator, conscious of the defeat at Chaeroneia, does not allow the passion of the moment to betray him into calling any of the earlier engage¬ ments victories, but forestalls all possible rejoinder by promptly adding:—‘a// of whom had the honour of a public funeral, and not the victorious only ’ (c. 16). The use of a Figure is most effective, when the fact that it is a Figure is unobserved, as in the oath by the men of Marathon, where the ‘Figure’ is concealed by the splendour of the context (c. 17). Figures include rhetorical question , exemplified in the orator’s questions about Philip in the First Philippic (§§ 10, 44)5 also asyndeton, illustrated from Homer’s Odyssey (x 251-2), the Meidias of Demosthenes (§ 72) and the Hellenica of Xenophon (iv 3, 19, iwdouvTo efj.&xovTO airtKTe<.vov airtOvricrKov), as contrasted with the accumulation of con¬ necting particles, characteristic of the school of Isocrates (c. 19—21); also hyperbaton (or inversion of order). It is by the use of this last Figure in the best writers that imitation approaches the effects of nature ; for Art is then perfect, when it seems to be Nature, and Nature again is most effective when she is pervaded by the unseen presence of Art. Many illustrations of this Figure may be found in Herodotus, Thucydides and Demosthenes (c. 22). Figures in which several cases are combined, as well as accumulations, variations and gradations of expression, are very effective, as also interchanges of cases, tenses, persons, numbers and genders. The interchange of singular and plural, and the use of the present for the past, are next illustrated; and it is added that a vivid effect is produced by addressing the reader, and also by suddenly changing from the third person to the first (c. 27). The last Figure mentioned is peri¬ phrasis, which must be handled with great discrimination (c. 28—29). The fourth source of the Sublime is a careful choice of striking words used in their normal sense (c. 30), on the effect of which it is needless to dilate, for beautiful words are in very truth the peculiar light of thought (oprtKos, /3avavoro\oLa, as an epithet of apple-trees in Empedocles (v 8). In the letter of consolation addressed to his wife, he finds fault with critics who ‘collect and gather together all the lame and defective verses of Homer, which are but few in number, and in the meantime pass over an infinite sort of others, which were by him most excellently made’ (p. 611) 1 . In the introduction to the dialogue De Defectu Oraculoru?n points of grammar, such as the question whether / 3 d\\(o loses a X in the future, and what is the positive of x^P ov and /SIXtlov, are described as causing the disputants to contract their brows and contort their features; while other topics can be discussed with a calm and unruffled mien (p. 412 f). Plutarch is mainly a moralist, not only in his so-called Moralia , but also in his Lives , with their vivid moral portraiture, which made Montaigne call them his ‘ breviary ’, and Madame Roland ‘the pasture of great souls’ 2 . Several of his Lives , e.g. his Pericles and his Caesar , his Demosthenes and his Cicero , have a literary as well as a historical interest; but it is disappointing to find that, at the moment when we expect some literary criticism in the comparison between the two greatest orators of Greece and Rome, Plutarch (notwithstanding the interest in Latin rites and customs shown in his Roman Questions') shirks the task on the ground of his imperfect knowledge of Latin ( Dem . 2); he actually rebukes Caecilius for instituting such a comparison (ib. 3); and, even in the case of the Greek orator, offers no 1 Trench, Plutarch , p. 27. 2 ib. p. 34 f. 300 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. criticism on his style. His Life of Cicero (24, 40) implies some acquaintance (either direct or indirect) with Cicero’s philosophical works. His knowledge of Latin has been discussed by Weissen- berger 1 , who defends him from some of the attacks of Volkmann. His Lives of Galba and Otho were founded either on Tacitus or on some authority common to both 2 . In his Life of Lucullus (c. 39) we find his only direct quotation from Latin literature (Horace, Ep. i 6, 45), but his description of Rome as tw avOpiDirivuiv epywv to koXXottov ( De Fortu?ia Rom. 316 e ) is possibly a reminiscence of Virgil’s rerum pulcherrima Roma {Georg, ii 534) 3 . His Roman Questions , in which Ovid’s Fasti are never quoted, are partly founded on Varro and Juba; and his Greek Questions on Aristotle. On the whole, Plutarch cannot be seriously regarded as a literary critic, but he fully deserves the credit of being a lover of literature. Literature is fully recognised in his fragmentary discourse on the question whether the Athenians were more glorious in war or in wisdom; and, in attacking the Epicureans, he warmly defends the cause of letters. His treatise on the profit which a young man may obtain from the writings of the poets supplied Basil with many hints for his treatise on the gain to be derived from the study of heathen authors. Montaigne ‘ can hardly do without Plutarch ’. In Southey’s Doctor the translation of the Moralia by Philemon Holland is one of the few books for which Daniel Dove finds room on his shelves. He is the theme of more than 250 allusions or direct references on the part of Jeremy Taylor; his Moralia occupied 24 years of the life of Daniel Wyttenbach, and had an important influence on the career of Neander 4 . ‘Plutarch’, says Emerson 5 , ‘will be perpetually rediscovered from time to time as long as books last’ 6 . 1 .Die Sprache Plutarchs , 1895. 2 Cp. Schanz, Rom. Litt. § 438. 3 Oakesmith’s Religion of Plutarch, p. 8411. 4 Trench, pp. 74, 108 f, 121. 5 Essay prefixed to translation of Plutarch’s Morals, revised by Prof. W. W. Goodwin (1870); see also Essay on Books in Society and Solitude , p. 451 of Prose Works, ed. 1889. 6 On Plutarch, cp. the monographs by Greard (1866) and Volkmann (1869), R. C. Trench’s Four Lectures (1873) and J. Oakesmith’s Religion of Plutarch ; XVII.] FAVORINUS. 301 Plutarch and Dion Chrysostom have points of contact with Favorinus of Arles (born c. 75 a . d .), who was a . . . Favorinus pupil of Dion and a friend of Fronto and Plutarch. He visited Ephesus, but lived mainly in Rome, where his lectures were attended by Herodes Atticus. He is much admired by Gellius. He was one of the most learned men of the age of Hadrian, whose favour he enjoyed for a time; and he appears to have died under Antoninus Pius. He vied with Plutarch in the number and variety of his writings, which included philosophy, history, philology and rhetoric; but he was more of a rhetorician than a philosopher. In philosophy he was a Sceptic. Besides several semi-philosophical works, he wrote at least five books of Memoirs , and twenty-four of Miscellanies. The latter is described by Photius as a store-house of erudition, and both are among the authorities followed by Diogenes Laertius 1 . He survives in frag¬ ments only; but he may here serve to mark the transition from Dion and Plutarch to the Sophists and the Atticists of the age of the Antonines, who will be briefly noticed in the next chapter. also Christ, §§ 470—485 s ; Croiset, v 484—538; Egger, 409—425; and Saints- bury, i 137—146. 1 Christ, § 510 3 ; Croiset, v 539 f. CHAPTER XVIII. GREEK SCHOLARSHIP IN THE SECOND CENTURY. The second century. Hadrian For nearly two-thirds of the second century the Roman Empire was under the beneficent rule of Hadrian (i 17—138) and the Antonines (138—180). Hadrian, the patron of Greek literature in general and of rhetoric in particular, was specially devoted to Athens, where he had distinguished himself as archon under the rule of Trajan. After he had ascended the throne, he completed the magnificent temple of the Olympieum, which had been begun by Peisistratus 650 years before. In the region north of the Acropolis, he built the ‘ Stoa ’ which bore his name, with its walls and colonnades of Phrygian marble, its roof glittering with gold and alabaster, and its chambers stored with books, and beautified with paintings and statues 1 . The bust of Sophocles, and the marble personifications of ‘the Iliad’ and ‘the Odyssey,’ found in the neighbourhood, may once have adorned the Library in these buildings. M. Aure¬ lius established at Athens a school of Philosophy, with a pro¬ fessorial chair for each of the four sects, the Academics, Peripatetics, Stoics and Epicureans; and a school of Rhetoric with two chairs, the ‘ political ’ and the ‘ sophistical ’, the holder of the latter being appointed by the emperor and set over the whole of the University. The selection of the four professors of Philosophy was assigned to Herodes Atticus (103—179), who, like Hadrian, was one of the greatest benefactors of Athens. His lavish Atticu°s deS liberality caused the Panathenaic Stadium on the Ilissus to gleam with marble from the quarries of Pentelicus, and (about the time when Pausanias was writing his 1 Pausanias, i 18, 9. CHAP. XVIII.] HADRIAN. HERODES. M. AURELI. 303 M. Aurelius Description of Greece ) raised a new Odeum with a roof of cedar to the south of the ascent to the Acropolis. He was the most brilliant of the Sophists of the age; he could refute the pretended Stoic by means of appropriate passages from Epictetus; and, in giving alms to a Cynic impostor, who had only ‘the beard and the staff’ of his profession, he could quote an effective precedent from Musonius 1 . His house at Athens and his villa, amid the olive-groves and water-courses of Cephisia, were frequented by statesmen, philosophers and rhetoricians 3 ; and among these last was the eminent rhetorician Aristides. In the age of the Antonines a remarkable proof of proficiency in Greek was given by M. Aurelius, the ‘ Stoic on the throne ’, in the famous Meditations (ra ct? iavroo), which (as it happens) include a single chapter on the moral effect of Attic tragedy and comedy (xi 6), while they represent in general the highest standard of morality attained prior to Neo-Platonism and apart from Christianity. The author of the Meditatio?is gave early encourage¬ ment to the precocious genius of the rhetorician Hermogenes ; among the preceptors of the adoptive brother of M. Aurelius, L. Verus, were Hephaestion and Harpocration; while the tutor of Commodus was the grammarian Pollux, whom his former pupil appointed professor of Rhetoric at Athens. During this century there was no lack of patronage for Scholarship at Athens and Rome; but, meanwhile, the greatest grammarian of the age, Apollonius Dyscolus, was living in poverty in Alexandria. His son, Herodian, lived in Rome, and dedicated to M. Aurelius his great work on accentuation. In the second century an interest in the ancient epics of Greece is attested by a composition in prose pur- porting to give an account ot a poetic competition torianS) ’ etc between Homer and Hesiod 3 . Verse is represented by the didactic poems of Dionysius Periegetes and Oppian, by the hymn to Nemesis by Mesomedes and the fables of Babrius; history, by Appian (f. 160) and by Arrian (ft. 130), the modern Xenophon, who, with his ‘ chameleon-like ’ 4 style, imitates Herodotus 1 Gellius, i 2, 3—13; ix 2. 2 ib. i 2, 2. 3 ayuv, printed in Goettling’s Hesiod , pp. 241—254, and in Rzach’s. 4 Kaibel in Hermes , xx (1875) 508. 304 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. and Thucydides as well as Xenophon and Ctesias; military history, by Polyaenus (Jl. 161-9) 1 geography and astronomy, by Claudius Ptolemaeus of Alexandria; while topography and bio¬ graphy were combined in the ‘cities and their celebrities’ of Philon of Byblus (c. 64—141), and the chronology of the Olympic Games was studied by Phlegon of Tralles. In the age of Trajan and Hadrian (if not at an earlier date) Ptolemaeus Chennus of Alexandria, besides writing a historical drama called the Sphinx , and an epic poem in twenty-four books entitled Anthomerus , compiled a vast collection of miscellaneous anecdotes which was known to Photius 1 . He has acquired a new importance from the fact that he is now regarded as the author of a lost treatise on the Life and Works of Aristotle , dedicated to one Gallus, and ascribed to ‘ Ptolemaeus ’ in an Arabic list of the Works, which is derived from a Syriac rendering of the Greek original 2 . In the time of the Antonines Archaeology and Topography were the theme of Pausanias, who was still engaged on Pausanias . . . ° his Description of Greece in 173 a . d . (v i, 2), having written his account of Attica before, and that of Achaia after, the building of the Odeum of Herodes Atticus. From his home in Asia Minor, near the river Hermus and mount Sipylus, he travelled over Greece, Italy and Sardinia, and even visited Syria, and the oracle of Ammon in the Libyan desert. His work is invaluable for its varied information on the mythology, topography, sculpture and architecture of ancient Greece; and its utility has been recognised in the archaeological exploration of Athens and Argolis, of Delphi and Olympia. It is neither a manual of archaeology, nor a guide-book, but a volume of reminiscences of travel. It cannot reasonably be doubted that it is founded largely on the author’s own experience; but there has been much discussion as to the degree of his indebtedness to authorities such as Polemon of Ilium in archaeology (supra p. 152), Artemidorus of Ephesus (fl. 100 b . c .) in topography, and Istrus of Paphos (a pupil of Callimachus) in history. He cites Euripides far less often than the ancient epic poets; and almost all that we know 1 Cod. 190, naivT) laropLa. 2 Christ, § 559 3 , and esp. A. Baumstark, Aristoteles bei den Syrern, 1900. The list is given in Arist. Frag. pp. 18—22 Rose. XVIII.] PAUSANIAS. ARISTIDES. 305 (or think we know) of the Messenian wars is due to his having preserved for us the substance of the lost epic of the Alexandrian poet, Rhianus 1 . Of the Sophists who lived under the Antonines, one of the most celebrated was Aelius Aristides (129—189), who studied oratory at Pergamon and Athens, be- Aristides CianS ’ sides visiting Rhodes and travelling in Egypt. The storms, which he encountered on his voyage to Italy in 155, shattered his health and compelled him to live as a valetudinarian for many years at Pergamon and Smyrna. When Smyrna was ruined by an earthquake (178), he obtained the aid of M. Aurelius for its restoration. At Athens he delivered his Panathenaic dis¬ course, with its rhetorical review of Athenian history. History he regards as holding a position intermediate between poetry and rhetoric (ii 513); rhetoric he defends from Plato’s attacks in the Phaedrus and Gorgias, while he shields Miltiades, Themistocles, Cimon and Pericles from the contempt with which they had been treated in the latter of those dialogues. He is also the author of several fictitious discourses on events in Greek history, and of a prose paraphrase of the speech of Achilles in the ninth Iliad . Lastly, he has left us a pleasant picture of a learned and accom¬ plished lecturer on the ancient Classics in the person of a teacher of M. Aurelius named Alexander of Cotyaeum, whose countrymen are assured that he will be gratefully welcomed by the authors of old in the world below, where he will be assigned an enduring throne as the best of their interpreters (Or. 12). Unhappily, the only work of Alexander mentioned by Aristides is vaguely stated to be on the subject of Homer, and he is now represented solely by a fragment on a point of textual criticism in Herodotus 2 . In editions of Aristides we find two compositions inspired by the Leptines and proving an intimate acquaintance with the text of Demosthenes ; but their authorship is not quite certain 3 . In 1 Christ, § 501 3 ; Croiset, v 679—683; Kalkmann, P. der Perieget (1886); Gurlitt and Bencker (1890); Heberdey, die Reisen des P. (1894); Frazer’s Pausanias (1898); ed. Hitzig et Blumner, 1896- . 2 Quoted by Porphyry, p. 288, Schrader. 3 They are not found in the mss of Aristides, and are only attributed to him on the ground of a passage in his Speech against Capito, p. 315 (H. E. Foss, 1841). . S. 20 3°6 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. style Aristides is one of the strictest Atticists of his time, his favourite models being Thucydides, Plato, Xenophon, Isocrates and Demosthenes. To rival Demosthenes was his main ambition, and he had the satisfaction of seeing in a dream the apparition of a philosopher who assured him that he had even surpassed that orator (i 325). As a successful imitator of the Attic writers he is highly praised by Phrynichus 1 ; his copiousness and force are lauded by Longinus 2 ; by later rhetoricians, such as Libanius and Himerius, he is regarded as a classic; his fame descended to the Byzantine age, in which Thomas Magister classes him alone with Homer, Thucydides, Demosthenes and Plato; and the study of his speeches in the schools is still attested by the extant scholia and prolegomena. His love of literature on its rhetorical side is frank and outspoken ; ‘ speeches ’ (he tells us) ‘ are his sole delight’; ‘the whole gain and sum of life is oratorical occupation’ 3 4 . In his apology for the blunder of commending himself in the course of an address to a deity (Or. 49), he justifies himself b^ many quotations from orators and poets, and from Solon in particular; but he shows no taste for literary criticism. In a history of Scholarship his main claim to notice rests on his suc¬ cessful study of the ancient models of Attic prose, and also on the fact that he has preserved for us (in Or. 49) the longest passage from the iambic poems of Solon which was known to us until the recovery of Aristotle’s Constitution of Athens \ Inferior to xAristides is the ‘Platonic philosopher’, Maximus of Tyre (fl. 180), who lectured in many lands (in¬ cluding Phrygia and Arabia), and paid several visits to Rome. All his forty-one discourses are written in the affected and over-symmetrical style of Gorgias, with an inordinate fancy for the accumulation of synonyms. As a Platonist of eclectic tastes, while he opposes the Epicureans, he borrows at will from the Peripatetics, Stoics and Neo-Pythagoreans; and, like Plutarch, he may be regarded as a precursor of the Neo-Platonists. Maximus Tyrius 1 ap. Photium, p. 101 A 18. 2 Dindorf’s Aristides, iii 741. 3 Canter in Dindorf’s Aristides, iii 779, quoted by Saintsbury, i ii4f. 4 On Aristides, see the editions of Dindorf (1829) and Keil (1899); and cp. Christ, § 52i 3 f; Croiset, v 572—581; and Saintsbury, i 113— 6- XVIII.] MAXIMUS TYRIUS. 307 But, while Plutarch is a genuine philosopher and a wise counsellor on the conduct of life, Maximus is merely a rhetorician, who happens to write by preference on philosophic subjects. The subjects themselves are not uninteresting: e.g. ‘ Does Homer re¬ present any special philosophic school?’ (32); ‘On Plato’s God’ (17); ‘On the Daimonion of Socrates’ (14, 15); ‘On Socratic Love’(24—27); ‘Was Plato justified in banishing Homer from his Republic?’ (23); ‘Have poets or philosophers discoursed better concerning the Gods?’ (to); ‘Are the liberal arts con¬ ducive to virtue?’ (37). He discusses the influence of music and geometry; he is fond of quoting from Homer and Sappho (e.g. 24, 9), and has contributed to the restitution of the fair fame of the Lesbian poetess 1 ; he eulogises Homer for his breadth of view and his varied knowledge, but describes Aratus as no less famous (30); he sees little difference between poetry and philosophy; he favours the allegorical interpretation of poetry; has a high admiration for Plato (17, 1; 27, 4); and, in discussing Plato’s attitude towards Homer, insists that an admiration for Plato is quite compatible with an admiration for Homer. On the whole, we are bound to admit that, so far as regards literary criticism, the high expectations raised by the titles of his lectures only end in dis¬ appointment 2 . The brilliant and versatile satirist, Lucian of Samosata ( c . 12K — c. 192), who includes rhetoricians and ' . 7 n ... Lucian sophists among the many themes of his satire, is himself a product of the sophistical and rhetorical education of his time. Born in northern Syria, and educated in Ionia, he travelled and lectured in Asia Minor, Greece and Macedonia, and even in Italy and Gaul; resided for some twenty years (c. 165—185) at Athens; and, towards the end of his life, held a Government appointment in Egypt. A history of Scholarship is only concerned with a few of the four-score writings that bear his name. His Judgement of the Vowels (&LKrj o)vr)evTa)v), which throws some light on the Attic Greek of his day, describes a lawsuit brought before the court of the vowels by the letter Sigma against the letter Tau, com- 1 Welcker’s kl. Schi-iften , ii 97. 2 Christ, § 511 3 ; Croiset, v 581 — 2; Saintsbury, i 117—8. 20—2 3°8 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. plaining of violent ejectment from various words such as cnjfxepov, OaXacraa and ©ecrcraA.ia, which the Atticists of the time pronounced Tr'/fj.epov, OaXarra and ©erraAta. His satire On the proper manner of writing History (77-cos 8el Icnoptav o-vyypaeiv), which was once much admired, is an attack on the incompetent historians, who were preparing to describe the Parthian War (which ended in 165) in the style of Herodotus and Thucydides. This attack on con¬ temporary historians is veiled under the disguise of advice to the historians of the future. The two great requirements of the true historian (says Lucian) are intelligence (crvveo-is) and power of expression (kppcqveCa). His Parasite is a parody of the discussions held by rhetoricians and philosophers, from Plato downwards, on the subject of rhetoric. In his Lexiphanes we have a playful satire on the Atticists of the day, and on their fancy for inter¬ spersing their compositions with obsolete phrases borrowed from the old Attic authors. A specimen of this kind of patch-work is produced by Lexiphanes himself, who is severely criticised, and is solemnly admonished to reject the miserable inventions of modern rhetoricians, to emulate the great classical writers such as Thucydides and Plato, and the ancient masters of tragedy and comedy, and, above all, to sacrifice to the Graces and to perspicuity. Lexiphanes has been supposed 1 to be a satirical representation of Pollux, the lexicographer; but the latter was not appointed pro¬ fessor of rhetoric at Athens until the reign of Commodus, whereas the Lexiphanes was apparently one of Lucian’s earlier works (§ 26) 2 . His Pseudologistes (or Solecist) is directed against gram¬ marians who lapsed into solecisms, in spite of a pedantic attention to correctness of style. Elsewhere, he writes an amusing satire (.Adversus Indoctum) on a collector of books in handsome bind¬ ings, including copies of Archilochus and Hipponax, Eupolis and Aristophanes, Plato, Antisthenes and Aeschines, which he could neither read nor understand. In the Teacher of Orators ( p-qropaiv SiSao-Ka/W) Lucian attacks the prevailing type of instruction in the person of one of its most conspicuous representatives, some¬ times identified (as in the Lexiphanes) with the lexicographer Pollux. In the same spirit as in that dialogue, Lucian distinguishes 1 By the Scholiasts and C. F. Ranke, Pollux u. Lucian (1831). 2 Christ, § 539 s . XVIII.] LUCIAN. 309 between the two paths which lead to the attainment of rhetorical skill, (1) the long and laborious imitation of the great authors of old, such as Plato and Demosthenes; (2) the collection of fashionable phrases for ordinary use and affected archaisms for occasional adornment 1 2 . Rhetoric is also represented in his Bis Accusatus , where Lucian is accused by ‘ Rhetoric ’ of having deserted her, and by £ Dialogue ’ of having disgraced her. In his Conversation with Hesiod, he ridicules the ancient poets for pretending to be inspired interpreters of the will of heaven. Lastly, in his dialogue On Daiicing, he states that, as an inter¬ preter of the poets, an accomplished dancer of pantomime ought to know Homer and Hesiod, and (above all) the tragic poets, by heart. Lucian singles out, in the literature of his age, the defects which were due to an affected imitation of ancient models; he ridicules the frivolity of the rhetoricians, and the pretentiousness of the historians of his day; and rallies the Atticists for their superstitious cult of an obsolete phraseology. He is himself an Atticist of a higher though far from perfect type, and Cobet has abundantly shown, quanto opere a Graecitatis aniiquae dicendi sinceritate desciverit a . His verbal familiarity with Greek literature is attested by his constant quotations from Homer, Hesiod and Pindar 3 , and his frequent reminiscences of Thucydides, Xenophon, Plato and Demosthenes 4 . The encomium on that orator found among his writings, shows a just appreciation of the patriotism of Demosthenes, but is wanting in wit, and is probably spurious. The legend of the Olympic recitation of the history of Herodotus is found in the writing which bears that historian’s name. Traces of Horace 5 and Juvenal have been detected in Lucian, and a passage in the Germania of Tacitus (§ 3) finds its parallel in the Method of writing History (§ 60). His skill as a critic of art 1 Saintsbury, i 151. 2 Var. Led. 300 f; cp. 75 f. 3 Ziegeler, De Luciano poetarum iiutice et imilatore (1872). 4 Brambs, Citate und Reminiscenzen bei Lucian (1888). On Lucian’s Atticism, cp. Du Mesnil (1867), W. Schmid, Attikismus , i 221—5, and Chabert (1897). 5 A. Heinrich, Lukian u. Horaz (1885). 3io THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. is proved by his Portraits (EIkovcs) and his Zeuxis. In his management of dialogue he exhibits the influence of Plato, while his genius has much in common with that of Aristophanes, to whom he repeatedly refers. He owes something also to the comedies of Cratinus, and to the satires of Menippus 1 . In his Prometheus es he admits that he has ‘attempted to adjust the philosophical dialogue to something like the tone of the comic poets’, and to avoid the faults and combine the excellences of both 2 . In the Byzantine age 3 he was often imitated; he was also a favourite author during the Renaissance 4 ; and the travellers’ tales of his True History have beien told anew in various forms by Rabelais, Cyrano de Bergerac, and Swift. His interest in the great writers of Attic prose is clearly marked ; but he has not sufficient seriousness of purpose or stability of principle to be a really great critic of classical literature 5 . With Lucian we may associate a slightly later writer, Alciphron, represented in the fictitious letters of Aristaenetus Alciphron (1 5 and 22) as one of the correspondents of Lucian, whom he undoubtedly imitates 6 . His own imaginary Letters are inspired by the Attic Comedy of Philemon, Diphilus and Menander. The Greek of Lucian was imitated in Latin by Apuleius of Madaura in Africa, who wrote in the times of Antoninus Pius and M. Aurelius. It was Lucian’s Ass that inspired the satiric novel known as the Metamorphoses of Apuleius, which includes the celebrated myth of Cupid and Psyche. The author’s title to the name of philosophus Platonicus rests on his minor works:—(1) De Deo Socratis , a prolix exposi¬ tion of the Platonic doctrine on the subject of God and the daemons; (2) De Platone et eius dogmate, a treatise on the natural 1 Rabaste, Quid cotnicis debuerit Lucianus (1867). 2 Saintsbury, i 149. 3 Krumbacher, Gesch. d. Byz. Lit. §§ 194, 198, 211, p. 756 s , and Hase, Notices et Extraits, ix 2, 129. 4 Forster, Lucian in der Renaissance (1886). 6 Cp. Saintsbury, i 146—152; also Egger, 464—9; Christ, §§533—542 s ; and esp. M. Croiset, v 583—616, and his Essai (1882). 6 Cp. iii 55 with Lucian’s Symposium. XVIII.] RHETORICIANS. 311 Alexander and moral philosophy of Plato, followed by a spurious book on the logic of Aristotle. He also wrote De Mundo , a free trans¬ lation of the 7 repl koc/xov, bearing the name of Aristotle, and possibly written by Nicolaus of Damascus 1 . Greek rhetoric includes the criticism of literature and the study of models of style, and in these respects has points of contact with the general history of rhetoricians Scholarship. All that was essential in the pre¬ vious teaching of rhetoric was summed up in the time of Hadrian by Alexander 2 , son of Numenius. His treatise on Figures 3 was the authority mainly followed by later writers, such as Tiberius 4 on the figures of Demosthenes; Phoeb- ammon 5 on ‘rhetorical figures’ (which he classifies and reduces in number); and Herodian 6 , who introduces examples from the poets. The age of Hadrian may perhaps also claim Aelius Theon of Alexandria, who wrote commentaries on Xeno¬ phon, Isocrates and Demosthenes, and whose Progymnasmata or ‘ preliminary exercises ’ are still extant 7 . Theon’s work deals with the art of writing under twelve divisions: —maxims, fables, narration, confirmation and refutation, common¬ places, description, encomium, comparison, prosopopoeia (or character-drawing), thesis (or abstract question), and proposal of a law; and it includes many illustrations from ancient litera¬ ture. It was superseded by a similar work composed towards the end of the fourth century by Aphthonius, the pupil of Libanius; but, in the mean time, it continued to hold its own beside the work of Hermogenes. Hermogenes of Tarsus, who lived under M. Aurelius and was already dis¬ tinguished at the age of fifteen, failed to fulfil the high promise of his early years. His Progymnasmata 8 are less Aelius Theon Hermogenes 1 All these Opuscula de Philosophia have been edited by Goldbacher (1876). 2 Fragments in Spengel, Rhet. Gr. iii 1—6. 3 Sp. iii 9—40. 4 Sp. iii 59—82. . 5 Sp. 'iii 43—56. 6 Sp. iii 60—104. 7 Sp. ii 59. Cp. Saintsbury, i 93 f, who rightly inclines to place him before Aphthonius. The name of Aelius given him by Suidas suggests the age of Hadrian. 8 Sp. ii 3—r8; cp. Saintsbury, i 90—2. i 312 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Demetrius interesting than those of Theon; his works on legal issues 1 , on rhetorical invention (with examples from the Attic orators) 2 , and on eloquence 3 , are more remote from the history of Scholar¬ ship than his treatise defining the different varieties of style and suggesting methods for imitating them, with critical remarks on some of the best prose writers 4 . The treatise of Demetrius on Verbal Expression 5 , wrongly attributed to Demetrius of Phaleron, certainly belongs to the Roman age 6 , and probably to the time of the Antonines 7 . The author frequently quotes from the Rhetoric of Aristotle, and has many interesting remarks on oratorical style and rhythm. Thus he happily compares the ‘disjointed’ style to a number of stones lying near one another, loose, scattered and uncombined, and the ‘ periodic ’ style to the same stones when bound compactly in the self-supporting cohesion of a vaulted dome (§ 13). He con¬ trasts the clauses (kw\o) of Prose with the metres of Verse, illus¬ trates these clauses from Hecataeus and from the Anabasis of Xenophon, and expresses a general preference for short clauses. He also discusses periods, and parallel clauses (including homoeo- teleuta). His main subject is well described by Mr Saintsbury (i 104) as the ‘Art of Prose Composition’. In this century rhetoric, as the art of literary expression, was in close alliance with grammar and lexicography. Grammarians . <=> sr j To the age of Hadrian we may assign the eminent grammarian Apollonius Dyscolus, who lived and died in poverty in what was once the royal quarter of Alexandria. He appears to have spent a short time in Rome, under Antoninus Dysc'o/us mS Pius. His name of Dyscolus (‘ crabbed ’) is said to have been due to a sourness of temper, caused by extreme poverty 8 ; but it is far more probable that it was suggested 1 irepl araaeuv, Sp. ii 133—174. 2 irepl euptaews, Sp. ii 177—262. 3 irepl fieaddov SeLvSrijTOS, Sp. ii 426—56. 4 irepl idea)v ii 265—425, esp. 410—25. Cp. Croiset, v 629—634. 5 irepl epp.r)vela<>, Sp. iii 259—328; ed. Radermacher, and Rhys Roberts, 1902. 6 § 108 refers to the patrician laticlave. 7 Croiset, v 87 n. 8 Anonymous life (ap. Flach, Hesychius Miles., p. 243). Cp. Grafenhan, iii 70 f. XVIII.] APOLLONIUS DYSCOLUS. 313 by the difficulty of his style. Apollonius and his son, Herodian, are the most important grammarians of the imperial age. He was the founder of scientific grammar, and the creator of Greek Syntax. Of his numerous writings a large portion was lost at an early date. The fact that Priscian founded his great grammatical work on that of Apollonius, has suggested the view that the writings of Apollonius (most of which are now known by their titles alone) formed part of a complete ‘art of grammar’, treated under thirteen heads. This view (which is that of Dronke 1 and Uhlig) is not, how¬ ever, generally accepted. The existence of a complete art of grammar cannot be inferred either from Priscian, or from the scholium on Dionysius Thrax 2 , which is quoted for this purpose. Apollonius must therefore be regarded as the author, not of a systematic treatise, but of a series of special studies on important points 3 . The subjects of his principal works were, the parts of speech in general, also nouns and verbs in particular, and syntax. The parts of speech, in his view, were eight in number, arranged in the following order:—noun, verb, participle, article, pronoun, preposition, adverb and conjunction. His works on nouns and verbs were extensively quoted, not only by Priscian, but also by Georgius Choeroboscus ( c . 600) and the scholiasts on Dionysius Thrax. But only four of his writings have survived—those on the pronoun, adverbs 4 , conjunctions and syntax 5 . This last is in four books, the first of which determines the number and order of the parts of speech (assigning precedence to the noun and verb), and next discusses the syntax of the article; the second deals with the syntax of the pronoun; the third begins with the rules of ‘ concord ’ ( Ko.ra\\y]k 6 rr ]^) and their exceptions, followed by the general syntax of the verb; the fourth includes the syntax of prepositions, adverbs and conjunctions, but only a small portion of this is still extant 6 . 1 Rhein . A/us. xi 549 f. 2 Preller, Aufsdtze, p. 89. 3 Cp. Matthias, in Fleckeis. Jahrb., Suppl. xv, quoted in Jeep’s Redetheile, p. 94. 4 First printed in Bekker’s Anecd. Gr. ii 630—646. 5 ib. ii 479—525. 6 ed. R. Schneider and Uhlig (1878!). Cp. L. Lange, Das System der Syntax des Apollonios Dyskolos (1852), and Egger, Ap. Dyscole (1854); also Steinthal, ii 220—347; Christ, § 564 s ; Cohn in Pauly- IVissozua, II i 136—9; and Croiset, v 635 f. THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. 314 While Dionysius Thrax was, as we have seen, the first to make a special study of grammar (p. 137), it was Apollonius who placed that study on a scientific basis. He analysed the true nature of language and of its component parts; set aside certain fantastic theories current in his day, and introduced scientific explanations in their place. Thus he refutes those who supposed that ‘the article served to distinguish the genders’, and insists that each part of speech has its origin in a conception characteristic of itself 1 . The characteristic of the article is ‘the retrospective reference to a person already mentioned ’; such a retrospect takes place, when we speak either of a known person, or of a definitely recognised class 2 . He was the only ancient grammarian who wrote a complete and independent work on Syntax, and his opinions continued to be recognised as authoritative throughout the Middle Ages, and down to the time of Theodorus Gaza and Constantinus Lascaris inclusive. His definitions of the parts of speech show a marked advance on those of his predecessors, and are adopted by Priscian and by subsequent grammarians 3 . Priscian (xi 1) calls him ‘maximus auctor artis grammaticae’, and refers to him and his son as ‘ maximis auctoribus ’ (vi i) 4 . The vast extent of their works is implied in Priscian’s mention of the ‘spacious volumes ’ of Apollonius, and the pelagus of the writings of Herodian ( Prooem . § 4). Aelius Herodianus, the son of Apollonius Dyscolus, lived at Rome under M. Aurelius. His principal work, entitled KaOoXiKr) irpoo-wSta, was in 21 books, the first 19 treating of accentuation in general, book 20 on quantities (xpoi'oi) and breathings (7rj/€vp.aTa), and book 21 on enclitics, diastole and synaloephe. It was mainly founded on Aristarchus and Tryphon, and the nature of its subject left little (if any) room for originality. It is now represented only by excerpts preserved by Theodosius and ‘Arcadius’. Herodian also wrote on ortho¬ graphy ; on barbarisms and monosyllabic words; on nouns and verbs; on inflexions, declensions and conjugations. Our know¬ ledge of these works depends entirely on extracts in later 1 Syntax, i p. 23 Bekker, Zkcuttov Se avr&v idias tvvolas dvdyera t. 2 ib. p. 26 (Croiset, l.c.). 3 Cp. Grafenhan, iii 109—132. 4 Cp. xiv 1, xvii 1. XVIII.] HERODIAN. NICANOR. 315 grammarians, e.g. in the Homeric scholia , and in Stephanus of Byzantium. His only extant work is a treatise ‘ on peculiar diction’ (7r€pi fiovrjpovs consisting of a series of articles on exceptional or anomalous words. The close of the preface skilfully leads up to the first article in the list, that on Zeus 1 . We have also an abstract of his teaching on syllables ‘ common ’ in quantity {irepl Sixpovwv), and numerous excerpts from his work on the accentuation of the Iliad and the Odyssey. These excerpts are mainly preserved in the Homeric scholia 2 . Herodian generally agrees with Aristarchus, while he often discusses the views of Tryphon and others less known to fame 3 . By grammarians of later ages he is generally called 6 re^vt/co? \ Another of the sources of the above scholia was the work of Nicanor ( 7repl s (Aratus) ap\bpevos tyq eic Aids apxwpecrda. 2 Lehrs, Herodiani scripta tria (1848). 3 Lehrs, De Aristarchi Siudiis Homericis , p. 30 3 ; cp. Ludwich, Aristarchs Horn. Textkr. i 75—80. 4 Cp. in general Lentz, Herodiani technici reliquiae (1867); Grafenhan, iii 72, 99; Christ, § 565 s ; Croiset, v 637. 5 Bachmann, Anecd. ii 316. 6 virepreXeia, reXeia, viroreXeia. 7 Aval irptorq, bevrtpa. 8 avwtrbKpiTos , evvirbKpiTos , and virocrTLypr}. This last is a ‘stop put after a protasis,’ an apodotic comma. 9 Friedlander, Nicanoris...reliquiae (1850); cp. Grafenhan, iii 67, 94; Christ, § 563 s ; Croiset, v 637 f. 10 Cp. Bernhardy, Gr. Litt. i 630—642 4 . 3i 6 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Aelius Dionysius This new type of imitative literature stimulated the production of lexicographical works prepared by compilers claiming the name of ‘Atheists’. Their aim was partly to collect words and phrases sanctioned by Attic usage, partly to explain unfamiliar terms found in Attic authors. Lists of such words had already been drawn up, in the Alexandrian age, by Aristophanes and Crates; and, early in the imperial age, by Demetrius Ixion and Caecilius of Calacte; also, in the first century a.d., by minor grammarians such as Dorotheus and Epitherses, Nicander and Irenaeus 1 . But it was in the time of Hadrian, at the beginning of a new age of Greek Scholarship 2 , that lexicography made its first important advance. In that age the chief representative of lexicography is the ‘ Atticist ’, Aelius Dionysius, described by Suidas as a descendant of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. He compiled a lexicon of Attic words in five books with a supplement in five more, both parts including many examples of each word. Photius {cod. 152) describes it as equally useful to imitators of Attic style and students of Attic writers. His own copy included a similar lexicon, of equal bulk, but containing fewer examples, compiled by another the*Att?cist’ ‘Atticist’, Pausanias, who lived under Antoninus Pius and possibly also under M. Aurelius. Photius {cod. 153) suggests the desirability of recasting and combining the lexicons of both of these ‘ Atticists ’ in a single work with all the items in a single alphabetical order 3 . For most of our knowledge of both, we are indebted to Eustathius. The sources of their learning are Aristophanes of Byzantium and Didymus, Pamphilus and Diogenianus, Tryphon and Herodian 4 . In the age of Hadrian, Julius Vestinus of Alexandria com¬ piled collections of words from Thucydides, and from Isaeus, Isocrates, Demosthenes and other orators 5 ; while his fellow- Vestinus 1 Croiset, v 639. 2 Wilamowitz, Eur. Her. i 173. 3 Cod. 152—3. Cp. Rindfleisch, De Pansaniae et A elii Dionysii lex. rhet. (1866). 4 E. Schwabe, A elii Dionysii et Pausaniae Frag. (1890), combined in alphabetical order. 5 Suidas, Ovrja twos. XVIII.] THE ATTICISTS. 317 townsman, Valerius Pollio, made a selection of Attic phrases, mainly from the poets. Pollio’s son, Diodorus, confined himself to explaining difficult terms in the Attic orators 1 . Of the ‘ Atticists 5 the most interesting to ourselves are Phrynichus and Moeris, some of whose works are . . Phrynichus still extant. Phrynichus ( fl. 180) appears to have taught Rhetoric in Bithynia under M. Aurelius and Comrnodus. He was a passionate purist, and, in spite of feeble health, composed a vast lexicon of Attic terms in 37 books, under the title of cro(f)iaTLKr} 7 rpo 7 rapaaKev 7 j, 1 the rhetorical magazine \ All that we know of this great work is the selection published in Bekker’s Anecdota 2 , and the summary in Photius {cod. 158), who describes the work as at least five times too long, and the author as failing to illustrate by example that beauty of style which he commends by precept. It was partly founded on the work of Aelius Dionysius. As authorities Phrynichus recognised, in prose, Plato and the ten Attic orators, with Thucydides, Xenophon, Aeschines Socraticus, Critias and Antisthenes (with a special preference for Plato, Demosthenes and Aeschines Socraticus); and, in verse, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides and Aristophanes 3 . He composed (probably in his youth) a far shorter work which has come down to us, known to Sui'das as the ’ArriKiornys, with an alternative title eK.\oyr\ pY)p.dT(ov kcu dvop-draiv ’Attikcoi/. It consists of a long list of rules and prohibitions, telling the student what expressions to avoid, and what to use instead 4 . Throughout the 1 Phot. 149 k Cp., in general, Christ, § 571 3 ; Croiset, v 640! 2 i pp. 1—74. 3 Photius, cod. 158, p. ioi b. 4 You must say not eKovrrju, but ideXovTr/v; not omdev, but ftirurdev; not iKeoia, but UereLa; not viro 8 eiyp.a, but irapd 8 eiyp.a.; not wvd.p.r]v, but wvr]p.r)v; not /iexpis and &XP LS ’ but pexp<- and axP L > not & 7 rival, but airdvai; not dadrw, but eio-iTU); not evxo.p<-fievov £6vQ)v’ ixaveXdovra eis MyvirTov iirayay < la6at re^- at vL>ra$ Uavovs’ tov ovv "0 , 8edaXdrjvcu £k£- Xevaev auros ToXvreXQr k < arcurKevd > £ei db abrbv B/)tfa£is 6 dirjpuovpybs’ oi>x 6 'A.d'qv < cubs’ a\\os> 8£ ns bfubvvp.os iicdvui tlol Bpvd^ibf 6s VXt) CHAPTER XIX. GREEK SCHOLARSHIP IN THE THIRD CENTURY. In turning from the second to the third century, which approximately begins with the accession of Sep- timius Severus in 193 and ends with the abdication ce ntury hird of Diocletian in 305, we feel conscious of a sense of decline. We leave the age of Aristides and Lucian for that of the Philostrati, and Aelian and Athenaeus. In science we have no longer any names to compare with those of Ptolemy of Alexandria and Galen of Pergamon. In history, however, we note a decided advance in authors such as Dion Cassius and Herodian, both of whom made Thucydides their model. In philosophy, the high level reached in the previous century by M. Aurelius is fully maintained by the earliest of the Neo- platonists. The decline of poetry, represented in the early part of the century by the Cynegetics of Pseudo-Oppian, is compensated by the rise of romance in the writings of Xenophon of Ephesus, and of Heliodorus. The Sophists of this century include Philostratus ‘the Athenian’ (b. c. 170; fl. 215—245) who, before the year 217, dedicated his Life of Apollonius of Tyana to the ‘the 1 Athenian’ empress Julia Domna, the wife of Severus, the mother of Caracalla, ‘the patroness of every art, and the friend of every man of genius’ 1 . Perhaps the most memorable passage is that in which Apollonius, in connexion with the art of Sculpture, identifies avTaa-La with ‘ the creative imagination ’ 2 , thus giving the term a new meaning unknown to Aristotle. A few years 1 Gibbon, c. 6 (i 127 Bury). Philostr. Vit. Apoll. i 3; Fit. Soph, ii 30; 73 - 2 vi 19 (quoted on p. 72); cp. tt epl iipov s, xv 1, and Egger, p. 484. 328 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. \ later (e. 230-7) Philostratus wrote the Lives of the Sophists , Book 1 including the ancient Sophists, such as Gorgias; Book n, the modern, among whom Herodes Atticus is prominent. These Lives are neither real biographies nor critical studies, but are rhetorical portraits drawn in an exaggerated style. Incidentally we here learn that, during the life of Herodes Atticus, a purer Greek was spoken in Attica than in Athens itself 1 ; and that, even after the death of Aristides, the study of rhetoric flourished at Smyrna 8 . His Gymnasticus , written after 219, is not without interest in connexion with the history of the Olympic games and the various kinds of athletic contests. His Letters are mainly inspired by the New Comedy of Athens and by the elegiac poets of Alexandria 3 . They also supply an interesting link between Greek and English poetry; for it is here that we find the source of Ben Jonson’s well-known Song to Celia :— ‘Drink to me only with thine eyes, And I will pledge with mine; Or leave a kiss but in the cup And I’ll not look for wine.... I sent thee late a rosy wreath, Not so much honouring thee, As giving it a hope that there It could not wither’d be. But thou thereon didst only breathe And sent’st it back to me; Since when it grows, and smells, I swear, Not of itself but thee!’ 4 Bentley’s grandson, Cumberland, found fault with Jonson for thus borrowing a ‘ parcel of unnatural, far-fetched conceits ’ from a ‘ despicable sophist’s ’ ‘ obscure collection of love-letters ’; and Cumberland’s criticism was in turn denounced by Giffard 5 * * . 1 ii 1, 13. 2 ii 26, 1. 3 Croiset, v 764—770. 4 Ep. 33, epol 5 b pbuois irpbmve rots 6 ppatpovavov pbbuv, ob ab ripur, xal tovto pbv yap , d\\’ abroh n x a P l ^f X€V0S T0 ‘ s pbboi s, tv a pi] papavdij. 4 6 , ult ., rd Xel\pava (tu>p pbdwp) avTlTrep.\]/ov irvlovra pbSuv pbvov aXXa xal & 8 ovs, cp. 7 repl rjpovs iii r, xxxii 7). 8 Diels, Doxographi. XIX.] DIOGENES LAERTIUS. 333 of high rank, interested in philosophy (iii 47, ix 20). It aims at enumerating the chief representatives of each school, with brief biographical sketches of an anecdotic character, a list of their works and a popular statement of their views. The first two books include the ‘ Seven Wise Men of Greece ’, the earliest philosophers down to Anaxagoras and Archelaus, and Socrates and his pupils with the exception of Plato, who is reserved for book iii. Book iv is on the Academics, v on Aristotle and the Peripatetics, vi on the Cynics, and vii on the Stoics from Zeno to Chrysippus. In viii we return to the earlier age, to the school of Pythagoras, with Empedocles and Eudoxus ; in ix we have a confused jumble including Heracleitus, the Eleatics, the Atomists and the Sceptics, while x is entirely on the School of Epicurus, to which the compiler himself appears occasionally to incline. Even in the case of Epicurus, the author has been convicted of gross carelessness in the use of his authorities 1 , while, in his list of the works of Aristotle, he follows the old Alexandrian catalogue, ignoring the fact that they had subse¬ quently been edited in a fuller form by Andronicus of Rhodes, in the time of Cicero. The work appears to have been partly founded on the works of Diodes of Magnesia (imSpo/xr] <£iAoo-o<£wi/ , first century b.c.), and Favorinus of Arles ( Travro^airr] la-Topia), with literary items from the forgeries 2 of Lobon of Argos (nepl TTOLrjTtov) 3 . Late in the second and early in the third century is the age of the most important of the ancient commen¬ tators on Aristotle, Alexander of the Carian town of^ph^odisias of Aphrodisias. He flourished under Septimius Severus, having been called to Athens c. 198, and having dedicated to Severus and Caracalla (not later than 211) his work On Fate, which is an inquiry into Aristotle’s opinions on Fate and Free¬ will. His works, which are of special value in connexion with the text of Aristotle and the history of Greek philosophy, are 1 Usener, Epicurea, xxi f. 2 Hiller in Rhein. Mus. xxxiii 518 f. 3 F. Nietzsche, in Rhein. Mus. xxiii—xxv, and Wilamowitz, Phil. Unt. iv 330-49. Favorinus alone is regarded as his original by Maass, Phil. Unt., Heft 3 and Rudolph, Leifz. Stud, vii 126 (Christ § 514 3 ; Croiset, v 818—820). 334 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Neo- Platonism largely quoted by later writers, such as the Neo-Platonists Syrianus and Simplicius. Holding aloof from the mystical tendencies of the Academics of his time, he mainly confined himself to the interpretation of Aristotle. His extant commentaries deal with the First Book of the Analytics 1 , the Topica 2 , the De Sensu 3 and the Metaphysics 4 . He is also the author of several independent treatises 5 . About half of his voluminous writings were edited and translated into Latin at the revival of learning; and his genuine works have been recently published, mainly by the Berlin Academy 6 . The only original product of Greek genius in the third century was Neo-Platonism, which necessarily involved a renewed study of the teaching of Plato, though it attempted to combine that teaching with the tenets of other schools of Greek philosophy. The doctrines of those earlier schools had already been partially merged with one another, and had also been blended with old and new varieties of belief. This tendency had shown itself in Philo Judaeus, in Plutarch and Numenius and (early in this century) in Alexander of Aphrodisias, the commentator on Aristotle. In the same century the verbal study of Plato’s text was exemplified in the Platonic lexicon of the sophist Timaeus 7 , which is later than Porphyry unless the extract from that Neo-Platonist (.r. v. ox>x rjKLo-Ta) is an inter¬ polation. Neo-Platonism is generally regarded as having been founded by Ammonius Saccas, who taught at Alexandria during the first half of the third century, but did not reduce his teaching to a written form. Among his many pupils (c. 205—211) was the Christian philosopher Origen (185—254), who in 203 succeeded Clement as head of the Christian School of Alex¬ andria. He was the first great scholar among the Greek Fathers. With his own hand he supplied himself with transcripts of the Greek Classics, but sold them all for a small Origen 1 ed. Wallies (1883). 2 id . (1891). 3 ed. Thurot (1875). 4 Latest ed. Hayduck (1891). 5 Scripta Minora, ed. Bruns in Suppl. Ar. ii. 6 Gerke in Pauly-Wissowa, i 1453 f. 7 ed. Ruhnken, 1789. XIX.] NEOPLATONISTS. PLOTINUS. 335 sum in order to be enabled to teach others without receiving any remuneration. The work of Origen most closely connected with Scholarship was his Hexapla , an edition of the Old Testament exhibiting in six parallel columns the Hebrew text and the same in Greek characters, with the four translations by Aquila, Sym- machus, the * Seventy ’ and Theodotion. Seven shorthand writers and as many copyists took part in it, and the work filled fifty large rolls of parchment; but it is now represented by fragments alone. He also devoted much time and labour to the text of the New Testament. As a commentator he holds that Scripture has in general three senses, the literal, the moral, and the spiritual; and, with a view to eliciting the last of these, he specially favours the allegorical method of interpretation. These three senses he regards as corresponding to the body, soul and spirit, which he fancifully describes as figured in the water-pots of Cana * containing two or three firkins a-piece ’ \ This weakness for allegorising was combined with a wide variety of learning. Ac¬ cording to a discourse delivered in his presence in 239 by his pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus, the range of his teaching at Caesarea included dialectics, physics, geometry, astronomy, ethics, metaphysics and theology; while he is described by Jerome (Ep. 70) as finding in Plato and Aristotle, in Numenius and Cornutus, support for the doctrines of Christianity 2 . The principles of Neo-Platonism were reduced to writing by Plotinus (204—270), who studied under Ammonius , . ' ^ Plotinus Saccas at Alexandria from 232 to 243, and spent the remaining twenty-six years of his life at Rome. He may justly be regarded as the true founder of Neo-Platonism, in so far as he perpetuated its principles in a written form. In his class-room 1 the later Platonic and Aristotelian commentators were read 3 ; but everywhere an original turn was given to the discussions, into which Plotinus carried the spirit of Ammonius ’ 4 . 1 Origen’s Philocalia, c. 12, p. 19, J. A. Robinson. 2 Croiset, v 845-55; cp. Christ, § 682 s , Bigg’s Christian Platonists, and Westcott in Diet. Chr. Biogr. 3 Porph. V. Plot. 3. 4 T. Whittaker, The Neo-Platonists, p. 33; cp. Bigg’s Neoplatonism, p. 187. 336 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. The teaching of Plotinus has been preserved with the aid of his pupil, Porphyry (233— c. 301-5), in six groups of nine books Porphyry called the Enneades \ Porphyry had, in his youth, known Origen at Alexandria; and had been a pupil of Cassius Longinus at Athens. It was from Longinus that he received the name of ‘ Porphyrius ’, as a rendering of his Tyrian name of Malchus, or ‘King’. In 263 he became the pupil of Plotinus in Rome. He was a scholar and a mathematician, as well as a philosopher and a historian. From Porphyry to Julian one of the principal aims of Neo-Platonism was the philo¬ sophic defence and maintenance of paganism. Porphyry’s attacks on Christianity, which were mainly concerned with historical criticism, and had an important influence on Julian ‘the Apostate’, were answered by Eusebius and others. His History of Philosophy was mainly confined to Plato, but it included a Life of Pythagoras , which is extant. He was among the last of the writers on philosophy who had a first-hand knowledge of the writings of his predecessors; and he quotes Longinus 1 2 as saying that, with the exception of Plotinus and A melius (a pupil of Plotinus), philosophers had ceased to do anything more than collect and expound and expand the opinions of their predecessors. In extreme old age he wrote the Life of Plotinus; and his own expositions of his master’s teaching are still represented in his Sententiae 3 . He also compiled a work on Chronology, which is among the authorities followed by Eusebius 4 . In the domain of Scholarship he produced a treatise on ‘ philological research ’ ( , ckci kclI Traocu erXeLirovai. dpTjKdres ras Koivwvicas x (t3 P‘*) ><7lt3 p.ev Kai eiri ras 8iaopas. Sevrtpa 8b Siacpopa avTiov < inrbpx^Tai, > 6 Tpbiros tt) s Karrjyoplas * ai p.bv yap ev rcot tL ecrTiy Karrjyoc povures> uxrirep rb ybvos Kai to eX8os‘ ai 8b bv run oiroXov < tL ecrriv > Cjoirep 7 / Siaipopa, Kai to i8iov Kai to a vp.fie^rjKbs. David the Armenian. Conspectus of Greek Literature, &c., 300—600 A.D Roman Emperors 305ConstantiusI 3o6ConstantineI 337 f -40 I Constan- J tine II -61 j Constan- tius II -50 \Constans I 361 Julian 363 Jovian 364 Valens 378 Theodosius I 395 Arcadius 400 - Poets 362 Apollinaris of Laodicea, d. c. 383-92 Quintus Smyr- naeus 408 Theodo¬ sius II 450 Marcian 457 Leo I 474 Leo II 474 Zeno 491 Anastasius I 500 - 518 Justin I 527 Justinian I 565 Justin II 578 Tiberius II 582 Mauricius 600- Palladas c. 410 Nonnus Eudocia Anatolius, bp of Constantinople 449-58 Tryphiodorus Colluthus Musaeus Christodorus Romanus Paulus Silen- tiarius Agathias c. 536—582 Chronologers Orators and Scholars and Other Writers & Historians Rhetoricians Critics of Prose 313 Eusebius Iamblichus 265—340 c. 280— c. 330 335 Philostratus Ulpian 326 Athanasius III Later 335 Dexippus 2 95—373 Eikones ? Callistratus 340 Proaeresius 365 Theon 367 Epiphanius 276—368 315—403 Olympiodorus I Gregory Libanius Nazianzen 314— c. 393 c. 330 —c. 390 Themistius 371 Basil g 310-20— c. 394 331—379 Himerius Gregory of c. 315—386 Nyssa c- 343 — c - 396 381 Chrysostom fAmmonius 344 - 7—404 39 1 ^Helladius 394 Theodore of Theodosius Mopsuestia !; Aphthonius c. 350—403 406 Synesius 405 Eunapius, Troilus Stephanus c. 370— c. 413 L ives ofPhilo- Byzantinus Isidore of sophers a?idSo- Pelusium phists 425 Orus c. 370—450 425 Orion 412 Cyril of Alexandria 429 Theodoret 380—444 386— c. 458 415 d. of Hypatia 439 Socrates Syrianus 431 d. of Plutar- chus 443 Sozomen 4 i 5 - 5 oHierocles 450 Zosimus Hesychius 431-38 Syrianus Alexandrinus 438-85 Proclus 410—485 c. 450 Syriac C om men ta to rs • on A ristotle Stobaeus 485 Marinus 480—520 ‘ Dio- Procopius of Hermeias nysius Areo- Gaza Timotheus of pagita’ John of Antioch Marcellinus Gaza Aristaenetus 5i8Zachariah of Sopater Ammonius son Isidorus Mitylene of Hermeias Hegias 533-6 Procopius 520 Damascius ft- 527—562 Choricius Simplicius Petrus Patricius Agapetus Joannes Philo- 7 ?- 534—562 ponus 529 The School 533 Nonnosus of A thens !’ Agathias closed 1 1 c. 536^-582 c. 550 Hesychius 551 John Lydus of Miletus 563 JohnMalalas Joannes Charax 559 Anastasius c. 500-73 564 Olympiodo- of Antioch 581 Theophanes rus II d. 599 582 Menander Protector ? David the Ar- 593 John of menian Epiphania ? Choeroboscus 593 Evagrius CHAPTER XX. GREEK SCHOLARSHIP IN THE FOURTH CENTURY. The fourth century begins a few years before the abdication of Diocletian (305). By the end of its first quarter (324), Christianity was recognised as the religion C entury OUrth of the State, and Byzantium chosen as the site of the new capital, which was henceforth to become a new centre of Greek learning. Before two-thirds of the century had passed, a pagan reaction had intervened during the brief reign of Julian (361-3). A historian of the eleventh century, who assigns to his reign the last of the pagan oracles, informs us, that the emperor sent envoys to restore the temple of Apollo at Delphi, but the work was no sooner begun, than the envoys were bidden to return with the following response :— curare Tip /SacriX^t, x° L l ULaL *"6x6 Saida Xos auXa. ovk£ti 3 >ot/ 3 os ?x €l Ka\ti[ 3 av, ov /advrida Sd4>vr]v, oi) iraydv \a\eoua\epav Kai Qeov irbppu fiaWovoav, kclk&s eiSbres (Croiset, v 937). 344 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. of hexameter, elegiac, iambic and ionic verse of the ordinary classical type, varied twice by metres of a new kind depending not on quantity but on accent. In his verses he occasionally' borrows from Empedocles. The cento from the Bacchae and other plays of Euripides, once ascribed to him, is now recognised as a production of the Middle Ages 1 . Basil’s brother, Gregory of Nyssa ( c . 343— c. 396), while he incidentally shows us that Christian youth still continued to be instructed in pagan poetry 2 , is mainly a theologian animated in exegesis by Origen’s partiality for the spiritual, figurative and allegorical form of interpretation, which was strongly opposed by Theodore of Mopsuestia (c. 350— 403) and by Chrysostom. Chrysostom (344-7—404), who exhibits the art of a Demosthenes and an Isocrates super- Chrysostom added to a great natural genius, was a pupil of Libanius at Antioch, where for sixteen years (381—397) he wielded by his extraordinarily eloquent discourses a far wider influence than he ever attained during his brief and troubled tenure of the patriarchate of Constantinople (398—403). Theo¬ dore of Mopsuestia ( c . 350—428) is highly esteemed as a biblical expositor and a theological controversialist. His Mopsuestia° f opposition to the allegorical method of interpreta¬ tion is noticed by Photius {Cod. 3). He prefers the grammatical and historical method which he had inherited from Chrysostom’s master and his own, Diodorus of Antioch; and in the exegesis of the New Testament, he shows the instincts of a scholar in noticing minor words which are often overlooked, in attending to niceties of grammar and punctuation, and in keenly discussing doubtful readings 3 . The mystic and Neo-Platonist, Iamblichus, died about 330 a.d. This enables us to infer the approximate date of the Neo-Platonist Dexippus, who refers to Iamblichus in the introduction to his extant Commentary on the Categories of Aristotle 4 . Dexippus is also the author of a dialogue on the Apart from Neo- Platonists, the principal writers of prose, on the pagan side, were Dexippus criticisms of Plotinus on the Categories 5 . 1 ed. Brambs (1885). 2 ii p. 3 H. B. Swete in Diet. Chr. Biogr. iv 947 a. 4 ed. Busse, 1888. 179. ed. Spengel, 1859. XX.] CHRYSOSTOM. THEODORE. HIMERIUS. 345 Himerius, Themistius, Libanius and Julian. Himerius, born at Prusa (< c . 315), was for nearly forty years a teacher • Himerius at Athens. Of his seventy-one Declamations only thirty-four have survived. Some of these are rhetorical exercises on themes such as the defence of Demosthenes by Hypereides, or the plea of Demosthenes for the recall of Aeschines. Others are of the nature of inaugural orations at the beginning of an Academic course. One of the latter is as solemn a discourse as that of a hierophant at Eleusis :—‘ Before the ceremony opens which is to give you access to the sanctuary, let me distinctly warn you what you should do, and what you should avoid 5 \ In another he tells his ‘freshmen’ that, to lead his flock, he has no occasion to resort to the rod, but is content to rely on melody alone: ‘ what blended sound of flute and pipes can touch your souls like the simple accents of this Chair?’ 2 In an earlier age he might have been an elegant poet instead of a semi-poetical rhetorician. He is far from being a profound student of Thucy¬ dides and Demosthenes; he shows a much deeper interest in poetry. He borrows largely from the ancient lyric poets, supplying us with prose paraphrases of some of the lost odes of Alcaeus 3 , Sappho 4 and Anacreon 5 , and also showing his familiarity with Stesichorus, Ibycus, Simonides and Pindar 6 . Themistius (born c. 310-20) declined important appointments in Rome and Antioch, and spent most of his life . . . Themistius at Constantinople, where he had a high reputation as an eloquent teacher. He enjoyed the favour of the emperors Constantius II, Julian, Jovian, Valens and Theodosius, and was entrusted with the education of Arcadius, but probably did not live to see his pupil ascend the throne of the East (395). We possess part of his early work, his Paraphrases of Aristotle , the portion still extant being a somewhat prolix exposition of the 1 xxii 7; xv 3 (Capes, University Life in Ancient Athens , p. 80 f); cp. Bernhardy, Gr. Litt. i 660 4 ; Juleville’s L'Ecole cTAthenes ; and Herzberg, Geschichte Griechenlcuids , iii 311-57. 2 xv 2 ; Capes, p. ii4f. 3 xiv 10. 4 Frag- i 33 > M 7 Bergk. 6 Frag. 124-6 Bergk. 6 xxii 5; xiii 7; Teuber, Qnaest. Himerianae (1882); ed. Diibner (1849) ; cp. Christ, § 602 3 , and Croiset, v 869 f. 346 THE ROMAN AGE. [chap. Later Analytics , the Physics , the De Anima , and some minor treatises \ His paraphrase of the Metaphysics , Book A, was translated into Arabic (in century ix), and thence into Hebrew (1255), and Latin (1576) 1 2 . In his teaching he appears to have assigned a prominent place to the Categories . When he is charged with making his pupils presumptuous and conceited, he inquires: ‘ have you ever heard of any of my friends speaking proudly or behaving haughtily on the strength of synonyms or homonyms or paronyms ? ’ 3 His original work consists mainly of official harangues. Under several successive emperors he was practically the public orator of Constantinople, and the noblest use which he made of that position was to plead repeatedly for toleration in matters of religious belief and worship. He was highly esteemed by Christians and pagans alike 4 . His Christian correspondent Gregory Nazianzen calls him ‘the king of elo¬ quence 7 (Ep. 140). He names, as the five Classics studied in Constantinople, Thucydides, Isocrates, Demosthenes, Plato and Aristotle 5 ; as a sixth, he mentions Aristophanes 6 . He shows us his general relation to the ancient Classics in a composition addressed to his father (Or. 20), where we find him vaguely referring to the ‘ golden Menander, and Euripides, and Sophocles, and fair Sappho and noble Pindar ’, while he quotes and actually discusses various authors in his Basanistes (Or. 21); but he supplies us with nothing of the nature of definite literary criticism. ‘To Themistius...the great writers of old are persons worthy of infinite respect, to be quoted freely, but to be quoted...for the substance only’ 7 . In another of his discourses (Or. 23) he complains of the length of time spent by teachers on the exposition of a single author, ‘ wasting as much time on one poor book as the Greeks spent in the siege of Troy’. He holds himself aloof from the Sophists of the day: ‘ the Sophists might dwell con¬ tentedly in the unrealities of dreamland, but eternal verities alone engaged the attention of his class ’ 8 . 1 ed. Spengel, 2 vols. (1866); also Anal. Pr. i, ed. Wallies (1884). 2 Steinschneider, Hebr. Uebersetzungen , § 89. 3 Or. xxiii p. 351 (Grote’s Ar. i 81). 4 Christ, § 601 3 ; Croiset, v 871-6; ed. Dindorf, 1832. 5 Or. iv p. 71. 6 Or. xxiii p. 350. 7 Saintsbury, i 125. - 8 Capes, p. 90. XX.] THEMISTIUS. LIBANIUS. 347 Another leading teacher of the day was Libanius (314— c. 393). He was born at Antioch. At the age of fifteen he . showed his first eagerness for literary learning, sold all his favourite pigeons, and turned with enthusiasm to the ancient Classics. The authors then most read were Homer and Hesiod, Herodotus and Thucydides, Lysias and Demosthenes; but others, such as the dramatists, and Pindar and Aristophanes, Plato and Aristotle, were not neglected, as is proved by quotations in Libanius and his contemporaries. At the age of twenty he read the Acharnians during a terrific storm of thunder and lightning, which almost blinded him and made him deaf, and even left him liable to headaches for the rest of his life 1 . At the age of twenty-two, though his kinsmen wished to keep him at home, and his friends offered him rich heiresses in marriage, he insisted on completing his education at Athens: ‘ he would have declined the hand even of a goddess, if he could only see the smoke of Athens’ 2 . At Athens he at once became the victim of a party of students who insisted on his attending the lectures of their favourite professor alone, whom he soon deserted for the private study of the ancient Attic authors 3 . He was a student for about four years, during which he visited Corinth, Argos (where he was initiated in the local mysteries) and Sparta (where he attended the primitive ceremony of scourging at the altar of Artemis Orthia). But his time at Athens passed swiftly by: ‘he saw it only as in a dream, and then went on his way ’ 4 . Soon afterwards, however, he became a public teacher at Athens, Constantinople, Nicaea and Nicomedeia, where he spent five years (344—349), which long remained in his memory as the very ‘ flower ’ and ‘ spring-time of his life ’ 5 . It was there also that he was visited by a friend who brought with him the welcome gift of a whole waggon-load of books 6 . From Nicomedeia he returned to Constantinople and Athens, and finally, at the age of forty, after sixteen years’ absence, reached his old home at Antioch, where he remained as a public teacher for the rest of his life. Among the Greek rhetoricians of the Roman age 1 i 9 f; Ep. 639. 3 i 13 {id. 99 f). 8 i 38- 2 i 11 (Capes, p. 66). 4 Capes, p. 67. 6 i 39 * 34» THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. he mentions Favorinus, Adrianus and Longinus 1 , and he takes special pains to obtain a bust of Aristides 2 . Like Themistius at Constantinople, he was a devoted adherent of the pagan cause at Antioch, but his most famous pupil was Chrysostom. We are told that, on his death-bed, he would have named Chrysostom as his successor, ‘if he had not been carried off by the Christians’ 3 . The genuineness of the correspondence between Libanius and Basil is doubtful, and there is no certain proof that the Christian bishop ever became the pupil of the pagan rhetorician. Libanius was a prolific writer. Among his purely scholastic works 4 are his Declamations (p^Xirai), and his Rhetorical Exercises (7rpoyu/xvao-/jtaT(jov Trapay-yeX/xara), the latter including speeches composed in the characters of Achilles and Medea, and a some¬ what dull and formal comparison between Demosthenes and Aeschines. He is also the author of certain critical works on Demosthenes, including a Life of that orator and Arguments to his speeches. These are preserved in the mss, and printed in most of the editions, of Demosthenes; he rightly declines to accept the Speech on Halonnesus as the work of Demosthenes, and is inclined to ascribe to Hypereides the Speech on the treaty with Alexander. Among his rhetorical works are an Apology for Socrates and a Speech against Aeschines, both in the artificial manner of Aristides. When he bitterly reproaches the gods in his Monodies on the destruction of Nicomedeia and on th£ death of Julian, his composition is in strict accord with the precepts of the rhetorician Menander 5 . Many of his other speeches are much more interesting owing to the light which they throw on the academic life and on the general culture of the time. We learn that he had assistants to copy all his speeches, and a slave in charge of the complete collection 6 . In one of his discourses he describes two of the pictures (scenes of country life) that adorned the Senate-House of Antioch 7 ; in another, he defends the pantomime of his day against the attacks of Aristides 8 . As a widely popular teacher, he is proud of the number of his pupils; 1 E PP- i 3 * 3 > 546 , 99 s - 2 Ep. 1551. 4 ed. Reiske, 4 vols. (1784-97). 6 Ep. 656. 3 Sozom. viii 2. 5 iii 435 Sp. 7 iv 1048 and 1057. H 345 - XX.] LIBANIUS. 349 he is ‘ too modest to aver that he has filled the three continents and all islands, as far as the pillars of Hercules, with rhetoricians ’, but he avows that he has ‘ spiritual children ’ in Thrace and Bithynia, in Ionia and Caria, in Galatia and Armenia, in Cilicia and Syria \ He represents a student complaining to himself: ‘what shall I gain from all this ceaseless work, from reading through so many poets, so many rhetoricians, and writers of every style of composition?’ 1 2 He complains of the inattentive¬ ness of his class : ‘ some of them stand like statues, with their arms folded ; others vacantly count the numbers of those who come in late, or stare at the trees outside...; they forget all about Demosthenes, the latest comments as completely as the first ’ 3 . He exhorts the idlers to ‘ pay less attention to the races and more to their books ’ 4 . His life and times are also reflected in his Letters , of which more than 1600 have survived 5 . Here we incidentally learn that he was ignorant of Latin 6 ; he reproaches a Roman friend for not writing to him in Greek, although his correspondent had thoroughly studied Homer and Demosthenes 7 ; and he tells Demetrius 8 that, having been much bored by the recitations of his pupils, he had, instead of lecturing in person, read them parts of the ‘ artificial epistolary discourse ’ of his correspondent. He is familiar with Attic comedy 9 , and no writer of that age is more thoroughly imbued with the language of Demosthenes and the other Attic orators. Four centuries later he was regarded by Photius as, on the whole, maintaining a true standard of Attic style 10 . In the most recent criticism of Demosthenes, his reminiscences of the orator’s language supply part of the materials for determining the original text; and a permanent value attaches to his Arguments to the orator’s 1 iii 444 (Capes, p. 79 f). 2 iii 438 (ib. p. 81 f). 3 i 200-2 (Bernhardy, Gr. Liti. i 66 $ 4 ; Sievers, p. 29; Capes, p. iii f). 4 Or. xxxiii (ii 294!); Saintsbury, i 123. 5 ed. J. C. Wolf (1738). 6 Epp. 923, 1241. 7 Ep. 956. 8 Ep. 128 (Saintsbury, l.ct). 9 Forster, Rhein. Mus. 32, 86 f. 10 Cod. 90, Kavu)v...Kal orad/AT] Xdyov’ATTiKov. He is often called Arjfioodevrjs 6 fJUKpds. 350 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Ulpian Julian speeches 1 . Probably his only contact with modern literature is to be found in the fact that his sixth Declamation 2 has been imitated in the character of Morose in Ben Jonson’s Silent Woman 3 . Some of the extant scholia on Demosthenes bear the name of Ulpian. They are of little value 4 , and probably belong in part alone to this eminent Sophist, the author of a number of lost rhetorical treatises and declamations, who taught rhetoric at Emesa and Antioch, under Constantine, counting among his pupils the Christian Proaeresius, and possibly the pagan Libanius 5 . Three of the discourses of Libanius, not to mention many incidental remarks in the rest of his writings, are on the life and character of the emperor Julian, with whom he had much in common. Blinded by the beauty and the power of the ancient Classics, both alike ‘ loved to dwell in a world of gods, goddesses, and heroes ’ 6 7 . When Libanius heard of Julian’s death, we are assured that nothing but the principles of Plato, and the duty of writing an encomium on the emperor, prevented the rhetorician from falling on his sword 1 . Julian, the son of the half-brother of Constantine, had owed his Greek training to a Hellenized Scythian, Mardonius, an admirer of Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus, and (above all) of Homer. When the lad was longing for races and dances and'other delights, his tutor gravely referred him to Homer’s admirable descriptions of the races in memory of Patroclus, to the dances of the Phae- acians, the lays of Phemius and Demodocus, the palm-tree of 1 Cp. Index to present writer’s First Phil, and Olynthiacs of Demosthenes. —On Libanius in general, cp. Sievers, Das Leben des Libanius (1868); Jule- ville, Sur la Vie et la Correspondance de Libanius; Christ, § 599 s ; Croiset, v 876-83; Egger, 502-9; Saintsbury, i 121-4. 2 SvgkoXos 777/xas XdXov 7 vvaira ecu nbv irpocrayylWei (separately edited by F. Morell, Paris, 1593-7). 3 IVorhs, iii (1875) 34 1 note; Hallam’s Lit. iii 97“*. 4 Boeckh, Staatshaushaltung , ed. Frankel, p.535 ‘der unwissende Ulpian’, cp. 399, 412, 549, 612, 641; better appreciated on p. 624. 5 Muller and Donaldson, Gk Lit. iii 290 f. 6 J. R. Mozley in Diet. Chr. Biogr. iii 710 b. 7 i 91 f, 521. XX.] ULPIAN. JULIAN. 351 Delos, the isle of Calypso, the cave of Circe and the garden of Alcinoiis 1 . After spending six years in the seclusion of Cappa¬ docia, he attended lectures at Constantinople and Nicomedeia. At the latter place, at the age of fourteen, he was not allowed to hear Libanius, but he privately obtained reports of his lectures 2 . He spent a short time as a student at Athens (355), counting among his companions the future bishops Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus. Writing afterwards to two of his fellow-students, he urged them not to despise light literature or to neglect rhetoric and poetry, but to pay more attention to mathematics, and to Plato and Aristotle (. Ep . 55). His own studies, however, were soon interrupted by affairs of state. Summoned by his cousin Constantius to take the command in Gaul, he left Athens with regret, stretching out his hands to the Acropolis and imploring Athena, with tears in his eyes, to grant him the boon of death 3 ; and, reluctantly assuming the purple robe of a Caesar at Milan, he expressed his foreboding of his future fate by murmuring to himself the ill-omened line of Homer: e\\a/ 3 e 7 rop which were in actual use, Theodosius sets forth all the imaginary aorists and futures of that verb, regardless of ancient usage. He is the earliest grammarian who does so; and his work transmitted this misleading teaching to later ages, in which it was expounded by Joannes Charaxand Georgius Choero- boscus (cent, vi), through whom it descended to the grammars of the Renaissance, and even to those of modern Europe. These monstrous and portentous forms have shown a wonderful vitality, notwithstanding the fact that they have been virtually slain by Cobet, who vigorously denounces them as ‘ monstra et portenta formarum,... quae in magistellorum cerebris nata sunt, in Grae¬ corum libris nusquam leguntur’ 3 . Near the close of the century (391), among those of the pagan party who resisted the destruction of the Serapeum at Alexandria, were the grammarians an^^ieiiadius Ammonius and Helladius 4 . The work on synonyms bearing the name of the former is only a Byzantine edition of the work of Herennius Philon 5 , while the lexicon of Helladius was known to Photius (cod. 145) and was one of the authorities followed by Suidas. Ammonius and Helladius fled from Alex¬ andria to Constantinople, where they became the instructors of the ecclesiastical historian, Socrates 6 . 1 ed. M. Schmidt, i860. 2 eicrayioyiKol Kavbves irepi KXiaews ovo/xaTUv kcli pripaTiov, Bekker Anecd. Gr. 974—1061; ed. Hilgard with the Scholia of Choeroboscus in Gi'am. Gr., iv 1889-94. 3 Variae Lectiones , p. 330. On Theodosius in general, cp. Christ, § 628 s , and Cohn in Pauly-Wissowa. Cp. supra, p. 138. 4 Rufinus, Hist. Eccl. ii 22; Socr. v 16-17. 5 Cohn in Pauly-Wissowa, ii 1866. 6 Photius, cod. 28. CHAPTER XXI. GREEK SCHOLARSHIP FROM 400 TO 530 A.D. The fifth century, and after In this chapter, which closes our survey of the Roman age, the time to be traversed begins in the brief and ineffective reign of Arcadius, and ends in the first few years of the long and fruitful reign of Justinian. Under the successor of Arcadius, the skilled calligrapher Theo¬ dosius II, a University was founded at Constantinople, as a counterpoise to the School of Athens; and the literary interests of the day are further illustrated by the fact that his consort, Eudocia, a native of Athens, won the applause of Antioch for a Greek speech closing with the Homeric line : v/xer 6/3775 (for TavTrjs tol ) yeverjs re kcu at/xaro? cv^o/xat emu \ Early in the fifth century we find evidence of a revival of interest in Greek poetry in northern Egypt. It is the age of Nonnus, who was born at Panopolis in the Thebaid, and probably lived at Alexandria. His vast and diffuse epic in forty-four books on the adventures of Dionysus is an immense repertory of mythological lore. After his conversion to Christianity he wrote a free and flowing paraphrase of the Gospel according to St John. The versification of both is marked by the predominance of dactyls, the strict avoidance of consecu¬ tive spondees, an almost invariable preference for the trochaic caesura in the third foot, and the constant use of the acute accent on one of the last two syllables,—generally the last but one. These innovations, which are better suited to the idyll than to the epic, are unknown to Quintus Smyrnaeus ; and the last of them forms a prelude to the accentual versification of Poets. Nonnus 1 //. vi 211 xx 241; Evagrius, i 20; Bury’s Later Roman Empire , i 131. CHAP. kXI.] NONNUS AND HIS SCHOOL. 357 Historians the Byzantine age 1 . The school of Nonnus includes the Egyptian grammarian and poet, Tryphiodorus, the author of an elegant but uninteresting poem on the Fall of Troy; Col- luthus, of Lycopolis in the Thebaid (fl. 491—518), coUAtJms° rUS the writer of a short epic on Helen; and (the only ^is t e 0 u dorus true poet of the three) Musaeus, whose Hero and Leander, with its echoes of the Alexandrian age of Callimachus, is the most charming product of Greek literature at the close of the Roman age 2 3 . During the transition from the fifth to the sixth centuries Christodorus of Coptus distinguished himself by his rhetorically poetical description of the seventy-three statues of the poets, philosophers, historians and heroes of Greece, which adorned the gymnasium of Zeuxippus at Constantinople until its destruction by fire in 532 s . In the fifth century general history is best represented by Zosimus, an imitator of Polybius, and ecclesiastical history by Socrates, who continues Eusebius from 306 to 439, and Sozomen and Theodoret, who cover part of the same period. All four of these historians belong to the middle of the fifth century. In the same century the philosophers devoted their attention mainly to the Timaeus of Plato, and to certain pseudo-orphic poems and a collection of oracles, which had already been expounded by Porphyry. The light of Neo-Platonism grows dim after the death of Proclus (485), and it slowly disappears in the course of the sixth century. The Syrian school of Iamblichus ( c . 280— c. 330), which had been so brilliant in the first half of the fourth century, fell into obscurity after the death of Julian. Early in the fifth century a new centre of Neo-Platonism was formed at Alexandria, and in that school the most interesting personality was that of Hypatia. Her father was the philosopher and mathematician, Theon, the commentator on Aratus, Euclid and Ptolemy, the compiler of a list of consuls from 138 to 372, and the last known member of the Alexandrian Museum (365). She studied Philosophers Hypatia 1 Christ, § 585 s ; Croiset, v 994—1000; cp. Bury, i 317—320. 2 Christ, § 586*; Croiset, v 1003. 3 Anth. Pal. ii. 358 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. the Platonic philosophy at Athens, and lectured at Alexandria on mathematics, as well as on Plato and Aristotle; in her philosophic teaching she followed the tradition of Plotinus 1 . As recorded in the ecclesiastical history of the time, her brilliant career was cut short by the fanaticism of the Alexandrian mob in the spring of 415 2 . The most distinguished of her pupils was Synesius, who in his Letters shows a very high regard for his Synesius J 0 0 teacher, even after he had become bishop of Ptole- mais, the metropolitan see of the Cyrenaic Pentapolis. He was born at Cyrene ( c . 370), being descended from the Dorian founders of his native city, which, as he proudly recalls, was also the birthplace of Carneades and Aristippus. In his boyhood he led a healthy life in the open air, thus acquiring that love of the chase which never left him. His youthful education under Hypatia at Alexandria included mathematics and philosophy (c. 390-5). He describes himself as united to one of his friends, Hesychius, by the sacred bond of their common study of geo¬ metry 3 ; he presents to another, Paeonius (an important personage at Constantinople), an astrolabe of his own invention 4 ; and, in one of his Letters , he tells a third that he fancies the very stars look down with kindly influence on himself, as the only man in Libya who could look up to them with the eyes of knowledge 5 . His father, a senator of Cyrene, left him his library; Synesius himself had many more books to bequeath than he had thus inherited; and, during his whole life, his sympathies were thoroughly Greek. From about 400 to 402 (during the patri¬ archate of John Chrysostom) he stayed at Constantinople as the special envoy of Cyrene at the court of Arcadius, before whom he delivered on his country’s behalf a courageous 6 plea for a remission of taxation. The speech owes much to reminiscences of Dion Chrysostom, whose style, however, is more simple than 1 W. A. Meyer, quoted by Bury, i 208. 2 There are monographs on Hypatia by Hoche (. Philologus , xv 435 f), and W. A. Meyer (1886). 3 Ep. 92. 4 Migne, lxvi 1577. 5 Ep. 100, p. 1470 D. 6 1310 A, tZv iruTore 'l&Wrjvuv dappaXeurepov. XXI.] SYNESIUS. 359 that of Synesius 1 2 ; and, besides including passages from the Gorgias and Republic , it is interspersed with some sixteen quota¬ tions from the poets. In one of the phrases which he borrows from Homer, he even describes the emperors as having, by their robes of purple and gold and their barbaric gems, brought on themselves ‘ that Homeric curse—the coat of stone 5 2 . In the same discourse he oddly speaks of the stone of Tantalus (instead of the sword of Damocles) as hanging over the state, suspended by a single thread. At Constantinople or elsewhere, he had apparently been bored by people who gave themselves airs on the strength of having seen the groves of Academe, the Lyceum of Aristotle and the porch of Zeno 3 . He accordingly paid a visit to Athens, writing to his brother from Anagyrus to tell him that he had been to Sphettus and Thria, to Cephisia and Phaleron, and that he had seen the Academy and the Lycaeum, and all that remained of the ‘ Painted Porch ’, which a Roman proconsul had robbed of the masterpieces of Polygnotus. The splendour of Athens (he adds) only survived in places bearing famous names; Hypatia of Alexandria far surpassed the ‘brace of Plutarchean Sophists 5 (either Plutarchus and Syrianus, or a son and son-in-law of the former), who attracted their pupils to their lecture-rooms, not by the fame of their discourses but by the bribe of jars of honey from Hymettus; for Athens, once the home of the wise, derived the last remnant of her glory from her bee-keepers alone 4 . He left Constantinople during an earthquake, and reached the Cyrenaic coast during a terrific storm. After his return, he spent two years at Alexandria (402-4), married a Christian wife and in 404 settled down at his old home as a country gentleman delighting in his horses and dogs, dividing his time between ‘books and the chase 55 , and suppressing local bands of brigands, when to his surprise and embarrassment he found himself called by the voice of the people to be bishop of Ptole- mais (406). After seven months of uncertainty, he allowed 1 Theodorus Metochita, in Dindorf’s Dion , ii 367. Cp. Byz. Zeitschr. 1900, 85—151- 2 II iii 57. 3 Ep. 54. 3 1307 D, 1388 c; cp. 1484 A, 1488 c. 4 Ep. 136. 360 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. himself to be consecrated by the Alexandrian patriarch, Theo- philus, early in 407. He was soon very active in the discharge of his duties, but his tenure of office must have been brief, for we find no trace of him beyond 413. It therefore seems probable that he died one or two years before the tragic end of Hypatia. Seven of his Letters are addressed to her; he regards her as ‘ his mother and sister, and his preceptor ’; and, when he has lost all his three sons and is trembling for the fate of Cyrene, he confides to her his woes, and (quoting Homer) assures her that, ‘if men forget the dead that dwell in Hades, yet even there’ he will remember Hypatia \ His Dion, an Apologia pro vita sua , written c. 405, is a treatise on education and moral discipline, composed for the benefit of a son who was yet unborn, and suggested by the teaching of Dion Chrysostom, whose later writings he regards as models of simple and natural elegance. He tells Hypatia how he had come to write it (Dp. 153)- Certain philosophers had accused him of pretending to opinions about Homer, and of caring for beauty and rhythm of language. He accordingly holds up Dion as an example of a rhetorician who had become a philosopher without losing the charm of a classic style. In. the treatise itself he insists that the true philosopher must be a thorough Greek; must be initiated into the mysteries of the Graces, and familiar with everything that is important in literature; all this he will know as a scholar (<£«AoAoyos) and will judge as a philosopher 1 2 . ‘These rigid critics, who profess a contempt for rhetoric and poetry, do so not of their own choice, but owing to poverty of nature ’ 3 . ‘ Beauty of language is not an idle thing; it is a pure pleasure, which looks away from matter to real existence’ 4 . ‘A man may be well-equipped in speech, and, at the same time, a master of philosophy.’ Synesius aims at being both, notwithstanding the criticisms of philosophers who are illiterate, and of grammarians who criticise philosophical works, syllable by syllable, without producing anything of their own 5 . 1 Ep. 124; also 10, 15, 16, 33, 80, 153; cp. Ep. 4, 1342 B (to his brother at Alexandria), dairaaai ttiv ore^aa'/juujTOiTTjv Kal deocpiXearaTTjv ou , Kal t6v evdai/xova x°P^ v T ^ v oaroXaiovTa rrjs decnrecrlas avdrjs, and Epp. 132, 135 f. 2 1125 A, C. 3 II25 D. 4 II29B. 5 1152 A. XXI.] SYNESIUS. 361 He also answers those of his critics who had reproached him with using incorrect and faulty texts; ‘ what does it matter ’ (he replies) ‘ if one syllable is put for another ?’ ‘ The very necessity for making emendations is itself an excellent training.’ ‘The whole end of books is to call out ability into active exercise; to make us think, and think clearly ’ \ In conclusion he refers with charming candour to his own skill in improvising the sequel of any passage which he happened to be reading, and to his own imitations of ancient tragedies and comedies, possibly dating from his Alexandrian days;—adding that, in these compositions, the reader would have taken him for a contemporary, now of Cratinus and Crates, now of Diphilus and Philemon. The influence of Porphyry is apparent in the Dion; and that of Plotinus in his treatise On Dreams (which he regards as a means of divine revelation). In this hastily written work he incidentally remarks that thoughts revealed to him in the visions of the night had helped him not merely in the pursuits of the chase, but even in the cultivation of his style 1 2 . His Letters , 159 in number, ranging in time from c. 399 to 413, are full of the news of the day, full too of grace and point and literary interest. They are praised by Evagrius, Photius and Suidas 3 . We here find, now the traveller, now the man of action, absorbed in his country’s good; now the meditative student, and now the active administrator. Throughout them all, the writer’s literary proclivities are most strongly marked. He tells us that he has been asked for some of his poems, but that he ‘has not had time even to take them out of their boxes’ 4 . In the same Letter he quotes from the Odyssey (ix 51) and from Archilochus. In a few lines full of idyllic charm, written to his brother at the seaside, he describes the birds and trees and flowers that surround him at Cyrene, adding that the cave of the Nymphs calls for a Theocritus to sing its praises 5 . In a violent storm between Alexandria and the Cyrenaic coast he recalls the Ajax of Sophocles and the tempests in the Odyssey 6 . He assures one of his friends, half in fun, that the rustics south of Cyrene regard 1 1160 C-D; 1556 a; cp. Nicol, p. 109; Crawford, p. i 6 $f. 2 c. 9. 3 Volkmann’s Synesius, p. 113. 4 Ep. 129. 5 Ep. 114. Ep. 4. 362 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Odysseus and the Cyclops as still in the land of the living, and suppose that the emperor, whom they have never seen, is the same as a certain Agamemnon who once sailed to Troy \ To Synesius himself, Menelaus is the type of the true philosopher who can extort the truth even from the evasive Proteus 2 . Throughout the whole of his writings his references to Greek literature are very numerous. He refers most frequently to Plato (c. 133 times), Homer (c. 84) and Plutarch {c. 36); less often to Aristotle (20) and Herodotus (16), and to Hesiod, Pindar, Euripides, Aristophanes, Xenophon and Plotinus {c. 10 each); while the smallest number of quotations comes from Archilochus, Empedocles, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Thucydides and Demosthenes 3 . A far greater familiarity with Demosthenes is shown by his correspondent; the monk and scholar Isidore of Pelusium ( c . 370— c. 450), whose reminiscences of Demosthenes, scattered up and down his 2000 Letters, are sometimes of value for purposes of textual criticism 4 . Once, when Dion quotes a passage, which is really to be found in II. xxii 401, Synesius actually ventures to assert that Dion must have invented it 5 . His writings happily illustrate the extent and the character of the study of Greek literature which prevailed in his age 6 , while they also embody the opinions of a man of singular versatility, a student as well as a sportsman, a man of genuine cultivation but not entirely free from pedantry, one who stood on the border¬ land between Neo-Platonism and Christianity, and filled at one time the position of a pagan orator and philosopher, and at another that of an active patriot and a Christian bishop. His Hymns have won high praise from Mrs Browning, who translated two of them, while the tenth and last and simplest of them all has found its way into Hymns, Ancient and Modern 7 . Even in an abstruser poem of portentous length, a passage where he bids all the sounds of inanimate Nature be silent while he sings 1 Ep. 147. 2 1128 D. 3 Crawford, pp. 522-79. 4 Cp. index to present writer’s ed. of First Philippic and Olynthiacs. 5 1200 A. 6 Cp. Volkmann’s Synesius, p. 135. 7 No. 185, ‘Lord Jesus, think on me’ (trans. by A. W. Chatfield, 1876). XXI.] SYNESIUS. PALLADAS. 363 the Father and the Son, supplies us with a strain of not ungraceful simplicity:— Let heaven and earth awed silence keep, Let air and sea be still, Let rushing winds and waters sleep, Hushed be the river, hushed the rill 1 . Touches of poetry are not wanting even in his prose. In contrasting the freedom of his life at Cyrene with the slavery endured by the orators in the law-courts of Alexandria, he says in his Dion :—‘ I sing to these cypresses ; and this water here runs, rushing along its course, not measured off, or dealt out by the water-clock... And, even when I have ceased, the stream flows on, and will flow on, by night and by day, and till next year, and for ever ’ 2 . In contrast with the Neo-Platonic and Christian hymns of Synesius we may briefly glance at the 150 epigrams & ailaQaS of one of the latest of the pagan poets, Palladas. We there see him sighing over the gods of the ancient world, whose days are gone for ever 3 ; studying the old poets, but finding himself so poor that he is compelled to sell his Pindar and his Callimachus 4 ; writing witty verses on the scholastic uses of the Iliad*; discovering that, in the Odyssey as well as the Iliad, Homer is a misogynist 6 ; and revealing himself as in general a gloomy pessimist, whose only enthusiasm is for Hypatia:— Thee when I view, thyself and thy discourse I worship, for I see thy virgin-home Is in the stars, thy converse is in heaven, Adorable Hypatia, Grace of speech, Unsullied Star of true philosophy 7 . 1 iii 72—81. 2 Dion , c. 11, 1149 a; Crawford, p. 195.—On Synesius in general, see Opera in Migne, lxvi 1021 — 16r6; Tillemont, Memoires , xii; Clausen (1831); Druon’s Etudes (1859) > Volkmann (1869); Lapatz (1870); A. Gardner (1886); J. C. Nicol (1887); Halcomb in Diet. Chr. Biogr. ; Nieri in Rivista diJilologia xxi (1892) 220 f; Seeck in Philologus lii (1893) 458-83 (where the chronology of the Letters is revised); W. S. Crawford (1901); and T. R. Glover’s Fourth Century , pp. 320—356; also Christ, § 654 s , Croiset, v 1043-9; and c. 21 of Kingsley’s Hypatia. 3 Anth. Pal. ix 441. 4 ix 175. 6 ix 173-4. 6 ix 166. 7 ix 400. Cp. T. R. Glover, pp. 303-19. 364 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Cyril. Theodoret Pelagius The murder of Hypatia, as we are assured by Socrates (vii 15), brought no small discredit on the patriarch Cyril and the Church of Alexandria. Cyril (380—444) had succeeded Theophilus as patriarch in 412. Apart from homilies and commentaries, the extant works of Cyril include a defence of Christianity against Julian, and against the Arians and Nestorians. He was opposed by the friend of Nestorius, Theodoret (386— c. 458), bishop of Cyrrhus in northern Syria (428). Theodoret, in his examination of Christian truth in the light of Greek philosophy, written soon after his appointment as bishop, institutes a comparison between the various schools of philosophy. His statement of the opinions of the Greek philosophers is of value in so far as it has been proved to be founded on Aetius, who lived in the first century b.c. 1 The study of Greek in this age is illustrated by the fact that, at the synod held in 415 at Diospolis (the ancient Lydda), Pelagius, who was born of a Roman family in Britain ( c . 370— c. 440), made a great impression owing to his perfect familiarity with Greek, which was an unknown tongue to the historian Orosius, the emissary of St Augustine at preceding conferences in Palestine 2 . On the side of St Augustine in the Pelagian controversy was a good Greek scholar, Marius Mercator (. fl . 418 —449), who wrote in Greek against the Nestorians. The decline of Greek scholarship at Rome at this time is indicated by the fact that, when Nestorius sent a Greek letter and other documents to Pope Celestine (430), the latter was compelled to invite Cassianus to come from Marseilles to translate them 3 . Athens was the scene of the latest phase of Neo-Platonism. * The mystic teaching of the Syrian pupil of Por¬ phyry, Iamblichus (d. c. 330), author of a life of Pythagoras and an exhortation to the study of philosophy, including excerpts from Plato and Aristotle, was introduced into Athens by one Nestorius. At the end of the fourth century a new school was engrafted on the old by the son of this Nestorius, Plutarchus (d. 431), who restored the authority Neo- Platonists. Plutarchus 1 i] irepl twv apeaKbvTiav £1 ivayuyrj, Diels, Doxographi, pp. 45 f. 2 C. Gidel, Nouvelles Etudes sur la litt. Gr. i?ioderne (1878), p. 61 f. 3 ib. 64-5. XXI.] NEO-PLATONISTS. PLUTARCHUS. SYRIANUS. 365 of dialectic, besides devoting himself to mystic speculation, and to the Neo-Platonic exposition of Aristotle as well as Plato. He wrote an important commentary on Aristotle’s treatise De Anima\ little, however, of his work has survived except the passages quoted by Olympiodorus (the younger) and other commentators on Aristotle. His successors as heads of the School of Athens were Syrianus (431-8), Proclus (438-85), Marinus, Isidorus, Hegias, and lastly Damascius (529). A pupil of Plutarchus, Hierocles of Alexandria, who succeeded Hypatia, and flourished between 415 and 450, produced a commentary on the ‘ golden verses ’ of syrianus 168 ’ ‘ Pythagoras ’, which is still extant \ A pupil of Hierocles, the Christian Neo-Platonist Aeneas, is the author of a dialogue called Theophrastus , on the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body, which is praised for its brilliant style and its successful imitation of Plato. Of the successor of Plutarchus, Syrianus of Alexandria, we are told that he was in the habit of introducing his pupils to the ‘lesser mysteries’ of Aristotle before initiating them in Plato. He is said to have written commentaries on the Phaedo , Republic and La?vs. His commen¬ tary on three books of the Metaphysics has been published 1 2 ; his comments on the rhetorician Hermogenes have also survived 3 . About the end of the fifth century a commentary on Aristotle’s Organon was produced by David the Armenian, a pupil of Syrianus 4 . All our knowledge of the Neo-Platonism of Syrianus is due to his distinguished pupil, Proclus, who declares that he owes everything to that inspired teacher. Proclus Proclus (410—485), who was born in Constantinople, and studied grammar under Orion, and Aristotle under Olympiodorus the elder at Alexandria, went to Athens shortly before 430. The first place, at which he sat down or drank water, was close to a temple dedicated to Socrates. At Athens he read with Syrianus the whole of Aristotle, and afterwards Plato; and there he remained, 1 ed. Gaisford in Stobaei Eclogae, ii (1850); Mullach, Frag. Phil, i 408. 2 ed. Usener, in Berlin Aristotle, v (1870). 3 ed. Rabe, 1892-3. 4 So Neumann (1829); Rose, however, De Ar. libr. ordine (1854) 244 f, makes him a pupil of Olympiodorus II and places him in the sixth century; and Busse, Praef. in Porphyrium, xli-iv, agrees. 366 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. living a laborious life in the practice of severe abstinence, and continuing to preside over the School for forty-seven years. We are assured that he was a deep thinker, a fluent lecturer and a man of great personal charm. His pupils deemed him divinely inspired, and on one occasion a casual attendant at his lectures declared that his head was illumined with a celestial splendour \ In accordance with his principle that ‘ all things sympathise with all' 2 , he held that the philosopher should observe the religious rites of all nations and be ‘ the hierophant of the whole world ’; he also practised the cult of the dead, visiting in the first instance the tombs of the ancient Attic heroes 3 . He reduced Neo- Platonism to a precise and systematic form, but was incapable of restoring life to theories which had long lost touch with reality. He wrote rapidly, and wrote much, mainly in the form of comments on Plato. To the teaching of Plato he adhered more closely than Plotinus; and Plato is the source of his system of triads. Among his extant works are commentaries on the Re¬ public, Timaeus and Par?nenides , also his ‘ Theological Elements ’ and a treatise on Plato’s ‘theology’ 4 . In the course of his commentary on the Republic he defends Homer against the attacks of Plato. Seven of his Hymns to the Gods have survived. They are inspired with the breath of an ‘ immortal longing ’, like that of Plato or Plotinus; and the poet is ever pressing toward the ‘path sublime’, while he prays to the Sun and Athene and the Muses for the pure and ‘ kindly light that leads upwards (<£( 3 ? arayoiyiov), the means of attaining thereto being the study of books that awaken the soul ’ 5 . His pupil, Marinus, describes him as having sounded all the depths of the theology and mythology of the Greeks and barbarians, and as having reduced them to perfect harmony 6 . Proclus (says Zeller) is really a ‘ scholastic ’: all his genius is devoted to the interpretation of texts, which he accepts unreservedly without caring to criticise them 7 . It is stated that he often said that ‘if it were in his power, he would withdraw from the knowledge of men, for the 1 Marinus, Proclus , c. 23. 2 Elements of Theology , no. 140. 3 Whittaker, p. 160. 4 V. Cousin, ed. 2, 1864. 5 Bury’s Later Roman Empire , i 316. 6 Marinus, c. 22. 7 See, however, Whittaker, p. 162. XXL] PROCLUS. HERMEIAS. AMMONIUS. 367 present, all ancient books except the Timaens and the Sacred Oracles’ 1 . He was not thinking of the Scriptures, but his aspiration as to Plato was not long afterwards fulfilled in the Western world, by the fact that ‘along with the few compendia of logic and the liberal arts, which furnished almost the sole elements of European culture for centuries, there was preserved ’ a Latin translation of a large portion of the Timaeus 2 . After Proclus, Neo-Platonism lived on for about a century. Among its representatives were Hermeias (end of cent, v), who taught at Alexandria, and whose Ammonias* diffuse scholia on the Phaedrus are still extant 3 ; many extracts from them are quoted in the edition of Dr Thomp¬ son, who observes that, ‘amidst a heap of Neoplatonic rubbish, they contain occasional learned and even sensible remarks’ 4 . He agrees with Synesius 5 in supposing that beauty of every kind is the theme of this dialogue. He was succeeded at Alexandria (early in cent, vi) by his son Ammonius, who is still represented by his commentaries on the logical treatises of Aristotle 6 , and is the earliest of the extant expounders of the Eisagoge of Por¬ phyry 7 . Among the pupils of Ammonius were Simplicius, Asclepius 8 , Olympiodorus the younger, and Joannes Philoponus. The last of these wrote (among other works) a commentary on Aristotle’s Physics 9 . After languishing under the successors of Proclus (Marinus, Isidorus and Hegias) the School of Athens revived for the last time under Damascius, who studied at Alexandria and was a pupil of Marinus at Athens. He was not merely a 1 1 # ... Damascius mystic, like Iambhchus; he was also a dialectician, like Proclus. His ‘Life of Isidorus’ (disfigured by many puerilities) 1 Marinus, c. 38. 2 By Chalcidius; Whittaker, p. 160. 3 Published in Ast’s ed., 1810, and by Couvreur, 1902. 4 Thompson’s Phaedrus , pp. ix, 92, 136. 5 Volkmann’s Synesius , p. 148. 6 ed. Busse, Categ. 1895, De Inter fir. 1897. 7 Busse’s ed. (1891), and Berlin program (1892), cp. Bursian’s Jahresb. Ixxix 88. 8 Comm, on Ar. Metaphysics A.-7i, ed. Hayduck (1888), largely founded on Alexander of Aphrodisias. 9 ed. Vitelli (1887-8). 368 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. and his ‘Problems and Solutions on First Principles’ have sur¬ vived 1 : his commentaries on Aristotle have perished. He was the head of the School in 529, when the ‘golden chain’ of the Platonic succession was broken by the edict of Justinian, which put an end to the teaching of Neo-Platonism at of Athens Athens. The public payments to the professors closed by had long ceased ; even their private endowments were now suppressed, and the closing of the School was the natural consequence 2 . Its teachers lingered for a short time in their Athenian home, and, in* 532, seven of them, namely Diogenes and Hermeias, Eulalius and Priscianus, Damascius, Isidorus and Simplicius, left for the court of Chosroes, the en¬ lightened monarch who had recently ascended the Persian throne and who proved his interest in Greek philosophy by promoting the translation of certain Platonic and Aristotelian writings. Their high expectations were bitterly disappointed and they soon entreated permission to return. In 533 Chosroes concluded a treaty with Justinian, which ensured the protection of the philo¬ sophers from persecution for their opinions 3 . They returned to the dominions of the empire, to settle, not at Athens, but at Alexandria. Among those who had left Athens for Persia was a pupil of Damascius and Hermeias, Simplicius of Cilicia, whose commentaries on the Categories 4 , 5 Physics, De Caelo and De Anima 5 of Aristotle are still extant; and whose ‘moral interpretation of Epictetus is preserved in the library of nations, as a classic book’ 6 . This last is popular in style; while the main value of the rest lies not in their exegesis but in their citations from early Greek philosophers. After 564 we find at Alexandria the younger Olympiodorus, who has left us a life of Plato and commentaries on the First the y younger US Alcibiades , Gorgias, Phaedo , Philebus , and Aristotle’s Meteorologica. They unfortunately exhibit no originality, either literary or philosophic. The Neo-Platonic Simplicius 1 airop'uu /ecu \ 6 aeis, ed. Ruelle (1889). 2 Bury’s Gibbon, iv 266 n; cp. Finlay’s History of Greece , i 277-87 Tozer; Herzberg’s Geschichte Griechenlands, iii 488—545; and Gregorovius, Stadt Athen im Mittelalter , i 54-7. 3 Agathias ( ft . 570) ii 30 (Ritter and Preller, ult.). 4 Basel, 1551. 5-5 ed. Diels, Heiberg, Hayduck (1882-95). 6 Gibbon, c.xl (iv267 Bury). XXI.] SIMPLICIUS. ‘ DIONYSIUS 369 School, and, with it, the study of Greek philosophy, practically ceased towards the end of the sixth century \ Shortly after the close of the School of Athens, we find (in 532) the first mention of the writings of ‘ Dionysius the Areopagite’. Their many coincidences with th*e Areopagite • the teaching of Proclus and Damascius have led to their author being identified as a Christian Neo-Platonist, and to their date being assigned to c. 480—520. The works on the heavenly and on the ecclesiastical hierarchy (with the triple triads in each), and those on the divine names and on mystical theology, had their influence on the ‘ angelologythe mysticism, and (in the case of Erigena) the pantheism of the Middle Ages 1 2 . Their author has been called the father of Scholasticism. He was specially studied by John of Damascus in the Eastern, and by Aquinas in the Western Church; while the effect of his teaching may be traced not only in Savonarola, Ficino and Pico della Mirandola, but also in Dante 3 , in the ‘trinall triplicities’ of Spenser 4 , and in the magnificent line in which Milton enumerates more than half the orders of the heavenly hierarchy:— ‘Thrones, Dominations, Princedoms, Virtues, Powers’ 5 . While Plato and Aristotle were being expounded at Athens and Alexandria, grammar and lexicography were 1 t ITT- 11 , Grammarians not neglected. With the grammarians the mam source of inspiration was Herodian. It was from Herodian that Timotheus of Gaza ( c . 500) derived the substance of his treatise on combinations of vocal sounds 6 ; on the same model, Joannes Philoponus (early in cent, vi), already mentioned as a pupil of Ammonius, wrote a work on dialects and accentuation, including 1 On Neo-Platonism in general, cp. Zeller, Phil. d. Gr. iii 2 (and the literature there quoted); also T. Whittaker’s Neo-platonists (1901); and Bigg’s Neoplatonism (1895). 2 Milman, Lat. Chr. ix 57 f; Westcott, Religious Thought in the West, pp. 142-93; T. Whittaker, p. 188; H. Koch, Pseudo-Dionysius (1900). 3 Par. x 115-7; xxviii 97-132. 4 Hymne of Heavenly Love, 64; cp. Hymne of Heavenly Beautie, 85—98. 5 P. L. v 601. The ultimate source of these terms is the Vulgate trans. of Rom. viii 38; Col. i 16. Cp. Lupton in Did. Chr. Biogr. i 847-8. 6 Kavdves KadoXiKal irepl avvra^eus, Cramer, Anecd. Par. iv 239. S. 24 370 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Lexico¬ graphers. ‘ Ammonius ’ Orion an alphabetical list of words differing according to their accent \ which was widely used in the Middle Ages; and, similarly, Joannes Charax (in the first half of cent, vi) compiled an abstract of Herodian’s work on Orthography, part of which (a fragment on enclitics) is still extant 1 2 . In lexicography the labours of the Atticists of the second century were continued in a series of mechanical compilations. A treatise on Synonyms 3 , attributed in the mss to ‘Ammonius ’, who left Alexandria for Constantinople in 391 4 , appears to be only a revised edition of that of Herennius Philon on the same subject (p. 355). A more important work is that of Orion, who was born at the Egyptian Thebes, and was one of the teachers of Proclus at Alexandria ( c . 430), and of Eudocia, the consort of Theodosius II, at Constantinople. This was an Etymological Lexicon, the extant portions of which prove that it was founded on the researches of Heracleides Ponticus, Apollodorus, Philoxenus, Apollonius Dyscolus, Herodian, and Orus of Miletus, who has often been confounded with Orion 5 . The work of Orion in its original form was one of the sources of the etymological compila¬ tions of the Byzantine age. Hesychius of Alexandria, who probably belongs to the fifth century, is the compiler of the most extensive of our ancient Greek lexicons. It is not so much a ‘lexicon’ as a glossary. In the preface it is described as a new edition of the work of Diogenianus (p. 288), with additions from the Homeric lexicons of Apion and Apollonius (the son of Archibius). Whether the lexicon of Diogenianus was an independent work, or only an abstract of that of Pamphilus Hesychius of Alexandria 1 ed. Egenolff (1880). 2 Bekker’s Anecd. 1149-56. Krumbacher, Byz. Litt. § 242 s f. 3 7 repi bfioLwv kcli Siabpwv Xti-ewv, ed. C. F. Ammon (1787). Christ, § 629 s . Cohn in Pauly-Wissowa, Ammonios (no. 17), ascribes the work to the Byzantine age. 4 Socr. Hist. Eccl. v 16. 5 Ritschl, De Oro et Orione , Opusc. i 582—673; Christ, § 630 3 . Orus and Orion were probably contemporaries; both of them taught first at Alexandria, and afterwards at Constantinople (cp. Reitzenstein’s Etymologika , pp. 287 f, and 348). XXI.] HESYCHIUS. 371 Hesychius of Miletus (p. 288), is still a matter of controversy. Hesychius is of special value in connexion with the emendation of classical authors. His work has often enabled Ruhnken and later critics to restore the original word in ancient texts where its place has been taken by an explanatory synonym. The existing lexicon, large as it is, is an abridgement only; in its original form, it apparently included the names of the authorities for each statement \ In the next century another scholar of the same name, Hesychius of Miletus, who lived under Justinian, was the author of a lexicon of special importance in connexion with the history of Greek literature 2 . He owed much to Aelius Dionysius and Herennius Philon. Our knowledge of his lexicon is solely due to the citations of Sui'das, who describes his own work as an epitome of that of Hesychius of Miletus. The reign of Justinian saw an abridgement of the great geo¬ graphical lexicon of Stephanus of Byzantium. The original work was produced after 400 a.d. ; and its Byzantium S ° f extent may be inferred from the fact that the articles before 2 filled as many as fifty books. The only part of the original which has been preserved is the article on T/fypia and those from A vfxrj to Aumov. It must have included many extracts from ancient authors, with notices of historical events and famous personages. In grammar Stephanus follows Herodian; and, in geography, Hecataeus, Ephorus, Eratosthenes, Artemidorus (y?. ioob.c.), Strabo, Pausanias, and especially Herennius Philon 3 . Among the earliest of compilers of chrestomathies was Proclus, who is regarded by Gregory of Nazianzus 4 and by Sui'das as identical with Proclus the Neo-Platonist (p. 365), and this opinion is accepted by Wilamowitz 5 , though the character of the work is totally different from that of Chresto¬ mathies. Proclus. 1 Ruhnken’s Praefatio, in Opusc. pp. 192—219. 2 6 vo/xaro\ 6 yos rj irlva.% Ttou iv tt cudela dvo/j-aarQu. Hesychti Milesii Ono- matologi quae supersunt, ed. Flach (1882). Cp. Krumbacher, Byz. Litt . § 1 39 2 * 3 Christ, § 597 3 ; ed. Dindorf (1825), Westermann (1839), Meineke (1849). 4 Migne, xxxvi 914, Hp 6 i<\os 6 IlXarwi't/cds ev povofttfiXip irepl kijkXov yeypafifilvy. 5 Phil. Unt. vii 330. 372 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. the extant writings of that philosopher. Earlier scholars 1 2 had identified him with Eutychius Proculus of Sicca (instructor of M. Aurelius), who, however, is a Latin 2 grammarian. He is possibly the Proclus, whose ‘enumeration of festivals’ is mentioned by Alexander of Aphrodisias 3 . For almost all our knowledge of the ‘grammatical (i.e. literary) chrestomathy’ of Proclus we are indebted to Photius (cod. 239), who states that, in the first two books, the author, after distinguishing between poetry and prose, dealt with epic, elegiac, iambic and melic poetry, naming the leading representatives of each; and that he described the epic cycle in particular as a consecutive series of poems by various authors. This account is confirmed by the fragments of Proclus preserved in the codex Venetus of the Iliad and in some other mss. They include a short life of Homer, and a list of the authors of the Trojan part of the cycle, viz. the Cypria , the Iliad, the Aethiopis (Arctinus), the Little Iliad (Lesches), the Iliupersis (Arctinus), the Nosti (Agias), the Odyssey, and the Telegonia (Eugammon), with an abstract of the contents of all except the Iliad and the Odyssey. Our knowledge of the contents of the lost epics of Greece comes almost entirely from this source 4 . The two other books probably dealt with dramatic poetry, and prose. The Readings in History by Sopater of Apamea, and the sources from which they were derived, are known to us solely through the account in Photius (cod. 161). The only Chresto¬ mathy which has come down to us in an approximately complete form is that of Joannes Stobaeus (of Stobi in Macedonia), who is probably not much later than Hierocles (c. 450), the latest author whom he cites. In its original form it was in four books, (1) on philosophy, theology and physics, (2) on dialectic, rhetoric, poetry and ethics, (3) on virtues and vices, (4) on politics and domestic economy. The 1 Valesius, and Welcker, Ep. Cycl. i 3 f. 2 Capitolinus, M. Aurelius, c. 2. 3 On Aristot. Soph. El. p. 4. 4 D. B. Monro’s Appendix to Homer’s Od. (1901), pp. 343—383. Christ, § 637 s ; Croiset, v 978. Text in Gaisford’s Hephaestion, and Westphal’s Scr. Metr. Gr. XXI.] PROCLUS. STOBAEUS. APHTHONIUS. 373 work is divided into 206 sections, each denoted by a short motto under which all the extracts are grouped, first those in verse, and then those in prose. The number of writers thus represented is no less than 500 1 . In the Middle Ages the four books were treated by copyists as belonging to two separate works, (1) and (2) being entitled ‘ Extracts on Physics and Ethics ’ (c/cAoyat), and (3) and (4) the ‘Anthology’, a name that really belongs to the whole work 2 . The study of rhetoric still survived as part of a general education and as a necessary preparation for public . . . . Rhetoricians life. We may here briefly notice Aphthomus, who, as a pupil of Libanius, belongs to the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth centuries. He is celebrated ° & . . . Aphthonius for his small manual of preliminary exercises (7 rpo- yv/xvatr/xara), a work remarkable for its simplicity and clearness, and for the variety of its examples 3 . It follows the tradition of Hermogenes, but the number of the exercises is here extended from twelve to fourteen by the separation of ‘ refutation ’ from ‘ confirmation ’, and the introduction of a new section on ‘ blame ’. It was the theme of several commentaries, and continued to be used as a text-book not only in the Byzantine age 4 , but even as late as the seventeenth century. It is happily described by Mr Saintsbury (i 92) as ‘one of the most craftsmanlike cram- books that ever deserved the encomium of the epithet and the discredit of the noun ’. After Aphthonius, the writers on rhetoric are only commentators on their predecessors. Thus Troilus (c. 400), Syrianus (430), Marcellinus (< c . 500) and Sopater (early in cent, vi) all wrote commentaries on Hermogenes. Marcellinus was also the author of an extant life of Thucydides, probably founded on the labours of Didymus 5 . 1 Photius, cod. 167; Meineke’s praef. xxxvii. 2 ed. Gaisford (1822); Meineke (1857); Wachsmuth and Heyse (1884-95); cp. Christ, § 639*; Croiset, v 979. 3 Spengel, ii. Cp. Christ, § 546 3 ; Croiset, v 982 f. 4 Commentaries by Joannes Geometres (first half of cent, x) and Joannes Doxopatres (first half of cent, xi) are mentioned by Krumbacher, Byz. Litt. 452, 462 and esp. 735 2 . 6 Susemihl, Gr. Litt. Alex . ii 203 n. 374 THE ROMAN AGE. [CHAP. Early in the sixth century the principal schools of ancient learning in the East were those of Athens, Alex- of 1 2 * * S iearn!ng andria and Constantinople \ Of these, Athens was the last stronghold of paganism; Alexandria, ‘the centre of the widest culture’, the home (especially in the fourth and fifth centuries) of pagan poetry and philosophy, as well as of Christian theology; and Constantinople, the seat of a university since the time of Theodosius II 2 , and, to a large extent, a school of Christian learning 3 . The secular library there founded by Julian (with its marvellous ms of Homer, forty yards long) had been destroyed by fire in 491, but there was a library of ecclesiastical literature in the patriarchal palace 4 . The best days of Nicomedeia and Antioch were in the fourth century, in the times of Libanius. The Greek and Syriac school of Edessa in Western Mesopotamia had been finally closed in 489. Apart from these, the eastern shores of the Mediterranean could boast of Berytus, which, from the third century till its destruction by an earthquake in 551, was a great school of Roman law, besides being (as described by Eusebius) a school of Greek secular learning 5 . Further to the south was the school of Caesarea, which had counted Origen among its teachers, and the historians Eusebius and Procopius (fl. 527—562) among its students. There was even a home of culture in the former land of the Philistines. Towards the close of the fifth century, Gaza 6 produced a grammarian in Timotheus, and rhetoricians such as Procopius of Gaza (y 7 . 491—527), whose paraphrases of Homer were admired by Photius 7 , and his pupil and successor, Choricius 8 , who held the office of orator under Justin and Justinian. The speeches of Choricius were among the models studied in the 1 Himerius, vii 13; Themistius, xxiii p. 355. 2 Bury, i 128. 3 Bury, i 212, 317. 4 Bernhardy, Gr. Litt. i 664 4 ; Bury, i 252. 5 De Mart. Palaest. iv 3; cp. Liban. Ep. 1033; and Bernhardy, Gr. Litt. i 664A Nonnus, Dion, xli 396, calls it * the nurse of tranquil life ’, and Agathias, ii 15, ‘the pride (iyKaWuiriafia) of Phoenicia 6 Seitz, Die Schule von Gaza (1892); Roussos, rpeis VafaioL (1893). 7 p. 103 a. His Letters are published in the Epistolographi Graeci (ed. Didot). Cp. Eisenhofer (1897). 8 ed. Boissonade, 1846; Forster in Philol. liv 93—123 &c. XXI.] SCHOOLS OF LEARNING. 375 Byzantine age, and they are even now of value in the textual criticism of Demosthenes 1 . All the rhetoricians, lexicographers and grammarians, whom we have now passed in review, belong to the age that ended with 529 a.d., the eventful year in which the School of Athens was closed in the East, and the Monastery of Monte Cassino founded in the West. Three years later (532) the rebuilding of the Church dedicated to the Eternal Wisdom by the founder of Constantinople was begun by Justinian, who adorned that Christian Church with columns from the pagan temples of Ephesus and Heliopolis, and left behind him, in the many-tinted marbles, the deeply-carved capitals, the lofty dome and the spacious splendour of Santa Sophia, the last of the great religious buildings of the ancient world. Between 529, the date of the publication of Justinian’s Code , and 533, that of the completion of the Digest and the Institutes, the legal learning of the past was summed up and reduced to a systematic form, while the old Roman Law of the Twelve Tables was finally superseded. In the following year, the emperor who had suppressed the School of Athens, put an end to the consulship of Rome, thus virtually closing the Roman age in the West, as he had already closed it in the East 2 . 1 See index to present writer’s First Philippic and Olynthiacs of Demosthenes. 2 If, in the transitional reign of Justinian, any further event should be sought to mark the end of the old order and the beginning of the new, it may be found perhaps (with Prof. Bury) in the plague of 542, which raged for four months in Constantinople and for four years in the Roman Empire. ‘ When the plague has ceased, we feel in 550 that we are moving in a completely other world than that of 540’ (Bury’s Later Roman Empire , i 400). if p »J \./ r 5 i{? * z 3 Z '3 W ^•\ *.-«s "«B *L?S 'S ij ‘p 'r '- 1 - $i i *s * g ,§* f i“t'| i %'j t 'i if rr.rI H If 11 j|if a-, a 5 o ^ F - || rill. 1 j ii -.1 ti I -:i'l J=)i i r f J if11 i I E 3 .r p.f f'j I ?’i *«-I.'t-- ... i ti-is r? *£ Q Z W Q I* > W o d ^ O 4 S ■©- 5k 'b << -b O' O' oo i-H • il, oo $r ►J •*« - >o W O' J Pf 5 ex c n U < b p- H 5k * 'O b f 5^ «b 2 a 5 . -vu -Vk) <" 5k Jt- b *g b ° *"Po -o S £ | * ii b “O -b § (u o b <3 b to 3 5 o O' 00 *> o b b* CO f- o o b o -n, b g f ^ b b Q. X o S /< << -b & 'O b ii b to 5k V -cu a. - b* 'P o «" b >u *0 3 to ^ a ® C3 *p" *■ N 'b ►Ik, --k (n b o * a cjf 4- I § ° •©. *b *o o b. -id lx> b T G b w t: . ^ o fc - - * 'O b ii 4 3 - 'cJ' n *° i: n ■“S- 5k b b K CO ^ 5k s 4. -S a b b , so b ^ 3- o k ^ ^ ^ ^ - ^ ( 2 -2 ^ *b 3- UJ . . t/\ ■s^ b b b Q. - 1. II 2 b S 5 <3 n 2 - b << 'O P «t> P o f! MU R b ft* rO C5 o o §- ^ to o z »—1 b-i >k rO * S ^3 o M | M) K < 5^ o K z T3 *a o K z V r> ^ b >—1 a w PQ 'S- o u C**J <4J 4 ( s N t»j • o o "2 k "b W S -j b •o K H 2 b ^ b aypap/uare, poi/cumypiciKTjv /3t/3XLo0ijKr]v rrj arj Trape^uracrets ^XV > Ka ' L ° Tt Karexets ypappara , iKKCvocs kcu avrrjv rw ypap.p,aTo6p(ov or/cevtSv; a<£es avrrjv ark yetv ra rt/ua. e\ev(T€Tat ns pern (re, r/ ypappa/ra, paOoJV, r) aAAa <£tA.oypapparo9. Eustathius, De emendanda vita monastica , c. 128, ed. Tafel. Conspectus of Greek Literature, &c., 600—1000 A.D Emperors 600 - 602 Phocas 6x0 Heraclius 641 Heraclius, Constantinus, and Heracleo- nas 642 Constans II 668 Constantine IV 685 Justinian II 695 Leontius 697 Tiberius III 700 - 705 Justinian II (restored) 711 Philippicus 712 Anastasius II 715 Theodosius III House of Leo 717 Leo III 741 Constantine V 775 Leo IV 780 Constantine VI 797 Irene of Athens 800 - 8o2NicephorusI 811 Stauracius 811 Michael I 813 Leo V 820 Michael II 829 Theophilus 842 Michael III Macedonian Dynasty 867 Basil I 886 Leo VI 900 - 912-59 Constan- tine VII 920-44 Roma- nus I 959 Romanus II 963 Nicephorus II 969 J ohn I, Zimisces 976 Basil II 1000 Poets Historians, Chroniclers Rhetoricians Scholars Ecclesiastical Writers 626 Sergius 629 Sophronius 610-41 Georgius Pisides 6x0-31 John of Antioch 610-40 Theophy- lact Simocattes 630 Chronicon Paschale Philopatris c. 602—610 6ioStephanusof Alexandria 630 Maximus Confessor 580—662 Barlaam and Josaphat Andreas of Crete c. 650—720 Jacob of Edessa ft. 651—719 Anastasius Sinaites ft. 640—700 736 John of Damascus c. 699— c. 753 743 Cosmas of Jerusalem Stephen of St Sabas 725—794 Theodorus Studites 759—826 Georgius Syncellus ft. 784— c. 810 736 John of Damascus 830 Josephus Studites d. 883 Nicephorus Patriarches d. 829 813 Theophanes Confessor d. 817 Theophanes continuatus 813—961 867 Georgius Monachus Nicolaus, Epistolae 852—925 Theognostus ft. 813-20 Michael Syncellus ft. 829-42 830-76 Syriac and Arabic translations of Aristotle 857 Photius c. 820— c. 891 863 Cometas 870 d. Alkendi 870 Ignatius 882 E tymologi- cum parvu7ti 806 Nicephorus Patriarches d. 829 j; 857 Photius c. 820— c. 891 9i7Constantinus Cephalas, edi¬ tor of Antho- logia Palatina Constantine Porphyrogeni- tus 905—959 907 Arethas c. 860—932 + 961 Theodosius, 'AAwtrts Kpijnjs John Geometres ft. 963—986 963 Symeon Magister • 992 LeoDiaconus c. 950—992 950 d. Alfarabi 950-76 Su'idas Symeon Meta- phrastes,Z,z'zw of Saints CHAPTER XXII. BYZANTINE SCHOLARSHIP FROM 529 TO IOOO A.D. In the history of Greek Literature the Byzantine age, in the broadest sense of the term, may be said to begin with the founding of Constantinople in 330 and to end with its fall in 1453. It may be divided into three parts : (1) the early Byzantine period, of about three centuries, from 330 to the death of Heraclius in 641; (2) the intervening period of two centuries, which, so far as secular learning at Constantinople is concerned, may be described as a dark age extending from about 641 to about 850; (3) the later Byzantine period of six centuries from 850 to 1453 1 . In the history of Scholarship this third period extends over five centuries only, beginning in 850 with the great revival of Byzantine learning heralded by the auspicious name of Photius, and ending about 1350, when, a full century before the fall of Constantinople, the interest in Scholarship passes westward to the cities of Northern Italy which caught the first rays of the new light that came to them from the East. In our survey of the history of Scholarship, we have found it convenient to treat the first two centuries (330—529) of the first of the above periods as the last two centuries of the Roman age, leaving a period of little more than a century p er iod 1, (529—641) for the opening pages of the present 529—641- Book. In this century, history is represented by Hlstonans the ‘statesman and soldier’ Procopius of Caesarea (Jl. 527—562), the secretary of Belisarius and the historian of his campaigns, who resembles Herodotus in his love of the marvellous, Thucy¬ dides in his diction, and Polybius in his subordination of the 1 Krumbacher, Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur, ed. 2, 1897, pp. nf. 380 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. course of events to the influence of Fortune 1 ; by the ‘poet and rhetorician ’ 2 and student of the ancient classics, Agathias (536—582), who, in relating the end of the Gothic war, the Perso-Colchian wars (541—556) and the invasion of the Huns (558), recognises a divine Being (to Ofiov) as the author of retribution 3 ; by Menander Protector (582), the imitator and continuator of Agathias; and by the Egyptian Theophylactus Simocattes, the euphuistic historian who describes the reign of Maurice (582—602) in a style rich in metaphors borrowed from the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek Romances. Antiquarian research is the province of Joannes Lydus ( c . 490—570), who studied Aristotle and Plato under a pupil of Proclus, and in his work On Offices gave a full account of the Roman civil service and the causes of its decline 4 . In poetry we have an imitator of Callimachus and of Nonnus in the person of Poets . . r Paulus Silentianus (the gentleman-usher who pre¬ served silence in the palace of Justinian), the author of nearly 100 elegant epigrams in the Palatine Anthology 5 , and also of a celebrated Description of the Church of Santa Sophia 6 , in which he incidentally betrays his contempt for the Athenians, and at the same time flatters the emperor who closed their philosophic School, by stating that his verses will be judged, not by ‘ bean¬ eating Athenians, but by men of piety and indulgence, in whom God and the Emperor find pleasure’ 7 . George of Pisidia (Georgius Pisides ), besides celebrating the campaigns of Heraclius, wrote a poem on the Creation, intended to refute Aristotle and Plato, Porphyry and Proclus. Except in a single poem, in which he imitates the hexameters of Nonnus, he uses the iambic measure alone, and is generally strict in observing its rules; but he departs from the standard of the ancient poets in breaking the law of the final Cretic, and in never allowing the accent to fall on the 1 Bury’s Later Roman Empire , ii 178. 2 Gibbon, c. 43 (iv 420 Bury). 3 Bury, ii 254 f. 4 ib. ii 183 f. 5 e.g. v 266, 270, 301. 6 ed. Graefe (1822); Bekker (1837); German trans. Salzenberg (1854). 7 Bury, ii 185 f. XXII.] HISTORIANS AND POETS. 381 last syllable of the line 1 . Psellus, the foremost representative of the Byzantine literature of the eleventh century, did him the honour of devoting a long letter to answering the question ‘ whether Euripides or Pisides wrote better verses’ 2 3 . The historian Agathias, who in his youth was addicted to heroic verse and ‘loved the sweets of poetic refinement’, allows reminiscences of the poets to colour his prose. He contributes about 100 epigrams to the Palatine Anthology 9 , with a preface 4 written in the style of the New Comedy and including a quotation from the Knights of Aristophanes ( 1 . 55 f). He assures us that ‘poetry is really a thing divine and holy’, and that ‘its votaries (as Plato would say) are in a state of fine phrenzy’ 5 . The sacred poets of this age are Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople (626) and Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem (629). Late in the sixth century is the earliest date that can be assigned to Georgius Choeroboscus, who played & ® . . ... Choeroboscus an important part in Byzantine education by his lectures on Grammar at the university of Constantinople 6 . The chronological order of his principal works was: (1) a treatise on prosody, followed by lectures on (2) Dionysius Thrax, (3) Theo¬ dosius, (4) orthography, (5) Hephaestion, and (6) Apollonius and Herodian. His grammatical learning is derived from the above authors, and from Orus, Sergius, Philoponus and Charax, the last three of whom belong to the sixth century. He is himself first quoted in the Etymologicum Florentinum , a ms of cent, x, representing a work prepared under the direction of Photius, with the aid of authorities which followed Choeroboscus, who accordingly cannot well be placed later than 750 7 . His prolix lectures on the rules of Theodosius of Alexandria on nouns and verbs have come down to us in a complete form, part of them 1 id. ii 256 f. 2 Leo Allatius, De Georgiis, reprinted in Fabricius, Bibl. Gr. x j{; Bouvy, Poetes et Melodes (1886), p. 169 ; Krumbacher, p. 710 2 . 3 e.g. v 237, 261; vi 76. 4 iv 3. 5 Bury, ii 185. 6 Certain MSS of his scholia on Theodosius describe him as SiaKovos and olKovfJLevLKos 5 i 5 acr/ca\os. He was also the University Librarian, x a P ro 0 l '^ a £* Cp. Hilgard, in Gra?n. Gr. iv p. lxi f. 7 Reitzenstein, Etymologika , p. 194, n. 4. 382 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. Stephanus having been taken down by dictation (cbro Kfxovrjs) 1 . He appears to have had comparatively little influence on the later Byzantine grammarians, who preferred to study the great original writers on grammar, but in the age of the Renaissance he is closely followed in the text-books of Constantine Lascaris (1463-8; ed. pr. Milan, 1476) and Urbanus of Belluno (Venice, 1497) 2 . Early in the seventh century (610) Aristotle was being ex¬ pounded by Stephanus of Alexandria, the author of commentaries on the Categories 3 , De Interpretation , De Caelo , de Anima , Analytics , Sophistici Elenchi , and Rhetoric 4 . The ecclesiastical writers of this age include Anastasius, patriarch of Antioch (559, d. 599), a precursor of Scholasticism, and an opponent of Justinian’s opinion that the body of Christ was incorruptible; and Maximus Confessor (580—662), the private secretary of Heraclius and the opponent of his views on monotheletism. The latter is among the persons conjectured as possible authors of the anonymous Chronicon Rascha/e, an epitome of the history of the world from the Creation to 630 a.d., containing lists of consuls first published by Sigonius (1556), and many other chronological details first communicated by Casaubon to Scaliger and published by the latter in his edition of the Chronicon of Eusebius (1606) 5 . Among the authorities on which it is founded are Sextus Julius Africanus and Eusebius, the Consular Fasti and the Chronicle of John Malalas. This last in its present form ends with the year 563; its author was a native of Antioch, who aimed at supplying the public of his day with a handbook of chronology written in the language of ordinary life. The only ms is in the Bodleian; the name of the author was identified by John Gregory (d. 1646), and the work published by John Mill (1691), with an appendix consisting of the famous ‘ Letter to Mill ’, which revealed to Europe the critical skill and the scholarship of Bentley. In this ‘ Letter’ the passages Chronicon Paschale Malalas 1 ed. Hilgard, Gram. Gr. iv 1 (1889) 101—417 and iv 2 (1894) Proleg. and 1—371. 2 Krumbacher, § 244 s . 3 ed. Hayduck (1885). 4 ed. Rabe, Comm. Arist. xxi 2. 5 Salmon in Did. Chr. Biogr. i 510. XXII.] MALALAS. JOHN OF DAMASCUS. 383 quoted by Malalas from the Greek poets are emended and ex¬ plained, the laws of the anapaestic metre laid down, and the blunders in proper names corrected, the ‘ earliest dramatists ’ Themis, Minos and Auleas being shown to be mistakes for Thespis, Ion of Chios and Aeschylus 1 . To the first half of the seventh century may be assigned the legend of the monk Barlaam and the Indian prince Josaphat, the most famous and most widely-known romance of the Middle jofaphat" 1 and Ages. The discovery of a Syriac version of the lost Greek original of the Apology of Aristides in the monastery of mount Sinai shows that sixteen printed pages of Barlaam and Josaphat are borrowed directly from Aristides 2 . Our second period of two centuries (641—850) includes the hundred years of the iconoclastic emperors, Leo the ‘Isaurian’ having issued in 727 the decree 6^—85^ H ’ against images, which was revoked by the empress Eirene in 802, and Leo the Armenian having in 816 promulgated a similar decree, which was finally set aside by the empress Theodora in 843. The chief opponent of the iconoclasm of Leo the ‘Isaurian’ was the Syrian John of Damascus ( c . 699—753) 3 3 who held high office at the court of the Saracens, and sent forth from Damascus three celebrated Damascus discourses in defence of the worship of images. He had been educated by Cosmas, an Italian monk familiar with Plato and Aristotle, who had been brought by Arab pirates, probably from the shores of Calabria, to the slave-market of Damascus. John is also celebrated as the author of the Fons Scientiae (7 rrjyrj yvwarcws), an encyclopaedia of Christian theology beginning with brief chapters on the Categories of Aristotle, together with extracts from the Eisagoge of Porphyry, for his knowledge of both of which he was indebted to Leontius of Byzantium (485— c. 542). Elsewhere, he describes certain of his opponents as seeing in Aristotle ‘a thirteenth apostle’ 4 . In 1 Jebb’s Bentley , pp. 12—16 ; Prof. G. T. Stokes, in Did. Chr. Biogr. s.v. ; Krumbacher, § 140 2 . 2 J. Armitage Robinson, Cambridge Texts and Studies, 1891 ; Krumbacher, § 392 2 ; Bury, ii 532-4. 3 Krumbacher, §§ 16, 275 s . 4 Contra Jacobitas , c. 10. 384 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. applying to Christian theology the logical system of Aristotle, he became, through Peter Lombard and Thomas Aquinas, a name familiar to the Schoolmen of the West. He has been assigned ‘the double honour of being the last but one of the Fathers of the Eastern Church, and the greatest of her poets’ 1 . At the convent of St Sabas, which looks down on the Dead Sea from a rocky ravine S.E. of Jerusalem, he composed those hymns, three at least of which have, in their English render- Greek hymns . . . . . . . . mgs, become widely known in modern times:— ‘ Those eternal bowers ’; ‘ Come, ye faithful, raise the strain ’; and the Golden Canon of the Greek Church, ‘’Tis the Day of Resurrection’ 2 . His adoptive brother, Cosmas of Jerusalem, was the most learned of the Greek Christian poets 3 , while to his nephew, Stephen of St Sabas (725—794), is assigned the original of the hymn ‘Art thou weary, art thou languid?’ 4 All of these were preceded by Anatolius, bishop of Constantinople 449—458, the author of the evening hymn of the Greek islanders, ‘ The day is past and over’ 5 ; by Romanus, who is regarded as ‘the greatest poet of the Byzantine age’ ( 57 * 3 ib. 64—83. 4 ib. 84-6. 5 ib. 2—12. 6 Krumbacher, § 272 s , p. 663. 7 Neale, pp. 17, 18. 8 ib. 122—152. 9 ib. p. 112. 10 ib. pp. 89, 119. The Greek texts of some of the above hymns are printed in Moorsom’s Companion to Hymns Ancient and Modern , pp. 79—91 2 . XXII.] THEOGNOSTUS. CHRONICLERS ETC. 3«S Theognostus have been left not only by John of Damascus, who has been already noticed, but also by Anastasius Sinaites {fl. 640—700), who begins his principal work, the 'OSrjyos or ‘ Guide to the true way ’, with a number of definitions clearly taken from Aristotle; and by Theodore of Studion (759—826), who is still represented by his theological writings and by a large collection of letters which throw light on the social life of the ninth century *. Under Leo the Armenian (813—820) the grammarian Theognostus com¬ piled a work on orthography comprising more than a thousand rules, mainly founded on Herodian’s great work on accentuation. The vowels and the diphthongs which, in Byzantine Greek, have the same pronunciation as those vowels, are here grouped together, e with at, and v with 01, the vowel being called e \J/lX 6 v, or v \pi AoV, to distinguish it from the diph¬ thong 2 . In the first half of the ninth century Michael Syncellus {/l. 829-42) wrote a popular manual on Syntax. The other prose-writers of the first half of that century include George Syncellus (d. c. 810), who brought his Chronicle of the world down to the reign of Diocletian; Theophanes (d. c. 817), who carried it on to his own day, to be succeeded by others who continued the work to 901; and the patriarch Nicephorus (d. 829), who wrote a short history of the empire from 602 to 769, and was, with Theodore of Studion, one of the main opponents of the iconoclastic emperor Leo the Armenian. Among the em¬ peror’s supporters was John the Grammarian, patriarch from 832 to 842, who to great literary attainments added a wide knowledge of science which led to his being accused by the ignorant of studying magic 3 . But, on the whole, the iconoclastic age was singularly barren in secular learning. It was, however, during the two centuries described as the dark age of secular literature at Constantinople that the light of Greek learning spread eastwards among the to Syria and Arabia. The philosophy of Aristotle Arabians 3 ”* 1 had already found acceptance, in the fifth century, among the Syrians of Edessa, and, about the middle of that Chroniclers etc.; George Syncellus, Theophanes, Nicephorus 1 Migne, xcix. 3 Finlay, ii 117, 143, 207 f. S. 2 Krumbacher, § 245 s ; cp. supra p. 90. 25 386 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. century, Syriac commentaries on the De Interpretatione , the Analytica Prior a and the Sophistici Elenchi had been produced by Probus. The School of Edessa, closed by Zeno in 489 owing to its sympathy with Nestorianism, was succeeded by that at Nisibis 1 , which attracted the notice of Cassiodorus, and that at Gandisapora 2 (between Susa and Ecbatana), which sent forth Syrian students to instruct the Arabians in philosophy and medicine respectively. In the sixth century works of Aristotle had been translated into Syriac by Sergius of Resaina 3 ; and, in the seventh, the De Interpretatione , Categories and Analytics were produced in the same language, together with a Life of Aristotle, by Jacob, bishop of Edessa (pi. 651—719). Under the rule of the Abbasidae (which lasted from 750 to 1258, and whose capital of Bagdad was founded in 762) the medical science of the Greeks became known to the Arabs through the medium of the Syrians; and, in the reign of the son of Harun-al-Raschid, the calif Alma- mun (813—833), whose request for the temporary use of the services of Leo the mathematician was resolutely refused by the emperor Theophilus (c. 830) 4 , philosophical works were trans¬ lated by Syrian Christians from Greek into Syriac, and from Syriac into Arabic. It was under Almamun that Aristotle was first translated into Arabic under the direction of Ibn al Batrik (‘Son of the Patriarch’). The Nestorian Honein Ibn Ishak, or Johannitius (d. 876), who was familiar with Syriac, Arabic and Greek, presided over a school of interpreters at Bagdad; and (besides versions of Plato, Hippocrates and Galen) 5 Greek commentaries on Aristotle were, in his name, translated by his sons and his disciples into Syriac and Arabic. In the tenth century new translations of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Alexander of Aphrodisias, Themistius, Syrianus, Ammonius etc were pro¬ duced by the Nestorian Syrians. Of the Arabian philosophers in the East the most important were Alkendi of Basra (d. c. 870), 1 /cat irtdov et 5 a Kal dcrrea iravra TSiaifiLv [r’], | 'Etixppa.T'qv Stands. Inscr. in Ramsay’s Cities etc. of Phrygia , ii 723. Cp. Lightfoot’s Ignatius , i 497. See p. 249 supi'a. 2 Gondi Sapor in Gibbon, c. 42 (iv 361 Bury). 3 A. Baumstark, Lucubr. Syro-Graecae> 358—438. 4 Cedrenus, p. 549; Gibbon, c. 52 (vi 34 Bury). 5 ib. vi 29 n. XXII.] ARISTOTLE IN SYRIA AND ARABIA. 387 who commented on the logical writings of Aristotle; Alfarabi of Bagdad (d. 950), who in logic followed Aristotle unreservedly, and accepted the Neo-Platonic doctrine of emanation; Avicenna (980—1037), who taught in Ispahan, combining instruction in medicine with the exposition of Aristotle, analysing the Organon and writing commentaries on the De Anima and De Cae/o, and on the Physics and Metaphysics ; and Algazel (1059—mi), who began his teaching at Bagdad and opposed (on religious grounds) the doctrines of Aristotle \ The Arabic translations of Aristotle passed from the East to the Arabian dominions in the West, Spain having been conquered by the Arabs early in the eighth century. The study of Aristotle in Spain in the twelfth century, and the influence of the Latin translations of the Arabic versions of Aristotle, is reserved for our review of the Middle Ages in the West (c. xxx). At the beginning of the two centuries which are regarded as the darkest portion of the Byzantine age, Leo the ‘ Isaurian ’, who repelled the last great effort of the Saracens to destroy Constantinople and ably reformed the military defences and the civil administration of the empire, did no service whatsoever to the cause of learning. He actually disendowed the imperial academy in the quarter between the palace walls and Santa Sophia, and ejected the Ecumenical Doctor at its head and the 12 learned men who assisted him in giving instruction in arts and theology 1 2 . He is even stated by Zonaras, and by George the Monk, to have burnt the academy with its library of 33,000 volumes of sacred and secular literature,—an act which (con¬ sidering the position of the building) would have been so indiscreet as to be absolutely incredible. It is probable, however, that the schools of theology were alone suppressed, as we know that 1 1 Ueberweg’s Grundriss, ed. 8, ii §28 (pp. 402—417 of History of Philosophy, E. trans.) with the literature quoted there, and in Hiibner, § 35, and Krum- bacher, p. 1098 2 f, esp. J. G. Wenrich, De auctorum Graecorum versionibus et commentariis Syriacis Arabicis Ar?nenicis Persicisque (1842), J. Lippert’s Studien (1894), and articles by M. Steinschneider; also A. Baumstark, Aristoteles bei den Syrern vom v — viii Jahrhundert (1900). Cp. Haureau, Histoire de la Philosophie Scolastique , ed. 2, 11 i 15—29. 2 Finlay, ii 44; Bury, ii 433 f. 3 88 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. Period III, 850—1350 learned divines such as Theodore of Studion and the patriarch Nicephorus ‘received an excellent secular education in grammar, language, science and philosophy’ 1 . Towards the end of this dark period, Leo the Byzantine received permission from Theophilus (829—42) to teach in public; under his successor, Caesar Bardas, who ruled on behalf of Michael the Drunkard, iconoclasm was abolished (through the influence of Michael’s mother, Theodora), and the university of Constantinople restored. In 857 the patriarch Ignatius, a man of the highest integrity whose father (Michael I) and grandfather (Nice¬ phorus I) had filled the imperial throne, was banished ; and a man of equal integrity and greater learning, Photius, whose brother had married the sister of the empress Theodora, and whose grand-uncle Tarasius had been patriarch in his day, was, like Tarasius, raised as a layman from the position of chief Secretary of State to that of the head of the Eastern Church 2 . The appointment of Photius led to a serious conflict with the papacy ; and Ignatius was restored in 863. Basil I (867—886), the founder of the Macedonian dynasty, appointed Photius tutor to the emperor’s son, afterwards known as Leo the Wise; and the two sets of moral exhortations, which have come down to us under the name of Basil and are founded largely on the work on the duties of princes dedicated by Agapetus to Justinian, and also (like Photius’ letter 3 to the king of the Bulgarians) on the moral precepts of Isocrates, may possibly have been really composed by Photius 4 . On the death of Ignatius in 878, Photius was reinstated by Basil, to be exiled by his pupil, Leo the Wise, in 886, and to die in exile in 891. Photius, who was born c. 820-7, had scarcely completed his own education when he was seized by his life-long passion for instructing others. He displayed an almost pedantic partiality for correcting the grammatical mistakes of his friends, and this passion pursued him not only during his tenure of the patriarchate, but even in the time of his exile 5 . 1 Bury, ii 435, 519. 2 Finlay, ii 175 f. 3 Ep. 6, pp. 224-48, ed. Valettas. 4 Krumbacher, § 191 2 . e.g. Ep. 236 Valettas, ...otfre u ir€pieTr\^K€TO rtppis, t&v pLavdav 6 vTiov opCovri top itSpop, tt)p airovdrjp tup iirepuruprup, t-tjp rpl^rjp tup TrpocrdiaXeyo/xtpup ktX. Cp. Hergenrother, i 3 2 2 - 35 - 3 Hergenrother, i 335, note 118. 4 Hergenrother, iii 342. 5 Krumbacher, § 216 2 . 390 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. embassy itself 1 ; but, whatever ambiguity there may be in the dedication, the most natural interpretation of the conclusion is that it was completed before the author departed for Assyria 2 . The work, which must have been finished before 857 b.c., while the author was still a layman, consists of 280 chapters, corre¬ sponding to the number of separate volumes ( codices ) read and reviewed, and it fills altogether 545 quarto pages in double columns in Bekker’s edition. Some of these reviews contain lengthy extracts, with criticisms on the style or subject-matter. Among the prose writings are the works of theologians, historians, orators and rhetoricians, philosophers, grammarians and lexi¬ cographers, physicists and physicians, and even romances, acts of councils, and lives of saints and martyrs. Next to the theo¬ logians, the historians fill the largest space; and, among the historical writings here preserved for posterity, are important notices of, or extracts from, Hecataeus, Ctesias, Theopompus, Diodorus Siculus, Memnon of Heraclea, Arrian, Phlegon of Tralles, and the chronologist Julius Africanus, besides later historians such as Olympiodorus of Thebes, Nonnosus of Byzantium, and Candidus the Isaurian. We are also supplied with excerpts from the Chrestomathies of Proclus and Helladius, and brief reviews of the lexicon of the latter, as well as similar works by Diogenianus, and the Atticists Aelius Dionysius, Pausanias and Phrynichus. The author is particularly happy in his literary criticisms. He notes the charm of Herodotus, the monotonously balanced clauses of Isocrates, the clear, simple and pleasant style of Ctesias. Josephus in his view is rich in argument, and in sententiousness and pathos; Appian, terse and plain; and Arrian, masterly in his capacity for succinct narration. Lucian spends all his pains on producing a prose comedy in a style that is brilliant and classical. Phrynichus has collected excellent linguistic materials 1 e.g. Nicolai in Brockhaus, Encykl. part 87 p. 359; Saintsbury, i 176. Gibbon, c. 53 (vi 105 Bury) is rather vague. 2 p. 545, el p.kv Tatirriv ttjv npeafidav diavdovra (diavoovvra MS) rb KOLvbv Kal dvdpwmvov KaraXafioc tAos, ^X ets T V oXtt] tw v \ 6 ywv tfpam) to spend sleepless nights over his task, in the hope of deriving great advantage from it and leaving to posterity something worthy of remembrance 2 . The authorities here quoted include Methodius, Orus and Orion, Zenobius (the commentator on Apollonius), Herodian, Choero- boscus, Theognostus (fl. 820), and many scholia on the ancient poets. It would appear that the explanations of Homeric words current early in the sixth century were supplemented from Choero- boscus and reduced to a lexicographical form; that interpolations were then introduced, and that, in this last stage, the work was taken up by Photius, who thus became the founder of the Greek Etymological Lexicons. The Etymologicum ge?iuinum was followed by the Etymologicum parvum , which was also drawn up under the orders of Photius, and, according to the statement at its close, was completed on Sunday 13 May, the date of ‘the opening of the great church’ (of Santa Sophia) in a year identified as 882, when the church was repaired and the western apse rebuilt by the emperor Basil the Macedonian 3 . Even on the day of the opening of his great cathedral church, the patriarch was doubtless not uninterested in the completion of the least of his three Lexicons. His extant Letters (260 in number) are mainly on points of dogmatic theology or exegesis, though many of them deal with exhortation and admonition, condolence or reproof. In a letter addressed, during his exile, to the emperor Basil I, he bitterly complains that he has even been deprived of the use of his books 4 . In another he expresses his surprise that the bishop of Nicomedeia regards St Peter’s use of lyKop-fiMo-aadt 1 ib. 63-5. 2 ib. 66 . 3 ib. 69. 4 P- 53 1 e( b Valettas, quoted on p. 377. XXII.] PHOTIUS. 393 (i Pet. v 5) as a barbarism, and justifies it from Epicharmus and Apollodorus of Carystus 1 . In a third, he 'writes to the bishop of Cyzicus, eulogising the epistles of Plato in preference to those of Demosthenes and Aristotle, and recommending his corre¬ spondent to study those ‘ ascribed to Phalaris, tyrant of Acragas ’, and those of Brutus and of the royal philosopher (probably M. Aurelius) and Libanius, together with those of Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, and Isidore 2 . He tells the bishop of Laodicea to cultivate a pure Attic style 3 ; and, lastly, he corrects a composition by the monk and philosopher, Nicephorus, and offers to make a collection of rhetorical works on his behalf, as soon as he is definitely informed as to the books which he requires 4 . The second part of his long letter to Michael, king of the Bulgarians (Efi. 6), is borrowed largely from the Nicocles of Isocrates. The style of his Letters varies from the extreme of an excessive redundancy to that of a most laconic terseness. One of the most beautiful passages in his longer letters is that in the first letter to Pope Nicholas (861), where he describes the loss of a life of peaceful calm which befell him on his ceasing to be a layman, and regretfully dwells on the happiness of his home in the days when he was surrounded by eager inquirers after learning by whom he was always welcomed on his return from court 5 . Among the minor contemporaries of Photius were Cometas, a professor of Grammar (863), who prepared a recension of Homer which is the theme of two epigrams written by himself 6 ; and Ignatius, the ‘master of the grammarians’ (870—880), who describes himself as the restorer of Grammar:— ’lyva tios rdSe revt-eu, 6s i s iSi, tcx^ikSs are represented in Latin by Barbara , celarent, darii , ferio ; and similarly in the other ‘ figures’. Cf. Prantl, Logik, ii 2 263—301. 6 ib. % 185 2 . 7 ed. Heylbut in Berlin Ar. Comm, xx 461—620. 8 ib. pp. 1—406. 9 Venice, 1534. Cp. Krumbacher, pp. 43o 2 f. 26—2 404 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. Among the published works of Psellus we find an encomium of more than 25 pages in honour of Joannes MaurSpus Mauropus who, besides passing through the ordi¬ nary education of his day, had made a special study of Latin, had modelled his Greek on that of Isocrates, and not unfrequently lit up the sombre style of his Letters with some glowing phrase ‘like a rose in winter’ 1 . Not long after the accession of Constantine Monomachus (1042) he became Professor of Philosophy at Constantinople ; but we soon after¬ wards find him in 1047 bishop of Euchaita, which lies between the Iris and the Halys, a day’s journey beyond Amasia in Pontus. He was the founder of the annual festival which is still celebrated by the Eastern Church in honour of Chrysostom, Basil and Gregory Nazianzen; and he sets a noble example of Christian toleration in an epigram in honour of Plato and Plutarch 2 . In the history of Scholarship he deserves mention as the author of an etymological work in iambic verse. The words selected are suggested by the Greek text of the Scriptures and they are arranged in order of subjects, beginning with words such as ©cos, ayycA.05, oupavos, acrTrjp , ^A.ios, cre\.iijvr], and with the names of the winds and the four elements. Plato in the Cratylus had con¬ jectured that 7 Tvp was an old ‘ barbaric ’ word, but had attempted to supply a derivation for yfj. Later etymologists had added yfj to the list of primary words; and Joannes Mauropus agrees with them, protesting against a contemporary who excluded yfj from the primary words, and adding that, for monosyllables, we are not bound to discover etymologies. The authority followed by Mauropus was apparently Jacob, bishop of Edessa (701), who produced a Christian version of an earlier work on ‘etymology’ or ‘ Hellenism ’, ultimately founded either on Seleucus or some contemporary grammarian in the age of Augustus and Tiberius 3 . We have already noticed the Etymologicum genuinum and the Etymologicum parvum as having been prepared L?xfcons° glCal under the direction of Photius. Next in date to these works is th e Ety??tologicum (c. 1100) deriving the epithet of Gudianum from the former owner of an inferior ms 1 Psellus in Sathas, /. c., v pp. 148—150. 3 Reitzenstein, Etymologika, pp. 173—189. 2 Krumbacher, § 308 2 . XXIII.] MAUROPUS. ETYMOLOGICAL LEXICONS. 405 of the same (1293), the Dane Marquard Glide (d. 1689), whose collection was presented by Peter Burman to the Library of Wolfenbiittel. Many items in this Etymologicum are borrowed from the Et. genuinum and the Et. parvum , and their source is denoted in the best ms , the codex Barberinus I 70 (hardly later than cent, xi), by a monogram for omo? consisting of two circles written above one another with the vertical stroke of T running through the centre of each 1 . Some of the items so marked are not to be found in our mss of the two Etymologica edited by Photius, but all of them were probably taken from less imperfect copies of the same works 2 . In general, the compiler fails in judicious selection, while he attempts to combine divergent views, and copies from his different authorities the same opinion in varying forms 3 . For the preservation of the old lexicons the ninth and tenth centuries were as fatal as they were fruitful. Photius and his circle diffused a wider interest in lexicography, but the value of the works produced was constantly deteriorating, the originals being abridged or expanded at the copyist’s caprice. In the twelfth century industrious scholars appear to have gone back to the works of the age of Photius. Hence arose the so-called Etyitiologicutn Magnum , which was founded mainly on the Et. genuinum with additions from the Et. Gudianum and from Stephanus of Byzantium and Tryphon ‘ on breathings while it dealt very freely with the Et. gen. by altering the headings and the phraseology, suppressing quotations, adding passages from Homer, and in general aiming at something more than an expanded recension of its original 4 . It was compiled between 1100 and 1250. It was first printed (with many interpolations) by Callierges (1499) who was the first to give the work the name of Et. magnum. It was afterwards edited by Sylburg (1594) and Gaisford (1848). The Etymologicum of ‘ the great grammarian’ Symeon 5 is an abridged edition of the Et. genuinum with additions 1 Reitzenstein, /. c., p. 138. The publisher of that work (B. G. Teubner) has kindly supplied me with a facsimile of the symbol, ^. Leopold Cohn {Deutsche Litteraturzeitung, 1897, p. 1417) demurs to accepting | as a monogram for 3 >wt(ios), but gives no other explanation. 2 ib. 152 f. 3 ib. 155. 4 ib. 241 f. 5 Studemund, Anecd. Var. Gr. i 113 f. 40 6 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. Lexica Segueriana from the Et. Gudianum , Stephanus of Byzantium and a lost ‘rhetorical lexicon’. It is later than noo and earlier than 1150, the approximate date of the lexicon of ‘Zonaras’, which derives its etymological glosses from this source. An expansion of Symeon’s work is described as the ‘great grammar’ 1 . The Lexica Segueriana are so called because they are pre¬ served in a ms of cent, xi formerly belonging to Pierre Seguier (1588—1672, President of the French Academy), now in the Paris Library ( Coislinianus 345). This ms, which contains a number of minor lexicons and treatises on syntax, presents us with a vivid picture of the general range of grammatical studies in Constantinople during the tenth and eleventh centuries. It includes lexicons to Homer (that of Apollonius), Herodotus and Plato (that of Timaeus), the lexicons of Moeris and Phrynichus, and five anonymous lexicons, generally called the lexica Segueriana , (1) an anti-atticist work directed against Phrynichus; (2) a lexicon on syntax with examples going down as far as Procopius (fl. 527—562) and Petrus Patricius ( c. 500—562); (3) a list of forensic terms; (4) rhetorical terms with notes on Greek antiquities, derived from a lexicon to the Orators; (5) a avvayu>yr) xpqcrLfjuav, in which the treatment of words beginning with A is very lengthy owing to numerous additions from Phrynichus, Aelius Dionysius and others 2 . The Lexicon Vindobonense was the work of one Andreas Lopadiotes (first half of cent. xiv). Almost its only vindobonense value rests on the fact that it has preserved lines from Sophocles 3 and Pherecrates not found else¬ where. It is mainly founded on the abridged Harpocration 4 . The eleventh century claims one of the best of the Byzantine poets, Christophorus of Mytilene (fl. 1028-43), who writes occasional verses and epigrams in the iambic metre 5 . The tragic cento called the Christus Patiens , 1 Reitzenstein, 254 f. Cp. Krumbacher, § 237 s . 2 The Lex. Seg. are printed in Bekker’s Anecd. Gr. pp. 75—476, including A of (5); the rest of which has since been published in Bachmann’s Anecd. Gr. i 1—422. Cp. Christ, § 635 s ; Krumbacher, § 236 s . 3 Nauck 738, ^r\fxlav \afieip &p.eiv 6 v ecnv 17 K^pdos kolk 6 v. 4 Krumbacher, § 238 s . 6 ed. Rocchi (1887); Krumbacher, § 307 2 . XXIII.] LEXICA SEGUERIANA. 407 once ascribed to Gregory Nazianzen, is now assigned to the eleventh or twelfth century 1 . History is represented not only by Psellus, the friend of the patriarch John Xiphilinus, but also by that patriarch’s nephew and namesake, who, at the prompting of Michael VII (1071-8), produced an epitome of books 36 to 80 of Dion Cassius and thus preserved for us the substance of the last twenty books, which would otherwise have been completely lost 2 . The year 1080 approximately marks the close of three other historical works, (1) the Chronicle (811—1079) of John Scylitzes who carries on the works of George Syncellus and of Theophanes; (2) the history (1034—79) of Michael Attaliates; and (3) the materials for the life of Alexius Comnenus collected by Nicephorus Bryennius who makes Xenophon his model, and whose work is continued and completed by his wife, the daughter of Alexius, Anna Comnena. Late in this century, or early in the next, we may place the Chronicle compiled by Cedrenus, which begins with the Creation and ends with 1057 A.D. 3 One of the foremost Byzantine rhetoricians is John Doxo- patres, also known as Tohn Siceliotes, an important r J .4 Rhetoricians commentator on Hermogenes and Aphthonius . He belongs to the first half of the eleventh century 5 . At the close of the same century a widely popular collection of oriental stories, which had been translated from Sanskrit into all the languages of the East, was rendered from Syriac into Greek under the name of ‘Syntipas’ by Michael Andreopulus, a Christian subject of the Armenian prince Gabriel of Melitene. Through this Greek rendering the stories passed to the West, where they reappeared in the romances of the Seven Sages and of Dolo- pathos, and even had their influence on the Gesta Romanorum and on the Decameron of Boccaccio 6 . 1 Krumbacher, § 312 2 . 2 ib, § 15.V 2 . 3 ib. § 152 2 . 4 Walz, Rh. Gr. ii and vi. Cp. Saintsbury, i 187 f. 5 Krumbacher, § 195 2 . 6 ib. § 393 s . 40 8 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. The ecclesiastical writers of the century include Symeon, the head of the Monastery of St Mamas in Constanti- wSers ia8tICal n °pl e > one of the greatest mystics of the Eastern Church and the precursor of the fanatic quietists of the fourteenth century 1 ; and the eminent biblical commentator, Theophylact, archbishop of Bulgaria, who owes much to Chryso¬ stom and Gregory Nazianzen 2 . His Exhortation , addressed to his royal pupil, Constantine, son of Michael VII, is founded on Xenophon, Plato, Polybius, Diogenes Laertius, Synesius, and especially on Dion Chrysostom and Themistius. It also shows a striking absence of prejudice in its quotations from Julian ‘ the Apostate’. His Panegyric on the emperor Alexius Comnenus closes with an impressive appeal for the protection of learning 8 . The twelfth century is marked by the name of Tzetzes (c. mo— c. 1180), the author of a didactic poem on literary and historical topics extending over no less than 12,674 lines of accentual verse, and displaying a vast amount of miscellaneous reading. The name of Chiliades is due to its first editor, the author’s own name for it being simply PifiXos io-Topucrj. The work is in the form of a versified com¬ mentary on his own Letters , which are full of mythological, literary and historical learning. The following lines on the seven liberal arts, founded on a passage in Porphyry, are a very favour¬ able example of his style:— Tzetzes Sevrtpu )s 5k eyK\jK\ia p.adr]fJ.aTa kclXovvtcu 6 kijkXos, t 6 avpLTtpaG 7 ]s, p.ovta, c. 135. 6 Michael Acominatus, i 17 (Gregorovius, /. c., i 286). 416 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. 19 August, 1203, the second of these conflagrations, which originated in the wilful act of a few Flemish soldiers, lasted for two days, when ‘ splendid palaces, filled with works of ancient art and antique classic manuscripts, were destroyed ’ \ ‘ Without computing the extent of our loss, we may drop a tear’ (says Gibbon) ‘over the libraries that have perished in the triple fire of Constantinople ’ 1 2 . After the capture of the city (13 April, 1204), when the Franks passed in procession through the streets, they showed their contempt for a people of scribes and scholars by displaying a pen and an ink-horn and a sheet of paper, but the Greek historian of these events had his revenge when he denounced the conquerors as ‘ ignorant and utterly illiterate barbarians’ 3 . During the seven and fifty years of the Latin emperors, there was probably a certain amount of literary inter¬ course between the East and the West. In 1205, Pope Inno¬ cent III exhorted the ‘ Masters and Scholars of the University of Paris ’ to go to Greece and revive the study of literature in the land of its birth 4 . Philip Augustus founded a college on the Seine where the Greeks of Constantinople might study the Latin language 5 . Lastly, in 1209, according to Guillaume le Breton, certain works on Metaphysics, composed (it was said) by Aristotle, had recently been brought from Constantinople and translated into Latin, but these libelli (he adds) were ordered to be burnt as likely to foster heresy 6 . The Byzantine age ends with the Palaeologi, who held sway Scholars between the recovery of Constantinople from the under the Franks in 1261 and its capture by the Turks in 1453. The scholars who lived under that dynasty are the precursors of a new era. They differ widely from those who lived under the Macedonian (867—1057) and Comnenian (1057—1185) dynasties, in their treatment of classical texts. 1 Finlay, iii 261, after Nicetas, 356, and Villehardouin, 82. 2 c. 60 ult. 3 Nicetas, aypaiifiarois fiapfiapois Kal riXeov dvaXtpa^riTois, Gibbon, c. 60 (vi 409 Bury). 4 ‘...in Graeciam accedentes, ibi studeretis literarum studia reformare, unde noscitur exordium habuisse ’ (Jourdain, Recherches , p. 48). 5 ib. p. 49. 6 ib. p. 187. XXIII.] PLANUDES. 417 While most of the mss from the ninth to the twelfth centuries (such as the Laurentian ms of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Apol¬ lonius Rhodius, and the Ravenna ms of Aristophanes) maintain the tradition of the Alexandrian and the Roman ages, those of the thirteenth and following centuries show that Byzantine scholars were beginning to deal with old Greek texts in a capricious manner, and to tamper with the metres of ancient poets with a view to bringing them into conformity with metrical systems of their own invention 1 . The scholars of these centuries have less in common with Photius, Arethas and Eustathius than with the earliest representatives of the revival of learning in the West, who are the inheritors of the latest traditions of the Byzantine age 2 . Among the late Byzantine scholars who had much in common with the precursors of the Renaissance the first . A . Planudes in order of time is the monk Maximus Planudes (c. 1260—1310). He had an exceptionally good knowledge of Latin, having possibly been led to acquire that language by the constant controversies between the Greek and Latin Churches. It was probably owing to his knowledge of Latin that he was sent as envoy to Venice in 1296. Among the many Latin works, which he translated into Greek, were Caesar’s Bellurn Gallicum , Cicero’s Somnium Scipionis , Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Heroides , and the smaller grammar of Donatus. His translation of the Heroides was founded on a ms now lost, which must have been superior to our existing mss. The value of this translation is shown in the late Mr Arthur Palmer’s edition (1898). Thus, in vi 47, quid mihi cum Minyis, quid cum Tritonide pinu , the version of Planudes alone has preserved the true reading Dodonide which is confirmed by AwSomSos...<£?7yov, used to describe the material of the cutwater of the Argo by Apollonius Rhodius, i 527 and iv 583. His independent works included a dialogue 1 Wilamowitz, Eur. Her. i 194 1 , ‘ Diese Byzantiner sind eigentlich gar nicht als Schreiber, sondern als Emendatoren aufzufassen; sie sind nicht die Collegen der braven stupiden Monche, die treufleissig nachmalten, was sie nicht nur nicht verstanden, sondern auch nicht zu verstehen meinten, sondern sie sind unsere Collegen...Sie haben so manchen Vers fiir immer geheilt, und noch viel ofter das Auge von Jahrhunderten geblendet.’ 2 Krumbacher, p. 541 2 f. S. 27 418 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. on Grammar with a treatise on Syntax 1 ; a collection of Letters, of special interest in connexion with the writer’s studies 2 ; a life of Aesop, with a prose paraphrase of the ‘Fables’; scholia on Theocritus and Hermogenes ; a work on Indian mathematics, and (probably) the scholia on the first two books of the Arithmetic of Diophantus. Among his compilations were historical and geographical excerpts from Plato, Aristotle, Strabo, Pausanias, Dion Cassius, Synesius, Dion Chrysostom and Joannes Lydus, some of them important in connexion with textual criticism. He also abridged and rearranged (with a few additions) the Anthology of Constantine Cephalas (p. 397), thus forming the collection of Greek epigrams called the Anthologia Planudea, the only Greek Anthology known to scholars before the recovery of the Anthology of Cephalas in 1607. The Planudean Anthology, still preserved in the Library of St Mark’s at Venice (no. 481), is in the hand of Planudes himself. It ends with his name, and with the date, Sept. 1302 (i.e. 1301 a.d.) 3 . Among his eminent contemporaries was John Beccus, patriarch from 1275 to 1282, who strongly supported the union of the Eastern and Western Churches, even dying in prison for that cause in 1293 4 . The chief opponent of Beccus was Gregory of Cyprus, patriarch from 1283 to 1289, whose Life and Letters supply a pleasing picture of his times, while his interest in education is proved by his mythological stories and by his prose paraphrases of Aesop 5 . Gregory’s devoted pupil and strong adherent, Nicephorus Chumnus ( c . 1261— c. 1328), Chunmus >rUS was connected with the royal house, his daughter having been married to the son of Andronicus II. He left public life for the retirement of the monastery in 1320. His literary works were mainly directed against Plato and the Neo-Platonists, and especially against Plotinus; but he also attacks the Aristotelian philosophy. It thus appears that the controversy on Plato and Aristotle, which was one of the characteristics of the Renaissance, had its counterpart as early as the Byzantine 1 Bachmann, Anecd. Gr. ii 1—166. 2 ed. Treu, Breslau (1890). 3 Krumbacher, § 2 2 3 s . 6 ib> §§ 30, 202 2 . 4 ib. § 29 s . XXIII.] MOSCHOPULUS. THOMAS MAGISTER. 419 age. In this respect, amongst others, Nicephorus Chumnus is a precursor of the Renaissance. In his rhetorical writings he insists on the maintenance of the Attic standard of style, finding his own models in Isocrates and Aristides, and also in his master, Gregory of Cyprus. His rhetorical manner often mars the effect of his Letters , some of which are professedly written in the Laconic and others in the Attic style; while a certain monotony results from the frequent recurrence of the same construction and the same combination of connecting particles 1 . Maximus Planudes counted among his pupils and friends Manuel Moschopulus ifl. 1300), the nephew of A ' ' . Moschopulus an archbishop of Crete. The reputation of Mos¬ chopulus is largely due to his having extracted from the two volumes of an anonymous grammatical work a catechism of Greek Grammar, which had a considerable influence during the early Renaissance 2 . He also compiled a school-lexicon of Attic Greek, besides brief notes on the first two books of the Iliad , as well as on Hesiod 3 , Pindar’s Olympian Odes, Euripides and Theocritus 4 . His influence on the Byzantine text of Pindar was unsatisfactory. Among the mss of Pindar a ‘family’ of forty-three, most of them containing the Olympian Odes alone, is regarded as representing the ‘badly interpolated edition of Moschopulus’ 5 . Among his contemporaries was Thomas Magister, secretary to Andronicus II (1282—1328). After becoming a monk, and assuming the name of Theodulus, he Magister 3 devoted himself to the special study of the ancient Classics. He was the author of several school-books, the chief of which is a ‘ selection of Attic nouns and verbs ’ 6 founded on Phrynichus, Ammonius, Herodian, Moeris and others, with many additions from his own reading, especially in Herodotus, Thucydides, Aristides and Synesius. He also wrote scholia on 1 Krumbacher, § 203 2 . 2 On its relation to the Erotemata of Chrysoloras, Chalcondyles etc., cp. Voltz, in Jahn’s Jahrb. 139 (1889) 579—99; and Hartfelder’s Melanchthon (1889), p. 255. 3 Facsimile on p. 428. 4 Krumbacher, § 224 s . 5 Seymour’s Selected Odes , p. xxiii; Tycho Mommsen’s ed., p. xxiv f. 6 ed. Ritschl, 1832. 27—2 420 THE BYZANTINE AGE. [CHAP. Theodorus Metochites Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, and on three plays of Aristophanes {Plutus, Nudes , Ranae). The scholia on Pindar, which bear his name, are ascribed by Lehrs 1 to Triclinius. Another scholar of the same age was Theodorus Metochites (d. 1332), who, like his eulogist Thomas Magister, was in the service of Andronicus II. Though inferior to the foremost scholars of former genera¬ tions, such as Photius and Psellus, he was one of the most learned men of his time. His works include Philosophical and Historical Miscellanies, with excerpts from more than seventy philosophers and historians, which are often of textual importance. His erudition is praised in the highest terms by his pupil, Nicephorus Gregoras 2 , a man of encyclopaedic learning, who is best known as a historian, though he is also the writer of a commentary on the wanderings of Odysseus, and of many works still remaining in manuscript, including a treatise on Grammar and Orthography 3 . The foremost textual critic of the age of the Palaeologi was Demetrius Triclinius (early in cent. xiv). He ex¬ pounded and emended (and not unfrequently corrupted) the texts of Hesiod, Pindar, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides {Hecuba, Orestes, Phoenissae) 4 and Theocritus. His scholia on Aeschylus and Hesiod ( quasi castrum sine armamentario. Geoffrey of Sainte-Barbe-en-Auge to Peter Mangot(c 1170), in Martene, Thesaurus novus Anecdotorum , i 511. notitia linguarum est prima porta sapientiae. Roger Bacon, Opus Tertium , c. 28, p. 102 Brewer. On peut dire que la philosophie scholastique est nee a Paris et qiielle y est morte. Une phrase de Porphyre , un rayon derobe a Vantiquite , la produisit; Vantiquite tout e?itiere letouffa. Victor Cousin, Ouvrages Inedits I Abelard , p. lx (1836). Conspectus of History of Scholarship, &c., in the West, 600—1000 A.D. Italy 600 - 604 d. Gregory I 612 f. Bobbio 615 d. Columban Greek monasteries founded in Rome by Martin I (649- 55 ) 690 Greek declines in Italy Spain 700 - 715-31 Gregory II 726 f. Novalesa 730- 80 Greek refu¬ gees in Italy 731- 41 Gregory III 770 Petrus Pisanus 774 end of Lombard kingdom 725-97 Paulus Diaconus 795-817 Leo III 800 - Charles the Great crowned at Rome 817- 24 Pascal I 818- 50 Greek refu¬ gees in Italy 823 Dungal at Pavia 846 d. Pacificus of Verona 858-67 Nicholas I 900 916-24 Gesta Beren- garii 924 d. Berengar 961-2 Otho I crowned at Rome king of Italy and emperor 967 d. Gunzo of No¬ vara 972 d. Luitprand bp of Cremona 974 d. Ratherius bp of Verona 999-1003 Silvester II {Gerbert) 1000 Ml— 570-636 Isi¬ dore of Seville 657 Euge- niusIII bp of Toledo 690 d. Julian bp of To¬ ledo ‘ France ’ W. Frankland ‘ Germany ’ E. Frankland 714 Arab Conquest of Spain 535-600 Venantius Fortunatus ‘Virgilius Maro’ 613 Frank kingdoms u- nited under Clothar II 620 f. Fleury 625 f. St Riquier 630 f. Ferrieres 634 f. Rebais 650 f. Peronne 656 f. Stavelot 658 Fredegarius 662 f. Corbie 688 d. St Wandrille 614 f. St Gallen 645 d. Gallus 721 f. Priim 725 d. St Giles 732 Saracens defeated by Charles Martel 724 f. Reichenau 752 end of Merovingian & beginning of Caro- lingian line 742-66 Chrodegang abp 744 f. Fulda of Metz 754 d. Boniface 763 f. Lorsch 772-814 Sole rule of 743-84 Virgil bp of Charles the Great Salzburg 796-804 Alcuin at Tours 810 Dungal at St Denis 814-40 Louis the Pious 821 d. Theodulfus bp and founder of school of Orleans 826 Ermoldus Nigellus 837 Thegan 840-77 Charles the Bald 805-62 Servatus Lupus 845 Joannes Scotus (d. 875) 850 d. Freculphus 840-60 Sedulius at Liege 865 d. Radbertus 877 d. Eric of Auxerre 881-8 Charles the Fat 908 d. Remi of Auxerre 910 f. Cluni 915 d. Regino 923 d. Abbo Cernuus 930 d. Hucbald 942 d. Odo of Cluni 950 b. Gerbert of Aurillac 987 end of W. Carolin- gians & beginning of line of Hugh Capet 991-6 Gerbert abp of Rheims 822 f. Corvey 770-840 Einhard 843 Treaty of Verdun 776-856 Rabanus Maurus 809-49 Walafrid Strabo 830 f. Hirschau 850 Ermenrich of Ellwangen 852 Rudolf. Ann. Fuld. 874 Agius, Poeta Saxo 890 Salomo III, abbot of St Gallen 911 end of E. Caro- lingians 912 d. Notker Bal- bulus 918-36 Henry of Saxony 925 Lotharingia re¬ covered for Ger¬ many 936 Ecbasis Captivi 936-73 Otho I 965 d. Bruno abp of Cologne 973 d. Ekkehard I 973-83 Otho II 983 Walther of Speier 984 Hroswitha of Gandersheim 996-1002 Otho III Continuedfrom p. 204. b. bom ; d. died ; f. founded. British Isles 602-5 Augustine abp of Canterbury ? Hispericafamina 651^90 Aidan bp of Lindisfarne 668-90 Theodore of Tarsus abp of Can¬ terbury 673 b. Bede 675 b. Boniface 688-726 Ina, king of Wessex 690 d. Benedict Biscop 650-709 Aldhelm 732 Egbert abp of York 734 d. Tatwine abp of Canterbury 735 d. Bede, b. Alcuin 778-81 Alcuin head of the school of York 810-5 b. Joannes Scotus 871— c. 900 Alfred 942-58 Odo abp of Canterbury 959-88 Dunstan abp of Canterbury c. 955—1030 iElfric of Eynsham 969 f. Ramsey 985-7 Abbo of Fleury at Ramsey CHAPTER XXIV. FROM GREGORY THE GREAT (c. 54O—604) TO BONIFACE (675—754). The Roman age has already been described as coming to an end in the memorable year 529, when the Monastery of Monte Cassino was founded in the West and the School of Athens closed in the East. The history of Scholarship during the Middle Ages in the West, to which we now turn our attention, covers a period of rather more than eight centuries, extending from about 530 to about 1350 a.d. Shortly after the beginning of this period, we have the birth of the biographer of Benedict, Gregory the Great (540), the father of mediaeval Christianity; and, shortly before its end, the death of Dante (1321), who embodies in his immortal poem much of the scholastic teaching of the age. In our survey of this period, we propose to pass in review the names of special interest in the world of letters, so far as they have definite points of contact with the history of classical learning. The present chapter begins with the biographer of Benedict, and ends with Boniface. Gregory the Great (c. 540—604), who became Pope in 589, belonged to a senatorial family and received a liberal education which made him second to none in Rome 1 . He had already filled the high office of Praetor, when he withdrew from a secular life and devoted his ancestral wealth to the founding of six monasteries in Sicily, and a seventh in Rome, which he selected for his own retreat. As papal envoy in Constantinople (584-7), notwithstanding his ignorance of Greek, he entered into a controversy with the Patriarch himself. 1 Greg. Tur. Hist. Franc, x 1; Paulus Diaconus, Vita Greg. c. 2. 432 THE SIXTH CENTURY IN THE WEST. [CHAP. In one of his Letters' he complains that there were none in Constantinople who were capable of making a good translation from Latin into Greek, an expression implying, on his own part, some slight acquaintance with the latter language, although, in another letter, he disclaims all such knowledge, adding that he had never written any work in that language 1 2 3 . In his Magna Moralia he sets forth an allegorical interpretation of the Book of Job, which he was not capable of studying either in Hebrew or in Greek, but only in the earlier and the later Latin versions. It was his own influence that led to the general recognition and acceptance of the Latin Vulgate. Towards the close of the long letter prefixed to the Moralia , he confesses his contempt for the art of speech, and admits that he is not over-careful in the avoidance of barbarisms or inaccurate uses of prepositions, deeming it ‘ utterly unworthy to keep the language of the Divine Oracles in subjection to the rules of Donatus 53 ; and this principle he applies to his own commentary, as well as to the sacred text. His attitude towards the secular study of Latin literature is well illustrated in the letter to Desiderius, bishop of Vienne. He is almost ashamed to mention the rumour that has reached him, to the effect that the bishop was in the habit of instructing certain persons in grammatical learning. ‘ The praises of Christ cannot be pronounced by the same lips as the praises of Jove’ 4 . He hopes to hear that the bishop is not really interested in such trifling subjects 5 . Elsewhere, however, the study of Grammar and the knowledge of the liberal arts are emphatically commended on the ground of the aid they afford in the understanding of the Scriptures; but the genuineness of the work, in which this opinion is expressed 6 , is doubtful. Later writers record the tradition that Gregory did his best to suppress the works of 1 Epp. vii 30. 2 Ep. xi 74, nos nec Graece novimus, nec aliquod opus aliquando Graece conscripsimus (cp. vii 32, quamvis Graecae linguae nescius). 3 Migne, Ixxv 516 B. 4 ‘ In uno se ore cum Iovis laudibus Christi laudes non capiunt ’; a reminiscence of Jerome’s Ep. ad Damasum, 21 § 13, ‘ absit ut de ore Christiano sonet Iupiter omnipotens’, xxii 386 Migne (R. L. Poole’s Medieval Thought , 8). 5 nugis et secularibus litteris; Ep. xi 54. 6 Book v of Comm, on I Kings 3, 30, Migne Ixxix 356. XXIV.] GREGORY I. IORDANES. GILDAS. 433 Iordanes Cicero, the charm of whose style diverted young men from the study of the Scriptures 1 , and that he burnt all the books of Livy which he could find, because they were full of idolatrous superstitions 2 . It was even stated that he set the Palatine Library on fire, lest it should interfere with the study of the Bible, but the sole authority for this is John of Salisbury 3 (d. 1180), and the statement is unworthy of credit 4 . In the same century we have an interesting group of three historians, all of whom exemplify the prevailing decline in grammatical knowledge. The first of these is Iordanes, the author of a universal chronicle, who, in his abridgement (551) of the History of the Goths by Cassiodorus, borrows his preface from Rufinus and his opening words from Orosius, and confesses his debt to others in delightfully ungram¬ matical Latin 5 . The justice with which he describes himself as agrammatus 6 is apparent on every page of his work. He makes dolus and fluvius neuter, and flumen , gaudium and regnum masculine; and abounds in errors of declension and conjugation; but even his blunders in grammar, gross as they are, cannot conceal the debt which he obviously owes to the rhetorical phraseology of Cassiodorus, to whom he is also indebted for all his learned quotations 7 . The interval between the consulship and the death of Cassiodorus corresponds to the life of Gildas of Bath (516—573), the first native historian of Britain. The learning he had derived from St Iltul, the ‘teacher of the Britons ’, was enlarged by a visit to Ireland; and he even founded a monastery in Brittany. Much of the earlier part of his ‘ lament Gildas 1 In Edict of Louis XI (1473); P. Lyron, Singidaritates Historicae , i 167 (Tiraboschi, Letteraticra Italiana , ii 2, 10, vol. iii, p. 118 ed. 1787). 2 S. Antoninus, Summa Theol. iv 11, 4 ( ibid.). 3 Policraticus, ii 26, viii 19. 4 On Gregory, cp. Tiraboschi, Lett. Ital. iii 109—123 (ed. 1787); Bayle’s Diet., s. v. ; Heeren, Cl. Litt. im Mittelalter , i 78—81; Milman, Lat. Christ. ii 97—145; Ebert, Lit. des Mittelalters , i 2 542-6; and Teuffel, §493; Epp. ed. Ewald and Hartmann in Mon. Germ. Hist. 1887-99. 5 Scito me maiorum secutum scriptis ex eorum latissima prata paucos flores legisse. 6 Get. 265. 7 Teuffel, § 485. S. 28 434 THE SIXTH CENTURY IN THE WEST. [CHAP. Gregory of Tours on the ruin of Britain’ is derived from St Jerome’s Letters and from a Latin version of the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius. The work as a whole is written in a verbose, florid, fantastic and exaggerated form of monastic Latin, and its prolix periods often tend to obscurity 1 . It was in the year of the death of Gildas (573) that Gregory, the historian of the Franks (c . 538—594), became bishop of Tours. In the preface to his History he refers to the decay of literature in Gaul 2 . His works in general show a certain familiarity with Virgil, especially with the first book of the Aeneid , but he cannot quote three lines of verse without making havoc of the metre 3 . Yet he ventures to criticise the versification of king Chilperic 4 , who, besides writing Latin poetry, had (like Claudius) attempted to add several new letters to the Latin alphabet. He is familiar with the preface to the Catiline of Sallust; but his quotations from Cicero are borrowed from Jerome, and those from Pliny and Gellius are probably second-hand. He repeatedly apologises for his imperfect knowledge of grammar 5 . He combines the plurals haec and quae with a singular verb; he writes antedictus cives for antedictos, and percolibantur (i.e. perculebantur) for percellebantur; and one of his favourite constructions is the accusative absolute. The study of his works shows that, in his day, the pronunciation of Latin 1 Cp. Ebert, i 2 562-5; Teuffel, § 486, 1. 2 Decedente atque immo potius pereunte ab urbibus Gallicanis liberalium cultura litterarum...Vae diebus nostris, quia periit studium litterarum a nobis. 3 H. F. iv 30 and Mart, i 40. 4 H. F. v 44, ‘ scripsit alios libros idem rex versibus, quasi Sedulium secutus; sed versiculi illi nulla paenitus metricae conveniunt ratione’. Never¬ theless, posterity placed the statue of Chilperic over the S.W. door of Notre- Dame, with a lyre in his hand in the attitude of Apollo (Montfaucon, Mon. de la Monarchic , t. i). Male, however, VArt Religieux, 438, identifies this as David. 5 H. F. iv 1, veniam precor, si aut in litteris aut in syllabis grammatifcam artem excessero, de qua adplene non sum imbutus. Vit. Pair. 2, praef., non me artis grammaticae studium imbuit neque auctorum saecularium polita lectio erudivit. Liber in gloria confessorum, praef., timeo, ne, cum scribere coepero, quia sum sine litteris rethoricis et arte grammatica, dicatur mihi a litteratis : ‘O rustice et idiota...qui nomina discernere nescis; saepius pro masculinis feminea...commutas; qui ipsas quoque praepositiones...loco debito plerumque non locas’...sed tamen respondebo illis et dicam, quia: ‘opusvestrum facio et per meam rusticitatem vestram prudentiam exercebo’. XXIV.] GREGORY OF TOURS. MARTIN OF BRACARA. 435 Fredegarius differed from the spelling; e was confounded with i, and 0 with u ; many of the consonants were pronounced feebly or suppressed altogether; aspiration was little observed, and a sibilant sound was introduced into ci and ii. Meanwhile, the vocabulary was being enlarged by the addition of words borrowed from Greek and Hebrew and even from barbarous languages, and by the use of old words in new senses. The departure from classical usage is most striking in matters of syntax, while there is comparatively little change in the inflexions. Gregory of Tours is primarily an authority for the history of the Franks during the century preceding his own death; but he also supplies important evidence on the characteristics of the Latin language in the days of its decline 1 . The decay of letters is lamented in the next century by Fredegarius Scholasticus ( f . 658), who, in a Chronicle written in a Burgundian monastery, complains that the world is on the wane, intellectual activity is dead, and the ancient writers have no successors 2 . Among the older contemporaries of Gregory, bishop of Tours, was Martin, archbishop of Bracara, whom he describes in general as second to none of his own Br “ a a r ^ n ° f 5go age in the world of letters, and in particular as the author of the Latin verses over the S. door of the church of St Martin at Tours. In his ethical works, and especially in his treatise de ira and the formula honestae vitae 3 , he makes much use of Seneca, and these works were long ascribed to Seneca himself 4 . The decline in Scholarship which has been traced in the historians is also to be noticed in the poets of this poets age. The poets of the middle of the sixth century Maximianus, include the Tuscan Maximianus, who spent his corippus, youth in Rome, and wrote in his later years the Fortunatus six elegies which had a singular fascination for students in the 1 Max Bonnet, Le Latin de Gregoire de Tours (1890). Cp. Ebert, i 2 566- 79, and Teuffel, § 486, 3—9. 2 Bouquet, ii 413 (Haase, De Medii Aevi Stud. Philol. 28); cp. Putnam, Books in the Middle Ages, i 128. 3 Included in Supplement to Haase’s ed. of Seneca. 4 Teuffel, § 494, 2; Schanz, § 470. 28—2 436 POETS OF THE SIXTH CENTURY. [CHAP. Middle Ages 1 . He is a Christian who poses as a pagan. Familiar with Virgil, Catullus, and the elegiac and lyric poets of the Augustan age, he is not always correct in points of prosody, his metrical mistakes including verecundia and pedagogus 2 . Irre¬ gularities of prosody are also frequent in the metrical version of the Acts of the Apostles produced by Arator, who studied at Milan and Ravenna. In the same age the African Corippus (55°) writes epic poems on historical subjects in a fluent style inspired by Virgil and Claudian, while he also imitates Ovid, Lucan and Statius, being, in point of prosody, the most correct of all the poets of his time. His contemporary, Venantius Fortunatus (c. 535— c. 600), was educated at Ravenna, left Italy for Gaul, where he found a friend in Gregory of Tours, and, towards the end of his life, became bishop of Poitiers. He is a devoted adherent of Radegunde (the widow of king Clothar I) and her foster-daughter. He tells us that Radegunde was a profound student of St Gregory, St Basil and St Athanasius, and that Gertrude, abbess of Nivelle, had sent messengers to Rome and to Ireland for the purchase of books 3 . He also mentions the custom of giving recitations from Virgil and other poets in the Forum of Trajan 4 . His elegiacs and hexameters include many reminiscences of Virgil and Ovid, Claudian and Sedulius, Prosper and Arator, while he is himself imitated by later versifiers such as Alcuin and Theodulfus, Rabanus Maurus and Walafrid Strabo 5 . He describes a castle on the Mosel, and a voyage from Metz to Andernach 6 , without attaining the charm of the Mosella of Ausonius. He addresses the bishop of Tours in a generally correct set of Sapphics after the Horatian model, unhappily ending with care Gregori. In the same poem he mentions Pindar (Pindarus Graius), and, in the prose preface to his Life of St Martin , he even quotes four rhetorical terms in the original Greek 7 . He flatters the poets and orators of his day with the 1 Reichling in Mon. Germ. Paed. XII pp. xx, xxxvii f. 2 Manitius in Rhein. Mus. xliv 540; R. Ellis in A. f. P. v 1—15 and Cl. Rev. xv 368; ed. Petschenig (1890), Webster (1900). 3 viii 1. 4 iii 20; vi 8. 5 Manitius, Index iii and iv to ed. by Leo and Krusch in Mon. Hist. Germ. {1881-5). 6 iii 12; x 9. 7 e\\el\f/eis, dLoupeveis, TrapevOtaeis. XXIV.] ‘VIRGIL’ THE GRAMMARIAN. 437 assurance that they found their inspiration in Homer and Demosthenes 1 ; but his own study of his classical predecessors does not prevent his perpetrating such mistakes as adhuc , initium , idolum, ecclesia and trinitas; and he succeeds in making four false quantities in the six Greek names included in the single line, Archyta , Pythagoras , Aratus, Cato , Plato , Chrysippus 2 . Three, however, of his sacred poems are widely known. Ambrose is his model in Vexilla regis prodeunt , while the triumphant trochaic tetrameter of the Roman soldiers, and of Prudentius, is the type followed by Pange lingua gloriosi proelium certaminis. The ordinary elegiac couplet is used in the description of Spring (Salve festa dies ) written for Felix, bishop of Nantes, whom he belauds as a perfect Greek scholar and as ‘ the light of Armorica’. It is only in these three poems, and in the modern hymns translated from them 3 , that Fortunatus may be said to have survived to the present day 4 . The decadence of Latin in the seventh century (one of the darkest ages in Latin literature) is exemplified in the person of the grammarian Virgilius Maro, who grammarian* 6 may be placed early in that century, or late in the sixth 5 . He assures us that his master Aeneas gave him the name of Maro, ‘quia in eo antiqui Maronis spiritus redivivit’. He describes certain grammarians as wrangling for a fortnight over the vocative of ego, and as drawing their swords after an equally long discussion on inchoative verbs. His only value lies in the way in which he illustrates the transition from Latin to its Provencal descendant, and from quantitative to rhythmical forms of verse. He is described as belonging to the school of Toulouse 6 . He records the custom of having two separate Libraries (i) of 1 viii l. 2 vii 12, 25; cp. index rei metricae in Leo’s ed. 3 Moorsom’s Companion to Hymns A. and M., pp. 58—66 2 . 4 Cp. Ampere, Hist. Litt. ii 312 f; Ozanam, La Civilisation Chretienne chez les Francs , pp. 412-9 (ed. 1855); Ebert, i 2 533; Teuffel, § 491 f; and Saintsbury, i 396-9. 5 Ozanam, 438 f. His only extant work^ are the Epitomae ad Fabianum puerum , and the Epistolae ad Julium germanum diaconum (Mai, Cl. Auct. v 1); cp. Hiimer (Wien, 1882). 6 Abbo of Fleury (d. 1004), Quaest. Gr. ed. Mai, Cl. Auct. v 349. 438 GREEK IN IRELAND. [CHAP. Christian, (2) of pagan literature 1 2 . He also tells us that his preceptor ‘ Virgilius Assianus ’ wrote a work on the twelve kinds of Latin. With the help of Greek, he coins new words: scribere becomes charaxare , rex appears as thors (from Opovos), and a cryptic form of Latin comes into use, which has points of similarity with the Irish monk’s Hisperica fatnina (cent, vii), where, amid much that is singularly obscure, it is a relief to find so clear a phrase as :—‘pantes solitum elaborant agrestres orgium V It is characteristic of the Irish origin of this strange composition that we here find two words borrowed from Greek. While the accurate knowledge of Latin was declining in Gaul, even Greek was not unknown in Ireland 3 . That Ireland m island had reaped the benefit of its remoteness from those incursions, which, in the fifth century, had wrought havoc on the civilisation of almost all the lands of the West. It was in the same century ( c. 405) that St Patrick, who had been educated under St Martin of Tours, crossed the seas to convert the Irish to the Christian faith. In 445 he established an archiepiscopal see at Armagh 4 ; and, four years later, the first invasion of Britain by the English drove Christianity into the mountains of Wales and the borders of Scotland, and even to the many monasteries which had recently been founded in Ireland 5 . The knowledge of Greek, which had almost vanished in the West, was so widely diffused in the schools of Ireland, that, if anyone knew Greek, it was assumed that he 1 Ep. p. 41. 2 Mai, l.c., v 479 f; Ozanam, La Civilisation Chretienne chez les Francs (1855), 423-51, 483 f, and Etudes Germ, ii 479!; Teuffel, § 497, 7; Hisperica Famina , ed. Stowasser (1887); ed. Jenkinson (announced); R. Ellis in Journ. Philol. xxviii (1903) 209!; Zimmer, Nennius vindicalus (1893), 291 f, assigns it to S.W. Britain (first half of cent. VI). 3 Cp. Cramer, De Graecis Medii Aevi Studiis (1849), i 42; Ozanam, l.c. 475-82; Haureau, Singularity Historiques et Litteraires (1861), pp. 1—36; G. T. Stokes, Ireland and the Celtic Church (1886), Lect. xi; and H. Zimmer, Keltische Kirche in Britannien u. Irland, in Realencyclopadie f. prot. Theol. (1901), abstract in Eng. Hist. Rev. 1901, p. 757 f. 4 Zimmer places the death of St Patrick in 459 ; Stokes in 463. 5 Cp. T. Moore’s History of Ireland, vol. i c. 10; and Eichhorn, Allg. Gesch. (1799) h l 7 6—188. XXIV.] COLUMBAN IN THE VOSGES. 439 must have come from that country. The Irish passion for travel 1 led to the light of learning which had lingered in the remotest island of the West being transmitted anew to the lands of the South 2 . The Irish monk, Columban, born in Leinster about 543, had received an excellent education on one of the many islands of Lough Erne before he entered the monas¬ tery of Bangor on the Eastern coast of Ulster. The monastery was then at the height of its fame, and it was doubtless owing to the classical training he had there received, that he was able at the age of 68 to address a friend in a lengthy poem of Adonic verse, from which the few following lines are taken:— ‘ Inclyta vates, Nomine Sappho, Versibus istis Dulce solebat Edere carmen. Doctiloquorum Carmina linquens, Frivola nostra Suscipe laetus ’. Migne, lxxx 291. Elsewhere he quotes Juvenal, and recommends the reading of the ancient poets as well as the ancient fathers 3 . About 585, he was suddenly smitten with a longing for foreign travel. Attended by twelve companions, he left for Gaul; and, having been invited to settle in Burgundy, he founded in the woodland solitudes of the Vosges the three monasteries of Anegray, Luxeuil (c. 590) and Fontaines 4 . It was about this time that he composed his Rule, which has much in common with that of Benedict, and prescribes the copying of mss, besides teaching in schools and constant toil in field and forest 6 . He was banished from Burgundy about 610, and, after withdrawing to Nantes, returned towards the Rhine, passing from Zurich to Zug and ultimately to the Lake of 1 Vita S. Galli , ii 47 (Pertz, Mon. ii 30), Scotorum, quibus consuetudo peregrinandi iam paene in naturam conversa est. 2 On ‘Scots on the Continent’, see A. W. Haddan’s Remains (1876), 258—294 ; cp. H. Zimmer’s Irish Element in Mediaeval Culture (E. T.); and Greith, Gesch. d. altirischen Kirche in Hirer Verbindung mit Rom, Gallien u. Alemannien (Freiburg in B., 1867). 3 Ussher, Ep. Hib. Syll. p. 11 f. 4 Life by Jonas, cc. 9, 10. Cp. Margaret Stokes, Three Months in the Forests of France (1895). 8 Margaret Stokes, Six Months in the Apennines , a Pilgrimage in search of vestiges of the Irish Saints in Italy (1892). 440 COLUMBAN AND BOBBIO. [CHAP. Constance, where he spent two or three years in preaching to the heathen. When he left for Italy ( c. 612), he was welcomed by the king of the Lombards and his queen Theodolinda; and, S.E. of the Lombard capital of Pavia, he founded on the stream of the Trebbia the monastery of Bobbio 1 ( c. 613). In a cavern, high above the opposite bank of the stream, he died in 615 2 . His life was written in the same century by Jonas, a monk of Bobbio, who quotes Virgil and Livy, and has evidently formed his style on the study of the Classics. Columban’s ‘ belt, chalice and knife ’ are still shown in the sacrarium 3 . The monastery founded by the Irish monk became a home of learning in northern Italy. In course of time its library received gifts of mss of the fourth and fifth centuries, originally transcribed for men of letters in Rome, and others of later date, presented by wandering countrymen of the founder, such as Dungal 4 , the Irish monk who presided over the school at Pavia in 823. The first catalogue, which contained 666 mss, including Terence, Lucretius, Virgil, Ovid, Lucan, Persius, Martial, Juvenal and Claudian, with Cicero, Seneca and the elder Pliny, was drawn up in the tenth century, and has been printed by Muratori 5 . It is arranged according to the authors and the donors of the mss. The second, ‘restored’ in 1461 and including 280 volumes, was discovered and published in 1824 by Peyron 6 . The library was explored by Giorgio Merula (1493) 7 , Tommaso Inghirami (1496), 1 On the spot it is pronounced Bobio , according to the old spelling of the name. The epitaph on Bp Cummian (d. 730) has Ebovio (Margaret Stokes, Six Months in the Apennines , p. 152). 2 In the same year died Aileran, an Irish monk who borrows from Origen, Philo and Josephus the best part of a brief explanation of certain Biblical names (Migne, lxxx 327-34). 3 M. Stokes, pp. 14, 178f. On Columban, cp. Ozanam, Civ. Chret. c. iv; Ebert, i 2 617 f; Milman, ii 284—295; Dr Moran, An Irish Missionary and his Work (1869); G. T. Stokes, Irela7id and the Celtic Church , Lect. vii; and M. Stokes, l.c. 4 Wattenbach, Schriftwesen i?/i MA , p. 489. Gottlieb, however, maintains that the work of the elder Dungal against Claudius of Turin was given by a later Dungal in cent. XII (Traube, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1892, 332-7). 5 Ant. Ital. iii 809—880, esp. p. 818; cp. G. Becker’s Catalogi Bibliothe- carum Antiqui (1885), p. 64 ; and Leon Maitre’s Ecoles , p. 297. 6 Fragmenta Orat. Cic. p. iiif. 7 Centralbl. f. Bibl. v 343 f. XXIV.] MSS FROM BOBBIO. 441 and Aulo Giano Parrasio (1499). Many valuable mss were removed by Cardinal Borromeo, some of them being placed in the Ambrosian Library, which he was founding at Milan (1606), while others were sent to the Vatican at the instance of Paul V (1618). In 1685 the monastery was visited by the learned Benedictine, Mabillon 1 . During the 18th century a number of the remaining volumes were transported to Turin. The greater part have thus been dispersed through the libraries of Rome, Milan and Turin, while some have found their way to Naples and Vienna 2 . It is practically certain that the Ambrosian palimpsest of Plautus 3 and those of several of Cicero’s Speeches (cent, iv) and of the Letters of Fronto, discovered in the Ambrosian Library early in the 19th century, all came from the monastery founded by the Irish monk at Bobbio; but the monks of that monastery, while they deserve our gratitude for preserving these mss at all, have made the task of deciphering them needlessly difficult by inscribing on these ancient scrolls later copies of works so easily accessible as the Vulgate, and the Acts of the Councils and the works of St Augustine. Among other mss, which once belonged to Bobbio, may be mentioned fragments of Symmachus and the Theodosian Code; scholia on Cicero 4 (cent, v), mss of St Luke (v-vi), St Severinus (vi), Josephus (vi-vii), St Ambrose, St Augustine and St Maximus (vii), Gregory’s Dialogues ( c . 750), and St Isidore (before 840) 5 . Lastly we cannot forget the ‘Muratorian fragment’ 1 Iter Italicum , 215. He describes it as ‘the Bobian (called by the ancients the Ebobian) monastery’. 2 M. Stokes, 281-2. On the mss in Turin, cp. Ottino (1890); on those in Rome and Milan, Seebass in Centralbl. f Bibl. xiii; on others, Gottlieb, ib. iv 442 f, and Gebhardt, ib. v 343-62, 383—431, 538. 3 Studemund, Apographum , p. v f, Neque unde neque quo tempore codex in bibliothecam Ambrosianam pervenerit, certo constat...Ubi sacer codex conscriptus sit nescimus. Bobbii eum conscriptum esse et vulgo credunt et inde probabile fit, quod rude ac parum elegans scripturae genus. amanuensem non Italum fuisse persuadet; itemque genus scripturae Anglo- saxonicum quo supplementa ilia insignia sunt, vix amanuensi ex Italia oriundo tribuerim. 4 ed. Orelli, v ii 214—369; recent literature in Bursian’s Jahresb. cxiii (1902) 192 f. 5 Facsimiles from all the nine mss here dated are published by the Palaeo- graphical Society. The Medicean Virgil (v) also came from Bobbio. 442 ST GALLEN AND RESBACUS. [CHAP. Gallus and St Gallen (cent, viii or earlier), the earliest extant list of the books of the New Testament. When the founder of Bobbio left for Italy, one at least of his companions, Gallus by name, remained on the shore of the Lake of Constance. Accompanied by several of the other Irish monks, he founded on a lofty site in the neighbourhood (614) the monastery which has given the name of St Gallen to the town which surrounds it. The founder died in extreme old age about 645. The monastery of St Gallen has proved no less important than that of Bobbio as a treasure- house of Latin as well as Irish literature. As we shall see in the sequel, at least four unique mss of Asconius, Valerius Flaccus, Statius and Manilius were there discovered in 1416 by Poggio, together with a complete copy of Quintilian 1 . The Library still possesses a few leaves of a ms of Virgil belonging to the fourth or fifth century 2 . Another pupil of Columban, Agilius (St Aile), was the first abbot of the monastery founded at Resbacus (Rebais, E. of Paris) in 634 s , and the mss there copied included Terence, Cicero, Virgil, Horace, Donatus, Priscian and Boethius 4 . Within less than 25 years after the Irish monks had founded Bobbio and St Gallen, and thus unconsciously promoted the preservation of some of the most important remains of Latin literature, Isidore, bishop of Seville {c. 570—636), produced an encyclopaedic work which gathered up for the Middle Ages much of the learning of the ancient world. The work is known as the Origines , and is remarkable for the great variety of its contents and for its numerous citations from earlier authorities. The friend, for whom it was composed, divided it into 20 Books, describing the whole as a vast volume of ‘ etymologies ’ including everything that ought to be known. Books 1—in are on the liberal arts, grammar (including metre) filling a whole Book; iv, on medicine and on Isidore of Seville 1 Cp. F. Weidmann, Gesch. d. Bibliothek von St Gallen (1842); Catalogues of the mss in G. Becker’s Catalogi (1885); cp. Leon Maftre’s Acoles, p. 278 f, and Ozanam’s Civ. Chret. p. 487 f. 2 Facsimile on p. 185. 3 Jonas, Vita S. Columbani , 26. 4 Greith, Altirische Kirche, p. 291 (Denk, Gallo-Frdnkisch. Unterricht, 257 f). Perrona Scottorum (Peronne, near Corbie) was founded by Irish monks c. 650. XXIV.] ISIDORE OF SEVILLE. 443 libraries; v, on law and chronology; vi, on the books of the Bible; vn, on the heavenly and the earthly hierarchy; vm, on the Church and on sects (no less than 68 in number); ix, on language, on peoples, and on official titles; x, on etymology; xi, on man; xn, on beasts and birds; xm, the world and its parts; xiv, physical geography; xv, political geography, public buildings, land-surveying and road-making; xvi, stones and metals ; xvii, agriculture and horticulture ; xvm, the vocabulary of war, litigation and public games; xix, ships and houses, dress and personal adornment; and xx, meats and drinks, tools and furniture. The work is mainly founded on earlier compilations, Book ii being chiefly taken from the Greek texts translated by Boethius; the first part of iv from Caelius Aurelianus; xi from Lactantius; and xn—xiv, xv &c., from Pliny and Solinus; while its plan, as a whole, and many of its details, appear to have been borrowed from the lost Prata of Suetonius 1 . The author also makes use of Lucretius, Sallust, and an epitome of Vitruvius, with Jerome, Augustine, Orosius and others 2 . The work was so highly esteemed as an encyclopaedia of classical learning that, to a large extent, it unfortunately superseded the study of the classical authors themselves. Among its compiler’s other writings is a Chronicle founded on Julius Africanus and on Jerome’s rendering of Eusebius (ending with 615), a History of the Goths, a con¬ tinuation of Gennadius De Viris lllustribus , and a treatise De Natura Rerum, widely known in the Middle Ages. We gain a vivid impression of his own surroundings from the verses written by himself for the 14 presses {armaria), which composed his library and were adorned with the portraits of 22 authors. Theology is represented by Origen, Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Chrysostom and Cyprian; poetry by Prudentius, Avitus, Juvencus and Sedulius; ecclesiastical history by Eusebius and Orosius; law by Theodosius, Paulus and Gaius; medicine by Cosmas, Damian, Hippocrates and Galen; and, besides these 20, we have Gregory the Great and Isidore’s elder brother, Leander. Each of these is commemorated in elegiac verse, beginning with X. 1 Nettleship, i 330 f. 2 Dressel, De Isidori Originum Fontibus , Turin (1874). 444 GREEK IN SPAIN. [CHAP. three couplets on the library in general, implying that it contained secular as well as sacred literature :— ‘ sunt hie plura sacra, sunt hie mundalia plura: ex his si qua placent carmina, tolle, lege, prata (vicles) plena spinis, et copia florum; si non vis spinas sumere, sume rosas...’ The series ends with some lines addressed ‘To an Intruder’, the last couplet of which runs as follows:— * non patitur quenquam coram se scriba loquentem; non est hie quod agas, garrule, perge foras ’ h Though Isidore was himself familiar with many portions of pagan literature, the only authors which he permitted his monks to read were the Grammarians. He held it safer for them to remain in humble ignorance than to be elated with the pride of knowledge, or led into error by reading dangerous works 2 . In support of this narrow view, he even appeals to the Vulgate rendering of Psalm lxxi where, by combining the end of verse 15 (as translated from an inferior variant in the lxx) with the beginning of the following verse, he obtains the singular text:— quia non cognovi litteraturam*, introibo in potentias Domini 4 . Had he referred to Cassiodorus, he might there have found a better motto in the prayer :— praesta , Domitie, legentibus profectum 5 . Isidore has the reputation of having been ‘learned in Greek and Latin and Hebrew’ 6 . He distinguished between five varieties of Greek, i.e. the four dialects and the KOLvrj, and eulogised it as excelling all languages in euphony 7 . But his knowledge of the language was very slight. Acquaintance with Greek is attested in Spain at a still earlier date Greek in Spain 1 Migne, lxxxiii 1107; cp. J. W. Clark’s Care of Books, p. 46. 2 ib. 877, Isidori Regula, c. 8, gentilium libros vel haereticorum volumina monachus legere caveat; melius est enim eorum perniciosa dogmata ignorare quam per inexperientiam in aliquem laqueum erroris incurrere. 3 ypa/uL/xaTeias v. 1. for xpayp-aTeias. 4 Senteniiarum Liber , iii 13. 5 Inst, i 33. On Isidore in general, cp. Ebert, i 2 588—602; Teuffel, § 496; Saintsbury, i 400 f. 6 Migne, lxxxi 53 D, 86 b. 7 Ep. ix 1, 4. ... J XXIV.] GREEK IN GAUL. 445 in the person of the ‘ world-renowned Spaniard ’ who took a prominent part in the Council of Nicaea, Hosius, bishop of Cordova (d. 357), who is said to have brought a Greek teacher back with him from the East to aid him in the study of Plato. John, the Gothic bishop of Gerona (590), had in his youth spent seven years in Constantinople with a view to perfecting himself in Greek and Latin 1 ; and, about the time of Isidore’s death, some knowledge of Greek is shown by Julian, bishop of Toledo (d. 690), who gives Greek titles to two of his works 2 , and touches twice on the beauty of the style of Demosthenes 3 ; while, in 657, another bishop of that see, Eugenius III, declares that it would need the powers of a Socrates or a Plato, a Cicero or a Varro, to do justice to the memory of Gregory the Great 4 . About the same date (659) in Gaul, we find St Ouen, archbishop of Rouen, urging the superiority of sacred over secular writings by asking what was the worth of philosophers such as Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, or the ‘ sad strains of those wicked poets ’, Homer, Virgil and Menander, or the histories of Sallust, Herodotus and Livy, or the eloquence of Lysias, Gracchus, Demosthenes and Tully, or the acumen of Horace, Solinus, Varro, Democritus, Plautus and Cicero 5 . The odd juxtaposition of some of these names excites suspicion, and the mention of Tully and Cicero, Democritus and Menander, suggests a doubt whether St Ouen had really read the secular writings on which he casts such profound contempt. About a century before his death, two celebrated Graeco-Latin mss, the Codex Bezae of the Gospels and Acts, and the Codex Claromontanus of St Paul’s Epistles, had been copied in Western Europe, possibly in Gaul itself; and Gaul may also claim a Graeco-Latin glossary of the seventh century 6 . In the same century the library at Liguge contained ‘nearly all the Greek and Latin Fathers’ 7 .- Early in the next, we 1 Isidore, De Viris III., c. 44. 2 TrpoyvwGTiKwv and avTLKei/xlvuv', Migne, xcvi 453, 495. 3 ib. 727. 4 Migne, lxxxvii 415 c. 5 Migne, lxxxvii 479. 6 Harley MS 5792 ; Palaeographical Society’s Facsimiles , ii 25. 7 Hist. Litt. de la France , ii 429. 446 CHRODEGANG OF METZ. [CHAP. find a Greek hermit living to the S. of Nimes in the person of Aegidius (St Giles), who is described as a native of Athens (d. 725). While the evidence for a knowledge of Greek at this time is slight indeed in Gaul, it is even slighter in Germany, Germany where there is no proof of any interest in Greek before the revival of learning under Charles the Great. Literary interests were, however, partially revived in the northern monas¬ teries under the influence of the Benedictine Chrodegang, archbishop of Metz (742—766), who had been Chancellor to Charles Martel from 737 to 741. The rules which he framed for the restoration of discipline 1 were adopted in the monasteries of France, Italy, Germany and England, and a certain uniformity was thus secured in the singing, the language and the script of the monastic schools which continued until the time of Alcuin 2 . Meanwhile, in Italy, four of the popes of the seventh and ital eighth centuries were actually Greeks by birth. Again, in 648, Maurus, archbishop of Ravenna, writes in Greek 3 to Pope Martin I (649—655), who sends to personages in the East a number of letters written in Greek 4 , but there is no proof that the Greek was his own, though in the Lateran Council of this time (649) we have many references to the Greek Fathers. It is supposed that it was under Martin I that the first Greek monasteries were founded in Rome 5 . The reply sent by Pope Agatho (■ c . 679) to a Byzantine emperor is preserved in Greek as well as in Latin, together with the Greek original of another letter. The Acts of the third Council of Constantinople were translated from Greek into Latin by Pope Leo II (683). But Greek must have been on the decline, as the year 690 is regarded as the date of the temporary extinction of that language in Italy 6 . In the following century the iconoclastic 1 D’Achery’s Spicilegium, i 564!; Migne, lxxxix 1053—1126; Life in Pertz, Mon. xii 552-72; 2 Denk, Gallo-Frdnkisch. Unterricht , 271-6; cp. Putnam’s Books in the Middle Ages, i 128 f. 3 Migne, lxxxvii 103. 4 ib. 119—198. 5 Hardouin, Conciles, iii 719; Gidel, Nouvelles Etudes, p. 150. 6 Martin Crusius, Annales Suevici, 274 (Gidel, p. 156). XXIV.] GREEK IN ITALY. 447 decrees of 727 and 816 drove many of the Greek monks and their lay adherents from the Empire in the West to the South of Italy and even to Rome itself. Gregory III (731—741) built them a monastery dedicated to St Chrysogonus. In 750 the Greek Pope, Zacharias, received the Greek nuns who brought from the convent of St Anastasia a celebrated image of the Virgin and the relics of St Gregory Nazianzen; Paul I (761) was equally hospitable to the monks, who probably procured for him the Greek mss which he sent to Pepin-le-Bref; while Hadrian I (780) enlarged for the benefit of the Greeks the church which had been known since the end of the sixth century as that of S. Maria in schola Graeca , but was thenceforth called S. Maria i?i Cosmedin, the new name being taken (as at Ravenna) from the quarter of Constantinople named Kosmedion. In 818 the existing monasteries were too few to contain all the Greek monks that flocked to Rome, and Pascal I gave the fugitives the monastery of St Praxedis, while other popes in the same century, e.g. Stephen IV (817) and Leo IV (850), founded monasteries for them in Rome and in Southern Italy 1 . The South of Italy continued to be politically connected with Constantinople from the time of the recovery of Italy by the generals of Justinian (553 ) 2 to its capture by the Normans (1055), and, in the extreme South, Greek monks of the Basilian order were still in existence in the age of the Renaissance. Even at the present day there are villages in the ancient Calabria near the ‘heel’, and in the modern Calabria near the ‘toe’ of Italy, where Greek continues to be spoken with slight varieties of dialect, while the tradition of Greek as a living language lingers in other parts of those regions 3 . The decline of learning in Northern Italy, at the time when the Greek monks were flocking to her Southern shores, is attested by 1 Muratori, Script. Ital. Ill i 215, 234. Cp. Gardthausen, Gr. Paldographie, p. 418. 2 Bury, Later Roman Empire, ii 439 f, 447 f. 3 Morosi, Studi sui dialetti greci della terra cC Otranto, Lecce (1870), and Dialetti...in Calabria (1874), and Zambelli, 'IraXocW^LKci, pp. 23, 202; cp. Roger Bacon, Opus Tert. 33; Cramer, i 26; Gidel, Nouvelles Etudes , 145—156, and Tozer in J. H. S., x 11—42, esp. 38 f; also A. Dresdner, Kultur u. Sittengeschichte der italienisclien Geistlichkeit im 10. u. 11. Jahr- hundert (1890), p. 195 k 448 GREEK IN BRITAIN AND IRELAND. [CHAP. Lothair I, who, in his decree of 823, deplores the general extinction of learning and reorganises education throughout his Italian dominions by instituting central schools at nine important places,—Pavia, Ivrea, Turin, Cremona, Florence, Fermo, Verona, Vicenza and Friuli 1 . The head of the school at Pavia was an Irishman. Early indications of a knowledge of Greek in Britain have been traced in certain Latin renderings from the an^ Ireland Old Testament apparently taken directly from the lxx. These are contained in the anonymous work De Mirabilibus Sacrae Scripturae (c. 660), and in a ms of Irish Canons (early in cent. vm) 2 . Three Greek letters (ct?) may be seen on an ancient block of tin, now in the Penzance Museum 3 ; and some slight knowledge of Greek is implied in an Irish Canon of the end of the seventh century, where a monk is thus defined :— monachns Graece , Latine unalis , sive quod solus in eremo vitam solitariam ducat , sive quod si?ie impediment mundiali mundutn habitet 4 . In the Book of Armagh ( c . 807) the Lord’s Prayer is written in Latin words but in Greek characters; and, down to the days of archbishop Ussher, a church at Trim was called the ‘Greek church’ 5 , while its site was still known in 1846 as the ‘Greek park’ 6 . The Irish monk, Virgil the geometer, who became the first bishop of Salzburg at the end of the eighth century, was charged by Boniface with believing in the existence of the antipodes 7 ; and, half a century later, an Irish monk of Liege, named Sedulius, was copying a Greek Psalter, writing Latin 1 Muratori, Script. Rer. Ital. 1 ii 151 ; Antiq. Medii Ami, iii 815; Tiraboschi, iii 179 k 2 J. R. Lumby, Greek Learning in the Western Church during the seventh and eighth centuries , Cambridge (1878), p. 3. ‘ In the AS church the Greek creed was sung in service, as at St Gallen and Reichenau ’; ‘ King Athelstan’s psalter ’ includes the Lord’s prayer and the apostles’ creed in AS characters, but in the Greek language; See esp. Caspari’s Quellen zur Gesch. des Tauf- symbols, iii (Christiania, 1875) 188-99, 2I 9 - 34 > 466—510 (Mayor and Lumby on Bede, p. 298 f). 3 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils etc. i 699. 4 ib. i 170 f. 5 Ussher, Ep. Hibern. Syll. note 16. 6 G. T. Stokes, Ireland and the Celtic Church , p. 218 n. 7 ib. 224; Ozanam, 133 k Boniface, Ep. lxvi, Jaffe iii 191. XXIV.] THEODORE OF TARSUS. 449 verses 1 , making extracts from Origen and expounding Jerome 2 . Another Irish monk, the grammarian Dicuil (c . 825), in a short treatise on Geography 3 ranging from Iceland to the pyramids of Egypt, gives an impression of very wide attainments by naming the following Greek authors:—Artemidorus, Clitarchus, Dicaearchus, Ephorus, Eudoxus, Hecataeus, Herodotus, Homer, Onesicritus, Philemon, Pytheas, Thucydides, Timosthenes and Xenophon of Lampsacus. His work is mainly founded on Caesar, Pliny and Solinus and includes quotations from Pomponius Mela, Orosius, Priscian and Isidore of Seville 4 . Macrobius and Priscian are his authorities on grammar 5 . While Ireland sent forth Columban to found monasteries in Eastern France and Northern Italy in 585 and 612 respectively, Rome, in the person of Gregory, sent Augustine to Britain in the interval between the above dates. Augustine arrived in Kent in 597 and died archbishop of Canterbury in 605. Some sixty years later, the archbishopric was offered by Pope Vitalian first to Hadrian, who is described as ‘ most skilful in both the Greek and Latin tongues ’, and finally to Theodore, who was born at Tarsus and educated at Athens, and therefore familiar with Greek 6 . This Greek archbishop (668—690) of^rsus^ founded a school at Canterbury for the study of Greek, and bestowed upon his foundation a number of books in his native language. Nine hundred years later, archbishop Parker showed an antiquarian at Canterbury copies of ‘Homer and some other Greek authors, beautifully written on thick paper with the name of this Theodore prefixed in the front, to whose library he reasonably thought (being led thereto by show of great 1 Poetae Lalini Aevi Car. iii 151—237 Traube. He often borrows from Virgil, Ovid and Fortunatus. 2 G. T. Stokes, pp. 225-8; cp. Ebert, ii c. 6; Pirenne, Sedulius de Liege (Bruxelles, 1882); Traube, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1892,338—346. His comm, on Eutyches, founded on Macrobius and Priscian, shows a knowledge of Greek (Hagen, Anecd. Helv. 1—38). 3 De Mensura Orbis Terrae. 4 ib. 214-6; Ebert, ii 392-4; cp. Letronne, Recherches, ii 3, vi 8. 5 Teuffel, § 473, 9. 6 Described by the Greek Pope Zacharias in Bonifatii Epp., 185 Jaffe, as ‘ Greco-Latinus ante philosophus et Athenis eruditus ’. S. 29 450 ALDHELM. [CHAP. antiquity) that they sometime belonged’ 1 ; but there is no doubt that this ms of Homer, which is still preserved among the Parker mss in the Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, belonged not to Theodore of Tarsus (who had died eight centuries before it was written), but to Linacre’s friend, William Tilley of Selling 2 . With the help of Hadrian, who had declined the archbishopric, Theodore made many of the monasteries of England schools of Greek and Latin learning, so that, in the time of Bede (673—735), some of the scholars who still survived, such as Tobias, bishop of Rochester (d. 726) 3 , were as familiar with Latin and Greek as with their mother-tongue 4 . The Worcestershire monk, Tatwine, who became archbishop of Canterbury (d. 734), besides writing riddles in Latin verse, was the author of a Latin grammar founded on Donatus and his commentators 5 ; and the tradition of Greek descended to the early days of Odo (875—961), archbishop of Canterbury 6 . Among the pupils of the school at Canterbury was Aldhelm A^h j { c ‘ 650—709), who was also educated under the Irish scholar, Maidulf, the founder of the monastery of Malmesbury, of which Aldhelm afterwards became abbot. Most of his literary labours were associated with Malmesbury, which continued to be a seat of learning down to the later Middle Ages. Aldhelm visited Rome in 690 and was bishop of Sherborne from 705 to his death. The church that he built at Bradford on Avon is still standing. In the records of his life we are told that ‘he had mastered all the idioms of the Greek language, and wrote and spoke it, as though he were a Greek by birth’. ‘ King Ina had hired the services of two most skilful teachers of Greek from Athens’ 7 ; and Ina’s kinsman, Aldhelm, ‘ made such rapid strides in learning that ere long he was thought t 1 Lambarde, Perambulation of Kent, p. 233 ed. 1576 ; Milman, Lat. Christ ., ii 272. ‘ 2 M. R. James, Abp. Parker's MSS (1899), p. 9. 3 Bede, H. E. v 8, 20, 23. 4 ib. iv 2 (with Mayor’s note on p. 298). 5 Teuffel, § 500, 4. 6 Migne, cxxxiii 934 B —c. 7 Migne, lxxxix 66. XXIV.] BEDE. 451 a better scholar than either his Greek or Latin teachers’ 1 . He often introduces Greek words into his Latin letters, an affectation censured by William of Malmesbury 2 ; he alludes to Aristotle and the Stoics, and employs Greek terms in defining Greek metres. His dialogue on Latin prosody (which fills forty-five columns in Migne) is enlivened with a number of ingenious riddles in verse, which the pupil is expected to solve and to scan. In writing on Latin metres, he naturally quotes Latin poets, such as Terence, Virgil, Horace, Juvenal and Persius. His principal prose work, De Laudibus Virginitatis , ends with a promise (which was duly fulfilled) of treating the same theme in verse:—‘the rhetorical foundations being laid and the walls of prose constructed, he would roof it with dactylic and trochaic tiles’ 3 . His Latin prose is unduly florid 4 . His prose and verse alike are marked by a love of Greek idioms and of alliteration 5 . His main claim to distinction is that ‘he was the first Englishman who cultivated classical learning with any success, and the first of whom any literary remains are preserved’ 6 . While Aldhelm has been justly called the father of Anglo- Latin verse, his younger and far more famous con- fiede temporary, Bede (673— 735), has left his mark in literary history almost exclusively in the field of prose. He spent 1 ib. 85. His familiarity with Greek and Latin is mentioned by the ‘ Scottus ignoti nominis ’ who wants to borrow a book for a fortnight and offers himself as a pupil:—dum te praestantem ingenio facundiaque Romana ac vario flore litterarum, etiam Graecorum more, non nesciam, ex ore tuo, fonte videlicet scientiae purissimo, discere malo, quam ex aliquo (alio ?) quolibet potare turbulento magistro; Bonif. Ep. 4 (Mayor’s Bede, p. 298). 2 Gesta Pontificum, v § 196, p. 344; Warton’s Eng. Poetry, Diss. II, p. cxxxv (ed. 1824); Cramer, i 41. 3 H. Morley’s English Writers, ii 135. 4 Cp. Ep. ad Eahfridum, lxxxix 94 Migne,...‘ Hiberniae rus, discentium opulans vernansque (ut ita dixerim) pascuosa numerositate lectorum, quemad- modum poli cardines astriferis micantium ornantur vibraminibus siderum ‘The flowers of his eloquence are reserved for Irish friends or Irish pupils’ (Haddan’s Remains, 267). His metrical studies are mentioned in his letter to Hedda, bp of Winchester (676—705), Jaffe iii 32. 5 Ebert, i 2 622-34; Milman, ii 279f; Teuffel, § 500, 2; Mayor’s Bede, p. 201; Traube, S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 1900, 477-9; Bp Browne (1903). 6 Stubbs in Diet. Chr. Biogr. Cp. Ozanam, Civ. Chret. p. 493-7. 29—2 452 BEDE. [CHAP. his whole life in the monastery of Jarrow, dividing his time between the duties of religion and learning 1 . He began his literary work at the age of 30, finding copious materials in the books which had been brought from Rome and elsewhere by his own teachers, Benedict Biscop and Ceolfrid. Even on his death-bed he was working still, and the last hours of his life saw the com¬ pletion of his translation of St John’s Gospel into Anglo-Saxon 2 . In the Historia Ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum (731) we have in¬ teresting references to the generosity with which Irish professors received English pupils (in 614) and furnished them gratis with books and teaching 3 , the diffusion of learning by Theodore and Hadrian and their pupils 4 , the studies of the English in Rome 5 , and the collection and circulation of books in England 6 . The author appears throughout as a master of the learning of his times, as (in Fuller’s phrase) ‘the most general scholar of his age ’ 7 . His diction, which is clear, natural and comparatively pure, gives the surest proof of mental discipline won by the study of the ancients and of the chief Fathers of the Church. Of Benedict Biscop he tells us that, from each of his five visits to Rome, he returned with great store of books 8 and pictures. Bede’s chronological works are founded on Jerome’s edition of Eusebius, and on Augustine and Isidore. His skill in Latin verse is shown in his elegiacs on Queen Etheldrida 9 , and in his hexameters on the miracles of St Cuthbert. He also wrote a treatise on metre, with an appendix on the figures of speech used in the Scriptures. His Greek learning is indicated in this treatise and in the references to a Greek ms of the Acts which are to be found in his Liber Retractionum. The Latin authors most frequently quoted by him are Cicero, Virgil and Horace, and 1 H.E. v. 24 (quoted on p. 429). 2 Cuthbert quoted in Mayor’s Bede , p. 179, and P'uller, ib. 192. 3 iii 27. 4 iv 18; v 20. 5 v 19. 6 v 15, 20. 7 Fuller’s Worthies , p. 292, ed. 1662. 8 Vitae Abbatum . Of his fourth journey it is stated ‘eum innumerabilem librorum omnis generis copiam apportasse’. He also obtained books at Vienne; and his sixth journey (685) was almost entirely devoted to the collection of books, including classical works. 9 //. E. iv 20. XXIV.] BONIFACE AND FULDA. 453 (doubtless at second-hand) Lucilius and Varro. The decline of learning at his death is lamented by William of Malmesbury in the brief tribute paid to his memory:— sepulta est cum eo gestorum omnispaene notitia usque ad nostra tempora (cent, xn).- adeo nullus Anglorum studiorum eius aemulus , nullus gloriarum eius sequax fuit 1 . It was not until long after the death of Bede that his Historia Ecclesiastica became known to his contemporary Boniface, or Winfrid (675—754), who was born two and Fuida years after the birth of Bede and died twenty years after his death. A native of Crediton, he was educated at Exeter and Nursling. With the sanction of Gregory II (719) he preached in Thuringia and Friesland, converted the Saxons and Hessians, became a bishop in 723 and archbishop of Maintz in 745, resigning that dignity to return to Friesland in 753 and to die a martyr’s death in the following year. His devoted follower, Sturmi of Noricum, had already founded a settlement in the woodland solitudes of Hersfeld, and, penetrating still further into the depths of the vast forest of beech-trees, had tracked the stream of the Fulda for nearly 30 miles to the South, until he reached a still more lonely place, where a plot of land extending four miles every way was given to God by the pious Carloman and a notable monastery (that of Fulda) built with the approval of Boniface (744) 2 . Boniface is best known as ‘the apostle of Germany’. In literature his works are of slight importance. They include two text-books on metre and on grammar (founded on Donatus, Charisius and Diomedes) 3 , a set of acrostic hexameters on the virtues and vices, and some sermons and letters written in an inelegant type of Latin. Among these last we find letters from English abbesses written in the florid style of Aldhelm, in which he is addressed, carissime prater , 1 Gesta, i 62 (Mayor’s Bede , 187). On Bede, cp. Teuffel, § 500, 3; and Ebert, i 2 634—650, translated (with other authorities) in Mayor and Lumby’s ed. of H. E. iii, iv; also Ozanam, Civ. Chret. 498 b and H. Morley’s English Writers, ii 140—157. The Latin poets known to Aldhelm and Bede are enumerated by Manitius, S. Ber. d. Wien. Akad. 1886, 535—634. 2 Bonifacii Ep. 75 ; Pertz (ii 368), Vita Sturmii (Milman, Lat. Christ, ii 3°4 0 - 3 Bursian, i 15, and in Bayer. Akad. 1873, 457 b and Jahrcsb. i 8. 454 BONIFACE AND FULDA. [CHAP. XXIV. while his own letters are described as dulcissimae' . One of his relatives, a nun who afterwards presided over the convent of Bischofsheim, sends him with much misgiving a short set of Latin hexameters 1 2 3 . He writes to his friends in England for books, and asks a learned abbess to make him a copy of St Peter’s Epistles ‘ in letters of gold ,3 . The only trace of any knowledge of Greek in his letters is to be found in a few Greek words written in Latin characters 4 . His sense of grammatical accuracy is so deeply shocked, when he hears of an ignorant priest administering the rite of baptism in nomine Patria et Filia et Spiritu sancta, that he almost doubts the validity of the rite 5 . At the age of 60 he was still capable of writing elegant hexameters congratulating the Greek Zacharias on his elevation to the papacy 6 . When he died in Friesland, his body was conveyed to the monastery which had been founded under his sanction at Fulda. The monastery adopted the Benedictine Rule, and soon rivalled St Gallen as a school of learning, numbering among its inmates Einhard, the future biographer of Charles the Great, and Rabanus Maurus, the earliest praeceptor Germaniae. In 968 it was deemed the most important in all Germany. It has since been turned into a Seminary, while the abbey-church hard by has become a Cathedral; but the bones of the founder still rest in the ancient crypt, and, in the midst of the many towers of the town that has gathered round the monastery, a statue of bronze continues to perpetuate the memory of Boniface 7 . 1 Ep. \\ = Ep. 3 Migne. 2 Ep. 21 Migne. 3 Ep. 32 Jaffe. 4 Apo ton grammaton agiis (= a litterarum sacris), Ep. 9. 5 Ep. 58 Jaffe, lxxxix 929 Migne. 6 ib. 748. 7 On Boniface, cp. Ozanam, Civ. Chret. c. v, 170—219, 503-6; Ebert, i 2 653-9; Teuffel, § 500, 5; Bursian, Cl. Philol. in Deutschland, i 14!; Norden, Kunstprosa , 669; and on the School of Fulda, Specht, Unterrichts- wesen in Deutschland , 1885, 296—306. CHAPTER XXV. FROM ALCUIN (c. 735— 804) TO ALFRED (849 — 900). In the present chapter we are mainly concerned with the interest taken in the study of the Classics from the age of Charles the Great to that of Alfred. As a scholarly adviser, the Welsh monk Asser was to Alfred what the English deacon Alcuin was to Charles the Great. Among the pupils of Bede was Egbert, archbishop of York, and among the pupils of Egbert in the cathedral school of that city was Alcuin ( c. 735—804), who was probably born in the year of Bede’s death. He owed less, however, to the general supervision of archbishop Egbert than to the direct teaching of his master Hilbert, who (in 766) succeeded Egbert as archbishop. More than once his master went abroad in search of new books or new studies 1 ; and, on one of these occasions, his pupil accompanied him to Rome. In 778 Alcuin was himself placed at the head of the School and Library of York. We still possess the Latin hexameters, in which he gives us an enthusiastic description of the Library and a list of the authors which it contained 2 . Among prose authors he mentions Jerome, Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, Athanasius, Orosius; Victorinus and Boethius ; Gregory and Leo; Basil and Chrysostom; Cassiodorus and Fulgentius; Aldhelm and Bede; among earlier writers, in prose or verse, Pompeius (Trogus) and Pliny ; Aristotle (doubtless 1 De Sanctis Euboricae urbis, 1455. 2 De Pont. Eccl. Ebor. 1535—1603, ci 843 Migne, and in Poetae Lat. Aevi Car. i 203 f; well rendered in West’s Alcuin , p. 34. 456 CHARLES THE GREAT AND PAULUS DIACONUS. [CHAP. in Latin 1 ) and Cicero; Virgil, Lucan and Statius; among later poets, Sedulius and Juvencus, and, among grammarians, Donatus and Priscian. His enumeration of all these and other authors shows that, in the last quarter of the eighth century, the Library at York far surpassed any, even in the twelfth century, in England or France, whether at Christ Church, Canterbury, or at St Victor’s in Paris, or at Bee in Normandy 2 . Alcuin himself had copied text-books at York in his youth 3 , and scribes were afterwards sent there to copy mss for his monastery at Tours. Alcuin paid a second visit to Rome in 780; and, on his return in the following year, met Charles the Great at Parma, and was thus led to take part in the revival of learning which marks that monarch’s reign 4 . He had already visited the Frankish court at Aachen on his return from Rome, twelve years before, in the year of Charles’ accession (768). He was now invited to become the head of a school attached to the court; and, after obtaining the consent of his king and his archbishop, was installed as master of the school in 782, and continued to preside over it for eight years. The school is best regarded as a migratory institution attached to the court, whether at Aachen or elsewhere 5 . Charles was as familiar with colloquial Latin as with his native German; he seems also to have understood Greek, though he spoke it imper¬ fectly 6 . His instruction in Latin and Greek appears to have been derived from an elderly grammarian, Peter of Pisa, while Greek was taught at his court (782-6) by Paulus Diaconus (< c . 725—797), a Benedictine monk, who had learnt his Greek at Pavia, and had lived at Beneventum (which was closely connected with the Greeks), and who wrote his celebrated History of the Lombards at Monte Cassino, after his final retirement from the world. He 1 Possibly the abridgement of the Categories bearing the name of Augustine (Haureau, Hist, de la Philosophic Scolastique, i 93—7). 2 Leon Maitre’s Ecoles, pp. 290, 295; Mullinger’s Schools of Charles the Great , p. 61. 3 Lp. 38. 4 So completely had the tradition of learning been broken in Gaul that a contemporary states that before his reign ‘nullum studium fuerat liberalium artium’ (Monachus Engolismensis, ap. Duchesne, ii 76). Cp. Monach. Sangall. i 1 {Mon. Carolina, p. 631). 5 Leon Maitre, p. 39. 6 Einhart’s Vita Caroli, c. 25. XXV.] ALCUIN AT TOURS. 457 shows his knowledge of Greek in his History, in his summary of the abridgement of Verrius Flaccus by Pompeius Festus 1 , and in his revision of the Homilies which were issued by Charles in 782 with the following memorable pronouncement:—‘We impose upon ourselves the task of reviving, with the utmost zeal, the study of letters well-nigh extinguished through the neglect of our ancestors. We charge all our subjects, as far as they may be able, to cultivate the liberal arts, and we set them the example’ 2 . The revision of all the church books enjoined in 789 stimulated a high degree of activity in the scriptoria of Frankland 3 . After a short absence in England (790-3), Alcuin, who had already been appointed abbot of St Loup near Troyes and of Ferrieres near Orleans, was made abbot of St Martin’s at Tours, which he soon restored to a commanding position among the schools of the land. He taught his monks to use the pen instead of the spade and hoe, telling them that copying mss was better than cultivating the vine 4 . Under his rule the clear and precise hand known as the Caroline Minuscule was developed at Tours 5 ; and ‘the script, which was accepted as the standard in the imperial schools, served seven centuries later as a model for the first type-founders of Italy and France’ 6 . Alcuin sent some of his monks to England for books 7 , and continued in constant corre¬ spondence with scholars in the land of his birth and the land of his adoption. He was himself a scholar and a teacher to the last: ‘ in the morning of his life ’ (in the language of one of his letters) ‘ he had sowed in Britain; and now, in the evening of that life, he ceased not to sow in France’ 8 . He died in 804, four years after Charles had been crowned Emperor in Rome. 1 Nettleship, i 202; Teuffel, § 261, 6. 2 Pertz, Leg. i 44 (Mullinger’s Schools of Charles the Great , p. 101). Cp. (on Paulus Diaconus) Ebert, ii 36—56 ; Teuffel, § 500, 6; Balzani’s Early Chroniclers of Italy, 66 —90. 3 Wattenbach, Schriftwesen im MA, 273 s ; E. M. Thompson, Palaeo¬ graphy, 233. 4 Fodere quam vites melius est scribere libros (ad Musaeum). 5 Delisle, Mini, del'Acad, des Inscr. (1885), xxxii 29—56, with 5 facsimiles ; Traube, S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 1891, 427 f; E. M. Thompson, l.c., 233 f. 6 Putnam, Books and their Alakers in the Middle Ages, i 107 (after Delisle, l.c.). 7 Ep. 38. 8 Ep. 43 (78 Jaffe), c. 209 Migne. 458 alcuin’s prose works. [chap. Among Alcuin’s prose works a prominent place is here due to his dialogues on Grammar, Rhetoric, and Dialectic. He is mainly a grammarian 1 . In his first dialogue On Grammar, the seven liberal arts are compared to the seven pillars of the house of Wisdom", and are described as the seven steps by which the student ascends to the heights of Theology. The substance of his second dialogue is taken from earlier grammarians, among whom Donatus and Priscian are mentioned, while the definitions are borrowed from Isidore. The interlocutors are a well-informed English youth of fifteen, who answers the inquiries of an eager Frank who is one year younger, while the master himself presides over the disputation. Grammar is here somewhat narrowly defined as the science of written sounds, the guardian of correct speaking and writing. In the dialogues On Rhetoric and Dialectic the persons concerned are Charles and Alcuin, and the principal authorities followed in the former are Cicero De Inventione and Julius Victor, and, in the latter, Boethius, Isidore and the Pseudo-Augustinian Categories. The importance of Dialectic is also urged in the dedication of the treatise On the Trinity , while the fragment On the Seve?i Arts shows that Cassiodorus was studied in the age of Alcuin. The tract On Orthography discusses in alphabetical order a number of Latin words which were apt to be wrongly spelt, and is useful in connexion with the pronunciation of Latin and the criticism of the texts of the time. The student is here told to distinguish between alvus and albus , vellus and bellns , acervus and acerbus ; also between vel and fel , quod and quot 3 . It may be noticed with regret, that, in the course of this tract, the author strangely derives hippocrita ( simulator ) from hippo ‘falsum’ and chrisis ‘judicium’ 4 . His Life of St Willibrord , the precursor of Boniface, supplies evidence as to the flourishing state of learning in Ireland: Willibrord left Northumbria, quia in Hibernia scholasticam erudi- tionem viguisse audivit (c. 4). The 1657 hexameters of his patriotic poem On the Kings , Bishops and Saints of York contain many reminiscences of Virgil and Prudentius. His Epigra?ns 2 Prov. ix 1. 4 Migne, ci 910 B. 1 Cp. Haureau, i 126. 3 Mullinger, 78b XXV.] ALCUIN AND VIRGIL. 459 consist partly of inscriptions for various monastic buildings, or for the beginning or end of mss. The epigram ad Musaeum libros scribentium (67) includes a couplet of some interest in connexion with Alcuin’s letter urging Charles to require copyists to attend to matters of punctuation 1 :— ‘ per cola distinguant proprios et commata sensus, et punctos ponant ordine quisque suo’. Of his 300 Letters 2 (all written in France, and five-sixths of them at Tours, during the last eight years of his life), the most in¬ teresting are those addressed to his friends in England or to Charles the Great or to his former pupil Arno, bishop of Salzburg. They are well written, and clear and natural in expression, the best in point of style being those addressed to the king 3 . Alcuin’s Greek quotations are mainly borrowed from Jerome, and his knowledge of the language (illustrated in a letter to Angilbert 4 where he quotes from the lxx version of the Psalms) is obviously very slight 5 6 . In the School of the Palace Angilbert was known as Homer, another as Macharius and Alcuin himself as Flaccus. He is familiar with Horace. Virgil he had studied with enthusiasm in those early days at York when, in the language of his biographer, he was Virgilii amplius quam Psalmoru?n amator 9 ; but, in after-life, when he had become celebrated as a teacher, he is described as saying to his students :—* The sacred poets are sufficient for you, and there is no reason why you should be corrupted by the luxuriance of Virgil’s language’ 7 * . The library at Berne, however, possesses a ms of Virgil in Caroline minuscules (cent, ix), which is believed to be either written in Alcuin’s hand 1 Ep. 112 Jaffe, 101 Migne. 2 Alcuiniana (1873); C P- Sickel’s Alcuinstudien in Vienna Acad. 1875, 461—550. 3 Separately edited by H. Schiitze (1879). 4 Ep. 27 (252 Jaffe). 5 Alcuin’s Greek scholarship (like that of many others) is much exaggerated by Tougard, IdHellenisme dans les Jcrivains du Moyen-Age du vii au xii s. (1886), p. 23. 6 Alcuini vita, c. 1. 7 ib. c. 10. sufficiunt divini poetae vobis, nec egetis luxuriosa sermonis Virgilii vos pollui facundia; cp. Maitland’s Dark Ages, 182 3 , and Mullinger, 112. 460 ALCUIN’S INFLUENCE. [CHAP. or at least transcribed from his own copy 1 , and which certainly once belonged to his monastery at Tours 2 ; and there is no prejudice against the poet in his own verses to his brethren at York (260 f):— ‘ Moenibus Euboricae habitans tu sacra iuventus, fas idcirco, reor, comprendere plectra Maronis, somnigeras subito te nunc excire Camenas, carminibusque sacris naves implere Fresonum’. Yet even here, he seems to regard Virgil mainly as a model for sacred verse. Elsewhere he regrets that one of his friends is less familiar with the four Gospels than with the twelve Aeneades (sic) 3 . But, notwithstanding his ‘timid mistrust of pagan learning’, ‘he loved the temple of the Muses, and was at once their high-priest and their apostle in the days when the worshippers at their shrine were few’ 4 . Alcuin has been described in the Benedictine History of the Literature of France 5 as ‘the most learned man of his age’, while recent writers have credited him with ‘ability as an administrator’, and with ‘a certain largeness of view, in spite of his circumscribed horizon’. He was conscious ‘of the continuity of the intellectual life of man’, and ‘of the perils that beset the transmission of learning from age to age’. ‘In every way that lay in his power, he endeavoured to put the fortunes of learning for the times that should succeed him in a position of advantage, safeguarded by an abundance of truthfully transcribed books, sheltered within the Church and defended by the civil power’ 6 . The tradition of learning had descended from Benedict Biscop, Bede and Egbert to Alcuin; and the influence of Alcuin, which passed from York to Tours, was transmitted through Rabanus to Fulda and thence to Auxerre and Ferrieres, to Old and New Corbie 7 , and Reichenau, St Gallen and Rheims, while part of that influence finally reached 1 C. G. Muller, Analecta Bernensia, iii 23 f (Comparetti, Virgilio, i 122). 2 Chatelain, Pal. des Cl. Lat. pi. 67. 3 Ep. 34 ( Alcniniana , p. 714). 4 Mullinger, p. 127. 5 iv 344 - 6 A. F. West, Alcuin , 122 f. 7 P- 473 in f ra - XXV.] LORSCH AND ST WANDRILLE’S. 461 Paris 1 . Alcuin marks the beginning of the period in the history of European education which is described as the Benedictine Age, the age extending from the brief revival of learning under Charles the Great to the rise of the University of Paris (c. 1170) 2 3 . Among the monasteries founded by Charles was that of Lorsch, E. of the Rhine, near Worms (763); while among those that witnessed a revival of learning in his time was that founded near Caudebec, to the W. of Rouen, by St Wandrille (d. 668), a pupil of Columban. Part of the building is still in use, while the rest remains beautiful even in its ruins. A school was there established by the abbot Gervold (d. 806), and a scriptorium instituted by a priest named Harduin, who himself copied the four Gospels Romana literal, i.e. apparently in uncial characters 4 . In a fragment of its Chronicle we find many words borrowed from the Greek such as scema, onomata , paralisis , tirannidem , anaglificus , while curia is explained by bouleuierioji and turricula by pyr- giscos 5 . A knowledge of Greek is also shown in the Chronicle of Freculphus, a pupil of Rabanus Maurus and bishop of Lisieux (d. 85 o) 6 . In the age of Charles the study of Greek was incidentally promoted by intercourse between the West and the East, whether in the form of diplomacy in general, or in the way of overtures for the intermarriage of members of the two imperial houses. Thus there were negociations for a marriage, first between Charles and the empress Eirene (d. 803), and next between a daughter of the former and a son of the latter (the ill-fated Constantine VI). In this second case the daughter, and the priests who were to accompany her, learnt Greek in view of a project that ended in 1 ib. 165. On Alcuin’s life and works (Migne, c, ci), see Lorenz (1829, E. T. 1837); Monnier (1853); Werner (1881 2 ); Diimmler’s Po'etae Lat ., i 160—351 (1881); Jaffe’s Alcuiniana (1873); Ebert, ii 12—36; Mullinger, and West; also H. Morley’s English Writers , ii 158—172; and the literature quoted in these works. For the whole of the period between 768 and 1180, cp. Leon Maitre, Les Pcoles Episcopates et Monastiques (1866). 2 Leon Maitre, 173; Rashdall’s Universities , i 26, 293. 3 Gesta abb. Fontanell. c. 16 in Pertz, Mon. ii 292. 4 Wattenbach, Schriftwesen , 370 2 . 5 Migne, cv 741 B —c. 6 Migne, cvi 1128, 1147, 1162 (Tougard, 26). 462 THEODULFUS. [CHAP. nothing 1 . Late in 804 Charles is said to have founded a school at Osnabruck, where Greek as well as Latin was studied, partly for the purpose of training envoys capable of speaking Greek at Constantinople 2 . Hatto, bishop of Basel, gave a Greek name (. hodoeporicum ) to the narrative of his fruitless journey to Constan¬ tinople, and Greek words occur in his writings. The envoys subsequently sent by the emperor of the East greeted the emperor of the West as ‘ imperatorem kcu fiacn\.£a. Near the close of his life, Charles is said to have carefully compared the Latin text of the Gospels with the Greek and the Syriac 3 . Among the friends of Alcuin and the advisers of Charles was Theodulfus, who practically succeeded Alcuin as Theodulfus head of the palace school, and in 798 became bishop of Orleans and abbot of Fleury. He is memorable not only as the initiator of free education, but also as an accomplished Latin poet. In one of his poems he mentions his favourite authors; they include the Fathers and Isidore, the ‘ pagan philosophers’ with Prudentius and other Christian poets, the grammarian Donatus and his commentator Pompeius, together with Virgil and Ovid. In reference to these last he favours the mystic or allegorical interpretation of mythology 4 . In another poem he supplies us with the earliest poetic description of the seven liberal arts 5 . Under Louis the Pious he was suspected of disloyalty and imprisoned from 818 to his death in 821. In his prison he composed the famous hymn beginning Gloria laus et honor tibi ' 6 , which continued to be sung in France during the procession on Palm Sunday for nine and a half centuries, down to the outbreak of the Revolution 7 . 1 Cedrenus, ii 21 Bonn. 2 Migne, xcviii 894 B. The genuineness of the ‘capitular’ for the founda¬ tion of Osnabruck has been disputed by Rettberg (Bursian, Cl. Philol. in Deutschland, , i 28; cp. Cramer, ii 17). 3 Thegan, De gestis Ludovici, c. 7; Gidel, Nouvelles Etudes, 157—161. 4 Carm. 14, 19, i 543 Diimmler’s Poetae Lat. aevi Carol., In quorum dictis quamquam sint frivola multa, Plurima sub falso tegmine vera latent. 5 Carm. 46, i 544 Diimmler. 6 Carm. 69, i 558 Diimmler; Moorsom’s Historical Co?npanion , ‘All glory, laud, and honour’. 7 Ebert, ii 70—84; K. Lersch (Halle, 1880). XXV.] CLEMENT, DUNGAL, DONATUS. 463 Among the Irish monks who represented learning under Charles the Great were Clement and Dungai. The . 0 Clement, Acts of Charles, written by a monk of St Gallen Dungai, late in the ninth century, tells us of ‘two Scots Donatus from Ireland’, who ‘lighted with the British merchants on the coast of Gaul’, and cried to the crowd, ‘if any man desireth wisdom, let him come unto us and receive it, for we have it for sale’ 1 . They were soon invited to the court of Charles. One of them, Clement, partly filled the place of Alcuin as head of the palace school 2 . The other ‘was sent into Italy, to the monastery of St Austin at Pavia’. In the mss the name of the second Irishman is either wrongly given as Albinus (i.e. Alcuin) or is left blank. It may here be suggested that the missing name is obviously that of Dungai. That learned Irishman was asked by Charles to explain the double eclipse of 810, and his letter in reply proves his familiarity with Greek and Latin poets, and with Virgil in particular 3 . Under the emperor’s grandson, Lothair (823), Dungai was placed at the head of the school at Pavia 4 . Another Irish monk, Donatus ( c. 800—876), who, in his early wanderings in North Italy, was welcomed in 829 as bishop ot Fiesole, alludes, in the latest prayer of his life, to the ‘ prophetic ’ lines in the Fourth Eclogue , and tells us in his own epitaph that he had ‘ dictated to his pupils exercises in Grammar, and schemes of metre, and Lives of Saints ’ 5 . The life of Charles the Great was written in admirable Latin by Einhard ( c . 770—840), a layman educated at Fulda, who, from about 795, did good service at the court of Aachen as architect as well as diplomatist. He had an excellent library, and was a diligent student of the ancient Classics. After the death of Charles in 814 he withdrew from the court and built two churches in the Odenwald, living at the place afterwards known as Seligenstadt from 830 till his death ten years later. His Einhard 1 Pertz, Mon. ii 731; Mon. Carolina , 631; Ebert, iii 214! 2 Mullinger, 121 f. 3 Migne, cv 447—458 ; Mon. Carolina , 396. 4 pp. 440, 448. The possible identity of Dungai of Pavia with the recluse of St Denis (810) is admitted by Traube, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1902, 332 f. 5 Poetae Lai. Aevi Car. iii 692 Traube; M. Stokes, Six Months in the Apennines, 206, 247 f. 464 EINHARD’S LIFE OF CHARLES THE GREAT. [CHAP. Life of Charles l , which was finished shortly after his hero’s death, has been justly described as a ‘classic monument of historic genius’ 2 , as ‘one of the most precious bequests of the early Middle Ages’ 3 , as the ‘ripest fruit of that revival of humane and secular learning, which had been brought about by Charles himself’ 4 . In comparison with the ancient Romans, its author describes himself as a homo barbarus , and all the tribes between the Rhine and Weser, the Baltic and the Danube, as ‘barbarians.’ But it marks the highest point attained in the classical studies of the Caroline age. To Einhard Charles is a new Augustus, and the culmination of his hero’s connexion with old Rome is his coronation in Rome itself (800). Einhard’s model in Latin style is the Life of Augustus by Suetonius 5 , and he also gives proof of a careful study of Caesar and Livy. In his preface he quotes the Tusculan Disputations , and he also imitates the rhetorical works of Cicero and certain of his speeches,—the Second Verrine , the First Catilinarian , and the Pro Milone 6 . It was probably owing to the architectural tastes of Einhard that the work of Vitruvius became first known in Germany and was preserved for other lands and later ages. The oldest extant ms, the Harleian, once belonged to Goderamnus of Cologne, abbot of Hildesheim (1022-30); but it is little later than Einhard. Einhard writes to a student at Fulda, asking him to make inquiries as to the meaning of certain technical terms in Vitruvius 7 . The copy of that author formerly preserved at Fulda appears to have been subsequently sent to Reichenau 8 . Except in the case of Einhard, the revival of learning pro¬ moted by Charles the Great, with the aid of Alcuin, was mainly concerned with sacred literature, and it was of no long duration 9 . 1 Jaffe-Wattenbach, Einharti Vita Caroli Magni, 1876 2 . 2 Mullinger, 126. 3 Hodgkin, Charles the Great , 222. 4 Ebert, ii 94; cp. Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen , i 6 178—187. 5 See parallel passages in Preface and notes to cc. 18—27 in Jaffe- Wattenbach’s ed.; also F. Schmidt (Bayreuth, 1880), and (on his other models) Manitius in Neues Archiv fur alt. deutsche Gesch. vii 517-68. 6 Manitius, l.c ., 565 k 7 Ep. 56 Jaffe. 8 Vitruvius, ed. Miiller-Strubing, p. iii f. 9 Bartoli, / Precursori del Rinascimento (1876), 10—16. XXV.] ERMOLDUS NIGELLUS, AND THEGAN. 465 After the death of Charles literary interests soon began to decline under his feeble son, Louis the Pious (d. 840), though Louis himself (like his father) ‘knew Latin and understood Greek’. His early conquest of Barcelona (801), and his successes with the Bretons (818) and the Danish king Harold (826), were sung in 6000 elegiac verses by a student of Virgil, the monk of Aquitaine, Ermoldus Nigellus 1 . Thegan, the high-born bishop, who wrote the Life of Louis , declares that a poet would need the united powers of Homer, Virgil and Ovid to describe the guilt of the low-born bishops who opposed their emperor (833) 2 . In 829 the prelates of Gaul were compelled to urge him to ‘cause public schools to be established in at least three fitting places ’ of his realm, in accordance with the canon of 826 enjoining the appoint¬ ment of ‘ masters and doctors to teach the study of letters and of the liberal arts’ 3 . During his reign the school of the monastery at Tours lost its recent importance, while the school of the palace was under the Irish monk, Clement, who compiled a grammar for the son of Louis, the future emperor Lothair (d. 869). Charles the Bald, the son of Louis the Pious by his second wife, the accomplished Judith, was king of France from 840 to 876 and emperor of the West for the last year of his life. At the head of his school he placed the foremost philosopher of the early Middle Ages, John the Scot (to whom we shall return in the sequel), and he is praised for inviting teachers of philosophy not only from Ireland but also from Greece 4 . The ancient and important school of Fulda, which had been founded under the sanction of Boniface 5 , was the scene of the learned labours of the most proficient of the pupils of Alcuin. Hraban or Rabanus, born at Mainz in 776, was educated at Fulda, and (after 801) at Tours under M aurus US Alcuin, who gave him the name of Maurus, the favourite pupil of Benedict. Rabanus himself became a teacher at Fulda, where he treasured the notes he had taken of 1 Pertz, Mon. ii 464!; Poetae Lat. Aevi Car. ii 1—93; Ebert, ii 170-8. 2 Vita Ludov. 44 (Milman, iii 141). 3 R. L. Poole’s Medieval Thought , 24 f. 4 Eric, p. 478 infra. 5 P- 453 supra. S. 30 466 RABANUS MAURUS. [CHAP. Alcuin’s lectures at Tours 1 . He continued to teach as abbot in 822, among his pupils being Servatus Lupus and Walafrid Strabo. At Fulda he founded the Library, and part of his teacher Alcuin’s epigram ad Musaeum was inscribed over the door of the Scrip¬ torium 2 . In 842 he retired to a lonely hill a few miles from Fulda, and there composed his encyclopaedic work De Universo. He became archbishop of Mainz in 847 and died in 856. Apart from extensive biblical commentaries, he wrote several educational works. In one of these he was the first to introduce Priscian into the schools of Germany. He also wrote a short treatise on alphabets and abbreviations; and a chronological work founded on Boethius, Isidore and Bede. His treatise on clerical education ends with a few chapters on pagan learning, which he describes as helpful towards the understanding of the Scriptures 3 . He also reviews the liberal arts, especially Grammar, which he defines as the ‘science of interpreting the poets and historians; and the art of correct writing and speaking’ 4 , thus recognising the literary side of Grammar more strongly than Alcuin. Dialectic 5 and the other arts are to be carefully studied for ecclesiastical purposes. The former is the ‘ disciplina disciplinarum; haec docet docere, haec docet discere’ 8 . Rabanus recognises that the writings of the Platonists in particular contain many useful moral precepts, and much that is true on the worship of the one God. A large part of this work is compiled from Augustine and Cassiodorus, and from Gregory’s Cura Pastoralis. His vast encyclopaedia De Universo is practically a theological edition of Isidore. His latest work, De Anima , founded on Cassiodorus, is strangely followed by a few chapters on the military discipline of the Romans, copied from Vegetius for the benefit of Lothair II. Certain glosses on Aristotle and Porphyry implying an adherence to Nominalism are accepted by their discoverer, Cousin, as the work of Rabanus, though they are attributed by others 7 to one of his pupils. Rabanus has the 1 Ne vaga mens perdat cuncta dedi foliis; | hinc quoque nunc constant glossae parvique libelli. Migne, cxii 1600. 2 Wattenbach, Schriftwesen, 364 s . Cp. Dtimmler, Ostfrdnk. Reich, ii 652, n. 13. 3 De Cleric. Inst, iii c. i6f. 4 c. 18. 5 c. 20. 6 c. 26. 7 Prantl and Kaulich (Seth, in Enc. Brit, xxi 420^). XXV.] WALAFRID STRABO. 467 reputation of knowing Greek, and in his writings we have passages assuming some slight knowledge of that language. Thus, in dis¬ cussing the derivation and meaning of syllaba , after quoting Priscian, he has recourse to Greek:—‘ nam syllaba dicta est cbro tov crvWafji.( 3 dveiv ra ypa/x/xaTa ’ \ He appears to have no direct knowledge of Homer, although he mentions the Iliad and Odyssey, as well as the Aeneid, as examples of a mixed kind of poetry (coenoti vel micton ) 1 2 . He is said to have held that Latin was derived from Greek, and that a knowledge of Greek was an aid to the more accurate knowledge of Latin 3 . At Fulda twelve monks were regularly employed as copyists, and down to the seventeenth century there was a large collection of mss, most of which were unfortunately scattered during the Thirty Years’ War. The library of the Westphalian monastery of Corvey (founded 822) is mentioned in the ninth century, and learning also flourished at Regensburg (652) on the Danube, and at Reichenau (724) on an island of the Untersee, W. of the Lake of Constance 4 . The most important pupil of Rabanus was Walafrid Strabo (c. 809—849). Unlike his master, he had a genuine gift for poetry; he studied Christian and pagan strabo**^ poets, and wrote on sacred as well as secular themes. Of his sacred poems the most striking is that on the Visions of Wettin, an early precursor of Dante’s Divina Cojnmedia. His two great secular poems are (1) On the statue of llieodoric , and (2) his Hortulus , a description of the plants in the monastic garden of Reichenau, which was widely read during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Its charm and freshness are not im¬ paired by occasional reminiscences of Virgil and Columella. In 1 Op. i 29; Migne, cxi 617; from Isidore, Etyrn. i 16, 1. 2 i 203; Migne, cxi 420; from Suetonius, De Po'etis (p. 5 Reififerscheid), ap. Diomedem, lib. iii 482 Keil. In cvii 408 quidam eloquens is his authority for a passage nearly identical with Cic. Orator , § 69; this quotation (which I have not seen noticed elsewhere) must have ultimately come from a writer who had a complete ms of the Orator. The codices mutili begin with § 91. 3 Trithemius (Migne, cvii 84 b), ap. Cramer, ii 23. Cp. Kohler’s Hrabanus Maurus , 13 f. 4 Ziegelbauer, Hist. Litt. Ord. S. Ben. i 487, 569, ap. Heeren, Cl. Litt. im MA, i 162 f. On Rabanus, cp. Ebert, ii 120 ; Mullinger’s Schools, 138—151; and West’s Alcuin, r24—164; Opera in Migne, cvii—cxii. 30—2 468 ERMENRICH OF ELLWANGEN. [CHAP. his other poems his principal model is Prudentius. He is also the author of the original form of the Glossa Ordinaria (subse¬ quently revised by Gilbert de la Porree and Anselm of Laon), which occupies the top and side margins of mss of the Vulgate. He brought out a new edition of the Life of Gallus and of Einhard’s Life of Charles the Great. His only independent work in prose was connected with Ecclesiastical History, being written at the request of the librarian of his monastery. He died in the prime of life, having been accidentally drowned in crossing the Loire. He was certainly a man of singular literary versatility; and his influence, as tutor to Charles the Bald and as abbot of Reichenau, was always healthy and bore lasting fruit 1 . A remarkable picture of the varied learning of the time is presented by a letter written ( c. 850) by a pupil of ofEUwangen Walafrid, Ermenrich of Ellwangen 3 , to Grimold, abbot of Weissenburg and St Gallen. After discussing the difference between the mind and the soul, he passes on to points of Grammar, dealing particularly with accent, quantity and pronunciation, and naming as authorities, not only Alcuin and Bede, Priscian and Donatus, but also Consentius, Sextus Pompeius and Servius. He next introduces a specimen of the allegorical interpretation of Scripture, with a digression on the nature of the soul. With the aid of Virgil and his com¬ mentators, he adds some remarks on pagan mythology, incidentally expressing his contempt for the pagan poets, whose works he condescends to regard as of the nature of manure, useful for fertilising the fields of sacred literature. He knows that Virgil has imitated Theocritus in the Eclogues , Hesiod in the Georgies and Homer in the Aeneid , but his knowledge of these facts is clearly due to Servius alone 3 . He refers in conclusion to the monastery of St Gallen, adding a specimen of his proposed poetic life of the founder, with some sets of verses in praise of his own preceptor, and on the sacred theme of the Trinity. In the course of this letter he quotes Lucretius (i 150-6), Virgil and Servius, Ovid, Prudentius, Juvencus, Arator, the Latin Homer, the epitaph on the son of Cato the Censor, the Mosel/a of Ausonius, Priscian’s translation of Dionysius Periegetes, and t 1 Migne, cxiii—cxiv; poems in Po'etae Lat. Aevi Car. ii 259—423 Diimmler; Ebert, ii 145—166; Specht, 310. 2 Edited (from a MS at St Gallen) by Diimmler (1873); cp. Bursian in Jahresb. i i o f. 3 p. 219 supra. XXV.] SERVATUS LUPUS. 469 lastly Pliny, Boethius and Fulgentius 1 . The letter also displays some slight knowledge of Greek vocabulary (as well as ignorance of Greek Accidence and Prosody) by the introduction of isolated words or single lines, sometimes in Greek and Latin combined. But, as a whole, it is a specimen of superficial learning rather than true taste. The writer’s erudition was, however, recognised by his being made bishop of Passau in 865, nine years before his death 2 . A far more agreeable picture is presented to us in the 130 Letters of Servatus Lupus, born of a noble family in the diocese of Sens, educated at Ferrieres and at Lupus &tUS Fulda, and abbot of the former from 842 to his death, little more than twenty years later. At Fulda he had not only been educated for six years under Rabanus, the most learned theologian of the day, but had also obtained literary advice and instruction from Einhard, the ablest scholar of the time. While Alcuin, the instructor of Rabanus, was exceedingly narrow in his literary interests, Lupus, the pupil of Rabanus, has a far wider range. In his literary spirit he is a precursor of the humanists of the Renaissance. To one of his correspondents he expresses his regret that the pursuits of literature are almost obsolete 3 ; to another, his delight at their revival in his own neighbourhood 4 . In writing to Einhard he confesses that a love of letters had been implanted in him almost from his very boyhood, and contrasts the revival of letters in Einhard’s own time, under Charles the Great, with their decline in the days when ‘men scarcely tolerate any who attempt to acquire knowledge ’ 5 . He is himself an eager borrower, and a wary lender, of books. He asks one of his relations to send a capable monk to Fulda and borrow from the abbot a copy of Suetonius £ in two moderate-sized volumes, which he can either bring himself, or send by a trusty messenger’ 6 . He begs the archbishop of Tours to send him a copy of the commentary of Boethius on the Topica of Cicero'. 1 Gottlieb, Bibliotheken , p. 441. a Ebert, ii 179—184. 3 34, nunc litterarum studiis paene obsoletis. 4 35, reviviscentem in his nostris regionibus sapientiam. 5 Ep. 1. 6 91. 7 16. I 470 SERVATUS LUPUS [CHAP He writes to the abbot of York to ask for the loan of the Questions on the Old and New Testaments ascribed to St Jerome by Cassiodorus, also those of Bede, the seventh and following books of St Jerome on Jeremiah, and the twelve books of the Institutions of Quintilian 1 . Not content with borrowing from Fleury in his own neighbourhood and from other monasteries in France, and from Fulda and York, he even writes to Rome. Thus he applies to pope Benedict III (855-8) for the above books of St Jerome, and for certain mss of Cicero de Oratore , and of Quintilian, which he had seen in Rome (849), the latter being ‘in a single volume of moderate size ’. He adds that his monastery already possessed parts of the last two works, and concludes by begging for the loan of the commentary on Terence by Donatus 2 . He is himself so cautious about lending a ms which is in constant demand, that he has almost resolved on despatching it to some place of security for fear of losing it altogether 3 . In the same letter he answers a number of minor questions on points of spelling and prosody by appealing to the grammarian Caper, and by quoting thrice from Virgil, twice from Martial, and once from Prudentius, Alcuin and Theodulfus. He lends the bishop of Auxerre St Jerome’s commentary on the Prophets before he has had time to read it himself, and (doubtless in answer to some inquiry) informs him that Caesar had not really written a History of Rome, but only the Commentaries on the Gallic War , of which the bishop had doubtless heard, and a copy of which would be sent as soon as possible, adding that the continuation was the work of Caesar’s secretary, Hirtius 4 . With a view to correcting his own texts, he borrows extra copies of works already in his possession. He thanks a friend for revising his copy of Macrobius and for sending a ms of the commentary of Boethius; he inquires about a ms of Cicero’s Tusculan Disputations , and, in the. same letter, answers questions on prosody by quoting Virgil and Juvencus as well as Servius and Priscian 5 . He in¬ forms a monk of the Benedictine monastery at Priim that he intends to compare his own copy of Cicero’s Letters with the text which he has just received, and thus arrive at the truth; 1 62. 4 37 - 2 103. 5 8 . XXV.] AND THE CLASSICS. 471 he also asks for his friend’s copy of Cicero’s translation of Aratus, with a view to filling up some lacunae in his own 1 . He declines to send a ms to a monk at Sens, because his messenger will be exposed to the perils of a journey on foot 2 . He cannot lend Hincmar the Collectaneum of Bede on the Epistles of St Paul, because ‘the book is too large to be con¬ cealed in the vest or the wallet, and, even if either were possible, it might be a prey to robbers tempted by the beauty of the ms’ 3 . He is prevented from sending Gellius to Einhard because the abbot has once more kept it in his own possession 4 . He is interested in obtaining, through Einhard, carefully copied speci¬ mens of uncial characters 5 ; and it may be remembered that it was in this age that Charles the Bald caused a ms of the Gospels to be copied in letters of gold for the abbey of St Denis 6 , with the donor’s portrait as frontispiece, and that he received a ms of the Bible in Caroline minuscules 7 from the abbot of Tours, where that hand had been formed under the rule of Alcuin. His attitude towards the Classics may be partly illustrated by a letter in which he good-humouredly describes a presbyter of Mainz, named Probus, as charitably including Cicero and Virgil (whose works he is copying) in the number of the elect 8 . His own literary tastes are more clearly shown in his first letter to Einhard, where, after saying that, in his judgement, ‘learning should be sought for its own sake’ 9 , he adds that he had found the authors of the day far removed from the dignity of the Ciceronian style emulated by the foremost of the Latin Fathers, until at last he lighted on Einhard’s admirably written Life of Charles the Great 10 . A wide knowledge of Latin literature is displayed in his frequent re- 1 69. 2 20. 3 76. 4 5. 5 5 (cxix 448 C, Migne), scriptor regius Bertcaudus dicitur antiquarum litterarum, duntaxat earum quae maximae sunt, et unciales a quibusdam vocari existimantur, habere mensuram descriptam. Itaque, si penes vos est, mittite mihi earn per hunc, quaeso, pictorem, cum redierit, schedula tamen dili- gentissime sigillo munita. 6 Hist. Litt. de la France , iv 282 f. 7 Specimen in Lecoy de la Marche, Les Manuscrits (Quantin), p. 69. It was written (c. 845-50) by a monk of Marmoutier. 8 20 ad finem. 9 Quoted on p. 429. 10 P- 434 A. 472 SERVATUS LUPUS. [CHAP. ferences to Latin authors. Among historians, we find Livy 1 , Sallust, Caesar, Suetonius, Justin and Valerius Maximus 2 ; in rhetoric, Cicero and Quintilian; among poets, Terence, Virgil, Horace and Martial; and, among grammarians, Caper, Gellius, Donatus, Servius, Macrobius and Priscian. He describes a knowledge of German as ‘most necessary at the present day’ 3 ; at the same time, he protests against the rumour that he had himself gone to Fulda to learn that language; it would not have been ‘ worth his while to go so far for such a purpose’; he had really spent his time there in copying mss, ad oblivionis remedium et eruditionis augmentum* . There is hardly any sign that he knew Greek. He consults Einhard about certain Greek words in Servius 5 ; and, when he is himself consulted on similar points by Gotteschalk, he hints that the niceties of the language are best ascertained from the Greeks themselves 6 . He states that blasphemus is obviously a Greek word, because of the collocation of p and h , and he proves from Prudentius that the second syllable is long, but he adds that he is informed by a Greek that, ‘ among the Greeks ’ (who in this case clearly allowed the accent to supersede the quantity), ‘it was always pronounced short ’,—an opinion shared by Einhard 7 . Even in his treatise on the tenets of the Latin Fathers, written in answer to art inquiry from Charles the Bald 8 , he cannot refrain from quoting Cicero and Virgil 9 . The importance of the age of Servatus Lupus, in regard to the preservation and transmission of mss, may be inferred from the large number of mss of the ninth century and the first half of the tenth, which are recorded as having belonged to the monastic libraries of France' 0 . It was also about this time that classical mss 1 34, illud quod sequitur tangere nolui donee in Livio vigilantius inda- garem. 2 Cp. Traube in S. Ber. Bayr. A bad. 1891, p. 402. 3 70. 4 6. 5 5 ad fin. 6 30 ad fin. 7 20 p. 467 C — D. 8 128. 9 Migne, cxix 633. For the Letters see Migne cxix 431—6ro, and cp. Nicholas, Etude (1861); De la Rocheterie, in Memoires i (1865-72) 369—466 of the Acad, de Sainte Croix d' Orleans ; Mullinger’s Schools of Charles the Great (1877) c. 4; Sprotte’s Biographie (1880); and ed. by Du Dezert (Paris, 1888); also Ebert, ii 203-9; Manitius in Rhein. Mus. (1893) 313—320; and Norden’s Kunstprosa , 699 f. 10 Norden, 704 b XXV.] PASCHASIUS RADBERTUS. 473 first found their way into Germany, the writers of the golden age being scantily represented by Virgil, Lucan, Livy and portions of Cicero, while later authors were more frequent, especially Macrobius, Martianus Capella and Isidore. While the monastery of Ferrieres, near Sens and the Upper Seine, was the home of Lupus, that of Corbie on the Somme, near Amiens, is similarly associated R ^ertus 1US with his contemporary Radbertus, who also bears the name of Paschasius (c, 790—865). He joined in founding the New Corbie in Westphalia (822). His familiarity with Latin literature is shown by the passages which he tacitly borrows from Cicero, Seneca, Virgil and Horace, and there is some slight evidence that he was acquainted with Greek 1 2 . In the reign of Charles the Bald (840—877), whom Lupus describes as ‘doctrinae studiosissimus’ 3 , there is a certain revival of interest in literature, but it resembles the final flicker of an expiring flame rather than ‘a light that rises to the stars’. This last is the flattering phrase used by Eric of Auxerre (d. c. 877) in a letter addressed to the king. He even describes Greece as lamenting the loss of those of her sons whom the liberality of the king has attracted to Gaul, and nearly all Ireland, with the band of her philosophers, as disdaining the perils of the sea and embracing a voluntary exile in answer to the summons of one who was a Solomon in wisdom 3 . The chief representative of Ireland and philosophy at the court of Charles the Bald was Joannes Scotus, or 7 Joannes John the Scot 4 (c. 810-5 — c. 875), who, from about Scotus 845, was the head of the palace school and thus ( En s en a) took part in a temporary revival of learning. In his person the 1 Migne, cxx ; Tougard, L'Hellenisme, p. 30; Ebert, ii 230 f. His four poems (including an ‘ egloga ’) are printed in Poetae Lat. Aevi Car. iii 45—53 Traube. 2 Ep. 119. 3 Migne, cxxiv 1133. 4 Known to his contemporaries as Joannes Scotus , Scottus, or Scotigena ; and called by himself, in his translation of ‘ Dionysius ’, Joannes Ierugena (changed in later mss into Erugena and Eriugena). Erigena appears later still, and Joannes Scotus Erigena not earlier than cent, xvi (Christlieb, isf, ap. R. L. Poole’s Medieval Thought , 55; and Traube in Poetae Lat. Aevi Car. iii 518). 474 JOANNES SCOTUS. [CHAP. Greek Scholarship of Ireland found a welcome in France in the days when England was being overrun by the Danes. His favourite manual was Martianus Capella. He was also familiar with the Greek Fathers, such as Basil, Chrysostom and Gregory Nazianzen (whom he oddly identifies with his namesake of Nyssa), and he had a special admiration for Origen 1 . In the phrase of William of Malmesbury, his mental vision was ‘con¬ centrated on Greece’ 2 . While his Latin style is recognised as correct and even elegant, he is fully conscious of the inadequacy of his Greek scholarship. He is familiar with Plato’s Timaeus 3 , and it has been supposed 4 that he knew the original text; at any rate, his Latin quotations from the Timaeus are independent of the translation by Chalcidius. His general familiarity with Greek is fully proved by the fact that he was chosen to execute a Latin translation of ‘ Dionysius the Areopagite ’. A copy of the original had been sent as early as 757 by Pope Paul I to Pepin-le-Bref, and a splendid ms of the same had subsequently been presented to Louis the Pious by the Byzantine emperor, Michael the Stammerer (827). The author was regarded as the patron-saint of France, and Hilduin, the abbot of St Denis, had in vain attempted to produce a satisfactory version. Thus it fell to the lot of an Irishman of the West to introduce the works of a Greek mystic of the East to the knowledge of a Franco-Roman king. The faithful and literal rendering executed by Joannes Scotus was regarded as an interpretation which itself needed an interpreter. Such was the opinion of the papal librarian, Anastasius, who had himself learned Greek at Constantinople, and wondered how ‘ this barbarian living on the confines of the world, who might have been deemed to be as ignorant of Greek as he was remote from civilisation, could have proved capable of comprehending such mysteries and translating them into another tongue’ 5 . The « 1 Cp. Baur’s Lehre von der Dreieinigkeit , ii 263—344 (Poole, 60). 2 Gesta Regum Angl. ii § 122, in Graecos acriter oculos intendit. 3 In De Div. Nat. i 31 he quotes in Latin 30 D f. In iii 27 he refers to the planets, ‘quae semper circulos suos circa solem peragunt, sicut Plato in Timaeo edocet’. 4 Haureau, i 2 152. 5 Migne, cxxii 93 c— D. The date of the translation is 858-60. The original was found in France and not brought from Ireland ; and the same is true of his later translation of Maximus on Greg. Naz. XXV.] HIS PRINCIPAL WORKS. 475 influence of ‘ Dionysius 5 is apparent in many parts of the great work of Joannes Scotus, De Divisione Naturae , and particularly in the last book, with its doctrine of the final absorption of the perfected soul into the Divine Nature 1 , where, by a fusion of Neo- Platonism and Christianity, he forms a ‘theory of the Eternal Word as containing in Himself the exemplars of created things ’, a theory implying the formula universalia ante rem. Another important work, his Liber de Praedestinatione , was written at the request of Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims, and a man of some pretensions to a knowledge of Greek 2 , in criticism of the Augustinian doctrine as stated by Gotteschalk (840). In his reply (851) he constantly resorts to the aid of Dialectic. He also anticipates the doctrine of the Schoolmen by insisting that true philosophy and true religion are identical with one another 3 . He describes the course of his argument as passing through the four stages of ‘division, definition, demonstration and analysis’, adding the Greek name of each 4 . When the Latin Fathers fail him, he appeals to the Greek, and, when the Fathers desert him, he takes refuge in the philosophers. The mistakes of his opponents he compassionately describes as mainly due to their ignorance of the Greek language. His treatise was opposed by theologians at Lyons and Fulda, and by Prudentius, bishop of Troyes, who traces in its pages ‘the folly of Origen’ and the trickery of an unsanctified sophistry, and meets his opponent’s ‘assumption of superiority on the ground of his classical learning’ by appealing to Jerome’s abjuration of Cicero. Jerome had maintained that the Scriptures should be understood in their simplicity instead of serving as a battle-ground of the rhetoricians; while Joannes Scotus had dragged his readers back to Greek sources for all that he had failed to find in Latin. Lastly, Prudentius attacks the work of Martianus Capella, which was 1 Abstract in R. L. Poole, 60—73. 2 Migne, cxxv 538 A — B. Cp. Carl von Noorden’s Hinkmar (1863); Schroers (1884); and Traube, in Po'etae Lat. Aevi Car . iii 406-20. 3 De Div. Naturae , i 1; Haureau, i 2 153 n. r. 4 (pddodos) diaipeTLKT), dpipTucrj, airodeucTiicf] and ava\vTucri. Cp. David the Armenian’s Prolegomena to Porphyry’s Isagoge : elol Si rtooapes ai 5ia\eKTUsa. Fcptr mca manciple dnrncrrainr ptalap cpiab. tnaxp manciple^/ feqtrefe nnnjia {reap manna arepap. meifuiancipnf duitdo Jaidnof mtnu manna ic <>ale penegap. met mancipja ojt. dnn> {rr. ppam upeTbptnep. Brpln on frf- upe irbjiopjut. nro^r Jrm obedimna. upd^rrlpaSpa -, #ba . -i. . r^rfr. . nroi pFf amo. upff rebpsppa ic tupe. anrif prib: tpomnpa rrbpo{nm- $enenf {eminim. tint feror. upr (pn peps nmr (oroni. “[{pa pspb fpapt op. sedinoson. turn anaUa^, jjenenf tienm. tirum arnlilium.upe pos-tin amfibt- upep pastp. “j{pa popb opr nemn gpnenf! Jnccfccbaee nttrf. &choc nra* tc.upep Uuisrp tmmn cSSs dlep bpat? ntttnf.j{pa pepk crpn. [urpe^jjpisftut sedmnti^. £all {pa life <$cbaec urot’^cboc tmcrr.eoppeflansep mann. lias ijta-Jm* “jkip^HitTOttf. ba&nu- ■V From Cambridge University ms (Cent, xi) of /Elfric’s Latin Grammar, folio 33 ( = p. 18 Zupitza); see p. 493 supra. Conspectus of History of Scholarship, &c., in the West, 1000—1200 A.D. Italy Spain France Germany British Isles 1000 1005 b. Lanfranc 1004 d. Abbo of Fleury 1004 d. Widukind of Corvey 1010 d. Richer of Rheims 1017 f. Bamberg 1029 d. Fulbert of Char- 1022 d. NotkerLabeo c. 1030 d. FElfric of 1033 b. Anselm tres 1022 d. Bernward of Eynsham ; 1034 £ Bee Hildesheim 1045-66 Lanfranc prior 1036 d. Meinwerk of c. 1050 Ji. Salerno of Bee Paderborn 1053 Papias 1050 d. Rodulfus Glaber 1054 d. Hermannus 1056 Anselm of Bi- 1066 Lanfranc abbot of Contractus sate Caen 1060 d. Ekkehard IV 1007-72 Petrus Da- 1020-70 Avice- 1066-78 Anselm prior of 1058-77 Ji. Lambert 1070-89 Lanfranc | miani bron Bee of Hersfeld abp of Canterbury 1075 ft. Leo Marsi- 1075 Adam of Bremen 1075 b. Ordericus canus 1084 f. Carthusians 1076 d. Immed of Vitalis 1050-80 Constanti- Paderborn nus Afer 1088 d. Berengarius of 1058-85 Alfanusabp Tours 1077-93 f. scripto- of Salerno 1078-93 Anselm abbot of rium at St Albans 1086-7 Victor 111 Bee under abbot Paul (Desiderius of 1093-1109 Anselm Monte Cassino) 1098 f. Cistercians abp of Canterbury nno 1100 Conrad of Hir- mi William of 1 ro6 d. Roscellinus schau 1109 d. Anselm Apulia 1112 d. Sigebertof Gem- bloux 1113 Irnerius of Bo- 1115 d. I vo of Chartres logna 1115 Radulfus Tortarius 1116 d. Leo Marsi- 1120 Honorius of Autun 1118 d. Florence of canus 1121 d. William of Cham- Worcester 1117 d. Grossolano peaux t. ' \ abp of Milan 1124 d. Guibert of No- gent 1119-24 Ji. Bernard of Chartres 1128 Jacobus de Ve- 1125 d.Marbod ofRennes Metellus of Tegern- netia 1134 d. Hildebert of see 1130 Adelard of Bath Tours 1138 d. Avem- 1137 Sckol. Med. Mont- 1 137-58 Otto bp of pace pellier Freising 1130-50 Ray- 1140 Bernard of Cluni mond abp of 1079-1142 Abelard 1142 d. William of Toledo; trans- 1142 d. Hugo of St Victor Malmesbury lations from 1142 d. Ordericus Vi- 1147 b. Giraldus Arabic by talis 1146-5 8 W ibald abbot Cambrensis Joannes His- 1142 fl. Petrus Helias of Corvey 1154 d. Geoffrey of palensis and 1146 d. Macarius of Monmouth Gondisalvi Fleury 1155 d. Henry of 1143 Robertus 1153 d. Bernard of Clair- 1152-90 Emp. Fred- Huntingdon j Retinensis vaux eric Barbarossa 1160 Serlo Gramma- 1150 Alberico of Bo- 1145-53 Ji. Bernard Sil- ticus logna vester of Tours 1170 Robert of Crick- 1154 d. William of lade 1 Conches 1110-80 John of i 1154 d. Gilbert de la Salisbury Porree 1173 Peter of Blois 1156 d. Petrus Venera- settles in England bilis 1175? b. Michael Scot 1167 William of Gap 1167-83 Simon abbot < c. 1160-70 Univ. Paris 1185 Saxo Gram- of St Albans \ 1187 d. Gerard of 1175 Gerard of 1173 d. Richard of St maticus 1154-89 Henry 11 Cremona Cremona Victor 1187 Gunther’s Li- 1196 Walter Map 1190 Godfrey of Vi- 1174 Matthew of Ven- gurinus archdeacon of Ox- terbo dome' 1165-95 Herrad of ford 1191 Henricus Septi- 1126-98 Aver- 1184 Jean de Hauteville Landsperg 1198 d. William of mellensis roes 1192 d. Adam of St Victor Newburgh 1194 Burgundio of 1135-1204 Mai- Daniel de Morlai Pisa monides 1200 d. Nigellus Wi- recker Continued from p. 430. CHAPTER XXVII. THE ELEVENTH CENTURY. In France the most notable teacher in the first quarter of the eleventh century is Fulbert, bishop of Chartres (d. 1029). One of his admirers describes the influence of his teaching as passing through many channels: School of Chartres ‘ Gurges altus ut minores solvitur in alveos,... Sic insignes propagasti per diversa plurimos,... Quorum quisque prae se tulit quod te usus fuerit’ 1 . Among the many pupils, who were proud to acknowledge their indebtedness to his teaching, were Lambert and Adelmann at Liege, Berengarius at Tours, Olbert at Gembloux, Angelrann at Saint-Riquier, Reginald at Angers, and Domnus at Montmajour- lez-Arles 2 . In the middle of the century, Saint-Evroult, S. of Lisieux in Normandy, was celebrated as a school , J m * St Evroult of copyists, which sent skilful transcribers to give instruction in the art to inmates of other monasteries in France 3 . The Norman monastery of Bee flourished under J Bee the rule of Lanfranc 4 (1045) and Anselm (1066), both of whom came from Northern Italy to Normandy, and were thence called to England to become archbishops of Canterbury. 1 Mabillon, Analecta, i 422 (Leon Maitre, Ecoles, 103); Clerval, Ecoles de Chartres, 59 f. 2 See Index to Leon Maitre; Clerval, 62 f, 72—91. 3 Ordericus Vitalis, iii 483, v 582. 4 ib. ii 246. S. 32 49 ^ LAMBERT OF HERSFELD. ADAM OF BREMEN. [CHAP. In England the incursions of the Danes, which ended in the conquest of the island by Canute (1016), had left no leisure for the pursuits of learning; and the influence of the Norman Conquest of 1066-71 on the intellectual life of the country did not take effect until after the close of this century. In the story of the many ruthless devastations recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, books are mentioned only in connexion with the plundering of Peterborough by Hereward in 1070 :— ‘ They took there so much gold and silver, and so many treasures in money and in raiment, and in books, as no man may tell to another, saying they did it from affection to the monastery In Germany, the eleventh century saw the foundation of the Schools of bishopric, library and school of Bamberg (1017), Bamberg and and a revival of learning in the school of Paderborn. This revival was due in part to the influence of Meinwerk, bishop in 1009-36, and still more to that of his nephew, Immed, bishop in 1052-76, in whose time the authors studied included Sallust, Virgil, Horace and Statius \ Latin verse on historic and other themes was being written with some success; but, towards the end of the century, the interest in the Classics began to abate. This was partly due to the influence of the monks of Cluni, who insisted on a stricter monastic discipline and a more complete subservience to the will of the Church, while, in the absorbing struggle for supremacy between Hildebrand and the German emperor, the claims of learning fell into abeyance 2 . About the middle of the century, the styles of Sallust and Livy were admirably combined in the Annals of Lambert Hersfeid ; of Hersfeld (d. 1077), who was familiar with Bremen f Terence, Virgil and Horace 3 , while Sallust and Lucan were well known to Adam of Bremen, the author of the Ecclesiastical History of Ha?nburg (c. 1075), which is an important authority for the early history of Northern Europe 4 . 1 Vila Meinwerci in Mon. Germ. Hist, xi 140 (Bursian i 55; incompletely quoted in Heeren, i 196). 2 Bursian, i 58—6 2. 3 id. i 57; Norden, Kunstprosa , 750 f. 4 Bursian, i 58 XXVII.] NOTKER LABEO. HERMANNUS CONTRACTUS. 499 Early in the century we find a distinguished teacher at St Gallen in the person of Notker Labeo (d. 1022), .... Notker Labeo also known as Notker ‘the German from his having translated (or taken part in translating) into that language not only the Psalms of David but also the Andria of Terence, the Eclogues of Virgil, and the Distichs of ‘ Cato ’, together with Martianus Capella, several treatises of Boethius, and the Latin version of Aristotle’s Categories and De Interpretatione 1 . He writes to the bishop of Sion, on the upper Rhone, to tell him that the abbot of Reichenau has borrowed the bishop’s copy of Cicero’s First Philippic and the commentary on the Topica, depositing as security for their return the Rhetoric of Cicero and of Victorinus; and he adds that, if the bishop wants certain books, he must send more parchment and money for the copyists 2 . In the same century a monk of Reichenau, Hermannus ‘ Con¬ tractus’ (the ‘cripple’, 1013—1054), composed a *c^nt™ctus U,S Chronicle founded on the Latin translation of Eusebius and on Cassiodorus and Bede 3 . The tenth and eleventh centuries, the golden age of St Gallen, were succeeded by an iron age in the twelfth century. Meanwhile, in Italy, where the study of ‘ grammar ’ and poetry seems never to have entirely died out, young nobles and students preparing for the priesthood were not unfrequently learning Latin literature together in private grammar-schools 4 conducted either by lay ‘philosophers’ or by like-minded clerics, who were regarded with suspicion by their stricter brethren. One of these liberal clerics, Anselm of Bisate (c. 1047-56), describes the Saints and the Muses as struggling for his of^Bisate possession, while he was utterly perplexed as to which he should prefer :—‘so noble, so sweet, were both companies 1 Jourdain, 285!; Cramer, ii 43; Bursian, i 56. The translations of Capella, Boethius and Aristotle were published by Graff in 1837, and also by Hattemer, Denkm . d. Mitte/alters, iii 263—372 (Prantl, Logik, ii 2 61 f). 2 J. Grimm, kl. Schriften , v 190; P. Piper, Die Schriften Notkers u. seiner Schule. i 861 (Norden, 708). 3 Bursian, i 56 f. 4 Giesebrecht, De Litt. Studiis apud Italos , p. 15 ( = 29 of Ital. trans.); Ozanam, Documents Inedits (1850), 1—79. 32—2 500 ANSELM OF BISATE. DESIDERIUS. ALFANUS. [CHAP. Desiderius that I could not choose either of them; so that, were it possible, I had rather both than either’ 1 . In the same century, Desiderius, the abbot of Monte Cassino, who became Pope as Victor III (1086-7), was causing his monks to make copies of Horace, and Ovid’s Fasti, as well as Seneca and several treatises of Cicero 2 ; Cicero, Sallust and Virgil were familiar to Leo Marsicanus, the Chronicler of Monte Cassino 3 ; and the composition of Latin hexameters and elegiacs, and of lyrics after the model of Horace and Boethius, was successfully cultivated by Alfanus, a monk of the same monastery, who was archbishop of Salerno from 1058 to 1085 4 . The strict disci¬ plinarian, Petrus Damiani (d. 1072), protests in a narrow-minded way against the ‘grammatical’ studies of the monks of his time, who ‘cared little for the Rule of Benedict in comparison with the rules of Donatus’ 5 ; he admits, however, that ‘to study poets and philosophers with a view to making the wit more keen and better fitted to penetrate the mysteries of the Divine Word, is to spoil the Egyptians of their treasures in order to build the Tabernacle of God’ 6 7 . In sacred verse he is best represented by the hymn on ‘ the joys and the glory of Paradise ’, beginning with the words :— Adperennis vitae fotitem 1 . Most of our evidence as to the knowledge of Greek in this century is derived from certain points of contact century xi between the West and Constantinople. Early in the century, Greek artists came to the Old Rome from the New to cast the bronze doors of the ancient basilica of ‘St Paul’s outside the Walls’, and Greek characters were used to inscribe the names of the prophets adorning those doors 8 . Greek, 1 Rhetorimachia, ii; Dummler, Anselm der Peripatetiker, p. 39 (Poole’s Medieval Thought , 82). 2 Chron. Cassin. iii c. 63 in Muratori iv 474 ; Giesebrecht, 34 (59 f Ital. trans.); Balzani’s Chroniclers , 160 f. 3 d. c. 1116; Pertz, Mon. vii; Balzani, 164—173 {Leo Ostiensis ). 4 Giesebrecht 54, 66—95 (in Ital. ed. only); Ozanam, l. c., 255—270; Shipa, Alfano /, Arcivescovo di Salerno , p. 45 (Salerno, 1880). 5 Opusc. xiii c. 11; Migne, cxlv 306. 6 Opusc. xxxii c. 9; Migne, cxlv 560. 7 Trench, Sacred Latin Poetry, 315; J. M. Neale, Hymns (1865), 2—15. 8 Gradenigo, Letteratura Greco-Ltaliana (Brescia, 1759), p. 29. XXVII.] PAPIAS. BENZO. 501 as well as Latin, was in use in the services at St Peter’s 1 . A patriarch of Venice, Dominico Marengo, who was sent to Con¬ stantinople to promote the reunion of the Churches, addressed the bishop of Antioch in a Greek letter (1053), which is still extant 2 . Thirteen years later, an Italian known as John Italus was lecturing at Constantinople on Plato and Aristotle, and on Proclus and Porphyry 3 . Meanwhile, in the literature of text¬ books, we find Papias the Lombard (,c . 105 3) 4 compiling a dictionary of Latin, in which he marks the quantity and gives the gender and the inflexions of the words, but draws no distinction between the ancient classical forms and the barbarous forms in modern use, and cares little for matters of etymology. But he invariably gives the Latin rendering of any Greek word which he has occasion to quote; he even transcribes five lines of Hesiod ( Theog . 907-11), and translates them into Latin hexameters 5 . It has, however, been suspected that this is an interpolation due to the editor of the Venice edition (1485) 6 . The work includes definitions of legal terms, with excerpts from earlier glossaries and from manuals of the liberal arts, including the current text-books on logic 7 . It was still in use in the six¬ teenth century. About 1061 Benzo, bishop of Alba, in his panegyric on the emperor Henry IV, makes a B enzo display of his Greek and Latin learning by naming Pindar and Homer, as well as Terence, Virgil, Lucan, Statius, Horace (Horatius noster ), and Quintilian 8 ; but it is probable that his acquaintance with Greek was solely due to his South-Italian origin 9 . Evidence of Italian interest in Greek literature is traced by the Laurentian librarian, Bandini, in the Greek mss of the tenth and eleventh centuries belonging to the library of the Bene¬ dictine monks in Florence 10 . Italy claims two students of Greek 1 Gradenigo, Letteratura Greco-Italiana (Brescia, 1759)1 p. 31. 2 ib. 40. 3 p. 403 supra ; Prantl’s Logik, ii 2 301. 4 Tiraboschi, iii 339f; Hallam, Lit. i 72“*; p. 639 infra. 5 Gradenigo, 38. 6 Haase, De Medii Aevi Studiis Philologicis , 32 n. 7 Prantl, Logik, ii 2 70. 8 Graf, Roma , ii 172. 9 Dresdner, Kultur- u. Sittengeschichte, 195. 10 Specimen litt. Florentinae s. xv, i (1748), p. xxvi. 502 LANFRANC AND ANSELM. [CHAP. v. in the persons of Lanfranc and Anselm, both of whom were of Lombard race. Lanfranc of Pavia (b. c. 1005), an^Anseim who studied the liberal arts and law in Italy, spent many years at Bee in Normandy, and was abbot of Caen (1066) and archbishop of Canterbury (1070-89). He is said to have studied Greek 1 . Bee was also (1060-93) the monastic retreat of another future archbishop of Canterbury, Anselm of Aosta (d. 1109), who shows an interest in Greek by quoting the opinions of the Greeks 2 , by inquiring for copies of their writings 3 , and by selecting Greek names for the titles of two of his works, moiiologion and proslogio?i A . He recommends his pupils to study Virgil and other profane authors with due reserve 5 . Before turning to the history of Scholasticism in connexion with the name of Anselm, we may briefly notice that, early in the eleventh century, a Greek Lectionary was copied at Cologne for the Abbey of St Denis (io2i) e ; also that, among the authorities for Norman history, Dudo of St Quentin uses not a few Greek words in the midst of the strange medley of prose and verse in which he panegyrises the early dukes of Normandy, while a more important writer, William of Poitiers, is familiar with Sallust and Caesar 7 . In the same age, the monastery of Hildesheim rose to distinction under Bernward, while that of Fulda was on the decline in 1066. In the second half of the century, St Gallen and Hirschau were continuing to flourish, Hirschau becoming specially famous as a school of copyists 8 . The latter part of the century saw the foundation of two new religious Orders, or new branches 1 Migne, cl 30 B; on Lanfranc’s studies, cp. Crozals (1877), c * x > 2 * His influence may be traced in a ‘ prickly ’ style of writing probably derived from the ‘ Lombard ’ hand which he apparently introduced at Bee and Caen, and afterwards at Canterbury (M. R. James, Sandars Lecture, 29 May, 1903, and Ancient Libraries of Canterbury, p. xxviii). See facsimile on p. 503. 2 Migne, clviii 1144 c. 3 ib. 1120 C. 4 Tougard, p. 55. 5 Ep. i 55, exceptis his in quibus aliqua turpitudo sonat. Cp. Migne, clvi 852 f. 6 Lectionary of Epistles and Gospels , now in Paris Library (Omont, MSS Grecs Dates , pi. xiv). 7 Korting, Litt. Ital. ill i 85-7. 8 Heeren, i 234 k XXVII.] CARTHUSIANS AND CISTERCIANS. 503 of the great Benedictine Order, the Carthusians (1084) and the Cistercians (1098). The Rule of the Carthusians enjoins the duty of keeping useful books and diligently transcribing them. Guigo (1133), the fifth abbot of the Grande Chartreuse near Grenoble, who is described by a nd Cistercians Trithemius as a man of learning in secular as well as sacred literature, insists on special diligence in the work of a copyist 1 . The Cistercians distinguished themselves in the following century by their skill in calligraphy 2 ; but neither of these Orders made any provision for schools open to' pupils unconnected with their monasteries 3 . 1 Heeren, i 254 ; cp. J. W. Clark, Care of Books, 69. 2 ib. 232; cp. Hist. Litt. tie la France , vii n; J. W. Clark, 70, 84-9. 3 On education in cent, x—xi, cp. Schmid’s Gesch. der ' Erziehung, 11 i . 232—58 (where ^Elfric is strangely omitted). JpiuK hbru prcvw cmyni LlUfrutfcvS ardncff dc hcxcnfi ccnotno in ‘ .inched riviin dcfcvri{ixi cXccdf1 dedi-Slyf erii d &; d}fbnlci % ix~> Mustrhenut Cn~. itiver (^Jtcmcnf cyffcruufferuop.dt Giffeut—ico anrairDcnmltard nepo.fdwX&tipUcXbcnedicnarie. trntntanur bnuf dikcnonifdtrtgmi. qutafwi^x-b^opmiimtrntc-lTOgtanna-reptufodtfiaTKcfrr fjmtnu do mcnhcafciarzu efhnuin. ficneg- cerri ixcnc c^nuxtinuvClx^jrvi^dihgml aplanm' 4c4tc iiuhr un yvrfcnnX (xoytam. cucpnlit acfaliraritetKw.ru enX4gt ^ are; r^4cpuminwi4*trwtM^ptviyc-Ti>rrumtf<«^tufl&rumtIv (ffi.iiivXiyUfycdldtirutntM umiftfc Adummo ttfreoa .«r. c? p that there were three different persons :—(1) Bernard of Chartres (d. c. 1126-30); (2) B. Silvester of Tours {Ji. 1145-53); and (3) B. of Moelan, bp of Quimper (d. 1167). C. V. Langlois, Bibl. de Vecole des chartes , 1893, 237-50, still identifies (1) and (2). Haureau’s date for the death of (1), ‘soon after 1141 \ is corrected by Clerval, Pcoles, 1895, 158 f. 3 Haureau, Mem. 1884, 99. Bernard’s Snmma Dictaminum, a manual of instruction in writing Latin letters, was composed in verse, probably at Tours, in or after 1153. It was abridged in prose by a canon of Meung (Langlois, l. c. 225-37). XXVIII.] BERNARD SILVESTER OF TOURS. 51 Bernard was a scholar of a musing, meditative type, who, in hil two short books On the Universe (entitled the Megacostnus and the’ Microcosmus respectively) 1 supplies us with a work on philosophical Mythology, mainly founded on the Timaeus , and written in a somewhat pagan spirit. Like the Co?isolatio of Boethius, it consists of prose varied with verse. The prose, is concise and obscure, while the verse is vigorous, and is suggestive of a wide knowledge of the classical poets. Most of the nine poems are in elegiacs, and only one in hexameters. Notwithstanding an able writer’s opinion that the model of the author of these poems was Lucretius 2 , they supply no certain proof of any knowledge of that poet; the rhythm of the hexameters is clearly that of Lucan, while the vocabulary is mainly that of Ovid 3 . The work was ranked by Eberhard of Bethune 4 next to the Consolatio of Boethius and the Satyricon of Martianus Capella. Its author is characterised by Gervase of Tilbury as egregius , both as a ‘versifier ’ and as a ‘ philosopher ’ 5 . Bernard also wrote an allegorical com¬ mentary on the first half of the Aeneid 6 , as well as an exposition of the Eclogues of Theodulus, and a prose and verse rendering of 1 De Mundi Universitate , ed. Barach and Wrobel (Innsbruck, 1876). 2 Poole, 118, 219 n. 3 My opinion is confirmed by that of Mr J. D. Duff, who, after examining the whole work at my request, has noted reminiscences of Ovid, Met. i 85 (p. 55, 1 . 30) and Am. i 5, 21 f (p. 69, 1 . 3); also of Juvenal, iii 203 f (p. 16, 1 .41) and v 23 (p. 17, 1 . 68). In the verse, he finds no certain trace of Lucretius, but he notices an apparent parallel to Lucr. iii 19 fin the following passage of the prose (p. 36 f) :—‘Anastros in caelo regio est...indefecto lumine, serenitate perpetua...Ea igitur...non densatur pluviis, non procellis incutitur nec nubilo turbidatur’. Here, however, I have no doubt that, while Anastros comes from Mart. Capella, viii § 814, the rest is derived from Apuleius, De Mtcndo, c. 33 (translated from the Pseudo-Aristotelian De Mundo, c. vi p. 400):—(’'OAiYnros) ‘ neque caliginem nubium recipit vel pruinas et nives sustinet; nec pulsatur ventis nec imbribus caeditur ’. Then follows in Apuleius, as in ‘ Aristotle ’, a quotation of Homer, Od. vi 42-5, the original source of Lucr. iii 19 f. 4 Lab. iii 85 p. 830 Leyser. 5 Otia imp. in Leibnitz, Scr. Rer. Brwisw. (1707) i 888, 975. 6 Specimens of this, and the Megacosmus and Microcosmus in Cousin, Frag. Phil, ii 265—291, cp. 134—142, ed. 1855 etc. Cp. Haureau, i 407 f; Prantl, ii 126 2 . The Megacosmus, c. iii 11 . 37—48, is imitated by Chaucer, Cant. Tales, 4617. 33—2 16 BERNARD SILVESTER OF TOURS. [CHAP. XXVIII. .n Arabic treatise on astrology, probably translated for him by Hermann the Dalmatian 1 . A treatise on the astrolabe in the library at Chartres is dedicated by Hermann to one B., who is probably Bernard Silvester 2 , sometimes erroneously identified with his earlier contemporary Bernard of Chartres. 1 Experi mentar ins Bernardi , sive Bernard ini, Silvestris ; Bodl. MSS, Digby 46 and Ashmole 304 (Langlois, /. c. 248 f). On examining the Pepys MS 911, De Virtute Planetarum . in Magdalene Coll., Cambridge, I find that this is another copy of the Experimentarius. 2 Clerval, Hermann le Dalmate, 1891, p. 11. C Vo) pmtnn aMdbens a&md&u fhtdumim cattfrirngtafTcm m gatuas anno atrb pqttamtUidfs wp attglomm lrnmais lea raftiae retype,/ / ceflir bmnattia.'&matlt/ me- t' /ixann patatmmn tjutmnc-m monte fif^nouefodarus hocroiiaintmabi' /Its otntufy pftdetan.jin aDptbes tins pm& arm imttisniBtttka accept .qp modulo / luraboie misuocutmts arahttaob mtptebam.fteth p dtfaf&tm eras cpti m fpropns tttftis magiftro From the ms of John of Salisbury’s Metalogicus etc. in the Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. This copy once belonged to Becket, Sancti Thome archiepiscopi having been erased on the flyleaf (see M. R. James, quoted on p. 518 n. 3 infra). In the above extract from Met. ii 10, the Leo Jtistitiae is Henry I (d. 1135), and the Peripateticus Palatinus, Abelard (b. at Palatium, Le Pallet, near Nantes). c THE TWEL The narrow scholas John of Salisbury (n to Paris, where he atte Logic, as well as those Alberic of Rheims and Hereford). Both of tinguished themselves the great foundation of the ancients ’ *. After he studied * Grammar celebrated ‘grammarian also studied the Quadri Theology under Gilbert to Paris for a course subjects of mediaeval very different to the mechai century 4 . After spending to England, became Canterbury, Theobald sent to France and Italy the central figure of Englis 1 Met. ii io (cxcix 867 a The place has been p. 22. 3 Among his other teachers German, Petrus Elias and 4 Rashdall, i 64. 6 Stubbs, Lectures, Lect [CHAP. V ncipal works are his his Policraticus 1 (with the same name as his : 2 . The Policraticus Both of them were led by his chancellor, ise. In the Policraticus , edia of the cultivated tury’ 4 , we have an in¬ ti rical account of the len the writer went to Schoolmen busy with new opinion on genera which they had been of Aristotle 6 . The ndantly illustrated in his of ‘Grammar’, or a while, in defending an it is useless in itself, the other arts 8 . He arguments against the own, and regards him meets the attacks of a the opponent of Virgil poet), and, under the hilosophorum (vii, viii). printed until 1868 (Mon. xx among the Parker MSS at James, A bp Parker's MSS, sic si sola fuerit, jacet ex- cum adjunctarum virtute XXIX.] THE SCHOOL OF CHARTRES. 519 title of Cornificiani, satirises the narrow-minded specialists in Logic who despised literature, and describes by way of contrast the system of literary instruction which prevailed in the School of Chartres. Early in the eleventh 0 f^haftres 01 century the cathedral school of that city had been famous under Fulbert (d. 1029), as a home of sacred learning; and learning continued to be represented there in the person of Lanfranc’s pupil, the great lawyer, bishop Ivo (d. 1115). Soon after the death of Ivo the School rose once more into fame under Bernard (1119-26) and his brother Theodoric (1141 f), canons and chancellors of Chartres. In John of Salisbury’s day (1138), William of Conches and Richard l’Eveque continued to perpetuate the teaching of Bernard, and thus carried on a sound and healthy tradition \ In that School the study of ‘ figures of speech ’ was treated as merely introductory to that of the classical texts, which were explained not only on grammatical but also on general principles, the different excellences of prose and verse being pointed out, and emphasis laid on the sense as well as the style of the author studied. The pupils wrote daily exercises in prose and verse, founded on the best models only 1 2 , and corrected one another’s compositions, besides learning passages by heart and holding discussions on a set subject. The general method of the School was founded on the scheme of education laid down by Quintilian 3 . John of Salisbury, the ripest product of this School, stands out as the most learned man of his time. He gives an analysis of the whole series of Aristotle’s treatises on Logic 4 . His Meta- logicus (1159) is, in fact, the first work of the Middle Ages, in which the whole of the Organon is turned to account 5 , and Aristotle’s own criticisms on Plato’s doctrine of Ideas applied to 1 Bernard belongs to a former generation, having probably died before 1130; Met. i 24, Sequebatur hunc morem Bernardus Carnotensis...Ad hujus magistri formam praeceptores mei etc. ; Pol. vii 13 senex Carnotensis. 2 Met. i 24, ea sufficere quae a Claris auctoribus scripta sunt. 3 Met. 1 . c. ; cp. Schaarschmidt, 65 f, 73!, 8-2 f ; Norden, Kunstprosa , 715—9; Poole, 113—124; Rashdall, i 65 f; Clerval, 223—232. 4 Alet. iii—iv. 5 The same ground is apparently traversed less completely in the Eptateuchon of Theodoric ( c. 1141), where the Later Analytics is omitted ; p. 513 supra. 520 JOHN OF SALISBURY. [CHAP. the scholastic controversy on universals 1 . He is familiar not only with the Boethian translations but also with certain new render¬ ings 2 . He laments the obscurity of the translation of the Later Analytics 3 , and the long neglect of the Topics 4 . He has studied certain parts of the Organon with a learned Greek 5 (possibly during his stay of three months with Hadrian IV at Beneventum 6 ); but he never professes to have read any Greek work without such assistance; he derives Analytica from ava and Ae£is 7 ; and he never quotes from any Greek author unless that author exists in a Latin translation. In the Metalogicus he mentions Boethius as often as Aristotle, and borrows from Boethius the explanations of all the Greek terms of Grammar or Logic that he uses 8 . He asks his former teacher, Richard ‘ l’Eveque now archdeacon of Coutances, for transcripts of any of Aristotle’s works (to be executed at his own expense), and for explanations of difficult passages 9 ; and his correspondence with John the Saracen shows that he was ignorant of Greek 10 . And yet, though he is opposed to Plato’s teaching, and is only acquainted with the incomplete translation of the Timaeus by Chalcidius and a few traditional passages from the Republic, he is so conscious of Plato’s greatness as to declare that, on the day when Plato, the first of philosophers, passed away, it seemed as though the sun itself had vanished from the heavens 11 . He repeatedly supports the Scriptures by citations from Latin authors, but he warns us not to allow authority (as represented by the Classics) to do prejudice to reason (or the mental faculty enlightened by Christianity) 12 . He praises the method of instruction pursued (as we have seen) by Bernard of Chartres, whom he describes as £ in modern times, the 1 Met. ii 20. 2 Ep. 211 and Met. ii 20 (the nova translatio has the more literal cicadationes instead of monstra in the rendering of TepeTioixara in Anal. Post, i 22, 4). See also Prantl, ii 2 108 n. 34, and Rose in Hermes , i 383. 3 Met. iv 6. 4 Met. iii 5; Prantl, ii 2 106. 5 Met. i 15 ; iii 5 ; p. 508 n. r supra. 6 Pol. vi 24. 7 Met. iv 2; Analetica in text, and Analectica in summary, of Corpus MS. 8 Jourdain, Recherches, 254 f; cp. Schaarschmidt, 113. 9 Ep. 211 (Schaarschmidt, 264). 10 Epp. 149, 169. 12 Pol. vii 10 (Poole, 219). 11 Pol. vii 6 (init.); Haureau, i 540. XXIX.] HIS CLASSICAL LEARNING. 521 most abounding spring of letters in Gaul’ 1 . That method began with Donatus and Priscian, and included Cicero and Quintilian, and the poets and historians of Rome. He himself quotes, in varying degrees of frequency, poets such as Terence, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Lucan, Statius, Persius, Martial, Juvenal and Claudian, as well as the apocryphal play called the Querolus 2 , 9 but he knows nothing of the genuine plays of Plautus, or of Lucretius; and he cites Catullus only once 3 . He quotes the historians Sallust, Suetonius, Justin and Valerius Maximus, but he makes the strange mistake of implying that Suetonius and Tranquillus were two different persons 4 . He has only one refer¬ ence to Livy 5 ; Caesar and Tacitus he knows by name alone, but he is familiar with Seneca and Petronius, Quintilian and the elder Pliny, and he even quotes the younger Pliny’s Panegyric 6 . He owes much of his classical lore to Gellius and Macrobius and the Latin Grammarians, and he has an extensive knowledge of Apuleius. But his favourite Latin author is Cicero. Though he only quotes the Speeches once 7 , he knows the Epistolae ad Fa- miliares, and is thoroughly acquainted with the philosophical works. He is supposed to have possessed the De Republica* , but all his references to that lost work are to passages already quoted by St Augustine. He says of Cicero: orbis nil habuit mains Cicerone Latinus 9 , and the purity of his own Latin prose has justly been praised by modern critics 10 . Among the mss that he bequeathed to the Library at Chartres were the De Officiis and De Oratore of Cicero, and the Quaestiones Naturales of Seneca 11 . The only Latin work known to him, which has since been lost, is that of an interlocutor in Macrobius,—Virius Nicomachus 1 Met. i 24. 2 Probably written in Gaul in cent, iv—v; Teuffel, § 421®; Schaarschmidt, 101; Norden’s Kunstprosa, 630. 3 xiv 9 in Met. i 24. 4 Pol. viii 18 ad fin. 5 Pol. iii 10, scriptor belli Punici. 6 Pol. iii 14, ‘ Caecilius Balbus’. 7 Pol. viii 7 ( i pro Ligario , 12). 8 Heeren, i 251. 9 Enth. 1215. 10 Ap. Hallam Lit. i 74“*; cp. Poole, 123; Rashdall, i 67. 11 Migne, cxcix col. xii. 522 PETER OF BLOIS. [CHAP. Peter of Blois Flavianus (d. 394), de vestigiis sive dogmate philosophorum, and he borrows the first part of this description in the full title of his Policraticus, and the second in that of his Entheticus \ In all the Latin literature that was accessible to him, he is obviously the best-read scholar of his age 1 2 . Peter of Blois (c. 1135 - 1204 ), who settled in England about 1173 as secretary to the archbishop of Canterbury, and became archdeacon of Bath and London, and secretary to Henry II, urges the importance of a literary training for a future king and assures the archbishop of Palermo that ‘ with the king of England there is school every day, constant conversation of the best scholars ’ 3 . In the 243 letters written by him for Henry II, it is quite exceptional to find one which contains no quotations from the Classics. Besides the poets, he quotes Cicero (with the exception of the Speeches\ Sallust, Livy, Curtius, Seneca’s Letters , Quintilian, Tacitus and Suetonius. His Latin prose is more ambitious than that of the other writers of the twelfth century 4 5 . His younger contemporary, the keen and active Norman- Welshman, Giraldus Cambrensis (1147— c. 1222 ), born at Manorbeer Castle in Pembrokeshire, studied from time to time in Paris until 1180, attended Prince John on his expedition to Ireland in 1185, and described its conquest by Henry II in a historical work, in which he aims at a style that is simple and easy, and absolutely free from all pedantry. ‘ Is it not better (as Seneca says) to be dumb than to speak so as not to be understood? 55 To the Irish chiefs he here assigns Greek patronymics, and makes them deliver set speeches garnished with quotations from Caesar and Ovid. He Giraldus Cambrensis 1 Schaarschmidt, 103—7. 2 Stubbs, Lectures, Lect. vii, 153 1 . Cp., in general, Schaarschmidt in Rheinisches Museum xix (1859) 200 and esp. Johannes Saresberiensis, nach Leben u. Studien, Schriften u. Philosophie (1862) ; Jourdain, Recherches 247 — 256; Prantl, Logik, ii 2 234—260; Haureau, i 533 f; R. L. Poole, Medieval Thought, 201—225; and the literature quoted in these works. 3 Stubbs, Lectures, 119 1 . 4 Opera in Migne, ccvii; cp. Norden, 717-9, and Clerval, Lcoles de Chartres, 293 f. 5 Vol. v 208 (in Rolls Series); H. Morley, English Writers, iii 76. XXIX.] GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS. 523 also wrote works of the highest interest on the topography of Ireland and Wales 1 , reviving an ancient classical custom by reciting the first of these during three memorable days of public entertainment at Oxford (1187) 2 . He was an ardent reformer of ecclesiastical abuses in his native land, and his great disappoint¬ ment in life was that he never became (like his uncle) bishop of St David’s. But his studies were never intermitted 3 , and he dwells with special interest on a description of his book-case 4 . His later writings teem with classical quotations. In his work De Principis Instructions (finished about 1217), with the exception of Lucretius and Tacitus, there is hardly any notable author between Terence and Boethius whom he does not cite. In the preface he gives us extracts from Cicero and Pliny in praise of a quiet and studious life 5 ; while, in the body of the book, he illustrates the virtue of patience by nine quotations 6 , and the modesty of princes by seventeen 7 . In the prologue to one of his latest works, the Speculum Ecclesiae (c. 1220), he speaks of the neglect of the Latin poets and philosophers, which had led to barbarism of style and to ignorance of prosody 8 . He also regrets the recent importation from Toledo of certain logical and physical treatises attributed to Aristotle, which he describes as having been lately prohibited in France on the ground of their heretical tendency 9 . The anecdotes in his Gemma Ecclesiastica illustrate the ignorance of Latin which prevailed among the clergy in Wales 10 . The Latin prose of the twelfth century is grammatically correct, and, even in the next two centuries, it ... Latin Prose has not ceased to be a living language. In fact, during the Middle Ages in general, Latin prose never dies out 11 . Among natives of England alone, the writers of historical prose include Florence of Worcester (d. 1118), Ordericus Vitalis, born near Wroxeter to become at Saint-6vroult the ecclesiastical I Vol. v and vi. 2 i 410. 3 iii 336. 4 i 369. 5 viii p. lxiii. 6 ib. 17. 7 ib. 47 f. 8 iv 3, 7 f (note). 9 iv 9 f. See p. 539 infra. 10 On Giraldus, cp. H. Morley, iii 64—82; Hardy, Descr. Cat. (in Rolls Series), 11 xxxii, and the Prefaces to his works by Brewer (vol. iv) and G. F. Warner (vol. viii), in the same Series. II Stubbs, Lectures , Lect. vii, 152—5 1 ; Norden, Kunstprosa , 748-63. 524 LATIN PROSE. [CHAP. historian of England and Normandy, and to die in the same year as William of Malmesbury (c. 1142); also Geoffrey of Monmouth (d. 1154), Henry of Huntingdon (d. c. 1155), William of Newburgh (d. c. 1198), Roger of Hoveden and Ralph de Diceto (d. c. 1201), Gervase of Tilbury (Jt. 1211), Matthew Paris (d. 1259) and Ralph Higden (d. 1364) l . An unnamed Englishman was probably the first collector of the Gesta Romanorum , with its many citations from Ovid, Seneca, Pliny, Valerius Maximus, Macrobius, Gellius and Boethius; the earliest ms belongs to 1326 2 . Meanwhile, in Italy, Latin verse had been successfully applied to historic themes by William of Apulia, a native of France who imitated Virgil in composing (between 1099 and mi) his epic poem on the Norman conquest of Southern Italy and the victorious career of Robert Guiscard (d. 1085) 3 ; and by other poets of Como, Bergamo, Pisa, Eboli and Parma between 1088 and 1247 4 . The Tale of Troy was the theme of Guido delle Colonne of Messina (end of cent. xm) 5 6 . The moralising type of verse, which was so dear to the Middle Ages, had, in the meantime, been represented in Italy by Henricus Septimellensis (fl. 1191), who imitates Boethius in his allegorical poem De diversitate Fortunae et Philosophiae consolatione 535 - 2 P- 5 i 9 ' 3 Jourdain, Recherches, 96. Cp. Rashdall’s Universities, i 81 ; and Steinschneider in Virchczv's Archiv, B. 37—39, Constantinus Africanus u. seine arabischen Quellen\ also F. Wiistenfeld in Gottingen Abhandl. xxii 2, 1877 (Die Uebersetzungen Arabischer Werke in das Lateinische, pp. 133), 10—20. ‘Constantyn’ is named with ‘old Ypocras’ and ‘Galien’ in Chaucer’s Prologue, 433. 540 GONDISAI.VI. GERARD OF CREMONA. [CHAP. Gerard of Cremona and by the command of Raymund, archbishop of Toledo (c. 1130— 1150) 1 . Gerard of Cremona, the elder (d. 1187), was attracted to Toledo by his interest in Ptolemy’s A/magest , which he translated in 1175. Among the more than 70 other works, which he rendered from Arabic , into Latin, were Aristotle’s Analytica Posteriora , Physics, De Caelo et Mundo , De Generatione et Corruptione and Meteorologica, as well as the Pseudo-Aristotelian De Causis s . The thirteenth century witnessed a still further and far more important extension in the knowledge of the works of Aristotle. For this extension the Schoolmen were indebted, on the one hand, to the Arabs and Jews in the West, and on the other, either directly or indirectly, to the Greeks in the East. Aristotle had long been studied in Syria and Arabia 3 ; and the knowledge of his writings, which had passed from Constantinople to the East, had subsequently followed the course of Arab conquest along the Northern coast of Africa, till it reached the West in Spain, and thence found its way into France; but the Arabic translations executed at Bagdad in the first half of the ninth century did not reach Paris in their Latin form until after the middle of the twelfth. 1 Jourdain, 112 f. In the preface to the Latin version of Avicenna’s Arabic treatise De Anima , ‘J oannes Avendehut ’ (i .z. Joannes Hispalensis), writing to the abp of Toledo, describes it as ‘ hunc librum vobis praecipientibus, et me singula verba vulgaritcr proferente, et Dominico Archidiacono singula in Latinum convertente, ex Arabico translatum ib. 449; cp. 151, 217. Gondisalvi also translated the De Caelo , Physics and Metaphysics of Avicenna (Brown, Michael Scot, pp. 236, 238), and the ‘Logic and Philosophy’ of Algazel (Ueberweg, i 407). Joannes Hispalensis was the translator of the De differentia spiritus et animae of Costa ben Luca, a Christian philosopher and physician of Baalbek (864—923), who brought Creek mss into Syria and translated Greek works at Bagdad (Barach, Bibl. Philos. Med. Aet. ii 118). Cp. Wustenfeld, Gottingen Abhandl. 25—39. The translation of the Koran promoted by Peter the Venerable (d. 1156) was executed in Spain in 1141-3 by Robertus Retinensis, an Englishman who ended his days as archdeacon of Pampeluna. He was probably aided by Hermann the Dalmatian and ‘Master Peter of Toledo’ (Brown, 119; cp. Migne, clxxxix 14, 659; Wustenfeld, 44—50). Rodolfus Brugensis, who translated Ptolemy’s Planisphere at Toulouse in 1144, was a pupil of Hermann, and Robertus Retinensis was a younger friend of the latter (WUstenfeld, 48—53). 2 Wustenfeld, Gottingen Abhandl. 58, 66 f. 3 P- 385 supra. XXX.] AVEMPACE. AVERROES. 541 The Arabian philosophy was a form of Aristotelianism blended with Neo-Platonism. In the twelfth century its . . . . . Avempace principal representatives in Spain were Avempace (d. 1138) and Averroes (d. 1198). Avempace, who wrote a number of logical treatises at Seville (c. 1118), and afterwards lived at Granada and in Africa, left behind him commentaries on the Physics, the Meteorologica and other physical works of Aristotle. Averroes, who was born at Cordova Averroes (1126), became a judge at Seville and Cordova, and (in 1163) was recommended to the Calif as the fittest person to expound the works of Aristotle and make them accessible to all 1 . He was physician to the Calif and to his successor, Almansur, by whom he was banished in 1195, the study of Greek philosophy having already been forbidden in the Moorish dominions in Spain. In 1198 he died, and, not long after, the Moors were defeated on the uplands of Tolosa (1212), subsequently losing Cordova in 1236 and Seville in 1244. The Arabian philosophy was soon extinguished in Spain and elsewhere, and the interest in Aristotelianism transferred from the Moslems to the Christians. Averroes, whose reverence for Aristotle even exceeded that of his Eastern exponent, Avicenna, regarded the Greek philosopher as ‘the only man whom God had permitted to attain the highest summit of perfection’, and as ‘the founder and perfecter of scientific knowledge’ 2 . His services to Aristotle were threefold. He prepared (1) short paraphrases reproducing Aristotle’s own opinions in strictly systematic order; (2) inter¬ mediate commentaries ; and (3) complete expositions (these last being of later date than the others). All these three types are extant in the case of the Analytica Posteriora , the Physics , the De Caelo, De Anima and Metaphysics; (1) and (2) alone in that of Porphyry’s Introduction, the Categories, De Interpretations, Analytica Prior a, Topica, Sophistici Elenchi, Rhetoric, Poetic, De Generatione et Corruptione, and Meteorologica ; (1) alone in that of the Parva Naturalia, the De Partibus Animalium and De Generatione Animalium; while only (2) was ever written on the Ethics. We have no comments of his on the Historia Animalium 1 Abd-el-Wahid ap. Renan, Averroes, 17 4 . 2 Renan, l.c., 54* f. 542 AVICEBRON. MAIMONIDES. DANIEL DE MORLAI. [CHAP. or the Politics. The former had already been abridged by Avicenna, and it is doubtful whether the latter was ever translated into Arabic at all. Averroes knew neither Greek nor Syriac, but he studied Aristotle in Arabic translations of Syriac versions of the original Greek, and the printed editions of his commentaries reach us in a Latin rendering of a Hebrew version of his own Arabic 1 . His later reputation was twofold. He was the great Commentator, who was imitated by Thomas Aquinas; and the great heretic , who was refuted by him 2 . The Jewish philosophy of the Middle Ages included Alexandrian and Neo-Platonic elements. Neo-Platonic as well as Aristotelian influence is represented by the Spanish Jew, Solomon Ibn Gebirol (c. 1020—1070), who wrote in Arabic and has been identified as the philosopher known to the Schoolmen as Avicebron. His arguments assume the Neo-Platonic theory of the real existence of all that is apprehended by means of universal concepts. He was not acquainted with Plotinus, but probably derived his Neo-Platonic views from Arabic translations of Proclus and of works erroneously ascribed to Empedocles, Pythagoras and Aristotle. The recon¬ ciliation of Aristotelian philosophy with Jewish theology was the aim of Abraham ben David of Toledo (c. 1150), and of Moses Maimonides of Cordova (1135-1204), who assigns Maimonides . .. . , ... .. to Aristotle an unlimited authority in all secular knowledge. The commentaries on Porphyry’s Introduction and on Aristotle’s Categories and De Interpretatione by Levi ben Gerson (1288—1344) are printed in a Latin rendering in the old Latin editions of Aristotle. Their author lived in the South of France. The Arabs and the Jews did great service by inspiring the students of the West with a new enthusiasm for learning. It was through learned Jews, acquainted with Latin as well as Arabic, that Arabic renderings of Aristotle were translated into Latin and thus came to the knowledge of the Schoolmen, and these translations owed their popularity to the fact that they were not only literal but were also accompanied by explanations of obscurities in the original 3 . 1 Renan, l.c., 52*. 2 See plate opp. p. 560. 3 Jourdain, Recherches , 16. XXX.] TRANSLATORS FROM THE ARABIC. 543 Daniel de Morlai It will - be remembered that the centre of attraction for all translators from the Arabic in this age was Toledo 1 . Shortly before 1200, an Englishman named Daniel de Morlai (of Morley, near Norwich), discontented with the dull traditional teaching of the doctors of Paris {c. 1170—1190), went to study under the Arabs at Toledo and came back to England ‘with a number of precious mss’ 2 , being warmly welcomed on his return by John of Oxford, bishop of Norwich, who was specially interested in astronomy. He had at first hesitated to return on hearing that in England ‘there was no liberal education, and that, to make way for Titius and Seius, Aristotle and Plato were forgotten’; and he was afraid lest he should be ‘the only Greek among the Romans’ 3 . His only extant work is on the teaching of the Arabians as to the earth and as to the orbs of heaven. Among the translators from the Arabic in centuries xn and xm were Gerard of Translators Cremona, Michael Scot, Hermann the German, from the • t ^Vi*cifoic and Alfred the Englishman. The earliest of these, Gerard of Cremona 4 , translated the Almagest of Ptolemy 5 , and 1 P* 539 * 2 cum pretiosa multitudine librorum. 3 Pref. to De Naturis Inferiorum et Superiorum, Arundel MS 377 f, printed by Prof. Holland in Oxford Hist. Soc., Collectanea , ii 171 f; cp. H. Morley’s English Writers, iii 187; Rashdall, i 323, ii 338; F. A. Gasquet, Dublin Rev., 1898, 359. 4 Roger Bacon, Comp. Phil. 471. Tiraboschi, iii 192, 381, and Bon- compagni, Vita di Gherardo Cremonense (1851), distinguish between Gerard the elder, who, according to the Chronicle of Francesco Pipino, died in 1187, and Gerard the younger (di Sabbionetta, S.E. of Cremona), an older con¬ temporary of Hermann the German (Hermann was still alive in 1271). Guido Bonatti, cent, xm (Boncompagni, p. 65), describes as his own contemporaries Michael Scotus, and ‘ Girardus de Sabloneto Cremonensis ’. But the difficul¬ ties as to the two Gerards are not yet entirely removed. In Boncompagni’s work Gerard the elder is identified with the translator, and Gerard the younger is an astronomer, wdiereas the latter alone (whom Roger Bacon describes as a translator) could have been a contemporary of Hermann. Possibly there is a mistake in Pipino’s date for the death of Gerard the elder, but that date is repeated in several MSS of his Life and is consistent with the date of his translation of the Almagest (1175). Accordingly, it appears more probable that, in Compend. Philos, c. 10, Roger Bacon confounded the ‘ older contem¬ porary of Hermann ’ with the translator of cent. XII. 5 Charles, Roger Bacon, 331. 544 MICHAEL SCOT. [CHAP. certain works of Galen, Hippocrates and Avicenna 1 . His translations were executed at Toledo 2 . The next, Michael Scot . . Michael Scot, is said to have studied at Oxford 3 , and is traditionally associated with Bologna 4 . He was certainly a student at Paris, and probably learned Arabic at Palermo before 1209 5 . He there lived at the brilliant court of Frederic II, the youthful King of Sicily, to whom he dedicated three of his earliest works. On the marriage of Frederic to the elder daughter of the King of Aragon (1209), he apparently left for Toledo and there completed a rendering of two Arabic abstracts of Aristotle’s Historia Animalium , (1) De Animalibus ad Caesarem 6 , and (2) Abbreviate Avicennae. The latter was dedicated to Frederic as ‘Emperor of the Romans and Lord of the World’. As Frederic was not crowned Emperor at Aachen until 1215, it is impossible to assign the second version to any earlier date 7 . In 1217 Michael produced a translation of Alpetraugi’s Arabic treatise on the Sphere 8 . Between that date and his return to the imperial court in 1223, he translated the commentaries of Averroes on the De Caelo and the De Anima of Aristotle. The versions of the other commentaries of Averroes contained in the same mss as the above were doubtless the work of the Toledo School of translators, and the renderings of the commentaries on the Physics and Metaphysics may well be assigned to Michael 1 Dr J. F. Payne, in Rashdall, ii 780-2. For his translations from Arabic versions of Aristotle, see p. 540 supra. 2 e.g. Vatican MS 2089, p. 307 v, incipit sextus de naturalibus auicenae translatus a magistro Girardo cremonensi de arabico in latinum in toleto (J. Wood Brown, Michael Scot , p. 238). 3 Jourdain, Recherches, 125. 4 Boccaccio, Dec. viii 9. 5 J. Wood Brown, p. 24. 6 Caius Coll, ms 109 (178) fol. 9-107. Wiistenfeld, Gott. Abhandl. 102-6, holds that Michael Scot translated from a Hebrew rendering of Avicenna’s Arabic abstract of the Hist. An. 7 Mr J. Wood Brown (p. 55) assigns it to 1210, and so reads the colophon of Vat. ms 4428, p. 158; but in his own facsimile (opposite p. 55) I notice a straggling v above the end of M 0 c 0 c°x. 8 Jourdain, 133; Renan, 208 4 ; Brown, 99—105. The author flourished c. 1190 and was a pupil of Abubacer. His name, which is spelt in several different ways, is really Ibn el-Bitraugi (from Petroches, N. of Cordova). y*’*’ «*••/ y'<* Christ in Glory St Luke St Matthew St Paul v "‘" Moses St John St Mark St Thomas Aquinas Aristotle . .. - Plato Averroes Altar-piece by Traini (1345), in the Church of S. Caterina, Pisa. Reduced from Rosini’s Pittura Italiana, tav. xx. XXX.] FREDERIC THE SECOND. 545 Scot, who is attacked by Albertus Magnus 1 for a digression on the part of Averroes stating the opinions of Nicholas the Peripatetic 2 . Frederic II was crowned at Rome in 1220, and Michael Scot was at Bologna on 21 Oct., 1221 3 , and had apparently returned to the imperial court at Palermo by 1223. He was highly esteemed as an astrologer and a physician. He was even recommended for ecclesiastical preferment in England by Honorius III (1224 4 ) and Gregory IX (1227 5 ), the latter attesting his proficiency in Arabic and Hebrew, but saying nothing as to any knowledge of Greek. Roger Bacon who, on the authority of Hermann the German, says that Scot was ignorant of languages, and adds that he was largely aided by a learned Jew, named Andreas 6 , describes him as introducing to the scholars of the West certain of the physical and mathematical (?) works of Aristotle, with the commentators on the same. Trans¬ lations from the Arabic are doubtless meant, and the date of their introduction is ‘after 1230’ 7 . In 1232 the emperor granted special permission for the transcription of Michael Scot’s Abbreviatio Avicennae , the second of the two works in which Scot had dealt with Aristotle’s Historia Animalium 8 . It was 1 Op. ii 140. 2 Haureau, i 470; Renan, 209 4 ; Brown, 127. The other commentaries of Averroes in the Venice MS are those on the Meteorological De Gen. et Corr., Parva Naturalia , and the apocryphal De Causis ; also the original work De Substantia Orbis (Jourdain, 128—130; Brown, 132). In the St Victor MS the Parva Nat. is ascribed to Gerard of Cremona. 3 Caius Coll. MS 109 (178) fol. 102 k has a transcript of the translator’s note to the De Animalibus ad Caesarem\ —‘ et iuro ego Michael Scotus qui dedi hunc librum latinitati quod in anno M°CC°XX°i, xii Ival. Novembr. die Mercurii accessit nobilior domina totius civitatis hononiensis (sic), quae erat hospita mea &c ’ (a new and definite date in Scot’s career, communicated by Dr M. R. James). 4 Chartul. Univ. Paris , i 105. 5 ib. 110. 6 Comp. Phil. 472. 7 Op. Map. 36 f, tempore Michaelis Scoti, qui annis 1230 transactis apparuit deferens librorum Aristotelis partes aliquas de naturalibus et mathematicis cum expositoribus sapientioribus, magnificata est Aristotelis philosophia apud Latinos. Cp. Jourdain, 128 f. Bridges, iii 66, has ‘de Naturalibus et Metaphysicis (Bodl. ms) cum expositionibus authenticis ’. 8 Brown, 178. S. 35 546 HERMANN THE GERMAN. [CHAP. apparently not long after 1232 that Frederic II sent to the universities of Bologna and Paris the translations he had caused to be made from the Greek and Arabic mss of the ‘works of Aristotle and other philosophers relating to Mathematics and Logic,’ which were contained in the imperial library 1 . Copies of the emperor’s letters addressed to Bologna 2 and Paris 3 have come down to us, and it is possible that they were delivered by Michael Scot himself, who may also have visited Oxford. He died before 1235 4 , and tradition places his burial, as well as his birth, in the lowlands of Scotland. With his fame as an alchemist, astrologer and necromancer we are not here concerned. His reputed skill in magic has been celebrated by Dante 5 , Boccaccio 6 and Walter Scott 7 . Hermann the German completed at Toledo in 1240 8 his translation of the intermediate commentary of Averroes on the Ethics , and, at some other date, a translation of an Arabic abridgement of the Ethics (possibly the work of Averroes). His work on the Rhetoric consisted simply of the glosses of Alfarabi, while that on the Poetic was merely the abridgement by Averroes 9 . It was only in this form that Aristotle’s treatise on Poetry was known to the Middle Ages. These slight works on the Rhetoric and Poetic bear the date of Toledo, 1256. Frederic II had died in 1250, Hermann the German 1 Jourdain, 154 f, 163 f. Prantl ( Logik , iii 5) assigns this to 1220. It is contended that Frederic would more probably have communicated with Bo¬ logna and Paris before founding his own university at Naples (1224) than after. 2 Petrus de Vineis, Epp . iii 67 (vol. i p. 432 ed. Iselius, 1740). 3 Chartul. i 435 (in the name of Manfred); cp. Brown, 174. 4 Henri d’Avranches, quoted by Brown, p. 176. The date of the treatise ‘written for Manfred in 1256’ may be that of the Spanish era, corresponding to 1218, and may refer to a work written for Frederic II in 1218, and after¬ wards copied for Manfred {Eng. Hist. Rev ., 1898, p. 349). 5 Inf. xx 115-7. 6 Dec . viii 9. 7 Notes 2 c— e on The Lay. 8 MS Laur. lxxix 18. 9 Printed at Venice, 1481, and included in the Venice Aristotle of 1560. Cp. Roger Bacon, Op. Maj. 59, Comp. Phil. 473; Jourdain, 139—144; Charles, Roger Bacon , 122 note 1, and 329; Wiistenfeld, Gottingen Abhandl. 91-6. XXX.] ALFRED THE ENGLISHMAN. 547 and the date of 1256 is in agreement with the fact that Roger Bacon, writing in 1267 1 , describes Hermann as a translator in the service of ‘Manfred, recently conquered by king Charles’ of Anjou (1266) 2 . Some mss of the above-mentioned Letter to the Universities bear the name of Manfred 3 , who may have re-issued his father’s Letter, with presentation copies of the translations made in his own time. A translation of the Magna Moralia was dedicated to Manfred by Bartholomew of Messina 4 . The last of these translators from the Arabic is Alfred the Englishman (fl. 1215-70), chaplain to Cardinal Ottoboni in Rome and papal legate to England Englishman under Henry IIP. He quotes Arabic writers and apparently knew no Greek 6 . He produced a Latin translation of the Arabic version of the Pseudo-Aristotelian De P/antis\ with a short supplementary comment on the same, in the course of which he quotes the De generatione et corruptione, the Meteorologica, De Anima and Analytica Posteriora 8 . He also appears to have revised the first translation of the Meteorologica and to have inter¬ polated that translation with additions of his own. This is stated by Roger Bacon 9 , who had a very low opinion of all these translators from the Arabic, including ‘ William the Fleming ’, to whom we shall return at a later point 10 . While the knowledge of Aristotle had thus been reaching the scholars of the West through the circuitous route of translations from the Arabic, the Latin conquest of Constantinople in 1204 had opened to those scholars the prospect of a direct access to the stores of Greek learning. The conquerors themselves regarded that learning with contempt, but the natural result of their con- 1 Op. Tertium , p. 91. 2 Renan, Av . 211-5 4 . 3 Cp. Denifle on Chartul. (Jniv. Paris., i 435 (Rashdall, i 359). 4 Tiraboschi, iv 170. 5 Bale, s.v. Alphredus Anglicus, p. 322, ed. 1557; Morley’s Eng. Writers , iii 187. 6 Introd. to Roger Bacon’s Gk. Gr. (1902), p. li, n. 5. 7 p. 536 supra ; quoted by Vincent of Beauvais (1250), Spec. Nat. ix pp. 91-2, ed. 1494 (Wustenfeld, /. c., 87 f.). 8 Barach, Bibl. Philos. Med. Aet. ii n—13, 113. 9 ap. Charles, 372b The ‘first translation’ is presumably that of Gerard of Cremona. 10 pp- 563.569 f - 35—2 548 TRANSLATIONS FROM THE GREEK ARISTOTLE. [CHAP. quest was the dispersion of Greek mss, some of which found their way to the West. The only evidence as to any mss of Aristotle having been brought from Constantinople refers to the Meta- physics\ but the Physics is probably meant. The Schoolmen, no longer satisfied with renderings from the Arabic versions of Aristotle, began to obtain translations taken directly from the Greek. Thus the De Anima was known to William of Auvergne (who became bishop of Paris in 1228 and was still alive in 1248) in a translation from the Greek, before the Schools of Paris had received Michael Scot’s translation either of the Arabic text 2 or the commentary by Averroes. The Rhetoric , the Politics , the first four books of the Nicomachean Ethics, the Magna Moralia , part at least of the Metaphysics , and the Parva Natnralia , were known from the first in Latin translations from the original, but the earliest complete versions of the Ethics and Metaphysics (with those of the Physics, Hist. Animalium, De Caelo and Meteorologica) were from the Arabic 3 . The translations from the Arabic had been often disfigured with Arabic words merely transliterated into Latin, because their meaning was unknown. On the other hand, those from the Greek were, indeed, slavishly literal and not always accurate, but they had at least the advantage of bringing the student one stage nearer to the original. The studies of the Schoolmen were greatly extended and transformed by their wider acquaintance with Aristotle, as well as with the partly Neo- Platonic and partly Aristotelian writings of Arabian and Jewish philosophers. The Neo-Platonic teaching of ‘ Dionysius the Areopagite ’, as represented in the pantheistic doctrine of Joannes Scotus, was revived by Amalrich (of Bena, near Chartres, d. 1207), and his most distinguished follower 4 , David of Dinant. This revival of pantheism was probably stimulated in part by the Aristotelian commentary of Alexander of Aphrodisias (translated by Gerard of Cremona 5 ), and by the pseudo-Aristotelian Liber de Causis 6 . Amalrich was already in his grave when the pantheistic 1 p. 416 supra. 2 Jourdain, 170. 3 Jourdain, 144, 177; cp. Rashdall, i 359f. 4 See, however, Erdmann, i § 192. 5 Jourdain, Recherches , 123 f, and C. Jourdain, Mem. de PAcad. d'Inscr. 26 (1867), 493, 497.' 6 Haureau, 11 i 103 f. XXX.] STUDY OF ARISTOTLE FORBIDDEN. 549 drift of his writings was discovered. As the result of a Council held in Paris in 1210, his doctrines were condemned, his bones disinterred, and ten of his followers burnt alive 1 . At the same time, it was ordered that ‘neither the books of Aristotle on natural philosophy, nor comments on the same, should be read, either privately or publicly’ 2 . It is uncertain whether the ‘books of Aristotle ’ were his own Physics , or one of the Arabic adapta¬ tions of the same, e.g. that of Avicenna or Averroes 3 , or some Pseudo-Aristotelian work, such as the De Causis or the De secretiore Aegyptiorum doctrina 4 . Guillaume le Breton inaccurately reports that it was the metaphysical (probably meaning the physical) writings of Aristotle, recently brought from Constantinople and translated from Greek into Latin, which were burnt and proscribed in 1209 (sic) 5 . In 1215 the Statutes drawn up for the university of Paris by the papal legate order the study of the Aristotelian books on Dialectic, while they forbid the study of the Physics and Metaphysics (the latter being now mentioned for the first time in a public document) 6 7 . Roger Bacon states that the opponents of the study of Aristotle brought against that philo¬ sopher (in connexion with his belief in the eternity of the world) a passage at the end of the De generatione et corruptione 1 . The 1 See the miniature in Lacroix, Vie...Religieuse an Moyen Age , p. 445. 2 Denifle and Chatelain, Chartularium Univ. Paris, i 70, with Denifle’s n., ‘ Inter auctores ante concilium mortuos inveni citatos libros De Metaphysica... Absque dubio erant etiam noti libri Physicorum et forsan De Caelo et Mundo'. See Giraldus Cambr. on p. 522 stcpra. Cp. Haureau, 11 i 101; Ueberweg, i 431; and literature in Rashdall, i 356 n. 3 So Jourdain, Haureau and Denifle. Ce qui reste indubitable (says Renan, 22 1 4 ), c'est que le concile de 1209 [1210] frappa PAristote arabe, traduit de Parabe , explique par les Arabes. 4 Cp. Charles, Roger Bacon, p. 313. 5 p. 416 supra. Cp. Launoy, De varia Aristotelis in acad. Paris, fortuna (1653)* c - 1 5 Jourdain, 187. 6 Chartul. i 78 f, ‘ non legantur libri Aristotelis de inethafisica et de naturali philosophia, nec summae de eisdem’. Cp. Roger Bacon, Opus Majus, p. 14, ‘ temporibus nostris Parisius diu fuit contradictum naturali philosophiae Aris¬ totelis per Avicennae et Averrois expositores, et ob densam ignorantiam fuerunt libri eorum excommunicati ’; Op. Tert. p. 28, and Comp. Theol. (p. 570 infra). 7 ap. Charles, Roger Bacon , 315, note 1. 550 STUDY OF ARISTOTLE ALLOWED. [CHAP. fact that this is one of Aristotle’s works on ‘natural philosophy’ may have led to all his works on that subject being condemned at the same time as the Metaphysics' . In 1220 we vaguely hear of a translation of Aristotle, partly from the Greek, partly from the Arabic, by those who knew both 1 2 3 . From 1228 to 1231, owing to a conflict between the university and the citizens of Paris, the members of the former withdrew to other places. On their return in 1231, Gregory IX directed that ‘the libri naturales ...should not be used until they had been examined and revised’ 3 . This implied a considerable mitigation of the severe sentences passed on the study of Aristotle in 1210 and 1215. Between 1230 and 1240 his reputation was so much enhanced by the introduction of his philosophical (as contrasted with his dialectical ) works, that he was recognised as the ‘prince of philosophers’ 4 . All his works began to be expounded in Paris by the most eminent doctors of the Church, such as Albertus Magnus (1245) and Thomas Aquinas (1257); and, in 1255, even the Physics and Metaphysics were included among the subjects prescribed in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Paris 5 . Meanwhile, the monks had long ceased to be the sole educators of Europe, the line of great monastic teachers having ended with the name of Anselm, who ceased to be abbot of Bee in 1093. A generation later the monasteries began to close their doors against secular students 6 . Even the revival of monasticism and the reforms of the twelfth century were of no permanent avail for the promotion of learning. The control of education passed from the monks and the monastic schools to the secular clergy and the cathedral schools 7 ; and the cathedral 1 Charles, 315. The eternity of the world is also maintained in Physics, viii 1. 2 Jourdain, 7. 3 Chartul. i 138, ‘(magistri artium) libris illis naturalibus qui in concilio provinciali ex certa causa prohibiti fuere, Parisius non utantur, quousque examinati fuerint et ab omni errorum suspitione purgati’; cp. Haureau, II i 108 f. 4 Jourdain, 28. 5 Chartul. i 278. 6 Rashdall, i 42. 7 Cp. Leon Maitre, Les Pcoles episcopates ct Monastiques (768—1180), 1866, esp. p. 169. XXX.] ALEXANDER OF HALES. 551 school of Notre-Dame, which was already famous under William of Champeaux (c. 1100), developed into the university of Paris (c. 1170) 1 . The Order of the Franciscans was founded at Assisi in 1210, and that of the Dominicans at Toulouse in 1215; and both of these Orders, whose centre of activity was in the towns, resolved on establishing themselves at the great seats of education. The Dominicans, who were characterised by a strictly conservative orthodoxy, fixed their head-quarters at Bologna and at Paris (1217), besides forming a settlement at Oxford (1221). The Franciscans, who were generally less highly intellectual than the Dominicans, and less strongly opposed to novel forms of opinion 2 , settled at Oxford and Cambridge in 1224, and at Paris in 1230 3 . A long struggle between both of these Orders and the university of Paris ended in their having certain restricted rights in connexion with that university in 1261 4 . When once these Orders had been founded, all the great Schoolmen were either Franciscans or Dominicans 5 . The first of the Schoolmen who was familiar with the whole range of Aristotle’s philosophy, and with his Arabic commentators, and who employed the same in the 0 f A Haies der service of theology, was Alexander of Hales, who derived his name from a place in the N. of Gloucestershire, now known as Hailes, near Winchcombe. He joined the Franciscan Order in Paris in 1231, on the return of the university from the dispersion of 1229 6 7 , and, after a distinguished scholastic career, died in 1245 \ He is a representative of Realism. His ponderous Summa Theologiae , left unfinished at his death, was completed by 1 ib. p. 145 ; Compayre, Abelard , 6—8 ; Rashdall, i 277 f. 2 Renan, Averroes , p. 259^ En general, l’ecole franciscaine nous apparait comme beaucoup moins orthodoxe que l’ecole dominicaine. Cp. V. Le Clerc, Hist. Litt. de la France au \\ e siecle, pp. 97— 144, esp. p. 129 f. 3 Rashdall, i 346 f. 4 ib. 369—392. 5 The great work on the writers of the Franciscan Order is Wadding, Annales Minorum, 6 folio vols. (1625 f), ed. 2 in 25 vols. (1731—1886). That on the Dominicans is Quetif et Echard, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum , 2 folio vols. (1719 f). 6 Bacon, Op. Minus , 326 Brewer, where his Summa is bitterly attacked. 7 He is lamented by Joannes de Garlandia, De Myst. Eccl., as the ‘ flos philosophiae ’ etc. 552 WILLIAM OF AUVERGNE. [CHAP. Edmund Rich William of Auvergne others in 1252. It shows the influence of the Eastern Arabs Avicenna and Algazel far more than that of the Western Arab Averroes 1 . The commentary on the Metaphysics, once ascribed to him, is now recognised as the work of another Franciscan, Alexander of Alexandria. In the University Library at Cam¬ bridge 2 , a ms of Alexander of Hales’ exposition of the Apocalypse, certainly belonging to his time and possibly written by his own hand, includes a portrait of the author represented kneeling in the habit of a Franciscan friar 3 . Another Englishman, Edmund Rich, born in Berks, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury (1235-40), canonised as St Edmund of Abingdon, w*as the first to expound the Sophistici Elenchi at Oxford 4 . The ideology and cosmology of Plato were taught in Paris by William of Auvergne (d. 1249), who knew the Phaedo and the Timaeus alone, and wrote works De Universo and De Anima largely founded on Aristotle, quoting the Physics , Metaphysics , De Atiima , Ethics etc. in Latin translations, though he had little confidence in Aristotle’s dicia b . He denounces as heretical a number of propositions mainly taken from the Pseudo-Aristotelian De Causis, and frequently attacks Averroism under the name of Aristotle and his followers, but he only mentions the name of Averroes once (when he calls him a ‘most noble philosopher’ 6 ), while he has many quotations from Aristotle himself 7 . John of Rochelle, who, as the pupil and successor of Alexander of Hales, taught at Paris from 1245 to 1253, shows his familiarity with the De Anima of Aristotle, and its Greek and Arabic expositors, in a treatise bearing the same name and exemplifying a new interest in the study of psychology 8 . Platonic and Aristotelian doctrines were combined by the eminent Franciscan Robert Grosseteste (c. 1175—1253), bishop of Lincoln, and the earliest recorded chancellor of Oxford, who was born at John of Rochelle Grosseteste 1 Renan, Averroes, 224“*. 2 Mm. v. 31. 3 J. R. Green’s Short History, illustr. ed., p. 287. 4 pp. 567, 570. 5 Haureau, 11 i 145.. 6 De Univ. i 85.1; Renan, Av., 22^-p. 7 Jourdain, 31, 288-99. 8 Haureau, II i 192. XXX.] GROSSETESTE. 553 Stradbroke in Suffolk, and educated at Oxford and (possibly) at Paris. About 1199 Giraldus Cambrensis 1 commends him as one whose education had been ‘built on the foundation of the liberal arts and on an abundant knowledge of literature’. He was appointed lecturer to the Franciscans shortly after their establishment in Oxford in 1224 s . His contemporary, Matthew Paris, writing at St Albans, then the centre of classical learning in England, describes him as vir in Latino et Graeco peritissimus 3 , and states that in his Greek studies he was assisted by a Greek monk of St Albans named Nicholas 4 . His great admirer, Roger Bacon, while he states much to his credit, assures us that, until the latter part of his life 5 , his knowledge of Greek was not sufficient to enable him to translate from that language, and that he could never translate from either Greek or Hebrew without assistance 6 . He also tells us that Grosseteste entirely neglected the works of Aristotle 7 ; but the context seems to show that this statement should be limited to the current translations of Arabic versions of certain of the physical treatises alone 8 . It was probably during his life at Oxford that he prepared his com¬ mentaries on the Categories, Analytics 9 and Sophistici Elenchi. He had access to translations of the Posterior Analytics besides that of Boethius, and he was also acquainted with the commentary of Themistius 10 . He drew up a summary of the Physics , with a commentary on the same 11 , and a few notes on the Consolatio of Boethius. Further, he supplied the Western Church with ‘ trans¬ lations’ from ‘Dionysius the Areopagite’ and John of Damascus 12 . I i 249 Brewer. 2 Mon. Franc, i 37. 3 Hist. Angl. ii 467 Madden. 4 Chron. Maj. iv 233 Luard. 5 Op. Tert. 91. 6 Comp. Phil. 472. 7 ib. 469. 8 Cp. F. S. Stevenson’s Robert Grosseteste , p. 41. 9 That on the Anal. Post., which was tacitly utilised by Albertus Magnus (Stevenson, p. 55), was printed six times between 1494 and 1552. 10 i 10, littera aliarum translationum et sententia Themistii neutri praedict- arum sententiarum videtur concordari (Prantl, Logik , iii 85). II Printed at Venice, 1498. 12 Bacon, Comp. Phil. 474. Grosseteste’s commentary on Dionysius is printed in the Opera Dion. Areop. 264—271, Argent. 1503. His ‘translation’ of John of Damascus is apparently a commentary on Burgundio’s version of the De Fide Orthodoxa. 554 GROSSETESTE. [CHAP. It was under his direction that in 1242 Nicholas of St Albans translated the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs from a ms lately brought from Athens by the bishop’s own archdeacon, John of Basingstoke 1 , which has been identified with a ms of the tenth century in the Cambridge University Library 2 . No less than 31 copies of the Latin version of this apocryphal work are in existence, one of them transcribed for the abbey of St Albans by Matthew Paris 3 , who has further transcribed for us the Greek numerals introduced by John of Basingstoke 4 . The name of Grosse¬ teste has also been connected with the Greek romance of Asenath, the patriarch Joseph’s Egyptian wife, the Latin version of which has been preserved by Vincent of Beauvais 5 . In the Compendium Scientiarum Grosseteste classified all the departments of knowledge recognised in his day, and a ms of his Summa Philosophiae in the Cambridge Library contains twenty chapters identical with the encyclopaedia in question 6 . All the above works probably belong to the time between 1239 and 1244. At the latter date, Grosseteste quotes from the Nicomachean Ethics\ and not (as before) from the Eudemian 8 . It is uncertain whether he actually translated the former; a translation and exposition of the same, ascribed to Grosseteste, was once in the Library of the Jacobins in the Rue St Honore, Paris 9 . M. Charles, however, refuses to believe that the translation was executed by Grosseteste 10 . But it may be pointed out that he certainly caused a copy of the Ethics (doubtless in the form of a Latin translation) to be transcribed for him, and that he was asked to lend this copy to a Franciscan in London in 1251 11 ; also that Hermann the German, who finished his translation of the Arabic commentary of Averroes on the Ethics in 1240, states, in the preface to his rendering of I p. 413 supra . 2 Ff. 1. 24. 3 British Museum, Royal mss 4 d vii; facsimile in Hardy’s Descriptive Cat . iii, plate 9. 4 Ckron. Maj. v 285. 5 Spec. Hist, i c. 118—122; M. R. James, in Carnb. Mod. Hist, i 586. 6 Ii. III. 19. 7 Ep. 106. 8 Epp. 94, 101, 9 Jourdain, Recherches , 59. 10 Roger Bacon , 328. II Adam Marsh’s Ep. in Brewer’s Mon. Franc, i 114, librum ethicorum Aristotelis quem scribi fecistis vestra gratia etc. XXX.] GROSSETESTE. 555 Alfarabi’s comments on the Rhetoric in 1256, that his work on the Ethics had been rendered useless by Grosseteste’s translations of the latter from the original Greek 1 . It may therefore be inferred that a Latin translation of the Greek text of the Ethics was known under the name of Grosseteste, having probably been executed under his direction between 1240 and 1244 by one of the Greeks whom he had invited to England. A Latin rendering of the important ‘middle recension’ of the Epistles of Ignatius, con- jecturally attributed to Grosseteste by Ussher (1644), is definitely assigned to him in a ms at Tours 2 . This translation betrays some acquaintance with the Lexicon of Suidas 3 , renderings from which are ascribed to Grosseteste by John Boston of Bury. These renderings consisted of only a few of the biographical articles, but even the fact that he possessed such a work is worthy of notice. The translations drawn up for his use by others were apparently extremely literal, while in those executed by himself he was content to give the general sense of the original 4 . He was not strong in verbal scholarship; he had strange ideas on the etymology of monachus and the meaning of Therapeutae 5 ; but, on his death-bed, he showed that he held orthodox views on the derivation of ‘ heresy ’, and, even in his last hours, he could aptly apply to the Mendicant Orders the line of Juvenal, cantabit vacuus coram latrone viator 6 . In his Letters he frequently quotes Horace 7 , Ovid 8 and Seneca 9 . ‘Probably no one’ (in the language of their editor, Dr Luard) ‘has had a greater influence upon English thought and English literature for the two centuries that 1 Reverendus pater, magister Robertus, Lincolniensis episcopus, ex primo fonte unde emanaverat, Graeco videlicet, ipsum librum est completius inter- pretatus, et Graecorum commentis praecipuas annexens notulas commentatus (Jourdain, 140; cp. Renan, Av ., 212 4 ). 2 Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers , 11 i 76 s f. 3 Val. Rose in Hermes, v 155; Brit. Mus. Royal 8 b i (M. R. James, Bibl. Buriensis, p. 76). 4 Ep. 57 (Stevenson, p.- 225). 5 Epp. p. 173 Luard. 6 Matth. Paris, Chron. Maj. v 40of. 7 Sat. i 7, 3; Ep. i 1, 60 ; A. P. 25. 8 Ars Am. i 655 ; Rem. Am. 91 ; Her. v 7 ; Ex Ponto ii 6, 38 (twice). 9 Epp. 23, 35, 67 (all on p. 23). 556 ADAM MARSH. [CHAP. followed his age Wycliffe actually ranks Democritus, Plato, Augustine and Grosseteste above Aristotle 1 ; and Gower calls him ‘the grete clerc Grossteste’ 2 . Apart from his important services as a reformer and a statesman, he fully deserves the credit of having given ‘a powerful impulse to almost every department of intellectual activity, revived the study of neglected languages, and grasped the central idea of the unity of knowledge’ 3 . He also deserves to be remembered as one of the earliest leaders of thought at Oxford, as a promoter of Greek learning, and as an interpreter of Aristotle, who went far beyond his master in the experimental knowledge of physical science 4 . The mss which he bequeathed to the Franciscans at Oxford have almost entirely vanished, but his copy of St Augustine De Civitate Dei is still carefully preserved in the Bodleian 5 . When Walter de Merton, the founder of the College bearing his name at Oxford (1264), applied to Grosseteste Adam Marsh for subdeacon s orders, he presented a letter of introduction from Grosseteste’s friend Adam de Marisco 6 , or Adam Marsh (d. 1258), who entered the Franciscan order shortly after 1226, and was unsuccessfully nominated bishop of Ely in opposition to Hugh Balsham, the future founder of Peterhouse, the earliest of the Colleges of Cambridge (1284). Adam Marsh was the first Franciscan who lectured at Oxford. His Letters (in the course of which he writes to Cambridge for parchment to supply the needs of the Franciscans at Oxford 7 ) contain only one verbal reminiscence of the Classics 8 , and his style is far less classical than that of his friend Grosseteste. But the attainments of both of these early Franciscans are warmly eulogised by a 1 Trials iv c. 3 (Stevenson, p. 335). 2 Conf. Am. iv 234. 3 Stevenson, p. 337. 4 Roger Bacon, Op. Tert. 469 (Rashdali, i 521). Cp. Mullinger, i 84f, 153 f, and (in general) F. S. Stevenson’s Robert Grosseteste (1899), and the literature there quoted. . : 5 No. 198. 6 Mon. Franc, i, Ep. 242. 7 Mon. Franc, i 391. 8 ib. 274, propter causam vivendi, vivendi finem facere (Juv. viii 84). XXX.] BONAVENTURA. VINCENT OF BEAUVAIS. 557 younger member of the same Order, their pupil Roger Bacon 1 . Among their contemporaries abroad, the teaching of Plato (as represented by the Neo-Platonists and Augustine) was followed in preference to that of Aristotle by the pupil of Alexander of Hales and the immediate successor (in 1253) of John of Rochelle, the mystical Franciscan, Bonaventura (1221—1274). In the Dominican Order the most learned scholar of this age was Vincent of Beauvais (d. 1264), tutor to the sons of Louis IX, who took pleasure in reading of Beauvais Vincent’s works and in collecting, in the Library at the Sainte Chapelle, all the mss needed for their composition. Vincent is best known in connexion with the Speculum Mundi , a vast encyclopaedia divided into four parts distinguished by the epithets Naturale , Doctrinale ( c . 1250), Historiale (c. 1254) and Morale (doubtless by a later writer, c. 1310-20) 2 . The spirit in which he prepared his colossal work may be discerned in the opening words of his preface:— ‘ Quoniam multitudo librorum et temporis brevitas, memoriae labilitas, non patitur cuncta, quae scripta sunt, pariter animo comprehendi, mihi, omnium fratrum minimo, plurimorum libros assidue revolventi, ac longo tempore studiose legenti, visum est tandem (accedente etiam majorum meorum consilio) quosdam flores pro modulo ingenii mei electos, ex omnibus fere quos legere potui, sive nostrorum, id est, Catholicorum Doctorum, sive gentilium, scilicet Philosophorum et Poetarum et ex utrimque Historiarum, in unum corpus voluminis quodam compendio et ordine summatim redigere.’ In compiling the Speculum Naturale , he had the assistance of many members of his Order, who made the extracts required for his purpose. In reference to his omnivorous reading he is justly described as a librorum helluo . The number of authors cited by him in the Speculum Naturale alone is as many as 350, with 100 more in the Speculum Doctrinale and Historiale; but, his knowledge of these authors being far from profound, he is sometimes landed in curious mistakes. Thus he supposes that 1 Op. Tert. 75, perfecti in sapientia divina et humana, and 70. Cp. (on both) Pauli’s Abhandlung (Tubingen, 1864); also (on Marsh) Little’s Grey Friars at Oxford, 134-9, an d Stevenson’s Grosseteste , 76 f. 2 Printed at Strassburg, 1473- , Nuremberg, 1483-6, Venice, 1494 ; also at Douai, 1624. Separate ed. of Spec. Hist. Augsburg (and Paris), 1474. 558 ALBERTUS MAGNUS. \ [CHAP. there were two authors bearing the name of Sophocles and only one of the name of Seneca, while he actually describes Cicero as a Roman general 1 . He knew no Greek: he calls the emperor Isaac Angelus Conrezach (ed. 1474) or Corezas (ed. 1624), obviously a corruption of K vp ’Io-aa* 2 . He supplies us, however, with valuable evidence as to the successive stages which marked the translation of the ‘Aristotelian’ writings into the Latin language. Thus, for the Organon , he uses the old rendering from the Greek, by Boethius; that from the Arabic in the Historia Animalium , De Plantis , De Caelo et Mu?ido , and in all except Book IV of the Meteorologica; the recent rendering from the Greek in the Parva Naturalia , the Physics, Metaphysics , De Anima and Ethics , while he never quotes the Politics 3 . In the case of Tibullus, he derives his quotations from certain excerpts earlier in date than any complete ms of that author now in existence 4 . In this age the great exponents of Aristotle among the Schoolmen were the two Dominicans, Albertus Magnus (1193—1280) and his famous pupil Thomas Aquinas (1225—7—1274). The former, a Suabian by birth, was a student at Padua and Bologna, and taught at Paris (near the narrow street still called the Rue de Maitre-Alberf), and also at the great school of the German Dominicans at Cologne. He was the first of his Order to teach philosophy and the first of the Schoolmen to state the philosophy of Aristotle in a systematic form, with constant reference to the Arabic commentators. Without neglecting the Platonic and Albertus Magnus 1 Graf, Roma , ii 178; cp. Hist. Lift, de la France, xviii 482 f, and Bartoli’s Precursori, 29—31. 2 Spec. Hist, xxix 64; Gidel, 274. Cp. Hallam, Lit. i 117 4 ; Boutaric, Vincent de B. et la connaissance de Pantiquite classique an xiii e s. (1875) in Rev. des quest, hist. xvii. 3 Jourdain, 33, 360-72. 4 O. Richter, De Vincentii Bellovacensis excerptis Tibullianis (1865). On the later literature, see Bursian’s Jahresb. li 318. The influence of the mediaeval encyclopaedias of Vincent de Beauvais, Brunetto Latini and Bartholomaeus Anglicus on western literature, and especially on German poetry in cent, xiv—xv, is indicated in Liliencron’s Festrede (Mtinchen, 1876). Cp. Hist. Litt. de la France, xviii 449— 519, and F. C. Schlosser (1819), XXX.] ALBERTUS MAGNUS. 559 Neo-Platonic writings (so far as they were known to him), he paid special attention to Aristotle, all of whose works were accessible to him in Latin translations either from the Arabic or the Greek or both. Thus, in the case of the De Anima and the Physics , he is able to quote a rendering from the Greek which is purer in its Latinity than that of the Arabic-Latin version of the fourth book De Cae/o, where the Latin is largely interspersed with transliterations from the Arabic. In interpreting the several works of Aristotle, he mainly follows Avicenna, continuing Avicenna’s plan of freely paraphrasing the text 1 . These para¬ phrases, in which he adapts the teaching of Aristotle to the requirements of the Church, are invariably followed by a ‘digression’, in which he states and discusses the views of his predecessors. The only case in which we find a regular commentary, instead of a paraphrase, is that of the Politics , which probably belongs to the latter part of his life 2 . His works, as printed at Lyons in 1651, fill 21 folio volumes, forming an encyclopaedia of all the learning and the polemics of his time. He is somewhat severely criticised by Prantl 3 as merely an indefatigable compiler; but he may perhaps be regarded with greater justice as a man of rich and varied endowments, who in astronomy and chemistry sought for truth in nature, and who deserves full credit as the restorer of the study of Aristotle 4 . As ‘provincial’ of his Order in Germany, he visited many monasteries, and, whenever he heard of any ancient mss, he either copied them himself or caused them to be copied by his companions 5 . But the influence of that Order, during the first century of its existence, was, in general, detrimental to classical learning. The Dominicans studied the Classics not for their own sake but for the purposes of preaching, and their own Latin style, which was doubtless debased by the low standard of 1 Cp. Jourdain, 38; Renan, Av ., 231, 23d 4 ; and list in Bursian, i 7811. 2 Charles, Roger Bacon, 316 note 2. He here follows the method of his pupil Thomas Aquinas. But the authorship is disputed (Erdmann, i § 200, 8). 3 Logik, iii 189. It is possibly Albertus who is attacked by Roger Bacon in Op. Tertium , p. 30 f and Op. Minus , p. 327 f (Charles, pp. 108, 355, ‘ ignorat linguas')', see, however, Brewer’s Pref. p. xxxiv. 4 Cp. T. Clifford Allbutt, Science and Medieval Thought , p. 74 note. 3 Haureau, II i 218. 56 o THOMAS AQUINAS. [CHAP. Thomas Aquinas Latinity attained in the current translations and comments on Aristotle, was apt to be exceedingly barbarous 1 . The great pupil of Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, the son of a count of Aquino, was born ( c . 1225-7) at a castle near the ancient Aquinum ; he received his first education at the neighbouring monastery of Monte Cassino, and continued his studies for six years at the stadium generate lately founded by Frederic II at Naples, where he entered the Dominican Order. He next studied at Cologne under Albertus Magnus (who took his favourite pupil with him to Paris and brought him back to Cologne), taught philosophy at Cologne, Paris, Bologna, Naples and elsewhere; lived at the papal court in Rome from 1260 to 1269, and was less than 50 years of age when he died in 1274, on his way to the Council of Lyons. In his teaching he brought Scholasticism to its highest development by harmonising Aristotelianism with the doctrines of the Church. Certain dogmas were, however, excluded from comparison by being regarded as mysteries to be received as matters of faith alone. With Aquinas, the logical and meta¬ physical basis is that of Aristotle, with elements derived from Platonism and from Christian theology 2 . While Albertus had composed paraphrases of Aristotle after the manner of his eastern exponent Avicenna, Aquinas produced commentaries after that of his western interpreter Averroes. He thus comments on the De Interpretatione, Analytica Posteriora, Physics , Parva Naturalia , Metaphysics , De Anima , Ethics, Politics , Meteorologica , De Caelo et Mundo and De Generatione et Corruptione. These com¬ mentaries were composed in Italy (c. 1260-9). His three greatest works are his Exposition of the Sentences of Peter Lombard, his De Veritate Fidei Catholicae (1261-4), and his celebrated Summa Theologiae (which was left unfinished). In this last his teaching on the subject of Angels is naturally founded on ‘Dionysius the Areopagite’; one of his favourite phrases is ut docet Dionysius ; and he has no suspicion of the true date of that author. In the domain of theology the Summa 1 Bursian, i 77. Cp. Hallam, Lit . i 77 4 note y. 2 All these sources of illumination are indicated by the convergent rays in the upper five-eighths of Traini’s celebrated picture. XXX.] THOMAS AQUINAS. 561 is an embodiment of the scientific spirit of the thirteenth century, a spirit which, as represented by Alexander of Hales, Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, stands in sharp contrast with the literary and classical spirit of the twelfth century, as exemplified in John of Salisbury and Peter of Blois 1 . As a commentator on Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas does not indulge in ‘digressions’, like those of Albertus Magnus, and in this respect he is followed by his Dominican pupil Robert Kilwardby (archbishop of Canterbury, d. 1279), who left behind him 39 treatises in philosophy alone 2 . On the question of ‘universals’ Thomas Aquinas is a Realist in the moderate Aristotelian sense, while he opposes the Platonic theory of ideas, as represented by Aristotle, though he accepts it, so far as it is supported by St Augustine 3 . The question how far he was familiar with Greek has been often discussed. He has been described as ignorant of Greek by Oudin 4 and others 5 , who are vaguely opposed by Gradenigo 6 on the ground of his frequent citations from Aristotle and the Greek fathers, and the wide prevalence of a study of Greek in the Dominican Order. The dissertations by Bernardo de Rubeis (1750), reprinted in the first volume of the papal edition of Thomas Aquinas (1882), tend to show that, though he was not a consummate hellenist, he was not an entire stranger to the Greek language. He had doubtless some original Greek texts at his disposal, and obtained fresh versions taken directly from the Greek, as his biographer expressly states 7 . In a single work, the Catena A urea , he cites the opinions of 60 Greek writers; in his Summa, he refers to a score of 1 F. A. Gasquet, in Dublin Review , 1898, 373. 2 Haureau, n ii -29. 3 Ueberweg, i 444 k 4 Comm, de Scriptoribus Eccl. (1722), iii 256, ‘ nesciebat...linguas quas appellant exoticas;...ut Graeca nec tantisper intelligent’. 5 Brucker, Hist. Crit. Phil, iii 803!; Gidel, p. 232. Erasmus on Ep. Rom. i described him as ‘dignus plane cui linguarum quoque peritia...con- tingeret ’. 6 Lett. Greco-Italiana (1759), 62. 7 Tocco, in Acta Sand., Antwerp, i 665, ‘scripsit etiam super philosophiam naturalem et moralem, et super metaphysicam, quorum librorum procuravit ut fieret nova translatio quae sententiae Aristotelis contineret clarius veritatem ’. Cp. Jourdain, 40, 392. S. 36 562 THOMAS AQUINAS. [CHAP. ecclesiastical and about the same number of secular Greek authors (including Heraclitus and Aristophanes), and Greek etymologies present themselves on the opening pages of that work 1 2 . He compares the Latin renderings of the Greek texts of the Ethics and Politics , and records variants which are copied from him by his master Albert. In his Commentary on the Ethics 2 (as observed by Dr Jackson) ‘the presentation of the right reading misspelt, and of a ludicrous etymology side by side with one which is very nearly right, seems to show that, whilst Aquinas had about him people who knew Greek, he himself had no substantial knowledge of it’ 3 . His Commentary on the De Interpretatione offers some criticisms on the Greek text, and implies the use of two Latin versions. He also refers to the Greek in commenting on the Analytica Posteriora. In the Physics (vii 2, 4) he explains the Greek words spathesis and ccrcisis , which are retained in the Latin versions. In the De Caelo et Mundo he notices that the words De Caelo alone represent the Greek title 4 , and he also gives the meaning of a number of Greek terms. The same is true of the Meteorologica, where he apparently used three versions, alt derived directly from the Greek 5 . In quoting Aristotle he uses translations from the Greek alone and not from the Arabic 6 . It was at his own instance that ‘William of Brabant’ is said to have produced in 1273 (doubtless with the help of others) a literal Latin translation of the Greek text of ‘all the works of Aristotle’, which superseded the old renderings from the Arabic 7 . ‘ William 1 Tougard, 63 f. 2 v I, (vbfjios) a. 7 reaxeSiacriueuos (p. 1129^ 15). 3 Clifford Allbutt, l.c., p. 76 f. 4 apud Graecos intitulatur De Caelo. 5 Jourdain, 396—400. 6 ib. 40. 7 1273: Wilhelmus de Brabantia, ordinis Praedicatorum, transtulit omnes libros Aristotelis de graeco in latinum, verbum ex verbo, qua translatione scholares adhuc hodierna die utuntur in scholis, ad instantiam domini Thomae de Aquino (Slav. Chron. in Lindenbrog’s Scriptores reru 7 n Germ, septent., 1706, p. 206; cp. Jourdain, 67). ‘Henri de Hervordia ’ adds: nam temporibus domini Alberti translatione veteri omnes communiter utebantur (ib. 68). Cp. Tocco on p. 561; also ms of De Caelo et Mundo in Trin. Coll. Library (no. 1498, late in c. xm) ‘hec est noua trawdacio ’. XXX.] WILLIAM OF MOERBEKE. 563 of Brabant’, Roger Bacon’s ‘William the Fleming’ 1 , is none other than William of Moerbeke, or Meerbecke, a small town S. of Ghent and on the borders of Flanders and Brabant. He was educated at Louvain and was probably 0 f Moerbeke one of the young Dominicans annually sent to Greece to learn the language. After his return ( c. 1268) he was chaplain to Clement IV and Gregory X, and acted as Greek secretary at the Council of Lyons (1274), where he was one of those who chanted the Nicene Creed in Greek, thrice repeating the words contested by the Greek Church 2 . Roger Bacon, who does not mention him in 1267 among the translators of Aristotle 3 , describes him as well known in 1272 4 . Towards the close of his life he became archbishop of Corinth (1277—1281) and continued the work of executing (and possibly superintending) translations from Greek into Latin. His translations included Simplicius on Aristotle De Caelo et Mundo , and probably Simplicius on the Categories (1266) and Ammonius De I?iterpretatione, possibly the Organon, Physics and Historia Animalium , certainly the ‘ Theo¬ logical Elements’ of Proclus (at Viterbo 1268) 5 , the Prognostics of Hippocrates, and Galen De Alnnentis (1277), and (above all) the Rhetoric (1281) and Politics of Aristotle 6 . The value of the last 1 Co 7 np. Phil., 471 ; infra pp. 569 f. 2 Hist. Litt. de la France, xxi 145. 3 Op. Tertium, 91. 4 Comp. Phil., 471. 5 Specimen quoted by Cousin, ed. 1820-7 ; MS in Peterhouse Library, after 1268, part 4 of no. 121 in M. R. James’ Catalogue ; p. 566 infra. Thomas Aquinas (xxi 718, ed. 1866) notices that the Pseudo-Aristotelian Liber De Causis is an Arabic abstract of the ‘ Theological Elements ’ of Proclus (Wustenfeld, Gott. Abhandl. nof); the De Causis is ascribed to Alfarabius (d. at Damascus, 950). The Dece? 7 i Dubitationes, De Providentia and De Malorum Subsistentia of Proclus were all translated by William at Corinth in 1280=1281 N.S. (Quetif, i 390). 6 Jourdain, 67 f. The Rhetoi'ic of Aristotle and of Cicero, and the Simwia of Aquinas, are among the mss received at Avignon by Adam bp of Hereford in 1319, for Laurence Bruton de Chepyn Norton, nephew of the abbot of Hayles (Gasquet, Essays, 37). William’s transl. of the Politics was finished before the death of Thomas Aquinas (1274), who quotes it twice in the Siwima cotitra Gentiles, c. 1261-5 {Rhein. Mus. xxxix 457). A Nova Translatio of the Ethics, bearing in the MS the date 1281 (probably by Henry Kosbein of Brabant, printed in 1497), was used by Thomas before 1262 (Quetif, u. s.). 36—2 564 SIGER OF BRABANT. [CHAP. two translations has been fully appreciated by Spengel and Susemihl respectively. Though this translator’s knowledge of Greek is imperfect 1 , the very baldness and literalness of his rendering, which has been denounced by Roger Bacon and by Sepulveda 2 , add to its value as evidence of the text of the lost ms from which it was translated, a ms better than the best of those that have survived. The Greek text of the Ethics is said to have been translated by Henry Kosbein of Brabant, who may possibly be identified with one of that name who was bishop of Liibeck from 1270 to 1284 3 . Another ‘translator’ of Aristotle, Thomas de Cantimpre (c. 1271), has a vague existence in a notice by Trithemius 4 . Siger of Brabant is described by Dante as lecturing at Paris in the Rue du Fouarre 5 ; and it was once supposed that Dante might have listened to his lectures in Paris. But it is now known that Dante was only seven when Siger left Paris (1272) and under eighteen when Siger died in prison at Orvieto, in 1283-4 6 . It is therefore clear that he is introduced by Dante, not as the poet’s teacher, but as ‘the typical representative of the faculty of Arts , to balance the Theologians and the representatives of the other Faculties’, mentioned in the same canto. It has also been ascertained that ‘Siger was an Averroist, i.e. a pure Aristotelian who taught the doctrine of Aristotle as to the eternity of the world, the unity of intellect, the mortality of the individual soul, without the compromises, accommodations, and corrections 1 See Newman’s Politics , vol. n p. xlivf, where examples of the translator’s ignorance are cited. Cp. Busse (1881) in Susemihl-Hicks, 71-3. 2 Pol. trans. 1548. 3 Hist. Litt. de la France , xxi 141; Gidel, 264 f. 4 Jourdain, 64^ who is wrong, however, in identifying him with the Thomas (bp of St David’s) mentioned by Roger Bacon, Op. Maj. 48. Thomas Cantipratanus, an Augustinian Canon of Cantimpre near Cambrai, became a Dominican in 1232, studied at Cologne and Paris, and was sub-prior of Louvain where he died (either as early as 1263 or as late as 1280). The most important of the works assigned to him in Zedler’s Universal Lexikon (1745) is De Naturis Renan ( c. 1240 in 20 books), but no trans. of Aristotle is there mentioned. 5 Par. x 136. 6 Maudonnet, Siger de Brabant (Fribourg, 1899). XXX.] GILLES DE PARIS. 565 adopted by the orthodox Aristotelians like St Thomas 51 . He wrote several works on Logic, including a commentary on the Prior Analytics 1 2 . He is further said to have expounded the Politics in a revolutionary spirit, and the same is reported of Nicolas d’Autrecour (c. 1348) and the Carmelite Pierre la Casa and the Benedictine Gui de Strasbourg. Meanwhile, about the date of Siger’s death, Gilles de Paris, who was studying the Politics for a very different purpose, had founded on that treatise a work De Regimine Principum , written (c. 1283) for the benefit of the future king, Philip le Bel 3 4 . About the same time, an Irish Dominican, Geoffrey of Waterford (d. 1300), translated the Physiognomical , and, in the preface to his rendering of the Pseudo-Aristotelian treatise De Regimine Principum , recorded the legend that, at the death of Aristotle, his spirit passed into the heavens in the semblance of flame 5 . The Saracenic in¬ terest in Aristotle is embodied in the belief that the bones of that philosopher were preserved in the principal Mosque of Palermo 6 . We have now seen that, in the course of about 130 years, i.e. in the interval between the early translations at Toledo in 1150 and the death of William of Moerbeke in 1281, the knowledge of Aristotle’s philosophy had passed in Europe from a phase of almost total darkness to one of nearly perfect light. The whole of the Organon had become known. The Physics , Metaphysics , and Ethics had reached Europe through translations from the 1 Rashdall on Maudonnet in Eng. Hist. Rev. 1902, 347 b 2 Cp. Hist. Litt. de la France, xxi 96—127. 3 Le Clerc, Hist. Litt. 505. The Augustinian monk Gilles de Paris is the same as Egidio (Colonna) da Roma, who became bp of Bourges in 1294, and died at Avignon in 1316 (Tiraboschi, iv 147-51; Lajard in Hist. Litt. de la France, xxx 421—566). He repeatedly quotes the Politics and Ethics in his De Regimine Principum, which was printed ir times in Latin (1473—1617) and translated into French soon after 1286 (ed. Molenaer, 1899). It is one of the sources of Occleve’s Governail of Princes (H. Morley, Eng. Writers, vi I 3 1 )* 4 Hist. Litt. de la France, xxi 216; Gidel, 263. 6 Gidel, 353. 6 Baddeley’s Charles III of Naples, 123. 566 ARISTOTLE ALMOST FULLY KNOWN. [CHAP. XXX. Arabic, and the De Anima , the Magna Moralia , Politics and Rhetoric through translations from the Greek 1 . The Poetic had already been translated into Arabic from a Syriac version founded on a Greek ms far older than any text of the treatise now extant, but this translation, which was probably little known, has only recently been made available for the purposes of textual criticism 2 . 1 Cp. p. 548 supra . 2 Margoliouth, Anecdota Orientalia (1887); Butcher’s ed. 2, p. 4. Cp. Egger, Hist, de la Critique , 554-60 3 ; Immisch in Philol. lv (1896) 20—38; J. Tkac in Wiener Studien, xxiv (1902) 70—98. The date of the Arabic version is c. 935. Zlf . oitem ♦ Colophon of the ‘Theological Elements’ of Proclus. From a xm cent, ms in the Library of Peterhouse, Cambridge, copied from the translation finished at Viterbo by William of Moerbeke, 18 May, 1268 (p. 563 supra). Part iv of ms 1. 2. 6 (M. R. James, Catalogue of the MSS in the Library of Peterhouse, Cambridge , no. 121, p. 142). CHAPTER XXXI. THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY AND AFTER. ROGER BACON (1214 — 94) TO DANTE (1265—1321). Among the keenest critics of the Schoolmen, and also of the recent translators of Aristotle, was Roger Bacon (c. 1214—1294). Born near Ilchester and educated R °s er Bacon at Oxford and Paris, he included among his teachers at Oxford men such as Robert Grosseteste, Adam Marsh and Thomas Wallensis (afterwards bishop of St David’s). All of these are said to have been pupils of Edmund Rich (archbishop of Canterbury, 1234—40), who, according to a biography ascribed to the Dominican Robert Bacon, studied as though he were to live for ever, and lived as though he were to die on the morrow 1 . It was probably under the influence of Grosseteste, the first lecturer to the Franciscans at Oxford 2 , that he entered the Franciscan Order. After pursuing his studies in Paris, he returned to England about 1250. Some seven years later, he fell under the suspicions of his Order, and, by the authority of its recently appointed general, afterwards known as the ‘seraphic’ Bonaventura, was for ten years (1257—67) kept in close confinement in Paris. He probably owed his partial release to the goodwill of Clement IV (d. 1268), for whom he now wrote, in the wonderfully brief space of 15 months, his three great works, the Opus Majus, the Opus Minus and the Opus Tertium (1267). These were followed 1 St John’s Coll. MS, fol. iii v, col. 2, (studebat) discere, quasi semper victurus; vivere, quasi eras moriturus (printed in Life by W. Wallace, 1893). 2 Grosseteste, Epp. p. 179 Luard. 568 ROGER BACON. [CHAP. by his Compendium Studii Philosophiae (12 71-2). He was once more placed under restraint in 1278; but he had again been released before writing his Compendium Studii Theologiae (1292), and he probably died at Oxford in 1294. His earlier reputation as an alchemist and a necromancer was greatly transformed by the publication (by Dr Samuel Jebb) of his Opus Majus (1733), which has been recognised as at once the Encyclopaedia and the Organon of the thirteenth century 1 . He here discusses the hindrances to the progress of true science, and broadly sketches the outlines of grammar, logic, mathematics, physics (especially optics), experimental research and moral philosophy; but in the text, as first published, the part on grammar was imperfect and that on moral philosophy 2 was wanting. Extracts from a ms of the Opus Tertium were published by Cousin in 1848 3 ; fragments of the Opus Minus , with the Opus Tertiu??i and the Compendium Studii Philosophiae, were first edited by Professor J. S. Brewer in the Opera Inedita of 1859; and an excellent monograph on their author was produced by M. Emile Charles in 1861. The following is the general purport of the passages in the above works of Roger Bacon which bear on our present subject:— ‘ Ignorance of the truths set forth by the ancients is due to the little care that is spent on the study of the ancient languages. It is vain to object that some of the Fathers neglected that study and misunderstood its advantages. Worthy as they are of respect in many ways, they cannot serve as our models in everything. They knew and appreciated Plato, but were almost entirely ignorant of Aristotle. The first to translate and explain the Categories was Augustine, who praises Aristotle more for that one small work than we for all {Opus Majus , p. 18). The next to translate Aristotle was Boethius, who rendered parts of the Logic and a few other works...The Fathers often follow Aristotle’s teaching on Grammar, Logic and Rhetoric, and the common axioms of his Metaphysics', but they neglect the rest and even bid us neglect it (p. 19). Philosophy is also neglected by modern doctors, who use inferior text-books (p. 21). It is impossible to obtain a perfect knowledge of the Scriptures, without knowing Hebrew and Greek, or of philosophy without knowing 1 Whewell’s Phil, of the Inductive Sciences , xii c. 7. 2 Since published by J. K. Ingram (Dublin, 1858). Cp. E. Charles, Roger Bacon , pp. 339—348. The Preface was first printed by F. A. Gasquet in Eng. Hist. Rev. 1897 p. 516 b The Op. Majus has been edited by Bridges (1897-1900). 3 Journal des Savants (1848), Mars—Juin. XXXI.] ROGER BACON. 569 Arabic as well (p. 44). A translator ought to be thoroughly familiar with the science of which he is treating, and with the language of his original and that of his own rendering. Boethius alone has known the meaning of the languages 1 ; Grosseteste alone, the meaning of the science. All the other translators are ignorant of both. Their translations of Aristotle in particular are impossible to understand (p. 45). The Latin translations of Josephus, Dionysius, Basil, John of Damascus and others, are inferior to those executed by Grosseteste ’ (p. 46). ‘ There are not five men in Latin Christendom who are acquainted with the Hebrew, Greek and Arabic Grammar...There are many among the Latins who can speak Greek, Arabic, and Hebrew; very few, who understand the grammar of these languages, or know how to teach them...So it is now with nearly all the Jews, and even with the native Greeks...Even when they do understand the languages, they know nothing of the sciences...We must have the original texts of the separate parts of philosophy, that the falsities and defects in the Latin copies may be discovered ’ ( Opus Tertium , p. 33). ‘The scientific works of Aristotle, Avicenna, Seneca, Cicero, and other ancients, cannot be had except at a great cost; their principal works have not been translated into Latin...The admirable books of Cicero De Republica are not to be found anywhere...I could never find the works of Seneca...although I made diligent search for them during twenty years and more’ (p. 55) 2 . ‘ Though we have numerous translations of all the sciences by Gerard of Cremona, Michael Scot, Alfred the Englishman, Hermann the German, and William Fleming, there is such an utter falsity in all their writings that none can sufficiently wonder at it...Certainly none of the above-named had any true knowledge of the tongues or the sciences, as is clear, not from their translations only, but also from their condition of life. All were alive in my time; some, in their youth, contemporaries with Gerard of Cremona, who was somewhat more advanced in years among them. Hermann the German, who was very intimate with Gerard, is still alive (1272) and a bishop. When I questioned him about certain books of Logic 3 , which he had to translate from the Arabic, he roundly told me he knew nothing of Logic, and therefore did not dare to translate them...Nor did he understand Arabic, as he confessed; in fact, he was rather an assistant in the translations, than the real translator. For he kept Saracens about him in Spain, who had a principal hand in his translations. In the same way Michael the Scot claimed the merit of numerous translations. But it is certain that Andrew, a Jew, laboured at them more than he did. And even Michael, as Hermann reported, did not understand either the sciences or the tongues. And so of the rest; especially the notorious 1 Cp. Op. Tert. 33; Gk. Gr. 29. 2 Brewer’s Preface , pp. Ixi—lxiii. 3 The Rhet. and Poet, are meant; cp. Comp. Stud. Philos, p. 473. Hermann the German (ap. Wiistenfeld, Gott. Abhandl. 93) himself describes them as logici negocii Aristotelis complementum. Cp. Charles, p. 122 n. 1, and Immisch, in Philol. lv 20; p. 546 supra. 570 ROGER BACON. [CHAP. William Fleming, who is now in such reputation (1272); whereas it is well known to all men of letters in Paris, that he is ignorant of the sciences in the original Greek, to which he makes such pretensions; and therefore he translates falsely and corrupts the philosophy of the Latins ’ ( Compendium Studii Philosophiae, p. 471) 1 2 . ‘ If I had any authority over the translations of Aristotle, I should have all of them burnt to save men from wasting their time in studying them and thus multiplying the sources of error and ignorance’ (p. 469). ‘ Slowly has any portion of the philosophy of Aristotle come into use among the Latins. His Natural Philosophy , and his Metaphysics, with the commentaries of Averroes and others, were translated in my time {temporibus nostris ), and interdicted at Paris before the year a.d. 1237, because of the eternity of the world and of time, and because of the book of the Divination by Dreams , which is the third book De Somno et Vigilia , and because of many passages erroneously translated. Even his Logic was slowly received and lectured on. For St Edmund, the archbishop of Canterbury [Edmund Rich], was the first who in my time read the Elenchi 2 at Oxford. And I have seen Master Hugo, who first read the book of Posterior {Analytics), and have also seen his writing (■ verbum ). So there have been few, considering the multitude of the Latins, who are of any account in the philosophy of Aristotle; nay, very few indeed, and scarcely any up to this year of grace 1292...The Ethics has but slowly become known 3 , having been only lately, and that seldom, ex¬ pounded by our masters 4 ...Thus far, there have only been three persons who could form a true judgement of the small portion of the whole of Aristotle that has been translated ’ 5 . In the Opus Majus Roger Bacon protests against the inordinate amount of time spent on the metaphysical controversy as to Universals 6 (p. 28); notices the expansion in the knowledge of 1 Brewer’s Preface , p. lix. 2 librum Elenchorum (Univ. Coll. Oxf. MS, Rashdall ii 754); libruni Elemetorum (Brit. Mus. MS Royal 7 F vii, folio 155). 3 coitata {communicata ?) Brit. Mus. MS. 4 a magistris ( ib .), not Parisiis (as printed by Charles). 5 Compendium Studii Theologiae, p. lv of Brewer’s Preface , corrected and supplemented from text in Charles, p. 412, and Rashdall, ii 754, and from MS in Brit. Mus. 6 His own position may be inferred from the fact that he criticises the ‘Unity of Form’ held by Thomas Aquinas, thus anticipating Scotus; while, in his doctrine of Universals, he anticipates Ockham, but avoids the mistake of supposing that the particular alone is real. Cp. Extracts in Charles, p. 383, ‘Universale non est nisi convenientia plurium individuorum’... 4 Individuum est prius secundum naturam ’ etc.; also the full discussion, ib. pp. 164—244, and the brief summary in Rashdall, ii 525. XXXI.] ROGER BACON. 571 Aristotle’s writings dating from the time of Michael Scot, i.e. from after 1230 (p. 36); and denounces the inadequacy of the current translations, and especially the ignorance which had led the translators to leave foreign words standing in their text (p. 45). Three times over he expresses his annoyance at the use of the word belenum in the Latin translation of the (Pseudo-Aristotelian) De Plantis. Once, while lecturing on Aristotle, he had hesitated and stumbled over this unwonted word, whereupon his Spanish pupils laughed outright and told him that it was only the Spanish for ‘henbane’ (hyoscyamus) 1 . Curiously enough, the late Greek translator of this Spanish equivalent for the Arabic rendering of the lost original of Nicolaus Damascenus, although he uses the word voaKvaixo s elsewhere 2 , has actually borrowed, from the Spanish-Latin rendering, the word fieXeviov, which has no real authority whatsoever. In the fragmentary Opus Minus Roger Bacon points out errors of translation in the Vulgate, as well as mistakes due to modern correctors of the text:—‘everyone presumes to change anything he does not understand,—a thing he would not dare to do for the books of the classical poets’ (p. 330 f) 3 . Here and elsewhere he lays the foundations for the textual criticism of the Scriptures 4 . He also protests against the implicit trust placed in the works of an earlier Franciscan, Alexander of Hales, even suggesting that his ponderous Summa Theologiae (‘ plusquam pondus unius equi’) was not composed by himself (p. 326). In the Opus Tertium he boldly challenges a comparison of his own work with that of Albertus Magnus and William Shirwood (p. 14), 1 Opus Majus, p. 45; Op. Tertium, p. 91; Comp. Phil., p. 467. Cp. De Plantis i 7, 2 (p. 821 a 32=iv 28, 39 Didot). The Latin translator of the Arabic was ‘Alfred the Englishman’. Bacon has the delicacy not to mention this fact, but he ascertains the right rendering from ‘ Hermann the German ’ (p. 467). 2 820 £ 5 (Ar. iv 27, 13 Didot). 3 The unnamed scholar, who had spent 40 years in cautiously correcting and expounding the Vulgate, has been identified as the Oxford Franciscan, William de Mara, or de la Mare. Cp. Denifle, Archiv f. Litt. etc. des MAs, 1888, 545. (See F. A. Gasquet in Dublin Rev., 1898, p. 21.) 4 Charles, p. 263; cp. J. P. P. Martin, La Vulgate latine au xiii s. d'apres Roger Bacon (1888), and esp. F. A. Gasquet on ‘ English Biblical Criticism in the 13th cent. ’, in Dublin Rev., Jan. 1898, 1—21. 572 ROGER BACON. [CHAP. while he is never weary of extolling the merits of Grosseteste 1 , or of descanting on the mistakes in the current renderings of Aristotle 2 . He also discourses on textual corruptions, on accents, on aspirates, and on punctuation and prosody (pp. 234—256 f). Lastly, in the Compendium Studii Philosophiae , he tells us that, in many parts of Italy, the clergy and the people were. Greek 3 , and that teachers of that language, who had been brought from Italy by Grosseteste, were still to be found in England (p. 434). In urging the study of Greek as well as Hebrew, he adds :—‘ we are the heirs of the scholars of the past, and (even in our own interests) are bound to maintain the traditions of learning, on pain of being charged with infinite folly’ (p. 435). He next gives a long list of Latin words derived from Greek (p. 441) 4 , attacks the etymological works of Papias, Hugutio and Brito 5 (pp. 447 — 452); quotes with approval the criticism on auricalcum (a mistake for orichalcunC ) which he had himself heard from Joannes de Garlandia in Paris (p. 453); and adds a number of common errors in spelling, scansion and etymology (pp. 454—462). He urges many further reasons for studying Greek (p. 464 f), insists that Aristotle should be read in the original (p. 469), and assures us that he had seen the Greek text of the 50 books of Aristotle on Natural History (p. 473), mentioned by Pliny (viii 17). Towards the close, he sets forth the Greek alphabet, with the name and sound and numerical value of each letter (p. 495 f) 7 , classifies all the letters, and discourses at length on accentuation and prosody (pp. 508—519). The desirability of the study of Greek is sufficiently shown by the copyist of the above treatise, who clumsily tries to represent Greek words in Latin characters. On the other hand, the Greek \ 1 PP- 33 * 7 °> 75 * 88, 91; cp. Op. Maj. 45, 64; Comp. Phil. 469, 472, 474; Gk. Gr. 118. 2 PP* 75 » 77 * 124; cp. Op. Maj. 262, 420, 460. 3 Cp. Op. Tert. 33; and Gk. Gr. 31, in regno Siciliae {meaning S. Italy ) multae ecclesiae Graecorum et populi multi sunt qui veri Graeci sunt etc. 4 Cp. Gk. Gr. 68 and Introd. xxxv f. 5 Cp. Gk. Gr. 37, 92, 98; Charles, pp. 330, 359, and infra , p. 639 f. 6 Cp. p. 386, Op. Min. c. 7, and Gk. Gr. p. 92 7 Facs. in Brewer’s Opera Inedita ad fin. Cp. frontispiece to Opus Majus, vol. iii, ed. Bridges. XXXI.] ROGER BACON. 573 is beautifully written in the ms of Roger Bacon’s Greek Grammar preserved in the Library of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, which includes a short Greek Accidence and ends with the paradigm of tvtttio 1 . This Grammar has now been published, together with a fragment, ascribed to the same work, in the Cambridge Library 2 . The author holds that ‘the Grammar of all languages is sub¬ stantially the same, though there may be accidental variations in each’ 3 . Greek Grammars had already been collected for Grosseteste in Greece itself 4 , and one of his friends had actually brought such a work from Athens and had translated it into Latin 5 . Bacon’s own knowledge of Greek was mainly derived from the Greeks of his day, and it is their pronunciation that he invariably adopts 6 . In his Grammar he naturally followed the Byzantine tradition, which was also followed subsequently by Constantine Lascaris and Chrysoloras 7 . He may have had some direct knowledge of Theodosius 8 ; but it seems more probable that, like Theodorus Prodromus 9 , he used a Greek Catechism resembling that preserved in the Wolfenbiittel Erotemata 10 . Besides the Grammar, there is a Greek lexicon which may be attributed to Roger Bacon 11 . But these are isolated works; in the library of Christ Church, Canterbury (c . 1300), not a single Greek text was to be found 12 . In the Opus Majus li Roger Bacon refers to the translation of Homer in a way which, at first sight, seems to imply a personal familiarity with the charm of the original; but this impression is unhappily dispelled when we find two parallel passages, from both 1 Brewer’s Pref. to Op. Inedita , p. lxiv; cp. Charles, 66. 2 E. Nolan (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1902). 3 p. 27. 4 Op. Tert. 91. 5 p. 413 supra. 6 Gk. Gr. p. xx of Introd ., and pp. 32, 48 and passim in the transliterations there given. 7 Heiberg in Byz. Zeitschr. 1900, 472 f; and S. A. Hirsch in Introd. to Gk. Gr. p. lx. 8 P* 354 supra. 9 p. 354 ult. 10 S. A. Hirsch, u. s., p. lxii. 11 M. R. James in Camb. Mod. Hist, i 587. 12 ib. 589; p. 536 supra. 13 p. 44, si cuiquam videatur linguae gratiam interpretatione non mutari, Homerum exprimat in Latinum ad verbum. 574 ROGER BACON. [CHAP. of which it is certain that he is here quoting Jerome 1 . In the preface to his Compendium Theologiae he justifies certain quota¬ tions from Cicero, Pliny and Seneca by adding:—‘ etiam causa specialis me monet ut excitem lectorem ad quaerendum libros auctorum dignos , in quibus magna pulchritudo et dignitas sapientiae reperitur, qui nunc temporis sicut a multitudine studentium, sic a doctoribus eius penitus ignorantur’ 2 . In philosophy his greatest names are Aristotle 3 and his Arabian exponents, Avicenna and Averroes. He refers to the Phaedo and Timaeus of Plato, which were probably known to him only in Latin translations 4 . In Latin his favourite authors are Cicero, whose appeal to Caesar he aptly applies to the pope:— noli nostro periculo esse sapiens 5 , and Seneca 6 , who helps him to denounce the blind following of authority:— vivimus ad exempla 7 . In history he knows Sallust, Livy and ‘Trogus Pompeius’; he is also familiar with Pliny and Solinus, and with Donatus, Servius, Apuleius, Gellius, Censorinus, Boethius, Cassiodorus and Priscian 8 9 . He describes Bede as literatissimus in grammatical , and even as 1 Op. Tert. 90; Comp. Phil. 466. 2 ap. Charles, p. 411. 3 He knew the whole of the Organon , the Physics, De Caelo (of which he had two translations, one of them taken from the Greek), De Anima, De Generatione et Corruptione, Parva Naturalia , the ‘ nineteen ’ books of the Hist. An., ten books of the Metaphysics {Comp. Phil. 473), and the Ethics (in three translations). He had some slight knowledge of the Khet. and Poet. (Charles, p. 325), and the Politics, but called it the ‘Book of Laws’ (ib. 397, and Comp. Phil. 422 f). He also knew the Pseudo-Aristotelian De Plantis, De Causis and Liber Secretoru?n. The Problems had only been partially and inadequately translated (Charles, 376). Cp., in general, Charles, 315-7. 4 Charles, 323. 5 Pro Marc. 25 ( Op. Tert. p. 87). He also knew the Verrines, Phil., Paradoxa, De Part. Orat., De Div., De Am., De Sen., De Nat. D., De Off., and the then ‘ little known ’ Tusc. Disp. He mentions ‘ five ’ books of the Academica {Op. Tert. p. 50, and Brit. Mus. ms, Royal 7. F. vii, folio 154 V), probably meaning the De Finibus; he cites fragments of the Hortensius and Tunaeus and searches in vain for the De Republica. Cp. Charles, 323. 6 He knows the Letters, De Benef., Ira, Clem., and Quaest. Nat. (besides certain apocryphal works). Charles, 322. 7 Ep. 123 § 6 (ap. Op. Tert. 50). 8 Charles, 330, 333 f. 9 Op. Min. 332. XXXI.] ROGER BACON. 575 antiquior Prisciano 1 ! but he mainly relies on Priscian, without slavishly following him 2 . In verse he quotes freely from Terence, Virgil, Juvenal, Lucan, Statius and the later poets. He urges that boys should not be taught the ‘foolish fables’ of poets such as Ovid 3 ; but, when he needs a new argument for the study of Greek, he tacitly borrows a line from the Epistolae ex Ponto (iii 5, 18):—‘gratius ex ipso fonte bibuntur aquae’ 4 . He knew Arabic and Hebrew, as well as Greek, and the same keenness of spirit, that prompted him to insist on the importance of the study of Greek, impelled him to extend the bounds of science. In science he was at least a century in advance of his time, and, in spite of the long and bitter persecutions that he endured, he was full of hope for the future. The spirit in which he looked forward to an age of wider knowledge was like that expressed in one of his own citations from Seneca 5 :—‘veniet tempus quo ista quae nunc latent, in lucem dies extrahat et longioris aevi diligentia’ 6 . In Roger Bacon’s day, notwithstanding his eagerness for promoting the study of Aristotle in the original Greek, it was the Latin Aristotle alone that was studied in the schools. In the very year in which he was writing his three great works in Paris (1267), Oxford was prescribing for the course in Arts the whole of the Latin Organon , and, as an alternative, the De Anima and the Physics 7 . The study of the Physics in England during this century may be illustrated by the ms of the Latin translation of that work, written in England and illuminated with a representation of a mediaeval lecture-room, in which a closely packed group of nine tonsured students, with their books resting on their knees, is 1 Gk. Gr. 41. 2 Op. Tert. 245, and Gk. Gr. 131. 3 Op. Tert. 55. 4 Printed as prose in Comp. Phil. 465 (with dtilcius). 5 N. Q. vii 25, 4. 6 Extr. in Charles, p. 393. See, in general, Hist. Litt. de la France, xvi 138—41 ; E. Charles, Roger Bacon, sa vie, ses ouvrages, ses doctrines (1861); A. Parrot, R. B., sa perso 7 ine, son ginie, ses ccuvres et ses contemporains (1894); Brewer’s Pref. to Opera Inedita (1859); and Adamson in Did. Nat. Biogr.; and cp. Mullinger, i 154-9; Rashdall, ii 522-5; Gasquet in Dublin Review, 1898, 1 — 21; Clifford Allbutt, Science and Medieval Thought, pp. 72, 78 f; and Hirsch in Introd. to The Greek Grammar of Roger Bacon (1902). 7 Rashdall, ii 455. 576 RAYMUNDUS LULLIUS. DUNS SCOTUS. [CHAP. listening to a scholar, who is lecturing with uplifted hand, robed in an academic gown and enthroned on a professorial chair 1 . Roger Bacon’s interest in Greek and Arabic was shared by a slightly later Franciscan, the unwearied traveller, Lunhis ndUS Raymundus Lullius (1234—1315), who urged the Pope and the authorities of the university of Paris to establish a college in which Greek and Arabic and the language of the Tartar races could be taught with a view to the refutation of the doctrines of Mahomet and Averroes 2 . While, among the Franciscans, the extreme Realist, Alexander of Hales, and the mystic Bonaventura had, in their philosophic opinions, agreed in adhering to the Augustinian tradition as to the teaching of Plato, the Dominicans Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas had introduced Aristotelianism into theology. The views of these Dominicans were opposed at Paris and Oxford (1277), and this opposition was followed by further developments of Franciscan philosophy 3 . A new form of Realism culminated in the teaching of the Franciscan Joannes Duns Scotus, who was possibly born at Dunstan (near Dunstanburgh Castle) in Northumberland, and who opposed the teaching of Thomas Aquinas at Oxford, Paris (1304) and Cologne, where he died in 1308 4 . While the system of Thomas Aquinas implies the harmony of faith and reason, Duns Scotus has less confidence in the power of reason and enlarges the number of the doctrines already recognised as capable of being apprehended by faith alone. He has also a less high regard than Thomas for the teaching of Aristotle, and he adopts many Platonic and Neo-Platonic opinions. His works include Quaestiones on Aristotle De Anima and Meteorologica, and an exposition and summaries and conclusions, as well as Quaestiones , on the Metaphysics. The 1 British Museum, Royal 12. G. v. (reproduced in Social England, ill. ed., i 623). The double columns of the text of this MS have two narrow columns of glosses on each side. 2 Renan, Averroh , 255 s f; Rashdall, ii 96; F. A. Gasquet in Dublin Rroiew, 1898, 365 ; Hist. Litt. de la France , xxix 1—386 ; Erdmann, i § 206. 3 Rashdall, ii 527 f. 4 The tombstone in the Minoritenkirche bears the inscription:—‘Scotia me genuit, Anglia me suscepit, Gallia me docuit, Colonia me tenet ’. XXXI.] DUNS SCOTUS. 577 Quaestiones on the Physics are now acknowledged to be spurious. In the domain of pure Scholarship he is represented by the Gi'ammatica Speculativa\ which is also described as a treatise De Modis Significandi , and is sometimes attributed to Albert of Saxony 2 , although Duns Scotus himself refers to it in his work on Logic, which he wrote early in his career. In his Grammar, he quotes Petrus Helias, as well as Donatus and Priscian. Even in the ranks of the Realists, the extravagant Realism of Duns Scotus was followed by a reaction led by Wycliffe (1324-84), who (for England at least) is at once ‘the last of the Schoolmen’ and ‘the first of the Reformers’. Humanists were agreed with later Reformers, such as Tyndale (1530), in opposing the subtleties of Scotus. In 1535 (a date which marks the close of the influence of Scholasticism in England) the idol of the Schools was dragged from his pedestal at Oxford and Cambridge; and one of Thomas Cromwell’s commissioners at Oxford writes:—‘We have set Dunce in Bocardo , and have utterly banished him Oxford for ever, with all his blynd glosses . . . (At New College) wee fownd all the great Quadrant Court full of the Leaves of Dunce, the wind blowing them into every corner’ 3 . But, a little more than a century later, a magnificent edition of his works, excluding the biblical commentaries, and including the philosophical and dogmatic writings alone, was published in 13 folio volumes by the Irish Franciscans at Lyons (1639). In the first volume of this edition he is called ‘amplissimae scholae nobilis antesignanus’, and is even described as ‘ita Aristotelis discipulus, ut doceri ab eo Aristoteles vellet, si viveret’. He also survives, as a typical Schoolman, in Butler’s Hudibras (1664), where the hero of the poem is compared to Duns Scotus (as well as to Thomas Aquinas and ‘the irrefragable Doctor’, Alexander of Hales):— ‘ In school-divinity as able As he that hight Irrefragable; A second Thomas, or, at once, To name them all, another Dunce ’. By a strange caprice of fortune the name of one who was celebrated 1 i 39—76 (ed. 1639). Cp. Babler’s Beitriige (1885), 84-8. 2 Title of Venice ed. of 1519. Albert taught in Paris, c. 1350-60. 3 Layton in Strype’s Eccl. Memorials , i 324. S. 37 578 WILLIAM OF OCKHAM. [CHAP. as ‘the subtle Doctor’, and was regarded by Hooker as ‘the wittiest of school divines’ 1 , and by Coleridge as the only English¬ man possessed of ‘high metaphysical subtlety’ 2 , has become synonymous with stupidity 3 . Duns Scotus is distinguished from all the other Schoolmen by what Prantl 4 has described as ‘a peculiarly copious infusion of Byzantine Logic’. The Synopsis of Aristotle’s Logic compiled by Psellus (d. 1078) 5 was translated by William Shirwood, who was a prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral in 1245, an< ^ treasurer in 1258 and 1267 6 . Tt is in this treatise that the mnemonic verses for the ‘Moods of the Four Figures’, Barbara, celarent etc., are found for the first time. The Synopsis of Psellus was afterwards incorporated in the seventh section of the Summulae Logicales of Petrus Hispanus of Lisbon, who died as Pope John XX (XXI) in 1277, while the first six sections of Petrus Hispanus contain the substance of the Logic of Aristotle and Boethius 7 . The teaching of the Dominican Thomas Aquinas was opposed not only by the Realist Duns Scotus, but also by ofOckham another Franciscan, the great Nominalist William of Ockham (d. 1347). The date of his birth is unknown, but, in his boyhood, he must often have gazed on the seven lancet-windows of the thirteenth century, which make the 4 church of his birthplace in Surrey unique in the annals of architecture. He studied at Oxford and graduated in Paris. Realism, which had been shaken more than two centuries before by Roscellinus, was to all appearance shattered by William of Ockham, who is the last of the greater Schoolmen. He opposes the real existence of universals, pointing out that, if (with Plato) an independent existence is ascribed to the universal, the latter practically becomes an individual object. He also regards Aristotle’s doctrine of Categories as resting on 1 Eccl. Pol. 1 xi 5. 2 Literary Remains , iii 21. 3 Trench, Study of Words, 83!; early exx. (1577) in Murray, Oxf Diet. s.v. 4 Logik, iii 203. 5 p. 403 supra. 6 Confused by Leland with William of Durham, Diet. Nat. Biogr. Iii 146. 7 Val. Rose and Thurot (as well as Mansel and Hamilton) held, however, that the Greek Synopsis was translated from the Latin. Cp. Ueberweg, i 404, 459 E. T.; and Mullinger, i 175—186. XXXI.] WALTER BURLEY. 579 a division, not of things, but of words, and as primarily having a grammatical reference 1 . His chief service to philosophy is that ‘he brought again to light . . . the true value of the inductive method, as auxiliary to the deductive,—the great truth which Aristotle had indicated and the Schoolmen had shut out’ 2 . As an opponent of Ockham at Oxford we have Walter Burley (1275—1345?), whose ignorance of Greek did not debar him from writing commentaries on the Ethics and Politics , which he dedicated to Richard of Bury. His liber de vita ac moribus philosophorum , extending from Thales to Seneca (and not excluding poets), was the first attempt in modern times at writing a history of ancient philosophy; but it is marred by strange mistakes in matters of literary history, the two Plinies and the two Senecas being treated as one, Statius Caecilius confounded with Papinius Statius, and Livy with Livius Andronicus 3 . The doctrines of Averroes were accepted by Burley and by the ‘ prince of the Averroists ’, the English Carmelite, John of Baconthorpe (d. 1346), but the influence of these two Englishmen was stronger in Italy than in England 4 . Though the pretensions of Scholasticism had been reduced by William of Ockham, its methods survived in works such as that of Thomas Bradwardine, who was archbishop of Canterbury at his death in 1349. He is the author of a scholastic treatise De Causa Dei , founded mainly on Augustine; it is in company with Augustine and Boethius that he is respectfully mentioned by Chaucer 5 , and, in the view of his editor, Sir Henry Savile (1618), ‘solidam ex Aristotelis et Platonis fontibus hausit philosophiam’. It is true that his pages abound in citations from Seneca, Ptolemy, Boethius and Cassiodorus, as well as the 1 Ueberweg, i 462 f and 154. 2 Mullinger, i 189; cp. Rashdall, ii 535 f; Clifford Allbutt, p. 89!; H. Morley, Eng. IVriters, iii 326 f, v 12—14; and Haureau, II ii 356—430. 3 Haase, De Med. Aevi stud. Philol. 13 f. MS in Trinity Coll. Library, O. 2. 50 (no. 1154 M. R. James), first ed. 1467 ; latest ed., Tubingen, 1886. Burley is said to have written 130 treatises on Aristotle alone. 4 Renan, Av., 318 4 f. 5 Cant. Tales 15248. 37—2 580 RICHARD OF BURY. [CHAP. Fathers and the Schoolmen, but we have reason to know that all this erudition is derived from the library of his ?f C Bury friend Richard of Bury (1287 —1345) \ Richard, the son of Sir Richard Aungerville, was educated at Oxford, and was appointed bishop of Durham in recognition of his success as envoy (in 1330) to the pope at Avignon, where he made the acquaintance of Petrarch. The latter describes him as c a man of ardent temperament, not ignorant of literature, and with a strong natural curiosity for obscure and recondite lore’, but the Italian attempted in vain to enlist the Englishman’s aid in determining the topography of the ancient Thule 1 2 . As the author of the Philobiblon, Richard is more of a bibliophile than a scholar, and the few Greek words that occur in its pages do not warrant our inferring that he had any extensive knowledge of the language. He is fully conscious of the great debt of Latin literature to that of Greece 3 . He proposes to remedy the prevailing ignorance by providing a Greek as well as a Hebrew grammar for the use of students 4 , whom he describes as at present getting ‘a smattering of the rules of Priscian and Donatus, and as chattering childishly concerning the Categories and Perihermenias , in the composition of which Aristotle spent his whole soul’ 5 . He agrees with Bradwardine and Holkot (who is sometimes supposed to have been the real writer of the Philo- biblon 6 ) in quoting ‘Hermes Trismegistus’ and ‘Dionysius the Areopagite’. His weakness for books is indicated by the fact that Richard II, abbot of St Albans (1326-35), once bribed the future bishop of Durham by presenting him with four volumes from the monastic library, viz. Terence, Virgil, Quintilian, and Hieronymus against Rufinus, besides selling him for ^50 1 Mullinger, i 198!; II. Moi'ley, iv 61-4. 2 De Rebus Fam. iii 1 p. 137 Fracassetti; cp. Voigt, Humanismus, ii 248 s ; Mullinger, i 201. 3 c. x § 162 f. 4 c. x § 167. 5 c. ix § 154, in cuius scriptura...calamum in corde tinxisse confingitur. The phrase is found in Isidore Et. ii 27, and also earlier, in Cassiodorus, De Dialectica (see supra, p. 253). 6 Holkot inter alia ‘moralised’ the Metamorphoses', cp. Philobiblon, c. 13 § 178, ‘veritas indagatur sub eloquio typicae fictionis’. XXXI.] BURIDAN. JEAN DE JANDUN. 581 Buridan thirty-two other volumes from the same collection, including a large folio ms of the works of John of Salisbury 1 . One of the best known of the supporters of the revived Nominalism of William of Ockham was Buridan, rector of the university of Paris in 1327 (d. after I 35°), who wrote Quaestiones on Aristotle’s Physics , De Anima , Parva Naturalia , Ethics and Politics 2 . His text-book of Logic taught the student how to find the middle term of a syllogism; and, as Aristotle 3 holds that the quick discovery of the middle term shows acuteness of intellect, this aid towards enabling dullards to gain credit for acumen became famous as a pons asinorum. Buridan’s proverbial ass, which stands unmoved between two bundles of hay, because it is attracted equally in both directions, has not been found in any of his works. In his commentary on the Ethics 4 * , however, he declares it impossible to decide whether the will, when under the influence of two evenly-balanced motives, can with equal facility decide for or against any given action; and the popular illustration of the ‘ass’ may have been suggested by a passage in Aristotle, De Caelo b . Among the most active exponents of Aristotle was Jean de Jandun, who nevertheless {c. 1322) showed himself fully conscious of the futility of the contemporary jandun 6 passion for argumentation which was only interested in the process of discussion and indifferent to its result 0 . Benedictines, Dominicans and Franciscans were at one in their keenness for expounding Aristotle. The catalogues of the Sorbonne for 1290 and 1338 show how vast a literature had gathered round Aristotle in the form of translations and comments by his Arabic and his Latin expositors. 1 Chron. Mon. S. Albani, ii 200 (quoted by E. C. Thomas, ed. Philobiblon, p. xxxixf); cp. H. Morley's Eng. Writers, iv 38—61. 2 The last two, printed in Paris in 1500, were reprinted at Oxford, 1637-40. 3 Anal. Post, i 34. 4 In Eth. Nic. iii, Qu. 1. 5 ii 13, t(3v tdwdlfxuv Kai totlov foov air txooros (/cat yap tovtov ippeixeiv avayKalov). Ueberweg, i 466 E. T. 6 Le Clerc, Hist. Lift, de la France au 14 e s., i 502 f. This enthusiastic admirer of Averroes wrote Quaestiones in Ar. libros Phys., Metaph., De Anima, De Caelo (printed in cent, xv, xvi). Cp. Renan, Av. 339~42 4 . 582 BOLOGNA. [CHAP. In the thirteenth century the extension of the knowledge of Aristotle beyond the narrow limits of the Organon widened the intellectual horizon by stimulating the study of Psychology and Metaphysics. Aristotle was now recognised as the supreme and infallible authority, not in Logic alone, but also in Metaphysics, in Morals, and (unhappily) in Physiology and Natural Science in general. He was associated in Northern Europe with the study of speculative philosophy and theology, and in Italy with that of medicine, thus incidentally leading to an alliance between the Faculties of Medicine and Arts in the Italian Universities 1 . Under the wing of Aristotle, room was found even for Averroes. About the middle of the fourteenth century the Inceptor in Arts at the university of Paris was compelled to swear that he would teach nothing that was inconsistent with ‘Aristotle and his commentator Averroes’ 2 . But the mediaeval dependence on the authority of Aristotle gradually gave way. The change was in part occasioned by the recovery of some of the lost works of ancient literature, and the transition from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance was attended by a general widening of the range of classical studies, and by a renewed interest in Plato. Early in the twelfth century the study of Roman Law had b j ^ been revived at Bologna by Irnerius (c. 1113), who, besides expounding the Roman code in lectures, introduced the custom of explaining verbal difficulties by means of brief annotations known as ‘glosses’. But Bologna was far from being a School of Law alone. It was also famous as a School of Rhetoric and the Liberal Arts, where composition in prose and verse was practised under the name of Dictamen , especially in the early part of the thirteenth century, when Buoncompagno was the great master of Rhetoric and Compo¬ sition 3 . In the same century the example of Irnerius was followed by Accursius of Florence, who also taught at Bologna (d. 1260). Whenever in his public lectures he came upon a line 1 1 Rashdall, i 235. 2 Chartul. ii 680 (Rashdall, i 368), with the important addition, nisi in casibus qui sunt contra jidem. 3 Tiraboschi, iv 464—500; Rashdall, i hi. He produced a work in six books on the art of writing letters (1215). XXXI.] ACCURSIUS OF FLORENCE. 583 of Homer quoted by Justinian, tradition describes him as saying: Graecum est , nec potest legi 1 . The phrase would naturally occur in his oral teaching only, and its alternative form, non legitur , need mean nothing more than, ‘ This is Greek, and is not lectured upon ’. It has not been found in the published Glosses of Accursius, who, in his translation of the Pandects, as was shown by Albericus Gentilis 2 (d. 1611), correctly explains the large number of Greek words occurring in the text. It has been suggested, however, that if the phrase was used at all by Accursius, it was not due to any ignorance of Greek on the part of this learned lawyer, but to the fact that the public assumption of a knowledge of that language would have laid him open to an imputation of heresy which he deemed it prudent to avoid 3 . In the first half of the sixteenth century, his ‘ barbarism ’ and his ‘ ignorance ’ are attacked by humanists such as Vives and Brassicanus, Budaeus and Alciatus 4 , but none of these deal with his knowledge of Greek. Bologna’s early fame as a school of Law was due (1) to the study of the Digest, (2) to a closer and more technical study of texts, and (3) to the fuller organisation of legal study. In the interpretation of Civil Law, the work of that school has been described as representing, in many respects, ‘the most brilliant achievement of the intellect of mediaeval Europe’ 5 . It certainly promoted textual criticism in its own department of study. The jurists of Bologna repeatedly made pilgrimages to Pisa to consult the famous ms of the Pandects, which was removed to Florence in 1406, and by the collation of this and other mss formed the ordinary text of the Civil Law 6 . 1 W. Burton, Gr. Ling. Hist. (1657), 49, notum est illud Francisci Accursi, quotiens ad Homeri versus a Justiniano citatos pervenit, Graecum est , inquit, nec potest legi. Cp. Tiraboschi, iv 356; Gidel, 236!. On the omission of the Greek Constitutions of Justinian in the Western mss, cp. Windscheid, Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts , ed. 1900, § 3. 2 Dial. (1721), 188; cp. E. Otto, Vita Papiniani (1743), 67. 3 Gidel, 236 f. * Bayle, s.v. Accurse. 5 Rashdall, i 122 f; Gebhart, Les Origines de la Renaissance en Italie ('879), 59 f, Le droit romain...est la grande originality doctrinale de VItalie an moyen age ...A Paris , on dispute sur Aristote dont le texte original manque; a Bologne , a Rome, on commente les monuments authentiques du droit icrit. 6 Rashdall, i 254!. Cp. Bartoli’s Precursori , 26 f. 584 BALBI OF GENOA. PETRUS OF PADUA. [CHAP. Balbi of Genoa While Accursius of Florence was lecturing at Bologna, Bologna counted among her native scholars the Dominican Bonaccursius, whose knowledge of Greek led to his being sent to the East in 1230 to discuss the points at issue between the Greek and Latin Churches 1 . In the same century Cremona claims four hellenists 2 ; while Genoa is the home of the learned Dominican, Balbi (1286) 3 , whose Catholicon (a Latin Grammar, followed by a Dictionary founded on Papias and Hugutio) was placed, as a book of reference, in the churches of France 4 , was printed by Gutenberg at Mainz in 1460 5 , and was translated into French and used in the schools of Paris as late as 1759. France also adopted a Latin Grammar of the thirteenth century compiled by a Lombard named Caesar, in which the examples are selected from Sallust, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Lucan and Juvenal 6 . Pietro d’Abano (Petrus Ajbonensis, c. 1250—1315) studied in Greece and at Paris, where he began the translation of the Problems of Aristotle, which he completed at Padua 7 . He also translated portions of the Greek text of Galen, and of the problems ascribed to Alexander of Aphrodisias, having been engaged on the latter during his stay in Constantinople 8 . In 1311 the Council of Vienne, in discussing the reunion of the Churches, recommended the appointment of two teachers of Greek in each of the principal cities of Italy. Under Clement V (d. 1314) a Greek school was accordingly opened in Rome, and money collected for Petrus of Padua Teaching of Greek 1 Gradenigo, 99; Tiraboschi, iv 160; Krumbacher, p. 98 2 . 2 Gradenigo, 102. 3 ib. 103 f. The small extent of his knowledge of Greek is indicated in the words: ‘hoc difficile est scire, et maxime mihi non bene scienti linguam Graecam’. Cp. Tiraboschi, iv 356, 481, 526. 4 Le Clerc, Hist. Litt. 430 2 . The sacristan of Saint-Oyan had a Catholicum, with an iron chain attached to it (inventory of 1483 in Bibl. de I'ecole des chartes, 1 322). Cp. Ducange, § 47. 5 Hallam, Lit. i 80 4 ; facsijnile of colophon in Bouchot, Le Livre , 33. 6 ed. C. Fierville (1886). 7 Jacobus Philippus Bergamas, Suppl. Ckron., p. 331 (Gradenigo, 107). The translation and exposition of the Problems of Aristotle, and of Alexander Aphrod., was printed at Venice in 1519. The latter are included in the Didot Aristotle, iv 291-8. 8 Tiraboschi, v 204. XXXI.] TEACHING OF GREEK. STUDY OF ARISTOTLE. 585 the founding of Greek and Hebrew professorships at Oxford 1 . In 1325 there were lectures on Greek, as well as Arabic, Chaldee and Hebrew, in the university of Paris, but the papal legate was instructed to take care that these strange tongues were not made the means of introducing outlandish doctrines. The suspicion of heresy clung to the Greek language in particular, and bishops gave up the traditional custom of signing their names in Greek. There were hardly any hellenists except among the Dominicans, who, as they had early secured complete control of the Inquisition, could with perfect impunity learn as much Greek as they pleased 2 . In the same age, a certain prejudice against the study of the Aristotelian Logic is implied in the story that, about 1330, a Bachelor of Arts of the university of Paris emerged from the tomb, robed in a cloak of parchment black with Latin characters scribbled over its folds, to warn his former instructor against the vanities of the world and to tell him of the torments he was enduring in consequence of his having studied Logic at Paris 3 4 . After many decrees to the contrary, the study of Aristotle was restored with hardly any restrictions by the Papal Legates of 1366. For the B.A. degree it was necessary to take up Grammar, Logic and Psychology, the first of these including the ‘Doctrinale’ of Alexander of Villedieu; the second, the Organon of Aristotle and the Topics of Boethius; and the third, the De Anima. For the License in Arts, the subjects comprised the Physics and the Parva Naturalia , and, for the M.A. degree, the greater part of the Ethics and at least three books of the Meteorological. But Aristotle was not studied in the original. The vast number of lucubrations on Aristotle included in the two oldest catalogues of the library of the Sorbonne (1290 and 1338) supply no proof of any direct acquaintance with the Greek text 5 . The university of Paris was too closely bound up with the 1 Rashdall, ii 459. Cp. Burton, Ling. Gr. Hist., 54. 2 Le Clerc, Hist. Litt. en 14 e s. 423-d 2 ; Hist. Litt. de la France, xxi 143, 216; Gebhart, Origines de la Renaissance , 136, (Les dominicains ) out brhle beaucoup de livres, en qnalite cPinquisitears, rnais ils en lisaient anssi beaucoup. 3 Le Clerc, l.c., 502. 4 De Launoy, De Var. Arist. fortuna, p. 50. Cp. Rashdall, i 436 f. 5 Le Clerc, l. c., 503. 586 EARLIER REVIVALS OF LEARNING. [CHAP. study of Aristotle and too strictly subservient to his supreme Earlier authority, to be able to take the lead in that general revivals of revival of Classical interests which we associate with the age of the Renaissance. Yet the Western lands of Europe, France as well as England, had seen more than one revival of learning in the course of the early Middle Ages. The first two revivals are associated with the names of Aldhelm and Bede, and of Alcuin and Charles the Great. Among the Latin versifiers of the Caroline age, the Englishman who assumes the classic name of Naso writes Virgilian Eclogues in which he borrows phrases from the poets of Rome to express his conscious¬ ness that he is himself living in the age of a renascence :— ‘rursus in antiquos mutataque saecula mores; aurea Roma iterum renovata renascitur orbi’ 1 . Even under the successors of Charles the Great, Latin verse lived on in the lines of Ermoldus Nigellus and of Abbo Cernuus, while Greek prose found an interpreter in the person of Joannes Scotus. In the tenth century Gerbert had been conspicuous in the study of Cicero; in the twelfth, Cicero and Seneca had inspired the moral teaching of Gautier de Chatillon 2 ; and, in the thirteenth, the composition of works in Latin prose had flourished in England under Henry II, while in France a wide acquaintance with Latin literature had been displayed in the vast encyclopaedia of Vincent of Beauvais 3 . In the province of education, the changes which began to pass over the schools of France in the eleventh century had culminated in a great intellectual renaissance in the early part of the twelfth, during the age of Abelard 4 . Throughout the Middle Ages the region of France which lay North of the Loire had taken the lead in the education of Europe, but that region had been too completely permeated and possessed by the 1 Eel. i 8 in Poetae Lat. Aevi Car. i 385 Dummler; Ovid, A. A. iii 113, ‘aurea Roma’; Calpurnius, Eel. i 42, ‘aurea secura cum pace renascitur orbi’; cp. Korting’s Lilt. It. iii 82. 2 P* 53 1 supra. 3 Cp. Bartoli’s Precursori t 10 —31. 4 Rashdall, i 30—71. John of Salisbury, Met. i 5, tells us that, under the influence of amatores litterarum (such as Abelard, William of Conches and Theodoric of Chartres), redierunt artes et, quasi jure postliminii, honorem pristinum ?iactae sunt, et post exsilhun gratiam et gloriam ampliorem. XXXI.] CAUSES OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ITALY. 587 mediaeval spirit to become the native land of the Renaissance 1 . That honour was reserved for the classic soil of „ . Italy, where the Renaissance was slowly called into Renaissance life by a variety of causes 2 , by the prevailing spirit m Italy of intellectual freedom, by the social and political condition of the country, by the continuous tradition of the Latin language, by the constant witness to the existence of Greek in the region once known as Magna Graecia , by the survival of the remains of antique sculpture, such as the marble reliefs which inspired the art of Niccola Pisano 3 , and by the abiding presence of the ruins of ancient Rome, which aroused the enthusiasm, not only of unnamed pilgrims of the tenth and twelfth centuries, but also of men of mark such as Giovanni Villani 4 , and Rienzi 5 , and Petrarch, in the first third of the fourteenth 6 . ‘During the gloomy and disastrous centuries which followed the downfall of the Roman Empire, Italy had preserved, in a far greater degree than any other part of Western Europe, the traces of ancient civilisation. The night which descended upon her was the night of an Arctic summer. The dawn began to reappear before the last reflection of the preceding sunset had faded from the horizon’ 7 . But, although the night was luminous, the sun was absent, and Petrarch was the morning-star of a new day; yet there were other stars in the sky before the star of Petrarch. The Renaissance generally associated in its early stages with the name of Petrarch, was a gradual and protracted process, and not a single and sudden event with a fixed and definite date. One of the prominent characteristics of that Renaissance was 1 Korting, Litt. It . iii 93. 2 Cp. Gebhart’s Origines de la Renaissance en Italic (1879), esp. pp. 51— 146. Sicily and Apulia had already seen a temporary revival of learning under Frederic II (pp. 544-6 supra). 3 Vasari, Vita , init. 4 J300; Cron, viii 6; Balzani’s Chroniclers, 332. 5 Voigt, Humanismus , i 53 s . 6 Petrarch, De Rebus Fam. vi 2 p. 314 Fracassetti. 7 Macaulay, Machiavelli (1827), p. 30 of Essays (1861). Ozanam, Doc. InJdits (1850), p. 28, has similarly described ‘the night which intervened between the intellectual daylight of antiquity and the dawn of the Renaissance’ as une de ces nulls lumineuses oil les dernieres clartes du soir se prolongent jusqiiaux premieres blancheurs du matin. 588 LOVATO AND MUSSATO. [CHAP. Petrarch’s enthusiasm for Cicero. But the Umbrian poet Jacopone da Todi, who died in 1306, two years after the birth of Petrarch, mentions the ‘melody’ of Cicero’s writings on the laws of Rome as one of the vanities that he abandoned when he renounced the world 1 . Among the immediate precursors of the Renaissance in Italy we may here mention two prominent representatives the *r enais °f Latin poetry at Padua. One of these, the sance; Lovato eloquent and learned Lovato (d. 1309), was the first to recognise the rules of metre followed by Seneca a . The other, his younger contemporary and the inheritor of his literary interests, was the eminent statesman, historian and poet, Albertino Mussato (1261—1329). Mussato was the author of poems abounding in reminiscences of Virgil, Ovid and Lucan, and of works in prose recalling Livy’s eulogies of the old Roman heroes, Camillus and Scipio Africanus. Seneca is his model in the diction, and, to some extent, in the general framework of his celebrated tragedy, the Eccerinis, a work founded on the career of the brutal tyrant, Ezzelino, who became lord of Padua in 1237. In a literary controversy with a Dominican monk of Mantua, Mussato strangely contends that poetry is a branch of theology; and, although he imitates ancient models in all his works, whether in verse or prose, he has only a dim apprehension of the beauty of the old classical literature. He thus belongs to the early twilight rather than the actual dawn of the Renaissance 3 . A smoother and more flowing style in Latin prose was attained by the two historians, Giovanni da Cermenate of Milan (1312), who successfully imitated Livy and Sallust 4 , and Ferreto of 1 Le poesie spirituali (1617) p. 5, Rinunzia del Mondo, str. 20, lassovi le scritture antiche , j che mi eran cotanto antic he , | et le Tulliane rubriche, | che mi fean tal melodia ; Gebhart, 157; Norden, 738. 2 Cp. Muratori, Script. Rer. I tal. x 1, ‘ habuit... Padua ci vitas Lovatum, Bonatinum et Mussatum, qui delectarentur metris et amice versibus con- certarent’; Korting, Litt. It. iii (1884) 355f; Wiese u. Percopo, It. Litt. 12 o; Novati, quoted in Wicksteed and Gardner’s Dante and Giovanni del Virgilio , 36. 3 Korting, iii 302-55; Voigt, Humanismus , i 16—18 3 ; Balzani’s Chroni¬ clers , 275-91, esp. 287!; Cloetta, Beitrdge , ii (1892) 5—76; Wicksteed and Gardner, 1—58. 4 Tiraboschi, v 451; Voigt, i 19 3 . XXXI.] CERMENATE. FERRETO. DEL VIRGILIO. 589 Vicenza (d. 1337), who made Virgil, Lucan, Statius and Claudian his models in an epic in honour of Can Grande of _ 1 Cermenate. Verona 1 . It was the Latin epic on a modern Ferreto. heroic theme that Giovanni del Virgilio of Bologna Del Virfflho suggested to Dante, when he had the audacity to send him (early in 1319) a set of Latin hexameters, criticising with a somewhat pedantic and superior air the poet’s preference of Italian to Latin as the language of the Divina Commedia. Del Virgilio’s claim to be regarded as a precursor of the Renaissance rests mainly on his admiration for Virgil, whose name was either assumed by himself or won from others by his success as an exponent or an imitator of the Roman poet 2 . He has no claim on the ground of any revival of the Virgilian Eclogue, for the credit of that rather unhappy innovation is clearly due to Mussato 3 and Dante. The only direct reminiscence of Virgil in Dante’s first Eclogue is caught up by Del Virgilio, who adds seven more in his reply 4 ; but, in a poem of 1327, six years after Dante’s death, Virgilio himself describes the pastoral flute of Virgil as first breathed upon by Dante:— ‘ fistula non posthac nostris inflata poetis donee ea mecum certaret Tityrus olim, Lydius Adriaco qui nunc in litore dormit’ 5 . Since the time of Virgil, Eclogues had been written by Calpurnius under Nero and by Alcuin under Charles the Great, and Benedictine Bucolics on sacred themes had been attempted from the ninth to the twelfth centuries 6 , but their revival is here ascribed to Dante. In the year of that poet’s death (1321), Del Virgilio was the only professor of poetry, the only interpreter of Virgil, Lucan, Statius and the author of the Metamorphoses, left in Bologna 7 . He had repeatedly sent his poetic greetings to the exile at Ravenna, and he now wrote a brief poem in his memory 8 . Six years later he sent a Virgilian Eclogue to one who in his day was at least as famous a poet as Dante, Mussato, then 1 Korting, iii 358. Cp. Balzani’s Chroniclers , 272-4. 2 Wicksteed and Gardner, 121. 3 Korting, iii 324, 365. 4 Wicksteed and Gardner, 207 f. 5 ib. 176. 6 ib. 230 f; e.g. the ‘egloga’ ascribed to Paschasius Radbertus (d. after 856), in Poet. Lat. Aevi Car. iii 45. 7 ib. 133. 8 ib. 174. 590 BRUNETTO LATINI. [CHAP. Brunetto Latini in exile at Chioggia. Virgilio was also the author of a treatise on the Metamorphoses 1 , which proves that the mediaeval passion for ‘moralising’ and allegorizing mythology was as strong as ever towards the close of the Middle Ages. A still earlier precursor of the Renaissance may be justly recognised in the person of the eminent notary of Florence, Brunetto Latini (d. 1290), who, during his exile in France (1260-7), wrote his Tesoretto and his Tesoro in Italian verse and French prose respectively. The former is a didactic poem in an allegorical form; the latter, an encyclopaedia of learning ranging over History, Astronomy, Geography, Zoology, Ethics, Rhetoric and Politics. In treating of Rhetoric, the author gives us a French translation of Caesar’s and Cato’s speeches in the Catiline of Sallust. Italian translations of the first seventeen chapters of the De Inventione , and of Cicero’s speeches in defence of Ligarius, Marcellus and Deiotarus, were also executed by Brunetto; but the renderings of Cicero’s ‘ Catilinarians ’ and of the speeches in Livy, which have been ascribed to him, probably belong to the times of the Renaissance. The general cast of both of his best-known works is mainly mediaeval, but he obviously takes a keen delight in quoting the Classics in his Tesoro, the work in which he ‘ still lives Such is the language which he is made to apply to his masterpiece in that Canto in which Dante mysteriously confesses that he had learned from its author ‘how man becomes eternal’ 2 . Dante (1265—1321) is a precursor of the Renaissance in a limited sense alone,—in his breaking loose from the mediaeval tradition by writing his great poem not in the Latin but in the Tuscan tongue; in his delight in minutely realistic descriptions, whether of the tortures of Hell or of the course of his travels through all the three realms of the spirit-world; in his proud self-consciousness as a poet; and in his personal longing for immortal fame. His individualism is also apparent in the autobiographical facts imbedded in the mediaeval mysticism of the Vita Nuova. The Convito, begun as a com¬ mentary on that work, is written in a comparatively modern spirit. Dante 1 Wicksteed and Gardner, 120, 314-21. 2 Inf. xv; Korting, iii 370—401- XXXI.] DANTE. 591 The De Monarchia, again, combines the political principles of the Middle Ages with a new enthusiasm for the traditions of the old Roman Empire; while the De Vulgari Eloquio discriminates between different varieties of Latin prose, and recognises the claim of a modern language to a strictly scientific investigation. It is a new thing to find such wide learning outside the clerical order. Dante is true to the strictest theology of the Middle Ages, but at the same time he is as learned a layman as any that we shall meet in the coming age of the Renaissance 1 . The speculative basis of Dante’s great poem is furnished by the scholastic combination of Christian theology with the Aristotelian philosophy. For Aristotle himself he has the highest regard. In the Limbo of the unbaptized, in a green meadow surrounded by the sevenfold walls of a noble castle, the poet sees ‘the Master of them that know’, with Plato and Socrates hard by; and, amongst others, Tully and Livy and the ‘moralist Seneca’, with Avicenna, and Averroes ‘who the great Comment made’ 2 . In his works in general he frequently refers to the Latin Classics. He ‘was born a student’ (says Professor Norton), ‘as he was born a poet, and had he never written a single poem, he would still have been famous as the most profound scholar of his times’ 3 . His references to ancient literature have been collected and classified, and the following list shows approximately the number of times he quotes each of the works mentioned:—the Vulgate (500 + ), Aristotle (300+ ) 4 , Virgil ( c . 200), Ovid {c. 100), Cicero (e. 50) 5 6 , Statius and Boethius (30—40), Horace (7)®, Livy and Orosius (10—20); the Timaeus of Plato in the translation by Chalcidius, with Homer, Juvenal, Seneca, Ptolemy, Aesop, Valerius Maximus and St Augustine (less than 10 each) 7 . The above list does not include the references to the Schoolmen, such as Peter 1 Korting, iii 401-15; Gebhart, 282—308. Cp. Villani, Cron, ix 136, (Dante) Tu grande letterato quasi in ogni scienza, tutto fosse laico’. See also Burckhardt, Renaissance, Part 11 c. 3, and Voigt, i n—15 3 . 2 Inf. iv 130—144. a Norton’s New Life of Dante, p. 102. 4 Mainly the Ethics, Physics , Metaphysics and De Anima. 5 De Off ., Sen., Am.', also De Finibus. 6 Six from Ars Poctica, and one from Ep. i 14, 43. 7 E. Moore, Studies, i 4 f. 592 DANTE. [CHAP. Lombard, Bonaventura, Hugh and Richard of St Victor and (above all) Albertus Magnus, and Thomas Aquinas, whose greatest disciple is Dante 1 . Sometimes, when he appears to be quoting Aristotle, his real authority is Albertus Magnus. Thus, in the Convito (ii 15), where he discusses the theories on the Origin of the Milky Way, his statement of the opinions of Anaxagoras and Democritus is derived, not from Aristotle’s Meteorologica (i 8), but from the corresponding work of Albertus Magnus, who knew the Meteorologica in an Arabic translation alone. Dante here compares the Old translation with the New, meaning by the ‘Old’ one of the renderings from the Arabic, and by the ‘New’ one of those from the Greek 2 . Again, in the Cotivito (iii 9), where he discusses the nature of vision, and refers to Aristotle, di Senso e Sensato, his statement as to Aristotle’s views apparently comes from the treatise by Albertus Magnus, which bears the correspond¬ ing title 3 . Dante’s eight references to Pythagoras are, directly or indirectly, due in four cases to Aristotle, in one to Diogenes Laertius, and in the rest to Cicero or St Augustine 4 . He follows Albertus and the Arabs in treating the De Partibus as a portion of the Historia Animalium 5 . Like Apollinaris Sidonius and Vincent of Beauvais, he apparently regards Seneca the moralist as different from the poet, and he wrongly describes the De Quatuor Virtutibus as the work of Seneca 6 . On the death of Beatrice, he finds consolation in Cicero’s Laelius and in Boethius 7 . On her first appearance in the Purgatorio he indulges his frequent fancy for interweaving the sacred and the secular by describing her as welcomed in the words of the Vulgate and of Virgil alike, benedictus qui venis being immediately followed by manibus 0 date lilia plenis 8 . His five great pagan poets are Homer, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Lucan 9 . Statius is not found in the Piferno , his 1 Contrapasso {Inf. xxviii 142), Aristotle’s dvTLirejrovdds, comes from Aquinas, Summa , ii 2 qu. 61, art. 4. Cp., in general, Ozanam, Dante et la Philosophie Catholique an xiii s. (1839), and Hettinger, on Aquinas and Dante {Die Theologie der Gottlichen Komodie , 1879), with other works cited in Ueberweg, ii § 33, p. 290 8 , esp. Berthier’s Comm. (Turin, 1893 f). - .Paget Toynbee, Dante Studies , 42 f; cp. Moore, i 305-18. 3 ib. 53. 4 ib. 87—96. 5 ib. 247b 6 De Mon. ii 5; Toynbee, 155 f. 7 Conv. ii 13, 14; Moore, i 282. 8 Ptirg. xxx 19; Moore, i 26 f. 9 Inf. iv 88. XXXI.] DANTE. 593 place, as a ‘Christian’, converted by Virgil’s Fourth Eclogue , being in the Pur gatorio x . Elsewhere, Dante names Virgil, Ovid, Lucan and Statius alone as the ‘regular’ Latin poets 2 , his omission of Horace being possibly due to a mere accident 3 , especially as he has previously quoted the Ars Poetica with respect, as the work of magister nos ter Horatius 4 . His standard authors in Latin prose are Cicero, Livy, Pliny, Frontinus and Orosius 5 . His knowledge of Greek appears to have been practically nil*. The only four references to Homer are borrowed from others 7 . It is true that he quotes the Greek word hormen 8 and carefully explains filosofo as amatore di sapienza*\ but, on the other hand, he blindly follows Hugutio in deriving autore from autentin (avOivTrjv) 10 , ‘worthy of trust and obedience’, adding on his own account that Aristotle is most ‘worthy of’ such ‘trust’, and that his teaching is of the ‘highest authority’ 11 . But Dante’s Aristotle was only the Latin Aristotle, and of the treatise on Poetry he unfortunately knew nothing. Like the mediaeval scholars in general, he lay in bondage to the Latin versions of the Timaeus and of Aristotle, and it was high time for a revival of learning to restore a knowledge of the Greek texts, and to extend the range of study, and inspire it with a new interest, even in the case of Latin literature. 1 xxi f. Cp. Verrall in Independent Review, Nov. 1903. 2 De Vulgari Eloquio, ii 6. 3 Hor atiurn might easily have fallen out before St atium. 4 De Vulg. EL, ii 4. 5 ib. ii 6. 6 Manetti (d. 1459), Boccaccii Vita, ‘graecarum litterarum cognitione Dantes omnino caruit’; Gradenigo, no. 7 Moore, i 341; Toynbee, 204b In Conv. i 7 ult., ‘Homer cannot be rendered into Latin’... 8 Conv. iv 21. 9 ib. iii 11. 10 Priscian, v 20, ‘ auctor , quando avOtvTrjv significat, commune est; quando av£r)TT]v, auctrix facit femininum ’. Eberhard, Graecismus, c. xi, distinguishes auctor ‘ ab augendo from autor ‘ ab authentin, quod Grecum est ’. 11 Conv. iv 6. Dante’s relation to Greek is discussed by Gradenigo, Lett. Greco-Italiana, nof, and Celestino Cavedone (Modena, i860); cp. Moore’s Studies, i 164 n; and, on Dante's Classical studies in general, Schuck in Neue Jahrb. (1865), ii 253—281. S. 38 CHAPTER XXXII. THE SURVIVAL OF THE LATIN CLASSICS. While the Greek Classics owed their safe preservation to the libraries of Constantinople and to the monasteries of the East, it is primarily to the monasteries of the West that we are indebted for the survival of the Latin Classics. A certain prejudice against Prejudice pagan learning, and especially against pagan poetry, against the had doubtless been traditional in the Christian Classics • m community. Tertullian 1 asked, what had Athens to do with Jerusalem, or the Academy with the Church; and Jerome 2 , what concern had Horace with the Psalter, Virgil with the Gospel, and Cicero with the Apostles? But Jerome 3 agreed with Origen 4 in holding that it was as lawful for Christians, as for Jews, to ‘spoil the Egyptians’, and (after due precautions) to appropriate any prize they had captured from the hands of the enemy 5 . The prejudice, however, lived on among Churchmen such as Gregory the Great, Alcuin of Tours and Odo of Cluni 6 . In a similar spirit, Honorius of Autun, in the preface to the Gemma Animae ( c . 1120), asks £ how is the soul profited by the strife of Hector, the arguments of Plato, the poems of Virgil, or 1 De Praescr. 7 (Migne ii 20). 2 Ep. 22 § 29 (Migne, xxii 416); cp. St Augustine, De Doctrina Christiana, ii 40 (60), Migne, xxxiv 63; Maitland’s Dark Ages, 173 3 . 3 Ep. 70 (Migne, xxii 665). 4 Migne, xi 87, xii 490. Cp. Norden’s Kunstprosa , 675-80. 5 Deut. xxi 10. 6 pp. 432, 459 f, 485 supra, and Norden, 531; also (on Alcuin and Virgil) Schmid, Gesch. der Erziehung, n i 177. CHAP. XXXII.] PREJUDICE AGAINST THE CLASSICS. 595 the elegies of Ovid, who, with others like them, are now gnashing their teeth in the prison of the infernal Babylon, under the cruel tyranny of Pluto’? 1 Even Abelard (who quotes Jerome’s opinion) inquires ‘why the bishops and doctors of the Christian religion do not expel from the City of God those poets whom Plato forbade to enter into his city of the world’ 2 ; while Nicholas, the secretary of Bernard of Clairvaux, (writing after 1153,) sighs over the charm he had once found in Cicero and the poets, and in the golden sayings of the philosophers and the ‘songs of the Sirens’ 3 . The Benedictine chronicler, Rodulfus Glaber (d. 1050), tells the story of one Vilgardus, a student of ‘grammar’ in the neighbour¬ hood of Ravenna, who, in a dream, saw three demons who had assumed the forms of Virgil, Horace and Juvenal, the study of whose texts betrayed him into heretical opinions, for which he was condemned by Peter, archbishop of Ravenna (in or before 971) 4 . Herbert de Losinga, the first bishop of Norwich (d. 1119), had a dream that compelled him to renounce the reading and the imitation of Virgil and Ovid 5 . Poets (unless their writings were of highly moral purport, or capable of being ‘moralised’ by means of allegorical interpretation) were in fact regarded with far less favour than philosophers. One of the celebrated illustrations in the Hortus Deliciarum , the pictorial encyclopaedia composed, or compiled, by the abbess Herrad of Landsperg for the nuns of Mont St Odile in Alsace (1167-95), represents two large con¬ centric circles filled with the following figures. In the upper half of the inner circle, Philosophy, a queenly form whose crown is parted into the semblance of three human heads identified as ‘Ethics’, ‘Logic’ and ‘Physics’, may be seen enthroned in majesty, while, in the lower half of the same circle, we have Socrates and Plato seated at desks with books open before them. The outer circle is filled with a series of seven arches, and, under each of 1 Migne, clxxii 543; Maitland, i85 a . 2 Theol. Christ, ii, Migne, clxxxviii 1210 D; Maitland, 186 3 . 3 ‘Petri Damiani’ Sertno 61, p. 296 e Caetani (Migne, cxliv 852 d). 4 Hist, ii c. 12 (Migne, cxlii); Tiraboschi, iii 192; Giesebrecht, De litt. studiis (Ital. trans. p. 24). 5 Epp. p. 53-7, cp. pp. 63, 93. Nevertheless he tells his pupils to take Ovid as their model in Latin verse (p. 75), and himself quotes Tristia, i 9, 5—6 (Goulburn and Symonds, Life and Letters of H. de L., i 249). 38—2 596 PREJUDICE AGAINST THE CLASSICS [CHAP. these, we have a personification of one of the Seven Liberal Arts, with her emblems in her hands, Grammar with a book and a birch, Rhetoric with a tablet and stylus, and similarly with the rest. Below and outside this outer circle are four ‘poets or magicians’, each of them writing at a desk, with an evil spirit prompting him, in the form of a raven hovering near his ear. The whole design is further embellished with many mottoes in appropriate places 1 . The philosophical works of Cicero had supplied a model for the Latin prose of the Fathers and of their successors in the Middle Ages; but even Cicero, it was sometimes felt, might be studied with an undue devotion. In 1150 we find the prior of Hildesheim writing to the abbot of Corvey in the following terms :— ‘Though you desire to have the books of Tully, I know that you are a Christian and not a Ciceronian 2 . You go over to the camp of the enemy, not as a deserter, but as a spy. I should therefore have sent you the books of Tully which we have,— De Re Agraria, Philippics and Epistles , but that it is not our custom that any books should be lent to any person without good pledges. Send us therefore the Nodes Aiticae of Aulus Gellius and Origen On the Canticles' . The abbot replies in the same strain, assuring the prior that Cicero is not the main staple of his repast, but only serves as dessert, and sending him Origen and (in the absence of Gellius) a book on Tactics 3 . Lastly, the abbot of Cluni, Peter the Venerable (d. 1156), writing to Master Peter of Poitiers, thus urges the uselessness of the study of the ancients:— ‘ See now, without the study of Plato, without the disputations of the Academy, without the subtleties of Aristotle, without the teaching of philo¬ sophers, the place and the way. of happiness are discovered...Why, vainly studious, are you reciting with the comedians, lamenting with the tragedians, trifling with the metricians, deceiving with the poets, and deceived with the philosophers? ’ 4 * 1 The ms perished in the flames during the bombardment of Strassburg in 1870. The illustrations have since been reproduced (from earlier copies) in Straub and Keller’s magnificent folio (1879— 99 ) > see Plate, p. 537 supra. Cp. Engelhardt (1818) 31 f (with plate); Bursian, i 74; and Graf, Roma, ii 193k 2 p. 220 supra. 3 Maitland, 175 3 f- Text in Jaffe, Bibl. Rer. Germ, i 326. 4 Migne, clxxxix 77 d; Maitland, 44s 3 . Cp., in general, Specht, Gesch. des UnterrichtsweseiiSy 40—57 ; and Wattenbach, Geschichtsquelleny i 6 324-6. XXXII.] COUNTERACTED. 597 A more generous spirit had animated Cassiodorus when he exhorted his monks to study the liberal arts and to follow the example of Moses, who was ‘learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians’, and also that of the learned Fathers of the Church 1 ; and the example of the Fathers is pleaded by the Norman poet, Etienne de Rouen (end of cent, xn), in the abstract of Quintilian, which he prepared for his pupils at Bee 2 . Doubtless many of those who entered the monastery were drawn to it as a place of peace and quietness, a home of learning and leisure, where they could live apart from the ‘strife of tongues’ and the tumult of war. The influence of such studious votaries of the ‘religious’ life must have done much to counteract the traditional prejudice against the pagan Classics 3 ; and intelligent learners of Latin could hardly fail to be attracted by the perfection of form attained by many of the old authors whose works they studied with a view to mastering the language that had long been traditional in the teaching and in the services of the Church, and remained (for the present) the only medium of literary expression in Western Europe. Thus an interest in the Latin Classics had succeeded in surviving all the fulminations of the Fathers and the censures of the Church. But, in the centuries with which we are now con¬ cerned, the study of the Classics, wherever it actually prevailed, was regarded not as an end in itself, but as a means towards the better understanding of the Bible, and this is the main difference in the attitude assumed towards that study in the Middle Ages a'hd the Renaissance. While the reading of pagan authors was discouraged by writers such as Isidore of Seville, and by the founders of the monastic Orders, no restriction was placed on the copying of mss. Jerome had recommended that form of industry as one of the most suitable occupations of the monastic life 4 ; and Ephraem the Syrian (d. 378) had mentioned the transcription of books, as well as the dyeing of parchments, among the manual labours of 1 Div. Led. c. 28. 2 Comparetti, Virgilio nel Medio Evo , i 112, note 2 ; Leon M ait re, Ecoles, 159; Fierville, Introd. to Quintil. I, p. xxviiif. 3 Cp. Clifford Allbutt, Science and Medieval Thought , 79; Putnam, i 122. 4 Ep. 125, scribantur libri. I 598 THE MONASTIC ORDERS AND THE CLASSICS. [CHAP. monks 1 . The copying of mss was in fact the only manual occupation recognised in the monasteries founded by St Martin of Tours, where it was confined to younger members of the house 2 . The Benedictine Rule is vague, but it assumes the existence of a monastic library 3 , naturally consisting of ecclesi¬ astical books, while the work of the monastic schools would no less naturally involve the acquisition of a number of classical texts. Thus the celebrated mss known as the Vatican Virgil (cent, ii or hi) and the Carolingian Terence (cent, ix) once belonged to the Benedictine abbey of St Denis, near Paris. The devotion of the Benedictine Order to the cause of classical and general literature has been fully and elaborately justified and exemplified in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries by Mabillon 4 and Ziegelbauer 5 , and has since been more succinctly set forth by Montalembert 6 and Dantier 7 . The Rule of the Cluniacs appoints a special officer to take charge of the books, and provides for an annual audit of the volumes assigned to the several monks, and a similar provision is to be found in the statutes of Oriel College, Oxford (1329) 8 . The Carthusian Rule assumes that very few of the monks are incapable of being copyists and punishes any monk who refuses to copy when he is able to do so 9 . The Carthusian abbot Guigo (d. 1137) regards the labour of the copyist as an ‘immortal work’ 10 . But the members of this Order apparently confined their attention to ecclesiastical literature. The Frisian brothers, Emo and Addo, were wider in 1 Wattenbach, Schriftwesen im MA, 351 2 ; Lecoy de la Marche, Les MSS, 89. 2 Sulp. Severus, Vita Martini , c. 7. 3 c. 48. 4 Traite des etudes monastiques (1691), and Reflexions (1693). 5 Observations Literariae O.S.B. four folio volumes (Augsburg, 1784). Cp. C. Acheri’s (i.e. Father Cahier’s) 12 Essais in Annates de philosophic chretienne, xvii—xviii, Oct. 1838-9, esp. Essais 3-7 bibliotheques , 8 calligraphic, 9—10 miniatures , 11—12 luxe bibliographique au moyen-dge. 6 Monks of the West , Bk xviii c. 41. 7 Les monasteres benedictins d'ltalie, 2 vols. (1866), on Monte Cassino, Bobbio, etc. 8 J. W. Clark, Care of Books, 67, 133. Cp. Gasquet’s Essays, 20, 28. 9 Lecoy de la Marche, 90. 10 Migne, cliii 883. XXXII.] THE MONASTIC SCRIPTORIUM. 599 their interests. As students at Paris, Orleans and Oxford, they divided the night between them, and spent it in copying all the texts they could find, with the explanations given them by their lecturers; and, as head of the Premonstratensian abbey of Wittewierum in Groningen (d. 1237), Emo afterwards instructed nuns as well as monks in the art of transcribing mss 1 . At Cluni all the requirements of the copyist were provided by the armarius or librarian 2 , and the rule of silence was strictly enjoined. If the copyist wanted a book, he had to stretch out his hands and make a movement as of turning over leaves. To distinguish different kinds of books, various further signs were in use. If he required a Psalter, he placed his hands over his head, in allusion to the royal crown of David; if a pagan book, he scratched his ear after the manner of a dog 3 . Sometimes, for lack of parchment, a copyist effaces a pagan text to make room for a Christian work; but the converse occasionally happens, and a case is known in which the Epistles of St Paul have been superseded by the books of the Iliad 4 . Occasionally, the copyist protests against or even alters a text which, on moral grounds, he disapproves 5 ; and the heathen incantations, copied in a ms of Apuleius de herbis in a hand of the ninth century, are marked for omission in a hand of the fifteenth 6 7 . The scene of the copyist’s industry was the scriptorium 1 . This might either be a large room where twelve copyists could be at work at once, or a small cell scriptorium for a single transcriber. In the old plan of the monastery at St Gallen, the scriptorium is beside the church and below the library 8 ; Under Alcuin, St Martin’s at Tours became 1 Wattenbach, l.c., 374 s ; cp. Montalembert, v 136! (1896). 2 ib. 37 2 2 . 3 Martene, De Antiq. Monach. Ritibus , lib. v, c. 18 § 4, pro signo libri saecularis, praemisso generali signo libri, adde ut aurem tangat cum digito, sicut canis cum pede pruriens solet. 4 Comparetti, Virgilio, i 114. 5 Comparetti, i 115; Friedlander’s Martial, i p. 73 b 6 Haase, De Med. Aevi Stud. Philol. 19. 7 Ducange, s.v. Scriptores ; Hardy, Descriptive Catalogue, Pref. to vol. iii {Rolls Series)', cp. Gasquet’s Essays, 41 f. 8 N. of the chancel; Pertz, Mon. ii 95 ; Wattenbach, 370 2 . 6 oo TOURS. AACHEN. FULDA. [CHAP. famous for a time as a school of copyists 1 , and one of his epigrams had the scriptorium for its theme, an epigram borrowed in part by Simon, abbot of St Albans, SEATED AT HIS BOOK-CHEST. British Museum, Cotton MS, Claudius E4. (From J. W. Clark, Care of Books , ■293.) 1 p. 457 supra. Alcuin’s direct share in the formation of the script, which became characteristic of Tours, has, however, been disputed by Prof. K. Menzel of Bonn in his contribution to the fine folio volume entitled Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift (Leipzig, 1889), 3—5. Prof. Menzel there assigns the credit to Alcuin’s successors, (1) Fridugis of York (804-34), an d (2) Adelard (834-45), under the former of whom Adalbaldus was active as a skilful copyist (Wattenbach, Geschichtsquellen, i 6 160). He also points out that the semi-uncial variety of that script ( facsimile in E. M. Thompson’s Palaeography , 234) hardly survived the year 900, while the Caroline minuscules lived on ( ib . 235). The ‘Ada ms’ (a celebrated codex aureus of the Latin Gospels, prepared by command of Charles the Great, and presented to the abbey of St Maximin, at Trier, by the emperor’s sister Ada, d. 817? or 823?) is written in exceedingly beautiful minuscules by two scribes, (A) c. 790-9, and (B) c. 800-20. The external and internal splendour of the MS suggests that it was probably prepared in the imperial city of Aachen itself; and the date of its completion is presumably after the death of Alcuin (804). On the other hand, the ordinary script of Alcuin’s own time at Tours may be regarded as well represented by a mixed MS of certain works of Alcuin and Bede, now at Cologne (no. cvi; facsimile in Arndt’s Schrifttafeln , 37—40). XXXII.] ST ALBANS. GLOUCESTER. DURHAM. 601 Alcuin’s pupil, Rabanus Maurus, for the scriptorium at Fulda 1 . In the Benedictine monasteries in general, it became customary to institute, first the library, then the scriptorium , and finally the school. At St Albans, the scriptorium founded by abbot Paul (1077-93) was above the chapter-house, while the mss collected a century later by abbot Simon (1167-83) were kept ‘in the painted aumbry in the church’ 2 . In many cases the scriptorium was considerately placed in the immediate neighbourhood of the calefactory. Instead of a large room, there might be a number of small scriptoria ranged round a cloister, each of them opening on to the cloister-walk and lighted by a single window on the opposite side, like the ‘carrels’ of St Peter’s abbey, now forming part of Gloucester cathedral. ‘Over against the carrells’ (in the great Benedictine House at Durham) ‘did stande certaine great almeries of waynscott all full of bookes, wherein did lye as well the old auncyent written Doctors of the Church as other prophane authors with dyverse other holie men’s wourks’ 3 . Nicholas, the secretary of Bernard of Clairvaux, describes his scriptoriolum (with its door open to the apartment of the novices, and with the cloister to the right and the infirmary and place of exercise to the left) as ‘a place to be desired, and pleasant to look upon’; as ‘comfortable for retirement’, and ‘fitted with choice and divine books’ 4 . The task of the copyist was often carried on in the open cloister 5 . No ms was copied in the monk’s own cell, and, for fear of accidents, candle-light was (in general) not allowed; but we know of one at least who (in his own pathetic words) ‘ Dum scripsit, friguit, et quod cum lumine solis Scribere non potuit, perfecit lumine noctis’ 6 7 . The scribe was expected to copy exactly what he saw before him, even when it was clearly wrong: and his work was afterwards revised by the corrector\ The extreme elaboration with which the copyists of Cluni 1 Browerus, Antiquitates Fuldenses (1612), p. 46, and p. 466 supra. 2 Gesta Abbatum, i 184, 192 (Gasquet’s Essays, 6). 3 Rites of Durham p. 70 (J. W. Clark, Care of Books, 90). 4 Ep* 35 > Migne, cxcvi 1626 f; Maitland, 404 3 f. 5 Gasquet, 43 f; J. W. Clark, 80 f. 6 Pez, Thesaurus , i p. xx. 7 Wattenbach, 359 s f (cp. Bursian, i 31 f). 602 SURVIVAL OF THE LATIN CLASSICS [CHAP. executed their work was criticised by the Cistercians, who, how¬ ever, ended by following their example, even exempting their copyists from all labour in the fields except at the time of harvest \ Among the most famous schools of copyists were those of Tours, Orleans, Metz, Rheims, Priim and St Gallen. But in 1297 at St Gallen, and in 1291 at Murbach in the upper Vosges, few (if any) of the monks were competent copyists, and similarly at Corbie (near Amiens) the monks ceased to act as copyists them¬ selves at the end of the thirteenth century 1 2 . The Lucretius, which was there c. 1200, has since been lost. Many of the other mss have, however, survived, notably a ms of Pliny the elder (cent, ix) and two of the Thebais of Statius (cent, ix, x) 3 ; and (although the copyist seldom signed his work) the names of 27 librarians, copyists or correctors of mss at Corbie are still known 4 . At Cluni, the mss included Livy, Sallust, Suetonius, Trogus Pompeius (i.e. Justin), Seneca, ‘Aristotle’, Cicero, Ovid, Virgil, Horace, Juvenal, Statius, Lucan, Terence, Claudian, Aesop, Pliny the elder, Festus, Priscian (besides the chief mediaeval authors), the catalogues of centuries xn and xm containing near¬ ly t 000 volumes 5 . The monks of centuries x, xi and xii are credited with having been keener copyists than their successors; but the love of learning, which had received its first impulse from Cassiodorus, never entirely died out. It left its results in the mss of Monte Cassino and Bobbio ; of Corbie and Cluni; of Moissac on the upper Garonne, and Tours 6 and Fleury on the Loire 7 ; 1 Wattenbach, 37 2 2 . 2 377* 2 ; cp. Gasquet’s Essays, 52. 3 Facsimiles in Chatelain, Pal. des Cl. Lat., PI. 140 f, 161. 4 Delisle, Bibl. de Corbie (i860), Mem. de F A cad. des Inscr. xxiv 266—342 — Bibl. de Vecole des chartes , xxxi 393—439, 498—515; Cabinet des MSS, ii 427. 5 Found by Mabillon and Martene; Delisle, Cabinet des MSS, ii 458—87; Inventaire (1884), 337-79; Lecoy de la Marche, 92 ; cp. E. Sackur, Die Cluniacenser (Halle, 1892-4). 6 e.g. the Berne Virgil, and the Leyden Nonius Marcellus. 7 e.g. the Berne Horace and Statius, the Paris Lucan, the Vatican Fasti of Ovid. Cp. also Traube, S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 1891, 400-2; Delisle, Cab. des MSS, ii 364-6, and Notices et Extraits, xxxi (1) 357—439; Cuissard-Gaucheron, MSS...d'Orleans, Fonds de Flemy (Orleans, 1855). XXXII.] PARTLY DUE TO LOCAL CAUSES. 603 of St Gallen and Reichenau; of Lorsch, Hersfeld 1 and Fulda 2 . The work accomplished at Monte Cassino under Desiderius has been already mentioned 3 . Among other Italian libraries were those at Novalesa, near Mont Cenis, which contained more than 6000 volumes in 906, when the monks removed them to Turin for fear of the Saracens 4 ; and at Pomposa, near Ravenna, including copies of Seneca and Pliny 5 6 . In France the monastery of Moissac alone preserved a copy of ‘Lactan tius’ De Mortibus Persecutorum *; that of Murbach, the only ms of Velleius Paterculus; that of Fleury, near Orleans, the longer version of the Commentary on Virgil by Servius 7 ; Bobbio once possessed the only ms of Terentianus Maurus; and similarly in many other cases 8 . Thus it is that the monasteries of the Middle Ages may justly be regarded not only as ‘repositories of the learning that then was’, but also as ‘well-springs of the learning which was to be’ 9 10 . While the records of other literatures have perished, we are indebted to the monks for the fact that ‘ Classic lore glides on, By these Religious saved for all posterity’ 30 . The survival of certain of the Latin Classics was due to their local interest. Catullus survived in his birthplace, Verona (possibly owing to Pacificus, the archdeacon of that city, who, before 846, presented 218 mss to the local College of Canons 11 ) ; Caesar’s 1 Cp. Holder-Egger’s Lambert (1894), p. xiif. 2 J- Gegenbaur (Fulda, 1871-4, 1878). On all the monasteries in this line, see Index to Wattenbach, Geschichtsquellen , and to Specht, Unterrichts- wesen. 3 p. 500 supra. 4 Muratori, Script. Rer. Ital. 11 ii 731; Tiraboschi, iii 194; Balzani’s Chroniclers , 183!; Cipolla, Mon. Novaliciensia (Rome, 1898). 5 Montfaucon, Diar. Ital. c. 6. 6 Now Par. Colbert. 1297. 7 Now Par. 7929. 8 Cp. Vadianus ap. Ziegelbauer, Obs. Lit. O.S.B. , ii 520. For Rutilius Namatianus we depend entirely on a Vienna transcript of a unique ms formerly at Bobbio. 9 Maitland’s Dark Ages , Pref. 10 Wordsworth, Eccl. Sonnets , xxv. 11 Muratori, Ant. Ital. iii 838; Tiraboschi, iii 264. 604 the CLASSICS IN FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, [CHAP. Gallic War , in France; the Germania and the early books of the Annals of Tacitus, with all that remains of Ammianus Marcellinus 1 , in Germany; and Frontinus, On Aqueducts, at Monte Cassino, S.E. of the Roman Campagna, where this unique ms is still preserved. The interests of education prompted the preservation of authors on Grammar, with Terence and Virgil, and (in a less degree) Lucan and Statius, Persius and Juvenal. Sallust, Livy and Suetonius were retained as models for historical, Cicero’s Speeches for rhetorical, and Ovid for poetical composition. The ethical interest prolonged the existence of the philosophical writings of Cicero and Seneca, and of the historical anecdotes of Valerius Maximus 2 . Germany seems to have been mainly interested in subject-matter; France, in style and form. Catullus was preserved in France, as well as in Italy; Horace, chiefly in France; Propertius, probably in France alone, being first mentioned by Richard de Fournival, chancellor of Amiens (xm) 3 ; the two earliest notices of Tibullus come from France 4 , and his allusions to the local rivers may have added to his popularity in that country 5 . The Cynegetica of Nemesianus is mentioned by Hincmar of Rheims alone, as a book which he had studied as a boy (d. 882). Cicero’s Speeches survived at Cluni, Langres and Liege, and the Ciceronian mss at Hirschau were brought from France 6 . The first to translate any of the Speeches was an Italian, Brunetto Latini (d. 1294); the Brutus survived solely in Italy; the De Oratore and Orator, in Italy and France. As an authority on matters of diction, the grammarian Festus was known in France, and was also preserved in Italy 7 , Paulus Diaconus, generally recognised as the author of the extant abridgement, having lived in both of these lands. The historians (with the 1 Codex Fuldensis (cent, x) now in Vatican. 2 On Valerius cp. Wibald of Corvey (0. 1150) in Bibl. Ker. Germ, i 280 Jaffe. 3 Propercii Aurelii Nautae monobiblos (cp. Teuffel, § 246, r), Manitius in Rhein. Mus. xlvii, Suppl. p. 31. List of Richard’s books in Delisle, Cab. des MSS, ii 514. 4 Norden, Kunstprosa , 718 n. 2. 8 i 7, 1 —12. 6 Bibl. Rer. Germ, i 327. 7 Cp. Manitius, in Philol. xlix 384. XXXII.] ENGLAND. RICHARD OF BURY. 605 exception of the author of the Gallic War ) were diligently read and copied in Germany 1 ; and the elder Pliny in Germany and England. Richard of Bury looks back with regret on the ages when the monks used to copy mss ‘between the hours of prayer’, giving all the time they could to the making of books, and contrasts the industry of the past with the idleness of his own day (1345) 2 . He also presents us with a vivid picture of his own eagerness in collecting mss with the aid of the stationarii and librarii of France, Germany and Italy. For some of his books he sends to Rome; he also dwells with rapture on his visits to Paris, ‘the paradise of the world’, with its delightful libraries, its mss of Aristotle and Plotinus, St Paul and Dionysius, and ‘all the works in which the Latin Muse reproduces the lore of Greece’ 3 . He adds that, in his own manors in England, he always employed a large number of copyists 4 , scribes and correctors, besides binders and illuminators 5 ; and he pays an eloquent and well- known tribute to his beloved books 6 . All the rooms in his house are said to have been crowded with them. They are even said to have encroached on his bedroom in such numbers that he could not get to bed without stepping over them. His library has unfortunately been lost, and even its catalogue has vanished 7 . From the Monasteries the copying of mss passed to the Universities. During the 70 years preceding the Universitie date of the Philobiblon , authorised copyists for the production of text-books were licensed and controlled by the university of Paris (1275), numbering 24 in 1292 and 29 in 1323 8 . The library of the Sorbonne was instituted in 1289; its catalogue (which is still extant) numbers 1017 titles, and by the statutes 1 Manitius in Rhein. Mus. l.c., with summary in Norden, 691 f. 2 Philobiblon c. 5. 3 c. 8, §§ 126-8. 4 antiquarii (§ 143 = transcriptores veterum , § 207). 5 § 143- 6 c. 1 §§ 26—29. 7 H. Morley’s Eng. Writers, iv 56; Putnam, i 168; p. 580 supra. 8 Paul Lacroix, quoted by Lecoy de la Marche, p. 110 f. On ‘ Books in the early Universities’, see Schmid, Gesch. d. Erziehung, 11 i 490-5, and Putnam, i 178—224. 6 o6 RISE OF MEDIAEVAL UNIVERSITIES. [CHAP. of 1321 one copy of every work in its best form was added to the collection 1 . But, at least half a century before Paris became famous as the home of Scholasticism ( c . 1100) or Bologna as a school of Law ( c . 1113), and more than a century before Oxford began to flourish, possibly owing to the withdrawal of certain English students from Paris (1167), Salerno had been known throughout Europe as a school of Medicine (c. 1050), and Latin translations of Arabic renderings of the great Greek physicians began to be in use in that ‘city of Hippocrates’ before the end of the eleventh century 2 . Montpellier is first noticed as a school of Medicine in 1137, and the text-books there used are chiefly those of the Greek Galen, as translated from Arabic into Latin in the twelfth century, mainly by Gerard of Cremona 3 . We hear of students migrating from Oxford to Cambridge in 1209, and from Bologna to Padua in 1222, and we find Salamanca and Toulouse coming into being about the same date, while the only important universities founded between that time and the middle of the fourteenth century are those of Pisa (1343), Florence (1349), and Prague (1347-8), this last being the earliest of German universities. The traditions of study, which had been in a measure maintained by the Monasteries down to about the end of the twelfth century, passed in part to the Dominican and Franciscan Orders in the thirteenth, while, before the close of the Middle Ages, they also found a home in Universities such as those which have here been briefly mentioned. A few of the indications of the relative importance attached to the principal Latin authors in the Middle Ages may here be noticed 4 , with some mention of the leading mediaeval mss still extant, and of the mediaeval libraries where they were formerly 1 A. Franklin, Les Anciennes Bibl. de Paris (1867), La Sorbonne, 221 —318; cp. Putnam, i 166. 2 Rashdall, i 77 f. 3 ib. ii [15, 780. 4 Cp. Manitius in Philologus , xlvii—lii, and Suppl. vii, 1899 (f° r mediaeval quotations), and Rhein. Mus. xlvii, Suppl. pp. 152 (for evidence from mediaeval catalogues), with literature in Hubner, Bibliographies §§ 34, 38 ; also A. Graf, Roma nella Memoria...del Medio Evo (1883), ii 153—367; and the very brief sketches in G. Meier’s Sieben Freien Kiinste (Einsiedeln, 1886), i 17— 21, and Bursian’s Cl. Philol. in Deutschland , i 27 f. . XXXII.] PLAUTUS. TERENCE. 607 preserved 1 . It will thus be seen how large a portion of the Latin Classics owes its present existence to the industry of copyists prior to the age of the Renaissance. Plautus was little read 2 ; he is only quoted second-hand by Rabanus Maurus, who clearly derives his knowledge from Priscian Terence and Isidore; but many isolated lines are cited in the Glossariutn Osberni 3 , a work of English origin. In the mediaeval catalogues, he is found at Bury 4 and at Bamberg 5 6 only, but he is mentioned by Ratherius, bishop of Verona (965)®, and Philip de Harveng (cent, xii) 7 , both of whom once belonged to the diocese of Cambrai. The text of Plautus now depends (1) on the Ambrosian palimpsest in Milan (cent, iv—v), containing the Trinummus and Miles G/oriosus and about half of twelve other plays, which almost certainly came from Bobbio 8 , and (2) on five mss of the ‘Palatine’ recension, viz. one at Heidelberg 9 , two in the Vatican, one in the British Museum (xi), and a second Ambrosian ms (xii). Until 1428, only the first eight of the twenty extant plays were really known. Terence was far more familiar. A line from his plays was even quoted in St Peter’s by Liberius, bishop of Rome (352-66), in an exhortation addressed to the sister of Ambrose on her reception as a nun in the presence of her brother 10 . He was closely imitated by Hroswitha, and not 1 Nearly all the mss here mentioned are included in Chatelain’s Paleographie des Classiques Latins , containing more than 300 facsimiles , with descriptive letterpress (1884—1900). Further details as to the ‘class-marks’ etc. of mss in modern libraries may be found in Teuffel or Schanz, and the current critical editions. 2 Peiper, Archiv f Lit. Cesch. v 495; Rhein. A/us. xxxii 516; Manitius, Philol. Suppl. vii 758 f. 3 A column and a half of references in Index to Mai, Auctores , viii. The work was ascribed by Leland to Osbern, a monk of Gloucester ( c. 1150); Rhein. A/us. xxix (1874) 179 f. 4 M. R. James, Bibl. Buriensis , p. 27. 8 Manitius, Rhein. A/us. xlviii 101. 6 Migne, cxxxvi 752, Catullum nunquam antea lectum, Plautum iam olim lego [nec]lectum. 7 Migne, cciii 872 ( Captivi ), 1008 (Asinaria). 8 p. 441 supra. 9 Complete facsimile (Leyden; 1900). 10 Hautontim. 373; Ambrose in Migne, xvi 225 c. 6o8 CATULLUS. [CHAP. unfrequently cited by others 1 ; but, although his metres had been expounded by Priscian, he was regarded as a prose-author not only by the learned abbess of Gandersheim, but also by the well- informed schoolmaster of Bamberg, Hugo of Trimberg 2 . The text depends on the Bembine ms in the Vatican (iv—v), so called because it belonged to Cardinal Bembo’s father, who describes it as a codex mihi carior auro 3 . The later mss (ix) belong to the inferior recension by Calliopius (m—iv). Verona’s poet Catullus, who had been imitated in the Roman Age 4 , and partially known to Ausonius, Paulinus Catullus ° . ... . and Apolhnans Sidomus in Gaul, and to Corippus in Africa 5 , is quoted by Isidore of Seville in the seventh century, but is not even named again until the time of Ratherius, bishop of Verona (965) 6 . The ms at Verona, lost for a time but recovered shortly before 1323, was known to Petrarch (1347) and Coluccio Salutato (1374), but had vanished again before Traversari’s visit (July 1433) 7 . It is (directly or indirectly) the source of all the extant mss 8 , the best of them being the Paris ms from Saint- Germain-des-Pres, copied at Verona in 1375 9 , the Oxford ms from the collection of the Venetian Jesuit Ganonici (1817), copied about 1400, and the codex Datanus in Berlin (1463). The Epithalcunium alone is included in a Paris Anthology of century ix. * Lucretius, who, in the Roman Age, had been familiar to 1 Manitius, Philol. lii 546-53; Cloetta, Beitrage , i; Komodie u. Tragodie im MA, 2 f (Halle, 1890); Magnin, Bibl. de Vecole des chartes, i 524-31. John of Salisbury, Pol. vii 9, calls him Comicus qui prae ceteris placet', but the only plays he quotes are the Andria and Eunuchns. 2 Registrum Multorum Auctorum (1280), ed. Hiirner, Ein Quellenbuch zur Lat. Literaturgeschichte des MAs , Vienna Akad. Sitzungsber. 1888, (Sallust, Cicero, Terence) ‘ non in numero ponuntur metricorum ’ ( 1 . 282). 3 Complete facsunile (Leyden, 1903). 4 Bursian’s Jahresb. li 239. 5 Philol. xlviii 760; cp. Bahrens, ii 65. 6 p. 607 supra , n. 6; R. Ellis, Prol. viif. 7 Hodoeporicon, p. 34; Voigt, Humanismus , i 207, 439, ii 384 s ; Bahrens, i pp. v—xi; R. Ellis, Prol. x—xii. 8 Disputed by L. Schwabe (1886) and B. Schmidt (1887). 9 Complete facsimile (Paris, Leroux, 1890). XXXII.] LUCRETIUS. 609 Arnobius, Lactantius 1 and Jerome 2 , and had been occasionally imitated by Commodianus and frequently quoted Lucretius by Isidore, was little read in the Middle Ages 3 . But he is mentioned by Ratherius, and, through the medium of the grammarians, he became known to Bede, one of whose quotations enabled Lachmann to emend the poet’s text (vi 868). A few consecutive lines are quoted by Ermenrich of Ellwangen 4 . Some at least of the quotations in Rabanus Maurus are un¬ doubtedly derived (as in the case of Plautus) from Priscian and Isidore. If any of them are first-hand, they may have been taken from the ninth century ms now at Leyden (A), which was formerly in the library of St Martin’s church at Mainz, the see of Rabanus. The tenth century ms at Leyden (B) was once in the abbey of St Bertin, near St Omer and not far from Corbie, and mediaeval catalogues show that Lucretius was not unknown at Corbie itself, as well as at Murbach and Bobbio. Our present authorities, A and B, are derived from a lost original of century iv—v, con¬ sisting of 302 pages written in thin capitals, which was formerly in some part of Frankland 5 . Marbod, bishop of Rennes (d. 1123), who opposed the Epicureanism of his day, has an obvious echo of Lucretius in the lines, ‘ Hanc (jv. mortem) indoctus homo summum putat esse malorum, Omnia cum vita tollentur commoda vitae’ 6 . A single line of Lucretius 7 is inaccurately quoted in works bearing the names of Wilhelm of Hirschau 8 (d. 1091) and Honorius of Autun 9 (c. 1120), both of which are now generally ascribed to William 1 Philippe, Rev. de VHist, des Religions , 1896, 16—36. 2 Adv. Rtif. iii c. 29. 3 Manitius, in Philol. Iii 536-8. Jourdain, Recherches, 21, seems hardly justified in saying that d toutes les epoques du moyen dge on a lu...le pohne de Lucrhe. 4 ed. Dummler, p. 20 (Lucr. i 150-8). 5 Lachmann, Comm. init. 6 Liber decern Capitnlorum, ix; Lucr. iii 898—901, and iii 2, ‘commoda vitae ’. 7 ii 888, ex insensilibus ne credas sensile gigni. 8 Philosophicae Institutiones, ip. 24. 9 De Philos. Mundi, i c. 21, Migne, clxxii 54. S. 39 6 io LUCRETIUS. [CHAP. of Conches 1 . The same line is quoted by Giraldus Cambrensis 2 (d. 1222); but, with William and Giraldus alike, the ultimate authority is Priscian (iv 27), as is proved by their agreeing with Priscian in making the last word of the line nasci instead of gigni 3 . Giraldus actually quotes it as a line of Plautus, thus revealing his ignorance of the text of Plautus and Lucretius, and of the metres of both. Richard of Bury 4 mentions Lucretius (with Homer and Theocritus) as a poet imitated by Virgil. This remark is described by Manitius 5 as a proof of very wide reading, but Richard may easily have found his authority (for Virgil’s debt to Lucretius) in one of his favourite authors, Gellius 6 ; or (for the poet’s debt to Homer and Theocritus, as well as Lucretius) in Macrobius 7 , whom he mentions in the very next section 8 . Of all the poets by far the most popular in the Middle Ages Virgil was The allegorical interpretation of the Aeneid , as an image of human life, as a story of the triumph of wisdom and virtue over folly and passion,, first put forward by Fulgentius 9 , was accepted by Bernard Silvester and his contemporary John of Salisbury 10 , as well as by Dante, and by scholars in the Renaissance, such as Alberti and Landini. Virgil was of course the constant model of the mediaeval epics. His general popularity in the Christian community was partly due to his Fourth Eclogue , which had been regarded by Lactantius, Eusebius, St Augustine and Prudentius as a prophecy of the coming of Christ 11 . Vincent of Beauvais 12 ascribed the conversion of three I Poole’s Medieval Thought , 339-46. 2 vol. iv 1. 3 The Vatican Glossariuni Osberni (xil) in Mai, Auctores, viii 515, also quotes the line with nasci. 4 Philobiblon , § 162. 5 Philol. lii 538. 6 i 21, 7. 7 (Theocr., Homer, v 2, 4—6); (Lucr.) vi 1—6. 8 See, in general, Manitius, l. c.; Jessen in Philol. xxx 236-8; J. Philippe, in Rev. de VHist, des Religions , xxxii (1895) 284—302, xxxiii (1896) 19—36, 125—162. Cp. Lambinus, Lucr. ed. 1583, p. vii; Barth on Statius Silv. ii 7, 76 (1664); and Munro, Lucr., notes i p. 1; also Voigt, i 3 241 n, 2. 9 Virgiliana continentia (c. 520 A.D.), ed. Helm, 1898. 10 Schaarschmidt, 97 f. II Comparetti, Virgilio , i 132-5. Jerome, Ep. 53 (Migne, xxii 545), describes such views as puerilia. 12 Spec. Hist, xi 50. XXXII.] VIRGIL. 611 pagans to the perusal of that poem. In the mystery-plays of the Middle Ages, Virgil, with the Sibyl and the Prophets, appeared as witnesses to the Incarnation. In a play of the eleventh century the Praecentor , addressing the poet, says :— ‘Vates Maro gentilium, Da Christo testimonium ’; and the poet replies :— ‘ Ecce polo demissa solo nova progenies est’ 1 . It was also a pious belief in Italy that St Paul had visited the poet’s tomb when he passed through Naples, and had shed tears of regret at the thought that the poet had not lived at a time when he might have been converted by the Apostle. A hymn in honour of St Paul, which continued to be sung at Mantua down to the fifteenth century, included the following stanza :— ‘Ad Maronis mausoleum Ductus fudit super eum Piae rorem lacrymae; Quern te, inquit, reddidissem, Si te vivum invenissem, Poetarum maxime ! ’ 2 To Dante (as is well known) Virgil is ‘the glory of the Latin race’ 3 , ‘the honour of all science and all wit’ 4 , ‘the sea of all wisdom’ 5 , ‘the gentile sage, who all things knew’ 6 , the poet who, as the symbol of human wisdom and philosophy, is his ‘leader, lord and master’ 7 in his journey through the Inferno and the greater part of the Purgatorio 8 . The text of Virgil rests mainly 1 Du Meril, Origines Latines du theatre moderne, p. 184 (Graf’s Roma, ii 206). 2 Daniel, Thesaurus , v 266 (Comparetti, Virgilio , i 131). 3 Purg. vii 16. 4 Inf iv 73. 5 Inf viii 7. 6 Inf. vii 3. 7 Inf ii 140. De Monarchia , ii 3, divinus poeta noster Virgilius. 8 Virgil leaves Dante in Purg. xxx 49 f.—A long list of reminiscences of Virgil in the Latin poets of cent, v—xn is collected in Zappert, Virgils Fortleben im MA (Vienna Akad., 1851); see also Ribbeck’s Index. The subject in general is fully treated in Comparetti’s Virgilio nel Medio Evo, 2 vols. (1872), and Graf’s Roma, ii 196—258; cp. Tunison’s Master Virgil, ed. 2 (1890), and C. G. Leland, Unpublished Legends of Virgil (1899), also Du Meril in Melanges archeol. et lit. (1850), 425-78. On Virgil in mediaeval schools, cp. Specht, Unterrichtswesen, 97 f. See also Schanz, 11 i 2 § 249. 39—2 612 VIRGIL. [CHAP. on the Medicean ms (v), once at Bobbio; the Palatine (v ?), formerly at Heidelberg; and the Vatican ms (3867), with 16 illus¬ trations (vi?), from St Denis. Hardly a quarter of the text is preserved in an older Vatican ms (iv?) including 50 pictures of Virgilian scenes 1 . There are seven leaves, from a St Denis ms (11 or hi ?), now in the Vatican and in Berlin, and fragments (iv ?) at St Gallen 2 ; also a Paris palimpsest from Corbie, and a Verona palimpsest with scholia (both of cent, iv ?). Lastly, we have two important mss from Tours and Fleury (ix), now in Berne 3 and Paris respectively; and, among the Paris mss (ix— xn), one from the abbey of St Martial at Limoges. The study of Horace in the Caroline age is represented mainly by Alcuin, who assumes the name of Flaccus, and Horace _ displays a knowledge of the Odes and Epodes as well as the SatBes and Epistles , which may also be traced in the poems of Theodulfus, bishop of Orleans (d. 821). The oldest extant ms of Horace, the codex Bernensis , came from the neigh¬ bourhood of Orleans. The famous description of Death (Odes, i 4, 13 f) is cited as follows by Notker Balbulus of St Gallen (cent, ix):— ‘ ut cecinit versu verax Horatius iste, caetera vitandus lubricus atque vagus: pallida Mors aequo pulsat pede sive tabemas aut regum turres, vivite, erit, venio’. In the Montpellier ms (cent, x) the Ode to Phyllis (iv 11) is set to the music of the lines ascribed to Paulus Diaconus, which supplied Guido of Arezzo with the names of the notes, ut, re, mi, fa, sol, la, si :— ‘ ut queant laxis re sonare fibris mita. gestorum famuli tuorum, solve, polluti lahii reatum, Aancte /ohannes ’ 4 . \ 1 Photographed in Fragmenta et picturae Verg. cod. Vat. 3225 (Rome, 1899); partly reproduced in G. F. Hill’s Illustrations of School Classics, No. 221 f (1903). 2 Facsimile on p. 185 supra. 3 p. 459 f supra. 4 Dummler, Po'etae Lat. Aevi Car., Appendix Carminum Dubiorum, i 83; Orelli’s Horace , Appendix to vol. ii ed. 3. XXXII.] HORACE. 613 The Satires and Epistles supply, in 250 lines, an eighth part of the Epics of the £ Calf and Wolf’, and the ‘Fox and Lion’, known as the Ecbasis Captivi (shortly after 936 )\ The poet is called noster Horatius by Benzo, the bishop of Alba (fl. 1061), who, in the Panegyric dedicated to the emperor Henry IV, also names Virgil, Lucan, Statius, ‘Homer’, and Quintilian 1 2 . The Odes and Epodes (as well as Virgil’s Eclogues) are imitated by Metellus of Tegernsee (first half of cent, xii) in the poems written in many metres in honour of St Quirinus 3 . Horace is named by Abelard among the ‘pagan philosophers’ cited by the doctors of the Church. In 1280 his hexameter poems are regarded by Hugo of Trimberg 4 as more important than the lyrics: the former are the libri principales , the latter are minus usuales. Thus the moral precepts embodied in his rather carelessly written hexameters were apparently recognised as possessing a permanent value, while his elaborate and almost inimitable lyrics were regarded as only the occasional poetry of a by-gone age, and were probably all the less likely to be appreciated, or imitated, owing to the perplexing variety of the metres employed. The distinction drawn by Hugo is fully confirmed by statistics. Out of 1289 scattered quotations from Horace in the Middle Ages, exactly 250 (or less than i) are from the lyrics and as many as 1039 from the hexameters 5 . The total number of quotations from the lyrics in Italy is only 19, distributed over several centuries, and gradually diminishing till they reach the age of Dante, when they entirely disappear. Horace was, in fact, little known in Italy before the Renaissance, while he was far more familiar in France and Germany. Germany in century xm claims the only two mediaeval quotations from the Carmen Saeculare. It was in the lands watered by the Rhine, the Mosel and the Meuse (within the limits corresponding to the mediaeval Lotharingia), that 1 ed. Voigt (1875); Bursian, i 49f, and in S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 1873, 46of; Ebert, iii 276, 285—326; and Testimonia in Keller-Holder’s Horace , ii (1869). 2 Graf, Roma, ii 172. 3 Canisius, Led. Ant. i, appendix, p. 35 b Cp. Bursian, i 71; S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 1873, Aufsatz 3; and Jahresb. i 9. 4 Registrum , 68 f. 5 See tabular conspectus in Moore’s Studies in Dante , i 201. 614 HORACE. [CHAP. Horace was best appreciated: and the same is true of other Latin poets. Thus it was apparently in the region immediately surrounding the ancient court of Aachen, that the influence of the revival of learning under Charles the Great lasted longest 1 . Most of the 250 extant mss come from France. The oldest, now known as the codex Bernensis, which belongs to the Mavortian recension (527) and is written in an Irish hand (ix), came from Fleury on the Loire. It has Celtic glosses here and there in the margin, and is one of a group of mss now ascribed to Irish contemporaries of Sedulius of Liege 2 . Among other mss, which are interesting by reason of the places of their origin or their preservation, we have the Leiden sis (ix) from Beauvais, the Bruxellensis (xi) probably from Gembloux, Paris mss (x) from Rheims and Autun, a Vatican ms (x) from Weissenburg in Alsace, and others at Einsiedeln (x) and St Gallen (xi). The ancient codex Blandinius perished in the fire which destroyed in 1566 the Benedictine monastery near Ghent, from which it had been borrowed by Cruquius 3 . A similar fate befell a ms of century ix—x during the siege of Strassburg in 1870. A popularity intermediate between that of Virgil and Horace was attained by Ovid, especially in his Meta¬ morphoses , his Fasti, his Ars Aviatoria and his Remedia Amoris 4 . He is named by Isidore of Seville in his treatise De Summo Bono as the particular pagan writer who is most to be avoided, but this does not debar the bishop from quoting about 20 passages from the poet. It is fair, however, to add that he only once quotes the Ars Amatoria (ii 24), and even this quotation (harmless in itself) may be regarded as neutralised by a reminiscence of the Remedia Amoris (140). ] The Analecta ad carminum Horatianorum historiam, carried by M. Hertz (1876 f) down to Venantius Fortunatus, have been continued to 1300 in the Analekten of Manitius (1893). Further reminiscences of Horace are quoted by Torraca, Naove Rassegne (1:894), pp. 421-9; cp. also Graf’s Roma , ii 293-6 ; and Schanz, 11 i 2 § 265 a. 2 Traube, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1892, p. 348 f. Complete facsimile (Leyden, 1897), pp. 333-72. 3 p. 184 f supra. 4 Manitius in Philol. Suppl. vii 721-58. Cp. Specht, Unterrichtswesen , 99, and Wattenbach, Geschichtsquellen , i 6 325. XXXII.] OVID. 615 Ovid was imitated by the scholars at the court of Charles the Great, one of whom assumed the name of Naso, while another, Theodulfus, believed that profound truths were contained in his poems, if properly (i.e. allegorically) understood 1 . The Metamorphoses was translated into German by Albrecht von Halberstadt (1210), and parts of that work, and the Heroides, were borrowed in the vast poem of Conrad of Wurzburg on the Trojan War 2 . The Tristia inspired the laments of Ermoldus Nigellus (d. 834) in the days of his exile 3 . Ancient and mediaeval poems, which Ovid never wrote, were ascribed to his pen, and, in England, the spurious De Vetula was strangely accepted as genuine by Walter Burley, Richard of Bury and Thomas Bradwardine. All his genuine works were known and quoted, and most of them imitated and translated, during the Middle Ages 4 . He is often cited by the Troubadours and the Minnesingers. In the twelfth century we find the monks of Canterbury using his poems as a treasury of stock quotations 5 ; and even the Art of Love was allegorised for the benefit of nuns 6 . It is only the first book of the Amores that is much quoted in the Middle Ages. There is no poet who is cited oftener by Vincent of Beauvais (d. 1264). In the middle of the same century all the works, except the spurious Halieutica , are named by Richard de Fournival of Amiens, while Conrad von Mure of Zurich (d. 1281) quotes from all, except the Medicatnina Faciei. Philip de Vitri translated and ‘moralised’ the Metamorphoses in French 1 p. 462 n. 4 stcpra. 2 Bartsch, Albrecht ..u. Ovid im MA (1861). 3 Migne, cv 551—640; Diimmler’s Poetae Lat. Aevi Car. ii 1—93 (where Virgil is, however, imitated more than Ovid). On the Tristia , cp. Ehwald (Gotha, 1889). 4 Gaston Paris, in Hist. Litt. de la France , xxix (1885) 455—525; Litt. Fr. au Moyen Age (1888) § 49 (a poem of c. 70,000 verses by the Franciscan Ch. Legouais, cent, xiv); and La Poesie dn Moyen Age , ser. 1 (1895); also E. Stengel, in Romanische Philol. xlvii (1886). On the French imitations and translations of the Met. cp. L. Sudre (1893). More than 2000 lines in the Roman de la Rose are inspired by Ovid. See also Schanz, II i 2 § 313. 5 Stubbs, Epp. Cantuarienses (1187-99) trolls Series; and Lectures, 129 1 . The monks quote Ex Ponto i 10, 36; ii 6, 38; iv 16, 52; Amores i 15, 39; Ars Am. i 444; Rem. Am. 462. 6 Wattenbach, Sitzungsb. Bayr. Akad. 1873, 695. 616 OVID. [CHAP. verse, at the request of Jean de Bourgogne, wife of Philip V (d. 1322) 1 . Dante regards the Metamorphoses as a model of style 2 , and as a work requiring allegorical interpretation 3 , in which sense it was fully expounded by his younger contemporary Giovanni del Virgilio 4 . Chaucer’s Legetid of Good Women proves his familiarity with the Metamorphoses and Heroides ; and there is no Latin poet that he cites more frequently 5 . The interest which he excited is proved by the mediaeval story of the two students who visited the tomb of Ovid, eo quod sapiens fuerat. One of them asked the poet which was (morally) the best line that he had ever written; a voice replied:— virtus est licitis abstinuisse bonis*. The other inquired which was the worst; the voice replied:— omne juvans statuit Jupiter esse bonum 7 . Thereupon both the students proposed to pray for the repose of the poet’s soul, but the voice ungratefully sent them on their way with the words:— nolo Pater Noster; carpe , viator, iter*. The earliest extant mss of any part of Ovid, those in Paris, Oxford and Vienna, belong to century ix. The Oxford ms, which includes (besides three other works) the first book of the Ars Amatoria with Latin and Celtic glosses, is written in a Welsh hand 9 . It was once in the possession of Dunstan, abbot of Glastonbury from 943, who has drawn a portrait of himself on its opening page 10 ; and there is a certain piquancy at finding such a ms in the hands of one who, after falling in love with a lady of the court, was ultimately among the strictest of monastic disciplinarians. One of the best of all classical mss is the codex 1 Le Clerc, Hist. Lilt., 406, 498. 2 De Vulg. El. ii 6. 3 Conv. ii 1; iv 25, 27, 28; cp. Szorabathely, Dante ed Ovidio (Trieste, 1888). 4 Wicksteed and Gardner, Dante and Giovanni del Virgilio , 314 f. 5 See Index to Skeat’s Chaucer. 6 Her. xvii 98, est virtus. 7 A paraphrase of Her. iv 133, Juppiter esse pium statuit quodcumque juvaret. 8 T. Wright, Latin Stories from MSS of XIII — XIV cent. (1842), c. 45. On Ovid in MA, cp., in general, Graf, Roma ii 296—315, and Manitius in Philol. Suppl. vii, 723-58. 9 R. Ellis, Hermes , 1880, 425 f, and XII Facs. 1885, pi. 1. 10 Illustr. ed. of Green’s History , p. T05. XXXII.] LUCAN. 617 Puteaneus of the Heroides (xi) in the Paris Library 1 . The ms of the Fasti now in the Vatican (x) has been identified with one formerly at Fleury. The best ms of the Metamorphoses (x—xi) was once in the monastery of San Marco at Florence. A palimpsest of two leaves from the Epistolae ex Ponto , now at Wolfenbiittel, belongs to the sixth century. Lucan was one of the best known of the Classical poets. He owed his popularity largely to his learned allusions Lucan to matters of geography, mythology and natural history, as well as to his rhetorical style and his pointed sayings. The anonymous author of a Life of archbishop Oswald (d. 992) in Latin verse (c. xm?) names, as the three typical epic poets, Homer, Walter of Chatillon, and Lucan 2 . He was also regarded as a historical authority, being the main source of the mediaeval romances on Julius Caesar. He is quoted by Geoffrey of Monmouth and John of Salisbury, and is the principal model of Gunther’s Ligurinus (1187). His poem was translated into Italian in 1310. He is mentioned by Dante as the last of the four great Latin poets in the fourth canto of the Inferno ; and is placed by Chaucer on the summit of an iron column in the House of Fame; ‘ And by him stoden all these clerkes, That write of Romes mighty werkes’ 3 . On certain other columns in the same building the poet places Homer, Virgil, Ovid and Statius 4 . The mss of Lucan belong to two recensions. (1), that of Paulus Constantinopolitanus, identified with the Papulus Const s Theyderich of a Paris ms of 674, is well represented by one of the two mss at Montpellier (ix—x), which was formerly at Autun: (2) is best represented by a ms at Leyden written in a German hand (x). Of two Paris mss of century ix, one came from Epternach and is possibly the source of the ms at Berne; while another (xi) came from Fleury. There are also two sets of 1 Facs. in Palmer’s ed. 2 Warton’s English Poetry , Biss. 3, i 231 (Hazlitt). 3 iii 407-16. 4 Cp., in general, Graf, Roma , ii 315-8, and Manitius in Philol. li 704-19. 618 STATIUS. [CHAP. fragmentary palimpsests, (i) at Rome, and (2) at Naples and Vienna; the latter once belonged to Bobbio. Statius was no less famous than Lucan. The Thebais was imitated by Chaucer in his Troilus and Creseide and Stjatius elsewhere; and the Achilleis by Joseph of Exeter, and by Conrad of Wurzburg. Both of his great epic poems are often quoted 1 , while his Silvae , imitated only once in the Caroline age by Paulus Diaconus 2 , remained practically unknown 3 till its discovery by Poggio at St Gallen (1416). In an ancient Norman poem he is called Estace le Grand , though Virgil (in the same line) has no epithet whatsoever 4 . He was expounded by Gerbert (x), closely imitated in the same century in the Panegyricus Berengarii (c. 920), and much quoted in the Glossarium Osberni (xn) as well as by Vincent of Beauvais and Conrad von Mure (xm). Dante attributes the ‘conversion’ of Statius to the perusal of Virgil’s Fourth Eclogue 5 . It has been suggested that Statius was possibly credited with an aversion to idolatry, owing to the lines in the Thebaid :— * nulla autem effigies, nulli commissa metallo forma dei, mentes habitare et pectora gaudet’ 6 . Among the more than 70 mss of the Thebais , the earliest are the three at Paris, viz. two from Corbie, i.e. the codex Puteaneus (ix) and another (x), and one from Epternach (x); also mss at Bamberg (x), Berne (xi) formerly at Fleury, and Leyden (xi) once at Wurzburg. The ms belonging to St John’s College, Cambridge (x), once the property of the poet Crashaw, is possibly identical with the codex Anglicanus of N. Heinsius 7 . The far fewer mss of the Achilleis include the above-mentioned codex Puteaneus (ix), and those at Eton (xi), Paris (xn) and Wolfenbiittel (xiv). 1 Manitius in Philol. lii 538-45. Cp. Schanz, 11 ii 2 § 412. 2 Carmen 35, Curve per Ausoniae non segnis epistola campos (Silv. iv 4); Manitius in Philol. Suppl. vii 762. 3 O. Muller, Rhein. A/us. xviii 189. 4 Cp. Graf, Roma ii 318-21, and Joly, Benoit de Sainte-More, ii 317 f. 5 Purg. xxii 66—7 3. 6 Theb. xii 493, v.l. ‘deae’. 7 A conjecture due to Mr H. W. Garrod, C.C.C., Oxford, who collated it in 1902. XXXIT.] MARTIAL. JUVENAL. 619 Martial The quotations from Martial preserved by the grammarians from the time of Victorinus, Charisiiis and Servius, to that of Priscian and Isidore, prove that he was well known from the fourth to the sixth centuries. There are many reminiscences of his epigrams in Ausonius and in Apollinaris Sidonius; but it is the variety of his metres, rather than his vocabulary, that finds an imitator in Luxorius (cent. vi) 1 . The epitaph of a bishop of Seville, who died in 641, ends with a line from Martial (vii 76, 4):—‘non timet hostiles iam lapis iste minas’. The curious name of Coquus is given him in certain ancient Glossaries 2 ; also sometimes in John of Salisbury 3 , Walter Map, and Conrad von Mure, and always in Vincent of Beauvais, who reserves the name of Martial for Gargilius Martialis. The mss of Martial fall into three families. The first includes mss (ix —x) at Leyden, Paris (no. 8071) and Vienna, the last of which was brought from France into Italy by Sannazaro (early in xvi). These mss were copied from a lost ms of century vm—ix. The second, including a Lucca ms now in Berlin (xii), and a Heidelberg ms now in the Vatican (xv), also an Arundel ms in the British Museum, formerly in the possession of Pyrkheimer and Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk (xv), and a ms in Florence (xv, Laur. 35, 39)% represents the recension made by Torquatus Gennadius (401). The third (inferior to the first and second), including a ms in the Advocates’ Library at Edinburgh (x) and a codex Puteaneus in Paris (x), is derived from a ms in Lombard minuscules of century vm or ix. The Excerpta Frisingensia , now in Munich, belong to century xi 5 . The moral earnestness of Juvenal led to his being highly esteemed in the Middle Ages. According to the monastic catalogues, his Satires were preserved in three copies at Bobbio, St Bertin and Rouen, and in two at Corbie, Bamberg and Durham. Abbot Marleberge (1218) Juvenal 1 Friedlander’s Martial , p. 68 f. 2 id. on iii 77. 3 iv 128, 230, 287 Giles; cp. Manitius, in Philol. xlix 560-4, esp. note on 562. ‘ Marcialis coquus ’ is the old title of a ms in C.C.C. Cambridge. 4 W. M. Lindsay, Cl. Rev. 1901, 413 f; 1902, 315 b 5 See Friedlander’s ed. pp. 67—108; also W. M. Lindsay’s Ancient editions of Martial (1902), and text 1902. The ‘ Lucca MS ’ formerly belonged to the monastery of S. Maria Corte-Orlandini (in Lucca). 620 JUVENAL. PERSIUS. [CHAP. brought to the monastic library at Evesham a Juvenal, as well as a Lucan and a Cicero 1 . He is often quoted by Geoffrey of Monmouth, John of Salisbury, Vincent of Beauvais, and others 2 . The composers of the semi-pagan student-songs of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries magis credunt Juvenali , quain doctrinae prophetali 3 . His popularity is still further attested by the fact that (apart from scholia of the fourth century) he is the theme of mediaeval scholia bearing the name of Cornutus. A reminiscence of the Tenth Satire may be noticed in Chaucer’s Troilus and Creseide (iv 197):— ‘O Juvenal lord, true is thy sentence, That little wenen folk what is to yerne The best ms, that at Montpellier (cent, ix), which includes Persius, formerly belonged to the abbey of Lorsch, and may once have been in that of St Gallen, which still possesses an important ms of the early scholia (ix), almost identical with those in the margin of the Montpellier ms. There are also early mss of Juvenal in the British Museum (ix) 4 , two in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge (x) from St Augustine’s, Canterbury, besides those at St Gallen and Einsiedeln, Vienna, Leyden and Paris (x), the last of which once belonged to the abbey of St Furcy at Lagny-sur-Marne. Another Paris ms (xi) was formerly in the abbey of St Martial at Limoges. Two mss of century xi at Leyden and Florence end with a subscription referring to a recension by Nicaeus, a pupil of Servius 5 . Either Nicaeus or some other grammarian composed the commentary from which our earlier scholia are derived; and a further recension connected with the name of Epicarpius (v?) is attested in a Paris ms (xi). From a copy of this recension, in which the last sheet was missing, came the revision connected with the later scholia bearing the name of ‘Cornutus’, and this in turn was the origin of the recension by Eric of Auxerre 6 , which is the source of all our 1 Chron. Abb. de Evesham , p. 267 Macray. 2 Manitius in Philol. 1 354-68. Cp. Schanz, 11 ii 2 § 420 a. 8 Anz.f. Kunde d. deutschen Vorzeil , 1871, 232. 4 Add. 15,600 (one of 59 mss); Winstedt, Cl. Rev. xvi 40. 5 Legi ego Niceus Romae apud Servium magistrum et emendavi. 6 Heiricus magis ter is quoted on ix 27. XXXII.] PROPERTIUS. TIBULLUS. VALERIUS. PHAEDRUS. 621 existing mss, except the Oxford ms (xi), which has supplied us with additions to the Sixth Satire (1899) 1 . The popularity of Persius is attested by many quotations, especially in Rabanus Maurus, Ratherius of Verona, Persius Gunzo of Novara, and John of Salisbury 2 . His name appears often in mediaeval catalogues of centuries ix—xn. Among the three best mss are two at Montpellier (ix and ix—x), the latter of which, like the ms in the library of the Canons of St Peter’s at Rome (ix), belongs to a recension of 402 a.d. There are also good mss in Paris (x and xi), and Leyden (x—xi), with two closely connected mss, both written in England, one in Trinity College, Cambridge (x), and the other in the Bodleian (xi), which was given to the cathedral library of Exeter by bishop Leofric (1050-72). The only complete ms of Propertius earlier than century xv is that at Wolfenbiittel (xn), formerly at Naples, ms known to Petrarch and Politian. Little a MSS of Propertius, Tibullus, Val. Flaccus, Phaedrus more than the first book is contained in a Leyden ms (xiv). The earliest evidence for the text of Tibullus is contained in certain Excerpta Parisina (ix— x) known to Vincent of Beauvais (p. 558); later than these are the Excerpta Frisingensia (xi) now at Munich; the earliest complete ms, that at Milan (xiv), was once in the possession of Coluccio Salutato. The text of Valerius Flaccus rests on the Vatican ms (ix —x) and the ms found by Poggio at St Gallen (1416) and now known only through copies, especially Poggio’s copy in Madrid and an independent copy at Queen’s College, Oxford 3 . The only complete ms of Phaedrus is the codex Pithoeanus , now at Du Mesnil near Mantes (ix—x). We have to be content with secondary evidence of the text of its twin- brother, the ms formerly at Rheims, which perished by fire in 1774. The fame of Boethius, the ‘last of the Romans’, w T as per¬ petuated throughout the whole of the Middle Ages. He was known not only as the first inspirer of the great scholastic problem and the translator of certain of Boethius 1 S. G. Owen, Cl. Rev. xi 402; Winstedt, ib. xiii 201. 2 Manitius in Philol. xlvii 710-20. 3 A. C. Clark, Cl. Rev. xiii 119—124. ‘Manilius’ similarly ‘survived’ at Gembloux and elsewhere (x—xn), awaiting the Renaissance. 622 BOETHIUS. THE POPULAR POETS. [CHAP. the logical treatises of Aristotle 1 , but also as the author of the Consolatio , which is preserved in many mss (ix— x), and was specially familiar to Dante and to Chaucer. The blended prose and poetry of that work found frequent imitators, as in the case of Bernard Silvester and Alain de l’lsle 2 . Its author is named with Terence, Sallust, Cicero, Virgil and Statius, as well as Arator, Prudentius, Sedulius and Juvencus, in a poem combining wide reading with much ignorance of grammar, composed by Winric, master of the cathedral school of Trier in the twelfth century 3 . The principal ancient and ‘modern’ poets are briefly reviewed as models of style in the third part of Eberhard of Bethune’s Labyrinthus (1212) 4 , where Horace is strangely omitted. A typical list of the authors studied in the schools of the Middle Ages may be found in the rhyming lines of Hugo of Trimberg’s Registrum (1280) 5 , while, in a satire by a monk of Erfurt (1281-3) 6 , we have a shorter list, including the grammarians Donatus and Priscian, and the poets Ovid, Juvenal, Terence, Horace, Persius, Plautus, Virgil, Lucan, Maximianus and Boethius 7 . The library of the abbey of St Edmund at Bury included Plautus, Terence, Horace, Juvenal, Persius, Virgil and Statius 8 . A ms of Silius Italicus is entered in a catalogue.of St Gallen in the ninth century, but otherwise he has left no trace of his existence from the time of Apollinaris Sidonius 9 to that of Poggio (1416). In the absence of all knowledge of the Greek Homer, who ‘apud Graecos remanens nondum est translatus ’ 10 , mediaeval students read of the Trojan War in the poem of 1 p. 239 supra. 2 This kind of composition was called prosimetrum in cent. XII—xm (Norden, 756). 3 ed. Kraus (Bursian i 70). On Boethius, cp. Graf, ii 322—367. 4 p. 532 supj'a. 5 ed. Hlimer; cp. Bursian, i 82. 6 Nicolai de Bibera Occulti Erfordensis carmen satiricum , ed. T. Fischer (1870). 7 Bursian, i 83; Gottlieb, Mitt. Bibliotheken , 446. Cp. Joannes de Garlandia’s list on p. 528 n. 7. 8 M. R. Janies, Bibl. Buriensis, 103. 9 Carm. ix 260. 10 Hugo’s Registrum , 162. XXXII.] CICERO. 623 ‘Pindarus Thebanus’ 1 and the prose narratives of Dictys and Dares 2 ; and the Tale of Troy was the theme of many Latin and vernacular poems in the Middle Ages 3 . Turning from verse to prose, we find Cicero revered through¬ out the Middle Ages as the great representative of 1 Cicero the ‘liberal art’ of Rhetoric. His famous sayings were collected by Bede; his De Inventione was the source of a short treatise on rhetoric by Alcuin; the Tusculan Disputations were quoted, and the pro Milone , the first Catilinarian and the second Verrine imitated, by Einhard; while the text of his Epistles , which was not unknown to the Irish monk, Sedulius 4 , was carefully studied by Servatus Lupus 5 . He is ‘the king of eloquence’ to Paschasius Radbertus in the ninth century, and to William of Malmesbury in the twelfth. In the former century Almannus 6 declares that to celebrate St Helena adequately would call for an eloquence greater even than that of Cicero. The knowledge of Cicero exhibited by all the above writers, and by Rabanus Maurus and Joannes Scotus 7 , is far exceeded by that shown by the presbyter Hadoardus, the custos of an unidentified library in Western Frankland, whose excerpts in a Vatican ms of century ix include many passages from the De Oratore , and more than 600 from the philosophical works 8 . In the tenth century Gerbert is specially interested not only in the rhetorical and philosophical works but also in the speeches, and the preservation of these last in France is possibly due to his influence 9 . In the same century the Letters existed in the library 1 Quoted by Ermenrich (850) and in the Gesta Berengarii (920), and often in later works (Manitius in Philol. 1 368-72). Cp. Teuffel, § 320, 7. 2 ib. §§ 423, 471. 3 A. Joly, Benoit de Sainte-More et le Roman de Troie , on les 7 netajnorphoses d Ho mere de iepopee Greco-Latine an Moyen Age ( Mem. de la soc. des Ant. de Norm, xxvii; also printed separately, 1870-1). Benoit was plagiarised by Guido delle Colonne (p. 524 supra), and either or both may have been the source of Chaucer’s Troilus. Cp. also Dunger (Dresden, 1869), Korting (Halle, 1874), Gorra (Turin, 1887), H. Morley, English Writers , iii 207-31; and Morf in Romania , 1892. 4 Mommsen, Hermes , xiii 298. 5 p. 470 supra. ■' Acta SS. Bolland., August iii 581 a. 7 P. Schwenke, Philol. Suppl. v (1889) 404-9. 8 Schwenke, ib. 397—588. 9 p. 490 supra. 624 CICERO. [CHAP. at Lorsch, and they were known to Luitprand 1 . Honorius of Autun (d. 1136), in his treatise De Animae Exsilio 2 , says that those who dwell in the ‘City of Rhetoric’ are taught by Tully to speak with grace, and are trained by him in the virtues of prudence, fortitude, justice and temperance. In the same century Abelard cites only four of his works, the De Inventione and Topica , and the De Officiis and Paradoxa. Abelard’s pupil, John of Salisbury, knew many more, and (besides being acquainted with the Letters 3 ) was specially familiar with the philosophical treatises, which are also quoted by his friend, Peter of Blois (d. 1204). Vincent of Beauvais (d. 1264) and Walter Burley (d. 1345 ?) give long lists of his works, but there is nothing to show that the former really knew the Letters included in his list. The latter does not even name them 4 . Meanwhile, in Germany, Lambert of Hersfeld 5 (fl . 1058-77) is familiar with the Catilinarians ; Conrad of Hirschau (e. 1100), who knew the Laelius and Cato alone, is eloquent in praise of their author 6 ; and Wibald, abbot of Corvey (1146), whose Letters show an extensive knowledge of Latin literature, is eager to make a collection of all the works of Cicero in a single volume 7 . Herbord of Michelsberg, near Bamberg (d. 1168), quotes whole chapters of the De Officiis 8 , and Ethelred of Rievaulx (d. 1166) wrote a 1 Cic. Epp. ed. Mendelssohn, p. vif. 2 c. 3, Migne clxxii 1244. 3 Mendelssohn, p. ix. 4 Orelli’s Cicero, ill 2 x—xi. The Letters are there described as unknown in cent, x—middle of cent, xiv; but we shall see shortly that there were 3 mss at Cluni in cent. xn. 5 ed. Holder-Egger (Norden, Kunstprosa , 708). 6 Dial. sup. auctores, 51 (ed. Shepps), Tullius nobilissimus auctor iste libros plurimos philosophicos studiosis philosophiae pernecessarios edidit et vix similem in prosa vel praecedentem vel subsequentem habuit (Norden, l.c.). 7 Jafife, Bibl. Per. Germ, i 3 26 (after asking the abbot of Iiildesheim for Tullii libros he adds) ‘nec pati possumus, quod illud nobile ingenium, ilia splendida inventa, ilia tanta rerum et verborum ornamenta oblivione et negligentia depereant; set ipsius opera universa, quantacunque inveniri poterunt, in unum volumen confici volumus ’; and he receives from Hildesheim the Philippics , the De Lege Agraria and the Letters (Norden, 709; Bursian, i 75). 8 ii 15, 16, in Vita Ottonis Episcopi Babenbergensis (Mon. Hist. Germ, xx 7 o 6 - 7 )* XXXII.] CICERO. 625 Ciceronian dialogue on Christian friendship. In century xn the library of Cluni possessed three mss of the Letters and of the Speeches , five of the philosophical and seven of the rhetorical works. Of the mss of the Speeches one has been identified with a ninth century ms containing the greater part of the Catilinarian Speeches, and of the pro rege Deiotaro, with a portion of the pro Ligario and Second Verrine, now in Lord Leicester’s collection at Holkham 1 . The library of the Sorbonne (1338) had 24 mss of the rhetorical and philosophical works, as well as the Letters. The Speeches best known in the Middle Ages were those against Verres, Catiline and Antonius. The rhetoric of attack was apparently more popular than that of defence. But the latter was also appreciated. Philip Harcourt, bishop of Bayeux, bequeathed to Corbie a collection of books including the pro ' Ligario, Marcello and Deiotaro , the De Divinatione, Natura Deorum, Legibus and Fato, the Tusculan Disputatio?is and l ad Hortensium liber /’ 2 , probably meaning thereby not the lost Hortensius but the second book of the Prior Academics, described by Vincent of Beauvais 3 as the Dialogus ad Hortensium. It may be remembered that the three speeches above mentioned were translated by Brunetto Latini (d. 1294) 4 . Dante’s references to Cicero are primarily to the De Officiis and Cato, secondarily to the Laelius and De Finibus, with one or two notices of the De Lnventione and Paradoxa. The Laelius is one of the two books in which he finds consolation on the death of Beatrice 5 . Among the earlier mss of Cicero, the most important of the codices mutili of the De Oratore and Orator is the ms now at Avranches (ix) formerly in the abbey of Mont-St-Michel. The codex mutilus of the De Oratore in the British Museum (ix) came from the abbey of Cormery, S.E. of Tours; and the corresponding ms at Erlangen (x) was copied for Gerbert at 1 W. Peterson, Anecd. Oxon. ix; Cl. Rev. 1902, 322, 401; doubted by R. Ellis, ib. 460. 2 Ravaisson, Les Bibl. de VOuest, p. xi. 3 Spec. Doctr. v 12 (Kayser’s Cic. xi 56). 4 p. 590 supra. 5 E. Moore, Studies in Dante , i 258—273. Cp., in general, P. Deschamps, Essai Bibliographique sur Ciceron (1863); Graf, Roma , ii 259—267; Norden, 708-10 n. S. 40 626 CICERO. [CHAP. Aurillac. The complete text of the above works, and of the Brutus , was unknown until 1422. The Topica is included in mss at Einsiedeln (ix) and St Gallen (x). There are important mss of certain of the Speeches in Rome (vm), Milan (ix), Paris (ix), and Munich, viz. two from Tegernsee (x, xi) and one from St Peter’s, Salzburg (xi); also a ms from Reichenau at Zurich (xi), and a ms, probably from Cluni, at Holkham Hall, Norfolk (ix) 1 . The fragmentary palimpsests in Turin (111? and lv?), Milan and Rome (v?) once belonged to Bobbio; another in the Vatican (iv?) was for a short time at S. Andrea della Valle, near Pompey’s theatre 2 . The fragments of the pro Fonteio and in Bisonem, included in a ms at Cues, have been traced to Sedulius of Liege 3 . The Brussels ms of the pro Archia (xi) came from the abbey of Gembloux. For the Epp. ad Atticum we have no longer to rely entirely on the transcript in Florence (Zaur. 49, 18) made at Milan in 1392, possibly from the ms found by Petrarch at Verona in 1345; there is independent evidence in a few leaves of a ms at Wurzburg (xi); also in six Italian mss and two in Paris (xiv—xv) 4 . For the Epp. ad Familiares our main authority is another ms (ix —x) in Florence (. Laur . 49, 9), which was taken from Vercelli to Milan, where it was first heard of in 1389; but there is an independent transcript of the two halves of the same original in the British Museum (xii, Harl. 2773; and xi, Harl. 2682 ; the latter from Cologne 5 ). The first half alone is preserved in a Paris ms (xii), formerly in the library of Notre-Dame. The two mss of the first half had a common origin. The Harleian ms of the second half (xi), together with an Erfurt ms (xii —xm), and a Palatine ms in the Vatican, formerly at Heidelberg (xv—xvi), form an independent German group, the last at least of the three 1 p. 625 supra. 2 This palimpsest (of the Verrines) possibly came from Bobbio, but it has not been traced to any earlier owner than Pius II (d. 1464), on the later fortunes of whose MSS cp. E. Piccolomini in Bolletino Storico Senese , 1899, fasc. iii. Text first published by Mai (1828), Cl. Auctores, ii 390 f, in Verrem. 3 Traube, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1892, p. 367 f. 4 C. A. Lehmann (Weidmann, 1892); cp. S. B. Platner, in A.J. P. 1899, 290 f; 1900, 420 f; and A. C. Clark, in Philol. 1901, 195 b 5 The same ms is specially important for the Speeches pro Milone , Marcello , Ligario and Rege Deiotaro (ed. A. C. Clark, 1900). XXXII.] VARRO. CATO. SENECA. 627 having probably been copied c. 1500 from a lost ms from Lorsch 1 . There is also a leaf of a palimpsest from Bobbio, nowin Turin (v). Among the numerous mss of the philosophical works are those in Florence (ix?), Rome (ix, x), Vienna (ix), Leyden (ix—xi) and Paris (ix — xii). The Paris ms of the De Amicitia (xi) came from the abbey of St Martial at Limoges. There are also mss of the De Officiis at Berne (ix), and in the British Museum (x), and a ms of the De Senedute at Zurich (xn); the latter once belonged to Reichenau, but there are earlier mss in Paris (ix) and Leyden (ix and x). One of the former (ix) came from Tours; one of the latter, from Fleury. Considerable portions of the De Republica were published by Mai from a Vatican palimpsest formerly at Bobbio (v) 2 . The best ms of Varro, De lingua Latina , is in Florence (xi), but an extract from that work is included in a much earlier miscellaneous ms, now in Paris, which was copied at Monte Cassino about 800 a.d. The text of Varro De re rustica (like that of the corresponding work by Cato) depends on a long- lost ms formerly in the. library of San Marco, Florence. Cato the elder enjoyed the reputation of being the writer of the widely popular Distichs 3 , which, with the fables of ‘ Aesop ’ and Avianus, were studied by beginners Seneca in the mediaeval schools. Seneca was famous as the author of the Naturales Quaestiones , and still more as a moralist. He is called Seneca morale by Dante 4 , and is quoted * _ * by writers such as Otto of Freising, Giraldus Cambrensis and Roger Bacon, oftener than either Cicero or ‘ Cato ’. He was believed to be a Christian, his ‘ correspondence with St Paul’ 5 being first mentioned by Jerome, who accepts it as genuine and includes its supposed author among his scriptores ecclesiastici. Jerome’s opinion was followed by John of Salisbury, Vincent of Beauvais and many others 6 . The ‘ Palatine ’ ms of Seneca 1 Mendelssohn, ed. 1893, pp. vi, xxiv; cp. Gurlitt (1896). 2 For further details as to the MSS of the several speeches and philosophical works, see Teuffel, §§ 179, 183-5, and the current critical editions. 3 Manitius in Philol. li 164-71; Graf, Roma , ii -268-78. 4 Inf. iv 141. 5 Haase’s Seneca , iii 476—481. 6 Graf, ii 278—293. Bernard of Clairvaux (Ep. 256) borrows a spirited sentence from Seneca (Ep. 20, 7) in urging the reluctant pope, Eugenius III, to proclaim a new Crusade (1146). 40—2 628 PLINY THE ELDER. [CHAP. De Beneficiis and De dementia (ix) came from Lorsch. Of the mss of the Letters , that at Bamberg (ix) is now the sole authority for Letters 89-124. The earliest of the mss of the Letters in Paris (ix, x, xi) probably came from Corbie; there are also mss in Florence, Leyden and Oxford (x). The ms of the Dialogues in Milan (xi) was probably copied at Monte Cassino. The Naturales Quaestiones are preserved in mss at Bamberg, Leyden and Geneva (xn) and at Montpellier (xm). The ms of the Tragedies (xi) in the Laurentian Library came from the Convent of San Marco. The principal mss of the elder Seneca are those of century x in the Vatican, and at Antwerp and Brussels, with the excerpts at Montpellier, the last of which belonged in century xiv to the Benedictine abbey of St Thierry near Rheims. The best ms of the unabridged text, that in Brussels, formerly belonged to Nicolas Cusanus, and may have had a common origin with the ms of the poems of Sedulius; it has hence been inferred that the preservation of the elder Seneca’s Greek quotations, however inaccurately they have been transcribed, is probably due to the influence of the Irish monk Pliny the elder of Liege 1 . Pliny the elder, whose ‘Natural History’ exactly suited the encyclopaedic tastes of the Middle Ages, was widely read in the original, and also in the excerpts of Solinus. In the mediaeval catalogues he is named nine times in France and in Germany, and only twice in Italy and England. But this gives a very imperfect impression of the care with which he was studied in England. A more convincing proof of the thoroughness of that study may be found in the Northumbrian excerpts now in Berne (vm) 2 , and in the fact that Robert of Cricklade, prior of St Frideswide at Oxford, dedicated to Henry II (1154-89) a Defloratio consisting of nine books of selections taken from one of the older class of mss, which has been recently recognised as sometimes supplying us with the only evidence for the true 1 Traube, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1892, p. 356. 2 K. Rtick, Ausziige (Munchen, 1888); Welzhofer on Bede’s quotations, in Christ-Abhandl. 1891, 25—41. King John lent a MS of Pliny to the abbot of Reading (Pauli, Gesch. v. Engl, iii 486). XXXII.] PLINY THE YOUNGER. 629 text 1 . The more important of the 200 mss of Pliny are divided into the incomplete vetustiores and the more complete recentiores. The best of the former is a ms of books xxxii-vii, now at Bamberg (x). Further, there is a palimpsest of parts of books xi—xv, formerly at Reichenau, and now in the Benedictine abbey of St Paul in the E. of Carinthiaj a ms of books ii—vi in Leyden (ix) and two in Paris (ix—x). One of the latter (G), and the Vatican ms (D), and a Leyden ms (V), are separate parts of a single ms formerly at Corbie. Even before the Corbie ms had been revised and corrected, it was copied early in century x in another of the mss now at Leyden (F) 2 . The younger Pliny was little known, being mentioned only twice in the mediaeval catalogues of Germany, and only thrice in those of France, but his Letters Se^younger are quoted once by Ratherius of Verona 3 , and his Panegyric by John of Salisbury 4 , while Walter Map even knows of Pliny’s wife, Calpurnia 5 . For the Letters we have to depend mainly on the Medicean ms (ix) consisting of the first 17 quires of the sole ms of the early books of Tacitus’ Armais. This ms of the Letters was transcribed (probably before it left Germany) in a ms now at Prague (xiv). The Vatican ms of books i—iv (x) was copied from the same original as the Medicean. For the latter part of book ix we depend partly on a Dresden ms (xv), one of a class containing eight books in all, but omitting book viii; the date of the oldest of this class, now at Monte Cassino, is 1429. There is also a third class of mss including only 100 Letters. This is represented by Florence mss from the Riccardi palace (ix—x) and from San Marco (x—xi). It was mss of this class 1 K. Ruck in S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 3 Mai 1902, p. 195 f. On quotations from Pliny, see Manitius in Philol. xlix 380-4; on those from Solinus, ib. xlvii 562-5. Cp. Detlefsen, ib. xxviii 296 f, and Riick, S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 1898, 203—318. Robert of Cricklade became prior in 1130 or 1141, and visited Italy and Sicily in 1158-9. In his dedication he addresses Henry II in the words: es in liberali scientia studiosus. 2 Facsimiles of G, V, F in Chatelain, Pal. pi. 140-2. 3 Migne, cxxxvi 391 (Ep. i 5, 16); Manitius, Philol. xlvii 566 f. 4 Schaarschmidt, 95. 5 p. 28 1 . 182 Wright. ‘ Plinium Calpurniae succendit scintilla’. 630 QUINTILIAN. [CHAP. alone that were known to Vincent of Beauvais 1 and to Coluccio Salutato, the first Italian who mentions the Letters 2 . For most of the Correspondence with Trajan we have no mss. The Panegyricus is preserved only in mss of the ‘Panegyrici’ copied from a lost ms formerly at Mainz (xv), and in three leaves of a palimpsest from Bobbio (vn—vm). The Declamations (or Causae) ascribed to Quintilian are alone mentioned by Trebellius Pollio and by Lactantius. There is evidence of a recension c. 500 a.d. They were abridged by Adelard of Bath (1130) 3 , and their study lasted through the Middle Ages down to the time of Petrarch (1350) 4 . His genuine Institutio Oratoria is described by Jerome as the model followed by Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367), and it was also studied by Rufinus and Cassiodorus, by Julius Victor and Isidore of Seville. It was known to Lupus of Ferribres and Wibald of Corvey 5 ; to Bernard of Chartres, to John of Salisbury and to Peter of Blois (xn), and, in the next century, to Vincent of Beauvais 6 . Meanwhile, among the books bequeathed to the abbey of Bee by Philip Harcourt, bishop of Bayeux (1164), there was a ms of the Institutio Oratoria. This ms was copied in the same century by the poet Etienne de Rouen in an abstract ex¬ tending to about a third of the ten books therein condensed. This abstract passed from Bee to the abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Pres, and, under the name of the codex Pratensis (xn), it is now in the Paris Library 7 . Harcourt’s ms, which is now lost, was also copied in the codex Puteanus (xm) in the same collection. The principal mss fall into three classes:—(1) represented only by the First Ambrosian at Milan (x—xi), consisting of three-fourths of a transcript of a complete ms which has disappeared; (2) the ms at Berne, formerly at Fleury, which has been copied in the Secotid 1 Spec. Hist, x c. 67. The ms from the Riccardi palace was formerly in the chapter library at Beauvais. 2 Plin. Epp.y ed. Keil, p. xvi. 3 Catal. Bibl. Leiden (1716), p. 383. 4 Ep. Fain, xxiv 7. 5 Ep. 167 Jaffe, Mon. Corb. 6 Orelli-Baiter, Cic. in 2 viiif; Quintil. I, ed. Fierville (1890) xiv—xvi. 7 Fierville, xxviii f, and facsimile ad fin. XXXII.] QUINTILIAN. 631 Ambrosian, and an independent Paris ms of the same class, formerly in Notre-Dame 1 , all three belonging to century x, and all marked by many lacunae small or great; (3) the mixed mss, primarily represented by that at Bamberg, which consists of two parts, the first (x) having been copied from the defective ms at Berne, and the second from a complete ms of class (1) now lost. Early in century xi, while this second part was being added to the Bamberg ms, the latter was itself copied in an exceptionally important ms, which was taken to Cologne 2 and afterwards to DUsseldorf, and is now in the British Museum (Harl. 2664) 3 . Of this Harleian ms there are two transcripts of special interest, both belonging to century xi. The earlier of these is now at Florence, the later at Zurich. The former owner of the first, Werner (Werinharius ), bishop of Strassburg (1001-29), attended the Council of Frankfort in 1006 and interested himself in the erection of the cathedral at Bamberg 4 . He may thus have been led to acquire a transcript of the Cologne copy of the Bamberg ms. He certainly gave to the library of Strassburg Cathedral in or before 1029 a ms of Quintilian, which has been identified as a transcript of the Cologne ms. In 1372 this copy was one of the chained books in the monastic dormitory at Strassburg; afterwards (with a Strassburg ms of Cicero’s philosophical works 5 ) it found its way into the Medicean Library in Florence, where it is still to be seen 6 . It was supposed by Raphael Regius (1491) 7 to be the ms found by Poggio at St Gallen (1416). But, although Poggio made a hasty copy of the ms at Constance 8 , there is nothing to prove that he did not return the original to St Gallen 9 . That 1 Akin to this is a MS in the library of St John’s Coll. Camb. (xm). Petrarch’s copy (xiv), now in Paris (7720), is a direct or indirect transcript of the cod. Bernensis. 2 A. C. Clark, in Neue Heidelb. Jahrb. 1891, p. 238!. 3 L. C. Purser in Hermathena , 1886, p. 39: Peterson, on Quintil. x, p. lxiv, with facsimile. 4 Gallia Christiana , v 792-4, ed. 1731. 5 San Marco 257 (in Laur.). 6 Laur. 46, 7 (examined at Florence). Facsimile on p. 203. 7 ap. Bandini, Cat. ii 382. 8 P°ggi° to Guarino, 16 Dec. 1416, haec mea manu transcripsi. * 9 Cp. Reifferscheid, Rhein. Mus. 1868, 145. 632 NEPOS. CAESAR. [CHAP. Historians Cornelius Nepos. Caesar original is probably the slightly later copy of the Cologne manuscript, a copy which was certainly once at St Gallen and has been at Zurich since the early part of cent. xvm 1 . Some of the quires show Italian memoranda giving the number of lines (rige) contained in the page 2 . Cornelius Nepos, Caesar, Sallust, Livy, Suetonius, Justin and Florus were much studied in the Middle Ages, and a special popularity attended the historical anecdotes of Valerius Maximus. The history of the text of Cornelius Nepos goes back to the time of Theodosius II (d. 450) 3 . One of the best mss, the liber Danielis (now lost), came from a library at or near Orleans. The extant mss include the codex Gudianus (xii— xm) at Wolfenbiittel, and the sole survivor of a better class of mss, the ms at Louvain (xv), formerly in the neighbouring Premonstratensian abbey of Parc 4 . Caesar is often quoted in the Gesta Treverorum. In the mediaeval catalogues (except in those of France) he is one of the rarer authors 5 . Among the best mss now extant are an Amsterdam ms (ix— x); two Paris mss, from Fleury (ix—x) and Moissac (xi —xii), which are better than the interpolated codex Thuaneus (xi —xii); and a Vatican ms (x) corresponding to that from Fleury. Besides these there are mss in the British Museum and at Leyden (xi), the latter from Beauvais, which is probably the former home of one of the two Florence mss (xi); there are also mss in the Vatican and in Vienna (xii). The writer of a Pelagian letter ( c. 410-30) protests against the study of Virgil, Sallust, Terence and Cicero, et caeteros stultitiae et perditionis 1 It was regarded by Mabillon (1673), A. Germ. 36, as the MS found by Poggio. Sabbadini, Riv. di Filol. xx, 1892, 307^ cites a letter of Guarino to Poggio (early in 1418) mentioning a second complete ms as in Poggio’s possession, which Sabbadini regards as identical with the Florence MS formerly at Strassburg, while he does not admit that the first MS found by Poggio is that at Zurich. The controversy might be settled by examining codex Urbinas 577, which purports to be a copy of Poggio’s transcript of the original. 2 Letter-press to Chatelain’s pi. 178. See, in general, Peterson’s Introd. to Quint. X, pp. lviii—lxxv, and lit. there quoted. 3 Traube, S. Ber. Bayr. A bad. 1891, 409-25. 4 On mediaeval quotations, see Manitius, Philol. xlvii 567 f. 5 Manitius, Rhein. Mus. xlviii; Philol. xlviii 567 f. XXXII.] SALLUST. 633 Sallust auctores x ; and a school-book belonging to the latter part of the previous century contains quotations from each of these four writers in the above-mentioned order 1 2 3 . Sallust was imitated by Sulpicius Severus, and (together with Virgil and Cicero) by Ambrose; and the Bellum Catili?iae % was even quoted by Leo the Great 4 . The last to study the Histories at first-hand was Augustine (d. 425) 5 ; later writers borrowed their quotations from Priscian and Isidore; but a new interest in Sallust was awakened in century vm 6 . In the latter half of century x his phraseology is reproduced by Richer of Rheims; and afterwards by Ragevinus, in his continuation (1160) of Otto of Freising’s history of Barbarossa 7 8 . Among the many mss of the Bella are three in Paris (two of cent, ix, and one of xi). A lacuna in these has to be supplied from later mss, including several at Munich (xi etc), and a Paris ms (xi) from Epternach. There is also a ms at St Gallen (xi), and one in Brussels (xi) from the church at Egmont. The Speeches in the Bella and in the Histories are contained in the Vatican excerpts from Corbie (x), and fragments of the Histories 8 in four leaves of a ms divided between the Vatican, Berlin and Orleans (iv—v), which probably came from Fleury. The great work of Livy was originally in 142 books, of which only 35 (viz. books 1—10 and 21—45) have survived. A summary of the contents of the lost books is preserved in the Periochae , best represented by a ms at Heidelberg (ix), and we have direct quotations from or vague references to the lost books in Asconius, Tacitus, Frontinus, in Plutarch and Dion Cassius; in Servius and Censorinus; and in Priscian and Cassiodorus; also in the Bernese scholia on Lucan. Thus the whole of Livy appears to have survived to the end of the Roman Age, but Livy. Florus 1 Caspari, Briefe etc. (1890), p. 17. 2 Keil, Gr. Lat. vii 449. 3 37> 5> sicut i n sentinam confluxerant. 4 Senno , xvi 4 (Weyman, in Philol. lv 471-3). 5 Sallust was a favourite model with African writers of cent. II—v (Monceau, Les Africains, 1894, 86—90). 6 Vogel, Quaest. Salt. Erlangen, 1881, pp. 426-32. 7 Bursian, i 76. He is also imitated by Widukind and Adam of Bremen. 8 Hauler, in Wiener Sttidien, 1887, 25 f; ed. Maurenbrecher, 1891-3. 634 LIVY. SUETONIUS. [CHAP. the books known to the Middle Ages 1 were the same as those known to ourselves, and the rumours of the survival of a complete Livy at some place in the diocese of Liibeck, which were rife in the times of the Renaissance 2 , remained uncon¬ firmed. The style of Livy was imitated by Einhard, and, with greater freedom, by Lambert of Hersfeld 3 . His work was first translated into French by the Dominican Pierre Berguire at the request of king John III (d. 1341) 4 . For books of the first decade the earliest authority, and the only representative of the earlier of the two recensions, is the Verona palimpsest of books 3—6 (v). All the ten books were included in the later recension by Victorianus, and books 3—8 were further revised by one or other of the two Nicomachi 5 , both of whom held office at Rome in 431. This recension is best represented by the Medicean ms (x— xi) 6 , next to which comes a ms from the Colbert collection in Paris (x), besides one from Fleury (ix—x), and others at Einsiedeln, and in the British Museum and the Vatican (x), and also in Florence and Leyden (xi) 7 . Similarly we have two recensions of the third decade , one of which is best represented by the Paris ms, codex Puteanus (v) from Corbie, and its Vatican copy, codex Reginensis (ix, c. 804-34) from Tours 8 , and by a Florence ms (x); the other, by a Turin palimpsest (v) and by mss nearly related to the lost ms of Speier. The text of the fourth decade depends on a Bamberg ms (xi) and on the recorded readings of the lost ms of Mainz; and that of the first five books of the fifth decade , on a Vienna ms (v) from Lorsch, which in century vm belonged to the bishop of a place near Utrecht. The epitome of Livy by Florus is preserved in an uninterpolated form in a ms at Bamberg (ix). Suetonius was successfully imitated by Einhard (830), who was educated 1 Manitius, Philol. xlviii 570-2. 2 Voigt, Humanismus , i 247 s f. 3 Ann. p. 71 f, cp. Liv. ii 6. 4 Le Clerc, Hist. Litt. 431, 499. 5 p. 215 supra. 6 Facsimile on p. 236. 7 On the Medicean ms, and the Leyden ms L, see Proc. Camb. Philol. Soc. 30 Oct. 1902. 8 Chatelain, in Rev. de Philol. xiv (1890) 78 f; Pallographie, pi. cxvif; Traube, S. Ber. Bayr. A had. 1891, 425 f. XXXII.] VAL. MAXIMUS. VEGETIUS. JUSTIN. 635 at Fulda. Servatus Lupus, who could find no ms of Sue¬ tonius in France, borrowed the Fulda ms (c. 850), and at the close of the same century a ms of Suetonius. J _ Val. Maximus. Suetonius was copied at Tours, which still exists Vegetius. in Paris under the name of the codex Memmianus Q US curtius (ix) , the best that has come down to us. While Eric of Auxerre made extracts from Suetonius and Valerius Maximus at the suggestion of Servatus Lupus, Sedulius of Liege had already been culling excerpts from Valerius and Vegetius 1 . Valerius is represented by mss at Berne (ix) and Florence (x), the former from Fleury, the latter from the abbey of Malmedy- Stavelot near Liege 2 ; also by the Vatican ms (ix) of the abridge¬ ment by Julius Paris (late iv). This ms of the abridgement, which came from Fleury, and the Berne ms of the original belong to a Ravenna recension by Domnulus (v) 3 . Vegetius, De Re Mi/itari, was much studied during the wars of the ninth century. An abridged excerpt of part of the work was made by Rabanus Maurus, and a set of elegiacs was written by Sedulius to accompany the gift of a ms from bishop Hartgarius to Eberhardus' 1 . The extant mss fall into two classes, best represented by a ms in Paris and a Palatine ms in the Vatican (x) , the former belonging to the recension of Eutropius (450). The mss of Justin, who was a favourite model for historical composition 5 , similarly fall into two groups, the first represented only by a ms in Florence (xi), the second including a ms at St Gallen (ix — x), a St Denis ms in Paris (ix), and a Fleury ms at Leyden (ix—x). Quintus Curtius, the imitator of Livy and Seneca, was studied by Einhard and Servatus Lupus and others in the Middle Ages 6 . The earlier mss (ix— xi) include those in Leyden (ix, x), Paris and Berne (ix) and fragments at Einsiedeln (x). 1 ms C 14 at Cues on the Mosel (including fragments of Cic. in Pisonem and pro Fonteio). Cp. Traube, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1892, 366-72. 2 Cp. Wibald (of Stavelot and Corvey), c. 1150, in Bibl. Rer. Germ, i 280. 3 Brandes, Wiener Studien, 1890, 297 f; Traube, S. Ber. Bayr. Akad. 1891, 387—400. 4 Poetae Lat. Aevi Car. iii 212 Traube. 5 F. Rtihl, Die Verbreitung des Justins im MA (1871). 6 Dosson, Etude, 360. 636 TACITUS. [CHAP. In the mediaeval catalogues there is no certain trace of Tacitus. Reminiscences of the Germania and the Histories have been detected in Einhard, and of the Annals in a single passage of Rudolf’s annals of Fulda (852) 1 , while the Germania is the source of the same writer’s description of the Saxons 2 , and of the epigram in Guibert of Nogent (d. 1124):— modernitm hoc saeculum corrumpitur et corrumpit 3 . William of Malmesbury supplies a remarkably close parallel to a passage in the Histories 4 , and Peter of Blois professes to have frequently referred to that work 5 . Books i—vi of the Annals have survived only in the Medicean ms (ix), found in 1509 6 and supposed to have come from one of the monasteries of Northern Germany, either Corvey 7 or Fulda 8 , or possibly Liibeck 9 ; A?mals xi—xvi and Histories i—v, solely in another Medicean ms (xi), ‘found’ in 1427, which is written in ‘Lombard’ characters and was possibly copied at Monte Casino 10 . The extant mss of the Dialogus , 1 Pertz, Mon. i 368, super amnem quem Cornelius Tacitus [Ann. ii 9—17] scriptor rerum a Romanis in ea gente gestarum Visurgim, moderni vero Wisahara vocant. 2 Mon. ii 675 f [Germ. 4, 5, 10, 11]. 3 Migne, clvi 858 (G. Meier’s Sieben Freiert Kiinste , i 19); Tac. Germ. 19, nec corrumpere et corrumpi saeculum vocatur. 4 ii 73, vix credibile memoratu est quantum...adoleverit; cp. Gesta Regum Angl. c. 68, incredibile quantum brevi adoleverit (Manitius, Philol. xlvii 566). Apart, however, from adoleverit, both historians may have been imitating Sallust, Cat. 7, incredibile memoratu est...quantum brevi creverit; and even brevi adoleverit may have been suggested to the English historian by Sallust, who has brevi adolevit ‘m Jug. 11 and 63. 5 Chartul. Univ. Paris., i 27 f. Cp., in general, E. Cornelius, Quomodo Tacitus...in hominum memoria versatus sit usque ad renascentes litteras (1888), where Widukind and the author of the Life of Henry IV are credited with a knowledge of Tacitus; also Manitius, Philol. xlvii 565 f. 6 Soderini Ep., quoted by Urlichs, Eos, i 244. 7 Ep. Leonis X, 1 Dec. 1517; Tac., ed. Beatus Rhenanus 1533; Philol. xlv 376-80; Hiiffer, Korveier Studien, 1898, 14. 8 Tac. ed. Ritter, p. xxxviif; refuted by Urlichs, Eos, i 243 f, ii 224 f. 9 Voigt, Humanistnus , i 253 s ; corrected in Neue Jahrb. 1881, 423, 805, and in Curtius-Aufsatze , 333. 10 Chron. Cass, iii 63; possibly copied c. 1053-87 in the time of Desiderius. The MS was probably known to Boccaccio (d. 1375), cp. Rhein. Mus. 1848, 145, and Voigt, i 250 3 ; complete facsimile of both MSS, Leyden, 1902. XXXII.] PETR0N1US. 637 Germania , and Agricola are all of century xv, with the exception of a ms of the Agricola and Germania recently discovered in a private library at Jesi near Ancona, which belongs to century xn 1 . The poem on the Civil War contained in the . Petronius Satires of Petronius (§§ 119—124) was known to Eric of Auxerre 2 . It is possibly Eric’s ms of excerpts from the Satires that was once at Auxerre 3 and is now at Berne (ix—x). Two leaves at Leyden belong to the same ms. There are also two mss in Paris (xn, xv), the second of which (the only authority for the Cena Trimalchionis) was found at Trau in Dalmatia. Fuller excerpts than those in the Berne ms were copied by Scaliger, Tornaesius and Pithoeus from mss which have since vanished. A favourable impression of the extent to which the ancient historians were sometimes studied is supplied by Radulfus de Diceto, dean of St Paul’s (d. 1202) 4 , who gives a dated list of the historical authorities followed in his Abbreviationes Chronicorum, beginning with ‘Trogus Pompeius’ and Valerius Maximus, while he quotes, in his own work, authors such as Caesar, Suetonius, Solinus, Florus, Apuleius, Virgil, Lucan, Martial, Statius, Claudian and Vegetius 5 . But, in the Middle Ages as a whole, we find an ignorance of ancient history in general, and even of the history of philosophy and literature. Historical studies were entangled with strange versions of the tale of Troy and fabulous stories of Alexander the Great 6 , while the wildest legends gathered round the names of Aristotle 7 and Virgil 8 . The fables of mythology, again, were either denounced as diabolical inventions or forced to minister to edification with the aid of allegory. The direct 1 Wochenschr. f. kl. Philol. 1903, 83, 163. 2 Vita S. Germani, i 109—113, v 207, 229; cp. Traube’s PoetaeLatini, iii 424. 3 Usener, in Rhein. Mus. xxii (1867) 413 f; not in Eric’s hand, says Traube, iii 822. 4 ed. Stubbs (1876). 5 Gottlieb, Mitt. Bibl., p. 447 f. 6 P. Meyer, Bibl. fran$. dn Moyen Age, t. iv—v; Gaston Paris, Litt. Fr. au Moyen Age, § 44; H. Morley, English Writers, iii 286—303. 7 Gidel, Nouvelles Etudes, 331—384; Hertz, Abhandl. Bayr. Akad. 1892, 1—104. 8 Comparetti, Virgilio ii. 638 MEDIAEVAL ENCYCLOPAEDIAS. [CHAP. Grammar study of classical authors was largely superseded by the use of encyclopaedic compilations 1 , such as those of Isidore and Rabanus, of William de Conches and Honorius d’Autun, the Floridum of Lambert (c. 1120), the Imago Mundi of Omons (1245) 2 , the Specula of Vincent of Beauvais (d. 1264), and the nineteen books De proprietatibus rerum of the English Franciscan, Bartholomew (fl. 1230-50), whose knowledge of Geography is derived solely from the Bible and from Pliny, Orosius and Isidore, with the commentaries on the same. His quotations from Aristotle are always taken from the Latin translations of the Arabic versions 3 . The Reductorium Morale of Pierre Berguire (d. 1362) was of the same encyclopaedic type as the above productions 4 . The classical learning of the Middle Ages was largely derived second-hand, not only from comprehensive en¬ cyclopaedias, but also from books of elegant extracts or florilegia; and, even if the student never attained to the reading of the authors themselves, he at least went through a protracted course of Latin Grammar. Early in the Middle Ages the vast compilation of Priscian was succeeded by the minor manuals of Cassiodorus and Isidore, of Aldhelm and Bede. All of these treated Grammar in a sober and serious spirit; it was reserved for the eccentric sciolist, who called himself ‘Virgilius Maro’ (cent, vi—vn), to invent new words at his own caprice 5 , and to justify their existence by fabricating quotations which imposed upon his successors. After the eighth century the history of Grammar falls into two periods, (1) from the age of Alcuin to that of Abelard (centuries ix—xi), and (2) from the age of Abelard to the Renaissance (centuries xn—xiv). In the first period the authorities mainly followed are Donatus and Priscian. The few examples of texts quoted in illustration of 1 Haase, De Medii Aevi Studiis Philol. , pp. 4—6; Liliencron’s Festrede (1876); and Norden, 740 note 1. 2 In French verse, Notices et Extraits , v 243-66. 3 Hist. An., Meteor ., De Caelo et Mundo; Jourdain, 359. The original Latin of Bartholomew was printed in 1470-2, and Trevisa’s English version (of 1398) in 1495 etc. Extracts are given in Steele’s Mediaeval Lore (1893). 4 Hallam, Lit. i H7-9 4 ; Bibl. de Vecole des chartes, xxxii 325 f; Haureau, Mem. de PAcad. des Inscr. xxx (2) 45—55. 5 Cp. p. 438 supra. XXXII.] GRAMMAR IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 639 grammatical rules are all borrowed from earlier grammars. Little of Greek is known except the letters; but, in the mss of writers on grammar, while the orthography of Greek words is in general correct (the words being written in capitals, and without accents), there is no knowledge of Greek Accidence. Donatus has in the meantime been converted into a catechism (. Donatus minor), and the most popular text-book is the commentary on that catechism by Remigius of Auxerre (d. 908) l . A superstitious respect for a standard grammatical text, an ignorance of Greek and of classical antiquity in general, a disposition to reason about grammatical facts instead of studying the facts themselves, a preference for ecclesiastical as compared with classical usage, are among the main characteristics of the first period. All these reappear in an exaggerated form in the second; but, in the latter, we find Logic intruding into the sphere of Grammar, asserting itself first in the early part of the twelfth century and still more strongly in the thirteenth 2 . While the study of Logic is diffused over all Europe, the general trend of grammatical studies in Italy and in France, South of the Loire, is different from that North of that river and in lands under the educational influence of Northern France, such as England, Flanders and Germany. In Italy and in Southern France the study of Logic, combined with that of Grammar, is subordinate to that of Law; and Grammar is cultivated solely for the practical purpose of enabling the student to speak and write Latin with correctness. The most popular lexicons of the Middle Ages were produced by Italians. Papias 3 1 p. 478 n. 4 supra. ~ ‘ Cupio per auxilium dialecticae grammaticam adiuvare the student’s reply to Buoncompagno’s warning against the neglect of Grammar (cent. Xli), cp. Thurot, Notices et Extraits , xxii 90. The following comparison is ascribed to Albertus Magnus (cent, xm): ‘ sicut se habet stultus ad sapientem, sic se habet grammaticus ignorans logicam ad peritum in logica’. The glosa notabilis on Alexander of Villedieu by Gerhard of Zutphen (Cologne, 1488) applies all the precision of Scholasticism to points of Syntax (Alexander, ed. Reichling, pp. xii, lxivf). 3 p. 50 r supra ; Littre on Glossaires in Hist. Litt. de la France , xxii (1852) 5—8; Rhein. Mus. xxiv (1869) 378, 390; Teuffel, § 42, 6—9, and § 472, 7. The principal source of Papias is the anonymous liber glossarum (cent, vm — ix), partly derived from Placidus (cent, v ?). 640 MEDIAEVAL GRAMMARIANS. [CHAP. (1053) is a Lombard; Hugutio 1 (fi. 1192, d. 1212) and Balbi 2 (1286) are of Pisa and Genoa respectively. The biblical glossary called the Manunotrectus (/xafxfxoOpe-TrToq) is ascribed to M.archesini of Reggio (c. 1300). In the second period the chief authorities on Grammar are men of Northern Europe who have studied in Paris. Petrus Helias, the author of a commentary on Priscian, is a Frenchman who taught in Paris ( c .. 1142). Alexander of Villedieu, the composer of a hexameter poem, in 2645 lines, on (1) Accidence, (2) Syntax, and (3) Prosody, Accentuation and Figures of Speech, compiled from Priscian, Donatus, Petrus Riga, and possibly also from unknown grammarians of the twelfth century, is a native of Normandy (1200) 3 . Flanders is the native land of his con¬ temporary, Eberhard of Bethune (1212), the author of a poem on Grammar, written in hexameters interspersed with elegiacs, which owes its name of Graecismus to the fact that it includes a chapter on derivations from the Greek 4 . Flanders also claims Michael 1 Of Papias and Hugutio Roger Bacon said, nesciverunt Graecum ; see p. 535 ; Ducange, Praef. §§ 44, 46 ; Haase, De Medii Aevi Sludiis Philologicis, 31-3; Charles, Roger Bacon, 330, 359. Cp. A. Scheler, Lexicogr. Lat. (1867); S. Berger, Deglossariis...medii aevi (Paris, 1879); Salvioli in Rivista Europea , xiv (1880) 745 f; G. Meier, Die Sieben Freien Kunste,\ 17; and Eckstein, Lat. u. Gr. Unterricht (1887) 53 f. Hugutio, s. v. cera, after showing that the second syllable of sincerus is long, severely adds that, if in any verse that syllable is made short, abradatur cum suo auctore de libro vitae et cum justis non scribatur. For sinceris , cp. Charisius in Keil’s Gr. Lat. i 81, 218; Hagen, Anecd. Helv. ccl; and Eberhard, Graecismus (c. xiii), 71— 4. 2 On Balbi ( Joannes Januensis ), see p. 584 supra ; Ducange, § 47; and Haase, 34 b He explains laicus ‘i.e. popularis, et dicitur a laos, quod est populus , vel potius a laos, quod est lapis \ inde laicus est lapideus , quia durus et extraneus est a scientia literarum ’. Hugutio and Balbi are among the sources of the Promptorium Parvulorum (1440), ascribed to the Dominican Geoffrey of Lynn. 3 ed. Reichling in Mon. Gernn. Paed. xn (1893), date, p. xxxvif; authorities, pp. lxxvi-ix; 250 mss (1259—1526), and c. 300 printed editions (1470—1588). Cp. Haase, 17, 45 (where the clearness of his Syntax is commended); Babler, Beitrdge zu einer Gesch. d. Lat. Gr. im MA, n6f; and Neudecker, Das Doctrinale (Pima, 1885). Alexander is mentioned in the Epp. Obscurorum Virorum , i Epp. 7, 25, ii Ep. 35. 4 ed. Wrobel (1887); cp. Babler, 95 f; Norden, Kunstprosa , 741 n. His date (1212 Leyser, Ducange, Reichling) rests on the somewhat ambiguous XXXII.] MEDIAEVAL GRAMMARIANS. 641 ‘Modista’ of Marbais (cent, xm), the writer of a treatise De Modis Significandi , who actually invokes the authority of Aristotle for the simple statement that one cannot give to another that which one has not got oneself 1 . Lastly, we find two Englishmen, the first of whom is Joannes de Garlandia (fl. 1204-52), who was known to Roger Bacon 2 , and left behind him about fourteen works on Latin Grammar and cognate subjects 3 . The second is Robert Kilwardby, archbishop of Canterbury (1272-9), who was a Master of Arts of Paris and famous as a commentator on Priscian 4 . In the thirteenth century Priscian was compelled to share the place of honour with his commentators Helias and Kilwardby, while in the fourteenth he was practically superseded by the modern compilations of Alexander of Villedieu and Eberhard of Bethune 5 . These last owed much of their popularity to the fact that they were written in Latin verse. Verse was also the medium used by a Canon of Hildesheim, Ludolf of Luchow, for his treatise on Syntax known as Florista , beginning with ‘Flores grammaticae propono scribere’, which was widely used in Germany, Flanders and France 6 . Even in the prose grammars of the previous century the principal rules had always been given in verse, as an aid to the memory. In this second period any Greek words that occur in the mss of the grammarians are mechanically copied, and are often wrongly read and erroneously explained. Latin Grammar ceases to be cultivated as the art of speaking and writing Latin with correctness. It has now become a purely speculative science. lines: * anno milleno centeno bis duodeno | condidit Ebrardus Graecismum Bethuniensis’. Haase (45) incorrectly interpreted this as 1124. On his ignorance of Greek, cp. ib. 15. He fills 60 folios of the ‘Canterbury lesson- book’ (c. 14S0) described in Gasquet’s Essays, 279. Conrad von Mure produced a Novus Graecismus at Zurich (1281), cp. Bursian, i 84 f. 1 Thurot, 118 n. 2. 2 Conip. Phil. 453 ; p. 572 supra. 3 p. 529 n. 1 supra', and Babler, 172, 175-8. • 4 Comm, on Books i—xv in Camb. Univ. Library, MS Kk. 3. 20. 5 Chartul. Univ. Paris., iii 145. 6 Florista, Papias, Hugutio, Michael Modista, and Joannes de Garlandia are all satirised by Erasmus in his Conjlictus Thaliae, Act. ii Opera i 892; cp. Rabelais i 14 [Journ. of Cl. and S. Phil, iv 6 note); also Erasmus, Epp. 2, 79, 507, 810, and 394 (Gudanus to Battus), ed. Leyden. S. 41 642 MEDIAEVAL LATIN. [CHAP. Modern Syntax owes much to the grammarians of the Middle Ages. In the thirteenth century a complete system of philo¬ sophical grammar was composed, which was destined to hold its ground in the schools for two centuries. The work in which this philosophy of grammar was first laid down was entitled De Modis Significandi , and its teachers were called Modistae. It has been variously attributed to Thomas Aquinas or Thomas of Erfurt or Duns Scotus in century xm 1 , and even to Albert tne Saxon in the following century. It was the theme of several commentaries, and of manuals such as that of Michael de Marbais already mentioned. These manuals were denounced by the early humanists because of the barbarous character of their Latinity, the inordinate number of their definitions, and the extreme subtlety of their distinctions 2 ; but much that was useful in them was incorporated in the new text-books 3 . The grammarians of the Middle Ages dealt with Latin as the living language of the Church and the Schools, and it was precisely because it was a living language that it departed further and further from the classical standard. Founded on the Vulgate and the Fathers, it enlarged its vocabulary by incorporating names of things unknown to the ancients, together with technical terms of the Schools, whether invented by the Schoolmen or the Grammarians. We owe ‘ instance 5 to the former, and ‘substantive’ (in the ordinary sense, different from that of Priscian) to the latter 4 . It is open to Seneca 5 to complain that he cannot translate to 6 V except by quod est , but Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus would have felt no such difficulty, and Quintilian 6 would not have condemned them for using ens or essentia. ‘ If fear ’ (says Priscian 7 ) ‘ had prevented authors from using any new words, which were necessarily demanded either by 1 P- 577 supra . 2 e.g. Erasmus, in his Antibarbarus , calls Michael an autor insulsissimus. 3 Haase, 38—42, 44!; Reichling’s ed. of Alexander, pp. cvi—cx. 4 instantia used for Zvctolgis in Buridan, in Metaph. Arist. Quaestiones (Prantl, iv 35); in the secondary sense of ‘example’, not found in English earlier than 1586. verbimi (not nomen ) substantivum is normal in Priscian. 5 Ep. 58 § 7. 6 viii 3, 33. 7 viii 92; cp. Paulsen, Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts , 27; Reichling, l.c. iv—vi. XXXII.] THE ARTS AND THE AUTHORS. 643 the nature of things or by the desire of expressing a certain meaning, perpetuis Latinitas angustiis damnata mansissef. Among changes of Syntax, the commonest are the use of quod or quia, instead of the Accusative with the Infinitive ; fore, for esse, with the Future Participle; the Accusative for the Ablative Absolute; and quatenus in the ‘ final ’ sense of ut. Even Grammarians gravely endeavour to maintain the legitimacy of the constructions legitur Virgilium 1 and sillogizantem ponendum est terminos 2 . The scholastic Latin of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries degenerates in the fourteenth; and this degeneracy was doubtless accelerated by the uncouth style of the renderings of Aristotle which began to be common in the thirteenth century 3 . Grammar was the portal of all the Liberal Arts; the latter could only be approached through the study of the ‘ parts of speech ’:— qui nescit partes, in vanum tendit ad artes 4 . But it was only one of the Seven Arts constituting the normal course of mediaeval study. Combined with Logic and Rhetoric, it formed the trivium, with which ordinary students were generally content. In the case of the more advanced, the study of these three Arts, was followed by that of the quadrivium , consisting of Music,. Arithmetic, Geometry and Astronomy 5 . The late Latin couplet The conflict between the Arts and the Authors 1 * There-is-a-reading-of Virgil ’. Thurot, 302 f. 2 ib. 307 f. 3 Cp. C. Thurot, Doctrines Grammaticales au Moyen Age , in Notices et Exlraits , xxii 2 (1868) pp. 591, esp. 60—121, 500-6; and V. Le Clerc, Hist. Litt. de la France au ip s. (1865), 420 f, 426!; also F. Haase, De Medii Aevi Studiis Philologicis (Breslau, 1856), and Vorlesungen (1874), i 12—T4; Specht, Gesch. des Unterrichtswesens (1885), 86—96; Eckstein, Lat. u. Gr. Unterricht (1887), 54!; Schmid, Gesch. der Erziehung, 11 i (1892) 299, 439; and Salvioli, in Rivista Europea , xiv 732 f. The study and use of Latin in Germany is treated by Jakob Burckhard, De linguae latinae in Germania...fatis (2 vols, 1713, Suppl. 1721). On mediaeval Grammar, cp. Babler’s Beitrdge (1:885). 4 ‘Metrista’ (Haase, 44); Buoncompagno (ap. Thurot, 90), qui partes ignorat, se ad artes transferre non debet. A woodcut in Reisch, Margarita Philosophica (1504), copied in Reicke, Der Gelehrte (1900), Abb. 43, exhibits Grammar opening the gate of a tower with representatives of the Arts looking out of the windows in the successive storeys, and with that of Theology on the summit. 5 See esp. G. Meier, Die Sieben Freien Kiinste im MA, Einsiedeln, 1886-7 » a l so Schmid, /. c. II i 439—448 ; and Specht, /. c. 81—139. 41—2 644 THE ARTS AND THE AUTHORS. [CHAP. h. > * it t-'V> ' ■* O (XAZ-x ontw+n' summing up the Seven Arts in two memorial lines corresponding to these divisions is well known to many who may not have heard the name of its author, or rather its earliest recorder 1 :— ‘ Gram loquitur ; Dia vera docet; Rhet verba colorat; Mus canit; Ar numerat; Ge ponderat; Ast colit astra \ The Middle Ages were the battle-ground of a struggle between the study of the Liberal Arts, as represented in meagre manuals like that of Martianus Capella, and the study of the classical authors themselves. The study of the Arts was regarded as subservient not only to the study of the Scriptures 2 , but also to that of theoretic Theology; and, in a work of art belonging to the close of the Middle Ages, a fresco of the Spanish Chapel in Florence ( c . 1355), we may see Thomas Aquinas enthroned among the Prophets and Evangelists, while, in a lower row, a subordinate position is assigned to the personifications and the representatives of the Liberal Arts. But the study of the Arts, though subordinate to that of the Scriptures, was deemed far more important than that of the Authors. In comparison with the latter, the text-books of the Arts in general, and of Logic in particular, were considered safer reading: a syllogism might possibly involve a fallacy, but it was at any rate free from the taint of paganism 3 . From the first part of the eleventh century, the influence of the Schoolmen made the schools of Paris the stronghold of the study of Logic; and, at the beginning of the thirteenth, we find the earliest statute of the u?iiversity of Paris insisting on the study of Plato and Aristotle alone, to the neglect of a general classical education 4 . Meanwhile, in the twelfth, the interest in the Classics still survived at Chartres during the three years (1137-40) in which John of Salisbury was studying there, under one of Bernard’s pupils, William of Conches, and Richard l’Eveque. Bernard had been succeeded as chancellor 1 The Franciscan Scotist, Nicolaus de Orbellis ( Dorbellus ), d. 1455 J born and died at Angers; lived chiefly at Poitiers. Logica, f. 3; Prantl, iv 175. 2 Alcuin, ci 853 Migne ; Abelard, ii 67 Cousin; John of Salisbury, Enth. 373 f, 441-5, etc. (Norden, Kunstprosa , 680-4). 3 Cp. Rashdall, i 36. The mystic Hugo of St Victor (d. 1141) regards the Authors as a mere ‘appendix’ to the Arts , describing the former as ludicra , and the latter as seria, Migne clxxvi 768 (Norden, 688 f). 4 ib. i 71 f. XXXII.] THE SCHOOL OF CHARTRES. 645 by Gilbert de la Porree (1126) and ultimately by Bernard’s brother Theodoric (1141— c. 1150-5), who composed {c. 1141) a great work on the Seven liberal Arts, treating each of them in connexion with ancient or modern text-books. For Grammar he quotes Donatus and Priscian; for Dialectic, Aristotle and Boethius; for Rhetoric, Cicero; for Music and Arith¬ metic, Boethius ; for Geometry, Adelard of Bath (the translator of Euclid), with Frontinus and Isidore; for Astronomy, Hyginus and Ptolemy 1 . In this con¬ nexion it is interesting to point out that it was between 1134 and 1150 2 , at a time when the influence of Bernard was still strong in Chartres, when his immediate pupils were actually teaching in its famous school, and while his brother Theodoric was successively ‘master of the school’ and ‘chancellor’, that the right-hand door-way of the West Front of the cathedral was adorned with figures of the Seven Arts, each of them associated with an an¬ cient personage, Grammar with Priscian, Dialectic with Aristotle, Rhetoric with Cicero, Music with Pythagoras, Arith¬ metic with Nicomachus, Geometry with Euclid, and Astronomy with Ptolemy 3 . We may here notice a certain preference for Greek authorities, even in cases where the text-books in current use were Latin; and it will be ob¬ served that Boethius, who fills a large part of the Eptateuchon, pcc.msc Grammar and Priscian from Chartres Cathedral. (Viollet-le-Duc, Diet. Arc hit. ii 2.) 1 Abbe Clerval, Les Jicoles de Chartres au Moyen-Age (1895), p. 222 f (synopsis of the Eptateuchon). Cp. p. 513 n. 4. 2 The dates given by Abbe Clerval, Guide Chartrain, 7 f. 3 Cuts in Viollet-le-Duc, Diet. Archit. s.v. Arts Liberaux , and E. Male, DArt Religieux du xiii e s. (1898), 117. The idea was borrowed from 646 THE SCHOOL OF CHARTRES. [CHAP. is absent from the sculptures. These are approximately assigned to 1145 1 ; it may therefore be conjectured that the absence of any public recognition of Boethius among the external sculptures of the cathedral may have been possibly due to the suspicions of heresy, which in 1146-8 2 gathered round the name of Gilbert de la Porree, chancellor of Chartres, in connexion with his com¬ mentary on the four books On the Trinity , ascribed to Boethius. But the names of the above representatives of the Arts, though probably correct, are only conjectural; and, after all, it is from Boethius that the designations of the Greek authorities on Music, Arithmetic and Geometry are derived. Apart from the cathedral of Clermont, that of Chartres stands alone in according, among its works of art, a place of honour to representatives of the old classical world 3 ; and this is true not only of the sculptures of the West Front (1145), but also of those of the North Porch (1275), where Medicine is represented by Hippocrates, Geometry by Archimedes, Painting by Apelles, and Philosophy by Aristotle 4 . To the school of Chartres (as we have already seen) 5 John of Salisbury owes his excellent Latin style and his general interest » in Classics. He regretfully remarks that, since the days that he spent under the pupils of Bernard, ‘less time and less care have been bestowed on grammar , and persons who profess all arts, liberal and mechanical, are ignorant of the primary art, without which a man proceeds in vain to the rest; for, albeit the other studies assist literature, yet this has the sole privilege Martianus Capella (p. 230 supra). Among other cathedrals, where the Seven Liberal Arts were represented (at a later date than at Chartres, and unaccom¬ panied by classical personages) are those of Laon and Sens (xn), Auxerre (end of xiii ), Rouen and Soissons. At Clermont Aristotle, Cicero and Pythagoras are represented with the attributes of the corresponding Arts, but the Arts themselves are absent. The statues of Philosophy at Laon and at Sens are modelled on the description in Boethius, Cons, i 1 (Male, pp. 122-5, an( b i n general, 102-121). For the representations of the Seven Arts in the Hortus Deliciarum , see plate on p. 537 supra. 1 W. Voge, Die Anfdnge des monumentalen Stils im MA (1894), pp. 118— 123, 156; E. Male, 119. 2 Poole, 179—191. 4 Cuts in Viollet-le-Duc, ii 8—9. 5 PP- 517—522. 3 Male, 121, 426 f. XXXII.] THE SCHOOL OF CHARTRES. 647 of making one lettered’ 1 . The results of the classical education initiated by Bernard are also clearly seen in Peter of Blois (e. 1135—1204), who passed his youth at Chartres and had the highest admiration for John of Salisbury. In one of his letters he expresses his doubts about a pupil who, neglecting a know¬ ledge of Grammar and classical authors, has betaken himself to the subtleties of Logic, ‘ which supply no proper foundation for literary learning’ 2 . Similarly, Giraldus Cambrensis, writing in his old age (c. 1220), requires of all who desire to speak, not only rede, but also lepide and ornate , an education, not in the trivium alone, but also in the authors 3 . From the twelfth century onwards, a marked improvement in Latin versification is manifest in France. A careful study of models such as Statius, Lucan and Ovid, as well as Tibullus and Propertius, may be noted in the poems of Matthew of Vendome 4 . Virgil, Horace, the elegiac poets and Martial are imitated by the best of the mediaeval Latin poets, Hildebert, archbishop of Tours 5 6 . In the history of classical studies in the Middle Ages an important place must be assigned to the struggle between the schools of Paris and Orleans b . The latter had been founded in the age of Charles the Great by the bishop of Orleans, Theodulfus, whose familiarity with classical literature is proved by his poem de libris quos legere so/ebam 7 . The classical tradition was maintained at Orleans, and was 1 Met. i 27 (Poole, 122 f). 2 Chartularium Univ. Paris., i 27 f, grammaticae et auctorum scientia praetermissa volavit ad versutias logicorum...non est in talibus fundamentum scientiae litteralis, multisque perniciosa est ista subtilitas. Cp. p. 522 supra. 3 Prooem. of Speculum Eccl., preserved by Ant. Wood, quoted in Brewer’s ed., iv 7. Cp. p. 523 supra. 4 P- 53 ° supra. 5 p. 529 supra. His Moralis Philosophia (clxxi Migne) abounds in quota¬ tions from the Classics. 6 Delisle in Annuaire Bulletin de la Soc. de VHisloire de France , vii (1869), 139—154; Mile A. de Foulques de Villaret, Mem. de la Soc. archeol...de VOrleanais, xiv (1875) 299—440; Norden, 724!; Rashdall, ii 136-8. 7 i 543 Dummler. 648 THE SCHOOL OF ORLEANS. [CHAP. further strengthened by the proximity of the schools of Fleury 1 and Chartres. The school of Orleans sent forth a series of men of learning in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries in particular, the art of letter-writing flourished at Orleans and in its immediate neigh¬ bourhood. That art became, indeed, so widely popular in the thirteenth century, that it even ceased to retain the distinction, which it had won in the hands of men of mark in the previous century 2 . The success with which classical composition was cultivated at Orleans is proved by the fact that the three papal secretaries of 1159 to 1185 (besides several Latin poets, and commentators on Ovid and Lucan 3 ) were produced by that school. A Latin versifier, who wrote in England about the year 1200, places Orleans as a school of Literature (literally ‘ Authors’) on a level with Salerno, Bologna and Paris as schools of Medicine, Law and Logic respectively 4 . While the school of Orleans was attacked by Alexander of Villedieu 5 , the Latin poets produced by that school were lauded by two poets of English birth, Alexander Neckam 6 and Joannes de Garlandia 7 . Even when the school of Chartres, overshadowed by Paris, began to decline, the classical tradition lived on at Orleans till at least the middle of the thirteenth century 8 . In that century the school acquired a new interest through its struggle with the Sorbonne. Orleans had 1 Cuissard-Gaucheron in Mem. de la Soc. archeol. de VOrleanais, xiv (1875) 551—715. The great abbey church of St Benoit-sur-Loire is all that now survives of the buildings of the famous school of Fleury. Its mss were dispersed in 1562. 2 N. Valois, De Arte Scribendi Epistolas apud Gallicos Medii Aevi Scriptores (r88o), 24, 28 f, 39^ 43. On Bernard Silvester’s Summa Die - taminum (e. 1153) see p. 514 supra. 3 In one of the models of the art of letter-writing the student asks for commentaries on Virgil and Lucan. There were glosses on Ovid by Arnoul le Roux of Orleans (c. xn). 4 Galfridus de Vino Salvo, Po'etria Nova, 1009 f, other passages quoted by Delisle, Reichling {Mon. Ger?n. Paed. xii p. xxxvii f), and Norden, 727 f. Cp. p. 526 supra. 5 Ecclesiale , prolog. 6 De Naticris Rerum , p. 454 Wright. 7 Ars Lectoria (1234), Delisle l.c. p. 145. 8 Rashdall, ii 138. I XXXII.] ORLEANS VERSUS PARIS. 649 neglected the study of philosophy and had insisted solely on the attainment of purity of style through the direct study of classical authors, especially Virgil and Lucan. The Authors were supreme at Orleans, the Arts in Paris 1 . This contrast is clearly shown in certain Latin poems of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries 2 . It is still more vividly represented in the contemporary poem of Henri d’Andely on the Battle of the Seven Arts, which belongs to the latter part of c. xiii 3 . The conflict between the study of philosophy in Paris and the cultivation of literature, especially poetic literature, at Orleans, is here represented as a battle between the forces of Logic and of Grammar. The piece is not without interest as a precursor of a far better known production, Swift’s Battle of the Books (1697). The following may serve as a brief summary:— Grammar unfurls her banner before the walls of Orleans, and summons all her forces to the fray. Around that banner gather ‘Homer’ and Claudian, Persius, Donatus and Priscian, with many another knight and squire. They are soon reinforced by the chieftains of Orleans itself, when they all combine in a march on Paris. Logic trembles at their approach; she summons aid from Tournai and elsewhere, and places in a chariot three of her champions who are skilled in all the Liberal Arts. Rhetoric has meanwhile taken up her stand with the Lombard knights 4 at a fort six leagues distant from Paris 5 , where her forces are joined by those of certain other Arts:—Physic, Surgery, Music, Astronomy, Arithmetic and Geometry, while Theology remains apart in Paris. Among the champions of that city are Plato and Aristotle. Donatus begins the battle by attacking Plato; Aristotle meanwhile attacks Priscian, but is thrown from his steed and continues to tight on foot against Grammar, i.e. Priscian (who is aided by his modern ‘nephews’, Alexander and Eberhard), when he is himself attacked, not by Priscian only, but by Virgil and Horace, Lucan and Statius, Persius and Juvenal, Propertius, Sedulius, Arator, Terence and ‘ Homer’; and would certainly have surrendered, but for the aid of Logic and the several impersonations of the Organon , Physics and Ethics , with Porphyry, Macrobius and Boethius. Dan Barbarime, though a vassal of Grammar, takes up arms against her, because he also holds lands in the domain of Logic. While the battle goes on raging, the Authors find it hard 1 The Statute of 1254 prescribes certain parts of Aristotle, with Donatus, Boethius and Priscian, but none of the Latin Classics. 2 Quoted by Delisle, l.c.; others add a passage from the discourse delivered at Toulouse by the learned monk, Helinand, in 1229: ‘ ecce quaerunt clerici Parisiis artes liberates, Aurelianis auctores , Bononiae codices, Salerni pyxides, Toleti daemones, et nusquam mores’ ( Sermo 2, In Asc. Domini ). 3 The author was a Canon of Rouen about 1270. 4 See n. 3, p. 650 infra. 5 Mont-l’Heri. 650 THE BATTLE OF THE SEVEN ARTS. [CHAP. XXXII. to hold their own, although Ovid and Seneca hasten to their aid, together with certain modern poets, including Jean de Hauteville and Alain de l’lsle 1 . Logic, however, is obliged to withdraw to the fort held by Rhetoric and Astronomy, and is there beleaguered by the forces of Grammar, till she sends down an envoy who unfortunately knows so little of the rules of speech that he cannot even deliver his message clearly and is accordingly compelled to return without result. Meanwhile Astronomy flings her lightning on her foes, burns their tents and scatters their forces; and, since that day, the Muse of Poetry has buried herself out of sight, somewhere between Orleans and Blois, never daring to show herself in the land where her rival, Logic, is holding sway. But she is honoured still by the Britons and the Germans 2 , although the Lombards hate her 3 . ‘This will last’ (adds the poet) ‘for thirty years; but the next generation will once more give heed to Grammar. Meanwhile, I declare that any scholar who cannot construe his text is a contemptible person, since, in every science, whoever is not perfect in his parts of speech, must be deemed the merest boy’ 4 . Before the year 1300 the literary school of Orleans had been thrown into the shade by the schools of the Seven Arts in Paris, and the study of Law alone survived 5 . But the fourteenth century saw the fulfilment of the poet’s prophecy of a revival of learning, which began, not in France or Germany or England, but in Northern Italy, where, in the early years of that century, the morning-star of the Renaissance arose in the person of Petrarch. 1 Only indicated by the names of their poems, Architre 7 iius and Anti- claudianus respectively (pp. 525, 531 supra). Similarly, Gautier de Chatillon is clearly meant by ‘ geta ducis Macidum ’, which the editor of the text has twice refrained from correcting into Gesta ducis Macedum, the first words of the Alexandras (p. 530 supra). 2 Li Breton et li Alemant. ‘ Les Anglais ’, says d’Aussy in his paraphrase, implying that Bretons are not meant. In 1 . 404 the poet uses the unambiguous /’ Englois in allusion to Adam du Petit-Pont. 3 A reference to the Lombard usurers in France, who are represented as hating the Muse of Poetry, only because they dun poets for their dues. 4 Quar en totite Science est gars, Mestres , qui n'entent bien ses pars. Text in Appendix to Jubinal’s ed. of Rutebeuf ii (1839) 415—435 and in iii (1875) 3 2 5—347 5 abstract by Legrand d’Aussy in Notices et Extraits, v (1800) 496—512, and in Norden, 728-31. 5 V. Le Clerc, Hist. Litt. 278 s ; Rashdall, ii 138 f. INDEX. Aachen, 456, 463, 484, 486, 600, 614 Abbo, (1) ‘Cernuus’, 481, 586; (2) of Fleury, 492 Abelard ( Abaielardus , 525), 509 f; 506, 5 1 7 » 533 > 5 86 > 595 > 613, 624 Accents, 126 Accius, 171 Accursius, 536, 582 Accusative Absolute, 434, 643 Acominatus, (1) Michael, 411 f; (2) Nicetas, 411, 414 Aero, 200 Acropolites, 415 Ada ms, 600 n. Adam, (r) of Bremen, 498; (2) bp of Hereford, 563 n. 6 ; (3) du Petit- Pont, 507 ; (4) of St Victor, 530 ‘Adamantius Martyrius \ 252, 254 (Teuffel, § 472, 6) Adelard of Bath, 511 f, 630, 645 ^Elfric of Eynsham, 493, 495 Aelian, 329 Aemilianus Macer, 251 Aemilius Paullus, L., 169 f Aeneas, 162 ; (2) Neo-Platonist, 365 Aeschines and Homer, 33 Aeschylus, 24, 52-4, 65; 131, 141 ; 284, 394, 420 Aetius, 364 Africanus, (1) Julius, 342, 390 ; (2) Constantinus, 539 Agapetus, (1) pope, 249 ; (2) deacon, 388 Agathias, 380 f Agius of Corvey, 480 n. 3 Alain de l’lsle (Alarms ab Insulis), 531 f; 230, 622, 650 Albans, St, 525, 553 f, 580, 600 f Alberico of (r) Monte Cassino, 648 n. 2 ; (2) Bologna, 535 Albert of Saxony, 577 Albertus Magnus, 558 f; 506, 550, 57 *, 59 2 Albinus on Plato, 321 Albrecht von Halberstadt, 615 Alcaeus, 44, 270, 280, 345 Alciphron, 310 Aleman, 23, 47 Alcuin, 455 f; 241, 254, 259, 466, 589,600, 612, 623. Cp. Haureau, i 2 123 f; Wattenbach G. Q. i 6 150- 163 ; Hauck, Kifchengeschichte , ii 116-145 ; on his Grammar, Frey, 1886; and on his influence, Mon- nier, 264~8 2 Aldhelm, 450 f (portrait in Social England , i 2 , 307) Alexander the Great, 34, 46, 101 f; in MA, 637 Alexander, (1) Aetolus, 121, 162; (2) of Aphrodisias, 333 ; 548, 584 ; (3) of Cotyaeum, 305 ; (4) son of Numenius, 311 ; (5) Polyhistor, * 59 , 3 2 5 5 (6) of Hales, 551 f; 506, 528, 561, 571, 576; (7) of Alex¬ andria, 552 ; (8) of Villedieu, 532, 585, 640 f, 648 f Alexandria, j o 1 ; School of, 105-43, 160; Museum, 105 f; Libraries, 107 f, tio-114, 409; Librarians, 114; Serapeum, 1x3, 341, 355; Alexandria and Pergamon, 111, 159-62 ; Alexandria in c. VI, 374 Alexandrian age, 102-64; dates of, 104 ; phases of scholarship in, 159 f; seats of learning in, 160-4 > Alex¬ andrian canon, 129 f; literature, 115 Alfanus, 500 Alfarabi, 387, 555, 563 n. 5 Alfred the Great, 481 f; 242; (2) ‘Alfred the Englishman’, 536, 547, 569 652 INDEX. Algazel, 387, 552. Alkendi, 386 Allegorical interpretation of the Bible, 335 * 344 > 43 2 ; Homer, 29, 147, J 54 > 337 * 409; Virgil, 610; Ovid, 615 f; myths and mythology, 147, 462, 590, 637 Alpetraugi, 544 Alphabet, Greek, 88 f, 275, 572 Ambrose, St, 234; 206, 223, 607 Amiatinus, codex , 251 Ammianus Marcellinus, 206, 604 Ammonius of Alexandria, (1) pupil of Aristarchus, 136; (2) father of Tryphon, 142 ; (3) Saccas (c. ill), 334; (4) author of work on Syno¬ nyms (c. iv), 142, 355, 370; (5) son of Hermeias (c. vi), 367, 563 Anacreon, 44, 127, 345 Analogy and Anomaly, 128, 131, 142, 148, 154 f, 161, 175-7 Anastasius I (emp. 491 A.D.), 258 ; (2) of Antioch (c. vi), 382 ; (3) Sinaites (c. vn), 385; (4) papal librarian (c. ix), 474 Anaxagoras, 30 Anaximenes, 109 Andreas, (1) of Crete, 384 ; (2) Lopa- diotes, 406 ; (3) Andreas (Andrew), and Michael Scot, 545, 569 Androclus and the Lion, 200, 289 Andronicus, Livius, 167, 199; (2) Andr. Rhodius, 164 Anselm (St) of Aosta, prior and abbot of Bee, and abp of Canterbury, 497> 506, 508, 550; (2) of Bisate, 499 ; (3) of Laon, 468 Anthologia Palatina, 397 f; Planudea, 418 Antidorus of Cumae, 7 Antigonus of Carystos, 149, 161 Antimachus, 34, 38 Antioch, 163, 344, 347, 374 Antipater of Sidon, 268 Antiphanes, on Alexandrian critics, 398 Antisthenes, 92, 109 Aphthonius, 373; 108, 311, 420 Apion, 288 Apollinaris of Laodicea, 352 Apollinaris Sidonius, 230 f; 208; (2) Sulpicius A., 198 Apollodorus, (1) of Athens (chrono- loger), 135 f, 151 ; (2) of Pergamon (rhetorician), 158 Apollonius, (1) Rhodius, 114, 116, 122, 269, 270; (2) Dyscolus, 312 f; 258, 303; ( 3 ) of Perga, 149; (4) son of Archibius, 289 Apsines, 330 f Apuleius, 310; 216 n. 2, 574; De Dogmate P/at on is, 310, 508; De Herbis , 599; De Mundo , 311, 515 n. 2 Apulia, William of, 524 Aquinas, (St) Thomas, 560 f; 506, 550, 576; his interest in Greek, 561 f; his commentaries on Aris¬ totle, 560, 562; his relation to Averroes, 542, 560 and pi. facing 560; his Latin hymns, 530; his in¬ fluence on Dante, 592 Arabic, study of, 575 f, 585; Latin translations of Arabic renderings of (1) Aristotle, 539^ 544, 548, 558, 565; (2) Hippocrates and Galen, 539 * 544 5 ( 3 ) Euclid, 512; (4) Ptolemy, 540, 543 Arabs, study of Aristotle among the, (1) in the East, 385 f; (2) in the West, 540-2 Arator, 436. Aratus, 116, 162 Arcadius, Pseudo-, 126 n. 1, 355 Archilochus, 22, 50; 129, 131; 270, 283, 361 Arethas, 395 ; 376, 425 Aristarchus, 130-5; 114, 140, 161 _ Aristides, Aelius, 305 f, 348, 395; (2) author of Apology , 383 ; (3) Ar. Quintilianus, 335, 337 Aristippus of Catania, 508 n. 1, 520 n. 5 Aristobulus, 325 Aristonicus, 140, 141 Aristophanes, 32, 43 ; in Plato’s Sym¬ posium, 61; the Frogs, 53 f, 60; in Alexandrian age, Aristoph. of Byzantium on, 128; Aristarchus, t 31 ; Callistratus, 135; Crates, 154; Didymus, 141 ; in Roman age, Plutarch, 298; Symmachus, 321; Byz. scholia , 409, 420 Aristotle, on Homer, 33, 35 f; dra¬ matic criticism in, 62 f; his didas- caliae, 64 f; his criticism of poetry, 70-2; outline of his Treatise on Poetry, 73 f; and of the third Book of his Rhetoric, 79 f; his re¬ lations to Isocrates and Demos¬ thenes, 81 f; his quotations from Plato, 83 ; Grammar in Ar., 97 ; the fortunes of his mss, 85 f; An¬ dronicus of Rhodes, 164 ; Arabic list of his works, 304 The Categories studied by St Augus¬ tine, 223, 478 ; expositions of Ar. INDEX. 653 by Alexander of Aphrodisias, 333, Themistius, 345, Syrianus, 365, Ammonius, 367, David the Armenian, 363, Philoponus, 367, and Simplicius, 368 Roman study of, 177, 265 f; Vet- tius Agorius and the Analytics , 224; translations from the Or¬ ganon by Boethius, 239, 241, 489, 558 (and by others, 510, 553); abstract by Cassiodorus, 253 In Byz. age, 382; 383, 389, 403, 418, 421 ; among the Syrians and Arabians, 385 f; Saracenic interest in Ar., 565 In MA in the West; (1) ‘ Logica Vetus’; Interpr. and Categ. studied by Joannes Scotus, 476, Eric of Auxerre, 478, and Jean de Vandieres, 484; Interpr. and Top. introduced into Germany by Gunzo, 480; Interpr. and Categ. expounded by Gerbert, 489, and translated into German by Notker Labeo, 499 (2) ‘Logica Nova’; Anal., Top., and Soph. El. translated (1128) by Jacobus Clericus de Venetia, 507, 535, and introduced into Germany by Otto of Freising, 512 ; Anal. Pr. known to Adam du Petit-Pont, 507, and Abelard, 510; and Anal. Post, to author of De Intellectibus, 510; the Organon in Theodoric’s Eptateu- chon , 513, and in John of Salis¬ bury’s Metalogicus , 519 f; Anal. Post, etc., known to Neckam, 536, translated from Arabic by Gerard of Cremona, 540; Soph. El. expounded at Oxford by Edmund Rich, Anal. Post, by ‘Master Hugo’, 570, and both by Grosseteste, 553; Interpr. and Anal, etc., criticised by Thomas Aquinas, 562; Anal. Pr. ex¬ pounded by Siger, 565 ; William of Ockham on Categ., 578; Richard of Bury on Interpr., 580 n. 5 (3) The new Aristotle, 539 f, 565 f; Latin translations from the Arabic, 54 °> 547 ’ 54 ^» 558 565* 638; from the Greek, 520, 548, 558 f, 562, 566; criticised by Roger Bacon, 569-572; their Latinity, 560, 643; Ar. expounded by Avi¬ cenna, 387, Averroes, 541, Alber- tus Magnus, 558 f, and Thomas Aquinas, 560 f; study of Physics arid Met. previously forbidden in Paris, 549, 570 ; allowed, 550; supreme authority of Ar., 582, 593 (Dante) ; legends of, 565, 637 ; prejudice against study of his logic, 585 ; Physics, 367, 507, 510, 540, 553, 559, 562, 575; Met. 365, 416, 507, 510, 548 f; Meteor. 540,547,562; De Caelo, 540 > 559 > 562 ; De Anima, 536, 539 ’ 548 , 55 2 j 559 » De Gen ‘ et Corr. 540 ; De Somno et Vigilia, 570; Hist. An. 544 f; Rhet. 35, 79 f, 274, 546, 548, 555, 563, 569; Poet. 24, 35 f, 47, 63, 73 f, 546, 566, 569, 593 ; Ethics , 548, 554’ 562, 563 n. 6, 564, 570; Magna Moralia , 547 ; Pol. 542, 548, 558, 562, 563, 565 ; [De Regimine Principum\ 565 ; Con¬ stitution of Athens, S&, 403; [Physiogn.], 565; [ Problems ], 36, 584; [De Causis ], 532, 540, 548 f, 552, 563 n. 5 ; [De Mundo], 311, 515 n. ; [De Plantis ], 536, 547 Aristoxenus, 99 Arno of Salzburg, 459 Arnobius, 205, 609 Arrian, 303 Arruntius Celsus, 198 Arsinoe II, 106, 122, 143 Artemidorus of Ephesus, 304 Artemon of Pergamon, 158 Arthurian legends, Latin version, 525 f Arts, the Seven Liberal, 174, 223, 228-30, 253, 408, 458, 462, 513, 525 n. 5, 526, 531, 533, 596, 643 f; in Hortus Deliciarum, pi. 537; in fresco of ‘ Spanish Chapel ’, Florence, 259, 644; in mediaeval sculpture, 645 f Arts versus Authors, 508, 644, 649 f Asclepiades of Myrleia, 158 Asclepius, 357 Asconius, 191; 442 Asper, Aemilius, 197, 211 Asser, 482 ; 454 Asterius (cons. 494 A.D.), 235 Ateius Praetextatus, L., 5, 182 Athanasius, 207, 343 Athenaeus, 330 Athenodorus of Tarsus, 159 Athens, and the Athenian age, 17-102 ; dates, 18; in the Alexandrian age, 162; Schools of, 343, 345, 347, 351, 654 INDEX. 364-8 ; description of surroundings by Psellus, 402; Athens in c. xil, 412 ; Athens and England, 413 Attalus I, 149, 161; II, 135,151, 157 ; III, 152 Attic Comedy, Eratosthenes on, 125; literary criticism in, 53-57 Atticists, Greek, 316 f; 308/; Roman, 265 Atticus, the friend of Cicero, 181; 320?; (2) commentator on Plato, 322 Auctor and Autor , 593 n. Augustine (St), (1) bp of Hippo, Con¬ fessions etc., 222-4; [Categories], 4/8, 505, 507; Dialectic , 224, 485, 507; Soliloquies, 482; Orosius and Pelagius, 364; (2) abp of Canter¬ bury, 449 Aurelius, M., 302 f Ausonius, 209 f Authority and reason, 476, 508, 520 Autun, 233 n. 3, 614, 617 Auvergne, William of, 548, 552 Auxerre, Eric of, 479, 637; cathedral, 646 n. Avempace, 541 Avendeath (Avendehut), 539 f Averroes, 541 f, 544 f, 552, 560, 570, 57 6 , 579 > 5 Sl n - 6, 5 §2 > 59 1 ? on Ar - De Caelo, De Anima , Physics and Met. 544, 545 n.; on Ethics, 546; refuted by Thomas Aquinas, 542, cp. pi. facing 560 Avianus, 627 Avicebron, 542 Avicenna, 387, 552, 559, 560; on Ar. De Anima , 539; Abbreviatio Avi- cennae , 544 f Avitus, Alcimus, 234 (Teuffel, § 474,5) Bacchylides, 47, 141, 285, 353 Bacon, Roger, 567-75; 5 ° 7 > 5 2 9 > 543 (Gerard of Cremona), 545 (Michael Scot), 547, 549, 553, 554, 557 (Adam Marsh and Grosseteste), 563 Baconthorpe, 579 Bagdad, 386 f, 389, 540 Balbi of Genoa, Catholicon of, 584, 640 Balsham, Hugh, 556 Bamberg, 498; mss, 607, 618, 619, 628, 631, 634 Barlaam, 423; (2) Barlaam andJosa~ phat , 383 Bartholomew, (1) of Messina, 547; (2) De Propr. Rerum , 638 Basil (St), 343; Basilian monks, 447 Basil I, 388, 392 Basingstoke, John of, 413, 554 Beauvais, 614, 632; see Vincent Bee, 497, 502 f, 534, 597, 630 Becket, 516-8 Bede (Baeda), 45if; 482, 574, 609, 623, 638 Belenum (beleho ), ‘henbane’, 571 Benedict, St, 256 f; Rule of, 255, 257, 500, 598; Order of, 258, 598; the Benedictine age, 461; ‘Benedictine Bucolics’, 589; (2) Benedict Biscop, 452; (3) Benedict III, 470 Beneventum, 479, 520 Benoit de Sainte-More, 524 n. 5, 623 n - 3 Benoit-sur-Loire, St, 648 n. 1 Bentley’s Letter to Mill , 382 Benzo, 501, 613 (Wattenbach, G. Q. ii 6 228) Ber^iire (Bersuire, Bercheure), 634, 638 Berengarii, Gcsta , 485, 618 Berengarius of Tours, 508 Bernard, (1) of Chartres, 511 f, 520 f, 644, 646; (2) of Clairvaux, 510, 530, 627 n. 6; (3) of Cluni, 530; (4) of Moelan, 514; (5) B. Silvester of Tours, 513, 514-6, 530, 610, 622 Berne, ms of Virgil, 459, 612; Horace, 614; Lucan, 617 Bernward of Hildesheim, 492, 502 Bertin, abbey of St, 609, 619 Berytus, 374 Bessarion, 423 Bible, allegorical interpretation of, 335, 344, 432 ; ms of, in Caroline minus¬ cules, 471 ; see also Vidgate Bion, 115 Blemmydes, 415 Bobbio, 440-2, 490, 602 f, 607, 609, 612, 618 f, 626 f Boccaccio, 636 n. 10 Boethius, 237 f, 259 f, 621 f; his translations and expositions of Aris¬ totle’s Organon, 239, 470, 478, 489, 499 » 5 ° 7 > 5 ° 9 > 5 I2 > 5 2 °> 568; non- Boethian transl s ., 510, 553; transl. of Porphyry’s Introduction, 239, 488, 505 f; the Scholastic Problem, 239 f, 505 f; Philosophiae Conso- latio, 241, 482, 487, 511, 515, 531, 622; De Trinitate, 241, 512,646; treatises on Arithmetic, Geometry and Music, 239, 646 Bologna, 606; Irnerius, Buoncom- INDEX. 655 pagno and Accursius, 582; Michael Scot, 544 f; Frederic II, 546; Del Virgilio, 589 Bonaccursius, 584 Bonaventura, 506, 557, 567 Boniface, St ( Winfrid ), 453 f Brabant, William of, 562 f Bradwardine, abp, 579 f, 615 Britain and Ireland, Greek in, 448 Brito, (1) author of Philippis , 530; (2) author of Vocabularium , 572 Brown, Master Thomas, 536 Browning, Robert, 2, 59; Elizabeth Barrett, 296, 362 Brunetto Latini, 590, 604, 625 Bruno, abp of Cologne, 484, 486 Bryennius, Nicephorus, 407, 409 Buoncompagno, 582, 639 n. 2, 643 n. 4 Burana, Carmina , 526 n. r Burgundio of Pisa, 536, 553 n. 12 Buridan, 581 Burley, Walter, 579, 615, 624 Bury, 607, 622; Richard of, 580, 615 Byzantine age, 376-428; dates, 377, 400; ‘dark age’ of Byz. literature, 379’ 3^3-5’ 426; study of the Classics. 394, 426; Grammars, 425 f; mss, 395, 415, 427; Byz. Scholar¬ ship, 424-6; debt of Scholarship to the Byz. age, 427 f. See also Constantinople Caecilius, 169; (2) of Calacte, 129, 281 Caen, 502 f, 534 Caesar, on Analogy, 176; 269, 470, 502, 603 f, 632; (2) Caesar the Lombard, Grammar of, 584 Caesarea, school of, 374 Caesellius Vindex, 197 Callimachus, 121 f; 114, 116, 129 Callinus, 22, 130 Calliopius, 608 Callisthenes, Pseudo-, 415 Callistratus, (1) Aristophaneiis, 135; (2) author of Eikones , 329 Camariotes, Matthaeus, 423 Cambridge (in 1209), 606; Franciscans in (1224), 551; Peterhouse (1284), 556 ; dates of other early Colleges, 538; MSS, facsimiles from, 495, 503, 516, 566; other mss, 319, 391, 445, 450, 492 n. 4, 516 n. 1, 518 n. 3, 527 f, 544 n. 6, 545 n. 3, 552, 554’ 562 n. 7, 563 n. 5, 567 n., 573, 579 n. 3, 618, 620 f, 631 n. 1, 641 n. 4 Cancellarius , 248 Canon, Alexandrian, 129 f; Attic Orators, 129, 281; Latin Comic Poets, 178 Canopus, decree of, 116 Cantacuzenus, emp., 422 Canterbury, Christ Church, specimens of hand, 502 f; catalogue, 536, 573; St Augustine’s (Juvenal), 620; the monks and Ovid, 615 Cantimpre, Thomas de, 564 Caper, Flavius, 197 Caroline minuscules, 457, 471, 600 n. Carrels, 601 Carthusians, 502 f; Carthusian Rule, 59 8 Cases, names of, Greek, 138, 145; Latin, 182 Cassianus, 207, 255, 364 Cassiodorus, 244-56; 237, 241, 260, 433’ 444’ 466, 490, 499, 597, 602, 638 Castor of Rhodes, 163, 342 Cathedrals of France, the Liberal Arts at Chartres and other, 645 f Cato the elder, 263 f; 251, 627 Catonis Disticha , 499, 627 Catullus, 268, 484, 603 f, 608 Cedrenus, 407 ; 341 Censorinus, 201 f Cermenate, 588 Chalcidius, 367, 507, 510, 520 Chalcondyles, Demetrius and Laoni- cus, 422 Chamaeleon, 99 Champeaux, William of, 506, 509, 551 Charax, Joannes, 370 Charisius, 206, 218, 453 Charles the Bald, 465, 468, 473, 476, 481 Charles the Great, revival of learning under, 455-464, 614; his tomb at Aachen, 484; ‘ Poeta Saxo ’ on, 480 Chartres, the School of, under Fulbert, 490, 497; Bernard and his succes¬ sors, 5 1 1 - 514 ’ 5 1 7 ’ 5 i 9 ’ 6 44 ; John of Salisbury, 517 f, 520 f; the Seven Liberal Arts, in the Eptateuchon of Theodoric, 513, and on the West Front of the Cathedral, 645 f Chaucer, 1, 242, 515 n. 5, 524 n. 5, 53^’ 533 n. 1, 539 n. 3, 579, 616, 617, 618, 620, 622 Chilperic, 434 (Schmid, Gesch. d. Erziehung , 11 i 333) Choerilus, 39 Choeroboscus, 313, 381 Choricius, 374 Christodorus, 357 656 INDEX. Christophorus of Mytilene, 406 Christus Patiens (cento), 344, 406 Chrodegang of Metz, 446 Chronicon Paschale , 382 Chrysippus, 147 f Chrysoloras (XpvaoXwpas), 421, 573 Chrysostom (St), 344, 348; (2) see Dion Chumnus, Nicephorus, 418 f Cicero, an analogist, 176; Latin philo¬ logy in, 180; literary criticism in, 178-180; his Greek authorities, 265-7; De Oratore, 470, 604, 623; Orator , 15, 99, 180, 467 n. 2, 604; To pic a, 239; Speeches , 490, 590, 604, 625; scholia on, 191, 441; Letters , 470, 623 f, 626; Philoso¬ phical Works , 265-7, 623, 625 ; ‘ Academica', 574 n. 5; ad Horten- sium , 625; De Rep. 569, 574 n. 5 ; Somnium Scipionis , 227, 266, 490, 492 n. 4; Cicero in MA, 623-6; 499, 546; Gregory I, 433; Einhard, 464; Servatus Lupus, 470; Gerbert, 489; John of Salisbury, 521; Roger Bacon, 574; Jacopone da Todi and Petrarch, 588 Cinna, 268 Cistercians, 502 f Cithara , 43 Claromontanus , Codex (c. vi, in Paris Library), 445 Classics, prejudice against the, 594-6; 432, 459 f, 485; counteracted, 597; their survival in France, Germany, Italy and England, 602-5 classicus, 200 Claudian, 206, 531, 589 Claudius Marius Victor, 234 claustrum sine armario etc., 429, 534 Cleanthes, 147 Cleisthenes, Psellus on, 403 Clement of Alexandria, 323-6; 395 Clement, Irish monk, 463, 465; (2) ‘Clement III’, letter to Lanfranc, 503 ; ( 3 ) Clement IV, 567; (4) V, 584 Clermont, 231, 646 n Climax, Joannes, 394 Clitomachus, 164, 264 Cluni, 485 ; 498, 596, 598 f; MSS, 602, 604, 625 f Colluthus, 357 Cologne, 560, 576; (Quintilian ms), 631 . Coluccio Salutato (d. 1406), 608, 621, 630 Columban, St, 439 f Columella, 251, 467 Cometas, 393 Comnena, Anna, 407, 409 Conceptualism, 506, 509 Conches, William of, 511, 517, 519, 609 f Conrad of Hirschau, 624; (2) C. von Mure, 615, 618 f; (3) C. of Wurz¬ burg, 615, 618 Consentius, 235, 468 Constantine VI, 461, 487; VII (Por- phyrogenitus), 396, 426 Constantine Cephalas, 397 ; Palaeo- kappa, 399; Manasses, 414; Her- moniacus, 422; Constantinus Afri- canus, 539 Constantinople, 379; the Classics studied there in c. iv, 346; Santa Sophia, 375, 380, 392 ; the libraries, 374, 387; the university, 356, 374; the monastery of Studion, 384; C. and the West, 415; the Latin con¬ quest, 415, 426, 547; the Turkish conquest, 426-8. See Byzantine Copyists, 207, 220, 252, 254, 599, 602, 605 Corbie, 473, 480, 602; mss, 609, 618, 625, 628 f, 633 f Corippus, 436 Cormery, ms of De Oratore from, 625 Cornificius, -ficiani, 518 f Cornutus, 290, 620 Corvey (New Corbie), 467, 473, 486, 492, 596; (Tacitus), 636 Crantor, 164, 267 Craterus, 162 Crates of Mallos, 154-8, 170 f; School of, 158 Cricklade, Robert of, 628 criticus , 11 Critobulus of Imbros, 422 Cos, 118 Cosmas, (1) Italian monk, 383; (2) C. of Jerusalem, 384 Cousin, Victor, 429, 466, 506, 568 Cowell, E. B., 211 Criticism, (1) dramatic, 52 f, 61-4; (2) literary, 11, 19f, 35, 52-7; 61- 4 5 67-75; 80,82; 99; 109; 129 f; 156; 177-180; 183; 191; 194-6; 199; 225f; 272-86; 292-5; 297f; 3 12 ; 33 1 f; 34 6 ; 360f; 390f; 410; 5^8; 533; 588; 591; 622; (3) textual, 32, 57; 118-43; r 55> 158, 160; 215f, 230, 235, 250, 344, 361, INDEX. 657 571, 583; (4) verbal, 32, no, 128, 160 f; 172, 187, 202, 219, 252, 287-90, 317 Cues, 626, 635 n. 1; Nicolas Cusanus, 628 Curtius, Q., 635; (2) Curtius Vale- rianus, 252 Cyclic poets, 24 f, 372 Cyprian (St), 205; (2) of Toulon, 234 Damascius, 367 Damascus, John of, 383 f, 395, 536, 553 Damasus, library of pope, 220 Damiani, Petrus, 500 Dante, 590 f; 243; his precursors, the Visions of Wettin, 467, and Anti- Claudianus , 532; statistics of his references to Latin literature and Latin translations, 591; Dante and Cicero, 625; Virgil, 610 f; Horace, 613; Ovid, 616; Lucan, 617; Sta¬ tius, 592 f, 618; ‘Dionysius the Areopagite ’, 369; Aristotle, Avi¬ cenna and Averroes, 591; Thomas Aquinas and Albertus Magnus, 592 ; Siger, 564; Brunetto Latini, 590; Del Virgilio, 589; Dante as a pre¬ cursor of the Renaissance, 590 ‘ Dark Ages ’, the, 483; 594-6 n. David the Armenian, 338, 365 n. 4, 475 n * 4 David the ‘Scot’, 535 De Causis, De Mundo, De Plantis; see ‘ Aristotle' ad fin. De Modis Significandi , 641 f Deinarchus, 278 Demetrius Cydones, 473; (2) De¬ metrius of Phaleron, 101, 106; (3) of Scepsis, 153, 161; (4) De¬ metrius trepl ep/J.r]veias, 312 Democritus, 26, 67, 92 Demosthenes, MSS, 3:9; Lept., 292, 3 ° 5 > 353 ; 6 >/., De Chers ., De Cor., 353; Fals. Leg., 294; Dem. and Ar. Rhet., 81, 274; Dion. Hal. 274-7» ‘ Longinus ’ (Dem. and Cicero etc.), 283-5; Aristides, 306; Libanius, 348 ; Julian, 353; Isidore of Pelusium, 362; Choricius, 375; ‘Lantern of’, 412; (2) Demos¬ thenes Philalethes, 460 n. 1 Denis, St, abbey of, 415, 471, 474, 481, 502, 534> 59 8 > 612, 635 Desiderius, (1) of Vienne, 432; (2) of Monte Cassino, 500, 636 n. 10 Dexippus, 344 Diagoras of Rhodes, 46 Dialectic, course of reading in, 528 n. 9; Alcuin on, 458 Dicaearchus, 100 Diceto, Radulfus de, 637 ; 524 Dictamen , 582, 648 n. 2 Diclionarii, 528, 539 f Dictys and Dares, 623 Dicuil, 449 Didascaliae, 64 f Didymus, 139 f; 129, 373 Diodes of Magnesia, 333 Diodorus, (1) Siculus, 117, 273; (2) son of Val. Pollio, 317 Diogenes Laertius, 332 Diogenianus, 288, 370 Diomedes, 206, 218, 453, 467 n.*2 Dion Cassius, 407, 426 Dion Chrysostom, 291 f; 358, 360, 362 Dionysius, Aelius, 316; (2) ‘Diony¬ sius, the Areopagite’, 369, 415, 474 , 5 ° 5 » 534 , 54 8 , 553 , 5 6 °; (3) Dionysius Exiguus, 250; (4) Diony¬ sius of Halicarnassus, 273 f; 156; (5) Dionysius Thrax, 7 f, 43, 137 f, 355 Dominicans, Order of, 551; their Latin style, 559; their study of Greek, 561, 585; William of Moer- beke, 563; Geoffrey of Waterford, 565; Vincent of Beauvais, 557, and Albertus Magnus, 558, ignorant of Greek; Thomas Aquinas, interested in Greek, 561 f Dominico Marengo, 501 Domnulus, 230, 635 Donatus, Aelius, 184, 218, 219; on Terence, 470; Grammar of, 453, 458, 462, 468, 500, 574, 638, 649 ; Remi(gius) on, 478, 639; Greek version of, 417, 536; (2) Tib. Claudius Donatus, 184; (3) Irish monk, 463 Dositheus (c. IV A.D.), author of a Greek version of a Latin Grammar, used at St Gallen and Bobbio, 138, 479 (Teuffel, § 431, 7) Doxopatres, John, 407 Drama, Greek; early study of, 59 f; criticism of, 52 f, 61-4; ‘canon’ of, 130 Ducas, 422 Duris, 42, and frontispiece Dudo of St Quentin (c. 1020), 502 Dungal, 440 n. 4, 463 n. 2, 479 Duns Scotus, 576 f, 642 Dunstan (St), 483, 492, 616 S. 42 658 INDEX. Durham, ‘ carrels 601; Juvenal, 619 ‘ Dwarfs on the shoulders of giants 5 11 Eberhard of Bethune, Graecismus, 640 f; quoted, 593 n. 10; Labyrin- thus, 532, 622, on Bernard Sil¬ vester, 515 Ecbasis Captivi, 613 Eclogues, 589 Edessa, 374, 385 f Edmund (St), of Abingdon, 552, 567, 57 ° Education of Europe, 550; free ed., 462 Egidio (Colonna) da Roma, 565 n. 3 Einhtrd (. Eginhard ), 463 f, 468 f, 471 f, 480, 623, 634-6 Einsiedeln, mss, 614, 620, 626, 634 f; monk or pilgrim of, 249, 480 Eirene, empress (797-802), 383, 461 Ekkehard I (d. 973), Waltharius of, 488; II (d. 990), Palatums, 487 f; IV (d. c. 1060), Chronicler, 488 Elegiac poetry, Greek, 48-50 Ellinici fratres of St Gallen, 479 Encyclopaedias, Byzantine, 396; me¬ diaeval, 558 n. 4; 638 England, Greek in, 536, 553 f, 573, 580; Latin Verse in, 451 f, 454 f, 524 f; Latin Prose in, 451, 523 f; study of the Elder Pliny, 628 Ennius, 168, 171, 199 Ennodius, 234, 237 ens and essentia , 642 Epaphroditus, 290 Ephraem the Syrian, 597 Epic Cycle, 24 f, 372; Epic poetry, early study of, 19-40; ‘canon’ of, 130 Epicarpius, 620 Epictetus, Simplicius on, 368 Epiphanius, 343 Epsilon, 90, 385 Epternach, 617 f, 633 Eratosthenes, 123 f; 5, 114, 136, 160 Erfurt, monk of; Nicolaus de Bibera, 622 Eric ( Heiricus) of Auxerre, 473, 478, 620, 635, 637 Erigena, 473 n.; see Joannes Scotus Ermenrich of Ellwangen, 468, 609 Ermoldus Nigellus, 465, 586, 615 Erotianus, 290 Ethelred of Rievaulx, 624 Etienne de Rouen, 597, 630 Etymologicum, Florentinum , 381, 391; Genuinum , 391 ; Gudianum, 404 f; Magnum, 405, 410; Parvum , 392; Et. in iambic verse, 404 Etymology, 93, 146 f, 404 Euclid, 116; MS, 396 ; transl., 512, 645 Eudocia, 356, 370; Violarium of Pseudo-Eudocia, 399 Eugenius III, (1) bp of Toledo, 445 ; (2) pope, 514 Eugraphius on Terence, 490 Eumenes I, in, 149, 161; II, in, 149 1 5 ( coin ) l6 4 Euphorion, 163, 271; Cantores Eu- phorionis, 268 Euripides and the Epic Cycle, 25; Bacchae (in Clement), 325, (in ‘ Christus Patiens ’), 344, 406; Electra , 52, 59; Medea, 57, 89, 271; Phoen., 534; Theseus , 89; early quotations from, 58, and study of, 59; Aristophanes on, 53- 55, 57, 60; Aristotle on, 63; Alex¬ ander Aetolus on, 121; Crantor, 164; Lucretius, 268; ‘Longinus’, 284 f; Julian, 353; select plays of Byzantine age, 394 Eusebius, 342; 220, 222; 395 Eustathius, 410 f Eustratius of Nicaea, 403 Eutropius, ed. of Vegetius, 230, 635 Eutyches, 252, 259 Evesham, Marleberge abbot of, 619 f Evroult, St, 497, 523 Exeter, Joseph of, 526, 618 Fabius Pictor, 169 Favorinus of Arles, 301, 333 Felix, bp of Nantes, 437; (2) rhetori¬ cian, 229 Fenestella, 188 Ferreto, 589 Festus, Pompeius, 188, 200, 457, 604 FitzGerald and Ausonius, 210 Fleming, William the, 547, 562, 569 f Fleury (St Benoit-stir-Loire), Servatus Lupus and, 470; Abbo of, 492 f; School of, 648 n. 1; mss from, 602 n. 1; Virgil, 612; Horace, 614; Ovid, 617; Cic. de Sen., 627; Quint., 630 ; Caesar, 632 ; Sallust, 633; Livy, 634; Val. Max., 635 Florence, Greek MSS of c. x—xi, 501; MSS formerly in San Marco (Ovid, Met.), 617; (Varro), 627; (Seneca, Trag .),6 28; (Pliny, Epp.), 629; other MSS in Laurentian library {cod. Amiatinus), 251; (Cic. INDEX. 659 Epp), 626; (Quint.), 631; (Livy), 634; (Tacitus), 636; fresco in ‘Spanish Chapel’, 259, 644 Florence of Worcester, 523 Florist a, 641 Florus, 634; (2) Mestrius Florus, 295 n. 2 fore for esse, in mediaeval Latin, 643 Fortunatianus, 216, 223 Fortunatus, Venantius, 436; 234 Fournival, Richard de, 604, 615 France, study of Greek in, c. xn, 533 f; Latin Verse in, 529^ 647 ; France N. of the Loire, 586, 639 Franciscans, at Oxford and Cam¬ bridge, 551, 556; Alexander of Hales in Paris, 551; Grosseteste, 552 f; Bonaventura, 557 ; Roger Bacon, 567; Duns Scotus, 576 Freculphus, 461 Fredegarius, 435 Frederic II, 544-6, 560, 587 n. 2 Frontinus, 604 Fronto, 198, 202; ms of, 441 Fulbert, 490, 497, 508, 519 Fulda, 453 f; 463-7, 469, 483, 502, 601, 603, 635 f Fulgentius, 610 n. 9 Furcy, abbey of St, 620 Gaisford, 396, 405 Gale, Thomas, 391, 478 Galen, 322; in, 386, 479, 491, 512, 539 > 544 > 563, 606 Gallen, Gallus and St, 442; Grimold, 468; Notker Balbulus, 479 f, 612; the Hungarians at, 483; Gunzo, 486; Ekkehard I, II, IV, 487 f; Notker Labeo, 499; in c. x, 502; scriptorium, 599; MSS, 602 f; Virgil, 185, 612; Horace, 614; Statius, Silv., 618; Juv., 620; Silius, 622; Cic. Top., 626; Quint., 631; Sallust, 633; Justin, 635 Gallus, Cornelius, 271 Gap, Guillaume de, 415, 534 Gargilius Martialis, 251, 619 Garlandia, Joannes de, 527 f; 532, 572, 641, 648 Gaul, early monasteries, 207, and schools of learning in, 233 f; study of Virgil in, 217; Latin Scholar¬ ship in, Ausonius, 209 f; Paulinus, 213; Sidonius, 230 f; Consentius, 235; victories of Clovis, 235; St Maur, 257; Desiderius of Vienne, 432; Gregory of Tours, 434; Fredegarius, 435; Fortuna¬ tus, 436; ‘Virgilius Maro’, 437; Greek in Gaul, 445 Gautier de Chatillon (or de l’Isle, Gualterus ab Insulis ); Alexandreis, 53 ° 533 > 617, 650 n. 1; Mora- lium Dogma , 531, 586 Gaza, school of, 374 Gellius, 198-200, 202, 471, 574, 610 Gembloux, 497, 614, 626 Gennadius, Torquatus, 216, 619 Geoffrey of Monmouth, 524, 617, 620 Geoffrey of Waterford, 565 Gerard of Cremona, (1) the trans¬ lator, 540, 543 f, 548, 569, 606; (2) the astronomer, 543 n. 4 Gerbert of Aurillac [Silvester II), 489 f; 484, 586, 618, 623, 625 German in c. ix, 472; Germany, classical mss introduced into, 473, (Gunzo), 486, (Otto of Freising), 512; Greek in, 446, 535; Latin Verse in, 533 Gerona, John bp of, 445 Gervase of Tilbury, 515, 524 Gervold of St Wandrille’s, 461 Gesta Romanorum, 524 Ghent, lost codex Blandinius of Horace from Benedictine monastery near, 184, 614 Gilbert de la Porree, 512; 241, 468, 510, 517, 645 f Gildas, 433 Giles (Aegidius), St, 446 Gilles de Paris, 565 Giraldus Cambrensis, 522 f; 553, 610, 647 Glossa Ordbiaria of the Vulgate, 468 Glossaries, Graeco-Latin, 445, 480 Glykas, chronicler, 414 Glykys, grammarian, 421 Gnipho, Antonius, 173 Godfrey of Viterbo, 535 Golias, 513, 525; Goliardi, 526 Gondisalvi, 539 Gorgias, 28, 77, 306 Graecum est, non legitur , 583 Grammar and Etymology, beginnings of, 88; Stoics, 144-6; tradition of Greek Grammar, 425; definitions of, 8, 458, 466; divisions of, 323; personification of, 596, 643 n. 4, 645; mediaeval study of, 638-43; Grammar and Logic, 639, 647 Grammarians, Greek, 137, 312-5, 318, 354 f, 369; 381, 385, 393, 42—2 66 o INDEX. 412, 419, 425, 479; 573; Latin, 172-7; 188 f; 192 f; 197 f; 208, 211, 217 22.5, 258; 493, 577, 584, 640-2 Grammatical terminology, Greek, 90, 97, 137 f, 144 f; Latin, 182 Grammaticus , 8, 190; - ca , 170 Greek literature etc., conspectus of, c. 840-300 B.C., 18; 300-1 B.C., 104; 1-300 A.D., 260; 300-600 A.D., 340; 600-1000 A.D., 378; 1000-1453 A. D. , 400. Gk. influence in Latin literature, 167-9, 263-72, and literary criticism, 177 f; his¬ tories of Rome written by Romans in Gk., 169, 264; Gk. literary criticism, 52 f, 73 f, 80, 82; 273-86; Gk. authors studied by Dion, 295, Julian, 352, Synesius, 362, Themis- tius, 346, Byz. age, 394,426; lost Gk. historians, 426; Gk. hymns, 384; survival of Gk. in S. Italy, 446 f, 572, 587; Gk. in MA, 438, 440-50, 459, 461 f, 476, 490; Joannes Scotus, 474-7; diplomatic, 461, 491, and ecclesiastical use of Gk., 480 f, 501, 535, 585; Gk. monks at Toul and Verdun, 484; Gk. lectionary copied at Cologne (1021), 502; Gk. in c. xi, 500-2; c. xii, 533—6; translations from Gk. text of Plato, 474, 508, and Ar., 548 f, 566; Grosseteste, 553-6; William of Moerbeke, 563 f; Roger Bacon, 572 f, 575; attempts to teach Gk. in c. xiii-xiv, 576, 580, 584; Graeco-Latin glossaries, 445, 480 ; Gk. in dictionaries of Papias, 501, and Hugutio, 535, and in mediaeval grammars, 639, 641 (see also Dosi- theus) ; Gk. pronunciation, 472, 488, 49 1 , 573- See Lexicographers Gregoras, Nicephorus, 420-2 Gregorius Corinthius, 413 Gregory of (1) Cyprus, 418; (2) Nazianzus, 343; (3) Nyssa,344,536; (4) Tours, 434 f Gregory (I) the Great, 431-3, 482; III, 447; V, 484; VII (Hilde¬ brand), 498; IX, 545 Grosseteste, 552 f; 413, 567-9, 572 f Grossolano, 535 Gui de Strasbourg, 565 Guibert of Nogent, 533, 636 Guido, (1) of Arezzo, 612; (2) delle Colonne, 524, 623 n. 3 Guigo, 503, 598 Guillaume, (1) le Breton, 549; (2) see Gap Guiscard, Robert, 524 Gunther, 533, 617 Gunzo of Novara, 486, 621 Hadoardus, Excerpta Ciceronis , 623 Hadrian, emp.,302; (2) pope (Adrian) I, 447; IV (Nicholas Breakspear), 520; (3) monk, 449 f, 452 Hales (Hailes), 551. See Alexander (6) Harcourt, Philip, 625, 630 Harduin, of St Wandrille’s, 461 Harpocration, 303, 318-20 Hartmund of St Gallen, 479 Hartwin the German, 517 n. 3 Harveng, Philip de, 535 n. 2, 607 Hatto, bp of Basel, 462 Hauteville, Jean de; Architrenius of, 5 2 5 > 533 > 650 Hebrew, 346, 545, 569, 572, 575; Latin transl. from, 542, 544 n. 6 Hecataeus, (1) of Miletus, 83; (2) of Abdera, 159 Hedwig and Ekkehard II, 487 Heidelberg mss, 397, 607, 612, 619 Helinand, 534, 649 n. 2 Heliodorus, 321 Helladius, 355 Heloissa (Heloise), 509, 511 Henri d’Andely, 514, 649 Henricus, (1) Septimellensis; (2) Mediolanensis, 524 Henry the Fowler, 483; (2) Henry of Huntingdon, 524; (3) Henry II, 518, 522, 586, 628, 629 n. 1 Hephaestion, 303, 321 Heracleides Ponticus, 98 Heracleitus, 29, 83, 91 Heracleon of Tilotis, 158 Herbert de Losinga, 595 Herbord of Michelsberg, 624 Hermannus Contractus, 499 (Watten- bach, G. Q. ^42-7); (2) Hermann the Dalmatian, 513, 516, 540 n.; (3) Hermann the German, 546; 543 n. 4, 554, 569, 571 n. 1 Hermeias, 367 Hermippus, 135 Hermogenes, (1) 92; (2) 311 Herodes Atticus, 302 f, 328 Herodian, 314; 258, 303, 369 Herodicus, 161, 398 Herodotus, 25, 83, 88; Dion. Hal. on, 274 f; ‘Plutarch’ on, 298 Herondas, 106, 115 Herrad of Landsperg, 533, 537, 595! INDEX. 661 Hersfeld, 453, 603 Hesiod, 22, 37; 120, 127, 131, 141, 303; scholia, 409, 419, 420 Hesychius, (1) of Alexandria, 370; 288; (2) of Miletus, 371 Hierocles, the Neo-Platonist, 365 Higden, Ralph, 524 Hilary (St), (1) of Poitiers, 234, 630; (2) of Arles, 234 Hildebert, 529, 647 Hildesheim, 492, 502, 535, 596, 624 n. 7 Himerius, 345 Hincmar, 241, 475,-604 Hipparchus, (1) son of Peisistratus, 21 f; (2) astronomer, 116 Hippias, (1) of Elis, 27 f, 78; (2) of Thasos, 28 Hippocrates, 92, 386, 479, 491, 539, 544, 563, 606 Hirschau (Hirsau), 502, 604; 609 Hisperica famina, 438 History, mediaeval ignorance of, 637 Holkot, 580 Homer, and the rhapsodes, 19 f; So¬ lon, 19; Peisistratus, 20, 159; Hipparchus, 21; early interpola¬ tions in, 22; influence of, 22-26 ; H. and the Sophists, 27-9; his mythology allegorically interpret¬ ed, 29 f (cp. 147, 154, 337, 409); H. in Plato’s Ion and Rep., 30 f; Aristophanes, Isocrates, 32; Zol- lus, iopf; ancient quotations from, 33; early ‘editions’ of, 34; Aris¬ totle on, 35 f; Homeric problems, 35 f, 147 , 337 ;. Homer’s theory of poetry, 67; his orators, 76 The Alexandrian age; Zenodotus, 119, 134; Rhianus, 120, 132; Ptol. Philopator, 124; Aristo¬ phanes of Byzantium, 126, 134; Aristarchus, 130 f, 134; Crates, 154 f; Didymus, 139 f; Aristoni- CUS, 1 41 The Roman age; Lucretius, 268; Virgil, 270; Dion. Hal. 275; ‘Longinus’, 283 f; Dion Chrys., 290, 292 f; Plutarch, 299; Por¬ phyry* 337 5 Julian, 352; Synesius, 36 1 f The Middle Ages; Tzetzes, 409; Eustathius, 410 f; popular Gk. version of Iliad, 422; the Latin Homer, 485, 622 f; Roger Bacon, 573 f ; Dante, 593 mss, 34,119,120,133 f, 140,374,449 Honorius of Autun, 594, 609, 624, 638; (2) pope Honorius III, 477, 545 Horace, his Greek models, 270; lite¬ rary criticism in, 183 ; early study of, 184; his curiosa felicitas, 191; imitations or reminiscences of, 213, 231, 241; quotations from, 248,485, 5 IO > 555* 59 1 * 613; mediaeval mss of, 184^ 488, 604, 612, 614 Hosius of Cordova, 445 Hoveden, Roger of, 524 Hrabanus, see Rabanus Hroswitha, 486 f, 607 f Hucbald, 481 Hugo and Leo, 535; (2) Hugo of St Victor, 534, 644 n. 3; (3) Hugo of Trimberg, 608 n. 2, 613, 622 Hugutio, 535, 572, 593 * 64° Hungarians, incursions of, 483^ 492 Hyginus, 159; 187 Hymns, Greek, 362, 384; Latin, 437, 462, 500, 530 Hypatia, 107, 357, 360, 363 f, 402 Hypereides, 284 f Iamblichus, 344, 357, 364 Iconoclastic decrees, 383, 446 f Ignatius, (1) St, his Epistles , 555; (2) patriarch, 308; (3) grammarian, 393 Ilium, 154, 291; Julian at, 352 Immed of Paderborn, 498 Ina (Ine), 450 Incidis in Scylla?n etc., 531 Innocent III, 416 ‘instance’, 642 Integumenta , 447 n. 1 Ion, (1) of Ephesus, 30; (2) of Chios, 285, 383 Iordanes, 246, 433 Ireland, early knowledge of Greek in, 438, 448 (G. T. Stokes in Proc. Royal Irish Acad., Feb. 1892, 179- 202); state of learning in, 451 n. 4, 458, 473 ; Giraldus on, 522 f Irish professors, generosity of, 452; Irish monks on the Continent, 439 f, 442, 448 f, 463, 484; Irish MSS at St Gallen, 479 Irnerius, 582 Isaeus, Dion. Hal. on, 276 f Isidore (St), (1) of Pelusium, 362; (2) of Seville, 442 f; 254, 393, 458, 466 f, 467 n. 1, 479, 597, 609, 614, 638 r t.- Isocrates on Greek poets, 32 f; his style, 78; Aristotle on, 81; Dion. 662 INDEX. Hal. on, 276 f; 284; later influence of, 353 , 388, 393 Istrus of Paphos, 123, 304 Italus, John, 403, 501 Italy (mediaeval), Greek in, 446-8; c. xi, 500 f; c. xii, 535 f; c. xm, 572 n. 3; c. xiv, 583 f, 587; Latin Verse in, 524 (cp. Gaspary, Iial.Lit. i 1-49); survival of literary studies in, 499; causes of the Renaissance in, 587 Ivo of Chartres, (1) bp, 519; (2) teacher, 525 Jackson, H., quoted, 95, 562 Jacob of Edessa, 386, 404 Jacobus, (1) Clericus de Venetia, 507, 535 ; (2) de Benedictis, 530 (, Jaco - pone da Todi , 588) James, M. R., 502 n. 1, 545 n. 3, etc. Jandun (in Ardennes), Jean de, 581 Jebb, Sir Richard, 2of, 26, 48n., 55 n., 76, 120, 153, 154 n. Jerome, St, 219-222; 342, 574,594,597 Jews; their services to learning, 540, 542, 545, 569; their study of Aris¬ totle and of Neo-Platonism, 542 Joannes, (1) Lydus, 380; (2) Mauro- pus, 404; (3) Hispalensis, 540 n.; (4) ben David, 339; (5)s Garlandia Joannes Scotus (Erigena), ‘John the Scot’, 473 f; 225 n. 3, 240, 369, 505, ,548, 586, 623 Johannitius (Honein Ibn Ishak), 386 John, (1) the Geometer, 398; (2) the Grammarian, 385; (3) the Saracen, 520, 534. See also Damascus , Doxopatres (or Siceliotes), Italus , Scylitzes\ and Basingstoke, Gerona , Rochelle , Vandieres John of Salisbury, 517 etc. ;s ^Salisbury Johnson, Dr Samuel,and Macrobius, 227 Jonson, Ben, 328, 350 Joseph, (1) of Sicily, 384; (2) of Exe¬ ter, 526, 618 Josephus, 289 Jourdain, A. and C., 507 n. Jowett, quoted, 70, 93, 94 Juba II, 287, 300 Julian, (1) ‘the Apostate’, 350-3; 205, 34 L 374>4°8; (2) bp of Toledo, 445 Julius Africanus, 342, 390; (2) Roma- nus, 201; (3) Rufinianus, 216; (4) Victor, 216 Justin, 272, 635 Justinian, 260, 368, 375, 447, 583 Justinus of Lippstadt, 533 Juvenal, 196; in MA, 619!; 485 f, 515 n. 2, 555 f Juvencus, 216, 234 Kilwardby, abp, 561, 641 Kosbein, Henry, 564; 563 n. 6 Lactantius, 205, 603, 609 Lacydes, 149 laicus, Balbi on, 640 n. 2 Lambert of Hersfeld, 498, 624, 634 (Wattenbach, G. Q. ii 6 97 f); (2) author of Floridum, 638 Lamprocles, 43 Lanfranc, 497, 502 f, 508 Langres, 604 Language, origin of, 92 f, 98 Laon, 480, 646 n. Lascaris, Constantine, 382, 573 Latin literature etc., conspectus of, c. 300-1 B.C., 166; 1-300 A.D., 186; 300-600 A.I)., 204; 600-1000 A.D., 430; 1000-1200 A.D., 496; 1200-1400 A.D. 538. The Latin Classics, their survival in the Middle Ages, 597-637 ; the Clas¬ sics in Aldhelm, 451; Bede, 452 ; Alcuin, 459; Theodulfus, 462; Einhard, 464 ; Walafrid Strabo, 467 ; Ermenrich, 468 ; Servatus Lupus, 469 f; Joannes Scotus, 476; Eric and Remi, 478; Ratherius, 484; Gerbert, 489 f; Luitprand, 491; ^Elfric, 492; Leo Marsicanus and Alfanus, 500; Bernard of Chartres, 520; Bernard Silvester, 515; John of Salisbury, 520 f; Peter of Blois, 522 ; Giraldus, 523; Neckam, 526; Joannes de Gar- landia, 528; Gautier and Alain de l’Isle, 530 f; Eberhard, 532; Gun¬ ther, 533; Grosseteste, 355; Vin¬ cent of Beauvais, 557 f; Roger Bacon, 5 74 f; Richard of Bury, 580; Mussato, 589; Dante, 591-3 Dictionaries; ^Elfric, 493; Papias, 501, 639; Balbi, 584, 640; Hu- gutio, 535, 572, 593, 640; Joannes de Garlandia, 528. Grammars, 640-2; Donatus, 184; Priscian, 258 f; ^Elfric, 493, 495; Caesar the Lombard, 584. Latin Prose in MA, 451; c. xii-xm, 521-4; 560; 642; Latin verse, c. xi, 498; c. xii-xm, 524-33, 647; pro¬ nunciation of Latin, 434^ 458,492 Laurus Quirinus, 427 INDEX. 663 Learning, seats of, in the Alexandrian age, 105 f, 148 f, 159-164. See also Schools Leo III, the ‘Isaurian’, 383, 387,396; V, the Armenian, 383, 385; VI, the Wise, 388, 396; popes Leo II, 446; and IV, 447 Leo, (1) the Byzantine, 388; (2) Dia- conus, 398; (3) Marsicanus (Osti- ensis), 500; (4) the mathematician, 386; (5) the philosopher, 394; (6) of Naples, 415 Leon Magentinus, 421 Leontius of Byzantium, 383 Letters of the Greek alphabet, 87, 572; classified, 89, 275 Letter-writing, art of, 582 n. 3, 648 Levi ben Gerson, 542 Lexicographers, Greek, 315-21, 370 f, 391, 399, 419 Lexicons, Greek, 404-6; Latin, 188, 208, 639 f; 501, 527 f, 535, 584 Libanius, 347f, 352 (ed. Forster, 1903-) Libraries, at Athens etc., 86, 302, 412; Alexandria, 107 f, 110-4,409; Per- gamon, 149^ Antioch, 163 ; Rome, 157 l8 7 > ! 9 8 - 22 °’ 2 3 G 2 3 8 » 2 49 > 273, 4331 in Gaul, 217, 232; Cassio- dorus, 251; Pamphilus, 342; Julian, 353; Synesius, 358; Isidore, 443L Byzantine etc., 387, 411, 416; me¬ diaeval, 606-37 passim', Bobbio, 440 f; St Gallen, 442, 479, 599; Liguge, 445; York, 454; Fulda, 466; Hildesheim, 492; Nonantula, 483; Sainte Chapelle, Paris, 557; St Albans, 580, 601; Verona, 603; Richard of Bury’s, 605 Liege, 448, 485, 604, 635 Limoges, abbey of St Martial at, 612, 620, 627 Literary Criticism, see Criticism litterator, -lus, 6, 8 •Livy, Polybius and, 272; recension of, 215; facsimile from MS of, 236; in MA, 633 f; 433, 498, 590 Lobon of Argos, 333 Logic, study of, 508, 512, 644; criti¬ cised, 517 f, 526, 535; logic and grammar, 639, 649; text-books by Psellus, 403, 578, Petrus Hispanus, 578, and Buridan, 581 Lollianus, 318 Lombards, 501 f, 584, 649 f London; British Museum, coins, 102, 142, 164; MSS, 570 n. 2-5, 576 n. 1, and 607-32 passim Longinus, Cassius, 331 f ‘Longinus’ On the Sublime , 282-6 Lorsch, mss from, 461, 486, 603, 620, 624, 627 f, 634 Lothair I, emp. (d. 855), 448, 463, 465 ; II, king of Lorraine (d. 869), 466 Louis I, the Pious (Le Debonnaire), 462, 465, 474; II, the Stammerer (Le Begue), 481; IX (Saint), 557 Louvain, abbey of Parc near, 632 Lovato, 588 Lucan, in MA, 617 f; 515, 530, 533, 5 8 9 Lucca, 619 n. 5 Lucian, 307 f; 320, 394, 491 Lucilius, 171, 264 Lucretius, 168, 268; in MA, 608 f; 443, 468, 515 n. 2, 532 n. 10, 602 Luctatius Placidus, 235 Ludolf of Luchow, 641 Luitprand, (1) king of the Lombards, 238; (2) bp of Cremona, 491, 624 n. 1 Lycophron, 116, 121, 409 Lycurgus, (1) Spartan legislator, 20; (2) Attic orator, 57 Lyons (1274), council of, 563 ‘ Lyric’, 43 ; lyricus , 265 n. 1 ; Greek lyric poetry, divisions of, 47 ; ‘ canon ’ of, 130 ; early study of, 41-50; in Himerius, 345 Lysias, Dion. Hal. on, 276?; Caecilius on, 282, 284 Mabillon, 441, 598 etc. Macarius of Fleury, 534 Macaulay and Ozanam, 587 n. 7 Macharius (Ricbod of Trier), 459 Macrobius, 224—7, 47 °> 477 ’ 610 Mahaffy, J. P., 85 n. 2, 106 f, 117 f, ! 33 ’ I 5 2 n - 3 ’ 2 93 n -» 2 9 6 etc - Mai, Cardinal, 397, 492 n. 4, 610 n. 3, 626 n. 2 Maimonides, 542 Malalas, 382 Malmesbury, 450, 476; William of, 45 C 453 > 474 ’ 5 2 4 j 5 2 9 ’ 62 3 ’ 636 Manfred, 546 n. 4, 547 Manilius, 442, 621 n. 3 Manitius, 606 n. 4, 610, 614 n. 1, 636 n. 4 Manuscripts, facsimiles from, 87, 185, 203, 236, 260, 326, 338, 376, 428, 495’ 5°3> 5 l6 ’ 566; references to, 395 » 4 G> 4 2 7 > 470 f’ 49 °’ 543 ’ 559 > and597-637 passim. Seealso papyri. 664 INDEX. Libraries , Cambridge , Oxford , Lon¬ don etc,, and names of ancient authors and mediaeval monasteries Map (Mapes), Walter, 525, 619, 629 Mara, William de, 571 n. 3 Marbod, 529, 609 Marcellinus, 373 Marchesini of Reggio, 640 Marculf, 494 n. 1 Marius Mercator, 304 Marsh, Adam, 556, 567 Martial, 196, 216, 619 Martianus Capella, 228 f; 6, 253, 474-6, 478 f, 485, 488, 499, 531, 533, 646 n. Martin,(i) of Bracara, 435 ; (2) Martin I, 446 Matthew of Venddme, 514, 530, 647 Mauropus, Joannes, 404; 174 n. 4 Maurus, 257, 465 ; St Maur-sur-Loire, 257 J ( 2 ) abp of Ravenna, 446 Mavortius, 185, 229, 614 Maximianus, 435 Maximus, (1) Tyrius, 306 ; (2) Con¬ fessor, 382 Mayor, J. E. B., 234, 527 f Media vita in morte sumus , 480 Meinwerk, 498 Meleager, 398 ‘ Melic’, poets, early study of, 43-7 Menander, 105, 130, 298, 402 ; (2) Rhet., 331; (3) Protector, 380 Merton, Walter de, 556 Merula, 440 Methodius, 384 Metrodorus, 30 Metz, 446, 485, 602 Meung, 514 n. 3 ; Jean de, 532 Michael, (1) Attaliates, 407 ; (2) of Ephesus, 403 ; (3) Italicus, 414 ; (4) ‘ Modista ’ of Marbais, 640 f, 642 ; (5) ‘the Stammerer’, 474; (7) Scot, 544-6 Michel, Mont-St-, 625 Middle Ages in the West, 429-650; dates, 600-1000 A.D., 430; 1000 - 1200 A.D., 496; 1200-1400 A.D., 538 Milan, Ambrosian library at, 441,607, 630 f Millenary year, 493 ; Alfred’s, 482 Milton, 60 f, 369, 532 Mimnermus, 48 Minucianus, 331 Modena, 479 modernus , 255 Modestus, 187 Modistae , 641 f Moerbeke, William of, 563-6 Moeris, 318 Moissac, 602 f, 632 Montaigne, 165, 299 f Monte Cassino, 256 f, 260, 500, 539, 560, 602-4, 627-9, 636 Montpellier, 606; MSS, 612, 617, 620 Morlai (Morley), Daniel de, 543 Moschopulus (Mo 54 1 f Neoptolemus of Parion, 123, 178, 271 Nepos, Cornelius, 269, 632 Newburgh, William of, 524 Nicaeus, 620 Nicander, 116, 152, 270 f Nicanor, 315 Nicephorus I, emp., 388; (2) patriarch, 385; (3) monk and philosopher, 393 J (4) Basilakes, 414; (5) Bryen- nius, 407, 409; (6) Chumnus, 418 f; (7) Gregoras, 420-2 Nicholas, (1) secretary of Bernard of Clairvaux, 595, 600; (2) of St Albans, 553 f Nicolas d’Autrecour, 565 Nicolaus; (1) of Methone, 414; (2) Damascenus, 571 ; (3) de Bibera, 622 n. 6 ; (4) de Orbellis, 644 n. i Nicomachi, recension of Livy by the, 215 f ifacs. 236, 634 Nicomachus Flavianus, Virius, 521 f Nigidius Figulus, 181 Nisibis, School of, 249, 386 Nominalism, 239, 466, 506 ; Nomi¬ nalists, Roscellinus, 508 ; William of Ockham, 578 ; Buridan, 581 Nonantola, 483 Nonius Marcellus, 208 INDEX. 665 Nonnus, 356 Normans in France, 480 f, 483; in England, 498; at Thessalonica, 411; in S. Italy, 447 Notker of St Gallen, (1) the Stam¬ merer, Balbulus, 479 f, 612 ; (2) Labeo , 499, 508 Novalesa, 603 Numenius, 322, 324 f Ockham (Occam), William of, 578; 507 Odo (St), (1) abbot of Cluni, 485 ; (2) abp of Canterbury, 450, 486 Olympiodorus, the elder, 365 ; the younger, 365, 367 f Omicron and 0 ?nega, 90 Omons, Imago Mmidi of, 638 Onomacritus, 22 Onomatopoeia, 94, 146 Opilius, Aurelius, 173 Ordericus Vitalis, 523 orichalcum , 529, 572 Origen, 334, 594 Orion, 318, 370 n. 5 Orleans, 462, 602 ; school of, 647-50 Orosius, 112 f, 207, 364, 482 Orthography, 171, 252, 254, 458 Orus, 318, 370 n. 5 Osberni, Glossarium, 607, 618 Osnabriick, capitular for foundation of school at, 462 (spurious, Watten- bach, G. Q. i 6 159, 1) Oswald (St), abp of York, 492, 617 Osymandyas, 117 Otho I, 484, 487, 491 ; II, 484, 491 ; III, 242, 484, 490-2 Otho of Lomello, 484 n. 1 ( Chron . Novalic. in Pertz, Mon. vii 106) Otto of Freising, 512, 535 Ouen, St, 445 Ovid, 271 ; 269 ; in MA, 614-7 ; 417, 477 n. 1, 500, 555, 575, 589 f Oxford (1167), 606; Dominicans at, 551; Franciscans at, 556; early study of Aristotle, 570, 575 ; re¬ citations by Giraldus, 523; Michael Scot (?), 546; Grosseteste, 552 f, 556, 567; Roger Bacon, 567 f, 573; Duns Scotus, 576 f; Greek and Hebrew professorships, 585 ; mss, 376 , 395 556 , 57 o n. 2, 573, 608, 6r6, 621 ; Merton Coll., 556 ; Oriel, 598 ; dates of other early Colleges, 538 Pachymeres, 422 Pacificus, 603 Pacuvius, 169 f, 199 Paderborn, school of, 498 Padua, univ., 606; 584, 588 Palaeologi, scholars under the, 416 f Palaeologus, Manuel, 423 Palaemon, Q. Remmius, 188 Palamas, Gregorius, 423 Palermo, 544 f, 565 Palimpsests, 441, 599, 626 f Palladas, 363 Pamphilus and Pamphila, 288 Panaetius, 158, 163, 264, 266 Panathenaea, 21, 162 Pandects, 583 Pantaenus, 323 Papias, 501, 572, 639 papyri, 66, 85 f, 103, 108, in, 133 f Papyrianus, 252 Parchment, in, 556 Parian Marble, the, 116 Paris, ‘ the paradise of the world ’, 605 ; Julian at, 351; Norman siege of, 481 ; schools of, 485, 606, 644; university of (paradisus deliciarum , 527)> 5 2 8, 546, 551, 582, 644; study of Aristotle at, 549 f, 585 ; Council of (1210), 549 ; Dominicans and Franciscans, 551 ; Greek col¬ lege of Philip Augustus, 416; Notre- Dame, 551, 626, 631 ; Rue de Maitre Albert , 558; Rue de Fouarre , 564; Sainte Chapelle, 557; St Germain-des-Pres, 257, 476, 481, 630; Sorbonne, 581, 585, 605, 625, 648; Paris in relation to Chartres, 648, and Orleans, 649 Paris, Matthew, 413, 524, 553 f Parthenius, 270 f Parts of speech, 90, 97, 131, 143, 148, 274, 313, 650 Pascal I, 447 Paschasius Radbertus, 473, 589, 623 Patrick, St, 438 Paul I, 447, 474 Paul (St), Carinthian abbey of, 629 Paulinus, 213, 234 Paulus Diaconus, 456 ; 188, 604, 612, 618 (Wattenbach, G. Q. i 6 163-71) Paulus Silentiarius, 380 Pausanias, 304 ; (2) the Atticist, 316 Pavia, 243 n. 3, 440 ; school at, 448, 463* 479 Pediasimus, 421 Peisistratus and Homer, 20 f, 159 Pelagius, 364 Pella, 162 Pepin-le-Bref, 447, 474 666 INDEX. Pepys ms of Bernard Silvester, 5i6n. pereant qui nostra etc. ,219 Pergamon and its rulers (dates, 104), 148-52 ; the Library, 149-51 ; 113, 187, 200; irlvaKes , 156; school of, 161; Pergamon and Alexandria, hi, 159-62; Pergamon and Rome, 152, 157 f, 187, 220 Pericles, 76 Peronne, 442 n. Persius, 191, 216, 486, 621 Peter of Blois, 522, 561, 647; (2) of Pisa, 456; (3) Peter Lombard, 384, 560 ( Lumbardus , 525); (4) Peter the Venerable, 511, 530, 540 n., 596 Peterborough, plundering of, 498 Petrarch, 224, 259, 580, 587, 608, 626, 650 Petronius, 191, 637 Petrus (1) (de) Riga, 530; (2) Elias, 517 m 3; Helias, 525, 577, 640 f; ( 3 ) Hispanus, 403 n. 5, 578; (4) De Vineis, 546 n. 2 Phaedrus, 484, 621 Phalaris, 393 Pheidias, 170, 293 Philargyrius, 235 Philemon, (1) 162 ; (2) gram., 123 Philes, Manuel, 421 Philetas of Cos, 105, 118 Philippus of Thessalonica, 161, 398 Philo Judaeus, 289, 325 Philochorus, 162 ‘ philologer ’, ‘ philologist ’, ‘ philo¬ logy ’, 2; philologus , 5, 11, 182, philologia , 5,11; modern philology, 11 f Philon ofByblus, Herennius, 304; 142 Philoponus, 114, 367, 369 Philostratus I, 327 ; II, III, 329 Philoxenus of Alexandria, 224 n. 1 ; 290 Phocylides, 49 Phoebammon, 311 Photius, 388 f; Bibliotheca , 389; literary criticism in, 390 f; Letters , 392 ; Lexicons , 391 f, 404 f Phrantzes, 422 Phrynichus, (1) dramatist, 53; (2) Atticist, 317 Phrynis, 44 Pierre (1) de Chantre, 534; (2) la Casa, 565 Pietro d’ Abano (of Padua), 584 Pindar, 23, 45-47; 127, 136; 285; 410, 419-21; (2) ‘ Pindarus The- banus’, 623 Pisa, 456, 535, 583, 606; S. Caterina, pi. facing 560 Pisander, cyclic poet, 270 Pisides, Georgius, 380 Pitt, 283 n. Planudes, 417 f; 242 Plataea, 298, 428 Plato, on Homer, 30 f, Solon, 48 f, Antimachus, 39; on the study (40 fj and criticism of poetry, 68 f; on the drama, 61 f, on rhetoric, 79, on compositions in prose, 84; on classification of letters, 89, and words, 90 f, and on the origin of language, 92 f; quotations from Homer, 33, Pindar, 45, Theognis, 49, Archi¬ lochus, 50, Aeschylus, 58, and Euripides, 59; early mss, 85; division of his dialogues into ‘ tri¬ logies’, 128; Crat. 92 f, 404, Gorg. 79 ; Lon , 30, 68 ; Phaedo (ms), 85, 87, 108 ; Phaedrus, 79; Laws, 41, 84 ; Protag. 41 ; Rep. 31, 69 ; Timaeus, 48 In Cicero, 265 f; Dion. Hal. 275, 277; ‘Longinus’, 283!; Dion Chrys., 294; Plutarch, 295!; Aristides, 305 f; Maximus Tyrius, 306 f; Lucian, 309 ; Apuleius, 310 ; Galen, 322 ; Clemens Alex., 324; Eusebius, 343; Synesius, 359, 362; lexicon of Timaeus, 334; Neo-Platonists, 334-7; 350f, 357 * 3 62 * 364-9 5 Boethius, 241 ; Commentators on, 321 f, 366-8; Gorg. 359, 368, Parm. 3 66, Phaedo 368, Phaedrus 367, Phile- bus 368, Rep. 359, 366, Timaeus , 241* 322, 357 * 366 f Mediaeval study of (1) in the East. Oriental versions of, 385 ; Byz. study of, 402 ; Photius, 389, 393 ; Arethas, 395; Psellus, 401 f, 418, 422 f; facsimile from Bodleian MS > 376, 395 '* (2) in the West, 5 ° 7 > SIC 557 ; Luitprand, 491; Abelard, 509; Bernard of Char¬ tres and William of Conches, 511 ; Theodoric of Chartres, 513, and Bernard Silvester of Tours, 515; John of Salisbury, 520; Alain de l’lsle, 532 ; William of Auvergne, 552; Roger Bacon, 574, 582 ; influence of the theory of ‘ideas’, 505, 510, 519, 521, 532 ; transl. of Meno 508; Phaedo INDEX. 667 508, 552, 574 ; Timaeus (Joannes Scotus, 474), Chalcidius (cent, iv) 486, 489, 507, 509-11, 513, 5 * 5 > S 3 *. 552 , 574 > 59 1 Plautus, 169; Fabulae Varronianae, 174 n.; in MA, 607; 484, 521, 610; mss 607 ; 441 Pliny, (r) the elder, 176, 192; in MA, 628; 602, 605; (2) the younger, 195 ; in MA, 629 Plotinus, 335 Plotius Gallus, 173 Plutarch, 295-300 ; quoted, 32, 59; (2) Plutarchus, the Neo-Platonist, 364 ‘ Poeta Saxo’, 480 Poetry, criticism of, (Athenian) 67-75 > (Roman) 177 f, 183 f, 191; Dion. Hal. 275 f; ‘Longinus’, 283 f; see also Criticism, literary . Poetry and Sculpture, 293 Poets, mediaeval prejudice against classical, 533, 537, 594-6 ; lists of, 622 ; 528 n. 7, 532 f Poggio (1416), 192, 442, 618, 621 f, 631 Poitiers, William of, 502 (1020—c. 1089) Polemon, (1) of Athens, 164; (2) of Ilium, 152, 160-2, 304 Pollio on Sallust and Cicero, 180; (2) Valerius Pollio, 317 Pollux, 320 ; 303, 308 Polybius, 117, 160, 170, 264, 272 ; Byz. excerpts from, 397, 426 Pompeius (Maurus), commentum artis Donati, 235, 462 Pompeius Trogus, 272, 574, 637 Pompilius Andronicus, 173 Pomponius, (1) Marcellus, 187; (2) Mela, 230 Pomposa, 603 Pope, 211 n. 1, 285 Porcius Licinus, 172 Porphyrio, 184, 200 Porphyry, 336 f; his Introduction to the Categories , 336, expounded by Ammonius, 367, and David the Armenian ( facsimile , 338), 365; transl. by Victorinus, 239 ; transl. and expounded by Boethius, 239, 253 . 503-7 5 Eric on, 478; John of Vandieres, 484; Gerbert, 490; Abelard, 509 f; 528 n. 9; Homeric Questions , 36, 337 ; the Seven Arts (Tzetzes), 408 Porson, 391, 396 Poseidonius, 163 f, 265 f, 269, 272 praeterpropter , 202 Praxiphanes, 7, 100 Priscian, 258 f; his authorities, 314; in MA, (Alcuin) 458, (Rabanus Maurus) 466; 468, 479, 485, 574^ 638, 640 f, 649; quoted, 642; ‘ Grammar and Priscian’, outside Chartres cathedral, 645 Probus, 184, 192-4, 199 Proclus, (1) Neo-Platonist, 365-7; transl. of his ‘ Theological Ele- • ments’, 563, facs. 566 ; (2) author of Chrestomathy, 371 f Procopius, (1) rhetorician, of Gaza, 374, 414 ; (2) historian, of Caesarea, 379 Prodicus, 78 Promptorium Parvulorum , 640 n. 2 Prose, Athenian study of, 76 f, 82 f; place of prose in Athenian edu¬ cation, 84 Protagoras, 27, 78, 91 Prudentius, 488; (2) bp of Troyes, 475 Priim, 470, 602 ; Regino of, 480, 484 Psellus, 401 f; 381, 578 Ptolemies, rulers of Egypt; dates of accession, 104; I, II, III, 159; I ( Soter ), ior, 105, 118, (portrait) 143; II [Philadelphia), ior, 105-8, ill, 115, 118, (portrait) 143; III or IX ( Euergetes I or II), 58, in ; IV [Philopator), 124; V [Epi- phanes ), in ; IX ( Euergetes II i.e. Physcon ), 135, 160 Ptolemy, (1) of Ascalon, 289; (2) Chennus, 304; (3) Claudius, 304; his Almagest, 540, 542 f; his Plani¬ sphere , 513 punctuation, 97, 125 f, 315, 459 Pydna, 157, 169 f Pythagoras, 29, 91, 592 Quadrivium , 643 quatenus for ut , 643 Querolus , 521 qui nescit pai'tes etc., 643 Quintilian, ananalogist, 177; grammar and literary criticism in, 194; 202 ; 278 ; on ens and essentia , 642 ; in MA, 630 f; Servatus Lupus, 470 ; Bernard of Chartres, 519; Etienne de Rouen, 597; mss {facsimile ) 203, 442, 630 f Quintus Smyrnaeus, 353 quod and quia, mediaeval use of, 643 668 INDEX. Rabanus (or Hrabanus) Maurus, 465-7; 240, 253, 259, 469, 609, 621, 623, 635 (cp. Hauck, Kirchengeschickte , ii 555 f) Radegunde (St), 436 Radulfus Tortarius, 529 Ragevinus, 633 Ramsey abbey, 492 Ratherius, 484, 607, 609, 621, 629 Raymund of Toledo, 540; (2) Ray- mundus Lullius, 576 Realism and Nominalism, 239, 506, 508 f; extreme Realists, Joannes Scotus, 477; Anselm, 508; William of Champeaux, 509 ; moderate (or Aristotelian) Realists, Alexander of Hales, 551, 557, Thomas Aquinas, 561, Albertus Magnus, 558 Recensions of Latin mss, 215 f, 230, 235> 2 5 8 > 607,617,619-21,630, 634! Recurrent verses, 232 Regensburg, 467 Regino, 480, 484 Reichenau, 467 f; 464, 480 n. 7, 486, 499, 603 ; mss 627, 629 Remi(gius) of Auxerre, 478; 485, 639 Renaissance, precursors of the, 418 f, 424, 469, 531, 588-91; causes of the Italian, 587 ; a gradual process, 587 ; authors appreciated in, Cicero, 588; Virgil, 610; Lucian, 310; Letters of Symmachus (214) and St Jerome, 221 Resbacus, 442 Revivals of learning, early, 586, 587 n. Rhapsodes, 19 f, 30 f, 101 Rheims, 480, 485, 489, 602, 614; St Thierry near, 628 Rhetoric, rise of, 76 f; literary criti¬ cism a part of, 82 Rhianus, 120, 132 Rhodes, 163 f Rich, Edmund (St Edmund of Abing¬ don), abp of Canterbury, 552, 567, 570 Richard of Bury, 580, 605, 610 Richard, (1) l’Eveque, 517 n., 519!; (2) of St Victor, 534 Richer, 489 f, 633 Rienzi, 587 Riquier, St, 480 Robertus Retinensis, 540 n. Rochelle, John of, 552 Rodolfus Glaber, 494 n. 2 ; 595 Rodolphus of Bruges, 513, 540 n. Roman age, dates in (1) Latin lite¬ rature etc., 166, 186, 204; (2) Gk. literature etc., 260, 340; end of, 260, 375, 432; Roman historians who wrote in Gk., 169, 264 ; Gk. influence in Roman literature (167 f) and literary criticism, 177; Roman study of Gk., 263-72 Romanus (C. Julius), 201 ; (2) Byz. poet, 384 _ Rome, Gk. influence in, 167 f; 263- 72 ; libraries in, see Libraries; monasteries for Gk. monks in, 446 f; Gk. at St Paul’s and St Peter’s, 500 f; ruins of, 529, 587 ; Versus Romae , 477 n. 1 Roscellinus, 508 f, 578 Rosetta Stone, 117 Rosla, Heinrich, 533 Rouen, (Juvenal) 619 ; cathedral of, 646 n. Rudolf, Annals, 636 Rufinianus, 216 Rusticus, his letter to Eucherius, 217 Rutilius Lupus, 189 Sabas, convent of St, 384 Sabbionetta, Gherardo di, 543 Saevius Nicanor, 173 Saintsbury, G., 55 f, 183, 196, 280, 286, 297, 311 n. 7, 373 Salisbury, John of, 517 f; his classical learning, 521 f; facsimile from Becket’s copy of his Met. etc. 516; 507, 511, 513, 536, 561, 581, 586 n., 610, 617, 619 f, 621, 629, 644, 646 Sallust, 269; in MA, 633 ; 486, 498, 502, 590, 636 n. 4 Salmasius, 397 Salomo III, of St Gallen, 479 Salvian, 208 Sappho, 44, 270, 276, 283, 307 ; the ‘greater Sapphic’ metre, 212 n. 1 Saracen, John the, 520, 534 Scaliger, the elder, 243 ‘ Scholar ’ and ‘ Scholarship ’, if; Scholarship and Philology, 2 f; subdivisions of Classical Scholar¬ ship, 14 Scholastic Problem, the, 239 f, 505 f; Scholasticism, authorities on, 504 n; doctores scholastici, 504 Scholia, on Homer, 140; 120; Hesiod, 409, 420 ; Pindar, 419, 421; Aesch. Soph. Eur., 420; Aristoph. 321, 409, 420; Dem. 348, 350; Lyco- phron, 409 ; Alexandrian poets, 142 f; Terence, 218, 490; Cicero, 191, 441 ; Virgil, 184, 235; Horace, INDEX. 669 200; Persius, 290; Juvenal, 290, 620 Schools of Alexandria, 105 f, 323, 334 f. 354 357 3^8 ; Pergamon, 148 f; Athens, 343, 345, 347, 35 L 364-8; Antioch, 344, 347 ; other Schools, 374, 386 ; Schools in Gaul, 209-13, 233; monastic and cathedral Schools, 550; see also under the several monasteries and cathedral cities ‘ Science ’, study of Greek and, com¬ bined by Gunzo, 486, and Roger Bacon, 575 Scot, Michael, 544-6, 569, 571 Scott, Sir Walter, 2, 247, 546 Scotus, Duns, 576 f, 642 Scotus (Erigena), Joannes, 473 f; 225 n. 3, 240, 369, 505, 548, 586, 623 Scriptorium , 599 f; 459, 461, 466 Scylitzes, John, 407 Secundus, 534 Sedulius, (1) author of Carmen Pas- chale, 235 ; (2) Irish monk, at Liege, 448, 614, 623, 626, 628, 635 . Segueriana, Lexica , 406 Seleucids, 163 Seleucus of Alexandria, 289 Selling, William Tilley of, 450 Seneca, (1) the elder, 189; in MA, 628; (2) the younger, 9, 190; in MA, 627 ; 528 n. 7, 555, 569, 574f, 588, 591 f, 642 ; (3) Pseudo-Seneca, 435 » 59 2 Sereshel, Alfred, 536, 547, 569 Sergius, (1) of Resaina, 386; (2) patriarch of Constantinople, 381 ; (3) bp of Naples, 486 Serlo Grammaticus, 524 Servatus Lupus, 469 f; 259, 478, 635 Servius, 218, 225-7, 468, 486, 603; (2) Servius Clodius, 173 Sextus Empiricus, 177, 323 Sextus Pompeius, grammarian, 468 Shirwood, 571, 578 Siceliotes, John, 407 Sidonius, Apollinaris, 208, 230-3 Siger of Brabant, 564 Sigonius, 382 Silius Italicus, 622 Silvester II (Gerbert q.v .), 242, 489! Simon, abbot of St Albans, 600 f Simonides of Ceos, 44 f, 276, 281 Simplicius, 368, 563 Simulus, 56 sincertiSy Hugutio on, 540 n. 1 Sion, on the upper Rhone, 499 Socrates, 54, 61, 68, 84, 92 Solinus, 201, 230 Solon, 19, 22; his poems, 48 f, 306 Sopater of Apamea, 372 Sophocles, 24, 57-9, 61, 63, 128, 131, 164, 169, 276, 284^ 361 f, 406, 558; PhilocteteSy 292; select plays, 394; bust, 302 Sophonias, 421 Sophron, 116 Spain, Greek in, 444; study of Aristotle among the Arabs, 539-41, and Jews in, 542 Spara( = Serva)dorsum, 485 (Pertz, Mon. iv 64) Speier (Livy), 634; Walther of, 488 Staberius Eros, 173 Statilius Maximus, 201 Statius, 196; in MA, 618; 442, 485, 498, 589, 592 f, 602 Stavelot, (Val. Maximus), 635 Stephanus, (1) of Alexandria, 382; (2) of Byzantium, 371 Stephen IV, 447; (2) of St Sabas, 384 Stesichorus, 23, 130, 283 Stilo, L. Aelius, 172 Stobaeus, 372 Stoics, Grammar of the, 144-6 Strabo, 273; 86 Strassburg, pi. on 537, 596 n. 1, 614, 631 Student-songs, mediaeval, 620 Sublime, treatise on the, 282—6 subscriptiones in mss, 215 f, 235, 258 ‘ substantive 642 Suetonius, 196 f, 202 ; in MA, 635; 463, 469, 478; De Gram. 8, 156, i7of; De Poetis , 467 n. 2; Prata, 443 Suidas, 399 ; Grosseteste and, 555 Sulpicius (1) Apollinaris, 198 ; (2) Galus, 169; (3) Severus, 234; (4) Victor, 216 Symbols used in Greek criticism, 126, 131, 140 Symeon, (1) the grammarian, 405; (2) ‘Magister’, 398; (3) Meta- phrastes, 398; (4) of St Mamas, 408 Symmachus, (1) on Aristophanes, 321; (2) cons. 391 A.D., 214-6; (3) cons. 485 A.D., 216, 237 Syncellus, Michael and George, 385 Synesius, 358-63; H 3 n * 2 ‘ Syntipas \ 407 Syrian study of Aristotle, 385 f Syrianus, 365 670 INDEX. Tacitus, 201; in MA, 636; 604; De Oratoribus, 195 Tarsus, 163 Tegernsee, 626; Metellus of, 613 Tennyson and Dion. Hal., 280; Quintus Smyrnaeus, 354 Terence, 169; in MA, 607 f; 487, 499 > 59 8 Terentianus Maurus, 200, 603 Terentius Scaurus, 188, 197 Theagenes of Rhegium, 7, 29 Thegan, 465 Themistius, 345, 553 n. 10 Theocritus, 115, 269, 270, 361 Theodora, mother of Michael III, 383, 388 Theodore, (1) of Mopsuestia, 344; (2) of Studion, 384f, 388; (3) of Tarsus, 449 b 452 Theodoret, 357, 364 Theodoric the Great, 236, 238, 244-8, 260. (2) Theodoric of Chartres, 513; 517 n. 3, 586 n. 4; his Epta - teuchon , 513 n. 4, 519 n. 5, 645 Theodorus, (1) of Byzantium, 79; (2) Metochites, 420; (3) Prodromus, 410; 354 , 4 * 4 * 573 Theodosius I, 341; II, 230, 356, 374, 632; (3) Alexandrian grammarian { c . 400A.D.), 354; 138, 381, 573; (4) Diaconus, 398 Theodulfus, bp of Orleans, 462; 229 n. 4, 612, 615, 647 Theodulus, Eclogues of, 515 Theognis, 49 (cp. E. Harrison, Studies , 1902, c. 1) Theognostus, 385 Theon, (1) commentator on poets, 142; (2) Aelius, rhetorician and commentator on prose authors, 311; (3) philosopher and mathematician, 357 (all of Alexandria); (4) Theon of Smyrna, 322 Theophilus, (1) patriarch of Alexan¬ dria, 360, 364; (2) Byzantine emp., 386, 388 Theophrastus, 99, 175, 265, 275, 277, 284, 504 Theophylact, (1)408; (2) Simocattes, 380, 426 Thessalonica, fall of (1185), 411,415; feuds of (1346), 423 Thomas Aquinas (St), see Aquinas Thomas Magister, 409; (2) Th. Scholasticus, 398; (3) Th. of Celano, 530 ; (4) bp of St David’s, 567, 564 n. 4 Thrasymachus, 78 Thucydides, on Homer, 26, 33; influence of Sicilian rhetoric on, 82; Dion. Hal. on, 275-9; ‘Longinus’, 283 f; Lucian, 308 f; Life of, 14T Tibullus, in MA, 621; 530, 558, 604 Timaeus, (1) historian, 162; (2) lexico¬ grapher, 334 Timonof Phlius, 102,106,115,119,162 Timotheus of Gaza, 369 Tiro, 181, 201 Toledo, Latin translations from the Arabic executed at, 523, 539 f, 543 546 , 565 5 Abraham of, 542 Toulouse, 209, 518, 527, 606 Tours, St Martin of, 207, 234, 438, 598; St Martin’s abbey at, 252; Alcuin at, 457 f, 599 f; Odo, 485; Gerbert, 489; Bernard Silvester, 514; mss from, (Nonius) 602, (Vir¬ gil) 612, (Cic. de Sen.) 627, (Livy) 634, (Suetonius) 635; Greek mass at, 481 Tragic poets (of Athens), text of, 57; quotations from, 58; select plays, 394 Triclinius, 420; autograph of, 428 Triviuniy 643 Troy, the tale of, 24-6, 34, 154, 329; in MA, 524, 526, 622 f, 637 Tryphiodorus, 357 Tryphon, 142 Tyrannion, 138 f Tyrtaeus, 48 Tzetzes, 408 f Ulpian, (1) jurist, 330; (2) scholiast, 35.0 Uncial characters, 461, 471 ‘ Universals’, controversy on, 239, 506; 475, 486, 508, 512, 520, 570 Universities, 605 ; 356, 374 Upsilon , 90, 385 ValeriusCato, 182,268; (2) Val.Pollio, 317; (3) Val. Flaccus, mss of, 621; 442; (4) Val. Maximus, 230; in MA, 635; 478, 529, 604, 632; (5) Q. Valerius of Sora, 172 Vandieres, John of, 484 Varro, 173-6, 264; 138, 146, 172, 178, 181 f, 188, 202, 210, 215, 223 f, 228, 241, 257, 300; in MA, 627; 476 Varro Atacinus, 269 Vegetius, 230: in MA, 635; 466 Velius Longus, 184, 188, 197, 252 Velleius Paterculus, 603 INDEX. 671 Verona, 484, 603, 608, 626 Verrius Flaccus, 188, 271, 457 Verse, passages rendered in English, 40, 56, 168, 211, 243, 341, 363 Vestinus, 316 Victor, Julius and Sulpicius, 216 Victor III ( Desiderius ), 500 Victorianus, his recension of Livy, 215 n. 6, 634 Victorinus, 217 f; 205, 223, 239, 489, 499 > 507 Vienne, Council of, 584 Vilgardus, 595 Vincent of Beauvais, 557 f; 586, 638; Virgil, 610; Ovid, 615; Statius, 618; Martial ( Coquus ), 619; Ju¬ venal, 620; Tibullus, 621; Cicero, 624 f; Pliny the younger, 630 Vindobonense, Lexicon , 406 Vinsauf, Geoffrey de, 526, 648 n. 4 Virgil, and Lucretius, 168; his Greek originals, 269 f; early study (and criticism) of, 183 f; Probus, 193; Gellius, 199; in c. IV, 216 f; Au- sonius, 211 ; Servius, 218 ; Jerome, 221; Augustine, 222; Macrobius, 225 f; in c. V, Sidonius, 231 f; As- terius, 235; in MA, 6iof; Alcuin, 459; Servatus Lupus, 471 f; Odo, 485; Notker Labeo, 499; Anselm, 502; Ekkehard I, II, 487!; Iiilde- bert, 529; Dante, 589, 591, 611; Del Virgilio, 589; the Fourth Eclogue , 463, 610 f, 618; allegory of the Aeneid, 515, 610; mss, 612; fac¬ simile , 185; 193, 235, 441 f, 459, 598; tomb of, 611; legends of, 611 n, 8, 637 (cp. Teuffel, § 232, 12) Virgil, (1) bp of Salzburg, 448 (Wat- tenbach, G. Q. i 6 i2if); (2) ‘Vir- gilius Maro\ the grammarian, 437 f, 638 (ed. H timer, 1886); (3) Giov. del Virgilio, 589 f, 616 Virgilium, legitzir , 643 Vitri, Philip de, 615 Vitruvius, 5, 464 Vocabularies, 527 f, 572, 640 Volcatius Sedigitus, 178 Vulgate, 220, 251, 254 n. 3, 432, 444, 571, 591 f, 642 Walafrid Strabo (or Strabus), 467 Walter of Chatillon, 617; see Gautier Waltharius (Walter of Aquitaine), 488 Wandrille’s, St, 461 Wibold, or Wibald, abbot of Corvey, 535, 624, 635 n. 2; cp. 596 Widukind of Corvey, 486 Winric of Trier, 622 Wirecker, Nigellus, 524 World, expected end of the, 493 f Xanthopulus, 422 Xenophanes, 29 Xenophon, 84, 86, 275, 278, 284, 295 ; imitated, 304, 407 Xiphilinus, (1) patriarch, 401 f; (2) historian, 407 York; Alcuin, 455 f; 460; Fridugis, 600 n. Zacharias, Greek pope, 447, 454 Zeno, 146 Zenodotus, (1) of Ephesus, 114, 119- 21, 127, 140; (2) of Malios, 158 Zoilus, date of, 108 f; 33 Zonaras, historian, 414; the lexicon (406) bearing his name, probably by Antonius Monachus (see Stein’s Herodotus , ed. maior, ii 479 f) GREEK INDEX. airicLTiKT] ( 7 rTcDwva, 89, 97, 275 Kadapais, 62 KaraXXrjXdTTjs, 313 KaT-qydp-qpa , 145 KaT 7 )yopo(ipevov (r6), 98 Kdrudev popos, 6 , 320 KepativLov, 126 Kidapa, KidapLs, 43 kXtjgis, 97 Kpt-TIKOS, IO kQXop, 126, 127, 27^ 80, 99; tus, 99, 277; of Didymus, I 44 > J 4 ^ XvpiKos, 43 n. 4; cp. 265 n. 1 peXiKd s, 43 n. 5 peXoiroioL , 43 peadryjs, ‘participle’, 148 peroxo, ‘participle’, 131, 274 n. 1 pLprjais, 69-72 (on ‘imitation’) /tup and pip, 161 6 f 3 eXos, 126, 131 ovopa, prjpa, go f, 97 f, 100, 131, 137 f, 144 f, 148 08 (name of letter), 90 iraduv, Trepl, I41 irapaypacpr), 80, 97 7 rapaarjpop, 97 TrtvradXos, 124 TTivaKes, 122, 129, 156 ttol 6 t 7 ]S and 7 roadrrjs, 267 TTTUGIS, 97; xroxreis, 97, 138, 145 pa\f/ipd 6 s, 23 n. 2 aLXXvpos, 122 CTLypr), 125, 131, 140, 315 abpfiapa, 145 abpdeapos, 80, 97, 274