Rabbinical books, which, however, we must pass "insalutatos," after stating that the works Aben-Ezra, Kimchii, Nachmanidis, Rascii, Maimonidis, ben Gerson, Mosis Kotzensis, Azariæ de-Rossii, Manassis ben Israël, have been added to the library by the liberality of the Abbé. Professor Peyron's remarks on them arise from a comparison of the volumes with the accounts given by Wolf and De-Rossi. 66 We now enter on the fourth and last part, where our author, after some introductory observations, and the notice of some volumes "en masse," makes his first remarks sigillatim" on Eschyli Tragadia sex 8vo. Venet. 1518, from which we extract the following: Adnotare lubet, Codicem Taruinensem 179, qui, præter alia, continet eclogas ex profanis scriptoribus decerptas, fol. 284. verso, claris sententiis ex Αἰσχύλου Χοηφόροις delectis præmisisse versiculum ̔Ερμῆ χθόνιε πατρῶ (sic) ἐποπτεύων κράτη. Cum vero codex soleat apophthegmatibus e quavis tragœdia excerptis primum tragadia versiculum præmittere, jure colligere videor, quod Stanleius conjiciebat, laudatum versum Choëphorarum esse primum. (p. 60.) No. 4. Дoyo 'ApioTeldou. Orationes Aristidis. Florentiæ, sumtibus nobilis viri Philippi Junta bibliopolæ, 1517, die 20 Maii. Fol. This is the editio princeps, and contains likewise an oration of Libanius de seditione Antiochena, from which our author endeavors to elucidate a difficult passage in Thucydides 1. 10. καὶ τῆς κατασκευῆς τὰ ἐδάφη, and with this the article is taken up: he has, however, subjoined some various readings "bonæ notæ" from Cod. Taur. B. II. 33. fol. on Themistius.' No. 20. Hesiodi opera et Dies, et Theogonia et Clypeus. Theognidis sententiæ, Sibyllæ carmina de Christo, quorum mentionem facit Eusebius et Augustinus. Musæi Opusculum de Herone et Leandro, Orphei Argonautica, Hymni, lished, the editor says, In Electra nostrum cum editionis Principis (Florentiæ sub finem sæculi xv a Jano Lascari curata) contextu contulimus. But the 1st edition of the Electra appears (see p. cxxvI of the same edition) to have been published by P. Victorinus, 8vo. Romæ or Florentiæ 1545. Some other play or edition must therefore be substituted. As most of the copies of the early printed volumes in this library are defective, the professor seems to rejoice in a Eustathius, which he describes as Exemplar integerrimum, nullaque labe affectum. We add the prices this work has fetched at various celebrated book-auctions: at Bridges', 101.5s.; Heath's, 681.5s.; Porson's, 551.; Randolph's, 301. 9s.; Roxburghe, 421.; and at Willet's, 581. 16s. et de Lapidibus. Phocylidis Parænesis. Florentia, per B. Juntam, 1540. mens. Feb. 8. The text of Orpheus in this edition agrees in the Argonautics with the Juntine 1519; in the Hymns with the Aldine. But we notice this volume as our author has given some inedited additional lines, from a Ms. in the Ambrosian library, some var. lect. from the same Ms., and some inedited fragments of Proclus on the Cratylus of Plato from 3 Mss. in the Turin library, No. 132, 205, 258. In Argonauticis vers. 51, 96, 1985, et in Hymnis XIV. 4, ΧΙΧ. 22, LXXX. 6. Ambrosianus codex eadem pra se fert additamenta, qua Hermannus probavit. At hymn. I. versibus 4° et 5° (seu vers. 48 τῆς Εὐχῆς) hunc addit hucusque inedi tum : Θηρόβρωμον, ἄζωστον, ἀπρόσμαχον εἶδος ἔχουσαν, Vocem θηρόβρομον (sic enim scribe) lericis inauditam verte FB- From the "scholia" of Proclus we make three extracts (p. 70-1.) Quast. 106. τὸ γὰρ καθαρὸν τοῦτο καὶ τὸ ἄχραντον ὑπόστα σιν παρέχεται πάσαις ταῖς τῶν Κουρήτων προόδοις. Διὸ καὶ ἐν τοῖς λογίοις τὴν πρωτίστην πηγὴν τῶν ἀμειλίκτων λέγεται περιέχειν, ἐποχεῖσθαι δὲ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν Νοῦς πατρὸς ἀραιοῖς ἐποχούμενος ἰθυντῆρσιν *Ακναπτον στράπτουσιν ἀμείλικτον πυρὸς ὁλκοῖς Ἔστι δ ̓ οὖν καθαρὸς νοῦς, ὡς καὶ τῆς ἀχράντου τάξεως ὑποστάσης, καὶ τῆς νοερᾶς ὅλης διακοσμήσεως ήγεμών Οὗδε γὰρ ἐκθρώσκουσιν ἀμείλικτοί τε κεραυνοὶ Ηδὲ κραταιὸν πνεῦμα πολλῶν πυρίων ἐπέκεινα. ἅπασαν γὰρ συνελίσσει τὴν ἑβδομάδα τῶν πηγών. Nullus ex codi cibus Taurinensibus saniorem habet lectionem. Interea v. 2. lege ἄκναμπον ; v. 4. fortasse reponendum est ἐκγενάουσι ; verius dicam, ipsa placitorum Orphicorum obscuritas, atque fragmenti conditio vetat, quin probabilis emendatio excogitari possit; versus quintus pessumdatus est; quare non ita facile sextus versus constitui potest ; incertum enim est, utrum πολῶν, an που λοῦν legas, vel etiam πόλων, id tamen probabilius est, reponendum esse πυρίνων cum uno ex codicibus Taurinensibus. * Cito versus et Hymnos editionis Hermanni, Lipsia 1808. Quast. 143. Ὅτι οἱ ἰδίως νοεροὶ καλούμενοι θεοὶ ὁλικοὶ, ὧν ἐστὶ πατὴρ ὁ μέγας Κρόνος, πηγαῖοι ἰδίως καλοῦνται. Τοῦ δὲ γὰρ ἐκθρώσκουσιν ἀμείλικτοί τε κεραυνοί, φησὶ τὸ Λόγιον περὶ Κρόνου. Περὶ δὲ τῆς ζωογόνου πηγῆς Ρέας, ἐξ ἧς πᾶσα ζωὴ θεία τε, καὶ νοερὰ, καὶ ψυχικὴ, καὶ ἐγκόσμιος ἀπογεννᾶται, οὕτως φασὶν τὰ Λόγια 'Ρείη τοι νοερῶν μακάρων πηγή τε ῥοή τε. Πάντων γὰρ πρώτη δυνάμει κόλποισιν ἀφράστοις Primus versus idem est ac tertius fragmenti superius allati ex Quæstione 106; ibi tamen legitur ούδε. Ceteros jam vulgavevat Franc. Patricius Discuss. Peripatet. iii. 5. pag. 326, atque ad Patricii fidem Gesnerus dedit in Fragmento XXXIV. Quast. 176. Monens Proclus vim καθαρτικὴν Apollinis complecti cum ἰατρικὴν, tum μαντικὴν, non secus ac faciant nostri ιατροί τε καὶ μάντιες· οἱ μὲν τὰ σώματα καθαίρουσιν, οἱ δὲ διὰ τῶν περιῤῥάνσεων καὶ τῶν περιθειώσεων ἁγνοὺς ἑαυτοὺς καὶ τοὺς συνόντας διὸ καὶ ὁ Θεουργὸς ὁ τῆς τελετῆς τούτου [Απόλλωνος] προκαθηγούμενος ἀπὸ τῶν καθάρσεων ἄρχει ται, καὶ τῶν περιῤῥάνσεων ἀποτελοῦσιν Αὐτὸς δ' ἐν πρώτοις ἱερεὺς πυρὸς ἔργα κυβερνῶν Κύματι φαινέσθω παγερῷ βαρύκχετος ἅλμης, ως φησι τὸ Λόγιον περὶ αὐτοῦ. Codices consentiunt in mendosa lectione βαρύκχετος. Fortasse reponendum βαρυογκέος, vel βαθυογκέος er nominativo βαθυογκής, cujusmodi jam προσογκής οι currit in Lexicis. [L. βαρυηχέτου, et Lexicis adde βαρυηχέτης. G. H. S.] No. 30. Platonis opera omnia, &c. &c. fol. Basileæ, 1556. This article contains various readings on the Phædrus “ ex Hermiæ Philosophi commentario inedito in Cod. Taurinensi, c. v. 23.” We must in concluding state that we have passed over many notices in which Panzer is supplied, even Fabricius corrected, or collations of Mss. given; and it contributes not a little to the value of the work that the author has actually seen the books he describes. It is, in fact, to such writers, who improve the opportunities afforded them, that bibliography owes very great obligations on the score of accuracy, and certain information as to the contents, size, dates, &c. of the volumes produced during the earlier stages of printing. 39 Observations on CREUZER's edition of the Commentary of OLYMPIODORUS on the First Alcibiades of Plato. 8vo. Francof. 1821. THE learned Editor commences his preface to this work with an account of the celebrated men that have been called by the name of Olympiodorus, and satisfactorily shows that the author of this Commentary was not Olympiodorus the Peripatetic, whose school was frequented by Proclus, for the sake of imbibing the doctrine of Aristotle; and in short that he was not a Peripatetic, but a Platonist. He also asserts with the greatest probability, that he florished under the Emperor Justinian, when the schools of the philosophers were not yet closed, and the sacred and salutary light of wisdom was not entirely intercepted by unparalleled barbarism, and lost in its attendant gloom. It seems, however, to have escaped the notice of this very learned editor, that the Olympiodorus, whose Commentaries on the Meteors of Aristotle are extant, is the same with the Olympiodorus who wrote the Commentaries on the First Alcibiades, Phædo, Philebus, and Gorgias of Plato. For that the Commentator of this name on the Meteors of Aristotle was a Platonist, is evident in the first place from what he says in p. 32 of that work in defence of Democritus and Plato, against the opposition made by Aristotle to their opinion about the sea; for his words are : Φερε δε ημεις υπερ τουτου απολογησομεθα, δείξαντες οτι ου καλως Αριστοτελης καταδρομη κατα τουτων εχρήσατο. μαλλον δ' ου του τοις εναντιούται, αλλα τοις κακως τα παρ' αυτων λεγομενα διαλαμβα νουσιν. ου γαρ ως συ της ως δαιμονιε φαμεν Αριστοτελης, ο Πλατων ολότητα του ύδατος έλεγεν οντα τον ταρταρον, αλλά τούτο έλεγε μυθικώς. ου χρη ουν τα μυθικως λεγομενα, φυσικώς εκλαμβανειν. αλλα ταυτα ελεγεν ο Πλατων αλλα τινα αινιττομενος. Here he says that Aristotle does not rightly blame Plato for asserting in the Phædo "Hucusque pertinuit veteris elegantiorisque doctrinæ proventus, qui paullatim exaruit Justiniano imperio ac deinceps. Hic Atheniensem clausit scholam, in qua floruerant Plutarchus, Nestorii filius, Syrianus, Proclus, Marinus, Damascius, unde Simplicius, Olympiodorus, aliique prodierant: philosophi expulsi: vexati per orbem Romanum avitæ religionis cultores, ex quorum numero fere erant docti homines. Per trecentos annos stupor et barbaries omnia obtinuerunt. Ergo in hoc temporis spatio plurimorum veterum librorum, in his etiam Plutarchorum, ponendus est interitus." These are the words of Wyttenbach in Præfatione ad Plutarch. Moralia p. LV. that Tartarus is the oλorns or wholeness of water; because Plato said this mythologically, obscurely indicating something else; and that what is asserted mythologically, is not to be assumed physically. And in the second place, this is evident from his calling Proclus in p. 59. Belos, by which appellation, as also by Mayas, he is usually designated by the Platonists posterior to him. That he was likewise the same with the author of this Conimentary on the First Alcibiades, is I think evident from what Olympiodorus on the Meteors, and Olympiodorus on the Phædo assert about the perpetuity of the punishments in Tartarus. For souls that have committed the greatest and incurable offences are said by Plato to be hurled into Tartarus, and to be there punished eternally. In the former of these works therefore (p. 32) it is said, πλην ει και λεγω αιδίως κολασθησομεναι δια το ανίατα ημαρ τηκεναι εν τω Ταρταρῳ, μηδε νομισης, ότι εις απειρους αιωνας κολαζεται η ψυχή εν τω Ταρταρῳ. ευγε ου δια μηνιν του θειου κολάζεται η ψυχή, αλλ' ιατρείας χαριν. αλλ' αιωνίως φαμεν κολάζεσθαι την ψυχην, αιωνα καλούντες τον αυτης βιον και την μερικην αυτης περιοδον. τῳ γαρ όντι τα μεγιστα πλημμελήσασαι ψυχαί ουκ αρκουνται μια περιοδῳ καθαρθήναι, αλλ' εισιν εν τῷ βίῳ διηνεκώς ωσπερ εν τῷ ταρταρῳ, ην περίοδον, αιώνα εκαλεσεν ο Πλατων. In this very remarkable passage Olympiodorus observes, that the soul is not punished by divinity through anger, but medicinally; and that by eternity we must understand the soul's partial period, because, in reality, souls that have committed the greatest offences cannot be sufficiently purified in one period. If we compare this with what is said by Olympiodorus on the Phædo, we shall find the same thing asserted in a more summary way, ει δε και αλλαχου λεγει αιώνιον την κολασιν, αλλ' ουν αιωνα καλει περιοδον τινα, και αποκαταστασιν. For here it is said that when Plato speaks of eternal punishment, he denominates a certain period and apocatastasis of the soul for ever. What this period is, Olympiodorus on the Gorgias admirably explains as follows: "There are seven spheres, the sphere of the moon, that of the sun, and those of the other planets; but the inerratic is the eighth sphere. The lunar sphere therefore, makes a complete revolution more swiftly for it is accomplished in thirty days. That of the sun 2 Oxorns in the philosophy both of Plato and Aristotle signifies a whole with a perpetual subsistence, and which comprehends in itself all the multitude of which it is the cause. 2 I quote this from a copy of the Harleian Ms. of this work which I have in my possession, not having the edition of these Scholia by Mustoxyd. and Schin. Venet. 1817. |