DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.30696#0080
70
ANCIENT CLASSICS. \Without Date.
the reverse of the third leaf, and concludes on the recto of the fourth.
In the former epistle, Aloisius speaks of the trouble of his correspon-
dent and himself, in correcting and analyzing the volumes which they
had consulted together—of the pleasant domestic relaxation to be af-
forded to Helius, by a work of this sort, after tlie fatigues and
exertions from other compositions of a literary and declamatory nature.
‘ A good opportunity now occurs (continues he). We may procure
printers who will more quickly execute 400 copies, than a scribe
would one copy.’ Not a word is said of former impressions. Helius
replies, that he will do all in his power to gratify the wishes of
his friend—although he fears his expectations are too highly raised:
he will do his best: all the copies of his author that he had seen, being
very defective—‘ Acronis exemplaria defuere’—one, however, was of
a less exceptionable character—‘ vnum habuimus, nec id quidem satis
emendatum, utcunque tamen sit, et libenter fecimus, et faciemus de
integro.’ As Count Iteviczky justly observes, this is not the language
of an editor who had inspected a previously-printed edition. It is
clear therefore that Helius alludes to manuscript copies of Acro and
Porphyrio; and that, the Milan impression of 1474 was not then in
existence. Further; on comparison between the present and subse-
quent text of these Commentators, a material variation will be found
both in omissions and additions :—the latter impression being much
fuller; and the contractions numerous, compared with those of the
present one. A Greek word— e priTopixwspov'— in tlxe letter of Helius,
is printed in very rude characters.
It remains only to add, that the recto of the 5th leaf presents us
with the Life of Horace by Acro : on the reverse, there is the same by
Porphyrio. On the recto of the following and 6th leaf, begins the
first Ode, with the title in capital letters. This is immediately fol-
lowed by the Commentaries of Acro and Porphyrio, separately printed.
The first verse of the 2d Ode presents us with this corrupt text:
Am satis terris niuis atq; dirp
Grandinis mouit pater. 8c rubente
Dexteras saeras iaculatus arces
Terruit vrbem.
The Commentary or ‘ Explanation’ of Porphyrio, upon the Ars
Poetica, coneludes the volume on the reverse of the 224th and last
leaf:
ANCIENT CLASSICS. \Without Date.
the reverse of the third leaf, and concludes on the recto of the fourth.
In the former epistle, Aloisius speaks of the trouble of his correspon-
dent and himself, in correcting and analyzing the volumes which they
had consulted together—of the pleasant domestic relaxation to be af-
forded to Helius, by a work of this sort, after tlie fatigues and
exertions from other compositions of a literary and declamatory nature.
‘ A good opportunity now occurs (continues he). We may procure
printers who will more quickly execute 400 copies, than a scribe
would one copy.’ Not a word is said of former impressions. Helius
replies, that he will do all in his power to gratify the wishes of
his friend—although he fears his expectations are too highly raised:
he will do his best: all the copies of his author that he had seen, being
very defective—‘ Acronis exemplaria defuere’—one, however, was of
a less exceptionable character—‘ vnum habuimus, nec id quidem satis
emendatum, utcunque tamen sit, et libenter fecimus, et faciemus de
integro.’ As Count Iteviczky justly observes, this is not the language
of an editor who had inspected a previously-printed edition. It is
clear therefore that Helius alludes to manuscript copies of Acro and
Porphyrio; and that, the Milan impression of 1474 was not then in
existence. Further; on comparison between the present and subse-
quent text of these Commentators, a material variation will be found
both in omissions and additions :—the latter impression being much
fuller; and the contractions numerous, compared with those of the
present one. A Greek word— e priTopixwspov'— in tlxe letter of Helius,
is printed in very rude characters.
It remains only to add, that the recto of the 5th leaf presents us
with the Life of Horace by Acro : on the reverse, there is the same by
Porphyrio. On the recto of the following and 6th leaf, begins the
first Ode, with the title in capital letters. This is immediately fol-
lowed by the Commentaries of Acro and Porphyrio, separately printed.
The first verse of the 2d Ode presents us with this corrupt text:
Am satis terris niuis atq; dirp
Grandinis mouit pater. 8c rubente
Dexteras saeras iaculatus arces
Terruit vrbem.
The Commentary or ‘ Explanation’ of Porphyrio, upon the Ars
Poetica, coneludes the volume on the reverse of the 224th and last
leaf: