DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.30696#0403
TACITUS.
393
JVithont Date^]
The reverse is blank. Maittaire, vol. i. p. 283, note 2, has assigned
the date of 1468 to this impression, on the authorities of Cheviilier
and Naudaeus. These authorities, however ingenious and respectable,
are not of sufficient weight to justify such a conclusion ; especially if,
(as it is presumed to be, before shewn to the contrary,) Vindelin de Spira
were the genuine printer of this edition. De Bure, Bibliogr. Instruct.
vol. v. p. 582, is copious and satisfactory; except that he is a little
confused concerning the priority of the present work, and that of the
Familiar Epistles of Cicero—both of them, in his opinion, executed by
J. de Spira. Seemiller is rather full and particular, noticing a few
discrepancies in De Bure; Incunab. Typog. fasc. i. p. 9-10. Denis
(whose brochure concerning John de Spira should be in the library of
every bibliographer) thus observes of the colophon — ‘ quem, an
Johannes etiamdum vivens, an ab ejus subita morte Wendelinus frater
vulgaverit, hic quidem in medio relinquam.’ What he adds, is in-
serted in the note below.* Upon the whole, I incline to believe that
this edition is the typographical workmanship of V. de Spira; and,
as such, and being the earliest production of his press, we may conclude
it to have been executed quite at the commencement of the year 1470.
Lichtenberger is not particularly instructive. Init. Typog. p. 162. In
regard to the intrinsic excellence of this impression, the reader, on con-
sulting the authories noticed in the Introd. to the Classics, vol. ii. p. 246,
* After stating the colophon, Denis continues—‘ Viden/ ait, [Heinecken] ultimis hujus
Epigrammatis verbis dubium fieri, an Ciceronis Epistola, an vero Tacitus labor primus Spi-
rensis fuerit ? Addit, hunc nodum hactenus a nemine solvi potuisse. Solvam fortassis ego,
et quidem e poeticee locutionis indole, latineeque constructionis regulis. Impressit a.
MCCCCLXXIII. Parmae Petrarchae Triumphos Andreas Portilia. Epigramma subjunctum
ita finit:
Hsec nam dedalicus posuit portilia parmae
Andreas : patrirn gloria magna su;e.
Quid censes, Lector ? An editio Petrarchae est pat-rue gloria magna suie, an vero Impressor
Portilia? Portiliam innuis, illudque, patrue gloria magna siue, Appositum poeticum vocas,
ut Virgilianum illud, quod tenes a scholiis: gemini, duo fulmina belli, Scipiadae, (/Eneid,
lib. vi) omisso nempe relativo pro, qui est gloria magna sute; neque enim, si de Editioue
sermo esset, latinum foret: Htec posuit Portilia gloria magna, sed gloriam magnam dici
oporteret. Age nunc, et Parma transgressus, Venetias Spirensem pariter expedi. Nam
sive totum posterius Distichon ad illum traxeris, quod potes, sive extrema: Pressit Spira
premens: artis gloria prima suce, non Taciti editionem, sed Taciti Editorem artis suce primam
Venetiis nempe, gloriam pronuntiabis, aut primarn, quod haud infrequens Latinis, prima-
riam, excellentem, singularem interpretaberis.’ Denis ; Suffragium pro Johanne de Spira
Primo Venetiarum Typographo, 1794, 8vo. p. 23-5.
3 E
VOL. II.
393
JVithont Date^]
The reverse is blank. Maittaire, vol. i. p. 283, note 2, has assigned
the date of 1468 to this impression, on the authorities of Cheviilier
and Naudaeus. These authorities, however ingenious and respectable,
are not of sufficient weight to justify such a conclusion ; especially if,
(as it is presumed to be, before shewn to the contrary,) Vindelin de Spira
were the genuine printer of this edition. De Bure, Bibliogr. Instruct.
vol. v. p. 582, is copious and satisfactory; except that he is a little
confused concerning the priority of the present work, and that of the
Familiar Epistles of Cicero—both of them, in his opinion, executed by
J. de Spira. Seemiller is rather full and particular, noticing a few
discrepancies in De Bure; Incunab. Typog. fasc. i. p. 9-10. Denis
(whose brochure concerning John de Spira should be in the library of
every bibliographer) thus observes of the colophon — ‘ quem, an
Johannes etiamdum vivens, an ab ejus subita morte Wendelinus frater
vulgaverit, hic quidem in medio relinquam.’ What he adds, is in-
serted in the note below.* Upon the whole, I incline to believe that
this edition is the typographical workmanship of V. de Spira; and,
as such, and being the earliest production of his press, we may conclude
it to have been executed quite at the commencement of the year 1470.
Lichtenberger is not particularly instructive. Init. Typog. p. 162. In
regard to the intrinsic excellence of this impression, the reader, on con-
sulting the authories noticed in the Introd. to the Classics, vol. ii. p. 246,
* After stating the colophon, Denis continues—‘ Viden/ ait, [Heinecken] ultimis hujus
Epigrammatis verbis dubium fieri, an Ciceronis Epistola, an vero Tacitus labor primus Spi-
rensis fuerit ? Addit, hunc nodum hactenus a nemine solvi potuisse. Solvam fortassis ego,
et quidem e poeticee locutionis indole, latineeque constructionis regulis. Impressit a.
MCCCCLXXIII. Parmae Petrarchae Triumphos Andreas Portilia. Epigramma subjunctum
ita finit:
Hsec nam dedalicus posuit portilia parmae
Andreas : patrirn gloria magna su;e.
Quid censes, Lector ? An editio Petrarchae est pat-rue gloria magna suie, an vero Impressor
Portilia? Portiliam innuis, illudque, patrue gloria magna siue, Appositum poeticum vocas,
ut Virgilianum illud, quod tenes a scholiis: gemini, duo fulmina belli, Scipiadae, (/Eneid,
lib. vi) omisso nempe relativo pro, qui est gloria magna sute; neque enim, si de Editioue
sermo esset, latinum foret: Htec posuit Portilia gloria magna, sed gloriam magnam dici
oporteret. Age nunc, et Parma transgressus, Venetias Spirensem pariter expedi. Nam
sive totum posterius Distichon ad illum traxeris, quod potes, sive extrema: Pressit Spira
premens: artis gloria prima suce, non Taciti editionem, sed Taciti Editorem artis suce primam
Venetiis nempe, gloriam pronuntiabis, aut primarn, quod haud infrequens Latinis, prima-
riam, excellentem, singularem interpretaberis.’ Denis ; Suffragium pro Johanne de Spira
Primo Venetiarum Typographo, 1794, 8vo. p. 23-5.
3 E
VOL. II.