DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.30697#0111
No Place; 1477-] POMPEIUS FESTUS.
103
578. Pompeiits Festus. Printed in\ATJ. Folio.
It is rather extraordinary that Denis should have said, upon the ex-
clusive authority of Laire, that this impression ‘ seems to have been
printed at Romewhen the reasons which Audiffredi has assigned, for
rendering such inference extremely questionable, appear to have been
entirely overlooked bv him. As far as intrinsic evidence weighs, we
may conclude that it was not printed at Rome; since it was rarely, if
ever, that Gothic characters, at the above period, were used by the
Roman printers. The insertion of the prefatory epistle by Manilius,
and the words of a part of the colophon, are, in fact, only copies of
what appear in Reinard de Enyngen’s impression of 1475—avowedly
executed at Rome ; so that these points, alone, are not strongly corro-
borative of Laire’s inference. Of this prefatory Epistle, I present the
reader with what may be called almost a literal translation:
* Manilius Romanus to Pomponius Letus: health. When I lately
read the mutilated books of Pompeius Festus, which relate to ‘ Ancient
Worbs,’ I was sadly grieved to find that a work of such importance
was left in so corrupted a state : since the author wrote for the infor-
mation of all antiquity, and for the use of posterity. But I apprehend
that the ignorance of later ages has been the cause of such mutilation
—for some incompetent person, without character and learning,
appears to have reduced his diffuse and copious work into a sterile
abridgment: and it is most probable that many important passages
have been omitted, as you have frequently complained to me. It has
been therefore my object to cause to be printed the whole of the
genuine text which remains; lest, by chance, some bold and rash
puhlisher should render it yet more corrupt. 1 have taken every care
that, as much as remains of the original work, should be at least
faithfully submitted to the public. Farewell.’
The preceding is at top, on the reverse of the first leaf. On the recto
of the second, is this prefix:
$ompei fegti coiieetaitea
grigcotum uetliorum*
A full page has 40 lines. There are neither numerals, signatures, nor
103
578. Pompeiits Festus. Printed in\ATJ. Folio.
It is rather extraordinary that Denis should have said, upon the ex-
clusive authority of Laire, that this impression ‘ seems to have been
printed at Romewhen the reasons which Audiffredi has assigned, for
rendering such inference extremely questionable, appear to have been
entirely overlooked bv him. As far as intrinsic evidence weighs, we
may conclude that it was not printed at Rome; since it was rarely, if
ever, that Gothic characters, at the above period, were used by the
Roman printers. The insertion of the prefatory epistle by Manilius,
and the words of a part of the colophon, are, in fact, only copies of
what appear in Reinard de Enyngen’s impression of 1475—avowedly
executed at Rome ; so that these points, alone, are not strongly corro-
borative of Laire’s inference. Of this prefatory Epistle, I present the
reader with what may be called almost a literal translation:
* Manilius Romanus to Pomponius Letus: health. When I lately
read the mutilated books of Pompeius Festus, which relate to ‘ Ancient
Worbs,’ I was sadly grieved to find that a work of such importance
was left in so corrupted a state : since the author wrote for the infor-
mation of all antiquity, and for the use of posterity. But I apprehend
that the ignorance of later ages has been the cause of such mutilation
—for some incompetent person, without character and learning,
appears to have reduced his diffuse and copious work into a sterile
abridgment: and it is most probable that many important passages
have been omitted, as you have frequently complained to me. It has
been therefore my object to cause to be printed the whole of the
genuine text which remains; lest, by chance, some bold and rash
puhlisher should render it yet more corrupt. 1 have taken every care
that, as much as remains of the original work, should be at least
faithfully submitted to the public. Farewell.’
The preceding is at top, on the reverse of the first leaf. On the recto
of the second, is this prefix:
$ompei fegti coiieetaitea
grigcotum uetliorum*
A full page has 40 lines. There are neither numerals, signatures, nor