תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

NOTICE OF

BIBLIOTHECA CLASSICA. By J. LEMPriere, D.D. Re-edited by E. H. BARKER, ESQ. from the VIth American edition by CHAS. ANTHON, ESQ. Adjunct Professor of Language, in Columbia College, New York; with an Appendix by MR. BARker. 8vo. 16s. bds. Bohn, London, 1828.

Or the "march of intellect," in the present day, and of the objections to that phrase, who has not heard? Altering it to "progression of intellect," the book now before us may be cited as an instance. From the lamp of learning which illumines us at home, light is borrowed by natives of other regions; and, in the event, the boon returned, by reflecting it back with new lustre, and with benefit to ourselves who bestowed it.

:

The first projector of this work, he by whose counsel and under whose supervision it was first prepared, was, as we understand, the well-known, and universally respected, Dr. Valpy of Reading its execution, indeed, devolved on his pupil and assistant, the late Dr. Lempriere; both of them natives of Jersey. After the lapse of forty years, the same work comes back to us from North America; is reprinted here, with an addition of new and amended articles, four thousand in number, as Professor Anthon tells us, (and we see no reason to suspect exaggeration,) made by the hand of a citizen of the United States.

Here, then, is a work of admitted utility; nay, indispensable to every votary of the classic muse; to the mature, as well as to the incipient scholar; which has been designed, executed, enlarged, improved, corrected, and not the hand of a native of England employed on it: wholly proceeding from the labor of scholars who have received English educations indeed, and are obliged to us for that information, which enables them, in their turn, to instruct those by whom they have been instructed. We do indeed view it as a singular circumstance regarding this very successful and useful work, that hitherto the name of no Englishman has appeared in preparing the numerous editions of a repertory used in all the schools in Great Britain, to which the master as well as the scholar, the college-student and the general reader, must resort, and which finds a place in every British library.

The first edition passed through the press in 1788, whilst its compiler was undergraduate of Pemb. Coll. Oxford. A second and much improved edition appeared in 1792; a third, in 1797. Whether in the editions subsequent to this any improvements were introduced by Dr. Lempriere himself, by others under his direction, or since his death, we have not the means of ascertaining. The last edition, numbered the fourteenth, dates in 1827.

So early as 1794, a Latin translation appeared at Deventer in Holland. The North American States possess six editious at least; of which the two last appeared under the direction of the present editor. His attention seems to have been directed, not exclusively, but principally, to the correction of the geographical portion of the work in this department we were well aware that many, very many, defects and errors were to be found; the margin of our own Lempriere was stored with no small number of amendments, but we by no means anticipated that the quantum of these deficiencies could have amounted to that which the present editor brings to light. Our classical students are not yet fully aware how much their pursuits are aided by a knowlege of the German language: Professor Anthon's acquaintance with this, has enabled him to apply the stores of Mannert and Uckert, in addition to those of MalteBrun and others, of whose writings Dr. L., for various reasons, had not availed himself. In the biographical portion, also, great additions are made: in each, the authorities are detailed carefully, and, as far as our examination has proceeded, accurately.

Neither in the original preparation of this work, nor in the subsequent editions revised by Dr. L. himself, does any attention seem to have been paid to the present state of the countries which it names, or to the observations of modern travellers. This defect the American editor has, in a considerable degree, and as far as his limits admitted, taken pains to supply. Reference is made, occasionally, to modern descriptions of repute, such as Sir W. Gell's, Dr. E. D. Clarke's, Belzoni's, and others. This improvement alone gives great increased value to the present edition: it the more deserves notice as we do not perceive that the learned editor has in his preface dwelt on this portion of his labor, though certainly not inconsiderable.

Nothing can be more fair than the mode which he has adopted in distinguishing his additions: these are inclosed in square brackets; hence, even cursory inspection enables us to

judge on the proportion and value of the new matter, though not indeed of that which it supersedes.

"Along with the additions, which have been made to the present volume, the Editor has introduced whatever appeared new and interesting in the theories of the day. He has taken the liberty also of occasionally intruding theories of his own. Regarding these last with a partial eye, as every one is induced to regard the creations of his own imagination, he has been bold enough to place them by the side of other and more approved theories, not from the vain desire of instituting a comparison between his own and the labors of others, but that the presence of the latter might in some degree shield his own efforts from the animadversions of sober and cautious criticism. As regards the nature of some of the articles which have been just particularly enumerated, the reader will find under Aristoteles an enlarged biography of that philosopher; under Carthago, an account of the ancient Punic literature; under Chaldæa, a theory respecting the Sclavonic origin of the Chaldæan race; under Cicero, an analysis of the works of that illustrious Roman; under Cyclopes, a theory respecting their location and the etymology of their name; under Daricus, remarks on the value of that coin; under Decemviri, a theory respecting the origin of the Roman laws; under Druides, some remarks on that singular priesthood; under Eleusis, an explanation of the probable object of the mysteries; under Eridanus and Phaeton, remarks respecting the existence, in former ages, of a milder temperature in the north of Europe; under Falernus, an account of the Roman wines, and the situation of the Falernian vineyards; under Gigantes, an argument against the possible existence, at any period, of a gigantic race; under Græcia and Iones, a theory respecting the movements and history of the earlier tribes of Greece; under Hercules, a theory identifying that bero with the sun; under Hetruria, a theory reconciling the conflicting opinions of the learned in relation to the origin of the Etrurians; under Homerus, remarks on the several theories which have been started respecting the poet and his works, and an attempt to prove that alphabetic writing was known in the age of Homer; under Horatius, remarks on the Epistle to the Pisos; under Hyperborei, a theory respecting the early settlements of the human race; under Ierne, remarks on the early religious system of Ireland; under Imaus, a full account of that remarkable chain; under Josephus, remarks on the works of that writer, and on the passage in which mention is made of our Saviour; under Italia, a theory respecting the early population of that country; under Jupiter, an analysis of the religion of Greece; under Lacedæmon, remarks respecting the affinity between the Lacedæmonians and Hebrews; under Lectonia, a theory respecting that ancient land, now sunk beneath the waters of the Mediterranean; under Mediterraneum Mare, a theory respecting the overflowing of the Hellespont, and the inundation of the northern coast of Africa; under Melita, remarks on the voyage of St. Paul; under Memnonium, a theory respecting the Egyptian Memnon; under Mycale and Nepos, corrections of the historian; under Niger and Nilus, a full account of those streams; under Orpheus, remarks on the several theories of the learned respecting the Orphic remains, and an attempt to prove that the ancient bard was of Indian origin; under Pandora, remarks on that old tradition, and an attempt to establish an analogy between it and the scrip

tural account of the origin of evil; under Pelasgi, remarks on that singular race, and on the introduction of alphabetic writing into Greece; under Pindarus, remarks on his lyric productions; under Plato, remarks on the life and doctrines of that philosopher; under Pomptina Paludes, an historical account of the Pontine marshes; under Pyramides, an account of those structures, and a theory respecting their origin; under Pythagoras, remarks on the life and doctrines of that philosopher; under Roma, a theory respecting the true origin of Rome; under Sphinx, an account of the excavation of that monument; under Syene, remarks on the position of that place; under Tacitus, remarks on the dialogue de Claris Oratoribus; under Taurus, a full description of that range of mountains; under Tentyra, remarks on the famous zodiac; under Theba, remarks on the origin, history, and ruins of that famous city, and on the state of the arts in ancient Egypt, together with an account of the mummies; under Thermopyla, a description of that pass; under Thule, remarks on the probable location of that island; under Troja, remarks on the site of ancient Troy, and the true cause of the Trojan war; under Varro, an account of the life and writings of that learned Roman; under Veneti, a theory respecting their Sclavonic origin; under Zeno, remarks on the life of that philosopher, and the doctrines of the Stoic sect. Of these theories, the one on which most labor has been bestowed, and to which the attention of the student is particularly invited, is that respecting the true origin of Rome."

But it is time to cull a few of the flowers of this American garden; they may be compared with those continuing to decorate Dr. L's. parterre,

CANNÆ, a small village of Apulia near the Aufidus, where Hannibal conquered the Roman consuls, P. Æmilius and Terentius Varro, and slaughtered 40,000 Romans, on the 21st of May, B. C. 216. The spot where this famous battle was fought is now shown by the natives, and denominated the field of blood. [The Greek writers, especially Polybius, make the name singular, Káva. There is an exception to this, however, in the 15th Book, c. 7 and 11, where the plural form is used by Polybius. This decisive victory was owing to three combined causes, the excellent arrangements of Annibal, the superiority of the Numidian horse, and the skilful manœuvre of Asdrubal in opposing only the light armed cavalry against that of the Romans, while he employed the heavy horse, divided into small parties, in repeated attacks on different parts of the Roman rear. The Roman army contained 80,000 infantry and 6000 cavalry, the Carthaginians 40,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry. Annibal drew up his forces in the form of a convex crescent, having his centre thrown forward before the wings. He commanded in the centre in person, and here he had purposely stationed his worst troops; the best were posted at the extremities of each wing, which would enable them to act with decisive advantage as bodies of reserve, they being in fact in the rear of the other forces. Asdrubal commanded the left wing, Hanno the right. On the Roman side, want of union between the two consuls, and want of spirit among the men, afforded a sure omen of the fortune of the day. Emilius commanded the right, Varro the left wing; the proconsuls Regulus and Servius, who had been consuls the preceding year, had charge of What Annibal foresaw took place. The charge of the

the centre.

Romans, and their immense superiority in numbers, at length broke his centre, which giving way inwards, his army now assumed the shape of a concave crescent. The Romans in the ardour of pursuit were carried so far as to be completely surrounded. Both flanks were assailed by the veterans of Annibal, who were armed in the Roman manner; at the same time the cavalry of the Carthaginians attacked their rear, and the broken centre rallying, attacked them in front. The consequence was that they were nearly all cut to pieces. The two proconsuls, together with Emilius the consul, were slain. Varro escaped with 70 horse to Venusia. The Romans lost on the field of battle 70,000 men and 10,000 who had not been present in the fight were made prisoners. The Carthaginian loss amounted to 5500 infantry and 200 cavalry. Such is the account of Polybius, whose statement of the fight is much clearer and more satisfactory than that of Livy. Annibal has been censured for not marching immediately to Rome after the battle, in which city all was consternation. But a defence of his conduct may be found under the article Annibal, which see. Polyb. 3, c. 113 et seq.] Liv. 22, 44.-Flor. 2, 6.-Plut. in Annib. VELLEIUS PATERCULUS, a Roman historian, descended from an equestrian family of Campania. [The year of his birth is commonly fixed at 19 B. C. the same year in which Virgil died.] He was at first a military tribune in the Roman armies, and for nine years served under Tiberius in the various expeditions which he undertook in Gaul and Germany. Velleius wrote an epitome of the history of Greece and of Rome, and of other nations of the most remote antiquity; but of this authentic composition there remain only fragments of the history of Greece and Rome from the conquest of Perseus by Paulus, to the 17th year of the reign of Tiberius, in two books. It is a judicious account of celebrated men and illustrious cities; the historian is happy in his descriptions; his pictures are true, and his narrations lively and interesting. The whole is candid and impartial, but only till the reign of the Caesars, when the writer began to be influenced by the presence of the emperor, or the power of his favorites. Paterculus is deservedly censured for his invectives against Pompey, and his encomiums on the cruel Tiberius, and the unfortunate Sejanus. Some suppose that he was involved in the ruin of this disappointed courtier, whom he had extolled as a pattern of virtue and morality. [The work of Paterculus is entitled Historia Romana, but it is possible that this appellation may be owing to the copyists. A single manuscript of the work was preserved at the convent Murbach in Alsace, where Beatus Rhenanus found it. This manuscript, which was in a very bad condition, was subsequently lost. Its place is supplied by the edition of Rhenanus, published in 1520, and by a collation of the manuscript, made by Burer before Rhenanus returned it to the convent from which he had borrowed it. This collation is added to the edition of 1546. The history of Paterculus does not enter into details. It is a general picture of the times rather than a narrative of individual events. The historian states merely results, and is silent respecting the causes which combined to produce them. He loves, however, to develope and draw the characters of the principal actors, and his work is filled with delineations traced by the hand of a master. We find in him also a great many political and moral observations, the fruit of experience and foreign travel. In his style he imitates the concise and energetic manner of Sallust. His diction is pure and elegant, without, however, being wholly

« הקודםהמשך »