Page images
PDF
EPUB

call the special pleading of Mr. Grote in behalf of his favourite Sophists; and we recommend him to read it diligently through both before and after perusing Mr. Grote's celebrated sixtyseventh chapter. In the second place, he will learn from this book how Plato ought to be read, and the nice points of verbal criticism which he must thoroughly master if he aspires to any pretensions to sound scholarship. For we may unhesitatingly affirm, that the critical labours of Dr. Badham have been so thoroughly endorsed by the approbation of Continental scholars, that no editor of Plato for the future can venture to put forth his edition without acknowledging Dr. Badham's services in the cause of Plato, and without noticing, even if he do not adopt, his Palmarian Emendations.'

6

The more advanced scholar, we may confidently assert, will be charmed with the critical acumen displayed in the numerous corrections of the text of Plato and other writers; and, if he has any taste for composition, we can promise him a great intellectual gratification in the perusal of one of the most exquisite specimens of Latinity which modern days have produced, in the Prefatory Letter to the Senate of the University of Leyden.

The reviewer of Dr. Badham's edition of the Iphigenia in the Quarterly pronounced the preface to that play to be the most beautiful piece of Latin composition since Porson's preface to the Hecuba. In our judgment, the preface to these Dialogues is even superior to it.

We cannot conclude this brief notice without mournfully referring to one passage in it. We will not spoil it by any attempt at translation, but give it in the words of the original

:

Nimirum

'Quantum enim numerum esse eorum oportet qui cum aliquâ laude Literas aut Philosophiam coluerunt, si quidem in hâc terrâ quæ tot et tam splendida præmia studiosis afferre dicitur in quâ Reginæ Consiliarii, Nobiles, Episcopi, Academiæ, Civitates, Municipia, suffragiis suis de virorum doctorum sorte decernunt, his tam diversis Mæcenatibus nihil indignum videtur me in ludo municipali elementa docentem consenescere. omnia illa munera, in quibus aliquid otii ad has literas colendas habuissem, a dignioribus occupata sunt. Quod si vobis minus verum videtur, ne tamen mea causa indignemini: etenim ne ipse quidem indignor nisi si quando cum molesta pituita vel alio incommodo conflictor. Jamdudum assuetus sum alio spectare, atque alios fautores quærere. Non quo civium meorum, qui mihi quidem sunt carissimi, liberam sententiam non magni faciendam existimem : sed in his rebus falsa quædam oracula in antiquis Scientiæ sedibus, ut vocantur, collocata tantum non omnes sequuntur. Quo fit ut illorum potius vicem doleam, qui parum justam de se opinionem exteris gentibus præbeant, in quibus quam multos sæpenumero querentes audivimus, nihil sani in judiciis ferendis, nihil probi in honoribus mandandis ex istis hominibus sperari posse, qui pro veritate auctoritatem, pro meritis mutuas Academicorum commendationes apud se valere patiantur.'

The depreciation of classical scholarship to which Dr. Badham adverts, and the want of appreciation and encouragement exhibited

by those who have it in their power to bestow a learned ease on those who devote themselves to such pursuits, is most touchingly put, and the truth of the complaint will be most feelingly endorsed by all who belong to that hard-working body of which Dr. Badham is one of the most distinguished representatives; and while the magnates of the land, the leaders of our Houses of Lords and Commons, devote their horæ subsecive to translations of the Iliad, and disquisitions on Homer, we may fairly ask, How can these things be?

It has long been the glory and the boast of the English Church that it held out the most munificent rewards for the longcontinued exertions of its faithful ministers. To revert once more to our Gallican neighbours-we have but to cast our eyes on the gigantic works of the glorious old Benedictines to see how a 'learned ease' has always been appreciated and turned to account by real scholars. In our own Church how are these rewards bestowed? It is not transgressing the bounds of either courtesy or truth to say that they have too frequently been given either in the spirit of nepotism, or as the rewards andguarantees of political partizanship.

Even in the cases which admit of a more searching investigation, we may be told that they have been the resting-places of the hard-worked parish-priest. But we may ask, without a sneer, whether their labours are so much greater than the neverceasing and unrequited toil of the schoolmaster? Of all professions, his is proverbially the one in which the greatest demands are made on patience, on unremitting labour, on the possession of the soundest practical knowledge. The schoolmaster's life presents one constant comment on Persius's words:

'Scire tuum nihil est nisi te scire hoc sciat alter.'

The faculty of imparting knowledge has been held to be, ever since the days of Aristotle, the soundest test of the real possession of it.1

Where shall we find a profession that requires such constant care, such fearful responsibility, that is exposed so much to the fluctuation of fashion, or where the bare subsistence of the professor is a matter of such precarious uncertainty? And when, after months and years of incessant labour, of wear and tear of body and mind, harassed by cares from which other professions are happily exempt, rewarded by a compensation which menial servants of the present day would reject with scorn,-when he feels old age creeping on him, his energies diminishing, and his

1 ὅλως δὲ σημεῖον τοῦ εἰδότος τὸ δύνασθαι διδάσκειν ἔστιν. Aristot. Metaphys. A. 981, b. 8.

precarious income failing, the schoolmaster looks for some recognition of his faithful exertions at the hand of those who have it in their power to bestow on him a few short years of existence exempt from degrading cares, he looks around him, and sees what used to be the avaraûλat of faithful labour and life-long self-devotion lavished on some favoured protégé of an evangelical minister of state, or given to secure some doubtful vote; and his last remaining prospect in this world reduced to-what?

[ocr errors]

311

ART. IV.-Berengarius Turonensis, oder eine Sammlung ihn betreffender Briefe. Herausgegeben von H. SUDENDORF, Dr. Ph. Hamburg und Gotha: F. and A. Perthes. 1850.

NEARLY a century has elapsed since Lessing, searching among the papers of the library at Wolfenbüttel, discovered a manuscript, which proved on examination to be the reply of Berengar of Tours to the treatise of Lanfranc, 'De Corpore et Sanguine Domini.' The existence of this document had not previously been even suspected. The work of Lanfranc, on the contrary, remained and was well known, and the Benedictine historians, who wrote the lives of him and his opponent, had assumed that the powerful argument and vehement invective of the Monk of Bec had so completely prostrated the Scholar of Tours, that he became mute and was obliged to accept his defeat. They had even charitably carried their assumptions still further than this. They had supposed that Berengar was converted by the treatise of Lanfranc, and that from the time when he became acquainted with this masterpiece of theological argumentation, he ceased to trouble the Church with his new and strange opinions on the Eucharist.1 This theory was supported by an extraordinary falsification of the text of Lanfranc's treatise, which will be more fully explained below. It is hardly conceivable that the acute authors of the Literary History of France could have believed in the genuineness of the interpolated passage; but, even if they did not, the object gained might seem to them to justify their assumption of its correctness. If a heretic could be rescued from the opprobrious brand which attached itself to his name-if a great prelate of their order could be shown to be so powerful in controversy as to convert and save an antagonist so skilled as Berengar had proved himself to be-surely this was a good end obtained. And after all it might be true. Who could say what effect Lanfranc had produced when Berengar seemed to remain silent after the publication of his treatise? These pleasant illusions of the Benedictines were, however, rudely scattered to the winds by the discovery made by Lessing. Not only had Berengar not been crushed or convinced by Lanfranc, but he had replied to him at great length, and with such vigour of retort and power of argument from Scripture, reason, and Fathers, that it was anything

1 Histoire Literaire de France par les Benedictins de la Congregation de St. Maur, vol. viii. Art. Berengarius,

[ocr errors]

but certain that Lanfranc had carried off the palm of victory. With a genuine delight and shout of exultation did Lessing brandish the weapons with which his great discovery furnished him, and inflict pitiless wounds on the authors of the Literary History of France. "The Benedictine historian will hardly 'venture now to assert that Berengar left the writing of Lanfranc without reply, for here is the reply. He will scarcely now 'persuade us that Berengar was converted by the writing of Lanfranc, for the answer of Berengar is very far from containing an "approval of his opponent. Rather this opponent is so hard pressed 'therein, that to all appearance not Lanfranc but Berengar has the 'last word. Still less, I imagine, will the Benedictine historian ' (or, if the actual writer be no longer living, that one of the 'brethren of the order who considers himself charged with the 'duty of defending the honour of their joint work) persist in the 'assertion that Lanfranc must have written his work in the time 'of Pope Gregory VII. Then why should they wish any longer 'to defend a wretched interpolation, as they must abandon the 'chief points which they thought to uphold by it.'?1 But not only did the discovery of Lessing scatter to the winds the baseless fabric which the Benedictines had built as to the effect of Lanfranc's treatise on Berengar, it also overset the whole history of Berengar's life as it had been constructed by De Roye, Mabillon, and all the writers before 1772.

In the treatise then found, Berengar had entered into much detail as to the circumstances of his previous controversial history. He had to excuse himself as best he might from the disgrace of his assent to the Romish Creed under Nicholas II.—an assent which he immediately afterwards declared to be null and void. In doing this he shows how hardly he had been treated, how much misrepresentation had been used against him, and how he had agreed to the formula presented to him at Rome in imminent peril of his life. He speaks in an honest and straightforward manner; not attempting to deny the shame of his tergiversation, but only to excuse it by the circumstances. But the facts which he relates as to his history do not at all agree with those assigned to it by Mabillon,2 and, in greater detail, by the authors of the Literary History of France. Indeed the discovery of the manuscript necessitated an entire reconstruction of Berengar's history, as it also demanded a different estimate of his theological opinions from that which had previously prevailed. There was, indeed, enough of the writings of the Scholar of Tours known, before the date of Lessing's discovery, to show, if rightly weighed, that the

1 Berengarius Turonensis, Lessing, Werke, ix. 63.

2 Act. Ord. Benedict. vol. v. Præf.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
« PreviousContinue »