Page images
[ocr errors][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

An Introduction to the Kunowledge of rare and valuable Editions of the Greek and Latin Clasics; including the Scriptores de re Rustica, Greek Romanets, and Lexicons and Grammars; to which is added a completa Index Analyticus: the whole preceded by an account of Polyglot Bibles, and the best Editions of the Greek Septuagint and Teflament. By Thomas Frognall Dibdin, A. B. (late of St. John's College, Oxford.) The Second Edition, enlarged and corrected. 8vo. Pp. 656. · 125. Dwyer, London ; Hanwell and Parker, Oxford; Deighton .. and Barrett, Cambridge. 1804.

THE first Edition of this valuable work was noticed by us, with

1 the approbation it deserved, in our Review of November, 1802. Of the extent of the additions made in what the author modestly calls the second edition of his work, the reader may judge from its confifting of 571 pages, exclusive of 73 pages occupied by the Preface, and the account of the editions of sacred icriptures, while the whole first edition comprized only 63 pages. '.

The present volume comprehends an account of the Polyglot Bibles, the Greek Bibles, the Greek Testaments, editions of the most popular Greek and Latin classics, arranged alphabetically, the Latin writers de re rustica, the Griek romances, the various sets of the classics, and an Analytical Index.

Besides an accurate account of each edition the author has added the different prices at which they have been sold, has noticed those printed on vellum, on large and on small paper, and mentioned in what collection, those which are become scarce, are now to be found. To this are added many notes which abound both with interesting in. formation and entertaining anecdote.

As a specimen of the manner in which Mr. Dibdin has conducted his work, we shall insert what he says of the two first editions of Anacreon: we do this as a doubt has been entertained in the literary world, and, in our opinion, justly, of the authenticity of inost of the Odes, ascribed to that poet, which though first started by Le Fevre, so early as the year 1660, seems so very little known, even to classical readers in general, as not to have been noticed by any of the translators or common editors.'

“ ANACREON. “ H. STEPHANUS. Lutet. 410. 1554., Græce. -“ Editi0 PRINCEPS*. A beautiful and rare edition, according to Fa. bricius and Clement, and printed by Henry Stephens when he was in his


« * The learned world has been divided on the subject of the antiquity and genuineness of the poems ascribed to Anacreon. It seems the present editio princeps was compiled by H. Stephens from two MSS.; the one evas given him by John Clement, a lervant of Sir Thomas More, Chancellor of Eng


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

twenty-sixth year. Maittaire, Vit. Steph. p. 220. Of the Latin version, in Anacreontic metre, by Stephens and Putschius, it was once disputed wliem ther the former was the author of his part of the version: bút Mons. de la Monnoie (Bayle, Dict. t. i. 206, note 1) has put this 'matter beyond all doubt in favour of Henry Stephens. The text of this edit. prin, has been followed by almost every sublequent editor, says Harles, Imurod. 4. G. t. i. 229. It fold for 21. at Mr. Bridges's sale, and along with a Latin edition of Andrea, (Paris, 410. 1555), was sold for 31. 75. cor. tuc. at Mr. Folkes's sale: I will not pretend to give its accurate price. See a copy Bibl. Pinell. No. 8937; Bibl. Crevenn, No. 3511.

"FABRI. Salmurii. O&t. 1660-80-90. Gr. et Lạt. ini “ Tanaquil Faber was the first editor who, in some very learned notes, attacked the antiquity of many of the 'odes of Anacreon; and Harles himfelf feems to coincide with those critics who have imagined the greater part of them to be the produclion of what are called the Scriptores recentiores:': this opinion is also espoused by Pauw and Fischer. Harles, Introd. L. G. t. i. 227. In the above editions, « poetam vero ipsum non tantum feliciter emendat et egregie explicat [Faber), sed etiam multis aliis aliorum veterum fcriptorum locis bene consulit lucemque adfert.” Harles, Fabr. B. G. t. iii. 96."

We do not exactly fee the reason why Mr. Dibdin chooses to call Mr. Le Févre by his Latin name of Tanaquil Faber in a note entirely English, though he is very properly called fo in the Latin title to the edition. On the same principle he should have called the Oxford Editor of Apollonius Rhodius, Shawius, in the body of the note, as well as in the title of the edition. ;

We give our readers the following extract from the account of Wolfs edition of Homer, as it contains a paradox, in our opinion, as absurd relative to the Prince of Poets, as we think that relative to Anacreon reasonable...

* WOLFII, Hal. Sax. Oat. 1794, Gr. et Lat. 5 Vol. :

Very great and judicious use has been made throughout this work of the Scholia, published by Villoison (in the fol. edition of the Iliad 1788, which see). «In the prolegomena, the external evidence relative to these most eminent works of classical antiquity is fully examined, and a particular account is given of the ancient critics who have directed their attention to this subject. Wolfius states his reasons for supposing that the works commonly attributed to the great Mæonian bard, were in part only composed by him; that the remainder were the produâions of the Homerida and other poets; and that the whole were finally arranged and methodized in two poems by Piliftratus and his family. The lover of genuine antiquity. will, doubtless, examine all the evidence with the greatest circumspection

land; the other was procured in Italy, which, after a long voyage, Stephens brought home with him to France. These MSS. added to the ode "Aiyerin ai quvcīzes," which Stephens found on the cover of an old book, formed the materials of his edition. See De La Monnaie's letter in Bayle's Dict. hist. et crit. t. i. art. Anacreon,' note L.”

, before

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

before he adopts the conclufions of this ingenious editor." Kerr's Elements of general Knowledge, addit. to second edit. p. 83.

That Pisistratus might collect scattered and mutilated copies of the works of Homer to make one correct une is very posible, but for such poems as the Iliad or as the Odyssey, where the parts chiefly depend on each other, and which absolutely admit of as regular a diary as an historical narration, to be a collection of fragments from various writers is almost as impossible as for the wonderful order of the unis verse to be derived from a fortuitous concourse of atoms.

Besides the common edition of this work there is one on large paper, adorned with several curious engravings of fac similes, very elegantly executed. .'

From the great merit of this publication, and its obvious utility, as well to the lover of biblical and classical literature, as to the admirer and collector of curious books, we have no doubt it will go through several editions; we take the liberty, therefore, of suggesting to Mr. Dibdin, what we think will be an improvement of his work.

A Chronological instead of an Alphabetical Arrangement of the Classical Writers, as all the advantages of the latter will be retained by referring to the Index Analyticus as it now stands; and an insertion of all the translations of the Classics into modern languages, which is done even by Fabricius in so learned and elaborate a work as his Bibliotheca Græca.

We observe also several inaccuracies of the press which are of more effential consequence in a book of this kind than in any other. II.

in page * \xxii. Professor White of Oxford is said to have pub. . lished his duodecimo edition of the Gospels in 1789, instead of 1798, and in the account of Shaw's edition of Apollonius Rhodius, page 29, we find the following quotation from the Italian Editor of 1794:“ Una tale" replicata fatica del Shaw se non ha portato Apollonio a . quel grado di perfezione, ari era destinato in appreffo, ha servato al-, : meno percominciar a diffundere il gusto e lo studio." Here per comin. ciar is printed as one word, and ari must be put for another word that has some meaning, but what we are not able to supply.;

Pinkerton's Modern Geography.

(Corcluled from our last, P. 169:) TXTE shall now accompany our author to Hindoftan, to Britons,

V undoubtedly, by far the most interesting country in the east. Mr. P. complains that the description of it is not a little difficult, as from other causes, so especially from the want of grand natural sub

* Why are the accounts of the editions of the Bible paged like the Preface, and not like the body of the work?- Reviewer. ??


long confidere only Then divifioned the moffamiliar to the by the followed is principal. The

or los princi od paroy this

cour aur thouane Riftns and

Pinkerton's Modern Geography.

, 267 divisions. After long consideration, he says, Mdjor Rennel's plan appeared the most eligible, not only in itself, but as having the advantage of being familiar to the public. The method pursued by this ingenious geographer is adjusted by the following fourfold partition : 1. The countries pervaded by the Ganges, and its principal branches : 2. Those along the course of the Sindeh or Indus: 3. The tract fituated between these two divisions and the river Kistna : 4. That which lies to the south of the Kistna; or the Southern Peninsula, as it is frequently called, though perhaps improperly. Agreeably to this arrangement, our author, in four particular chapters, treats of " Gangetic Hindoftan, or the countries on the Ganges; Sindetic Hindoftan, or the countries on the Indus; Central Hindoftan, or the Middle Provinces ; and the Southern Division of Hindostan.” “ If scientific geographers," hc observes, “ had the privilege, usurped by travellers and mariners, of imposing new names and divisions, the above partitions might be styled, in native terms, Gangestan, Sindestan, while Deccan might be confined to the southern part, and some native word applied to the middle or centrical (central] division.” (p. 236.) In the firit of these divisions are included Bengal, Bahar, Allahabad, Oude, a part of Delhi, and Agimere ; in the second, Kuttore, Cashmir, Cabul, Candahar, Lahore, Moultan, and Sindè; in the third, Gu. zerat, Candeilh, Berar, Orissa, the Sircars, the chief part of Golconda, Visiapour, Dowlatabad, and Concan; in the fourth, the remainder of Golconda, the Mysore, the extensive region called the Carnatic, with Madura and other smaller districts. In this last division is naturally included too the island of Ceylon.

In each of Mr. P.'s four chapfers the reader will find much curious matter; but the most important topics are concentrated, and very ably discussed, in a pretty extensive sketch prefixed, which is intituled a “ General View of Hindoftan." Much useful information is here conveyed on every subject connected with the nature of the country or the state of its inhabitants. But what, we are persuaded, will attract most notice in this part of Mr. P.'s work, is the marked disrespect, we had almost said ihe sovereign contempt, with which he uniformly treats those extravagant encomiums so generally lavished on Hindoftan antiquity and civilization. Every one of the most imposing pretensions of this celebrated people our author holds very cheap indeed. Their history, chronology, government, religion, science, literature, genius, taste, all are weighed in his scrutinizing balance, and pronounced greatly wanting. We have little doubt that by this bold attack he will bring upon himself a formidable host of assailants ; but we have none at all that he stands upon ground from which it is im. possible completely to dislodge him. The visionary and absurd pretensions to antiquity of the Indian chronology, in order to be laughed at, need only to be known, and were never, we are satisfied, seriously believed even by those who have laboured most strenuously in Europe to promote an opinion of their validity. But Voltaire and the AntiChristian conspiracy found them highly convenient; and, on this


[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

account alone, endeavoured to invest them with all the credit of estad blished authenticity; Whether or not, in this important field of con: troversy, our ingenious geographer be fully entitled to a triumph, we; shall not take upon ourselves to determine. He has certainly combated throughout with vigour, and in general with success. In some of his fallies, perhaps, he may be thought to have gone somewhat tou far., But,; to drop the inetaphor, we are glad that he has agitated the question, for his strictures we think must have the effect of subjecta, ing it to a thorough investigation. ...; ;

nisi In this place our readers will doubtless expect some specimens of Diéber Mr. Pi's observations. We are willing to gratify them as far as we tribe! can; and shall therefore insert his very masterly examination of Drapeire Robertson's 'arguinents for the high civilization of the ancient Hindoos. The passage is long, but no abridgment would do it justice; and we hope that its length will be excused on account of its importa, ance.

Dr. Robertson had argued in favour of the claims advanced by the Hindoos, from their divisions into casts; from their civil policy s from their laws; from their useful and elegant arts; from their sciences and religious institutions. But, says Mr. Pinkerton, is;

:5The arguments of that able author seem liable to some objections, s ented at 1. The distinction into cafts is, doubtless ancient and peculiar ; but seems to beiros as have proceeded from a crafty priesthood, in order to fix their own superio bat all rity and preponderance. The error of the Doctor's argument consists in confounding casts with trades, while they are in truth totally distinct, as neither a priest, a soldier, a farmer, nor a labourer, is a tradesman. Sepa ration of trades' argues refinement; but from the Hindoo casts nothing can be concluded, except that agriculture existed at their institution. When our author adds, "What now is in India always was there,' he evinces raq, ther a singular love of hypothesis. All we know from antiquity is that the casts existed in the time of Strabo, Arrian, and Pliny, and perhaps were not known even in the time of Alexander. Suppose that they even existed three centuries before the Christian æra, we have only a proof that agri. culture and merchandize were then known in Hindoftan; and yet the first tribe that palled from the centre of Alia might, even in that cale, have orily begun to people the north of Hindostan a few centuries, ar say,a thousand years, before the Christian ära. 2. The civil policy is considered as proving early civilization, not indeed because the Hindoo fables represent the whole country as subject to one monarch, but because Alexander found kingdonis of some magnitude. But these kingdoms were no larger in proportion than those which Cæsar found in barbaric Gaul and Brilain. . The magnitude of the country is forgotten, inhabited by an indigenous people, and remarkably defiitute of natural barriers. That some old institutions remain is no wonder, when the identity of oriental customs is confidered. 3. The laws are fufficiently numerous and complex ; but-so are those of England at present, though they were in a very different predicanient fix centuries ago ; but our ingenious author fpeaks familiarly of the Hindoo millions of years, and forgets our little centuries. The Hindoo code may be extremely ancient; and yet perhaps-was written about the plain Christian year 1200. 4. The Weful and elegant arts likewise require the illustration of chronology; and.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

; as.

« PreviousContinue »