ers, lefs diligent than himself. Ælian, who was nearly his contemporary, has made ufe very liberally of the Deipnofophifts in his Various Hiftory. In a later age, we again find our author pillaged by Macrobius, who feems to have taken from him not only many of the materials, but even the form and idea of his Saturnalia. But of all writers, ancient or modern, there is none who is fo highly indebted to Athenæus as the industrious Eustathius. Although the Archbishop of Theffalonica appears never to have seen the entire work, but to have made ufe of the Epitome, the stores of his erudition would be miferably reduced, if he were compelled to make reftitution of the property of our author which he has converted to his own benefit.

By the fame fortunate accident which has preferved a few of the writings of the ancients, a fingle copy of Athenæus appears to have escaped from the ravages of time, ignorance, and fanaticifm. That copy ftill exifts. After the death of Cardinal Beffarion, who probably brought it from Greece, it paffed into the Library of St Mark at Venice. In this fepulchre of books it would certainly have continued for many ages, unknown to the learned, if the late revolutions, which have changed the face of Europe, had not caufed it to be included in the valuable fpoils of Italy which now enrich the national collections at Paris. It confifts of three hundred and feventy-three leaves of the largest dimenfions. Each page is divided into two columns. It is writ ten without contractions, and, from the form of the characters, may be attributed to the tenth century. The fubjunctive vowel of the diphthongsa,, and , is never subscribed, but commonly placed after its prepofitive, in the ancient manner. The whole orthography is very incorrect, particularly in the divifion of the words, and the punctuation.

Many tranfcripts of this manufcript exift in different parts of Europe, which were probably made while it was in the poffeffion of Cardinal Beffarion. All of them betray their origin, as, befides their coincidence in orthographical errors, the fame parts

M 4

are

* Among the good qualities of his hoft Larenfius, Athenæus enumerates his diligence in collecting and preferving the works of ancient authors, which, through the pixaria, the want of tafle, of the multitude, were almoft configned to oblivion. The art of printing has lef fened, but certainly has not removed the danger to which authors are expofed. Perhaps, a hundred years hence, a complete copy of the works of Blackmore may be fought for in vain. We recommend to modern Larenfii the redemption of thefe and other fimilar productions from tapers and defrauded pyes. We tremble for the future fate of many of the most celebrated of our contemporaries.

are wanting in all of them. The two first books, the beginning of the third, a few leaves in the eleventh, and part of two leaves. in the fifteenth, are wanting in the Venetian manufcript, and the deficiency appears evidently to have proceeded from accident. The fame lacuna occur in every other manufcript, but are exhibited in a manner which fhews the cause to have exifted in the copy from which they were tranfcribed. It is unneceflary to fay, that the errors of the Venetian manufcript are in general faithfully retained, and the number of them confiderably augmented.

Fortunately for Athenæus, the integrity of his work is in some measure preferved by an epitome of the whole, which has been tranfmitted to us without defalcation. This abridgement, if it may be called fo, is nearly as bulky as the original work. The age of it is uncertain. It is executed in a careless manner;. and the copy which the writer had before his eyes, appears to have fuffered fo much from time or accident, that he frequently breaks off in the middle of an extract, and declares his inability to decypher the remainder. From thefe fources our editions are derived; and it will eafily be feen that where the original copies are fo few and fo faulty, conjectural emendation will find ample fcope to difplay its powers. The fact is, that although the game has been confiderably thinned by Cafaubon and fome other fagacious critics, there ftill remain fufficient materials to exercife the industry of the keeneft grammatical sportsman.

The editions of Athenæus are three, or rather five, in number. The firft was printed at Venice by Aldus, in the year 1514 Mufurus, who was the editor, was obliged to make use of a very faulty manuscript, and to fupply the deficiencies of the original from the epitome; a practice which has been imitated in all the fucceeding editions. The lacuna in the eleventh book, however, was not perceived; and the correfponding portion of the epitome did not appear until the publication of Cafaubon's commentary. Twenty-one years afterwards, a new edition was published at Bafil, which, in most of the paflages in which it differs from that of Aldus, recedes ftill further from the purity of the original. In this edition, the paffages of Aristotle and Theophraftus, which are adduced by Athenæus, are profeffedly altered to the readings of the then existing copies, by which means many important various lections in the writings of these two philofophers are completely abliterated. Neither of thefe editions is accompanied with a tranflation, or with notes. third edition is that of Ifaac Cafaubon, of which there are three different impreflions, in the years 1597, 1612, and 166.4, which do not differ confiderably from each other. To thefe editions is annexed the Latin tranflation of James Dalechamp of Caen,

The

which was first printed by itself in the year 1583. The Greek text is much more perfect and accurate than in the preceding editions; as in the long interval which elapfed between that of Bafil, and the first of Cafaubon's, many new manufcripts had been discovered, and much labour had been bestowed on Athenæus by fome of the most celebrated scholars of that age. There exists an edition of the epitome of the first book by Tumebus, of a prior date to that of Cafaubon, in which the editor has indulged great licenfe of conjectural emendation. It seems to have been meant as a specimen of an entire edition; but from the boldness and clumfinefs of the alterations, we do not think that it is to be regretted that the design was laid afide.

The most valuable part of the edition of Cafaubon is his celebrated commentary, which conftitutes a folio of no inconfiderable magnitude. The work is dedicated, with much propriety, to Henry the Fourth, between whofe character, and that of Athenæus, the author difcovers a refemblance which, to common eyes, is certainly not very apparent. The work itself is fo well known to fcholars, that it would be fuperfluous to enlarge upon it. We must only obferve, that many of the emendations which are propofed by Cafaubon are violent and improbable, and that a ftill greater number may be confidered as obvious to any perfon who is endowed with a moderate fhare of critical fagacity. Notwithstanding thefe defects, we know no work of this kind, except perhaps Bentley's differtation on Phalaris, in which the reader is prefented with fuch a mafs of pertinent information. Unlike many commentaries, the text of the author is almost always kept in fight; and the erudition of the critic, although ample, is difplayed without oftentation.

Two hundred years have elapfed between the publication of this edition, and the prefent performance of Profeflor Schweighæufer. From our previous knowledge of his labours as an editor, we certainly fhould not have conceived Athenæus to be the author moft likely to be benefited by his exertions. The editor of an hiftorian, and still more of a moralift, has a much eafier and more fimple talk to perform, than must be undertaken by him who labours in the elucidation of an author of so mifcellaneous a nature as Athenæus. We cannot avoid wishing that the editor of Appian, Polybius, and Epictetus, had continued in his original courfe, and had left the Deipnofophifts to fome perfon more accurately acquainted with the minutia of Greek literaIt is, however, far from our intention to speak with difrefpect of Profeflor Schweighæufer; particularly as he candidly admits the deficiencies of which we complain.

ture.

The greatest advantage which he has enjoyed, is the collation If the Venetian manufcript, which, as we have already obferv

ed

ed, is now depofited in the grand repofitory for all the flolen goods in Europe. An accurate collation of this venerable original, almoft entirely fuperfedes the neceflity of examining other copies. All readings which are found only in the latter, are to be confidered either as mistakes, or as conjectural emendations of the tranfcriber. We could have wished that the Profeffor had feen this manufcript with his own eyes. We think that no perfon ought to undertake an edition, the merit of which depends greatly on the accurate examination of a fingle manufcript, unless he has an opportunity of infpecting it in perfon. We have no particular reafon to think lowly of the abilities of young Mr Schweighæufer, the actual collater; yet we think that the Profeffor himself would have had no caufe for repentance, if he had spent, one of his vacations in the national library at Paris. Befides the Venetian manuscript, he had the ufe of a valuable copy of the epitome, from which confiderable advantage has accrued both to thofe parts of the work which exift only in the abridged form, and to thofe which have been tranfmitted to us entire.

It would ill become us, who inhabit this metropolis of false quantities, to cenfure with afperity a Profeffor of the University of Strafburg, for a fault which is imputed to ourselves by our fellow-citizens of the fouth. Were it not for this confideration, we should be tempted to inveigh with feverity against fome of the Iambic verses with which the Profeffor has prefented us, particularly as many of them appear to us to have no other faults than those which are produced by his alterations. We fhall exhibit fpecimens, before we conclude the prefent article.

We have now before us only two volumes of the text, containing fix books, and two of the commentary, containing four. If the edition be continued on the fame fcale, it will extend to thirteen volumes; and, as the price is by no means low in this country, many readers will be precluded from the ufe of it. The great price of Greek books we confider as one of the most ferious obftacles to the cultivation of that department of literature. In the prefent cafe, the expence might have been diminished by omitting the Latin verfion. Few perfons are tempted to read Athenæus, except thofe who do not require a tranflation. The commentary might alfo have been compreffed confiderably, without any injury to the work. As the animadverfions of Cafaubon are not republifhed entire, the prefent edition does not preclude the ufe of the former. Thefe, however, are petty objections. The principal point which we are to examine, is the degree of purity to which, by the affiftance of manufcripts, the conjectures of other critics, and the fagacity of the prefent edi

ter,

tor, the text of Athenæus has been restored. We fhall exhibit to our readers fome of the principal novelties which appear in the fix first books. In moft places where the editor has deviated from the text of the former editions, he has judiciously placed the common reading under the text. We lament that he has not faithfully obferved this rule in every alteration. By thefe means, the comparifon of this edition with the former would be rendered extremely eafy. We cite the numerals of the common editions, which are retained in the inner margin of the prefent.

P. 3. D. Antiphanes :

ὁ θυρωρὸς ἱλαρὸς πρῶτον ἔσιν, ἡ κύων
ἔσηνε καὶ προσῆλθεν,

δίφρον εὐθέως ἔθηκε.

υπήντησε τις,

In the fecond verfe, which wants a fyllable, Profeffor Schweighaufer teads ὑπαντήσας δε Τίς.

P. 5. B. Plato the Comic Poet:

* * * * ἐγὼ δ ̓ ἐνθαδ ̓ ἐν τἠρημία.

The Profeffor, who is by no means afraid of a hiatus, proposes

ἐγὼ δ ̓ ἐν τῇδε τῇ ἐρημία.

P. 6. C. Tithonus is faid to be fufpended ἐν θαλάμω, in a bea chamber. Profeffor S. reads ἐν ταλάρω, in a wicker cradle.

P. 11. D. fchylus:

καὶ ταξιάρχας, καὶ στρατάρχας, καὶ ἑκατοντάρχας

ἔταξα.

Palamides, whofe words thefe are, could hardly boast that he invented the office of a commander in chief, although he might fettle the economy of the inferior leaders. Profeffor S. reads

καὶ ταξιάρχας, κάκατοντάρχας στρατῷ

ἔταξα.

P. 23. A. Antiphanes :

τὰ δ ̓ ἀντιτείνοντ ̓ οἱονεὶ δίψαν τινὰ

ἢ ξηραξίαν ἔχοντ' αὐτόπρεμν ̓ ἀπόλλυται.

Profeffor S. proposes exit' for exert in the second verfe: but he is not aware that the fecond fyllable of Engaria, which is derived from Engaiva, is long. The true reading is

δίψαν τίν,

ξηρασίαν ἔχοντ', απόπρεμν ̓ ἀπόλλυται.

P. 35. D. Diphilus :

τόν τ' ἀσθενῆ τολμῶν τι, τὸν δειλὸν θρασύν.

Profeffor S. propofes θρατεῖν. Θαρσείν and θαῤῥεῖν are common; but we do not at prefent recolled an inftance of θρασεῖν.

P. 36. F. Alexis :

ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἀπογηράσκων ἀηδὴς γίγνεται.

As this verfe contains a fyllable too much, Profeffor S. changes the or der of the words, and places yag before andns. The true reading is the participle of the aorift ἀπογηρὰς, which, being rather uncommon, was altered by the transcriber.

P. 39.