and appears very recent. I now come to a Codex of the Odyssey, which occupied me most. It is that which Nessel, Part iv. p. 36. No. lvi, describes as, Homeri Odyssea variis notis marginalibus et interlinearibus illustrata. The manuscript is on paper, folio ;* and at the end the date is expressed, in these three verses;

Εἴληφε βίβλος τέρμα πέμπτῃ Μαΐου
Ἰνδικτυῶνι τῇ δεκατρίτῳ δ' ἅμα

Ραψωδιῶν φέρουσα τριπλῆν ἔκταδα
ἔτει στῶ 7.
Chr. 1300.

i. e. "the book was finished on the 5th of May, in the 13th Indiction, containing twenty-four rhapsodies. In the year 1300”

The 13th indiction corresponds win the year 1300. Under these lines are the following, by the hand which wrote the text: Ὁ μὲν σόφος Ὅμηρος ταύτην ἐξέθετο τὴν Ὀδυσσαϊκὴν βίβλον, ἐν Ἰθάκῃ τῇ νήσῳ μαθὼν ἅπαντα παρ' Ὀδυσσέως ἐστ ̓ ὧδε. τὰ γὰρ πρόσω καὶ τὸν ἐκ Τηλεγόνου θάνατον Ὀδυσσέως ἄλλοι ἱστόρησαν : “ the poet Homer composed this book on the history of Ulysses, having in Ithaca from Ulysses learnt all the facts hitherto related. What followed, and among other things, the death of Ulysses by Telegonus, others have told." Here Homer is represented as a contemporary and acquaintance of Ulysses, and as having been with him in Ithaca: This agrees with the tradition that Homer had been in Ithaca, which is to be found elsewhere, and approaches the notions of Mr. Bryant, who, though he did not consider Homer as a contemporary of Ulysses, yet conceived him to be a native of Ithaca, and that the poet had under the character of that hero delineated his own history. On the last page of this MS. is a ridiculous and absurd anecdote, respecting the death of Homer, written in the same hand. "Όμηρος κατὰ τὴν ̓Αρκαδίαν γεγονώς" χώρα δὲ αὕτη τῆς Πηλοπονήσου [leg. Πελοποννήσου] περιέτυχεν ἁλιεῦσι φθειραμένοις, [leg. φθειρισαμένοις] καὶ ἠρώτησεν αὐτοὺς οὕτως•"Ανδρες ἀπ ̓ Αρκαδίης αλιήτορες, ἆρ ̓ ἔχομέν τι; ὁ νοῦς τῆς ἐρωτήσεως οὗτος· ὦ ἄνδρες Αρκάδες ἁλιεῖς τὴν τέχνην, ἆρ ̓ ἐθηρεύσαμέν τι; Οἱ δὲ ἁλιεῖς ἀπεκρίναντο τοῦτο τὸ ἔπος· Οὓς ἔλομεν [leg. εἵλομεν ?] λιπόμεσθ'· οὓς δ ̓ οὐκ ἕλομεν, φέρομεν. ὁ δὲ νοῦς τοῦδε τοῦ ἔπους τοιοῦτος οὓς φθεῖρας ἐθηρεύσαμεν, ἀπεκτείναμεν ἐνταῦθα· οὓς δ ̓ οὐκ ἰσχύσαμεν θηρεῦσαι, φέρομεν ἐν τοῖς εἵμασιν. Οὐκ ἐνόησε δὲ, ὥς φασιν, ὁ Ὅμηρος, τὸ ἔπος τοῦτο· καὶ μικροῦ ἐκεῖσε γενόμενος ἀπέθανεν ἀπὸ λυπῆς· λέγουσι [δὲ] καὶ εἶναι χρησμὸν τὸν χρησμωδηθέντα [χρημοδοτηθέντα] Ὁμήρῳ, ὅταν προταθῇ ζήτημα καὶ μὴ εὕρῃ, ἀποθανεῖται. "Homer being in Arcadia, which is a province of the Peloponnesus, fell in with some fishermen, who were lousing, and he asked them thus: Ye fishers from Arcadia,

See the Life of Homer, attributed to Herodotus.

2 See Jacob Bryant's dissertation concerning the war of Troy; 2d ed. p. 94, and the following pages.

have we got any thing? The meaning of which question was: Ye Arcadian fishermen, have we caught any thing? And the fishermen answered in this manner: Those we have caught, we leave; and those we have not caught, we carry with us. The meaning of this answer was this: The lice which we have caught, we have killed here; but those which we could not catch, we carry with us in our clothes. But Homer, as they say, did not comprehend this speech, and having been there a little while, died from grief. It is reported that there was an oracle given to Homer, that he should die, when a question was proposed to him that he could not solve." The same story is told in the life of Homer attributed to Herodotus, but more accurately, and also more rationally. The occurrence is there said to have happened on the coast of the island of Ios, whereas our narrator makes it an inland event, that had taken place in Arcadia: we must in this case suppose the fishermen to have been river, not sea-fishermen. The text in the MS. is not correct, as may be seen from the alterations I have put in brackets. It is evident that the riddle was copied from the metrical wording of it, which is thus given by the Pseudo-Herodotus:

“Ασσ ̓ ἕλομεν, λιπόμεσθ'· ἃ δ ̓ οὐχ ἕλομεν, φερόμεσθα. Thence the error of ἕλομεν, for εἵλομεν ; for in prose the augment should not be dispensed with; and for ropeo' should be read Xiroper. The ignorant transcriber copied in a slovenly manner. The Pseudo-Herodotus rejects the opinion that Homer died of vexation from so trifling a cause, though he admits that some entertained it, among whom is to be reckoned the original, from which our scribe copied the story. In the life of Homer, attributed to Plutarch,' the story is likewise found, and there the poet is made to die, as in our Codex, from grief, because he could not guess the riddle : ὅπερ οὐ δυνηθεὶς συμβαλεῖν Ομηρος, διὰ τὴν ἀθυμίαν ἐτελεύ Tnoe. The riddle is there also proposed in verse, with the slight difference, that"Ogoa and öoa are read, instead of "Aroa, and &, thus:

“Οσσ ̓ ἕλομεν, λιπόμεσθα· ὅσ' οὐχ ἕλομεν, φερόμεσθα.

The manner of telling the story, in Plutarch's life, rather agrees with our manuscript; for instance, in the question which Homer is made to ask the fishermen, which is in Plutarch ei ri exoter. The

see Ernesti's edit. of Homer, vol. v. p. 146.

2 This verse, with one preceding, which forms the question to it, is found among the Greek Epigrams; for instance, in the collection published by Weikel (Frankfort, 1600. fol.) p. 133, thus:

Ερώτησις Ομήρου.

Ανδρες ἀπ' ̓Αρκαδίης, αλιήτορες, ή δ' ἔχομέν τι ;

Απόκρισις.

“Οσσ ̓ ἕλομεν, λιπόμεσθ'· ὅσσ ̓ οὐχ ἕλομεν, φερόμεσθα.

That question agrees very nearly with the words of our manuscript.

seene, however, is laid, by the latter, in the island of Tos, not, as in ours, in Arcadia.

But, leaving this trifling story, let us finish the description of our Codex. It is written, throughout, by the same hand, and the lines of the text form one column on the page, from the beginning as far as Rhapsod. X. 245. leaving a broad margin. At this line, 46. Τοὺς δ' ἤδη ἐδάμασσε βιὸς καὶ ταρφέες ἰοὶ, the page begins to be divided into two columns, for the text, by which means the margin is diminished; the writing is not smaller. The scholia in this Ms. are not copious; the interlineary glossa rather numerous. Both decrease, in quantity, as the Ms. approaches to its conclusion.

Besides the manuscripts of Homer, which I have described, Nessel mentions in his Catalogue some others, which I had not time to subject to a particular inspection. They are Catalog. Part IV. p. 28. Cod. XXXIX. Homeri Ilias, variis interlinearibus et marginalibus notis illustrata. Codex Chartaceus, vetustus, bonæ notæ. fól. After this manuscript Alter edited the Iliad, having conceived a great opinion of it from an expression of Valckenaer, who, it seems, had upon hearsay classed it among the best Codices of Homer, on account of the scholia. Alter had no very just notions of criticism, but imagined that the text of an author, printed after a manuscript of good repute, must be superior to any which the labors and judgment of successive editors could have produced. How unfortunate this speculation proved, is known to those who have seen Alter's edition. Heyne speaks of it in his introduction concerning the materials used for his edition. Ibid. p. 37. Cod. LXI. Homeri Iliados libri duo. Cod. partim chartaceus, partim membranaceus. Heyne had a few readings of this Ms.3 Ibid. Cod. LXIII. Homeri Ilias cum Isaac Tzetze commentario. Cod. chartaceus, fol. Ibid. p. 42. Cód. LXXII. Homeri Iliadis libri XIII. et XIV. cum Eustathii Commentariis. This forms part of a volume, in which there are several other manuscripts; for instance, Libanii Epistola. Ibid. p. 48. Cod. LXXXI. Homeri Opera cum Scholiis marginalibus et interlinearibus. Cod. chartaceus antiquus, et optima note, in quarto majori. Ibid. p. 147. Cod CCCVII. Homeri Odys sea fragmentum aliquod. Cod. chartaceus, 4to. Heyne mentions a Codex, on cotton paper, marked No. XLIX., and says of it: Codes charta gossypina No. XLIX. inter meliores numerandus. Heyne farther names' Cod. VII. and Cod. CLXXVÍ.

Dissert. de Scholiis ineditis, p. 107.

2 De Subsidiis studii in Homericis occupati. Homer. Vol. III. p. 49. 3 See Vol. III. p. 44.

VOL. XXIII.

CI. JI.

NO. XLV.

E

There is a Codex of Orphei Argonautica, on parchment, in 4to. It is numbered in Nessel's Catalogue Cod. CLIII. and is spoken of p. 89. Being interested in Eschylus, of which my friend, Professor Hermann, is going to publish an edition, I took notice of Scholia in Eschylum, which Nessel introduces Part IV. p. 158. as: Cod. CCCLXXXIV.; and says of it, mediocriter antiquus. It is in 8vo, and on paper. There are farther to be found two or three Codices of Pindar; two, if not three, of Nonni Dionysiaca; one of Photii Bibliotheca; of Demosthenis Orationes; several of different works of Plato; of Aristotle; Xenophon; a Cod. of Herodotus, on paper, 4to, of which Nessel (p. 143. Cod. LXXXV.) says, antiquus, et bonæ notæ ; but Kollar refers it only to the 14th century. It has been collated for Wesseling's edition. Codices of Thucydides, and Diodorus Siculus; a Cod. of Diogenes Laertius (Ness. p. 118. Cod. LIX.), upon paper, fol.; Cod. of Dionysius Periegetes 4to, (Ness. p. 171.) of Heliodori Ethiopica; of the Epistles of Phalaris; of the Sibyllina Oracula, (Ness. p. 148). There are some Mss. of Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes: Manuscripts of Euclid; Apollonius Perseus; Hero Alexandrinus. A Codex of Claudius Ptolemæus, the geographer, with maps, and handsomely written, is a fine Ms., but has no value from its age, being of the year 1454.- Concerning the Greek and Oriental Manuscripts sufficient information may be collected from the Catalogues of Lambeccius Nessel, and the Supplement of Kollar; works which have been quoted in the foregoing pages. Lambeccius is very prolix and copious in what he describes, but he has left out many Codices: Nessel attempted to supply the omissions of Lambeccius, and at the same time to be concise and compendious. But after Nessel much still remained to be supplied; a task undertaken by Kollar. He did not, however, live to execute his purpose: and after his death, a posthumous volume was published, containing the beginning of that intended work. This volume has been referred to above, when we spoke of the Codex Neapolitanus of Dioscorides.

From those works, and even from the few data which I have communicated, it appears that the Vienna library is rich in Greek manuscripts; it is, I believe, not less so in Oriental ones; of which some idea may be formed by referring to the authors alluded to. But it abounds in manuscripts of the Latin classics. These are not to be found in any printed catalogue; but on enquiry a written catalogue was presented to me, in which were specified Codices of Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius, Lucretius, Manilius, Persius, Juvenal, Statius, Claudian, Plautus, Terence, Cicero, A. Gellius, Seneca Tragedia, Seneca Epistolæ, Quintilian, Petronius, Priscian. There is no manuscript either of Livy or of Cæsar.

Before I quit the Imperial Library, I will notice some other

objects of literary curiosity. There is a manuscript of one of Tasso's works, in the author's own hand-writing. It is the Gieru salemme Conquistata, but not the whole poem; it begins with the 30th stanza of the 2d book. There is a great deal of scratching and blotting in it; and it seems to be a bad scrawling hand. The paper is small folio. Some beautiful specimens of old writing adorned with painting and gilding are to be seen. Among them deserves to be remarked a volume of the Gospel Lessons, in Latin, as they are read in the Roman Catholic Churches. The writing is in gold, and in the Monkish or black-letter character. This splendid manuscript is excessively well preserved. Another, still more magnificent, ornamented with exquisite gilding and coloring, is a prayer-book said to have belonged to one of the wives of Charlemagne. It was for a long time kept at Bremen, but disposed of at the time of the Reformation, and thus came into the library at Vienna.-Of old German manuscripts, which have of late years become an object of investigation to some learned men of that country, the library at Vienna does not possess a great quantity, nor any thing particularly valuable.

§ 1. De Pronunciatione Reuchliniana et Erasmiana. NUPER UPER prodiit Parisiis viri docti Anastasii Georgiada, Græci Philippopolitani, et nisi fallor, apud Germanos Vindobonenses Medicinæ et Chirurgia Doctoris, opusculum Græce conscriptum de Literarum Græcarum pronunciatione, cum Latina versione. Titulus est: Πραγματεία περὶ τῆς τῶν ̔Ελληνικῶν στοιχείων Εκφωνήσεως, ὑπὸ ̓Αν. Γεωργιάδου Ελληνιστὶ καὶ Λατινιστὶ λorovnica. Paris. Vindob. et Lips. 1812. 8vo. Hujus argumentum libri materies nobis erit insequentis disputationis.

Cum enim inde a Reuchlino, Germano, qui Græce se Cap-' niona dici maluit (obiit autem anno 1521,2 et inter suos Græ

A Germ. Rauch, fumus, kárvos, deminutivum fit Räuchlein, quasi dicas, fumulus, κάπνιον. Hinc deriv. Καπνιών.

2 Haverk. de L. Gr. Pronunc. T. II. p. 626.