the power of description, to have restored the city to its ancient splendour. He has not only given us the greater outlines and their measures, but separate measures and drawings of the minuter decorations; so that a British artist may (if he please) follow Phidias, and build in Britain as Phidias did at Athens." Spon, speaking of Attica, says that the road near Athens was pleasing, and the very peasants polished. Speaking of the Athenians in general, he says of them, "Ils ont une politesse d'esprit naturelle, et beaucoup d'addresse dans toutes les affaires, qu'ils enterprenent."a Wheeler, who was Spon's fellow-traveller, says as follows, when he and his company approached Athens: "We began now to think ourselves in a more civilized country than we had yet passed for not a shepherd that we met but bid us welcome, and wished us a good journey." p. 335. Speaking of the Athenians, he adds, "This must with great truth be said of them, their bad fortune hath not been able to take from them what they have by nature, that is, much subtlety or wit." p. 347. And again, "The Athenians, notwithstanding the long possession that barbarism hath had of this place, seem to be much more polished in point of manners and conversation, than any other in these parts; being civil, and of respectful behaviour to all, and highly complimental in their discourse."b Stuart says of the present Athenians, what Spon and Wheeler said of their forefathers: he found in them the same address, the same natural acuteness, though severely curbed by their despotic masters. One custom I cannot omit. He tells me, that frequently at their convivial meetings, one of the company takes what they now call a lyre, though it is rather a species of guitar, and after a short prelude on the instrument, as if he were waiting for inspiration, accompanies his instrumental music with his voice, suddenly chanting some extempore verses, which seldom exceed two or three distichs; that he then delivers the lyre to his neighbour, who, after he has done the same, delivers it to another; and that so the lyre circulates, till it has passed round the table. Nor can I forget his informing me, that, notwithstanding the various fortune of Athens, as a city, Attica was still famous for olives, and mount Hymettus for honey. Human institutions perish, but nature is permanent. z This most curious and valuable book was published at London, in the year 1762. a Spon, vol. ii. p. 76, 92. edit. 8vo. CHAPTER IV. ACCOUNT OF BYZANTINE SCHOLARS CONTINUED SUIDAS-JOHN STOB.EUS, OR OF STOBA-PHOTIUS-MICHAEL PSELLUS THIS LAST SAID TO HAVE COMMENTED TWENTY-FOUR PLAYS OF MENANDER-REASONS TO MAKE THIS PROBABLE-EUSTATHIUS, A BISHOP, THE COMMENTATOR OF HOMER-EUSTRATIUS, A BISHOP, THE COMMENTATOR OF ARISTOTLEPLANUDES, A MONK, THE ADMIRER AND TRANSLATOR OF LATIN CLASSICS, AS WELL AS THE COMPILER OF ONE OF THE PRESENT GREEK ANTHOLOGIES-CONJECTURES CONCERNING THE DURATION OF THE LATIN TONGUE AT CONSTANTINOPLE. THAT I may not be prolix, I hasten from the writers already mentioned to Suidas, who is supposed to have lived during the ninth or tenth centuries. In his Lexicon, which is partly historical, partly explanatory, he has preserved many quotations from authors who lived in the earlier and politer ages, and from poets in particular, whose works at present are for the greater part lost. Kuster, an able critic in the beginning of the present century, gave a fine edition of this author, at Cambridge, in three volumes folio; and Mr. Toupe of Cornwall (whom I have mentioned already, and cannot mention with too much applause) has lately favoured the learned world with many valuable emendations.c John Stobæus, or of Stoba, (whose name John makes it probable he was a Christian,) is of an uncertain age, as well as Suidas; though some imagine him to have lived during an earlier period, by two or three centuries. His work is not a lexicon, like that of the other, but an immense common-place, filled with extracts upon various subjects, both ethical and physical, which extracts he had collected from the most approved writers. As this book is highly valuable, from containing such incredible variety of sentiments upon interesting topics, and those taken from authors many of whom are lost; as it is at the same time so incorrectly printed, that in too many places it is hardly intelligible; it would be a labour well worthy an able critic, by the help of manuscripts and plausible conjecture, to restore it, as far as possible, to its original purity. The speculations he chiefly gives us are neither trivial nor licentious, but, in the language of Horace, Quod magis ad nos Pertinet, et nescire malum est. But to return from Stobæus to Suidas. If we consider the d See Fabric. Biblioth. Græc, vol. viii. 665. Concerning this little-known author, see the preface of his learned editor, Kuster. late age when Suidas lived; if we consider, too, the authors which he must needs have studied, in order to form his work; authors who, many of them, wrote in the most refined and polished ages; it will be evident, that even in those late centuries the taste for a purer literature was by no means extinct, and that even then there were readers who knew its value. In the ninth century lived Photius, patriarch of Constantinople. His most celebrated work may be called a journal of his studies; a journal where we learn the various authors he perused, the subjects they treated, the plans of their works, and where sometimes, also, we have extracts. From him we are informed, not only of many authors now lost, but what was in his time the state of many that are now remaining. Among the authors now lost, he perused Theopompus the historian, and Hyperides the orator; among those now mutilated and imperfect, he perused entire Diodorus Siculus. Many others, if necessary, might be added of either sort. It is singular, with regard to Photius, that from a layman he was raised at once to be patriarch of Constantinople. Yet his studies evidently seem to have had such a rank in view, being principally applied to theology, to history, and to oratory; with enough philosophy and medicine not to appear deficient, if such subjects should occur. As to poetry, one might imagine, either that he had no relish for it, or that, in the train of his inquiries, he did not esteem it a requisite." Michael Psellus, of the eleventh century, was knowing in the Greek philosophy and poetry of the purer ages, and for his various and extensive learning was ranked among the first and ablest scholars of his time. Besides his treatise of Mathematics, his comments upon Aristotle, and a number of other works, (many of which are printed,) he is said to have commented and explained no less than twe. tyfour comedies of Menander, a treatise now lost, though extant as well as the comedies in so late a period. He must have had a relish for that polite writer, or otherwise it is not probable he would have undertaken such a labour.f Nor need we wonder this should happen. Why should not the polite Menander have had his admirers in these ages, as well as the licentious Aristophanes? Or rather, why not as well as Sophocles and Euripides? The scholia upon these (though some, e See Fabric. Bibl. Græc. vol. ix. 369. See Fabric. Bibl. Græc. vol. i. 769. In the passage quoted by Fabricius upon this subject, its author says, that the latter Greek monks persuaded the latter Greek emperors, to destroy Menander and many other of the old Greek poets, from the looseness of their morals, and their great indecencies. That the monks may have persuaded this, is not improbable; perhaps from bigotry, perhaps from a consciousness of their own wretched inferiority in every species of elegant composition, but certainly from no indignation against indecency and immorality. For if so, why preserve Lucian? why preserve Aristophanes ? why preserve collections of epigrams, more indecent and flagitious than the grossest productions of the most licentious modern ages? perhaps may be more ancient) were compiled by critics, who lived long after Psellus. We may add, with regard to all these scholiasts, (whatever may have been their age,) they would never have undergone the labours of compilation and annotation, had they not been encouraged by the taste of their contemporary countrymen. For who ever published, without hopes of having readers? The same may be asserted of the learned bishop of Thessalonica, Eustathius, who lived in the twelfth century. His admiration of Homer must have been almost enthusiastic, to carry him through so complete, so minute, and so vast a commentary both upon the Iliad and the Odyssey, collected from such an immense number both of critics and historians.h Eustratius, the metropolitan of Nice, who lived a little earlier in the same century, convinces us that he studied Aristotle with no less zeal; and that, not only in his logical pieces, but in his ethical also, as may be seen by those minute and accurate comments on the Nicomachean Ethics, which go under his name, and in which, though others had their share, he still is found to have taken so large a portion to himself.i Planudes, a monk of the fourteenth century, appears (which is somewhat uncommon) to have understood and admired the Latin classics, Cicero, Cæsar, Ovid, Boethius, and others; parts of which authors he translated, such as the Commentaries of Cæsar relative to the Gallic wars, the Dream of Scipio by Cicero, the Metamorphosis of Ovid, the fine tract of Boethius de Consolatione, and (according to Spon) St. Augustine de Civitate Dei. Besides this, he formed a Greek Anthology, (that well-known collection printed by Wechelius in 1600,) and composed several original pieces of his own. k It appears from these examples, and will hereafter appear from others, how much the cause of letters and humanity is indebted to the church. Having mentioned Latin classics, I beg leave to submit a conjecture concerning the state and duration of the Latin tongue at Constantinople. When Constantine founded this imperial city, he not only adorned it with curiosities from every part of the Roman empire, but he induced, by every sort of encouragement, many of the first families in Italy, and a multitude more of inferior rank, to leave their country, and there settle themselves. We may therefore suppose, that Latin was for a long time the prevailing language of the place, till in a course of years it was supplanted by g Demetrius Triclinius, the scholiast on Sophocles, lived after Planudes, for he mentions him. See Fabric. Bibl. Græc. p. 634. h See Fabric. Biblioth. Græc. vol. i. p. 289, &c. i See Fabric. Biblioth. Græc. vol. ii. P. 151. k See Fabric. Biblioth. Græc. vol. x. P. 533. Greek, the common language of the neighbourhood, and the fashionable acquired language of every polite Roman. We are told, that soon after the end of the sixth century, Latin ceased to be spoken at Rome. Yet was it in the beginning of that century that Justinian published his Laws in Latin at Constantinople; and that the celebrated Priscian in the same city taught the principles of the Latin grammar. If we descend to a period still later, (so late, indeed, as to the tenth and eleventh centuries,) we shall find, in the ceremonial of the Byzantine court, certain formularies preserved, evidently connected with this subject. As often as the emperor gave an imperial banquet, it was the custom for some of his attendants, at peculiar times during the feast, to repeat and chant the following words: KovoÉPBET Δέους ἠμπέριουμ βέστρουμ-βήβητε, Δόμηνι ἠμπεράτωρες ἐν μουλτὸς ἄννος· Δέους ὀμνήποτενς πρέστεθ—Ην γαυδίῳ πρανδεῖτε, Δόμηνι. It may possibly for a moment surprise a learned reader, when he hears that the meaning of this strange jargon is, "May God preserve your empire: live, imperial lords, for many years; God Almighty so grant: dine, my lords, in joy." But his doubts will soon vanish, when he finds this jargon to be Latin, and comes to read it exhibited according to a Latin alphabet: "Conservet Deus imperium vestrum-vivite, domini imperatores, in multos annos; Deus Omnipotens præstet-in gaudio prandete, domini." It is evident, from these instances, that traces of Latin were still remaining at Constantinople during those centuries. It will be then, perhaps, less wonderful, if Planudes upon the same spot should, in the fourteenth century, appear to have understood it. We may suppose, that by degrees it changed from a common language to a learned one, and that, being thus confined to the learned few, its valuable works were by their labours again made known, and diffused among their countrymen in Greek translations. This, too, will make it probable, that even to the lowest age of the Greek empire their great libraries contained many valuable Latin manuscripts; perhaps had entire copies of Cicero, of Livy, of Tacitus, and many others. Where else did Planudes, when he translated, find his originals? 1 See before, p. 454, note a. m These formularies are selected from a ceremonial of the Byzantine court, drawn up by the emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus, who reigned in the beginning of the eleventh century. The book, being a large folio, was published in the original Greek, with a Latin translation and notes, by Leichius and Reiskius, at Leipzic, in the year 1751. See of this book, p. 215, 216. Many more traces of this Hellenistic Latin occurs in other parts of it. In the Latin types I have followed the commentator, and not the translator; and as the Greeks have no letter but B to denote the Latin V, have preferred vivite to bibite. |