Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

he left to his children, proves the in justice of the reproach. Gruter, in his Observations upon Pliny's Letters, complains that Aldus has given too much licence to his conjectures. J. A. Ernesti, in the preface to his excellent edition of Homer, 175964, 5 vols. 8vo. pretends that the three Aldine editions of Homer, and particularly the last, were very incorrect. In the preface to his Tacitus, he goes still farther: "Observatum est a viris doctis Aldum sæpe priores editiones non auxisse, nisi vitiis operarum.”

have destroyed? How many works of antiquity would have been lost, if the first, perhaps alınost unintelligible fragments, which were discovered in the dust of old libraries, had not been printed without loss of time.

Typographical correctness certainly depends upon the printer; but it is generally found, that this is more difficult to be obtained in Greek editions, than in works written in a language more generally known. Let these slight errours be compared with all the important labours of Aldus, and let it be recollected, that some few of the great works, or some brilliant actions, of celebrated men are frequently mentioned, whilst the rest of their lives and writings are passed over in silence; whereas all the numerous editions of Aldus have been critically examined in order that a few faults might be detected, which should justify the censures of the critick; notwithstanding which, Aldus is justly and universally considered as deserving of the first rank in the list of printers either ancient or modern.

These complaints may in some measure be retaliated, for the Homer of this learned editor is not exempt from faults; hisTacitus, valuable as it may be, is far from correct; and his edition of the Latin Bibliotheca of Fabricius, 1773-74, 3 vols 8vo. is so faulty, that in the use of it much discretion is necessary. It is certainly true, that the Greek editions of Aldus are generally less correct than his Latin or Italian ones; it is also true, that he has not always been happy in the choice of his readings, and that some of his editions are not priated from a correct text; that The Aldine editions, and particof the lesser works of Plutarch, ularly the Greek ones, have been 1509, folio, is not good, but he frequently consulted by the first edwanted better materials. The editors, in preference to later ones; tion of Lucian, 1503, folio, must be admitted to be far inferiour to that of Florence, 1496: but to judge impartially, the state of acient literature at that time should be considered. When Aldus was able to collect different manuscripts, he compared them with each other; but he was very often obliged to print from imperfect and mutilated cop. les. Ought he, as he possessed only one bad manuscript of Hesy. chius, to have determined not to publish that excellent Lexicon, the only existing copy of which so many unforeseen accidents might Vol. V. No. IX.

as can be shewn amongst many other authorities, by that of the learned Brunck. In his Greek editions of Aristophanes,and of Sophocles, &c. he gives to those of Aldus unqualified praise, and declares them to be the foundation of every future edition. The fault, of which Aldus has been accused, of taking too great license in his corrections, might be imputed more justly to his immediate successors. Andrea of Asola, and his two sons, who though also learned, were much less skilful, and have given more than one inferiour edition, particularly in Greek.

The Oppian of 1517,and some other of their works, are proofs that if they had not succeeded Aldus, they would not have been considered as eminent printers. Their editions, however, are not to be contemned; and with the exception of a few, they merit the attention of the learned, whilst their great rarity and splendid execution render them valuable to the admirers of ancient lit

erature.

Amongst those who consult the Aldine editions, some exclusively prefer those. of the elder Aldus.; others admit the authority of those published previous to the year 1529, the period of the death of Andrea of Asola; but a greater number, independently of the great value which they attach to almost all the editions published during the thirty three first years, esteem most of tliose also of Paulus Manutius, and a few only of those by the younger Aldus, and those afterwards printed, previous to the year 1597, (when the younger Aldus died) with the Aldine anchor, and in the same office by Nic. Manassi. 'The editions of the elder Aldus are undoubtedly scarcer than those of a more recent date; they are frequently better printed, and upon excellent paper; they have also this singular advantage, that being printed from manuscripts, which are since lost, they, in a great measure, supply their place, and are more faithful copies of them, than the editions of the fifteenth century, most of which were published by less learned editors; yet the early Aldine editions seldom contain a text more carefully revised than the subsequent ones.

The editions of the latter years of Paulus Manutius, and of his son, the younger Aldus, are far less valuable, both on account of the want

of typographical neatness and accuracy; they also too frequently bear evident marks of the parsimony with which they were brought out.

Before the time of Aldus, the Greek characters, confined to some few offices, were rudely cut and illformed; Aldus, was the first, who examining with attention the form of the letters of the best ancient manuscripts, furnished his office with a letter more pleasing to the eye; from which, with some few corrections, all the best Greek types have since been formed. As to the Roman type, it is well known that Jenson and Vindelin de Spire, after having used the round letters, which founded their reputation, till the year 1472, were obliged to resume both Gothick and Semi-Gothick characters, to suit the great number of readers, accustomed to the use of ancient manuscripts; most of the Germans also prefer even now the rude shape of this Gothick, to the neater and more elegant Roman letter. Aldus would admit no Gothick among his types; he constantly endeavour'ed to imitate manuscripts; that is those in the best running hand. which suggested to him the idea of the Italick character. His Roman letters were cast nearly in the form which was at first adopted by Vindelin de Spire. The two first alphabets were very imperfect, but the third is excellent, and far superiour, ofits kind,to many modern ones.

Having furnished his office with a numerous assortment of excellent Greek and Latin types, and having put it in full activity, he thought it right to adopt a particular mark for his house, to decorate the first or last page of his books, and frequently both. This mark, well known to be an anchor, surrounded by a dolphin, is justly celebrated in the annals of typography, under the

name of the Aldine anchor. It is perhaps the best chosen mark which any printer ever adopted, and it is particularly suitable to him, who first determined that it should decorate his editions. The dolphin intimates swiftness, on account of the rapidity, with which it cuts the water. The anchor, on the contrary, is a mark of stability and firmness; which justly indicates, that in the prosecution of any pursuit, unceasing labour is necessary, united with deliberate reflection; a due degree of consideration in the formation of plans, but great celerity in their execation is well expressed by the Latin adage Festina lente.' To the anchor was attached his name divided. This mark was long employed exactly as Aldus had at first formed it. His sons having, in 1540, separated from those of Andrea, did not immediately change it; and with their new formula, apud Aldi filios,' they were satisfied with a fresh engraving of the ancient anchor. At length, in 1546, its simple form underwent a considerable change, in which the words, Aldi filii,' were substituted for Aldus.'

The greater part of the books, printed from the year 1546 to 1554, bear this new mark, which Paulus Manutius disused in 1555, probably at the period when he became sole master of the office. He afterwards resumed the simple anchor, which in the following years he sometimes surrounded with an oval ornament.

The younger Aldus, dissatisfied with his cousin's adopting the same mark, distinguished his editions by a

very complicated one, and on the back of the leaf, he sometimes added the portrait of his grandfather, with a notice, that the edition was really Manutian; sometimes also, instead of the anchor, he affixed this portrait of the elder Aldus to the title page. His own is placed upon the title page of "Paulí Manutii Antiquitatum Liber de Senatu, 1581, 4to."

The anchor of Aldus attracted the attention of many printers, some of whom were desirous of enhanc. ing the value of their editions, by placing in them, either the exact copy of this mark, or some one similar. Others less scrupulous forged it, and endeavoured to publish their editions as from the Aldine press. This mark of Aldus, with a few alterations, has frequently been adopted, by different printers, in the list of whom might be mentioned, Thierry Martir, Nicolas le Riche; at Venice, Hieronimo Scoto; at Brescia, Francesco and Pietro-Maria Marchetti; at Geneva, Jean Crespin and Eustache Vignon, &c.

&c. &c.

Such are the principal events in the life of Aldus the Elder, a man whose classical knowledge and critical skill were surpassed only by his unwearied exertions, and continued labours, in the cause of literature. These ensured him reputation and distinction whilst living, nor is it at all likely, that the deserved veneration which has so long been attach, ed to his name, will be lost or even impaired, while classical literature shall possess one sincere votary.

For the Anthology.

TO THE AUTHOR OF THE 35th REMARKER.

Sir,

I CANNOT sufficiently admire your disinterestedness; that when, as you gravely tell us, you have already produced an ode superiour to Gray's on Spring, you should yet be willing to reduce the estimation in which he is held, purely out of regard to the interests of literature. Indeed, Sir, I fear that the publick will not be so impartial either toward Gray, or his imitator.

The relative merit of this poet is a mere question of taste. I am charged, however, with having misrepresented Dr. Johnson; and this is a question of fact. If it was extravagant to assert, that he found nothing in Collins, but clusters of consonants, let us see what he allows him beside. He acknowledges, forsooth, that "his mind was not deficient in fire" (admirable parsimony of doubtful praise !) and that "his efforts produced in happier moments, sublimity and splendour." splendour." The Doctor, lest he should be betrayed into excessive commendation, has contrived to bestow even this penu⚫rious praise on qualities, which Collins hardly possessed. Neither sublimity nor splendour is characterisick of Collins, but a delicacy of imagery, a tenderness, melancholy, and abstract elegance of sentiment, which Johnson was either unable, or unwilling to observę.

When I ventured to say, that "if Pindar and Horace were poets, so too is Gray," it was not, as you seem to think, because they all

Thus in

wrote odes; but, as I attempted to show in the course of the essay, because they all have the same beauties, and, if you choose, the same faults. That there are no obscuri ties in either of them, which canlong delay a reader of taste or attention, I am willing to believe; but that they have every where shades of meaning, and refinements of expres sion, the full beauty of which never reaches the sense of careless or vulgar minds, you love poetry hope too well to deny. the Greek poet, whom Gray has imitated in the passage quoted, the phrase "the light of love shines on her purple cheeks" is poetical enough; but Gray though not more obscure, is, I will venture to say, far more poetical. For in describing a goddess what is there unnatural or far-fetched in supposing the light, which encircles the fea tures of this celestial being, to be tinged with the purple glow, which love diffuses over her cheeks? You may say, that this is to write like nobody but Gray. His admirers would not murmur if it were so; but they are reminded of Virgil

Namque ipsa decoram Cæsariem nato genitrix, lumenque juventa Purpureum,&lætos oculis afflarat honores. EN. 1. 594

To defend the opinion of Burke would lead me into a discussion too long and metaphysical, as well as remote from the criticism expected in an essay. If you have lately read

the last part of his treatise on the Sublime and Beautiful, and have examined the examples which he has there adduced, 1 must be allowed to wonder, that you should yet maintain that the strength of the impression, which we receive from poetical language always depends upon the exactness of the images conveyed. In lyrick poetry this is seldom the case; because this kind of poetry is chiefly employed about ideas generated within the mind, if the express sion may be allowed, and consequently always in some degree obscure to those, whose intellects have not been exereised in similar contemplations. It is the character of this kind of poetry "to give to airy nothing a local habitation and a name;" and the force of the words used, often depends upon some fine associations and remote sympathies, with which the canvas has nothing to do. What is there absurd or unphilosophical in supposing, that an abstract word may excite a train of delicate and poetical associations in the mind, so as to affect it with sensible emotion, without presenting a definite picture? The reading of· every man will furnish him with instances.*

A passage from Burke may be opposed to the assertion of your anonymous reviewer of his treatise.

"By words we have it in our power to make such combinations as we cannot possibly do otherwise By this power of combining we are able, by the addition of well chosen circumstances, to give a new life and force to the simple object. In painting we may represent any fine figure we please; but we never can give it those enlivening touches which it may receive from words. To represent an angel in a picture, you can only draw a beautiful young man winged: but what painting can furnish any thing so grand as the addition of one word," the angel of the Lord?" It is true, I have here no clear idea, but these words affect the

[blocks in formation]

Here is displayed the force of union in

Rocks, caves, lakes, dens, bogs, fens, and sbades:

which yet would lose the greatest part of the effect, if they were not the

Rocks, caves, lakes, dens, bags, fens, and shades -of Death.

This idea or this affection caused by a word, which nothing but a word could annex to the others, raises a very great degree of the sublime; and this sublime is raised yet higher by what follows, a "universe of Death." Here are again two ideas not presentable but by language; and an union of them great and amazing beyond conception; if they may properly be called ideas which present no distinct image to the mind; but still it will be difficult to conceive how words can move the passions which belong to real objects, without representing these objects clearly. This is difficult to us, because we do not sufficiently distinguish, in our observations upon language, between a clear expression,and a strong expression."

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »