of religion, and led to his publishing a work which was a contribution to the History of Romance rather than to the History of Scholarship1. He lived to produce in 1897 a second edition of his Psyche, in which many additions were made to the notes. He died at the age of 53. The three stages of his literary life had been marked by the study of three historic problems connected with (1) the Greek Novel, (2) the Chronology of Greek Literature, and (3) Greek Religion. His treatment of all three was marked by thoroughness of research, and clearness of exposition2. Kühn Dietz The medical literature of Greece was criticised and expounded by Karl Gottlob Kühn (1754-1840) and Friedrich Reinhold Dietz (1804-1836), professors at Leipzig and Königsberg respectively. Kühn's edition of the Greek medical writers, published in 1821-30, extends to twenty-six volumes, including a Latin translation, with critical and exegetical commentary and indices. Galen alone fills twenty volumes, and the rest are devoted to Hippocrates, Aretaeus, and Dioscorides, this last being edited by Kurt Sprengel (1766-1833), professor of Medicine at Halle. Dietz, after editing 'Hippocrates on epilepsy' (1827), collated many medical MSS in foreign libraries, but did not live to make use of more than a small part of his collations, which are now preserved in the library at Königsberg. Another short-lived scholar, who was also an adept in Natural Science, was Julius Ludwig Ideler (1809-1842), who wrote on Greek and Roman Meteorology (1832), and edited Aristotle's Meteorologica (1834-6), and the Physici et Medici Graeci minores3. 1 Friedrich Creuzer u. Karoline v. Günderode (1896). Ideler 2 W. Schmid in Biogr. Jahrb. 1899, 87-114 (with bibliography); and biographical Essay by O. Crusius, 296 pp., with portrait (1902); also E. Weber in Deutscher Nekrolog, vi (1904) 450-465. Kleine Schriften in 2 vols., ed. Fr. Schöll, 1901. 3 Bursian, ii 931 f. Ribbeck CHAPTER XXXII. EDITORS OF LATIN CLASSICS. THE study of the Latin poets has already been represented by Lachmann, Haupt, and Ritschl'. Ritschl was succeeded at Leipzig by one of the earliest of his pupils, Otto Ribbeck (1827-1898), who studied in Berlin and Bonn, and, on returning from a tour in Italy, held scholastic appointments in Germany. After filling professorships at Bern and Basel (1856-62), he was successively professor at Kiel (1862-72), Heidelberg (1872-7), and Leipzig (1877-98). His work was mainly limited to the history and the criticism of the earlier Latin poets. He published an important collection of the Fragments of the Latin Dramatists, as well as an edition of the Miles Gloriosus, a work on Roman Tragedy in the age of the Republic, and a valuable History of Roman Poetry in three volumes. He also published a comprehensive critical edition of Virgil, in five volumes, as well as a smaller edition of the text. His work on Virgil had been preceded by his text of Juvenal, and was succeeded by his Epistles and Ars Poëtica of Horace, in both of which he evinced an inordinate suspicion of textual interpolations. His numerous minor papers included an important treatise on Latin Particles (1869). His study of the Latin dramatists led him to their Greek originals. He accordingly published a lecture on the Middlet and the New Attic Comedy (1857), discussed Greek and Roman Comedy in his Alazon, a work including his German rendering of the Miles Gloriosus (1882), and wrote on the early cult of 1 Chap. xxx. 3 1875. 21852-5; ed. 2, 1871-3; ed. 3, 1897-8. 1859-68, abridged ed. 1895. 1859. Cp. Der echte und der unechte Juvenal (1865). Dionysus in Attica (1869). The story of his life has been partly told by the publication of his Letters, while his own. Life of Ritschl is itself a monument of learning, enthusiasm, and good taste1. Lucian Müller Lucian Müller (1836-1898) was educated at Berlin under Meineke, Moritz Seyffert, and Giesebrecht, and studied at the university of Berlin under Boeckh and Haupt, and at Halle under Bernhardy. After living for five years in Holland (mainly at Leyden), and for three at Bonn, he was appointed professor of Latin Literature at St Petersburg, where he worked for the remaining twenty-seven years of his life. While he was still a student in Berlin, he produced a dissertation on the Latin abridgement of Homer bearing the name of Pindarus Thebanus. In 1861 he published his treatise De re metrica, on the prosody of all the Latin poets except Plautus and Terence, an original work of wide learning, which was only marred by a bitterly polemical spirit. A compendium of the same appeared in 1878, together with a summary of Latin orthography and prosody, followed by a text-book of Greek and Latin Metres'. His critical acumen was attested in his editions of Lucilius (1872) and Phaedrus, and in the Teubner texts of Horace, and of Catullus, Tibullus, and Propertius. In his edition of Horace he adhered closely to the MSS, while he admitted some of the best modern emendations, and assumed the existence of interpolations. He also edited the Odes and Epodes with German notes, and produced a text of Namatianus and Porfyrius, as well as papers on the Latin Grammarians, on the Tragedies of Seneca, and on the Latin Anthology. His edition of Lucilius was followed by a sketch of the life and work of that poet, ending with a restoration of a number of scenes from his Satires (1876). In 1884 he wrote a work on Ennius, and published the remains of Ennius, and the fragments of 1 Otto Ribbeck, Ein Bild seines Lebens aus seinen Briefen (1846-98, mainly to relations and friends, including six to Ritschl), 352 pp. with two portraits by Paul Heyse (1901); Reden und Vorträge, 1899; cp. Bursian, ii 723, 840f; Deutsche Rundschau (Dec. 1898, W. Dilthey), (Feb. 1902, A. Hausrath). 2 1880; ed. 2, 1885; transl. into French, Italian, Dutch, and English. Naevius' epic on the Punic War. In the following year he edited the fragments of the plays of Livius Andronicus and of Naevius, and published a work on the 'Saturnian Verse'. fragments of the old Roman poets led him to Nonius, and he accordingly produced in 1888 an edition of that grammarian and lexicographer, extending over 1127 pages, the index alone filling 55. This led him to write a treatise on Pacuvius and Accius (1889 f), followed by two works of general interest on the artistic and the popular poetry of the Romans (1890). After that date he prepared three important works: (1) an enlarged edition of his De re metrica (1894); (2) an annotated edition of the Satires and Epistles of Horace for the use of scholars (1891-3); and (3) a similar edition of the Odes and Epodes, posthumously published in 1900. His 'Life of Horace' had appeared in 1880. As a child, he had lost the sight of one of his eyes, and was very short-sighted; as a boy, he repeatedly read through Zumpt's larger Latin Grammar and made himself the best Latinist in his school. During his brief experience as a school-master, he proved an ineffective disciplinarian; his head-master, in the hope of improving the discipline of the boys, solemnly told them that they did not deserve to be taught by so learned a master', and repeated this remark to Müller, who replied, 'Yes! that is exactly what I have told them myself'. He held that, for a great scholar, it was essential that he should have, not only wide learning and clear judgement, but also a strong power of concentration on a definite field of labour. It was this that led to his own success in the province of Latin poetry. But he was far from neglecting Greek, for he also held that, without Greek, a fruitful study of Latin was impossible. He was a skilful writer of Latin verse, and insisted on the practice of verse composition as a valuable aid towards the appreciation of the Latin poets. He was impressed with this fact during the preparation of his 'History of Classical Philology in the Netherlands' (1865), and he returned to the point in his biographical sketch of the life of Ritschl (1877-8), in the course of which he urged that it was, on the whole, more important for an eminent classical professor to train first-rate school-masters than to turn out classical specialists'. 1 Biogr. Jahrb. 1899, 63 --86; cp. Bursian, ii 934-6. Baehrens One of Lucian Müller's rivals as an editor of Latin poets was his former pupil at Bonn, Emil Baehrens (1848-1888). He owed much, not only to the teaching of L. Müller, but also to that of Jahn and Usener; he afterwards studied for a year under Ritschl at Leipzig. In 1872 he visited the Italian libraries, remaining six months in Rome. In 1873 he settled for a time as 'privat-docent' at Jena, but in the next year he was already working in the libraries of Louvain, Brussels, and Paris, and, in 1875, in those of Paris, London, and Oxford. In 1877 he was appointed professor of Latin at Groningen, and, being unfamiliar with Dutch, delivered in Latin an inaugural address on the History of Scholarship from the Revival of Learning. He was professor at Groningen for the remaining eleven years of his life. He began his literary career with a dissertation at Jena, on the Satire ascribed to Sulpicia. This was followed by his Analecta Catulliana, and his editions of the Panegyrici Latini and Valerius Flaccus; his text of and commentary on Catullus (1876—1885); and his editions of the Silvae of Statius, and of Tibullus. In 1878 he produced his Miscellanea Critica, a little-known volume of 200 pages including emendations on Q. Cicero, Propertius, Horace's Ars Poëtica, and the Agricola of Tacitus. His principal work was his edition of the Poëtae Latini Minores in five volumes (1879-1883). In the laborious preparation of this work he examined more than 1000 MSS. It was supplemented by his Fragmenta Poëtarum Romanorum (1886). Meanwhile, he was editing Propertius, and the Dialogus of Tacitus, proposing as many as 125 conjectures in the 42 chapters of that work, and, lastly, a text of his favourite Classic, the Octavius of Minucius Felix. The mere titles of all that he produced in the last eighteen years of his life would fill four and a half pages of print. He was a most industrious scholar, and an excellent teacher, especially in the case of the more diligent students; and he did much to improve the pronunciation of Latin in Holland. But many of his works were marred by over-haste. He saw one of the principal MSS of Catullus for the first time in March, and the other in May, and completed his edition of the text in September. Similarly, the Commentary, for which he had long been making collections, was prepared for the press in less than eleven months. Among his other defects were an exaggerated self-assertion, and an unduly polemical spirit. He excluded himself from society, and accordingly did not know how to 'give and take'. In his Commentary on Catullus, as well as in his criticisms of the Roman renderings of Aratus, he very seldom quotes from the Alexandrian poets,-an omission which has been attributed to a very superficial knowledge of Greek1. For the textual criticism of Terence a firm foundation was laid in 1870 by the critical edition prepared by Franz Umpfenbach (1835-1885), who, after studying at his native place, Giessen, and also at Göttingen under K. F. Hermann, Umpfenbach 1 Halbertsma in Biogr. Jahrb, 1890, 7—46; cp. Bursian, ii 936–8. |