« PreviousContinue »
had been obscured by the careless copying of Simonides. Here then the evidence now offered is confirmatory of their work. The passages marked with dotted lines are illegible in the Codex: but most of them occur in the earlier part of the work, where we are fortunate in having the Sinaitic MS. to guide us. There are several places where Simonides was led by homoeoteleuton or other causes to omit whole sentences. These have been conjecturally restored by the Editors by the help of the Versions : but now for the first time we have them in the original Greek text. Such passages are the following: Gebh. and Harn. p. 106, 11. 20—22; p. 190, 11. 19-21; p. 198, 11. 17, 18; p. 218, 11. 9, 10.
The very complete apparatus of Hilgenfeld's latest edition enables us to see at a glance that the text of the Athos MS., as now restored to us,corresponds with apogr.I, Hilgenfeld's L', which Tischendorf had edited; and not with apogr. II, Hilgenfeld's L', which Anger and Dindorf had edited. It is true that in some instances it does agree with apogr. II as against apogr. I;
I but, as far as I have observed, this is only the case where apogr. I was quite obviously wrong, and the correction could at
. once be made either by conjecture or by the aid of the Old Latin Version: The question of the origin of apogr. II may now be re
. garded as finally settled. For its discussion it is sufficient here to refer to Tischendorf's Essay, 'De Herma Graeco Lipsiensi', in the Prolegomena to Dressel's Patres Apostolici (1857). But a comparison of the materials recently published by Hilgenfeld with the editio vulgata of the Old Latin Version, as it may be seen in Dressel, will satisfy most people as to the manner in which Simonides must have set about its production : and some light will be incidentally thrown on his probable motive in thus improving on his Athos copy, when we consider the forged Greek ending (see Appendix A) and its relation to the Old Latin Version. It will then appear that his aim was to present his readers with a pleasant, easy, flowing style of Greek, which he did not scruple to purchase at the cost of accuracy. In preparing apogr. II, just as in forging the Greek conclusion, he used the Old Latin Version with considerable freedom, and
retranslated from it in a loose paraphrase, in order to fill up gaps and to avoid harsh constructions.
I have added two Appendices. The first of these illustrates, by a comparison with the Versions and a passage of Antiochus, the method adopted by Simonides in forging his Greek ending of the Hermas. In the second I have carried out somewhat further some suggestions recently made by Mr Rendel Harris with regard to the Scene of the Vision in the Ninth Similitude, though I have not been able to follow him in the conclusions which he is inclined to draw from the curious coincidences which he has undoubtedly discovered.
I desire to record on behalf both of Dr Lambros and myself our obligation to the Syndics of the University Press for their readiness in undertaking the publication of this book.
J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON.
THE ATHOS CODEX OF THE SHEPHERD
DURING the years 1855 and 1856 considerable excitement was caused in the literary world by the appearance in Leipsic of the Greek Constantine Simonides, who offered to scholars certain presumably valuable manuscripts of authors hitherto unedited, such as the much discussed Uranius whom Stephanus of Byzantium frequently quotes as an Arabian author. Among the manuscripts which awakened the liveliest interest was a Codex containing the Shepherd of Hermas. This Ms. was
MS written on paper, and was composed of two portions. One of these consisted of three original leaves obtained from a library on Mount Athos; the other of 31 pages in the handwriting of Simonides himself, copied as he said from that portion of the Codex which he had not been able to bring away. The Leipsic University Library lost no time in making this new treasure its own.
It was indeed of real worth, since the Shepherd of Hermas, the work of a Christian writer of the second century, could only be read in a Latin version, the Greek original having been up to this date wholly unknown. In a little while Rudolf Anger published, with the assistance of William Dindorf, the first Greek edition of the Shepherd. It was scarcely printed when the bad faith of Simonides in reference to the Shepherd of Hermas among other matters was brought to light, mainly by the exertions of Alexander Lycurgus, the late Bishop of Syros and Tenos, who was at that time studying Theology at Leipsic'.
1 Enthüllungen über den Simonides-Dindorf’schen Uranios von Alexander Lykurgos. Leipzig, 1856.