which, in every other place where similar expressions are rendered by two verbs, those verbs are (I believe) invariably connected together by the copulative and; not excepting even those places where, as in the present, a verb of the present tense follows a participle of the aorist. In answer to these observations it may be said, that our English version of the passage is countenanced by the Ethiopic, and by the opinion of numerous critics and commentators. So it certainly is. Chrysostom, among others, is very particular in his comment on this passage, distinguishing between the meaning of ὑπερειδέω and περιειδέω. He says: τί οὖν ; οὐδεὶς τούτων κολάζεται ; οὐδεὶς τῶν θελόντων μετανοεῖν· περὶ τούτων λέγει· οὐ περὶ τῶν ἀπελθόντων, ἀλλ ̓ οἷς παραγγέλλει· οὐκ ἀπαιτεῖ λόγον ὑμᾶς, φησίν. οὐκ εἶπεν, ἐκεῖνος περιείδεν, οὐκ εἴπεν, εἴασεν. αλλ' ὑμεῖς ἠγνοήσατε, ὑπερείδεν, τοῦτ ̓ ἔστιν, οὐκ ἀπαιτεῖ κόλασιν. (Vid. in loc.) And on the same side are found Grotius, Erasmus, Beza, Sanctius, Vatablus, Pricæus, and a host of others. But their opinion will be found to rest chiefly on those passages in the Septuagint where repedé answers to Dynn (in which the Greek word has been shown above to be capable of the signification contemsit or iratus est, as well as connivendo dissimulavit,) without: any direct confirmation from other writers of the interpretation which they have thought proper to adopt. It may also be said, that in two copies the word is not negov, but mapidav, which would certainly be very well rendered by connivendo dissimulare, or oculo non attento prætermittere, in which sense it is frequently employed; but the small number of copies in which this lectio varia occurs, and the similarity. existing between úπepidav and Tapidav, when written in the abbreviated form, make it probable almost to certainty, that this difference is assignable solely to an error on the part of the transcribers. Other objections, which persons of more extensive research may be acquainted with, may possibly be offered in addition to those already stated. But there is none perhaps more plausible than that which is supplied in the parallel passage which has been before cited in the note upon Chrysostom; a passage which seems at first sight to be totally irreconcilable with the interpretation for which I am contending, and has been in the judg 1 Chrysostom is rather unfortunate in the use of this word (elarev), as it happens to be precisely the word which the Apostle has made use of in the parallel passage, Act. xiv. 16. Ος ἐν ταῖς παρῳχημέναις γενεαῖς εἴασε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη πορεύεσθαι Taïs ddoîs avtŵv :—a passage which the comment of Chrysostom directly contradicts. 2" Duo codd. habent rapidav." Schleusner. ment of some critics the principal barrier against its universal acceptation as the legitimate and only meaning of the word. So Schleusner, though he allows the authority of the LXX to favor this interpretation,' adds almost immediately, possunt tamen hæc verba etiam ita explicari, connivendo dissimulavit vel silentio transmisit tempora ignorantiæ," and refers to the parallel passage above mentioned. But the difficulty arising from this passage will vanish in a moment when it is remembered that although God is said therein to have "suffered (or left) all men to walk in their own ways," it is not said whether he did so by connivance or in contempt and anger, and the word law is employed sometimes in the latter sense as well as in the former. Thus Thersites, in the very paroxysm of his scorn and resentment against Agamemnon, and while attempting to rouse the Greeks to revenge themselves upon him for the wrongs which he had done them, says, Οἴκαδέ περ σὺν νηυσὶ νεώμεθα· τόνδε δ' ἐῶμεν - Iliad. II. 236. This signification will also accord with Rom. ch. i. where St. Paul mentions again the moral dereliction of the heathen, and ascribes it not to the connivance of Jehovah, but to his judgment on their inveterate and infatuated obstinacy. (See particularly v. 21 to 24). On the whole therefore would it not be better that the passage, instead of standing as it does in our authorised translation, should be rendered in some such manner as the following: Moreover God has been angry with the times of (such) ignorance, and now commands all men every where to repent. There will then be no need of a long comment to clear Jehovah from the charge of connivance, and a proper consistency will be maintained between the interpretation of this passage and the general tenor of other passages in Scripture where idolaters are mentioned. 1 Frodsham. Nov. 1820. J. CROWTHER. "Priorem vero explicationem (i. e. Vulg. despiciens) suadet et commendat non solum series orationis, sed etiam usus loquendi apud Alexandrinos interpretes," &c. Vide Lexicon sub voc. OF THE LATIN HISTORIANS BEFORE LIVY. PART I. In consequence of the nearly total loss of the works of all the early Roman Historians, the finished productions of Sallust and Livy stand alone as regards all preceding attempts, and the art of historical writing seems to have sprung to perfection at its birth. A nearer approach, however, discloses a long line of historians, who from small beginnings gradually increase with the growth of their native city in wealth of materials and richness of style, which certainly reached their acme in the noble writers we have just named. The remains of these ancient authors are few-of some only the name still exists; but to many Livy was largely indebted for his materials, and to some perhaps for useful instruction in the science of which he is certainly a master. The art of history has itself a history, and it cannot he uninteresting to trace its rise and progress in ancient Rome to mark the first efforts made in it, of a glorious people who begin to feel that they have done, and are doing, things worthy of being handed down to posterity. The materials for a sketch of this kind are to be found in the learned and laborious work of Vossins de Historicis Latinis, and in the historical collections of historical fragments of Riccoboni and others. The treatise of Vossius is overlaid with that which may now be termed useless, though doubtless at the time necessary, discussion. It however supplies all that learning can bring to the task. We do not pretend to any profound erudition on the subject; but we hope, with his assistance and aided by our own enquiries, to afford what is as far as we know a desideratum in English literature, an account of the most ancient Roman writers of history and the subjects of which they severally treated. Rome was more than 500 years without an historian. Her legislators had however ordained various modes of perpetuating I 'Gerardi Joannis Vossii de Historicis Latinis Libri tres, Lug. Bat. ap. Jo. Maire. 1627. It is addressed to the famous Duke of Buckingham, the favorite of James I, in a very curious dedication. 2 Ant. Riccoboni Rhodigini de Historia liber, cum fragmentis Historicorum veterum Latinorum summa fide et diligentia ab eodem collectis et auctis, Basil. 1579. See also Fragmenta Historicorum collecta ab Antonio Augustino, emendata a Fulvio Ursino. Antverp. 1595. 2 the memory of events, and the love of fame which so remarkably characterised her citizens, established many acts of domestic piety well calculated to furnish materials for the future historian. From the beginning of the Roman state the High Pontiff committed the transactions of every year to writing, upon a white board, which was exposed at his house for the general information of the citizens. These were the Annales maximi. Together with these there are mentioned the Libri lintei, probably records of the different magistrates, to which Livy often refers; various religious and ceremonial books, the accounts of the Censors, the family memorials, and the inscriptions and statues erected in memory of signal events; which were all of a nature to be highly useful to the historian. Unhappily, however, the greater part of these documents perished in the burning of Rome by the Gauls, and hence arises that uncertainty in its early history which has been the subject of so much discussion. When, however, from this wreck of authentic materials the origin and history of the nation became obscure and difficult to be rightly ascertained, there were not wanting inen who came forward to supply the defect. The first Punic war seems to have infused the historical spirit into the few who had at that time made any progress in letters. They appear to have then first become unwilling that such important events as marked its duration should pass on to oblivion, without attempting to perpetuate them in such homely phrase as their language and education then supplied. The narration of contemporary affairs naturally led them back to the consideration of ancient times; and after Q. Fabius Pictor once set the example, Rome never wanted historians to record her exploits, or antiquarians to investigate her origin.-Rome was more than 500 years without an The passage in Cicero which describes them is too remarkable to be omitted. Erat enim historia nihil aliud nisi annalium confectio. Cujus rei memoriæque publicæ retinendæ causa, ab initio rerum Romanarum usque ad Publium Mucium Pontificem Maximum res omnes singulorum annorum literis mandabat P. Maximus, referebatque in album, et proponebat tabulam domi ut esset potestas populo cognoscendi, iique etiam nunc annales maximi nominantur." Lib. 2. de Orat. 12. 2 We learn this fact from Livy, who complains of the paucity and the obscurity of materials for the first part of his work: "Quæ ab condita urbe Roma ad captam eandern, quinque libris exposui: res quum nimia vetustate obscuras, veluti quæ magno ex intervallo loci vix cernuntur: tum quod raræ per eadem tempora literæ fuere, una custodia fidelis memoriæ rerum gestarum: et quod, etiamsi quæ in commentariis pontificum, aliisque publicis privatisque erant monumentis, incensa urbe ple» raque interiere." Lib. 6. c. 1. historian, and before the first production of Fabius Pictor her history had never been attempted, except in the verses of Nævius and Ennius. Fabius Pictor, whom Livy calls scriptorum antiquissimus, and longe antiquissimus auctor, was provincial quæstor in the year U. C. 535. After the battle of Cannæ he was selected as the fittest person to be sent to consult the oracle of Delphi,2 where he enquired the probable issue of the war and the meaus of appeasing the Gods. Livy thus appeals to his authority, as a contemporary of the events on the banks of the Thrasymenian lake: "Fabium, aqualem temporibus hujusce belli potissimum auctorem habui." The subjects which Fabius appears to have chosen, judging from the few fragments which still remain, were the antiquities of Italy, the origin of the city, and the contemporary events of his times. He wrote, it is probable, in Greek as well as in Latin, and is said to have been largely indebted to Greek authors. His name and authority are frequently introduced in the works of succeeding authors, and generally with respect. Cicero thus characterises his style, as well as that of the annalists who succeeded him: "Hanc similitudinem scribendi multi secuti sunt, qui sine ullis ornamentis monimenta solum temporum, hominum locorum, gestarumque rerum reliquerunt; talis noster Cato et PICTOR et Piso, qui neque tenent quibus rebus ornetur, et dum intelligatur quid dicant, unam dicendi tandem putant esse brevitatem." Polybius speaks of Fabius at some length, and warns his readers not to place implicit faith in him, because he was a senator and a contemporary of the events he describes, but to consider the nature of things themselves, and judge what was worthy of credit. Fabius indeed appears to have been partial to his countrymen and is accused by Polybius in another place of misrepresenting facts with an unjust prejudice against the Carthaginian. Dionysius also more than once has occasion to mention our historian; and though he seems to have considerable confidence in the truth of his relations of the matters which came under his knowledge, he accuses him of negligence as to the early history of Rome, The name of Pictor is derived from his uncle, who painted the Temple of Safety, of which circumstance Pliny thus speaks:-" Apud Romanos quoque honos mature huic (pingendi) arti contigit; siquidem cognomina ex ea PICTORUM traxerunt Fabii clarissimæ gentis, princepsque ejus cognominis ipse adem Salutis pinxit ccccL., que pictura duravit ad nostram memoriam, ade, Claudii principatu, exusta." Lib. xxxv. c. iv. 2 Lib. ii. de Orat., et vid. de Leg. lib. i. |