A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

572 PTOLEMAEUS. PTOLEMAEUS.
catalogue is the one which should be cited. It have been twice printed in Greek, and together;
gives the readings of the Florence and Paris mann- first, by John Camerarius (Gr. Lat.), Nuremberg,
scripts (from IIilma), of the Greek of Grynoeus 1535, 4to.; secondly, with new Latin version and
and Halmna, and of the Latin of Liechtenstein and preface, by Philip Melancthon, Basle, 1553, 8vo.
Trapezuntius, with corrections from our present (Fabricius, Hoffmann). Among the Latin editions,
astronomical knowledge very sparingly, and we over and above those already noted as accompanybelieve very judiciously, introduced. The astro- ing editions of the Almagest, Hain mentions two
illmer might easily make Ptolemy's catalogue what (of both works) of the fifteenth century; one by
it ought to have been; the scholar, from criticism Ratdolt, Venice, 1484, 4to.; another by Bonetus
alone, would certainly place many stars where it is (with other astrological tracts), Venice, 1493, fol.
impossible Ptolemy could have recorded them as There is another, translated by Gogava, Louvain,
being. From frequent conversation with Mr. Baily 1548, 4to. (Hoffmann, Lalande); and there is anoduring the progress of his task, we can confidently ther attached to the collection made by Hervagius
say that lie had no bias in favour of making his (which begins with Julius Firmicus, and ends with.
text astronomically correct at the expense of cri- Manilius), Basle, 1533, folio; and all except the
tical evidence; but that he was as fully impressed Firmicus and Manilius seem to have been printed
with the necessity of producing Ptolemy's errors as before, Venice, 1519, folio (Lalanlde). There is
his truths. mention of two other editions, of Basle and Venice,
Mr. Baily remarks, as to the catalogue, and the 1551 and 1597, including both Firmicus and Masame appears as to other parts of the Almagest, that nilius (Lalande). The Centiloquiuom has been
Halma often gives in the text he has chosen read- sometimes attributed to Hermes Trismegistus: but
ings different from those of all his principal subjects this last-named author had a Centiloquiumn of his
of collation. This means that he has, in a consi- own, which is printed il the edition just described,
derable number of cases, either amended his text and is certainly not in matter the same as Ptoconjecturally, or preferred the reading of some lemly's. Fabricius, mentioning the Centiloquium,
minor manuscript, without particular mention. says that Ptolemy de Eectionibus, appeared (Lat.),
This'is no great harm, since, as the readings of all Venice, 1.509, —. Perhaps this is the same
his great sources are always given,it amounts to hav- work as the one of the same title, afterwards pubing one more choice from an unnamed quarter. But lished as that of the Arab Zahel. The English
it is important that the critical reader of the edition translation (1701) purporting to be from " Ptoshould have notice of it; and the more so, inas- lemy's Qtiadripartite" (Hoffinann), must be from
much as the readings are at the end of each the paraphrase by Proclus, as appears from its
volume, without text-reference from the places in title-page containing the name of Leo Allatius, who
which they occur. edited the latter. The usual Latinl of the CentiloOn the preceding summary of the bibliographical quium is by Jovius Pontanus: whether the Cornmenhistory of the Almagest, we shall remark that the taries attributed to himl, printed, Basle, 1531, 4to.
reader is not to measure the currency of it by the (Lalande), &c., are any thing more than the version,
niumber of its editions. It was the gold which lay we must leave to the professedly astrological biblioin the Bank, while paper circulated on its authority. grapher. It was printed without the QuadriparAll the European books on astronomy were fa- iituln several times, as at Colognle, 1544, 8vo.: and
shioned upon it, and it was only the more learned this is said to be with the comment of Trapezuntius,
astronomers who went to the common original. meaning probably the version. The commentaries
Euclid was actually read, and accordingly, as we or introductions, two in lnumber, attributed to
have seen, the presses were crowded with editions Proclus and Porphyry, were printed (Gr. Lat.)
of the Elements. But Ptolemy, in his own words, Basle, 1559, folio (Lalande).
was better known by his astrology than by his as- 3. Ke.vdv BaLeiAe'wv. This is a catalogue of Assytronomy. We now come to his other writings, on rian, Persian, Greek, and Roman sovereigns, with
which we have less to say. the length of their reigns, several times referred to
2. Te'TpaCL~Xos UmYv'qrams, generally called Tetra- by Syncellus, and found, with continuation, in
biblon, or Quadripartitum de Apotelesmatibzs et Ju- Theon. It is considered an undoubted work of
diciis Astrorum. With this goes another small Ptolemy. It is a scrap which has been printed by
work, called Kap7ros, or Fructus Libror2tmz Suorulm, Scaliger, Calvisius (who valued it highly), Petavius
often called Centiloquium, from its containing a and Dodwell; but most formally by Bainbridge
hundred aphorisms. Both of these works are as- (in the work presently cited), and by 1almna, as
trological, and it has been doubted by some whether above noticed.
they be genuine. But the doubt merely arises 4. ba'rre sraav dmrlaYEpwC, cKai avvaoywy7) s'rtr7from the feeling that the contents are unworthy of,uaeEiLZv, De Apparentiis et SigniJicationibus inerranPtolemy. The Tetrabiblon itself is, like the Alma- timz. This annual list of sidereal phaenomena has
gest and other writings, dedicated to his brother been printed three times in Greek: by Petavius,
Syrus: it refers, in the introduction, to another in his Uranologion, Paris, 1630, folio; partially
work on the mathematical theory. Both works in Fabricius, but deferred by Harless to a supplemenltary volume which did not appear; and by
* If editors will put the various readings at the Halma, as above noticed. There are three other
end of their volumes, instead of at the bottom of works of the same name or character, which have
the pages, we should wish, when there are more been attributed to Ptolemy, and all three are given,
volumes than one, that the readings for one volume with the genuine one, by Petavius, as above. Two
should be inserted at the end of another. It would of them are Roman calendars, not worth notice. The
then be practicable to have the text and its variations third was published, in Latin, from a Greek manuopen before the reader at one and the same moment, script, by Nic. Leonicus, Venice, 1516, 8vo. (Fabriwhich, when two or three instances come close to- cius): and this is reprinted in the collection begingether, is very desirable. iiing with Julius Firmicus, above noticed. We havo