Astronomicon

members (304 and 302 lines) are two sets of 7 leaves ($44 \times 7 = 308$): how sets of 7 leaves could be interchanged he does not explain, nor what has become of the superabundant verses. For Mr Thielscher, whose archetype is wax in its creator's hands, these are two ternios of about 48 ($48 \times 6 = 288$)The explanation of this low figure is that he has overlooked the titles and so reckons III 400–IV 9 as 292 lines. or 50 ($50 \times 6 = 300$) lines to the leaf. How it happens that β was unaffected by the transposition Bechert did not enquire; but this was a very serious question for Mr Thielscher, who is committed to the false assumption that L and M are direct copies of the archetype. That false it is I have already shown on p. ix; the glimpse which we have just caught of α is another nail in its coffin; and the shift to which it here reduces Mr Thielscher ought to make even him distrust it. If M and not L were the mss with the wrong order, he would have no trouble; he could say that the transposition took place between the 11th and the 15th century. But now he is forced to suppose that the leaves of his endlessly subservient and obliging archetype, after having been astray in the 11th century, were consecutive in the 15th.

From the mss I now proceed to the efflorescence of editions which has enriched the opening of the 20th century.

In 1907, his 83rd year, Breiter published the first volume, text with apparatus criticus critical notes/apparatus, of the edition which he had been meditating for a lifetime; the second, a commentary, followed in 1908, a few months before his death. Though slender in bulk and unpretentious in character they were hailed by his countrymen as a 'gigantisches Lebenswerk' gigantic life's work and a 'monumentum aere perennius deutschen Gelehrtenfleisses' a monument more lasting than bronze, of German scholarly diligence; 'Durch ihren hohen wissenschaftlichen Wert tritt Br.'s Ausgabe den Arbeiten Scaligers, Bentleys und'—eloquent conjunction—'Pingrés würdig zur Seite' Through its high scientific value, Br.'s edition steps worthily to the side of the works of Scaliger, Bentley, and Pingré; 'Die Wissenschaft ist um ein monumentales Hilfsmittel für das Verständnis dieses schweren Dichters bereichert, der Studierende hat einen zuverlässigen Führer gewonnen: immensus labor est et fertilis idem!' Science is enriched by a monumental aid for the understanding of this difficult poet, the student has gained a reliable guide: the labor is immense and likewise fruitful! This ought not to be forgotten, and the reader should bear it steadily in mind as he peruses what I am about to say.

Breiter's papers in Fleckeisen's Neue Jahrbuecher, vol. 139 (1889) and vol. 147 (1893), were the most estimable contribution made to the study of Manilius after Jacob's edition. The corrections of Ellis were rather more numerous, and one or two of them were very pretty, but his readers were in perpetual contact with the intellect of an idiot child: in Breiter's articles the good preponderated, and