Complete Works of Cassiodorus, Vol. I

our most illustrious Senator. For although he does not exhibit that grace and elegance of style which flourished with the majesty of the Empire under Augustus: yet he possesses such quality in a rude age and under Barbarian Kings, which you may rightly wonder at, and to which writers of better reputation deservedly subscribe.

We have gone through all the editions of these books, as many as we could obtain, and we have both compared them with several codices of various ages and corrected them from these. We were aided primarily by the manuscript codex of St. Ouen, though in it books 5, 6, and 7 are missing, and by the most ancient parchments of St. Remigius of Rheims: in which, however, except for the first four books, the rest are missing. We also had from our Library an edition of these books published by Mariangelus Accursius in the year 1533, which the most clear and learned man Claudius Grulartus, formerly Prince of the supreme Senate of Normandy, had compared with the exemplar of the celebrated Cujacius at Bourges. But of what quality that codex of Cujacius was, we cannot divine; since we only found these words on the front of our book, written by the hand of Grulartus: I compared it at Bourges on the Nones of November, 1575, with the exemplar of the most clear man, D. Cujacius. But whatever that exemplar of Cujacius may have been, the book of Grulartus certainly provided us with many and excellent corrections as well as observations, which he who reads will easily perceive how much they have illuminated the text and notes of our Edition. Furthermore, whether we owe those observations to the exemplar of Cujacius or primarily to the wit and care of Grulartus, since it has not been clear to us thus far, we have decided that they should be appended under the name of each in their respective places. Finally, the most learned man Franciscus Juretus was especially helpful to us, whose annotations and diverse readings for the Variae books, based on the authority of many manuscript codices, were most kindly transmitted to us by the most illustrious man D. Bouhierius, President of the supreme Senate of Burgundy, and the literary heir of Juretus.

Now, indeed, we have subjoined all those observations which we had from learned men on these books at the end of each Epistle, so that the learned Reader may see everything in one view, as it were. There, therefore, he will see again the things that Fornerius and Brossaeus had already made public law: but not without some correction, for we have added to them the notes of Juretus, conspicuous for various erudition, by which he not only illuminates the words and sentences of our Senator, but also corrects the very observations of Fornerius themselves; and he either corrects or restores many authorities viciously cited by him, both from legal experts and other Authors.

Certain idle men have prefixed summaries or synopses to the individual Epistles of Cassiodorus: but with such a dull mind and perfunctory effort that there are many who think they either did not read them or did not grasp the meaning. It was our more intent care that we might not stray from the scope, by publishing other headings, which we willingly submit to the censure of the Readers.

Lest anything be missing from this Edition of the Variae, we have taken care to explain what we thought were difficult, semi-obscure, and not easily accessible to anyone. We also present a notice of dignities, places, rivers, and many things of that kind, which can be found in that work most worthy of note. But lest the bulk of this volume be too great, this little work of ours will run separately after we have applied the final hand to this our Edition.

On the Tripartite History. Lib. div. litt. cap. 17. In the Preface to the Trip. History. Lib. div. litt. cap. 17.

The History follows the books of the Variae most closely, which is called Tripartite three-part because Cassiodorus had collected it into one body of twelve books from three Greek Authors, namely Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret: Whom we, says our Senator, rendering into Latin eloquence through Epiphanius Scholasticus, deemed it necessary to bring their deflowered sayings into the tract of one style, with the Lord helping, and to make one diction from three Authors. And lest an indistinct matter trouble anyone, he says he placed titles throughout the entire text of the work. Nor does he testify that he had any other scope in that work than that this history, written wonderfully, as he says, by those Authors, should not be lacking to his Monks of Vivarium: Lest, he says, eloquent Greece insult you by having something necessary which it judges to be subtracted from you.

In the Epistle prefixed to the works of Eusebius.

We know that Beatus Rhenanus inveighs bitterly and insultingly against the version of Epiphanius, and objects to him an ignorance of the Greek and Latin language, whose negligence and the errors of the Typographers he, weary, warns not without pride that he has corrected, deleted, and supplied many things. But how little just his reproaches against the interpreter are, everyone will confess...