1801.] Account of the Ilerculancum Manufcripts. 



521 



contents of tliefe manufonpts were flill 

 proceed uiff, had alinod begun to dcl'pair 

 ot deriving any pcirnuncnt bcuelit Ironi 

 their ex rtiuns; vviicn, in 1793, Tke 

 J'lHirth Book of P/iilodtmiixs Tretitife on 

 Miijk, (tlic tirll inauufcript whicli had 

 been properly unrolled,) illYied from the 

 preis, under the title of " llcrculancu- 

 iiunx \'olu!iiinuni quae fuperfunt, Toinus 

 I. Neapoli, Ex regia Typograpliia.'' 

 Not more than two or three copies, we 

 V)elieve, have even yet tiouiid their way 

 to j'ng^fiiid, from one of which tlie 

 fpecimea in tlic plate liua been engrav- 

 ed. 



From the preface to this trcatifo, t'ne 

 Gi-eelv title of wi ich is <3>IAOAHMOY 

 riEPI MCTS1KH2. A. we leain a tew 

 particulars, wljich acconnt for the llow 

 progrefs of the undertaking. The dilh- 

 (•ulty, the tedioufncfs, and the dani;cr of 

 unfolding the manufcripts, do not appear 

 to iiave been the fole caufes of the hin- 

 drance. The fuccelli(jn of Charles, King 

 of Naples, to the crown of Spain, in 1759, 

 Occafioned a long interrujjtion to the 

 litboursof the academicians, which were 

 not refumed with proper energy till 1787, 

 when four individuals v/cre a)jpointed to 

 fupcrinteufl the publication of four an- 

 cient volumes. Of thefc Philodemus 

 was the firft, publiOied in the name of 

 the Academy, but by the immediate 

 care of Carolo Kolini. 



The credit of unrolling Pliilodcnuis, 

 however, appews to have been princi- 

 pally due to one father Antonio, an able 

 and adroit writer at the Vatican, who 

 was recommended to the King of Na- 

 ples, about 1753, by Signior Allemaui. 

 He made a machine with which, by 

 means of threads, gummed to tlie back 

 part of the papyrus, where there was no 

 writing, lie began by degrees to pull; 

 while with a fort of engraver's inftrument 

 he loofencd one leaf from the other, 

 and then made a kind of lining to the 

 back part of the papyrus with exceed- 

 ing thin leaves oi' onion ; and with foine 

 fpirituous liquor, with which he wetted 

 the papyrus, by little and little he un- 

 folded it. 



The original manufcript, which ap- 

 pears to have received great injury, inid 

 was one of the finallefi that were found, 

 is given in the publication, in thirty- 

 eight columns iii fuc Jiiidlc, in the uncial 

 ciiarafter, written without any divifion 

 of the words, and almoil without any 

 abbreviation. It is followed by a tran- 

 fcript in the modern letters, in whicli 

 the gaps of the original, occalioncd either 

 by fire or the procefs of unrolling;, have 

 been conjecturally I'lipplied, and difiiu- 



guiflied by tlie editor with red letters, but 

 ill the prefeiit inllance with a dalli be- 

 neath ; to which lie has added a Latin 

 trunilation, and copious and learned 

 notes. 



The following is the fuinmarv of the 

 chapters into which tlie trcatife appears 

 to divide itfeif. 



" Cap. i. Nullam efle Muficam qure 

 ad animos iiiforniaiidos lit idonca. 



" Cap. ii. An Mulica Divinitati coleu- 

 dae per fe lit idonca ? 



" Cap. iii. All Mufica aliijuid confei-at 

 encomiis, hymenffiis, epithalamiis, thrc- 

 nis? 



" Cap. iv. De Mufica qua; ludicris 

 certaminibus inferviret, quid fentienduin. 

 " Cap. V. An Mulica luapte natura vi 

 movendi polleat } 



" Cap. vi. Generali Argumonto, (]uod 

 in lior.ore apud veteres fucrit Mulica, 

 obviam itur. 



" Cap. vii. An ad amorem IMufica 

 quid conferat ? 



" Cap. viii. Quid in conviviis pra,-rii<i 

 terit Mulica } 



" Cap. ix. An ad amicitias conciliandas 

 quid conferre queat ? 



" Cap. X. Quid de Thaietis et Ter- 

 pandri hilloriolis fentienduni ? 



" Cap. xi. An Mulica eo nomine fit 

 commendauda, quod religioni vulgo in- 

 ferviat. 



" Cap. xii An Mufica intellcamn 

 acuat, ct ad alias fcientias relationeia 

 habeat ? 



" Cap. xiii. An Mufica ad virtutes 

 animum difpunat .? 



" Cap. xiv. Quid Mullcse nomine fit 

 intelligenduin .? 



"Cap. XV. An Mufica calelvibus me- 

 teoris relpondeat ? 



" Cap. xvi. Num animi alTe£tus im- 

 uiutare queat .'' 



" Cap. xvii. An utilitatein Mufica pariat? 

 " Cap. xviii. An Mulicain Dei iuvc- 

 nerint .? 



" Cap. xix. Quibus de caufis vulgo 

 Muficam difcercnt." 



From thefe it will be fcen,that through- 

 out tiic work mulic is treated, not iu a 

 fcientifical, Init in a philofophical point 

 of view. Philodemus, in a difputatioa 

 againll the lloic, Diogenes Babylonius, 

 contends that mulic is confmetl in its 

 influence to the fenfual gratification of 

 the ear; that it luxs no power over the 

 adbciions of the mind; and that it is in- 

 capable of exciting any virtuous or no- 

 ble fentiments. lie blames it as perni- 

 cious to fociety, iuid as produttive of 

 foftncfs and cllcmiiiacv. 



The firfl cohinin, engraved in our 

 platt;, is thus explained by the editor. 



2 CULUMNA 



