428 Memoirs of Aldus Manutius, or the Elder Aldus. [June 1, 
him for selling his books so dear, and for 
leaving such large and useless margins. 
But as the works of Aldus were well 
printed upon excellent paper, they were 
certainly of more value than the inac- 
curate editions of many of his contempo- 
raries; and the dittle praperty which he 
left to his children, proves the injustice of 
the reproach. 
tions vpon Pliny’s Letters, complains 
that Aldus has‘given too much licence to 
his conjectures. J. A. Ernesti, in the 
preface tohis excellent edition of Homer, 
1759—64, 5 vols. 8vo. pretends that the 
three Aldine editions of Homer, and 
particularly the last, were very incorrect. 
Ip the preface to his Tacitus, he goes 
still farther: “ Observatum est a viris 
doctis Aldum szpe priores editiones non 
auxisse, nisi vitlisoperarum.” These com- 
plaints may in some measure be reta- 
liated, for the Homer of this learned edi- 
tor is not exempt from faults; his Ta- 
citus, valuable as it may be, is far from 
corrett; and his edition of the Latin 
Bibliotheca of Fabricius, 1773 —74, 3 vols. 
8vo. is so faulty, that in the use of it 
much discretion is necessary. It is cer- 
tainly true that the Greek editions of 
Aldus are generally less correct than his 
Latin or Italian ones; it is also true that 
lie has not always been happy in the 
choice of his readings, and that some of 
his editions are not printed from a cor- 
rect text; that of the lesser works of 
Plutarch, 1509, folio, is not good, but he 
wanted better materials. The edition 
of Lucian, 1503, folio, must be admitted 
to be far inferior to that of Florence, 
1496: but to judge impartially, the state 
of ancient literature-at that time should 
be considered. When Aldus was able 
to collect different manuscripts, he com- 
pared them with each other; but he was 
very often obliged to print from imper- 
fect aiid mutilated copies. Ought he, as 
he possessed only one bad manuscript of 
Hesychius, to have determined not to 
publish that excellent Lexicun, the only 
existing copy of which, so many unfore- 
séen accidents might have destroyed? 
How many works of antiquity would have 
been lost, if the first, perhaps almost un- 
intelligible, fragments, which were dis- 
covered in the dust of old libraries, had 
not been printed without loss of time. 
Typographical correctness certainly 
depends upon the priiter; but it 18 gene- 
rally found, that this is more ditheult to 
be obtained in Greek editions, than in 
works written in a language more vene- 
rally known. © Let these slight errors be 
a 
= 
Gruter in his Observa-— 
compared with all the important labours 
of Aldus, and let it be recollected that 
some few of the great works, or some 
brilliant actions, of celebrated men are 
frequently mentioned, whilst the rest of 
their lives and writings are passed over 
-Iin silence; whereas all the numerous 
editions of Aldus have been critically 
examined in order that a few faults might 
be detected, which should justify the 
censures of the critic; notwithstanding 
which, Aldus is justly and universally 
considered as deserving of the first rank 
in the list of printers either ancient or 
modern, ; 
The Aldine editions, and particularly 
the Greek ones, have been frequently 
consulted by the first editors, in pre= 
ference to later ones; as can be shewn 
ainongst many other authorities, by that 
of the learned Brunck. In his Greek 
editions of Aristophanes, and of Sopho- 
cles; &c. he gives to those of Aldus un- 
qualified praise, and declares them to 
be the foundation of every future edition. 
The fault of which Aldus has been ace - 
cused, of taking too great licence in. his 
corrections, might be imputed more justly 
to his immediate successors, Andrea of 
Asola; and his two sons, who, though © 
also iearned, were much less skilful, and 
have given more than one inferior edi- 
tion, particularly in Greek. The Oppian 
of 1517, and some other of their works, | 
are proofs that if they had not succeeded 
Aldus, they would not have been consi- 
dered eminent as printers. Their edi- 
tions, however, are not to be contemned; 
and with the exception of a few, they 
merit the attention of the learned, whilst 
their great rarity and splendid execution 
render them valuable to the admirers of 
ancient literature. 
Aimeongst those who consult the Aldine 
editions, some exclusively prefer those of 
the elder Aldus; others admit the autho- 
rity of those published previous to the 
year 1529, the period of the death of 
Andrea of Asola; but a greater number, 
independently of the great value which 
they attach to almest all the, editions 
published during the thirty-three first 
years, esteem most of those also of Pau- 
lus Manutius, and a few only of those hy 
the younger Aldus, and those afterwards. 
printed previous, to the year 1597, (when 
the younver Aldus died) with the Aldine 
anchor, and in tie same office, by Nice. 
Manassi. The editions of the elder Al- 
dus are undoubtedly scarger than those 
of a more recent date; they are fre-, 
quently beiter printed, aud upon Geng 
“ ent 
