Note A from Bayle's Dictionary Entry on Johannes Sturmius [Link]:
It is not true that he was familiary acquainted with Conrad Goclenius.] Melchior Adam expresses himself thus: “Ibidem (Lovanii) cum familiariter versaretur cum Rudgero Rescio, & Conrado Goclenio, Hominibus literatissimis utriusque linguae Graecae & Latinæ Lovanii tum Professoribus, &c.[1] As he was familiarly acquainted at the same place with Rudgerus Rescius and Conrad Goclenius, two very learned men, and at that time professors at Louvain of both the Greek and Latin languages, &c.’ These words are not clear enough : the plain meaning of them seems to be that Conrad Goclenius was professor of the Greek and Latin tongues, as well as Rudgerus Rescius; but it was not so. Goclenius was only professor of the Latin tongue, and Rescius of the Greek. The words I am going to quote out of John Sturmius will inform us of this distinction, and, besides, that he applied himself to Rescius, who had fallen out with Goclenius, and was little acquainted with the latter.
It is not true that he was familiary acquainted with Conrad Goclenius.] Melchior Adam expresses himself thus: “Ibidem (Lovanii) cum familiariter versaretur cum Rudgero Rescio, & Conrado Goclenio, Hominibus literatissimis utriusque linguae Graecae & Latinæ Lovanii tum Professoribus, &c.[1] As he was familiarly acquainted at the same place with Rudgerus Rescius and Conrad Goclenius, two very learned men, and at that time professors at Louvain of both the Greek and Latin languages, &c.’ These words are not clear enough : the plain meaning of them seems to be that Conrad Goclenius was professor of the Greek and Latin tongues, as well as Rudgerus Rescius; but it was not so. Goclenius was only professor of the Latin tongue, and Rescius of the Greek. The words I am going to quote out of John Sturmius will inform us of this distinction, and, besides, that he applied himself to Rescius, who had fallen out with Goclenius, and was little acquainted with the latter.
Memini ego,
Hermanne princeps lllustrissime,’ So Sturmius speaks to the Archbishop of
Cologne in the epistle dedicatory of the second volume of Cicero's Orations, ‘cum
Lovanii ante annos quindecim essem, præclaram de Comite Schauemburgio, quem tu
tibi adjutorem atque siiccessorem cooptasti, spem nobis omnibus datam esse.
Audivit ille tum quotidie in Latina lingua doctorem, disertum hominem Conradum
Goclenium: cum ego Rutgeri Rescii propter græcas literas, quas ille omnium
optime tradebat, essem studiosus: ob eamque caustam minus ego Conrado
familiaris qui a Rutgero dissentiebat. Sed de Schauemburgio consentientes
nostri sensus erant, maximum aliquando ornamentum atque lumen in sua Repub.
futurum, si eum curium studiorum, in quo tum erat, posset conficere.
[‘Most
illustrious Prince Hermanns, I remember that about fifteen years ago, while I
was at Louvain, we had conceived excellent hopes of Count Schauemburg, whom you
chose for your assistant and successor. At that time he daily frequented the
school of the eloquent Conrad Goclenius, professor of the Latin tongue; whereas
I applied myself to Rudgerus Rescius, who taught the Greek language the best of
any: and for this reason I was the less familiarly acquainted with Conrad, who
was at variance with Rudgerus. Nevertheless we had all the same notion of
Schauemburg, viz. that he would prove a shining light, and an exceeding great
ornament to his country, if he could but finish the course of studies in which
he was then engaged.']
I have said
more than once, that it is a fault not to date Epistles Dedicatory and
Prefaces, and I have been confirmed in this opinion as I was transcribing this
passage of Sturmius; for as it is not laid in my edition, which is that of
Strasburgh, apud Josiam Rihelium 1558, whether it be the second or the
third, &c. I should have thought that it is the first, and consequently
that Sturmius dedicated it in the year 1558 : but had I drawn such a
consequence, I had been mistaken in several things; I had falsely believed that
he studied at Louvain in 1543, and that Conrad Goclenius was then living. In
order to avoid those mistakes I have been obliged to enquire into the true date
of the first edition of Cicero's Orations, published by Sturmius, and I have
found that it came out in 1540. Is it not a sad thing to lose one's time by the
negligence of others? Is it reasonable that the omission of a thing, which
required no more than a dash of a Pen[2] should
expose many readers to a very great trouble.
No comments:
Post a Comment