[320] XXV, 92.

[321] XXI, 19; XXV, 11.

[322] XXIV, 62; XXV, 21.

[323] XXIV, 62-63.

[324] XVI, 95.

[325] See XXIV, 6, for other methods of plucking the mistletoe.

[326] XVIII, 45.

[327] See also XXV, 6.

[328] XIX, 58.

[329] XVIII, 70.

[330] XVIII, 73.

[331] XXVIII, 81.

[332] XVIII, 8.

[333] XXXVII, 14, 73.

[334] XXXVII, 55-56.

[335] XXXVII, 13.

[336] For instance, XXXVII, 12 amber, 37 jasper, 39 aetites, 55 “baroptenus.”

[337] XXXVI, 31.

[338] XXXVII, 15, 58, 67.

[339] XXXVI, 25, 39.

[340] XVI, 20.

[341] XXXIII, 25.

[342] XXX, 12, 25.

[343] XX, 3; XXVIII, 6, 9; etc.

[344] II, 63; XXIX, 23.

[345] XXXIII, 34

[346] XX, 51; XXVIII, 21.

[347] VII, 13; XXVIII, 23.

[348] XX, 33; XXII, 30; XXVIII, 18-19.

[349] XXVIII, 8.

[350] XXVIII, 9.

[351] XXVIII, 9-11.

[352] XXVIII, 7.

[353] VII, 2.

[354] XXVIII, 6.

[355] XXII, 49.

[356] XXIV, 102.

[357] In this paragraph I have combined views expressed by Pliny in three different passages: XXII, 49 and 56; XXIV, 1.

[358] IX, 88; XXIV, 1; XXVIII, 23; XXXII, 12; XXXVII, 15; etc.

[359] XXIV, 1; XXIX, 17.

[360] VIII, 50; XXVIII, 42.

[361] XXIX, 17 and 23.

[362] XXVIII, 43.

[363] XX, 1. “Odia amicitiaque rerum surdarum ac sensu carentium ... quod Graeci sympathiam appellavere.” XXIV, 1. “Surdis etiam rerum sua cuique sunt venena ac minimis quoque ... Concordia valent.”

[364] XXVIII, 41; XXXVII, 15. Yet a note in Bostock and Riley’s translation, IV, 207, asserts, “Pliny is the only author who makes mention of this singularly absurd notion.”

[365] “Nunc quod totis voluminibus his docere conati summus de discordia rerum concordiaque quam antipathiam Graeci vocavere ac sympathiam non aliter clarius intelligi potest.”

[366] XXIV, 41.

[367] XXI, 47.

[368] XX, 36.

[369] XVI, 24.

[370] XXV, 55.

[371] XXXVII, 54.

[372] XXIII, 62; XXIV, 1.

[373] XXVIII, 41.

[374] XXIX, 32.

[375] XXVIII, 61.

[376] XXIX, 27.

[377] XXVII, 74.

[378] XXXVI, 11.

[379] XXV, 3.

[380] XXII, 29.

[381] XXVIII, 9.

[382] XXVIII, 17.

[383] XXVIII, 47.

[384] XXIX, 38.

[385] XXX, 20.

[386] XXVIII, 49.

[387] XXXII, 52.

[388] XXIX, 27.

[389] XXX, 7.

[390] XXXII, 14.

[391] XXX, 20 and 14.

[392] XXXII, 29; XXX, 11.

[393] XXVIII, 42.

[394] XXII, 65.

[395] XXII, 72.

[396] XXII, 32.

[397] XXX, 12.

[398] XXV, 106.

[399] XX, 81.

[400] XXVIII, 47.

[401] XXX, 12, 15.

[402] XXVII, 62.

[403] XXIX, 17.

[404] XXIX, 24.

[405] XXVI, 89.

[406] XXXII, 16; also XX, 39.

[407] XXII, 30.

[408] XXIV, 32, 38.

[409] XX, 72, 82.

[410] XXVI, 69.

[411] XXIX, 36.

[412] XXX, 8.

[413] XXVIII, 10.

[414] XXXII, 24.

[415] XXX, 18.

[416] See also XXX, 8.

[417] XXIV, 106 and 109.

[418] XXIV, 107 and 110.

[419] Some examples are: XVIII, 75, 79; XXII, 72; XXIII, 71; XXVIII, 47; XXIX, 36; XXXII, 14, 25, 38, 46.

[420] XXXII, 14.

[421] XXX, 12.

[422] XXIV, 112.

[423] VIII, 50.

[424] XXVIII, 6.

[425] XXIV, 17.

[426] XXX, 15.

[427] XXIX, 34.

[428] XXXII, 24.

[429] XXXII, 38.

[430] XVII, 47.

[431] XIX, 36.

[432] XVIII, 35.

[433] XXVI, 60.

[434] XXVIII, 7.

[435] XXVII, 75.

[436] XXVII, 106.

[437] XXVIII, 3-4.

[438] XXVII, 35. “Catanancen Thessalam herbam qualis sit describi a nobis supervacuum est, cum sit usus eius ad amatoria tantum.” XXVII, 99. “Phyteuma quale sit describere supervacuum habeo cum sit usus eius tantum ad amatoria.”

[439] XXV, 7. “Ego nec abortiva dico ac ne amatoria quidem, memor Lucullum imperatorem clarissimum amatorio perisse....”

[440] A few examples are: XX, 15, 84, 92; XXIV, 11, 42; XXVI, 64; XXVII, 42, 99; XXVIII, 77, 80; XXX, 49; XXXII, 50.

[441] XXII, 9.

[442] XXV, 7.

[443] XXIX, 27.

[444] XXX, 1. On the general attitude to astrology of the preceding Augustan Age and its poets see H. W. Garrod, Manili Astronomicon Liber II, Oxford, 1911, pp. lxv-lxxiii, but I think he overestimates the probable effect of the edict of 16 A.D. upon the poem of Manilius.

[445] II, 5. “Astroque suo eventus adsignat nascendi legibus semelque in omnes futuros umquam deo decretum in reliquom vero otium datur.”

[446] VII, 37.

[447] VII, 50.

[448] VII, 57.

[449] II, 24.

[450] II, 6, “Non tanta caelo societas nobiscum est ut nostro fato mortalis sit ibi quoque siderum fulgor.”

[451] II, 9.

[452] II, 18.

[453] II, 23.

[454] II, 30.

[455] XXV, 5.

[456] II, 1.

[457] II, 4.

[458] II, 16.

[459] II, 13.

[460] II, 6; and see II, 39.

[461] II, 6. “Potentia autem ad terram magnopere eorum pertinens.”

[462] II, 6.

[463] XVIII, 5, 57, 69.

[464] XVIII, 68. Other authorities tell the story of Thales; see Cicero, De divinatione, II, 201; Aristotle, Polit. I, 7; and Diogenes Laertius.

[465] XVIII, 78.

[466] II, 81.

[467] XXXVII, 28.

[468] XXXVII, 59.

[469] XXIX, 5.

[470] XXX, 29.

[471] II, 40.

[472] II, 102.

[473] II, 41.

[474] XXXII, 19.

[475] L. Annaei Senecae Naturalium Quaestionum Libri Septem, VI, 4, “Aliquando de motu terrarum volumen iuvenis ediderim.” The edition by G. D. Koeler, Göttingen, 1819, devotes several hundred pages to a Disquisitio and Animadversiones upon Seneca’s work. I have also used the more recent Teubner edition, ed. Haase, 1881, and the English translation in Clark and Geikie, Physical Science in the Time of Nero, 1910. In Panckoucke’s Library, vol. 147, a French translation accompanies the text.

[476] VII, 25.

[477] VII, 31.

[478] III, 26.

[479] V, 6, for animals generated in flames; II, 31, for snakes struck by lightning; III, passim for marvelous fountains.

[480] III, 25.

[481] IV, 7.

[482] II, 32.

[483] II, 46.

[484] I, 1.

[485] VII, 30.

[486] II, 10.

[487] VII, 28.

[488] That is to say, five in addition to the sun and the moon.

[489] II, 32.

[490] III, 29.

[491] II, 31-50.

[492] II, 32.

[493] A complete edition of Ptolemy’s works has been in process of publication since 1898 in the Teubner library by J. L. Heiberg and Franz Boll. They are also the authors of the most important recent researches concerning Ptolemy. See Heiberg’s discussion of the MSS in the volumes of the above edition which have thus far appeared; his articles on the Latin translations of Ptolemy in Hermes XLV (1910) 57ff, and XLVI (1911) 206ff; but especially Boll, Studien über Claudius Ptolemäus. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie und Astrologie, 1894, in Jahrb. f. Philol. u. Pädagogik, Neue Folge, Suppl. Bd. 21. A recent summary of investigation and bibliography concerning Ptolemy is W. Schmid, Die Nachklassische Periode der Griechischen Litteratur, 1913, pp. 717-24, in the fifth edition of Christ, Gesch. d. Griech. Litt.

[494] Some strictures upon Ptolemy as a geographer are made by Sir W. M. Ramsay, The Historical Geography of Asia Minor, 1890, pp. 69-73.

[495] Schmid would appear to be mistaken in saying that the Geography was already known in Latin and Arabic translation in the time of Frederick II (p. 718, “Seine in erster Linie die Astronomie, dann auch die Geographie und Harmonik betreffenden Schriften haben sich nicht bloss im Originaltext erhalten; sie wurden auch frühzeitig von den Arabern übersetzt und sind dann, ähnlich wie die Werke des Aristoteles, schon zur Zeit des Kaisers Friedrich II, noch ehe man sie im Urtext kennen lernte, durch lateinische, nach dem Arabischen gemachte Übersetzungen ins Abendland gelangt”), for in his own bibliography (p. 723) we read, “Geographie ... Frühste latein. Übersetzung des Jacobus Angelus gedruckt Bologna, 1462.” Apparently Schmid did not know the date of Angelus’ translation.

However, Duhem, III (1915) 417, also speaks as if the Geography were known in the thirteenth century: “les considérations empruntées à la Géographie de Ptolémée fournissent à Robert de Lincoln une objection contre le mouvement de précession des équinoxes tel qu’il est définé dans l’Almageste.” See also C. A. Nallino, Al-Huwarizmi e il suo rifacimento della geografia di Tolomeo, 1894, cited by Suter (1914) viii-ix, for a geography in Arabic preserved at Strasburg which is based on Ptolemy’s Geography.

[496] In this Latin translation it is often entitled Cosmographia. Some MSS are: CLM 14583, 15th century, fols. 81-215, Cosmographia Ptolomei a Jacobo Angelo translata. Also BN 4801, 4802, 4803, 4804, 4838. Arsenal 981, in an Italian hand, is presumably incorrectly dated as of the 14th century.

This Jacobus Angelus was chancellor of the faculty of Montpellier in 1433 and is censured by Gerson in a letter for his superstitious observance of days.

[497] The several editions printed before 1500 seem to have consisted simply of this Latin translation, such as that of Bologna, 1462, and Vincentiae, 1475, and the Greek text to have been first published in 1507. See Justin Winsor, A Bibliography of Ptolemy’s Geography, 1884, in Library of Harvard University, Bibliographical Contributions, No. 18:—a bibliography which deals only with printed editions and not with the MSS. According to Schmid, however, the editio princeps of the Greek text was that of Basel, 1533. C. Müller’s modern edition (Didot, 1883 and 1901) gives an unsatisfactory bare list of 38 MSS. See also G. M. Raidel, Commentatio critico-literaria de Claudii Ptolemaei Geographia eiusque codicibus, 1737.

[498] L’ottica di Claudio Tolomeo da Eugenio ammiraglio di Sicilia ridotta in latino, ed. Gilberto Govi, Turin, 1885.

[499] Schmid (1913) still cites it without qualification. Hammer-Jensen has an article, Ptolemaios und Heron, in Hermes, XLVIII (1913) 224, et seq.

[500] Haskins and Lockwood, The Sicilian Translators of the Twelfth Century, in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, XXI (1910), 89.

[501] Ibid., 89-94.

[502] A. Heller, Geschichte der Physik von Aristoteles bis auf die neueste Zeit, 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1882-1884. The statement sounds a trifle improbable in view of the number of MSS still in existence.

[503] Opus Maius, II, 7.

[504] The Dioptra of Hero is really geodetical.

[505] Govi (1885), p. 151.

[506] Ptolemy in Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography.

[507] It was also so printed in Sphera cum commentis, 1518: “Explicit secundus et ultimus liber Ptolomei de Speculis. Completa fuit eius translatio ultimo Decembris anno Christi 1269.”

[508] C. H. Haskins and D. P. Lockwood, The Sicilian Translators of the Twelfth Century and the First Latin Version of Ptolemy’s Almagest, in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, XXI (1910) 75-102.

C. H. Haskins, Further Notes on Sicilian Translations of the Twelfth Century, Ibid., XXIII, 155-66.

J. L. Heiberg, Eine mittelalterliche Uebersetzung der Syntaxis des Ptolemaios, in Hermes XLV (1910) 57-66; and Noch einmal die mittelalterliche Ptolemaios-Uebersetzung, Ibid., XLVI, 207-16.