Ὅτι μὲν οὖν καὶ ἑτέροις ὑπὲρ τούτων ἐσπούδασται, καλῶς οἶδα·
ἐγὼ δὲ ἐμαυτῷ ταῦτα, ὅσα οἷον τε ἦν, ἀθροίσας, καὶ περιβαλὼν
αὐτοῖς τὴν συνήθη λέξιν, κειμήλιον οὐκ ἀσπούδαστον ἐκπονῆσαι
πεπίστευκα. Εἰ δέ τῳ καὶ ἄλλῳ φανεῖται ταῦτα λυσιτελῆ, χρήσθω
αὐτοῖς· ὅτῳ δὲ οὐ φανεῖται, ἐάτω τῷ πατρὶ θάλπειν τε καὶ
περιέπειν· οὐ γὰρ πάντα πᾶσι καλὰ, οὐδὲ ἄξια δοκεῖ σπουδάσαι
πᾶσι πάντα.
+Ælian. de Natura Animalium, Præfat.+
For the amusement of such as may be desirous of consulting the
Cynegetical works cited in the preceding annotations on Arrian and the
Appendix, a list of their respective titles and editions is subjoined.
The author does not pretend to enumerate all the known editions of each
Cynegeticon, but only those of his own library. Where two or more of
the same work are mentioned, the copy made use of is either pointed out
by specification, or the name of the editor and place of publication
are printed in italics. In cases of disputed text, different editions
have been collated, and the most approved readings selected for use.
Enrolled in the catalogue are a few treatises _de re Venaticâ_ which
the present writer has never seen. They are admitted on the authority
of earlier compilers, in whose bibliothecæ they appear: but their
importance to the θήρης κλυτὰ δήνεα (Oppian. Cyneg. +i.+ 16.) is
assumed rather than established. Remoteness of residence from public
libraries must plead for the author’s unavoidable ignorance. He could
not certify by actual examination the admissibility of any book not
on his own shelves. The works in question are distinguished by the
prefixture of an asterisk.
A Bibliotheca Cynegetica upon the following plan was first attempted by
Rittershusius in his _Prolegomena_ to Oppian, imperfectly executed by
Lallemant in his _Bibliotheca Historica et Critica Thereuticographῶn_,
and subsequently, but still far short of perfection, by Belin de
Ballu in his prefatory matter to the poet of Anazarbus. The latter’s
catalogue professedly excludes all prosaic works, save those of the
classic ages—departing from its rule in the solitary instance of Conrad
Heresbach’s Compendium. Of the English Cynegetica, Somerville’s Chace
is alone admitted, the doggrel of the Book of St. Alban’s possessing
insufficient poetical pretensions, perhaps, in the eyes of a foreigner,
to place Dame Juliana Berners, or the “one sumtyme scole mayster of
seynt Albons,” or whoever be the author of these antique canons,
amongst those “qui _metricè_ hanc materiam persecuti sunt.” Proleg. in
Oppian. p. +xvi.+ Ed. 4to.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: +i.+ Xenophon.]
Xenophontis Opuscula Politica, Equestria, et Venatica, cum Arriani
Libello De Venatione, &c. _J. G. Schneider. Oxonii_, +mdcccxvii.+