On the first editions of the chemical writings of Democritus and Synesius / by John Ferguson.

  • Ferguson, John, 1838-1916.
Date:
[1884]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the first editions of the chemical writings of Democritus and Synesius / by John Ferguson. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    4/14 (page 2)
    o stamp of an esotericism, the aim and the interpretation of which are alike a puzzle to the historian. 2. Over and above the difficulty of interpretation, there is nearly as much in ascertaining precisely such apparently commonplace and ob^•ious matters as the date when the translation was first printed, and the number of editions of it which appeared. Dr. Kopp, who has gone into these questions most minutely, has not been able to arrive at a definite settlement of them. In his survey of the statements made by the different authorities he has found them at such variance with one another that he has been constrained to believe that the descriptions of the various editions could not have been written from inspection of actual copies. As he himself has succeeded, after great trouble, in seeing a copy of only one edition, all that he has been able to do for the othei’S has been to compare the statements of different writers, and to get from them what seem to be the best conclusions under the circumstances. Subsequent inquirers are under a deep obligation to him for the amount of labour he has thus spared them, 3. Of Pizimenti’s translation, the number of editions quoted incidentally by Dr. Kopp from the various authorities is con- siderable. They are as follows:—Pome, 1570; Padua, 1572, 1573 ; Cologne, 1572, 1574; Frankfurt, 1592, 1613, 1673 ; Klirnberg, 1717. For the edition of 1570 there is the authority of Conring. Dr. Kopp, however, attaches no importance to it; he does not criticise Conring’s statement about it; he does not apparently think it worth while to consider even the possibility of its existence, for he looks upon this date as an error. I shall consider it below (§ 11). The Padua edition of 1572 is mentioned by Ducange, by Grasse, and by Mullach. Dr. Kopp considers this date also erroneous. It is the Padua edition of 1573 which is reckoned by him the first or oldest, and he gives the following title:—“ Democritus Abderita de arte magna sive de rebus naturalibus; nec non Synesii et Pelagii, et Stephani Alexandrini et Mich. Pselli in eundem comnientaria. Dom. Pizimentio Yibonensi interprete. Patavii, 1573. After much searching and trouble. Dr. Kopp succeeded at last in finding a copy of this extremely rare book in the University Library at Gottingen; the very volume, I suppose, described by Beckmann, who was professor of Technology there towards the