1845.] Freund's Latin Lexicon. 79 tions are intended to produce. Seek, therefore, on every possible occasion, to weaken and destroy it. The practised eye will not fail to discern such opportunities. Such passages, for instance, as Matt. 17: 24-27. 21: 10. etc., you will not suffer to pass unimproved for this purpose. In particular, I would remind you, that the cross on Golgotha is the place where the Saviour of men was mocked eighteen hundred years ago, and where it will be specially seemly to renew that derision, if any one has a disposition for it at the present day. Go thou now and do in like manner. "I will give thee the whole world, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. And your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall become as gods." Probatum est. ARTICLE IV. PRINCIPLES OF LATIN LEXICOGRAPHY. Translated by Professor T, D. Woolsey, Yale College. [The first part of the Latin dictionary of Wilhelm Freund, of Breslau appeared in 1834, and contained the letters A-C. The second part was published in two numbers, in 1836, and 1844, and went from D to K. The fourth part, (R-Z) was published in 1836, and the third part has been announced as about to appear in 1844. We believe that this lexicon will take a very high rank, probably before any other Latin, and certainly before any Greek one in existence. The preface, containing the author's views of lexicography and an account of his method, has a bearing by no means confined to the Latin or to any particular set of languages, and is, we think, calculated to be useful to all whose labors are directed to lexicography as well as to scholars in general. A translation of this preface is now laid before the reader.—TR.] BETWEEN the first publication of the Latin lexicons of Forcellini, Gesner, and Scheller, and the appearance of the present work, more than fifty years have elapsed; and during just this interval, classical philology has met with so thorough a transformation that for this very reason the attempt to bring out a dictionary of the Latin tongue, which shall better correspond with the altered standpoint of the philological sciences, requires no excuse. Still it is the duty of the author to make known what is the problem he has proposed to himself, and by what means he has tried to solve it to do this as completely as possible is the aim of the ensuing lines. In order, however, to take the necessary survey where the vastness of the subject almost precludes its being surveyed, it is advisable to arrange it under particular rubrics; and therefore in what follows we shall treat, (1) of the idea and elements of Latin Lexicography, (2) of the compass of the present dictionary, (3) of the method of handling the several articles, (4) of the arrangement of the articles, (5) of the signs and technical terms employed in the work, and (6) of the aids in composing it. I. Of the idea and elements of Latin Lexicography. § 1. If Lexicography in general is that science whose task it is to set forth the nature of every single word of a language through all the periods of its existence, it is the task of Latin lexicography in particular to set forth the nature of every single word of the Latin language, as it makes itself known in all the periods of the existence of that language; or more succinctly expressed, it is the object of Latin lexicography to give the history of every single word of the Latin language. It is, therefore, a purely objective science, and although by its aid the understanding of works written in Latin is promoted, still it does not acknowledge this to be its end, but like every objective science it is its own end. § 2. The history of a word consists in unfolding its outer nature, that is, its form, class, syntactical connections and the like, together with its inner nature or meaning. But since in Latin, just as in all cultivated languages, every word has not a particular form peculiar to itself, but belongs to a distinct class of words, whose forms it adopts; and since the doctrine of the forms of classes of words and their alterations is the subject matter of grammar, it is not required of lexicography to make known all the forms of each particular word in its various relations and connections; on the contrary, it needs merely to designate the class to which a word belongs, and only then when a word has assumed a form peculiar to itself to mark this as an exception. When the lexicographer adds ae to the word mensa, this is nothing but a convenient abbreviation which grammar renders intelligible to all, and by means of which the enumeration of all the inflections of this word becomes unnecessary. On the other hand, as the form capsis of the word capio deviates from the regular form of 1845.] Idea and Elements of Latin Lexicography. 81 kindred words, the lexicon must necessarily give notice of that fact, because otherwise the external history of the word capio will be incomplete. This is the grammatical element of lexicography. § 3. The greatest number of words in Latin, as in every culti vated language, is derived from others termed radical or groundwords. It is the duty, therefore, of the external history of words, in the case of every word which is not underived, to indicate the root from which it springs. This is the etymological element of lexicography. § 4. The internal history of a word consists, as has been mentioned, in the exhibition of its meaning. This is the exegetical element of lexicography. Inasmuch as every word has its own distinct and peculiar meaning, to make this known is the peculiar and distinct province of lexicography, and grammar invades the field of its sister science, whenever, besides giving an account of the forms and connections of classes of words, she treats also of the meanings of single words, which exert no influence upon their grammatical relations,-a mode of proceeding which many Latin grammars adopt in regard to the meanings of the pronouns, prepositions and conjunctions. § 5. In Latin, as in other languages, many words have in their meanings so much resemblance to one another, that a superficial examination can hardly distinguish them. It is the duty, therefore, of the internal history of words to hold up the meaning of such words over against one another; to compare and to distinguish them. This is the synonymous element of lexicography. § 6. Only a very few words, forms of words and meanings were alike in use through all the periods of the life of the Latin language; most of them had a much shorter duration; many did not even outlive a single period. The history of a word thereas far as extant materials allow-must let us know to what time a word, a form or a meaning belongs. This I name the specialhistorical, or chronological element of lexicography. 7. In like manner, there are but a few words of the Latin language and those containing the most general notions-which were equally in use in all kinds of style. The history of words, therefore, must inform us to what kind of composition a word, a form or a meaning belongs; whether to prose or poetry, to the higher prose of the orator, or the lower of the people, or to the language of art, as a technical term of religion, of oeconomy, of rhetoric, of philosophy, and so on. I call this the rhetorical element of lexicography. § 8. Finally, the Latin, like every polished dialect, has certain favorite words which it willingly and often uses; and again a number of words, of which it makes use but seldom, or perhaps only once. It is incumbent then on the historian of words, under each word to notice its frequent or rare occurrence. the statistical element of lexicography. II. Of the extent of the present Lexicon. I name this § 1. As Latin lexicography has to do with the history of all the words of the Latin language, and as the number of words in this language varies according as we consider it to be in a narrower sense the dialect of the Romans, or in a wider sense, that both of the Romans and of the learned afterwards, in the middle ages, it becomes necessary to say, in which of these spheres the present lexicon has chosen to move. We confine ourselves, then, to Latin as the national language of the Romans, and accordingly give the history of all those words which occur in the written remains of the Romans, from the earliest times to the fall of the West-Roman empire. Within this period, the work of every Latin writer, whether he was a born Roman or not, a heathen or a Christian, will be held to belong to the Latin literature, and will receive attention in proportion as the modes of expression current in it have any peculiar bearing upon the history of words. § 2. But in the materials furnished by the writings of the ancient Romans to the lexicographer, a separation of the greatest importance for the trustworthiness of the history of words must be made between such as lie before our eyes in the extant works of the Latin classics, and those of whose existence at one time we are informed by the old grammarians and lexicographers. In the case of the former, our own inspection, our own judgment is allowed to us; the others we must take on credit and authority. We have, therefore, in the present work represented to the eye by capitals, those words and forms, for the knowledge of which we are indebted only to old grammarians and glossators; and which are, as it were, the isolated remains of an ancient world of words. For example: “ABAMBULANTES abscedentes." Festus, p. 22. Apollo,-inis (earlier APELLO, as hemo for homo. Festus, p. 19. 3. The case is the same with words and forms found only in inscriptions, since for the most part we know neither the person 1845.] Limits of the Lexicon in Time and Form. 83 making use of them, nor the time when they were used. These also are, therefore, designated by capital letters. For example, ARCHIBVCVLVS. (BVCOL.) -i, m, an upper priest of Bacchus. Inser. Orell. No. 2235, 2351, 2352. [doy-Povzólos.] = Apollo, inis, (.... APOLONES Apollini, in a very old inscription, VICESIMA. PARTI. APOLONES. DEDERI. i. e. vicesimam partem Apollini dedere. Inscr. Orell. No. 1433, etc.). §4. The limits of the lexicon, again, are to be determined not merely with respect to time, but also with respect to the origin of the words which it contains. The Latin language, as is well known, like that of every nation which has had intercourse with other nations, has not kept itself free from foreign words. The question now arises whether Latin lexicography ought to embrace words. adopted into Latin from other languages, or whether it should confine itself to its own unmixed stores. The latter procedure we have seen used in German; so that peculiar dictionaries have been composed for words borrowed from abroad. Is this advisable also for the Latin? It is right that the decision here should not rest upon considerations of convenience, and of what is customary; but simply and solely upon the more or less scientific character of the two courses. The adoption of a foreign word into a language, assumes of course the real or supposed want of a corresponding native word denoting the same idea. Now the foreign word, in taking upon itself the function of a fully synonymous but not existing native word, and in representing a peculiar notion, ceases, as far as actual use is concerned, to be foreign, although at its origin it was really such. But the duty of general Latin lexicography, with which we are alone concerned, unlike that of special etymological lexicography, requires it to give the sum total of Latin words, considered as conveying the notions of persons speaking this language, and not considered as indigenous expressions of ideas; whence it follows, that a place on the list of Latin words cannot be refused to such as are borrowed from foreign tongues and by means of written Latin characters had full citizenship conceded to them. 5. On the other hand, from the circumstance that one language needs to borrow from another, arises the necessity of making a distinction between those words which a nation finds in its own language adequate to the expression of its thoughts, and those which it is forced to invite out of foreign parts. This distinction is made in the present work by crosses prefixed to all words which originally were not of the Latin stock. In doing |