[149]. One would not suppose that the later Greek rhetoricians were so fascinating as to be introuvables; but this is very nearly the case. Aristides himself is very scarce and very dear. Maximus Tyrius and Themistius refuse themselves to the seeker, except after long waiting; and as for Libanius, Messrs Parker of Oxford inform me that they have for years been vainly searching for a complete copy of Reiske’s edition, while an incomplete one of which they knew was snapped up before I could get it. I can only suppose that the editions which Reiske himself and Dindorf edited, at the end of the last century and early in this, were printed in small numbers, and have been gradually absorbed into public libraries. In these latter I have never myself been able to work, except under compulsion, and then with no comfort. Why Herr Teubner, the Providence of inopulent or leisureless students, has been so slow to come to their help in these cases, I do not know.
[150]. P. 481, op. cit.
[151]. The reading in Long., Frag. 1, is disputed, some suggesting Hyperides. But Sopater, in commenting on Aristides, attests the admiration of Longinus.
[153]. 3 vols., Leipsic, 1829. The collection is at iii. 772. Although Dindorf says scornfully, neque enim is scriptor est Aristides cui diutius quis immoretur, would that all editors gave editions as well furnished!
[154]. Any one who has experienced a humiliating sense of initial bafflement may be encouraged, as the present writer was, by the round declaration of such a scholar as Reiske, that of all the Greek he had ever read outside of the speeches of Thucydides, Aristides was the most difficult. Ed. cit., iii. 788.
[155]. The excellent Canterus, who has strung these passages in his Prolegomena (iii. 779), would fain translate οἱ λόγοι “literature”; but it is pretty certain from the context that Aristides was thinking of rhetorical literature only.
[156]. Ed. cit., i. 751.
[157]. Ibid., ii. 1.
[158]. Ibid., ii. 156-414.