nes Pr

ks of Cassiodorus to attract the notice of printers at the revival of learning. The Editio

oannes Sichardus (printer, Henricus Petrus). The contribution of Cassiodorus is prefaced by an appropriate Epistl

f the 'Variae,' published at Augsbu

blished at Basel a series of Chronicles with which he interwove the Chro

of Niv

istory, the Exposition of the Psalter, or the 'Complexiones' on the Epistles. Some notes, not without merit, are added, which were compiled in 1578 by 'Gulielmus Fornerius, Parisiensis, Regius apud Aurelianenses Consiliarius et A

ter of Sidonius is evidently inserted owing to a confusion between the two Theodorics; and this error has led many later commentators astray. But the reprint of the 'Edictum Theoderici' is of great interest and value, because the MS. from which it was taken has since disappeared, and none other is known to be in existence. A letter is prefixed to the 'Edictum,' written by Pi

only, which will be found at the end of the Panegyric of Ennodius. Garet's Index, which is in itself not so fu

xcluding the Tripartite History and the Biblical Commentaries), publishe

, and again by Pierre and Jacques Chouet at Geneva in 1609, and by their successors in 1650.

on of

entioning 'Codex S. Audoeni' (deficient for Books 5, 6, and 7 of the 'Variae'), 'et antiquissimae membranae S. Remigii Remensis' (containing only the first four books of the same collection). A codex which once belonged to the jurist Cujacius, and which had been collated with Accurtius' text i

ng Editio

s a volume of the 'Auctores Antiquissimi' in the Monumenta Germaniae Historica. The editor is Professor Wilhelm Meyer, of Munich. The

ragment of

gelo Mai, who was then disposed to attribute them to Symmachus (the elder), and to assign them to the early part of the fifth century. On reflection, however, he came to the conclusion that they were probably the work of Cassiodorus, and formed part of a panegyric addressed to Theodoric. T

by

ery minute investigation, but it seems to be a creditable performance, the work of one who had carefully studied the 'Variae,' but unfortunately quite misleading as to the whole

y St.

e fact that the handy octavo volume written in French was accessible to a wider circle of readers than Garet's unwieldy folio in Latin. A more original performance was that of Count Buat (in the 'Abhandlungen der Kurfürstlichen Bairischen Akademie de

monog

hree excellent monographs which have recently been published

rbe

Cassiodorus Senator'

an

lius Cassiodorius Senat

en

i' (Bonn, 1877), described in the

o our knowledge of the subject in presenting us with Holder's fragment; and his Commentary (of eighty pages) on this fragment is a model of patient and exhaustive research. It seems probable that these three authors have really said pretty nearly

a treatise on the political system of the Ostrogoths which is almost a continuous comm

tween these two writers was also elaborately discussed by von Sybel in his thesis 'De Fontibus Libri Jordanis' (Berlin, 1838), and by Schirren, in his monograph 'De Ratione quae inter Jordanem et Cas

rs in the 'Variae;' and Binding, in his 'Geschichte des Burgundisch-Romanischen K?nigreichs' (Leipzig, 1868), discusses the relations between Theodoric and the

niglich S?chsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften;' Leipzig, 1861), has said all that is to be sa

hlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter,' tell us with fullness and accuracy just what the student ought to wish to know concerning Cassiodorus

language from forming an opinion as to the work of Thijm ('Iets over M.A. Cassiodorus

of the 'Various Letters' in English, as far as I know, is unfortunately entombed in the pages of a periodical, being an article by Dean Church, contributed in July, 1880, to the 'Church Quarterly Rev