Page:The Voyage of Nearchus and the Periplus of the Erythrean Sea.djvu/17

x of expreſſion were allowed, perſpicuity would be utterly unattainable.

If I have perſuaded myſelf that I am better qualified for an interpreter of theſe works than many others of ſuperior talents and acquirements, it does not ariſe from preſumption, but from the contemplation of theſe ſubjects for many years, and from the poſſeſſion of materials, which few would have had the curioſity to collect, and fewer ſtill the patience to arrange and prepare for publication.

It was originally intended to give the text, Greek and Engliſh, without farther remarks; a few notes have been now added for the purpoſe of correction, and to ſave the trouble of perpetual reference: but wherever investigation is requiſite, recourſe must be had to the former work.

The Greek text of both the following works is that of Nicolas Blancard; but in the Voyage of Nearchus it has been corrected from the edition of Gronovius, (Leyden, 1704.) and moſt of the readings of his beſt Florentine manuſcript admitted into the text. That manuſcript was one of those procured by Lorenzo de Medicis, and it is ineſtimable.

The Periplûs has received but little correction ſince its firſt publication by Gelenius at Baſle, 1533. The edition of Stuckius (Geneva, 1577.) has large Scholia; but, in a geographical point of view, of no great value.

The Oxford edition by Hudſon, 1698, is moſt accurately printed; but the ſtate of the text, where defective, is rarely touched. The few marginal notes he has added are not of importance, and ſome of them are erroneous; but without MSS, he did wiſely in