eloquent wisdom of the great master, and has, together with the Professors, Edwards of Andover, and Felton of Cambridge, laid down in the "Classical Studies" a noble gift on the altar of learning and edu cation. In 1840, when Hermann had been doctor of philosophy for fifty years, all the universities of Europe vied with each other in presenting their homage by deputies, diplomas or poems. Scholars of all kinds had held back their new books for the great day, to dedicate them to him; others had written literary dissertations only for that occasion. The government, which had created him long before "Comthur" of the "order of merit," presented his son, Conrad Hermann, with a "stipendium" for three years, to study in some other universities in Germany. The Greek Society gave him a tabula votiva of silver, with an inscription on one side, and the names of the "Sodales" on the other.

Gottf. Hermann was born in Leipzig, and spent nearly all his life in the same city. The classical air of the gymnasium could not but inspire the highly gifted youth with love for ancient literature, and excite the desire of continual communion with the favorite studies. At that time very few devoted themselves exclusively to philology, and only such as purposed to pursue the "academical career," and to become university professors of classical literature. The professorships in the gymnasia were commonly filled by such candidates of theology, as in addition to their required studies (das Brodstudium) had, while at the university, most successfully continued their classical studies. G. Hermann, when entering the high school, chose, like his father, the study of law, and had almost finished his course, when he exchanged the corpus juris for the corpus poetarum graecorum. Classical learning is much indebted to Prof. Reiz (Plauti Rudens, 1784. Herodotus, etc.) whose learning, taste and teaching talent were able to win the young Hermann for a field in which his genius had a larger scope than in the dull and mouldy pages of Tribonian. Hermann remembered him always with respect and gratitude. The notes to Viger, inserted in Hermann's edition, will carry his name with that of his celebrated disciple down to classical scholars of coming ages. With 1790 Hermann's academical and literary career commenced. The "Elementa artis metricae," "Epitome" and "Handbuch" showed him soon to the world as a scholar of the first order. With philosophical sagacity he analyzed the metrical laws of the ancients, and though there may be in the introduction too much of Kant's categories, his attachment to Kantianism, like that of Schiller, could not but bear fine fruits of independent research. His grammatical writings, "de Emendanda Rat. Graec. Grammaticae I. 1801; Adnot. ad Vigerum; de

1850.]

Labors of Hermann.

367

Particula, av," etc., showing a thorough acquaintance with authors and grammarians, and an unusual acuteness of judgment, made him the first authority in grammatical learning. His editions of Aristotle de Arte Poet. 1802, Eurip. Hecuba, 1800, Homeri hymni, 1806, Orphica, 1806, Sophocles after Erfurdt, 1809, Euripides, etc. completed his renown. It is true, he has published no popular grammar like Buttmann or Kühner, but he gave new principles and new materials to others for writing common books in systematical arrangement. It is not less true, that his editions never have been nor will be favorite school books, because they contain very little matter suited to the wants and tastes of younger students. He intended to emend the text, not to explain it. He purposed to show the right way to other critics, and to prepare the field for teachers or editors who sow the classical seed by books or recitations. According to the different character of the university and gymnasium, the professors of the former have to promote learning as such by new theories and new researches, whereas those of the latter have to make it popular by a new method or the skilful application of an old one. Hence popular school editions are, generally speaking, written by gymnasia professors, as Krüger, Anabasis and Thucydides, Kühner, Tusculan Questions, Stallbaum, Plato, Matthiae, Cic. Orat. Select, etc., Wunder, Sophocles, Wagner, Virgil, Herzog, Caesar, Doering, Horace, Goeller, Thucydides, Rüdiger, Demosthenes Olynth., Jacobs, Lucian, Fabri, Sallust, Livy, etc. Besides the above named books, we have a treasure of classical learning in the many treatises on various subjects, published in "Programms" or reviews. The former we owe to his function as professor of eloquence and poetry, which obliged him to write at all public occasions the universityprogramme, i. e. a dissertation, followed on the last page by the invitation or other communications in the name of the university. (The gymnasia professors write them by turns.) They are all, together with prefaces, poems and letters, collected in the six volumes of his Opuscula. They contain "De mythologia Graecorum antiquissima, 1817, De historiae graecae primordiis, 1818, a number of researches on Aeschylus' tragedies, and the great review of Aeschyli Eumenides, ed. by C. O. Müller in Göttingen, 1833, almost a complete commentary and as valuable as Müller's edition itself. In length it is only surpassed by Ed. Wunder's "recension" of Lobeck's Ajax, and by Hermann's "über Herrn Prof. Böeckh's Behandlung der griech. Inschriften, 1826, 8. vs. Böeckh's corpus inscriptionum graecarum, 2 vols. 1825." The "Incredibilia" were directed vs. Schaefer, with whom a dispute had arisen on account of some remark in the preface to Viger. If his literary disputes were to be judged by the most rigid mo

ralist, he might perhaps receive some little censure for his quarrel with Schaefer, but certainly would be acquitted on any other account. His disputes with Böckh and O. Müller may by a phrenologist be traced to large combativeness; but by others they are considered as the necessary results of opposite positions in the field of science, and hallowed by many useful and interesting results. We remember well, that in the lecture on mythology, the views of "Professor Müller" (Prole gomena zu einer wissenschaftlichen Mythologie, 1825) were sharply, sometimes even scornfully contradicted, and that in the Pindar-lecture many Böckhians were unpardonably rejected, but Hermann was critic by profession, and the students wanted not to hear a school-like genealogy of the gods, with a chronological account of their exploits, etc., but the principles of the science in general, and the peculiar views of Hermann in opposition to other chief masters. The amiability of his character blunted generally the sharp point of his criticism. Hence he was feared, not hated by his opponents, respected by all, and loved, sincerely and warmly loved, by his disciples. The scholar Hermann was only surpassed by the teacher Hermann. The most elegant Latin was flowing from his lips, while all eyes of the audience were rivetted upon him with unbroken attention. The most tasteful combination of critical and explanatory matter, laid the author open in all his beauty and strength. When the passage was rugged, a conjecture smoothed the way, and each hearer was gliding along convinced, that if the pro posed reading was not the genuine one, it was the better one. The hour passed rapidly, but the thinking hearer had enough to reflect upon for a whole day. Hermann gave always six lectures a week, from 11 till 12 every day; on a Greek author, rarely on a play of Plautus or Terence, four times; and on mythology, metre, Greek syntax, and similar subjects, twice, i. e. on Wednesdays and Saturdays. The latter were given in German. In the first days of a new term, the " Auditorium" was always crowded, many "hospites" being there to see and hear, once at least, the great man of whom they had heard so much; and throughout the term we seldom found, on the four days ("publice"), less than fifty hearers. The "wissenschaftlichen" lectures were attended by scarcely any others than philologists; yet, since nearly all of these were present, the audience numbered at least twenty.

Hermann's colleagues were formerly Chr. Daniel Beck, the polyhis tor, author of an history of the world, 1787, remarkable for the completeness of the literature, of a "Grundriss der archaeologie," 1816; of "de philologia saeculi Ptolem. 1818; Observ. critt. histor." 1821, etc. and editor of Plato, 1813, of the "Commentarii in Aristophenem, etc.; Carl Beier, the editor of Cicero de Officiis, 1820, Caelius, 1828, and

1850.]

Professors at Leipsic.

369

Benj. Weiske, the editor of Xenophon, 1798, Longinus, etc.; G. H. Schaefer, the editor of the apparatus ad Demosthenem, Gregory of Corinth, of the Corpus Poetarum Graecorum, Tauchn. 1810, etc. They were succeeded afterwards by A. Westermann, who lectured exclusively on Greek authors, and particularly on the orators; also on the Greek inscriptions, on Greek literature, etc. His history of Greek and Roman eloquence is his greatest work and highly thought of. Reinhold Klotz is the representative of Roman learning in Leipzig. As Beier was bold, so prudent and circumspect is Klotz in the use of the Codices (diplomatische kritik), and his editions of Cicero's Orations, 3 vol., Tuscul. Disp., Laelius and Cato, show his critical taste and Roman scholarship in the most favorable light. A critical edition of all of Cicero's Works has been expected for a long time by all the friends of the great statesman and philosopher. Klotz is still young, about forty-three, but his active mind has been very productive. He has published Clemens Alexandrinus, Terentii Comoediae, with the emended commentaries of Douat and Eugraphius, Devarius, a translation of Cicero's philosophical works, etc., and edited with the celebrated conrector of the Thomas-school, J. Ch. Jahn, the Philologischen Jahrbücher, and has been, since Jahn's death, its chief editor, with the assistance of Prof. Dietsch of Grimma. The last works of the greatest importance, but not yet finished, are his Römische Literaturgeschichte, and his Latin-German lexicon. They bid fair to leave Bähr's Röm. Literatur, 1828, and Freund's Lexicon, behind. May the publisher of the lexicon, in Brunswick, not be prevented by the present unfavorable circumstances, from continuing it! W. A. Becker, who died in 1846, was, previously to his appointment, professor in Meissen, and labored in the university about ten years. His "Gallus," "Charicles," and "Roman Antiquities," are the popular monuments of his archaeological learning, perhaps less various and universal, but more exact and systematical than that of the celebrated Böttiger of Dresden (Sabina, Amalthea, Andeutungen zu Vorträgen über Archaeologie, 1806, Vasengemälde, etc.). Mor. Haupt, Hermann's son-in-law, now P. O. of old German literature, used to lecture as privatdocent on Catullus and other Latin poets with much success. The two rectors of the gymnasia in Leipzig, Stallbaum the celebrated Platonist, and Nobbe the editor of Cicero's fragments, are also professors of the university; yet, being sufficiently occupied with their important chief business, make very little use of their academical professorship. Wilhelm and Ludwig Dindorf, formerly connected with the university, retired a long time since and devoted themselves entirely to writing and publishing. To these philological professors must be added

the P. P. O. of history, Wilhelm Wachsmuth, the far renowned author of the "Hellenische Alterthumskunde," etc. His Lectures on Greek and Roman Antiquities, and on ancient history, are well attended by the philologists, as they deserve to be.

This description may have given a fair idea of the opportunities which the universities generally, and that in Leipzig particularly, afford to a classical student. Yet, the character of philological studies being such as to require much reading and personal research, the student, the more he advances, loses the more interest in lecturés. He needs particular exercises, in order to bring out his discoveries and to be corrected or encouraged. After passive hearing and solitary study, he needs some social activity, to consolidate and to enlarge his learning. And these wants were admirably provided for, at least for those who were able to testify sufficient scholarship. Having been, for three or four terms, an attentive listener to the best teachers, the student contrived to be admitted into the philological seminary. For that end he presented a Latin composition, on a Greek or Roman author, to the two leaders, Hermann, director, and Klotz, adjunct, and if approved by them, he could expect to be accepted in the course of the year; if not, he tried a second time and then gave it up. The number of members was, according to the statutes, limited to twelve, but almost never exceeded nine. Some of them belonged to it for three and more years. They assembled on Wednesdays and Saturdays, at 5 o'clock, around a broad table in Hermann's lecture-room. Hermann conducted the Greek exercises, and Klotz the Latin. Euripides' Medea, and Cicero's four orations against Verres, were the two pieces explained in the winter term of 1838. Both professors were regularly present. A member lectured for nearly one hour, on twenty or more verses of Euripides, or on a chapter of Cicero, beginning where his predecessor had left off the last time. After he had finished, the other members, from the oldest down to the youngest, reviewed the lecture and criticised with sharp Latin tongues. The professor of the respective branch was judge, and condemned or acquitted the defendant in doubtful cases. When the youngest member had spoken, in case something was left to him by his more fortunate superiors, the professor was the last opponent, and reviewed those passages on which he had not decided before. All the members will agree with us, that these exercises were as interesting as useful, and will always with joy and gratitude recollect the seminary-meetings of their university life.

Of different character and standing was the Greek Society. If the candidate had been successful with his request and critical essay, the new member had to defend his composition against some opponent, who