of various ages for the text of this
edition, especially mentioning '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 in 1575 by a certain
Claude Grulart, seems to have given Garet some valuable readings by
means of Grulart's notes, though the codex itself had disappeared.
Garet's edition was re-issued at Venice in 1729, and more recently in
Migne's 'Patrologia' (Paris, 1865), of which it forms vols. 69 and 70.

[Sidenote: Forthcoming Edition by Meyer.]

There can be little doubt, however, that all these editions will be
rendered obsolete by the new edition which is expected to appear as a
volume of the 'Auctores Antiquissimi' in the _Monumenta Germaniae
Historica_. The editor is Professor Wilhelm Meyer, of Munich. The work
has been for some years announced as near completion, but I have not
been able to ascertain how soon it may be expected to appear.

[Sidenote: Supposed fragment of orations.]

Finally, I must not omit to notice the fragments of an oration
published by Baudi de Vesme in the Transactions of the Royal Academy
of Sciences at Turin (1846). Those fragments, which were found in a
palimpsest MS. of the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon, were first
published in 1822 by Angelo 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. This theory appears now to meet with
general approval. The style is certainly very similar to that of
Cassiodorus; but, as will be inferred from the doubt as to their
origin, there is little or nothing in these scanty fragments which
adds anything to our knowledge of the history of Theodoric.

[Sidenote: Life by Garet.]

To the literature relating to Cassiodorus the most important
contribution till recent times was the life by Garet prefixed to his
edition of 1679. I cannot speak of this from a very 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 framework of the life of Cassiodorus, from
the confusi