The present work will be found to supply a desideratum that has long been felt by the classical student. The preface of the English editors will show the various sources whence they have culled their materials; while an examination of the volume itself will convince any one how successfully they have accomplished the object which they proposed themselves in preparing it. We have had, in fact, no work before this, on the same subject, in the English language, at all deserving of being compared with the present one, and it is to be hoped that the wretched compliations which have hitherto been used will now be completely discarded. No teacher, indeed, can retain them after this, who is conscientious in his vocation, and sincere in his efforts for the improvement of his pupils. It seems unneccessary, at the present day, to say any thing in favor of frequent practice in Greek and Latin composition. No one can be an accurate scholar without it. Whether a work like the present one is likely to be a useful aid in pursuing such a practice, the following remarks of Lipsius will satisfactorily decide: “Lectio non sufficit, imo nec felicissima memoria; sed opus est excerptis quibusdam et notis rerum verborumque singularium, quas imitemur. Quae excerpta memorialibus libellius, tanquam aerario, contineri velim, unde sermonis illae opes per tempus et ad usum promantur.” – Epist. Institut. c. xii.

In preparing the present edition for the press, numerous corrections have been silently made in the body of the work, and various improvements introduced, all tending to make the volume a more useful one. What will be found, however, to give the American edition a decided advantage over the English work, is the Dictionary of Proper Names, which is wanting in the latter. This has been prepared from the best sources, but more particularly Quicherat’s “Vocabulaire des Noms Géographiques, Mythologiques, et Historiques de la Langue Latine,” Mühlmann’s “Verzeichniss der geographischen, mythologischen, und geschichtlichen Namen,” Freund’s “Wörterbuch der Lateinischen Sprache,” Klotz’s “Handwörterbuch der Lateinischen Sprache” (as far as published), Sharpe’s “Nomenclator Poëticus,” Leusden’s “Onomasticon” &c., and Bischoff und Möller’s “Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der alten, mittleren und neuen Geographie.”

It remains but to add that the present work has enjoyed the careful supervision of the editor’s learned and accurate friend and colleague, Professor Drisler, a circumstance of no small importance as regards the utility of the book.

Columbia College, Sept. 1, 1849

The work, now at length completed, has cost us many years of labor—labor that has often seemed almost hopeless. A very slight inspection of it will show that it aims at a far higher standard of accuracy and completeness than any of its English predecessors. Indeed, it can hardly be said to have had any predecessor in its own kind; for no English-Latin Dictionary hitherto published has ever professed to give any account of the use of words set down, their synonmical distinctions, the niceties connected with their employment by classical writers, with such remarks and cautions as a cursory glance at any important word in the following work will prove that it has at least attempted to supply.

The title-page states that it is founded upon the German-Latin Dictionary of Dr. Charles Ernest Georges, of which the first edition was published at Leipsic in 1833; the third in 1845. That work consists of two octavo volumes, usually bound together in one very thick volume of 1820 pages. Dr. Georges had a predecessor of great merit in Dr. Frederic Charles Kraft. As, however, the only edition of Kraft’s Dictionary that we have consulted is the fourth edition (“remodelled and enlarged”), which appeared at Stuttgard in 1843, we can not state exactly how far Dr. Georges is indebted to the earlier editions of Kraft’s work, which, in its present form, is the most copious of all the German-Latin Dictionaries, consisting of two very thick octavo volumes, which contain respectively 1426 and 1509 pages. Though we have occasionally consulted Kraft with benefit, we are decidedly of opinion that Georges is considerably superior to him in clearness of arrangement, and in the combination of sufficient fullness with a sound principle of selection; nor do we hesitate to give the preference to Georges even on the ground of scrupulous accuracy, though the occasional instances of inaccuracy that we have detected in Kraft are very rare exceptions to the general character of his work. Dr. Mühlmann, who published a German-Latin Dictionary in 1845, is almost entirely dependent upon Georges.

With respect to other helps, the “Anti-barbarus” of Krebs, Döderlein’s “Synonymical Hand-book,” and Freund’s “Wörterbuch der Lateinischen Sprache,” have been our constant companions. We have also derived considerable assistance from Bonnell’s “Lexicon Quintilianeum;” and have often consulted with advantage Haase’s notes to Reisig’s “Vorlesungen,” Hand’s “Tursellinus,” and Krüger’s “Grammatik der Lateinischen Sprache.” Among other works, of which we have occasionally made use, we may mention Billerbeck’s “Flora Classica,” Kraus’s “Medicinisches Lexicon,” Ernesti’s “Lexicon Technologiae Latinorum Rhetoricae,” with Crusius’s “Vollständiges Wörterbuch” to Caesar, and Billerbeck’s to Cornelius Nepos.

About 150 pages of the work were printed off before either of us became aware that the other was engaged in the same task, and was drawing his materials from the same sources. For that portion of the work Mr. Arnold alone is answerable. When a joint publication was resolved upon, the portion (A-C), which Mr. Riddle had but recently sent to press, was withdrawn, and we exchanged the materials that each had prepared for the half which was to be executed by the other; but, to speak generally, Mr. Arnold is responsible for the first half, from A to K (inclusive), and for the letter U; Mr. Riddle for the remainder. Mr. Arnold has to thank W. Frädersdorff, Esq., of the University of Berlin, for very useful assistance rendered to him during the progress of the work. Mr. Riddle has also some acknowledgements to make to the same gentleman, and is still more indebted to his own brother, the Rev. John B. Riddle, M. A., of Wadham College, Oxford.

We are very conscious that the work is still far from perfect; but we feel a just confidence, founded upon the excellence of Georges’s Dictionary, and a consciousness of our own diligence, that it possesses the general merit of strict accuracy, and is the only English-Latin Dictionary that a student can consult with the reasonable hope of finding what he wants, and the certainty of being able to trust what he finds.

A copious Dictionary of Proper Names, to complete the work, will be published separately.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

The source is available at https://github.com/FergusJPWalsh/riddle-arnold