ERNESTI (JoaN Avouerus), one of the most illustrious Philologers and Theologians of the last century. He was born on 4th August 1707, at Tennstadt, of which place his father, likewise a dis tinguished theologian, was pastor, and superintend ent of the electoral dioceses of Thuringia, Salz, and Sangerhusen. After having received his first instruc tion in the learned languages, under the domestic discipline of his father, and in the gymnasium of his native town, he was sent at the age of sixteen to the celebrated Saxon cloister school of Pforta. Here he continued four years. At the age of twenty he entered the University of Wittenberg, where he studied eloquence and ancient literature under the celebrated Berger, theology under Wernsclorf, and the Wolfian philosophy under Schlosser. From Wittenberg he passed to the University of Leipsig, where he applied himself to the mathematical sciences under Hansen, following the courses of Boerner and Deyling on theology, and the lectures of Gottschecl on -German eloquence. In 1730, he was made Mas ter in the Faculty of Philosophy. In the following year he accepted the office of Conrector in the Thoman school of Leipsig, of which J. M. Gesner was then Rector; and on Gesner's vocation, as profes sor of eloquence, to Gottingen, he succeeded him as Rector. In this situation, by his erudition, diligence, and the elegance of his methods, he surpassed all his contemporaries, and created an epoch in Germany for the study of the ancient authors. From this office, in opposition to the present custom, which precludes a translation into the universities to the masters of the subordinate schools, he was, in 1742, named as Extraordinary Professor of Ancient Literature in the University of Leipsig, and in 1756, promoted to the Ordinary Professorship of Eloquence. In both these chairs he knew how to combine more intellect, philosophy, and taste, than had been done by any of his predecessors. His reputation as a scholar, and his rational treatment of the biblical exegesis, paved the way to his entrance into the Theological Faculty. Through the elegance of his learning, and his manner of discussion, he co-operated with Baumgarten of Halle in disengaging dogmatic theology from the scholastic and mystical excrescences with which it was then deformed ; and thereby contributed greatly to the new revolution in theology, although he him self never deviated from the ancient system. In these deserving labours, and with unbroken health, he attained an honourable old age; and died, after a short illness, in his seventy-sixth year, on 11th Sep tember 1781.
Whether Ernesti be considered as a philologer or theologian, it is perhaps as much from the impul sion which he gave to sacred and profane criti cism in Germany, as from the intrinsic excellence of his own works in either department, that he must derive his reputation. With Gesner, he instituted a new school in ancient literature; and after Crocus, Melancthon, and Camerarius, has been perhaps the greatest reformer and promoter of classical learning in Germany. With Semler he partially co-operated in the great revolution of Lutheran theology ; though he is guiltless of all participation in the deductions which many of those who profess themselves his dis ciples, have drawn from the principles which he esta blished.
An enthusiastic and enlightened study of the an cient Greek and Roman authors is the well-merited boast of the present German literature. This com menced, in its existing form, towards the middle of the last century. Not that Germany, before that period, had neglected ancient literature, or could not enumerate her proportion among the great names of classical erudition. No nation, in fact, had pro duced so many, or more illustrious scholars immedi ately after the Reformation ; but for a long time po lite literature had become deformed, if not neglected, in proportion as religious wars and polemical theo logy had exhausted and engrossed her governments and universities. The German scholars were chiefly theologians ; and theologians who had studied every..
thing in reference to their peculiar profession. Add to this, that the most disgusting and inefficient me thods had been introduced ; whereby the spirit of the instruction was at utter variance with the object of the study. Accordingly, during the whole of the seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth century, Germany was far excelled by Holland in the number and excellence of her philologers; and it was not until the appearance of Gesner and Ernesti, with their somewhat earlier contempo raries, Cortina, Daniel Longolius, and Michael Heusinger, that she could op p above one or two rivals to the great critics the Dutch schools. Gesner and Ernesti, however, through the influ ence of their lectures at the greater universities of Gottingen and Leipsig, through the wider ex tent of their labours in philology, and still more through the greater excellence of their methods, are alone entitled to be held the founders of the new German school of ancient literature. Both excelled their philological countrymen in taste, in the ele gance of their Latin style, in a philosophical spirit, and in a wider acquaintance with the subsidiary branches of erudition. Both made an advantageous use of their critical knowledge of the languages; both looked at once to the words and to the subject of the ancient writers; established and applied the rules of a legitimate interpretation; and carefully ana lysed the meaning as well as the form of the ex pression. Both contributed effectually to expel the old absurd, and disgusting methods of instruction from the schools and universities, and to introduce an improved and more effectual system. To the epoch which they formed, many circumstances in deed contributed :—their acquaintance with the Dutch criticism ; the universal enthusiasm of the Germans for establishing a national literature, and for be coming, at the same time, reformers in the depart ments of ancient learning; and withal the spirit of philosophy which at that period, in Germany, began more and more to blend itself with every part of science and literature. It is also true that their editions do not possess the complement of erudition and criticism which distinguish those of many of their contemporaries : their commentaries have the precision, but how inferior are they in certainty, co piousness and depth of illustration, to those of the philologers of Holland? In their editions of the La tin classics, they returned back to the somewhat in convenient method of Cellarius, collecting their prin cipal illustrations into an Index Rerum et Verborum, as is done by Gesner in his Quinctilian, and by Er nesti in his Cicero; not, however, that they did not possess the means of illustrating their author with a rich, critical, and philological commentary; of which the former has given ample proof in his editions of the Scriptores de Re Rustica, and in his Claudian, the latter in his two most valuable labours, his Sue tonius and Tacitus. Both, but especially Ernesti, have detected grammatical niceties in the Latin tongue, which had escaped all preceding critics; such, among others, are the use of the subjunctive mood after the pronoun qua, and the legitimate con secution of the tenses. His canons are, however, not without exceptions. As an editor of the Greek classics, Emesti deserves. hardly to be named beside his Dutch contemporaries Hemsterhuis, Valkenaer, Ruhnken, or his colleague and enemy, the learned and unfortunate Reiske. How insignificant are his own labours in his editions of Homer and Cams thus ? In regard to the higher criticism, it was not even attempted by Ernesti. But to him and to Gai ner, the peculiar praise is owing, of having formed, partly by their discipline and partly by their exam ple, philologers greater than themselves; and to them is due the honour of having so strongly excited in Germany that enthusiasm for ancient learning, which has now, unfortunately, no parallel in the other countries of Europe.