“(i) Selden. Uxor Hebr. p. 342. Cæterum de Alphonsi Regis curâ in promovenda Arabica Quadripartiti versione, vide, si placet, Nic: Antonium in Bibl. veteri Hispana, t. 2, p. 55, vel Acta Erud. A. 1697, p. 302. Latino versio ex Arabico facta lucem vidit Venet, 1493, fol. Viderit porro Gassendus qui in Philosophia Epicuri, ubi contra Astrologos disputat. t. 2, p. 501, contendit tetrabiblon indignum esse Ptolemæi genio et subdititum. Equidem Jo. Pico judice, l. 1, contra Astrologos, p. 285, Ptolemæus _malorum_ sive Apotelesmaticorum est _optimus_.” † “Nechepsos and Petosiris are anciently spoken of, for they first explained prognostication by Astrology.” †† This was perhaps a reprint of the edition of 1635, from which the present translation has been made; unless there may have been an error of the press in stating 1654 instead of 1635, which seems probable, as the edition of 1635 is unnoticed by Fabricius. Proclus, to whom the world is indebted for the improved text of the Tetrabiblos,[16] was born at Constantinople, in the year 410. He studied at Alexandria and at Athens, and became very eminent among the later Platonists. He succeeded Syrianus, a celebrated philosopher, in the rectorship of the Platonic school at Athens, and died there in 485.[17] He was a most voluminous author, in poetry as well as in prose. Among his works there are Hymns to the Sun, to Venus, and to the Muses; Commentaries upon several pieces of Plato, and upon Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos[18]; an Epitome or Commendium of all the Astronomical Precepts demonstrated in the Almagest; and elements of Theology and Natural Philosophy. He was in dispute with the Christians on the question of the eternity of the world, which he undertook to prove in eighteen elaborate arguments. A late writer in a certain periodical work has erroneously identified him with another Proclus, who was in favour with the Emperor Anastasius, and who destroyed the ships of Vitalianus, when besieging Constantinople in 514, by burning them with great brazen mirrors, or _specula_. [16] It will be seen by the preceding note, that Proclus’s Paraphrase of the Tetrabiblos should properly be considered as superior to the other readings of that book; since it appears, on the authority of Fabricius, that Melancthon, after having been at the pains of correcting and republishing, in 1553 (with his own emendations), the edition of Camerarius, containing the reputed original text, still deemed it advisible, in the following year, to edit Proclus’s Paraphrase. This Paraphrase must, therefore, necessarily have had claims to his attention not found in the text he had previously edited.† †“Ptolemy addresses the book to Syrus, to whom he has also addressed all his other treatises. Some say that this name of Syrus was feigned; others, that it was not feigned, but that he was a physician, and educated in these sciences.” [17] Chalmer’s Biographical Dictionary.