Google
This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world’s books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book’s long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individual
personal, non-commercial purposes.
and we request that you use these files for
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google’s system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book’s appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
ai[http: //books . google. com/|
Β unmore
aibrary.
A! Sueur 3
ay,
[NIVERSITY ΘΕ May
ἜΞ : "Ὁ
|
Α 3 9015 00393 431 5.“
University of Michigan - BUH!
“1
<_< re
unmore
Abrary.
Α : Sherr 3
1 xT. OF MIcHgy
ee
A 3 9015 00393 431
Univer
ity of Michigan
SEMINARY ~
ooo
ween)
CG
JES
THE
CLASSICAL JOURNAL:
MARCH axp JUNE, 1818.
VOL. XVII.
Eric. Ixcenr.
Lenden :
PRINTED BY A. J. VALPY,
τοοκεῖς COURT, CHAXCERY LAUES
SOLD BY
LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AXb BROWN; RiVING.
TONS; SHERWOOD, NEELY, ΔῈ» JOMES, FATERNOSTER
ROW; BLACK AND SON, YORK-sYREET;, FARKEL,
OXFORD; BARRETT, CAMBRIDGE; MACKEDIE
AND CO., EDINBURGH; CUMMING, DUB-
LIN; AND ALL OTHER BOOKSELLERS.
—
1818,
CLASSICAL JOURNAL:
FOR
MARCH anp JUNE, 1818.
VOL. XVII.
“ἘΠ » ia
Ὧ φίλος, εἰ σοφὸς εἶ, λάβε μ᾽ ἐς χέρας εἰ δέ γε πάμπαν
Νῆϊς ἔφυς Μουσέων, ῥίψον ἃ ph νοέεις.
Eric. IncERT.
London :
PRINTED BY A. J. VALPY,
TOOKE'S COURT, CHANCERY LANS}
SOLD BY
LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN; RIVING-
TONS; SHERWOOD, NEELY, AND JONES, PATERNOSTER
ROW; BLACK AND SON, YORK-STREET; PARKER,
OXFORD; BARRETT, CAMBRIDGE; MACREDIE
AND CO., EDINBURGH; CUMMING, DUB-
LIN; AND ALL OTHER BOOKSELLERS.
oui
1818.
ERRATA IN NO. XXXII.
P. 302. 1. 7. memorant
SOT. —S. miserere
————-§. quas
-“- 1}. minasque
DIRECTIONS TO THE BINDER.
Place Quarto Plate opposite p. 1.
Octavo. Plate opposite p. 155.
CONTENTS OF NO. XXXIIL
Notice.of. the Origin of Pagan Idolatry, ascertained from
: Historical Testimony and Circumstantial Evidence. By
᾿ Grorce Sranuey Fasin, B.D: with a Map «+>.
On Literary Coincidences, No. I. oo .sccceccccecccccce
On the Science of the Egyptians and Chaldeans. [Sir W.
. DrumMonp.] .Part II]. .ccccecvcccccccscccvccce
Remarks on the Prometheus of Aéschylus. [Rev. J. Jonzs.]
Miscellanea Classica,. No. 111. sccceccccccecccccccces
Modern. Greek .Proverbs. ..From the Appendix to Col.
.1.ἘλκπκῈ᾿8 “.Redearches in Greece” ccccce cecccsccccce
Note et Cure sequentes in Arati Diosemea, a Tu. Forster,
F. L..S. . No. 11. eo2ee0e08008 2808008 φοφρεφςοσθοδοροοθ᾽
Annotationes.in Sophoclis Antigonam, .ex recetisione C. A.
| ErrurpDtTlt COCK SCO EES OOEHES 606 099 eoecccsccs once
On the Particle ὧν. By Proressorn DUNBAR ὁ. 6466 646.
An Essay on the Greek Pastoral Poets Ὁ 9.99 “629 48..696
Greek Dialects op. 2ccccoces ΠΝ
Littérature Οτβοᾳιία.᾽. No.-[..Pat Constantin ΝΊσοΟΙο-
POULO cecccccccccccccccsccccccescescveceve ree
Collatio Codicis Harleiani 5674. cum Odyssea .Editionis
Ernestine 1760. No. UX. »2coccaccscccscccccen ree
Page.
Qo tm
19
30,
88
39
46
52
63
74
84
89.
97
On the character of Plutarch as an Historian; together. with —
Remarks on some of Plutarch’s “ Lives of the Illustrious
_-Men of Greece.” On the Lives of ‘Thennstocles, Aristides,
- and Cimon. : Part IL, «--ccce ee ee ccccee oaccessencos
ViINDici@ ANTIOUB. : No. LEB. ctccaccccccccccscecs
Collection. of the Chaldean Oracles, . Part [],..0s0+0eees
10g
114
128
Observations on some Orations. ascribed to, Cipero cccceese 134
" = τ e
. " ἊΣ
vs ny ee
iv CONTENTS.
” r _ -ο ὦ“. we αὶ - Page.
Biblical Crificism Ὁ ὁ ὁ ον »οοδοοορεοοοφοοοφοοοθοσοδοοφο 15g
Monuments of Aristotle, with an Engraving ++ .cscccocesss 155
Orphic Remains, (never before edited) +» ececcesovccece 158
Bishop Pearson’s Minor Tracts chronologically arranged 9. 164
On M. Gail’s Recherches Hist. Géogr. et Philolog. cos 170
On a Geometrical Query in Plato’s Meno cccceccccccoee 171
Sketch of the Life, Character, and Philosophy, of Anaxagoras 178
Variz Lectiones Aischyli e Cod. Msto Emerici Bigot «+--+ 179
Strada’s Contest of the Musician and Nightingale eovceces 179
Notice of Histoire Chronologique de P Art da Dessin «ooes+ 182
Manuscripts, Biblical, Classical, and: Biblico-Oriental,
No. ΙΧ. οοοονοοοοοοοοοοοροσθοοοοοῦ. sesvscccccs 189
Vari Lectiones ad Euripidem occescccccccccccceccesse 188
Stanleii Note quedam in-Callmachum. No, 11. ..«2e+e2 190
Remarks to prove that Josephus is am Historian and :Apolegist
ες of the Gespel. No. iI, [Rev..J. JONES. ] covccsccecce 198
Herculanensian Papyra oscvecccccescorcccccccsscecces 203
Apversania Literagia, No. XVI.—Exstract from a |
. Letter by Dr. Bentley to.J. G. Grevius, comprising the
leading arguments against the genuineness οὗ the Epistles
of Phalaris, commonly so called.— Derivation of the word
PECUNIA—Meyarwy ἀπολισθάνειν ἁμάρτημ᾽ ebyevis.— Κῶται
δ᾽ ἄσιτος, σῶμ᾽ ὑφεὶς ἀλγηδόν!.---“Ἴο deliver over unto death,’
a Greek, as well as Latin, expression.—Chronology of
Horace’s works, according to Dr. Bentley.—The figure of
speech called by Grammarians Anacoiuthon.—On the pro-
nunciation of the Greek %—Nov and-Nuv.— Ἐπὶ ξυροῦ γὰρ
ἀκμῆς ἔχεται ἡμῖν τὰ πρήγματα x. τ. A—Potores ..... 204
Exemnnations for the ‘Classical Medals at Cambridge 90.9.9... 209
Mola Juventutis Restauratrix. Carmen Comitiale «+ 99.966 210
Literary Intelligence «+ cccccoccccvsecescsvesseveccess 218
Notes to Correspondents οοοουδοσύονθοφοσυύσονφο bee ee 296.
-
CONTENTS OF NO. XXXIV.
| PAGE
Au Examination of Mr. J. BELLAmy’s Specimen of his
Emendation of the Bible. By CuristorHer Leo. +. 221
Cambridge Tripos, 1813.—Celebrare Dumestica Facta. ++ 240
Collection of Chaldean Oracles. No. 111. By Tuomas
TAYLOR. coccceccccccccscceccccccccesccvccscese 243
Observations on some Lines of Homer. By Proressor
Dunas. wee ee coc ecs cecccs vecvccascccecceseese QG635
Bishop Pgarson’s Works, Chronologically arranged. «+++ 272
Collatio Codicis Harlejani 5674. cum QOdyssea Editionis
Ernestine 1760. No. x. concluded. veersscsecssscee 299
Οἱ Literary Coincidences. No. 11. occcesccccccsesoee 295
Latin Prize Essay. Auctore T.S. HucHEs. “5. 92452 29. 311
Ptolemy. occccverveccsccccccvccvccccsvcscvesessses SLO
Notice of Col. Francklin’s “ Inquiry concerning the Site of
ancient Palibothra.” ..cccscscccescescccscescsesves 99]
E. H. Barkeri Epistola Critica ad T. Gaisfordium, de Frag-
mentis Poetarum Minorum Gr. csecesscescccssceses 398
Loci quidam Luciani emendati atque explanati, a J.
Seager, A.B. No. vir. COCCOT SORT CEEESE δυοοννυνον 325
iv CONTENTS.
PAGE
VINDICIR ANTIQUE. No. Iv. covcccccvcccccaccceccns
Varie Lectiones ex MSto. Nn. 2. 32. Bibl. Publ. Cantab.
Miscellanea Classica. No.iv. cosccccccccccccsccsocs
‘ Stanleti Note quedam in Callimachum, No. 11. 9.955 5 6 5.69 ὁ
Commentatio ad Inscriptionem Actiacam, auctore J. F.
BOIsSONADE, coccccecvccvccccsccscccccececevces
Observations on some Orations ascribed to Cicero, No. 11.
Professor Duport’s Greek Prayer Book. «-+ccccccccceees
Lexicography. sssssceccececcsscccccccscccsssaecuss
Biblical Criticism. occcccvcccccvevccsvccesccsvcvenece
Report from the Committee of the House of Commons on
the Petition of Trustees of the British Museum, relating to
the Library of the late Dr. C. BURNEY. eccceccecceces
330
340
548
361
429
Letters on the ancient British Language of Cornwall. ........ 437
Apversagia Lirerarta, No. xvi1.—Fabularum Utilitas
—Tfnvidi Supplicium—ZEnigma—Danaé, ex Simonide—
Schol. in Plut. Aristoph. vel. emendatur—Remarks on a
Passage in Stobeus—Classical Criticism—MS. N ote of
Markland—Resemblance between Horace and Ferdusi. «+
Literary Intelligence. CoCOds ee CR CeCe ese COCe rece roreccece
Note to Correspondents, Decors rneccesecevevesessecons
453
458
464
aS
ra
THE
CLASSICAL JOURNAL.
ΝΟ. XXXII.
MARCH, 1818.
| NOTICE OF
The Origin of Pagan fdolatry,- ascertained from EHis-
torical Testimony and Circumstantial Evidence. By
George Stanley Faber, B.D. Rector of Long Newton,
3 Vols. 4to. Price £6. IDs. a
One of the most interesting characters in Shakspeare has.
said: “ I am not only witty in‘myself, but the cause that wit is in
other men.” This observation we can apply im a more serious
sense to the work under our notice. In the perusal of it a reader
of any learning or sagacity wilt not only be pleased and instructed
in various branches of biblical, historical, and general knowledge,
but he will find himself insensibly led to draw many collateral ob-
servations from his own memory, reading, and experience. Thus,
he will not only be pleased with the learned and ingenious author
a work, but he will find: in his own mind a fand of useful
ctions and important deductions.
To give a general idea of the work would greatly exceed our
limits. We shall only give the general. argument in the wards of
the author; and introduce an. extract on a curious subject—the
situation of the ‘Terrestrial Paradise,
“The various systems of Pagan Idolatry in different partsof the world
correspond so closely, both in their evident. purport and in numerous
oints of arbitrary resemblance, .that they cannot bave been struck aut,
independently in the several countries where they have been estalbithed,
VOL. XVU. ΟἹ, Ji. NO. ARAMA. NR
2 Notice of Faber’s Origin
but must have all originated from some common source. But, if they
all originated from a common source, then either one nation must have
communicated its peculiar theology to every other people in the way of
peaceful and voluniary imitation; or that same nation must have com-
municated it to every other people through the medium of conquest
and violence; or lastly, all nations must, in the infancy of the world,
have been assembled together in a single region and in a single commu-
nity, must at that period and in that state of society have agreed to
adopt the theology in question, and must thence, as from a common
centre, have carried it to all quarters of the globe.
‘These are the only three modes, in which the universal accordance
of the Gentiles in their religious speculations can possibly be accounted
for. But, as the incredibility of the first, and as the equal inere-
dibility and impossibility of the second, may be shown without much
difficulty, the third alone remains to be adopted. Now this third mode
both perfectly harmonises with the general purport of Heathen Idolatry,
and minutely accords with, an historical fact which is declared to us on
the very highest authority. An examination of the theology of the
Gentiles forces us to conclude, that all mankind were once assembled
together in a single community, and that they afterwards spread them-
selves in detached bodies over the face of the whole earth: Holy Scrip-
ture asserts, that such was actually the fact.
‘* Under these circumstances, I am necessarily led to treat largely of
the dispersion from Babel, and specially to insist upon an important
peculiarity in that dispersion which has hitherto been entirely over-
looked. I am also led to discuss certain other subsequent great move-
ments, whith stand closely connected with the peculiarity alluded to.
In short, the events which occurred in the plain of Shinar have
stamped a character upon the whole mass of mankind that remains
vividly impressed even to modern times. The powerful and martial
family, that once obtained a decided pre-eminence over their brethren,
have never, down to the present hour, ceased with a strong hand to vin-
dicate their superiority.” |
‘‘ It is vain labor to look for the garden of Eden below Babylon; both
because it 15 impossible to find the four heads of any four rivers in that
region, and because, if the vast streams of the Tigris and the Euphrates
had flowed through it in the manner which it has been conjectured they
did, every part of it, except one, must have been utterly inaccessible to
the first man: let us now endeavour to learn positively where we are to
seek it.
41, Moses informs us, that a river went out of Eden to water the
garden, and from thence it branched out so as to constitute the four
heads of four other rivers, which he denominates Pison, Gihon, Hid-
dekel, and Euphrates. From this account, according to its most na-
tural and obvious interpretation, we may collect, that, in the antedi-
Juvian world, previous to the effecting of any partial alterations by the
action of the flood, a stream flowed out of a region called Eden into
the garden, which God had planted for the reception of fhe first pair.
Herc it fell into a lake or reservoir: and from this reservoir it again
~
®
of Pagan Idolatry. ἢ 3
issued through four distinct glens or channels. The four new streams,
ptoduced by such a division of the waters, soon quitted the limits of
the garden; for we are told, that the original river, which rushed a
single stream into Paradise, was divided from it, or left it, in four
brooks, which were the heads or beginnings of fowr great rivers. Have
ing quitted the garden, the four streams pursued their course: dnd, by
the gradual reception of other streams, at length became rivers, which
flowed contiguous to certain countries very accurately described by
Moses, and of which two at least may be positively ascertained without
the slightest difficulty.
' “4 This seems to me to be evidently the substance of the inspired ac-
count, which has been handed down to us, of Paradise and its rivers,
If then the heads of all the four rivers met together in the garden, the
garden must clearly have been situated in a high region at the sources
of all those four rivers, not surely in a low country far distant from the
head or origin of amy river and removed but a little distance from the
sea. To such a conclusion we are necessarily brought, both by the
plain import of the language used by Moses, and by the very reason of
the thing itself. If the heads of rivers mean their beginnings, as the
signification of the Hebrew word here employed absolutely requires ;*
and if the single river of Eden, in quitting the garden, was divided
into four heads of rivers; then the garden must have been situated at
the beginnings or fountains of the rivers, not near the mouths through
which they emptied themselves into the sea; in other words, it must
have been situated in a high inland region, where the courses of the four
rivers all commenced. And, if the words of Moses clearly imply that
every part of the garden was equally accessible to Adam ; and if never-
theless that garden, as his words also intimate, was divided into several
‘different parts by the course of the streams which watered it; then the
very reason of the thing proves, that it cannot have been planted near
the sca where rivers are broad and deep, but that it must have been
planted wear the sources of its irrigating streams where they flow only
in the condition of shallow brooks, which might easily be passed over.
With this conclusion every idea, which we are taught to form of Para-
dise, exactly accords. No tract of country could possibly produce
more exquisitely beautiful and romantic scenery, than one, which con-
tained a stream, running through a finely wooded vale into a glassy
Jake, and afterwards discharging itself by four rivulets murmuring
through the same number of deep rocky glens: while, on the other
hand, the charms of the dead flat country below Babylon, where com-
mentators have generally agreed to place the garden, might indeed
rival the beauties of Holland and Batavia; but they would be physi-
cally incapable of ravishing any eyes except those of a Dutch burgo-
master. |
‘“‘ If then Paradise, according to the description of Moses, must haye
becn seated in a high country and at the source of the four rivers which
a SS SS SD,
᾿ ΠΝ worg WN") always involves the idea of priority. See Pordourste
eb. Lex.
4 Nottce of Kaber’s Origin
iasued from it; since one of those rivers is declared to be the well-known
Euphrates, Paradise must have been seated in the region whence the
Euphrates takes its rise. But the Euphrates rises'in Armenia. There-
fore Paradise must have been seated in Armenia.
“. This seems to ‘be the inference, which must necessarily be drawn
from the language of Moses interpreted according tu its most plain and
obvinus acceptation: and with such an inference I might rest satisfied’;
for I only proposed to show, that there is considerable reason for be-
lieving that the terrestrial Paradise was seated in the same lofty region
where the Ark rested after the deluge; and in establishing this position
Ihave now made some progress, since Ararat is generally supposed to
have been une of the Armenian mountains. But it may be curious to
push the inquiry sumewhat further, and to examine how far it is pos-
sible to ascertain the three other rivers mentioned by Moses. Before I
commence this inquiry, however, I wish distinctly to specify, that,
whether I be right or wrong in my determination, the main question
. Fespecting the site of Paradise will not be at all affected; for, since
the garden was seated at the head of the Euphrates, I see not where it
can be found except in the land of Armenia.’
“2. In forming any bypothesis respecting the semaining rivers of
Paradise, it is necessary that three things sheuld concur: that they
should be in the-same part of the world as the Euphrates; that they
should take their rise in the same high tract of country as that river;
.for, though the heads af all the four no longer now meet together m
one point, we cannot suppose that their channels were so far altered by
the deluge as to’ be diverted into a totally different region; and that in
* This whole country, says 8 modern author, speaking of Armenia, is se
extremely beautiful, that funcifyl travellers have imagined that they had found
here the situation of the originul garden of Eden. The hills are covered with
forests of vak, ash, beech, chesnuts, walnuts, and elms, encircled with vines
growing perfectly wild but producing vust quantities of grapes. From these is
annually made as much wine as is necessary for the yearly consumption ; the
remainder ure left to rot on the vines. Catton grows-spontancously, as well-as
the finest European fruit trees, Rice, wheat, millet, hemp, and flex, are raised
on the plains, almost without culture. The valleys afford the finest pasturage
in the world ; the rivers are full of fish; the mauntuins abound in minerals ;
and the climate is delicious; so that nature appears to have lavished on this fa-
wored country ecery production that can contribute to the happiness of its inha-
bifants. Memoir υἱ a map of the countries between the Black sea and the
Caspian, p. 48. Armenia then is so beautiful a region, that from the mere
‘aspect of it travellers have been led to deem.it the land of Eden. Nor were
they mistaken in their opinion; though, in forming such dn opinion by
_ guess alune, and without adducing any arguments in favor of it, they them-
selves may certainly be considered as fanciful. Let us however contrast
the outward appearauce of this lovely country with the monotonous Bata-
‘vian aspect of Babylonia, and we can scarcely hesitate in determining
which bids fairest to have comprehended the primeval garden of Paradise.
It is. not unworthy of observation, that Milton, as a poet of the picturesque,
found himself absolutely compelled by his subject to place the holy garden
jn 8 romantic mountainous country, “
of Pagan Idolatry. 5
their course they should correspond with the geographical description,
with which. we. have been furnished by the sacred historian. If, in ad-
dition to these indispensable marks, there should, in the rivers. which
we may pitch upon, be a.close correspondence of name with the rivers
particularised by Muses; the probability, that we have nat been mis-
taken, would be munch increased: for, though neither mere etymolo-
gical coincidence would be sufficient to establish a theory, nor the want
of it be enough to overthrow one, yet a triple resemblance of appel-
lation, when all.the necessary marks had been found to meet together,
would at least furnish a corollary to the argument not wholly con-
temptible. — ΝΣ ΝΣ
- *(1.) The Euphrates being indisputably one of the Paradisiacal
rivers, if we simply cast our eye upon a map,.we shall iminediately he
led to conclude, as all commentators invariably have concluded, that
the Tigris is another. Nor.shall we be mistaken; for it. exhibits every
mark which has been laid down as necessary.
** With respect to its locality, it is to be found in the same part of
the world, and it rises in the same high country, as the Euphrates, It
- @lso bears the precise geographical relation to Assyria, which Moses
ascribes to the river Hiddekel: whence it must clearly, | think, be
identified with that river. In our common English translation, indeed,
the Hiddekel .is said to go toward the cast of Assyria, whereas .the
Tigris flows to the west of that country: but this apparent contrariety
arises solely frum an errdmeous rendering of the original. The phrase,
which is translated toward the east of Assyria, ought to have been
translated before Assyria; as it is rightly understoud by the Greek in-
terpreters.' . The expression may indeed denote eastward: but it like-
wise means before, in the sense either of ¢ime or place. Here it relates
to place :- and, sitice ‘Moses composed his history in a region far to the
west of Assyria, a river, which, with reference to Aem. the speaker,
flowed before Assyria, would of course be the westera boundary of that
eountry, as is precisely the case with the Tigris. Hence the Greek ine
terpreters, agreeably to their very just translation, explain the Hidde-
kel of Moses to mean the Tigris of the classical writers: and in this
opinion Josephus agrees with them.”
* “ As for the Greek appellation of the river, it departs indeed very
widely from the sound .of the Hebrew: but the oriental name of the
Tigris, as well as its geographical situation, seems ever to have pointed
out its identity with the scriptural Hiddekel. By Josephus, the Chaldee
Paraphbrasts, the Arabians,.and the Persians, this river is called Dige
ath; by the Syrians, Dsklat 3 by Pliny, or rather by those who come
municated to him its eastern name, Digilitv ; and by the Levanters and
other modern orientals, it is still denominated, with a slightly varied
pronunciation, Diglath, or Degil, or Degola.* That each of these is ἃ
mere abbreviation of the word Htddekel, the first syllable being
omitted, is abundantly cvident: and some have even supposed, that
Tigris itself is but an Hellenic corruption of Dighs or Tighs.*
: Κατίναντι "heoupler, 1. Joseph. Ante Jud. libs i. ¢.4.43.
3 Wells’s Geog. of O. Test, parti.c.1.993. * Lord.
6 Notice of Faber’s Origin
4“ Be that however as it may, there is yet another argument, by which-
the: identity of the Tigris and the Hiddekel may be sufficiently esta-
blished. Daniel mentions, that he himself'was once on the banks of
the Hiddekel during his sojourn in Babylonia.* Now, as the Hiddekel
cannot be the Euphrates, it must, when thus mentioned, if.we would
preserve geograpby consistent with itself, be the Tigris, which is not
distant from Babylon more than fifty or sixty miles, That it cannot be
a mere canal or petty tributary stream to the Euphrates, is evident
from the descriptive language of the prophet. He says, that he was by
the side of the GREAT river uhich ts Hiddekel: but there is no river,
which can merit the appellation of great, in the Babylonian neighbour-
hood of the Euphrates, except the Tigris: the Tigris therefore must be
the same as the Hiddekel.
: “(2.) Hitherto commentators are very generally agreed ; and indeed
there can scarcely be more than one opinion respecting the Hiddekel
and the Euphrates: but it is not quite so easy to determine the situa-
tion of the Pison and the Gihon. That it is vain to seek for these two
rivers where they have commonly been placed, I have already pointed
out: and not morc satisfactory is the conjecture of Josephus (though it
15 a conjecture which may easily be accounted for, as will appear in the
sequel), that they are the Ganges and the Nile. Yet, if we do not
attain to absolute certainty, we may at least be able to reach a mode-
rate degree of probability. . :
. “ The river Pison is described as compassing a land named after the
patriarch Havilah, and abounding in gold. Hence, in order to ascertain
the river, it has been usual to inquire into the scite of the country.
- ‘The region, generally selected for this purpose, is that mentioned
by the author of the first book of Samuel, when he says, that Saud
smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur. that is
over against Egypt :* and, in order to make it answer to the propnsed
arrangement of the Pison, it is arbitrarily extended all the way from
Egypt westward to the Persian guif eastward.’ But such a.disposi-
tion ill accords with the obvious purport of the language employed by
the sacred historian. The pursuit of the Amalekites is positively de-
clared by that writer to have commenced from one of thetr own cities,
and Saul is afterwards said to have smitten them from Havilak to Shur.*
This Havilah therefore must have been a district,. which bordered upon
the Amalekitish city where the pursuit commenced, or which not im-
probably comprehended it. But the land .of Amalek, thus immedi-
ately contiguous to the land of Havilah, was distant scarcely less than
a thousand miles from the lower Euphrates, which Wells and Morinus
would identify with the Pison, and it was. also completely separated
from Babylonia by the vast intervening desert of Arabia. Hence it is
hot very easy to conceive, how the land of Havilah, from which Saul
chased the Amalekites, can have been compassed by the Pison, if we
‘Dan.x.4. *1Sam.xv.7. [ζἜ Wells’s Geog. par. i.c. 1. § 9.
of 4 1 Sam. xv. 5. compared with ver. 6, 7.
~
of Pagan fdolatry. . 7
suppose that river to mean the lower Euphrates. Nor would the mat-
ter be much mended, even if it could be shown that there-was a country
bearing the name of Havilah on the western bank of the lower Eu.
phrates: for still that country could not be the Havilah intended by
Moses in his description of Paradise. The Havilab, of which we are
in search, is declared to be compassed by a river, the head or begin-
ning of which was close to that of the Euphrates; for the heads of both
are said to have been alike comprehended within the garden. But no
large river empties itself into the sea in that part of the world, which at
all answers to such a description. .
.“ Perhaps it is impossible to determine positively the scite of that
land of Havilah, which is mentioned by Moses, in his account of Para-
dise, as watered by the river Pison: but, since Havilah was a son of
Cush, and since there were several countries denominated from that
patriarch owing to the very great extension of his posterity, it is reason-
able to conclude, both that there might in a similar manner be more
lands of Havilah than one, and that the regions so called would fre-
quently be in the vicinity of countrics which bore the name of Cush.
Of this we may at any rate be sure, that the Havilah of which we are
in quest, was a district bounded by some river that rises like the Tigris
aud the Euphrates in the lofty region of Armenia, and that it was.a
country celebrated in old times for the production of gold. Taking
these.particulars for my guide, 1 am inclined to believe, that the Pison
of Moses was the Absarus of the classical writers, or the Batoum of moe
dern geographers. This river and the Phasis appear to have been a
good deal confounded together by the ancients. For the latter stream
was sometimes called the true Phasis, by way of distinguishing it from
other rivers which bore the same name; and it was imagined, as we
learn from Dionysius, to take its rise from a mountain of Armenia,
though its real source lies far to the north of that country:* while the
former stream was also a Phasis, and ducs in fact originate from the
very district whence the Greek geographer erroneously deduces the
other. Hence 1 suspect, that the Absarus or the false Phasis ought ta
be deemed. the true one, and that the name itself is a corruption of the
scriptural Pison. But, however this may be, it answers with sufficient
accuracy to the account given by Moses. The Colchians, whose ter-
ritory was encompassed by the winding stream of the Absarus, were
certainly.a race of Cuthites, probably through the line of Havilah:
and their country was famed in ancient times for the abundance and
excellence of its gold, as Strabo, Appian, Eustathius, and Pliny, all
concur in testifying.”
“(8.) It only now remains that we should ascertain the river in-
tended by the Gihon. |
_ “ This is said by Moses to have compassed the whole land of Cush;
a description in itself somewhat ambiguous, since, as I have just ob-
served, there were “more countries than one which bore the name of
° 1 Diog. Perieg. ver. 691—694.
. .* See Pochart. Phaleg. lib. iv. c. 31. p. 290.
§ Noticé of Faber’s Origin, &c.
thet patriarch. But the ambiguity is sufficiently corrected by the man-
Her in which he particularises the rise of the river. Its head before
the deluge was close to that of the: Euphrates and the Tigris: its head
therefore after the deluge must at least be sought for in the same tract
of country as that whence those streams now originate.
.* © Of the various lands of Cush, the two most celebrated ‘were the
Asiatic and ‘the African. Each of these was styled by the Greeks
Ethiopia, as being occupied by two great branches of the same family:
and the two are still denominated by the Hindoos, in language per-
fectly corresponding with that of Scripture, the Cusha continent within
Weaning the Asiatic, and the Cusha continent without meaning the
African. It was partly from a mistaken notion that the African Ethi-
opia was intended by Moses, and partly (I apprehend) from a corre-
“pondence of names, that Josephus was induced to pronounce the Gihon
esame as the Nile. The ancient pagans were strongly addicted to
focal appropriation: hence, in whatever countries they settled, there
they alike placed both Paradise and mount Ararat; and, in more than
one instance, upplied to their sacred river, which flowed froin the sup-
posed scite of the garden and the arkite mountain, the name of one of
the rivers of Eden. Thus the Nile was called both compoundedly
een or Ogeon, and simply Geon: thus the Oxus is still denominated
hon or Gikon: and thus the present Indus was formerly known
by the appellation of Phison.» The Ganges or Ganga also, which
flows from the Paradise and Afarat of the Hindoos, is most
probably a mere variation of Guikon, pronounced contractedly
Gaon. But neither can the Ganges, the Nile, nor the Oxus, be the
scriptural Gihon; nor yet can the Indus be the scriptural Pison: be-
cause both those rivers are said by Moses to rise from the same country
as the Euphrates; consequently’ the origin of both must be seaght for
in the high tract of land which beats the name of Armenia. This
being the case, since the Gihon is described as compatsing the whole
land of Cush, and since it is also represented as rising in the same
fange as the Eaphrates; the Ethiopia, which it compasses, must doubt-
fess be the Asiatic, not the African, Ethiopia.
“Τῆς Asiatic Ethiopia, however, in its largest sense, or the interior
Cushadwip of the Hindoo geographers, is a most extensive tract of
country, comprehending the whole of the ancient empire of Iran, from
the river Indus to mount Caucasus, or even to the shores of the Euxine,
and therefore receiving its general appellation rather from its Cuthic
governors than from the great mass of its inbabitants.* This region
consequently is so ample, that it contains both Babylonia and Assyrig :
Whehce we must plainly took for some specific part of it, which will
answer to the description given by the sacred historian. Now there
Wiis a portion of it bordering upon the Persian gulph, which of old was
een ee σασσασσααανααπσαασασποοασασποαοσασσααπσσοονοσννσνα
1 They so call them in reference to the sittiatton of ther own:
the Romans were wont to spéak of the nether and the further Gaul.
2 Chron. Pasch. Ὁ. $0.84. -? Asiat, Res. vol. ii. p. 43, 44.
On Literary. Coimcidences. 9g
called Cissta, and which is even yet denominated Chusistan, or the land
of Cush, as being peculiarly occupied by the descendants of that patri-
arch. This then 1 conceive to have been the Ethiopia intended by
Moses. . :;
** And now, if we consult 8. map, we shall perceive, that the western
boundary of Chusistan is the ancient Gyndes, which empties’ itself into
the Tigris a little before that river falls into the Euphrates. The Gyn-
des therefore, judging both from its name and its situation, I suppose
to:be the scriptural Gillon, Its name is nothing more than Gihoa, with
a Greek termination suffixed: in its course it compasses the whole of
Chusistan, or the proper Asiatic land of Cush; and it rises, though not
jn Armenia, yet in the same mountainous region which may be deemed
ἃ continuation of that country.
“8. These then I suppose to be the four rivers of Paradise ; and,
whatever alteration has taken place in the higher part.of their courses,
I attribute to the violence of the deluge. The Euphrates and the Tigris
appear to have suffered the least change, for their heads are still very
near to each other: and it may be remarked, that even the present face
of the country seems to indicate, that the form.which it exhibited before
the flood was not very different from what I have supposed. Those two
rivers both rise in the neighbourhood of a considerable lake, formerly
denqminated the Patus Arsesa, and now Lake Van. This inland sea,
though more than one stream falls into it, has no visible outlet: conse-
quently its waters must be discharged through certain subterraneous
passages. Where they re-appear, it is impossible, and would be useless,
to. attempt to determine: but there is no absurdity in conjecturing,
that, before the great convulsion of .the flood, they may bave quitted
the lake through visible channels. I think it, in short, not improbable,
that this very lake may be an enlargement of the pool, into which the
river of Eden once flowed, and from which the four rivers of Paradise
took their rise, Should this speculation be well-founded, the garden
may be considered as submerged beneath the surface of the present
more ample sheet of water.” ,
Γ--- -- ----- 8 re -"Ἱ
ON LITERARY COINCIDENCES.
No. 1.
"As the pledge given in the preface to Porson’s Tracts, p. xcix.
still remains, as far as I know, unredeemed ; it is, I trust, allow-
able for an humble individual to fotlow the laborers in this harvest,
and to bring forward a few gleanings which have fallen m my way.
I mean not, however, to touch upon the conduct .of those cele-
bratéd critics, who, without meaning any harm, have silently used
the emendations of friends, as Benttéy did the undoubted restora-
tion of his friend Grevius ad Mamitt. 1. 776.; ak well wa Wook Sh
10
his friend Edward Bernard, in his Dissertation upon Pseudo-
Phalaris. ‘The unacknowledged obligations of H. Stephens to
Hartungus, and those of Archbishop Potter to Dr. Bentley,
will not, I fear, admit of so plausible an extenuation. They will,
perhaps, be submitted to your consideration in a future number.
t has, however, sometimes happened, that minds equally anxious
for the discovery of truth, and perfectly unconnected with each
other, have proceeded with equal success. ‘Their views were just,
and their feelings correct; and the same conclusions necessarily
On Literary Cotncidences.
result from the same premises.
begin with instances of this sort.
1. JOANNES HILDEBRANDUS
WITHOFIUS. — .
PREMETIUM CRUCIUM CRI-
TFICARUM PRECIPUE EX
- SENECA TRAGICO. 4to. L.
- BAT. 1749.
Emenda: relegit—Cur, inquit,
non ipsum Plutonem Jovi parem
trahit, oppressum catenis, et Erebo
capto potitur, id est, victor ejus
evadit, et sic relegit,. iterumque
transit Styga, cum hac opima pre-
da ad Superos revertens? Agam.
574. Hance alia retro spatia rele-
gentem ferit. Vide Bentl. ad Horat.
ib. 1. Od. 34. p. 33.
sublata prava distiactione legen-
dum est: Heic qui rex populis
pluribus imperat,—p. 155.
libere et fidenter ex Florentino
MS. recipi. potuisset : qualis
incertis vagus Meander undis er-
rat, et cedit sibi.—p. 156.
Scripsit Seneca: Ultrice manu :—
p- 97.
Nunquam et nusquam me legisse
aut audivisse fateor, Herculi ensem
inter cetera arma sibi consueta,—
gessisse aut adhibuisse :—emen-
demus ipso Seneca, ipso Hercule
attestante, sine omni temeritate:
μὰς arcum date.—pp..120, 121.
conjeceram quidem unum columen
afflicto malis; sed postea vidi
Danieli Heinsio idem in mentem
venisse,—p. 124. ΒΝ
[ shall, Sir, with your permission,
RICARDUS BENTLEIUS.
L. A. Senece Tragedie; cum
notis J. F. Gronovii; 8vo. Amst.
1682. |
Herc. Fur. 54. Ereboque capto
potitur, et retegit Styga? In mar-
gine relegit.
560. Hic qui rex populis pluribus
imperat.
683, 4. — qualis incertis vagus
Meander undis errat, et cedit sibi.
1103. Ultrice manu.
1229. huc arcum date.
1251. unum columen afflicto malis
Temet reserva.
On Literary Coincidences.
WITHOFIUS.
tpsa antiqua Basil. editio bene re-
stituit habet, procul dubio e MSS.
postea a ceteris neglectum ;—p.
130.
THOMAS GRAY’s Works; 2 Vols. .
410. 1814.
Acharnenses.
Should we not read Παρνήθιοι 7
Vol. ii, p. 133.
Vespee.
157. Read, Δικάσοντά pe, p. 139.]
‘Lysistrata.
Τὰ ᾿κάτιον yu. Τουκατεῖον 1 1. 6.
τὸ 'ΕἙκατεῖον, p. 167.
Plutus.
Φιλυλλέον, p. 180.
TYRWHITTI Appendix ad Toupii
Emend. in Suid. P. iii. p. 77.
Scribendum fortasse ΕἸ ΛΗΣ, quam
a Tyrwhitto olim oblatam pro sua
conjectura in Schol. ad Soph.
(Ed. Col. 311. venditavit Brun-
ckius.
Lupovicr Hétrpi1_ Lectiones
Aristophanez. 8vo. Berolini 1808.
Σκηνὰς λαμβανουσῶν fragmentum
3. quod in iambicos redigere sena-
rios sibi videbatur Brunckius, pene
nulla facta mutatione sic legendum
esse moneo, restitutis ejusmodi te-
trametris catalecticis : “Ὥστ᾽, εἴ τις
ὀρχοῖτ᾽ ev, θέαμ᾽ hy νῦν δ᾽ ὁρῶσιν
οὐθὲν, ᾿Αλλ᾽, ὥσπερ ἀπόπληκτοι,
στάδην ἑστῶτες ὠρύονται. Νῦν δ᾽
ὁρῶσιν οὐθὲν, quod oppositum τῷ
Bean’ ἦν. p. ult.
11
BENTLEIUS.
1343. Restituet armis.
resipuisse videtur.
Sed mox
BENTLEIUS.
Acharnenses.
347. F. Πιρνήθιοιε vide Stephan.
de Urb. Suid. in Παρνάσιοι. Sed
conf. omnino R.P. apud P.P.D.
ad Ran. 1088, 9. oe
Γαβρι.
δικάσοντά μ᾽’ Ω. 8. Fl. Christia-
nus. |
Lysistrata. .
64. τοὐκατεῖον ad . Callim. Fr.
ccxxvil. et in exemplari olim suo
R. B
Plutus.
1195. Incertus apud Schol. φιλυλ-
λίου.
L. C. VALCKENERIUS ad Ado-
niaz. Theocriti,—1773.
Callim. Fr. exxiv. Etéeos in Eins
commode mihi videor mutasse.—
Ρ. 344,
RicARDI PoRSON!I SUPPLEMEN-
TUM ad Pref. in Euripidem. 8vo.
_Cantab. 1802.
Aristophanes apud Athen. xiv. p.
628. E. “Ὥστ᾽, εἴ ris dpyoir’ εὖ,
θέαμ᾽ ἦν' νῦν δὲ δρῶσιν οὐθέν" ᾿Αλλ’
ὥσπερ ἀπόπληκτοι στάδην ἑστῶτες
ὡρύονται. P. xliz=xlv.
Ita hos versus suo marte digerere Hotibium nullus dubito. “Fora
man. would have very hard measure, if because another, whom he
knew not of, had lit upon the same thought, he must be traduced as
a plagiary: Though it appear from the rest of his performances (i. τ.
upon Aristophanes) “ (which are certainly new, and bis own) Yost be
19 On Literary Coincidences,
was very able to do that toe without stealing from others.” ‘Beniley’s
Auvswer to Boyle, p. 333.
2. As the preteusions of departed critics to fame may be innocently
discussed, I shall now proceed to subjoin certain alterations of ttre
learned and accomplished Jeremiah Marklund, appropriated with
reat self-complacency, but not with equal discernment, by Joseph
Valart, in his preface to an edition of Horace printed at Paris
1770; and to add the recorded opinion of the illustrious
Bentley upon the respective merits of the original alterations. [
am aware that this has been done concisely in a late edition of the
works of this poet, from the Cambridge press ; but I hope for the
indulgence of your readers, in giving a more enlarged account than
the limits of that publication would allow. The words included in
crotchets are mere insertions, or, if your readers please, interpo-
lations. The work of Raphael Fiorillo would have remained un-
molested on the shelf, if a learned brother had not thought it a
good deed to make known an imputation,’ which I shall attempt
to support by something shore than slight probabilities. I have
also appended certain emendations adopted with nice discrimination
and wonderful composure by Augustus Meineke, and -have con-
trasted them with the great and unquestionable services done to
ancient literature by his predecessors. ‘The depredations, | pre-
sume, are more extensive; but having been deluded in two or
three instances, I give a detailed account of those alienated resto-
rations, as far as my memory reaches, in order that others may not
be so easily ensnared. ‘These suspicions may be deemed unchari-
table ; let the reader judge. :
VALART. MARKLANDUS.
Q. Horatir FLiacct OPERA, [Jer. Marklandi EPIsTOLA CRI-
ad fidem 76 codicum.—Curante TicA* ad_ eruditissimum virum
Jos. VALART, Acad. Amb. 8° Franciscum Hare 5. T. P.—Can-
Parisiis, 1770. tabrigie : 1723. [Ignoscas, velim,
benigne lector, si mutationes ali-
cunde a Valartio derivatas, prout
"" memoria suggessit, adscripserim. |
Carm. I. xxi. 14. legendum, @ po- [Ex emendatione Scaligeri.]
pulo, Princtpe Casare—PR. viii.
A a a a eT ET Nat ace a
* Quart. Rev. No. ix. p. 207.
* « Sunt,” teste Bentleio, “ qui hoc indignantur, se in cujusvis argu-
menti scriptis suas laudes non reperire;” quod scilicet in Miscellaneis
Criticis ejus Epistolam et Statium Vir primarius silentio preterierit,
Marklandus suee huwanitatis immemor, Dawesii famam in postremis
scriptis idcirco strenue obloquitur; imo, Bentletum ipsum enixo stu-
dio inspergit. Ne quis Dawesium invidize insimulet, miutitationes
alias ex illo opuscule religiose recensitas hoc loco subjiciam, et singu-
‘is Viri prestantissimi calculim spponam. ==
On Literary Coincidences.
EV. iv. 17—23. Videre Retis bella
sub Alpibus Drusum = gerentem
Vindelici; [quibus Mos unde de-
ductus per omne Tempus Amazonia
securi Dextras obarmet, quercre
distuli: Nec scire fas est omnia:
13
[Exemplari suo adscripserat J.
Taylorus ;—Vindelici ; et diu Le-
teque victrices caterre — Preclare :
eain vero inter illas correctiones,
quibus viri laudis alieni, et litteras
humaniores sine dote tractantes
studivsam juventutem condonave-
sed] et diu Lateque victrices ca-
P. 15. Apul. Met. i. p. 2. edit. Colv. [p. 14. ed. Oudendorp.] cor-
figit, Ac dumis jentaculum ambulatorium PARAT, QUOD PER ITER
ere—. Male. R. B.
-P. 16. An. iii. 670. Legendum, Verum ubi nulla datur dextra
adfectare potestas ;—Male. R.B. (Conf. virum summum ad Hor.
Carm. Ii. xvii. 13. Maerklandi conjectura viros preclaros in frau-
dem illexit ; Wyttenbachins in PR. elegantissima oppido ad Plutarch.
operam affectant, ai rite memini, utitur. Recte quidem Valck. Opusc.
1, 391. ad Philosophiam viam adfectabant. Frequenter m delendo,
subinde eam inserendo sana evasit lectio; ut En. i. 747. vi. 559.
Stat. Theb. ix. 811. Hujus tum vultu dea dissimulata profatur—
-emendarat ἠὲ, B. conf. Ku. vi. 799.
P. 18. Petr. Arbiter, Vol. i..cap. 115. p. 689. ed. Burman. omnino
ὦ ἂν muginantem,— Male. R. Β.
P. 19. Val. Flacc. 11. 191. legendum, INFESTAQUE conjuns— Male.
R. B.
. Tbid.1. ult, Claudian. Lib. n. in Eutrop. 250. UBERIS expers et Dp,
21. 1.17. INDICIS eapers—utrumque τῶ, Male notavit R. B.
P. 22. 1. 11. Suetom. in Claudio, xxxviii. nec ante PERSUASIT
guam intra breve tempus liber editus sit,] Male R. B. qui pro quem,
cum conjecit.
P. 25. 1. 12. Cic. de N. Ὁ. Il. xvi. pro NATURAM necessario Fe-
-ecribamus TEMERITATEM ;—Male. R. B.
P. 26. 1. 27. 16. IIL. xxxv. atqui ix suo lectulo— Male. R. B.
P. 27. 1, 6, 7. in triumphantis toga elatus est.| Male: inter manus
suorum elatus est. Virg. Ain. ix. 501. et Sueton. R. B. Mox hanc cor-
rectionem damnavit tanquam falsam, ‘ cum de Dionysio Siculo sermo
fiat, cui non competit toga, que Romanorum est. Markland. PR. ad
. 5. Gell. N. Α. χ. 18. Omnino legendum, inter lamenta et
MEZENIAS uzoris. Male. R.B. -
P. 30. 1, 13. Propert. ii. 19. Cl. Davisius eleganti conjectura repo-
hit molimine. Male. R. B
P. 31.1.7. Lucan. Phars. vili. 807. lege—momenta,— Recte R. B.
quem vide ad 1, et in nota pro Partisque corrige, Patrieque—[16,
], 11. monumenta rerum gestarum, Liv. pref. PORSONUS.]
~ -P, 33. 1. 9. Sil. Ital. vini. 9. Indivisus honos RERUM ; QUIN rur-
sus etdem—- Male. R. B.
P. 34. 1.09. Val. Flacc. v. 594. CHCA TEGITUR caligine campus,
Ρ, 89. 1. 13, 14, Flor. Ul. ii, African εἰ Syrtes BY omnia, τὰ HO.
14 - On Literary Coincidences.
terve—In textu Parisino nulla runt, habeamus. In ludo quodam
sunt hujus mendz vestigia ; sedin celeberrimo, Etonensem dico, jam
‘PREF. iv. se emendationis causas olim innotuerunt duz _ lectiones
in notis attulisse dicit Valartius. Venusine, quas viri eruditissimi,
Snapius et Georgius adolescenti-
bus tanquam κτῆμα ἐσαεὶ relique-
runt; vide R. P. Tracts, pp. 309.
372.: altera fortasse crat ad Serm.
II. iii. 69. Scribe D1gAm a Nerio:]
MARI jacentium insularum littora implevit. Male; lege, omniun-
QUE INTERJACENTIUM—R. B. Postea Marklandus ipse, Syrtes et
omnium INTERJACENTIUM tnsularum litora; prout me comiter mo-
-nuerunt Summi Viri Franciscus Hare et Ricardus Bentleius, et Eru-
ditus Vir Daniel Walterus, ‘Tutor olim meus: PR. ad. Stat. Sylv. xiv.
P. 40. 1. 17. Sil. Ital. xiii. 144. (μὲ Sidonius, superante lecerto,—
Male. R. B.
ΟΡ. 42, 1. 24. Sil. Ital. xiii. 182. Et missm suCcCEDUNT turribus
hasta. Male. R. B. | .
P. 45. 1.4. Sil. 114]. xiii. 369. occulsisse probatur—Male. Pro
virtus fortasse vise. Statius Theb. xii. 222. Vadit atrox visu, R. B.
P. 47. 1.6, 7. Cic. de Divinat. ii. 21.—aera legum de celo tacta
guid habent observandun? Q. At VETUS, tum Pinerii Natta, no-
bilis; Male. R. B.
P. 48.1, 10. Plin. Ep. vi. 17. quem habere socium maxime OPT A-
VERAM. OPTARIM. ἢ. B. .
”- P, 50.1.3. Sil. Ital. VIE. 257. NULLEQUE movent in FRONDIBUS
AURE: Male. R. B.
P. 51. 1.14. Lucan. V. 600. lego tortas; Male. R. B. qui maluit,
Pontus ut in scopulos gelidas erexerat undas. Occurrit Geticus
Boreas, pelagusque refundit : Sil. Ital. IV. 244. (ει Geticus Boreas,
Luean, ib. 644.—in cumulos—usurpat. . |
Ibid. 1, 21. Silius Ital. IV. 244. lege iterum, tortum: Male. R. B.
P. 52.1.3. Virg. Geo, III. 253. scribe, correptos FUNDO torquentia
montes, Male. R. B.
τς Ibid. 1. 14. Hin. I. 88. legerem tortum: Male. R. B.
P. 53. 1. 10. Val. Flace. IV. 409. nonne legendum torquens? Male.
. B.
P. 57.1. 12. Lucan. V. 457. movitque Ceraunia FLATUS. Male. R. B.
P. 59. ). ult. Lucan. V. 137. fatique PATENT—Male. R. B.
P. 60. 1. ult. Lucan. IX. 6. Quodque PatuNs—Male. R. B.
[qui in curis secundis tanquam spurium περιγραπτέον censuit. patens
ens
—patet—patet—Codices.]
ΠΡ, 61.1. 14. Tacit. Annal. XVI. xix. Intit ev viAs—Recte. R. B.
[P. 62. adde Οἷς. de LL. 25. pro Sex. Rosc. 1. 8. Liv. IV. 4.
PORSONUS.] . | ͵
P. 63. ]. 19. Porphyrius de Abstinentia, III. xviii. p. 120. ed. Can-
tab. πλὴν τῶν ΙΧ ,»--ἰεροθύτων. RB. ο
On Literary Coincidences. ee
Serm. I. i. 29: Perfidus hic caupo, —totum locum sic constituo ;
Perlecta, ut liquet, Marklandi Causidicus vafer hic, p. 8. Male.
disceptatione Jo. Valertius in viri R. B. [Perfidus hic cavTOR felici
perdocti sententiam apud Taylo- solertia eruit vir doctissimus apud
rum in Jur. Civ. p. 220 pedibus Taylor. 1. οἱ ‘* Cavere verbum ju-
“P66. 1. 14. totum locum sic constituo; πλὴν τῶν OYZTIMON,
(8 καὶ αὐτὰ Big, ΟΥ̓Κ dvapoipev)—Male. R. B.
* Pp. 69. 1.8, 9. Hor. Serm. IT. iii. 154. INGEST’ accedit— Male. R. B.
P. 70. 1. 28. Solinus, c. xxii. Non aliter quam in bello VITAM
AGAT, et tnter arma MORTEM OPPETAT. Male. R. B.
_ 7° P27. 1. 22, 23.-Sil. Ital. IV. 511.—detur ! cum fata vocabunt,
ntem cecidisse meum esto! Male. R. B. '
- P. 78. 1. 28. Lucan. X. 105.—INGEsTA perorat. Male. R. B.
[incesta duo codices, incerta unus, inculta alter.]
. P. 81.1.1. Hor. Serm. II. iii. 183. LaRGus—Male. R. B.
P. 93. 1. 17, 18. Serm. II. vi. 30, 31—obstat Ad Macenatem me-
mori δὲ mente recurras? Male. R. B.
P. 96.1. 17. Gellius XVIII. 4. fatuos— Male. R. B.
P. 97. |. 20. de Hor. Epist. I. 1. 25. Male. R. B.
- P. 103. 1. 15. Apuleius de deo Socratis, p. 296. ed. Colv. posteriorum
—posterorum. R.B. -
Ῥ, 104.1. 7. Statius Theb. IX. 216. lege, timidum—(timidum MS.
Petrensis;) male; Hin. X. 866. R. B.
P. 106. 1. 14. En. V. 541. scribo, more Greco, invidit honoris,
Male. R. B. :
P. 107. Hor. Carm. I. vi. 2. Meonii carminis ALTER!I, Male. R. B.
[Non Nemo legit, Mzonii carminis mulo, pp. 104, 105. scilicet At-
terburius apud Adventurer, No. 58.]
P.111. 1. 6. Hor. Serm. I. x. 64. Combustam propriis, Male ;
-forte pestilentia obiit; ideo scripta una: concremata fuerint; ut in
peste solere fieri pluribus exemplis intelliges ex Pieriano de literatorum
infelicitate. R. B.
“ΠΡ, 116. 1. ult. Celsus de Med. II. i. [=II. i. p. 34. ed. L. Bat.
1785.]|—qua per hyemem quoque exercent: Male. R. B.°
P, 122.1. 4. Ho. 1. 445. Omnino legendum umbre. Sic Heinsii
-editio. R. Δ.
εὖ 125.}.1. Hoa. IV. 471. Aut Agamemnonius PaNis—Male.
ΚΝ. B.
Ibid. 1. 13. Val. Flacc. I. 797. lege, meriti regis succedite tectis,
_Male. R. B.
P, 126. 1. 12, 13, 14. Virg. Cul. 375. Ergo ΜῈ causam mortis, ME
dicere vicTAM— Male. R. B.
P. 127. 1. 8, 9. forte leg. Ποιναῖς, ἘΠΙΤΙΜΙΟΙ͂Σ Mate. R. B.
-[Tlotvats φρικταῖς, Ἐριννύσι τιμωρητικαῖς. T. HEMSTERHUSIUS ad Lu-
can. I. 459.]
, P. 139. 1. 24. Stat. Thebaid. I. 331, 2. lapsum—lassum R. B.
\- Ibid. 1. 25. hine arte scopuloso limite pendens—scribo hine Actes
scopuloso limite pendens,—Male. En. IX. 323. lato te mile ducarm.
4
16 On Literary Coincidences,
ibat. Sed, ut liberaliter agam; hoc ridicum.-—Cic. Fam. IIE. i; Meliss
uoque factum fecisse videtur enim ei cevere volo, quam ipse elie
aderus in Emend. p. 70.; Ve- solet. Id. de Legg. 1. 5. Non enim
lartii enim editionem se penitus id querimus hoc sermone, Pom-
ignorasse ipse profitetur p. 78. poni, quemadmodum caveamus ip
allidus hic cautor Valart. PR. x. jure, aut quid de quaque consul-
Χ, 513. latumque per agmen Ardens limitem agit ferro,—et Curtius
TV. p. 43. [arote—arte—arces Codices; Stat. Sylv. II. ii. 112.. Cur
seryet Pharias Letheus janitor aras: arces R. B. Conf. En. 1. 112.
P. 143.1. 23. Juv. Sat. ΧΙ. 165.—artes—Male. R. B. “
- P. 145. 1. 2, 8. Sil. Ital. I. 897, 8. Ain. VEL. 620. Terribilens cri-
stis galeam, flammasque vomentem, Ibid. 1. 5. et p. 146.1. 3. ξωρεᾳ
una, ac multis fatalem millibus hastam: lege, fatales. R..B. Ibid.
1.6, 7. Preterea textam nodis aurogue trilicem’ Loricam, nulli tegmen
penetrabile telo. Ain. Ill. 467. Lonicam consertam hamis, aurague
icem.
P. 148. 1. 27. legendum, quod plabiscito Stolenis prohibitum fust.
Recte. R. B. quam margini exemplaris sui apposuerat Vir prestantissi-
mus.
P. 150.1. 15. Lucan. IX. 156. ET PHARII reges, Mole. ἢ. B.
[Fortasse, Quique alii,—Ovid. Met. XV. 867. Vide aptem Zn. VIL
183. Hor. Serm. 1. iv. 2. R. B.] |
P. 151. 1. 3. Id. ibid. 1074. vestrisque est ista ligentia regnig.
Male. R. B.
P. 152. 1. 9. Gratius Cyneg. v. 318. frustrare— Male. R. B.
πων 1.16. Juv. Sat. 1V. 24. Suceinctus Pharia quandem,— fale,
. B. ,
Ibid. 1. 24. non exinde—Immo ex Sat. I. 26. R, B. .Nec aliter
sentit Schraderus in Observat. pp. 19, 20.
P. 153. 1. 13. Gell. X. 3. ἐπ his umbre et color quasi opace vette
statis est ;—umbra et quasi squalor v. e.: ἀρχαῖος xivos καὶ χνοῦς
[i. €. χνοῦς ἀρχαιοπινὴς) R. B.
- P. 157.1. 24, Stat. IX. 562. elypeumque revellit HyPsEos. Male,
[épsius unus Cod. ypsius i post rasuram alter. An. ΧΙ. 196. Jpsorug
elypeos, et non felicia tela, R. B. .
P. 196. |. 22, 3. Claudian. in Eutrop. Il. 450. crebro pulsatus per-
stre pitictu BOSPORUS; it varias penetrans Chalcedona nidor. Male.
Codex i.e. Caudex, et carius penetrat—R. B, (Varie super hac
Elaudiant loco doctorum ἔμπεσε sententie. Vide J. F. Gronovium
Observat. Ill. 21. J. Toup. Epist. Crit. p, 170. (=Vol, Ik. p. 612,
Oxon.) PorsoNus. | °
P. 164. 1. 3. Suidas v, ᾿Αλίβυες Zevyviratr-—omnino legendum-—zept
BAPKHY οἱ Λέβυες, Male. R. B.
P 169. 1. 20. Hor. Epist. I. i. 85, Cui si vENTOSA lihido— Male.
R. B. .
ERRATIs addidit R. B. p. 12. lin. ult. pro referre, lege proferre,
p. 89. L 12. pro rescripsit lege rescripserit, p. 90. lin. 21. pro pedites
Jege patres. P.107. 1.6.1, Ὁμῃρικοῦ. P, 1.54, 1, 28. pro satios lege satictas,
Φ
Previdus bic oauter, Schrader. |.c.
p. 71. Pervigil bic compe miles,
Qn Literary Coincidences.
1
tatione respenteamus. De veei-
bus κάπηλος, καπηλεύειν, vide Bent-
AX, Bosch. ia Pref. ad Poemata leit Conc. pp. 339, 340. Valck. ad
oua P. XX}.
N. F. p. 410. Morell. ad Liban.
p- 230.; et de cauponari adi virum
eruditissimum Gent. Mag. for
Oct. 1805. pp. 921, 922.]
Serm. II,.i. 63. Primus in hunc operis componcre carmina morem.
Qiid bec sbi volunt, Jn bunc
eperis morem? Quid mos operis?
Placeret mihi igitur versum hunc
sic emendare. fie HANC operis
compenere carming FORMAM.
PREF. x, Xie
Nunquam ista concoquere potai,
componere carmina in hunc MQ-
REM eperis:—Aut quid denique
est Mos operis ?—Lego igitur,
Primus in hanc operis componere
carminag FORMAM. pp. 9—lI.
Male. R. B.
fii. 185. Scilieet ut plausus quos fert Agrippa, feras tu.
Ut ebstringantur duo, interpuactio
tantum modo mutanda est, et ad-
denda literula una, A scilicet,
plenusque :sensus efficitur. Pra.
ai.
—mutatione—distinctionis, et ad-
ditione literz unius, et sensum
Horatio, et partem suam Tiberio
restituisse me confido: Scilicet?
aut plausus quos fert Agrippa,
Jferas Tu. pp. 92—3. Male. Καὶ. B.
τ. 59, 60. O Latrtiade, quicquid dicam, aut erit aut non:
Divinare etenim magnus mihi donat Apollo.
Sic—lego. Quidguid dicam ant
(Taylorus in margine exemplaris a
erit, aul non Divinare mihi meg- me inspecti reliquit, “0 Laértiade,
aus donavit Apollo: Pr. xii.
quidquid dicam, aut ertt, aut non
Divinare mihi magnus donavit
Apollo. Ovid. Met. I. 391.
Aut fallax, ait, est solertia nobis,
Aut pia sunt, nullumque nefas
oracula suadent.” ‘‘ Porro,” monet
BENTLEIus, “in codice Regi-
nensi et illo Regiz Societatis, nan
magnus miki habetur, sed mthé
magnus: et in Codice Collegii
Trinitatis, etsi is note sit non op-
time, apparet, Divinare etenim
magnus DONAVIT Apollo. Quic-
quid dico citat R. B. in Conc. iil.
104.”] .
Epp. I. ii. 25. Sub domina meretrice fuisset turpis et excors.
Si pro Excors quis ExsoRs lege- —lis autem que sequuntur, turpis
ret, is-—vocem maxime congruam et exsors, nuoquam vidi quidquam
adbiberet ; exeors θάμα dicitur qui proprius aut eruditius.—Sed plus
VOL. XVIE, Cl. Jt. NO. XXXII. S
18 ΄
On Literary Coincidences.
omnis et humanitatis et sensus Venustatis et Eruditionis latet in
communis expers est. PR. xij.
xiij. :
voce Exsors. Sors est hereditas:
Inde exsors, exhares, — Ulysses
igitur si hoc poculum bibisset,
exutus veluti, et exhares et exsors
Humanitatis fuisset: pp. 102, 3.
Male. R. B.
vi. 11. Improvisa simul species exterret utrumque.
Quum Latine non dicatur, species ut recte dicas, species aliqua EX-
exterret timentem, error est in hoc
TERRET CUPIENTEM, Vix tamen,
verbo exterret, qui nullus erit si opinor, eodem tempore dixeris,
quis legit (legat), EXERCET. PR.
xij.
species eadem EXTERRET TIMEN-
TEM,—media vox querenda ‘est,
que utrique affectui conveniat,—
Improvisa simul species EXERCET
utrumque, pp. 113—15. Male.
R. B. eodem loco, p.116. C. Cel-
sum tentaverat Vir Cl. quod nigro
calculo notavit R. B. et Virg. Ain.
IV. 450. Tum vero infelix fatts
EXERCITA Dido, p.117. Male.
R. B. qui citatib. En. XII. 610.
Conjugis attonitus fatis urbisque
ruing. Melius Scaliger ad Cirin. p.
307 =48. Impia prodigiis ut quon-
dam exercita amoris—olim, exter-
rutt amplis. Vide ad Daw. Misc.
Cr. p. 613. ed. nov: Geo. Hl. 434.
exercitus @estu legit Amicus qui-
dam meus, Juvenis Eruditus. p.
121. Male. R. B.
—vil. 40. Haud male Telemachus, proles patientis Ulixei.
Nihil sapientius Telemachi respon-
80 quod mox sequitur: sapiens
autem filius quum sapientem pa-
trem arguat, non vero pattentem,
heic SAPIENTIS magis Horatium
sapit quam PATIENTIS, PR. ΧΙ].
—proles sapientis Ulixei:
Ecce veram Horatii manum! Tele-
machns sapienter respondit, utpote
filius Ulissis sapientis,—sapientis
patris sapiens filius, adeo ut pa-
trem in filio agnosceres. p. 134.
Male. R. B.
xvil. 62. Quere peregrinum, vicinia rauca reclamat.
Si quilibet de vicinia, uhi semel sic
irrisus est, non curat planum, ja-
centem follere, nec committit ut ad
ravim usque clamitet iterando duas
has voces Quere peregrinum, is
raucus dici nullo ‘modo potest.
Tantumne ab re sua otii illis fuit,
ut pre studio reclamandi, huic,
quem planum et impostorem scie-
bant,—ad ravim usque vocifera-
rentur ? Non conveniunt, hee
sapientia sive calliditas vicinie
On the Science of the Egyptians and Chaldeans. 19
. Ergo rauca heic locum habere non
potest. Nulla porro vox propius
_accedit ad RAUCA quam CAUTA,
neque magis huic loco convenit.
‘Legendum igitur, vicinta cauta re-
.clamat. PR. xiv.
grinum,
non permittentis sibi illudi, et stul-
titia ejusdem viciniz, guere pere-
ad ravim occinentis:
quando semel aut iterum hec di-
xisse sufficeret—rescribo, QUERE
peregrinum vicinia CAUTA recla-
mat: hunc locum itaa TE ( Ha-
rio) legi solitum nuper audio, pp.
136 -39. Male. R. B.
II. i. 207. Lana Tarentino violas imitata veneno.
Quam vereor ne in hoc vocabulo
LANA interciderit literula una, E
scilicet, /anaque facta sit ex lena.
Lena autem vestis. genus erat,
que ubi Tarentino veneno violas
mentiri didicerat, hyacinthina dice-
batur. Actor autem cui, ut Per-
sianis verbis utar, circum humeros
Ayacinthina lana grat, ubi pro-
dierat in scenam, statim in spec-
tatorum plausus veniebat. PR. xiv,
XV.
scribo—L2&NA Tarentino violas
imitata veneno. Quod autem ca-
put fuit hujus mez conjecture,
apud Persium I. 32. invenio, Hic
aliquis cut circum humeros Hya-
cinthina LENA est. Quid, queso,
est Lena Hyacinthina Persii, nisi
Lena violas imitata Horatii ? —
His peregrinis divitiis actor obli-
tus, statim ac scenam ingressus
est, immenso plausu excipitur. pp.
87. 90, 91. 85. Male. R.B. qui
provocavit ad Juv. xiv. 187. pere-
grina, ignotaque nobis Ad scelus,
atque nefas, quecunque est, pur-
pura ducit. Virg. Au. XI. 771.
Ipse, peregrina ferrugine clarus et
ostro, Geo. II. 465. Alba nec
Assyrio fucatur lana veneno,
.
ON THE SCIENCE
OF THE EGYPTIANS AND CHALDEANS.
Part I1I.—[Continued from No. XXXII. p. 273.]
Havine finished the digression which I thought it necessary to
make concerning the stadium, I shall now praceed to consider two |
objections; which may have occurred to the minds of my readers
in perusing the first part of this essay. It may have been said,
Jirst, that the Chaldeans did not begin to make any astronomical
20 On the Sctence of the
observations, even according to those who were the most inclined
to favor their antiquity, until about 720 years before Alexander thie
Great; and that as Nabonassar destroyed the historical records of
the Chaldeans, it is very unlikely that Pythagoras should have ob-
tained much information concerning the more ancient learning of
that people :— secondly, that if after the death of Nabonassar the
Babylonians kept any records of their astronomical observations,
those records were still in existence in the time of Alexander, and
were consequently accessible to the Greeks long after the time of
Pythagoras. |
The first of these remarks may seem to be authorised by the
following passage in Pliny. Literas semper arbitror Assyrias
fulisse ee ee Anticlides in Egypto invenisse quent
dam nomine Menona tradit XV. annis ante Phoroneum antiquis-
simum Gracia Regem : idque monumentis adprobare conatur. E
dwerso Epigenes apud Babylontos DCCXX. annorum observa-
tiones siderum coctilibus laterculis inscriptis docet, gravis auctor in
primis: qui minimum, Berosus et Critodemus, CCCCXC. anno-
rum.. Ex quo aternus literarum usus. (LVII.)
Epigenes florished a few years before Alexander, and Berosus
passed his youth under that prince. But the quotation from Pliny
can be of no avail, because the text has been evidently corrupted.
The original numbers set down by the author probably alarmed his
copyists, and they have mended his chronology at the expense of his
logic. Pliny would scarcely have said, that because inscriptions had
beeni made upon bricks by the Chaldeans, about 11 centuries before
his own time according to some, or about 9 centuries according to
others, the Assyrian characters had always existed, and the use of
letters had been eternal.
The Babylonians, as it appears from Cicero and Diodorus
Siculus, had very different pretensions. Contemnamus etiam
Babylonios, says Cicero with just severity, ef eos gui e Caucaso
cali signa servantes numeris et mottbus, stellarum cursus perse-
quuntur : condemnemus, inquam, hos aut stultitie aut vanitatis,
aut tmpudentia, qu CCCCLXX. millia annorum, ut ipsi dicunt,
monumentis comprehensa continent. (De Divinitate L. 1.) Dio-
dorus thus expresses himself. Περὶ δὲ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν ἐθῶν ἐν οἷς
φασι τὴν θεωρίαν τῶν κατὰ τὸν κόσμον πεποιῆσθαι τὸ σύστημα τῶν Χαλ-
Egyptians and Chaldeans. ΔΙ
Valeur, οὐκ ἄν τις ῥαδίως πιστεύσειεν. ᾿Ετῶν γὰρ ἑπτὰ καὶ τετταράκοντα
μυριάδας καὶ τρεῖς ἐπὶ ταύταις χιλιάδας εἰς τὴν Αλεξάνδρου διάβασικ
γεγονέναι καταριθμοῦσιν ἀφ᾽ ὅτου τὸ παλαίον ἤρξαντο τῶν ἄστρων τὰς
παρατηρήσεις ποιεῖσθαι. (L. 1.)
‘¢ What the Chaldeans (literally the college of the Chaldeans) say
concerning the multitudes of years, which they have employed in
the contemplation of the universe, no one will easily believe ; for
they reckon 473,000 years from the time when they anciently be-
gan to make astronomical observations to the passage of Alexander.”
Berosus himself, as I shall have occasion to remark, asserted, that
the Babylonian records went back beyond 150,000 years. I think
therefore we must abandon the present reading of enays and the
argument built on it.
In the Greek Chronography, edited by Syncellus, we are told
that Nabonassar, (according to Alexander Peolyhistor and Berosus,
who had published the Chaldaic Antiquities,) having collected the
monuments that recorded the actions of the kings who preceded
him, destroyed them, in otder that the enumeration of the Chaldean
᾿ monarchs might begin with him. (Ersddy, ὡς ὁ ᾿Αλέξανδρος [ὁ Πο-
λυΐστωρ] καὶ Βερωσσός φασιν, οἱ τὰς Χαλδαϊκὰς ἀρχαιολογίας περιειλη»
φότες, Ναβονάκορος συναγάγων τὰς πράξεις τῶν. ἡπρὸ αὐτοῦ Βασιλέων,
ἠφάνισεν, ὅτως ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἣ καταρίθμησις γίνεται τῶν Χαλδαίων βασιλέων.)
Nabonassar reigned about 400 years before the birth of Alexander,
and about 200 years before the time when _ Pythagoras visited
Babylon. But in the passage which I have cited, there is: nothing
to authorise the supposition, that he destroyed the astronomical
records of the Chaldeans. This monarch, we may presume, was a
Tsabaist. He could have no interest im destroying the astronomi-
cal records, which might be considered as the religious archives of
a people who adored the host of heaven. After all, the story told
of Nabonassar is very improbable ; as it directly contradicts the
assertions of Berosus himself, as we sball presently see. What can
be thought of an historian who gives himself the lie?
᾿Φ, 1 have observed that when Pythagoras visited Babylon, the
ecientific records of the Chaldeans were probably still preserved ;
but that they could hardly have escaped destruction, when
Xevxes plundered and demolished the temple of Belus. The
Persians cared little for the sciences; they abhorred the idolokry
of the Babylonians; and it is not likely that they respected toe
92 On the Science of the
literary monuments of that people. In fact the very bricks, which’
were covered with inscriptions, must have been objects of de-
testation to the jealous orthodoxy of the Persians. These
bricks, it is true, could not have been all destroyed; but when
the priests, who could alone interpret the sacred characters, (for
the Chaldeans had also a sacred language) were killed or dis-
persed, the records must have soon become useless and unintelli-
gible.
But let us now examine the objections which may be made to
these remarks. It may be said, that the authorities of Berosus, of
Ptolemy, and of Simplicius, may be cited against them.
Bepwoods δὲ ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ τῶν Βαβυλωνιακῶν φησι γινέσθαι μὲν αὐτοῦ
κατ᾽ Αλέξανδρον τὸν Φιλίππου τὴν ἡλικίαν, ἀναγραφὰς δὲ πολλῶν ἐν Βα-
βυλῶνι φυλάσσεσθαι μετὰ πολλῆς ἐπιμελείας ἀπὸ ἐτῶν που ὑπὲρ μυριάδων
δεκαπέντε περιοχούσας χρόνον" περιέχειν δὲ τὰς ἀναγραφὰς ἱστορίας περὶ
τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ θαλάσσης, καὶ πρωτογονίας, καὶ Βασιλέων, καὶ τῶν
κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς πράξεων. “ Berosus says in the first part of his Baby-
Jlonian Antiquities, that he was vet in his youth in the time of |
‘Alexander-the son of Philip, and that inscriptions relating to:many
antiquities in Babylon, and comprehending a period of above
150,000 years, were then preserved with great care. These in-
scriptions contained histories about the heaven, and the sea, and
primordial generations, and kings and their transactions.” (Chro-
nograph. Grec.)
From this account it would follow, that the Babylonian records,
whether scientific or historical, for a period of more than 150,000
years, still existed in the time of Alexander. But by whom 1s this
extravagant statement made?’ By the same author who asserts,
that Nabonassar destroyed all the writings and monuments which
‘ recorded the actions of his predecessors. What credit can be given
to a writer, who has been guilty of such a flagrant contradiction ὃ
‘Tatian has spoken highly of Berosus-; and his reason seems to be,
that he had mentioned the war which Nebuchadnezzar had carried
on against the Jews; and thus confirmed, in the opinion of Tatian,
the testimony of the sacred writers. The zeal of Tatian was indis-
creet : he ought to have recollected, that the testimony of the sacred
writers could receive little support from the additional authority of
the historian of the fish Oannes, which raised its head twice a day
Egyptians and Chaldeans. 23
out of the waters of the Euphrates to exhort the people of
Babylon.
Simplicius tells us, that Callisthenes furnished Aristotle with the
astronomical observations of the Chaldeans for a period of 1903.
years before Alexander. Callisthenes, the friend of this prince,
had undoubtedly all the means of obtaining information at Babylon ;
and if any writings, or monuments, containing such observations,
had existed in his time, there can be little doubt that they would
have been copied and translated into Greek for the use of Aristotle.
No expense, no pains were spared by Alexander to enable his
ancient preceptor to write for the instruction of mankind. Many
thousand men, according to Ply, (L. VIIL.) were employed in
collecting rare animals for his inspection, while he was writing his
Natural History, a work which, if we believe Athenzus, (L. [X.)
cost Alexander 800 talents. But I am inclined to think, that Calli-
sthenes merely transmitted to Aristotle such traditions, as he could
collect among the Chaldeans, of the scientific discoveries and astro-
nomical observations of their ancestors. ‘There are several pas-
sages in the treatise de Calo, which seem to imply that Aristotle
Was not unacquainted with the traditions of the Egyptians and
Chaldeans, concerning their ancient astronomical science. Know-
ing very little of the matter himself, and holding opinions contrary
to those of the very philosophers whom he should have taken. for
his guides, he has spoken too briefly of their systems, and of the
principles upon which they founded their theories. Still it seems
incredible that Callisthenes should have sent a regular series of ob-
servations, for the long period of 19 centuries, to Aristotle, and
that this philosopher should never have acknowledged the present.
He says, indeed, that the Egyptians and Chaldeans had cultivated
astronomy for many years (ἐκ πλείστων ἐτῶν). Would he have em-
ployed this indefinite expression, if he had possessed documents,
which carried back the observations of the Chaldeans for the pre-
cise period of 1903 years? If Aristotle did possess such docu-
ments, and yet never mentioned their existence, though all Greece
must have been acquainted with the fact, what became of them
after his death? If he did not know how to prize them, how came
they to remain unnoticed by the philosophers of the school of
Alexandria? Upon the whole then I am disposed to think, that
“
24 On the Sctence of the
Callisthenes merely communicated to Aristotle, such oral traditions
as he could find still preserved among the Chaldeans concernmage
their dncient observations and discoveries. The treatise de Calo
seems fully to confirm the probability of this supposition; and the
language of Simplicius may be interpreted in conformity with it.
Ptolemy mentions several eclipses, which seem to have been
observed with great precision at Babylon. Three took place du-
ring the reign of Mardocempadus, 720 and 719 years before
Christ—a fourth happened under Nabopolassar, about 100 years
afterwards—a fifth under Cambyses, 524 years before Christa
sixth and a seventh under Darius—an eighth and a ninth during
the archonship of Phanostratus, 384 years before Christ—and.
finally, a tenth during the archonship of Evander the following
year. Montucla has erroneously stated, that Ptolemy enumerates:
only seven eclipses observed at Babylon. (Histoire des Mathé-
matiques, Part. I. L. 2.)
᾿ς [tis in the fourth book of the Almagest that Ptolemy mentions: _
these ten eclipses. His account of them seems to be taken from
Hipparchus. Now it is to be observed, that 337 years elapsed
between the first of these eclipses and the last. Instead then of
concluding that Hipparchus possessed a regular kalendar, in which
the eehpses, as they had been observed at Babylon, were noted in-
continued succession, Ε should rather infer, that he had been only:
able to collect a few scattered remrams of the scientific records of.
the Chaldeans. Ptolemy speaks of the three eclipses, which took
place during the reign of Mardocempadas as the most ancient of
any that had been observed at Babylon. The reign of Mardecem-
padus commenced the 28th year of the δι of Nabonassar ; and if
it be true that this last-mentioned king destroyed 28 the records of
thé Babylonians, the three ecltpses which took place in the:
28th and 29th years of tris era may have been the first that were
described after his time. But unless the Babylonian kalendar had
been complete, whieh it appears by ne means to have been, Pto~
lemy, or rather Hipparchus, was only authorised to. say that these
eclipses were the most ancient, of which he bad received any ae-
count.
E return then with undiminished confidence to my position, that
the scientific and historical records of the Chaldeans must have been
Egyptians and Chaldeans. gr
in-great part destrayed during the reign of Xerxes ; while I can by
no means admit, on the authority of Berosus, who flatly contradicts
himself, that this event happened in the time of Nabonassar. This
prince might have reformed the kalendar, and thus have given rise
to the story reported by Berosus.
. The traditions, which the Greeks preserved of the astronomical
discoveries of the Chaldeans, .seem to show that they had been only
able to collect the fragments of a mighty system, which had fallen
into ruin. No one will accuse M. Montucla of being too partial
to the pretensions of the ancient Oriental nations. Let us then
listen to some of his remarks.
“ Les anciens écrivains font mention de quelques périodes luni-
solaires, qui peuvent donner une idée fort avantageuse de |’astro-
nomie Caldéenne. Geminus en explique une, d’ot lon conclut le
mouvement drume et moyen de la lune, de 13°, 10, 55”, ce qui
s’écarte a peine d’une seconde de la grandeur qui résulte des ocb-
servations modermes. Mais rien ne fait plus d’honneur a ces anciens
astronomes que la période ἃ laquelle ils donnoient le nom de Saros;
elle étoit composée de 223 mois lunaires, 6585 jours, 8 heures, et
elle avoit ’avamtage remarquable de ramener aprés ce terme la lune
presque exactement dans la méme position ἃ l’égard du soleil, de
son noeud et de son apogée; d’oa if suit que les phénomeénes qui
dépendent du mouvement combiné de ces deux astres, se renouve-
Joient avec assez de précision dans le cours des périodes suivantes.”
Again—* L’astronome Asabe Albatenius dit.que les Caldéens fai-
soient l'année astrale de 865 j. 6h. 11‘. Ne pourroit-on en conclure
que la progression des étoiles fixes ne leur fut pas inconnue ? Car il
est évident par la comparaison des périodes ci-dessus, qu ils avoient
approché de fort prés de la vraie année solaire, et qwils avoient faite
de 365 jours, 5 heures, 49’, 30”. D’ot peut donc venir cette nou-
velle année nommée astrale, sinon de la connoissance qu’ils eurent
que les étoiles fixes s’avancoient lentement dans l’ordre des signes ?
dans ce cas on pourroit dire qu’ils déterminoient ce mouvement de
51” et quelques tierces par an, ou d’un degré en 69 ans environ.”
F suspect that there is an error of the press in this statement.
Montucla probably meant, as may indeed be inferred from what
he had said some pages before, that the Chaldeans reckoned the
length of the solar year at 365d. 5h, 51’, 36”. ‘Fhis was, accord-
26 . On the Science of the
ing to Cassini, the length of the year as established by the Aate-
dijuvians, if they, as Josephus asserts,. were the inventors of -the
cycle called the Nerus. it may be proper for me here to restore
the reading of a passage in the first part of this Essay. (Cl. Jl.
No. XXXL. p. 156.) It is there stated from Cassini, that the
inventors of the Neros “ estimated the diurnal period at 94 ἢ. 51’.
36”., which is nearly 3’ too long.” Whether the error were mine,
or whether it were the printer's, | know not; but it is evident that
several words and cyphers have been omitted. The statement
clearly was intended to be as follows—‘“‘ They estimated the diurnal
period at 24 h., and the annual period at 865 d. 5h. 51'. 36”,
which is nearly 3’ too long.” |
- Τὸ return to Montucla. 1am of opinion that he might have
found good reasons for attributing a yet more accurate knowledge
of the great cycle to the Chaldeans. (See my Essay Περὶ τοῦ Φοί-
yixos, Part [1]. and the first Part of this Essay, p. 156.)
From the observations which I have made, and from the autho-
rities which I have cited, it must appear, I should think, to all
unprejudiced minds, that most of the important truths which re-
late to astronomy were known to the Egyptians and Chaldeans. I
would then ask, how these ancient philosophers obtained this know-
ledge, if they had not gone over the same ground, which has since
been trodden by the moderns? No one will deny, that 300 years
ago, the moderns had made very little progress in the exact sci-
ences. How then, while they are yet so young in the wisdom of the
universe, can they venture to conclude that of all the mighty na-
tions that have been swept away, none could be compared with
themselves? The facility with which the astronomers of the pre-
sent age know how to express much in a small compass by the aid
of algebraical formule, gives them a decided advantage over the
Greeks. The understanding is now enabled to reason by the aid _
of signs alone. With their help it pursues truth through all the
mazes of intricate calculation, measures proportions in infinite
progression, and establishes laws for all the forms of extension,
all the modes of motion, and all the combinations of number.
But when our modern mathematicians send forth their scienti-
fic volumes crowded with algebraical formule, checkered with
_ dines and with letters, great and small, Greek and Roman, and
Egypt tans and Chaldeans. 27
bristling with crosses.and hooks and crooks—-when, I say, they
send forth: these volumes, and leave just room enough to assure
their readers in the vulgar character, that the Europeaus infinitely
surpass all the ancient nations in knowledge, I would have them to
consider a few circumstances which may not be unworthy of their
attention. The mechanism which they employ, though without
doubt very greatly improved, was first used, as they tell us, by an
Alexandrian Greek. It was in Egypt, then, that they believe algebra
to have been invented by a Greek ; but as I have shown that the
ancient Egyptians had gone much farther in mathematics and astro-
nomy than the Greeks of Alexandria, I think myself entitled to
contend, that they possessed the facility of expressing their know-
ledge in proportion to its extent. Diophantus, who advanced the
science, which he is said to have invented, to equations of the
second degree, employed letters and lines for his formule. Now
is it not true, that we see lines and letters frequently combined on
the sculptured monuments of Egypt? Most antiquaries agree that
these lines were numerical signs. We are told that the Chaldeans
inscribed their scientific discoveries on bricks. The bricks found
on the site of Babylon are covered with characters, all formed by
᾿ straight lines, and no brick contains the characters in the same order
with another. The Egyptian priests had two modes of writing,
used only by themselves and unintelligible to the vulgar—the first
was called by the Greeks ἱερατικὸν, or cupBorsxdv—the second iepo-
γλυφικόν. From these circumstances ἔ would conclude, that the
Chaldeans and Egyptians had the art of expressing themselves by
a mode of writing extremely concise, and of enabling the mind to
carry on a train of reasoning by the help of signs and symbols
alone. .
It appears to me utterly improbable, that the college of the
Chaldeans {τὸ σύστημα τῶν Χαλδαίων) should have determined the
circumference of the earth so exactly as Bailly states them to have
done, (and as I have endeavoured to help him in showing to have
been the case,) unless they had possessed a thorough knowledge
of geometry. But let the reader consider the many other examples’
which I have cited, and judge whether, or not, it would have been
possible for the ancient Orientalists to have known so many truths
established by science, if to science they had really been strangers.
48 On the Science of the
We hear it said, that where knowledge is not very generally dif
fused, the sciences can never arrive at perfection. ἰ venture to
think otherwise. The general diffusion of knowledge in a country
3s no doubt very desirable, because without it the great mass of the
people can neither know their own interests, nor judge justly of the
conduct of their rulers. Knowledge is power; and therefore all
the knowledge should not be kept in the hands of a few. I am
far from being persuaded, however, that the great diffusion of
knowledge is favorable to the cultivation of the severer sciences.
‘Fhe stream becomes shallow as it widens. Those, who in our
days apply themselves to any particular branch of learning, must
study and know ten thousand things besides. ‘The case was very
different in Egypt. There the learned only pretended to learning.
Seience was the business of a whole class of men, who from the
cradle te the grave were occupied with it alone. Their provision
was assigned to them by the state. ‘They mixed not with the world,
ané were strangers to its cares. ‘They lived only to learn and to
teach. By their habits they were temperate,: and by their seclusion
they were tranquil. In public they might affect to venerate an ox,
or a ram, ora cat, or a dog, as popular superstition happened to
compel their submisston; but in the retirement of their colleges,
they read the numerous volumes ascribed to Thoth, or calculated
the periods of time, or studied the celestial phenomena, or busied
themselves with geometry, chemistry, and pharmacy, or discussed,
in a language unknown to the vulgar, the most abstruse questions
in Philosophy and Theology. Their private and common dissent
from the monstrous idolatry of the people, rendered them tolerant
towards each other. If some were seduced into the errors of ma-
terialism ; others taught, as Cudworth has clearly shown, the wisest
doctrines, and the purest principles of natural religion. (See Cud-
worth’s Intellectual System B. iv., and a passage cited from Che-
remon by Jerom, adversus Jovinianum, L. ii.)
Let those, who question the learning of the ancient sages of the
East, consider the long duration of the Egyptian and Chaldean mo-
narchies. Let them remember, that the sciences were already taught
ts Egypt for many centuries before our era. The great pyramid
remains to attest this truth. He, who built it, knew how to take
a meridian, Thies was more than was known to the ablest modern
Egyptians and Chaldeans. 29
astronomers 250 years ago, for the celebrated Tycho Brahe made
an error of 20’, in the determination of his meridian line, in build-
ing his observatory at Uraniberg. According to the report of
some writers, the northern side of the great Pyramid is illuminated
by the rays of the sun at mid-day from the vernal equinox to the
autumnal, but casts a shadow from the autumnal equinox to the
vernal. ‘Thus at mid-day at each equinox the sun will be seen pre-
cisely at the apex of the pyramid, by those who place themselves
at the centre of the northern base. The division of the circle into
360 degrees was already made in the time of Osymandias. Ptolemy
notes an ancient observation of the heliacal rising of Sirius the 4th
day after the summer solstice. Justin (L. xiii.) says that Aristzus
discovered the solstitial rising of Sirius. This is nonsense. Arir
stzeus was contemporary with Cadmus, and consequently lived about
1500 years B. C.; and the heliacal rising of Sirius, even the 4th
day after the solstice, would carry us farther back than that period
by 750 years. Aristzus then should have been said to have cele-
brated the memory of the solstitial rising of Sirius, of which the
memory had been preserved, because the rural year of the Egyp-
tiartts had been established at that period. The observation noted
by Ptolemy would consequently carry:us back within 100 years of
the deluge. Since, then, the Egyptians had been occupied with the
cultivation of the sciences for a long lapse of ages, may we not
conclude that they were advanced as far in them as the moderns,
whose progress in them has been made within S00 years? It is
something to know that Plato has spoken with reverence of the
learning of the Egyptian priests, Yet before Plato’s time those
priests had been the objects of a cruel and lasting persecution ; the
mighty fabric of their knowledge, founded en the experience, and
built up of the collected wisdom of ages, was already fallen into
decay; and the ancient Genius of Egypt, still holding, like Har-
pocrates, the finger oni the lip, had expired under the iron yoke of
the Persian despots.
Marseslle, Jan. 1818. W. DRUMMOND.
30
REMARKS ON
THE PROMETHEUS OF ASCHYLUS.
Tr the following cursory remarks on the Plays of AEschylus be.
worthy of insertion, I shall continue them. ‘The introductory lines
of the Prometheus seem not sufficiently understood.
Xbovds μὲν εἰς τηλουρὸν ἥκομεν πέδον,
Σκύθην εἰς οἶμον, ἄβατον εἰς ἐρημίαν.
The reader might take πέδον, οἶμον, ἐρημίαν, as but different terms
descriptive of the same place ; and thus they appear to be under-
stood by the critics, The agents in the scene were now moving
towards Caucasus; and as they were supernatural, their move-
ments were as quick as the words they uttered. ‘‘ We are come,”
says Kratos, “ to the foot of the country,” meaning the borders
of Scythia. By this time they had advanced to its frequented and
cultivated parts: the next moment they found themselves on the
remote point which was to be the limits of their journey, having
traversed the country during the time they are supposed to have
uttered these words. A modern reader can only conceive of this
velocity as it is suggested by the occasion; but the spectators who
witnessed the representation of the play, were doubtless made sen-
sible of it by the scenery. Mr. Blomfield, in his edition, has
corrupted the text by introducing ἄβροτος in the room of ἄβα-
tos, thus spoiling the beautiful antithesis of the original. The term
οἶμος, like ὅδος, and even χέλευθος, in this play, ver. 729., means
not only a path, but a country containing paths, that is, frequented
and cultivated country. Thus it stands opposed to ἄβατος, a re-
gion, a place not marked by human footsteps. Introduce, ἄβροτος;
and the opposition is destroyed. Nor did the poet mean to repre-
sent the country in which Prometheus was crucified as uninhabited,
but only as a spot znaccessib/e to men, whose abrupt height, while
it held forth the sufferer as a sad spectacle to the surrounding na-
tion, frustrated their attempts to rescue him. Lucian thus under-
stood the passage, and therefore must have read ἄβατος. His
words are the following : περισχοπῶμεν δὲ ἤδη κρημνόν τινα ἐπιτήδειον,
ὡς sees οὗτος ἅπασι περιφανὴς εἴη κρεμάμενος ++ e+ ἀπότομοί τε γὰρ αἱ
πέτραι καὶ ἀπρόσβατοι, πανταχόθεν ἠρέμα ἐπινενευκυῖαι" καὶ τῷ ποδὶ στενὴν
ταύτην 6 κρημνὸς ἔχει τὴν ἐπίβασιν, ὡς ἀκροποδιτί που μόλις ἑστάναι.
Vol. 1. p. 185. Ed. 1743. Besides, it may be fairly doubted whether
ἄβροτος, if admitted, cau have the sense here ascribed to it. The
term is used only in II. & 78., where it occurs as an epithet of
night, νὺξ ἀβρότη" which is explained hominibus carens, that is,
night wanting men; because forsooth men do not go out in the
night. This explanation, to say the least of it, seems puerile, and
Remarks on the Prometheus of /Eschylus. 31
‘unworthy of Homer, though it may be traced to Eustathius as its
author, The parent of the word I take to be ἁβρὸς, soft, delicate,
-sweet. Epithets of this import might with propriety be applied to
night, as disposing the mind to meditation, and conferring tran-
quillity and repose. This is the cause of night being designated
εὐφρόνη. Homer describes ὕπνος as μελίφρων, and in the same
place νὺξ as ἀμβροσία. It is creditable to the judgment of Dr.
-Butler, that he has retained his text undefaced by this innovation:
but the elegant and learned Maltby has surrendered his own un-
derstanding to the authority of Damm and Porson.
‘Ag ἂν διδαχθῇ τὴν Διὸς τυραννίδα
Στέργειν, φιλανθρώπου δὲ παύεσθαι τρόπου. . ver. 9.
Στέργειν is explained by Schutz to mean colere, and by Mr. B.
@quo antmo ferre: but it here retains its primary sense of ¢o (ove,
to have affection for ; and the point of it turns on the opposition
between the feelings which Prometheus cherished towards Jupiter,
and towards the human race. The former he hated ; the latter he
loved : but his executioner tells him that he should be taught to
reverse these feelings, to transfer to the sovereign of the Gods the
regard which he had hitherto cherished for man.
᾿Εξωριάζειν γὰρ πατρὸς λόγους βαρύ. νεῖ. 17.
The root of ἐξωριάζειν is ἔξωρος, out of season, unseasonable, and
hence it means to delay the doing a thing so as to do it out of sea-
son, and has precisely the same meaning with xaroxvéw, used in
ver. 67. to express the same reluctance in Vulcan, being opposed
to ἐπείγομαι in δὲ. But Mr. B.has in the room of ἐξωριάζειν in-
troduced εὐωριάζειν. Εὔωρος, if used absolutely, may signify one who's
at his ease in taking care; if relatively, one who so takes care of a
thing, as to do well, or be beneficial to-him against whom he takes
care, that is, in regard to himself, remiss, negligent; the root of
the word being εὖ, well, and aga, care. Hence εὐωριάζειν must
denote, to keep a careless watch, to be heedless, not to mind;
ἀφροντιστεῖν, a word by no means so applicable to Vulcan on the
present occasion as ἐξωριάξειν.
Ποταμῶν te πηγαὶ, ποντίων re κυμάτων
᾿Ανήριθμον γέλασμα. ver. 00.
Ye rivers springing from fresh founts, ye waves
That o’er th’ interminable ocean wreathe
Your crisped smiles.
The use of metaphors often depends on the origin of the term
by which it is expressed ; and a writer will appear more figurative,
as he is more ancient or approaches near to the age in which the
primary was the current sense of his words. We have an illustra-
tion of this in the above line. In Hebrew 99, gel, or ΤΡ), gela,
means the bubbling of a fountam, or the purling of a 816 8η'. From
a fancied resemblance between this soothing sound and laughter,
88 Remarks on the Prometheus of Hechylus.
the Greeks have borrowed the Hebrew term under the form of
λάω. The word also carries an allusion to the bright and exhi-
arating aspect of a clear fountain; an object bighly delightful in
all, and especially in warm countries. ’Asipiduoy is for ἀνηρίθμων, as
an effect qualifying κυμάτων. “ Ye unnumbered waves, that stretch
your murmuring smiling leagth, while rolling round me on every
side.” Toup would substitute χάχλασμα for γέλασμα.. This
Mr. B. properly rejects as an unhappy conjecture. But he is mis-
taken, where he says that καχλάξειν means cachinnare. ‘The word
used to express violent laughter is χαγχάξω, or κακχάζω, (whence
cachinno) while καχλάξω is confined to the murmuring noise which
the waves make by dashing against the ahore, or moving the peb-
bles by their retreat. These two words have a very different origin.
The. former is derived from a reduplication of yaw or χαίνω, fo
gape, thus—yeo, χάζω, καχάζω; and is thus augmented to ex-
ress the wide opening of the mouth in violent laughter ; the latter
is a reduplication of κλάξω, clango—xayadtm ;* and thus by its
composition it is intended to express the loudness of the sound con-
veyed by it.
As I am speaking of the origin of metaphors, I will anticipate
ene that appears. the most harsh and ‘exceptionable in the compo-
sition of Aéschylus, but is in reality, on account of the allusion,
not unnatural :
Τραχεῖα πόντου Σαλμυδησία γνάθος
᾿Εχθοόξενος ναύτῃσι μητρυιὰ νεῶν. v. 752.
This Salmydesta was a bay, which opened between opposite
rocks a seemingly safe retreat from the storm. From its shape
resembling, it is probable, the mouth of a beast when open, it is
here called, jaw of the sea: and it is further termed step-mother of
ships, in reference to the term κόλπος, which means both a bay and
the bosom of a mother. ‘The word stzus in Latin, bears the same
double signification ; and to this circumstance we owe the fullow-
ing line of Virgil : τς
Nunc tantum sinus, et statio male fida carinis.
It is observable that the Greek poet, by giving his object the
_ direct name μητρυιὰ, has rendered the image violent and turgid,
while the Roman has invested it with chastened beauty and dignity,
in only alluding to the perfidy of a step-mother by the epithet
“ male fida.”
JOHN JONES.
* The verb καχλάξω may be thought to have the same origin with yeAdo. This
opinion is countenanced by the Onomasticon, which explains xaxAdfw-by scatw-
rte, ebuliio, and by Hesychias, who interprets it by ἀθρόως γελῶ. ‘Tus interpre-
tation, if true, justifies Mr. Blomfield.in giving it the sense of cuchinnare. But
this cannot be admitted, unless an instance be adduced from a Greek author in
justification of it; since the most obvious composition of the word is κλάζω
κλάζω, or καικλάξω.
883 ον os
MISCELLANEA CLASSICA.
NO. IlI.—[Continued from No, XXXII. p. 357.]
I shall now produce a selection of parallel passages.
l. 1. Crescit et invito lentus in ore cibus. Ov. Ep, Paris Helene.
Faucibus ut morbo siccis, interque molares
Dithcili crescente cibo. Juv. Sat. xiit. 213.
Both the poets are delineating the effects of strong mental pertur-—
"bation. -
2. “DNs εἰπὼν, wrpuve πάρος μεμαυῖαν "Adyyny
βὴ δὲ κατ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο καρἥνων ἀΐξασα.
οἷον δ᾽ ἀστέρα ἧκε Κρόνου παῖς ἀγκυλομήτεω,
ἢ ναύτῃσι τέρας, ἠὲ στράτῳ εὐρέϊ λαῶν,
λαμπρόν' τοῦ δέ τε πολλοὶ ἀπὸ σπινθῆρες ἵενται"
τῷ εἰκυΐ ἤϊξεν ἐπὶ χθόνα Παλλὰς ᾿Αηήνη. Hom: Il. 4. 73.
——Divino semita gressu
Claruit. Augurium qualis laturus iniqnuum
Praeceps sanguineo dilabitur igne cometes
Prodigiale rubens: non illum navita tuto,
Non impune vident populi: sed crine minaci
Nunciat aut ratibus ventos, aut urbibus hostes.
Claud. Pros. }, 230.
5. Nan, quz nivali pascitur Algido
Devota, quercus inter et ilices,
Aut crescit Albanis in herbis
' Victima, pontificum secures
Cervice tinget: te nihil attinet .
Tentare multa cade bidentium, .
Parvos coronantem marino ;
Rore Deos, fragilique myrto,
Immunis aram si tetigit manus, ΄
Non sumtuosa blandior hostia
Mollivit aversos Penates “
‘ Farre pio, saliente mica. Hor. Lib. ii.Od, 23, 9.
Sed qui, quam potuit, dat maxima, gratus abundé est,
Et finem pietas contizit illa suum.
Nec, que de parvé Dis pauper libat acerra,
Thura mints, grandi quam data lance valent.
Agnaque tam lactens, quam gramine pasta Falisco
Victima, Tarpeios inticit icta focos. ; Ov. de Ponto.
Hi membris animaque litant, hi cespite nudo; — |
NO. XXNIII. ql. Jt. VOL. XVII. ς᾽
34 Miscellanea Classica.
Nec minds auditi, si mens accepta meretur .
Thure Deos. Stat. Theb. ἢ, 248.
4. Ast 9jna erpctat tremefactis faucibus ignes :
Inclusi gemitus pelagique imitata furorem,
Murmure per czcos tonat irrequieta fragores
Nocte dieque simul: fonte e Phlegethontis ut atro
Flammaruyp exundat torres, piceaque procella
Semiambusta rotat liquefactis saxa cavernis.
Sed quanguam largo fammarum exgestuat intys
Tyrbine, et assidyé subnascens profluit ignis,
Summo cana jugo cohibet (mirabile dictu)
Vicinam flammis glaciem, sxternoqye rigore
Ardentes horrent scopuli: stat vertice celso
Collis hyems, solidAque nivem tegit atra favilla, 51], Ital. xv.
In medio scopuljs se porrigit tna perustis
Nunc vomit indigenas nimbos, picedque gravatum
Foedat nube diem: nunc molibus astra lacessit
Terrificis, damnisque suis incendia autrit.
Sed quamvis nimio ferveps exuberet zstu,
Scit nivibys servare fidem, pariterque favillis
Durescit glacies tapti secura vaporis,
Arcano defensa gelu, fumogque fideli
Lambit coatiguas ippoxia famma projnas. |
Claud. Pros. 156, 162.
5. Crescunt in cumulym strages, vallemque profundam
᾿ /Equavere jugis. Claud. Cogs. Prob. et Olyb. 110.
Slaughter the wearied Riphaim’s bosom fills ;
_ Dead corps imboss the vale with little hills. Cowley, Davil. i.
6. Ἦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ὃς τ᾽ Boos, ὅς Te werner,
ὅς τε χερειότερος" ἐπεὶ οὕπω πάντες Guoios ὁ
ἀνέρες ἐν πολέμῳ" νῦν ἔπλετο ἔργον ἅπασι. Hom. Il. Μ. 269.
Καὶ νομίσατε---ὁμοῦ τότε φοιῦλον, καὶ τὸ μέσον, καὶ τὸ πάνυ ἀκριβὲς
ἂν ξυγκραθὲν, μάλιστ᾽ ἂν ἰσχύειν. Thuc. vi. 18.
7. arcano florentes igne smaragdos. Stat. Theb. ii.
arcano flurentes lumine postes, Claud. Pros. iii.
8. Καὶ τότε ἄλλη τε ταραχὴ qux ὀλίγη, val ig πᾶσα καβειστήκει ὀλέ-
θρουι ‘Thuc. vii. 29. ᾿
crudelis ubigue
Lactus, pbhigve pavor, εἴ plurima mortis imago.
Virg. &x. ii. 368.
9. ————et si quando in preha ventum est,
Ut quondam jn stipylis magnus sige viribus ignis,
Incagsym furit. Virg. Georg. iii. 98.
Their valur like light straw on flame,
A fierce but fading fase. Scott, Marmion, V.
10. ἀτὰρ καχών γε χατόρῳ γενήαθμαι
Miscellanea Classica. 35
θανοῦσ᾽, ἵν᾿ εἰδὴ pan ᾽πὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς κακοῖς
ὑψηλὸς εἶναι. Eurip. Hipp. 725.
---.-. -.. mscebitar alter
Samguis, nee Stygias ferar imcomitatus dd umbras,
Nec mea secures ridebit fenera victor. Claud. Ruf. ii.
11, ned τὰς ἐς σφᾶς αὐτοὺς πίδτεις οὐ τῷ Delay νόμῳ μᾶλλον ἐκρατύ-
γοντο, ἢ τῷ κοινῇ τι παρανομῆσαι. Thuc. i. 84.
---- ----..-..--- «ὐἴλνλο tiocetrtum
᾿ Concilium, qui perpetuis crevere rapinis,
Et quos una facit Rufiuo cansa sodales,
Hlieitam duxisse nihil. Delicta fuere
Nexus δι εἶδε. Claud. Ruf. ii.
1 2. \ τὸ γὰρ
φανθὲν τίς ἀν δύναιτ᾽ ἀγέννητον ποιέν; Soph. Frach. 744.
- neque .
Diffinget, infectamque reddet,
Quod fugiens semel hora vexit. Hor. Od. ili. 29, 46.
19. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἧμαι παρὰ νηυσὶν ἐτώσιον ἄχϑος ἀῤούρῆης. Hom. [].
Ὡς οὐδὲν ἐσμὲν, πλὴν σκιαῖσιν εἰκότες,
βάφος περισσὸν γῆς ἀναδτρωφώμενοι. Soph. Fr. xxvii.
14. “Obev κατεῖδον τὴν βεβακχιωμένην
βροτοῖσι κλεινὴν Νῦσαν. Soph. Fr. xciv.
Bacchatainque jugis Naxon. Virg. An. iii. 125.
15. Preclaram autem nescio quod adepti sunt, qui didicerunt, se,
cum tetipas mortis vetiisset, totos esse peritures. Quod ut ifa sit (aibil
eniin pugno) quid habet res ἰδία aut letabile dat gloriosum? Cie.
Tusce. Disp. i. 21.
So Campbell, in the Pleasures of Hope, on the same subject :
Are these the ponrpous ticfings ye procfaim,
Lights of the world, and demigods of fame ?
s * *
Ok ! star-eyed Science, hast thou wander’d there,
To bring us back the message of despair ?
Yet, if thy voice the note of thunder roll’d,
And that were true which Nature never told,
Let Wisdom smile not on ker conquer’d field ; |
No glory dawns, no treasure is reveal'd ! Campbell, ii.
16. An vero, si domum magnam pulchramque videris, non possis
adduci, ut, etiam si dominnm non videas, muribus ἢ πὶ et mustelis
zedificatam putes: tantum vero orndtum mondi, tantani varietatem
pulchritudinemque rerum ceelestium, tantam vim et magnitudinem
maris atque terrarum, si tuam, ac non deorum immortaliim domici-
lium putes, nonne plane desipere videare? Cie. de Nat. Deor. it. 6
So Young, in asserting the im:nortakity of the soul:
Why this so sumptuous insult o’er our hiéads 7
Why this cerulean canopy display’d ?
30 Miscellanea Classica.
Why so magnificently lodg’d Despair? -
* * * .
A Thebes, a Babylon, at vast expense
Of time, toil, treasure, art, for owls and adders,
As congruous, as, for man, this lofty dome,
reich prompts proud thought, and kindles high desire,
ἄς.
17. Σάλπιγξ δ᾽ ἀὐτῇ πάντ᾽ ἐκεῖν᾽ ἐπέφλεγεν. Asch. Pers. 401.
—- quo non prestantior alter
ΖΞ τε ciere viros, Martemque accendere cantu.
Virg. En. vi. 164.
18. © Obstipum caput, et tereti cervice reflexum.
Cic. ex Arat. de Nat. Deor. ii. 42.
—illam tereti cervice reflexdm
Mulcere alternos. Virg. En. vil. 633.
19. Sic expectabat populus, atque ore timebat
‘Rebus. Ennius ap. Cic. de Divin. i. 48.
——timuitque exterrita pennis :
Ales. Virg. En. v. 505.
struggling in vain,
And loudly wond'ring at the sudden change. Cowp. Task. iv.
20. ᾿Ετόλμησάν te τὰ δινότατα, ἐπεξήεσαν re. Thue. iil. 82.”
Ausi omnes immane nefas, ausoque potiti. Virg. En. vi. 624.
41]. Μέλας μὲν γὰρ ἦν τὴν χροίαν, ἰσχνὸς, τὴν σάρκα πεπιλημένος,
ἀλλ᾽ ἐνῴχει ψυχή τις ἡρωϊκὴ λεπτῷ σώματι, καὶ πολὺ τῆς ἰδίας ἀλκῆς
στενοτέρῳ. Jos. Bell. Jud. vi. 1, 5. —
A fiery soul, that, working out its way,
Fretted the pigmy body to decay,
And o’er-inform’d the tenement of clay.
| Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel.
20. Ὁ γὰρ μισότεκνος, καὶ πατὴρ πονηρὸς, οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο δημα-
γωγὸς χρηστός" οὐδὲ ὁ τὰ φίλτατα καὶ οἰκείστατα σώματα μὴ στέργων,
οὐδέποτε ὑμᾶς περὲ πλείονος ποιήσεται τοὺς ἀλλοτρίους" οὐδέ γε ὁ ἰδίᾳ πο-
νηρὸς, οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο δημοσίᾳ χρηστός. βοῇ. de Cor. xxix.
For where was public virtue ever found,
Where private was not? Can he love the whole,
Who loves no part? He be a nation’s friend,
Who is in truth the friend of no man there?
Can he be strenuous in his country’s cause,
Who slights the charities, for whose dear sake
That country, if at all, must be belovd? © Cowp. Task, v.
23. — —énel οὐχ ἱερήϊον, οὐδὲ βοείην
ἀρνύσθην, τά τε ποσσὶν αεἐθλία γίνεται ἄνδρων,
ἀλλὰ περὶ ψυχῆς θέον Εκτορος ἱπποδάμοιο. Hom. 1]. X. 169.
The wounded hind thou track’st not now,
Pursuest not maid through greenwood baugh,
Miscellanea Classica. $7
Nor pliest thou now thy flying pace
With rivals in the mountain race ;
. But danger, death, and warrior deed,
Are in thy course—speed, Malise, speed !
Scott, Lady of the Lake, iii.
Ἃ "To the passage froma modern poet, cited among the parallel pas-
sages in the first number of the Miscellanea. Classica, under tlie head
of Eur. Hipp, 918, φιλούς ye, κἄτι μᾶλλον ἣ φίλους, is to be added a
passage from the xxvth of Dr. Johnson’s Sermons: ““ He who follows
his friend, or whatever there is dearer than a friend, to the grave.”
In the same number, under the head of Thuc. ii. 43. τοὺς δὲ λοιποὺς
χρὴ ἀσφαλεστέραν μὲν εὔχεσθαι, x. τ. A. Were quoted the following pas-
sages :
Disce, puer, virtutem ex me verumque laborem,
Fortunam ex aliis. Virg. En. xi. 435.
. ᾿ Digna minus misero, non meliore viro. Ovid.
To the above may be added : .
ἢ ied 7 ν > ,
4) παι, γένοιο πατρὸς εὐτυχέστερος,
τὰ δ᾽ ἀλλ᾽ ὅμοιος. Soph. Aj. 550.
--Ξ- - σὲ δ᾽ ἄλλη τις γυνὴ κεκτήσεται, ᾿
σώφρων μὲν οὐχὶ μᾶλλον, εὐτυχὴς δ᾽ ἴσως. Eurip. Alc. 189.
Bright as bis manly sire my boy shall be
In form and mind—but ah! more blest than he! ᾿
Campbell, Pleasures of Hope, 1.
Southey has also imitated. the line of Ovid:
Worthy a happier, not a better love. Joan of Arc, -iv.
The following are a few instances of parallelisms occurring between
modern writers exclusively.
1. Certainly virtue is like precious odours, more fragrant when they
are incensed or crushed. Bacon’s Essays. (Of Adversity.)
The good are better made by ill,
As odours crush’d are sweeter still. Rogers’ Jacqueline.
Believe me, my-friends, the poet, the tender poet, is like the rich
perfume, which, the more it is crushed, the more delicately yields its
odours. D’Israeli’s Romances, 1799, p. 40.
‘Reminding him, that poets were a timid and sensitive race, whose
sweetness was not to be drawn forth, like that of the fragrant grass
near the Ganges, by crushing and trampling upon them. Moore's
Lalla Rookh, p. 163, 4. | 7
2. For his love, therein, like a well-drawn picture, he eyes all his
children alike. Fuller (of a Good Parent). ae
‘The state, with respect to the different sects of religion under tts
protection, should resemble ἃ well-drawn portrait. Let there be half a
score irdividuals looking upon it, every one sees its eyes and its benig-
nant smile directed toward himself. Southey’s Omniana, vol. ii. p.
205. art. Toleration. 7 '
3. Menthought (so much ἃ flame by art was shown,)
The picture’s self would fall in ashes down, Cowley’s Dav. ili.
38
Miscellanea Classica.
falsus tanta arte accenditur ignis,
Ut toti metuas tabule, ne famma per omne
Livida serpat opus, tenuesque absumta recedit
Pictura in cineres, propriis peritura favillis. Addison.
His double-biting axe and beamy spear.
Dryden's Palamon and Arcite, ili.
-Lords of the biting axe and beamy spear. _ Heber’s Palestine.
Thy life a long dead calm of fix’'d repose,
No pulse that riots, and no hleod that glows. Pope's Eloisa.
Be his the life that creeps in dead repose,
No joy that sparkles, and no tear that flows. Palestine.
Several other adaptations of the same kind occur in the last quoted
poem.
6. Most of those who have translated Thucydides, have traduced
him. Hobbes, Preface to Transl. of Thucydides.
I fear, lest while I seem te have translated my author, I should, ac-
cording to the French phrase, have traduced him. Dryden, Preface
to Fables. °
. Virgil has been traduced into French, and everturnzed into Dutch.
~Quarterly Review, art. Chalmers’s English Poets.
Te
10.
Abde caput, Benace, tuo εἰ te conde guh amne,
Victrices nec jam Deus interlabeze lguras. Frae. Svph. i.
--nec qui late, Beugce, ad odorya
Poyrigeris μερῃοξᾷ, et densam interlabere laurum.
Ars. Piscatoria, }. 110, auctore J. P. Mug. Crit. T. ]. p. 468.
Love js no more ἃ violent desire,
*Tis a mere metaphor, a painted fire. Dryden’s Prologues.
And all her love of God a groundless claim,
A trick ypon the canyas, painted flame. Caowp. Conversations.
—_—_—_———Fresh and clear
The rivulet, rejoicing in its strength,
Ran with qa young man’s speed. Wordsworth’s Poems.
Behold where, uptired agd ynbroken in might
Ry his toils af a thousand years,
With foot like a youth, leaping down from his height,
The torrent of ages appears. Poems from the Danish.
Thys we prevent the last great day,
And judge ourselves. Herbert's Poems.
- deputed Conscience scales |
The dread tribunal, and forestals our doom. Young, Night ix.
Attonite novus hospes ayre. “ asim,
Corulez novus hospes aura. Lawson. in Comet.
. Frustra: nam in ὑτρᾷ surdus et immemor
Jaceho pulvis. Casi.
Hew nos sub urnd surdus et immemor
Pulvis, fugato sole, jacebimus. Lawson. ibid.
. As when an earthquake shakes th’ Idzan grove. Dryden.
As when an earthquake shakes the nodding grove.
' Pope's Iliad, Book xiii.
Modern Greek Praverbs. 39-
This line is an addition of Poge’s, unautharised by the original, as
will be seen by inspecting the whole passage.
Ψαῦον δ᾽ ἱππόκομοι κόρυθες λαμπρεῖσι φάλοισι
γευόντων" as πυκνοὶ ἐφέστασαν ἀλλήλοισιν. Ll. Ν. 199.
CAHCIEIUS METEELLUS.
MODERN GREEK PROVERBS.
From the Appendix to Col. M. Leaxe’s “ Researches
xn Greece.”
Tr bas often bees: rewasked, that nething helps te give ἃ mere cor-
rect estiasate of the genius of a nation, than the proverbs of the
common people; but it is no less true, that they lose a great part
of their wit awd mationalty i a translation. | have here sub-
joined some of these, which are m use aniong the Greeks. Being
seldom written, they may be cousidered as perfect specimens of
the vulgar dialect, and the fairest which could have been chosen
for the purpose of showing, that Romaie words, ne their transmu-
tation from Hellenic, have generally fofowed ἃ systematic mode
of change, and that the modern langage 18 mn τον respects ra-
ther a dialect of the Hebbenic thay a separate tongue, or a cor-
rupted jargon.
1. Ὃ @eds ἀργεῖ, ἄλλὰ δὲν Anopovel.
God delays, but does not forget.
2.°H καλὰ ἡμόρα and τὴν αὐχὴν δεΐχνει.
The fine day shows iteelf in thé morning.
8. Τὰ φέρει ἡ ὥρα, χρόνος δὲν τὰ φὅρεν.
An hour (sometimes) brings to pass what a year does not.
4. Ὃ πάβος εἶναι ἰατρός. ‘
"Fhe disorder iz a physicran.
δ. Μὴν ρώτηξης τὸν ἴατρὸν, μόνον pwra τὸν πάθον.
Censalt net the physician, but the disosder.
ὁ. 0 τρελὸς τὸν βουολισμένον σὰν τὰ μάττασαυ τὸν ἔχει.
The fool loves the fool ike his own eyes.
1. δὲν from οὐδὲν, hy dropping the vewel-seund ia the beginning.
3. Tea for °A, those which—a veetige of tha Ionic. dialect.
5. ρώτηξης for ἐρωτήσης.
6. τρορλὸς, fool, from Εἰ. rawais, balbus, iraulua—pPeovpriva, I am silly ar mad,
seems to be from the same etyman as the low Latin apd. Italian burlars, te play. .
40 Modern Greek
7. Apyupo τὸ μίλημα, χρυσὸ τὸ σιώπα.
Discourse is silver, silence is gold.
8. Οἱ πολλοὶ καραβοκυραῖοι πνίγουν το καράβι.
- Many commanders sink the ship.
Q.”Orav τὸ σπίτι τοῦ γειτονός σου καίεται, πάντεχε καὶ τὸ δικόνσου.
When your neighbour's house is on fire, look to your own.
10. ‘H νύμφη στὰ πεθεριακὰ χωρὶς γαμβρὸν τί θέλει ;
What has the bride to do at her father-in-law’s house without
the bridegroom?
11. Τοῦ παιδιοῦ κοιλιὰ κοφίνι καὶ τρελὸς ὁποῦ τοῦ δίνει.
The child’s belly is a basket, and he is a fool who gives it (food
without measure.)
12. Πές το, πές το---τὸ κοπέλι ἔκαμε τὴν γριὰν καὶ θέλει.
Ask for it, ask for it—(thus) the child makes the old woman
willing; 1. 6. the parent yields at last to the child’s importunity.
13." AdAa τὰ μάτια τοῦ λαγοῦ x’ ἄλλα τῆς κουχουβάγιας.
The eyes of the hare are of one kind, and those of the owl of
another.
14, ᾿Αλλοῦ τὰ καρκαρίσματα καὶ ἀλλοῦ γεννοῦν αἱ κόταις.
Thehen cackles in one place and lays her egg in another.
15. Τὰ κερνᾶς χάνεις, καὶ τὰ χρουστᾶς πληρώνεις.
What you spend you lose, and what you owe you pay.
16. Κάθισε στραβὰ καὶ κρίνε ἴσια.
Sit crooked (if you will) but judge strait.
17. Μὴν ἀκοῦς ἕναν καὶ νὰ κρίνῃς δύο.
Do not hear one and judge two ; i. 6. hear both sides.
7. σιώπα, the imperative of σιωπάω, used for a substantive.
8. καράβι, ship, from H. κάραβος, in allusion, perhaps,. to the similarity of shape
between the high-sterned vessels, which are still in use at Constantinople, &c.
and the shell of a lobster.
9, σπίτι for σπίτιον, from Latin hospitium.
πάντεχ,, expect, for anavreyt, from H. ἀντέχω, retineo, duro.
12. Πὲς; tell, from H. εἰπὲ, dic, by dropping the initial vowel-sound, and adding
the paragogic ¢.
κοπέλιον, child, fem. κοπέλω, qu. from H. κόπτομαι, plango, unde κοπετὸ;, plancius.
In the middle Greek, κόπελος meant a bastard child, in opposition to γνήσιος, This
meaning is now obsolete. , ᾿
γριὰν for γραίαν, or yptav—by converting the ἔα into ἰὼ, with the accent on the
last syllable, as in μηλιὰ, apple-tree, from HH. μηλέα, συκιὰ, fig-tree, from W. ovxén,
13. κουκουβάγια, owl, from H, κικκωβαῦ, the cry of the ow:.
14, καρκάρισμα, cackling, from H. καρκαίρω, sonitum do, tremo—xéra, hen, from H.
κότος, gallus, according to Hesychius, διὼ σὸν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν (κόττην) λόφον. Κότ τη,
nead, seems to be the root of some other Romaic words, as κούτελον, furehead—
κουτούνιον, the back part of the head—xour(ovyade, the head or seed-vessel of the poppy.
15. κερνάω, I mix, pour out, formed from H. xseaw, by the insertion of » between
the liquid and final ὦ.
xpove saw, Fam in debt, is formed by changing the first ὦ of the H. χριωστέω in-
to ov, and its iw into aw, both commen conversions.
4
Proverbs. Al
18. Στῶν ἀματρωλῶν τὴν χώραν ἀδικος κριτὴς καθίξει.
n the town of Sinners, the Unjust sits in judgment.
19. ‘Orod φτεῖ τὸν οὐρανὸν φτεῖ τὰ μούτρατου. ;
He that spits against Heaven, spits in his own face.
20. Τ᾽ ἄλογον ᾿ποῦ χαρίζουσι στὰ δόντια μὴν τὸ βλέπῃς.
Do not look at the teeth of the horse which is presented to you.
21. Τὸ μεγάλο ψάρι τρώγει τὸ μικρό.
The great fish eats the little one.
22. Tov ξένον εἰς τὸ σπίτισου γιὰ μαρτυριὰν τὸν ἔχεις.
‘The stranger in your house is a witness against you.
23."Oray σοῦ λέγουν πῶς μεθᾶς, βάστα τὸν τοῖχον, πήγαινε.
When they tell you that you are drunk, μο]α by the wall, and go
on; 1. 6. yield to public opinion.
24." Apobos βρακὶ ᾽ν ἐφόριε κάθε πάτημα τὸ ᾿θώριε.
When the unpractised puts on breeches, he looks at them every
step. a |
25. Στραβὸς βελόνι ἐγύρευε μεσὰ στὸν ἀχυρῶνα,
Καὶ ὁ καυτζοχέρας ἔκαμε καλάθι νὰν τὸ βάλη...
The blind man sought for a needle in the straw-loft,
And the man with lame hands made a basket to put it in.
26. Td καλὸ ἀρνὶ βυζαίνει δύο μανάδες, τὸ κακὸ οὔτε THY μάναντου.
The good lamb sucks two mothers, the bad not even its own.
27. Μὲ τὸν δικόνσου φάγε καὶ πίε καὶ πραγματιὰν μὴ κάμνῃς.
With your relation eat and drink, but have no traffic.
48. Μὲ τὸν καλλήτερόνσου pays καὶ πίε καὶ νηστικὸς ἀσήκα. -
With your superior, eat and drink, and rise with an appetite.
29. Κάθε ψεύστης ἔχει καὶ τὸν μαρτυράτου.
Every lar has another for a witness.
90. Ὃ φρόνιμος ὧν γελασθῇ σ᾽ ὀλίγον δὲν γελιέται.
“If the wise man. ὃς deceived, it is not by a trifle.
19. pret for wre, for πτνεῖ, πτεῖ for πτύει isa vulgar contraction, like that of ὠκοῦς
for dxquesc, in No. 17. .
μούτρον, μούτϑογον, μούττη, OF μούρι, face, is from μύτη, the Romaic word for nose,
the etymon of which is the same as that of «vga, mucus, viz. μύω, compremendo
claudo. The low Latin musum, the Italian muso, and French museau, have all the
same origin. \
21. ψάρι for ὀψάριον, by the usual Romaic apocope at either end.—é{cp.0v, from
ὅπτομαι, Meaning properly any meat eaten with bread, was applied to fish in par-
ticular, ata remote period. See Atheneus, 1.9. c. 35. ed. Schweigh.
94. pops, the third person imperfect of φορῶ, 7 put on, wear—iSwpe from θωρῶ,
from H. θιωρίω. .
45. κουτζοχίρας. This nominative is formed from χεὶρ, according to the usual
method in imparisyllabics—of κου τζὸς I am ignorant of the etymology. Nay τὸ
βάλη, for νὰ τὸ ἐμβάλῃ, the preposition being separated from the componnd verb
ἐμβάλλω or ἐμβάζω, or ἐμπάζω, and attached td va.
28, ἀσήκα, the imperative of ἀσηκάω, the same verb as donxiyw of which σηκόγω is
the more comnion form. ᾿ς
80. γελιέχαι. The circumflexed verb in cw is here converted into one ἴῃ ἕω,
42 Modern Greek
31. Ὃ ξένος ἀνωποιύει μιὰ Cav θερωπεύει. .
The stranger rests, but is not cured; 3. 6. he cannot be quite bin-
self till he returns home.
32. Baciay τίμα τὸν παπὰ καὶ σὺ πωπὰ ἔχε γνῶσιν.
Basil, honor the priest, and you too, priest, have prudence.
33. Παλοιιὸς ἐχθρὸς φίλος dav γίνεται.
An old enemy will never be ἃ triend.
34. Εἰάστερος οὐρανὸς, ἀστραπὴν μὴν φοβᾶσαι.
The sky is serene, fear not a thunder-storm.
35.’ And χεῖλι βγαίνει λόγος κοὶ εἰς χιλίους καταντεύει.
The word comes forth trom the lip and arrives at thousands.
86. "Αχουσά osx’ ἵδρωσα, εἶδασε κοὴ ᾿ξίδρωσα.
I heard you and was sick, | saw you and was well.
37. Κάλλιον τὸ σημερινὸν οὀγὸν παρὰ τὴν οἰὐρινὴν xray.
Better to-day’s egg than to-morrow’s hen.
38. Τὰ δικάσου ἀμπέλια φράζε καὶ τὰ ξένα μὴν γυρεύῃς.
Fence your own vineyards and covet not your neighbour's.
39. ‘On’ εἶναι an’ ἔξω τοῦ χοροῦ πολλὰ γραγούϑια ' ξεύρει.
He that is ows of the dance knows many songs.
40. Tesig ἡμόροιις ely ᾽τὸ Oatiucs νοὶ τρεῖς τὸ παραθαῦμα.
A wonder kisis three days, and a moracie three days.
41. ᾿Οχοῦ "var xaropoltsnos, γεννῶ nol ὁ woxords Tov.
For hin who is bucky even the cock lays eggs.
442. Ὅταν βγάνῃς καὶ δὲν Berrys, πᾶντοχε τὸν πάτον πιᾶνεις.
When yos take out and do not pat m, expect to rexch the bottonr.
48. “Ὅποως κωΐει mi τὸ ζοστὰ, φυσάϑι κοὐ τὸ κρυὸν.
He that has been burnt by the hot, blows even apon the cold.
44. Τὶ θὲς τὸ χρυσὸ βατζέλι meted φνῆς τὸ αἵμα μέσα.
What profits the golden vessel to spit blood into.
, 84. Ξάστερος or κατάστερος, serene, from ξε or κατὼ, and H. στορέω or στρόγνυμι.
35. A play upon the word χ εἴλι--- βγαίνει for εὐγαίνει.
36. The supposed exclamation of a man, who is disappointed in seeing ἃ wo~
man’s face, after having admired her figure. “I2pwoa the past tense of ἰδρόνω, from
H. idg6w, sudo, by the usual insertion of » before the ὦ pure, like χάνω, I lese, from
H. yaw, racuns sum, &c.
ξίδρωσα is for ἐξίδρωσα, literally I unseated.
47. αὐγὸν, cgg, from H. wv, by converting ὦ into av, and inserting y between
the vowels, as in κλέγω, from H. κλαίω, and many others. |
38. φράφω from H. φράσσω, like τάζω, F promise, row, from τώσσω, and τωρόζωμ I
disturb, from rapaccw, From Hi. γῦρος, circulus, ambitus, are derived γυρίζω, I turn,
return, and γυρεύω, [ seek, desire.
39. In Greece it is common to sing and danee at the sane time. Tpayodd: is from
H. tpayweia, by taking the neuter termination, and changing the ὦ into ov, the
commonest of all the R. conversions.
ξεύρει for ἰξιύριν, or ἐξεύρει, from ἐξεῦρον, 2d aorist of ἐξευρίσκω, invenio.
42. πιάγω, ἴ tuke, from H. πιάζω, rexo, prehendo—zaros, battom, from H. πατέω,
calco, whence the H. πότος, callis,
44. Borers, from Latin vas, the etymon also of vascello, vaisselle, vessel, &c.
Proverbs. | 43
45. ‘Owod τρώγει λινοκούκι τρώγει τὸ ᾽ποκάμισότου.
He that eats Hax-seed, eats hes shirt.
46. "Osos εἶσαι πάντα φαίνου xat κομμάτι maponerd.
Always appear what you are, and a little below it.
47. Πάρεμε ὅταν μ᾽ οὗρῃς, γιὰ νὰ μ' ἔχης ὅταν θέλεις.
Take me when you tind me, that you may have me when you
want me.
48. Μίας στνγμῆς ὑπομονὴ δέχα χρόνων χουζοῦρι.
A moment’s patience is (sometimes) ἃ ten years’ comfort.
. 49. Ἢ "Adnan εἶναι μαλώτρα.
Truth 18 a quasrelsome person.
50. Ἢ χορέψοτε καλὼ } ἀφῖτε τὸν χορόν.
Either dance well or ot at all
51. Hira, ᾽ποῦ δὲν τρώγεις τὶ we γνοιάξζοι dy’ καίστωι.
The pie that you are not to eat, what care you whether it is burnt.
δῷ. Ἢ ξένη ἔγνοιοι yxeder νὸν σνύλον. '
The dog is worn out in the care of another's property.
58. ᾿Λξίξει ὁ ἕνας que ὁκανὸν weed ἑκουγὸν οὗτε ἕνοι.
One man is (sometimes) worth a hundred, and a hundred (seme-
tumes) not worth one. .
54. "Evas ζουρλὸς phevar τὴν πέτραν εἰς νὸ πηγάδι, κοὐ ἑχατὸν φρονι-
μοὶ δὲν τὴν εὐγάζουν. .
One fool throws a stone into the well, and a hundred wise men
cannot take it out.
ὅδ. Ta, ὡς dav θόλεις, γίνοντωι, θέλε τα nal bs γίνοντων. :
Those things which happen as you do not wish, wish for them
as they happen.
56. ”Equg’ ὁ κλέπτης τὴν φωνὴν, νὰ φύγῃ ὁ οἰκεκύρις.
45. κούκι, bean or grain, from Fi. κόχχος, by two usual changes. asticlos in the
” Baud ἁπκοκαμαίον. The χώμωδου and swenapioo Were two in
dress of the Greek monks—the xayuvo heing so called from heing the chamber-
dress, from κώμα, chamber, from L. camera. .
46. καμιμάτιον, ᾳ little hid, from Ἡ. κόμμα.
41. πάρε aorist imperat. af πέρνω, ἢ take.
48. χουζοῦρι, a word horrewed from the Turkish.
5O. &pirs, quit, for ἀφίνετε, from ἀφίνω. .
51. γνοιάζει for lnodgu, from H. ἔννοια, cura, by dropping the initial slender
vawel, and prefixing y to the liquid, as in γνέμα, ned, trom H. wipa—prnqu, i
Hick from H. dsiqw, which change was also common in H., as γνόφος far νέφος, yvew
or you, ἄχο.
Lica and pie seem to be the same word.—It was ao called, perhaps, by the
lower Greeks, because it resembled the cakes of pitch (sizra), which were form-
ed in cauldrons, hy mixing the raw resin with vinegar, and coagulating MW. See
Plin. rae Nat. l. 16. ¢. 11. fouprigus, ane, ὑνκίαν
54. ζουρλὰς has probably the same origin as βονρλίζω, and burlare.
56. σύρω, from H. σύρω, by the insertion of ν after the liquid, bas a great variety
of applieatious in Romaic. This proverh alludes to those, who accuse others, to
prevent accusation against themselves.
4A Modern Greek
The thief raised his voice to make the master of the house run
away. |
87. Ὅπως στρώσει καθένας, θὲ κοιμηθῇ.
Jevery one will sleep as he makes his bed.
58. Τῶν ἀκριβῶν τὰ στάμενα σὲ χαροκόκου χέρια.
The riches of misers (fall) into the hands of the spendthrift.
50. Οπ᾽ ακοῦς πολλὰ κεράσια, βάσταινε μικρὸ καλάθι.
Where you hear of many cherries, carry a small basket.
60. Τοῦ κλέπτου καὶ τοῦ δυναστοῦ καθένας τοὺς χρωστάει.
To the thief and the man in power every one has debts.
Ol. Amd ζουρλὸν καὶ μεθυστὴν μανθάνεις τὴν ἀλήθειαν.
From the fool and the drunkard you learn the truth.
62.’ Amo τὸ κεφάλι βρωμάει τὸ ψάρι.
From the head the fish begins to stink.
63. Tod χωριάτη τὸ σχοινὶ δὲν σώνει, μὰ δίπλον περισσεύει.
Single the clown’s rope is not long enough, double it is too long.
64. Τὶ θὲς τα χίλια πέρπερα καὶ κακοείδην γυναῖκα.
Τὰ χίλια πέρπερα πετοῦν Χαὶ ἣ κακοείδη ἀπομένει.
Why do you choose ἃ thousand sequins, and an ugly wife?
The thousand sequins fly away, but the ugly one remains.
05. 4ύο γαϊδάροι ἐμάλωνὰν στὸν ξένον ἀχυρῶνα. |
‘Two asses quarrelling at the manger of a third.
, 06. "Ame ἀγκάθι βγαίνει ρόδον, καὶ ἀπὸ ρόδον βγαίνει ἀγκάθι.
From the thorn springs the rose and from the rose the thorn.
67. Οὐδ᾽ ἀγίου κηρὶ μὴν τάξῃς οὔδε παιδιοῦ μικροῦ κουλοῦρι.
Neither promise wax to the saint, nor cakes to the child.
08. ’Ano κακὸν χρεωφειλέτην καὶ σακκὶ ἄχυρα καλὸ εἶναι.
From ἃ bad debtor even ἃ bag of straw 1s worth having.
69. Tov σκύλον κάμε σύντεχνον καὶ τὸ ραβδίσου βάστα.
Make the dog your companion, but hold fast your staff.
58. στάμενα, from the H. word ἰσταμένα, viz. χρήματα, an expression analogous
to that of beni stanti in Italian.
χιαροκόπος---Ἴ here are several other Romaic substantives compounded of κόπος,
and verbs of κοπῶ, generally meaning the pursuit of some particular inclination to
Excess, as χαρτοκόπος, gambler at cards, μεθοκοπῶ, Tam u drunkard.
63. σώνω, 1 save, arrive, δὲς. σώγει, tt is sufficient, from H. σώω, by the usual in-
sértion of y
64. πέρπερα, a provincial word, which I have not seen in any dictionary—pro-
bably from the H. πέρπερος, levis, in allusion to the thinness of the gold—in the
same manner as πέταλον, horse-shoe, from H. πέταλον, folium.
66, ἀγκάθι, from H. ἄκανθα, by the metathesis of n, and converting the feminine .
termination into a neuter in soy, which of course removes the accent.
67. This proverb alludes to the custom of barning wax-candles before the pic- |
tures of saints in Greek churches, and to the common superstitious practice of:
promising, upon the successful conclusion ofany undertaking, to be at the expence
of adorning the picture of the favorite saint with a gilt or silver frame, or of butns
ing wax-candles before its image, or any other absurdity of the same kind. — Kov-
λούρι from Η. κολλύρα, by the usual changes.
Proverbs: — τ 45
70. Κόρακας κοράκου μάτι dev βγάνει.
Crow does not pick out the eye of crow.
71. Παπούτξι ἀπὸ τὸν τόπονσου καὶ as εἶν᾽ καὶ μπαλομένον. -"
The slipper trom home. (is acceptable) though it be patched.
72. Τ᾽ ἄλογον τὸ πληγωμιένον. ὡς ἰδῃ τὴν σέλλαν, τρέμει. +
The wounded horse, when he sces the saddle, trembles.
73. Κάλλιον ἕνας φρόνιμος ἐχθρὸς mapa ἕναν ζουρλὸν φίλον.
Better a wise enemy thana foclish friend. 7
74. T ἄσπρα τὰ θέλει ὁ ἄνθρωπος διὰ τὴν μαῦρ᾽ ἡμέραν.
Man wants money for the black (evil) day.
75. Βασιλιᾶς λογάριν ἔχει, x av τοῦ δώσουν x ἄλλο θέλει.
The emperor has large treasures, but wishes for more, if you will
give it him. . .
76. Ἢ μικρὸς παρδρέψου ἢ μικρὸς καχογερέψου.
Fither marry when young, or turn monk when young,
77. Ὅταν κλέπτουσι μὴν κλέπτης καὶ ὅταν διαλαλοῦσι μὴν φοβῆσαι.
When they rob, partake not, and when they divulge, fear not.
78. Ὄψιμος υἱὸς μὲ κύριν δὲν θερίξει.
The tardy son reaps not with the father.
79. Τὰ στραβάμας παραθύρια τὰ χρυσὰ φλωριὰ τὰ σιαξζουν..
Our windows are crooked—golden sequins will make them straight.
80. Τῆς νυκτὸς τὰ καμώματα τὰ βλέπει ἣ ᾽'μέρα καὶ yeaa.
The day beholds the deeds of th® night and laughs.
81. ζήτρα δότρα δὲν γίγνεται.
She that has the habit of asking has not that of giving.
82. ‘On’ ἔχει πρόβατ᾽ ἔχειτα καὶ ὁποῦ τὰ βοσκεὶ τρώγειτα.
He that has sheep has them, but be that feeds them eats them.
83. Ὃ Διάβολος γίδια δὲν εἴχε καὶ τυρὶ ἐπούλιε.
‘Lhe devil had no goats, yet he sold cheese.
84." Ayougos προξενητὴς γιὰ λόγουτου γυρεύι.
He that solicits on the part of another in ἃ disagreeable or un-
seasonable manner, 16 making interest for himself.
΄
75. βασιλιᾶς for βασιλέας, the common R. form of the H. βῳσιλιύς. 15 change
of into :, with the accent on the last syllable, is also exemplified in αλλιῶς for H.
«λλέως--- ἀπ is like that of μηλιὰ tor μηλέα, already given in No. 12. ,
79. ota fouy for ἰσιάφουγ, from H. ἴσιος.
ixcdass, 84 sing. imp. οὗ. πουλῶ, 1 sell, far H. πωλῶ, vendo.
83. yidiov, goat, from H. aff, αἰγὸς, whence the diminutive ayisior—and by
dropping the initial a:, (equivalent to εν yidicy.
84. ἄγουρος, immature, unseasonuble, from H. ἄωρος, by changing ὦ into ov, and in-
serting y between the two vowels, as in the instance of αὐγὸν, and many others.
The preservation of ancient accent in ἄγουρος and αὐγὸν is remarkable. It is also
curious to observe, that in the former word AFQPOX, Γ supplies the place of the
aspirate, and in the latter QFON (whence the Latin orum) that of the digamma.
In modern verbs derived from Hellenic, v is often inserted before the w pure, as
σφεξεύω, 1 deprive, from H. ccigiw. -And the same practice was known to the an-
cieuts, who wrote τυραγγεύω, as wellas τυραγγέω,. In other modern verbs, taken
7
46
e
4
85. Οὔτε ὁ πτωχὸς, οὔτε ὁ λόγος
Note et Cura Sequentes
TOU. .
Neither the beggar nor his word (are good for any thing.)
86. Δώσε πλούτη, δώσε γνῶσιν, δώσε Or
elas, δώσε τρέλειν.
Give riches, you give sense, give poverty, you give folly.
87. Els φουρκισμένου ewirs σχοιὴὶ μὴν μελετήσης.
Treat not of cords in the house of the man who has been
hanged.
88. Me? ἑκατὸν στὴν φυλακὴν καὶ μὲ τὰ χίλια μέσαι.
For a hundred you go to prison, and fora thousand to (prison).
Anglicé, In for a penny, m for a pound.
SQ. ᾿Εμεῖς ψωμὶ δὲν ἔχομεν καὶ ἡ κατα κίτα σύρνει.
We have not bread to eat while the cat drags away the pie.
90. Κάλλιον λόγια στὸ χωράφι παρὰ μάγγανα ot ἀλώνι.
Better words in the field than cudgels at the threshme-floor.
from H. y, and sometimes vy, are introduced before the w, a8 προύγυῳ
H. xpodw, κλαίω ----τυραγγεύγω for ᾿τυραγνεύω, and τελεύγω for H. τιλίω,
malyw, for
But these
changes seem also to have been practised by the ancients, whose φιύγω has
probably been taken from the more ancient φέω. °
89. Applied to fathers, living in misery, while their sons are spend thrifts,
be]
NOT ET CURE SEQUENTES IN ARATI
DIOSEMEA,
a TH. Forster, F. Σ. 5.
No. 11. (Continued from No. xxv111. p. $73.)
᾿ Εἰ δέ xe μιν περὶ πᾶσαν ἀλωσὴ νυκλώσωνται,
“H τρεῖς ἠὲ δύω περικείμεναι, ἠὲ μὲ om, 80
Τῇ μὲν ἰῇ ἀνέμοιο γαληναίης τε δοκεύειν"
v. 73—78. Non omnibus diebits eve-
ningyt ompia signa; que teitie et quar-
to fuerint, usque ad dimidiatam signifi-
eant, ἃ dimidiata quidem usque ad se-
mimenstruam (plenilanium). Rursuse
semimenstrua usque ad dimidiatum de-
creseentem, mox vero habetur ejus
quarta mensis decedentis, post hanc
tertia abeuntis. De Lune dicebus vid.
gafr. Exc.
(79—86.) Hic sequuntur vel unius,
vel duorum, vel trium halonum pleuam
Lanam circumambientium, presagia.
Per unom ventum sed etiash sereénum
coelum observa; si vero scissus est,
ventum (solum ;) si marcescat, sereni-
tatem (siné vento) Si duo batunes
conspicinatur, tempestas sequi solet.
Sed si tres conspecti sunt ; precipué
si nigricant (id est, si spatium inter
circulos et Bunam reliqna nube atrivs
sit) ant si frangantur, (id est, si circulo-
rum cotitinuitas rapta sit) major tém-
pestas ventaraest. Notum est
pluviosam tempestatem preesagire,
Que tamen poé¢ta scripsit de diversis
in Arats Dwsemea.
47
᾿Ρηγνυμένῃ, ἀνέμοιο" μαραινομόνῃ δὲ, γαλήνης.
Ταὶ δύο 8 ὧν χειμῶνι φεριτροχάοιτο σελήνῃ.
Μείξονα δ᾽ ὧν χοιμῶναι φέροι τριέλικτος εἱλωὴ,
Καὶ μᾶλλον μελανεῦσα" καὶ εἰ ῥηγνύωτο, μᾶλλον. 8ὅ
Καὶ τὰ μὲν οὖν ἐπὶ μηνὶ σεληναίης κα φύθοιο.
᾿Πελίοιο. δέ τοι μελέτω ἑκάτερθεν ἰόντος"
᾿Ηελίῳ καὶ μᾶλλον ἐοικότα σήμωτα κεῖται,
᾿Αμφότερον, δύμοντι καὶ ἐχ περώτης ἀνιόντι.
Μή οἱ ποικίλλοντο νέον βάλλοντος ἀρφούρωις
00
Κύκλος, ὅτ᾽ εὐδίου κεχρημένος εἵματος εἴης,
δηδέ τι σῆμα φέροι, φαίνοιτο δὲ λιτὸς ἁπάντη.
Εἰ δ᾽ αὕτως καθαρόν μιν ὄχοι βουλύσιος ὥρη,
“Δύνοι 8 ἀννέφελος μαλακὴν ὑποδείελος αἴγλὴν;
Καὶ μὲν ἐπερχομένης ἠοῦς ἔθ᾽ ὑπεύδιος εἴη.
95
diversorum halonis generum presa-
giis, que secundum siugnios Lune
phases variantor, observationes nostrse
confirmare pequeant. In australiori-
bus regionibus furtasse hec discrimina
locum habent. 81. τῇ μὲν ἀνέμοω γα-
Anvalns te, etc.) eophrastus ita
scribit ὅλως δὲ ἐὰν ὁμαλῶς πογῆ καὶ μα-
ράνθη. [Theoph. Sign. Seren.} Et Pli-
pigsin Hist. Nat. Libro, Si plena cirea
se habet orbem, ex qua parte is maxime
sprendebit, ex eg ventum ostendet. [ Plin.
ist. Nat. xviii. 95-1 be. (Ῥήγνυμένη
ἄνέμριο,) 118 Aristoteles Ὅταν δὲ δια-
σπασθῇ (ὅλως) πνεύματος σημεῖαν" ἦ γὰρ
διαίρεσις, ὑπὰ πνεύμᾳτος γέγονεν ἤδη μὲν
ὄντος, οὕπω δὲ wdpovros’ σημεῖον δὲ τού-
του, διόνι, ἀντεῦθεν γίγνεται ὁ ἄνεμος, ὅθεν
ἂν ἡ κυρία γίγνηται δίασπασις. [Ατίϑί.
Met. ii. 8.] Seneca observat. Non-
numguem peullatim diluuntur ac desi-
unt: nonnumquam ab aligua parte rum-
Ῥώμην; οὐ inde venium nautici expec-
dant, unde contextus corona perit. Si
.onigg ἃ Septentrione discesscrit, Aquilo
«ὦ; _ mane Faresius. (Seneca.
at. Quest. i. 2.) Ibid. (μαραινομένη
δὲ γαλήμημ.) ita Arist. ᾿Λπαμαραμιομένη
δὰ εὐδίᾳ. (Arist. Meteor. iii. 3.] Sencea
habet, Ha, de quibua dizi, corona, cum
‘dolepsa sunt equaliter, et ian semetipais
eveguerint, significalur αὐτὶ quies ct
ohinm οὐ tranquillitas. Cum ub uaa
eqaserunt, illine ventus est unde fin-
duatur. Si rupta pluribus locis sunt,
tempestas fit. [Sanec. Nat. Quest. i.
4.} vv. 83, 84, 85. (ταὶ ὁ δύο, etc.) Bic
Wiiains, Si ealigoe orbia nubem incluserit
ventus qua se ruperit; af gemini erées
cinwevunt, sujorem tempestetem : δὲ ma-
gis ai tres erunt, aut igri, aud iaterrugti
atque distresti. [Plin. Hist. Nat. xviii,
35.
De halenis cosene οἱ atiorum ha-
jusce generis meteorum varietatibus
atque de eernm caussis vid. infra Ex-
curs. ad v. 64.
(v. 87—95.) Jam ad Solis presagia
8. tranefert: soli enim certiora et
inagie nota signa penantar. Ut me-
morat Virgiliua:
Denique quid vesper sevus vehat, unde
serenas ee
Venius agat nubes, quid cogitet humidus
Auster
Sal sbi signa debit ; solem quis dicere
Salsum τς
Audeat?
[Virg. Gear. i. 464.]
.Omnia hee signa, que solis disci
coloribus aut refractionibus lueis con-
stant ; per vaporem aut nubes interpo-
sitas producgater ; itaque melius sub
οἵα et occasum cernuatur quam
medio die quem altius cursuin fectit.
Ergo dicit vv. 87, 88, 89.
Ἠελίοια δέ τοι μελέτω, ἑκάτερθεν ἰόντος,
᾿Ἠελίῳ καὶ μᾶλλον ἐοικότα σήματα κεῖται
᾿Αμφάτερεν, δόνοντι καὶ ἐκ περάτης ἀνιόντι;
quos Maro imitatus est.
** Sol quoque et exoriens. et quam se
cundit in undaa, ; _
Signa dabit; solem certiasima signa
sequuntur. ;
Et gue mane refert et qua sargenti-
bus astris.”
[Virg. 1.458) 0
93-—95. Si vespers sol purus st er-
\
Note ct Curé Sequentes
᾿Αλλ᾽ οὐχ ὁππότε κοῖλος ἐειδόμενος περιτέλλῃ,
Οὐδ ὁπότ᾽ ἀκτίνων αἱ μὲν νότον, αἱ δὲ βορῆα
Σχιζόμεναι βάλλωσι, τά δ᾽ αὖ περὶ μέσσα φαείνη"
᾿Αλλά που ἢ ὑετοῖο διέρχεται ἣ ἀνέμοιο,
Σκέπτεο δ᾽ εἴ κέ τοι αὐγαὶ ὑπεῖεν ἂν ἠελίοιο
100
Αὐτὸν ἐς ἠέλιον' τοῦ γὰρ σποπιαὶ καὶ ἄρισται.
Εἴ τι που ἢ καὶ ἔρευθος ἐπιτρέχει, οἷά τε πολλὰ
᾿Ἑλκομένων νεφέων ἐρυθραίνεται ἄλλοθεν ἄλλα:
“H εἴ που μελανεῖ. καί σοι τὰ μὲν, ὕδατος ἔστω
cubatque innubilus cum blando ful-
gore, purus etiam orietur, et serenus
dies sequetur. Nihil magis notum est
quam sol, cum purus sit, serenitatem
portendere. Theophrastus scribit:
ἙΕὐδίας δὲ σημεῖα τάδε, ἥλιος μὲν ἀνίων
λαμπρὸς καὶ μὴ καυματίας, καὶ μὴ ἔχων
σημεῖον μηδὲν ἐν ἑαντῷ εὐδίαν σημαίνει"
ὧς 8 αὕτως σελήνη πανσελήνῳ. Καὶ δυό-
- pevos ἥλιος χειμῶνος els καθαρὸν, εὐδίεινος
ἐὰν μὴ ταῖς προτέραις ἡμέραις εἰς μὴ καθα-
‘poy δεδυκὼς ἢ ἐξ εὐδίων, οὕτω δὲ ἄδηλον
καὶ ἐὰν χειμάξοντος ἡ δύσις γένηται εἰς
καθαρὸν εὐδίεινον. [Theoph. Sign. Seren. ]
Plinius confirmat: ‘ Puros oriens at-
que non fervens serenum diem nun-
ciat, hybernam pallidus grandinem.
Si et occidit pridie serenus et oritur,
tanto certior fides serenitatis.” [Plin.
Hist. Nat. xviii. 33.) ᾿
Ft Virgilias,
** Atsi quum referetque diem condet-
que relatum
Lucidus .orbis e1it, frustra terrebere
nimbis :
Et claro sylvas cernes aquilone-moveri.”
[ Virg: Georg. 1. 460.]
96—99. Nunc de pluvie prognos-
ticis ex sole agit. Non enim sol sere-
nitatem prasagiet, qnuum cavus exori-
atur, sed pluviam.. Neque cum e ra-
diis quidam ad Austrum, quidam ad
Boream scissi tendunt, media autem
(μέσσα τοῦ δίσκου) lucida sint. Hee
vel pluviw vel venti signa sunt; que
omnia confirmat M. Varro. ‘* Si ex-
oriens Sol concavus videtur ita ut a
medio fulgeat, et radios partim ad
Aquilonem partim ad Austrum jaciat,
tempestatem humidam οἴ veiltosam
‘futorum-innoit.” [Varro Frag.] Comm,
in German. habet * Si Solin ortu suo
maculosus sit, atque sub nube latens
aut dimidia parte appareat, imbres fu-
turos inauit.” [Calp. Bas. Comm. in
Germ.].-Et Plinius, “ Concavas oriens
pluvias predicit.” [Plinv. Hist. Nat.
xvilis 35.) Nec multam dixsentire vi-
detur Virgilins cum de prasaglis 6 sole
agit in fine, Geor. 1.
“¢ Tile ubi nascentem maculis variaverit
ortum, ᾿
Conditus in nubem medioque refogerit
orbe,
Suspecti tibi sint imbres, namque ur-
get ab alto,
Arboribusque satisque Notus pecori-
que sinister,
Aut ubi sub lucem densa inter nubila
sese,
’ Diversi rumpent radii, aut ubi pallida
surgit
Titheni crocenm linquens Aurora cu-
ile,
Heu male tum mitis defendet pampinus
uvas,
Tam multa in tectis crepitans selit
horrida grando.”
_ [Virg. Geor. i. 149.]
100—101. Adspice autem si solis
radii subeant ipsum in solem, naw hu-
jus observationes optima sunt.
10¥—107. Si quando incidit rubor,
ut sxpe attractis nubibus rubeseit ali-
-cunde aliter, aut si quando nigreseit,
pluvia portenditur; sed si omnino ra-
bescit, ventns. Porro si ambobus si-
mul sol coloratus sit; plnviam et ven-
tum denunciat. Plinins inter pro-
gnostica tempestatum e sole, scribit.—
“item ventos (predicit) cunt ante ex-
orientem eum unbes robescunt, ‘quod
«Αἱ et nigrae rubentibus intervenerint
et pluvias. Cum orientis atque occi-
dentis radii rubent,:coire pluvias.”
-[Plin. Hist: Nat. xviii. 35.j) Notissimi
-sunt ili Maronis versus ex Arato sub-
lecti, quibus in fine primi Geor. ex-
‘pressit presagia tempestatis ex: solis
speciebus ; partim supra citati; paulio
interins scribit; 7 '
a Aratt Diosemea.
Σήματα μέλλοντος" τὰ δ᾽. ἐρευθέα πάντ', ἀνέμοιο.
105
Eye μὲν ἀμφοτέροις ἄμυδις κεχρωσμένος εἴη,
Kal κεν ὕδωρ φΦορέοι, καὶ ὑπηνέμιος τανύοιτο.
Εἰ δέ οἱ ἀνιόντος ἣ αὐτίκα δυομένοιο ..
᾿Αχτῖνες συνίωσι, καὶ ἀμφ᾽ ivi wexaniwosy,
"H ποτε καὶ νεφέων πεπιεσμένος, ἢ ὅτ᾽ ἐς ἠῶ
110
"Ερχηται παρὰ γυκτὸς, ἢ ἐξ ἠοῦς ἐπὶ νύκτα,
"Path κεν κατιόντι παρατρέχοι ἤματα κεῖνα.
My® ὅτε οἱ ὀλίγη νεφέλη παρὸς ἀντέλλῃσι,
Τὴν 83 μετ᾽ ἀκτίνων κεχρωσμένος αὐτὸς ἀερθῇ,
᾿Αμνηστεῖν ὑετοῖο" πολὺς δ᾽ ὅτε of περὶ κύκλος
115
eee ee Di ee
** Hoc etiam emenso quum jam dece-
dat Olympo
Profuerit meminisse magis, nam sepe
videmus
Tpsius in voltu varios errare colores ;
Cerulenas plaviam denunciat, iguens
Euros ;
Sin macule incipient rutilo inmisce-
rier igni,
Omnia tum pariter vento nimbisque
videbis
Fervere: non illa quisquam me nocte
. per altom ᾿
Ire, neque a terra moneat convellere
. fanem.”
[Virg. Georg. i. 457.]
Bene distinguit (per vv. 104, 105.)
inter obscuritatem que pluviam indi-
cat, et raborem qui ventam portendit;
ambo qui aére nebuloso interposito
efficinntar. Cum ruber et nigritia
mixti sunt; sive-_per nubem, sive .per
diffusiorem vaporem efficiantur, plu-
‘viam et ventum futurum denunciant.
Negque veritate caret observatio, ut
-gepe notavi. . Nubes que effectum
reddat in utreque casu laté expansa est
tine multa densitate. Nomen cirro-
stratus. a madernis meteorolegicis ei
affigitur, de quo ixfra. Monendum est
-quod daobus modis nubes coloretur:
psa nubes radios lucis vel refrangere
vel per aéra nebulosum refractos ite-
rom ad nos reflectere potest ; frequen-
tissime eccidit ut qnum nabcs visibiles
seu definite eo genere sazt ut rubo-
rem, per .refractionem, ostendant suf-
fusi vapores quibus conatat, quod An-
lice Haze dicitur, etiam eundem ha-
ot colorem. Swzpé tamen diverses
inter se nubes diversos colores habent
eodem tempore; coloris diversitate a
: differentia in nubium structura facta ;
. ed numquam manet idem color in
NO. XXXIII. Cl. Jl.
ceelo per decem fere minuta; variatio
perpetua est ab occidente usque ad
tenebras. Nunc quum de cell colo-
ribus agitur; observare licet de illuni-
bus noctibus ceruleam inter stellas
spatium, claro celo, non semper 2-
qualiter lacidum esse. Aliquando co-
Jor densior, aliquando pallidior est.
Ceelum a montium verticibus conspec-
tum fere atrum videtur. Duz hajus
rei causse philesophis placent. Aliqui
credunt lucidiorem seu candidiorem
colorem a vaporibus suffusis effici;
alii, ut celeber Saussure (Saussure,
Voy. Alp. iv. 2070.], ignis decomposi-
tioni impytant. -
108--112. Si orientis aut yicissim ᾿
occidentis solis radii coéant, et circa
unum locum crassescant ; aut quando
sol pressus nubibus est, vel quum ad
Auroram veniat a nocte, vel ad noctem
ab Aurora; dies illi pluvio peragan-
tur. Perquandam refractionem, solis
radii apparent radiantes -interposita
mube, quasi trabes lucide ab uno loco
(ecil. sole) divergentes. Hoc notum
plavie signom ut supra dictum. Con-
sul, etiam Arist. rept ὧν, in Meteor.
libro. [Arist. Meteor. iii. 4 et 8.] 110.
νεφέων πεπιεσμένος. Cum sol aut oritor,
aut occidit, pubibus obscaoratus, plu-
vias expectemus: caussa est quod na-
bibus vesperi non decrescentibus, aut
apparentibus mane ante tempus; sohk-
tas nubium caussas per aliquam ceeli
mutationem interruptas esse putamus.
Nam serenitatis tempore pubes, si ulle.
sint; paallo post orientem apparent;
crescunt per diem, et vesperi paulia-
tim minuantur; quasi in rorem muta-
rentur; hemisphzricam fere formam
habent et cumuli vocantar.
113—119. Neque cum modica nubes
et soli preorietur; vero postea radia
VOL. XVII. Ὦ
Note et Cura Sequentes
ἴον τηχκομένῳ ἐναλίγκιος εὐρύνηται!,
Πρῶτον ἀνερχομόνοιο καὶ ἂψ, ἐκὶ μεῖον ἴησιν,
Εὔϑδιός xe φέροιτο" καὶ strove χείματος ὥρῃ
'Ωχρήσῃ κατιών' ἀτὰρ Wares ἡμερινοῖο
Γινομένου, κατόπισθε περὶ νέφεα σκοπέεσϑαι.
120
Καὶ δὴ δυομένου τετραμμένος ἠελίοιο,
“Hy μὲν ὑποσκιάῃσι μελαινομένῃ εἰκυῖα
᾿Πέλιον νεφέλη, ταὶ δ᾽ ἀμφί μιν ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα
᾿Ακτῖνες μεσφηγὺς ἑλισσόμεκαι δυχόωνται,
7H τ' ἂν ἔτ᾽ εἰς ἠῶ σκόπαος κεχρημένος εἴης.
Εἰ δ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἀννέφολος βάπτοι
125
υ ἑσπερίοιο,
Ταὶ δὲ κατερχομένου νεφέλαι καὶ οἰχομένοιο
Πλησίον ἑστήκωσιν ἐρευθέες, οὔ σε μάλα χρὴ
Αὔριον οὐδ᾽ ἐπὶ νυκτὶ περιτρομέειν ὑετοῖο.
᾿Αλλ᾽ ὑπότ᾽ ἠελίοιο μελοωινομένησιν ὁμοῖαι
.. 130
᾿Εξαπίνης ἀκτῖνες ax’ οὐρανόθεν τανύωνται,
Οἷον ἀμαλδύνονται, ὅτε σκιάγσι κατ᾽ ἰθὺ
variatus ipse elevatus fuerit, plauvire
ipmemor esto. Neque serenus erit,
quam ejus.primum orientis orbis flac-
ceacenti similis dilatetur, et mox.de-
erescat: etiam: si pluvieso tempore
-eccumbens palluerit. Dilatatio orbis
a cirrostrata nube facta est certissimo
venture plnviie signe.
119-125. At a diurna plows,
‘Bubes circnmspicito ; et occidentem
.ad solem conversus ; ‘si quidem nubes
\Wigricanti similis solem obscuret ; sed
circam ipsam nubem hinc inde circum-
voluti radii finduntur . certe adhue in
Auroram operimesto indigus esses.—
.Densam cirrostratum ante oculos ha-
-buisse videtur dum vv. 122, 123. scribe-
.bat ; nam in plana hnjus nubis facie,
.ecum longe lateque -horizontaliter ex-
. pansa est, solis radii quasi intervoluti
. et scissi sepius videntur.
126—129. At si sol innmbilus se
-fuctu vespero submergat; descendenti
‘vero et abeunti nubes rubicunds vi-
cine. existant; :-hand te valde oportet,
.Deque per noctem neque cras. timere
de pluvia. Vulgaris opinio est rubi-
enndum.vesperi calum crastinam sere.
-Ritatem portendere; sed, cum, mane
rubet, pluviam in illo die. Ex tre.
-quentissima hujus prognostici observa-
stione fit adaginm nostrum ;
«© An eveniug red aud a morning grey,
. @ asure sign οἵα fine day.”
; ἢ [Ray Proverb.A. edit..p..37.]
‘Nonnulli addant,
“ But an evening grey and.a merning
Put on ‘your hat or yowll-wet your
shead.”
Jam in mentem venit notissimnum illad
Gallorum proverbiam,
Rouge:soir εἰ blanc matin
Font νά) μὲν le peleria.
[Ray Proverb. 4..edit. p. 37.]
_-Cui-simillimum habent itsli,
Sera rasa, 6 nigre matino
Allegra tk pelegrine.
{Ray Proverb. 4. edit. Ρ..57.]
. Plinius scribit, “ Si cirea occidentem
rubescunt nubes, serenitatem : Segue
diei apendent ;”’ [Plin. Hist. Nat. wwii.
35.] paullo inferius notat, “ Qued-si
in exortu fiet ita ut rnbescant mabes,
maxima ostenditur tempestas.” -[Plin.
Hist. Nat. xviii..35.]
130. Verum quando solis radii sner-
cescentibus similes extemplo e oslo
portendunwr, quasi evanescentes,
quandoque Luna stans ex directosolis
terreque obumbret, tum oportet .te
. timere de pluvia. I. T. Buhie -de: tis
versibus ita commentatnr, Οἷον «era
«καθερὸν γῆΞ. καὶ ἡλίον" καὶ γὰρ τῇς ἄψεους
. ἡμῶν πολὺ. μείζων ἐστὶν ἡ σελήνη ; ὥστε
. ἀποφράττει ἡμῶν τὰς ὄψεις μὴ ὁρᾶν αὐτοῦ,
ἐν ἰσομοιρίᾳ κατὰ καθερὸν γινομένη. Αἱ δὲ
.ἡλιακαὶ ἐκλείψεις φθίνοντος μηνὸς γίνονται,
χὸ δὲ
ἱσταμένη, ἤγουν ὅταν τὸν
, oluctoy δρόμον ἡ ισελήνη ἐν μίκει γινομέαπῃ,
an Arati Diosemea.
Cr
a
ἱΙσταμένη γαίης τε xad ἠελίοιρ σελήνη"
Οὐδ᾽ ὅτε of ἐπόχοντι φανήμεναι ἠῶθι πρὸ
Φαίνονται νεφέλαι ὑπερωθέες, ἄλλοθεν ἄλλη, 13:
“Appavros γίνονται ἐπ᾿ ἤματι κείνῳ ἄρουραι.
Myo αὕτως ἔτ᾽ ἐόντι πέρην, ὁπότε προταθεῖσαι
᾿Ακτῖνες φαίνονται ἐπίσκιοι ἠῶϑι πρὸ,
“Ὕδατος ἢ ἀγέμοιο κατοισομένου λελαθέσθαι.
᾿Αλλ᾽ εἶ μὲν κεῖναι μᾶλλον κνέφαος φορέοιντο
140
᾿Αχτῖνες, μᾶλλόν κεν ἐφ᾽ ὕδατι σημαίνοιξν,
ΕἸ δ' ὀλίγος τανύοιτο περὶ δνόφος ἀκτίγεσσιν,
Οἷόν που μαλακαὶ νεφέλαι φορέουσι μάλιστα,
ΤΗτ' dy ἐπερχομένοιο περιδνοφέοιντ᾽ ἀγέμοιο.
Οὐδὲ μὲν ἠελίου σχεδόθεν μελανεῦσαι ὁ λωαὶ
145
Εὔδιοι" ἀσσότεραι δὲ, καὶ ἀστεμφὲς μελανεῦσαι,
Μᾶλλον χειμέριαι" δύο δ᾽ ἂν χαλεπώτεραί εἶσι.
Σκέπκτεο δ᾽ ἢ ἀνίοντος, ἣ αὐτίκα δυομένοιο, —
Εἴ που οἷ νεφέων τὰ παρήλια κικλήσκονται,
Ἢ νότου ἠὲ βορῆος ἐραύθεται, ἣ ἑκάτερθεν,
150
My? οὕτω σκοπιὴν ταύτην ἀμενηνὰ φυλάσσειν"
ὀκισκιάζῃ τὸν ἥλιον, ἱσταμένη κατ᾽ εὐθὺ
τῇ; γῆς καὶ τοῦ ἡλίου. [Buhle Arat. Vol.
1. p. 193. Edit. Leipz. 1793.]
De solis radiis ita Plinius, ‘* Cum
oviente radii non illustres eminebunt,
quamvis circumdati nube non sint,
pluviam portendent.” [Plin. Hist. Nat.
xviii. 35.
134. Neque, cum moranti soli nubes
subrubre lucescere ante Auroram
appareot, alibi alia arida fiunt arva in
iio die. Nubes rubentius colorate
ante orientem pluviam portendunt;
ergo arva non arida, sed humida fiunt.
gli proverbium habent,
*¢ Ifred the Sun begins his race,
- Be sure that rain will fall apace.”
Hoc proprie ad solis colorem respicit ;
eadem tamen causa ruboris est, sive in
solis disco sive in circugjacentibus
nubibus observatur; nempe specialis
vaporis interpoaiti atructura, que talis
est ut radii rubri transeunt, dum ceteri
reflectuntar. |
137—144. Inutilis repetitio in his
versibus de prognosticis ex radiis con-
tinetur. Itatranstuli, Neque eodem
modo adhuc eaistenti inferre, quando
phetenti radii ante’ Anroram obscuri
apparent, pluvie aut venti inituri ob-
liviscere. At si radii caligine magis
involvantar, certius pluviam predi-
cunt. Sin autem caligo modica circa
radios exiendatur, qualem syepe tenerz
.“¢ Nune dicendum est de virgis
a we Xow wat dene a -
nubes ferant, certe adveniente vente
obtenebrari solent. De his radiis quos
virgas appellant, ita scribit Seneca,
quas
minus pictas variasque et zque pluvia-
rum signa solemus accipere; in quibus
pon multum operz consumendum est;
quia virge nihil aliud quam imperfect:
arcus sunt. Nam facies quidem illis
_est picta, sed nihil curvati habent: in -
rectum jacent. “Fiunt autem juxta so-
lem in humida fere nube et jam se spar-
gente. Itaque idem est in illis ji in
τοι eolor, tantum figura mutatar :
via nubium quoque in quibus exten-
tur alia est.” [Seneca, Nat. Quest. i.
9.] Et inferins in capite undecimo,
“ Aliud quoque virgarum genus appa-
ret com radii per angusta foramina
nobium § tenues, intenti, distantesque
inter se diriguntur et ipsi signa im-
brium sunt.” [Sepeca, Nat. Quest.
i. 10.
tar. Iterum de halonibus agit
et inter diversa geneva distinguit. De
halonibus circa Lunam apparentibus
ratis supra disputavimns ; com iidem
solem circumdent, eand«-m fere tempes-
tatem portendunt. Ergo secribi€ vv.
145-7. ut trans. Neque quidem prope
sulem halones nigrescentes, sereni ; vi-
ciniores vero et impense nigricantes
magis tempestuosi; duo sxviores fue-
rint.
52
ANNOTATIONES
IN SOPHOCLIS ANTIGONAM,
EX RECENSIONE CAROL. AUG. ERFURDTIL.
V.2. ὅτι scripsit Hermann. pro ὅ, τι; cleganter Erfurdtio quidem
‘judice. ‘ Amant enim Greci diversas confundere structuras, veluti
cum ὅτι vel ὅπως infinitivo jungunt, quem ab ellipsi verbi alicujus pen-
dere perperam statuit Zeunius.’ ‘T'um locum, qui nihil ad rem prze-
sentem spectat, e Platone laudat, additque: ‘ Non aptius exem-
plum afferri potest quam (4. ἢ. 1402.’ Sed illic certissima est
emendatio Elmsleii legentis, apa pov μέμνηταί ti pou. Hinc pene
inducor ut in nostro loco legam, ἄρ᾽ οἶσθα τί Ζεύς. Sequentia
Scheferus: 8, τι si genuinum est (habent autem et libri omnes et
vere etiam Scholiastes) dicam positum pro ὁτιοῦν, ὀτιδήποτε. Call.
Hymn. in Dian. v. 18. πόλιν δέ por ἥντινα νεῖμον, ἽἬντινα λῇς.
Pausan. 11. 9. 7. τόπον ὅντινα εἶπον. Cf. Bastii Epist. Crit. p.
114. § 121.
40. ‘Schol. λύουσα τὸν ὁρισμὸν καὶ θάπτουσα τὸν Πολυνείκην : unde li-
quet pre oculis Scholiastz versari veterem lectionem, que Brunckio
manifesta depravatio videtur: nam “ que inter duo verba oppositio
debet esse, nulla hic est, quum λύειν τὸν νόμον idem sit quod
θάπτειν." Legit igitur λύουσ᾽ ἐν ἢ φάπτουσα ; opposita enim sunt
λύειν et ἐφάπτειν, solvere εἰ adstringere. Ad hec recte observat
Eerfurdtius, ἐράπτειν neque simpliciter, neque addito νόμον, significare
posse “legem adstringere.” Recipit ergo lectionem Heraldi ad
Tertulliani Apolog. 1. Digress. 27. emendantis λούουσ᾽ av ἢ θάπ-
rovca; et ne quis particula ἢ sententias disjungente offendatur,
locum citat ex Eur. Phoen. 1647. ὃς dv νεκρὸν τόνδ᾽ ἢ καταστέφων
GAG *H γῇ καλύπτων, θάνατον ἀνταλλάξεται. Commemoratur etiam
lavatio tanquam mos funerationem precedere solitus. Sic in
Eurip. Phoen. 1661. Antigone a Creonte petit, ut Polynicis cada-
ver sibi saltem lavare liceat. Σὺ δ᾽ ἀλλὰ νεχρῷ λουτρὰ περιβαλεῖν
μ᾽ ἔα. <Avay autem et λούειν alibi quoque confusa reperiuntur, ut
Orphei Lithic. 380., sed de loco ex Aéschyl. Choeph. 291. desum*
to male ratiocmatur Erf.:—Hermanni enim emendatio δέχεσθαι δ᾽,
οὔτε συλλούειν τινὰ, supervacanea est. Rectius ed. vet. συλλόειν
i. 6. cuynxataavay, ‘una diversart.” Praterea hanc Heraldi emen-
dationem quodammodo defendit hujusce fabula v. 802. ᾿Επεὶ θα-
yovras αὐτόχειρ ὕμας ἐγὼ “EAovoa κακόσμησα κι τ. Δ. Infelices
conjecturas Toupii et Musgravii in his versibus emendandis memo-
rare supersedeo.
24. ποῦ γνώμης ποτ᾽ ef; sic cum membranis et Aldo exhibent
omnes quos scio editores: male. Nam εἶ in hoc loco non ab
εἰμὶ, sum, sed ab εἶμι, tbo, derivatur ; ποῦ etiam de. motu dici non
Annotationes in Sophoclis Antigonam; 53
potest: legas igitur sos cum T.. quod in his formulis usitatius.
fd. Col. 170. ποῖ τις φροντίδος ἔλθῃ; ibid. S10. ποῖ φρένων ἔλθω,
πάτερ; Eur. Hipp. 342. |
43. “Sepelire hunc meditaris, id quod publice prohibitum est,
vel nunc cum publice prohibitum est?” Musgr. sed male ; con-
struas ‘‘ Tune hunc sepelire meditaris, qui interdictus est civibus?”
53. διπλοῦν docs male, ut mihi quidem videtur. Cum Aue
ust. Dresd. et ed. vet. reponas πάθος, quam agnoscunt membr.
f. Cid. Tyr..732. 1297. ὦ δεινὸν ἰδεῖν πάθος ἀνθρώποις.
56. αὐτοκτονοῦντε. ‘Ita Coraius emendavit vulgatum αὐτοχτε-
vouvres: quod Lexicographi, D. Scotto preeunte, ab αὐτοχτείνω,
prorsus barbaro illo, derivant. Cf. Schneid. Lex. Tom. II. p. 690.
Vulgata tamen scriptura facit ut meminerim Euripidei illius στα-
διοδραμοῦμαι. Herc. F. 865. cujus non aliud prasens dici potest
quam σταδιοτρέχω, quod non minus barbarum videtur.” Schzfer.
58. In hoc loco primam personam pluralem nominativo duali con-
jungit noster, ut etiam Eurip. Orest. 1060. Agacavre κατϑανούμεθ᾽
ἀξιώτατα. Aristoph. Aves, 120. ixéra νὼ πρὸς σὲ δεῦρ᾽ ἀφίγμεθα.
Qui bujusce syntaxeos plura exempla cupit, adeat is ‘“ Annota-
tiones in Euripidis Iphigeniam Tauricam ex Recensione Augusti
Sedleri in Mus. Crit. editas, egregiamque Elmsleii notam ad 777
consulat. |
67. Cf. Hipp. 785.
71. icf—i.e. ab εἰμὶ sum. Cave ab ἴσημι derivandum putes,
quod Brunckius fecisse videtur.
75. τῶν ἐνθάδε, id est, τοῦ, ὃν δεῖ μ᾽ ἀρέσκειν τοῖς ἐνθάδε. Sic in
Philoct. 682. οὔδ᾽ ἔσιδον μοιρᾷ τοῦδ᾽ ἐχθίονι συντυχόντα θνατῶν, 1. 6.
ἣ τόνδε. Eurip. Troad. 787. ‘ Talia nuutiari decet eum, qui immi-
sericors est, vestreque impudentiz quam sapientie studiosior.’ Si
dixisset ἀναιδείας μᾶλλον φίλος ἢ γνώμης, genitivus γνώμης e φίλος
penderet. Nunc a μᾶλλον regitur, ut etiam sic dicere potuerit
ἀναιδείαν τὴν ὑμετέραν μᾶλλον γνώμης φιλῶν. Cf. Hermann. ad Vig.
Ρ. 714.
80. xpouxor’— Hesych. πρόχοιο, προφασίξοιο, quo sensu hic ac-
cipiendum.’—Musgr. Cf. Herod. 1x. iv. ταῦτα δὲ τὸ δεύτερον ἀπέ-
στελλε, προέχων μὲν τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων οὐ φιλίας γνώμας, ἐλαίξζων δέ σφεας.
ὑτήσειν τῆς ἀγνωμοσύνης.
88 μὴ ᾽μοῦ legendum, non μή μου.
86. V. Porson. δὰ Eurip. Hec. 624. et Monk. ad Hip. 487.
Lycophron, 667. πλεῖον ἐξωλέστερος. Vulgatam tamen defendit
Trach. 1198, ubi forma πόλλὸν iterum invenitur.
92. Nunquam vertas ἀρχὴν, omnino, nisi in eadem sententia par-
ticulas οὐ vel μὴ reperias. Phil. 1232. ᾿Αρχὴν κλύειν ay οὐδ᾽ ἅπαξ
ἐβουλόμην. Electr. 480. Cf. Elermann. ad Vig. p. 718. ubi minus
recte intellexisse -videtur vir doctus Herod. 1. 9. ἀρχὴν γὰρ ἐγὼ
μηχανώσομαι : quem locum sic construas: imprimis rem totam tta
geram ut—Diversa chorda oberrat Machines χατὸ Krasvqanto4
54 Annctationes in Sophoclis Antigonam,
orationis Editor Oxoniensis p. 12. ἀρχὴν ὑπεύθυνον μὴ ἀποδημεῖν, δὲ
heec nota occurrit: ‘ ἀρχὴν reddas omiino adverbialiter :’ minime z
in illo loco ἀρχὴν valet magistratum.
' 96. Malim παίσομαι γὰρ οὖν.
_ 104, Sic v. 871. λάμπαδος ἱερὸν dupa, et Eur. Iph. T. 194.
ἱερᾶς ὄμμ᾽ αὐγᾶς de Sole dicitur. Sic etiam Luna noctis oculus
vocatur in Aisch. Theb. $86. Pers. 428. Tragicorum in his rebus
graiidiloquentiam ridet Aristoph. Nub. 284. “Oupa γὰρ aibépos
ἀκάματον σελαγεῖται Μαρμάρέαισιν by αὐγαῖς, quod monuit Valcke-
naer. Aniitiad. in Ammon. p. 76.
106. Aldus et Codd. vet. τὸν λεύκασπιν ᾿Αργόθεν, metro claudi-
cante. . Inepto additamento Triclinius defectum supplévit xpby.
Legit Brunck. τὸν. λεύκασπιν ἐξ ’Agydbev, quod improbat Hermann.
dd Viger. p. 812. epicorum poetarum usu in Sophoclem intruso
offerisus: qua ratio minus Erfurdtium movet: multa enim Fragict
ex Epicis adoptasse reperiuntur. Sed metrum Bruntkii mutatio-
ném repudiat: reponit igitur ἀπ᾿ ᾿Αργόθεν, quod probo. Aésch.
Theb. 89. Phoen. 1110. Μεύκασαιν εἰσορῶμεν ᾿Αργείων στράτον.
Wn Cf. Aisch. Agam. 48. Μέγαν ix θυμοῦ κλάζοντες “Aen Τρόπον
ἀϊγυπιώνγ. -
120. Te hoc modo post plures voces in priore sententie meéih-
bro positum multis exemplis confirmari potest. (Εά. T. 758.
Οὐ δῆτ᾽. ag’ οὗ yap κεῖθεν ἦλθε καὶ χράτη Σέ τ᾽ εἶδ᾽ ἔχοντα Λάϊόν τ᾽
ὀλωλότα. Phil. 141. Iph. T. 199, ab Elmsleio emendatur : ἔνθεν
τῶν πρόσθεν δμαθέντων Τανταλιδῶν ἐκβαίνει wove τ᾽ εἷς οἴκους, σπεύδει τ᾽
ἀσπούδαστ᾽ ἐπὶ σοὶ δαϊμῶν.
' 126. Musgravio assentior, qui ἀντιχάλῳ δῥάκοντ' de Thebanié
dictuth arbitratur, quod et docet Scholiastes, et satis per’ se perspi-
ctium est. Ejus tamen conjecturam δυσείρωτοιί tion probo: mehor
ést δυσχὰίρωμα, quod siguificat difficultatem objectam ab adversarid
serpente.
127. Cf. Blomfieldium ad sth. Pers. 882.
130. Xpucod καναχῇ ὑπεροπλίαις. Sic Brunck. prima posteriori#
vocabuli syllaia db crasin copul καὶ producta. Quare Erfurdt.
juiigit χρυσοῦ cum ῥεύματι, εἰ Hermanni emendationem, que ést
καναχῇ ὃ ὑπεροπκλίας, ih textum adnnittit.
134. Sic AEschylus de Capaneo Sept. Theb. 428. "ἔχει δὲ σῆμα;
γυμνὸν aie πυρφόρον.
135. 8.}}}}. Sept. Theb. 384. Masvowevos δ᾽ ἐπιπνεῖ λαοδάμας
patvew Ἐὐῤσέβειαν “Agns. |
138, Aldus hunc versum sic edidit: eye δ᾽ ἄλλᾳ' τὰ μὲν ἄλλαι
Tad’ ἐπ᾽ BAAois ἐπενώμά κ. τ. A. ubi, si legas ἄλλῳ pro ZAAg, omnia
sutit clara. Sic constftias : “ Sed aliter cecidit res. Hee in illum,
itla in alios; mala contulit Mars.” Infelicem Musgravii conjec-
ftitani pretereo. Brunckius sic constituit: Εἶχε δ᾽ ἄλλᾳ τὰ piv
ἄλλά, τὰ δ᾽ ex’ Addis, Hhegiectis antistrophicorum versuutn tiumeris.
Εἶχε 8 ἄλλα τὰ μὰν, ᾿Αλλὰ δ᾽ ἐπ’ ἄλλοις ἐκενώμα, Erfurdtins; qui;
ex Recensione Carol. Aug. Erfurdta.. 58.
τε Sensus est :” ait, “ alia alibi sors.” Vocibus τὰ μὲν poeta subjun-
git ἄλλα δὲ ut Pind. Olymp. 11. 158. Nem. vii. 51.
148. “ Τέλη hic valet rdéw. Cf. Eustath. p. 686. 19. “Σοφοκλῆς
δὲ καὶ τὰς στρατιωτικὰς παντευχίας ἐν ᾿ΑΛντιγόνῃ πάγχαλκοι τέλη λέγει,
διὰ τὸ τελεωτέρους ἴσως ποιεῖν τοὺς ἔχοντοις αὐτὰ, εἰ μή τι ἄρα καὶ ἐκεῖ
οὕτως ἐχάλεσε τὰ ὁπλιτικὰ τάγματα. Posterior interpretatio vera.”
Herm. m. Notis- Mas. et confirmatur, ut.ait Erfardtius, simili loco
in Asschyl.. Pers, 295. “Os τ᾽ ἐπὶ σκηπτουχίᾳ Ταχθεὶς, ἄνανδρον τάξιν
ἠρέμου Gavov.— Non opinor. Prior interpretatio mihi videtur melior..
149. Post Θήβα tantum sit virgula: namque ἀλλὰ γὰρ, ut docet
Eimsleius ad Eurip. Heracl. 481., valet ἀλλ᾽ ére:.—Verba sequen-
tia-sic conjunge: ἐκ πολέμων post bellum θέσθε λησμοσύγαν τῶν νῦν.
obliviscamins prasenttum malorum.
154. .Ο Θήβας δ᾽ ᾿Ελελίχθων Βάκχιοι ἄρχοι. Sic pessime ex
Scholiaste edidit Erfurdtius. Pra ἐλελέχθων, legendum, ἐλελίζων----
quod exhibent Aldus et veteres Codd.—Recte Schneiderus in
Lex. Gr. jungit ἐλελίζων ἄρχοι, “ leetum clamorem incipiat.”
163. Πολλῷ σάλῳ σείσαντες. Quam metaphoram adamat noster
poeta. Cid. R. 22. πόλις. γὰρ, ὥσπερ καὐϑτνὸς εἰσορᾷς, ἄγαν "Ηδη:
σαλεύει κἀνακουφίσαι κάρα Βυθῶν. ἔτ᾽ ody οἵα τὸ Φοινίου σάλου.
175; Πρὶν cum subjunctivo. vel optativo non usurpant Tragici,
nisi 10 priori:membro adsit negandi aut prohibendi significatio. Cf.
Med. 277. 677. Philoct. 451. 96.1. Cid. Tyr. 505, Trachin. 659.
Interdum, ut in: nostre loco abest. particule. negativa, sed ita tamen
ut maneat sensus negativus. Negativam particulam in adjectiyo:
ἀμήχανον includi:vix opus est ut moneam. Idem est, ac si dixisset,
οὐχ ἀν éxpasorss ut in Trach. 2. ὡς οὐκ ἂν alay ἐκμάθοις βροτῶν
πρὶν dy Θανῇ τις. Cf. Elmeleium ad Med. Φ41.. |
181. νῦν τε. καὶ πάλαι, “nunc ut olim. Alibi dixit sty τε xq) rene),
vid. not. ad Eleet. v. 676, Plato. Phed. p. 274. ἀεί τε καὶ. πότε,
tunc ut semper.” Scheef. —
184. Frach. 577. στέρδει γυναῖκα κεῖνος auti σοῦ, πλέον. Eurip.
Suppl 429. ὋὉ γὰρ χρόνος μάθησιν ἀκτὶ, τοῦ τάχους Κρείσσω
be to.
189. Cicero ad Famil. x11. Epist.%5. “Una navis est jam
bouorum omnium: quam quidem neq damus operam, ut rectam
teneamus.” τοὺς φίλους ποιούμεθα recte explicat Erf. ‘ comparamug
nebis eos amices, 4209 nobis. comparagnus.” Eadem ratione dicitur
τοὺς θεοὺς ἡγεῖσθαι, credere deos esse, quoe esse credi solitum est.
199. Sept. Theb. v. 579. Πόλιν πατφῴαν wel θεοὺς τοὺς ἐὀχχιενεῖς.
208. Recte, ut mibi quidem videtur, legit Erfurdtius ἀκκεκήρυχται
pro ἐκκεκήρυχθαι. 7
205. "Egy δ᾽ ἄδᾳητον. καὶ rods οἰονῶν δέμας Καὶ πρὸς κυνῶν Berziy,
αἰκιστόν τ᾽ ἰδεῖν. Sic legas et verba conjungas: din δέμας dbamner
net ἐδοστὸν : πιρὸς ---τ--οοϊμεισηόν τὸ aera ἰδεῖν qua via ompia patent.
Neugatur qui Schaliastes legens ainisevG—“ retro sal ὅλον xad.
papas τὸ μὲν οἰκισθέγεᾳ ὅλον" τὸ δὴ δέμας, μέρες ἢ τς
56 Annotationes in Sophoclis Antigonam,
207. κοὔποτ᾽ ἔκ γ᾽ ἐμοῦ, male Aldus—quem sequitur Erf.: non entas
dici potest pro ἐξ ἐμοῦ ys. Recte aliz editiones ἐξ ἐμοῦ.
213. In vulgata scriptura πού τ΄. quid sibi velit particula rs,
nemo exputaverit. Reponit igitur, et mea sententia recte, Erf.
τοῦτ᾽, quze vox interdum abundat, ut v. 699. Aid. Col. 504. ubi et
τόδε, v. 640. ,
218. rots’. Brunckius rod. legendum inquit ἄλλο τοῦδ᾽, aliud
prater hoc. Sed Porsonus ad Toupii Emend. p. 486. vix credit
ἄλλος Cum genitive usurpasse ‘['ragicos.
228. Recte usurpantur οἷ et ὅποι, cum in utroque membro est
motus significatio. Sic Eurip. Orest..1678. Χωρεῖτό νυν ἕκαστος,
οἷ προτοίσσομεν (sub. χωρεῖν.) Telepho 111.16 ὅποι χρήζεις (86. levers.)
234. xei σοι τὸ μηδὲν ἐξερῶ, δ᾽ ὅμως. Hunc versum sic exhibet
Erfurdtius ; minus recte; Brunckius tamen rectius, qui sic legit:
τέλος γε μὲν τοι δεῦρ᾽ ἐνίκησεν μολεῖν Dol κεὶ τὸ μηδὲν ἐξερῶ, φράσω δ᾽,
ὅμως. ubi languidum σοὶ, sic sensu ἃ reliqua versus parte divisum,
valde displicet. Scio equidem ἡμῖν tali modo pon Eunp. Helen.
1810. “Eoras rad οὐδὲ μέμψεται πόσις ποτὲ ᾿Ημεῖν. σὺ δ᾽ αὐτὸς,. ἐγγὺς
ὧν, εἴσει τάδε. sed illic emphaticum est ἡμῖν, quod .minus displicet.
Ajax, v. 331. Τέκμησσα δεινὰ, mai Τελεύταντος, λέγεις “Huw, τὸν
ἀνδρὰ διαπεφοιβάσθαι κακοῖς : quod melius ita punctum monet vir
doctus, Τέχμησσα δεινὰ, παὶ Τελεύταντος λέγεις, μιν τὸν ἄνδρα Stee
πεφοιβάσθαι κακοῖς, conferens ejusdem fabule v. 216. Μανίᾳ. γὰρ
ἁλοὺς ἥμιν ὁ κλεινὸς Νύκτερος Alas ἀπελωβήθη. In priore nostri
versus parte, lege σοὶ δ᾽, εἰ τὸ μηδὲν, conferens v. 76. σοὶ δ᾽, εἰ doxas
v. 467. Totum versum sie punctum volo Σοὶ δ᾽, εἰ τὸ μηδὲν ἐξερῶ,
φράσω δ᾽, ὅμως. | :
256. Hor. Carm. 1.28. Attu, nauta, vage ne parce malignus
arenz QOssibus et capiti nhumato Particulam dare :—precibus non
linquar inultis, Teque piacula nulla resolvent. . Quanquam festinas,
non est mora longa: licebit [njecto ter pulvere curras.
| 271. ἐγυγνώσκομεν aut tale’ verbum ante ὅπως ex nostre lingue
indole esset expectandum. Similis autem verbi omissio inveniter
ll. Γ. 315, 6. Hippol. 255.931. Med. 535-8.
276. Simili modo versum claudit Eurip. Pheen. 1633. .
277. Cf. Aisch. Pers. 258. Οἴμοι, κακὸν μὲν πρῶτον ὠγγέλλφιν
278. μὴ pro si, num, utrum. Sic v. 1236. ἀλλ᾽ εἰσόμεσϑα, py τι
καὶ κατάσχετον κρυφὴ καλύπτει. Cf. Heracl. 483. Troad. 176.
287. Post γῆν ἐκείνων virgulam insere, et cum prioribus conjunge.
206. Hipp. 487. Τοῦτ᾽ ἐσθ᾽, ὃ θνητῶν εὖ πόλεις οἰκουμένας Δόμους τ᾽
ἀπόλλυο'᾽-- ΘΟ
$16. Οὐκ οἷσθα καὶ νῦν, ὡς ἀνιαρῶς λέγεις; Erf. Sed legendum
puto: Οὗ καὶ οἶσθα, νῦν ὡς----
818. ‘ Simplicius et elegantius esse putabam cum Hermanne,
si tolleretur interpunctio post τὶ δὲ, que quidem et m cod. Au«
gust. et in ed, Ald. abest.’ Erf.: cut non assentior, Cum
ex Recensione Carol. Aug. Erfurdti. 57
Brunckio reponas: τί δε: ῥυῤμίζοις---ϑῖο Aj. 103. °H τοὐπίτριπτον
κίναδος ἐξήρου μ᾽ ὅπου ; Cad. T. 926.
S21. Οὔκουν τόδ᾽ ἔργον τοῦτο ποιήσας ποτέ. Sic membr. August.
et impressi. Br. e cod. E. dedit οὔκουν τόδ᾽ ἔργον εἰμὶ ποιήσας ποτὲ,
cui impugnat Erf. primum, quia εἰμὶ in cod. August. supra ποιήσας
scriptum est, tanquam interpretatio; deinde, quod ποτὲ supervaca-
neum est; denique quod omissum est pronomen ἐγὼ, sine quo
nullus cum precedentibus nexus. Legit ergo οὔκουν τό γ᾽ ἔργον
τοῦτο ποιήσας sym. Harum rationum vim haud curo, nec, ut vide-
tur, curavit Valckenaerius, qui et ποτὲ retinuit et ἐγὼ omisit, sic
legens :. οὔκουν ποτ᾽ ἔργον τοῦτο ποιήσας ἔχω : cui objicio, quod ἔχω,
cum aoristi participio conjunctum actionis durationem plerumque,
81 non semper, denotat: que significatio huic loco minime conve-
nit. cf. sup: v. 22, 32. 180. 786.
324. Brunck. recte ᾧ δοκεῖ ye: rectius tamen fuisset, si totum
versam sic legisset : Η δεινὸν, ᾧ δοκεῖ γε, τὸ Ψευδὴ δοκεῖν. Haud
infrequens est hc antecedentis ellipsis, ubi antecedens antea
memoratum ἔπ. Cf. v. 36. ἀλλ᾽ ὃς dv τούτων τι δρᾷ [τούτῳ] φόνον
πρόχεισθαι. 477. 581. Οἷς γὰρ ὧν σεισθῇ θεόθεν δόμος,᾽ ἄτας Οὐδὲν
ἐλλείπειν γενεᾶς ἐπὶ πλῆθος ἕρπον ; ubi constructio est: οὐδὲν drags
ἐλλείπει ὅρπον ἐπὶ πλῆθος γενεάς [τούτων] οἷς ἐν σεισῆῇ δόμος. Aj. 1069.
834. “ τοῦτο, i.e. xara τ.᾿ Br. Ut mibi videtur, male. Alludit
ad τοῦτο τὸ δεινὸν hoc solers animal; mecum ‘facit Schol. τοῦτο τὸ
γένος τῶν ἀνθρώπων.
* 8348, Vulgo περιφραδής. Sed Eust. p. 138, 24. veram lectionem
ἀριφραδὴς servavit. .
S55. ᾿Ανέμοεν φρόνημα de celeritate consilit wtelligendum male
docet Hermann.: nec tamen Brunckio assentior, qui pro sublimium
rerum sctentia sumendum putat. ‘Avéuoev Dorica est forma pro
ἠνόμοεν, quod Hermannum videtur latuisse. Per ἠνέμο. gp. tran-
quillitatem animi intelligo.—Pro ὀργὰς Musgr. conjicit, infelicis-
sime sane, ὀρχμῶς, 1. 6. ex Hesych. expositione, φραγμούς : ἀρχὰς
legit Schol.: sed non solicitanda sunt vulgata.* ᾿Αστύνομοι ὀργαὶ
civiles mores et omnino civilia instituta denotant. Affini significatu
ὀργὰς adhibet noster Aj. 640. Οὐκ ἔτι συντρόφοις ὀργαῖς ἔμπεδος.----
ἐδιδάξατο- hic valet αὐτὸς ἑαυτὸν ἐδίδαξεν. Cetera pauilo audacius sic
refingit Hermann. : δυσαύλων "Beis πάγων αἰθρίων. “ Defectum
duabus syllabis versum restituit Hermanni sagacitas, addita voce
ἴδρις» quod quidem Sophocleum sonat, et simile quid Schol. legisse
colligere licet ex illius interpretatione εὐαίσθητός tors καὶ οἰχοδομη-
μάτων. Preterea ipsam vocem ἴδρις ab eo expositam esse proba-
bilem facit Scholion ad Aj. 910, ubi voces xaos et ἀΐδρις declaran-
tur per ἀναίσθητος. Erfurdt. In reliquis haud pari fortuna rem
gessit: meliora sunt nec tentanda vulgata.
_ $67. Pro νόμους παρείρων rectissine et ingeniosissime scribit
Schaefer. νόμους γὰρ αἴρων, i.e. ἀνέχων, τιμῶν. V. Ariat. Ran. S18.
δὶ αἴρειν Glossee interpretantur ὑψοῦν, μεγαλύνεν. Bronce tran
58 Annotationes in Sophoclis Antigonam,
gow; Musgrav. φρουρῶν, Reisk. γεραίρων, Hermanni ῥύων silentid
pretermittenda censeo. Non autem male vulgatam lect. defene
dit: Erf. “ Verbum παρείρειν, quod preter hunc locum occurrit
in fragni. ASsehyli apud Longinum IIL. 1, in Xenoph. Symp. VI.
2, et Polyb. Hist. XVIII. 418. verti debet conserere, counectere.
Sic ergo construas: Qui leges patrie et sacratam Det justitiam
comnectit, i.e. qui leges patria tales esse vult, quales sancta
justttia conventant.
885. ‘Cum Schol. προὔβην legisse videatur, Christianus Car.
Reisigius, juvenis harum hiterarum studiosissimus, probabiliter
corrigit ποίᾳ ξύμμετρσς προὔβην τύχῃ. Scheef. Eandem lect., now
monito lectore, ad Heracl. 461. exhibet Elms.
887. Cf. Hip. 436. Al δεύτεραι δὲ φροντίδες σοφώτεραι.
888..Recte vulg. Conjicit ex Suida Erf. σχολῇ γ᾽ ἄν. Sed
Hted, ut mihi quidem videtur, ad Ged. T. 433. solum spectat ; ubi
poetam nostratem laudat Elms. Titus Andron. Act. 1. Sc. 2. FH
trust by leisure him that mocks me once.
$95. Punge post ἄλλου. In v. 399. pro καθευρέθη legas καθῃρέθη;
In v. 404. ἡρέθη scribendum recte putat Schef. ad Greg. Cormth.
p: 582.
400. ἐπίστασαι reponendum putat Hermann. in Not. Mas.
Frequenter nuncii in peroranda narratione hac formula: utuntur
ἐάντ᾽ ἔχεις λόγον, πάντ᾽ ἀκήκοας, et similibus.
_ 407. ἦ κατείχετο νέκυς emendatio est clarissima Hermanni. ‘ Are
ticulus,’ ait m not. Mss. ‘ versum finiens auribus est molestus:
neque unquam alibi Soph. sic collocat. Sapius quidem apud
Soph. articulus in precedente versu, nomen in sequente, est, sed
semper interjecta aliqua particula vel. adjectivo. Cid. T. 553,
995, 1056. CEd. C. 290, 351, 577,’ &c. Brunck. confiteor in
Cid. FP. 1266. legisse : twa δέ γ᾽ ἢ Τλήμων ἔκειτο, δεινὰ τἀνθέγδ' ἦν
δρᾶν. Sed illa et seqq. mirum in modum corrupit. Rectius Elael,
reponit : ἐπεὶ δὲ γῇ ἔχοιτο τλήμων, δεινά γ᾽ ἦν τἀνθένδ᾽ ὁρῶν. -
412. εἴ τις τοῦδ᾽ ἀφειδήσοι πόνου. Genuina lect. Cf. simillimam
constructionem apud Phil. 376. 6
16. ἄγος jubet legi Hermann. quo proprie significari putat
quod quis stupet et a quo quis pre ‘new refuge. Sed ea significa-
tio cum Erfurdt. vereor ne nulla possit auctoritate comprobart.
Nec Erfurdt. assentier, cur οὐράνιον ἄχος esse videtur ingens ma-
lum, quamvis haud ignorem ἱερὸς in illo sensu interdum usurpari ut
aped Hip. 1201. Cych. 264. H. x. 407, ἱερὸς ἰχθύς. Blomf. πὶ
loss. ad Pers. 379, de nostro loco optime disputat. ‘ Οὐρ. aos
absurde post Hesych. et Phot. VV. DD. intelligunt, pulverem ad
caelum sublatum, cam sit calamitas divinitus immissa. Aj. 195.
dray οὐρανίαν, ubi Schol. τὴν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ πεμφθεῖσαν.
ΠΣ}. πικρῶς conjicit Bothius, vere, εἰ opinatur τὰ Indictum
. Sic Aj. 628. olerpd Sevsbos ἀηδοῦς “Hees ogog. Ia
bot levo sings eat chu pl. sre be us
ex Recensione Carol. Aug. Erfurdtii. 59
423: CF. Porson. ad Hec. 302. Blomf. ad Pers.-425.
428. Repone ἄρδων. Cf. Pers. 408, 811.
429. De libaminibus, que mortuis fiebant, v. Gloss. Blomf. ad
Pers. 616. ,
449. ‘ Verba τούσδε νόμους non intelligi possurit, nisi de iis -legie
bus, quarum paullo ante vv. 444, 6, 7, mentio facta erat. Deinde,
quee ‘Thebanis date fuérant, quo jure ἐν ἀνθρώποισιν condite vocan-
tur: fortasse pro τούσδε scribendum τούς. Erf. Muibi quidem
recte, aliter vero Schefero videtur judicasse. ‘ Tovode νόμους st.
θάπτεσθαι τοὺς νεκροὺς, ut recte Schol.: legem enim justorun thom
tuis persolvendorum intelligi oportere satis docet versus proxime
antecedens. . Sic autém exithie magnanima piiella Creontis illud,
καὶ δῆτ᾽ ἐτόλμας τούσδ᾽ ὑπερβαίνειν νόμους, respondet, tanquam paro-
dra ridéns.’
451. * A sensu hujus loci Brunckius in versione aberravit, verba
θνήτὸν ὄνθ᾽ ὑπερδραμεῖν, quee manifesto de se dicit Antigone, referens
ad Créontem.’ Erf: Sed propter plures causa’ false. Primo, locus
ex Eurip. Ion. ab Herm. ad Vig. p. 713. depromtas non defen-
dit hanc loctitionem,: θνητὸν ὄνθ᾽, si quis eam dese ab Antigone
usurpatam intelligat: illic enim recte legit Musgr. Kal πῶς ra
χρείσσαι, θνατὸς ὀὖσ᾽ ὑπερδραμῶ ;—Preterea, notus canon Dawesi-
anus: ‘Si mulier de se loquens,’ &c. Erfurdtii opinioni adversa-
tur.— Deinde ὑπερεῥέχειν non ést idem quod ὑπερβαίνειν ciolare, sed
vincere, superiorem esse, vixgy, xpareiy, denotat. Cf. Valck. ad Phten.
581.—Denique, 81 θνητὸν ὄνθ᾽ ad Creonta referemus, ellipsin τοῦ ine
ante θνήϊξὸν ὄνθ᾽, que haud sane frequens est, vitamus.
454. Recte in notis Mss. Hermannuse ‘ Repugnat sensui γῦν
γε: scribe viv τε χἀχϑὲς; ut viv τὲ καὶ πρῴην Aristoph. Ran. 726.’
Conferatur Cid. R. 865, 8c. ὧν νόμοι ἐρόκεινται, Sic.
461. V. Blomfield. in Gloss. ad Pers. 1013. Quoad sententiam
conferendus Cesar apud Sallust. Cat. 11. 20. In luctu atque misee
ruis mortem erumnarum requiem, non cruciatumi, esse.
bo wag οὐδὲν nullius momenti. Sic v. 35. Agam. 237. Orest.
569. . ἐὺς
. 482. Elmsleio ad Heracl. 661, scribendum videtur ἡ τὰρ᾽ tya—.
In versu proximo legendum est ἀνατί. ΝΕ
485. Hic et Aj. 108. ὅρκιος pro ἑρκεῖος dat Erf. Sed, ut ejus
verbis utar, ‘ ἑρκεῖος procul dubio rectius est.’ Cf. Choeph. 559,
569. Troad. 17, 483. ,
491. Recte conjungit Musgrav. χλοπεὺς cum πρόσϑεν ἥρησθαι, ut
constructio sit: ὁ δὲ θυμὸς τῶν ἐν σκότῳ μηδὲν ὀρθῶς τεχνωμένων φιλεῖ"
Hp. ἧ. xA.: mens autem eorum, gui in tenebris pravi aliquid moliun-
tur; solet prits malefica convict, i.e. maleficii. Paullo aliter
vertit H. Steph. ‘ Mens eorum, qui aliquid sceleris clam moliun-
tur, quum alioget stt illius occultatrix, solet tamen prius deprehendi,
je. solet ecorum vultus, qui scelus moliuntur, certis quibusdam
indiciis. detegere mentem et trepidam. conscizitiam. ἐοτυτὰ qua οδὰ-
60 Annotationes in Sophoclis Antigonam,
quid,’ ὅς. Huc pertinere videntur hi senarii Menandri : ‘O cunere-
ρῶν αὑτῷ τι, κἂν ἢ θρασύτατος, “H σύνεσις αὑτὸν δειλότατον εἶναι ποιεῖ.
Cicero de Fin. I. £tsi vero impietas molita quippiam est, φμαηκοὶξ
occulte fecerit, nunguam tamen confidit id fore semper occultum.
Plerumque improborum facta primo suspicio tnsequitur, deinde
sermo, atque tum accusator, tum juder.
498. Elmsleius ad Cid. R. 322. scribendum putat dpior” εἴη.
502. Brunckii conjecturam τοῖσδε pro rovrosg in textu recipit
Erfurdt.: mea quidem sententia male. Libri omnes τούτοις. Si
quid mutandum, τούτοις ταὐτὸ legerem, quamquam haud ignoro
ταὐτὸ pro ταὐτὸν non valde frequentasse Tragicos. Legitur tamen,
ut notat Elmsl. ad (id. R. 734. apud Trach. 425. Choeph. 208.
In versu sequenti melius legeretur ἐγκλείοι.
513. ὁ κατθανὼν νέκυς ineptum Brunckio videtur, quum de utro-
que fratre perinde intelligi possit. Sed, ut recte monet Erf., uter
fratrum significetur, e nexu satis apparet. Vulgatum satis de-
fendit v. 26. τόνδ᾽ ἀθλίως θανόντα πολυγείκους νέχυν. Od. A. 87. 490.
γεχύεσσι καταφβθιμένοισι.
517. Ὅμως ὅ γ᾽ “Αδης τοὺς νόμους ἴσους ποϑεῖ, post Brunck. edidit
Erf. Malim ὅμως δδ᾽---ποθεῖν. “OF Ald. et ὅδε ποθεῖν dicetur ut in
5. C. Th. 368. ὅδε---μαθεῖν. Hip. 294. γυναῖκες αἵδε συγκαθίσταναι
γόσον ; ubi male Porsonus conjicit συγκχαθίσταιντ᾽ ἄν. Cf. que
notantur v. 732.—De sententia ‘Lucian, Dial. Mort. xxv. 2. "Ioe-
τιμία γὰρ ἐν “Adou καὶ ὅμοιοι πάντες: et Dial. xxiv. Chiron: τὴν ἐν
“Abou ἰσοτιμίαν, ut rem plane popularem laudat.
524. Eodem modo.supprimitur verbum v. 618. 5. C. Th. 868.
Hip. 170. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἦδε τροφὸς γεραιὰ πρὸ θυρῶν —
526. Hip. 172. στυγνὸν δ᾽ ὀφρύων νέφος αὐξάνεται. ᾿
529. Male legit Brunck. ὑφημένη. ᾿γφειμένη repone, quod ne ille
quidem prorsus damnandum putat, et cum Musgrav. verte furtim
subrepens; non cum Brunckio, qui locum ex Herc. Fur. 71, ubi
1D sensu τοῦ ταπεινὸς Occurrit, laudat.
. 535. Eandem constructionem in Prom. 339. notat Hermann,
Πάντων μετασχὼν καὶ τετολμηκὼς ἐμοί.
541. Post λόγοις recte monet Erf. subaudiendum esse μόνον,
Cf. Hip. 359, et ibi Porsonum. ἢ |
550. Τί δῆτ᾽ av, ἀλλὰ viv,—Edd. ommes, quasi a. viv per nunc
saltem interpretandum esset. Sic autem positum mihi valde frigi-
dum videtur: nec loca, ubi ἀλλὰ in hoc sensu occurrit, vulgatam
defendunt. Electr. 411. "2 θεοὶ πατρῷοι ξυγγένεσθέ γ᾽, ἀλλὰ viv.
1018—Leyerem τί δῆτ᾽ av ἄλλο viv—Cf. v. 218. Τί δῆτ᾽ ὧν ἄλλο
τοῦτ᾽ ἐπεντέλλοις ἔτι:
556. Malim καὶ μὴν ἴση νῷν y’—et 1042. καὶ νῦν λέγεις--- Ὁ]
vulgo legitur καὶ μήν. Particule enim καὶ μὴν, si γε una alterave
voce interposita non inducatur, adventum nove persone. semper
indicant: quod bene notum.
566. Cf. Pors. ad Or, 1051.
ex Recensione Carol. Aug. Erfurdtii. 61
567. Recte Erf. ἀρώσιμοι. Foemininum γύη Atticis ignotum
fuisse cum Elmsl. ad Heracl. 839. jamdudum putavi.
571. Locis a Brunckio prolatis addas Hip. 113.
587. Recte in textu Jacobsii emendationem admisit Erf., tum
quod δυσάνεμον θῖνα post δυσπνόοις Θρήσσῃσι πνοαῖς egregie langueret,
tum quod antiqui poete non solent epitheta pluria per copulam
jungere. Legant igitur futuri editores θῖνα καὶ δυσανέμῳ Στόνῳ
βρέμουσιν ἀντιπλῆγες ἀκταί.
592. Repudianda est Brunck. lect. quam male defendit Electr.
142. Facillime excidere potuit τις, ut notat Erf. quod ipsum additur
Cid. R. 921. Lege igitur cum Erf. ἔχει λύσιν τινά.
597. Legendum ’Epivis. Cf. Blomf. in Gloss. ad Prom. 53.
598. κατάσχοι frustra tuentur Erf. et Herm. ad Vig. p. 784;
lingue ratio postulat κατάσχῃ. In Electr. 800 cum Bothio lege
κατάξι'᾽ ἄν. |
605. οὐδέν᾽ ἕρπειν legendum puto. Sic intellige: legem hanc—
sc. neminem mortalium in vita procul a calamitate incedere—
satis comprobant tempus instans et futurum et prateritum; quasi
verba essent νόμος ὅδε, ὅτι οὐ. θ. ἕ. ἐν β. πάμ. γ᾽ ἑ. ἀ. ἀρκ. ἐπὶ τὸ ἔπ.----
Misere nugantur editores: nec scio an melius profecerim.
- 615. Recte reponit Elmsl. τῷ δὲ μέν: forma ἔμμεν pro εἶναι
ut suspicor offensus. Hoc enim piv, cui nullum respondit δὲ,
‘non insolens est.—Sententia notissima: Quem Jupiter vult per-
dere, prius dementat. Schol. versus seqq. profert: Ὅτσαν δ᾽ ὁ
δαίμων ἀνδρὶ πορσύνῃ κακὰ, Tov νοῦν ἔβλαψε πρῶτον, ᾧ βουλεύεται.
fEsch. Frag. quod servavit Plut. de Aud. Poet. p. 63. Θεὸς
μὲν αἰτίαν φύει βροτοῖς, Ὅταν κακῶσαι δῶμο παμπήδην θέλῃ" Ly-
curgus contra Leocrat. p. 213. ed. Tayl. οἱ γὰρ θεοὶ οὐδὲν πρότε-
poy ποιοῦσιν ἣ τῶν πονηρῶν ἀνθρώπων τὴν διάνοιαν mapayougs καὶ μὴ
δοχοῦσι τῶν ἀρχαίων τινὲς ποιητῶν, ὥσπερ χρησμοὺς γράψαντες τοῖς
ἐπιγενομένοις, τάδε τὰ ᾿Ιαμβεῖα καταλιπεῖν; “Otay γὰρ ὀργὴ δαιμόνων
βλάπτῃ τινὰ, Τοῦτ᾽. αὐτὸ πρῶτον ἐξαφαιρεῖται φρενῶν Τὸν γοῦν τὸν ἐσθλὸν,
εἰς δὲ τὴν χείρω τρόπει Γγώμην, ἵν᾽ εἰδῇ μηδὲν ὧν ἁμαρτάνει.
623. ὑπέρτερον melius. Sic 5. C. Th. 525, Choeph. 103. De
hac περὶ τῶν ἀφανῶν loquendi formula cf. Hip. 346. Οὐ μάντις εἰμὶ
Tahavy γνῶναι σαφῶς, ubi Monk. laudat Hec. 737. Heliodori Thea-
genes Cnemonem sic alloquitur i. p. 97. πῶς ταῦτα dy εἰδείην , οὐ
γὰρ δὴ μαντικόν we τόδε σπηλαῖον ἀνέδειξε.
,. 624. ἄρά por κλύων, Τῆς μελλονύμφου πατρὶ λυσσαίνων πάρει ; Sic
‘legendum puto. Vulgo ἄρα μὴ κλύων, que et Musgr. et Herm.
perabsurda questio apparet : haud tamen Blomf. qui ad 5. Th.
° 198. nostrum locum defendit, citans Soph. El. 446. 5. Th. 108.
Sed hzc ἃ nostro loco sunt paullum diversa: conjecturam igitur
ab Herm. ad Vig. p. 789. propositam in textum reciperem ; deii,
τῆς μελλογύμφου cum λυσσαίνγων jungo, ut Alc. 5. οὗ δὴ χολωθεὶς, ubi
‘G2 Amnnotationes in Sophoclis Antigonam,
. yap aut ἕνεκα supprimi recte monet Monkius. In versu ultimo
im δρῶμεν φίλα.
629. Recte Muagr. ἀξιῴώσοται----λδεῖζον conjicit, quod tamen non
.probat Erf. Rectius fecisset, s1 virgulam post φέρεσθαι delevigset,
ut constructio esset: μεῖζ. σοῦ x. 4. Languidior est sensus, 61 σοῦ
%. 4. pro genitivo absolute, ut alunt, posito accipias.
| 682. ἐστάναι male-Erf. Cum Schef. malim ἰστάναι : ‘ sic gx-
matum esse oportet, ut postponas”— ᾿
645. Quid sibi velit τε, prorsus ignoro. Legerem cum Schutz. ad
Choeph. 194. ὡς εἰς τὰ δυσμενῆ. Sententia est similis v. 802-8. .
652. δῆτα male Br.; nam, ut recte monet Schef., in hoc
ticularum complexu δῆτα nunquam conspicitur. Recte igitur .Erf.
εἰ γὰρ δὴ τά yf ἐγγενῆ. "άκοσμα θρέψω nutriam ut sint parum
. abedientes. Post verba sgpe ponitur adjectivi accusativus, qyi
effectum ab actione productum denotat. Elect. 1297. toyov ὀργὰν
ἄναυδον. Phoen. 446. διαλλάξασαν ὁμογενεῖς φίλους. Med. 860.
séykas χερὰ φοινίαν. Heracl. 575. δίδασκε σόφους doce, μὲ sint
sapientes. Aut. 788. Cesar Bel. Gal. 1V. iti. Multo Aumiliores |
inferioresque redegerunt.—N ostrum locum cum Heath. verte: ‘ $i
hos, qui nataltbus mihi conjuncti sunt, parum morigeros habuero
τείϊφμον, guibus nulla mecum generis necessitudo, non pmpino
. 0.” .
655—9. Hos quatuor versus ad Seidleri mentem optime huc
-retraxit Erf., vulgo positos post v. 663. .
662. τοῦδε χρὴ χλύειν, ἔξω ἴ.-τοδεὰ ut recte se habeat στήσειε, DFO
presenti χρὴ repone preteritum χρῆν. De diversa horum verborym
significatione, v. Elmsl. ad Heracl. 959. | 7
669. Xotews malum pro κοῦ τοι, quad tamen stare potest, ai ex
Eustathio p. 759, 39. legimus γυναικῶν : mipime, 81 yuvesxds Cum
editionibus vulgatis retinemus. Tos enim generali, non specifice,
observationi prefigitur. Locum sic construas; ‘“ Sic enim. pugnare
-necesse est pro is que. decreta et edicta sunt: nec sinendum est
ut nos a foermiois vincamur.” Non enim ante ἡσσήτεα est supplen-
dum ex versu precedenti τὰ χοσμούμενα, ut putat Musg. Eleganter
enim Attici verbalia in τεὸν numero plurali efferunt, quod ubservatum
fuit a Conntho de Dial. Att. ὃ Ixm. Cf. Anstoph. Plut. 1084-5.
“Ὅμως δ᾽ ἐπειδὴ καὶ τὸν οἶνον ἠξίους Πίνειν. ξυνεχποτέ᾽ ἐστί σοι. καὶ τὴν
spoya. Lysist. 124, 450. ᾿Ατὰρ οὐ γυναικῶν οὐδέποτό γ᾽ ἡσσητέα, ubi
nostrum locum parodia ridet facetus ille conncus.
673. Conjicit, nec male, Scheterus βεβλάμμεθα sc. τὸν ναῦν.
. Facillimam esse mutationem non negabunt paleugraphie periti.
Vulgatam tamen defendit v. 1218. ἢ θεοῖσι κλέπτομαι, quod Scho-
hastes interpretatur: ἢ ἀπατῶμαι ὑπὸ τῶν θεῶν. Comparat Erf. Eur.
ΠΡ μη. 500. Quud ex nustro fuisse derivatum non dubitat Valcke-
-naerius: nam aliquot ann.s ante actam esse Sophoclis Antigonam,
quam Euripidis committerentur Phoenisse.
678. Recte fecit Erf. qui in textum Musgr. conjecturam χάτέρᾳ
ef Recensione Carol. Aug. Enfuedhi. +68
pro οἰὐτόρῳ admisit.. Seholiastes legisse videtur ‘ydripws; unde
corruptum est χάτέρῳ, ut monet Hermannus in Notis Mas.
Totus'locus sic logendus : -Févorro μὲν τῶν ycrien καλῶς ὄχον. Sen-
sus est: Tu guin recte dicus, non .negaverim, quanquam et alia
-vaisone recie fortasse se habeat ves. ᾿
607. μὴ wvmale. Legendum μή wy, et.v. 1318. .Cf. Soph, Hl.
316. 824. JEsch. Prom. 516. Suppl. 206. 5. ‘Th.-228. et que
abi .annotavit Blomf. .
718. ‘ An subaud. [κατὰ] πάντα ἢ vel etiam sine ellipsi regi potest
ab ἐπιστήμης πλέω. Musgr. Neutrum mihi placet: τὸν ἄνδρα. πάντ᾽.
vigum quemque. " | .
714. τὰἀῦτα. In his formulis adamant Tragici. Prom.
520. Med. 368. .
722. Male .post céSav interrogationis notam -delet Erf. ΟΓᾺρ
in interrogationibus usurpatum Anglice vertendum then, ut v. 724.
727. Hunc yereum et superiorem sic construas: ‘ Non atatem
magts.quam opera decet respicere.’ 4 Itane est? anne officivm θεῖ
-duum srobedientes colere.’ Nam in hoc loco ἔργον ἐστὶ non popi-
tur, ut putat -Erf. pro χρεία ἐστὶ opus est. : Concedo equidem apyd
A). 18. sic usurpari: sed in nostro loco non de necessitate, sed.de
-officio agitur, υἱ ἴῃ Phil. 15. ἀλλ᾽ ipyov ἤδη σὸν τὰ λοῖφ᾽ ὑπηρετεῖν.
Lysistr. 315. Hujus formule exempla. congesait Valck. ad.Rhoen.
"447. .ἕ Recte observat: Musgr. ‘.in.dvadimadoeow non semper cavisse
-yidentur veteses, ut yox-repetita eandem utrobique potestatem con-
retur. .
729. Sic:Phil..386. “Πόλις γάρ ἐστι πᾶσα τῶν ἡγουμένων. Gd. R,
917, δὶ -Aristoph. Eq. 860. citat Brunck. 3
. 73@..doE. συμμωχεῖν, quod recte in notis suis defendit, quamvis
in textum -non admiserit Frfuedt. Similem constructionem prebent
‘rach. 1240. Pers. 194, 570, τυτθὸν ἐκφυγεῖν dvaxr’ Αὐτὸν gs
ἀκούεμεν. Sismiles constructiones ex Herod. et Platone protulit
: Erfardt. ;. unde potest defendi mea conjectura ad ν. 517.
734. ‘ Pors. ad-Gr. 30.1. pro ὦ swyxaxiere legi jubet ὦ χαῖ
“κάκιστε ex: Plut. I. 483.. Cui scripture2 non modo obstat Trach.
-3126. wbi Hyllum-filiam itidem alloquitur, ὁ sayx., sed multo
magis etiam. loquepdi usus, ex quo.dicendum fuerat ὦ. κάκιστα παῖ.
ὦ enim articuli constructionem sequitur. QObverti quidem possunt
duo loci ex ipso petiti:Seph. El. 86. ὦ φάος ὡγνὸν,. οἱ Cid. R. 58.
.@ παῖδες oixrgol..verum tantum abest ut illam labefactent regulam,
wt stabiliant potiuset contirment. Rationem sic declaravit Herm.
-ad Hom. Hymn. in Apol. 14. ‘ Non dicitur of παῖδες οἰκτροὶ, sed
of οἰκτροὶ waidsc.. At quuin of οἰκτροὶ x. dicimus, primanum est ὀϊκτροὶ,
quum οἱ παῖδες of οἶκ. potius est οἰκτροί. Ltaque qui ὦ olwrpol παῖδες
dicit, museros allvquitur qui sunt pueri: qui ὦ. παῖδες οἰκτροὶ pueros
- qui -sunt :misesi. . Aperta est caussa, qua-hec formula articuli ex-
emplum deserat, neque ὦ παῖδες &-olxrpol dicatur.’ .Recte. et
64 Annotationes in Sophoclis Antigonam,
ingeniose, In hoc loco Porsoni mutatio est supervacanea.—tia δίκης
lav πατρί. |
789. Οὗ τ᾽ ἂν ἕλοις ἥσσω γε τῶν αἰσχρῶν ἐμέ. Optima lect. quam
sprevisse non debuit Erf. in secunda hujusce fabule edit.
748. Simili modo adhibetur τις Aj. 1188. Ran. 552. lon. 1811.
Hip. 876. S. Th. 408. Cf. Valck. ad Hip. 725. ubi simili sensu
usurpatur ὕγερος. :
746. Ni fallor, κλαίων est merus typographicus error. KAday
enim scribendum monuit Pors. Pref. p. iv. et obtemperantem 510]
habet Erf.
750. De adverb. ἄληθες v. Brunck. ad Ran. 840. Verbo χαίρων,
quando gui pane immunis est significat, notandum ἀλλὰ cum οὐ,
οὔδε et plerumque οὔτι, semper conjungi.
757. Recte vertit Musgr. ut sit τοῖς θέλουσι ξυνεῖναι.
758, 9. Quod ad sententiam cf. Ged. R. 1073-5.
773. Libri omnes dvixere μάχαν : recte, ut mibi quidem videtur.
Conjecturam Tib. Hemsterhusii ἀμάχαν᾽ in textum recipit Br.
quam jure suo rejicit Musgr. metri causa. Erf. lect. Avixer’ ἀμά-
yar’ "Epos Hermanno debetur. Sed post dvix. epith. ἀμάχ. valde
frigeret.
774. κτήμασι pro βοσκήμασι sumit Br., nomini κτῆμα significa-
tionem tribuens, que nullo confirmari potest exemplo. Displicet
etiam Erfurdtio, cujus humanitatem non satis mirari potes, bellua-
rum cum puellis consociatio. Per ὃς ἐν χτήμασι πίπτεις intelligen-
dum est gu? divitesincadis. Husckius in Anal. Crit. p. 49. apposite
confert Propert. xiv. 15—22.—Sic, ut monet Erf., oppositionem
continent versus, laxiorem quidem, sed ipsa laxitate sua tanto simi-
liorem jis que statim sequuntur: ‘ verbis enim ὃς ἐν χτήμ. πίπ.
formidolosa Dei potentia, proximis autem versibus blandissimum
ejus lenocinium graviter ac venuste describitur.’
776. Cf. Hip. 449. &c. . .
779. Kal σε οὐδεὶς φύξιμος Br.; sed metri causa. φυλάξιμρς
rescribit Erf. Hance tamen entend. satis dammant ipstus verba:
¢ Quamquam autem φύλ. alias eum denotat gui defendi custodirique
potest, nec, quod ego quidem sciam, activa potestate usquam re-
curnit, nihil tamen obstat quominus de eo accipiamus, gui devitare
potis est.’ Plurima, ut opinor, obstant. . .
783. ἀδίκους recte servat Erf. quem videsis.
787. Hunc locum perperam vertit Br., nec melius rem gessit
Erf, Construas: Vincit, sc. Hamonem, manifesto ex oculis ejus
erumpens desideritum formosa sponse, i. e. iy. ving. ἐν. BA. parem
potestatem habens magnis tuter principes judiciis.
795. Cf. Pors. ad Pheen. 381.
796. i.e. ἐνύτουσαν Boy [πρὸς] θάλαμον. Cf. Aj. 606."Ers μέ wal’
ἁνύσειν τὸν ἀπότροπον, τὸν ἀΐδηλον "Aday, Or, 1701. Suppl. 1152.
Hemsterhus, ad Plut. 607. a,
On the. Particle ἄν. 65
802. Malim πάγκοινος “Adys. ;
813. Bene interpret. Schol. μετ᾽ ἐλευθερίας τεθνήξει, ἰδίῳ καὶ καινῷ
ψόμῳ περὶ τὸ τέλος χρησαμένη. Ubi recte contra Musgr. observat Erf-
glossam ἰδίω νόμω non ad αὐτόνομος sed ad μόνη δὴ θνητῶν pertinere.
Αὐτόν. bene explicat Schol. per’ ἐλευθερίας. ;
825. Hic usus τοῦ κατευνάζειν non infrequens. V. Aid. T. 961.
Hip. 559. Hec. 477.
837. Locis.a Musgr. laudatis addas Antig. 149. Τῷ πολυαρ-
βάτῳ ἀντυχαρεῖσα Θηβᾷ. _ ἘΝ
840. Legendum ex Schol. ἕρμα. Similem errorem ex Oppian.
Hal. iv. 447. delevit Blomf. ad S. Th. 552. 5
843. Optime confert Erf. Sup. 968.
850. En transitus a genitivo ad accusativ. Cf. Aj. 870. ‘HM.
Ἰδοὺ, ἰδοὺ, δοῦπον αὖ κλύω τινά. “HM. ᾿Ημῶν γε, ναὸς κοινόπλουν ὁμιλίαν.
Dem. ΟἹ. B. 7. Οὔ ros σωφρόνων οὐδὲ γενναίων ἐστὶν ἀνθρώπων ἐλλεί-
ποντᾶς τι τῶν τοῦ πολέμου, εὐχερῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα ὀνείδη φέρειν. Male
igitur μερίμνας pro accus. sumunt Musgr. et Eff.
55. 1.6. ares ματρώων λέκτρων. Sic v. 785. νεῖκος ἀνδρῶν ξύναι-
μον. Hip. 335. σέβας γὰρ χεῖρος αἰδοῦμαι τὸ σόν. Kc.
867. αὐτόγνωτος explicat Erf. ‘qui ex sua tantum animi senten-
tia unumquidgue agit, aut ut Angli dicimus, se/f-willed. Hate
Schef. ‘ Erf. interp. unice probanda. Etym. Mag. Αὐτόγ. ΣῈ δ᾽
αὖτ. ὥλεσσεν ὀργά. “Σοφοκλῆς, ἀντὶ τοῦ αὐβαίρετος καὶ ἰδιογνώμων
τρόπος. Bene comparat Schneid. αὐτογνώμων. Idem significat adro-
βούλητος : quod adjectiv..in Lexica infer. Zonaras Lex. I. 621.
ἐθελοντὴς----ὁ. αὐτοβούλητος, αὐτοπροαίρετος, Addere potuisset αὐτό-
βουλος ex Aisch. 5. Th. 1055.
ene
ON THE PARTICLE “an.
BY GEORGE DUNBAR, F.R.S.E.
ὸ
Most of the confusion and uncertainty observed in the writings
of philologists respecting the application and meaning of particles,
arose from a total ignorance of their original powers, existing com-
monly in_the form of verbs; an ignorance by which various sig-
nifications altogether different from each other were ascribed to
several of them. In none of them is this more remarkable thau
in the different meanings they have given to the particle ἂν. oe
NO. XXXII, οἱ J. VOL. AVAL.
66 On the Particle ἄν.
most common but least understood of all the conjunctions.’
Hoogeveen, the moat laborious and diligent of all these philalo-
gists, has endeavoured to explain its power in the following words;
““ Particule ἀν potestas ἀοριστολογικη, ubi in verbis versatur, suum
ipsis actum tollit, et quidem quadruplici modo. ‘Tollitur enim
actus, ubi is redigitur vel ad potentiam, vel ad voluntatem, vel ad
officium, vel denique ad tempus futurum.” He then proceeds
to give examples of these in their order, without ever reftecting
that such different significations must depend upon the context,
and that the meaning of the particle must be simply one wherever
it occurs. This will be rendered, ἢ think, evident by endeavouriog
to trace this - particle to its.original source, and by establishing. its
primary signification from several examples.—Lennep derives it
from ἄνω, the same, he says, as avuw, perficio, from which algo he
derives the preposition ava. “ὁ Hinc jam dy,” says he, “‘ quasi ab
ἀνα vel obsoleto ἀνος vim accepit particule expletive et potentialia,”
&c. This is not at all satisfactory, as 1s the case with many othess
of Lennep’s derivations, and therefore we must endeavour to trace
it to some other source.—It is evident that ἀν and éay are neasly
connected together both in point of form and signification. *Eay,
I imagine, is not derived, as Scheide and Eloogeveen suppose, from
. ἐ or εἰ and ay, but from the verb éaw, stno, permitto: perhaps the
᾿ imperative with the y added, or more probably a contracted partie
ciple-neuter of the passive voice. "Av was likely formed in 8
similar manner from the original verb aw, or ds, or anys, the same
with &@ or ἕω, mitio, sino. It was not unusual with the Greeks
to prefix the ε to several simple verbs and nouns, as Lennep hag
remarked in his Analogia Lingue Grecw. He has produced
several examples: as, éxw from κιω, vado; ἔερση from époy, ros;
éedya from ava, spolia. ‘To these might be added a variety of others,
such as where the ¢ 1s prefixed forthe temporal as well as the sylla-
bic augment, ἐαγον, ἕωρων, ἐελπιζον, Zomatov, &c. According to this
analogy, it is not unlikely that iew was formed from 4, the root of
the particle ἂν, signifying to give, grant, allow.—lIt is very τὸ»
markable that the Anglo-Saxons had a verb of the same significa-
tion, viz. nan, from which the imperative ἄν was formed, signifying
grant, allow: a word now become almost obsolete in the English
language, but which was frequently used in the time of Shakspeare,
as Horne Tooke has remarked in his Diversions of Purley. The
particle an among the Latins also was probably of the same
amily. ,
Several examples might be produced to show that ἀν and iad
(REREAD
" For a more detailed account of this particle, I must refer the reader to
ἃ small treatise “ on its Origin and General Power,” printed with the Ana-
lysis.of the Greek verb. |
On the Particle dy. 67
have nearly the same meaning, particularly when the former is com-
srued with the subjunctive mood. The following will, I judge,
be sufficient: thus Demosthenes, ἀν δ᾽ bao τῶν πγευματων pm δυνω-
μοθω" περὶ τῶν ἐν Χεῤ. If we ave unable by the winds. ἐστε as ins
ἂν μεν νικωμεν ὑμας ἀἄρετῃ, | WAY αἰσχυνὴν Pepel, ἧδε ἧττα, sav ἥττωμε
οὐδουρκονιαν. Plato Menez. Be assured, ¢f we surpass you im
Virtue, the vietory briags disgrace upor us; bat defeat, if we are
overcome, happmess.— Reasoning then by analogy, and from these
and other examples, we may, I think, conclude that ἀν and iay are
both sprung from the same root, and that the former was from the
original verb. |
_ Before proceeding to establish the meaning which from this
derivation ὧν must assume, it may be necessary to notice also the
probable root and signification of the particle xe or κεν, as it was
used synovymously with ἀν by the early poets, particularly Homer.
Ke, in all probability, was formed from xew* or xsew, to lay down:
perhaps the imperative of the former xee, by an apocope, xs, lay
down. The ν is commonly added before a vowel, or in order to
lengthen the syllable. Ke, therefore, will signify lay down, or in
other words, allow, grant ; for, when a condition or supposition is
mee, what is figuratively /aid down, may be said to be granted or
owed. ᾿
ἔνθα κεν ὑψυπυλον Τροιην ὅλον ules ᾿Αχαιων,
eb μη ᾿Απολλων Φοιβος "Aynvopa διον avnxe. Hom.
If Phoebus Apollo had not sent forth the noble Agenor, day
down that, grant that, the sons of the Greeks had then taken lofty-
walled Troy.
In like manner the particle ἀν may be resolved in the following
sentence frem Aristophanes.—An old woman: is asked by Chre-
mylus what her lever chiefly demanded from her, she replies, οὐ
Borda’ καὶ yap ἐκνομως μ' ἡσχυνετο. Not much, for he had an
uncommon regard for me.
ἀχλ᾽ ἄργυριου δραχμας ἀν ἠτησ᾽ εἴκοσιν
εἰς ἱματιον'
_ But he might perhaps (as it is commonly translated) have asked
twenty drachms of silver for a coat: grunted he asked twenty
drachms for a coat: οὐ πολλα,. it was not much.—édxtw δ᾽ ἀν εἰς
ὑποδηματα, granted he asked eight for shoes: οὐ πολλα, it was not
much.
The auxiliary verbs may and can, might and. could, would and
should, by which ay is usually translated, are all epithets of power
* κα is used for κι or ὧν by Lampito, the Lacedemonian lady, in the Lyw-
strata of Aristophanes. 9. 117. ’
68 On the Particle ἄν.
flowing from the permission of others, the nature of circumstances,
one’s duty or inclination. Hence, when any thing is allowed or
granted, or supposed, a person may, or can, or might, ὅς. perform
is intention or purpose, whatever it be. The-present or imperfect
time denoted by them does not depend upon this particle, but u
the context ; a circumstance to which it is necessary to attend m
the common use of the subjunctive and optative moods. For,
according to Dawes in his: Miscellanea Critica, * the subjunctive
is used only after verbs of a present or future signification,* and
answers to the Latin amem; the optative after verbs of the pasé
tense, and answers to the Latin amarem.” In illustration of this
rule, he produces several examples from Aristophanes with the
conjunction ive: one of each will be sufficient for our purpose at
present.
. ὅδε μ᾽ ᾿᾽ΕΠΟΙΗΣῈΝ τυῷλον
ive μη ΔΙΑΓΙΓΝΩΣ ΚΟΙΜΙ τουτων μηδενα. Plut. 791.
He made me blind that I mighi not distinguish any of them.
Aos cu μοι τὸ τριβωνιον,
iv’ ᾿ΑΜΦΙΕΣΩ τον συκοφαντὴν τουτονι. Id. 086.
Give me that thread-bare cloak that I may clothe this informer.
I have already remarked, that the different meanings affixed to
av by Hoogeveen may be all reduced to one simple signification,
by stripping it of every adventitious idca derived from the context.
As every disquisition of this kind is best understood by examples,
Ἵ shall take some from each of the four sections in which he affixes
to ἀν the signification of posse, velle, debere and futurum esse.
1. In which ἀν signifies posse.
Εἰ δὲ τις τοὺς xparouvras tou πλήθους ἔπι ἀρετὴν προτρεψειεν, ἀμφο-
τέρους ἀν ὠφελήσειε. ἴδοογ. If any one would excite the rulers of
the people to virtue, that granted, he would benefit both. In
this case the benetit cou/d only accrue from the excitement to
virtue; that being allowed or granted, it of course necessarily
follows.
Lucian, in his panegyric upon Demosthenes, says that it was
easier to praise htm thaa Homer, as his country was known, and a
wide field for bis eloquence was open: but, he adds, if this, viz.
Athens, had been Homer’s country, οὐδ᾽ ἀν εἷς ἐπ᾽ ions ἀξίως ἐφικεσθαι
Cuvairo τῷ λογῳ 6 Δημοσθενης, this granted, no one Demosthenes
would be able by his’eloquence to,do justice to his fame. Here
it may be necessary to remark, that the verb δυναμαι implies bodily
a neem and
* The Greek writers have sometimes deviated from this rule by using the
-subjunctive after verbs of the past tense, particularly the imperfect, as Dr.
Burgess has shown in his notes upon Dawes.Miscell. Crit. p. 441.
On the Particle ἂν. ) 69
. of mental power; ἀν reflected. power, if 1 may be allowed the ex-
pression.
2. In which ἀν is translated by vedle.
“ Generalis particule ἀν," says Hoogeveen, “ facultas verbis
suum actum eripiendi non semper ad vim 8uyyrixyy reduci debet,
sed est ubi velle potiusquam posse notat,” &c.
‘Oxocou ἀν mgiouo, ὥστε τὴν γυναῖκα ἀπολαβειν ; said Cyrus to
Tigranes, the prince of Armenia: so as to recover your wife,
that granted, that put in your power, what price would you give?
Tigranes wished to recover his wife: the verb then with which
ἄν is connected must imply that inclination. Βουλοιμὴν av, ὦ Σω-
xpares, says Euthyphro to Socrates in the Euthyphro of Plato, when
that philosopher informed bim that the accusation of Melitus was
Intended for the public good : granted tt were so, that is my wish:
{ would wish it were ‘so. :
3. When ἀν 18 translated by debere.
Οὐ μὴν δια rout’ ἀἄμεινων δοξειεν ἀν yevvasou καὶ στρατηγίκου ἀνδρος.
Lucian. We ought not on this account to be reckoned better than
a noble commander : granted his head was encircled with a diadem,
on this account he could not be better, &c. The circumstance
of having worn a diadem adds nothing to his merit, he oughé not
therefore to be reckoned better. Οὐκοῦν, é¢y ὁ Kupos, τα δικαια ποιῶν,
ἥχιστ᾽ av τὸν ἁμαρτανοντα μιμοιην. Aen. Cyr. ὃ. 3. Wherefore, said
Cyrus, by acting justly, this granted, I would by no means imitate
an offender. The translation in Latin ought rather to be by
wnitaturus sim than debere.
4. When ἀν is translated by futurum esse.
Εἰ Φιλιππος λαβοι καθ' ἥμων τοιουτὸν καιρὸν, καὶ πολεμος ὙΈνΟΙΤΟ προς
τῇ χώρᾳ, πως ἀν αὖτον οἶεσθε ἕτοιμως ἐφ᾽ tas ἔλθειν; Dem. Olynth.
If Phi ip should make use of such an opportunity against us, and
a war should take place adjoining our country, this granted, how
readily do you think he would invade us?—From all these ex-
amples, 1 think it is obvious that ἀν has only one simple, definite
meaning, that of denoting conditional power.
[ shall now proceed to mention the tenses and modes with which
ἀν is commonly construed. |
I. The Present Indicative.
The late Professor Porson, in his notes upon Toup’s emenda-
tions to Suidas, denies that 27 is ever construed with the present-
indicative. Brunck, however, and Dr. Burgess, have produced
instances to the contrary from different plays of Aristophanes
‘The 885th line of the Plutus is quoted by both: In line 395 of
the comedy of the Clouds, ἀν is also construed with the present-
indicative : ἀλλ᾽ ὁ κεραῦνος wobev ἀν φερεται, Anpmav xe. “The par-
70 On the Particle ἄν.
ticle ad is supposed to be the genuine reading. See also Aves
1069, and Anacreon’s Hymn to the Dove: πιουσα δ᾽ ἀν χορεύων,
having drunk, that granted, | may dance.—It must, however, be
confessed, that very few examples of ἀν construed with the present
indicative are to be found. Itis safer, therefore, to conclude with
Porson, that ἀν ought not to be construed with the present indica-
tive.
_ 1]. With the Indicative of the Imperfect, Aorists, and Pluper-
fect, when used as an Imperfect.
Rue 1. ᾽4ν, preceded or followed by εἰ, joined with the Indi»
cative of the Imperfect, Aorists, Pluperfect or Perfect, when a
supposition or hypothesis is made, is also construed with the
Indicative of all these Tenses except the Perfect.
Rue 2. When εἰ is construed with the Optative,' the Verb
m the other member of the sentence with ἀν must also be in the
Optative.
1. ᾿Εγωγ᾽ av εἶπον εἰ παρὼν ἐτυγχανον. Aristoph. Conc. 407.
If I had been present, that granted, | would have spoken. Ei
yap tore ἔκεισε ἐβοηθησαμεν, ὥσπερ ἐψηφισαμεῦα, προϑθυμως, οὐκ ἂν
ἠνωχλεῖ γυν ἡμιν ὁ Φιλιππος. Demosth. Olynth. 8. For if we had
then promptly sent our assistance thither, as we had decreed, that
granted, Philip would not now be disturbing us.
2. Ei, νη Av’, ἀντι της κακῆς yAwrrns ποθεν
Πυρους πριαιο, σωφρονειν ἂν μοι δοκοῖς.
Aristoph. Vesp. 1404.
If by Jove, instead of this foul tongue, you would buy wheat
from any quarter, granted you did so, you would seem to me to
have some sense. Οὐκ ἀν θβαυμασαιμι, εἰ μειξων εἰποντι μοι yevoiro παρ᾽
ὕμων βλαβη. Dem. Olynth. I would not be surprised if a heavier
punishment from you awaited me mentioning, Xc.
it sometimes happens, when ἀν is construed both with the indi«
cative, optative, and infinitive, the condition or supposition usually
stated by εἰ must be inferred from the context. 1 take the follow-
ing examples from Hoogeveen as an illustration of this remark :
καὶ παντὰ ταῦτα ἐν ἕτεροις μὲν lows ἀν wxvouy εἶπειν. Isocr. ad Nicocl,
And all this, if among others indeed, (εἰ ἐν ἑτέροις μεν ἦν; not elyy,
as he has it), I would be afraid perhaps to mention. ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ἂν
ἀγροικως γε, οἶμαι, λοιδορησειαν, said Socrates to Phedrus, who had
made the following reply to an observation of that philosopher,
καὶ οὗτοι! dv, οὐ Σωχροιτες, οἶμαι, καταγελῳεν, εἰ τις οἴεται τραγωῳδιαν
ἄλλο τι εἶναι ἢ τὴν τουτων συστασιν, πῥοπουσαν ἀλληλοῖς τε καὶ τῷ ὁλῷ
* Εἰ is frequently conatrued with the indicative of the present in the first
member of the sentence denoting a supposition in the statement, but a cer-
tainty in the factand is followe by ἂν in the other member of-the sentence.
See the exampie from Piato’s Phedrus in this page. :
On the Particle dy. — 91
συνισταμένην. Plato Phedr. p. 367. Ed. Bip. If any one enter-
tains such an .opinion, they would laugh at him: But, says
Socrates, if he did entertain such an opinion, they wou/d not, 1
imagine, rudely insult bim.—Much depends upon supplying the
ellipsis properly in all conditional statements towards understanding
correctly the meaning and application of this particle. _
Instead of the particle εἰ, as construed with the endicative or
optative, the participle of the verb of existence is frequently either
expressed or understood, denoting an affirmation, or the purticiple
of some other verb precedes ἀν, with the same power: thus, ws
φὖν, αὐτὸς ὧν τοιουτος, ἄλλους ἀν ἡ ἄσεβεις---ἐποιησεν: Xen. Mem.
How then, he deing such a person, cou/d he make others either
ampious? 8c. οὐχ ἂν yevesto vous xaxos καλως φρονων. Soph. (Βαϊ.
ZLyr. 600. A mind well disposed cannot become wicked.
ΠῚ. With the Future Indicative.
Dawes, in his Miscellanea Critica, will not allow that ἀν is
ever construed with the future indicative. Dr. Burgess, however,
has shown that xev, which has the same power with ἀν, is joined
with it by Homer, Iliad, ά. 139. ὅδε κεν κεχολωσεται, dv κεν ἱκωμαι.
-—Other passages might also be adduced in which xe or xev with
εἰ is construed with the future indicative, giving it the usual power
of the subjunctive of the Aorist : as, ἀλλ᾽ ayer’, εἰ κεν πως SwpnEomer
vias ᾿Αχαιων. 8.72. But, as in Homer’s time the particles were
used with greater latitude and uncertainty than by later writers, we
must therefore endeavour to discover whether they have ever used
ἀν with the indicative of the future. Brunck has preduced several
instances from Aristophanes, contrary to the opinion entertained
by Dawes: dpa ye τοῦτ᾽ dv tym wor’ ὄψομαι; Nubes, 465. Pray
shall I ever behold it? Shall ἐξ ever be granted me to behold tt?
ws σκηψιν ἀν ἀγὼν οὗτος οὐκ ἐσδεζετα!. Since this contest (your
grievances being allowed) will not, cannot admit of consideration.
See also Vesp. 94@. Nubes, 1157. ‘The examples, however, are
so few that it appears safer not to follow them. _
IV. With the Subjunctive.
_ Ay,” says Dawes, “is never construed with the subjunctive un-
lesa accompanied with certain uther words.” —These, which he has
not mentioned, are the relative ὃς, Ke. ; 65 avs boas ἀν; ὅστις av; ὁπο-
Tapes av; οὗ ἀν; ὅπου ἀν; iv’ ἀν; ὡς Av; ὅπως dy, translated by the Latin
ut.—ébtoray ; ὅταν: douxig dv;—bray, bresay; treday'; ἔπεικα; brexey;
- ἋΣ bwubdwy is construed by Lucian with the indicative. Dielag., Mort. ; ixtiday
Apes kaon δαὶ otiertminitynd, Whenever we lament and groan—he
at us. It-is alse cdnstrued by Xenoplion with the optative: ἐπείδαν |
οἶκοι dus, Cyr.. Whenever you return home, The reading, thavld We trukn.
"2 On the Particle &.
ἕως dv; πριν ἀν," é¢p” ay,” or xev; and a few others.’ After verbs
denoting past time, they are commonly followed by the optative,
It would be quite superfluous to yive a number of examples
upon each of these; one or two will be sufficient: thus, Xen.
(Cyr. οἱ δ᾽ ἀν ἐν τοις ἐξηβοις διατελέσωσι τὰ νομιμα ποιουντες. Whoever
among the youths steadily perform the duties prescribed by law,
ei’ ὅποταν xy ἔπι τὸ δειπνον. Then whenever he comes tu supper.
ἁπανθ᾽ ὁσ’ ἀν λεγω. Aristoph. Achar. 355. All whatever I may
say. ἑως σεαυτον ἄν λαθῃς διαῤῥαγεις. Id. Pac.
Ἄν, however, when it is merely conditional, and has the same
power with éay, is also construed with the subjunctive: thus, ὅπως
οὖν μὴ ἀπολῃ μαστιγουμινος, ἐπειδὴ οἶκοι sing, ἀν, παρα τούτου μαθῶν,
ἡκης, Kec. Xen. Cyr. Beware lest you be whipped to death, wheu
you return home, if, having learned from him, you come, &c. μῇ
τοινυν, ὦ ἀνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, θαυμασητα, av παραδοξον einw τι τοῖς πολλοῖς.
Dem. Olynth.
V. ᾿Αν construed with the Optative.*
‘Av is construed with the optative of all the tenses except the
future, chiefly after verbs denoting past time; for, as it was be-
fore remarked, the optative has generally the same relation 15
voint of time to the subjunctive, as the imperfect has to the pre-
sent.
tis unnecessary to multiply examples, as many have already
been given, and others may be found in every Greek author. See
below, where ἀν is construed with the optative after the interro-
gative particles πη, ποι, ποθεν, &c.
VI. With the Infinitive.
᾿Ὥσπερ καὶ τὸν Δαιδαλον φασιν of ἀνδριαντόποιοι γυν---καταγελαστον -
ἂν εἶναι. Plato Hipp. Maj. As the statuaries now-a-days: say
that Dedalus would be laughed at. siovras yap rous ἀχαριστους, καὶ
περι Geous ἂν μαλιστα ἀμελως ἔχειν, Kc. For they think that the
' The tragedians, says Elmsley, do not use the subjunctive with zew ἀν une
less there be in the preceding member of the sentence « negation er prohi-
bition: thus, xodx ἀπεμι πρὸς δομους παλιν, πρὶν ἀν oe γαια; τερμόγων ἔξω Baro,
Eurip. Med. 2717. The same, he adds, must be stated of the optative. See
Annot. in Eurip. Med. Museum Crit. No. 5. |
> Frequently with the subjunctive after preterite verbs. See Brunck’s
Annot. ad Apoll. Rhod. 17.
3 Occasionally the tragic poets and prose writers omit the dy after seme
of these indefinites.
* évis never construed with the genuine optative, i.e. when a wish is ex-
pressed by it, but with the potential: thus, J παῖ, γέναῖιο wazpos εὐτυχέστερος.
Ajax Soph. O son, may you be more fortunate than your father. ye’ ὧν, you
might become. See Brunck's Annot. ad Aristoph. Equit. 400. .
On the Particle ἄν. 13
hinprateful must be exceedingly careless, &c. It is not construed
with the future infinitive. See Dawes. Misceld.
VII. With Participles.
ὝΜμεις 8 οἱ καὶ μόμψαμένοι πολλα καὶ δικαια ay ἔκεινοις slxorws.
em. x. στεῷ. When you who might have with reason justly com-
plained against them. ὡς οὐδ᾽ ἀν, ei τι γενοιτο, ἔτι συμπνευσοντων ὕμων
καὶ τῶν Θηβαιων. Id. That the Thebans and you, should any thing
happen, could no longer conspire together. ἀταρ, ὦ πατερ, ἔφη, ov
εἰ ἔνοραις τινὰ mopoy καὶ an’ ἔμου av προσγενομενον. Xen. Cyr. But,
father, said he, if you perceive any resources that could even be
provided by me.
VIII. ‘Ay repeated with the same Verb.
1. ’Av is frequently repeated in long sentences, where several
particulars intervene between the conditional statement signified
by it at the commencement of the sentence, and the verb with
‘which these particulars are connected. '
2. Ay is frequently repeated for the sake of emphasis, or for
calling the attention particularly to the nature of the condition
suggested by it.
The following sentence from the Acharnenses of Aristophanes,
will exemplify both these observations.
οὐκ ἀν ἐπ᾽ ἔμης γε νεῦ-
τήτος, OF ἔγω Φερῶν
ἀνθρακων 'Φορτιον
ἠκολουθουν Φαύλλῳ τρεχῶν,
ὧδε φαυλως ἀν ὃ
σπονδοῷορος, ὑπ᾽ ἐμου ὃι-
ὠχοόμενος, ἐξεφυγεν,
οὐδ᾽ ἀν ἐλαφρως ἀν ἀπεπλιξατο.
1. crag ἀν, ὅσπερ οὗτος, ἔπι τῇ εἰσοδῳ, ἔπειτα, ὅποτε βουλοιτο εἰσιεναι
ἐπὶ ἀριστον, λεγοιμ av, Kc. Xen. Cyr. Having stationed myself,
like him, upon the threshold, then, whenever he should wish to
enter, | would say.
2. πως δὲ γ᾽ ἀν καλως λέγοις dv, εἶπερ ἐσπεισω γ᾽ anak,
οἷσιν οὗτε βωμος, οὐτε πιστις, οὐθ᾽ ὅρκος μένει;
Aristoph. Achar.
How can you, how can you say it was properly done, if you
have but once formed an agreement with those who regard neither
altar, nor good faith, nor oaths? idpac’ ἀν, εὖ rout’ iad’ av. Soph.
CEdip. Tyr. 1438. I would have done it, be assured I would.
ae ene
* dy, says Elmsley, is never repeated with the subjunctive. See Prometh.
Vinct. Bloomfield’s note on 2. 795. .
4
AN ESSAY
ON THE GREEK PASTORAL POETS.
To tHE EpitTor or THE CLASSICAL JOURNAL.
I shall probably be thought to differ in the following Essay
from preceding writers on Pastoral Poetry. I have however
formed my opinions from the works of those Poets who have
been eminently successful in this species of Poesy, chiefly in-
deed from Theocritus. ‘This will perhaps be a safer and more
useful method to endeavour to establish laws for Pastorals than
upon any metaphysical and speculative principles of criticism
JOHN MACGILWRAY.
Contents. Section I. Of Rural Scenes and Manners in general.—It, Of
the Origin of Pastoral Poetry.—111. Of the Greek Pastoral Poets, with some
historical reasons for the use of different dialects.—1V. Of Theocritus; 88
Inquiry into his Imitations of the Song of Salomon.—V. Of the peculiar genius
of Theocritus ; that enthusiastic but delicate Taste for Nature was his most
distinguishing Excellence; of the Scenery of Sicily, &c.—V1. The peculiar
Taste of Theocritus proved from his sliding into rural Descriptions in these
Poems which are not professedly pastoral.—VII. The same Taste appears from
many passages in bis professed pastorals, &c.—VIVI. That Theocritus observ-
ed the slighter and more imperceptible Shades of Nature.—IX. Of the Charac-
ters of his Shepherds; their accomplishments, simplicity, superstition, &c.—
X. Of his Turn for Moralising._X\. That Theoecritus is often pathetic, and
sometimes rises to the Sublime.— XII. Objections to Theocritus.— XIII. Of the
Harmony of his Versification.—X1V. Of the peculiar Felicity of his Langaa
—XV, The different Subjects of Theocritus arranged.—X VI. Of Moschus and
Bion.— XVII. Of the Idyllia of Bion.—XVIIL. Of the Idyllia of Moschns ;
the Europa.—XIX. Elegy on Bion.—XX. The Megara—XXI. A beautifel
Fragment, &c. _
§. 1. Of Rural Scenes and Manners in general.
Tuar a fondness for rural scenery Is natural to man has been
often observed. I believe there aré few persons who can prefer at
all times houses and streets with the amusement of towns, to the
romantic and pleasant views of the country. It may be with some
truth affirmed, that the manners also of the country are upon the
whole more mnocent than those of a great town, because, on ac-
count of the thinness of its population, there are fewer temptations
to vice, and fewer opportunities for depraved indulgence. If how-
a
An Essay on the Greek Pastoral Poets. 75
ever we think that perfect mnocence reigns in the country, we shall
be as much disappointed as that amiable man Mr. Cowley the
poet was, when he retired trom the city and the court to Chertsey
in Surrey. Wherever mankind are to be found, whether in towns
er the country, in savage tribes or polished nations, there is also to
be found a mixture of vice and misery; We have the same sad
tale from every quarter. It is therefore as chimerical to believe
in the pure innocence and unmingled happiness of Arcadia as in
the actual existence of the golden age. Both may charm the tma-
gination of the poet, but cannot much engage the attention of the
historian or the philosopher. |
It may be said in support of the golden age, that the notion of
it is derived from some tradition of man’s primitive state of inno-
cence as revealed in the writings of Muses. From the very early
eriod of time to which it is ‘referred in Hesiod, the Politicus of
lato, and Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and from some other circum-
stances, I am inclined to think that this may be really the case.
We may further venture to affirm with some degree of probabi-
lity, that mankind, notwithstanding some atrocious actions, would
not become so generally corrupted in the very first ages of the
world, as they did in the progressive course of centuries.
In favor of the fancied happiness of Arcadia, it may at least
be said that there is a more striking simplicity of manners and less
of fretting constraint in the country, than in cities and the scenes
of polished life. This simplicity is more pleasing to an uucor-
rupted taste than that elegant ease which is the last polish of a
refined education and the most genteel company. ‘This ‘ease of
manners is seldom to be seen and seldom comprehended by those ,
who converse with the person who has had the good fortune to
acquire it. Those who do comprehend it will not perhaps so
highly prize it, as they know it is in a great measure the effect of
concealed art and of habit. On the other hand, certain strokes of
native simplicity of character irresistibly charm all men.
In the next place, the air and scenery of the country és favora-
ble to health, which is a considerable ingredient in human happi-
ness. Its views also give ns an idea of liberty, soothe the spirits,
and delight the imagination. When fretted with cares and the ill
temper of other persons, [ have sometimes experienced the most
pleasing relief from plunging into the thick gloom and calm silence
of a great wood, where nothing was to be heard but the melody of
birds, the murmuring of streams, or the leaves whispering and rust-
ling in the breeze. Some parts of the country are no doubt more
romantic and charming than others, yet scarcely any part has so
tame and joyless a character as not to present some features
which will please both in the actual prospect and still more in de-
scription. fits occupations and amusements are ta general wWhee-
76 An Essay on the
able, and though some of them are less so than others, yet hardly
any of them disgust us when described by a man who is skilled in
sketching with the pencil of nature.
Horace beautifully illustrates the force of this original passion.
in man for rural objects from the practice of planting groves,
amid the superb buildings and columns of Rome, and from the
wish to have a town-house which may command an extensive pros-
pect of the country. He represents this passion to be so strong
that it cannot be conquered by the most fastidious acquired taste.
Nempe inter varias nutritur Sylva columnas,
Laudaturque domus, longos que prospicit agros.
Naturam expellas furca ; tamen usque recurret,
Et mala perrumpet furtim fastidia victrix.
Hor. Ep. Lib. I. Ep. 10.
Though this elegant poet had familiar access to the politest com»
pany in Rome in its Augustan age, yet we find him always in his
heart attached to the country. The most pleasing passages in his
satires and epistles are those in which he describes this predi-
lection.
Those who have spent their earliest and happiest years at a dis-
tance from the smoke and bustle of the town, will probably in fu-
ture life be more particularly enchanted with rural prospects and
descriptions. Those again, who have been in their youth accus-
tomed to bold and romantic scenery, will probably find a languor
and depression of spirits when they remove into a flat and level
country. But those, who from tame and uniform prospects make
a transition iito grand, mountainous and rocky regions, will be
struck with wonder and solemn awe.
Among the occupations of the country, that of tending flocks
and herds, appears very pleasing to the imagination, whatever may
be the feelings of those whose actual employment it is. It is no
wonder then that Pastoral Poetry, which gives us a representation
of that innocent and seemingly happy mode of life, has so univer-
sally pleased, when executed by true genius. As-the pastoral ‘life
naturally advances’ to the agricultural and blends itself with it, we
shall hardly find any poet whose ideas are purely pastoral. ‘Fhus
we have harvest-scenes in Theocritus. One might on the first
thought imagine that it would be easy to write an humble eclogue.
Yet it appears that it is a very difficult species of poetry from the
small number of those who have succeeded in it, and we may
affirm that it is.no less dangerous to touch the Sicilian reed than
the Theban lyre.
LLL SS SSS SEED
‘ An antient writer has said prettily but quaintly: “ pastorum vitam
€sse mcentivam, sgricolarum succentivam” tibiam.
Greek Pastoral Poets. qT
§. 2. Of the Origin of Pastoral Poetry.
THERE have heen different opinions concerning the origm of
‘Pastoral Poetry. That ingenious and useful critic, Dr. Blair, says
an his Lectures on Rhetoric: “ Though | begin with the conside-
ration of Pastoral Poetry, it is not because I consider it as one of
the earliest forms of poetical composition. On the contrary, I
-ain of opinion that it was not cultivated as a distinct species, or
-eubject of writing, until society had advanced in refinement. Most
authors haye indeed indulged the fancy, that because the life which
mankind at first led, was rural, therefore their first poetry was
\pastoral, or employed in the celebration of rural scenes and ob-
jects. I make no doubt that it would borrow many of its images
and allusions, from those natural objects with which men were
-best acquainted ; but | make as little doubt, that the calm and
tranquil scenes of rural felicity were not by any means the first
objects which inspired that strain of composition, which we now
call poetry. [{ was inspired in the first periods of every nation by
events and objects which roused men’s passions, or at least awak-
ened their wonder and admiration. ᾿
“ The actions of their gods and heroes, their own exploits in
war, the successes or misfortunes of their countrymen and friends,
furnished the tirst themes to the bards of every country.”
Fle afterwards adds: “ It was not till men had begun to be
assembled in great cities, after the distinctions of rank and station
were formed, and the bustle of courts and large societies was
known, that Pastoral: Poetry assumed its present form. Men
then begau to look back upon the more simple and innocent life
which their forefathers led, or which at least they fancied them to
have led: they looked back upon it with pleasure ; and in those
rural scenes and pastoral occupations, imagining a degree of feli-
-city to take place, superior to what they now enjoyed, conceived
‘the idea of celebrating it in poetry. It was in the court of King
Ptolemy that Theocritus wrote the first pastorals with which we
are acquainted,” &Xc. .
Though much respect is due to the judgment of Dr. Blair as
a sober aud philosophical critic, yet 1 cannot assent to his opmion
on this occasion, as it is contrary to the tradition of antiquity. It
-seems not improbable that poetry may have appeared in various
forms at the same period of society, as in hymns to the gods, in
songs in praise of valiant achievements, in love-songs, and in de-
scriptions of rural scenes and manners; or we may say, that the
‘first poetry of a country will depend on the character and emplopy-
ments of its inhabitants. ‘The specimens of the Lapland poetry
which have been translated in the Spectator, furnish a proof οἵ
τ An Essay on the
this. Odes celebrating great military expeditions or revolutions,
were more likely to be preserved than eclogues or ballads on
humble rustic themes. ough Theocritus is the earliest pas-
toral poet we have now extant, yet it is by no means clear that he
was the first who attempted thet strain of poesy. The sasne
honour is attributed to his countryman Daphnis, the Sicilian
shepherd, whom he celebrates im his first Idyllium. It is more
probable that Theocritus improved to its utmost perfection a
species of composition before known in different parts of Greece.
1 think also that the probability is that he wrote most of his ge-
nuine pastorals, before he went to the court of Ptolemy. I see
no reason why we may not with the antients attribute the origin of
Pastoral Poetry to Arcadia. ‘This country was surrounded by
mountains on all sides; and consequently less subject to the
ravages and devastations of war, and more likely to indulge im rusal
music and poetry. Pan, the reputed inventor of the pipe, 15 repre-
sented by Virgil in his fourth eclogue as the favorite deity 1a
Arcadia. The Arcadians are also mentioned as particularly skill-
ed in music, in the tenth eclogue.' It is true indeed that we have
other traditions of this matter from the autients. The invention of
pastoral poetry is ascribed to Apollo, when he tended the flocks
and herds of Admetus king of Phere in Thessaly. If we admit
with the Abbé Banier, that Apollo was a kmg of Arcadia, who
being dethroned by his subjects for the severity of his government,
took refuge with Admetus, this tradition will not appear so ro- .
mantic.
In the short preliminary notices to Theocritus, we have three
other different accounts, which [ shall mention. The first ie as
follows. Bucolic peetry is said to have been first invented in La-
cedemon, and to have been brought to a state of high improvement
there. In the time of the Persian invasion, the time of the festaval
of Diana Caryatis (which ought to be celebrated by virgins,)
arrived. ‘These bemg concealed on account of the general com
fusion and alarm in the country, the shepherds entered the temple
of the goddess, and chanted her praises in their own peculiar
hymns, which grew into a custom.
The second tradition is this: that Orestes came with the statue
of Diana, which be had breught from the Tauric Chersonesus and
washed m the streams by Rhegium, into Tyndaris in Sicily.
‘Fhe people of the country celebrated the goddess with their pecu-
liar hymns. It only remains to state the last account, which is
ae ΒΒΝΝΒΝΝΝΝΒΝΒΒΝΝΝΝΟΝΕΝΟΒΟΝΟΒΝΒΟΒΘΘΟΟΒΟΝΟΝΟΝΟΝΒΟΝΟΝΟΝΟΘΟΝΟΝΒΝΝΟΒΌΝΟΟΝΗΝΝΝ
Ν ἐς the seventh Hevogue. we have “ Arcades ambo,” which I suppose
wi Tvjus, means, “ as skilful as Arcadians in singing ;”—not real Arca-
dians, or of Arcadian origin by their ancestors. ges
Greek Pastoral Poets. 79
said to be more probable. After a violent dissention in Syracuse
za which. many citizens lost their lives, the survivors were recou-
ciled, aad this reconcilsation was thought to be brought about by
the influence of Diana. The shepherds and herdsmen overjoyed,
bsought. aw offering, and celebrated the goddess in hymns. Aften-
wards pastoral odes became customary.
However contradictory and improbable these traditions may seem,
they tend to show that the origin of Bucolic Poetry is lost in fable
and remote antiquity. ΓΕ was, perhaps, at first a rustic religious hymn
only,.and afterwards.diverted to other subjects. Thus tragedy is
said to have sprung from the byma which'was sung when the goat,
as the destroyer of the vine, was sacrificed at the time of the vint-
age to Bacchus. It is remarkable that even in modern Europe,
we had moralities and religious interludes before we had regular
tragedies and comedies. ‘There are some, however, who think that
tragedy, a word compounded of τράγος and a3, was so called
from a contest in poetry and music; ia which a goat was givén as
ἃ prize to the conqueror. They have a verse of Horace im their
favor, as well as many other authorities :
Carmine qui tragico vilem certavit ob hircum.*
Hor. de Arte Poet. 220.
On this supposition we might conclude that sven tragedy took its
rise from pastoral. That it was usual for shepherds to play on
pipes in the most ancient times, we learn from Homer. ‘Thus we
have in the description of the shield of Achilles :
δύω δ᾽ aim’ ἕποντο γομῆες
Τερπόμενοι σύριγξι' had. Σ΄. 525.
‘The tending of flocks might be an employment of some dignity:
In certain parts of Greece.
We learn from Varro, that Dicearchus, a great historian and
philosopher, wrote a full account of the ancient pastoral life of
the Greeks before they had learned to. plough the ground, or to
plant and prune trees ; but as that book has not reached our times,
we must remain much in the dark as to the manners of 80 remote
a period. [ shall here subjoin a few more particulars from the
prolegomena to Theocritus, but without vouching for the truth of
them, as [ know not on what authority they are founded. Some
pastoral poems were called Βουκόλικα, some αἰπόλικα, and somé
? Aristotle says that comedians were so called from their strolling about
the villages, κατὰ xwpas, and this might in his time appear a very probable
derivation of the word, Yet comedy might have taken its first rise from
a village song or hymo, So I take κωμάζω to signify “to go dancing and
singing like a villager to court a mistress,” and Comus to.signify the god
of rural mirth and revelry, when men began “ to praise the gods ama.
80 An Essay on the
ποιμένικα. ‘They came at last to be all called Bucolics, because the
ox is a more excellent animal than the goat or sheep." The
actors sung them with bread, on which the figures of wild beasts
were impressed, suspended to them; with a scrip full of every
‘kind of seed; with wine in a leathern bottle, from which they
offered a taste to those whom they met; with garlands on their
heads; with deers’ horns protended, and crooks in their hands.
‘The conqueror received the bread of his rival. It is said that a
custom continued in Syracuse, that those who were vanquished
went about to places in the vicinity of the town to beg for food;
and that they received other things besides, which were likely to
occasion mirth and laughter; and that they finished with this benison
as an epilogue :
Atkas, τὰν ἀγαθὰν τύχαν, δέξαι ὑγίειαν
"Av φέρομεν παρὰ τῆς θεοῦ, ἀν ἐκαλέσσατό τηνα :
That is: “ May you meet with good fortune and enjoy good
health, which we bring from the goddess* that has been now in-
voked.”
It might appear to us incredible that shepherds should be able
to contend with each other in extemporaneous verses; but we
-now know from the modern improvisatori in Tuscany, that this is
very possible. We have specimens of such contests in the fifth,
eighth, and ninth Idylliums of Theocritus. We may conclude
that the ancient amozbean or alternate pastorals were like these,
though composed in a ruder strain.
The term εἰδύλλιον, Idyllium, which is applied to the poems
of Theoeritus, is evidently a diminutive noun derived from εἶδος.
We find the word: εἶδος applied to the Odes of Pindar, whatever
may be the meaning of it when thus used, whether it signifies a
description, picture, representation, vision, or miscellaneous
poem.
§. 3. Of the Greek Bucolic Poets ; with some historical
reasons for the practice of using different Dialects.
As we have so little light to guide us in our inquiries into the early
state of pastoral poetry, it would be idle to attempt to form our
ideas of its true character from a period of which we have no dis-
tinct information, and of which no compositions remain. Dr.
* Diana. Perhaps the figures of wild beasts on the bread suspended from
the singers, might allude to Diana as a huntress and the destroyer of wild
animals. Their horns might also allude to the herds of Diana, as they
are said to have had horns; or perhaps they intended to personate satyrs.
_ Ἐκαλέσσατό ryva—to read rnvos for τῆνα appears too rash, and to take ryve
in the neuter plural seems tame. Perhaps these words were first uttered
by females. os
Greek Pastoral Poets. 81
Johnson with much good sense has observed: “ In writing or judg-
ing of pastoral. poetry, neither the authors nor critics of later times
seem to have paid sufficient regard to the originals left us by anti-
quity ; but have entangled themselves with unnecessary difficulties,
and advanced principles, which having no foundation in the nature
of things, are wholly to be rejected from a species of composition,
in which, above all others, mere nature 1s to be regarded.”
- Tt were to be wished, however, that Dr. Johnson had taken .
Theocritus for his guide rather than Virgil; and that he had drawn
his ideas from the original rather than the copy. It was .from
studying the original authors who were universally allowed to have
beén successful in their attempts, that Aristotle and other ancient
critics formed their ideas of excellence in every kind. Yet we
are not to be so superstitiously devoted to former models, however
perfect, as to refuse to a man of superior genius the liberty of
eviating from them fortunately and judiciously. ‘This would be
hke keeping the human mind in fetters, a circumstance from which
it has often suffered, and by which its exertions have been checked.
1 propose in what follows to give a slight sketch of the Greek
Pastoral Poetry. All the remains of this kind which we have, are
the Iidylliums of Theocritus, and a few Idylliums of Moschus
and Bion with their fragments. |
They are for the most part written in the Doric dialect. With-
out entering into any elaborate inquiry into the migrations and
dispersions of the Ionians, Dorians, and olians, the reputed
descendants of Ion the grandson, and of Dorus and Aéolus the
sons, of Hellen, who is himself said to be the son of Deucalion
and Pyrrha, I shall just mention the information which Strabo
has left us concerning the Greek dialects in his eighth- book.
‘¢ There being four dialects, we affirm that the Ionic is the same
with the ancient Attic (for they who then inhabited Attica were
called Ionians, from whom sprung the lonians who led colonies
to Asia, who use what is now called the Tonic dialect), and we
affirm that the Doric is the same with the AZolic.” He means
that the Doric is the same with the primitive Zolic, which the
H£olians spoke before they migrated into Asia. From him we
learn that AMolian colonies passed over into Asia immediately after
the time of the ‘Trojan war, four ages before the Ionian colonies ;
and that the folic was anciently spoken by all the inhabitants
of Greece both within and without the [sthmus, except the inha-
bitants of Attica. Thus, we find, there were originally only two
dialects, if we credit Strabo, a writer of sound judgment and ex-
tensive information." Jamblichus, indeed, in his life of Pytha-
- § Dionysius of Halicarnassus nearly agrees with Strabo in this account
of the Greek dialects. . ες ᾿
ΝΟ. XXXIII. Cl. Ji. VOL, AVAL. Ὲ
«84 An Essay on the
goras says, “ That it was confessed as a truth, that the mast
ancient dialect was the Doric, next to the Jolic so called from
fBolus; the third, the Ionic, derived from Ion the son of Xuthus ;
the fourth, the Attic, established by Creusa the daughter of Erec-
theus, and this was three generations subsequent to the former.”
But Meursius has remarked that the assertion of Jamblichus m
regard to the Attic dialect is a mistake. .
Bishop Squire, in his Inquiry into the origin of the Greek
language, has shown that the land of Greece is more than ance
expressly called the land of Javan or Ionia, in the sacred writings;
and that the Syrians, Persians, Arabians, and the Barbarians in
eneral, called all the Greeks Javans or laonians, a name derived
rom Javan the grandson of Noah. According to this system, I
should conclude that the Ionic was the primitive dialect. Accord~
ingly we find that the most ancient poets, Homer and Hesiod,
used chiefly the Ionic. This last circumstance may however
admit of a different explanation. ‘The Abbé Barthélemi in his
Travels of Anacharsis observes, that it would be absurd to sup-
pose that Homer formed his poetical language from the various
dialects. tis much more probable, that he used the poetical dia-
lect of the country in which he lived. Now we learn from
Homer’s Hymn to Apollo, which is allowed by Thucydides to be
genuine, that he lived when blind in Chios, an island just opposite
to Ionia. Simonides and Theocritus both call him a Chian. If
we should grant that he was born in Smyrna, that also was.an
Tonian city. |
If we pursue this principle which we have adopted in the case
-of Homer, we shall find it of pretty extensive application. It
may, however, be asked why Hesiod, who lived at Ascra in Beeotia,
and whose father came from Cumez in /Eolia, wrote in the Jonie
dialect; and why his countryman, Pindar the Theban, wrote in the
Doric. ‘fo this it may be answered, that the dialect of Beeotia
in Hesiod’s age was perhaps the lonic. This appears the more
probable, because we have seeu in Strabo, that the primitive dialect
of Attica, a couutry just bordermg on Beeotia, was the Ionic.
The Eolians afterwards possessed Boeotia, and established thew
folic or Doric dialect. This is probably the reason why Pindar,
who wrote many centuries after Hesiod, calls his own poetry in
the first Olympic Ode, by the term “ Αἰοληΐδι μολπῇ, the ΖΕ οἶδα
Song.” In the fragments of that very ancient poet Tyrteus, we
find a strong mixture of the Lonic. He lived in Attica, but he
is said by Suidas to have been a native of Laconia or Miletus.
1 conclude from his language, that he was from Miletus the
capital of Ionia. ἐπ the remains of Mimnermus, we find a slight
tincture of the ume: be was a native of Colophon in Ionia.
The beautiful and singular poetry of Anacreon is in the Lonic
Greek Pastoral} Poets. 89
dialect.. He was a native οἵ Teos in [onia. Solon the Athenian:
legislator was born at Salamis, and educated at Athens. The style
of his poems ts slightly affected with the Ionic, from which it ig
not unlikely that it was then the poetic dialect in Attica; but ag
Solon was a great traveller, be might have acquired it in other
countries, He was contemporary with Mimnermus. Hippe-
crates, who was a native of Cos or Coos, an island near Miletus,
wrote also in the Jonic. On similar principles, we can easily see
why Alczus and Sappho wrote in the Kolic dialect, ‘They were
both natives of Lesbos in olia. .
Qne of the earliest writers in the Doric dialect was that great
poet, Stesichorus a Sicilian. He was-born.in Himera, and wag
contemporary with Sappho and Alceus. Thijs shows us the anti-
quity of the Doric as a poetical and lyric dialect in Sicily.
Stesichorus is highly praised as a lyric writer by Quintilian. We
Jearn from Theocritus* himself, that the people of Syracuse were
acolony from Corinth, and spoke the Doric. The celebrated
Simonides of Ceos, is said to have written in the Doric. The
small and beautiful poem on Danae, exposed with her infant
Perseus in a boat during a violent tempest, is indeed slightly
tinged with that dialect. Other fragments generally ascribed to
Sumonides partake more of the Ionic, and may perhaps have been
written by qnother Simonides, a native of Amorgus, one of the
Sporades.— Bacchylides w. : the nephew of Simonides, and seems
to have written more in the Doric manuer than his uncle, if we
may judge by the little that remains of him. The poet Aleman
wrote in this dialect. 1 have already mentioned Pindar the prince
of lyric poets, and eudeavoured to show the reason of his composing
in the Doric.—To come now to Theocritus ; it was surely nataral
for him to use the dialect of his owu couutry, when writing pastorals,
ito which it seems particularly adapted. On this occasion it may
be asked why Empedocles, a native of Sicily, does not seem by
the remains we have of him to have written in the Donc? To
this we may answer, that we learn from Aristotle, that Empedo-
cles was a great imitator of Homer (‘Opnpixds), laboured and forcible
in his manner of expression, full of metaphors, and used every
other invention he could to improve the beauty of his poetry.
Epicharmus the Sicilian comic poet wrote in the Doric dialect,
as appears from an epigram of ‘Theocritus.
It must appear evident to every one, that such writers as
JEschylus, Euripides, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Plato, Thucydides,
.menophon, &c. must necessarily, fram the place of their nativity
or from their education, write in the Attic dialect.
* Theocrit. Idyllium xv. v. 91-—92.
84 Greek Dialects.
It is not necessary here to account for the dialect of later writers,
when established models of each were generally known. A writer
might then use that which seemed most agreeable to his own taste,
to the nature of his subject, or to the fashion among those for
whom he wrote. Thus Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote in the
‘Attic dialect, because it was in his time esteemed the most polite.
So Bion, who was a native of Smyrna, finding the Donc used
by Theocritus in pastoral poetry, might naturally enough have
imitated him. But Bion appears to have lived in Sicily, as
Moschus, who was undoubtedly a Sicilian, acknowledges him for
his master. Moschus says,. “ that Homer and Bion were both
dear to the fountams; that the former drank from the Pegasean
fountain, and the latter from Arethusa: _
ἮΝ ὃς μὲν ἔπινε
᾿ς Παγάσιδος κράνας, ὃ δ᾽ ἔχεν πόμα τᾶς ᾿Αρεθοίσας.
Whether we can understand from this, that Bion lived near Are-
‘thusa, or only that he cultivated the Sicilian poetry, as Homer
‘was the chief poet in Greece, | shall not pretend to determine.
Before we quit ffs subject, we may naturally inquire why the
‘Attic dramatic writers frequently retain the Doric in their odes
‘or choral songs. Perhaps the song of the goat was originally m
‘the Doric, and the choruses continued to be composed in the
‘same through custom; or it may have been for the Doric music.
‘We have besides seen, that the first great lyric poets wrote in the
‘Doric, or in its kindred dialect the Aolic. So that it might in
‘a manner be considered as particularly appropriated to lyric. com-
‘position, after the examples of Stesichorus, Alceus, Sappho,
‘Aleman, and Pindar, Dr. Buresss, the Bishop of St. David’s,
in his Annotations on “ Dawwes’s Miscellanea Critica,” has given
‘a somewhat different account of the Greek Dialects ; but I have
not found my sentiments altered by the opinions of that learned
and Ingenious prelate. © :
GREEK DIALECTS..
Tue following compendious sketch of the Greek dialects was
drawn up, nearly eight years ago, by one of the Classical Lec-
turers at Cambridge, for the use of the Freshmen, (as they are
called) at their general examination. ‘The person who has sent us
the article will not be answerable for the entire correctness of the
detail, as it was taken down at the time in short hand, with a pri-
vate view only, and uot the least idea then of its ever being com-
Greek Dialects. | 85
mitted to: print. He however takes it upon him to. say, that if
there be any inaccuracy in it, it is but of the most trifling kind.
As it was given to Freshmen by a lecturer, as famed now for the.
goodness of his lectures as he was then, and under whose authority,
future Freshmen may yet come, it is ‘hoped that its insertion in
Lhe Classical Journal will hereafter have its use.
The Grecian Dialects are, strictly speaking, three:
(1,) The Ionic, spoken by the inhabitants of Attica, Achaia,
and Ionia. [The Athenians and Achaians are called by Homer
᾿Ιάονες. ᾿Ιάονες is applied to the Athenians by ZEschylus. ]
(2.) The Doric, s oken in the mountainous parts of Greece,
particularly those in Peloponnesus. |
(3.) Fhe Zolic, which was the oldest, (and similar to the. Do-
ric,) spoken by the ‘Thessalians and Boeotians, who introduced it
into the Peloponnesus.
(1.) The Jonic was carried into Asia by N eleus, the son of Co-
drus—was there spoken in its original form—but in Attica changed.
mto a more refined and elegant state, called the Atéic—which, in
fact, is nothing but.contracted Ionic.
The Attic is divided into three classes :
The Old. The Middle. The New.
Under this, | Aristophanes, Xenophon,
Thucydides, Plato, Menander,
ZEschylus, Philemon,
Sophocles, a Isocrates,
Euripides, Demosthenes, _ ,
féschines,
| and the other orators.
The tragedians used an older cast of language than was em-
ployed by the Attics in their common writings. Hence we find
the Ionic forms, μοῦνος, ξεῖνος, δουρὶ, Οὔλυμπος, &c. Aeschylus, of
the three tragedians, has the most of these forms; Euripides, the
fewest. More of these are to be found in the choruses than in
the dialogue.
The Attic, as we have said above, is a contracted kind of
Tonic ; because the Ionians delighted in the Dactylic or Heroic
measure, while the Attics were more partial to the Iambic and
Trochaic.
onic. Attic.
ἐσω-ὁσω-άσω wo
καλέσω -- τ καλῶ
ὁμόσομαι ὁμοῦμαι
ἐρέω ἐρῶ
κομίσω. Ope
ἐλάσω ἐλῶ
&6 Greek Dialects.
In thes¢ cases ~’* (ἐρέω) is cut down into the ~~ (ἐρῶ). But, when,
the antepenult is long by position, the Attics retain the Fonte
form. So both Attics and Lomics say yoprace,—because it suits
either the“, or“, or“.
fonic. Attic.
σημανέω σημανῶ
Φανέω ᾿ φανῶ
-ὅἄσομαι -ὦμαι
«ὅσομαι -οὔμαι
κολάσομϑι κολῶμαι
- ἮΝ. Β. A short syllable precedes these contractions,
_clow -ἰσομαι | «Ἰ'ῷ ιοῦμαι
ὀνει)δίσω ὀνειδίσοριαι δνειδιῶ ὀνειδιοῦμαε
φροντίσω φροντιῶ
without reference to the preceding syllable, as in χορτάσω. :
- The lonics discarded the augment—the Attics never, except in
the case of χρῆν and ἐχρῆν, which are used promiscuonusly. [See
Porson’s Preface to the Hecuba. }
Old Attic. New Attic.
pr and oo pp and tr
θάρσος θρᾶσος
θάλασσα θάλαττα
The New Attics disliked the Σ. Hence Euripides is ridiculed
for his σιγματίσματα, "
Sota Σ᾽, dz adv ᾿Ἑλλήνων 650. Med. 475.
where the letter 3 is repeated seven times. Sophocles has a line
where the letter T occurs eight times; which is not remarked by
Aristotle. Porson observes that there is in Euripides a lie more
remarkable than the one just quoted. It is this; ἧ
τὸ Σῶμα ΞΣώΣΑΣ, ro! ἈδγουΣ ΣΏΣΕΙΣ euody. Iph. Taur. 772.
Here the Σ΄ is repeated ten times. In Sophocles,
OY tAX ἀδέλφα!ξ τάδε τὰξ ἐμὰ χέραΣ. Cd. Rex. 1481.
the letter occurs as often as in the passage given from the Medea.
And so in Cid. Rex. 425. " os
ΓΝ. B. nomen σίγμα indeclinabile est.] |
(2.) The Doric became gradually refined to a degree of sweet
ness that ne other dialect ever attained. [The Doric is to the
Attic what the Scotch is to the English,—in songs, ballads, and
the like.| The Drama originated in the mountainous parts of
Greece: hence a slight cast of the Doric remained in the choral
odes,—only slight, when compared with Theocritus or Pindar ;
[perhaps, confined entirely to the changing of η into a, and this too —
only under certain conditions. | :
(3.) The Holic was carried over into Asia from Peloponnesus :
from whence it spread among some of the islanders off the Asiatic
coast, particularly Lesbos. Hence used by Sappho and Alceus.
Greek Dialects. 87
. We learn that Homer was translated into different dia-
lects. Hence has arisen the difficulty of accounting for his parti-
cular amects [all three remaining, in consequence, I some degree
mixed.
From the /Kolic sprung the Latin. Evander emigrated into
Italy before the Trojan war, and transported thither the language
of Arcadia (the clic), which, mixed with the origmal Tuscan,
(something like the Celtic,) formed the basis of the Latin language.
The article was seldom, if ever, used by the earlier Greeks, as
appears from Homer. [Yet αὐτὰρ ‘O αὖθι θύεστ᾽ ᾿Α. ὃ. 6. and se-
veral others in the passage about the sceptre.] Hence its disuse
in the Latin language. a
One of the principal advantages which the Greek laaguage has
over the Latin 1s m the article ; 3
ὁ ἡγομοὶν στρατοῦ,
ἡγομῶὼν στρατοῦ,
ὁ ἡγεμὼν τοῦ στρατοῦ,
ἡγεμεὺν τοῦ στρατοῦ,
the leader of an army,
a leader of an army,
/
the leader of the army,
ἃ leader of the army,
all of which differ in meaning, but can only be represented in Latin
_ by dur exercitis. e
The augment seems to have been seldom useé by the earlier
Greek writers, and therefore by those who wrote in the Holic dia-
lect; the reduplication often. This is another proof. of the two
languages being akin to each other. The Latins have cecidi,—ce-
cidi,—cucurri, &c. Other characteristics are,
Folic ἡ into ἃ
Doric ἡ into ἃ
Hence from γύμφη νύμφώά nympha,
| apy hapa fama.
Our account of the Molic dialect arises principally from cer-
tam of the ancient gtammarians, who possessed accounts of them
from writings lost to us.
The Holic is mostly destitute of aspirates; and the same is
very nearly the case with the oldest Latin. |
The three labials, three. palatals, and three dentale are easily
commutable. And so’ in English: for mother Chaucer wrote
moder, and for murder, Shakspeare and other old English authors,
murther. : .
Till the time of Simonides and Epicharmus, s.and 6 were pro-
misouously used for y and «; for 6, rH; for χ, xH; fos ¢,#H; for
ξ, xo; for ζαὃσ ; and fer ᾧ, xc.
88
Latin.
ambo,
nebula, .
alibi,
guberno,
apgulus,
Deus,
inde,
lateo,
misceo,
fremo,
triumphus,
purpureus, ᾿
Greek Dialects.
Greek.
ἄμφω
γεφελη
ἀλλοχὶ
κυβερνῶ
ἄγκυλον
Θεὸς
ἐνθὲν
ἔλαθον [λαθέω]
ἔμισγον
βρέμω
θρίαμβος.
“τὸ δύρεος.
"The retention of the F inthe Latin, shows the traces of the Holie
in that language. In some degree it supplied the place of the as-
pirate. It is expressed in Latin by D, sometimes by S.
Latin.
sylva,
evum,
avernus,
boves,
divus,
video,
viginti,
venter,
vestis,
! vesper,;
ver,
vesta,
"Eolic.
ΕὐλΡὴ
αἰ Εὼν
a i Fopyos
BoF es
diFos
Εἶδον
Εἰκότι (old form)
Fe evr egos
F ἐσθὴς
Fé ἐσπερος
(ἔαρ) Ῥῆρ
Fic tia
See Dr. Valpy’s Greek Grammar.
Other forms are deduced by iiiterchange of consonants, ὅζο.
Latin.
vulgus,
" num,
forma,
lac,
dulcis,
tener,
ab,
aub,
super,
tunica,
animus,
mens,
Greek.
ὄχλος [ὄγλος, ὄὅλγος, Εὔλγος]
μορφὴ ἣν ;
ἄνεμος
μένος (used in Homer for
heart’s blood.)
Eittérature Grecque. 89
somnus, Εὔκνος
venl, ἦνθον (ἦλθον)
᾿ ιδίζυον, [οαὐέμογ, ut κέττορες, Molic for τέσσαρες.
cottidie pro quotidie. |
fallo, σφάλλω
unus, ἕγος
legunt, λέγοντι (λέγουσι)
legimus, λέγομες
sunt, (οὖσι, ἔοντι) ὄντι.
Principal changes are ; oo
Latin us from ὡς Greek
terminations, εν Ὅν terminations.
Δἴ αν
— ΞΞΙΣΣΣΣΣΣ
τ EYTTERATURE GRECQUEz
\
Ἱπποκράτους τὸ περὶ ᾿Λόρων, ‘Yiarwv, Τόπων, δεύτερον ἐκδοθὲν μετὰ
τῆς Γαλλικῆς μεταφράσεως, κιτ. λ.γ) φιλοτίμῳ δαπάνῃ τῶν ὁμογενῶν χίων.
Traité d’Hippocrate, des Airs, des Eaux, et des Lieur ;
Deuriéme Edition, accompagnée de la traduction Fran-
caise, &c., et publiée aux frais des généreux Grecs de
Chios ; par M. Coray de Smyrne." |
Calamitas virtutis occasio est. SENECA de Provident. Cap. 1v.
!
“-“ο]»..6}»».τ.»-----.
ΝΟ. Ie
Pp ersonne n’ignore que la Gréce fut long-temps la terre privilégiée,
od les lettres, les sciences et les arts arrivérent au plus haut degré
de perfection: La Médecine, particuliérement, y subit la réforme
la plus importante pour le bonheur de Vhumanité. Hippocrate,
le plus illustre descendant d’Esculape, eut la gloire de devenir le
véritable réformateur de la science,” et d’acquérir par les travaux de
son vaste génie le titre immortel de Pére de la Médecine.
Aujourd'bui, la patrie antique des héros et des grands hommes
semble, comme le phénix de la fable, renaitre de ses cendres ; mais”
rrr rr συσνασαν αν υυσσασανασ νυ συ σσοοὐνσυσανανυσασσασσνασσπωσαπασσοαπαπασαπονυσασσιασπουποναπαανσσυσυσοσο
= Un vol. in 8vo. Paris, 1816. Chez Théophile Barrois, Pere, Rue Haute-
Feyille, No. 28.
Voyez Sprengel, Hist. de la Médec., T. 1. p. 283 et 986 de la traduetion
Francaise de M. Jourdan.
90 Littérature Grecque.
elle présente au monde le spectacle le plus extraordinaire, le plus
affligeant et Je plus digne des regards de la Providence: celui d’ane
lutte opimatre du courage contre Ja mauvaise fortune," de le
patience la plus noble conte l’oppression la plus atroce, de V’inté-
grité contre la corruption, de l’amour de la patne contre la stupide
indifférence ou le faux patriotisme, de la droiture contre les noires
intrigues, du mérite et du vrai talent, de la vertu méme contre la
jalousie la plus vile et la plus dangereuse ; enfin, du progrés des
lamigres et de la civilisation contre les épuisses ténébres de Vigno-
rance et de la barbarie. ἢ
Tel est actuellement l'état moral de la Gréce infortunée dans le
bnilante aurore de sa régénération.
vrai philosophe et le petit nombre d’hommes d’état, qui
prennent un vif intérét au sort d’une contrée si belle, mais si
heureuse, peuvent aisément deviner quelle sera tét ou tard l’issue
de sa lutte constante.
Sans nous .permettre aucune réflexion sur ce triste sujet, nous
nous bornerons a dire ici que M. Coray est celui qui, par ses
nombreux et excellens travaux, a eu le bonheur de contribuer le
plus aux progrés étonnans dans les bonnes études, qu’ont faits
depuis quelques anuées les Grecs, ses. dignes compstnotes. |
Favorisé par les circonstances les plus heureuses, aprés avoir
bravé une infinité d’obstacles divers, M. Coray a employé pour
Putilité générale de sa patrie, les ressources d’une érudition vaste,
dune philosophie noble et élevée, d’une morale solide et tou-
chante.
Parmi le grand nombre d’ouvrages que ce savant a mis au jour,
on distingue sa traduction et son commentaire du T'raité des Atrs,
des Eaux et des Lieur, que l’6n attribue généralement ἃ Hippo-
Crate.
La premiére édition de cet ouvrage parut en 1800, et fut ὅς»
cueillie non seulement par tous les savans médecins, mais encore
par tous ceux qui s’occupent spécialement de la langue d’Homére
et d’'Hippocrate. C’est en effet par ce grand et beau travail que
M Coray a principalement fixé Pattention de la République tes
ettres.
Les exemplaires de cet important ouvrage étant épuists depuis
quelque temps, le savant traducteur s’est déterminé ἃ en donner une
seconde édition supérieure a la premiére.
On se rappelle que Μ, Coray a obtenu en 1810 le prix décennal
proposé par le Gouvernement d’alors, pour la meilleure traduction
d’un ouvrage Classique écrit en Grec, a
_* & Ecce spectaculum, ad quod respiciat intentus operi suo Deus: cece Deo
.dignum, vir fortis cum malé fortun’ itus, utique si et provocavit.”
(Seneca de Provident, Cap. 11.)
Littératare Grecque. 91
᾿ Le Jury, composé des membres distingués de l'Institut, aprés
evoir examiné avec impartialité si le Tiaité des Airs, des Eaux et
des Lieur, remplissait [65 conditions exigées par le décret, a déclaré
ἃ l’unanimité que cette production était une de celles qui honorent
le plus le pére de la médecine. Cette sentence du tribunal Acadé-
mique était au surplus fondée sur l’opinion des médecins et des
philosophes de tous les siécls.
On connait plusieurs traductions Francaises de cet immortel
euvrage ; mais avant la publication de /’excellent travail du Docteur
Coray, on ne consultait que celle de Dacier qui s’était mépris plus
@une fois, parce qu'il n’avait pas les counaissances nécessaires en
médecine. Profondément versé dans cette science divine, et con-
naissant a fond la belle langue de ses ancétres, M. Coray était
peat-étre le seul en état d’entreprendre et de publier une nouvelle
traduction du traité qui nous occupe ; traduction qui lui a mérrté
les applaudissemens de |’Europe savante, et que le Jury de 1810
a senle jugée digne du prix décennal, juste récompense de ses
nobles efforts. :
La nouvelle édition dont nous allons faire une faible analyse,
West pas encore enti¢rement achevée. M.Coray, dans un trés-
court avertissement, s’exprime sur son nouveau travail en ces
termes.
“ L’indulgence avec laquelle ces savans (les membres du Jury)
ont jugé mon édition, m’a engagé d’en entreprendre une seconde
plus correcte, s’il était possible, que la. premiére. Mais comme
elle exige une plus longue étude, j’ai cru devoir publier, en atten-
dant, le texte seul avec la traduction, en faveur de mes jeunes com-
patriotes qui se livrent a l’étude de la médecine. | Une gratide
partie des corrections sont des Ionismes que javais négligés dans
premiere édition. Celles de la traduction sont plus nom-
breuses.” |
. Le vénérable éditeur, désirant d’étre encore plus utile a la jeu-
nesse studieuse de la Gréce, a ajoaté a la fin du traité dont il s’agit,
Pexcellent morceau d’Hippocrate intitulé: Loz, composée par ce
philosophe pour Péducation médicale de ses disciples. Vient
aprés le petit traité de Galien qui a pour titre : “ Ὅτι ἄριστος ἰατρὸς,
χαὶ φιλόσορος ;” c’est-d-dire: que [excellent médecin est aussi un
philosophe. |
Le volume est terminé par des notes critiques et trés-impor-
tantes sur les deux petits traités dont nous venons de parler. Ces
notes sont écrites en Grec littéral avec beaucoup d’élégance. Je
regrette pourtant que M. Coray n’ait point traduit le morceau de
Galien, tandis qu'il a accompagné /a Loi d’Hippocrate d’une excel-
lente traduction Frangaise..
Notre savant éditeur a fait précéder sa nouvelle édition da
Traité des Airs, des Eaux et des Lieur, d’un long discours pré-
92 Littérature Greeque.
liminaire écrit en Grec moderne, adressé aux jeunes Grécs qui
étudient la médecine. Ce discours est d’une si haute importance,
que nous croyons faire plaisir 4 nos lecteurs, en leur en offrant
quelques fragments traduits.
L’auteur commence par s’adresser aux jeunes descendants d’ Hip-
pocrate, en s’excusant avec une rare modestie de la liberté qu'il
prend de leur donner des conseils; et cela, dans un temps οὗ,
comme il le sait trés-bien, tous ceux des jeunes étudians de la
Gréce, qui ont regu une éducation libérale, le regardent et comme:
leur bienfaiteur, et comme leur tendre pére. :
‘¢ J’ai voulu, dit-il, 6 mes jeunes compatriotes qui fréquentez
encore les écoles de médecine, placer votre nom dans la seconde
édition de cet ouvrage, afin d’avoir le motif, non de vous donner.
des conseils (quoique mon 4ge puisse en quelque sorte m’excuser
en cela), mais de vous communiquer les avis Pun grand homme,
d’un grand médecin,—d’Hippocrate.”
Quelques lignes plus bas, l’auteur passe ἃ des considérations
générales sur le génie, les vertus et le dévouement de l’auteur des:
Aphorismes.
' “ Lavie d’Hippocrate, dit M. Coray, est du petit nombre de’
celles auxquelles il est difficile de trouver une autre vie paralléle.....
Le mérite de ce grand homme est, non seulement d’avoir été le
premier dans l’art qu'il professait, mais plus encore, d’avoir relevé
cette supériorité par |’éclat de la vertu, en égalant par sa condulte
Socrate, son contemporain. Lhistoire et ses écrits attestent qu’en
s’occupant de la médecine, il n’avait d’autre but que celui que
doivent se proposer les vrais amis de la vertu, utilité des:
hommes.’ .....Hippocrate combattait les charlatans en médecine ;
Socrate, les faux philosophes.” :
Une chose remarquable et que notre savant éditeur n’a point
paste sous silence, c’est que l’heureuse mére d’Hippocrate portait
e méme nom que celle de Socrate; elle s’appelait Phénaréte.
Il parait cependant qu’elle n’exerga pas les fonctions de Sage
Femme, comme la mére du _ philosophe d’Athénes; mais on a liew
de croire que ce n’était pas du moins une femme ordinaire, puis-
qu’elle a élevé un grand homme et un vrai philosophe.
¢ Lorsqu’on loue quelqu’un, ajoute M. Coray, avec l’intention
de le proposer pour modéle aux autres, on ne doit faire connaitre
que celles de ses vertus qui ont été pratiquées pour le bien de
Vhumanité ; qu’on se serve des fleurs de la Rhétorique dans tout
' ¥ Aristote ne placait le bonheur dont ’homme est susceptible, que dans
une ame dont les mouvemens, dirigés par la raison et la vertu, sont unique=
ment consacrés 4 l’utilité publique.
Vid, Ἐθικ. Νικομαχ,») Lib. 1. ap. Vie
Littérature. Grecque. 93
leur éclat pour louer d’autres qualités, selon les préceptes des
Rhéteurs: Ja louange n’est alors qu’un brillant bavardage. L/an-
tiquité donuva le nom de héros a Hercule, ἃ Thésée, et a d’autres,
non parcequ'ils étaieut plus forts que leurs contemporains, mais
parcequ’ils employérent la force pour le salut de la Gréce, en la
purgeant des bngands et des assassins.”
Le paragraphe suivant n’est qu’une transition heureuse dictée
par un juste sentiment d’indignation, et dirigée contre une “ autre es-
péce de brigands qui ont existé, dit l’auteur, en tout temps et chez
toutes les nations ; race cruelle, ennemie du genre humain, race
d’hommes d’autant plus redoutables, que ce ne sont point les
foréts qu’ils parcourent avec des armes, mais quwils passent leur
vie au sein des villes mémes, sans étre armés: et en apparence, ils
sont en paix avec leurs concitoyens. Les étres de cette espéce
sont ceux qui veulent exclusivement étre comblés de tous les biens
de la fortune, et que les autres soient condamnés a en souffrir
toutes les rigueurs; qui veulent avoir seuls des yeux pour voir, et
que les autres restent totalement aveugles; qui ont la prétention
d’étre les archontes ou les docteurs perpétuels, et aspirent a: ce que
les autres soient leur humbles serviteurs ou leur éléves éternels; en
un mot, ceux qui batissent leur félicité personnelle sur la-sottise
de ceux qu’ils appellent avec mépris le peuple ignorant, tandis
qwils sont eux-mémes les premiers auteurs de son ignorance, de sa
bassesse et de ses malheurs. Quiconque entreprend de combattre
de tels brigands, a besoin d’un autre pouvoir et d’autres armes que
Ja force et la massue d’Hercule; car la sagesse méme jointe ἃἂ la
vertu suffit ἃ peine pour le sauver de leurs. persécutions barbares.
_ En effet, outre les moyens que leur suggére leur.méchanceté, ils
sont souvent aidés par la sottise de leurs disciples. Voila pourquot
peu d’hommes ont osé leur livrer un combat, la plupart du temps
aussi funeste 4 celui quile tente, qu’inutile ἃ ceux qu'il défend. Le
sort de Socrate a prouvé ce que j’'avance. De ce petit nombre de
suges fut Hippocrate issu d’Esculape.” *
Μ. Coray entre ensuite dans beaucoup de détails sur le Dieu de
la Médecine, les Asclépiades ses descendants, ses temples; sur la
cupidite, la ruse et la fourberie de quelques-uns de ses Ministres,
sur l’abus qu’ils faisaient de Ja confiance et de la crédulité de leurs
concitoyens, &c. &c.
“ 1] est probable, dit-il, que la haine qu’avaient ces prétres ἃ
Paganisme contre Hippocrate, donna naissance a la calomnie hor-
rible et impudente qui forga ce philosophe ἃ fuir sa patrie,—
comme ayant brfilé le temple d’Esculape. Voila donc le grand et
* Ceux qui connaissent ]’état actuel de la malheureuse Gréce, pardonneront
sans doute ἃ la sensibilité de l’auteur ce qui pourrait paraitre sévére dans ce
long paragraphe.
94 Littérature Grecque.
divin Hippocrate sur le mfme rang que l’exécrable Hérostrate qui
incendia le temple de Diane!”
Notre estimable auteur observe ensuite avec justesse 48} y ὦ
des hommes tellement au-dessus de l’ingratitude et de la médisanee,
que ce serait les insulter que d’entreprendre leur défense ou leur
apologie. ‘“ Ces homnues, dit-il, sont en trés-petit nombre, i est
vrai, mais il en existe. Hippocrate en est un; mais il ya ates
plusieurs personnes dont on entendrait parler avec plus ou mosns
de sévérité ; alors on ne court aucun risque de se tromper és
s écriant avec Aristophane : : :
Τούτου πάνυ τοὔργον, οὗτος ὁ τρότος πανταχοῦ.
Oui, telle fut partout sa vie et sa conduile.
Mais comme la Biographie d’Hippocrate, dictée par un faut
jugement et par le mauvais gofit, est remplie de contes, qu'il me
soit permis d’examiner la calonmie relative ἃ l’incendie du ὦ
d’Esculape, et de me constituer en φυοίαᾶς sorte l’avocat du
losophe de Cos.”
Le savant auteur entre ensuite en matiére et prouve toute ia
fausseté de cette horrible assertion par les argumens les plus solides,
et surtout par des documens historiques et chronologiques qui πιὸ
laissent aucun doute. .
Certes, Phomme extraordinaire qui a tant Jutté contre I’mgrat}-
tude et les autres vices de ses contemporains, quia consacré toute
sa vie au soulagement des maux de ses semblables, qui n'a jamen
&é découragé par l’injustice, la malignité et l’imposture; ua tel
hommie, dis-je, ne pouvait trouver dans la postérité un défenseur
plus impartial, plus zélé, plus digne de lui. M. Coray, le plus
savant des Grecs modernes, peut a juste titre se gloritier d’étre Pun
des compatriotes du pére de la médecine. Dans l'impossibilité o&
il est d’exercer cet art divin, le vénérable auteur ἃ qui nous rendens
cet hommage public de notre admiration sincére et de notre pre-
fonde reconnaissance, n’en marche pas moins sur les traces da
grand homme; cur il soulage, par ses crits pleins de candeur et
de sagesse, les maladies de l’'4me qui afflivent encore la malheureuse
Gréce, sa patrie, courbée sous le joug le plus odieux et le plus
barbare.
Aprés avoir vengé Hippocrate de la maniére la plus noble et
la plus touchante, le Docteur Coray parle des devoirs et des qua
lités du véritable médecin, et s’adressant a ses jeunes compatriofes,
il leur dunue des couseils patemels et vraiment salutaires. Les
deux paragraphes suvans sont surtout remarquables et dignes de
l'attention des moralistes et des médecins: -
«M. Coray aura sans doute cru inutile d’ajouter ces mots: heureusement
pour Phumanité et pour Phonneur de la patrie, .
Etéttérature Grecque. 95
$¢ Le véstable science de guérir doit étre imséparable de la
science et de la morale. Si nil’une ni l’autre n’ont ἐξέ perfec-
tiomnées jusqu’ici, c'est uniquement parceque peu de savans ont
ecana jusqu’a présent |’étroite liaison de ces deux sciences. I] est
vare que le corps éprouve des effections sans les communiquer ἃ
Fame ; comme il est rare aussi que celle-ci soit malade, sans que
ke corps en soit plus ou moins affecté. Vous étes donc non-seules
ment les médecins du corps, mais de l’4me, et il vous est impose
sible de guérir celle-ci, ἃ moins que vous ne songiez ἃ remédier
aux maux de la votre.
“ Comme enseignant la morale, votre principal devoir est d’ap-
prendre aux hommes, avant qu’ils tombent dans des maladies, que
le moyen le plus efficace de conserver la santé et de prolonger la
vie, c'est de modérer les passions de l’Ame,’ et que pour parvenit
ἃ cela, ils ont besoin de gouverner le corps selon les régles de ja
médecine; qu’en se servant surtout de ce moyen pour l'éducation
de leurs enfans, ils leur laisseront un héritage plus précieux sasie
comparaison que tous les trésors du monde: la vertu et la santé.”
Ces lignes et la note que nous venons de traduire avec une fidé-
διέ scrupuleuse parlent tellement au coeur, qu’ils n’ont pas besom
de nos éloges. Si par malheur il se trouve des hommes incapables
de sentir et d’apprécier les profondes vérités que renferment ces
paroles si simples et dépouillées de tout ornement, nous les in-
vitons a lire, nous les prions méme de méditer, l’ouvrage si connu
de Cabanis, intitulé: Rapports du physique et du moral de
1 Roga bonam mentem, bonam valetudinem animi: deinde corporis.” (Se
neca Epist.x.) Ce précepte est sans contredit de Ja plus grande inaportance ;
mais malheureusement, dans ce siecle des lumiéres, la najorité des hommes
font plus de cas-de la santé du corps que de celle de I’ame. Vuila la source de
nos miséres ! .
, *Ménandre a dit: “ γγίεια καὶ νοῦς ἐσθλὰ τῷ βίῳ δύο.) Ce que Juvenal a rendu
par “ mens sana in corpore sano.” Séneque dans sa 72e lettre explique le
‘6 Mens sana,” par ces muts: “ δὲ reipsd contenta sit, si confidit sibi, si scit omnia
cota mortulium, omnia bencficia, que dantur, petunturque, nullum in oitd beaté
habere momentum.” Les anciens ont.écrit beaucoup de tra?tés eur l’éduca-
tion des enfans. Les mudernes en unt publié un beaucoup plus grand nom-
bre, surtout dans le dernier siécle. Ces ouvrages formeraient une grande
bibliothéque, si l’on en fesait la collection; et cependant, ils ont jusqu’ic
pou cout.ibué a la civilisation du genre humain. En voici la cause: Qui-
congue se propuse d’écrire sur l’éducation des enfans dans l’espuir de déter-
miner les houmes ἃ devenir des hommes, et ἃ procréer des hommes, duit née
cessairement posséder ces deux avantages; €étre excellent médeciy ct homme
d’une vertu rare. Hippucrate seul efit exécuté l’uuvrage le plus par‘ait sur
Yéducatiun. Maintenaut nous devons attendre que quelqu’un parmi les
modernes pulsse égaler ce grand humme; quelle gloire pour la Gréce, si elle
le voyait naftre!
(Note de M. Coray.) a |
06 Littérature Grecque.
homme. Ce savant admirateur d’Hippocrate était sans doute ‘un
médecin:philosophe.' . |
Le paragraphe suivant de M. Coray relatif ἃ l'influence du moral
sur Je physique, n’est ni moins curieux que le précédent, ni moins
‘digne de la méditation des étudians en médecine. ‘ Quand. vous
&tes appelé chez un malade, dit-il, votre prenuer devoir est -d’exa-
miner scrupuleusement si parmi les causes de la maladie,: 1l-n’y.a
pas des causes morules, c’est-a-dire, des affections de l’ame-qui
peuvent nuire a la santé du corps. En effet, il y a des hommes
qui sont malades d’ambition démesurée, de cupidité, de chagrms
insensés pour n’avoir pas acquis de la gloire ou des richesges.
D’autres le sont de pauvreté, et de chagrin léyitime occasionné par
les tendres soins et les inquiétudes ἃ l'égard de ceux qui leur appar-
tiennent par les liens du sang. D’autres, pour des discordgs se-
crétes de famille ; d’autres enfin, pour ne pas m’étendre davantage,
sont malades par diverses circonstances morales. Les secours
ordinaires de l'art seraient insuffisants pour ces sortes d’hommes
souffrants, si vous n’y joigniez aussi les conseils de la morale, - et
que votre conduite irréprochable n’inspirat a ces étres malheureux
assez de confiance pour vous révéler Jes secrets de leur Ame, et
assez de courage pour accueillir vos conseils et vos consolations.”
Un des plus beaux et des plus touchans paragraphes du discours
de M. Coray est, a mon avis, celui-ci; on le lira, j’en suis sd, avec
un tendre intérét :
“ La vertu, quel que soit celui qui la pratique, obtient toujours
des éloges mérités ; mais si quelqu’un |’exerce au mépris de tout
autre gain, s'il ne se propose pour. but que l’utihté commune, 31,
a renee σα θπκιημοιβηθαιδαααα σα ΝΝΝΝΝΝΝΝδΝΘ
* Sauf quelques idées un peu trop hardies et trop subtiles, peut-étre, Ca
banis réunissait aun trés haut degré les qualités nécessaires pour instruire
ges semblables. Aucun Docteur de nos jours n’a mieux prouvé par l’exem-
‘ple la vérité de ces paroles remarquables: ‘ Pour instruire Jes autres, il ne
sufit pas d’étre fort instruit soi-méme: il est nécessaire d’avoir beaucoup
réfléchi sur le développement des idées, d’en bien connaitre }’enchainement
naturel, afin de savoir dans quel ordre elles doivent étre présentées, pour étre
saisies facilement, et Jaisser des traces durables: on a besoin d’avoir étudié
profondément l’art de les rendre, afin d’en simplifier et d’en perfectionner de
plus en plus Vexpression.” Rapports du physique et du mor. t.1, p. 27. 26
édition.
Ceux qui ont lu avec attention les discours préliminaires de M. Coray, ont
pu remarquer et méme se convaincre que le succés unanime qu’ils ont obtenu
dans presque toute la Gréce, est di en grande partie aux qualités importantes
dont nous venons de parler. Dans Je second volume de cet ouvrage (page
164) il rend hommage aux lumiéres de notre auteur en ces termes: “ὁ Sije
ne me suis pas servi de la traduction (du Traité des Airs, §c.) de M. Coray,
c'est que j’avais écrit ce mémoire avant qu’elle parfit. Personne, au reste,
ne rend plus de justice que moi aux travaux de ce savant célébre, dont j‘ho-
nore autant la personne, que j'admire la sagaeité de sa critique et sa vaste:
érudition.” -ς τος
Collatio Codicits Harleiani. 97
environné d’ennemis de la vertu et du genre humain, il a le courage
d’aimer la vertu et ses semblables, s'il méprise et la guerre qu’il
attend de la part des imposteurs, et l’ingratitude ou lipdifférence
de ceux qu il s’efferce de délivrer des erreurs ; quelle louange, quel
panégyriste se trouyerait digne d’un tel homme?”: ° |
L*auteur termine son important discours par le petit paragraphe
suivant qu’a inspiré le sentiment le plus louable, |’amour de l’hu-
manité. < Nobles adolescents de la Gréce, non! aucun de vous
ne déshonorera le nom Grec, en égalant les barbares médecins des
nations barbares. ‘Tous, sans exception, vous n’étudierez la méde-
cine, que dans [intention de devenir les sauveurs et non les de-
structeurs des hommes. Yous suivrez le conseil philanthropique de
celui dont vous voyez ici l'image: “’Adeddey, ἢ μὴ βλάπτειν,"
“<‘ Zire utile, ou ne pas nutre.”"
' -On peut juger, par les passages que noys avons fidélement tra-
duits, quels sont les sentimens qui apiment celui qui est le plus be]
ornement de la Gréce moderne. Cependant, cet homme, qui 8
congacré toute sa vie ἃ l’utilité de la Gréce, sa patrie, et dont les
importants travaux ont été appréciés par tous les savans de.]’Eu-
rope, .a £té. attaqué,.de la maniére la plus’ injuste, par un petit
nombre d’hypocrites, et plus partieuliérement par 168 fauteurs du
d sme et de la tyrannie. Mais, grace au génie tutélaire de la
Greéce infortunée, les clameurs impuissantes de la médiocnité en-
vieuse, les pamphlets injurieux et obscurs, djctés par esprit de
parti, par la mauygise fo et par la plus l4che malveillance, n’ont
pu arréter la marche majestueuse de la vérité, qui déja parcourt
sous dheureyx auspices Je so} classique et sacré, auquel toute
Europe savante doit ja civilisation, et les immenses connaissances
dont elle se glorifie.” .
CONSTANTIN NICOLOPOULQO, ©
Membre de la Société Philotechnique de Paris, ete.
a TESTO
~ COLLATIO
-. CODICIS HARLEIANI 5674.
CUM ODYSSEA EDITIONIS ERNESTINE 1760,
| No. 1x.—(Copntinued from No, xXx11. p. 313.)
POSTSCRIPTVM. |
ox collationem meam relego et ad codicem ipsum exigo, video
gane paullo plura cum omissa, tum commissa, quam putabam. Nec
Mubito, quin, si quis laborem conferendi codicis iterum susceperit,
quedam adhuc inventurus sit, que diligentiam meam effugerintt.
= ‘
' Hipp. Epidem. Lib, 1..Sect. 2.
NO.XXXUL Cl. Ji, VOL. XVII. G
98
men, opinor, 86
ΟΔΥΣΣ. A-
| 27. Alibi. Ad A. 406.
88. In var. lect. lege igsodias.
85. ὦ τῇ κατ᾿ ἀντίμαχον ὠγνλίην
“Φ0Ἐ 2. lege δὲ,
. . 2. st, pro
113. εἶδε ex emend.
138. πὰρ δὲ,
146. Lege ἔχεναν. εἴ 6 super a.
(Plerumque puncta addidi vel
omisi, prout textus et scholia ad-
dunt vel omittunt. Sed sicubi
hanc regulam imprudens violavi,
condonabit, uti spero, equus lec-
tor.
is. si καὶ etiam Schol.
- 175. le © ve. μεθέπη.
185.. adde “ et alibi.”
. 193. ἀναγουνόν. Nullo certo con-.
silio przpositiones jangaunt aut dis-
jungunt MSS. bed” Harleianus
sepe przpositiones a verbis suis
per tmesin disjunctas sine accen-
tibus reprzsentat.
204. 1. 2. lege “in marg. ad
hunc locum.”
270. 295. ὅππως κι.
$14. Primo scripta erat vulga-
ta lectto. Sed hoc in omnibus
locis intelliges, ubi emendationem
simpliciter memoro.
337. τὸ οἶδας οὐκ ἔχρήσατο :
ξηνόδοτος yee εἴδεις καὶ ἀρίσταρχος.
οὗ δυσχεραίνει τῇ γραφῇ.
356. Quidam scripsere, ἀλλὰ
σύγ᾽ εἰσελθοῦσα, alii, in quibus Ari-
starchus, totos quatuor versus de-
levere, cpesiver λύγων αὐτοὺς ἔχειν
ἑλιάδι καὶ ἐν τῇ τοξεία τῶν μνηστήρων:
In alio schol. ἐν δὲ ταῖς χαριστί-
γροφαῖς οὐκ ἧσαν:
$70. γε tantum fuisse primo vi-
detur, sed δὲ ab eadem manu ad-
ditum:
408. Nunc video scribam pri-
Collatio Codicts Harleiani:
Quicunque hoc opus aggredietur, me non invito fecerit;
quantum opera mea esse adjutum.
agnoscet fm
mo dedisse #1 τοι, sed priusquam
per » mutasse m τε et deinde κ᾽
addidisse.
424. Adde, perawembivas δέ Ga-
σιν ὑπὸ ἀριστοφαάίΐνους τὸν στίχο». ᾿
444, βούλεσε δὲ εχ emend. ε}18»
dem m.
ΟΔΥΣΣ. B.
11. δύω omittit Apollonius v.
᾿Αργόν.
24. τοὺς ὅγε etiam textus ἃ m. pr.
ut videtur.
41]. ὅγειρα Schol. Codicis Town-
leiani ad I]. I. 225.
50. μητρί τ᾿ ἐμῇ idem ibidem,-et
noster Scholiastes; qui preterea
bis ἐπέχραον. Textus ex emend.
ἐπί 97.
60. Lege, ov τι text. et sv SUe
peradditum, sed vulgata in scho»
his. .
65. Mirus error. Corrige, εἷλε
λοῦς τε text. et bis schol. .
77. προτιπτυσσοίμεθα pire τοῦ 6»
δελῶ δὲ τὸ στερνιδοίμεθα. ἢ ἀχώριστω
γιυοίμεεθα. καὶ ἔδει μὲν ἡμᾶς weer,
Cus εἰς αὐτό" τὸ δὲ pide τοῖς is ἄπο"
διδόναι. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδίποτε ὁ εἰκοστὸς χρό
γος τοῦ ἡρωϊκοῦ στιγμὴν ἐπιδέχεται
Confer hanc notam cym regulaa
Bentleio tradita ad Lucan. i. 281.
120. adde, “et sic Apollonius
mV. Στιφάνη,.᾽
123. Supra stay est τὸν σὸν. Arie
stophanes videtur legisse gernoragts
ἔδονται.
144. Ante πόθι adde ye.
152. ὄσσοντο: ἐν τῇ fared ioowre
[Sorarre] ἀντὶ τοῦ ὄσσαν καὶ κληδένῳ
ἐποίουν : .
156. ὅπερ pro ὥσπερ Aristophay
nes. ἔμελλον aliud scholion.
168. οἱ δὲ pro 42 schol. infra. ad
244,
. γί
Collatio.Codicis Harleiani.
170. μμαντεύσομαι text. sine σ
wchol.
201. Adde ἐς text. sed” ante σύ,
pr
232. pages seho]. marg.
244. Schol. ῥιανὸς γὰρ [ve- | xa
wesveres παὶ λόγον ἔχοι διὰ καὶ τὸν [τὸ
τὸν] μεοίντιν εἰπεῖν. φραξώμεθ᾽ ὥσκεν κωτα-
παύσωμεν. οἱ δ καὶ αὐτοὶ «αὐίσϑων"
«φεὶ γὸ ἡ ύνων κωτωισαύεμεν:
296. Addes “ accentu super κα
eraso.” ...
350. Lege λαρώτωτος.
- 854. «eodem tempore additum.
367. φρώσσονται.
410. παλλέστρατος διῦτι φίλοι ope
nee φιρώμεεθα καὶ ἔστι τῆς rrrigns ἀτ-
Φιϑος οὕτως συναιρεῖν εὖ.
Sed nls est disyllabon infra I.
212,
OAYEZ. r.
8. sed. ἱκάστοθι Anstarchus et
Herodianus.
Ἰ 6. Post “ ev” adde, « in marg.
24. adde “et in altero scholio.’?
- 28. cenjunctem schol.
50. οὕνεκά sbtext. Marg. ἐχρὴν
(sic) ὀῤθοτονεῖν τὴν σον" Cnvddores δ τεῦ «οὔ-
γέχῳ τοὶ γΡ-
51. vulg. in text. sed sas su-
per ἡδέος et infra duz lineole sig-
nificantes textui esse addendum.
(Error fluxit ev. 46.) Super 3-
“τας valde minuto charactere scri-
ptum, ὁ δ᾽ kare καήρων.
77. 79. notantur «, γ, 78. in
margine adscriptus, am. certe
antiqua, notatur καὶ et legit ¢ ἔχησιν.
82. schol. ἀριστοφάνης διδήρειος ὁ
ἵξω τοῦ δήμου.
112. sed prius, credo, erat θεῖν.
159. sed s duobus punctis nota-
tum in recensione.
‘172. bint. ex emend, antiqua,
aatonighs schol.
‘ 99
416. nunc video awericsas revs-
ra esse in scholiis.
2380. λαγαρός στιν ὁ στίχος δὲ
ἴσως με γίγεαφε τηλίμαχ᾽ ὑψαγόρη μές.
γι γήπω στοῖον ἔμπες τὸν δὲ δεύτερον wt
φινέρει [περιμρ} τελίς διὰ τὸ μαχό-
μένον αὐτῶ, $i μὴ θεοὶ ὡς ἰδέλοιω ς
(Sub corruptis istis δὲ ἴσως latet
Critici alicujuas nomen. Pro ms
lege μὲν.)
231. σῶσαι schol. ad vers. 566.
OATZZ. A. ,
9. wel,
15. Ἃ ὃς primo.
49. supra. τούσδ᾽ scriptum τοῖσδε:
113. ὅρσε a m. pr.
22.1. ἰπέληθες Dion Chrysost. xii,
p. 209.
᾿ 952. Nunc est λόευν, sed videtur
8 Adsey factum.
356. sic schol. non text.
443. sed x suprascr.
457. πόρδαλις Apollonius in v.
Schol. supra ad 156. πέρδαλις ἡ
δορὰ καὶ πόρδαλις τὸ Caen
461. et sic prius fuerat in textu,
sed eadem manus correxit. .
. 477. ζηνόδοτος δὲ δήϊπετῇ φὸν Diave
γῇ ἰκδίδωσι διὰ τοῦτο καὶ γροφε, διω»
αὐτίος διὼ τῆς εἰ 30's
497. ejecit Zenodotus, quem re-
fellit Scholiastes ex v. 551. '
517. ἱσχατιῆς schol. supra ad v.
497. ᾿
578. dele “Ἅ ut puto.”
598. p. 35.1. 4. νέστορι excudi
debebat.
712. Schol. § τις μιν ἀφίσταρχος
διὰ τοῦ ἡ.
726. περιττὸς 6 στέχος" καὶ vig
προιῖῖΐπιν 4 πρὶ μὲν πόσιν ἰσθλόν. καιὴ
οὐκ εἶδεν ὁ ᾿ enenges τὴν καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἑλλόδα»"
ἀλλὰ Thy’ ϑισσαλικὴν οὕτω λέγε nat
ἕλληνας τοὺς ἐκεῖθεν:
727. ἀνηρίάψαντο θύελλαι τ H XA-
PIEZTEPA ΤΩΝ APIZTAPKOY :
100
καὶ ἄλλαι πολλαὶ οὕτως. Sic com-
posui Scholiaste membra, que an-
te dispersa erant. Inter enim
verba, que majusculis literis scri-
psi, et cetera totus interjacet textus.
741. Qbles ex emend, et su-
rascr. daPhiges. In m. φθεῖσαν
ἕω τοῦ ives. εν
ΟΔΥ͂ΣΣ. Ε.
48. 1. ult. lege “Vid. Od. Δ.
97. 98.”
288. Inter lineas “e super ἦν.
vit.’?
S27. xaveppees.
397. ἀσπασίως schol. MS. Town-
leiani ad 1]. A. 515.
_ 440. Refer ad 470. In MS.
meo male scripseram 440, unde
alii errores, ut fit, profluxere.
ΟΔΥ͂ΣΣ. Ze
8. εἶσιν δ᾽ is σχιρίην ἑκὰς ἄλλων
Apollonius v. εἶσεν. .
46. ῥιμνὸς τῇ ἐνὶ πρὸς τὴν αἴγλην :
. 89. sés MS. et Apollonius v.
Deias,
106. γέγηθε δέ τε MS. sed ex
emend, γύγμϑε δ᾽ ἄρα Apollonius v.
ἀγρονόμοι. Schol. μεγακλιέδης ἀγρόν
"potvas παΐζουσιν ἀνὰ δρίᾳ παιπαλόενται;
108. sid τε οὕτως διὰ τοῦ te" αἱ
ἀφριστάρχειοι καὶ σχεδὸν πάσαις
115. 1,1. Pro «In marg.” lege
« Inter lin.”
155. βροτὸς est a manu prima,
βροτῶν ex emend. Pro of 1. 2. lege
Ofe
172. κάώμβαλι, qui error, si ta-
men est error, frequens est in hur
jusmodi compositis.
201. sed διερὸς Aristarchug.
ον 205. βροτῶν sine var. lect.
_ 907, sppra τὸν, νῦν script. καιλλές
ἂν
στρατὸς τῷ μὲν (I. porn]
$23. adde, “ sed statim muta- τ
Collatio Codicis Harletani.
- 987. χάριτι Apollonius ν᾿ nbaass
241. Schol. οὕτως ἕν pesrrcres
χρόνω ἐπιρίξεται 3
244. 245. adde, ἐπεὶ καὶ ἀλκρὼν
αὐτὴν μετίβαλε waglisers λυγούσεις tise
aya. Cit πώτιρ' αἱ γὼρ ἐμὸς πό-
σις εἴη:
261. ζχισίωε text. et diserte
Schol.
262, ἰπιβέομεν. — -
264. sieledun ,ex emend. et
bis schol, plane. » ,υἱ
275. καίνν τίς ἃ mM. pr. sed wy
in x¢mutatum. ,
297. agivreParas δώμωτα ἴχβαιο
ΟΔΥΣΣ. H,
suram. ᾿ -
184. 228. σπείσαντ᾽. "
195. μεσαγγύς τε post rasuram.
212. nunc est καὶ ἔν. #Primo
erat seiess καν Sine ἐκ,
216. στυγιρᾶς ἐπὶ γαστέρος, Ut VE
detur, pro var. lect. .
217. ζηνόδοτος so. Anne alii Jer
gebant dm? mt
222, ve. ὀτρύνεσϑαει. Aliud schol,
ὅτε awaginParey ἀπεὶ προστακδιπκοῦ"
Owtg ἀγνοῶν ξηνόδοτος γραφει ὀτρῶν
γνεσθαε:
[ἐτρύνεσθι). Textus ὀτρύνισθ᾽ la
t
255. veity ex emend. ejusdem
Manus. ;
267. ἑπτὰ δὲ καὶ δίκα μὲν. In Ἑ.
278. scriptum erat, tare δὲ zed date
xe μὲν πλέον, sed τε NUNC ErasumM, et
““λίον in Atv Mutatum.
315. sixtdiawy γε (sic).
14. αὐτὰρ ab eadem m. post rae
OATES. @,
23. τοὺς Apollonius v.” AcbAacs..
45. τίρπειν.
. p3. adde, “ text. vero 6 rasura.”*
54. text. et schol. τως
163, ἐπίστροφος Apollonius in v,
Collatio. Codicis Harle:ani.
Deinde in marg. Hark. ye. εἶσι καιὴ
sivigxn- |
160. ἔμπας. ,
249. sivara δ᾽ i. MS. sed sias’
aueBa schol. ad v. 102.
292. λίκτρω δέ.
294. Habent vocem ἀκριτόφωνοι
Apollonius et Hesychius, quam
interpretantur βαρβαρόφωνοι. Re-
fert Tollius ad Il. B. 867. Sed
vide an varia lectio sit hujus loci.
as πος
299. πέλοντο (corrige numerum).
$83. ἀπιίλησας Apollonius v.
᾿Απελεῖς.
453. τόφρα δέ μοι κομιδὴ τι---ἰἴη
Schol. ad 451.
492. duds Apollonius in v.
. 80. sed Obiveves ex emend.
549. scripserat κάλλιον ἐστίν, sed.
ἐστίν transversis lineis notatum et
οὕτω additum. |
GATES. fF.
_ 116. ζανόδοτος τὴν βραχεῖαν. γράφων
διὰ τοῦ τι [lege | ἐλάχρια.
144. περί νηνσὺ Apollonius v.
age
221. Lege μεσήλικες, ut recte
235. sgupeydw A. 188. et in
Marg. égvypads xvglvg: In Ω. 70.
ὀρυγμαδός.
249. αἰνυμένω,͵
269. αἰδεῖο.
295. βυμῶ ἃ τῇ. pr.
817. sed mutatum in dgq
479, dicta:
531. omittit. .
540. 542. Lege 540-542.
OAYES. K.
194. dewnigertas ἀτερπία Apol-
lonius Ve Pigerre, “
141. videtur ἃ m. pr. fuisse
Geet 3.
"969. schol. κατωλλοφώδεω ς et ἢ
101
super ss. Note ad 164. prefige
ἐμιβαίνων.
174. πο schol.
190. ὦ φίλοι: καλλίσερατος Φη»
σὴν ὡς ὑπὸ τινος ὁ στίχος προτίτακται
189. nempe] ἀγνοοῦντος τὸ ὁμηρικὸν
ἔθος ὡς θέλει ἄρχεσθαι ἀπὸ τοῦ yee 3
204. ἀρχὸν οἴ ἡ super ὃ.
264. ἀμφοτίρη,σιν ἑλὼν εἴ λαβὼν
suprascr,
329. ἀκήλατος.
351. adde, ἀρίσταρχος δὲν οἱ εἰς
400. Post “ὁ supra” adde, ye. |
454A. στινιχίζετο.
509. PagosPorsins.
ΟΔΥΣΣ. A,
17. ope.
$8.—43. Ita lege et adde, Pro
δὲ καὶ videtur legendum of ev’.”
58. Ut variam lectionem intel-
ligas, sciendum est «, cum super-
scribitur in fine vocis, valde simi-
lem esse contractioni ei, qua signi-
ficatur ay vel εν. πάσω igitur cor
ruptum est ex rac, idque ex ποῦν
O49.
67. ὃ σ.
135. γήραι ὑπὸ.
141. οὐδ᾽ fy ex em.
148. et sic Apollonius v. ’Ava-
oyveins.
281. dy Id.
318. sed prius a punctis: dam-
natum.
348. ἥμμιν et ὑ SUprascr.
364. πολυσπορίαις.
Pro 378. lege 373.
$92. οὐδέ τε MS. et Apollonius
V. "Axixus. .
520. Locus scholiaste est ad v.
538. -
565. lege 566.
-§86. sic schol. sed textus et
Apollonius v. ἄζιτο vulgatam-re-
tunent.
102
ON THE CHARACTER OF PLUTARCH.
AS AN HISTORIAN,
Together with Remarks on some of Prutancn’s “ Lives
of the Illustrious Men of Greece.”
On the Lives of THEMisTocLEs, ARISTIDES, and Cimon.
Part II.—{Continued from No. XXXII. p. 288.]
(1.) “« Wun Themistocles was young, and as yet obscure, he
vied with Cimon in the sumptuousness of his feasts and the magal-
ficence of his tents at the Olympic games. This might be proper
in a young nobleman like Cimon, said the Athenians, but. Them
stocles by so doing only προσωφλίσκανεν ἀλαζονείαν." Plutarch
Vit. Them. How is this to be reconciled with what Plutarch
afterwards says of the private fortune of Themistocles before he
entered into. public business? οὐδὲ τριῶν ἄξια ταλάντων κεκτημένου
τοῦ Θεμιστοκλέους πρὶν ἅπτεσθαι τῆς πολιτείας.
(2.) Plutarch speaks, apparently not without approbation, of a
decree which Themistocles procured to be passed, by which the
interpreter of the ambassadors of the king of Persia, in violation
of what even then was the law of nations, was put to death, He
camot be speaking of the first invasion of the Persias under
Datis ; for then, according to his own account, Themistdtles was
a young soldier fighting under the banners of Miltiades,' and pining
after his glories.* . It appears on the other hand from Herodotus
that Xerxes in the secdnd invasion. did actualy send no ambassa-
dors to either Athens or Sparta. ‘The first public action of ‘The-
mistocles of which we hear, was the prominent part he took in intro;
ducing naval tactics, and in bringing forward the decree for turnmy
the supply, which the Athenians individually received from the
mines of Laureium, to the support of a naval power, "Hy δὲ τῶν
τις ᾿Αθηναίων ἀνὴρ, says Herodotus, ἐπὶ πρώτους νεωστὶ παριῶν, τῷ
οὔνομα μὲν ἔην Θεμιστοκλῆς, παῖς δὲ Νεοκλέος ἐκαλέετο .. οὗτος ἀνὴρ . -
x. 7. A. and-he goes on to mention the share he bad m making the
mines of Laureium the means of the future greatness of Athens. If
also we may form any conclusion from connexion and juxtaposition
= Plat. Vit. Ariat. ᾿ "᾿ .
2 Plat. Vit. Them.—et éj. Basin. ἀποθεγμ. Wyttenbach. Μον, 1. 1. δ1δι Θηκέσεν-:
κλῆς ἔτι μειράκιον ὧν, ἐν. πότοις ἐχυλιγδεῖτο καὶ yurarkive Ix) δὲ Μιλτιάδης στριφηγῶν
ἐνέκισεν iv Μαραθῶνι τοὺς βαρβάρους, οὐκ ἔτι ἦν ἐντυχεῖν ἁταχτοῦντι Θεμιστοκλεῖ" πρὸς δὲ
φοὺρ θαυμάζοντας τὴν μεταβολὴν, ἔλεγιν ὡς, οὖκ. be μα καθεύδειν οὐδὲ ῥαθυμεῖν τὸ Μιλτιάδευ
σγόκαιον.
On the Character of Piutarch, §c. 108
wm Plutarch, the mention of this fact immediately follows, and is
42 connexion with the appointment of Themistocles as general of
the forces against Xerxes. |
_ (8.) Plutarch mentions that Eurybiades and the other admirals
were anxious to retreat from Artemisium ; but represents them as
prevailed upon by Themistocles to stay, where they resisted in
many successful engagements the further progress of the Persian
fleet until that resistance became useless, after the death of Leoni-
das and his heroes at Thermopylz. In his zeal for the honor of
the Greeks, Plutarch carefully conceals the former retreat of the
fleet, which, he would learn from Herodotus, struck with a panic
en the first sight of the Persian armament, retreated to Chalcis, and
did not return tll their fears had partly subsided on hearing the
ews of the violent effects of the storm—It was then that those
engagements took place which Piadar, whom Plutarch quotes,
says, “ laid the foundations of the liberty of Greece.”
(4.) When the Grecian fleet was on the point of retreating,
according to Plutarch, the Euboans gave Themistocles a large
sum to procure its stay till they removed their disposable property.
“This sum of 30 talents,” says Plutarch, ‘‘ as Herodotus writes,
Themistocles took and gave to Eurybiades who coneented to
stay.” Plutarch either here quotes Herodotus from memory and
Js incorrect, or, what is more probable, to represent the fact in
what appeared to him the most favorable light to his hero, has
omitted a material part of the story. Themistocles only gdve 5
talents to Eurybiades and 8 talents to Adeimantus the Corinthian,
who, influenced by this bribe, accompanied by. a threat, is duced
as well as the commander in chief to stay; thus keeping 22 to
himself. It would have been better, if instead of concealing that
part of the transaction, which he feared might appear to the dis-
credit of Themistocles, he had converted it into, as it probably
was, a proof of his readiness and foresight. It was wise in The-
mistocles to give at first only a small part of his store, so that he
might be able to add to the sunr if more hiad been demanded, as
was likely to happen, whatever had been the sum first given. Ie
would have-been the part of a very inexperienced diplomatist to
have given his whole store in the first instance.
(5.) In the life of Themistocles, Plutarch relates the meeting of
Aristides and Themistocles in the straits of Salamis, after Hero-
dotus, and aa it in all probability happened. When Aristides
told the latter that the Grecian fleets were surrounded, Themi-
_ ptocles in return informed him of his stratagem, and sent him to
repeat the information to. Eurybiades, and to prevail upon him to
_, fight in the straits. In his life of Aristides, he takes the opportu-
nity. of telling a more striking story: he sets before bis reader a
council. of war, in. which Themistocles, apparently. for the first
104 On the Character of —
time, is holding forth on the advantages to result from staying, st
a-time when there was no alternative. Colacutus the Cormthiany
however, rises and says: ‘‘‘Themistocles, your opinion 1s not agree-
able to Aristides, for he is present and is silent.’ Whereupon
Aristides assures the asseinbly, that be is silent because he concurs
in the sentiments of the speaker. Τὸ Themistocles’ motion there~
fore the council agreed.
.(6.) In the dispute which occurred relative to sailing away to
the. isthmus, Eurybiades said to Themistocles rising to 9 3
‘They who at the games rise before their time, are punished with
stripes.” ‘ True,” said the other, “ but they who neglect to en-
gage in the contest, never obtain the crown.” So far Herodotus
and Plutarch agree; except that Plutarch has substituted the
name of the commander in chief instead of Adeimantus. But this
was too good a beginning to pass through the hands of Plutarch
without a brilliant finish. Plutarch goes on; Upon which, ἢ
biades lifting up his cane to chastise him, Themistocles coolly
said, “ Eurybiades, strike but hear!” The general, in admiration of
his self-possession, allowed him to proceed. . _
(7.) Plutarch, speaking of the stratagem which Themistocles
played upon Xerxes to detain the Grecian fleet in the straits of Sala-
mis, says: ἐβουλεύετο καὶ συνετίθει τὴν περὶ τὸν Σίκινον πραγματείαν' ἦν
δὲ τῷ γένει Πέρσης ὁ Σΐκινος, ὅς. Vit. Them. Herodotus does..
not say this messenger was not a Persian, but he virtually con-
tradicts it; for he speaks of this Sicinus as afterwards having become
rich and a citizen of Platea, which, as far as we know, could not
happen toa Persian. Dacier denies it to be probable, that Them?
stocles should either send a Persian on this errand, or that he
should have a Persian for the tutor of his children, which office
Sicinus filled. He suspects Plutarch to have read in Herodotus,
Instead of πέμπει ἐς τὸ στρατόπεδον τὸ Μήδων ἄνδρα, τὸν Μήδων
The following verse of AEschylus, however, clearly shows Plu-
tarch’s error :
᾿Ανὴρ yap Ἕλλην ἐξ ᾿Αθηναίων στρατοῦ
‘Exkes, ἔλεξε. Pers. 355. Ed. Stanl.
(8.) Before the engagement at Salamis, while ‘Themistocles was
sacrificing on his trireme, three beautiful youths were brought
captives to his ρα] }εγ--- κάλλιστοι μὲν ἰδέσϑαι τὴν ὄψιν, ἐσθῆσι δὲ χαὶ
χρυσῷ κεκοσμημένοι διαπρεπῶς" ἐλέγοντο δὲ Σανδαύκης παῖδες εἶναν τοῦ
βασιλέως ᾿Αδελφῆς καὶ Αὐτάρκτου. Vit. Them. εἴ. Arist. ‘These,
Euphantides ordered, without bemg prevented by. Themistocles,
to be sacrificed ; and they were sacrificed immediately to Bacchus
Omestes. This horrible, and, if true, most disgraceful transaction,
15 mentioned by no other historian, and is taken by Plutarch on the -
authority of Phanias the Lesbian, without apparently a suspiciog ᾿
of its truth or a mark of reprobation. We leafn from the life ‘of
e
Plutarch as an Historian. 105
Aristides, where he has repeated the story, that they were prisonérs”
from the island of : Psyttaleia, where Herodotus says Aristides
landed and put every one to death without exception. We alse
learn both from Herodotus and Aéschylus (Persa,) that Aristides.
landed in the heat of the engagement, when Themistocles would
be too much engaged. to‘ receive, and Aristides to send, captive
youths to a galley fighting in the throng of battle. The atrocity
of the action itself would Ἂν us to reject it as unfounded, if we
had not other contradictory evidence to convince us that Plutarch
has here yielded to his love of the marvellous.
(θ.) "Ev τούτῳ τοῦ ἀγῶνος ὄντος, φῶς μὲν ἐκλάμψαι μέγα λέγουσιν
᾿Ελευσινόθεν, ἦχον δὲ καὶ φωνὴν τὸ θριάσιον κατέχειν πεδίον, ἄχρι τῆς.
θαλάττης ὡς ἀνθρώπων ὁμοῦ πολλῶν τὸν μυστικὸν ἐξαγαγόντων ἴακχον..
ἐκ δὲ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν φθεγγομένων, κατὰ μικρὸν ἀπὸ γῆς ἀναψερόμενον
νέφος ἔδοξεν αὖθις ἀπονοστεῖν καὶ κατασκήπτειν εἰς τὰς τριήρεις, ἕτεροι δὲ
φάσματα καὶ εἴδωλα καθορᾶν ἐνόπλων ἀνδρῶν, dx’ Αἰγίνης τὰς χεῖρας
ἀνεχόντων πρὸ τῶν ᾿Ελληνικῶν τριηρῶν οὗς εἴκαζον Αἰακίδας εἶναι παρον:
κεκλημένους εὐχαῖς πρὸ τῆς μάχης ἐπὶ τὴν βοήθειαν. Plut. Vit. Them.
_p. 263. ed. Bryan. oo
This passage is quoted at length, both because it is curious, and
every word proves its author to have had Herodotus in his hands ;
and yet how different is this from Herodotus! The noise and
voices on the Thriasian plain, the mystical Iacchus, the cloud, and
the supplication to the Aéacide are all. mentioned by Herodotus.
Before the Persian fleet had arrived in Salamis, Diczeus and De-
maratus walking on the plain of Thria had seen “ a dust as of an
army, and heard a voice which seemed the mystic lacchus, and
had then observed a cloud which directed its course towards 88»
lamis and the triremes.”. In one or two chapters before this ac-
count, the Grecians are described as sending a vessel to A‘gina to
supplicate the acide. These.detached and previous occurrences,
Plutarch, like a skilful painter who attends to effect more than
fact, has crowded all into one picture, making them all happen in
the heat of the engagement. it was fine to make voices sound
from heaven to increase the din of war—to exhibit clouds alight-
ing in the midst of the battle on the ships for the encouragement
of, aud departed heroes extending their hands in supplication for,
the fighting. patriots.
(10.) Plut. Vit. Them. Μετὰ δὲ τὴν ναυμαχίαν, Ξέρξης μὲν ἔτι
. θυμομαχῶν πρὸς τὴν ἀπότευξιν ἐπεχείρει διὰ χωμάτων ἐπάγειν τὸ πεζὸν
εἰς Σαλαμῖνα, τοῖς “Ἑλλησιν ἐμφράξας τὸν διὰ μέσου πόρον. Plutarch
represents Xerxes in earnest in this attempt, as if he were still
eager to engage the enemy, and only deterred from this wild and
unprofitable scheme by the secret information from Themistocles
that the Greeks were proceeding to destroy the bridge at the
Hellespont. This is another instance of Plutarch’s ingenuity,
τοῦ . On the Character of:
making the actions of his hero appear more important and benef-
cial than they really were. Xerxes, after the battle of Salamis,
was in the utmost fear for the fidelity of his Lonian allies, and fer.
the safety of his return by the Hellespuntic bridge. It was there-
fore of the greatest consequence that he should conceal every symp-
tom of flight, which would probably be fatal to both, until pro
precautions were taken; and he pretended to undertake this Im-
possible exploit to amuse and blind both enemies and _ allies,
When Mardonius, however, had selected a strung and efficient
army, he was on the point of returning, and had sometime before
sent away his fleet—it was then that Themistocles sent the mes-
sage—not that they were going to destroy the bridge, but that he
had prevented the Greeks from attempting it. ‘Ins ‘Themistocles
did, not to hurry him out of Greece, but to ingratiate himself with.
the Persian: ἀποθήκην, says Herodotus, μέλλων ποιήσεσθαι ἐς τὸν
Πέρσεα, ἵνα, ἦν ἄρα τί μιν καταλαμβάνῃ πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίων πάθος, ἔχῃ ἀπο-
στροφήν. -
ak When the generals were awarding at Aégina the distinc-
tions of the πρωτεῖα and δευτερεῖα, Plutarch says every man reckoned
himself first and ‘Themistocles the second. This complete unani-
mity would indeed have been a most decisive proof of where the
highest merit lay; yet Herodotus, from whom this is taken, only
says the majority placed ‘Themistocles second, Θεμιστοκλῆς δὲ δευ-
τερειοῖσι ὑπαρβάλλετο πολλόν.
- (140) Plutarch Vit. Them. p. 268. ἐπεὶ γὰρ ὁ τῶν ' Ἑλλήνων, x. τ. Ἀ.
‘‘ When the Grecian fleet, after the departure of Xerxes,
was wintering in the harbour of Pagasez, Themistocles, addresei
the Athenian people, said, he had: a very profitable and salutary
scheme to propose, but that it was of a nature that could not be
communicated to the assembly at large. They bade him then
communicate it to Aristides, and if he approved it, they promised
to carry it into effect. lt was to burn the naval arsenal -of their
allies m the bay of Pagase. Aristides, on hearing his scheme,
came forward and told the people nothing could be more advan-
tageous or mure unjust. The Athenians immediately rejected it.”
. Diodorus mentions nothing of this, but tells the following story:
Themistocles, in his desire to make Athens a naval power,
felt the want of an arsenal sufficiently extensive and convenieut.
Pireus at that time hed no harbour, χρωμένων τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων τῷ
προσαγορευομένῳ Φαληρίχῳ, μικρῷ παντελῶς ὄντι. In his archonship,
a year before the invasion of Xerxes, he had had a design of, and
provided materials for, improving the port of Pireus. The Laceds-
monians had however just shown their extreme jealousy of Athe-
nian improvement, in the opposition they made to the building of
the walls. He therefore stated to the assembly, that. he had an
excellent plav-in contemplation, but that there. wus ἃ necessity for
Plutarch:as an Historian. 107
sécresy ; ἔκρινε φανερῶς μὲν τὴν ὑπιβολὴν μὴ λέγειν, ἀκριβῶς γινώσκων
τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους κωλύσαντας. Fhe people named two distin-
guished citizens to whom he was to make the communication,
Aristides and X antippus, his political opponents, and all three the
heads of different factions. ‘hey both approved the plan. De-
mocratical jealousy, however, suspecting collusion, again demanded
that the scheme should be laid before them. Themistocles per-
sisted in refusal, and the people decreed, that, if it was communi-
cated to and met with the. approbation of the senate of 500, it
should be carried into execution, whatever it might be. ‘The
senate also approved, the work was carried on vigorously, and the
Pireus became the finest port in the world.” ‘lhe one of these
accounts has the appearance of -history, and has every probability
to support it—the other of the later writer looks like fable, atid is
such a fable as one might expect to be fabricated by the advocate
of the virtue and sustice of a democracy. There can be little
doubt that one is the foundation of the other. Hinc sumta vide-
tur ansa exstruend hujus narrationis. Neither of them is men-
tioned by other historians. ‘Cicero indeed relates,” says Mr.
Mitford, * the very story. which Plutarch has told, but with this
material difference, that the proposal of ‘Themistocles was to bum,
not the fleet of the whole Grecian confederacy in the bay of Pa-
gase, where we may venture to affirm that fleet never was, but only
the Lacedemonian fleet im the port of Gythium. ‘This appears
not at all an improbable project for ‘Themistocles to have con-
ceived, when the forcible interference of Lacedemon for preventing
the fortifying of Athens was apprehended : but we still want infor-
mation how, cortsistently with the other circumstances of the story,
it could be publicly known.”—‘ Whether Aristides was the rogue
or Themistocles the fool, afterwards te divulge the secret, Plutarch,
with a thoughtlessness ordiaary with him, has omitted to inform
us.” Setting aside therefore the superior credit due to the earlier
historian, (for out of Siciltan affairs, Diodorus may be reckoned
good authority; his testimony indeed is generally worth the cre-
dence that would be given to accounts considerably more ancient.
He was an honest man, and though his history is a mere com-
pilation from various and often contradictory writers, their very
vontradiction proves that he quotes fairly)—and louking at the in-
ternal testimony of each, we have no difficulty m rejecting the bril-
lrant story of the biographer. ‘ But the evident impolicy of the
measure, without taking any thing else into consideration, might
reasonably induce us to doubt the truth of the tale. Had it been
executed, the Athemians indeed alone would bave had a fleet, but
where would they have had an ally?” Miatford, 1. 519.
‘’ €13:) Thucydides, m the introduction to his history, has entered
Into'the details of ‘Fhemistocles’ banishment and flight to the Pex-
108 . On the Character of
sian court. As might be expected from his veracity and oppor-
tunities for acquiring information, he gives a clear and probable
account, such as no future historian, especially one who lived
more than 500 years after him, would be warranted in deserting
without strong and opposite testimony. Plutarch however, always
studious of dramatic effect, differs much from the almost contem-
rary historian, and.gives a variation of the story told by Diodorus.
lutarch, until he lands his hero in Asia, follows the account
of ‘Thucydides. After his landing, according to the latter
historian, Themistocles travels up the country with a Persian
of one of the maritime provinces, and procures a letter to
be delivered to the. king, stating his claims to favor, and re-
questing to be allowed to remain in his dominions a year to
learn the language, and be prepared at the expiration of that
time, to lay before him the reasons of his journey. When he
appeared at court he was much caressed, became a distinguished
favorite, was magnificently provided for, and not long after died at
‘Magnesia, one of the cities which had been presented to him by
Artaxerxes for his support. Plutarch, after Diodorus, in part,
raises him up a wealthy friend in AZolia, where he escapes from 8
number of people who were watching to take him at Cuma. He
is concealed in the house of Nicogenes his friend, but in a few
days, being determined to proceed to court by the augury of Olbius
the tutor to Nicogenes’ children, and a dream of his own, (both
which are related at length,—he is carried to court in a close
covered cart or carriage, with “ flags and streamers flying,” says
Diodorus, (xi. 56.) and: the atteudants are instructed to say they
are carrying a concubine to the king. Applyimg to Artabanus for
an audience, (his dialogue with him on the authority of Phanias is
given) he is admitted to the king. He addresses his majesty, and
is sent back without an answer. The king however is highly
pleased with his good fortune, prays to Arimanius, and cries out
‘in his sleep, “I have got Themistocles the Athenian.” In the
morning the exile is brought up for his sentence, expecting the
worst ; the king however orders him to receive the 200 talents
which he had promised to the person who brought him, and in-
quires his business. ‘Themistocles, by the aid of a simile in the
ersian style, puts off his curiosity, and requires a year. to learn
the language and customs of the country.
(14.) After the Athenians had driven the enemy from the plains
of Marathon to their ships, Plutarch says, the Persians being
compelled by wind and tide towards Attica, the Athenians in.
alarm lest they should seize on the undefended town, immediately
made for home. (Vit. Arist.) After the battle, the barbarians first.
spiled to Euboza and took on board the Eretrian plunder: then
doubling the promontory of Sunium they made for Athens, with
Plutarch as an Historian. 109
the mtention of arriving there before the army, (Herod.) Plu-
tarch, in his treatise against Herodotus, says, ‘‘ it is depreciating
the victory to suppose that the Persians, after so decisive a battle,
were able to have entertained this design.” It is for this that he
introduces the wind and tide compelling them against their will ta
double the cape of Sunium.
.. (15.) ** When Mardonius had entered Attica a second time,”
says Plutarch, (Vit. Arist.) * Aristides was sent to Sparta to re~
monstrate with the Lacedemonians on account of their delay.
The Ephori gave them the hearing, but at the moment seemed
intent on mirth and feasting. In the night however they sent off
5,000 Spartans, each taking with him 7 helots.” For this Plu-
tarch quotes Idomeneus, but adds that in the decree of Aristides,
Cimon, Xantippus, and Myronides, were sent on the embassy.
Herodotus relates this transaction, (ix. 7. cap.) but by no means
to the credit of the Lacedemonians. For this in his treatise περ.
Ηροδ. κακοηθ. Plutarch abuses him “ for thus venting his malice,”
he says, “on the Lacedemonians and their glorious victory at
Platea.” It is not by an unfounded imputation of malice that the
authority. of Herodotus is to be controverted by Plutarch.
In the account of Herodotus, certain ambassadors are sent from
Athens to complain of the Lacedemionian delay ; they are trifted
with and put off from day to day for 10 days, till the fear they had
formerly had of the fidelity of the Athenians to the Grecian cause,
is diminished by the completion of the wall across the isthmus.
The Ephori however are at length influenced to afford prompt
assistance, by the forcible representation of the consequences of
their conduct made to them by Chileus the Tegean, a man of con-
siderable authority of Sparta. it is then that the 5,000 Spartans
are sent off in the night. | .
(16.) Plutarch, speaking of the attack of the Persian cavalry under
Masistius upon the Athenians at Plata, says, when Masistius was
thrown from his horse and killed, the ‘‘ Medes left the body and
fled.” (Vit. Arist.); Whether this is malignity or carelessness I
do net know; it is however casting a degrading imputation an
men who little deserved it, the true Persians.
In one of the desultory attacks made by the Persian cavalry on
the Athenians, Masistiug was thrown down and pierced through
᾿ an open part of his visor, as he lay on the ground. (Herod, ix. 22.)
His troops, after performing their customary evolution, retreated ;
and it was not till they made a stand that they perceived their
leader gone; then uttering a loud shout, they returned, rushmg
upon the enemy to recover the body of their chief—pefévres δὲ τὰ
γεγονὸς, διακελευσάμενοι, ἤλαυνον τοὺς ἵππους πάντες, ws ἂν τὸν νεκρὸς
ἀνελοίατο. (Herod. ib.) The combat for the body was vigorously
kept‘up by the Persians; the 800 Athenians were compelled ts,
116 On the Character of ἢ
vive way, until the aid they had sent for arrived. It was then that
the Persians, driven back, were compelled to return without the
body, and with great additional Joss.
(17.) Plutarch says, Alexander the Macedonian communicated
the information, that Mardoniug intended to attack next day, to
Aristides alone, and that with a promise of secresy: but he, thinks
ing it wrong to keep this from Pausanias, disclosed it’ to him.
Herodotus however never mentions Aristides, but speaks of the
Athenian generals collectively, whom Alexander expressly enjoined
to impart the information to Pausanias. (Herod. iv. 45.) Plu-
tarch ought to have recollected, however he might wish to honor
Aristides by making him the sole depositary of this secret, that it
could not be of the slightest use unless it was known to him, who
had the direction of the movements of the army.
(18.) Plutarch states, (Vit. Arist.) that the common treasury of
Greece, deposited at Delos, was removed to Athens in the admi-
nistration of Aristides; who defended the action by saying, ‘ that
though it might not be just, yet it was expedient.”” ‘This action
and saying, so unlike the character of Aristides, is contradicted in
the life of Pericles, where this very measure is objected against
Pericles by his enemies, and apologised for by him.
(19.) Dodwell in his Annal. Thucyd. places the building of tha
long walls, on the authority of Thucydides, under the year 457.
a.c. ‘ Plutarchus,” says he, “aliter in Cimone,” and quotes
the passage, λέγεται δὲ καὶ τῶν μακρῶν τενχῶν, Kc. in which this
great work is stated to have been built by Cimon after the battle
of Eurymedon (Vit. Cim.) Dodwell concludes: “ Non est ut
contendamus invicem testimonia Thucydidis et Plutarchi.” ᾿
* (20.) We learn from Thucydides that the revolt and siege of Thasus
occupied Cimon three years. In the introductory sketch to his
history, he has thought the transaction of sufficient consequence to
mform us that the Athenians sailed against the island with @
large naval force, and that having gained a victory by sea, they
landed on the island, again defeated the ‘hasians, and besieged the
city. The besieged applied to Lacedemon for assistance, whieh:
was promised ; the preparations however were stopped by the
earthquake at Sparta. e Thasians nevertheless detained Cimon
before their walls three years, and at length obtained terms, whiclr
Thucydides has given. After this, we cannot but think it a total:
dereliction of both Plutarch’s biographical and historical duties, τὰ
say no more of this transaction than the following paragraph—ix-
δὲ τούτου, Θασίους μὲν ἀποστάντας ᾿Αθηναίων καταναυμαχήσας τρεῖς καὶ:
᾿ιάκοντα ναῦς ἔλαβε, καὶ τὴν πόλιν ἐξεπολιόρκησε καὶ τὰ χρυσία τὰ:
wipay ᾿Αθηναίοις προικτήσατο. (Vit. Cim.) os
_A French critic says of Plutarch, “il allonge ou resser‘e’ sa:
narration selon que son imagination est plus ou moins échauffée, il:
Plutarch as an Historian. 111
s'€tend sur des bagatelles et il ne fait qu’indiquer, on méme 1] passe
sous silence, des événements importants.” (Acad. des Inscz. t. vii.)
A jadgment which will be more completely verified in the lives of
the Greeks of later times, than in the three before us.
(21.) The first act of Cimon, when he took the command of
the allied tleet, was, accordmg to Plutarch, (Vit. Cim.) m which
he agrees with Herodotus, to sail to Eton and expel the Persians.
“‘ Immediately after the destruction of the town,” says Plutarch,
“δ planted at Eion and Amphipolis a colony of Athenians; for
which the Athenian republic permitted him to erect three marble
Herme, with inscriptions,” Kc. This however, we learn from
Thucydides, did not take place till after the ‘Thasian revolt, which
Plutarch does not mention for some pages, and did not happen till
about five years after the expulsion of the Persians, and the de-
struction of Boges or Butes at Eion. |
(22.) Plutarch, after relating Cimon’s escape from the prosecu-
tion. carried on against him, after his return from Thasos, and be-
fore he goes to the assistance of the Lacedemonians at the siege
of Ithome, has these words, ὡς δὲ πάλιν ἐπὶ στρατειὰν ἐξέπλευσε,
&c. ‘ When he sailed away on another expedition, the people
got the upper hand, and overturned the ancient institutions of the
country ; Ephialtes procured the subversion of the power of the
Areopagus, and made the government completely democratical :
this was at a time when Pericles was powerful.” Since Plutarch
informs us neither where Cimon went nor what he did im this ex-
pedition, (no other historian mentions it,) I think we shall be war-
ranted in concluding it a fiction of the biographer; especially
when it appears that the domestic transactions he assigns to the
mean time, happened some years afterwards.
. The dimiaution of the power of the Areopagus is spoken of
twice in the life of Pericles, as his act when minister, though
ostensibly by means of lis colleague Ephialtes. Now Plutarch
states, that the mode in which Pericles acquired popularity enough
to effect this, was, by distributing the contents of the public trea-
sury among the people; which certainly could not take place
during an erpedition of Cimon, while he and his friends had the
guidance of all public affairs ; and this they had, until the opposite
faction rosé on the failure of the subsidiary supply sent to Lace-
demon, and procured his ostracism. it was then that, in want of
Cimon’s wealth and liberality, so captivating to the “ lordly
beggars” of Athens, Pericles and his colleagues made use of the
treasury to support that popularity and influence ; which enabled
them to diminish the power of the Areopagus, and effect the other
changes alluded to in the passage quoted above. After bis recal
from banishment it would be, that he set himself to reform the
abuses or alterations that had taken place during the five years he
112 ' On thé Character of
had been absent, and Pericles, Ephialtes, and the opposite faction
had conducted the administration.
Dodwell under the year 461 Ant. Christ. has the following: -
«¢ Reversus.a Thasiorum obsidione Cimon periclitatur de bene>
volentia in Alexandrum Mac. Reg. &c. Sequitur in Plutarcho
alia στρατηγεία quam hujus anni fuisse necesse est. Eo spectant
Plutarchi verba alla “Mg δὲ πάλιν ἐπὶ στρατείαν ἐξέπλευσε, Χο. Tum
eo absente judicia pleraque ab Areopago sustulit Ephialtes. Pro-
made hoc anno.” (Ann. Thuc.)
Under the next year 460 a. c.
“« Reversus a superioris anni στρατείᾳ Cimon Areopagi dignitae
tem restaurare conatur ab Ephialte labefactatam.”
Thus Dodwell, deceived by paying attention to these words of
Plutarch, has assigned the motion of Ephialtes to the year 461
A.C. two years before the time, according to the express. . testin.
mony of Diodorus; and has put off one year Cimen’s expedition
against Ithome, for this imaginary στρατηγεία, during which not a
line of history is left us of his situation or pursuits.
Diodorus xi. 77. "Apa δὲ τούτοις πραττομένοις, ἐν μὲν ταῖς ᾿Αθήναιῳ
᾿Εφιάλτης ὁ Σιμωνίδου δημαγωγὸς ὧν καὶ τὸ “πλῆθος παροξύνας κατὰ τῶν
᾿Αρεοκαγίτων, κ- τ΄. λ. ‘This transaction he places ἐπ᾿ ἄρχοντος δ᾽ ᾿Αθήν
γῃσι Φρασικλείδου, ᾿Ολυμπίας μὲν ἤχθη ὀγδοηχοστῇ
(23.) Plutarch, (Vit. Cim. i. p. 130.) after describing the first
assistance the Athenians afforded to the Lacedzmonians, and thein
march back again to Athens under Cimon, says, οἱ δὲ “Λακεδαιμόνιος
τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους, αὖθις ἐκάλουν ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐν ᾿Ιθώμῃ Μεσσηνίους καὶ εἵλωταρ,
This second time which Plutarch mentions, was the first and only
time that the Athenians after the earthquake went to the assistance
of the Lacedemonians. ‘The Athenians were invited to the siege
of Ithome at first, μάλιστα δ᾽ αὐτοὺς ἐπεκαλέσαντο ὅτι τειχομαχεῖν
ἐδόκουν δυνατοὶ εἶναι. (‘Thucyd. 1. 102.) If the authority of ΟΥ̓͂Ν
dides wanted confirmation, it might be found in the account of
Diodorus. Plutarch may have fallen into this error, by having
seen some account of their return to Athens during the cessation
of hostilities in the winter.
(24.) When Cimon, during his banishment, put himself at the
head of his tribe to join the Athenian forces proceeding to Tanagra
to fight the Lacedemonians, “ the council of five huudred,” says
Plutarch, (Vit. Cim.) “ being informed of it, ordered the generals
mot to receive him, because they feared lest his enemies should
charge him with putting the phalanx in disorder, and endeavouring
to bring the Lacedzmouians into the city.”- In his life of Pericl
he says that Cimon was repulsed as an exile bya combination ‘of
the friends of Pericles the minister, -
Plutarch as an’ Historian. 118
_ (24.) After Cimon had been ordered to depart, (Ρ μέ. Vit. Cim.)
as has been mentioned, he called upon all his friends who were
suspected of Laconism, to contend with all their might against the
enemy, and to refute the charge by their deeds. ‘They took his
panoply amongst them, placed it io the middle of their troop,
amounting to a hundred, and stood by it to the last man: every
one fell fighting valorously by the side of his comrade. During
these transactions, which Mr. Mitford says are of a romaniic cast,
but may have had some foundation in truth, there 1s some reason -
to think that Cimon was residing on his estates in the Thracian
Chersonese. He was there when recalled, we know, from Ando-
cides, καὶ Κίμωνα τὸν Μιλτιάδης ὠστρακισμένον καὶ ὄντα ἐν χεῤῥονήσῳ
κατοδεξάμεθα δ᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο, πρόξενον Λακεδαιμονίων, ὅκως πέμψαιμον εἷς
“ακεδαίμονα προχηρυκευόμενον περὶ σπονδῶν. (Orat. Gr. ed. Reiske,
t. iv. p. 91.) And we have Plutarch’s own testimony that he was
recalled immediately after the battle in which he wished to fight,
vevinntves γὰρ ἐν Τανάγρᾳ μάχῃ μεγάλῃ καὶ προσδοκῶντες εἰς ἄρα
ἔτους στρατιὰν Πελοποννησίων én’ αὐτοὺς ἐκάλουν ἐχ τῆς φυγῆς τὸν Κί-
μωνα, (Vit. Cim.); and again, Εὐθὺς μὲν οὖν ὁ Κίμων κατελθὼν truce
τὸν πόλεμον, &c. Dodwell, on the authority of these passages, has
assigned the return of Cimon to the same year as the battle of
Tanagra, and before the summer of it.
(25.) To the battle of Tanagra, and the fear of. another Pelo-
ponnesian army before the summer, Plutarch (Vit. Cim.) attributes
the desire which the Athenians had for peace. Cimon, according
to him, was recalled immediately after the battle, a peace was
made, and the Grecian states reconciled to each other as soon as
he arrived. τς
We do not learn from Thucydides, (b. 1. c. 107—112.) that this
battle had any such consequences. Sixty-two days after it, Myro-
nides led out the Athentans again into Boeotia, and conquered the
Beeotians in a very considerable engagement, which brought, it is
the expression of Thucydides, all Boeotia and Locris under their
dominion. Neither do we learn from !tucydides that any Pelo-
ponnesian army was expected befgre the summer, but we know
that the Lacedzmonians before the battle of ‘Tanagra only came to
assist their allies the Doriqng, and would have been willing to pass
quietly through Boeotia and by the Attic borders, had not the Athe-
nians compelled them to tight their way through. |
But we know that the Athenjan affairs in Greece were in 8
prosperous condition after the battle of Tanagra. In the year
after, gina surrendered, and ‘l'uJmides returned from a victorious
cruize round the Peloponnesus, in which he had burnt the naval
arsenal of the Lacedzmonians, and defeated the Sicyoulans. The
affairs in Egypt had not afforded the supplies expected, and were
now suffering a sad reverse, and the Athenians had completely
NO, ΧΧΧΙΠ, CiJ VOL. XV.
114 Vindicie Antique.
failed in an expedition to Thessaly. It was now when probably
money was wanting for carrying on these expeditions, though in
the main successful, that a cessation of hostilities began to ‘be
wished for and apparently agreed upon. But it was not till three
years after this, and five after the battle of ‘lanagra, that the peace
was made, in which Plutarch goes on to describe that Cimon un-
dertook the expedition against Cyprus.
. (26.) ““ Cimon,” according to Plutarch, “ sent sixty of his ships
to Egypt, and with the rest defeated the king’s fleet, consisting of
Phoenician and Cilician ships: he subdued all the cities round,
formed designs against Egypt, and thought of nothing [688 than the
destruction of all the Persian king’s power. Meditating on.these
contests, he put into some harbour of Cyprus, and laid siege to
Citium, where he died, after sending to consult the oracle of
Jupiter Ammon.”—-Cimon did send sixty of his ships to Egypt at
the request of Amyrteus, who yet supported himself in the marshes.
But he never fought these combined fleets of Phoenicia and Cili-
cla, and it is very improbable that he had any of these romantic
views of destroying the king of Persia’s power, or of conquest in
Egypt,-whence the Athenians had just been expelled. His object
was Cyprus; and before the siege of Citium, the first place to
which he turned his attention, he died. After his death, as both
fleet and army were coming home, they were attacked by the
united forces of Pheenicians, Cilicians, and Cyprians, whom they
defeated by land and sea. ‘These circumstances we learn from
Thucydides,
‘VINDICIZ ANTIQUE.
No. IEI.—[Continued from NO. XXXII. p. 800.]
In the preceding number it was shown that the inductive method
of philosophising is by no means to be attributed to Bacon as
discovered by him, but that on the contrary induction has in all
ages been the means of forming the first advances in knowledge.
It was shown from the most uuexceptionable authorities that upon
induction the syllogism 1s founded, and that when Lord Bacon
advised the rejection of the syliogism, that recourse might be again
had to induction, he might with equal propriety have recommended
the rejection of the arithmetical rule of multiplication, and to
Vindicia Antique. 115
confide solely in addition, which is more easily comprehended by
the vulgar, for it literally 15----ἐπαγωγὴ σαφέστερα, πιθανότερα----λια
τοῖς πολλοῖς κοίνον.
It was also shewn, that Bacon claimed the discovery of the
Mductive method ; and his admirers down to Dr. Reid affirm it to
be so, both he and they being so little acquainted with the philoso-
phy of antient Greece, as not to know that it was universally. in
use thousands of years. before the seventeenth ceutury. In some
recent periodical publications it has been denied that Bacon repre-
sented the inductive method as a discovery of his; but his express
words prove that he did so represent it, and really believed that
by multiplied experiments, without the aid of syllogistic reasoning,
mankind might arrive at a knowledge of first principles. Con-
cluding his book, “‘ De Augmentis Scientiarum,” he says, “ certe
objici mihi rectissimé posse existimo, quod verba mea seculum
desiderent. Secudum forte integrum, ad probandum ; Complura
autem secula, ad perficiendum. Attamen, quoniam etiam res
maxime queque initiis suis debentur, wibi satis fuerit sevisse
posteris et Deo immortali.” ‘From these and otker such expressions
it is evident that Bacon supposed he had introduced an entirely
new. system of philosophy, which would be slowly perfected, and
prove of great advantage to posterity ; and many even at the present
day indulge the same opinions.
_ At the age of sixteen he declared his dissatisfaction with a system
of philosophy, which it was utterly impossible he could understand,
and to censure works which he was unable to read. Quotations
have already been given from the writings of Aristotle, showing in
the clearest manner that tuduction was universally held to be the
first and simplest process in the acquisition of knowledge; and
nothing can be more express than his words at the commencement
of his Sec nd Aualytics, where he says that all learumg proceeds
from knowledge already acquired ;‘ that the syllogism aud induction
2 Wao διδασκαλία, καὶ πᾶσα μάθησις διανοητικὴ, ἐκ προὐπαρχούσης γίνεται γνωσέως.
Φάνερον δὲ τοῦτο θεώρουσιν ἐπὶ πασῶν᾽ alre γὰρ μαθημάτικαι τῶν ἐπιστημῶν διὰ τούτου
φτοῦ τρόπου παραγίγνονται καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἑκάστη τέχνων.------- Ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ περὶ τοὺς
λόγους, οἵ δε διὰ συλλογίσμων, καὶ οἱ δ᾽ ᾽ΕΠΑΓΩΓΗΣ᾽ ἀμφότεροι γὰρ διὰ προγινωσκο-
phew ποιοῦνται τὴν διδασκαλίαν" οἵ μεν λαμβάνοντες ὡς παρὰ ξυνιέγτων' οἵ δε ϑείκνυνταν
τὸ καθϑολοῦ διὰ τοῦ δήλον εἶναι τὸ καθέκαστον.
116 Vindicia Antique:
both proceed upon such acquired knowledge—the first assuming’
certain known propositions ; and the last, demonstrating the whole
from evident particulars, In the same manner, says he, our orstor#
persuade their audiences by examples,-—that is, by induction.
Although the philosophy of Aristotle was no doubt understood
by some of Bacon’s contemporaries, it seems evident that it was
not generally known ; and by the time that the Royal Soctety camd
to be formed, if we except 8 few individuals as Cudworth, Milton;
More, and Temple, who valued becayse they comprehended it,
our philosophers had completely withdrawn their attention from
principles, and engaged in the pursuit of true science by experi-
ments on infinite particulars : a task as hopeless as it would be to
attempt to reach the heavens by piling mountain upon mountam. ᾿᾿
It should be ever kept in mind that of those who during the
seventeenth century were called great discoverers, Bacon, Harvey,
Loeke, and Newton, not one was acquainted with the antient
philosophy, physiology or logic, nor can we collect from their
writings that they were conversant with the language in which these
sciences are explained, It is necessary in order to obtain a just
view of the subject to attend to the fact that these men of good
natural parts, but without any well founded pretensions to learning,
appeared at a time when the dogmas of the schools delivered in
barbarous Latin were falling into disrepute, and the Greek philoso=
phy was known but to very few. Under different circumstances
their pretended discoveries would have obtained no attention, and
it would have been unnecessary at the present day to be at pains
to show that the philosophers and physicians of antiquity were really"
men possessed of good sense, and reasoned, to say the least, as
accurately as ourselves. The Royal patronage of what was termed.
the Experimental Philosophy and the establishment of a Royat
Society, in which the antient philosophy was not understood and
therefore despised,—the numberless periodical publications that
have come abroad containing the most ignorant censures of the
science of former ages ; all these causes have contributed to reduce
us ta our present state of ignorance, a state from which we cannot
possibly emerge without recurring to true principles. When we
consult the periodical and other publications that have «appeared
during the last century, we find a yery curjous gradation ia the
Vindicie Antiqua. 117
contemptuous language made use of by the writers towatds the
great masters of antiquity.
_ At- first, although these writers all agreed that Bacon was a
greater philosopher than Aristotle, they yet gave due applause to
the popular works of the antient. They believed the esotertca
to be unmtelligible or useless; but they highly approved his
Natural History, Ethics, Politics, Rhetoric, and Poetic, for they
are not difficylt to be understood by any person who understands
the language in which they are written; and the reasoning is so
clear and convincing that none who read with intelligence can
doubt of the justness of the conclusions. It is however remarkable
that Gray, who was believed to be no mean scholas, declares that
he found even these the plainest of al] Aristotle’s works intolerably
difficult, “For my part (says he) I read Aristotle’s poetics,
politics and morals, though I do not well know which is which.
In the first place he js the hardest author by far I ever meddled
with. Then he has a dry conciseness that makes one imagine
one is perusing a table of contents rather than a book: it tastes for
all the world like chopt hay, or rather like chopped logic, for he
has a yiolent affection for that art, being in some sort his own
invention, so that he often loses himself in little trifling distinctions
and verbal niceties, and what is worse leaves you to extricate him
‘as well as you can. ‘Thirdly, he has suffered vastly from the tran-
scribers, as all authors of great brevity necessarily must. Fourthly
apd lastly, he has abundance of fine and uncommon things which
make him well worth the pains he gives one,” ‘This extract from
a letter of Mr. Gray’s affords another instance of the flippant levity
with which those who confess themselves unacquainted with the
writings of Aristotle proceed to censure them.
_ .No persen capable of reading the works of Aristotle be mentions,
an the original, will say that they are not to be distinguished, or that
his clear didactic style is to be undergtood with difficulty. Logic,
which merely implies accurate reasoning, can never be the cause
why an author shoyld dose himself, in little trifling distinctions and
werbal niceties, and those who understand Aristotle deny that he
floes so; and the idea of those who are ignorant of his meaning
attempting to. extricate him as well as they canis absurd in the
extreme. Many of the books of Aristotle, we. know, are lost, but
118 Vindicia Antique.
those that remain have been transcribed with the greatest care, and.
are in a more perfect state than any work of the age in which he
lived. If however Mr. Gray concluded that whatever he did not
understand upon a superficial perusal must necessarily be imperfect,
we are not to wonder that he believed that his author had suffered
prodigiously from the ravages of time. ‘That he has abundance of
fine, and uncummon things, which make him well worth the
pains he gives one, is very true—but the admission is not to be
reconciled with Mr. Gray’s previously expressed opinions, and
merely proves that he had understood some passages. Such is the
censure of Aristotle by one who had attempted to read his works
and failed; the following animadversions by Dr. Campbell, whose
Greek studies were for the most part confined to the books of the
New Testament, also deserve notice. In his sixth chapter of the
Philosophy of Rhetoric the doctor says, ‘‘It is long since I was
first convinced by what Mr. Locke hath said on the subject, that
the syllogistic art with its figures and moods, serves more to display —
the ingenuity of the inventor, and to exercise the address and
fluency of the learner, than to assist the diligent enquirer in bis
researches after truth. T'he methud of proving by syllogism appears
even on a superficial view, both unnatural and prolix. The rules
laid down for distinguishing the conclusive from the inconclusivé
forms of argument, the true syllogism from the various kinds of
sophisms, are at once cumbersome to the memory, and unnecessary
iu practice. No person, one may venture to pronounce, will ever
be made a reasoner who stands in need of them. Ina word the
whole bears the manifest indications of an artificial and ostentatious
parade of learning, calculated for giving the appearance of great
profundity to what is in. fact very shallow. Such I acknowledge
have been for a long time my sentiments on the subject. Ona
nearer inspection I cannot say I have found reason to alter them,
though I.think I have seen a little farther into the nature of this
disputativeescience, aud consequently into the grounds of its futility.
I proceed upon the supposition that the reader hath some previous
Anowledge of school logic’; but on the other hand it is ποῖ neces
sary that he be an adept in it, a. mere smattering will ‘sufficiently
sérve the present purpose. My first observation is that this method
ef arguing has not the smallest affinity to moral reasoning, the pro-
Vindicia. Antique. 119
cedure ia the-one being the very reverse of that employed in the
other. In moral reasoning we proceed by analysis, and ascend
from particulars to universals; in syllogising we proceed by syn«
thesis, and descend from universals to. particulars. ‘The analytic
is the only method we can follow, in the acquisition of natural
knowledge, or whatever regards actual existences ; the synthetic
is more properly the method that ought to be pursued in the appli-
cation of knowledge already acquired. [1 has for this reason
been called the didactic method, as being the shortest way of —
communicating the. principles of a science; but even in teaching,
as often as we attempt.not barely to inform, but.to. convince, there
is a necessity of. recurring to the tract in which the knowledge we
would convey was. first acquired. Now the method of reasoning
by: syllogism more resembles mathematical demonstration, wherem
from universal. principles called axioms we deduce. many truths;
awvhich though general in their nature, may when compared with
these first principles be. justly stiled particular. Whereas in all
kinds of knowledge wherein experience is our only guide, we can
proceed to general truths only by an induction of. particulars.”
From this extract we see that Dr. Campbell, like Dr. Reid,
receives with full conviction the dicta of Locke, who as it appears
from his writings was unacquainted with the true nature of the
syllogism, and believed induction to be the discovery of Bacon:
it has already been observed that the great mistakes of onr modern
reasoners concerning syllogism and induction arise from their
agnorance of the fact that induction is the basis upon which the
syllogism rests ; that the propositions are either axioms, or agreeable
to universal experience, and that by a certain arrangement of these
propositions a certain and well defined conclusion necessarily follows
at first unknown. This conclusion (συμπέρασμα) is demonstrative,
provided the propositrons have been in every respect just; and if
false propositions have been assumed, then the syllogism is vitiated. .
in its first principles. How this mode of reasoning should appear
to Dr. Campbell to manifest an ostentatious parade of learning,
calculated for giving the appearance of great profundity to what is
in itself. very shallow ; those who have studied the subject will not
easily discover. . The syllogism was intended by Aristotle, not as a
vain display of learning, but as the test and proof of sound and
120 _ Vindtcia Antiqua.
conclusive reasoning, while at the same time it affords the ready
means of extending knowledge, from that of which we are already
in possession. ‘The doctor calls logic a disputatice science, and
says he has seen into the grounds of its futz/ity, but there is nothing
In connected reasoning that ought to lead to dispute, and the
syllogism is chiefly valuable as it prevents or terminates the wrang-
lings that arise from imperfect ideas and ambiguous terms.
Addition is a very proper rule for beginners in the study of arith-
metic to learn; but that affords no argument why the more advan-
ced should not use their multiplication table, the results of which
are just as satisfactory as those of addition, and are obtained in-2
way much more compendious. It is however sufficiently evident
that Dr. Campbell suw into the nature of this disputative science,
merely through the medium of Latin trauslations, for he uses the
barbarous terms for the several forms of syllogism invented by the
schoolmen. At the same time he speaks of the logical art as so
well known that it would be superfluous in a work like his to give
even the shortest abridgement of it; observing that it will not be
necessary for his reader to be an adept in the art ; a mere smattering
will sufficiently serve the present purpose. Had it been his intea-
tion that his reader should form a sound judgment of what was to
be offered concerning the syllogism, we should rather have expected
a recommendation to acquire a knowledge of it something beyoad
mere smattering, that the reader might be convinced of the justice
of the author’s remarks by actually seeing and knowing tke defects
of the reasoning employed. “ In moral reasoning,” says the
doctor, “ we proceed by analysis, and ascend from particulars
to universals ; in syllogizing we proceed by synthesis, and descend
from universals to particulars.” It is to be regretted that he did
not give some illustrations of these definitions of moral reasaning;
and syllogizing, because he appears to use the terms analysis-end
syuthesis in a sense altogether unwarranted by the analogies of the
Greek language, and unsanctioned by use. -4aalysis universally
signifies in philosophical language the reduction of a whole to #s
component parts, so that by its means we never can ascend from
particulars to universals, and it is equally tmpossible to descend
by synthesis from universals to particulars, for synthesis always
suplies apposition, and the formation of ome ont of many.“ The
Vindicja Antique. 121
wnalytic (says the Doctor) is the only method which we can follow
in the acquisition of natural knowledge; the syuthetic is more
properly the method that ought to be pursued in the application
of knowledge already acquired.”—“ Even in teaching, as often as
we attempt, not barely to inform but to convince, there is a neces-
sity for recurring to the tract in which the knowledge we would
gonvey was first acquired.”
It is no doubt true, that in teaching we must use the means as by
which we ourselves acquired our knowledge; but every teacher,
pay, every speaker, descends from ideas to words, he analyses his
knowledge that the hearer may be enabled to ascend by synthesis
from words to general ideas. When a hearer can arrive at no ᾿
clearly defined ideas, he does not understand; if he ascend to
ideas dissimilar from those of the speaker, he misunderstands ;
and only understands aud acquires knowledge when he forms
ideas, similar in every respect to those which it is the object of
ihe speaker to communicate. In teaching, the musician must in
the first place analyse the piece he intends his pupil to perform,
and shew the effect of each component part; and it is after these
are understood, that the learner, by correct recollection and syz-
thesis, acquires the knowledge of the whole, understands it, and
can himself give it due effect. How then can we admit that the
analytic method is the only means by which we can acquire natural
knowledge, when we see distinctly that m every science we must
begin with elementary component parts, and by synthesis arrive at
general ideas? Analysis is necessary on the part of the teacher,
whije the process by which jhe learner is to acquire knowledge is
directly the reverse."
' ¥ A late writer on the Philosophy of the Human Mind, Mr. Dugald
Stuart, attempts to show, that in- modern philosophy, and even among the
Greek_ geometers, analysis sometimes signifies composition, and synthesis
decomposition. He refers to the authority of Pappus Alexandrinus, as
translated by Dr. Halley. If geometers of ancient or modern times will
grossly pervert language, whether wilfully or from ignorance, we are not
ffom thence to infer that language itself is uncertain. I may be told that
aratrum signifies a spade, and digo a plough; but as I could only infer from
such information, that the person thus speaking must be ignorant of the
import of terms in the Latin language, his authority would pass for nothing.
Mr. Stuart, however, very directly contradicts Dr. Campbell’s explanation of
132 Vindicia Antique.
Dr. Campbell says, “I observe, that though this manner. of
arguing (the syllogistical) has more of the nature of scientific
reasoning than of moral, it has nevertheless not been thought
worthy of being adopted by mathematicians, as a proper mode.
of demonstrating their theorems. 1 am satisfied that mathematical
demonstration is capable of being moulded into the syllogistic
form, having made the trial with success in some propositions:
But that this form is a very incommodioug one, and has many
disadvantages, but not one advantage of that commonly praetised,
will be manifest to every one who makes the experiment. It is
at olce more indirect, more tedious, and more obscure. I may
add, that if into those abstract sciences one were to introduce
some specious fallacies, such fallacies would be much more easily
sheltered under the awkward verbosity of this artificial method,
than under the elegant simplicity of that which has hitherto been
used.” The Doctor is mistaken when he says, that the syllogism
has not been thought worthy of being adopted by mathematicians
in their demonstrations. The greatest mathematician of the last
century, Wolfius, expressly informs us, that a mathematical demon-
stration is actually a chain of connected syllogisms, and that every
demonstration must bear the test of the syllogism, otherwise it
cannot be held conclusive. ‘‘ By syllogisms,” says he, “ we ives
tigate whatever is discoverable by human understanding, and de-
monstrate to others what they want to be convinced of in order
to a manifestation of its truth; though we have not always before
our eyes, either in investigating or in demonstrating, the syllogistie
form or method ; but whoever duly attends to himself, when medi-
tating or demonstrating, will be abundantly convinced of the fact.
Let no one imagine that a proof can be comprised in a single
syllogism: for, as we admit the conclusion only on account οὗ
the premises, we cannot be assured of its truth till we are com
the words Analysis and Synthesis. “In physics, in chemistry, and in the
philosophy of the human mind, analysis naturally suggests the idea of ἃ
decomposition of what is complex into its constituent elements.”—Phi-
losophy of the Human Mind, vol. ii. p. $08.
If words are to be at will perverted from their original and general
acceptation, to that which implies directly the reverse, there is at once an
end of human science.
Vindicia Antique. 123
viaced of the justness of the premises. And therefore these pre-
mises are so loug to be proved by other syllogisms, till we come
to such a syllogism as has for its premises, definitions, axioms,
clear principles taken from experience, or propositions previously
demonstrated. A proof is called a demonstration, if we can so
far carry on our syllogisms till we obtain in the last, ‘nothing but
definitions, clear experiences, and other identical propositions as
premises.” No wonder that Dr. Campbell found he could suc-
cessfully mould mathematical demonstration into the syllogistic
form in some propositions, for all mathematical demonstration is
strictly syllogistical, and. is in reality composed of syllogisms.
It may be asked why, if mathematical demonstration depend
entirely on the syllogism, do we find that Sir Isaac Newton, cer-
tainly a great mathematician, makes no mention of the term? It
was not to be expected. of Sir Isaac Newton, who was by no
means a learned man, that he should be acquainted with the
Analytics of Aristotle, as Wolfius and many of the most eminent
mathematicians were; but, in so far as his denionstrations ‘are
correct, it is evident that he syllogised rea/ly, although not for-
mally, as a person possessing a good ear and a taste for music,
without instruction, and without knowing any thing of the matter,
preserves the just intervals of the musical scale.
“So far (continues Dr. Campbell) from leading the mind
agreeably to the design of all argument and investigation from
things known to things unknown, and by things evident to things
obscure; the usual progress of the syllogism is, on the contrary,
from things less known to things better known, and by things
obscure to things evident.” Were we to admit this account of
the syllogism as just, we must conclude that Aristotle was a mere
trifler, and that all his admirers, for thousands of years, have
passed over unnoticed obvious and great defects in his reasoning.
But we must not lose sight of the fact, that the admirers of
Aristotle have ever been those who have studied his writings,
while his censurers admit that they have not taken the trouble ἴα
make themselves masters of his language, logic or philosophy,
satisfying themselves with the assertions of ove another, that his
Jogic and philosophy are alike unworthy of the pains necessary to
understand them. That these. pains must be very considerable is
124 Vindtcie Antique.
true, but it is also true that. the study amply rewards those whe
seriously engage in it; the difficulties which at first appcar almost
asurmountable, gradually disappear, and the admirable accuracy
and concise energy of the style become apparent Dr. Campbell
was certainly one of those who had wot taken the trouble to study
the Logic of Aristotle, otherwise he would not have said that the
progress of reasoning by the syllogism is from what is more
obscure to that which is more evident. ‘The conclusion of 4
proper syllogism possesses all the certainty of the propositions of
which it is formed, in the perfect kind, and all their probability in
the imperfect, and neither more nor less. “ A perfect syllogism,”
says Aristotle, “ stands in need of nothing more than the propo-
sitions assumed to exhibit the necessary conclusion; that which
is imperfect, wants the assistance of one or more conclusions
supposed necessary in the component definitions, but not assumed
in the propositions.” Τέλειον μὲν οὖν καλῶ συλλόγισμον τὸν
μηδενὸς ἄλλου προσδεόμενον, παρὰ τὰ εἰλημμένα, πρὸς τὸ φανῆναι
φὸ ἀνάγκαιον. ᾿Ατελὴ δὲ τὸν προσδεόμενον ἢ ἑνὸς ἢ πλειόνων, ἅ ἔστι
μὲν ἀνάγκαια διὰ τῶν ὑποχειμένων ὅρων, οὐ μὴν εἴληπται διὰ προτασέων.
The conclusions therefore of the syllogism are always equally
clear and certain, as the propositions of which it is formed are
self evidently true, are fully proved true, or are in a certain
degree probable. And, as we see that all mathematical de-
monstration depends upon the drawing just and undeniable
inferences from truths already known, and that we thus arrive at
a general conclusion not evident at first, it is by no means to be
admitted that the progress of reasoning syllogistically is, as Dr.
Campbell has said, from the obscure to the evident ; for the con-
clusions from just propositions must necessarily be certain, of
possess the same degree of probability with the propositions
themselves. In mathematical reasoning we form a syllogism and
draw a conclusion, which conclusion forms a proposition in the
next, and we thus proceed to the general conclusion. It is true
that self-evident truths may be rendered into formal syllogisms,
and Doctor Campbell gives examples of identical propositions
formed into a major, minor, and conclusion. For instance, he takes
the words signifying a sheep from the Italian, French, and English
languages, and forms this syllogism :—
Vindicie’ Antique. : 195
Pecora is the same with brebis,
Brebis is the same with sheep,
Therefore pecora is the same with sheep.
Again— ) :
Twelve are equal to the fifth part of sixty,
Now a dozen are equal to twelve,
_ ‘Therefore a dozen are equal to the fifth part of sixty.
Every person must at once see that these form no syllogisms, but
merely amount to a play upon words signifying the same identical
thing, having no regard whatever to the distinctions of genus and
species. Truisms, no doubt, may be reduced to real syllogisms ;
but it is certam, that by a chain of correct syllogisms, we come
to conclusions not at first in our view; conclusions, as has just
been said, possessing the same degree of evidence as the propo-
sitions from which they are derived. But Dr. Campbell seems
to think that, because the propositions are known, and the cone
clusion from just propositions being self-evident, the syllogism
must be altogether useless, and never can encrease our stock of
knowledge. In this instance he forgets that many and important
conclusions are derived from juxtaposition, which are not at all
evident while the propositions are considered separately. The
arithmetician is perfectly well acquainted with all the commonly
used numerical signs, and their value; but, by varied arrange-
ments, he can deduce an infinite number of completely satisfac-
tory conclusions, unknown until the necessary operations have
been gone through—
“ Tantum SERIES JUNCTURAQUE pollet.”
All knowledge must proceed from that which has been already
acquired, for the poet justly enquires
‘©OF God above, or mau below,
What can we reason but from what we know 2”
Or how shall real science be acquired from uncertain principles ὃ.
The commonly prevailing opinion at the present day is, that
the Logic of Aristotle was not so much intended for useful pure
poses, to facilitate the acquisition of knowledge, and assist the
scholar in reasoning correctly, as to exbibit a vain display of
126 Vindicia’ Antique.
superior learning, calculated to impose upon the public as pro»
found reasoning what is no better than mere verbal trifling.
Were we to receive this censure of Aristotle as really just, we
must believe that he was a very weak man, and would naturally
expect to find an ostentatious pedantry pervading his whole works,
and particularly those addressed to the people, as his Ethics and
Politics. We should expect to find bis reasoning weak, and his
conclusions often false. But we discover none of these defects
in the writings of Aristotle, and it is reasonable thence to infet
that the censure is not founded in truth. ‘That in all his writings
he kept in view the syllogistic method, is certain; but, after read-
ing the pieces which he designates by the title of Organon, we.
find that he supposes the reader acquainted fully with the method
in these works explained, and his style is, throughout his ofher
works, plain and purely didactic. His reasoning deserves the
character given of it by Cicero, it is nervous and cogent; and,
‘although expressed in very concise terms, upon attentive consi-
deration nothing will be found wanting to complete the proof of
his conclusions. That his Logic, and what may be termed his
Lectures on Nature, are expressed with such brevity as to be
scarcely intelligible without illustration, he himself informs us ; for
his royal pupil having complained that he had diminished the
value of the instruction personally communicated to him, by pub-
lishing these works, he in reply tells him, that they are published,
and not published ; for, says he, they will not be understood unless
by such as have heard my illustrations. That this was really the
case in his own time, appears very probable ; but the successors
in his school have given to the world commentaries upon these-
books, which render them intelligible to all who will bestow the
necessary pains in studying them; and Philoponus has given
Diagrams with his Explanations of the Analytics, to render the
various forms of the syllogism perfectly clear.
Tn short, whoever admits that every science is resolvable into
its theorem«, and the fact is undeniable, must admit that theorems
are resolvable into the syllogisms of which they are composed;
these into their propositions, and these again into their component
definitions, simple or single terms, and there the analysis is com-
plete.. Without such analysis no man can judge accurately of. the
Vindicie Antique. 127
reasoning of others, nor reason with precision himself, unless by
ἃ process exactly the converse ; of well established terms forming
correct propositions, of these, conclusive syllogisms, and by a just
connexion of these, making out those theorems which are the
essence of all science. ‘Inasmuch (says Ammonius) as demon-
stration is a scientific syllogism, it is impossible to say any thing
concerning it without first saying what is a syllogism ; nor can we
learn what is simply a syllogism, without having first learned what
isa proposition, for propositions are certain sentences, and it 18 a
collection of such sentences that forms a syllogism, because it is
out of these. that a syllogism is compounded. Farther—it is im-
possible to know a proposition without knowing: nouns and verbs,
out of which is composed every species of sentence; or to know
nouns ‘and verbs, without knowing sounds articulate or simple
words, inasmuch as each of these is a sound articulate having a
meaning. It is necessary therefore, in the first place, to say
something concerning simple words. Here then ends the theo-
yetical:part (of resolution), which is the beginning of that which
is practical. First therefore (with a view to the practical part) he
(Aristotle) disserts concerning simple articulate sounds in lis
PREDICAMENTS: after that concerning nouns, and verbs, and
propositions, in his treatise concerning INTERPRETATION : then
concerning syllogism, simply so called, in his FIRST ANALYTICS:
and finally, concerning demonstration, in his LATTER ANALYTICS.
And here is the end of the practice which was the beginning of
the theory.”" :
᾿ς AN ἐπειδὴ ἡ ἀπόδειξις συλλόγισμός ἐστιν ἐπιστημόψικος, ἀδύνατον εἴπειν περὶ
φούτου τὸν μὴ πρότερον εἰπόντα τί ἐστι Συλλόγισμος τὸν δὲ ἁπλῶς Συλλόγισμον οὖκ ἂν
μαϑοῖμεν, od μαθόντες τί ἐστι πρότασιΞ᾽ λόγοι γάρ τινές εἶσιν al ΤΙροτάσεις" τῶν δὲ
φοιουτῶν λόγων συλλογή ἔστι 5 Συλλόγισμος" ὥστε ἄνευ τοῦ γνῶναι τὰς προτάσεις,
ἀδύνατον μαθεῖν τὸν συλλόγισμον" ἐκ γὰρ τούτων σνγκεῦται" ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ τὴν πρότασιν Ever
Τῶν ὀνομάτων, καὶ τῶν ῥημάτων ἐξ ὧν συνέστηκε πᾶς Adyes’ τὰ δὲ ὀνόματα καὶ ῥήματα
ἕνεν τῶν ἁπλῶν φωνῶν, ἕκαστον γὰρ τούτων φωνή ἐστι σημαντική. Δεῖ οὖν πρότερον περὶ
τῶν ἁπλῶν φωνῶν εἴπειν. Ἐνταῦθα οὖν ἡ Θεωρία κατέληξε, καὶ γίνεται τοῦτο τῆς
πραξέως ἀρχή. Πρότερον γὰρ διαλέγεται περὶ τῶν ἁπλῶν φωνῶν ἐν ταῖς Κατηγορίαις.
EM οὕτω περὶ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων, καὶ προτάσεως ἐν τῇ περὶ ἙἭ, ρμήνειας. Εἶτα
χερὶ τοῦ ἁπλῶς Συλλογίσμον ἐν τοῖς προτέροις ᾿Αναλυτίκοις. Εἶθ᾽ οὕτω περὶ ᾿Αποδείξεως
ἐν τοῖς ὑστέροις ᾿Αναλυτίκοι.. Ἐνταῦθα δὲ τὸ τέλος τῆς πράξεως, ὅπερ ἣν ἀρχὴ Tis
@capias.—Ammon, in predic. p. 16. ed. ὃνο.
128
COLLECTION OF THE CHALDEAN ORACLES.
Pant II.—(Continued from No, XXXII. p. 344.)
— ἀΠ|}}».ττρρι..-..
Δίηναιον τε ὃρομημα, καὶ ἀστεριον προπορευμα. ᾿
Procl. in ‘Fim.
The course of the moon, and the advancing procession of the
' Stars.
* Tov Βαβυλωνίων οἱ δοκιμώτατοι, καὶ Οστανη;, καὶ Ζωροαστρης,
ἀγελας χυριως καλοῦσι τας ἀστρικας σζφαιραᾶς. Hros παρ᾽ σὸν τελδιὼς
αίγονται περὶ τὸ XEVTPOY μόναι παρα τα σωματικὰ μεγεθη" ἢ ἀπὸ τοῦ CUE
δεσμοι πῶς καὶ συνάγωγαι χρηματίζειν δογματιζεσθαι παρ᾽ αὐτῶν
τῶν PuTinwy λογῶν, ας ayeous κατα τὰ αὐτὰ χαλοῳσιν ἕν TOES
λογοις" κατα παρεμπτῶσιν δετου γαμμα, ἀγγέλους. Aso xas τοὺς καβ'
ἐχαστὴν TOUTWY ἀγελων εἐξαρχοντας ἀστέρας, καὶ δαίμονας ομοιους
ἀγγέλους, καὶ ἀρχαγγέλους προσὰ ορευεσθαι, οἵπερ εἰσὶν OETA TOY
"μον. Anonymus, in Theologimenis Arithmeticis.
The most celebrated of the Babylonians, together with Ostanes
aod Zoroaster, very properly call the starry spheres herds; whether,
because these alone among corporeal magnitudes, are _perfeotly:
carried about ἃ centre, or in conformity to the oracles, because
they are considered by them as in a certain respect the bonds and
collectors of physical reasons, which they likewise call in their
sacred discourses herds, and by the insertion of a gamma, angels:
Hence, in a similar manner, they denommate the stars and demons
which rule over each of these herds (or starry spheres) angels and
archangels : and these are seven in number. ""
* Qui se cognoscit, in se omnia cognoscit, ut Zoroaster prius,
deinde Plato m Aleibiade scripserunt. Pici, Op. tom. i. p. 41}.
He who knows himself, knows all things in himself, as Zoroaster
first asserted, and afterwards Plato in the first Alcibiades.
* Ζωὴης τὸ uypoy συμβολον. dio καὶ τοτε μὲν λιβαδα καλουσιν αὐτὴν
(animum) τῆς cAns ζωογονιας, τότε δὲ πηγὴν τινα, καὶ πλατῶων και πρα
“λατωνος οἱ Geos Ν Procl. in Tim. p. 318.
Moisture is a symbol of life; and hence both Plato, and prior
to Plato, the gods call the soul, at one time, a drop from the
whole of vivification ; and, at another time, a certain fountain of it,
* Sunt etiam dwmones aquei quos Nereides vocat Orpheus, in
sublimioribus eshalationibus aquz, quales sunt in hoc aere nubiloso,
quorum corpora videntur quandoque acutioribus oculis, presertim:
ip Perside et Africa, ut existimat Zoroaster. oe
Ficin. de Immortal. Anim. p. 123,
΄
Chaldean Oracles. 129
: ‘Where are certain aquatic denions, called by Orpheus, Nereides,
in the more elevated exhalations of water, such as reside in this
cloudy-air, whose bodies, according to: Zoroaster, are sometimes
seen by more acute eyes, especiaily in Persia and Africa.
᾿ * Cum anima currat semper, certo temporis spatio transit
omnia, quibus peractis cogitur recurrere paulatim per omima denug,
‘atque eandem in mundo telam generationis retexere, ut placwit
Zoroastri, qui iisdem aliquando causis omnino redeuntibus, eosdem
similiter effectus réverti putat. . Ibid. p. 129.
Sing the soul perpetually runs, in a certain space of time it
passes through all things, which circulation being accomplished, it
is compelled to run back again through all things, and unfold the
same web of gencration in the world, according to Zoroaster ;
who is of opinion, that the sanie causes on 8. time returning, the
᾿ same effects will, in a similar manner, return,
: * Voluit Zoroaster ethereum anime indumentum in nobis aesi-
due volvi. Ibid. p. 131.
_ According to ‘Zoroaster, i in us the etherial vestment of the soul
perpetually revolves.
* Congruitates materialium formarum ad rationes anim mundi,
Zoroaster divinas illices appellavit. Ficin. de vita coelitus compa-
fanda, p. 519.
| Zoroaster calls the congruities of material forms to the reasons
of the soul of the world, divine alluremeuts.
- In that part of the works of Johannes Picus, Earl of Mirandula,
which j is denominated Conclusiones, there are fifteen conclusions,
aecording to his own opinion, of the meaning of certain oracles of
Zoroaster, and the meaning of his Chaldean expositors, In these
the two following oracles are prescrved, which are not to be found
iu any Greek writer now extant:
Nec exeas cum transit lictor. 4
Nor should you go forth when the lictor passes by.
Adhuc tres dies sacrificabitis, et non ultra.
As yet three days shall ye sacrifice, and no longer.
It appears hkewise, from these conclusions, that the first oracle
of Zoroaster was concerning a ladder, which reached from Tar-
tarus to the first fire.
That the second oracle was respecting a two-fold air, water, and
earth, and the roots of the earth.
That the eleventh was concerning the two-fold intoxication οὗ
Bacchus and Silenus.
That there was an oracle respecting a syren, and another respect-
ing she-goats.
As a translation of these ccnclusions, from their mixture with
Cabalistic and other barbarous jargons, would not be of the least
VOL. XVII. Cl. Ji. NO. XXXII. I
180 Chaldean Oracles
use to the philosophic Enylish reader, I shall only give them in
the original. . 7
Conclusiones numero 15 secundum propriam opinionem de in-
telligentia dictorum Zoroastris, et ¢xpositorum ejus Chaldzorum.
1, Quod dicunt interpretes Chaldvi super primum dictum Lo-
roastris, de scala a tartaro ad primum ignem: nihil aliud significat
quam seriem naturarum universi, a non gradu materie ad eum, qui
est super omnem gradum graduate protensum.
2, Ibidem dico, interpretes nihil aliud per virtutes mysteriales
intelligere quam naturalem magiam.
8. Quod dicunt interpretes super dictum secundum Zoroastris
de duplici aére, aqua et terra, nihil aliud sibi vult, nisi quodlibet
elementum, quod potest dividi per purum et impurum, habere he-
bitatores rationales et irrationales; quod vero purum est tantum,
rationales tantum.
4. Ibidem per radices terre nihil aliud intilligere possunt quam
vitam vegetalem, convenienter ad dicta Empedoclis, qui. ponit
transanimationem etiam in plantas.
5. Ex dicto illo Zoroastris, Ha Ha, hos terra deflet usque ad
filios, sequendo expositionem Osie Chaldzi, expressam habemus
veritatem de peccato originali,
6. Dicta mterpretum Chaldeorum super 11 aphorismo de
duplici vino ebriatione’ Bacchi et Sileni, perfecte iutelligentur per
dicta Cabalistarum de duplici vino.
7. Quz dicunt interpretes super 14 aphorismo, perfecte intelli-
géntur, per ea, qua dicunt Cabaliste-de morte oscull.
8. Magiin 17 aphorismo nihil aliud intelligunt per triplex indu-
mentum, ex lino, panuo et pellibus, quam triplex anime habitacu-
lum ceeleste, spiritale, et terrenum.
9. Poteris ex precedenti conclusione aliquid intelligere de pelli-;
ceils tunicis, quas 5101 fecit Adam, et de pellibus quz erant in ta-
bernaculo.
10. Per canem imibil aliud intelligit Zoroaster, quam partem ir-
‘rationalem animg et proportionalia. Quod ita esse videbit qui dili-
genter dicta omnia expositorum consideraverit, qui et ipsi sicut et
Zoroaster enigmatice loquuptur.
11. Dictum illud Zoroastris, Nec excas cum transit lictor, pers
fecte intelligitur per illud Exodi, quando suut probibiti Israelite
exire domos suas in trausitu angeli interficientis primogenita A.gyp-
tiorum.
12. Per Sirenam apnd Zoroastrem nihil aliud intelligas quam
pertem anime rationalem.
_ 13. Per puerum apud interpretes nihil aliud intelligibile quam
intellectum. . :
14. Per.dictum illud Zoroastris, Adhuc tres dies sacrificabitis,
by Theurgists. 131
et non ultra, apparuit mihi per‘Arithmeticam saperioris Merchiane
illos computaidi dies‘esse, in eo dicto expresse predictuin advent-
um Christi. : : "
15. Quid sit rtelligendum per capras apud Zoroastrem, intelli-
git, qui legeret in libro Bair que sit affinitas capris ‘ef qué agnis
οὐαὶ spiritibus. Pici. op. vol. i. p. 69.
Chaldean Oracles delivered by Theurgists, under the reign of the
Emperor Marcus Antoninus.
Concerning the summit of the intelligible order :
H μονας exes πρώτως οπὸυ πατρικὴ μονας ἐστι. Procl.in Eucl. p. 27.
Tlie monad is'‘there first where the paternal monad subsists.
Concerning the production, of the middle of the intelligible
order : .
Ταναὴ ἐστι μόνοις ἡ δυο γεννᾳ. Procl.in Eucl. p. 27.
The monad is extended, which generates two.
Concerning eternity, according to which, the middle of the iu-
telligible order is characterised :
Tat go-yevss $aos. Πολὺ yap povos
᾿ Ἔκ πατρὸς αλκὴς δρεψαμιενος voou avbos,
ἔχει τῷ νοεῖν πατρικὸν νοὺυν ενδιδοναι
Πασαις πηγαῖς Te και ἀρχαῖς ;
Και το νοεῖν, aes τε μένειν coxvp στροφαλιγγι. Procl. in Tim. p. 242.
Father-begotten light. For this alone, by plucking abundantly
from the strength of the Father, the flower of intellect, is enabled,
by intellection, to impart a paternal intellect to all the fountains
and principles ; together with intellectual energy, and a perpetual
permanency, according to an unsluggish revolution.
* Τῆς yap αἀνεχλείπτου Cans και τῆς arcurou δυναμεως, καὶ τῆς αὐκγου
κατα τὸ λογιὸν ἐνεργειας, 9 civ (αιτια). "
For eternity,* according to the oracle, 1s the cause of never-
failing life, of unwearied power, and of unsluggish energy.
Concerning the extremity of the intelligible order:
Ενθεν συρόμενος πρηστὴρ apvdpos mugos avbos
Κοσμων ενῇρωσκων κοιλωμασι. mavra yap eviev
Ἄρχεται εἰς TO XaTW TeIvElY UXTIVAS αὙήῆτας.
. Procl. in Theol. Plat. p. 171, 172.
Thence a fiery whirlwind sweeping along, obscures the flower
of fire, leaping, at the same time, into the cavities of the worlds.
For all things thence begin to extend their admirable rays down-
wards. * |
' Agreeably to this, Plotinus divinely defines eterrity to be infinite life, at
once total and fuil.
' 7 See my Introduction to the Parmenides of Plato, near the end.
133 Chaldean Oracles
Μηδε προηλθεν, αλλ᾽ apevev ev τῷ πατρικῷ Bude,
Και ev τῷ αδυτῳ κατα τὴν θεοῆρεμμονα σιγὴν. Procl.in Tim. p. 167,
Nor has it proceeded, but it abides in the paternal profundity,
aud in the adytum, according to the divinely-nourished silence.
Ἔστι yap περας του πατρικοὺ Budov, και πηγὴ τῶν νοερῶν.
Damascius, περι ἀρχων.
It is the boundary of the paternal profundity, and the fountain
-of intellectual natures. .
Ors epyaris, ors exdoris ἐστι wupos ζωηφορου.
Ori και ζωογονον πληροι τῆς Exatns κολπον.
Kas exigpes τοῖς Συνοχεὺσι ἀλκὴν ζειδῶρον ia od
Meya δυναμενοιο. roc]. in Tim. p. 128.
It is the operator, and the giver of life-bearing fire. It fills the
vivific bosom of Hecate, and pours on the Synoches the fertile
strength of a fire endued with mighty power.
Concerning Love:
Os ex voou exfops πρωτος
Eocapevos πυρι πὺρ συνδεσμιον, ofpa xepacy
Πηγαιους xparngas eov xupos avios ἐπισχων. Procl.m Parmenid.
Who first leaped forth from intellect, clothing fire bound toge-
ther with fire, that he might govern the fiery cratera, restraining
the flower of his own fire. :
Concerning Faith, Truth, and Love:
* Lavra yas ev τρισι τοῖς δὲ κυβερναται τε καὶ ἐστι.
Procl. in I. Alcibiag,
- All things are governed and subsist in these three. ,
Apyais yao τρίσι ταῖς δε An Boss δουλευειν ἀπαντα.
Damasc. περὶ ἀρχιῦν..
You may conceive that all things act as servants to these three
- principles.
Concerning the intelligible order in general :
H vonty warns τμήσεως ἀρχει. Damasc. περι ἀρχῶν.
The intelligible order is the principle of all section.
Apyy πασὴς τμήσεως nde ἡ ταξις.
_ "This order is the principle of all section. Damasc. περι ἀρχῶν.
* Ta λογια περι τῶν ταξεων προ του ουρᾶνου ws adbeyxroy ενεδειξατο,
καὶ προσεθηχκε. "
Diy’ ἔχει μυστα. ᾿ς Procl. in Crat.
The’oracles show, that the orders prior to Heaven are ineffable,
and add, ‘‘ They possess mystic silence.”
ἘΦ Goas” ras vontas aitias τὸ λογιον καλεῖ, καὶ προιουσας ἀπὸ TOU
πατρος θεειν ew avrov.” Procl. πὶ Crat. |
‘The oracle calls the intelligible causes “ Swift,” and asserts,
“That proceeding frum the Father, they run to him.”
“Tlavra yag ἐστιν ομοὺ ἐν κοσμῷ toys νοήτῳ. Damasc. περι ἀρχῶν.
All things subsist together in the intelligible world.
ὃν Theurgists. | 133
Concerning hyparxis, power, and energy :
* tov ομΠυθαγορειοι, δια povados καὶ δυαδος, καὶ τριαδος, ἡ ο MAaray
Sia τοῦ πέρατος, χαὶ τοῦ ἀπειροῦυ, καὶ τοῦ μίκτου, ἢ πρότερον γε ἡμεις δια
TOU ἐνὸς χαι τῶν πολλῶν, καὶ τοῦ ἡγωμενου, τοῦτο οἐ χρήσμοι τῶν θεῶν διοι
τῆς ὑπαρξεως και δυναμεως καὶ ἐνεργειας. Damasc. περι ἀρχῶν.
What the Pythagoreans intended to signify by monad, duad, and
triad—or Plato, by bound, infinite, and that which is mixed from
both—or we, in the former part of this work, by one, the many,
and the united, that the oracles of the gods signify by hyparzis, *
power, and intellect.
. Concerning power and intellect :
Ἢ μεν yap δυναμὶς σὺν exeivots, νοῦν δ᾽ απ᾿ exesvov.
Procl. in Plat. Theol. p. 365.
Power is with them (father and intellect) but intellect is from him
(the father).
Concerning the intelligible in general :
Tpody δὲ τῷ yoourrs τὸ νοήτον.
. Procl. in Cret. and Hesychius in voc, vospoy.
The intelligible is food to that which understands.
Ὥς τι νοῶν ou xeive γοήσεις. Damasc.
You will not apprehend it by an intellectual energy, as when un-
derstanding some particular thing.
Ov δη χρὴ σφοδροτήτι vossy τὸ νοητὸν ExEsyO, |
«ἄλλα voou ταναου ταναῃ ῷλογι παντὰ μετρουσῃ,
Πλὴν τὸ νοητὸν exsivo. Xpn de τοῦτο γοησ αι"
H yup εἐπεγκλινῃς σὸν γουν xaxeivo νοήσεις
Oux ατενως.
AXA’ αγνον επιστροῷον ομμα Gegovra
Σης Ψυχὴης τειναι κένεον νοῦν, Εἰς Τὸ vonTov,
Οῷρα μαθῃς τὸ νοήτον,
Exes sw νοου ὑπαρχει. Damasc.
It is not proper to understand that intelligible ? with vehemence,
but with the extended flame of an extended intellect : a flame which
measures all things, except that intelligible. But it is requisite to
understand this. For if yuu incline your mind, you will understand
it, though not vehemently. It becomes you, therefore, bringing with.
ou the pure convertible eye of your soul, to extend the void intel-
ect to the intelligible, that you may learn its nature, because it
has a subsistence above intellect.
en eel
2 By hyparxis, understand the summit of the nature of any being. |
2 This is spoken of a divine intelligible, which is only to be ἃ prehendcd
by the flower of intellect, or, in other words, the unity of the soul.
3 That is, a divine intelligible,
134
OBSERVATIONS ONSOME
ORATIONS ASCRIBED TO CICERO.»
— ae
Uvon various parts of the works ascribed to Cicero the opinions
of scholars have now and then been divided, as to their authenticity.
Some of them are now rejected by general consent: e. g. the
Book de Gloria, the Episle of Cicero to Octavius,’ and the
Speech against Sallust. In the last century there arose in Eng-
land a controversy upon the Epistles to Brutus,’ and upon four
1 « The other six or seven, rather fragments than entire letters” (i. 6. to
Brutus), “ made their first appearance in Germany near two centuries after-
wards. The last did not meet with general approbation, and had little re-
spect paid them in the more ancient editions: the former were universally
received as the unquestionable remains of Cicero, till after the time of Eras-
mus, and in common with the oration against Sallust, till the (τὴ οἵ Vic-
torius.” See Tunstall’s Observat.ons, p. 408, aud p.251 οἵ his Latin work,
De Ciceronis Epistolis ad Quintum Fratrem, et ad Marcum Brutum. In justice
to Tuastall I must state, that in his Latin notes there are many conjectural
emeodations of Cicero's text, which do credit tahis erudition and his sagacity.
Ernesti, indeed, in his Preface to Ciceru’s Epistles to Atticus, &c. writes thus:
—Cum plures alii viri doctissimi in textu harum epistalarum emendando per
conjecturas laborarint, tamen raro illi felices satis In eo fuere : suntque plere-
que, ut Malaspine, Bosii, Tunstalli, duriores ; ut etiam sepe miratus sim,
quare jn illis in textum recipiendis tam facilis etiam Gruterus fuerit; cujus
facilitatem nos nec in illis, necin his Tunstallinis imitati sumus. ‘Vide
p- 131. Vol. ii. of Ernesti’s Prefaces and Notes, republished Hale, 1807. I
commend Ernesti for not admitting such conjectures into the text. But I
observe, that when he produces Tunstall’s conjectures in detail, some appear
without ally remark; and with respect to the rest, those which Ernesti
approves are nat less numerous than those which he rejects.
* Markland allows the first letter to Brutus to be genuine, upon the authe-
rity of a passage in Nonius Marcellus, “ which,” says Markland, “ has been
restored from MSS.” Vide Markland, p. 15.
“1 amenabled,” says Mr. Tunstall, ““ by a curious observer and excellent
judge of various lections, to restore, as there is the greatest reason to believe,
the true reading of Nonius’s citation, from which it appears that the epistle
now remaining belonged to a collection wnder the name of the Ninth Book of
See Tunstall, p. 65.”—Cicero’s Letters to Brutus.
Tunstall’s note is, upon many accounts, worthy of being produced.
Vide Non. in voc. amare et diligere. Mr. Markland has in his possession
Josias Mercer's edition of Nonius Marcellus, collated with a MS. or MSS. by
Steph. Baluzius, where the reading of the passage in question, “ Et Lib, vitij.
Lueitius Cledius ‘Tribunus Plebis etc.” in which manner Mr Markland ob-
On some Orations, ὅσ. 185
Orations, viz. Ad Quirites Post Reditum, Post Reditum in Senatu,
Pro Domo Sua ad Pontifices, de Haruspicum Responsis. ‘The
Epistles to Brutus were suspected by myself before I had read the
controversy ; and when I turned from Markland’s observations to
the Four Speeches, I was completely convinced by the arguments
which he had adduced for proving that they are spurious. - My
opinion, though it should be erroneous, has not been hastily formed ;
for I have read Markland’s Book three or four times, and 1 have
examined the Speeches much oftener.
In the year 1SOL was published, at Berlin, the following works :
M. Tultii Ciceronis Que viilgo feruntur Orationes Quatuot ;
1. Pust Reditum in Senatu ; 2. Ad Quirites post Reditum ; 3. Pro
domo Sua ad Pontifices; 4. De Haruspicum Responsis Recognovit
animadversiones integras. J. Marklandi et J. M. Gesneri, Suasque
adjecit Frid. Aug. Wolfius. —
From books in my own possession,’ I some years ago drew up
serves, that number is often expressed in MSS., as in Gellias xv. 7. ed. Gronov.
Patero. ii. 61. ed. Oxon. 1711, 8vo. ; and Cic. Ep. Fam. xiv. 18, ed. Grev. Am-
stel. 1689, 8vo. The same very learned person observes farther, that Luci-
lrus for Lucius is, without doubt, a mistake of the transcriber; because Lu-
᾿ς cilius and Clodius are both of them gentilia, and therefore cannot subsist ii
‘the same person, unless he had been adopted, and then it must have been
Lucilius Clodianus ; as one adopted out of the family of the Valerii into ano- -
ther, would be called Valerianus ; out of the Octavit, Octavianus: which was
the case of Augustus, whom we call Octavius. In an ancient MS. likewise
of Nonius, which is now in the library of Corpus Christi college, in Caus-
bridge, the reading is very fair and distinct, “et Lib. viiij. Lucl. Clodius.”
Markland, with bis usual modesty, was content to say that the text had beet
restored by Mr. Tunstall from manuscript. But I am inclined to think that
4“. the curious observer and excellent judge of various lections,” who enabled
Mr. Tunstall to make the restoration, was Markland himself.
Having stated that Markland allowed the first letter to Brutus to be ge-
Nuine, becanse it is quoted by Nonius, I should add, that he does nut absu-
lately reject the seventh; and that next to the first and seventh, the fifteenth
letter seemed to him “ to bid the fairest for antiquity.”. Markland, p. 20.
: The only book on this controversy which I have not seen, is one which
Wolfius thus describes in the 12th page of his Preface,“ A Dissertation in
‘which the objections of a late Pamphlet to the Writings of the Ancients,
“after the manner of Mr. Markland, are clearly answered; those passages of
Tully corrected, on which some of the objections are founded : with amend-
ments of a few pieces of criticism, in Mr. Markland’s Epistala Critica. Lon-
don. 1746, 8v0.” Wolfius speaks of the author as unknown tohim; but Mt.
130 On some Orations
an historical ‘statement of the dispute between Markland,
Tunstall, Middleton, &c. on the Epistles to Brutus, and the
Speeches. A similar statement was prepared by Wolfius, and
inserted in his Preface to the republication of the four Ora-
tions, aud of the remarks made upon them by Markland and
Gesner.'. I shall insert Wolfius’s Preface in the Cilassical
Journal, not only because it contains a clear, a correct, and
a full bistory of the controversies, which I just now mentioned,
but because it will interest every scholar by a luminous and argu-
mentative statement of the general principles,’ upon which a man of
Nichols, in hisanecdotes of Mr. Bowyer says, “ The book was certainly printed
by Mr. B.; and if he did not write it himselt, (which is extremely probable,)
he wasat least anassistant in it.” Page 189.
* Gesner thus mentions his own work, in No. cxxxiv. of his Isagoge in Erw
ditionem Universalem : Recentioribus tampuribus a Jeremia Marklando iv.
Ciceronis post reditum habite iv dubium vocate sunt Orationes: quod idem
fecit de Bruti ad Ciceronem Epistolis, Qui res et mihi occasiouem dedit,
ut ii. prelectionibus vindicarem Ciceroni suas Orationes,
* In the year 1815, I received from Italy parts of the orations pro Scauro,
pro Tullio, et pro Flacco. They seem to me ἰὼ have the same internal inarks
of spuriousness which Markland detected in the four orations above mene
tioned. I should say of them as Markland said of the four orations, which
he rejected, that “ I do not deny them to be ancient, but, on the contrary,
believe them to have been written not many ages after Cicerv.” See Mark-
Jand’s Dissertation, p. 282. They remind me however ufa striking passage
in page 8 of Markland; “ If the insipid and blundering exercises and decla-
mations of a school-boy, written five or six hundred years ago, should now
be brought to light out of a MS. of that age, with the title of Ciceru’s Ora-
tions, for M. Scaurus, C. Corneliys, or any other lost piece, they must, upon
this principle, be received as the genuine works of the Orator.” See Mark-
land’s Remarks, page 8. Markland was aware that Cicero had written ὦ
speech for Scaurus. If he had seen the fragment Iately published by Maius,
he, in all probability, would not have thought it genuine. But as an imita-
tion of Cicero’s style, it certainly has so much resemblance, as not to de-
serve the name of “ a school-boy’s declamation.” Indeed nut one of the three
fragments is entirely destitute of resemblance to the style uf Ciceru. They
contain many expressions which may be found in his genuine writings.
" But in my opinion they “ want the spirit, strength, and elegance of compo-
sitions really good ;” and their general effect upon my mind is very feeble.—
Every scholar, I am sure, will acknowledge his obligations to our learned coun-
tryman, Mr. Blomfield, for the critical remarks, and the verbal emendations
which adorn the 2nd edition published in London, 1816. On the fragments
of the eight Orations, which Maius edited at Milan, in 1812, together with
a
ascribed to Cicero. 187
learning may be induced to doubt the authenticity of ancient writ.
ings which have been generally admitted and even applauded. This
part of Wolfius’s Preface will prepare the minds of intelligent readers
for another controversy, the whole of which appears to me worthy
of attention from scholars, and will therefore be laid before them in.
the Classical Journal. | |
Many years ago I. was led to doubt the genuineness of the
Speech for Marcellus. Every fresh perusal increased these doubts,
and at last they were fully confirmed by a publication with the fol-
lowmg title; M. Tullii Ciceronis Que vulgo fertur Oratio pro
M. Marcello Recognovit, Animadversiones Selectas Superiorum
Interpretum, suasque adjecit Frid. Aug.. Wolfius. Berolini. "1802:
To this work of Wolfius succeeded Commentarius perpetuus et
plenus in Orationem M. Tullii Ciceronis pro M. Marcello cum
Appendice De Oratione que vulgo fertur M. Tullii Ciceronis pro
Q Ligario, Auctore Benjamin Weiske, A. M. Schole Portensus
nuper Conr. Lipsiz. 1805. ἰ know not whether any formal
answer to Weiske has yet appeared. His arguments did not in the
smallest degree shake my. conviction upon the genuineness of the
Speech for Ligarius, nor did they weaken the impression which
Wolfius has made upon my mind, in his animadversions upon the
Speech for Marcellus. In the first volume of the Museum Auti-
quitatis Studiorum, which was published at Berlin in 1808, the
Hirst article is G. L. Spaldingii De Oratione Marcelliana Disputa-
ae ...-.....-.
an ancient commentary, I cannot form any decisive opinion, because the
passages ascribed to Cicero are so very few. Some of them are indisputably
_ genuine, and are found in all our editions. I have not often been 80 in-
structed and so interested by the cuntents of our periudical publications, as
by a critique on the Ambrosian MSS. in the Quarterly Review for January
1817. The introductory observations are very profound, and do honour to the
sagacity, ingenuity, and erudition of the writer. He has not expressed any
opinion upon the genuineness of the fragments, but quotes from the speeches
for Scaurus a few passages which seem to him “ very spirited and good
specimens of that impetuous expression of contempt, which Cicero often
employed with so striking an effect.” No scholar will be at a loss to find
very spirited passages in the Orations, which Markland has, I think, proved
to be spurious.
One of the most sagacious and learned men now living, once spoke to mé
of-the pleasure with which he had read the speech Pro domo sua ad Ponti-
fices. He was not aware of Markland’s publication, to which, however,
I referred him, iu justification of my own doubts.
138 On some Orations
tio. Itis in all respects worthy of that excellent critic, whom
scholars‘are accustomed to admire for the best Edition of Quint
lian that ever appeared. It is however to be lamented, that
Spalding died' before the completion of this noble work.
Spalding holds, as Wolfius did, that the Speech for Marcelles
is not genuine, and the additional arguments which he has brought
furward seem to me quite invincible. As mapy readers of the Clas-
sical Journal may uot possess all the books relating to the contro-
versy on the Speech for Marcellus, 1 shall, with the permission of
the Editor, insert them in the Classical Journal, according to the
order in which they were respectively published by Wolfius, Weiske,
and Spalding. I have already assigned my reasons for prefixing
the introductory address of Wolfius to the Reader, in bis edition
of the four Speeches rejected by Markland, and defended by
Gesner.
The subject discussed in these works cannot be uninteresting to
English scholars. I am aware indeed that’ the arguments which
convince me, may not be satisfactory to other men, and therefore
I shall feel no diminution of respect for the judgment or the learning
of those who differ from me. I should suppose, however, that the
very examination of the question will be an agreeable and useful
exercise to my learned countrymen, and therefore I shall im con-
clusion express my assent to the spirit of the candid and temperate
language of Mr. Tunstall, at the close of his observations upoa
the epistles to Brutus: Ego interim mihi nequaquam tantum arrogo,
ut quod longe doctiores, maxima cum laude in Ciceronis rebus
scriptisque exercitati (Manutius, Victorius, Middletonus) non vi-
derunt, id ine jam primum vidisso fidenter affirmem. Rationes ex
rebus ipsis, atque Epistolarum ipsarum ingenio depromptas, que
de earum νοθεία, si minus fidem mihi quidem certam fecerunt, sus-
piciones tamen non leves, nec, opinor, contemnendas attulerunt,
libere atque ingenue proposui. Quod si quis horum Antiquitatis
Monumentorum, veterum fortasse, dictisque et sententiis (neque
enim unquam dissimulabo) subinde nitentium, amore adductus, is
* Spalding died June 11, 1816, after publishing three volumes. The fourth
was published by Philip Buttman, who in his preface expresses a wish that
a fitth volume. ‘ supplementa et indicem complectens,” might be prepared
by some critic, not unworthy of Quintilian and his editor Spalding.
V. Buttmanni Precfat. p. 4, et p. 7.
ascribed to Cicero. | 189
Ciceronis auctoritatem nomenque derogari egre ferat, is suum
dolorem tum demum justissimum fore sentiat, cum vel firmioribus
rationibus.eam auctoritatem adstruere se posse existimet, vel nostras
non satis moment habere intellexerit. See Tunstall Epist. ad Mid-
dleton, p. 251. P.V.
WOLFIUS DE QUATUOR ORATIONIBUS CICERONIANIS.
EDITOR LECTORIBUS.
Quo in Prafatione ad quatuor Orationes, quibus Ciceronianum
nomen Marklandi et meis obelis detraxi, conjecturam afferrem de
quinta quadam Oratione ex ejusdem magni scriptoris operibus summo-
venda ; tametsi graviores plerasque causas senteutie mez tenebam
consigznatas, id tamen non agebam, ut, eadem disputandi subtilitate ad
novam questionem trauslata, consensum doctorum hominum singu-
lis puuctis colligerem. Hoc si facere voluissem, nullus ei rei locus
fuisset aptior, quam is ipse, ubi suspicionem jaciebam. Sed mihi
videbar ista brevi significatione satis dixisse intelligentibus, qui verum,
leviter et summisse admoniti, suo magis ingenio perquirere quam
aliena opera doceri mallent: ceterorum et imperite turbe rationem
Non magnopere ducendam putabam. In hoc enim genere si quid recte
conjectum est, talem vim novimus esse veritatis, ut, per longum tem-
pus suppressa, tandem emergat, assertorem nacta suum; quum leves
conjecture et opiniones, vel callidissime ornate, insita quandoque con-
cidant infirmitate. Denique ita nuper defessus eram castigandis vitiis
umbratici magistri, ut requiem potius apud prestantiores scriptores,
quam novum laborem quererem ex simili causa, εἴ θᾶ, que mihi multo
difficiliorem explicatum habere videretur. Jam vero quoniam pos-
cunt quidam amicorum meorum, ut quam primum exspectationi suze
‘satisfaciam, aliosque in viam reducam, quos in illis a me indicatis
extremis Orationibus varie errare narrant ; sumpsi aliquot dies feriarum
‘ad ea, que ante rudibus lineis inchoaveram, singulari libello dis-
serenda.
Itaque etiam hee alea jacta esto. Quamquam non temere aleator
ad fortunam ludi experiendam confidentius ruit, quam ego nunc con-
siderate accessi ad illud judicium confirmandum. Adeo mihi in
Oratione pro Marcello, (nam hec est illa subditiva,) siugulos locos et
‘upiversam artem excutienti, certa et perspicua videbantur inesse
indicia νοθείας, et mirificus error, per tot secula propagatus, plurimis
argumentis plane et evidenter convinci posse. Ad hanc autem evi-
dentiam nobis in his studiis unice acies mentis intendenda est, ut in
quaque obscura re, quoad ejus fieri possit, veritas indagetur, et parum
explicate probabilitati quam minimum loci relinquatur. Quod nisi
sedulo tiet, valde verendum erit, ne ex alio seculo in aliud transmissi
‘@rores novas radices agant, ac, si cui olim Erudito in aliquo loco
acumen feliciter cessit, priorum ingeniorum fructus sensim intercidat
-secordia nostra. Duo afferam exempla hujus rei, non ignota illa qui-
dem sed ad hoc ouod declarandum est, aptissima, Nemo literatorum
140 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
nescit, brevia Carmina, quibus nomen Anacreontis inscribimus, ἃ
nonnullis vel omnia, vel maximam partem, ad posteriores ztates detrusi,
poetisque tribui minime nobilibus : sed de tota hac questione multi,
neque indocti, viri se vix quicquam inaudisse simulant: ita istorum
versuum auctoritate utuntur, tamquam pulcherrimorum et vetustissi-
morum : aliosque, id mirantes, mirantur ipsi vicissim; ac Jure 800,
quia a nemine adhuc ea questio ad liquidum confessumque perducta est.
Inimo illis et tot Anacreontis cantoribus magnus persuasionis adjutor
adest R. Bentleius, quatenus, ubi sententiz dicende locum habebat,
tacendo assentiri, et vulgi opiniunem probare videri debet. Roma-
norum summo historico adscribuntur duz, sive Orationes, sive Epi
stole, ad Cesarem de republ. ordinanda, quarum auctor nec Cesarem,
cui consilia dare voluit, neque ingeniuim Sallustii sui satis perspexerat.
Haud latuit ea fraus sagaces quosdam Editores, qui in his scriptis
nonnulla scholasticarum loquutionum exempla notaverunt: at note
eorum nuper Brossium, egregium Sallustii restitutorem, non potuerunt
a temeraria credulitate et amore istorum libellorum abducere. He
unde nascantur tante virorum pari fere doctrina dissensiones, requt-
ris? Nimirum aliud est, in his criticis causis, sicut in jure civili,
persentiscere rem et suspicione attingere, etiam nonnullas, si forte,
rationes conjecture afferre ; aliud vero, penitus omnia momenta rei
perscrutari, eamque adhibitis firmis argumentis sic pertractare, ut
idonei judices nihil dubitationis relictum putent, atque alii, qui
memoriola vacillant, jamdudum ipsi in eadem sententia sibi fuisse
videantur.
Sed veniamus statim ad disputationem de hac ipsa Oratione. Habet
ea non minus, quam quatuor ante edite, magnam auctoritatem a
testibus et laudatoribus omnis zvi; ut nihil dicamus de vestigiis
imitationis apud posteriores, que quodammodo incerta haberi possunt,
nihil de vetustate codicum nostrorum et antiqui Scholiaste, cujus
nonnulle annotationes in exemplis Gronovii leguntur. Locum quen-
dam ex ea protulit et explicavit Asconius Pedianus ; alios aliquot
locos recitarunt Nonius Marcellus, Lactantius et Priscianus :" quo-
rum testimonio facile apparet, hanc Orationem, nisi a Cicerone, saltem
ab aliquo scriptore proxime wtatis et eodem, quo Cicero periit,
seculo compositam esse. Nam hoc quidem nos credere oportet
Asconiis, Quintilianis, reliquis illorum temporum Grammaticis_et
Rhetoribus, satis vetustum esse, quod ab ipsis laudatur pro vetusto,
certe non ab zqualibus eorum suppositum: illud tamen ne antiquis-
_ “Sane mirum est, ab his scriptoribus ea fere recitari, que aliqua reprehen-
sione digna sunt. Priscianus III. p. 605. XVIII. p. 1125. affert istud εἰπε ἐδ.
mum deo §. 8, et p. 1209. fundamenta que cogitas §.25. Item quod Nonius
Jaudat verba ex cap. 1. illo amulo atque imitatore studiorum meorum, mihi qui-
dem de Consulari viro displicet voc. imitator, etsi de minore natu. Quanto.
modestius scribit ad ipsum Cicero Epp. Famil. XV. 9. ‘“ Maxima letitia
aficior, quum ab hominibus prudentissimis, virisque optimis, omnibus dictis,
factis, studiis, institutis, vel me tui similem esse audio, vel te mei.” Sed
nonnulla hoc genus pretermisi suis locis, ne quis calumniari me, et juste
acerbius omnia carpere, putet.
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationibus Ciceron. 141
simi quidem auctoris fide dijudicari potest, an quid ejusmodi Ciceroni
potius quam aliis tribuendum sit, ejusque manu et excelienti ingenio
dignum putandum. Atqui id de nostra Oratione nequaquam dubium
fuit Viris doctissimis, quieam partim seorsum, partim cum reliquis
junctam ediderunt, vel singulares locos ejus in aliis scriptis illustrarunt.
Non huc congeram honorificas censuras superiorum, ut Benti, Minois,
Melanthonis, Sylvii, Camerarit, Francii, ne injuriam facere existimer
lis, qui merita illorum penitus obscuraverunt, Manutiis, Victoriis,
Lambinis, Greviis, similibusque Interpretibus. Et horum quidem is,
quem primum nominavi, P. Manutius, tum spe alias in Commentario
suo extollit et admiratur hanc Orationem, tum ad c. 10. ait, consequé
ut tota Oratio, mirabilt artificio condita, Caesarem delectarit. Sed
mittamus hos Interpretes, quamvis his nostris, qui nuper se estheticos
nuncuparunt, longe preferendos, et propria eloquentia subtilique
judicio, verum sensum antique venustatis et dignitatis spirantes ;*
unum et alterum hujus Orationis laudatorem excitabo ex prima
classe recentiorum, qul, si auctoritates audiendz erunt, quemvis aliter’
sentientem ad se revocare posse videbuntur. Hic quid alii sensuri
sint, nescio ; me quidem, tantorum Virorum ipsa nomina reverentem,
eorumque auctoritati, quantum par est, tribuentem, multis in locis
solicitum habuit, et, ne oculis meis crederem, deterruit Latinarum
imprimis literarum princeps, Jo. Fr. Gronovius, quum in Observatt.
Ρ. 712. eum vidi hauc Marcellianam vocare tncomparabilem Panegy-
ricum, Plinti incomparabili Panegyrico copulandum, quem in omnibus
sibi imitandum, tamquam optimum, proposuerit Plinius.” Longe
inferior est auctoritas Middletoni, presertim si quis percontetur ex
60, quibus notis vitiosa et proba Latinitas distinguatur, quam ad rem
maxime pertinet hec nostra disceptatio: verum idem tamen d¢-recta
eloquentia non iuscite judicat, et in arte scribendi patrio sermone
eximiam laudem meruit apud populares suos. Is igitur Vir, etsi
* Non ab re fuerit, hic afferre verba Ruhnkenii ex Epist. ad Rinkium
V. C., si forte aliquid valebunt ad animum incorrupti juvenis rectis studiis
imbuendum: “ς Non dubito, quin brevi alius ex ventosa ista Astheticorum
natione exorturus sit, qui reliquam partem Horatii hoc novo more perficiat,
id est, nulla aut mediocri utriusque linguz scientia, nulla exquisitiore
eruditionis copia, nullo denique critices usu, super locis, quos non intelligit,
philosophetur, et circulatoria vanitate jactet, se demum totum et singularum
jum ad totum rationem (le plan d‘ouvrage,) que scilicet Casaubonos,
Pronovios, Bentleios fefellerat, planissime demonstraturum. Tales veterum
scriptorum interpretes quum nunc in Germania vigeant, non mirum est,
editiones a Batavis et Britannis curatas paucos, ut scribis, emtores apud vos
reperire.” Hac sapientissimi et elegantissimi Viri vox est, quam ego, etsi
philosophiam in literis non odi, novo cuique Editori ad aurem lususurrari a
familiari velim, precipue iis, qui poetas centies editos repetunt isto ornatu.
2 Vide Animadvv. adc. 3. p. 31. ubi ejus late expositam sententidm de
quodam joce hujus Orat. attuli, cujus explicationi illud praconium presgndi —
causa appusuit. At ne [‘linii quidem Panegyricum omnes docti ex merito
laudatum putabunt. Non. desunt, opinor, homines, qui continua lectione
nobilissimi libri vix tres horas delectari possunt. Enecuisset Principem
novus Consul, si ita dixisset, ut scripsit.
142 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero. .
Orationem pro Marcello, qualem eam prw oculis habemus, ex tempore
dictam opinatur, ita pulchram et perfectam esse putat, ut nihil ἐπ᾿ koe
genere exstet ex omni antiguitate, quod magis splendeat elegantia et:
reliquis oratoriis virtutibus.' Atque hos et alios clarissimi nominis
duces satis impune sequitur multitudo eorum, qui quotannis selectas.
Orationes a se illustratas edunt, qui eas in sermones variarum nostri
temporis nationum vertunt, denique qui Fundamenta seu Pracepta
stili, quem vocant, Latini conscribunt. Quo de genere librorum nobis
nunc ipsum aliquis venit in manus, quo inulta sane utilia juventuti
collecta sunt. (The Well-bred Scholar, or practical Essays on the best
Methods of improving the Taste and assisting the exertion of Youth
in their Literary Pursuits, by Will. Milns, Lond. 1794+. 8.) sed ibi
quoque hec Oratio ut preclarum exemplar demonstrativi generis
proponitur, in Anglicum sermonem translata.”
1 Longior censura adscribenda {uit nonnullas ob causas, que ex Commen-
tario patebunt, Nihil enim cpus est in quoque loco nominari! Virum doctum,
qui erravit, aut aliquid falsi attulit. “ Cesar, though he saw the Senate
unanimous in their petition for Afurce/lus, vet took the pains to call for the
particular opinion of every Senator upun it; amethod never practised, except
in cases of debate, and where the house was divided: but he wanted the
usual tribute of flattery upon this act of grace, and had a mind probably to
make an experiment of Cicero's temper, and to draw from him especially some
incense on the occasion: ner was he disappointed uf his aim ; fur Cicero,
touched by his generosity, and greatly pleased with the act itself, on the
account of his friend, returned thanks to him in a speech, which, though made
upon the spot, yet for elegance of diction, vivacity of sentiment, and politeness of
compliment, is superior to any thing extant of the kind in all antiquity. - The
many fine things which are said in it of Cesar, have given sume handle
indeed for a charge of insincerity against Cicero: but it must be remem-
bered, that he was delivering a speech of thanks, not only for himself, but
tn the name and at the desire of the Senate, where his subject naturally
required the embellishments of Oratory; and that all his compliments are
grounded on a supposition, that Cesar intended tu restore the Republic;
of which he entertained no small hopes at this time, as he signifies in a
letter to one of Cesar’s principal friends. (Epp. Famil. XIII. 68.) This
therefore he recommends, enforces, and requires from him in his speech,
with the spirit of an old Roman ; and no reasonable man will think it strange
that su free an address to a conqueror, in the height of all his power, should
want to be tempered with some tew strokes of flattery.” Middleton's Histury
of the Life of Cic. Vol. If. p. 351.
7 Euam ex hoc libro nunnulla apposni, que, si tanti res est, sui slocis
addenda sunt Commentario nostro. Pag. 259: “ The Orator having in this
beautiful Exordium turned off his speech with great address from the Senate
to Cesar in person, enters upon his Panegyric of the latter, and while he
pays him the most flattering compliments, takes occasion with admirable
delicacy to shew the groundlessness of his suspicions against Marcellus.”—
Ad principium cap. 11. “ The close of this complimentary address is worked
up with great art and delicacy. ‘The Oratur, as if he telt himself hurried away
too far frum the main object, by his zeal for the personal security of Casar,
suddenly restrains his excursive fligiit, and changes the language of’ praise
into the renewed assurances of gratitude.”—Et in extremo: “ Pliny cer-
tainly had a better subject in his Panegyric to work upon, than Cicero in the
former instance; but he had not Cicero's talents to do it equal justice.”
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationibus Ciceron. 143
Ab horum omnium judiciis quantum discrepet mea ratio et opinio,
et quas ob causas discrepet, equidem omni, qua decebat, cura exph-
candum duxi, sic plane, quasi Latinus liber nunc primum sine nomine
auctoris editus nos ad comparationem optimorum scriptorum, nomina-
tim Ciceronis, invitasset. Quod consilium quum sine diligenti lectione
constare non posset, eo sum perductus legendo et interpretando, ut
libellum hunc non modo Ciceroni omnibus modis abjudicandum, sed
etiam genuinorum illius scriptornm et hujus nullam nisi quandam
coloris similitudinem esse viderem, totumque tale, cujus vix aliquam
partem scribere Cicero potuisset, si vigilans aut somnians hanc actionem
scripto mandare voluisset. Sed ne voluisse quidem eum id facere
arbitror: quin precise negaverim verisimile esse, ut ullam umquam
orationem pro Marcello ediderit Cicero, nedum hanc, que jam in
peritorum et acutorum judicum cognitionem adducta est.
Omnino due sunt cause, propter quas antiqui oratores Romani
literis consignarent forenses et senatorias actiones, rebusque szpe
multo ante transactis per otium componerent orationes suas." Unam
causam afferebant res ipse, si magne, si illustres, si difficiles tractatu
essent, si cupiain darent egregii speciminis elaborandi, quo legendo alii
delectarentur, alii assidue intuendo proficerent in arte, cui maxima
illo tempore premia proposita erant. Ita scripte sunt, que partim
ne haberi quidem potuerunt, Verinz ef Philippice, et plures aliz, de
quibus mentio facta est in Epistolis ad Atticum. Huic enim et aliis
uibusdam familiaribus, in primis iis, qui in provincia versabantur,
icero mittere solebat exempla horumn scriptorum, que spectata illis
et probata, paullo post multifariam descripta juventus, optimorum
studiorum et vere Romane artis emula, cupidissime conquirebat.”
= Cicero Dispp. Tusc. IV, 25. ‘Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare
non dedecet. An tibiirasci tum videmur, quum quid in causis acrius et
vebementius dicimus ? Quid? quum jam rebus truasactis et preteritis orutiones
scribimus, num irati scribimus? Idem in Bruto, c. 94. Non est eadein
causa non scribendi, et non tam bene scribendi, quam direrint oratores.
Nain videmus alios inertia nihil scripsisse, ne domesticus etiam laber acce-
deret ad forensem: pleraque enim scribuntur orationes habite jum, non ut
Aabeantur. De Senect.c.1r. “ Causarum illustrium, quascumque detendi,
nunc quam maxime conficio orationes.” (Ubi loquitur Cato senex) De Off,
II. 1. “ Primum, ut stante republ. facere sulebumus, in agendo p/us quam
tn scribendo uvperam poneremus ; deinde ipsis scriptis non ea, que nunc, sed
actiones nostras mandaremus, ut δῶρα fecimus,” etc. etc.
2 Ad Att. II, 1. “ Oratiunculas, et quas postulas, et plures etiam mittam ;
quoniam quidem ea, que nos scribimus adulescentulorum studiis excitatl, te
‘etiam delectant,” etc. Loquitur 1bi de Philippicis. ΓΝ, 2. “ Oratio (de Domo)
juventuti nostre deberi non potest : quam tibi, etiam si non desideras, tamen
mittam cito."—XIII, 19. “ Ligarianam preclare auctoritas tua commen-
davit. Scripsit enim ad me Balbus et Oppius, mirifice se probare; ob eam-
que causam ad Cicsarem eam se Oratiunculam misisse.” XIII, 44. “ Bru-
tus mihi T. Ligarii verbis nuntiavit, quod appelletur L. Curfidius in oratione
Ligariana, erratum esse Meum, sed, ut alunt, μνημονικὸν ἁμάρτημα. Sciebam
Curfidium (αἰ. Corfidium) pernecessarium Ligariorum : sed eum video ante
144 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
Atque hanc causam edendi Cicero, illud presertim wtatis, frequentis
simam habuit pariter in accusutionibus ac defensionibus. In defensio-
nibus autem accessit interdum Δ] ἃ scribendi consilium, quum is,
quem patronus discrimine fortune capitisque liberasset, adeo dictam
seu verius elaboratam de iisdem argumentis orationem legere, et quasi
denuo frui innocentia sua cuperet. Quem ad usum compositam esse
cognovimus eam, quz est pro lege Deiotaro, quam a se scriptam ipse
auctor testatur, ut gratum faceret veteri amico, etsi causa tenuis essef,
nec admodum eo labore digna." Itaque quod apud nos fere faciunt
ii, qui se ad habendam orationem parant, ut calamo accurate meditentur,
quod in actu rerum dicturi sint, apud Romanos illis temporibus moris
non fuit; nec dubitabant oratores, juvenili doctriva et forensi exereite-
tione freti, extemporali facultati se committere, aut, si quid antes
formaverant et in commenturios retulerant, id sibi, non aliis notatum
excidere et pervulguri non patiebantur.
Etenim ante Octavianum Aug. vix quisquam Rome recitabat,
neque in concione, neque apud judices ; et ad solas acroases pcrtinebat
recitatio seu lectio: nec recitabantur in Senatu sententix, sed déce-
bantur ; nisi aliquid gravius et difficilius magis meditata et concepta
postularet. Multo minus judices aut populus tulisset oratorem de
scripto dicentem, etsi nonnumquam ad illos in gravioribus causis
afferebatur meditata oratio.” S:d postquam versa reipubl!. forma novos
esse mortuum. Da igitur, quasu, negotium Pharnaci, Anteo, Salvio
(librariis Aftici) ut id nomen ex omnibus libris tollatur.” (Locus p. Ligar.
est c. 11.}—XV, 1. “ Bratus noster misit ad me Orativnem suam, babitam in
conciune Capitolina, petivitqne a me, ut eam nec amhitiose corrigerem, ante:
vam ederet. Est autem scripta ele gantissime sententis, verbis, ut nibil
ssit ultra. Ego tamen, si illam causam habuissem, scripsissem ardentius
ὑποθέσεις, Vides, 4.8: sit persuna dicentis. Itaque eam corrigere nop
potui,” etc.
* Epp. ad Famil. IX, 12. ‘ Oratiuneulam pro Deiotaro tibi misi, quam
velim sic legas, ut causam tenuem et inopem, nec scriptione magnopers
dignam. Sed ego hospiti veteri et amico munusculum mittere volui les
dense, crasso filo, cujusmodi ipsius solent esse munera.”
2 Verr, 11,1. c. 40. “Ad illam jam veniamus praclaram preturam, erie
minaque ea, quz notiora sunt his, qui adsunt, quam nubis, qui meditatj ad
dicendum parutigue venimus.” Philipp. V.7. Antoninus deme XVII digs
in Tiburtino Scipionis declemitavit : “6 scil. ut prime Philippice responderet
in Senatu. Dequibus sententiis senatoriis (qualis et hac videri vult eseq
pre Marcello) etiam hance ob causam dictis de scripto, ut in eas statim
Senatus cunsulta fief! possent, sepius mentionem facit Cicero, ut ὃ
Att. IV, 3. ‘¢ Proposita Marcellini sententia, quam ille de scripto ita dizerat,
ut totam nostram causam,” etc, Ad Famil, Χ, 18. “ Id cx Senatus ‘consulte
poteris cognoscere : ita enim est perscriptum, ut a me de scripto dictu senter-
tie est, quam Senatus frequens sequutus est summu studio magnoque con
sensu.” De temperibus inde ab Augusto aucturem habemus Sueton, c. 84,
“ Mutinensi bello, tanta mole rerum, et legisse ct scripsisse et declamasse
quotidie traditur Augustus. Nam deinceps neque in Senatu, neque apud
populum, neque apud milites, luquutus est umquain nisi meditata et compor
sita oratione; quamvis non deficeretur extempurali facultate; ac ne pericue
luni memuriz adirét, aut in ediscendu tempus absumeret, tnstituit reciters.
f
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationibus Ciceron. 145
mores in rebus plurimis, et novum ingeniis habitum cultumque
induxerat, omnis prope vis dicendi ad scripturam recidit, quz illius
quondam magistra et adjutrix fuerat; et quum mutari id humana ope
nequiret, quod paullo ante Cicero predixerat eventurum,’ ne obmu-
tesceret et interiret eloquentia, splendidis et animosis causis orbata,
studiosi in umbra ludorum quwrere coeperynt argumenta antiquioris
zevi, quibus stilo ornandis, seu in conspectu auditorum declamandis,
linguam acuerent, animumque magnarum rerum memoria et vetustatis
spiritu nutrirent. Eadem res non minus in poesi accidit, quum ii, qui
maxime omniym scriptorum in lucem et publicum conspectum prodire
volunt, scenicj poetse, fabulas suas, antiqua plerumque argumenta, soli
recitation} intra parietes auditorii scribebant ; quo in genere hodieque
exstant trageediz sub nomine Senece tragici. Jam prose eloquentiz
Magistri suis discipulis certatim prelegebant orationes ad normam
veterum conscriptas ;” alii liberius de quavis proposita re, sive vera, sive
ficta, declamitabant, partim ex preparato, partim ex tempore: fuit
adeo sub Augusto clarus quidam professor artis, qui institutionem
omnia.” Id exemplum, uti pleraque alia ab. Augusto instituta, sapienter
sequuti sunt principes ad nostrum usque tempus; sed notabile est, eos jam
st Claudium ccepijsse alieno stilo indigere, qua de re conf, Tacitum
Annal. XIII, 3. Cete haud crediderim omnino defyisse priore evo, qui
diligenter comméntgta δὲ memoriz mandata in forum afferrent, quibus
oratoribus Hortensiana memoria optanda fuit, De hocenim Cic. Brut. c, 88,
Memoria tanta, quantam in nullo (male editur ullo) cognovisse me arbitror,
ut, que secum commentatus esset, ea sine scripto verbis ejsdem redderet,
uibus eogitavisset,” etc,
* Tuscul. II,2. “ Oratorum laus ita, ducta ab humili, venit ad summum,
ut jam, quod natura fert in omnibus fere rebus, senescat, brevique tempore
ad nihilum ventura videatur.” De Off. II, 19. ““ Admonebat me res, ut hoe
ue loco intermissionem eloquentig, ne dicam interitom, deplorarem ;
ni vererer, ne de me ipso aliquid viderer queri. Sed tamen videmus, quibus
exstinctis oratoribus, quam in paucis spes, quanto in paucioribus facultas,
uam in multis sit audacia.” Huc egregie pre multis aliis locis convenit
ece patris Controvv. I. Pref. “ Ut possitis estimare, in quantum quo-
. tidie ingenia decrescant, et, nescio qua iniquitate nature, eloquentia se retro
tulerit; quicquid facundia Romana habet, quod insolent: Greecie aut
opponat, aut preferat, circa Ciceronem effloruit. In deterius deinde quo-
duta res est sive Juxu temporum: nihil est enim tam mastiferum inge-
nijs, quam luxuria: sive quum premium pulcherrime rei cecidisset, trans-
Jatum est omne certamen ad turpia, multo honore questuque vigentia t
sive fato quudam, cujus maligna perpetuaque in othnibus rebus lex est, ut ad
summm perducta, rursus al infimum, velocius quidem quam adscenderant, ,
relabantur, Torpent ecce ingenia desidiosg juventutis, nec in ullius honesty
rei labure vigilatur,”etc. Similia his plura sunt in aureolo Dial. de causis
corrupts eloquentiz, que rem illustraut et labem seculi pingunt; nonnull,
quz divinitus dicta videntur in strenuam desidiam nostrorum temporum.,
* Veteres appellu scriptures eos, qui fuerunt ante Augusti principatum,
quorum tempura .szepe entiquitatem seu prius evum, ipsos antiquus 8, veleres
wocant Seneca, Tacitus et alii. Ita antigui Grecorum scriptorium vocantur
ii, qui usque ad Alexandrum Macedonem vixerunt. Conf. Sueton, Tib. c. 704
VOL. XVII. Cl. Jl. NO. XXXII]. K
146 - On the Orations ascribed to Cicere. "ἢ
suam ‘aa propria declamatione contineret.’ Ex this sntem antiqués
oratoribus Ciceronem, statim post mortem ejus, preecipua cufa lectem,
ejusque nomen, ceteris oninibus, qui cum:eo de fori principata com
tenderant, posthabitis, vulyo jactatum et tamquam ipsius artis, nom
hominis, celebratum erse, plares loci ostendunt apud Senecam Rheto
rem, Velicium, Juvenalem, ‘alios. Nihil igitur miram est, 51 declams
tores, qui, Ciceronis copiam, ut imitatu facillimam, edamantes, totes
se ad itluin legendum et ediscendum dedissent, ex tanto numero orate
num ‘eleperuut aliquas, quibus modo tefmgendis certamen quoddam
cloquationis tentarent ; modo, contrariis partibus sumtis, reos Oivero:
nianos defenderent, aut ab illo defensos accusdrent; postremwo ‘et
omni dccasione, qua eum verba fecisse ex ‘historia constabat, declaxa-
torixyn-materiem decerperent, m qua polienda et coloranda versuri sibi
in foro et in Curia, germanique Cicerores esse viderentur.” Sic que
dammodo supplevit ista natio, quodcumque maximus auctor artis sue
aut onmimo non dixérat, quam dicere potuisset, aut neglexisset edie
Bcribere, quum dixisset : siquidem multarum ‘causarum, quas'oravertt,
nullz ab eo confectz erant orationes.
“Tn ‘hoc numero, ut ad ‘propositum redeam, hanc Marcelltenem
censendam esse non-dubito. Dizisse Ciceronem eo die, quo Marcellas
exul-restitueretur, plurtbus verbis, ut Casari gratias ageret, apud ipsum
in Epistolis kegim us :? ¢am-natrationem legerunt haud dubie et rhetores,
cainque pro fundo ponere potuerunt, si sub illustri nomine tis -detls
mre in schola libuit. At etiam Cicero scribere ‘potuit talerh ‘oratio-
nem; sive hanc, quam veteres testes et membrane germanam esse
consentiunt ; sive alia, quam, hodie deperditam, usurpare potuit olim
interpolator, ut et sententiis et verbis Ciceronis distinctum opus
conficeret, non multum fortasse dissimile Ciceroniani. Ita ‘aliquis
: ἢ Seneca Controvv. [V. 25. “ Neque Porcio Latroni mos erat quemquam
discipulorum audire declamantem: declamabat ipse tantum ; et.-aiebat, se
non esse magistrum, sed exemplum. Nec ulli alii contigisse scio, quem
apud Grecos Nicetz, apud Romanos Latroni, tt discipuli non audiri-deside
rarent, sed contenti essent audire.” Eundem Latronem et aliis locts
ambitiogse laudat Seneca, et Pref. L. IV. πέσαν eremplum ᾿
virtutis vocat. Quo niagis memoria dignum est, quod refert ibidem, etm,
nimis assuetum umbre scholarum,-quum pro reo in Hispania dieeret, wages
€0 esse confusum, ué a solecismo inciperet ; nec ante potuisse confirmari, tectum
et. narietes desiderantem, quam impetrarit, πὲ yudicium ex foro in besilicem tree
Jferretur. Nimirum accidit homini, quod dicit Petronius: Quum in forts
venerunt, putant se in alium terrarum orbem delatos. ' .
, > Quotusquisque Scholasticorum non hac sua persuasione fruitur, ut 86
ente Cicerunem numeret ?” Dialog. de elog. c. 26. In eodem l.broc. 82
judicia-posterioris evi, vel paucorum potius ex iHo zvo, de Ciceronis vitirs
Jeguntur, magis, quam adhuc factwn est, expendenda. Sed is ipse leces
ducet, quam studios Ciceronis fuerint schole rhetoriee usque ad temper
\espasiani.
᾿ 3 Integrum locum Ciceronis pete ex Summario p. 8. Plerumgue its
feci, ut non necesse esset mter legendum ‘diversas libros evolvere, ingrate
lsbare et conspectum rerum turbante. Neccharte parcenduya erat in tenui
0. ᾿ “
Wolfins de Quatuor Orationibus Ciceron. 147
eredut, qui nimis mirabjle putet, fiominem de schola nohis.in quinque
Orationibus tam diu- pro Cicerone lectum, probatum, imitatiove
expressam egse. Sed primem quidem homines istos septentiis verbis-
we minime eguisee videmus, tum .ea, quibus bec Oratiuncula constat,
Se junctu et composita reperientur, ut, nisi me fallunt omnia, ne
wicesimam quidem partem dicere aut chartis illiuere eloquentem et
classicum -oratorem patuisse, quivis nunc non vimis indoctus lector
intelligere, οἱ manifestum falsarium maou tenere possit. Ciceronem
autem de hac re:scribere noluisse, atque adeo non scripsisse, plures
ennt rationes, que adbis penitus persuddeant. Primum hie oulla
itur- causa ex iis, quas.supra attulimus, que:iHom iopellere patuerit
ad sceibendum ; nulla rei gravitas,-aut difficultas, aut aliqua gratia,
mec denique voluatas Marcelli, quippe qui, Cesaris clementiam,
acersinus libertatis:propugnator, non magnum erga se.meritaum putans,
et in reditu potius amicis suis obsequens, iniquissino animo faturus
fuisset, illius.diei iadignitatem scripta oratione testatam et ad .posteros
proditam.” Ad hc adde hujus statis morem et elegaptiam, cui, me
quidem jadice, coatrarium videtur et ineptum, verbis pluribus uti
aliquem ia gratiarum actione, quam ipsa res postularet, id est, ut
Cicero dicere solet, amplissimts, singularibus, seu pluribus quam
factum esset a ceteris Senatoribus. Tertio aut quarto post :Christum
seculo,.quibus temporibus Eumeuius.et Panegyrici Latini vixerunt, in
tali loco et tempore convenit justa oratio, non Ciceroniano. Denique
Plutarchum ‘si audimus, testimonio, quo aullum locupletius optari
potest, planissime apparet, illa plura verba non explesse modum juste
orationis, que deinde posset litteris mandari. Testis ipse Ceesar est.
Nam quum brevi post restitutum Marcellum Cicero pro Ligario dic-
turus esset, quo tandem pacto potuisset Cesar iis verbis uti, quibus
tum usum tradit Plutarchus: Quid gbstat, guo minus Ciceronem
TANTO INTERVALLO audiamus dicentem ? Jam pridém nobis certum
est, Ligarium improbuin esse et hostem.” Audierat scilicet paucis sate
mensibus dicentem pro Marcello. :
. Raro -accidisse arbitror, υἱ imitator scholasticus .edendis taktbus
scriptis doctos -homines.ludere vellet, aut falserium de indastria agere =
neque ea suspicio in hunc personatum Ciceronem cadit: verumtamen
primis statim temporibus vulgari coeptas esse Orationes sub falsis
nominibus, bujus pote fraudum exempla docent. Rei memoriam
nobis bonus auctor, Suetonius, conservavit. Refert.enim, Julio Ceesari
usque ad suam extatem temere vulgo tribui Orationes quasdam :
quarum unam, pro Q. Metello, censuerit Augustus ab actuariis ex-
ceptam, male subsequentibus verba dicentis, et plura, ut credibile est,
1 De indignitate contra sentit Cicero; non sum oblitus. Sed novimus
virum. Ceterum absurdissime conjicias, in scribenda tantula Oratiuncula
operam posuisse Ciceronem post mortem Marcelli. Nullus labor :agis
tum supervacaneus et inutilis fuisset.
2In-Ciceronis vita p. 880.: Ti κωλύτε ATA XPONOY Κικέριυνος. ἀκοῦσαι λέγοντος,
Perperam-hec vertunt alii: Quid obstat, quin Ciceronen ALIQUAMDIU orantens
audiamus? Hoc est, testem corrumpere.
148 Onthe Orations ascribed to Cicero.
ad suam libidinem mutantibus; de altera, ad stilites ἐπ Hispanie,
selut unte prelium habita, notarit Asinius Pollio, severus judex sui
seculi scriptorum, Cesari die illo ne tempus quidem alloquendi milites
fuisse propter subitam ivcursionem hostium.' Sed quid hoc ad
rhetorem, qui nibil aliud nisi occasionem dicendi scribendique capta-
bat ex personis historicis et vera scena rerum? Sulle videlicet etiamsi
nemo amicorum consilium dedisset, dictaturam abdicandi, licuit tamen
libuitque facere tironibus ; a quibus et eorum magistris talia consilia
pluribus modis, quasi ad Czesarem, scripta puto de republ. restituenda,
cujusmodi illze Sallustianze Epistole sunt, quibus serio conatu prelu-
sisse legimus Ciceronem.? Quis umquam doctorum audivit, Catilinam
justa oratione respondisse Ciceroni, in Senatu gravissime in eum
invehenti? At nemini non in promtu fuit hoc argumentum, si qui
Catilinarias studiose legisset ; ac videmus id quoque placuisse umbra-
tico magistro ex media barbarie, qui Catilinze nomine scripsit
Declamationem, 4038 nuperrime a nobis in codice quodam reperta est.’
Itaque in barbara usque szcula dimanavit iste mos declamandi cam
omnibus vitiis et corruptelis ingeniorum, que cum eo conjuncta 6858
ipsa res monet. Nam quuma tenuibus initiis profectus, primum utilis
esset futuro oratori; mox late diffusus, omnem Latine eloquentiz
sanitatem sic perdidit, ut post principatum Tiberii exiguus fuertt
humerus oratorum et scriptorum, quem a publica contagione immunem
x Sueton. Ces. c. 85.
% Noti sunt versus Juvenalis:
Et nos ergo manum ferule subduximus ; et nos
Consiljum dedimus Sullz, privatus ut altum
Dormiret.
3 Epp. ad Att. XIII, 27. et 81. De alla epistola Ciceronis ad Cesarem
conf. ibidem VIII, 9. Quem locyin velim diligenter consideret lector Orat.
nostre : “ Epistolam meam ipse multis dedi describendam. Ea enim et
ecciderunt jam, et impendent, ut testatum esse velim, de pace quid senserim.
Quum autem ad eam hartarer eum presertim hominem, non videbar ullo
modo facilius moturus, quam si id, quod eum hortarer, canvenire ejus Sapi-
entie dicerem, Eam si admirabilem dixi, quum eum ad salutem
hortabar, non sum veritus, ne viderer agsentari, cuj tali in re lubenter me
pedes abjecissem.”
4 Obtulit nobis veterem codicem juvenis Danus, doctrine Grece et Latinz
studiosissimus, qui olim nomen suum egregiis in Jitteras meritis illustrabit.
Libri, cum aliis similibus uno volumine juncti hec inscriptio est, et prima
periodus: Incrprt Ornatio Catitinz ΙΝ M. Cicernonem. “ Omnes haminey,
Qui in maxinis principatibus vitam agunt, ayt qui de rebus publicis et privat
consultant, decet imprimis animadvertere, ne cujusquam voluptati temere assen-
tiant, neu liberum ingenium furore et iracundia pessumdent.’’— Addidi etiam
ultima; “ Vos, Patres conscripti, nanne pericula vestya videlis? Capessite igitar
aliquando rempubl. miseram et ruentem; subvenite patrie pereunt. et simul salut
omnium, et fortunarumn vestrarum misereamini, neque Consulurem, Patricium,
civem et umicum reipubl. a faucibus inimici Consulis ertpite ; supplicem atque
insontem pristine cluritudini, omnium civium gratig et benevolentia vestre re-
atituite. Finis, Amen.” Quum singulari fortuna ha nuge ad me pervenissent,
Primo conspectu me cuptdo incegsit eas huic jibro addendj; sed tedium
Jectionis tantum fuit, yt id cum aliis communicaye inhumanum putarem,
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationibus Ciceron. 149
praistiterit nielior Génius. Quippe maximam partem infamiz, qua
odie ztas labentis linguee urgetur, illi uni cause assignari par est.
Vebementer enim errare videntur, qui hanc wtatem, quam vulgo
argenteam vocumus, de ipsius linguze neglectu et depravatione
accasant, quasi post Ciceronem Latini Latinis verbis uti desiissent ;
quo errore aliquot abhinc seculis ducebantur Viri docti, qui nomen
Ciceronianorum adepti sant. Immo multa sunt argumenta, quibus
demonstremus, copiam et‘ nitorem sermonis usque ad . Antoninos
crevisse, diligentius exculta lingua, aptioribus vocabulis et formis
loquendi partim ex prisco usu revocatis, partim ‘ovis: ad normam.
analogie procusis, etiam subtiliore cura discretis significationibus. Sed
qe primus hac in parte plazimum juvit Latinitatem, eundem, si fas est
icere, primum in poesi declamatorem exstitisse videmus, etsi venustis-
simam et ingeniosissimum, Ovidium:’ prosam autem orationem et
historiam simili labe inquinavit Trogus Pompeius, pendeus maxime a
Theopompe, in quo antiquitas scholam Isocratis rhetoris agnovit.
Reliquos quid nominem, qui in omni genere compositionis pravas:
argutias, effrenatam lasciviam, tumorem, fumum, ineptias. cupide
Captaverunt, dictionemque’ finxertint ‘a recto judicio veterum mire
abkorrentem? Scilicet illi sibi cum tot scriptoribus, qui etiam tum
vulgo in manibus erant, certanduin et-novis modis diceudum, aut tur-
piter conticescendum putabant. Exinde nata sunt festiva acumina
Q. Curtii;* puerilis affectatio Valerii Maximi; pinguis letitia Flori;
* Ab hoc poeta apud Latinos quasi novum ordinem duci, tota oratio ejus et
color et argumenta, que tractavit, arguunt. Plura horum haud dubie dis-
plicuissent Virgilio et Horatio, qui tot alia In eo itmprobaturi fuissent. Sed hi
teactandis solis Grascis paucisque Romanis exemplaribus formaverant inge-
nium, Ovidius artes addidit schol rheturicz. Notabilis in primis de poeta
adolescente locus est Senecz Controvv. I[,10. “‘Meminime videre Nasonem
declamare apud rhetorem Arellium Fuscum, cujus auditor fuit : nam Latronis
admirator erat, quum diversum sequeretur dicendi genus. Uabebat enim
ille constans et decens et amabile ingenium : oratio ejus jam tum nihil
aliud poterat videri, quam solutum carmen. (Trist. IV, 10. Sponte sua car-
men numeres venicbat ad aptos: Et quod tentabam dicere, versus erat.) .Adeo
autem studiose Latronem audivit, ut multas ejus sententias in versus suos
transtulerit.—Tunc, quum studeret, habebatur bonus declamator. Hane
certe controversiam ante Fuscum declamavit, ut mihi videbatur, longe inge-
niosius.” In eodem cap. deinde hec sequitur satis jucunda narratio.
“< Nasoni molesta erat omnis argumentatio;. verbis minime licenter usus est,
nisi In carminibus, in quibus non ignoravit vitia sua, sed amavit. Mauifes-
- tum potest esse, quod rogatus aliquando ab amicis suis, ut tolleret tres
versus, invicem petiit, ut ipse tres exciperet, in quos nihil illis liceret: equa
jex visa est. Scripseruntilli, quos tolli vellent, secreto ; hic, quos tutos esse
vellet: in utrisque codicillis iidem versus erant; ex quibus primum fuisse
narrabat Albinovanus Pedo, qui inter arbitros fuit, Semibovemque virum,
οὶ ue buvem; secundum, Egelidum Borean, egelidumque Notum. Ex
uo apparet, summi ingenii viro judicium non definsse ad compescendam
icentiam carminum suorum, sed animum: aitebat interim, decentiorem
faciem esse, in qua aliquis nevus esset.”
* Primo loco pusui Curtium. Sequor enim conjecturam valde probabilem,
qua Casaubonus et alii quidam hunc seriptorem eundem esse statuunt, cujus
150 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
dulcia, sed quodammodo generosa, vitia Senece philosophi ; precipites
furores et tinnitus poetarum, Valerit Flacci, Stati# et aliorum; ctians
Grecorum, qui se maxime Romanis moribus obleverant; scholastice
deliciz, ut istorum, 4005 Lucianus irridet, ut Dionis Cassii coafectio
directarun) orationum, his Ciceronianis non dissimilium. Atque borum
omniam scriptorum ut quisque fertilissimo erat ingenio, ita pernicio-
sissime juvenes in sui admirationem rapiebat: id quod prudenter
fecisse legimus Senecam, qui et Neronem suum a kctione veterum
oratoram avertit. Quid? quod ii, qui 58. 0}} sui ¢orruptelis obniti
ausi sunt vel doctrina, vel exemplis, parum in ea re cflicere potuerunt,
ipsique ita scripserunt, ut recentia vitia magis vitasse, quam antiquam
vim et siccitatem et elegantiam assequeti exse videantur. Adeo ener-
vatur optimus quisque publicis moribus, et fato quodam ineluctabilt
civitatum simul fortuna atque ingeniorum color et habitus vertitur.
Sed hec obiter: qaz, etiam aliis tractata, st hic plénius perseqrd
vellemus, magna pats historiz literarum nobis enarranda esset. ‘Nuac
tandem pauea proprie addenda sunt de hac Oratione et nostra ejus
editione.
Non deesse in illa diximus similitudinem stili Ciceroniaui: ef
quanam dlia re umquam doctos lectores fallere potuisset? vernm
fucata est ea similitudo, minime sincera: swpissime verba magis
Ciceronis audimus, quam sensus; periodorum formas magis, quam
éarum vim et aptam continuationem; magis corpus et extertan
specie, quam animum ac spiritum; pleraque multo molliora et
solutiora, quam vere actioni illius temporis conveniebat. Sed Πῶς
una dissimilitudo, in quantum res sinunt, demonstrata, perpaucis
forsan suffectara fuisset ad nostram conjecturam (sic enim antea
modeste vocabam) wequo animo ferendam; et recte quidem. Nam
quis, quem notus liber, alio submonente, ingrata peregrinitatis offen
siove percussit, nisi certiora argumenta vofeias viderit, calide rejiciet,
quod prius sine ulla suspicione amavit? Reddenda igitur fuit ratio
eorum omnium, que lectorem offendunt, et scriptor uno ictu sic
affligendus, ut posthac nulla spes restitutionis supersit. Quod videbi-
mur nobis effecisse, si demonstraverimus, Orationem esse inapem
rerum; verbis, formulis, constructionibus seepe vix Latinam, in tots
compositione ineptam, stultam, ridiculam; denique fatuo principe,
Claudio, quam Cicerone digniorem."
notitiam in amissa parte libelli de Rheforibus dedit Suetonius, indice tabula
nominuin, ex quibusdam codd.edita. Ita nos magistrurnm ordo ibi recen-
sitorum et notissimus lucus X, 9 eo ducit, ut illum putemus Rhetorem fuisse,
et historiam suam scripsisse sub principia Tiberiani imperii. Vide impr.
Perizonii Curtinm restitutum et vindicatum p. 8 seqq.
* Sueton. Cland.c. 41. “ Composuit et de vita sua octo volumina, magis
inepte quam ineleganter ; item Ciceronis defensionem adversus Asinit Galli
libros, su/is eruditam.” Ergo scribere aliquis potest eleganter et erudite, et
tamen inepte: immo ipsa nimia eleguntia, et erudilionis ostentatio,
tnepta dicenda est. Stullam a wuebis vocari Orationem, nue quis
jndignetur, quum verbis perscripta sit Ciceronianis ; cunsideret hee a Mureto
dicta in novos Ciceronianos, Oratt. T. I. p. 293. ““ Sequutum est aliud malum,
Wolfius de Quetuor Orationibus Ciceron. t5t
. Textus a nobis constitutus est eadem awquitate; qua nuper, et ex
iisdem fontibus variarum lectionum, preter Garatonii copias, ad
postremam partem Qratt. Cic. aut vane αι editas, aut ad nos nen
perlatas. Auimailversiones, que tum agnotationum tum et castigationum
vim. habent, brevitate Lbells et mivore molestia metu facts sunt
accuratiores et iu sumyama verborum parsyuonia lougiores; ut prope
pucdeat me totidem, paginas complevisse in personato Cicerone, qua
ceteros in eo, quem verum credebant. Sed plures ob causas it,
faciendum putavi. Ipsa multorum locoxrum sententia nondum recte
exposita egat, alias. lectio dissidiis superiosum interpretum obscurata y
quibus in locis eorum ἔργα integras intexyi disputationes, alia nus
sensu legendas, quam quo primum scripte suat. Nonnylla_ parg
Commentarii pertinet in primis ad Latinitatem, cujus hic quoque
scholam aperui, haud inutilem, ut spero, iis, qui recte et Latine
seribere, aut, quale hoc ‘sit, discere cupient. In universum autem, ut
Omnia, Maxima mwlmMa, perquirerem, ipalit me delectatio quedam,
qvam affert digotas et gravissimum muagus critice artis, quae ipsos
antiquitatis auctores falsi judicti et erroris eonvincit, ac per se judi-
cando in linguis emortuis, in temporibus remotissimis, idem efficit,
quod mathematici ratiocinando in locis terre disjunctissimis, nec
minus cerfam sug in genere cognitionem parare potest quam qua illi
jure superbiunt.
Ceterum ejusdem artis critica est nosse, ultra quem finem progredi
non liceat in vero quzrendo. Ita rerum et certum, opinor, habendyum
jam est, has quinque Qrationes non esse Ciceronis, sed hominis cujus-
dam scholastici; verisimillimwa, scnptas esse aliquanto ante Asconium,
imperante Tiberio. At vero querenti, idemne sit Marcelliane et
reliquarum, an diversi auctores, et plures, non nisi probabili conjege
dura responderi potest: mihi quidem intima familiaritas, quam cum
hisce opusculis contrakere debui, prope ad veritatem persuait, ea ex
oe ae ae oo es be en pee ee ee on ol
exerta factione ineptorum hominum, qui preter Cicerunem, Cesare, Sallug-
‘tium, aliquot alius eidem ztati suppares, tum ex poetis, preter Catullum,
Lacretium, Virgilium, tres aut quatuor alios, clamare cceperunt, ceteros
geanes barbarcy esse, nec satis diguos, in quibus cognoscendi+ ullum studium
neretur.. Inde exstitit enectum quoddam et famelicum eloquentia genus
ominum existimantium, bene dicendi jaudem in eo pusitain esse, ut ne
ullum vocabulum panas, quod non ex Cicerane sumseris, quemvis fatue
atque insulse loquaris, sive ulla vi, sine ullo acumine, sine ullo pundere sen-
tentiarum, dummutdo unum iliud observes, ipsius te Cicerunis fraterculum
esse, Similis fatuitys eorum quuque, gui poetarum Jaudem uffcctabant,
animos occupavit. Nam quum sibi indices quordam confectssent earum
vocum, quibus veteres aliquot poeta tsi essent, putarunt, -¢ hs aquiparatum
iri, dum sedulo cavereut, se quam vocem versibus suis iinmiscterent, qua
non in illis, quos dixi, indicibu- reperiietur. Ergo hoc exemplo ous utrigue
runt, ex omnibus Crceroniunis cocibus’ stultissimas orutwnes, ce oman
Virgilianis pessioos versus posse componi.” Apparet, Murctum boqui de suis
temporibus; sed eadem de antiquts imitatoribus diceuda eunt: nisi quis
putet, stultam orationem antiqui scriptoris esse non pusse, id est, ssultos novurn
genus esse hominum et nuper ereatum.
152 Biblical Criticism.
unius opificis manibus, certe ex unius scholz officina venisse. Minose
fiducia, non conjicere, sed divinare licebit, Romzne scripta sint, an iz
provincia : num inscitia rerum urbanarum, cujus aliquot vestigia
notavimus, etsi minus provincialem quam Romanum hominem dedecet,
tamen etiam negligenti tardoque, in Urbe degenti, imputari potest.
Hilud vero solis Aariolis relinquendum erit, utrum professori an tiroat
tribuende sint Declamationes ; siquidem omnis etas et semidoctos tulit
professores, et discipulos i _ingeniosos doctrinaqu ue preestantes.
Jam si quis forte erit in iis, quos ego de hac queestione judicare
posse putabam, cui perlectus Commentarius videatur i ipsum Ciceronem
calumniari: pro opera mea hoc unum et leve premium postulo, ut
is nobis quam primum Orationes pro Ligario et Deiotaro, vel aliam
uamcumque, eadem ratione calumnietur. Ea si displicuerit con-
itio, velim sibi persuadeant lectores, memet ipsum, Rossii,’ non rem
seriam agere, sed rectiora edoctum vineta mea ceedere, vel hoc totum
genus criticarum suspicionum, ne in imperitorum manus veniret,
cavillando cludere voluisse. Etiam hec possunt fieri; et vera sunt
interdum, qui non sunt verisimilia. ΝΣ
Scrib. d. 15 Jan. 1802. ᾿
BIBLICAL. CRITICISM.
Jitustration of a Passage in the Twenty-third Chapter a
Deuteronomy.
. et) ae
Tue 1¢thand 13th verses of c. xxiii. of Deuteronomy, as they
are rendered in our English translation, are scarcely intelligible to .
a common reader. This may have been purposely done to throw
a veil over the indelicacy of the subject. The Septuagint seems
to have had the same object in view; but to have been clearer [Σ
giving the meaning, thus rendering the Hebrew FDNY (coming
out) by ἀσχημοσύνη, and nyy, (nakedness), by the same sword.
Whoever will, however, carefully examine the passage, will per-
ceive that it contains an injunction to cleanliness in the host of the
Israelites; and that the 14th verse, which describes the Almighty
xs walking in the midst of the camp, is no more than the usual
aanction of the Hebrew legislator, who introduces the name of the
First Person in the Trinity, that he might impress more strongly
on the minds of the people, those ordinances, which were in ἃ
more special manner to be observed.
PES SSSA
" Conf. Prafationem ad Orationes quatuor p. X ᾿
Biblical Criticisni.. 458
- This particular law is of the same tendency as many others in the
Hebrew code ; in which Moses, either directly or otherwise, seems
to have encouraged an attention to cleanliness among his country-
men. The importance, however, which I now attach to the pas-
sage, is iv the way of illustration. This I apprehend will strikingly
appear. in the followmg quotation from Busbequius, who was
ambassador from the Emperor Ferdinand [. at Constantinople.
‘The very same custom prevailed in the ‘Turkish armies of his time;
and as he mentions it incidentally, and without any reference to the
Mosaic precept, he may justly be considered as an unbiassed and
wdconscious witness.
« This strange and even puerile way of ensuring cleanliness,' and
so contrary to our own manners, seems to be evidently of an oriental
origin. This, among other innumerable instances, affords an in-
ternal and iudirect evidence, that the Pentateuch was the work of
ὅπ Asiatic, both from its coincidence with the ‘Turkish custom,
and because no European could possibly have thought of such a
precept. How it has been derived to the Turks, I am unable to
determine ; whether it came down to them as a piece of military
discipline, common throughout the East, or whether it was derived
from.the Deuteronomy itself by Mahomet, and made a part of his
own system. Be it as it may, the coincidence itself is curious, and
even perhaps sufficiently important to find a place in the Classical
Journal. :
' The English Bible can be so easily consulted, that it 1s unneces-
gury to quote the passage except τ the original, and the Septuagint.
ws 1NPP? vin ἼΝ ὃν 7? mi ἽΝ Deut. xxiii. 15. -
459“
TDN Me NOD) ‘Daw m2 wpm
TH. nnn asap ym aya qyne spb MP 3 14.
‘SP MND- 232) 37 ANY ἼΔ TN T-NY WAT? PIT mm Te?
The Septu: agint runs thus :
— Deut: xxiii. 18. Kad πάσσαλος ἔσται σοι ἐπὶ τῆς ζώνης σου" καὶ
ἔσται ὅταν διακαβιζάνῃς ἔξω, καὶ ὀρύξεις ἐν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἐκαγαγῶν᾽ καλύ-
Ψεις τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην σου"
(14. Ὅτι Κύριος ὁ Θεός σου ἐμπεέρίπατεῖ ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ σου, ἐξελέ-
σϑαι σε καὶ παραδοῦναι τὸν ἐχθρόν σου πρὸ προσώπου σου" καὶ ἔσται ἢ
παρεμβολή σου οἱ γία, καὶ οὐκ ὀφθήσεται ἐν σοὶ ἀσχημοσύνη πράγματος,
καὶ ἀποστρέψει ἀπὸ σοῦ.
154 Biblical Criticism.
Busbequii Ep. 111. p. 151. “ Turce im proximis campis ten-
debaunt, cum vero eo boco tribus mensibus vixerinn, fuit mihi facul-
tas vieendorum dpsorum castrorun, et cogposcende aliqua ex parte
discipline, qua de re nisi pauca attingam, baheas fostasse quod me
accuses. Sumto habitu Christians haminibus w iths locis usi-
tato, cum uno aut altero comite quacunque vagabar ignotus. Pri
mam videbam summo ordine cujusque corporis milites suis hoes
distributos, et (quod vix credat,:qu) nostratis malitiz coasiretudinem
novit,) summum erat ubique slentium, summa quies, rxa nulla,
nullum cujusquam insolens factum, sed ne vox quidem aut vitulatio
per lasciviam aut ebrietatem emissa. Ad hec summa mundities :
imaila sterquitinia, nulla purgamenta, nihil quod oculos aut nares
offenderet. Quicquid est hujusmadi, aut defodiunt Furce, ou
procal a conspectu submovent. Epsi qguotiescunque ulzi exonexagde
necessitas urget scrobem sibi ligone εαϑαπὲ, ἐκ qua excrementa mula
Obruunt. Sic tote castru sordibus vacant. Sed nec ullas compe
tationes aut convivia, nullum alee genus, magnum nostratis militie
flagitium, videre erat; nulla lusoriarum chartarum neque tessera-
rum damna norunt Turce. Occurrebat modo horridus aliquis, 2
finibus Hungaricis cum suis gregalibus, miles, qui flebili in chelyde
meestum quiddam, tristis ipse, ululabat verius quam cantabat.. Ea
erant suprema verba commilitonis in herbido prato.ad Danubi -
ripam e vulneribus morientis; quibus Danubium obtestabatur, ut
quoniam cursum teneret versus eorum regionem, unde 1pse ortus
eszet, meminisset referre amicis et popularibus, se pre religions
incremento, et pro gloria gentis, non indecoram neque inultam
mortem oppetere. Ad que ingemiacentes socii, O ter felicem,
beatum, et-cum quo suam sortem permutatam ‘vellent, vocibus in-
geminabant. _’ Habent hoc in opinione Turca, ut nullorum animas
majore. compendio | in ccelum evolare credant, quam virorum for-
tem, qu in bello cecjderynt ; pro quorum etram incolumitate vir-
gines quotidie ad Deum’ precés et vota faciuat.” ©
1 have no doubt that this quotation will be considered as a
7 full illustration of the passage in question. Such is the i impression
that it has had upon me; and therefore any thing else that I might
ὙΠῸ concerning it, would bes I fear, but a auperfluaus extension ᾿
of this article. .
« Bodmin, January, 1818, .. : - 2D.
Γ
eee οὐ
Ν᾿ «ἃ Ἂριστ FZ f
BOYAHNIKENTOMENOMENEIKTOSYNIZ TAME
NAIAEMAPEIAIANEPOZSAMOIEAIZZONEMANT
EYONTOMENOINHNKAITPOXAAAIZ HMAINON
AOAAEAMHTINOTQUAL
155
EMIKPO EQ AAAKPOSTPAYAOS OF TATEIPITHE
MONUMENTS OF ARISTOTLE.
——
I sen for the gratification of your readers two engravings, which
A consider the most valuable of the portraits of Aristotle. ‘They are
copied from Visconti’s splendid work intitled Iconographie Grecgue.
‘Che monuments of this extraordinary mau were numerous in anti-
quity. Philip of Macedon dedicated to him a statue at Delphi,’ as a
” Bdiany alv. 1.
156 Monumenis of Aristotle.
testimony probably of his approbation of the method. which the
Stagirite had adopted in forming the mind of his son. [tis probable
that his portrait was executed during his life-time by Gryllion.’
Pausanias speaks of a statue raised to his honor at Olympm;
and Diogenes Laertius records another erected by his disciple
Theophrastus ‘inthe Lyceum... A Bust of ‘the Stagitite “adored
the house οἵ. Atticus at Rome.’ . Visconti meltions that some
years since a bust was dugiupion:the Quitiual mount: Δ᾽ Atticus
dwelt there, it has been presumed to bethe sanie alluded to by
Cicero. Visconti lamerits, with reasou, -that this monument has
never been engraved. We know from Juvenal that bis portraits
were common at Rome. In the gyamasium of Zeuxippus at
Constantinople there was a -fine..bronze ‘image of the ‘Stagirite.
There exists in the Spada: palace,.a very.good-one in marble, 88
large as life ; it is given in Visconti’s work; and δ΄ copy of it is
annexed to this memoir, But of-all the portraits commemorated by
that accomplished scholar, none appear to me so deserving of
notice, us the fine cornelian in the Dolce cabmet: a ¢opy of
which I herewith. transmit to you. Several of your readers, a5
they examine it, will probably call to mind the line of Pope, in his
Temple of Fame :
“ Sits fix’d in thought the mighty Stagirite,” &e.
Diogenes Laertius has left us some interesting meinorials of the
person of Aristotle. He was under-sized, lisped, ‘had’small legs
and thighs, was bald, and had little sumfen eyes, but sparkling
with intelligence ;? which characteristics the Abbé Barthelemy has
admirably hit off in his Anacharsis: “ Quel est ce jeune homme,”
exclaims the Scythian, as he stands at the gate of the Academy,
“ maigre et sec, qui grasseye, qui a les yeux petits, et pleins de feu!
C’est Aristote de Stagire.” Zhan also bas preserved a few anec-
dotes of Aristotle. We learn from that author, that he was uot a
little attentive to his dress; indulging in refinements which did not
suit the strict discipline of the Academy of Plato: he tells us also
a ch PAT PSD
* Diog. Laert. ]. ν. οἷ. τ 3 Cicero ad Att. iv. 10.
3 One would almost think that this was a description of Pope.
Monuments of Aristotle. 357
that he had a satiric smile on his lips, ἦν te μωκία τις αὐτοῦ περὶ τὸ
πρόσωπον, which expression has been preserved in the gem given by
. Visconti; : though in the copy herewith sent, it is not -perceptiblé:
the least deviation of the buria loses it. Elian relates another
anecdote of him, which may furnish- useful hints to medical prac-
titioners, when they prescribe: for great philosophers. When ill,
he addressed his physician in this dry and half-satiric manner : μήτε
ὡς βουλάτην με θεράπευε, μήτε ὡς σχαπάνεα, ἀλλὰ δίδαξας πρότερον τὴν
αἰτίαν" οὕτως ἕξεις ἕτοιμον πρὸς τὸ πείθεσθαι. “’ If you mean that I
should follow your prescriptions, master first the diagnosis of my
malady ; and do not tqke mein hand, as if I were a digger, or
or-driver.” But these are trivial memorabilia of the Stagirite, and
would be thought scarcely worth recorditg, did they not relate to
the man who disentangled the minds of the deep thinkers of Greece
from the reveries of Plato. Nothing gives‘us a higher idea οὐ the
extraordinary mental powers of the Stagirite, than the consideration
that the same man who outstripped all the other Greek philogophers
m the depth of his metaphysical. researches, and his application of
analysis to puetry, politics, and ethics, should himself have excelled
in poetry; which is confirmed to us-by the celebrated ode on the
death of his friend Hermeias of Atannea. As the translation given
by Stanley in his Lives of the Philosophers is not only tame but
defective, I: subjoin.a new one; which will, I trust, be found to
make a nearer approach to the spirit of the original.— )
᾿Αρετὰ πολύμοχθε γένει βροτείῳ,---καὶ ἕτ,
Virtue! pure offspring of the skies,
Whom multifarious toils delight ;
For love of thee, O Virgin bright,
The sacred flame through Greece is seen to rise,
Which Jabour stern defies,
And heroes’ souls inspires with scorn of death.
They nothing loth to yield their breath,
(Such fruit thou graftest in their bosoms bold,)
For thee, fair maid, they deem
Worthy alone of their esteem,
Better than parents dear, and downy sleep, and gold,
Alcides felt thy love, .
Alcides sprung from Jove,
158 Orphic Remazns.
Their peerless deeds proclaimn’d thy mighty ρον; .
Thou wast at ance theis prize, and of defeace their tow’r.
And Leds’s twins toil’d many ἃ painful hour ; = }
Ajax to thy inviting call attended,
Like Peleus’ warlikeé’son ;
Both into Hades’ palaces descended,
Both immortal trophies won.
Smit with the sacred fire
Which thy beauty «id inspire,
Atannea’s care, Atannea’s praise,
For thee hath widow’d Phoebus’ rays."
Forbid, ye Sisters nine,
Ye handmaids of Mnemosyne,
That Mysia’s boast Ublivion’s victim be.
Ah! for his high desert your chaplets twine ;
Enhance the name of hospitable Jove,
Add faith to friendship ; purity, to love.
C. K.
ORPHIC FRAGMENTS,
HITHERTO [NEDITED.
Tuer following Orphic fragments have escaped the notice of
Hermann, the last and best editor of the Orphic remains;
which is most probably owing to the rareness of the Greek
Manuscripts, in which alone all of them except one are to be found,
From the MSS. Scholia of Procius On the Cratylus.
Concerning Jupiter.
Aso και Opdeus Onpsoupyourra μὲν αὐτὸν THY OUpaviay πάσαν γενεαν
παραδιδωσι, χαὶι ἥλιον ποιουνγτὰ καὶ σελήνην, καὶ τοὺς αλλοὺς ἀστρῳους
θεους" δημιουργουντα δὲ ta υὑποσεληνὴν στοιχάια, καὶ διακρινοντα τοῖς
εἰδεσιν αταχκτῶς ἔχοντα προτερον᾽ σειρᾶς δ᾽ εἐφισταντα Dewy περ! ολον Τὸν
* In the original ᾽Δελίου χήρωσιν αὔγας. Magnificent exptession ! and which
almost baffles the efforts of the translator.
Orphise Remains. 159
κοσμον Wig αὐτὸν ἀνηρτήμενας, καὶ ᾿διαθασιροοθεσουνσίε Ἰδωσι τὰς “Ῥυσμεοις
Gers xxv’ cfscey. διανημοις τῆς ἐν τῷ πιστὰ πϑοιοιας.
‘he. “. Hence Orpheus represents: bim (Jupiter), fabricating
every celestial race, making the sun and moon, and the other starry
Gedas, tagether with the sublunary elements, and diversifying ithe
Jatter with forms, which before hed « digordered subsistence. -He
likewise represents. him presiding over the Gods: whp are -dintri-
buted about the whole world, and who are suspended.frem him;
pnd ia the character .of -a-legislator assigning distributions. of pro-
‘adence in the universe, according to desert, to eH the mundane
Gods.” |
Kas yap διτταὶ υφιστησι διικοσμους, τὸν τε οὐράνιον “Ναὶ TOY υπεραίρα-
mov’ olay αὐτοῦ xe τὸ σκῆπτρον ives ᾧησιν 0 θεολοιος, πισυρων. κα
ποσὶ μετρων,ιφες διττῶν. ἄρχοντος δυοδεκαδων.
i.e. “ For Jupiter gives. subsistence te twofold orders, ‘the
celestial and the supercelestial; whence also the theolegist
(Orpheus) says, that bis-sceptre consists of four and twenty meas
sures, as rahop over a:twofuld twelve.” '
- «Ὡς δ᾽ Ὄρφευς evden oropars Acyel, καὶ πατώπενθι τὸν πρϑγονον' αὐτόν
Sov Φανητα, καὶ αγχολπιζοτόι πασοις αὐτοῦ tag δυνάμεις 0 Zeus, καὶ γινε-
Fas παντα γρερως οσιασπηρ HY EXEIvOS ψϑήτως.
i.e. “ But as Orpheus says, with a divinely-inspired ‘mouth,
Jupiter swallows his progenitor Phanes, embosems all his powers,
and becomes all things intellectually which Phanes is imelligibly.” ”
. Concerning. Satura. .
9 Κρόνος magus φής δημιουργιοις exdsdocs τῳ dis Tag διρχέοις, 1088 THE
εἰς.τα αἴσδητα. προνοίας, ‘KEES ϑοιυτον φοων. ἡγοξαι τοις Ἔρυτασζοις νδητοις,
yon πεπληδωται τῶν engilercryalen’ Sto καὶ τρεφεσθοι φησιν: αὐτὸν Ὁ feo
λογος υπὸ τῆς Νυχτος,
Ex mavrwy. δὲ Κρονον Nek. erpapey κ᾿ α-τιταΐλον.
-e. © Saturn also imparts to Jupiter the principles of fabrica-
tion, and of providential attention to sensibles, and intellectually
. ἢ The twelve -Gods who first subsist in the Aberated or supercelestial
order, which is called azonic by the Chaldeans, and who are divided inte
fuur triads, are Jupiter, Neptune, Vulcan; Vesta, Minerva, Mars; Ceres,
Juno, Diana; and ’Mercury,'Venus, Apollo. The first of thése triads -is
fabricative ; ; the second defensive ; the third vivific ; and the fourth harmonie.
See my translation of ‘Proclus on the Theology of Plato,’ 2 vols. 4to.
4
160 Orphic Remains.
perceiving himself, he becomes united to first intelligibles, and
is filled with the goods which are thence derived. Hence also the
theologist (Orpheus) says, ‘ that he was nursed and nourished by
Night from all things.”
Ors ο μεν Ορφευς πολυ τῆς τῶν μυϑων εξουσιας ἀπολελαυκχε, καὶ φαντάὰ
τα πρὸ τοῦ Ουρανὼν μέχρι τὴς πρωτιστης αἰτίας ονόμασιν ἐδηλώσε. καὶ
αὐτὸ τὸ ἀρρῆτον καὶ τῶν γοήτων εἐναδων ἐχβεβηκος Κρονον προσειρηκεν"
ef ors πασὴς γενέσεως αἴτιον προυπαρχῶν, af oT) τὰ ὀντῶς OYTa Ὑ490"
μενα mapadiBous, wa τὴν ταξιν ἐνδειξηται αὐτῶν, καὶ τὴν τῶν ολιχώτερβον
πρὸς τα μερικωτερα ὑπεροχὴν Wa ἢ TaUTOY τὸ χατα χρόνον, τῷ αν
αἰτίαν, ὥσπερ ἡ γενεσις τῇ TeTAypavy προοδω.
i. 6. ““ Orpheus greatly availed himself of the licence of fables,
and manifests every thing prior to Heaven by names, as far ag to
the first cause. He also denominates the ineffable, who trans
cends the intelligible unities, Time ; whether because Time pre-
subsists as the cause of all generation, or because, as delivering
the generation of true beings, he thus denominates the ineffable,
that he may indicate the order of true beings, and the transcea-
dency of the more total to the more partial; that a subsistence
according to time may be the same with a subsistence accordnig
to cause ; in the same manner as generation with an arranged pro-
gression.” | ἘΝ
Kas τοῖγε οτιο Koovos ὑπερτερος ἐστι τοῦ Ὥκχεανου, δεδηλῶκεν 0 θεολον
γος παλιν λεγων᾽ τὸν μὲν ρονον αὐτὸν καταλαμβανειν τὸν ουρανιὸν
Ολυρύπον, κακει θρονισθεντα, βασιλεύειν τῶν Titavov τὸν δὲ ὥκχερανεν
τὴν ληξὶν ἀπασαν τὴν μεσὴν' ναίειν yap αὑτὸν ἐν τοῖς θεσπεδιοις ρενῆροις
τοῖς μετὰ τὸν Ολυμπον, καὶ τὸν exes περιεπειν Oupavoy, ἀλλ᾽. οὐ Ψαῦ
axporaroy, ws δὲ φησιν ὁ puloc, τὸν ἐμπεσοντοι rou Ολυμπου, mors exes
τεταγμένον, Procl. in Tim. p. 296. "
.e. “ That Saturn is superior to Ocean, the Theologist mani-
feats, by again saying, that Saturn himself received the cetestial
Olympus, and that there being throned he reigns over the Titane;
but.that Ocean obtained all the middle allotment. For he says
that Ocean dwells in the divine streams which are posterior to
Olympus, and that he environs the Heaven which is there, and
not the highest Heaven, but as the fable says, that which fell from
Ol} mee and was there arranged. »
-Orphic Remains. 161
᾿ Concerninig the occult (i. e. the intelligible) order of the Gods.
Ὄρφευς περι tov xpudiou διακοσμου τῶν θεων ourms spy,
To δ᾽ ἀπειρεσιον κατα κυκλον ατρυτῶς εἐφορειτο.᾿
i. e. “ Orpheus thus speaks about the occult order of the Gods :
Unwearied, in a boundless orb it moves.”
Concerning Ceres.
Ori τὴν Anunreay Opgeus μὲν τὴν αὐτὴν λέγων τῇ Pec εἰναι, Avyes ors
ανωϑεν μεν μετα Kpovou ουσα ανεχφοιτητος Pea ἐστι, προβαλλουσα δε
Aas αἀπογέννωσα τὸν dia Anuyrye λέγει. yap,
Ῥειὴν τὸ πριν εουσαν, ewes Διος ἐπλέτο μήτηρ,
Γέγονε Δημήτηρ.
i. e. According to Orpheus, Ceres is the same with Rhea :
for he says, that subsisting ‘on high in unproceeding union with
Saturn, -she is Rhea, but that by emittmg and generating Jupiter,
she is Ceres. For thus he speaks,
-The Goddess who was Rhea, when she bore
Jove, became Ceres.”
H be Δημήτηρ πρωτη, καὶ tas διττας τροφας διειλεν ev. τοῖς θεοῖς, ws
φησιν Ορφευς,
Μῆήησατο yap προπολους, καὶ ἀμφιπαλους, καὶ ὁπαδους"
Mycaro δ᾽ ἀμβροσίην, xa ἐρυῦρου νεκταρος ἀρθρον"
Mycato δ᾽ ἀγλαὰ εργαὰ μελισσαων εριβομβων.
i.e. “4 Ceres first separates the two kinds of aliment (1. 6. nectar
and ambrosia) in the Gods, as Orpheus says,
She cares for pow’rs ministrant, whetlier they
Or Gods precede, or follow, or surround :
Ambrosia, and tenacious nectar red,
Are too the objects of her bounteous care.
Last to the bee her providence extends,
Who gathers boney with resounding hum.”
Concerning Proserpine.
H Ἢ Περσεφόνη κατα μὲν τὴν ἀκροτήτα εαὐτὴς Αρτεμις καλεῖται παρ᾽
Ορφει, xara δε τὸ μέσον κεντρὸν Περσεφονη, κατὰ δε τὸ mapas τῆς δια-
χοσμησεως Abnva.
i.e. “4 Proserpine according to her summit is called Diana by
Orpheus ; but according to her middle centre, Proserpine, and
according to the extremity of the (vivific) order, Minerva.”
VOL. XVII. Cl. Jl. No. XXTU. L
162 Orphic Remains.
Avo καὶ παρ' Θρῷει ἡ Δημὴτηρ ἐγχειριζουσα τῇ Kepy τὴν βασίλειαν
σιν.
᾿ Aurap Απολλωνος θαλερὸν λεχὸς εἰσαναβασα,
Teberas αγλαα τεχνα πυριφλεγεθοντα προσώποις.
i.e. “ According to Orpheus, when Ceres delivered up the
government to Proserpine, she thus addressed her :
But next Apollo’s florid bed ascend ;
For thus the God fam’d offspring shall beget,
With faces glowing with refulgent fire.”
Obev dy καὶ ἡ Κορὴ κατα μὲν τὴν Αρτεμιν τὴν εν savry, xe ΤῊ
Αϑηναν, παρθενος λεγεται μένειν, κατα δὲ τὴν τῆς Περσεφονὴς ὝΟΥΙΜΩΥ
δυναμιν, καὶ πρόσιεναι καὶ συναπτεσθαι τῷ τριτῷ δημιουργῷ, καὶ τΙΚΤΕΙν
ὡς φήσιν Ορφευς,
Evea buyarepas γλαυκωπιδας ανθεσιουργους.
i.c. “ Core also according to the Diana and Minerva which she
contains, is said to remain a virgin; but according to the prolific
power of Proserpine, she is said to proceed forth, and to be con-
joined to the third demiurgus (Pluto), and to bring forth, as
Orpheus says, nine azure-eyed, flower-producing daughters.”
Concerning Diana.
Ori δὲ πολλὴ τῆς Αρτεμιδος, καὶ ἡ πρὸς τὴν εγχοσμιον Ἑκατὴν eveorss,
χαὶ ἡ πρὸς τὴν Κορην, φανερὸν τοις χαὶ ολιγα τῷ Ὅρφει παραβεβληήκοσιν,
ἐξ ὧν δηλονοτι καὶ ἡ Δήτω περιέχουσα ev τῇ Anuntol, καὶ τὴν Kogny
ὑποστήσασα σὺν τῳ Asi, καὶ τὴν ἐγκοσμιον Exaryy exes κοι τὴν ἄρτεμιν
Ἑκατὴν Opgeus κεχλήκεν.
᾿ Ηδ᾽ apa Exary παιδὸς wean cubs λιπουσα,
Ayrous eurAoxapoio Koon προσεβησατ᾽ Ολυμπον.
1, e. “ That there is a great union between Diana, the mundane
Hecate, and Core, is evident to those that are in the least degree
conversant with the writings of Orpheus; from which it appears
that Latona is comprehended in Ceres, and together with Jupiter
gives subsistence to Core, and the mundane Hecate. To which
we may also add; that Orpheus calls Diana Hecate.” |
) Concerning Bacchus.
. Ὅτι τὸν Asovucoy os ϑεολογοι πολλάκις καὶ απὸ τῶν TEAEUTAIMY αὐτου
Ewowy οἶνον καλοῦσιν, οἷον Ορῷευς,
Owou mavra μάλη χοσμῳ AaBs, καὶ μοι ενεικχε.
ι. 6. “ ‘Theologists frequently call-Bacchus wine, from the last
Orphice Remains. 168
of his gifts, as, for instance, Orpheus, ¢ Take all the members of
Wine (that are distributed) in the world, and bring them to me.”
From the Commentary of Syrigaus on Aristotle's Metaphysics. *
‘¢ Ancient theologists assert that Night and Heaven reigned, and
prior to these the mighty father. of N ight and Heaven, who dis-
tributed the world to Gods and mortals, and who first possessed
royal authority, the illustrious Eyicapaus : |
Tosoy ere διενειμε ϑεοις, ϑνητοισι δὲ κοσμον,
Os πρωτος βασιλευέ περικλυτος͵ Hpinerasos.
Night succeeded Ericapseus, in the hands of whom she has a
sceptre :
Σχήπτρον εἐχουσ᾽ ey χερξιν Hpsxerasou.
To Night, Heaven sugceeded, .who first reigned over the Gads
after mother Night.
Os xpwros βασιλεῦε ἤεων, μητερα Nuxra.
Chaos transcends the habitude of sovereign dominion : and with
respect to Jupiter, the oracles given to him by Night, manifestly
call him not the first, but the fifth immortal king of ‘the Gods :
ἄθανατον βασιλεὰ θεων πεμπτον γενεσθαι.
According to these theologists, therefore, that principle, which
is most eminently the first, is the one, or the good, after which,
according to Pythagoras, are those two principles, /&ther and
Chaos, which are superior to the possession of sovereign dominion.
In the next place succeed the first and occult genera of the Gods,
in which first shines forth the father and king of all wholes, and
whom on this account, they call Phanes.” Lib. xii.
Chaos is said by. Orpheus to be
Χασμα καὶ peya χασμα xedwpior™ avbec καὶ ενθα.
«A mighty chasm ev'ry way immense.” Lib. ii.
' Manor Place, Walworth. T. TAYLOR.
_* Asa Latin translation only of this work of Syrianus is printed, and I
have not the MS. of it in my possession, I have not been able to give the
original of the whole of these extracts, But as my copy belonged to the
learned Thomas Gale, who has everywhere in the margin given extracts
from the Greek, I have been fortunately enabled to give the above Orphic
lines in the original.
. 2. Aristotle, in his Rhetoric, Lib. iii. cap. 8, says, that ssawgiev is an ancient
word, which affords an argument in favor of .the great antiquity οἵ. these
Orphic remains.
164
BISHOP PEARSON’s
Minor Lracts
CHRONOLOGICALLY ARRANGED.
NO. VIII. ΝΣ
[The following title ought to have been ipserted immediately after
No. 1V. iC. J. No. xix. p. 95.]
NO. IV. ἃ.
The Patriarchal Funeral: or,
A SERMON
Preached before
The Right Honorable the Lord GEORGE BERKELEY
Upon the Death of his
FATHER.
By JOHN PEARSON. .
LONDON:
Printed by E. Cotes, for John Williams, at the Sign of the Crown
in St. Pauls Church-yard, 1658." [4to. pp. 1-31.]
[It is dedicated] to the Right Honorable the
Lord GEORGE BERKELEY,
Baron of Berkeley, Sea-grave, and Bruce.
Oratio habita in Capella Pembrochi ad exsequias Matthaei Wren*
Ep. Eliens. per Io. Pearson, 5. 1΄. P. et Coll. Trin. Mag.
Reverendissime De. De. Procancellarie, Nobilissimi
Juvenes, Viri ornatissimi spectatissimique.
Si unquam mihi in ullo Reipublicae Literariae negotio exoptat-
dum fuit, ut feliciter cederet, et officio auspicaté suscepto eventus
‘ On ist May, in this year Mr. John Cleveland, the poet, was buried in the
Parish-church of St. Michael, College-hill, London, “ and the Reverend and
learned Dr, Pearson, (now Lord Bishop of Chester) preached his Funeral
Sermon, and made his death glorious.” .
> « Matthew Wren, D.D. was translated to Ely, April 24, 1638, died April
24, 1667, in the 82d year of his age, and was interred, according to bis own
appointment, in a vault which he had caused to be built for that purer
under the Communion Table of the new built chapel of Pembroke all,
Cambridge, which had been erected at his own expense, without any fur-
ther memorial than the initial letters of his name, and date of his death, on
his Coffin.” Bentham’s Ely, p. 201.— He was a person of great Icarning,
Bishop Pearson’s Minor Tracts, $c. 165
responderet, certé hoc potissimum tempore votis omnibus expe-
tendum videtur, ut digna nobis, digna Presule contingat oratio:
ne vel Academiz existimatio, vel Ecclesie honos et dignitas, aut
animi mei imbecillitate, aut verborum penurif, aut infirmitate judicii
evilescat. Neque enim hactenus amplissimo huic artium domicilio,
quod habitamus, justior sese efferendi occasio indulta est, neque
eligionis, quam colimus, illustrior unquam splendor emicuit, qu
in ejus Antistitis vita, rebusque gestis, ac varietate fortune, cujus
exequias funebri solennitate celebramus. In quo uno viro, si hec
Musarum sedes, quicquid honestum, nobile, gloriosum, ostendere
potuit, non exhibuit ; in quo si fama ab omnibus meritissim6 elicita,
extorta, ad nos non maxima redundavit, de honore literis vendicando
in zternum plané desperandum est. Aspicite sacras infulas vohis
quasi in Lyceo ante oculos positas, cogitate hec Episcopatis
Insignia, tanquam tropwa ad Athenas reducta: sed precipué
Mattheum, Presulem vestrum animo, memoria recolite, cujus
feretrum non magis manifesté hc ornamenta gestavit sustentavitque
quam ipse-dum viveret, sacrum illum ordinem, dignitatemque suftul-
sit, excoluit, ornavit. Erit igitur oper pretium, viri gravissimi,
et vobis grat cogitatione revolvere, et mihi luculentz orationis filo
explicare, quibus auspiciis consummatissima queque aggressus
est, quibus gradibus ascenderit, per quas ambages et diverticula
transierit: ut ejus vestigia legentes, illius exemplo ducti, illius vir-
tutibus ornati, tantum ducem sequi discamus, et ad tam ardua,
tamaue preclara anhelemus. Ut familiam miré antiquam, ac satis
nobilem, ceteraque que in exemplum trahi mints possunt, prae-
teream; ad Academiam accessit summe spel juvenis, nec vulgar
expectatione, aut aliorum more missus: sed (quod felicissimi omj-
nis fuit) a Lancelotto Andrewsio laudatissimo liujus Aule Preposito
expetitus, accersitus, adductus: illius manu in hoc feraci Episco-
porum solo primulim positus, illius cura diligenter observatus,
consiliis perpetim instructus, favore pertinaci excitatus, bonarum
literarum studiis totum se dedit, perpetuis vigiliis animum excoluit,
corpus maceravit, attrivit, exhausit. Brevi, Artium, Linguarumque
insigni peritid notissimus, publicis Academiz muniis exercitilsque
summa cum laude perfunctus, ritus religiosissimé observabat, disci-
plinam acerrimé exercuit, privilegia gravissimé tuebatur, tamque
altum animo harum sedium amorem concepit ac fixit, ut non ztatis
longinquitas, non iniquitas temporum, aut obliterare aut diminuere
potuerit. Postquam omnibus humanioribus literis, liberalissimisque
TT
singular gravity, and exemplary piety.” Echard, p. 848. a. “ and was buried
with the greatest solemnity seen in the memory of man, performed by the
whole University, 24 scholars of St. John’s, Peter-house, and Pembroke, elng
his relations, in mourning.” Lloyd, p. 612. See Peck’s Desid. Curiosa, lib,
xiv. p. 545.
* Est—sit supra ex coryectione,
166 Βιβίιορ Pearson’s Minor Tracts
studiis eruditus, excultus, ac perpolitus evaserat; tot# mente, atque
omni animi impetu in Ecclesiam incubuit: Et sané eximia δοῦν
Fimaque ingenia, homimesque omni doctrine genere, et illustris
cujusduam’ note dotibus maximeé florentes ‘Theologia quasi jure suo
sibi vendicat; neque enim melids omnes animi vires, quam in
ietate excoletnda, in cultu Dei exornando, in rebus divinis cele-
randis, exerceri, et impendi possunt. Dum in bis versatur vir,
fara conspiratione et doctissimus et pientissimus, et ad promovendos
Academiz fines et Ecclesiz paritér intentus, quamvis inter hoe
parietes, quos tantopere coluit, delitescere videretur, aut Lancelotte
suo fidissimée obsequentissiméque adheresceret ; in summa expec-
tatione esse ccepit; nihil erat tantum, quod non ab illo perfic
atque obtineri posse omnes judicabant ; neque perspicacem sapien-
tissimi Regis Jacobi oculum latere potuit, cui erat anté vel ex
subselliis nostris satis cognitus atque perspectus; quare eo tem-
poris articulo, quo familia Principis verum Ecclesiz Anglicans, et
exploratissime fidei filium postularet, hunc potissimum sua sponte,
et ex Judicio proprio, (hoc est maximo) a sacris Carolo suo
assignavit: cui rei hic etiam honoris cumulus accessit, quéd tem
secretd gesta sit, ut in dubio relinqueretur, an daretur a Rege, an
peteretur a Principe: que dubitatio adhuc etiam felicissimé aucts
est, quod utrique pariter carus esset : et in illo secreto, hoc certé
apertum et perspicuum fuit, quod majori arcano preluderet. Ecce
enim alté insedit animo prudentissimi Regis rei gerendz certissiniuas
consilium, que toti terrarum orbi cum ageretur, miraculo fuit, et
postquam gesta est, fortasse nunquam desierit : aded fatigantur et
caligant hominum ingenia qui arcana Principum rimari et publico-
rum negotiorum causas discutere, ac rationes cognoscere”* satagunt,
ambiuntque : Statutum est Regum solertissimo fillum unicum,
Regni triplicis heredem, indulgentissimi Patris dilectissimam pro=
lem, paternz familie spem et solatium, Carolum, in oras Hispanie
mittere ; prudentissimorum occultissimorumque consiliorum genti,
nobis hactenus ex versutia, superbia et diuturna inimicitié note, .
non exefcitu cinctum, non classe armatum (quales Angli Hispanos
petere solebant) concredere, et eorum fidei satis suspecte, sud tantim
prudentid munitum committere. Cum igitur Mattheus vester
optimo Principi in negotio peériculosissimo a sacris (dixerim an ἃ
secretis’) esset. (ubi enim vera pietas radices egit, et pectus hand
δοιὰ religione penitus imbutum est, hc apud alios tam laté discre-
pantia, aut nihil aut parum differunt) tum verd Religionis nostre
fundamenta tam diserté ubique explicavit, nervoséque defendit; et
nodos ab Ecclesiasticis viris ad res Principis implicandas nexes,
* Primo cujusquam, mox in cujusdam mutatum.
* Pernoscere e correctione.
Chronologically arranged. 167
tanto cum acumine privatim dissolvit, ut nec ullis aliis artibus reditus
Principis ad Patrem magis aperté patuerit. Ceterum si ullo indi-
cio, viri gravissimi, reputare cupiamus, quanta Academie nostre
lA tempestate estimatio fuerit ; non aliunde conjecturam faciendam
reor, quam quod hic eam tam ardenter deperiret, ut huc a reduct
(stc) Principe convolaret: Carolus taut& cura dignatus, tanta indul-
gent prosecutus sit, ut ad eam ornandum, a suo quasi latere
attheeum dimitteret. Pretereo beneficii opimitatem, qua statim
remuneratus; Preebende dignitatem qua drnatus: ad Collegii D.
Petri gubernacula admotus potits quam exsectus (f. evectus), cim
Socios omnes moderatione animi atque imperii ad summam concor-
diam pertraxisset, Juventutem ad studia bonarum literarum excitas-
set, nova etiam edificia extruxisset, archiva Collegii blattis et tineis
erepta, excusso pulvere, summ4 industrié in luculentum ordinem
redegisset: videretque pietatis officia, (ob defectum sacrorum in sinu
Collegi conventum, et emendicatam quandam Deo serviendi extra
pomeeria licentiam minus decoré peragi; quod proprio sumtu tunc
temporis efficere non potuit, alieno impendio, séd sua apud bonos
auctoritate, Capellam extrui et ornari curavit. Procancellarius
factus, disciplinam collapsam restituit, omnes in officio continult,
Academiam ipsam docuit, ut se tandem aliquando intelligeret.
Veram enimverd serenissimus Rex ferre non potuit, ut diu a se
abesset, et in Academico pulvere decertaret; quare privati Oratori
Clericum adscivit, (sub mioris vocabuli nomine ingens decus:) imd
prius Capella sue apud Winsoram Decanum prefecit, ubi non
tantum officiis divinis, ut rite et decoré fierent; sed etiam summe
hujus imperii dignitati atque splendori qui in clarissimo Periscelidis
ordine consistit, inserviret: quem non tantum insigni gravitate,
pradentia, auctoritate rexit; sed scriptis accuratissimé perpolitis
ornavit, et locum amplissimum fratri, exemplum posteris omnibus
reliquit. Cam enim eum ad publicum Ecclesie regimen quasi
natum et comparatum, non jam conjecturé Rex prospiceret, sed
omnibus experimentis probé perspectum haberet, Herefordensi
‘Episcopatui admovit. quem vix attigisse crederetis, nisi brevissimo
illo temporis spatio Ecclesiam aut ambiguis, aut mutilibus (f. inutt-
Hibus ), aut auctoritatis nullius statutis fluctuantem, certis et definitis
etatumin4sset, accuratis et elegantibus ornasset.' Ecce Norwicensis
Diceceseos sedes vacua, larga quidem illa ac patens, schismate etiar.
uassata atque dirupta, gnarum, prudentem, fortem, consultum
ulem effagitabat huc igitur qui solus tanto negotio par vide-
batur, ab Herefordia translatus est: ubi per biennium et quod am-
~phius frit, Schismaticorum fraudes detexit, conatus repressit, animos
fregit. Interim ab oratorio privato ad Regie Capella Decanatum,
quo altiis in Aula non ascenditur (hoc est, Regi propinquits non
acceditur), transit: et cum ad Episcopatum Eliensem recté admi-
nistrandum non tantum in rebus Ecclesiasticis peritia, sed et aliqua
168 Bishop Pearson's Minor Tracts
fegum Civilium cum Academicorum etiam institutorum notitid con-
juncta requiratur; cQmque inillo uno hec omnia tam manifesté concare
rerent ; sedem etiam illam, ad quam factus esse videbatur, occupavit.
Ita tandem ad dignitatis fastigium, ad proventus uberrimos, ad sinum
indulgentissimi Principis, florentissimo et imperii et Ecclesiz tem-
pore, magnis virtutibus contendit: inter quas haud postremo loco
ponendw et apud vos presertim memorandz Modestia et M oderatio:
Nemiucm unquam rogavit, neminem vel verbulo sollicitavit : hono-
rem nullum, quem consecutus est, ambivit : impetratuin semper est,
quod non erat expetitum, oblatum est quod non postulabatur: faces-
sunt, qui honoribus Ecclesiz inhiant, qui fores Magnatum aut Presu-
Jum obsident, qui diguitatem non tam acquirunt quam surripiunt: illum
vobis preponendum judico, quem uon sua vota sed merita evexerunt:
qui in ipso pené felicitatfs apice, cum lectissim4 conjuge, et numerosa
prole, magnum faventissimi numinis exemplum stetit. Nimium,
Academici, ea zetate, nimium felices fuimus: ea tunc temporis nobis
indulserat Deus, que nec ingrate gentis scelera ferre, nec longani-
initas clementissimi Numinis diutius pati potuit, ipsa felicitas quos
corrupit, perdidit; ipsa beatitas quos depravavit, pessundedit. Subitd
enim ab Aquilone orta tempestas Regni compagem protenus laxavit;
omnladue membra pestis pervasit ; sub larva pietatis sceleratissimi ho-
ruines Ecclesiam convellunt, in Episcopos omnes, sed precipué Regi
caros involant, quod non tam eos quam Carolum peterent, accusationes
corradunt, turbam concitant, invidiam conflant, odia imstigant, eo
tantim fine ut in Regem transferant. Przsulem imprimis nostrum
solo Principis sui favore sceleratum, gratidque nefarium, insimu-
lant: non querunt quam veré, sed quam fortiter calumnientur ;
coram supremo tribunali facinora exponunt, ultimumque suppliciam
exposcunt; interim sedatissimi animi Praesul, innocentia fretus, et
non sua culpa perire certus, defensioni justae se tacité accinxit,
quz cum mira felicitate prodita servavit ; ut quem fraus accusdrat,
perfidia protegeret. In carcerem igitur causa incognit4 conjiciunt,
conjurationis celebritati et suorum opinioni confisi: vite et fortu-
narum omnium reum faciunt, ab omni indulgentie spe et expecta-
tione, publico decreto secludunt. Ita calumniis onustus, defensione
nudatus, potentiaé oppressus, rapine expositus, bonis omnibus ex-
utus, decreto confossus, libertate privatus, latebris inclusus, perpetui
carceris pedore foedatus, dignum Ecclesia, dignum orbe terrarum
non tam spectaculum quam exemplum factus est. Indigna hee
quidem zrumnosa, miseranda, omnibusque. deflenda preter illum
qui passus est ; homines sapientes turpitudine, non infelicitate ; et
delicto suo, non aliorum injuriaé commoventur. voluit divina provi-
dentia ut cetere virtutes in prospera, equabili, perpetuaque fortuna
minis conspicue hac tandem quasi flamu:4 accense emicarent et
illustrioribus radiis illucesserent (sic). Comparuit enim ad durissima
perferenda, ad contemnendas minas ingenitA quidam firmitudine
Chronologically arranged. 169
Ron tam institutus quam natus atque firmatus: et ne eum du-
bitemus in his angustiis divinitds constitutum, aded erat obfir-
mati animi, constantiz incredibilis, equabilitatis ‘inaudite, spe
certissima suffultus, expectatione semper erectus, ad sevissima
perpetienda paratus, ad optima queque letissimaque ingenti fiducia
precipienda proclivis et promtus, ut conscientia recie voluntatis
et honesto prwsidio infamarit injurias ; 81 quem aliquando virum tam
fortiter miserum videndi cupido invaderet, si virtut:s infelicis spe-
ctandz desiderium, periculo suo potentids illiceret, videbat unum
hominem, erectissimum animum se solo sustinentem, et tutam Regni
spem, rerumque meliorum expectationem ad unum angulum redac-
tam, in uno pectore conservatam. Quinetiam hanc inconcusse mentis
firmitatem insuper studiorum solatio nutrivit, et quem ompia pene
libroruim subsidia destituerant, ad sacras literas suo ingenio, acu-
uiine, doctrini, judicio, memori4 illustrandas animum appulit: quod-
que alii incarcerationem vocabant, ipse liberale otium ratus, totum
meditando se et scribendo impendit; intimos S. Codicis sensus
tniplici linguarum peritid rimatus, innumeras chartarum paginas
furtim conscripsit, totque volumina confecit, ut eum plures quam
18 annos in carcere transegisse facilé crediderit posteritas : quz
quidem omnia ipse eleganter et accuraté delineavit, testamentuque
curavit, ut amicorum doctissimorum judicio, in publicum si ita
videretur prodirent. Dum in his totus esset, tyrannidis jugum pau-
latim collabi, et nove reipublice gubernacula fatiscere coeperunt,
omniaque que mente conceperat, que solus speraverat, prospex-
eratque, contingunt : dum nefarii homines sui facinoris satis conscii,
quod fecerant, cogitant, et infectum cupere videri volunt: carcere
tam subitd, tam inopinatd eripitur ; ut ex omni mutatione rerum
sola sui ipsius liberatio fuerit ipsi improvisa, quod ut divine indul-
genti singulari acceptum referret, eodem die a turri Londi-
nense pené invitus produt, quo Capellam Petrensem consecrandam.
curaverat, necduin tamen edibus suis restitutus, sed incerto lari ex-
positus est, ut e carcere potius ejectus quam liberatus videretur,
donec Carolus omnium votis expetitus, bonorum omnium gaudio
exceptus, suprem4 auctoritate armatus, et in Paterno Solio locatus
constitit. Quam memorem versam illam rerum faciem : licet enim
hoc triste spectaculum sit et luctuosum, neminem tamen esse arbi-
tror, quem non illius diei recordatio ab hoc meerore aliquantisper
recreaverit. Ille cum ceteris quidem, iisque paucis restitutus, sed
haud pari momento rediit ; confugit ad sinum ejus concussa Eccle-
Sia, qui aut solus aut inter paucissimos disciplinam collapsam, ex-
tinctanque renovare et novit et ausus est, in illo pené uno, et libertas
ejus, et safus et securitas fundabatur. Cam igitur eum summa po-
scerent, videturque Ecclesia nomalitér quam illius humeris sustentari
potuisse, ad altiora minimé aspiravit, non provehi cupidus, sed re-
stitui contentus, in su sede resistere, senescere, obdormire cupivit.
170 Gail's Recherches, Fe.
In magni bonorum copia affluentiaque nihil voluptati indulsit, summa
continenti : temperautizque mnsersire obstinaverat [ f. obduraverat]
animum: ne vini quidem guttulum per vigints pene aunos hausit,
gustavit ; corpus inediis jejuniisque macerare perseseravit, uliis satis
Indulgens, 5:01 soli crudelis, quasi hujus vite perteesus festinaret ed
Coslos. Neque vero familie sue, qué tantopere recreabatur, nimium
prospexit, pari et in hac exornanda continentie studuit, non ad eam
ditandam aliena involavit, non omnia, que ad ipsum pertinebant,
arripuit ; successoribus ex industria haud spicilegium, sed amplam
messem reliquit: et hanc insuper Aulam adoptavit in familiam, in
hwreditatem ascivit, pecuniam ex proventibus primd receptam, mm
hoc Erarium premisit; hic in honorem Dei op. max. cujus jugi
veneration: se totum semper dicaverat, in Academie decus, quam
incredibili cura et flagranti quodam amore cunstantissimé prosecutus
est, in memoriam prime institutionis quam gratissino animo quo-
tidie recolebat, Capellam hanc impendio maximo extruxit, perpetuls
reditibus dotavit, precibus suis rite consecravit, sub hac dormitorium
condidit, huic tandem corpus concredidit, illustre quidem hoc, sed
minimum tamen, ex monumentis que reliquit.
[The List will be continued in our next No.]
_ -εο-ο------ - ----- - --------------᾽ ------͵
ON M. GAIL’S RECHERCHES
, Hist. Geogr. et Philolog.
An vir doctus mihique amicissimus, J. B. Gail., KoAyias, if
Theoer. xiv. 17. (v. Recherches Hist. Geogr. et Philolog. pp-
127-37.) recte verterit, Semblable ἃ P oignon de la Colchide, duby
tare mihi liceat. Pauca quedam afferre dcbebat exempla gentilium,
vel deminutivorum, vel frequentativorum, in sas desinentium. Dum
id fiat, quod quidem haud facile fiet, Κολχίας nec deminutivo nec
frequentativo sensu sumi potest, sed nec simpliciter significabit i. 4.
Lat. Colchicus. Gentilia enim in sas sunt feminina: at βολβὸς, cul,
ut Gail. arbitratur, a Theocrito Koaylas junctum est, masculinum
sibi sumit genus. Κολχίας ergo, 8, pro voce nihili proculdubio ha
bendum est. Etym. p. 389. 14. Τὰ εἷς ευς ἐβνικὰ, εἰ μὲν ἔχουσι προ:
γούμεγον σύμφωνον, εἷς is ποιοῦσι τὸ θηλυκὸν, οἷον, ᾿Αλεξανδρεὺς, ᾿Αλεξο»
δρὶς γυνή" ᾿Αντιοχεὺς, ᾿Αντιοχὶς γυνή" εἶ δὲ φωνῆεν, εἰς ας, ᾿Ιλιεὺς, ᾿Ιλιάς.
Οὕτως Ὧρος. Ceterum, ut in Theocr. κοχλίας et Κολχίας permu-
tantur, sic in Anthol. Palat. (vide Jacobsis Annotatt. p. 592. et $42.
κόχλος et χόλχος confunduntur.
Thetfordie, Mar. 4. 4. Ὁ. 1818, E. H. BARKER.
171
ON A GEOMETRICAL QUERY
IN PLATO'S MENO.
“Συγχώρησον ἐξ ὑποθέσεως αὐτὸ σκοπείσθωι. ------- λέγω δὲ τὸ ἐξ ὕπο
σεως Ber ὥσπερ οἱ γεωμέτραι πολλάκις σκοποῦντι, ἐπειδάν τις ἔρηται
αὐτούς οἷον περὶ χωρίου, εἰ οἷόντε ἐς τόνδε τὸν κύκλον τόδε τὸ χωρίον
τρίγωνον ἐνταθῆναι" εἴποι dy τις, “Ors οὕπω οἶδα εἰ ἔστι τοῦτο τοιοῦτον,
ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ μέν τινα ὑπόθεσιν προὔργου ones ἔχειν πρὸς τὸ πρῶγμω τοι»
ἄνδε εἰ μέν ἐστι τοῦτο τὸ χωρίον τοιοῦτον οἷον παρὰ τὴν δοθεῖσαν αὐτοῦ
γραμμὴν παρατείναντα ἐλλείπειν τοιούτῳ χωρίῳ οἷον av αὐτὸ τὸ παρατε-
ταμένον 7, ἄλλο τι συμβαίνειν pos δοκεῖ: καὶ ἄλλο αὖ, εἰ ἀδύνατόν ἐστι
ταῦτα καθεῖν. ὑποθέμενος οὖν ἐθέλω εἰπεῖν σοι τὸ συμβαῖνον περὶ τῆς
ἐγγάσεως αὐτοῦ εἷς τὸν κύκλον, εἴτε ἀδύνατον εἴτε μή.---ἘΪαῖο, Meno,
pp- 86—87. ed. Steph.
This most difficult passage has lately attracted so much atten-
tion in Germany, that no less than seven different explanations
have been offered. Unfortunately they all agree" in the radical
mistake of supposing the query to relate to a given triangle, as if
the words had stood, τόδε τὸ τρίγωνον χωρίον. But the construction
is, τόδε τὸ χωρίον ἐνταθῆναι (ὡς) τρίγωνον. Can this figure be re-
duced to a triangle, and so placed in this circle? Or, Givena
circle and a rectilinear figure, to determine whether any triangle,
equal to the figure, can be inscribed in the circle.
M. Mollweide, Astronomy Professor at Leipsic, has published
an elaborate, and, as far as I can judge, an able paper on the whole
subject :* I agree with him in thinking that παρατείνειν χωρίον παρὰ ᾿
γραμμὴν, Sc. means, to apply to a line a figure deficient by an-
other similar figure. (σαρὰ τὴν δοθεῖσαν εὐθεῖαν εὐθύγραμμον waga-
βαλεῖν ὅμοιον τῷ ἐλλείμματι. Euclid, vi. 27, 28, 29.) In other
words, to divide the line into two parts, and on each part to de-_
ecribe a figure, so that the two figures shall have a common side,
1 ‘One critic conjectures τοτρώγωνον. But he also supposes that the given
figure itself, and not merely one given to it, is to be inscribed.
> Commentationes Mathematico-Philologice tres, &c. Lips. 1813. pp.
172 On a Geometrical Query.
and be similar to each other. But I differ from him in translating
the words τοιοῦτον, οἷον. He makes the sense to be, such, that if
a similar figure be applied; 1 conceive that the figure itself 15 to
be applied.
I imagine the given figure to have been a rectangle. The most
obvious meaning of χωρίον is a square, as in the places presently
quoted. But as τοιοῦτον and τοιόνδε are four times used, pp. 83—4,
to express similarity, and not equality, it may simply mean a space;
1. 6. the given figure. In this case the figure itself is applied:to
the line. If we translate it a square, we must understand Plato's
expression, of applying ἐξ, to mean, applying some figure equal
fo at.
But what was the γραμμήϊ The hypothetical mode of reasoa-
ing, of which this problem is an illustration, requires that the first
step of the investigation be grounded entirely on the thing: as-
sumed. Now this is either a property of the figure, or one of the
circle ; and it is evident that part at least of the words εἰ μέν ἐστι
τοῦτο τὸ χωρίον, &c., relate to the figure. I therefore am of M.
Mollweide’s opinion, that they all do so.
It is by no means impossible that in Plato’s diagram (for he
doubtless did refer to a particular diagram) the figure and the circle
had some common line; but this need not affect the reasoning.
The γραμμὴ may perhaps be the line whose square equals the
figure." Thus p. 83. Ὁ. 84. A. ἡ τοῦ ὀκτάποδος χωρίου γραμμὴ is
the side of a square which is equal to eight square feet. .
If these conjectures be admitted, the enquiry will proceed thus:
" If this be the case, the line must be produced before the second recte
angle, or ἔλλειμμα, can be drawn; and the length to which it is to be pro-
duced, will depend on the ratio of the sides of the first rectangle applied.
That Euclid or his predecessors, in the actual solution of a problem, would
have talked of applying a figure to a line whose length was not already
known, it is not my business to prove. For, 1. it has been observed by
others, that it is not certain that Plato uses strict mathematical language.
4. The object of this hypothetical theorem, is not to ubtain a specific trians
gle, but to find in the given figure some limiting property which shall af-
terwards be compared with something in the given circle. Jn one word,
this is not the solution of the problem, but merely a theorem laid down 88 ἃ
lemma.
Sketch of the Life, Gc. 178
Let the square of AB equal the given figure, and AC equal
the diameter of the given circle.
On any part A Ὁ of E
AB describe the rect- .
angle A D, Ὁ E,' equal |
to AB?. Produce AB
to F, so that AD: 4}? B F c E
DE:: DE: DF, and
ED to G so that DG
=DE; complete the
rectangle DE, DF; | G
jom AE, AG. The points A, E,G are in the circumference of
a circle whose diameter is AF; and the triangle AEG is equal
to the rectangle AD, DE, or AB2. Therefore if to AF be ap-
plied the rectangle A E, equal to AB2, and similar to its defect EF,
8 triangle equal to AB2, can be inscribed in the circle whose
diameter is AF. If, therefore, A F be equal to AC, or less than
it, the thing inquired about is possible.
So much for our lemma. The problem itself I leave to pro-
fessed geometers ; merely observing, that as Plato has given, in
the same dialogue, a peculiar method of doubling a square, he
may have known one of trebling it. Now as the equilateral is the
greatest inscribable triangle, and the square of its side is three times
the square of the radius, this would soon lead to the solution of
his query.
‘SKETCH OF THE LIFE, CHARACTER,
AND PHILOSOPHY, OF ANAXAGORAS.
Beronrgz we come to Anaxagoras himself, it will be expedient, and
‘even necessary, to say a word about his ‘immediate predecessors,
Anaximander and Anaximenes.
Anaximander was a Milesian, and a disciple of Thales. He first
constructed spheres, and asserted that the earth was of a cylindrical
ν The reader is requested to complete the figure.
174 Sketch of the Life, Character, and
form. His opinion was, that men were born of earth and water,
impregnated by the sun. He was the Grst (accerdmg to some ac-
counts) who thought that the: moon shone with a borrowed ight,
reflected from the sun; which: last he considered as a carcle ef §re,
twenty-eight times bigger than our earth. He first made. maps- and
dials. He died, aged 64. B.C. 547. |
Anaximenes was the son of Erasistratus, and disciple of Anaxt-
mander, whom he succeeded in his schovl. He thought that the
air was the great principle of creation, and a self-existent deity 5;—
that “the sun, the moun, and all the stars’ were made from the
earth ;—that the earth was an immense plain; the heavens ἃ selid
concave sphere; and the stars fastened to them like nails. Hence
the proverb ; τί εἰ οὐρανὸς ἐμπέσοι; Quid si calum τιμαὶ Ὁ The Ori-
ental philosophers, on the other hand, thought that the heavens were
made of cloth: (Pro tentorio vel canopeo habebant. Gesuer on
Horace.) Anaximenes died B.C. 504. There wae another phir
losopher of the same name, suid to have been a pupil of Diogenes,
and one of Alexander’s preceptors. Ele was the means of saving
Lampsacus, his native city, (when Alexander threatened its destruc-
tion,) which he did by interceding with him, and begging of him not |
to destroy the city, but to be content with enslaving its inhabitants.
He wrote a Life of Philip (Alexander’s father,) in twelve books,
which have long siuce perished, -
Anaxagoras was the son of Hegesibulus, or, as some say, of
Eubulus, and disciple of Anaximenes. He was born a Clazomenz,
(hodie Kelisman). Πρῶτος τῇ ὕλῃ νοῦν ἐπέστησεν ἀρξάμενος οὕτω
τοῦ συγγράμματος" πάντα χρήματα ἦν ὁμοῦ, εἶτα νοῦς ἐλθὼν αὐτὰ διεκό»
σμησε ἀρχὰς δὲ τὰς ὁμοιομερείας. καθάπερ γὰρ ἐκ τῶν ψηγμάταω
λεγομένων τὸν χρύσον συνέσταναι, οὕτως ἐκ τῶν ὁμοιομερῶν μικρῶν σωμάτων
τὸ τᾶν συγκέκρισθαι" καὶ νοῦν μὲν ἀρχὴν κινήσεως. ἰλ)ῖοσ. Laert. Anaz-
agoras inquil maleriem infinttam, sed eas particulas similes inter se,
minutas; eas primum confusas, postea in ordinem adductas mente
diving. Cic. Acad. Quest. ii. Nunc et Anaragore scrutemur
homeromeriam, Quam Greci memorant, nec nostra dicere lin
Concedet nobis patrii sermonis egestas. Lucret. Πρῶτος τοῖς Sou
οὐ τύχην, οὐδ᾽ ἀνάγκην διακοσμήσεως ἀρχὴν, ἀλλὰ νοῦν ἐπέστησε καϑ
καὶ ἄκρατον ἐμμεμιγμένον πᾶσι τοῖς ἄλλοις ἀποκρίνοντα τὼς ὁμοιομερείας"
Plutarch. Pericl, And so Tim sn also: Καί που ᾿Αναξαγόρην φᾷσ᾽
ἔμμεναι ἄλκιμον ἥρω, Νοῦν, ors δὴ νόος αὐτῷ, ὃς ἐξαπίνης ἐπαγείρας Πάνναι
συνεσφήχωσεν ὁμοῦ τοταραγμένα πρόσθεν. He is said tu have diss
tribute! all his patrimony amongst his friends; and, being re-
proached with indifference as to bis own imterest, to have replied,
Ti οὐχ ὑμεῖς ἐπιμελεῖσθε : Why don’t ye observe the lesson yourselves,
that ye would fuin have me learn? On retiring from public life, and
giving himself wholly.up-to the study of physics, he was asked, Why
Phibsophy of Anazagoras. 275
he paid no regard to the affairs of hie country: whereupon, paint-
ing up to: heaven, he exclaimed, thai Ais country was his deavest
object. He was twenty. years old.at the time that Greece was in-
vaded by Xerxes; and died, aged 70. According to Apolloderas’s
account, he was born Olymp. Ixx. and died in the first. year of
Olymp. Ixxxviii. He taught philosophy at Athens, im the time of
Callas, at the age of twenty, according to Demetnus Phalereus.
in this occupation he is said to have continued thirty years.
Of ail his philosophical opinions, the most remarkable is the. ne-
tion which he entertained of the vun.* Οὗτος ἔλεγε τὸν ἥλιον μόδρον
εἶναι διώπυρον, καὶ μείζω τῆς Πελοποννήσον, Diog. Laert. According
to Plutarch, he believed the moon tobe of the same.size with the
Peloponnesus ; .an assertion, we believe, false, and childishly de-
duced by that author from the well-known idea which he had formed
of the sun. He believed the moon to be inhabrtable,s &c. Τὴν δὲ
σελήνην οἰκήσεις ἔχειν, ἀλλὰ καὶ λόφους καὶ φάραγγας" ἀρχὰς δὲ rag
ὁμομερειάς: καθάπερ γὰρ ἐκ τῶν ψηγμάτων τῶν λεγομένων τὸν χρούσον
συνέσταναι, οὕτως ἐκ τῶν ὁμοιομερῶν μιχρῶν σωμάτων τὸ πᾶν συγκέχρισθαι"
καὶ νοῦν μὲν ἀρχὴν τῆς κινήσεως" τῶν δὲ σωμάτων τὰ μὲν βαρέα, τὸν κάτω
τόπον, ὡς τὴν vive τὰ δὲ κοῦφα τὸν ἄνω ἐπίσχειν, ὡς τὸ πῦρ' ὕδωρ τε καὶ
ἀέρα, τὸν μέσον οὕτω yao: ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς πλατείας οὔσης τὴν θάλασσαν
ὑποστῆναι, διατμισθέντων ὑπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου τῶν ὑγρῶν. ΤᾺ δ' ἄστρα xo
ἀρχὰς μὲν θολοειδῶς ἐνεχθῆναι. ὥστε κατὰ κορύφην τῆς γῆς τὸν ἀεὶ φαινό-
μενον εἶναι πόλον, ὕστερονδὲ τὴν ἔγκλισιν λαβεῖν" καὶ τὸν γαλαξίαν ἀνάκλασιν
εἶναι φῶτος ἡλιακοῦ, μὴ καταλαμπομένων τῶν ἄστρων' τοὺς δὲ κόμητας,
σύγοδον πλανήτων φλόγας ἀφιέντων' τοὺς δὲ διάττοντας, οἷον σπινθῆρας ἐπὸ
τοῦ ἀέρος ἀποκάλλεσθαι. ᾿Ανέμους γίνεσθαι λοπτυνομένου τοῦ aloe ὑπο
τοῦ gal βρόντας, συγκροῦσιν vepav ἀστράκας, ἔκτριψιν νεφῶν' σεισμὸν,
ὑπονόστησιν ἀέρος εἰς γῆν. Ζῶα γενέσθαι ἐξ ὑγροῦ καὶ θερμοῦ καὶ γεώδους,
ὕστερον δὲ ἐξ ἀλλήλων nol ἀῤῥένα μὲν, οἰπὸ τῶν δεξίων, θηλέα δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν
ἐριστέρων, Viog. Laert. He is said to have foretold the fall of the
stone near Aigos-Potamos ; and his opinion was, that it fell from
the sun. Pliny-(1. 68.), speaking of the fall of that stone, remarks,
that a comet mede its appearance about the same time, and was: vi-
sible for several nights after; and Aristotle, alluding to the stone,
says, ἔτυχε δὲ τότε χομήτης ἀστὴρ, γενόμενος ἐφ᾽ ἑσπέρας. It was from
this circumstance, (namely, the apparent corroboration of Anaxago~
res's opinion respecting the sun, by the fall of the stone,) that Euri-
pies, one of his disciples, embraced the notion as being a true-one.
na fragment of the Phaeton, he calls the sun ypucia βῶλος, a clod
® Some ascribe this opinion t» Tantalus, which, hawever, Xenophon dees
not notice, Φάσκων δὲ τὸν ἥλιον λίθον διάπυρον εἶναι, καὶ τοῦτο ἠγνόει, ὅτι λίθος μὲν,
ὃν πυρὶ ὃν, οὔτε λάμπει, οὔτε πολὺν χρόνον ἀντέχει. Ὁ δὲ ἥλιος τὸν πάντα χρόνον, πάντων
λαμπρότατος ὧν, διαμένει. Memurab. iv. He.is speaking of Anaxagoras. .
*-Fhis was likewise the opinion of Xenophanes. :
176 Sketch of the Life, Character, and
of gold. Compare also Orest. where Electra says, MéAdsjes “ras
οὐρανοῦ μέσον χϑόνος Τεταμέναν αἰωρήμασι Πέτραν ἁλύσεσι χρυσέαισι,
φερομέναν δίναισι βῶλον ἐξ ᾽Ολύμπου. See Porson on the passage, as
also the Scholiast. Likewise the Scholiast on Pind. Olymp. i,
Strab. i., and the Scholiast on this line of Apollonius: Nelxeos ἐξ
ὁλόοιο διέκριϑεν ἀμφὶ ἕκαστα. Of Euripides Eusebjus says, ᾿Επεὶ δὲ
ποιητικὴν μεταβὰς, ὑπό τινων σχηνικὸς Φιλόσοφος ἐκλήθη. And Cicero,
similarly, (‘Tusc. Quest. ili.) Quod autem Theseus a docto τῆῦο se
audiisse dicit, id de seipso luquitur Euripides. Fuerat enim auditor
Anaxagore. Other pupils of his were Pericles and Archilaus.
It is related, that on a remarkably clear and serene day, he once
went to Olympia in an outward leathern garment, while the rest, .
who were thither bound, thought the precaution uunecessary. Ac-
cordingly (a circumstance which none looked for but himself) there
came on a heavy shower of rain, which proved our philosopher to
be weather-wise. Some one once put it to him, Whether a certain
hill at Lampsacus would ever become sea? His answer was, Yes;
if time shall out continue to gv on. When asked, for what pur-
pose he was born? he replied, thut he cume into the world to look
at the sky, the sun, andthe moon. Being told that he wus a great
loser by not associating with his friends at Athens, he answered,
that they were the losers, not himself. On beholding the monu-
meut of Mausolus, his remark was, that τάφος πολυτελὴς λελιθωμένης
ἐστὶν οὐσίας εἰδῶλον. A friend happened to express his displeasure
at the philosopher’s wish to die in a foreign country, when he-ob-
seryed, with much truth, πανταχόθεν ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἣ εἰς Aldou κατάβασις.
According to Phavorinus, the historian, he is said to have been the
first that observed, that the poems of Homer were written with ἃ
view to promote the cause of justice and virtue ; to which opinion
it is related that he brought over his friend Metrodorus of Lampsé-
cus. He was the first man, also, who published what he wrote;
although we are told by Suidas (in‘Exaraios) that Pherecydes, of
Syros, was the first written author. Plutarch (Life of Nicias) re-
marks, ‘O γὰρ πρῶτος σαφέστατόν γε πάντων, καὶ θαῤῥαλεώτατον, περὶ
σελήνης χαταυγασμῶν xal σκιᾶς λόγον εἰς γραφὴν καταθέμενος Avakaye-
eas. lt was in consequence of Anaxagoras’s idea that the moon bor-
rowed her light from the sun, that Euripides, his disciple, wrote
Σελάνα θυγάτερ ’Λελίου, the daughter of the sun, not the séster, ac-
cording to the usual mythology. Some say that he was indebted to
Anaximander (see above) for the notion τὴν σελήνην Ψευδοφαῆ, καὶ
εἰπὸ ἡλίου φωτίζεσθαι' ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν ἥλιον οὐκ ἐλάττονα γῆς, καὶ καθαρώ-
τατον πῦρ. Others attribute it to Parmenides; Aisi παπταίνουσα πρὸς
εἰὐγὰς ἠελίοιο, Νυκτιφαὲς περὶ γαῖαν ἀλώμενον ἀλλότριον φῶς. Anax-
Imander’s idea of the moon was, however, according to Plutarch and
Stobaus, quite different from Anaxagoras’s.
The stone before spoken of, is said to have fallen, according te
Philosophy of Anaxagoras. 177
the historian Silenus, during the archonship of Dimylus’: on which
occasion Anaxagoras is said to have remarked, that the whole sky
was composed of vaulted stone, and consisted of an immense con -
cave. 170 this account, however, too much credit must not be at-
tached ; as he had already ascribed the phenomenon to the circum-
stance of the sun being made of stone. This last notion had well-nigh
lost our philosopher his life; as we are informed by Sotion, ὑπὸ Κλέ-
νος αὐτὸν ἀσεβείας κριθῆναι, διότι τὸν ἥλιον μυδρὸν ἔλεγε διάπυρον. Hisde-
fence was undertaken by Pericles, and the sentence of death commuted
into a fine of five talents and perpetual banishment. Some accounts
have it that he was acquitted through the eloquence of Pericles, or
from pity on account of the feeble state of health in which he ap-
peared to be at his trial, and not because he was innocent. It is
said that he was accused by ‘Thucydides of entertaining political
sentiments opposite to those of Pericles. On hearing that his sons
were dead, he remarked, ὅτι ἠδεῖν αὐτοὺς θνητοὺς γεγονότας. Compare
Cicero, (Tusc. Quest. tii.) Quem ferunt, nunciata morte filii, di-
xisse, Sciebam me genuisse mortalem. And a little after, Et Anaxa-
goras inquit, Sciebam me genuisse mortulem. See ASlian, iv. 2.
ome report this of Solon, others of Xenophon. Demetrius
Phalareus says, that he buried bis children with his own hand.
He died at Lampsacus, aged seventy-two years, B.C. 428, and
ordered that the boys educated there should keep holiday annually,
during the month in which he died. This period was termed ¢he
Anaxagorea. He was buried sumptuously by the inhabitants of
Lampsacus, and this inscription was placed on his tomb :—
"Evbade, πλεῖστον ἀληθείας ἐπὶ τέρμα περήσας
Οὐρανίου κόσμον, κεῖται ᾿Αναξαγόρας.
Laertius wrote the following epigram upon him:—
᾿Ηέλιον πυρόεντα μυδρόν ποτε φάσχεν ὑπάρχειν,
Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο θανεῖν μέλλεν ᾿Αναξαγόρας"
᾿Αλλ᾽ ὁ φίλος Περικλῆς μὲν ἐρύσατο τοῦτον' ὁ δ᾽ αὑτὸν
᾽ ’ ’ / ,
Ἐξάγαγεν βιότου μαλθακίῃ σοφίης. .
-He was the first person who thought of the method of squaring the
circle, or of comparing the diameter of a circle with its circumference.
Seer
* Menagius says there was no such archon as Dimylus, and: proposes
Αυσιθεροῦ, in the place of Διμύλου ; or he would read d{uvaov λίθον, lapidem instar
duorum molarium, and strike out τοῦ ἄρχοντος,
VOL. XVII. Cl. ὑἱ. NO. XX XIII. M
-178
VARIE LECTIONES SCHYL1
e Codice MSio Emerici Bigot.
- PROMETHEUS.
¥. 23. Pro ἀσμώῳ. ΜΒ. ὦ 644. τόνδε, MS.
27. πω. ΜΒ. πον. seve 738. φθιμήνοισι. ie φϑηήνουν γε.
69. MS. ‘ops. ᾿
76. F. Portus πόδας. Agamemnon.
80. τραχύτητα. MS. ὀρασύτητα.
98. cuclaics. ΜΒ, ἀνίαισι. 10. Pro κρωτεῖν. Port. uguew
109. δὲ ϑηρώμαι. MS, δ᾽ ἐγὼ ῥηρῶν. 11- ἐλπίζω. Port. ἤλπιζον.
baron. Aurat. δυστυχίαις,
241. φιτῦσαι. MS. φυτιῦσαι.
447. προσελούμενον. MS. προσιλού-
paver.
448. ἐπηβόλους. Hesych. ἐπιστείτας.
665. σαφῶς. MS. σάφ' ὡς.
792. Κισϑίνης. MS. κεϑήνης.
833. προσηγορεύθης. ΜΒ. πρεσηγο-
857. παλιμπλ--- MS. πολυπλείγο-
χτοισι,
805. γναμῶν' δυεῖν δὲ ϑώτερον MS.
γνώμαιν δυοῖν δὲ θώτιρας.
899. δυσπλάγχνοις. Μ8.ϑυσαλάνοις.
902. ἴρως. MS.
908. ἄπορα. MS. εἰς ἄπορα.
915. Pro κτύποις MS. κτυποῖς.
947, ἐκπήττει. MS. ἐκβληθῇ
960. πολλοῦ. Aurat. φέβον.
979. Qyoi. MS. ἰώ μοι.
1013, πεισϑῇς. MS. πείθῃ,
1025, μή τι. MS. ph δ.
1056. εὐτυχῆ. MS. εὐτυχῆ.
1086. éxedix—MS. ὐτοδεικνύμενα.
1090. ἐμῆς. MS.
θέμις.
Septem contra Thebas.
12. Pro βλώστημον ἀλδαύτντα.
MS. βλάστηματ' ἀλδαύνειν ss, et pro
πολύν. MS. πολύ.
13. ixert’. MS. ἔχειν. et pro ὥς τὶ
MS. ὥστε
299. δυσιννήτειρα. MS. ϑοξιννέσορα.
13. ἐπισκαπουμένην. Acurat. teroenee
τουμένμ». -
14. ἐμὴν, φέβος edge ΜΒ. inal ¥
ag sins.
81. ἀρείων. MS. ἄρειον.
87. bvecxinis. Aurat. svernsis.
106, ἐκτελίων. Aurat. ἐντελίων,
107. μολπέν. Arurat. μολπίς.
122 βλαβίντα. Aurat. βλαβεζσαν.
α. MS. πεισήνορα,
206. ἐπεὶ δὲ. MS. ἔπειτα δέ.
220. λειπόναυς. MS. λεῖπον αὐτῇρ.
224. Glossema.
225. bipas. MS. “Agréeise
. ἐπεὶ δ, MS. ἐαειτοί,
+ ἡδονήν. MS. ἠδονίν.
. ἀφρασμ---Μ8. ἀφρανμόνως,
889. ἀξίστοισιν. MS. ἀναίστοισιις
343. νἴουσιν. MS. ναίουσιν.
844. ὡς ϑυσϑαίμονις. MS. deb
δαίμονι. :
818. ὑπὶς ἄστεως, MS. πέραν:
374. σκήψειν. MS. σκήψαι.
397. σίνος. MS. ota
452, ᾿Αντήνορος. MS. ἀντήνορορι
453, εὐθέτου. MS. εὐθέτους. +
466. δημοκρέτου δ΄. MS. δημοκράίς
τοὺς e's
469. πολυκτόνων. ΜΒ, πολυστόνωνν
486. ἐτητύμως. MS. ἐτήτομο,. ΄
489. πυρωίώτα, MS. πυροϑῇ τάν; -
Strada’s Contest, &.
491. ἀλλα MS. oe
a wee. ΜΒ. δ᾽ aig’.
29. τοῖσι δ᾽ ἔμμασι. ΜΒ. τοῖς ΩΝ
τῳ γῶν. ἮΝ “Ὡς ἐστι.
. γά M$ ag’.
561, ed. MS. τις a.
564. μόχλους de. MB. μέχλος ὃ'
2969. γάρ.
578. ἀνωστήναι. MS. ἀνκστέγει»-
. MS. χρῆν
. ih Ms. “πάντα.
. ἐνθέων. MS. ἐν θεῶν.
612. ἀπό. MS, ond.
. χρλκοῦ. MS. χαλκός.
624. εἶπε. MS. shore.
. ἰνπριπῶς. MS. εὐπρίπει.
. τ᾽ ἀληθῆ. MS. ) μὴ Anda.
. ἄκρος. MS. ἄκρου.
639. γάρ. MS. ὃ' ae’.
° τεφοντος, MS: στρίφοντος.
643. γώρ. Μ5.3 ἃ
654: τόνδ΄, MS. ak.
662. δυσκύμαντα. MS. ϑυσχείεαν-
τα.
666. ποιμένος κακοῦ. MS. ποιμένων
NOK»
κοῖς τ᾽ ἐρειπίοις.
678. νέον. MS. νέφις.
705. κελσάντων. MS. κέλσαν τες.
706. ἀξιφύλλους. Μ8. α«ὐξιφύλλους.
716. ἐπέῤῥεαιν. MS. ἔπφετ:».
669. ναυτικῶν τ' ἐρειπίων MS, VOT
179
728. wapmelet. MS: σφνήλη, ἔν
φσεφροπένθη.
748. drat dace. MS. QT ACTH.
728, οὗτος. MS. οὕτως.
"-ZG0. εὐφιλόπᾳιδα. MS. καὶ φιλόπε--
“431. mses. MS. yigaseis.
7392. MS. werd.
734. Das MS. gedenwa.
736. ---ῶν τι. MS. were.
738, γάρ. Μ.Σ
744. ἐκ best. MS. jubiap
704, πικρὼς τιλεντές. MS. winger
σελεμτρῖγ.
763. μετά. MS. τέκνα
770. γάρ. Μ5. δ᾽ ¢ ae.
777. "ἀρὰ φαους κότον, MS. νεαροῦ
Pdovs τόκον.
780. μελαώας---ἄτας. MS. μελαίναν
«- ὅταν. MS. τ
791. τίρμα. τι
795. brendan, ie ὑποκύψας.
796. καιρόν. MS, μέτρον.
834. ἀσπιδηστρόφος λεώς. MS. ἀσ-
τιδησερίξο Bias.
τέτρωται. MS, ἐτέτρωτ᾽ ἄν.
ζῇ λέγειν MS. λόγῳ.
887. κύριος. MS. κύρος ὧν.
900. ἀτημεέλήτους. MS. ἀτῳμελήτος
942, διίσας. MS. δήους.
951. τήνδε. MS. τῆσδε.
957. σωματοφθορεῖν. MS. στρωμα-
τοφϑορεῖν.
1662. ἐρούμοϑα. Μ5. αἱρούμεθα.
1671. μοι. MS. μή.
1672. δαίμονας, MS. δαίμονᾳς.
1675. μέτειμ᾽ ἔτι. MS. μετελεύσομεκις
MATTHEUS RAPER.
STRADA’S' CONTEST
Of the Musician and Nightingale.
"Tur insertion, in the
“-τοια etn ane
of our Journal, of this remarkable com-
position, which the elegant and classic Tytler has pronounced, perhaps
* Prolus. Acad. Orat. Histor. Poet. R. P. Famiani Suade Romani e |
societate lesu. Lib, 11. Prol.6. Acad. 4.
180 Strada’s Contest of the
with certainty, as bidding defiance to the art of the translator, will not,
it is presumed, need apology. We shall therefore only premise, that the
present transcript, with the notes below that give the substance
of the poem as it proceeds, is made out from an edition of the
““ Prolusiones Academice” of Strada, printed, as the title bears, Colonie
Agrippina, apud Joannem Kinchium, sub monocerote. Anno
DCXVITI., except that we have here and there (it is hoped for the
better) taken a liberty with the punctuation. The translations that have
been hitherto attempted are ; that by Ambrose Philips, the celebrated
pastoral writer; another, by the Reverend T. Bancroft, printed at
Chester 1788, in a little volume entitled ‘ Prolusiones Poétice ;” and
a third, to be found in the poems of Pattison, the ingenious author of
the epistle of Abelard to Eloisa. See Tytler's Essay on the Principles
of Translation, p. 346. seqq. third edition. |
Jam Sol a medio pronus deflexerat orhe, ”
Mitius e radiis vibrans crinalibus ignem : »
Cum Fidicen,” propter Tiberina fluenta, sonanti
Lenibat plectro curas, estumque levabat
Ilice defensus nigra, scenaque virenti.
Audiit hunc hospes sylve Philomela propinque,
Musa loci, nemoris Siren, innoxia Siren : ἢ
Et prope succedens stetit abdita frondibus, alte
Accipiens sonitum ; secumque remurmurat; et quos
[lle modos variat digitis, hc gutture reddit.
Sensit se Fidicen Philomela imitante referni,
Et placuit ludum volucri dare. Plenius ergo
Explorat citharam ; tentamentumque future *
Prebeat ut pugne, percurrit protenus omnes
Impulsu pernice fides. Nec segnius illa, °
Mille per excurrens varie discrimina vocis,
Venturi specimen prefert argutula cantus.
Tunc Fidicen, per fila movens trepidantia dextram,
Nunc contemnenti similis diverberat ungue,
Depectitque pari chordas et simplice ductu ; °
Nunc carptim replicat, digitisque micantibus urget.
Fila minutatim, celerique repercutit ictu.”
Mox silet. Illa modis totidem respondet, et artem ἢ
Arte refert. Nunc, ceu rudis aut incerta canendi, Α
Projicit in longum, nulloque plicatile flexu
Carmen init, simili serie; jugique tenore
Prebet jter liquidum labenti e pectore νοοῖ:
Nunc cesim variat, modulisque canora miuutis
Delibrat vocem, tremuloque reciprocat ore.
a Bae TT, |
ἃ Claudiani Stylus. 2. Fidicen. 3 Philomela. 4 Fidium exploratio,
2 Par Philomele responsio. 6 Ad Hispane cithare modum, —
7 Minuritio. δ Pay Philpmele responsio.
Musician and Nightingale. 181
Miratur Fidicen parvis e faucibus ire’
Tam varium, tam-dulce melos: majoraque tentans
Alternat mira arte fides: dum torquet acutas
Inciditque, graves operoso verbere pulsat,
Permiscetque simul certantia rauca sonoris ;
Ceu resides in bella viros clangore lacessat.
Hoc etiam Philomela canit: dumque ore liquenti
Vibrat acuta sonam, modulisque interplicat quis ;
Ex inopinato gravis intonat, et leve murmur
‘Turbinat iatrorsus, alternantique senore
. Clarat, et infuscat, ceu martia classica pulset.
. Sceilicet erubuit Fidicen; iraque calente,
᾿νε Aut non hoc,” inquit, “ referes, Citharistria sylve!
Aut fracta cedam cithara.” - Nec plura locutus,
Non imitabilibus plectrum concentibus urget.’
Namque manu per fila volat, simul hos, simul illos
Explorat numeros, chordaque laborat in omni ;
Et strepit, et tinnit, crescitque superbius, et se
Multiplicat relegens, plenoque choreumate plaudit.
_ Tum stetit expectans si quid paret emula contra.
illa autem, quanquam vox dudum exercita fauces ὃ
Asperat, impatiens vinci, simul advocat omnes
Nequidquam vires. Nam dum discrimina tanta
Reddere tot fidium nativa et simplice tentat
Voce, canaliculisque imitari grandia parvis,
Impar magnanimis ausis, imparque dolori, §
Deficit,—et vitam summo im certamine linquens,
Victoris cadit ia plectrum, pat aacta sepulcrum.®
Usque adeo et tenues animes ferit emula Virtus. |
“1 must be here remarked,” says the accomplished Tytler, ‘that
Strada has not the merit of originality in this characteristic description
of the song of the Nightingale. He found it in Pliny, and with stili
eater amplitude, and variety of discrimination. He seems even to
ave taken from that author the hint of his fable.” We give the
passage. :
‘“‘Digna miratu avis. Primum, tanta vox tam parvo in corpusculo,
tam pertinax spiritus. Deinde in una perfecta musice scientia modu-
᾿ fatus editur sonus ; et nunc continuo spiritu trahitur in longum, ounce
. vayatur inflexo, nunc distinguitur conciso, copulatur intorto, promit-
tur revocato, infuscatur ex inopinato: interdum et secum ipse
murmurat, plenus, gravis, acutus, creber, extentus; ubi visum est
vibrans, summus, medius, imas. Breviterque omnia tam parvulis in
faucibus, que tot exquisitis tibiarum tormentis ars hominum excogi-
tavit.—Certant inter se, palamque animosa contentio est. Victa
morte finit seepe vitam, spiritu prius deficiente quam cantu.”
ov? ‘Plin. Nat. Hist. x. 29.
'* Fidium varia alternaque percussiv. 7 Fidium omnium multiplex ae
giena complexio. 3 Philomele responsure conatus. * Sed mpar.
5: Ejus obitus. 6 Vis emulationis.
188
NOTICE OF
Histoire Chronologique de ? Art du Dessin.
ii
Ir is not, perhaps, generally known, that we are tadebted fora very
curious work, (or at least for the commencement ef one) to Monsieur
Langleés, a gentleman whose skill in oriental literature, which has long
since procured him such well-merited celebrity, must not be con-
sidered as his only accomplishment ; whilst travellers of every country
pay him a due tribute of praise for the urbanity, etfention, and —
liberality with which he fills his important station in the Bildiothéque
du Roi.
Of the work to which I allude, sixteen pages are now before me ;—
whether more have ever beer printed, (and it was evidently the author's
intention to continue the wotk) I beg leave to inquire from some of
your ingenious correspondents. The title is ‘ Histoire Chronologique
de l’Art du Dessin ;” and the form is Quarto. In this work M. Langlés .
proposed to trace chtonologically the art of Design or ef Drawing,
through a series of miniatures, embellishing variows manuscripts
preserved in that magnificent library, over a considerable department
of which he so ably presides.
His history of Design commences with that inestimable copy of
Virgil, formerly belonging to the Vatican Colleetion, and eommonly
entitled the Coder Romanus. It has been assigned by learned an-
tiquaries to the fourth, and even the third century. Of this literary
treasure the text was published in 1741 at Rome, by. Bottari; with a
fac-simile of the writing, and vignettes taken from the miniatures
which illustrate the manuscript, and originally engravéd by Sante-
Bartoli. But as this artist thought proper to give a high finieh to
what was imperfect; to give plan and perspective, and light and
shade, where none existed, his copies (if se they may be called) of those
old drawings cannot be of any service to the artist or the antiquary,
who wishes to trace the history of design. M. Langlés, however,
desirous of conveying a just and precise idea of the state of that art
at the time when those drawings were executed, has placed before his
readers sume outlines engraved with the most scrupulous fidelity after
the originals; although the able artist whom he employed found con-
siderable difficulty in restraining himself within the bounds of exaet-
mess prescribed. From the tetal absence of punctuation, and other
circumstances, our learned author is inelined to believe that the codes
in question was copied from one of more ancient date, and perhaps
contemporary with Virgil himself; or one that escaped the proscrip-
tion issued by Caligula against the works and portraits of that immortal
poet, and of Livy; as we learn from Suetonius. Of the eighteen
miniatures which ornament the manuscript, such as seemed most
intereeting from their style of execution, or the subjects which they
represent, ave been selected by M. Langlés for the illustration of bis
Meanuserepis. 183
work. The fragment before me comprises three plates, equal in size
to the original drawings ; and each a square of above eight inches ; but
Some miniatures of the MS. are not so large. The first plate repre-
sents the navigation of the Trojans, foreed to seek an asylum in ἃ
foreign land :—we behold two gallies filled with armed men, and the
ious /Eneas is easily reeognised, raising his hands towards Heaven.—
he winds blow in opposite directions on those vessels, and Juno is
seen shaking over them, from the clouds, two flaming torches—
Ventt velut agmine facto, &c.
Intonuere poli, et crebris micat igoibus ether, &c.
Ingemit, ef, duplices tendens ad sidera palmas, &c. Ain. 1.
Notwithstanding this tempest, the gallies float with perfect horizen-
tality on a calm sea; but their forms, their sails and oars, the lances,
shields, and other details represented in this plate, deserve minute
attention. M. Langlés has offered some ingenious remarks on the
aureole or glory which generally throughout this MS. surrounds the
head of Aineas, and every other person invested with supreme power.
In the second plate Dido appears entertaining at a table, near which
her guests recline, the Trojan hero and the faithful Achates. This
modest banquet (for.the table contains but-a single dish) does not
exhibit those arte laborate vestes ostrogue superbo, or the ingens
argentum mensis, which might be expected from /£n. lib. 1. v. 643,
&c.: still, the drawing possesses much iaterest with respect to the
costume—the fashion of the table—the bed ox couch—the vessels for
wine or for water which servants hold—tbe cup from which Eneas
drinks, and other particulars.
Not less interesting is that scene represented in the third engraving,
Speluncam Dido dux et Trojanus eandem
Deveniunt— ZEn. lib. iv. v. 165. ᾿
' «and here, while the minute details will gratify the artist and the
antiquary, we are surprised at the indifference or apathy with which
/Eneas seems to receive the caresses of his lovely Carthaginian Queen.
But I must not dwell on this cavern-scene, the clandestine union of
Creiisa’s pious husband with the inconsolable widow of Sicheus. In
indicating this work of M. Langits, my object was toascertain, through
the medium of your Journal, whether that learned writer had completed
his design. P. ἢ. Υ.
Feb. 1818.
Fea
MANUSCRIPTS, οι
BIBLICAL, CLASSICAL, AND Β1Β71ζΟ.-
ORIENTAL.—No. 1x.
*," We have made arrangements for collecting an account
of ALL Manuscripts on the foregoing departments of
Literature, which at present exist in the variqus Pos-
184 Manuscripts.
tic Liprariges in Great Britain. We shall con-
tinue them till finished, when an INDEX will be given of
the whole. We shall then collect an account of the Ma-
nuscripts in the Roya and Impreritay LIBRARIES on
the Continent.
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY.
ORIENTAL Mss.
1. Rauzat Essafa: i.e. Hortus Claritatis; Historia Univer-
salis a Mahomed Ben Khasvand Shah Persice scripta, septem
tomis ; quorum tres primi, hoc volumine contenti, et charactere qui
Nesk dicitur, conscripti, res gestas narrant a Mundi Creatione ad
Tempora Chalife Elmonstanser Billa Abu-Giafar Ben Mansoor
Estahir. Fol. Chart.
Dictionarium Persicum (Berhan Katnah dicitur) Pars Prima.
Dictionarii Pars Secunda.
. Historiz, Rauzat Essafa dicte, Tom. 4.
. Rauzat Essafa dicta, Tom. 5.
. Rauzat Essafa dicta, Tom. 6.
. Habeed Essayar, sive Historia duodecim primorum Filamismi
Pontificum Secte Persice.
8. Tooteh Nama: i.e. Psittaci Historia.
9. Berhan Kalaah: 1. 6. Argumentum decisivum, Dictionarium
Persicum absolutissimum.
10. Ganz ul Lughat: 1.e. Thesaurus Verborum, sive Lexicon
Arabico-Persicum per modos Infinitivos (Arabicas Sc. Radices)
digestum. |
11. Lexicon Mulla Giamal Eddeen Hossein Argiu, e quadra-
ginta quatuor Furhang, seu Dictionariis, compositum.
12, Magiumah Ulpharsee Serwan: i.e. Dictionarium Persicum
ad intelligendos Poetas presertim compositum.
13, Ganz ul Lughat: 1. 6. Thesaurus Verborum, Lexicon, 86.
Arabico-Persicum. . |
14. a. Tage Ulmussader; Primitivorum Corona.
14. ὁ. Furhang e Pharsee ; hoc est, Dictionarium Arabico-Per-
sicum.
15. Historia Akbar; Tertii e stirpe Mogulorum Imperatoris in
Hindostan. .
16. Anwar e Sohelce : i. e. Canopi Stella Lumina ; ita ab Ara-
bibus Persisque dictus.
17. Idem iterum. .
18. Historie Regum Dekhan, sive Regionum Indie Me-
ridionalium,
19. a. Malhnovee Mullaie Roum: 1. 6. Carmina Eruditi Greeci ;
poeta scilicet Persice docti, natione veroGreci, δ δὡ᾽᾿
ΡΣ
«Ὁ ὦ) Or
Manuscripts. 185
19.5. Aalam Arai: i.e. Ornamentum Mundi; Historia Regum
Persarum. |
᾿ Φ0. a. Aalam Arai: Tom. 2.
20.6. Nazumee: i.e. Poema Persicum de Amoribus Josephi
et Zuliche. | ;
21. Insshai: 1. 6. Liber de Conscribendis Epistolis.
22. Boostan: 1.6. Hortus; Liber Poematum Persicorum de
Moribus et Virtutibus Politicis.
23. Timur Namur: i.e. Liber de Vita Timur, seu Tamerlani,
yersibus Persicis conscriptus.
_24. Codex Al-khorani insignis, Arabice ; interjecta Verborum
Interpretatione Persice, liters rubris.
25. Nazumee Carmen Persicum. de Amoribus Chorron et
Shereen.
26. Dewan e Saib: i.e. Opera Saib, poete sc. Persici pra-
stantissimi. |
27. Dewan e Hafiz: 1. 6. Opera prestantissimi poete Hafiz.
38. Inshai Abul-fazel : i.e. Formulare de Conscribendis Epi-
atolis.
29. Goolistan: i.e. Floretum, sive Rosarium, auctore Sheic
Saadi eximio inter Persas poeta. |
80. Tractatus de Rythmis Persicis et Versuum Scansione.
31. Poemata quedam Sheich Saadi.
832. Tareek Vazirat: i. 6. Historia et Elogia quorundam
Viziriorum.
33. Ousaph Nama Aureng-Zeb: i.e. Liber de Laudibus Impe-
ratoris Aureng-Zeb. |
34. In hoc Volumine continetur Liber Abul Fazel de Conscri-
bendis Epistolis, una cum Jesoophi Libro, De Arte Medica et
Medicamentorum Compositione, atque de Secretis septem Chemi-
corum.
35. Dewan e Hafez: i.e. Opera poete Hafez.
36. Dewan e Rehai: i.e. Opera Rehai poete Persici.
37. Dewan e Akbefee: i.e. Opera Akberee poete Persici.
38. Carmina poete Abu Turah Beg. Quedam etiam poete
Giani de Rebus Divinis et Mysticis, Persice, Codex scriptus.
39. Khissah Seiph Almulk : i.e. Regni Gladii Historia, Prin-
cipis sc. cujusdam Historia, qui Regni Gladius appellatus est,
Poema Indica Lingua scriptum. .
40. Khasfah Ambeia: i. 6. Prosodia Persica.
41. Taaveezat: 1. 6. Incantationum Liber.
42. Amad Nama: i.e. Modus Conjugandi Verbum Amad.
In hoc etiam Libro Verba Persica et Indica secundum Modps et
Tempora, inter se comparantur.
43. Naseeb. Sibian: i.e. Pensuin Puerorum in quo Vocabula
Aikhorani Arabica in usum puerorum Persice explanantur. ~~
186 . Manuscripts.
44. Vita et Elogia Prophete Mahomedis: Codex Arabicas.,
45. Codex Al-Khorani preclarissimus.
46. Quatuor Evangelia Persice, scriptus Codex. Chatimah
Rauzat Essafa: i.e. Coronis Libri Rauzat Essafa dicti. Ctuatuor
Evangelia, Persice. A. Dewan e Saib: i.e. Opera Saib poeta,
recentiore manu descripta. Vide Num. 26. B. Kaleel ὁ Damna,
Pars 1. ex Versione quz habetur Num. 17. C. Kaleel e Damna,
Pars 2. ex Versione Nam. 17. Ὁ. Auwar e Sohelee, sive Kaleel
e Dauna, ex Versione is Lit. Ε." E. Anwar e Sohelee e Li
Indica in Persicam Versio. F. Libri Vet. Testamenti, Job,
verbia, Ecclesiast. Cant. Canticorum, Isaiah, &e. Arabice. H. In
hoc Volumine continentur Tres Libri, Insha Ferooffee. 4. Mifta
Goolistan. 3. Teftah Sheruar Impthalah. I. Dewan e Hafez
Sherazi; Opera sublimis illius et mystici poeta Hafiz Shes-
ziensis. v. Kum. 27. et 36. K. Quatuor Evangelia Persice.
L. Naseeb Sibean: i.e. Pensum Puerorum; in quo Puerorum
gratia Al-Khorani Vocabula Arabica Persice explanantur. M.
Huic Volumina varia insnnt; inter alios Liber lingua Indica in
Persicam conversus, et Poema, quod in lingua que Hisdostan m
scribitur. N, O, P, Q, R. Historia Universalis, que Rauzat Essafa
vocatur, Tom. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. 5. Dewan Aaraphie, Opera
Aaraphie, Persice. ‘T. Dewan e Hafez: i.e. Opera Hafez, vid.
Lit. I. et Num. 27. 86. U. Pand. e Attar, hoc est, Momita Doc-
toris Attar, que Juvenum gratia carmine Persico conscripsit, ad
eos Virtutis preceptis imbuendos. W. Liber Precum Communt-
um; seu Liturgia Anglicana, Arabice. X. Lexicon, Persico-
Latinum, ad finem litere A. perductum.
Dr. Buchanan’s Eastern MSS. ase classed generally thus:
I, Hebrew MSS.—Pentateuch,—Esther,—Gad,— Ahasuerus,
— New Testament,— Acts and Epistles,— Rabbinical Books. .
If. Syriac MSS. t. Old and New Testament,—2. Pentateuch,
—8. Historical Boeks,—4. Prophetical Books,—5. Apocryphal
Books,—6. Gospels,—7. Acts and Epistles,—8. Psalters,—9. Li-
turgies,—10. Miscellaneous. |
1Π. Athiopic MSS.,—St. John’s Gospel.
IV. Persian MSS. Official Letters.
V. English Letter to Sir W. Jones. |
More particularly, Dr. Buchanan’s MSS. are, as follows. 1809.
1. Pentateuchus Heb. Class Oo. 1. 3.—This MS. ona roll of
oat-skin, dyed red, was found in the Record Chest of the Black
ews, in the interior of Malayala, in India, in the year 1806. .
2. Megillath Esther. Class Oo. i. 4. An elegant Roll of the
Book of Esther, brought from one of the Synagogues of the Black
Jews in India. itis a vellum roll covered on the back with silk,
a ee einer 1a rrr ee)
«ἢ Alia manu ;—a mistake: itis a poem of Iami.
Manuscripts. 187
atid routed with a handsome roller. ‘It has the same peculiarities
as the former, but has not been collated. ΝΞ
5. Megillath Esther. Oo. i. 5. A small parchment Roll, con-
taining 26 columns in squares of a hand’s breadth, modern, and
Written without points, but retains the Masoretical distinctions ob-
served in the preceding roll.
ΓΙ VAT, Words of Gad the Seer. €]. Oo. i. 20. or Book
of Gad the Prophet, a paper Book in 4to. and is only a transcript,
Written apparently for private tse. This also was obtained from
the Black Jews in lndia, written iv 1771. |
4. wNeTIN PD, Megillak Ahasuerosh. Oo. i. 20., or the
Roll of Ahasueru, and is found to be no other than the Book
of Esther; or that part at least inserted in the Apocrypha. The
English version prefaces this book in the following manner: The
rest of the chapters of the Book of Esther which are found neither
in the Hebrew nor in the Chaldee.
5. Novum Testamentum Hebreum. Oo. 1. 32. A paper Book,
small 4to, written im the Epistolary Rabbinical character. It con-
tains all the Books except the Revelations. It is a version in the
Chaldaico-Hebrew dialect, supposed to have been made by some
Chaldaic Jew, to'whont the Syriac text of the N. Test. was known,
but neither the person, place, nor time, is expressed in.this copy.
The much-disputed text of 1 John. v, 7. is found in it.
Acta Apostolorum, or Epist. Heb. Oo. i. 16. A large 4to Vol.
written in the square Hebrew character, containmg the Acts,
Epistle to the Romans, 1 and 2 Cormthians, Galatians, and Ephe-
sians ; also the Revelation of St. John, in the Epistolary Rabbini-
cal character.
nben nn Toor Tephilloth Ordo Precum, or Hebrew
‘Liturgy, imperfect, in 12mo. obtained from the Black Jews in
India. Class. No. 49.
~ Commentarius in Pentateuchum Heb. N.46. A small folio,
imperfect, and without a title ; not known whether it is extant in
riot.
P Commentarius in Pentateuchum Heb. No. 19. A 4to Book,
containing about 500 pages, supposed to be not in print.
Commentarits in Pentateuchum Heb. No. 34. A 4to Book,
imperfect, in the Rabbinical character.
Parashath Beresheith, N.35. A Commentary on the Book of
Genesis, small 4to, perfect, no date, in Rabbinical character.
Orach Halim. Semita Vite. A Treatise of Practical Rules ac-
cording to the Jewish Institution, 4to. Rabbinical character. N. 30.
Regulez Vite. A Tieatise of Rules according to the Jewish
Institution, 4to. imperfect. N. 33. ΝΞ
¢
188 Varie Lectiones ad Euripidem.
Likute Joseph. Collectanea Josephi, or Selections from the
Talmud.
Joreh Daah &c. N. 38. Containing directions about Slaying and
Slaughtering of Beasts.
Sepher Machalmoth Relatio Somniorum. This is a book bound
up with N. 20. and is a Hebrew Translation, made by a learned
Jew in India, containing a prophecy of the events to happen to
Europe, which he characterizes by the name Babylon. ° |
Liber Cabalisticus, tractans de Nominibus Divinis; written
beautifully in the Rabbinical character; an Indian Copy. N. 24. |
Historia Judaica. Written in Rabbinical Hebrew ; but it is not
clear to what part of the Jewish history it relates. N. 37.
VARLE LECTIONES AD EURIPIDEM.
Desumrz sunt ex exemplari editionis Aldinz, quod in fronte
prefert nomina Laur. Bochelli, C. Val. 1588. et Stephani Joha *ni
(duas literas non expedio). Bochelli esse videntur. In Medea
plerumque cum Lascari consentiunt. Intermixtz sunt glossis, ita
ut interdum difficile sit statuere, utrum ascripta vox glossa sit an
varia lectio. Manuscripti diserta mentio fit ad Hec. 332. 819.
Ηες. 13. (ed. Porson.) gue res. 537. dos δ᾽ ἡ. π. ἀ.
διὸ [hoc forsan pro
v. 1.
86. yp. κασάνδραν
147. yp. ὄρφανον [sic]
149. τύμβῳ
158. yp. ἀμύνῃ
187, 8. κοινὰ--- γνωμὰ [sic]
207. γρ. ἀΐδα
225. δράσον [sic] .
332. yp. πέφυκ᾽ ἄρα vel ἄγαν
vel πέφυκ᾽ ἀεί. sic in ma-
nuscripto codice
369. yp. ἄγου p’
399. οὐκ, ἤν ye
401. μὴν
679—80. νόμον βακχεῖον
772. γρ. κακὸν
819. ἐκ τοῦ σκότους γὰρ τῶν τῷ
νυκτέρων πάνυ Φίλτρων
μεγίστη 'γίνεται βροτοῖς
χάρις. sic in codice ma-
puscripto |
842. yp. φανείη γ᾽
—— yp. σοί τ᾽ ἔχειν καλῶς
865. yp. γραῖα
885. yp. δισσὴ μέριμνᾳ
906. χοροποιῶν
960. ἄλλως re
975. μέρος
994. idlas
413. yp. τέλος δέχῃ vel τέλος
ie yp- τέλος δ᾽ ἔχ᾽
1065. τάνδε συθεὶς
1176. ἀπόλοντο
1261. ἐξάρασ᾽
᾿ 4608. yp. δαιδαλέοισι
481. yp. ἀΐδα Orest. 128. ἀπέθρισε
Varia Ecctiones ad Euripidem. 180
143. ἀπόπροθι [servato μοι
scil.}
200. ἐπὶ
384. pe
495. ἀντὶ [pro ἂν τῆς]
746. ἐφ᾽
792. ὧν
1021. κρανθέντ᾽
1259, én’
1433. συστολίσαε
1477. λαιμὸν
1506. δὴ πρὸ
Pheen. 31. γόνον
45. ἐπεξάρει
72. ὑπὸ ὃ.
119. στρατὸν
177. φιλαιμάτουν
191. κοιμέθοις
803. ἀλλὰ [quasi schol, sed
est var. lect.]
804. πῶλον
902. —wWovras
950. κτήσεσθ᾽
1061. ἄσμενος
1108. λαιμῶν
1202. [γῆν δ᾽ voluit}
1268. σκήπτρων
1415. ἧκεν
1738. ἐλαύνεις
Med. 4. Χέρες
53. δούλων
105. [ἐξ ante ἀρχῆς delet]
138. ἐπεί μοι φ.
140. ὃς μὲν
—-— yp. λέκτρα
281. Ahi εὐπρόσιτος
284. yp. παρεμπέχειν [sic]
330. yp. wots
425. yp. ἔπνευσε
434. ξείνᾳ
511. yo. σεμνὸν
566. λύειν
584. ὡς
586. πείσαντά
6 10. yp. φυγῆς
640. yp. προσβάλλοι δεινὰ κύ-
τρις, ἀπτολέμους δ᾽ εὐνὰς
642. ‘yp. κρίνοι
662. yp. φίλους
664. ἐπιστρωφᾷ
666. yp. ἐστάλης
721. yp, ἔχοι μοι
723. τοσόνδε
734. μεθεῖ ay
739. yp. ὦ γύναι
750. φάος [pro re φῶε]
763. καλλένικοι
778. πολεμίας
858. φόνῳ
——— yp. δυνάσῃ
859. πιτνούντων
860, 1. yp. τέγξαι χεῖρα φοινγί-
αν τ. 0.
926. ἐξηύχον
948. yp. ἀλλ᾽ εἰς μ.
962. κείνην [ν. ]. pro κεῖνα,
potius quam schol.]
969. ἐκείνην .
974. yp. ἀναδεσμέων
1060. yp. πέπρωται
1069. yp. εὐδαιμονεῖτον
1083. yp. δὲ [pro δὴ]
1097. θρέψανσι
1104. Biordy &
1242. ws φ.
1248. οὐλομέναν
1267. πιτνοῦντ᾽
1353. προσθεὶς
Hipp. 160. vel ἀνναίᾳ [sic] ὁ
491. διϊστέον [pro em. 61 ejus
mentem capio]
637. τἀγαθὸν τῷ δυστυχεῖ
750. αὔξει
Androm. 6. δυστνχεστέρα
326. ἀντίπαιδος
Iph. A. 1350. chewy
1355. εὖνιν
1381. ras
1567. ἔξωθεν
Iph. T. 112. προσφέροντε
ἘΠ 104, [ἐξ ἔδρας conjicit, et”
sic Elmsleius] ©
190 Stanleii Nota quedam in Callimachum.
281. πέτρον: --ζδέμοιν 1042. εἶπον
3999. βαλών 1049. γε
390. τὸ φ. 1096. ἀγορὰς
394. οἷστρος 1119, κάμνει
483. wel λυπῇ 1135. ὑκέρστολον
487. ἄνελπις ᾿ς 1154. vel ἥδη
494. ἐστί γ᾽ εἴ σοι [ut fe- 1169. οἵδ᾽
ze Porsonps] 1182. ἀγγέλλρντέ
552. δεινῶς 1213. ὡς φ.
553. θανών. 1214. lise. os
556. ig. πῶς. Ope. νιν 1216. μόλοις
592. οἶσθα 1850. πρώρην
728. ξένοι 1356. δ εὐθυντηρίας,] ove
757. εκαώσω fet punctum delet;
811. eis Aderpa ergo velebat διεν-
ee 1814. vel oP θυντηρίους, ut Rer-
5 ΠΊΩΝ ᾿ς 887, εὐτνυχῆεναὶ εὐτνχοῦσ' skius.]
ΡΟ ᾿ O12. ἀποστήσει.
STANLEH NOTE QUEDAM IN
- CALLIMACHUM.
No. II.—[Continued from No. XXXI. p. 167.]
In Hymn. II. Eis ᾿Απολλῶνα.
1. Οἷον ὁ x. τ. λ.
Quod Greei θειασμὸν ἐπιδημοῦντος θεοῦ Romani ‘tripudivwm θομιν!μ8}᾽
dicebant; diveraum certe (ut ast Heinsius) a terre motu, quanquam
ad poetam id grammatici confundunt, ad illud
tremere omnia visa repente
Laminaque laurusque Dei—
ubi etiam exemplum tremoris ῥελάτοῦ, 6 paganorum mente, et
/Eneid. VI.
Sub pedibus mugire solum, et juga cepla moveri
Sylwarum - {additur)
Adventante Dea— |
quod Aristot. Muxeries σεισμοί.
Sic σεισμὸς μέγας, tremor ingens, quem interpretes terres motum
teddidére. Hesych. σεισμὸς, τρόμος. B. cxiv. 7. ἀπὸ προσώπου
Κυρίου ἐσαλεύϑῃ § γῆ (S.) a
Stanleii Nota quedam vn Callimackum. 101
= Exsicaro.] Signam sc. adventantis Dei: sic Stat. Syiv. LIL. iv. 106.
Sic ait, οἱ motas miratur Pergamos aras:
et Claud. De Raptu, I. 7.
Jam mihi cernuntur trepsdis delubra movert
Sedibus, et claram dispergere culmmina tucem
. Adventum testata Dei.
3. Καὶ δή που x. ὁ. A.] Sac Catall. Ix. 7, 8.
Nimirum ALteas astendat noctifer ignes.
Sic certé ; viden’ ul perniciter exsiduere ?
et lix. 77 » 78.
Virgo adest. Viden’ ut faces
Splendidas quatiznt comas?
4. “ἥλιος ἡ. τ. φοῖνιξ.) Pansan. In omnibus feré certaminsbus
victor palma datur, ex institute Thesel : 18 enim, ex (ὑγρὰ Delum
vectus, ludes Apollimi celebravit, ipsosque wictores Deliz palmz
foliis ornavit: cujus Homerus ia Odyss. meminit, ubi Nausicaz
supplicat Ulysses. Sic Claud. De V1. Cons. Honor. 25. etc.
Cum pulcher Apollo, etc.
At si Phebus adest
Tunc syive, tunc entra logui, tunc vivere fontes,
LTunc sacer horror azuis, adytisque effunditur Echo
Clarior et docta spirant presagia rupes.
5. ‘0.88 xdxvos] Prisc. lib. 1. De Construct. Homer.
_ --Τηλέμαχ᾽ obras ἄνου θεοῦ ἤλυθεν ὄρνις
| Κύκνος, ᾿Απολλῶνος ταχὺς ἄγΓελας, ἐν δὲ πόδεσσι
Τίλλε πέλειαν ἔχων"
_ Koxveoy dicitur τὸ τοῦ κυκνοῦ μέλος. Κύκνος, ὄρνεον φίλωδον. (Suid.)
Idem de cygni cantu distichon hoc cujusdam veteris poet refert :
Δωΐτερος κύκνων μικρὸς ἤρόος, He κολοίων
Kpay pos ἐν εἰαρίναις σιιδνάμενος νεφέλαις"----
Quod Lucretius sic expressit, iv. 182, 188.
Parous ut est cycni melior canor, te gruum quam
Clamor in etherits dispersus nubibus Austri.
[Est illud distichon ultimum Epigrammatis, ab Antipatre Sidonioe
conscripti.] Et est versus proverbialis,
Οὐ δύναται κύκνῳ xopudds παραπλήσιον ἄδειν.
Horat. Od. IV. iii. 20. pro dulcissimo sono dicit “ cycni sonum.”
ἴπης et Agyptii, clin significare volunt musicum, cycnum pin-
192 Stanleii Note quedam in Callimachum.
gunt, test. Oro Niliaco in Hieroglyph., Isidor. xii. 7. Idem
scribit B. Ambros. v. 22.; etiam collum cycnis hanc ipsam ob cau-
sam procerius a natura datum esse scribit, ut ed suavior et magis
canorus per procera modulus colla distinguatur, et longiore exerci-
tatione purior longe resultet.
Plura de cycnis Minoes in Alciat. Emblem, clxxxiii. (B.)
6. Αὐτοὶ] Αὐτόματοι rectissimé. Sic Hom.
Αὐτόματοι δὲ πύλαι μύκον οὐρανοῦ
et Virg. Sponte sud patuére fores—
nec absimile illud Petronii, Dum loquimur, sera sud sponte de-
lapsa cecidit, recluseque subitd fores admiserunt intrantem (S.) εἴ
Philosophus Heron in Pneumaticis ediculam docet construere,
cujus accenso ignt fores item αὐτομάτως (id est, sponte) aperiantur,
extincto claudantur. Et Apul. Metam.1. Janue, que sud sponte
deserata noctu fuerant. (B.) Ad verbum expressit illud Psalm.
χχῖν. 7. “Apare πύλας, of ἄρχοντες ὑμῶν, καὶ ἐπάρθητε πῦλαι ἀιώγιοι,
καὶ εἰσελεύσεται ὁ Βασιλεῦς τῆς Δόξης. :
7. Ὃ γὰρ θεὸς κι τ. A.] Sic Virg. supra Adventante Ded (et
Psalm. ἀπὸ προσώπου Κυρίου), quod est ἐπὶ παρουσία, vel παρούσης τῆς
θεοῦ" nam quemadmodum suam ΓΦ sive Dei veri presentiam
Hebrei celebrabant, ita Diabolus, Dei ubique simia, Deorum
quandam qui non essent presentiam excogitavit ; unde in mscrip-
tione quadam Rome,
PRAESENTIAE
MATRIS . DEVM
Q.SEPTIMIVS . FELIX
OB . CORONAM
MILLESIMO.VRBIS.ANNO.
9. ’2 *éAdAwv.] Bourdelot. in Heliodor, Pectora scelerata
adveniens numen, nec suscipere, nec solum suspicere posse ex phi-
losophorum decreto, ut patet sepius apud Platonem, notat quedam
ad hoc facientia ‘Theod. Marcil. ad Aur. Carm. Pythag. S.
17. Εὐφημεῖτ᾽ ἀΐοντες Sic Horat. Favete linguis: unde et fa-
yorem Latini τὴν εὐφημίαν dixerunt. Glosse veteres Εὐφημία, favor,
εὐφημεῖ, facet, hoc est silentio; quem favorem innujt Horat. , de
Sapphone et Alco loquens :
Utrumque sacro digna silentia
. Mirantur umbre dicere.
Stanless Note quadam in Callimachum.. 198
18. εὐφημεῖ καὶ: πόντος] Pontus (inquit) sacro favet sifeniio, cm
poete canunt. Virg. urbanissimé in eodem sensn lusit ;
Et nunc ecce tibi stratum silet a@quor, et omnes
Aspice ventosi ceciderunt murmuris aure ;
hoc est, ipsum mare εὐφημεῖ, et expectat ut canas; quam urbani-
tatem non ceperunt interpretes, ut nec illud Horatii,
Ingrato celeres obruat otio
Ventes, ut caneret fera
Nereus fata— — (Od, I. xv. 4.)
Ubi ofiwm ventorum vocat sacrum silentium, Solent enim silentium
ventorum et maris orationibus Deorum premittere poets, quod
ex alls satis notum est; quod otium pausam more veteri antiquus
poeta dixit,
. Mundus celi vastus constitit silentio,.
Et Neptunus sevus undis asperts pausam dedit,: &c.
22. Kal μὲν ὁ daxgudes] Ad verbum. a Propertio expressum
(III. x, 8.)
Et Niobes lacrymas supprimat ipse lapis. (Dous. in Cat.). 8.
—Hoc Blomfieldius et alii indicaverunt.
, 25. κακὸν μακάρεσσιν ἐρίζειν.) See Gr..
Θεῷ μάχεσθαι δεινόν ἐστι καὶ τύχῃ (Menand.)
et Σὺ δ᾽ six’ ἀνάγκῃ, καὶ θεοῖσι μὴ μαχοῦ. (Eurip.)
Hom. item Od. 3. 397. ᾿Αργάλεος γάρ τ᾽ ἐστὶ θεὸς βρότῳ ἄνδρι δάμηναι»
et Pind, Pyth. ii, 161. χρὴ δὲ πρὸς
Θεὸν οὐκ ἐρίζειν.
Siracides xlvi. Contra Deum pugnare non est facile (quod tamen
ya Greco aliter). Huc refert La Cerda illud A®schyli Πρὸς κέντρα
κώλον ἐκτένειν, et Scripture Πρὸς χέντρρι Aaxrivesy.
28. Asi δεξιὸς ἧσται] Sic Psalm. cx. Κάθου ἐκ δεξίων μου, et Symb,
Apost. καθεξόμενον ἐκ δεξίων τοῦ Πάτρος Παντοκράτορος" dexter enim
locus honestior. Sallustius: Sed Hiempsal, qui minimus ex illis erat,
pgnobilitatem Jugurtha (quia materno genere impar er at) despiciens,
dextra Adherbalem adsedit. Ratio est, 3 τὸ τὴν χίνησιγ εἶναι ἐκ
δῶν δεξίων, καὶ ἰσχυροτέραν διὰ ταῦτ᾽ εἶναι τὴν φύσιν τῶν δεξίων. (Aristot.
de Part. Anim. ix.) τ
84. Καί τε πολυχτέανος.] Strabo; lib. ix. Πρότερον δὲ πολυχρήμα»
Τὸν ἦν τὸ ἵερον, καθάπερ“ Ομηρός τε εἴρηκεν,
VOL. XVII. Cl. Jd. NO. XX XIII. N
X
194 Stanless Note quedam in Calkmachum.
Οὐδ᾽ ὅσα λάϊνος οὐδὸς ἀφήτορος ἐντὸς ἐέργει
Φοίβου ᾿Απόλλωνος Πυθοῖ ἔνι πετρηέσσῃ.
35.—de) καλὸς, καὶ ἀεὶ véos.] Opp. Cyneg. I,
—rol τ᾽ ἐν μακάρεσσιν ἄγητοι
Φοῖβον δαφνακόμην, καὶ κισσοφόρον Διόνυσον :
εἰ Tibull. I. ἵν. 387. Solts aterna est Baccho Pheboque Jucenta.
30.---ᾧ κεν ἐκεῖναι x. τ. A.] Scholiastes Theocriti ad Carm. iv.
16. Τὴν σταγόνα τῆς δρόσου πρωΐα λέγουσιν, ἀπὸ τοῦ πρωὶ πέμπεσθαι"
χαὶ Καλλίμαχος, ᾧ κιν ἐκεῖναι Πρῶκες ἔραζε πεσοῦσαι κ. τ. A. (Casaub.
dect. Theocr.) ὃ. Hune proculdubio versum innuit Scholiastes,
quod miror doctissimum Casaubonum fugisse.
᾿ 42. ᾽Οἰστευτὴν ἔλαχ᾽ dvipa.| Scaligeri lectionem, ἔλαχεν ῥέα vix
affirmare ausus sum. Vulg. Lect. defendunt Homeri ἰατρὸς. ἀνὴρ,
Herodoti ἀνὴρ ἁλιεὺς, Plauti serous homo, Sallustiique homo
sacerdos et mulier ancilla. (B.) ᾿
| 47. ξευγήτιδας ἔτρεφεν, ἵππους. Tibull. 11. ni. 11., et Senec. i in -
ΒΙρροῖσιο, Tauros, Ovid. in Epist. GEnones, 151. Vaccas. B.
. *Hibeou ὑπ᾿ ἔρωτι.) Plutarchus in vith Nume Phorbantem,
H vaciuthum Admetum ab Apolline amatos fabulari poetas ait :
et in Instit. Div. I. 10. Quid Apollo, pater ejus, inquit Firmianus,
nonne ob amorem quo flagravit turpissime gregem pavit alienam?
Ex quibus luce fit clarius ob amorem hujusmodi usum fuisse Apol-
linem. ministerio, aliam licet causam afferant Orpheus, Euriprdes,
Diodorus, Eusebius, Flaccus, Papmius, Servius, et alii; qui-idcirce
eum dicunt vaccas pavisse Phereas,
' Ingrato Steropen quod fuderit arcu. (B.)
— xexavpévos.] loquendi genus, quo nihil apud poetas magis frequens:
Oppian. Cyneg. ii. Δαιόμενος γύμφης κυανώπιδος ὠκεανίνης
et Claud. De Nupt. Honor. et Mar. 16.
Syria sic tenerum virgo flammabat Achillem, 5.
Me torret face mutua
Thurint Calais Jilius Ornyti. (Hor. Od. III. tx: ")
Accede ad tgnem hunc ; jam calesces plus sats.
- 52. ὕπαρνοι.] Josephus Παῖς ὑπομάζιος. Rufinus, Erat εἰ sb
uberibus parvulus filius. Latini sububeres appellant, qui adirut
sub.ubere: Stat. Theb. 1. 672.
—parvumgue sub ubere caro
Lhessandrum portabat avo—
Stanle#i Note quiedam in Callimachum. 195
Le. ὑπομάξιον" et ut agni a Varrone subrumi appellantur, qui adhuc
‘sub ruma, bh. 6. manmma, ita Callimacho oves dicuntur J ὕπαρνοι, οὐδ᾽
ἀγάλακτες %. TA.
Agnus quisque sue pendebit ab ubere matris.
Eurip. Androm. 555. “Taapvos γάρ τις ὥς, ἀπόλλυσαι.
61. Bapav ἐκ κεράων.] Kegérivos βωμὸς inter septem orbis spe-
ctacula (sicut Plutarchus ait) celebratus, qui tantum ex dextrts
cornibus sine glutino ullo aut vinculo coagmentatus compactusque
Bit; rion verd ex dexrtris (eodem, in Theseo, teste) sed ex simistris
tantim cornibas. Diogenes Laértius item, in Pythagore wita, |
mentionem nonnullam facit Ceratina are, et Mart. Epier. T. 1. 4.
B. Ex cornibus-sc. Cynthiadum caprearum a sorore mterfecta-
rum, de quo diserté Ovid
Miror et innumeris structam de cornibus.aram Ογᾶρρε
Acontio, 99. Vid. quoque Politian. Syll. i. 52.
68. ᾿Ὦ 'woaacy, πολλοί.] Istiusmodi alliterationes multhm in
deliciis habuerunt poete, ut ex multorum locis manifestum - est.
Theocr. Id. xxvi. 26.
ἜΣ ὅρεος πένϑημα καὶ οὐ Πένθηα φέρουσαι,
ubi Euripidis imitafionem in ἔδρα ἃ cognomini agnosco, qui dixit,
Tlévbeus δ᾽ ὅπως μὴ wévbos εἰσοίσει δόμοις
; Τοῖς σοῖσι, Κάδμε' S.
Affisio,: sive ut vocat Hermogenes (iv. de Inventione) παρήχησις,
quan ttc fieri ait, ὅταν δύο ἢ τρεῖς ἢ τέσσαρας λέξεις ἢ ὀνόματα εἴπῃ
τις, Opole μὲν ἤγχχγουντα, διάφορον δὲ τὴν δήλωσιν ἔχοντα. Placet ex-
empla ex-ejus Persis depromere. Xenophon. Πείθει τὸν Πειθίαν"
Homerus: “Hros xewredlov ᾿Α λήϊον οἵος ἀλᾶτο,
: Ὃν θυμὸν κατέδων, πάτον ἀνθρώπων ἀλεείνων"
Thacyditles : Καὶ μὲν τότ᾽ Αἴγυπτος ὑπὸ τῷ Ξέρξῃ βασιλεῖ ἐγένετο,
πλὴν ᾿Αμορταίου τοῦ ἐν τοῖς ἔλεσι βασιλέως, τοῦτον δὲ διὰ μέγεθος “τοῦ
ἄλεους οὐκ ἠδύνατο ἑλεῖν, x.7.A. Sic Cicero in Οταῖ, pro P. Sextio:
Vultis recordari vultum? Si nondum scelera.vulneraque inusta
Reip.:- cultis recordari, vultum atque incessum animis intueamini.
7% ἄστυ Κυρήνης.) Corripuit syllabam que aliis producitur, nec
tativen id-sine exemplo, inquit Scaliger ad Catull. vii. 4.
Laserpiciferis jacet Cyrents ;
et Hermesianax, “Avipa Κυρήναιον x.7.A. B. Sic Vulcanius antea.
75. ᾿Αριστοτέλης.) Aristeus, filius Apollinis ex nympha vena-
196 Stanlea Note quadam in Callimachum
trice Cyrene, rex Arcadiz, ut est apud Apollon. 1i., Cic. de Nat.
Deor. iii, Ovid. Fast. i.. et Virg. Georg. iv. quem pre ceteris
vide. B.
78. πίπτουσιν) Sic et cadere Latinis verbum sacrificiis pro-
pnum ; Agna cadet vobis. 5.
79. σεῖο δὲ βωμοὶ x.t.A.] Eadem omnia hoc versu expressit
Catullus, viii.
Florido mihi ponitur picta vere corolla.
88. τόῤμιαι.)] Schol. ὠρισμέναι" sic Opp. Cyneg. iil. κύριον ἥμαρ,
Pind. xuplo ἐν μήνι, et Eurip. κύριον ἦμαρ et κυρίαν ἡμέραν dicit;
Aristophanes item κυρίαν ἐκκλησίαν, τούτεστι νόμιμον καὶ ὡρισμένῳ
χαὶ κενυρωμένην. (B.)
91. σίνιν.)] Sic vint pernictes, Catull. .
96. ἢ, ἰὴ, Παρῆον.) Sic Claudian. Omnis ‘lo Pean’ regio
sonat.—Proclus, Παῖαν δέ ἐστιν εἶδος ὥδης εἰς πάντας νῦν γραφόμενιν
βεοὺς, τὸ δὲ πάλαιον ἰδίως ἀπενέμετο τῷ ᾿ΑΔπόλλωγι καὶ τῇ ᾿Αρτεμίδι eat
χατακαύσει λοίμων καὶ νοσῶν ἀδόμενης. ὅ.
105. ὅσα πόντος.] Editio Epistole Vindiciani; quem alu De-
signationem puto vocant Archiatrorum Comitis, habet proverbt
alem φρο de Nilo locutionem: Quibus ego prasentibus, clemen-
- tissime Imperator, tantis sudoris ejus abstersionibus laboravi, ut
st dict fas est, Nilus ex ejus corpore videretur effiuere: Nilus enim
maximorum amniuin non postremi personam. sustinet. Dion.
Longin. Περὶ Ὕψουρ. xxxv. “Evbev φυσίχως πῶς ἀγόμενοι μὰ Af od τὰ
μικρὰ ῥέεθρα [θαυμάξομεν, εἰ καὶ διαύγῃ] καὶ χρήσιμα, ἄλλα [τὰ]
Nelagy, καὶ Ἴστρον, ἢ ᾿Ῥήνον, πολὺν δ᾽ ἔτι μᾶλλον τὸν ᾿Ωχέανον. Sil. Ital,
montes ut Atlas, ut flumina Nilus.
Hinc flumeu ingenii est eloquentia potans et uberans hac oratione ;
nullius est tantum Jlumen ingenti, nulla dicendi aut scribendi-tqnia
gis, Si¢ Demosthenes et Oyidius locuti sunt. . Apollinar. Sydow
Et qui pro ingenio fluente nyllis, _
Corneli Tavite, es tacendus ort. ;
Auson. Profess.v. Moz inde cursim, mare torrentis Sreti,.
Epos ligdsti metricum.
Contrarium est ingenitum rorans, id est, non fluens sed ctillana,
apud Pomp. Mel. Omnia, quz magna copia ingruunt, fluctibus
comparahtur :
| Mané salujantum totis vomit edibus undqm,
Valerianus ad Matt. vii. Barth, Adv. (8.
Stanleii Note quedam in Callimachum. 197
Proverbialiter-—Catull. cxii. 2.—Cetera sunt maria. Hebrai
eodem proverbio utuntur, in Threnis. Hieremia, ii. 13. Magna est,
sicut mare, tribulatio tua. Callimachus malé audiebat apud poetas,
qudd semper parva poematia scripserit. Huc respexit Propertius,
11.i.39. Sed neque Phlegreos Jovis Enceladique tumultus
Intonet angusto pectore Callimachus.
109. Μέλισσαι.) Porphyr. lib. de Antro Nymph. Tas Δήμητρος.
ἱέρεις, ὡς τῆς xbovins Θεᾶς μὔστιδας, © Merlocas οἱ πάλαιοι ἐκαλοῦν.-
Eurip. Schol. ad Hippol. ras ἱερείας (Δήμητρος) “Μελίσσὰς᾽ ἑκαλοῦν οἱ
“τοέηται. ὥ..
Jil. Πίδακος ἐξ ἱερῆς. Fontes fluviorum sacri habebantur ab
antiquis, ut inde ingens commodam humano gener proveniret.
Hinc descendit quod proverbium Greci de re inusitaté habent
(apud Eaert.) “Avo ἱέρων ποτάμων χωροῦσι reyes. Extat autem in
Medea Euripidis. Horat.
—ad aque lene caput sacra.
Theocr. -------- τὸ δ᾽ ἔγγυθεν ἱερὸν ὕδωρ.
Propert. _Devini fontes.
Frontinus de Aquaéductibus : : Fontiam memoria cum sanctitate
adiwic extat et colitur. inc a Cicerone De Legg. ii. Fontts
Ara memoratur, et De Nat. Deorum, iii. Fontis Delubrum. S.
_ “ἄκρον ἄωτον Sic Hom. Aivov ἄωτον, οἴνου ὦ ἄωτον, quod Plautus
erepiuscule (flos vint. Philostrat. “Avdos πυρὸς, quod JEschylus
᾿ἄνϑος ᾿Ηφαίστου, flos flamme. Sic apud A. Gellium flos cane pro
délicatissim4 coend. Alii flos Bacchi, flos Liberi. Virgilius, eodems
sensu quo Noster, Summum lactis, et alibi fios lactis, quod ital
adhuc fior di latte. 8.
- Virg.'flos faring, quod Angli adhuc flower (flour) Lucret. fros
ἐνὶ, Pindar. Pyth. iv. ἄνθος ἥβας, Senec. Hippol. flos juvente, flos
etatis apud Livium et Apuleium. Quod optimum purissinumque
ext in quaque re, id florem rei appellarunt veteres: exempla
passim obvia.
112. φϑόρος1 Malé Robortellus et alii φθόνος : precatur enim
poeta, ut Momus ibi habitet ubi Mors, id est, ut intereat. (B.)
198
REMARKS
To. prove that Josephus is an Historian and Apologist of
the Gospel. |
No. 11.—[{ Continued from No. XXXII. p. 380.]
Havine in the preceding Number proved, I presume by satis-
factory evidence, that Epaphroditus, the master of Epictetus and
minister of Nero, was a Christion, it is natural to conclude that the
books against Apion, dedicated to him by Josephus, were intended
to support and promote the Gospel ; and this conclusion is ren-
dered unquestionable by one or two passages that occur in them.
That I might not be suspected to misrepresent the original, I will
here take some extracts from it. Od μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ πλήθεσιν ἥδη,
πολὺς ζῆλος γέγονεν ix paxpod τῆς ἡμετέρης εὐσεβείας. Οὐδ᾽ ἔστιν οὐ
πόλις Ελλήνων οὐδητισοῦν, οὐδὲ βάρβαρος, οὐδὲ ὃν ἔθνος, ἔνθα μὴ τὸ τῆς
ἑβδομάδος ἣν ἀργοῦμεν ἡμεῖς, τὸ ἔθος οὐ διαπεφοίτηκε . . . . μιμεῖσθαι δὲ
πειρῶνται καὶ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἡμῶν ὁμόνοιαν, καὶ τὴν τῶν ὄντων doen.
δοσιν, καὶ τὸ φιλεργὸν ἐν ταῖς τέχναις, καὶ τὸ καρτερικὸν ἐν ταῖς ὑπὲρ. τῶν
νόμων ἀνάγκαις" τὸ γὰρ θαυμασιώτατον ὅτι χωρὶς τοῦ τῆς ἡδονῆς ἔπαγα»
γοῦ οὐ δελεαστὸς, αὐτὸς καθ᾽ αὐτὸν ἴσχυσεν 6 νόμος" καὶ ὥσπερ 6 Θεὸς διὰ
παντὸς τοῦ χοσμοῦ πεφοίτηκεν, οὕτως ὁ νόμος διὰ πάντων ἀνθρώπων βεβά»
δικεν' αὐτὸς δέ τις ἕκαστος τὴν πατρίδα καὶ τὸν οἶκον ἐπισκοπῶν τὸν αὖ-
τοῦ, τοῖς ὑπ’ ἐμοῦ λεγομένοις οὐχ ἀπιστήσει . .... καὶ γὰρ εἰ μὴ συνιέμεν
αὐτοὶ τῆς ἀρετῆς τῶν νόμων ἁπάντων, ὑπὸ τοῦ πλήθους γοῦν τῶν ζηλούντων.
μάγα φρονεῖν ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῖς προήχθημεν. Con. Ap.1.2.§.39. Moreover, mul-
titudes for some time become exceedingly zealous for our worship ;
nor is there a city among the Greeks, nor a nation among the Bar-
barians, to whom the custom of observing the sabbath as we (Jews)
do, has not been extended, and who do not endeavour to imitate the
cordiality and harmony, the distribution of their property, the.
industry tn their callings, the patience under tortures.tn support of.
our laws, which are ecinced amongst us. And what is most worthy,
of admiration in this respect 1s, that this zeal for our law w
awakened, not by any allurement from pleasure or profit, bu by-
the internal excellence of the law itself. And as God pervades
the whole world, so his law has at length pervaded all mankind ;
and whoever reflects on his own country, and even his own family,
will find evidence of the assertions now made by me... . And tf we
ourselves were not sensible of the superior excellence of our laws,
we should be taught to glory in them by the multitudes who embrace
them.
Remarks on Josephus. - 199
In this passage, it is asserted that some time before the. compo-
sition of it, a zeal for the Jewish religion broke forth among the
nations; and that multitudes of Greeks and Barbarians in every
place had eagerly: received it. Are we to understand this of Ju-
daism as the term is now used in contradistinction to Christianity ?
If so, the assertion made by Josephus is a gross falsehood. The
teachers of Judaism, however zealous to make converts, never en-
tertained the thought of planting their religion among the Gentiles.
Their worship was entirely local, and every convert was expected
to reside in Judea, or at least on solemn: occasions to visit the
temple. And if they entertained the generous design of bringing
mankind at large to the knowledge of the true God, and to the
cultivation of the moral. virtues, that design would have been hope-
Jess, and even impossible ;. for they blended with these fundamental
principles, notions the most repugnant to the rest of mankind.
The name of Jews was odious even to a proverb; many of their
rites were ridiculous in the eyes of a stranger,. and too oppressive .
even for themselves to bear. Above all, the doctrine of an expected
Messiah to subjugate and. not to save the world, excluded for ever
all hope of converting the Gentiles to Judaism. From the advent
of. our Lord to. the destruction of Jerusalem, the leading men
among the Jews, by: their wild expectation of emancipation and
universal conquest, were incessantly employed in irritating the
Romans, and the tributary nations around them, rather than in
schemes of proselyting them to their faith: and after the fall of the
Jewish. state, their religion would, instead of being diffused among,
the Gentiles, have been completely extinguished, had it not survived
in.the scattered remnants of that unhappy nation.
When Jesus announced the Gospel, he professed not to teach a
new.religion, but to fulfil the law and the prophets. His religion
therefore was the religion οὗ his ancestors, improved, refined, and
spirttualised. With this view he considered the institutions of
Moses and the language of the prophets under the figure of a dtvzng
being; the external ordinances, or the express literal signification, as
constituting the body, while the implied spiritual sense formed the
soul of the Jewish Scriptures. This new interpretation formed the
nature and grounds of the dispute between the advocates of the
Gospel and its. opponents among the Jews. The latter, taking the
words of Moses and the prophets in a literal sense, expected a fem-
poral king ; and confining their attention to the letter of the law,
considered it only as a system of external ordinances. But the former,
overlooking the literal and primary signification, hke the body or
flesh, as of inferior importance, rested in the spiritual meaning. 88.
the soul, the essential part, of Moses. and the prophets. Hence,
while- the Scribes and Pharisees degraded the religion of their
200 Remarks on Josephus.
fathers below its natural standard, Christ and his followers regarded
it as a diviue institution, addressing its exterior only to the mfancy
of human society, but expanding from sense to intellection with the
ress of reason, till the period was mpe for the promised
essiah. In the fulness of time the Messiah came, rising like the
sun with all the majesty and mildness of truth. Supported by the
power, and illumined by the wisdom of God, he drew aside the
veil of sense: the twilight of rites and symbols disappeared, and the
Gospel with life and immortality emerged into a bright eternal day.
This is the light in which Philo and Josephus considered the re-
ligion of Jesus. The terms Christianity and Christians had
originated with the enemies of the Gospel; and these noble uuthors,
in common with the rest of the Jewish believers, rejected them as
terms of reproach, obviating by that means the objection made, on
one hand, that the followers of Jesus were apostates fram Moses,
and, on the other, that the Gospel was a new religion. Whenever
then, they speak of the religion of the Jews or the laws of Moses;
they mean that religion or that law spiritualised and perfected by
Jesus Christ. Of this we have the most satisfactory proof in the
testimonies they give to its diffusion among the gentiles, which is
not in the smullest degree true of Judaism, but in the strictest sense
true of the Gospel. ‘Thus in the paragraph before us Josephus
asserts that, long before he wrote it, a zeal for the Jewish worship
broke out among the nations; that there was no city or place
among Greeks or Barbarians, where it was not made known and
enrbraced ; the law of God being thus, like God himself, rendered
universal. This we know to have been the case with regard to
Christianity. Between sixty and seyenty years before the apostles
had received their commission to preach and to convert the heathens,
and within the space of 50 years, there was not a place in the civie
lized world where the glad tidings of the Gospel were not known
and welcomed. It is remarkable that the heathen converts were
not in general inferior to their Jewish brethren in the zeal they
showed for the new faith, in the credit which they reflected on ita
influence, or in the firmness with which they attested its truth ; and
this circumstance is observed by Josephus when he says that, ‘if
we Jews were not sensible of the superior excellence of our laws,
we should be taught to glory in them by the multitude of converts
who embrace them.”
Before the advent of Christ, the sanctions of the Jewish religion
avere altogether demporal, its rewards and punishments being com
fined to good and evil in the present life. But after the mode of
interpreting it in a metaphorical sense was taught by Christ, it was
a natural consequence that, as a spiritual prince was unders
to be presignified under the symbols of a temporal prince, so the
Remarks on Josephus. 401
Janguage iminediately expressive of the present sensible world might
be construed as hulding forth an intimation, and even the assurance,
ef a higher, and spiritual state. It was this construction, it appears
to me, more than any direct express prediction, that enabled our
Lord to refer his adversaries to the Jewish Scriptures as containing
eternal life, (John v. 39.); and the great apustle of the Gentiles to
affirm that he said “ none other things than those which Moses and
the prophets did say should come.” Acts, 26. The doctrine of a
future state arising from the supposed immortality of the human
soul prevailed not only in Judea, but in other countries. Our
Saviour might have availed himself of this popular notion, as a
powerful auxiliary in support of the Gospel. But though in some
places he uses the common language respecting the soul, he has no
where adduced its immortality in favor of its surviving the stroke
ef death. He might have considered the notion as very un-
certain, or altogether erroneous ; at all events he could not but think
it an improper subject of testimony; since its advocates, if they
siybmitted to suffer in its support, would only evince the sincerity,
not the truth of their faith. Our Saviour therefore seems to have
forbidden all discussion of this important question, in. the commis-
sion which he gave to his apostles; and to have taught them to
rest their own faith and the faith of others on the fact of his own
_ Nesurrection as a pledge, as the first fruits of the resurrection of all
wankind. This fact, of which they were eye-witnesses, and in
which they were deeply interested, they could not have mistaken.
Now if we examine the preaching of the apostles, we shall per-
ceive that, though due use was made of Moses and the prophets,
of the works of Christ, and of the descent of the Spirit, the principal
cause of the conversion of the Gentiles, was the doctrine of a future
state, placed on a solid foundation by the resurrection of Christ.
It followed, moreover, that as the immortality of the soul was not
insisted upon by Jesus and his apostles, it was naturally concluded
that death was not its separation from the body, but a suspension
of life in the grave; aud that there could be no hope of a new life
till the resurrection of the body. This conclusion might not
necesaurily follow ; but it was natural to be drawn from the silence
af the evangelical teachers on a question in which, if true, they
might fairly avail themselves of the prejudice of mankind. Fortu-
nately, Josephus is not silent on this important point. ‘* The re-
ward of those who conform to our laws, is not silver, or gold, or
a crown of olive, or some such honor: but each one believes,
having in himself the testimony of his conscience (i.e. entertaining
a firm and conscientious conviction) that, as our lawgiver foretold,
and God has afforded a mighty proof, if they keep our Jaws, and
when necessary cheerfully die for them, God has appointed them
302 Remarks on Josephus.
to live again, and after a revolution of ages receive a better life.”
᾿Αλλὰ αὐτὸς ἕκαστος αὑτῷ τὸ συνειδὸς ἔχων μαρτυροῦν, πεκΐστευκε, τοῦ
μὲν νομοθέτου προφητεύσαντος, τοῦ δὲ θεοῦ τὴν πίστιν ἰσχυρὰν παρέσχην
κότος, ὅτι τοῖς τοὺς νόμους διαφυλάξασι, κἂν δέοι ϑνήσκειν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ©
ϑύμως ἀποθανοῦσιν, ἔδωκεν ὃ Θεὸς γενέσθαι τε πάλιν, καὶ βίον ἀμείνω λαβέ,
ἐχ περιτροκῆς, &c. ὃ. 30.
The arguments, which prove that Josephus is here speaking: of
the Gospel, may thus be briefly stated: ‘The law of Moses, or, as
he calls it, the law of God, had at the time-be wrote, that 1s, about
70 years after the resurrection of our Saviour, pervaded the whole
world, and was received with ardor by multitudes in every place
and in every city. This is not true of the religion of Moses as now
understood im any sense: it is true of the religion of Moses, as
perfected and spiritualised by Jesus Christ, tn the strictest sense.
The sanctions of Judaism were limited to the present state ; the
sanctions of the Gospel were extended by Christ to a future world;
~ and they rest chiefly on the foundation of his death and resurrection,
which he was authorised by God to announce, as a pledge of the
resurrection of all mankind. Josephus, therefore, means the Gos
pel, and not Judaism, when he represents all men as embracing. it
from a firm confidence in the proof which God had given of 8
future existence. | |
The cause of the attachment of the Jews and the conversion of
the Gentiles to the law of Moses was, according to Josephus, a
firm belief of a future life: and it appears from the book of the
Acts, as well as from the early fathers, that this belief was the
principal, if not the only, cause of the prevalence of Christianity.
y the law of Moses, he must, therefore, have meant that law as it
was fulfilled by Jesus Christ. | .
By Christ and his apostles we are taught to expect that we shall
live again, because we shall rise frum the dead ; and this great-event
shall take place at some remote period which God has appointed
in his wisdom. This was the conviction of the converts spoken.of
by tbe Jewish historian. They embraced, and when necessary. died
for the divine law, not because they believed in the immortality of
the soul, and in its survival of the body after death, but because
God has solemnly. promised after a revolution of ages to confer
on them a new and better life.
JOHN JONES.
203
HERCULANENSIAN PAPYRA.
As the attention of the public has, since the researches of Walpole
and Drummond, been once more directed towards the Herculanen-
sian Papyra, a catalogue of those, whose subjects and authors have
been ascertained with precision, may not be whally -uninteresting.
Its value may be somewhat enhanced by. its being hitherto unpub-
lished at Naples. I obtained permission to have the catalogue
which is preserved in the Studij transcribed, and transmit this
copy after having examined its accuracy.
Rome, Feb. 4, 1818. PHILELLENUS.
Seer
Societa Reale Borbonica, Napoli.
NoTAMENTO Dt VotuM! D1 Papiro secondo l’ordtne col quale
. sono stati suolt:.
Di Filodemo intorno la Musica
Di Filodemo intorno la Rettorica
Filodemo ivtorno la Rettorica
Filodemo intorno i Vizj, 6 le opposte Virti
Filodemo intorno i Fenomeni, ed i Segni
Filodemo intorno la Rettorica Commentary]
Filodemo intorno i Vizj, e le opposte Virti, 6 di coloro
In Cul sono i Intorno a che
Filodemo intorno la Rettorica
Filodemo intorno 1 Vizj :
Filodemo di cid che deve farsi, e della causa e di al-
cune altre cose ‘Trattati memorabili
Filodemo intorno ai Poemi
Filodemo intorno la Rettorica
‘Di Epicuro intorno la Natura
Filodemo intorno la Rettorica
Filodemo intorno la Grazia .
Filodemo intorno la Ricchezza
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Epicuro intorno.la Natura
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Epicuro mterno la Natura
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Filodemo Commentarj intorno la Rettorica
Filodemo intorno ai Dei
904 " Adversaria
_ Filodemo intorno la Rettorica “ot
᾿ Filodemo intorno ai Poemi
Epicuro intorno la Natura
_ Di Colote sul Liside di Platone oF
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Filodemo intormo la Marte
Di Polistrato sul Disprezzo irraggionevole
Filodemo intormo at Filosofi
Di Demetrio intorno ai Poemi
Filodemo intorno ad Epicuro
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Di Cameisco intorno alla Amicizia
Demetrio intorno alla Geometria
Di Crisippo iatorno alla Providenza
Filodemo intorno ad Omero
Epicuro intorno la Natura
Filodemo intommo ai Costumi, ¢ alle Vite, Opera com:
pendiata dai Libri di Zenone, o sia intorno alla
Liberta di Dire
Filodemo intorno al Modo di Conversare
Filodemo intorno all’ Ira
| Filodemo intorno ai Vizj, ed opposte Virti
Filodemo intorno al Culto degli Dei
Filodemo intorno ai Poemi.
ADVERSARIA LITERARIA.
No. xvi.
Extract from a Letter by Dr. Bentley to John George Gravius,
comprising the leading arguments against the genuineness of
the Epistles of Phalaris, cominon'y 80 called. See Bentlett Epist.
Ρ. 98.
(1.) ““ Obitum Phalaridis, secundum Eusebium ét Suidam, incidere
in Olymp. lvii. Iu Epistola autem ultima mentionem esse Φιντιέων.
Phintiam vero urbem Olymp. demum cxxv. conditam, ab Agrigenti
tyranno Phintia nomen habuisse. (Diod. p. 867.)
(2.) Ibidem una cum Phintiensibus nominari ΓΓελώους, tanquam ab
illis diversos; atqui eosdem esse Phintienses (idem ibid.) qui antea
Geloi dicti.
(3.) Epistola xcii. eis “AAaoar. Sed Alesam primum conditam
esse Olymp. xciv. (Idem p. 246.)
~ Literaria. 205
(4.) In Epistola Ixx. xornplavy Θηρικλείω» : Pocula autem Thericlea
a Thericle figulo appellari, (Athen. p. 470.) qui, wqualis erat Ariste-
phanis Comici.
(5.) In Ep. Ixxxv. Ζαγκλαίους, in xxi. et Ixxxiv. Μεσσηνίους. Sed
eosdem esse Zancleos, qui (Thucyd. Herod.) Messenii vocati Olymp.
Ixxiii. sub Anaxilago Rhegii tyranno.
(6.) Ep. xv. et aliis Τυρομενείτας. Tayrominium (Diod, Lib. xiv, xv.)
autem conditum Olymp. cv.
(7.) Ep. xxxv. Adyos ἔργον σκιά : hujus (Laert. Plutarch.) sententiz
auctorem fuisse Democritum post Olymp. lxxx.
Hec, et alia multo plura,” &c. &c.
*," On the origin of Doctor Bentley’s Dissertation, &c. see Bent-
deti Epist. p. 95. . |
Derivation of the word PEcUNIA. |
The word pecuniag comes from pecu, an old expression desoting
the same with pecus. The common origin is the Greek πέκος, vellus.
Pecu, and the plural pecua, accur in Plautus and Livy. Before the
invention of coin barter was used, and wealth estimated according to
the, number of live-stock of which a man.was possessed. In the sixth:
Iliad, Glaucus exchanges. his golden armour, wortli one hundred head
of oxen, with Diomedes for his brazen armour, worth but nine,—éxa-
τὀμβοῤ ἐννεαβοίων. The term golden fleece, in quest of which the
Argonauts are said to have sailed, will receive illustration from this
consideration. Compare Virgil. Eclog. ii. 20.
Quamn dives pecoris nivei, quam lactis abundans ;
Mille mez Siculis errant in montibus agne.
And again, ia the Zneid:
Dives equum, dives pictai vestis et auri.
Ovid, Metam. xiii,
Hoc pecus omne meum est ;: multze quoque vallibus errant ;
Multas sylva tegit; multe stabylantyr in antris.
Homer, Iliad B. ΝΞ
πολύαρνι Θυέστῃ.
Niad 1.
᾿Ξ χίλ᾽ ὑπέστη,
Alyes ὁμοῦ, Giés τ᾽, ἃ οἵ ἄσπετα ποιμαίνοντο.
Theocrit. Idyll. xi.
᾿Αλλ’ wiros τοιοῦτος ἐγὼ, βότα χίλια βόσκω.
-“1|0-6.»-«(0ὅὕ0....
Μεγάλων» ἀπολισθάνειν dudprnp’ εὐγενές.
Fragm. apud Longin. περὶ ὕψους. .
So read for the common ἀπολισθαίνειν, a form never used in Attic
(Greek: . Compare Ovid ; ΝΞ
' Quem si non tenuit, magnis tamen excidit ausis.
᾿ And Propertius ;
Quod si deficiant vires, audacia certe
' Lays erit: in magnis et voluisse sat est.
206 Adversaria
With respect to the expression εὐγενὲς ἁμάρτημα, compare Pope's
Elegy on the Death of an Unfortunate Young, Tody: ἣ
Ambition first sprung from your blest abodes,
The glorious fault of angels and of gods.
Again, in The Temple of Fame :
And here and there disclosed a brave neglect.
᾿ς So also Publius Syrus, the gnomologist :
Est honesta turpitudo pro bona causa mori.
Κεῖται δ᾽ ἄσιτοι, σῶμ᾽ ὑφεὶς ἀλγηδόνι.
Eurip. Med. 24.
The poet seems to have had in his eye (which none of the commed-
tators have observed) the following line from Homer :
Keir’ ἄρ᾽ ἄσιτος, ἄπαστος ἐδήτνος, ἥδε xérnros.—Odyss. A. 788.
conti aGyiee
The poetical expression ‘to deliver over unto death,’ ts Greek, it
should seem, as well as Latin. Virgil has,
Quos dat tua dextera letho——nx. xi. 172.
And Pindar, ;
Πολλοὺς δίδωσι Oavérw.—— Olympic.
ati =e gee
Chronology of Horace’s Works, according to Dr. Bentley.
Horace’s Age. Works. Date. B.C.
26, 27, 28 eceeee First book of Satires ......9 38 36
ΘΙ, 32, 33 ....2ς. Second book of Satires -++- 33 31
34, 35, — e@ere0068 Epodes φΦοοοοοοσοοῦο eceeeeenn 30 29
36, 37, 38 .“..... First book of Odes -e-+-+++ 28 26
40, 41, — ο..... Second book of Odes “..... 24 23
42,43, — ...... Third book of Odes ...... 22 21
46, 47, —- ooeees First book of Epistles ...... 18 17
49, 50, 51 Fourth book of Odes and Secular poem 15. 13 ᾿
The rest afterwards.
The figure of Speech called by Grammarians
ANACOLUTHON.
When an author begins a sentence with a construction, which, in
order to be complete, ought to fall, in a natural and grammatical
order, upon a subsequent part of that sentence,—as, for instance,
when he begins with a nominative suspended (pendens nommativus),
Literaria. 307
which to all appearance, belongs to a verb forthcoming,—and
no such subsequent part,—or verb,—is to be found,—but the
train of ideas pursued flies off at once into a construction quite at va-
riance with what was looked for, the figure which thus takes place is
termed Anacoluthon, (from ἀνακόλουθος, precedentibus non adherens).
One of the most remarkable instances where this figure occurs, is
to be found in Homer, Iliad Z. 506. seqq.
‘Qs δ᾽ ὅτε τις στατὸς ἵππος, ἀκοστήσας ἐπὶ φάτνῃ,
Δεσμὸν ἀποῤῥήξας, θείει πεδίοιο κροαίνων,
Ἐϊωθὼς λούεσθαι eippetos ποταμοῖο,
Κυδιόων, ὑψοῦ δὲ κάρη ἔχει" ἀμφὶ δὲ χαῖται
"Ὥμοις ἀΐσσονται" “ὁ δ᾽ ἀγλαΐῃφι πεποιθὼς,
Hitherto the grammatical order is correct and according to rule, and
the reader is prepared to expect a verb to 6 δὲ, as he found one be-
fore to ἵππος, and χαῖται. Instead of which he meets all unexpectedly
with a break at πεποιθὼς, and the direction of the whole sentence is
thus turned off, as it were, into another channel,—_,
. _ Ῥιμφα & yotva φέρει μετά τ᾽ ἤθεα καὶ νόμον ἵππων.
Other instances occur in Virgil ;
Urbem, quam statuo,—vestra est.'-— Eneid.
+ In Terence:
Quas credis esse has, non sunt vere nuptiz. Andr.
Populo ut placerent, quas fecissent, fabulas.— Prolog. ad Andr.
And in Euripides :
Μέλλων δὲ πέμπειν μ᾽ Οἱδίπον κλεινὸς γόνος
Μαντεῖα σεμνὰ Λοξίου τ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάρας, ---
Ey τῷδ᾽ ἐπεστράτευσαν ᾿Αργεῖοι πόλι».
Pheniss.
The custom (in a Grammar-school in the North of England)
of pronouncing the Greek ὦ like the combination 4c,” and not like
the English z (as is the common method of pronunciation), is com-
pletely justified by a passage in Bentléy’s Dissertation on the Epistles
of Phalaris. See p. 173. In speaking of the introduction of some
new Greek letters into the language, he expressly says that, in the
earlier ages, before the imtroduction of 2: the Greeks used ὃσ, and
that the substituted double letters were afterwards sounded in the
same manner as their constituent parts had been formerly ; for that
the language was the same. Now it is not easy to conceive the termi-
nation adow pronounced like the English azo. Add to this, that the
custom derives still further support trom the metathesis which takes
place in the Doric dialect of od for ὦ, that is dc.
opie
* Id est, Urbs, quam urbem statuo, vestra est. Ep.
* Thus, the Italians pronounce the words garetta, suna, as though they
were spelled gadsetta, dsona.
208 Adversaria Literaria.
Ni» and νυν.
The precise difference between the import of these two words may
be thus laid down.
Νῦν signifies the ““ now” of time.
Nyy ----- ------ ὠὀἔτὧο» .
So we should say, εἴ wore ἦλθεε, ἐλθὲ καὶ νῦν. ““ If you ever did
come, come now—sc. instantly.” ‘‘ Come, [aye, and let it be] now.”
But where the other form occurs, viz. the enclitic for instance, so:
Μεγακλῆς μέν νυν οὕτως Expacce,—‘* Megacles, for his part then, was
going on so, or so,”—-the word may. be usally represented in English
by then, where it is similar to the Greek οὖν. But γυν so circum
stanced is, generally, less emphatic than οὖν : it serves frequently te
brace together the opening particles of a sentence, where itself is,
almost universally, a secondary particle. Ody, on the other hand, is
mostly a primary one.
By the way, our English words now and then are used precisely in
the same manner. ‘‘ Come, (we say) and let it be now,” (emphatically,
and with a tone equivalent to the Greek circumflex). “ΤῈ it is done
at all, it must be done then.” Where both evidently have referehce
to time. On the other side, we say: “1 told you sow what would
be the consequence ;” “ Well then, let him do it, if he can.” Here
is no reference to time. The historical usage teo (as it may be called),
‘* Now Barabbas was a robber ;” ‘‘ Now it came to pass,” &c., is of
the latter sort. |
πα»... ee—
It has been observed that the celebrated expression in a passage
(quoted by Longinus) from Herodotus, book vi. ᾿Επὶ ξυροῦ yap ἀκμῆς
ἔχεται ἡμῖν ra πρήγματα x. το Δ. was copied from Homer:
viv yap δὴ πάντεσσεν ἐπὶ Evpow ἵσταται ἀκμῆς
ἣ μάλα λυγρὸς ὄλεθρος ᾿Αχαίοις, ἠὲ βιῶναι.
{t has not yet been remarked, that the historian Procopius has used
the same expression: Ἢν μὲν οὖν ἐπὶ τὸν πολέμιον ἴωμεν, ἐπὶ ξυροῦ
ἀκμῆς τὰ πράγματα ἡμῖν στήσεται. p. 41. Edit. Princ. which for ἴωμεν
and ξυροῦ, that we have restored to the text, reads ἴοιμεν and ξηροῦ,
And again ; Οἷς ra πράγματα ἐπὶ ξυροῦ ἀκμῆς, ὥσπερ ἡμῖν ra νῦν, ἵσταον
ται. p. 228. ejusd, Edit. Procopius seems here to have had in view
both the passage from Homer and that from Herodotus.
Potores.
Vix adsunt, properant mensis considere leti
Potores, ictoque simul quasi foedere, bella
Indicunt vino, unanpimique capacia poscunt
Pocula, nil pejus quam pocula parva timentes.
Quam male tum vetulum, non servatura, liquorem
Heu fragili nimium muvimine cera tuetyr| ~
Examinations at Cambridge. 209
Objicibus ruptis fervet, vitroque nitenti
Gemmeus exsultat, leni cum murmure, Bacchus.
Irrequieta manus it amica lagena per omues,
Perque manus othnes redit irrequieta lagena.
Pocula jam crebro crepitant admota vicissim,
Tum vapor involvens multa caligine mentem
Surgit, et in venas discedit plurimus ardor.
Visus hebet duplici delusus imagine ; credunt
Circum se volvi muros et tecta rotari.
Nec mora: confuso miscentur murmure cantus,
Queis longe et late vicinia tota remugit.
Felices nimium Arcadiz telluris alumni,
Vos quibus haud molles dotali munere finxit
Auriculas natura; melos qui fundere durum
Assueti, durum securi audire potestis.
Quales cuncentus! stridens hic perstrepere aspro
Gutture, hic eliso longam modulamine vocem
Protrahere, ille sonis gravibus producere gaudet,
Tinnit acuta aliu-: si quis caret arte canendi,
Interea tremulo exercet stridore susutros.
At simul ut siccam sitientia guttura ravim
Contraxcre, merum poscunt iterumque reposcunt.
Jam sensim subeunt convicia, jurgia, rixe ;
Pocula ad ora volant, volat omnis ad ora-supellex,
Et trahit ingentem mensa exturbata ruinam. BY.
EXAMINATIONS FOR THE CLASSICAL
MEDALS AT CAMBRIDGE.
Our readers will have seen the method of examination at Cam-
bridge for one of the public Scholarships, in p. 180. of No. XX XI.
We now add the éxdmination proposed in February last for the
two Classical Medals, at the same University.
First day.— Morning. Latin Essay: subject: ‘ Oderunt pec-
eare boni virtutis amore.—Evening. An Extract from Lord
Chesterfield’s Letters into Latm Prose. |
Second day.— Morning. Latin Hexameters: subject: ‘Somnus
agrestium Lenis virorum,’ &c.— Evening. Translation of Shen-
stone’s Song, entitled ‘ Daphne’s Visits,’ into Latin Elegiacs.
Third day.—Morning. Apol. Rhod. Arg. iv. 350—393. into
VOL. AVI. Ci. Jl. © NO. XXXIIL. O
210 Carmen
English Prose. Quote parallel passages’ in Virgil, Homer, and
Euripides. Esch. Ag. 226—256. into English Prose and Latin
Verse. Quote the passage of Lucretius, which appears-to be
imitated from it.—Evening. Aristoph. Ran. 895—-904, 993—
1008. into English Prose. Thesmophor. 1186—~1159. inte
English Verse. Mention the different metres. Lysistr. 1907 .---
1842. into Attic Greek. Quote passages in the Tragedians, which
are imitated in any of these extracts.
Fourth day.—Into English Prose: Thucyd. v. 16., and an
extract from the περὶ καταπρεσβείας of /Eschines.
Fifth day.—Extract from Dryden’s Prose Works: Vol. ii. p.
269. into Greek Prose. Milton, Sonnet 23. into Greek Tragic
Iambics. Comus v. 982.: ‘ Noble Lord ὁ. . . and intemperance,
into Greek Tragic Anapestics.
Sixth day.—Cicero, Epist. vi. 18.: and Persius, Sat. v. 161.
to the end, into English Prose.
MOLA JUVENTUTIS RESTAURATRIX.
CARMEN COMITIALE.
Natura effeetas vires, tardumque Senecte
Languorem, et siccas occulta febre medullas
Lugebant veteres ; nondum ars reparaverat xvi
Deciduos flores, avidumque fefellerat orcum..
Frustra illis medicus salientem pollice venam
- Arguto explorat, pingui de cortice frustra
Balsama guttatim exsudant—Mors frigida membris
86 furtim insinuans vitai claustra relaxat.
Discusse tandem tenebre, atque evanida ccelo
Nubila discedunt : vanas ars dedala curas
Dispulit. A&terno ridet lasciva lepore
Progenies humana, nigroque insultat Averno.
Dic, Musa, ingenii que vis miracula rerum
Ignotn explicuit ; qua debilis arte Senectus
ulsa fugit, tremulos late dum fusa per artus
Dia salus redit, et pigro se corpore miscet.
Admiranda, pedes bis senos, machina plano
Assurgens campo erigitur ; non illa rotanti
Ventorum impulsu, aut rapida versatilis unda
Comttiale. » 411
Urgetur: Quivis ansze moderamine curve
Obtortam regat adsistens. Compagine ligni
Quadrati aptatur pyxis ;—de margine preceps
Extrema huc senior demittitur ; ilicet omnes
Corporez excedunt pestes ; rediviva repente
Luxuriant membra, et juvenilis subsilit ardor.
Discolor huc ccetu certatim turba frequenti —
Conveniunt. Sonitus passim obversantur ad aures
Confusi, et tremulum fluitans natat aere murmur.
Singultu, en! vetuli titubans labat interrupto
Lingua loquax ; illi obluctantem tussis anhelans
Pulmonem quatit, atque artus nervosque coactat.
Plurima pallidulis circum tremebunda labellis
Mussat anus: macies rugosis tetrica malis
Incubat, horrendum visu ! curvantur in arcum
Corpora distorta, et segni languore vacillant.
Parte alia incedens immani mole movet se
Cruribus inflatis Hydropicus ; albus aquoso
Suffusus morbo venter tumet :—exuere aunos
Jam parat, et nitidis iterum juvenescere membris.
Hos juxta veneranda cohors, quibus. invida nomen
Virginitas peperit multos servata per annoa.
Si quis forte inerat, dudum decor excidit omnis
Vultibus ; inque vicem ruge, pallorque, famesque
' Corripuere genas ; nunquam illas serus amator
Solicitat, primo nullus procus ambit ab evo.
Nona tamen antiquum cessant defendere honorem,
Et tutari arcem, quam nemo invadere gestit,
_ Exgo ubi conceassa est reparande copia forme,
Huc omnes propere accurrunt : licet horridus egros
Deformet squalor.vultus, humerique tumescant
In gibbum, aut limos acies obliquet ocellos,
Purpureus veniet rursus decor, aptaque nervis
Compages membrorum ; at vos, pia turba, cavete,
Casta prius: novus instat amor, nova vota lacessent.
Non erit ulterius, credo, genus omne virile
Kxosum, juvenis nec jam execrabile nomen.
Mille parat fraudes Dea Cypria, mille Cupido,
Et non invitas mox in sua retia coget. |
Haud procul informi subridet lurida vultu
Turba senum, queis nulla Venus, nullique Hymenzi
Surripuere jocos, et coelibis otia vite. 3
Tile humero, hic lumbis, hic coxa debilis: le
Dirigit arboreis trepidus vestigia falcris.
Multaque preterea variis portenta Sguris,
212
Carmen Comitiale.
Matres atque viri agglomerant; magis horrids nunquam
Tisiphone visa est, non vipereo ore minaces
Gorgones, Harpyieque, aut Graie bellua Lerne
Hydra, venenatis circum vallata colubris.
Nec mora: jamque operi accinctus, preludia teritat
Impiger, et turbam preco compellat hiantem.
“ Bia agite, O cives, queis lento egrore senectus
Membra bebetat, frigentque effoete in corpore vires,
Hic evi datur exuvias, hic semina morbi
Concreta excutere, atyue annos revocare priores.
Dicite lo Pean!— Nature claustra refregit
Artis vivida vis: gelidas discedere mortes
En! jubeo, atque omnes vegeta florere juventa.
Vos, Erebi latebre, plorate, et lurida Ditis
Limina ;—non aliis posthac immania lethi
Pallescent umbris adyta, aut Cyllenia proles
Mittet agens virga trepidos ad ‘l'artara manes.
Vos quoque, queis vires datur, herbarumque latentem
Humorem excoquere, et medicos miscere sapores,
Deserti lugete Machaones ;—irrita Pheebi
Dona jacent; letam quamvis incocta salutem
Pharmaca concipiant ; quamvis referatur in artus
Distractos anima Hippolyto, medicamine sensim
Peonio fota, atque infusis vivida succis. "
Vos quoque, funeream soliti longo agmine pompam
Instruere, et vanum pretio conducere luctum, .
Exuite horrorem, et speciose insignia mortis
Tollite ;—ne picea trepident ferrugine tede,
Ne fluitet vaga crista, et vertice nutet equino. -
Pelle nova micat, et rediviva βίδα coruscat
Vipera; ridenti guttarum imbuta lepore,
Deciduos reparat Pavonis pluma colores ;
—Nos quoque purpuree florem renovare juvente
Ars docet, atque iterum validis adulescere membris.”
Dixerat: Unanimi populus clamore secundum
Ingeminat plausum, scalisque interritus heret
Pensilibus. Facili momento impulsa rotatur
Machina, demissoque in capsam desuper zgros
Excipit amplexu vitali, artusque figurat. |
Attritis furtim excedens vis morbida nervis
Exprimitar ; passim vitai diditus humor
Per dubios fluit anfractus, et clausa relaxat
Spiramenta :᾿ salus roseis perfusa labellis
Subrubet, atque habilem sinuat per membra wigorem.
Pro vetulis sensim exiliunt puerique puelleque,
Iiterary Intelligeritce. 218
Ac veluti Hsonia proles rediviva juventa
Luxuriat, luditque animis lasciva novellis.
In Comitiis Prioribus. 1774. G. CULE, 4. 8.
Coll. Reg. Cantab. Soc.
LITERARY INTELLIGENCE.
_ Onder the Patronage of, and Dedicated to,
‘HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE REGENT.
Prospectus of a new and corrected Edition of the DELPHIN
CLASSICS ; with the Variorum Nores appended. To
be intitled The Regent’s Edition. ‘To be printed and edited by
A. J. Valpy, M.A. late Fellow of Pembroke College, Oxford.
Tue high reputation in the Learned World of the DELPHIN
CLassics, and the prevailing scarcity of most of them, leave
little doubt that their Republication will be received with patron-
age and approbation.
The Edition, now proposed to be published under the Patron-
e of, and Dedicated to, His Royal Highness the Prince Regent,
] be printed in a neat and uniform manner.
The Maps will be beautifully executed ; and the Woop-CurTs
at present existing in the DeELPHIN and VarioruM EpiITIONS
will also be inserted.
The avidity with which the DELPHIN CLASSICS are sought,
and the impracticability of procuring complete Sets, as well as
the knowledge that they contain many literal errors, and that the
critical labors of the last Century, and the collation of many im-
. t MSS. have considerably improved the text, encourage the
rinter in the expectation that a new and corrected Edition will
be regarded in the most favorable manner ; especially as it is con-
_ ceived that no library can be considered as complete without a re-
-gular Collection of the CLassics, and the DeLpmin have been
ever regarded by the Literary World as most valuable and distin-
guished Editions. _ .
The Notes in the best and latest Varionu™ Edition will be
printed at the end of each Author; and the Various Readings
paced ander the Text—thus will be incorporated, as it were, the
ELPHIN and the VariornuM EDITIOoNs.
The best Indices will be adopted, and carefully collated with
the Text, to remove the present numerous faults in the references.
‘The reference will be to the Book and Chapter, and not to the
page, by. which means the same Index will apply to all other edi-
914 Literary
tions. The Delphin Interpretatio will be placed under the text,
to preserve the beauty of the page. ‘Lhe Literaria Notitia from
the Bipont Editions, continued to the present time, will be added
to each Author.
The whole will be printed uniformly in Octavo, pr. 18s. boards,
each Part to Subsceibers, and £1. 1s. to Non-Subscribers. Each
Part will contain 672 closely printed pages, without reference to
the conclusion of any author, so that the Subscribers may bind
each author in as many Volumes as they please, and arrange them
alphabetically or chronologically, as most convenient.
Some Copies will be struck off on very fine thick.Royal Paper,
with a large margin, and hotpressed, Price to Subscribers £1. 16s.,
to Non-Subscribers £2. 2s, each Part. The Price will be raised
higher to Non-Subscribers, as the Work advances.
The whole will make about 120 or 130 Parts—and twelve Parts
will be printed in the year without fail. Each Part to be paid for
on delivery.
As only a certain number of Copies will be printed, the Work
cannot be sold in separate Parts. .
To preserve a fair margin, the page will not be quite so broad
as the present Octavo Editions. ΝΣ
It may not be improper to observe, that a complete set of the
Delphin Editions sold at the Roxburghe Sale in 1812 for above
£500. and that a uniform set of the VanionuM can scarcely be
obtained at any price.
The necessity of publishing such a National Work by subscrip-
tion is obvious, as it prevents all apprehensions of any check te
its completion, and without which it could not be undertaken. --
A List of Subscribers will be published with the Work.
As it is confidently hoped that the Subscription will soon enable
the Work to be sent to press, it may be necessary for such as are
desirous to subscribe to be early in forwarding their-names ; and
at the same time to state /arge or small paper, as also the manner
in which the name should be printed m the List of Subscribers.: -
** To save expense, it is particularly requested that a reference
may be given to some friend or agent in London, where the Parts
may be left and the money received. Any Person travelling abroad
may have his Parts kept at Mr. Valpy’s Office until his return.
For Subscribers’ Names see Mr. Valpy’s Catalogue at the be
ginning of this No. :
PREPARING FOR PUBLICATION.
| CLASSICAL. .
Mr. Thomas Taylor is now preparing for the press, 2 ‘Sune.
tion from the Greek of Iamblichus’ Life of Pythagoras, or Pytl
goric Life; which will also be accompanied-with a trans
of the Ethical Pythagoric Fragments in the Doric dialect, pre-
Intelligence. . 215
seryed by Stobseus; and of many Pythagoric sentences, which
have escaped the notice of all modern editors. This work will form
ene Vol. 8vo., and will be published by subscription.
IN THE PRESS.
CLASSICAL.
The publication of “ The Regent’s Edition” of the Latin
Classics in 18mo. (somewhat retarded, of late, by accidental cir-
cumstances) will henceforth be prosecuted with vigor, industry,
and perseverance.— Livy and Sallust are now in the press, under
the Editorial superintendence of Dr. J. Carey, to whom the public
are already indebted for the Horace, Catullus, Tibullus, Proper-
tius, Martial, Cesar, Tacitus, and the second edition of the Virgil,
with the Opuscula, recently published.
_ Dr. Carey has also in the press ‘“‘ The, Eton Latin Prosody
illustrated,” with English explanations of the rules, and copious
examples from the Latin Poets.
In the Press, and speedily will be published in two large Vols.
Octavo, (dedicated, by permission, to The Right Hon. Lord
᾿ Colchester,) An Introduction to the Critical Study and Know-
ledge of the Holy Scriptures, by Thomas Hartwell Horne, A. M.
“Wlustrated with Maps and Fac-Similes of Biblical Manuscripts.—
This work, on which the author has been engaged for many years,
is offered to the biblical student and to divines, as a manual of
what is most valuable in sacred literature, digested from the la-
bors of the most eminent biblical critics, both British and foreign
and is divided into three Parts. :
Part I. contains a view of the Geography of Palestine, and
of the political, religious, moral, and civil state of the Jews, il-
lustrating the principal events recorded in the Scriptures; and
treats on the physical and political Geography of the Holy Land,
including a description of Jerusalem and its various edifices—the
political state of the Jews from the patriarchal times to the Baby-
lovish captivity ; under the Asmonzan princes, the sovereigns of
the Herodian family, and the Roman procurators—the Roman
judicature, manner of trial, and treatment of prisoners, as meu-
tioned in the New Testament—Crucifixion, comprising a particular.
illustration of the circumstances attending the crucifixion of Jesus
Christ—the ecclesiastical state of the Jews, including ao account
of the Jewish church and its members; the ministers of the temple
and other ecclesiastical persons ; the sacred times and seasons ob-
served by the Jews ; their religious and moral state during the time
of Jesus Christ ; their different sects; Jewish and Roman modes
of computing time, mentioned in the Scriptures. "
Part II. is appropriated to the interpretation of the Scriptures,
216 Literary
compreheuding an investigation of the different senses of Scripture,
literal, spiritual, and typical, with criteria for ascertaining and
determining them—the signification of words and phrases, general.
rules for investigating them; emphatic words, rules for the investi-
gating of emphasis, and particularly the Greek article—the subsi-
diary means for ascertaining the sense of Scripture, viz. the original
languages of Scripture; 1. Elebrew: its antiquity; characters;
review of the question concerning vowel points; bibliographical
and critical notices of the best Hebrew Lexicons and Grammars.
2. Greek : critical history of it; and of the style of the New Tes-
tament, its dialeets, Hebraisms, Rabbinisms, Syriasms and Chal-
daisms, Latinisms, Persisms and Cilicisms ; bibliographical and
critical notices of the best Greek Lexicons to the New Testament
—the kindred dialects ; Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic—
ancient versions of the Scriptures; the Chaldee targums or para-
phrases ; history of the Septuagint and other Greek versions, with
critical and bibliographical notices of their several editions, and of
the Biblical labors of Origen; the Syriac, Arabic, and other
Oriental veisions ; the Latin, Gothic, Sclavomic, and other Wes-
tern versions of the Old and New ‘l'estaments; the use and appli-
cation of ancient versions—analogy of Scripture, or parallel pas-
sages, rules for ascertaming and applying them; Scholia and Glos-
saries ; the subject matter, context, scope, and analogy of Faith—
the figurative language of Scripture, comprehending the principles
of interpretation of tropes and figures; together with an examuina-
tion of the metonymies, metaphors, allegories, parables, proverbs,
and other figurative modes of speech occurrifig in the Sacred
Writings—on reconciling the apparent contradictions in Scripture,
whether in the Mosaic laws, historical or chronological ; seeming
contradictions between prophecies and their accomplishment; ap-
parent contradictions in morality ; apparent contradictions between
the sacred writers themselves, and between sacred and profane
writers ; seeming contradicticns to philosophy and the nature of
things—on the quotations from the Old Testament in the New,
presenting new tables of all the quotations ; showing, first, their
relative agreement with the Hebrew and with the Septuagint ; and,
secondly, whether they are prophecies cited as literally fulfilled;
prophecies typically or spiritually applied; prophecies accommo-
dated ; simple allusions to the Old Testament ; apocryphal
sages ; and passages from profane authors quoted in the New Tes-
tament. .
These diseussions are followed by the application of the preceding
principles, for ascertaining the various senses of Scripture, to the
historical interpretation of the Sacred Writings ; the interpretation
of Scripture-miracles ; the spiritual or mystical interpretation of the
Bible ; the interpretation of types ; of the doctrinal and moral parta
of Scripture ; of the promises and threatenings of Scripture ; and
Intelligence. 217
to the practical reading of the Bible; observations on commenta-
tors, with rules for consulting them to the best advantage.
Under each head or section are introduced very numerous refe-
rences to the Scriptures ; and, throughout the work, references are
also made to the most approved writers on every topic discussed,
in order to assist the further researches of the studious.
Part III. treats on the analysis of the Scriptures, in two books.
Book I. On the Old Testament, comprises a short account of the
Sacred Canon, its ancient and modern divisions, and English trans-
lations of the Scriptures—observations on the Pentateuch, proofs
of its authenticity, and a vindication of it from the exceptions and
misrepresentations of Dr. Geddes and others—critical prefaces to
each book, and also to the historical books of the Old Testament,
arranged under the following heads, viz.—1. title—2. author—3.
date—-4. general argument—5. scope—6. prophecies or types of
‘the Messiah (if any) mentioned in each book—?7. synopsis of its
contents, exhibiting them at one view on an improved plan—8.
observations on difficult topics occurring im any hook.—On the
poetry of the Hebrews; its construction, nature, and gemius; dif-
ferent species of Hebrew poetry; observations for better under-
standing the productions of the Hebrew poets; similar critical
prefaces to each of the poetical books, particularly illustrating their
respective structures, and their prophetical and mystical or typical
import.—On the prophetical books of the Old Testament, includ-
Ing an account of the various kinds of prophets mentioned in the
Scriptures ; nature of prophetic inspiration ; structure of prophe-
tic poesy; number and order of the prophetic books; rules for
ascertaining the sense, and for the interpretation, of the prophetic
writings ; critical prefaces to each of the prophetical books, which
are arranged in the order of time when the prophets respectively
fiorished, viz.—1. prophets, who lived before the Babylonian cap-
tivity—@. prophets, who lived near to or during the captivity ; and
3. propbets, who florished after the return of the Jews from Bab
lon.—On the apocryphal books, with critical prefaces to each,
briefly exhibiting ‘an account of its title, date, in what language
originally written, its argument, scope, and synopsis.
Book II. On the New Testament, contains an account of its
canon, with critical prefaces to each of the historical books, com-
prising—1. its titlek—-2. author—3. date—4. canonical authority—
5. argument—6. scope—7. synopsis—8. observations on its style.
—An Essay on the state of the Christian church during the apo-
stolic age.—On the Epistles in the New Testament, arranged in
the order of time when they were respectively composed, with simi-
Jar critical prefaces.—Qn- the Apocalypse, with a like preface.—
Notice of the apocryphal writings ascribed to the apostles.
A copious Appendix will be subjoined : cone 1. an
VOL. XVII. Ci. Jl. NO. XXX1 P
218 Literary ἢ
account of the Jewish calendar, in which the various festivals are
introduced ; together with the state of the weather im Palestine in
the various seasons of the year.—@. a list of commentators and
Biblical critics of eminence, with bibliographical and critical no-
tices of each, extracted from authentic sources.—~3. rules for the
better understanding of Hebraisms.—4. a critical account of the
principal manuscripts of the Old and New Testament.—5. a critical
notice of the principal editions of the Old and New Testaments.
—6. observations on various readings; with a digest of the chief
rules for weighing and applying them.—7. an abstract of profane
oriental history, from the time of Solomon to the Babylonian cap-
tivity ; illustratmg the history of the Hebrews as referred to in the
prophetic writings, and including historical notices of the Assy-
rian, Chaldee, Median, Persian, and Egyptian empires.—8. tables
of the weights and measures mentioned in the Bible, together with
chronological and other tables, necessary to facilitate the study of
the Holy Scriptures.
The greater part of this work is printed off ; and the whole will
be executed with as much dispatch as the variety and importance
of its contents will admit.
LATELY PUBLISHED.
CLASSICAL.
Hermes Romanus, ou Mercure Latin, par J. N. Barbier
Vémars. 12mo. Paris.
This is a monthly publication of an interesting nature to the
classical student. It consists of Extracts from the best anctest
Latin Poets, under the title of Veterum Carmina; of madem
poetry, Recentiorum Carmina; of Miscellanea, ancient and orr
ginal Latin prose. We have given, in the Adversaria, a specimen
of B. V.’s poetical talents, which many of our readers will think
very respectable. :
Clavis Metrico-Virgiliana, a Metrical Gmide to the right’ intel-
ligence of Virgil’s versification, by John Carey, LL. D. Imo.
1818.
It is sufficient to say that this little book is written by the author
of Latin Prosody made easy, a work, to which we have had more
than once occasion to allude, and which ought to be in the hands
of every metrical scholar. This Clavis notices and analyses every
verse in Virgil containing a poetical licence, and is calculated to
be materially useful to the young Prosodian.
A neat Edition of the Septuagint, with the 4 ha, from
the Oxford Edition of Bos. Prey ἰ. 8. Poe
This Edition is hot-pressed, and handsomely printed by Mr.
Valpy, in one volume 8yo. for use in Churches, Chapels, ard refe-
rence, as well as the Library.
Intelgence. 219
Horace, with English Notes to the Qdes, Critical and. Explana-
tory. Pi. ὅς. bound. Printed by the same for Schools.
_ Lettere ε Dissertazioni numismatiche di Domenico Sestini, &e.
Tomi I—II—III. in 4to. Milano, 1813—17.
Sopra le Medaglie Antiche relative alla Confederazione degli
Achei: Dissertazione di Dom. Sestini, &c. Milano, 1817. 4to.
' pp. 44.
Mémoire sur les Oracles des Anciens, par M. Clavier. Paris,
1818. in 8vo. p. viij + 176. :
. Q. Horatii Flacci Carminum Libn v. Ad fidem xvii. MSS.
Parisiensium recensuit, notis illustravit, et Gallicis versibus resti-
tuit C. Vanderbourg. Par. ὦ Vol. in 8vo. 1813.
«
Nova acta Regie Societatis Scientiarum Upsaliensis. Vol. vii.
4to. Upsal. 1815.—This volume contains only two Dissertations
of the philological kind: 1. De Lingue Phenicie et Hebraice
mutua zqualitate, Commentatio ΟἹ. Gerh. Tychsen. 4. Speci-
mina affinitatis Lingue Lapponice cum Latiali a Car. Gust. Nor-
din collecta. | .
_ Relation d’une insigne Imposture littéraire, découverte dans un
Voyage fait en Sicile en 1794, par le Dr. Hager: traduit. de.
FP Allemand. Erlang. 1799.
Pandecte Medice, sive succincta explicatio retum Medicarum
in Institutionibus, Digestis, Novellis obviarum : scripsit Chr. Gfr.
Gruner. Jenz. 1800.
Diropediag τὰ Σποράδην. Miscellanesee Doctrine Lab. tertius.
{auctore et editore D. Wyttenbachio} Amst. 1817. 8vo. p. vili+
$26. This volume, containing 1. An unedited Fragment of Hiero-
nymus Rhodius; 2. Memoria G. L. Wassenaer dicta a D. W
tenbach; 3. A Recension of the Edition of Plato’s Phedon by D.
Wyttenbach ; 4. item, of Ruhnken’s and others’ Epistles, edited
by Tittmann, with a Vindication of the Dutchmen ; 5.-ifem, of
Epistole Sodalium Socraticorum Philomathiz, the editor of which
is M. Mahne; 6. Parentalia, i. e. Encomiums of several learned
men recently deceased ; 7. Narrationes et librorum summaria.
Traduction Frangaise des CEuvres de Tacite par Dureau de La
Malle. 86 Edition. 1818. Paris 6 vols: 8vo.
Tl. | 290
NOTES TO CORRESPONDENTS.
a> a ee
᾿ Our Correspondent W, D. we hope will bear with us for the
omission of his solicited article, till he knows our reasons.
Muscologus in our next.
Kimchi came too Jate for our present No.
We shall be obliged to any of our Readers to lend us a copy of
Professor Luzac’s Dissertation de Ostracismo, for the purpose of
reprinting it in our Journal.
In our next we shall give Professor Boissonade’ s Distertatio ad
Inscriptionem Actiacam, with many additions and alterations:
Observations on some Lines of Homer in our next.
Mr. C. Leo’s Observations on Mr. Bellamy’s Prospectus will
certainly appear in No. XXXIV.
Rhenus, a Poem, came too late.
On s’empresse d'accueillir les articles de A. N. T. P. 1, 1,
mais il a mis tant de fleurs dans ses traits de plume, qu’il n’est pas
facile ἃ un compositeur Anglais de les déchiffrer. Ses caractéres
Grecs sont presque t/lisibles.
J. C.’s Alcaics are in general good: but we would recommend
to his perusal the rules in the Classical Journal, particularly in
No. ΧΧΗ.
THIS DAY IS PUBLISHED,
In Octavo, with the Plates separate in Folio, 1. 8s.
TOPOGRAPHY ΣΝ
ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE BATTLE OF PLATHA$ |
Consisting of Plans of the Plain and City of Platea, of Plans of
Eleuthera, fEnoe, and Phyle, and a View of Eleuthera, from Drawings
made on the spot, by T. ALLASON, and engraved by CooKE.
ACCOMPANIED BY MEMOIRS . ° ’
. Read to the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres of the
. ‘Institute of France.
By JOHN SPENCER STANHOPE, F.R.S.
. _And Acad. Inscrip. and Bell. Lett. Instit. Paris. Corresp.
Printed for JOUN MURRAY, Albemarle Street.
END OF NO. XXXIII.
Eee
Ce
: THE
CLASSICAL JOURNAL.
NO. XXXIV.
JUN E, 1818.
‘AN EXAMINATION"
Of the Fourteen Verses selected from Scripture, by Mn. J.
BuLLAmy, as ὦ specimen of his emendation of the Bible.
By CunistorHer Lxo, Teacher of the German Lan-
guage in the University of Cambridge. |
.
Ir is difficult for a mind laboring under the continual pressure of
‘private cares, to assume sufficient resolution and composure to enter
on the task of literary disquisition ; particularly when the subject of
that disquisition is important, and renders it necessary either to sanc-
tion or to oppose the assertions of another author.
‘This cause alone has prevented me from expressing my sentiments
sooner on the intended New Translation of the Bible by Mr. Bellamy.
It was at the Public Library in Hull, that I met with No. XXVI.
of the Classical Journal. From this publication I first learned Mr.
Bellamy’s intention; together with some remarks and references, by
which he claims, not only the favor of the public, but also the ap-
probation of every Hebrew scholar, for the intended New Transia-
tion of the Bible: and on these he rests, what he calls, a satisfactory
reply to the Bishop of St. David’s ““ Remarks why a new translation
of the Bible should not be published without a previous statement
and examination of all the material passages which may be supposed
to be misinterpreted ?”
As I have neither seen nor heard of the Circular Letter published
by the Bishop of St. David’s, and know nothing of the controversy
between his Lordship and Mr. Bellamy concerning the New Transla-
tion, I shall confine myself to the observations and references by
which Mr. Bellamy supports the cause of his new version, and
which he has inserted in the Classical Journal, No. XXVI., witha
view, | suppose, to stand the test of a fair and impartial examination.
ΤΑ full answer is given to this Examination in the Pretace to the first
Part of Mr. Bellamy’s new Translation of the Bible, which is just published.
VOL. XVII. Cl. Ji. ΝΟ. XXXIV. Q
232 Onthe Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s
But before I enter into this examination, I think it necessary to say
a few words respecting translations in general, and the difficulties of
expressing in a modern language the simplicity and spirit of the most
ancient of all. The translator will frequently find that he cannot do
justice to the author. The reason is very obvious : the grammatical
Constructions, the idioms and phrases of different languages, even of
those in modern use, vary so widely from each other, that in the best
translation a material shade of difference will appear, when compared
with the original.‘ Hence an impartial translator is often obliged to
quote the very words of the author, and to accompany them with a
comment, to avoid misinterpreting the sense of the original work.
It is then absolutely necessary, before an author finds fault with a
translation, and presumes to give us a better. one instead of it, that he
should have a perfect knowledge of the yrammar, idioms and phrases
of the original language. If we believe the pretensions and assertions
of Mr. Bellamy, he possesses all the requisite acquirements for the
task he has undertaken. But with me the question is: Are his ac-
quirements equal to his pretensions? This | am now going to exa-
mine. a
Why the author in question has placed the few verses he has picked
out from the Bible in such a confused order, appears to me very
_ singular. It} gives the scholar who wishes to consult the Bible aa
unnecessary trouble, in looking backwards and forwards, in order to
examine them. To save the reader this trouble, I shall take notice
a them in the regular order in which we meet with them in Holy
rit.
But before I consider them all according to the order in which they
stand in the Bible, it may be proper to make an exception with one
ai Verse, 2 Kings, v. 18. since Mr. Bellamy has filled up nearly seven
“pages with the words Ν ΠῚ Ww) NIT Nid, and with re-
ferences in order to establish the correctness of his translation: and
this will naturally claim a greater space and minuteness, in my exami-
nation of them.
_ © A reference to the following passages,” says Mr. B., ‘* will show
-that the word N12 in the simple form, occurs in the sense of came.”
44 See Gen. xxxix. 16. Ch. xlili, 25. 1 Sam. ix. 15, Ezek. xxxili, 22.”
‘“* Thus we find, that his Lordship is not strictly accurate, in saying,”
There is no example in the Bible of N\A (in the simple farm as tt
ts representcd in the note) inthe sense of came. Dove» Mr. Bellamy
here pretend to assert that ΣΧ, in the four instances cited, signifies
in the original came? If he does, [ tell him that his knowledge of
the Hebrew must be superficial. But if he refers us to the trans-
lation, to the very translation he finds fault with, what does his refer
Dr. Biair, alter poimtingout the peculiarities of the French and English
languages, says, “ Languaze 15. generally understood tu receive its predo~
minant tincture from the national -character of the ‘people who speak it.”
See his Rhet. Lect. ix. p. 200, 201. .
New Translation of the Bible. 223
ence amount to? It amounts to no more or less than guod volumus,
facile credimus. ‘This may be a maxim with Mr. Bellamy, but this by
no means affords a proof to the Hebrew scholar of the propriety of
his translating NIDA came. |
Such assertions, supported by such references, are repugnant to the
feelings of ἃ scholar; they destroy the vital essence of the sacred
language. No wonder that the Sceptic and Deist should add still
more obstacles to those already opposed against the Divine Revela-
tion, when they are told that the infinitive in Hebrew is often rendered
in the perfect tense. - |
But here Jet us ask, has our author given any reason, or pojnted
_Outany rule, why the infinitive ΝΣ in these verses to which he refers,
occurs in the sense of came? No! And I have good reasons to affirm .
-that he cannot. I will defy him to produce a single instance, where
Ni on the principle of grammatical construction can be rendered in
the perfect tense.
An_ attentive and impartial examination on those principles will
show that in the above-mentioned four verses, the infinitive ND is to
_be considered as a noun: for whenever an infinitive is found in
construction with a noun, or one of the following prepositions,—
ΠῚ ὃν, W, Ww, 2D), 09, INN, ἄς. &c. so placed before it,
we must regard it asa noun. Hence, Gen. xxxix. 16., 1732 MA
WPI-ON PIN Nias Ty TWN And she laid up his garment by her,
until his master’s coming home. Gen. xliii. 25. WMIATNAN WD"
OMA HOY NW And they prepared the present during the
coming of Joseph to dinner. The word ΣΧ in both these verses
becomes a noun; for it is constructed with a noun, and has likewise
the preposition WY before τ, The same is the case with the verse
1 Sam. ix. 15. NWTNID “BO INN Oy Sw pax md) mM
SQN And Jehovah revealed in the ear of Samuel a day before the
coming of Saul, saying. Ezek. xxxiii. 22. y2 ON AAT MATIN
MOT NID 1995 And the power of Jehovah was upon me in the
evening before the arrival of the fugitive. Here again, N12 in both
_verses is constructed witlz a noun, and has the preposition ‘357 before
it. By either of these rules it is evident that an infinitive can be
taken substantively. And for this reason the Hebrew Grammarians
call the infinitive likewise ΕΠ Dw, that is, an infinitive noun,
which signifies neither more nor less than the infinitive mood being
taken as a substantive. |
I now come to take notice of the infinitive N)3 with one of the
letters D533. And here, since Mr. Bellamy has in part, though per-
haps reluctantly, admitted, that ΝΖ in Gen. xv. 12. and N25 Jud.
v. 28. 1 Sam. xxiii. 7. and Mal. iv. 5. are in the infinitive mood, I
think it proper to omitthem; and direct my attention to the passages
1 Sam. iv. 5. Ch. v. 10. Ch. vii. 13. 2Sam. xv. 2. and xix. 3.
In these passages our author says, ‘“ the translators have been im-
lled to translate NIQD and ΝῺ in the preterite.” Why
impelled? I have good reasons to suppose that our translators were
224 On the Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s
better acquainted with the Hebrew Grammar, and Syntax, than Mr,
Bellamy, and had too good a knowledge of the English tongue, to
find themselves impelled to translate the inftmtive 312, with the
letter 5 or 5 in the perfect tense." They might, I have no doubt, if
they chose, have expressed the sense of these Hebrew verses in more
than one way. It is a mere conjecture of Mr. B. to,say “ they were
impeHed ;” and for my part I believe it is only done to give 60 his
cause a plausible appearance: but here again, I wilf convinoe the
author, if he wishes to be convinced of his errors, that his knowledge
of the Hebrew is very confined ; for if he knew the grammatical rules
concerning the infinitive, with one of the letters p723 prefixed, he
would not for a moment suppose that the infinitive, in these passages,
must be rendered in the preterite.
The infinitive, for the most part, has one of the letters Ὁ555 pte-
fixed, and is generally preceded by a verb of the past or fe-
ture tense: but in both ways the infinitive retains its infinitive
sense. For instance, I shall cite the same passages 1 Sam. iv. 5.
ASIST ON ΓΎΤΕΓΥΩ ΝΣ NIID YM And it was at the coming
of the ark, the Covenant of Jehovah, into the camp, chap. v. 10.
ΤΡ» OTDNT WN ND TM And it was at the coming of the ark
of God to Ekron, ch. vii. 13. SID Hy WORD ON wm
ΝΣ ὉΔΔΣ And the Philistines were subdued, and they did not
venture to come any more into the frontiers of Israel : 2 Sam. xv. 2.
m2 and maw weirdo mh Ard it happened that every
one who had a dispute to come before the ing ch. xix. 3.
yr iad NT DP OT aN And the people were obliged
the same day to come into the city by stealth. In the first two the
reader will see that the infinitive N19 is preceded by the future tense
ΤΡ with a ἡ conversive (being therefore in the past tense). In the
‘two following, the infinitive 135 is preceded, in the first by the pre-
terite of the verb 4}, in the second by the future tense of the verb
ΤΥΤΊ, and in the last by a reflective verb of the future tense, with
ἃ ἡ conversive.” Since the infinitive in these verses, remains in its
infinitive sense, consequently these references, in support of his asser-
tions, are without foundation.
Indeed our translators have given us a good interpretation of all
these cited verses; and if I am allowed to judge from Mr. Bellamy’s
questions, observations, and the translations of the fourteen verses,
which he has chosen as a specimen of bis emendatidn of their labors,
my opinion is, that-he is not only incapable of amending our version,
but cannot even equal it.
It is true our translators have rendered the infinitive in all the above
cited verses in the preterite ; but what of this? Does any scholar for
”
= There is a mistake here in the references of the Author, and likewise in
prefixing to all the infinitives of NI cited a 4 two of them have a 3.
> It may be proper to remark, that the verb 939, as a reflective verb, ap-
pears in no other place of the whole Bible besides this verse.
New Translation of the Bible. 225
a single moment presume to obtain a knowledge of the idioms and
phrases of a language from a translation ?
All we have to look for in a translation, is a faithful interpretation,
so that the true sense of the original may be preserved; and in this,
with a few exceptions," our translators have been, considering the
great task, very careful. They have transmitted to us the sense of the
sacred writers; and ‘as long as we have this, what need we more? It
is one thing to point out the grammatical structure of a language, and
another to translate a language. To analyse and to construe a phrase
of.a language, is the design of Grammar; to become acquainted with
the customs and manners of a nation, or with any detail contained in a
book, is the design of a translation. If we take our present version in
that light, we shall find it very little less than a well-executed and
laborious work. °
There is not the least doubt that our Divines were qualified to trans-
late the Hebrew | e; and had they been called upon to answer
the question, Why they rendered the infinitive in these verses in the
perfect tense? their reply probably would have been the following :
The meaning we have adopted, is the only one which suits the genius
of both languages, by preserving the real spirit of the sacred pages,
without violating the rules of the English syntax.
Having shown that N13 in the verses quoted by Mr. Bellamy is, on
the basis of Grammar, either to be taken as a noun, or to remain in
its infinitive tense, I will now (to conclude with it) point out a few
passages in which we find the infinitive actually placed instead of 4
noun. Ps. ci. 3. DMO MWY WNdw I hate the work of, ἄς. Here
the construction plainly shows, that the infinitive (WY occupies the
place of ‘the noun Wy. See also Gen. ii. 4. Jer. ii. 17 and 19.
gain, a noun instead of an infinitive: Numb. xxiii. 10. SDN
NW’ YOVNN. And the number of the fourth part. Here also
the construction convinces us, that the noyn 5D) is substituted
for the infinitive "BD9) See likewise Numb. x. 2. Esth. ix. 19.
I now.come to examine the other words, ΠΟ ΠῚ. Ww) NYT
2 Kings v.18. And here the reader will. perceive, after I have
pointed out the errors of this translator, how provoking it must be to
* Ithas been the fashion of late to depreciate the merits of our learned
translators; And why? Because there are passages to be met with, wherein
they have been incorrect in their interpretation. Granted: but is it not for
all this a valuable work? and have.we not derived, and do we not daily still
derive, great benefit from their Jabors? This cannot be denied. Let us
then, instead of finding fault with a few passages, acknowledge our thanks
for what they have done for us; and let those, who feel themselves compe-
_tent to render it more perfect, add their observations without accusation.
‘Our translators had a difficult and laborious task to undergo, and we by their
assistanee are now enabled to improve it. But let us never overlook their
merits; let us never lose sight of this great work! It is the encouragement
of our present and future labors; and is the cawse of such an ericourage~
ment to be treated with contempt?
226 On the Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s
a person who is acquainted with the rules of the Hebrew syntax, to
read such singular questions, and insignificant remarks; with- the
strange quotations given, in order to establish his notion, vis. that
the ), with shevab prefixed, in ΠΟΣΊ, is not conversive.
It appears from the author's own confession, that the Bishop of St.
David’s has taken notice of the same words, and stated the errors of
them. ὁ“ [lis Lordship allows,” says Mr, B. “that the three verbs
are, indeed, in the preterite form ;" but adds, ‘‘ every reader of the
Hebrew text knows that the future time is commonly expressed by the
preterite (sometimes without the ἡ conversive, but oftener with 1ὃ
perhaps more commonly than by its own proper form. The last
preterite has the ἡ conversive prefixed to it; the one before it has it
prefixed to its pronoun.”
These observations of the learned Prelate, no Hebrew scholar will -
dare to contradict. Ancient and modern grammars, written by
Hebrews as well as by Christians, have filled whole pages with the
rules of HDT) Vay Ὁ (rau copulative and ται conversive). 1
will here copy what Elias Lerita says (who is acknowledged to be
one of the first Hebrew scholars that ever lived), in bis grammar
WIT WD, fol. iii. p. 2.
ὯΣ WRID ΠΝ Ὁ DWN Why> aay Jen ΠΥ ΩΣ νῚ .1
Nw) 2 aN DI NOW) OD Nw! ΠῚ Tow ow
Doman not NWA ANP NT Pom : ws wD NT
“NIFTY WRI pI oN MND oN pwd AME ὈΛΘΞΙΤΌΠ
DIT pI.
NT PST DN HINT NT TON JIN fa TON OND 2
TIN PIOD) Want NTN InN ay Syp mad onwd.
api dw maw pr: pa Sowom min Sys oD ἸΘῸ
PD) ndw >. anew ΥἹ ἼΩΝΑ ox ΠῚ
"TON IAW ΓΙΧΊΩΡΙΠ WT Naya Tay Syp Nw TNT ΠΝ ΠΝ ἸΝῚ
THY Thy ΟΡῸΞ ray pwoa Ὡ pon WT Dyn 9
ΟΝ NAT ὝΒΌΣ Sax ANA MITA ANd AN Jay ops:
: 2. OD :
PIT ANN ἸΟῸ THD NWA ὝΠΟ moan ΠΡ wD rH 4
ὈΨῸΣ ὉΠ INT) OY ὈΠῸΣ AM PsA Ὁ Ὁ NaN)
MNO snday) v9) Dd Pon ow ww ann by Sybo
py San ΘΟ pyonw onay of ooo Sy cman oY
ὍΣ ΓΝ mw ws an? dy ywibp oywr rive pen γ᾽
: AN Maw NII ΡΠ
That is, 1. To convert the past tense into the future, a ἡ, with
shevah, must be prefixed, as may be seen by the preterite WOW, turned
into a future tense, Deut. vii. 12. 7 THON MVP WL, And Jehovah
thy God will keep thee. Here the preterite "Ww, with the 4 shevah
refixed, signifies W)QW (and he will keep). Again, Exod. xxxi. 16.
Ww Ὁ MW, And the children of Israel shall keep. Were
New Translation of the Bible. 237
YW) signifies, for the same reason, YW"). , And the ἡ conversive
is always pointed with a shevah, except the pM (annihilators), "
turn the } shevah, either into a shurik, pathach, or chirik.
2. The rule to discern the } copulative from the ἢ conversive is,
that every ἢ prefixed to a past tense, preceded by a preterite, is copu-
lative ; for instance, Isaiah xli. 4. TUB OyD ἢ, who has wrought
and done it? ch. vi. 3. “ὮΝ ΠῚ bye ΓΙ NWI, and one cried unto —
another, and said. In these two passages the ἢ is merely copulative :
in the first, on account of being preceded by the preterite, who has
wrought, in the second, on account of its being preceded by the
future tense of the verb fo see, with a Ὁ conversive, which turns the
future into the ‘past tense. . .
3. In prophecies, and poetical writings, we find frequently the past
tense instead of the future, and the future tense instead of the past ;
but in historical accounts very seldom. . ’
4. In the first and second person singular of the preter tense, the Ἷ
copulative may-also be distinguished from the Ἷ conversive, by the
accent: for the accent generally will determine the case. An accent
in penultima shows that the } is copulative; for instance, Lev. x.
19. DVT ANWT ΩΝ), and had I eaten the sin-offering to-day. ,
Hos. xii. 10. ὩΣ Sy WM IA, [have also spoken by the prophets.
An accent in ultima. shows that the } is conversive; for instance,
Exod. xv. 26.. ὉΠ 5D AN NM Ww, and will keep all his statutes.
Jer. 1.16. ΒΝ MIAH, and I will utter (pronounce) my judg-
ment.” To this I add, that instances of a ἡ with shevah, converting
the preterite into a future tense, might be produced to a very great
number; whole chapters can be exhibited for that purpose. See Exod,
ch. xxv. xxvi. Xxvii. xxviii. and xxix. I have now particularly to re-
quest the reader to apply these rules concerning the ἢ conversive of
the preterite, to the verse 2 Kings v. 18., which I think proper to
transcribe, for the better and more convenient application of them:
Tow MINNA PT. Ie NIA Ty) MP MDD MT IIT)
7 Va sAsnnwm sy we im ay> ma xondo
ivy IIT
« By mona is understood, that the } conversive before the second
person plural of the preterite is pointed with shurik, likewise before the
pial letters $9), And before the guttural letters YAN the Ὁ is pointed
with pathach, é&c.
2 These rules are not only confirmed by eminent Hebrew and Christian
scholars, who-lived prior to, and later than Elias Levita, as Juda Chyuck,
Sadias Gaon, Aben Ezra, Moses and David Kimchi, two brothers, Reuch-
linius, Buxtorf, Schekard, &c. &c. but by authors of avery 416 date, as by
David Levy, in his Grammar, called Lingua Sacra, published in London,
1785, (which, by the bye, is a mere extract of David Levita’s works), and
by all the modern grammars ever since published in this and other coun-
tries; of which I particularly notice J.G. Vater’s, Ὁ. Ὁ. at Konigsberg,
who published a grammar no longer ago than 1814, and which, in my opr
nion, may be censidered a copious and instructive work on that head. See
his Gram. p. 54, 182, 183, $17, 329, 333, and 338. ΄
238 On the Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s
The preterite tenses, in this verse, are preceded by the future of
the verb fY9D (to forgive); hence the succeeding verb, in construce
tion with , must be according to’syntax, likewise in the future
tense; and on that account, the shevah is prefixed to the last pre-
terite ΟΥ̓), and accented in in ultima: and the preterite
Ww" has the } shevah prefixed to its pronoun NYT. All verbs pre-
ceded by a noun, pronoun, or particle, have the }, whether copulae
tive or conversive, prefixed to that noun, pronoun, or particle, instead
of the verb itself: for instance, Exod. xxxiii. 7. Mp’ TWD), ari
Moses took ; Gen. xvii. 16. ΠΣ) ON, and I will give thee also.
And this is the case with ws. These passages may, without vio-
lating the syntax, be written thus: "wD , and Moses took;
Ὁ) AN, will give thee also; NYT DWH, and he leaneth.
It has been asserted, by the authority of Elias Levita, that the future
tense is, at times, expressed by the past, and the past by the future;
but as I consider authorities and assertions, without proof, as mere
dead letters, I therefore think it necessary to give a few instances,
Deut. xxxii. 39. ° , I will wound ; ver. 41. ΠΣ, 1 shail |
whet ; 1 Sam. ix. 6. ΔΤ, we shall go ; Job xix. 17. IN, they shal?
see. In the following passages we find the future tense instead of the
past, Exod. xv. 1. WII Ὑ tN, then Moses sang ; Genii. 6. TOY? INT
but there went up a mist ; Josh. x. 1. YOWY AIT IN, then spake
Joshua.* These examples will be sufficient to convince the reader
how just and correct his Lordship is in his observations.
Now having shown, in the second place, that the ἡ in “AMNTWM
is conversive, and that a pronoun, belonging to a verb, has the ἢ com
versive, instead of the verb; and that the preterite, at times, expresses
the future, and the future tense the preterite (particularly in prophe-
cies, and in the poetical writings), what will the reader say to Mr.
Bellamy’s mode of expression to the Bishop of St. David’s? Here
are his words: “Τῆς future tense expressed by the preterite!”—~
<< Without the ἢ conversive.”—‘‘ Does then his Lordship suppose that
the ἡ with shevah is conversive ?”—‘* There is no such power in the
shevah, as to convert the preter to the future.” Such questions
started by Mr. Bellamy clearly indicate, that he has no knowledge of
the Hebrew Grammar, and is of course unfit for the task to which he
aspires. A person that is a stranger to these rules, cannot have spent
tauch time in studying the Hebrew; and I have, therefore, reason to
doubt the following voluntary assertion of our author. Seventeet
™ In my humble opinion }jyy/9 is here a participle, and in that case the ἢ
prefixed to the pronoun Nyt is merely copulative, which connects the first
part of the verse with the follawing. Every participle must either have ἃ
Noun, prunvun, or an article before it.
2 To substitute the past tense for the future, and the future for the past _
tense ; this is not only the case in the Hebrew, but also in the Arabic, Syriat,
Chaldaic languages; and in the German, a modern language, the present
tease is frequently used instead of the future.
_ New Translation of the Bible. ¥99
years, says Mr. B., he has studied the Hebrew, and has ever since
devoted the whole of his time to it. Seventeen years! And has be
not even learned, during that time, to know the ).copulative from the
\ conversive? Thathe has not, he himself proves, by the passages he
refers to, in favor of his strange remarks. ‘If the future tense,”
says the author, ‘“‘ be expressed by the preterite, with a ἡ conversive,
why is the preter of verbs with this ἢ conversive, as it is erroneously
called, found in every page of the Bible, and yet they still are in the
preter tense. See Gen. xxx. 41. U1, and it came to pass; ch. xivil.
22. DN, and they did eat ; Exod. xxxiii. 7, 8,9. TIN, and it came
to pass ; ver. 10. SIN, and saw ; Neh. xii. 39. YO, and they stood ;.
1 Sam. ii. 15. “WON Ni, and he came and satd.—2 Kings, xiv. 14.
np and he took; 1 Sam. xvi. 23. ΣΡ Πν and it came to pass;
᾿ Eccles. ch. iv. 4. ch. vii. 17. SSYNV, and Toonsidered.’ Here I know
not how to express my surprise, that any one possessing the least
knowledge of the Hebrew, can help knowing, that the } shevak, in
these words, is not conversive, but copulative; which I hope to have
fully explained, in pages 17, 18, No. 2. The next question is as sin-
gular and inconsistent as the former, if not more so: Mr. B. asks,
“ΠῚ, with shevah, has this converting power, where was the necessity
for the verb to Be written in the future tense, when this same ἡ is pre-e
fixed?” In order to convince him how strange and absurd his
question is, I must add asother quotation from Elias Levita 3°)
wom NST) Ὁ NIN VIM ὝΝ wD w ofnya 9
sper) Sax ora Syd onimw wD NWI Hp? NT NIT
JON ADM WN 12 NAM WI ΠΙΒᾺ Ap) AT) mT
Φ 13 .
ie. The ἡ prefixed to the future tense has a particular mark, by
which the ἡ copulative is to be distinguished from the ἡ conversive..
‘The ἡ copulative is pointed with shevah, as I have mentioned in Sect.
iv. But the ἡ conversive is pointed with a pathach, and the following
letter acquires a dagesh forte, as WNT WONT “WON, &c. ἄς,
There are other rules belonging to that part of syntax. To mention
them all would be to transcribe a great part of the Grammar itself,
which is not my present object. But what I have stated will be suffi-
cient to convince Mr. B. that he does not understand the rules of gram-
. mar, by which the syntax is regulated. :
The author quotes the following passages: Gen. ix.27. JW, and
he shall dwell. Jer. xiv. 10. pH, and he will visit. Hos. viit. 13.
PO. 1 Kings xxii. 20. 55%, and fall. Eccles. xii. 4. DY, and
he shall rise; and asks, in atone of surprise, “ If 4 with shevah had
this converting power, where was the necessity for these verbs to be
Written iu the future tense, when the same ἢ is prefixed?” Where was
the necessity? because, in all these verbs, the ἢ is copulative, accord-
pene TL a
* The author has neither given us the Hebrew, nor the English, of these
his references, which I consider an unjust omission ; such omissions may
cause mistakes. .
230 On the Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s
ing to the rule just cited. Had it been conversive, the ἡ would have
been pointed with pathach ; as JW in Exod. xxiv. 16. Numb. x. 12.
Deut. xxsili. 955. 1 Chron. xxiii. 25. “SPB in Gen. xl. 4. Numb.
lit, 16, 42. ch.iv.4. Judg.xv.1. 1 Sam. xiii. 15. 2 Sam. xviii. 1.
Ezek. vii. 10. ἢ, Gen. xvii. 3. ch. xvii. 17. ch. xxxiii. 4. ch. χἶν.
4. Exod. xxxii.28. Numb. xiv. 5. ch. xvi. 4. Josh. vii. 6. Judg.
vii. 13. and OP, Gen. iv. 8. ch. xix. 1. ch. xxii. 3. ch. xxiii. 3, 6,
17. Exod. i. 8. ch. xxiv.13. Numb. xxil.13, 21. In all these pas-
sages (and numbers of instances more can be produced), the ἡ is con-
versive, and is, therefore, pointed with pathach, and the following
letter has a dagesh forte.
. Can Mr. B. produce a few more examples of JAW Ip, &c. ὥς.
where the Ὁ prefixed is pointed with shevah? That he cannot. All
these five cited future tenses in favor of his hypothesis are not to be
found all together more than eight timesin the whole Bible.’
In tine, the number of} convérsive prefixed either to the past or
future tenses, exceeds by far the number of ἡ copulative prefixed to
the future or past tenses.” This ἢ conversive our author calls erro-
neous! But I have very good reason to say, that his ideas and his
knowledge of the Hebrew are erroneous, and to these I attribute his
erroneous conclusions.- . |
To mention all the expressions of Mr. B. directed to the Bishop of
St. David’s, in support of his cause, I should have to transcribe the
greater art of his reply ; and since it is of no material consequence,
omit them, and refer the reader to the reply itself, in the Classical
Journal, No. XXXVI. I shall, therefore, only mention such as will
serve to elucidate my observations: aud for this reason I have only
copied, in part, what he says in defence of his translation of the word.
ΤΠ). The same mode I adopt now concerning bis remarks of
WI NIT. . Ε
** For another proof,” says Mr. B. “" that his Lordship is inaccu-
rate in his conclusion, that the ἡ prefixed to a pronoun has anf effect
on the following verb, I refer to Gen. iii. 16, where the ) with shevah
prefixed to the pronoun, has no effect on the following verb; for in
that case the sacred writer would not have written the verb in the
future form Ἴ2 ΘΟ" NIT, and he shall rule over them.”
3 ae is found only once in this verse. . .
ps % — _ only twice, as cited. .
9} — only thrice; once as mentioned 2 Chron. xviii. 10.
Ezek. xiii. 11.
op") — only twice, once as mentioned, and in Job xxii. 28.
* I think it necessary to observe, that the ἢ copulative, in three instancés
out of the five cited, is in the imperative mood. The Hebrews are obliged
to make use of the future, to express the third person of the impera-
tive mood: they have no proper form for it. Ww) Gen. ix. 27. and
Jer. xiv. 10, and Hos. viii. 18. are in the imperative mood; the syntax
proves it.
New Translation of the Bible. 251
‘* But the ἡ, with shevah prefixed to a pronoun, cannot even under
the notion of that 4 being conversive, convert the following verb in
the preter, to the future tense, 48 his Lordship supposes, by its being
prefixed to the pronoun NY.” ‘ See where the same word, NV,
and the 9, with shevah prefixed, introduces the verb, and vet is not
converted into the future time, Gen. xxxviii. 14. Ὁ ΤΣ Ν᾽ NIT,
and she was not given to him, eh. xxxii. 22. } NN, and he lodged,
ch, xxxiii. 3. VAY NWN, and he passed over. These are conclu-
sive.” e
~ Does Mr. B. pretend here to assert, that his Lordship supposes
that the ἡ prefixed to these pronouns is conversive 1 ἴ am convinced,
from his Lordship’s observations, that he is too well acquainted with
the syntax, to suppose, for a moment, that the 4, in the words here
cited, is conversive ; each of these last three preterites' is preceded
by the future, with a 4 conversive, and becomes thereby a past tense,
and ἽΔ Sw’ NIM, is in the future, on account of being preceded: by
the future, of the verb 72" (to multiply). As to his next and last
references, they tend to no other purpose, than to show, that he is-not
acquainted with the Hebrew conjugations. The cited passages by
him are, Gen. xviii. 1. DW NYT), and he sat ; verse ὃ. Ἵν NWN, and
he stood; ch. xxxii. 31. sox NY, and he halted; ch. xxv. 29.
YY NWN, and he was faint: of which the three first, namely,
Yo Wy Iw", are participles, aud as such they must always have a
noun, before or after, or a pronoun, or an article before them; and
when analysed, must be rendered in the original ; ‘ and he was sitting,
standing, halting.” As for the word 5 y, it is an adjective: and if
the last passage, which is given without the Hebrew, like many others,
and with an inaccurate reference, be the following, ch. xxvi. 6. JW, ᾿
the 1 there found, is, according to-the author’s own translation, con-
versive, aS we contend. . ὌΝ
_ For what purpose Mr. B. has quoted these passages, I am at ἃ loss
to imagine, since the ἡ conversive does not affect a participle or ad-
jective. Such mistakes, and the like, are entirely owing to the want
of Hebrew knowledge. | :;
Having clearly proved, that all the references of Mr. Bellamy, in
favor of his translation, are of no avail; but, on the contrary, tend
only to expose his incapability of amending the present version, it
only remains now to take notice of N83, whether this word, in the
. Verse 2 Kings v. 18. is a mere interpolation or not? But before I pro-
ceed to examine the pvint, 1 am tempted to ask Mr. B. (as he has
_ mentioned that the doctrine of 4, with shevah, depends on a branch
of Hebrew learning), what is this branch of learning? Why does he
not point it out? It is but just that he should, in order that the
reader may be informed on what ground aad just cause he differs
from the translators? If it be admitted, that the public are entitled
ΟΣ The learned will here observe the nicety of the Hebrew syntax.
484 -—On the Specimen of Mr. Bellatny’s
to know the competency of an author, before they subscribe to a
publication, they are still more so entitled, when the publication of
that author endeavours to supersede a translation which they already
esteem, and particularly on such an important subject as that of the
ible?
_ What time, what paper, what words might not the author have
saved, if he had given a direct answer to the learned Prelate’s obser-
vations, in pointing out by what grammatical rule he is authorised to
translate NID in the past tense, and YPMWM, and YWws NN πὶ
the like manner. But the truth is, he cannot; ‘and has, therefore,
adopted the same evasive mode of answer, which all cavillers are
obliged to adopt.
As for the word $3, the TDD YI, the learned biblical critics
have taken notice of this word, as of niany others, and have marked
it in the margin as an orthographical error, with the words nn 270
Learned men like these have not only examined with ἃ pe-
culiar attention, and singular application, every chapter, section, and
verse; but every letter, point, and accent of each word of the Bibi
and compared them with parallel passages. If the remarks of su
investigators are not to be attended to, what are then to be attended
to? |
Mr. B. considers them of no importance, and remarks thus ; “ Five
hundred or a thousand years after the dispersion of the Jews, we are
to be told by a few Jews, who knew no better, that N) is written, but
not read: why then did the sacred writers insert it? and the Septua-
gint translate it by 647 To this I answer, that he is under a great
mistake, to suppose that these critical, orthographical notes in the
margin took place one thousand years after the dispersion of the Jews.
Their origin we can trace to have taken place (before the Christian
era) in the schools of Judeaand Babylon: since the Talmud, im many
places, makes mention of them. See Tal. Bab. Megilla, fol. 8.
Nedarim, fol. 37. Berachoth, fol. 42. Eruvim, fol. 21. The Treatises
of Sophrim, ch. vi. sect. 7,8. It appears also very clear, from what
Hieronymus says in his Preface to Chronicles, that there were learned
Hebrew Biblical critics at Tiberias, in the year 400 of the Christian
era; for he confesses to have been assisted in his translation of the
Bible by a Jew of Tiberias. ‘Cum a me,” says he, “ nuper literis
flagitassetis, ut vobis Paralipomenon latino sermone transferrem, de
Tiberiade quendam legis doctorem, qui apud Hebrzos admiration
habebatur, assumsi, et contuli cum eo a vertice, ut ajunt, usque ad
noeam unguem, et sic confirmatus ausus sum facere quod jube<
atis.”
From the manuscripts of these schools, the two famous scholars,
Ben Assur, and Ben Naphtali, composed each of them a copy, which
afterwards were thoroughly examined, with great patience and perse
verance, as well as all other works of this kind, by Rabbi ben Chajim,
and published at Venice, 1525; who has acquired thereby an immer-
tal name among those that possess a love -for biblical study, and
x
New Translation of the Bable. 998.
oriental languages. Are these authorities to be rejected, in order to
follow the advice of Mr. Bellamy 1
' As to his question, why the sacred writers bave inserted N3? Is he
‘positive they have, and that the transcribers bave. committed no mis-
take in copying it? And as to his last question, why the Septuagint
did translate it by the word 64? They translated the Bible withest
the vowel points, and hence the word N3 did not strike them as a
conspicuous instance of exception; and how often have they not, en.
the same account, mistaken the sense of the Scripture; for instance,
Isaiah xxiv. 23. NIL MP ἼΡ Ton ww Ndr sw,
Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the
Lord of Hosts shall reign: the Greek version is; the brick shall
waste, and the wall shall fall, when the Lord reigns. How abject
and miserable is their interpretation of this verse!" They made a
gross mistake in the reading, which they could not have made if the
red Books from which they translated had been pointed. Their
faults of that kind are innumerable, and this will be sufficient to show,
that the Septuagint is no criterion; and it likewise testifies against
Mir. Bellamy’s assertions, “ that the translators have been guided by
the Septuagint and the Vulgate:” if they had, how will Mr. B.
account for such a material variation in the interpretation of the pas-
Sage just cited? besides, many other instances that might be pro-
daced. ΄ And to finish with N), I have only this to add, that the rejec-
tion of it in the afore-mentioned verse is grounded on its being
contrary to the rule of syntax; and if Mr. B. will but examine the
receding verses of the same chapter, verse 7, 8, 9, and 15, he will
n, perhaps, perceive better, why the Biblical critics have here
Fejected it. Their orthographical notes are always founded on parallel
passages, and parallel constructions ; and this is the case here.
I now conclude witk this verse: 2 Kings v. 18. and hope to have
given a clear and satisfactory explanation, why the words that have
under consideration are misinterpreted by our author. I likewise
hope to have answered all his objections with truth and justice, since
my remarks have been founded on the basis of grammar only.
From all that has been said, it might appear to the learned reader
a-waste oftime to contend any further with Mr. Bellamy; and I
should be of the same opinion, and would willingly have saved my
time, and spared myself the task of investigating his translatiun of the
Femaining thirteen verses, were it not for the following argument,
expressed in his reply: ‘ln the prospectus of the new translation, I
have given fourteen passages, which I have contrasted with the same
passages in the vulgar version, and among this number his Lordship
only found one, which he attempts to show is not truly translated.
As he has been silent respecting these thirteen important passages, it
is an acknowledyment that they are correct.” :
¥ See Bishop Lowth’s observation on this passage. De Sacr. Poet, Heb.
Preelect. vi. p. 69, 70.
234 On the Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s
Such an unexpected argument might, perhaps, notwithstanding all
that has been said, still cause some prejudice against our authorised
version, among those who are unacquainted with the original: and it
is under this impression, that I am determined to examine these
remaining verses, and to show, in a clear light, that the translation of
them is as incorrect as bis conclusion is fallacious.’
There is no other mode of obtaining the true sense and application
of a word in the Hebrew, than in any other language. The best
authors are the best guides. In the Hebrew, the sacred writers can
be our only guides; he who affixes to a word another meaning than
that which is authorised by the analogy and usage of the sacred
authors, is not only guilty of inconsistency, but of something worse,
of converting the language of Scripture to his own fancies and opi-
nions. It is the want of knowing those principles that affixes a false
value to imaginary improvements. |
That such is the very case with our author, I shall take upon me
to prove in each text, on the authority of passages in which the same
words occur, and from passages in Holy Writ (either preceding or
subsequent), which bear reference to them. The verses and parts of
verses which Mr. B. has culled, as examples of his improvement of
our version, when placed according to the order they have in the
Bible (and iu which order I propose to examine them), are, Gen. vi.
3, 4. 6. ch. xx. 16. 1 Sam. ii. 25. ch. xix. 9. 24 Prov. xiv. 14. Isaiah
iv. 10. ch. ix. 3. Jer. iv. 10. ch. xx. 7. and Amos iii. 6. "
1. In his translation of Gen. vi. 8. ““ Then Jehovah said, My spiri
shall not strive with man because of the transgression of his flesh.”
There is no such word in this verse as transgression, nor will the
grammatical construction admit of the words because of the, and of
his; the words Wa. NWT OIW2? are too plain in their meaning, and
too simple in their construction for either to be mistaken. OW is
a contraction of Ὧ) “ἼΩΝ τ- 2, the first letter A is one of the letters
ὉΝ52, a preposition, WN, a pronoun relative, and D) is a conjunction;
the same word we find without the preposition 3, in Eccles. 1. 17. in
the very same sense as here. That the letter w, instead of “WN, is
usually prefixed to a noun, pronoun, or conjunction, will .be ve
clear, from the following passages: ΓΝ, Eccles. ii. 14. OPW, iil.
18. 9, Cant. v. 9. No Hebrew scholar can find the least objec-
tion to our received version in the translation of this verse.
2. Gen. vi. 4. ‘ The apostates were-on earth in those days,
and also afterwards, when the sons of the great came unto the daugh-
ters of men.” ‘The sense of apostates Mr. B. has atlixed to the word .
eT Ca
1 If the learned Prelate had even selected out of the fourteen verses any
one particular verse fur investigation, would it follow from thence, that the
translation: of the remaining thirteen is correct? “uch aun inference is far
from being just, and still more so,- if the reader but recollects that it was
the very first verse in which his Lordship defeated this pretended improved
translation.
New Translation of the Bible. 235
’ oY SD2T: the real signification of the word D'ODIN, is explained in
Numb, xiii. 33. DODIT TD PIY 22 OMPITANN IND DU “ There
we saw the giants, the children of Anak descended from the giants ;”
but that the children of Anak were giants is very plain from the
passage in Deut. ix. 2. ὈΨ 22 OW WO, i.e. “ The children
of Anak are a tall and mighty people.” See also Deut. i. 28. ch, ii,
10,11. 21. Many other passages are to the same effect. ‘‘ The sons
of the great,” is his translation ofO%DNT 9D ; the very same words —
occur in Job i. 6. ch. ii. 1. ch. xxxviii. 7. From these passages it is
‘evident, that the true translation of this verse is that of our Bible.
3. Gen. vi. 6. "“ Yet Jehovah was satisfied that he had made man
on the earth; though he idolized himself at his heart.” Here DMN
ΓΤ is translated by Mr. B. “ Yet Jehovah was satisfied,” but from
the authority of the following parallel passage, in 1 Sam. xv. 35.
Nw nN TOOT OD MV the true sense of OMI? is that of
our common version. See the very same words, in ‘Exod. xxxul. 14,
_ 2 Sam. xxiv. 16. 1 Chron. xxi. 15. Jonah iii. 10. Jer. xxvi. 19.; and
‘to Jer. xviii. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. I particularly request the reader's atten-
tion. Of the words 129 5x ayy his translation is “ though he
idolized himself at his heart.” The following passages will clearly
prove the correctness of our present translation. See Gen, xxxiv. 17.
ΘΝ UI “ And the men were grieved.” ch. xlv. 5. 2 Sam.
xix. 3. Isaiah Ixiii. 10. Nehem. viii. 10, 11.
4; Gen. xx. 16. ““ Behold, he is to thee a covering of the eyes, to
ali that are with thee, and with all; thus she was justified.” The
word ΠΩ) is interpreted by our author, “ thus she was justified.”
Here I differ, not only from his translation, but also from that of our
version; the root of this word I take to be [133,° signifying ὁ present,’
and not ΓΦ" ; the J affixed is, on account of its being in the feminine
gender, and in that case, ought to have been translated (including the
words by ΓΝ), ‘‘ and to all that are present ;” for examples, see
Exod. xxvi. 35. ch. xl. 24. Numb. xix. 4. Judges xvili. 6. Esth. v. 1.
Prov. νυ. 21. Ezek. xiv. 2,3.6. To this I add, that the word AMD
cannot be separated from the preceding two 5D FN), on account of
the accents under them, since the accents are conjunctive.
5. 1 Sam. ii. 25. ‘* Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the
voice of their father, therefore it pleased Jehurah to cause them to die.”
If the reader compares this translation with that of our Bible, he will
easily perceive that the cmendation of it concerns the construction
enly: but itwould be more conformable to the syntax of the Hebrew,
ee
1 The word OMS ΓΟ migit be expressed without vieluuing the syntax,
by TYP OFM Sc page 20
2 The ro oot cat word ts 7), and is conjugated as a verb passive; but
hasan active ~iznification, like the deponents in Latin.
3 This woid is an anomaly, and 1 express this upinion with: diffideace,
éince the precise word here used is found in this passage only.
436 On the Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s
to say, ‘ but they would not listen to the voice of their father, so the
Lord would have them die.”
6. 1 Sam. xix. 9. “" Now the spirit of Jehovah was displeased with
Saul.” By ‘ displeased” Mr. B. expresses the word FY. Now it
is clear, from preceding passages, that iT} signifies “ evil.” See
1 Sam.xvi.1 4. TT AND ΓΟ Ύ ΤΙ nya) ANw DIVO ΓΤ Mp MM
“ And the spirit of Jehovah (the Lord) departed from Saul, and en
evil spirit from the Lord terrified (troubled) him.” See also the
two following verses 15, 16. ch. xviii. 10. Aud I need hardly
observe, that this verse, ch. xix. 9. stands in connexion with. the fore-
going verses, to which our translators, it appearg, have paid ἃ strict
attention. However, according to the syntax, the words MN ΠῚ
ΟΝ ΓΝ TT ought to be translated, “and the Spirit of -
the Lord was an evil unto Saul (i. e. torment).”
7. 1 Sam. xix. 24. ‘* Then he took off kis garment, and prophesied
also the same, before the face of Samuel ; but he supplicated artfully,
all that day, and all that night.” Mr. B. interprets the word Spm,
‘¢ but he supplicated,” and the word Ὁ, “artfully.” In order tg
show that our translators are very correct in the sense they have
affixed to these two words, it will suffice to refer to the following
passages. See Gen. xvii. 3, 17, PINOY DWN ODN, “And Abram
fell (or lay down) on his face,” ch. xxxiii. 4. ch. xlv. 14. ch. xix.
16. Exod. xxxil, 28. Numb. xiv. 5. Josh. vii. 6. Judges iv. 16.
1 Sam. iv. 10. 18. ch. xi. 7. ch. xvil. 49. ch. xx. 41. ch. xxviii. 20.
ch, xxxi. 4, 5. ἅς. ἄς. As to the word Oy, Mr. B. has miastakea
DAY * for DY, the following passages will convince him of his error:
Gen. iii. 1. 99% Ὁ» TT WIM. “ And the serpent was more
cunning.” See also Prov. xii. 16. 23. ch. xiii. 16. ch. xiv. 8. ob.
xxii. 3. ch. xxvii. 12. and for oy, “naked.” See Job i. 21.-ch. -
av 7, 10. ch. xxvi.6. Eccles. v. 14. Isaiah xx. 2, 3, 4. and Amos
2. 10.
8. Prov. xvi. 4. ““ Jehovah has ordained all to answer him; thus
also the wicked for the day of wickedness.” Here Mr. B., as well as
our translators, have made a mistake in the etymology of the word
ΓΝ in this verse. This word is compounded of the preposition
WD. signifying (for), and the pronoun NW, signifying (he, it); and
the literal translation of this verse is, ‘‘ God has wrought every thing
for a (its) period, and to the wicked for the day of evil.” (i.e. for-
ment.)”
* This word, when applied to men, signifies prudent, but to brutes
cunning.
> The genius of the Hebrew language, and particularly the style in whick
the bouks of the Prophets, Psalms, and Proverbs, are written, will not
always admit of a literal translation; hence this verse: ΣῚΡ Oy δ
Γ ord yw ὯΝ) way, according to the spirit of the original, ough
New Translation of the Bible. 287
_ 9. Isaiah vi. 10. “ The heart of this people became gross, also hie
cars became heavy, because his eyes turned aside; lest he should see
with his eyes, and hear with his ears; or his heart should under-
stand, and return, and be healed.” Here Mr. B. has been mistaken
In the mood of the verbs, and in the construction : YOWTT TAIN Pwr
are in the imperative mood of the conjugation Syn, and can have
80 other signification than that expressed in our version. References
te that effect cannot be produced, since they appear in the simple
form of the imperative mood in this verse only, except in Exod. viii.
15. where ‘TI3/3 occurs in the same sense as here, but with a ἡ copu-;
lative. It is used more frequently in the other tenses of the verb, to
the same effect. See Zech. vii. 11. Exod. ix. 34, &c. &c. This
chapter is very remarkable for the accomplishment of one of the pro-
phecies predicted by Moses, Deut. xxviii. 28. ch. xxix. 4. and the
correspondence is, in the interpretation of these passages, another
preof of the strict attention which our translators have paid to the
general spirit of the work. ΝΣ
10. Isaiah ix. 8, “" Thou hast multiplied the nation ; hast thou not
tncreesed the joy? they joy before thee, according to the joy in har-
᾿φεϑέ, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil.” Mr. B. turns
the words ΠΟΤ TTT ND into a question: “ hast thou not in-
creased the joy?” ‘There is no interrogation in this verse. The
dificulty im undetstanding this verse arises from the negative particle
109, but from the Massorites’ annotation in the margin, x5 is marked
as an orthographical error. It should be » (a pronoun), and not nd
(a megative), and the difficulty is thus removed ; for, according to
the correction of the Massorites, this verse ought to be translated thus :
“ Thou hast multiplied the nation,’ and increased its joy; they joy
before thee, as in the joy of harvest ; they rejoice like men in dividing
‘ their booty.” The connexion of the preceding, and the following
to be translated thus: “‘ God has fixed a time for every being, and so for the
wicked a day of retribution.” The word ὃνθ signifies literally, “6 he
wrought.” See Isaiah xli. 4. TWN Syp 97% Deut. xxxii, 27. “ ordained,
made, fixed,’ are analogous terms; the proper use of them depends on the
construction. The word 13795 we find compounded with many other pro-
nouns ; for instance, °}}7> 1375 ΣΡ, the first consists of the prepo-
sition Wo? end ὯΝ, the second of } yond and 1D; the third of Wn? and
D3». Our translators, as well as Mr. B. derive this word, as I suppose, from
the. root 77337: this appears to me to be a mistake. See examples of its
being a cumpound, in Deut. iii. 4. Isaiah xlviii. 11. ch. ΧΗ]. 14. Jub xviii. 4.
The idea that all words are derived from verbs, causes many errors in the
etymology of the Iebrew. |
* The sense may be more properly expressed by “ Thou hast caused the
Gentiles to be prosperous,” &c. That the. Gentiles were to be made pros-
perous, is evident from the declaration in this chapter, Verse 6. 1s parti-
cularly strong to that effect.
VOL. XVII. Ci. Jl. NO. XXXIV. R
238 On the Specimen of Mr. Bellamy’s .
verses of this chapter, is in favor of the Massorites’ observation, of
which it is proper to mention, that our translators have taken notice
in the margin.
11. Jer. iv. 10. “ Then I said, Ah! Lord, Jehovah, truly te dese-
dation thou hast desolated this people, even to Jerusalem, for saying,
Peace shall be among you: but the sword reacheth to the soul.” To
the words ΝΟΣ NWit' Mr. B. affixes the sense “to desolation thes
hast desolated ;” these two belong to the conjugation Syyert, and
their true meaning, including the particle JON is, ‘‘ thou hast justly
deceived this people.” See the following passages: Gen. ἐπὶ, 18,
NWT Ws, “ the serpent has deceived me,” 2 Kings xix. 10.
qu On ch. ii. 18. Jer. xxix. 8. ch. xxxvii. 9. ch. xlix. 16. Obed.
i.3. 7. Isaiah xxxvii. 10.
12. Jer. xx. 7. “ Thou hast persuaded me, O Jehovah! thas F was
persuaded ; strengthen thou me, for thou hast prevailed.” The
words JIDN) 7 ὁ are translated by Mr. B. “ thou hast persuaded
me, and I was persuaded.” These words certainly admit as well of
such interpretation, as of that of our Bible. However, that it is gene-
rally used in the sense of persuading a person in a bad cause (or to
an evil deed), we learn from Exod. xxii. 16. Prov. 1. 10. ‘ch. xvi. 29.
hence by analogy, ‘ to entice, to deceive, Pir} our author trans
lates ““ strengthen thou me:” this word is nut in the imperative
mood, but in the past tease; and its meaning is, “ thou hast urged
me (or encouraged me, or made me strong).” And although the
and the future tenses are frequently found with two pronouns
to them, as here, yet the word ὩΠΡΙΓΙ occurs in this passage only.
: 13. And last, Amos iii. 6. “* Shall a trumpet be blown in the city,
and the people not be afraid? shall evil be in the city, and Jehovah
has not requited it?” There is no difference in the trauslation of this
verse by Mr. B. and that of the Bible, except in the word FWY, which
is the last word in it, to which he affixes the sense of ‘ requited it.”
Now this word is so frequently used in the Sacred Books, that we
cannot be mistaken in its meaning. The literal signification of Wy
is ‘ to make,’ and its analogous terms are, ‘ to do, to finish,’ but it
is never found in the sense of “ to requite.’ Numberless references to
that effect can be produced from Scripture: seven times it occurs in
a
* The root of this verb is Nw) (signifying to deceive, disappoiat, beguile),
and not FINW, (signifying to make a noise, to rage, to distresgjy hence the
conjugation ΩΣ is pointed with a dagesh forte, to compentate for the 3
(being the first letter of the root), which is deficient in this conjugation.
__* 1018 very probable, that the Greek words πείθω, ἀπατάω are derived from
the root ΠΠΞ.
3 That either of these expressions will suit the interpretation of ΣΡ 75
FIDN) is very plain from the language of the Prophet, in this chapter, to
which I particularly call the reader’s attention ; he will do well also to consult
the foregoing chapter.
New Translation of the Bible. 239
the very first chapter of Genesis, and from thence the reader will be
convinced, that -its meaning is the very same which I have stated
here; and if we compare with this passage the words of Isaiah xlv. 7.
SVINTID TOY ΠΡ OME PT NN Dw AwY WHT NTI We IY
I do not know whether we shall find them consistent with the opinions
which Mr. B. entertains; but we shall certainly acknowledge a
strong testimony in favor of the translation which he here attempts
to disparage. Ἵ
- These are my evidences, which might have been extended toa
greater length ;’ but if these evidences alone testify that our autho-
rised version has given us, for the most part, a faithful translation,
then conciseness and brevity will add to the weight of them. |
But it is not to be wondered at, that the Sacred Books should
become unintelligible, nay even become exposed to the most absurd
conclusions, when a man sets about selecting a few words * or verses
out of them, for the purpose of confounding the text of Scripture.
Any original work, or any translation must suffer, when it falls into
the hands of a person who exercises his ingenuity in picking out pas-
sages, and separates them from their connexion and context.? They
must become ambiguous, and still more so, when they are collected
and exhibited with such a view. And is not this the very case with
our author? The verses under consideration, I confess, are, in the
state in which he exhibits them, very ambiguous: they would, per-
haps, puzzle the sacred author himself; separated, as they are, from —
their proper place, they cannot convey that sense and just idea which
they have when we read them in the course of the work to which
they belong.* In a word, one could hardly know they belong to the
Bible, if the author had not told us he took them from the Bible.
. Who, for instance, could have supposed for a moment, that the ex-
* Many Rabbinical and Christian commentators I could have produced,
to plead the cause of our version; but I have avvided, on purpose, all
- learned authorities; since a just cause need no assistance from others. Our
translators had recourse to the fountain head, or, in other words, to the
Scripture only, and by that standard they ought to be defended.
2 The one half of his specimen consists only of parts of verses.
3 It is generally admitted, that no one can form a proper judgment of a
work until he has read it thoroughly. Why should it be otherwise with the
Bible? here is such an union and harmony in the Sacred Books, that we
can hartyunderstand the one, without reading the other: the Sacred Writ-
ings are seciprocally illustrated by each other. If the reader will compare
the first verse in Genesis, with the following passages of Psalm xxxiil. 6. 9.- -
civ. 26. Jer. li. 15. Prov. iii. 19. Isaiah vi. $.—xl, 26. 28.—xli. 4.—xliv. 94.
—xlvi. 10.—xlviii. 13.—Ixvi. 1. Neh. ix. 6. Deut. ili, 24. 1 Chron. xxix. 11.
it will, perhaps, better convince him of the intimate connexion which exists
throughout the writings of the prophets. |
' 4 Every verse of bis specimen is as plain, and as easy to be understood, as-
‘words can be made ; if the reader will but pay attention to the chapters and
verses before and after, with which they stand in relation. .
240 Cambridge Tripos.
pression “ Yet Jehovah was satisfied thet he had made man on the
earth, though he idolised himself at his heart,” are the words of
Moses, unless our author had mentioned the book of Genesis,
chapter and verse? If the sense of OMS), Gen. vi. 6. ts (according to
Mr. B.'s translation) ““" Yet God was satisfied ;" then the very next
verse, where again this verb occurs in the past tense, must accord-
ingly be expressed thus: ‘“‘ And the Lord said, I will des mani,
whom I have created, froin the face of the earth; both maa.
and creeping thing, and the fowls of the air GJVYWY Ὁ Wor} °5),
for I am satisfied that I have made them.” Here I call upon Mr.
Bellamy to explain to us the meaning of this verse, and to reconcile
this connexion. In our Bible, both these verses are as plain as they
are in the original, to which the reader is referred.
Such a correction, which is intended to remove a dvfeulty, bas
actually increased it: and, indeed, it is not for an interpreter of Holy
Scripture, because he cannot form a just idea of some expressions,
when applied to Providence (how, for instance, can it be said, that
God repents, or that he is the Author of evil), to alter, on that
account, the true sense of the words, and ‘to torture them,” as a
consummate Divine has remarked, “ till he has made them to speak,
what he had previously determined they should speak.” ἢ
Our author's objections are of a very ancient date: Rashi, an
eminent Hebrew commentator, has answered them many hundred
years since; and whilst I advise him to consult Rashi on these pas-
sages, I recommend him also to read, and to examine the passages in
Jer. xviii. 7, 8, 9, 10, and Isaiah xlv. 17,7 as well as his translation of
the Fourteen Verses; then, perhaps, he may see, whether I am not.
justified in forming the idea, that such interpretations and objections
can only origmate from his not having a proper knowledge of the
sacred language? But how a man can become a critic in the Hebrew,
or in any other language, without having a sound knowledge of it, is
a subject which 1 submit to the judgment of the public.
.
CAMBRIDGE TRIPOS, 1813.
CELEBRARE DOMESTICA FACTA.
Lavupasvunr alii mediis volitantia signa
Nubibus, et rigido fulgentes ere catervas,
Jusque datum furiis et tela minantia telis.
Sezpius arma ducum bellique referre tumultus
. Ὁ See the Lectures of the Bishop of Landaff, Part iv. Lect. xix. page 21.
> I have already taken notice of these passages. Ok
‘
Cambridge Tripos. 44)
Musa dedit fidibus: quis nunc certamina Galli
Nescit, et infestis concussum viribus orbem ?
Semirutas urbes delubraque lapsa deorum,
Impositosque rogis juvenes ante ora parentum
Usque sonant chorde. ‘Te tristi, Mosqua, favilla
Pressam, et Cantabriz multos marata per annos -
‘Jugera, et effuso saturatos sanguine manes,
Assiduo clamant rupte lectore column.
Nunc igitur, Phoebo quoniam non gratior ulla est,
Quam quz victrices celebravit pagina laurus,
Nos etiam tenui conabimur alite pugnas :
Quzrentesque modos plectro leviore, canemus
Arma, quibus ceelo caput extulit alma Mathesis,
Et studia et mores et non inamabile bellum. _
Vos, operosa cohars, quos anni tedia primi
Preteriere, toga volitantes atque galero:
Vosque, quibus molles digitos subducere nuper
Contigit Orbilii ferula, valeatis, amici: .
Nil nunc tale loquor. Juvat, O juvat acta Sophorum
Pieriis tentare modis, et prodere versu
Innocuas rixas litesque sine hoste furentes.
Ergo cum radians Sol bis sua signa peregit,
Incipiuntque Sophis iterum procedere menses,
Nuncius accedit, vultuque et veste tremendus:
Tnvisamque viris vibrans Superisque papyrum,
Indoctum sevis terret doctumque loquelis.
Tempore non alio tantum exsultantia pulsat
Corda pavor juvenum : quisorte premuntur acerba
Degeneres trepidant, prope nunc instare periclum :
Cetera turba ruunt duros cognoscere casus,
Et, quando ista sibi tempus spectacula pogcit,
Tecta petunt ultro, dictu mirabile, moustri.
Incusare moras desistite : proferet hora,
Serius aut citius cunctis ventura, dolores,
Spesque, levesque metus ef acute prelia lingue.
Quanto rectius hic, animo qui preditus equo
Non absens optat fatum prasensve tremiscit.
Hic, quamvis aliis sonitum trepidetur ad omnem
Queis volvenda dies objecerit hosce labores ;
. Hic, qualem nequeo monstrare et sentio tantum,
Participes operum brevis ad convivia mensz
Invitat letus : nam curas pellere vino 7
Lex patrum prohibet, prohibetque potentior usus,
Ut ventum est, primo ceeli de lenibus auris,
Cambridge Tripos.
Aut de precipiti, si res ita contigit, imbre
Fit sermio: posthac dicenda tacenda loquentes
Aure bibunt avido false mendacia fame,
Opprobriisqnue onerant reges regumque ministros.
Quas inter nugas postquam deperditur hora,
Consurgunt omnes, citiusque aquilone procellas
Discutiente graves, abeunt. Quid multa? Vicissim
Festa salesque parant, iterumnque iterumque fruuntuy
Alloquiis variis, Thezque calentibus undis.
Te tamen, O juvenis, jurantem in verba verendi.
Newtoni, veterum leges mandataque cogunt
Has Divum noctes coenasque relinquere primum.
Nam simul ac lentis pedibus discedis et egris,
Inter se coeunt, et monstrant dira flagella,
Spiculaque exacuunt rostris aptantque lacertos
Impavidi, donec cursu fugiente dierum
Grammaticas sedes ineunt et pulpita nota.
Non, mihi si linguz centum sint, oraque centum,
Enarrare queaim, quantus tremor occupet artus,
Ingeniique premat vires, quum voce superba
Bella ciet pulcri certaminis arbiter equus.
“4 Ascendant juvenes, hic, respondere paratus,”
“ Ile, sagax astu verum obscurare dolisque.”
Haud mora: nunc illis, populi spectante corona,
In solitas sedes ascenditur: aurea vultus
Pax tegit, et rixis strepituras deserit umbras.
Principio, lenes assueto more loquelas
Effundunt ambo, proprieque ad murmura linguae
Pallescunt trepidi: mox nil mortale sonantes,
Et proptore Defim contacti numine, promunt
Quidquid habent Newtoni armamentaria dirum,
Ampullas gravidas et sesquipedalia verba.
Siccine sed prensus lupus effugit? Hac ratione
Inter vos agitur ? Non, si mea pectora vero
Impulit augurio Phoebus, sic salvus abibis ?
Hora cito veniet, quum vox subsellia frangens,
Ingenti luctu curisque oppressa, silebit ;
Quum loca per fremitu reboantia concidet omnis
Verborum fragor et dicendi copia torrens.
Dum loquimur, venit: cessat volitare per edem
Istud, summa caputque operis, pulchrum, bene, recte.
. Nunc, juvenis, rabidum si versat in ossibus ignem
Magna sitis laudum, nunc viribus utere totis. .
Nexibus implicuit te cautum cautior hostis :
1 potis es, nodi contexta ligamina solvas.
co By vs tg as
_ Chaldean Oracles.
ἔς Sum Davus”—Novi. “ Non Ckdipus :” id quoque novi.
‘Te tamen:intendas, queso, bone: nil sine magno .
Vita labore dedit mortalibus. Hec dum agis, ecce
Longior Iliade et fortassis inanior exit
Formula. Te preter, tenet admiratio cunctos.
Sed tibi terror adest: teque et taa’sidera damnans
Irruis in mortem, et similis preclara minanti,
Distorquens oculos et pulvinaria pulsans, |
Nescio quid tecum grave cornicaris inepte.
Omnes solvuntur risu: fremit ipse cachiono,
Quem premit et cundit nostri regnator Olympi.
Tunc opponentem compellat. Commodat aurem
Iile pavens ; demittit eum, nudo capite alter -
Ingenium laudans. Stat circum cuncta juventus,
Attonitisque mhians animis miratur euntem,
Ut pueri Junonis avem, stellantibus alis
Fulgentem. Ne te longis ambagibus ultra -
Quam satis est cuncter, superadditur alter et alter.
Czdunt, inque vices plagis vexantur iniquis,
Lento Samnites ad Jumma prima duello: -
Et szepe in seram noctis crudesceret horam
Pugna, nec argutis tum cessaretur ab armis,
Ni belli judex, venturis omnibus eger
Impatiensque more, dictis finiret amaris
Hos motus animoram atque hec certamina (anta.
Sic, ubi convolvit vastos ad littora fluctus _
Eripuitque diem foedis niger imbribus Auster,
Porta tonat ceell, scopulisque illisa reclamant
/Equora, tempestasque furit: maris advenit alts
Rector, et oceano late dat signa cadenti.
Piacantur citius dicto fera murmura venti,
Undaque languescens tacitis adlabitur oris.
J.T.
a . . - Trin. Coll.
Varch 4, 1818. In Comitiis Prioribus.
COLLECTION OF CHALDEAN ORACLES.
No. 111,—[ Continued from No. XXXIIE. p. 138.] -
Concerning. the energy of intellect about the intelligible :
Κεντρῳ emonegyay εαῦτον φωτος κελαδοντος. Procl. in Tim. p. 286.
Eagerly urging itself towards the centre of resounding light.
a
a. ΜΝ Γ΄ Ἢ
244 Chaldean Oracles
Concerning the triad:
Ilavrs yap ev κοσμῳ λαμσει Tplas NS μόνοις apyel. ᾿ .
amasc. in Parmenid.
In every world’ a triad shines forth, of which a monad is the
principle. |
Ta παντὰ μέτρουν καὶ ἐζον, ὡς τα vee Φησὶ.
. ‘ “er ΡΝ, in Plat. Theol. p. 386.
The triad measures and bounds all things. . :
Concerning intelligible, and at the same time, intellectual na-
tures :
Ta μὲν ἐστι voepa καὶ VONTa, OTA γοουντα νοϑιται.
Procl. in Theol. Plat. p. 179.
Those natures are both intellectual and intelligible, which, pos-
sessing themselves intellection, are the objects of intelligence to
others.
Concerning the Iynges, or the summit of the intelligible, and,
at the same time, intellectual order of gods: Ὁ i
Πολλὰι μεν by αἱ δε ἐπεββαινουσι φαεινοις
Κοσμοις ἐνθρωσκχουσαι, ev ais ἀκροτητες ἑασιν
Τρεις. Damasc. in Parmenid.
‘These being many, ascend leaping into the shining worlds ; and
they contain three summits.
Concerning the defensive triad, which subsists with the Iynges:
—— Bpovpos τῶν epywy εἰσι του πατρος,
Kas τοὺ ενος vou τοῦ vonrov. Procl. in Plat. Theol. p. 205.
They are the guardians of the works of the Father, and of one
intelligible Intellect. : ,
Concerning the empyrean Synoches :
Tots δὲ mupos voepou νοεβοις πρήστηρσιν axavra |
Εἰκαθε δουλευοντα, πατρὸς rey Bovay. , Procl.in Parmenid.
All things yield ministrant to the intellectual presters of intel-
lectual fire, through the persuasive will of the Father.
1 i.e. In each of the seven worlds mentioned by Psellus, in the exposition
prefixed to these oracles: and the like must be understood in every divine
order. Indeed, that in every procession of divine natures, a monad pre-
sides over, and is the principle of, a kindred multitude; and, first of all,
of atriadic multitude, is largely and beautifully shown by Proclus, in Plat.
Theol., and is demonstrated to be the doctrine of Plato; but, to understand
this, requires very different qualifications from those by which a man is
able to discover, that instead of ἀνθρώπων in a Greek MS. you may read
evdpuv!—Et hoc dico pro ratione officii mei; non quod velim conviciari, sed
admonere, ΝΣ . |
᾿ 7 net
oe
by Theurgists. — 245
Concerning the material Synoches :
λλα και ὑυλαιοις ooo δουλευει Συνοχευσι.
But likewise such as serve the material Synoches..
Concerning. the Synoches in general :
Dpoupsiv av πρηστηρσιν εοῖς ἀκροτητας ἔδωκεν
Eyxspacas αλκὴς ἴδιον μενος εν Συνοχευσὶν. Damasc. reps ἀρχῶν.
He gave them to guard the summits with their presters, ming-
ling the proper force of his strength in the Synoches.
WAVTA γαρ συνέχων τῇ εαὐτου pie τῆς ὑπαρξεως ἀκροτῆτι, κατα TO
λογιον, αὑτὸς wag ἐξω υπαρχει. Procl. im Theol. p. 212, respecting
the first of the Synoches.
_ «Connectedly containing all things in the one summit of his hy-
parxis, according to the oracle, he himself subsists wholly beyond.
* ra λογία τας γωνικας συμβολας των σχημάτων συνοχηΐδας ἀποκαλεῖ»
καθόσον εἰκονα φερουσιν τῶν cuvoyixwy ενώσεων, καὶ τῶν συζευξεων τῶν
θειων καθ᾽ ας τα διεστωτα συναπτουσιν αλληλοις. Procl. in Eucl. p. 36.
᾿ The oracles call the angular junctions of figures Synocheide, so
far as they contain an image of synochean unions, and of di-
vine conjunctions, according to which, they connect together things
separated from each other,
- Concerning the Teletarche :
Os Be τα ἀτομὰ καὶ αἰσθητὰ δημιουργουδὶ,
Και σωματοειδὴ καὶ κατατεταγμενα εἰς ὑλὴν.
These fabricate indivisible aud sensible natures, together with
such as are endued with corporeal form, and are distributed into
matter.
Os TedAerapyas συνειλήπται τοῖς Suvoyevos. Damasc. regs apywy.
The Teletarche are comprehended’ together with the Synoches.
Concerning Saturn, the summit of the intellectual order :
Ou yap εἰς vAny xup ἐπέκεινα τὸ πρῶτον .
Eny duvapsy κατανᾷειει epyoic, ἀλλα vow.
Nov yap vous ἐστιν, o κοσμου τεχνιτὴς πυρίου.
_ Procl. in Plat. Theol. p- 333, and in Tim. p. 157.
_ The fire which is the first beyond, did not shut up his power in
matter, nor in works, but in intellect. For the artificer of the
fiery world is an intellect of intellect.
Kas Tou vou ος Toy ἐμπυριον κοσμον ayes. Damase. reps ἀρχῶν.
And of that intellect which conducts the empyrean world.
. Avro yap εκθρωσχουσιν ἀμειλικτοιτε κεραῦνοι,
Kas πρηστηροδοχοι κολποι παμφεγγεὸς ἀλκῆς
Hearpoyevous Ἑκατης, καὶ ὑπεζωκος πυρος ανθος,
Hoe χράταιον πνευμα πόλων Tuplwy ENEXEIVA. Procl. in Crat.
From him leap forth the implacable thunders, and the prester-
capacious bosoms of the all-splendid strength of the father-begot-
246 Chaldean Oracles
ten Hecate, together with the environed flower of fire, and the
strong spirit which is beyond the fiery poles.
* Ey ross λογιοις THY πρωτιστὴν πηγὴν τῶν ἀμειλιχτ,ν (id est Satur-
num) Aeyeras περιέχειν, καὶ ἐποχεισθα! τοις αλλοις ἀπαισιν.
Nous πατρὸς apasoss φενχουμενος ἐθυντηρσιν..
Ακναμπτου ἀστραπτουσιν αμειλικτου πυρὸς oAxois. Procl. in Crat.
In the oracles it is said, tbat Saturn, who is the first fountain of
the Amilicti, comprehends and rides on all the rest. ‘Thei
lect of the Father, riding on attenuated rulers, they become -
gent with the furrows of inflexible and implacable fire.” "
Concerning Rhea, who, in the intellectual triad, is called by the
Chaldeans, Hecate : D "*
᾿ Tro δυο voooy ἡ ζωογονος. περιέχεται ψυχων. Damasc. περι ἀρχῶν.
The vivific fountain OP eels ie comprekcnded under two intel-
lects.
Noorois δ᾽ apes θεας φυσις awdyros ηώρηται. Procl: m Tim. p. 4.
Immense Nature is suspended about the shoulders of the god-
dess.
Μέσον τῶν xarequy Exarns xevrgoy φορειται. .
The centre of Hecate is carried in the middle of the fathers.
Xasras yap ες οξυ πεφυκοτι φωτι BAewovras.
Procl. in Plat. Polit. p. 387.
Her hairs appear similar to rays of light ending in a sharp point.
. . ™ Pay τοὶ νοερων μακαρῶν πηγὴ τε pon τε,
Tlavrow yap πρωτὴ δυναμειῖς χολποισὶν ἀφραστοις 7
“4εξαμενη, γενεὴν exs παν mpoyett τροχαουσαν. Procl. in Crat,
Rhea is the fountain and river of the blessed intellectual gods.
For first receiving the powers of all things in her ineffable bosoms,
she pours running generation into every thing.
_ Concerning Jupiter, the artificer of the universe:
Avas yap παρὰ τωδε xabyrai, καὶ voepais actranres τομαῖς,
Kas To xuBepvay τα παντα, καὶ Tarren ἐχαστον οὐ ταχθεν..
Procl. in Plat. p..376.
The Duad’ sits with this god, and glitters. with intellectual see-
tions ; together with the power of governing all things, and placing
in order every thing which is not regularly disposed. 7
Και πηγὴ πήγων, καὶ περας ayyov ἁπασῶν. § Damasc. reps .
And the fountain of fountains, and the boundary of all foun-
tains. ,
_ Ess τρια γαρ εἰπε vous πατρὸς αἴδιου εν
No παντα κυβερνων. Procl. in Tim. p. 813.
* Thus too both Orpheus and Plato characterise Jupiter by the duad.
‘by Theurgists. 247
The intellect of the eternal Father governing all things by intel-
lect, said into three.
Ess τρια yap vous εἰπεπατρος τεμνεσῆαι amavra,
Ou το θελειν κατενευσε, καὶ ἡδὴ waver’ eretueyto. Procl. in Parmenid.
For the intellect of the Father said ali things should be Cut into
three. His will assented, and immediately all things were cut.
᾿ Ἐνθεν ἀαρδὴν θρωσκει yeverts πολυποικιλου vans. Procl.in Tim. p. 118.
Thence the generation of multifarious matter wholly leaps forth,
Epya vonoas yap πᾶτρικος voos αὐτογενεῦλος
Tlacw ἐνεσπειρεν δεσμον πυριβριθὴ ἐρωτὸος
Odpa ra παντὰ μενῇ χρονον εἰς ἀπέραντον ἐρωντα.
Mevy πασῃ τὰ πατρος νοέερως υφασμιενα Φεγγειῖ,
Ὡς ev ἐρωτι μενῃ χύσμου στοιχειὰ ἤεοντα. Procl. in Tim. p. 155.
The paternal self-begotten intellect, understanding his works,
disseminated in all things the bond of love, heavy with fire, that
all things might remain loving for an infinite time; that the con-
nected series of things might intellectually remain in all the light of
the Father; and that the elements of the world might continue
running in love.
_ SupPore yao πατρικοὶ νοὸς ἐσπειρεν κατὰ xoopoy,
Os τα νοητὰ νοεῖ, καὶ appara καλλωπίζει. Procl. in Crat.
: The paternal intellect, who understands intelligibles, and adorns
things ineffable, has disseminated symbols through the world.
No μεν κατέχει τὰ νοητα, αἰσθησιν δ᾽ exayes κοσμοις. Procl. in Crat.
Through intellect he contains intelligibles, but he introduces
sense to the worlds.
Ἐστι yap ἀλκῆς
Αμᾷιφαους δυναμις voegais στραπτουσα τομαισι. Damascius.
For he is the power of a strength every way lucid, and he ghit-
ters with intellectual sections.
Kas 0 womrns, ος avrougywy τεκτήνατο Tov κοσμον. Damascius.
The artificer who himself operating, fabricated the world.
Noegass aotpanres τόμαις, epwros δ᾽ averAnoce ta παντα. Damascius.
He glitters with intellectual sections, but he has filled all things
with love.
Taura-matyp evonoe βροτος δὲ οἱ ψυχωτο. Procl. in Tim. p. 336.
These things the Father understood, and the mortal nature be-
came animated for him.
Myrpa cuveyoura τὰ παντα.
A matrix! containing all things. a
Chaldzorum theologia septem processiones huic deo tribuit. Is
Σ Agreeably to this, he was celebrated by the Pythagoreans as the deead,
from the all-comprehensive nature of this number.
’
248 | Chaldean Oracles
enim σκταγλῶχις et ewraxris ideo dicitur in oraculis. Gal. not. in
Iamblich. p. $16.
The theology of the Chaldeans attributes seven processions to
this god. Hetce he is called, in the oracles, seven-angled and
seven-rayed. .
Concerning the unpolluted, or guardian intellectual order: .
* AvuxegPantos yap ἐστιν ἢ ἐνωσις τοῦ Te πρωτοῦ πατρὸς (Satetei)
κᾶι τοῦ πρώτου τῶν ἀχράντων θεῶν, καὶ δια Touro“ σιγωμενος καλὲνγιδ
τῶν θεῶν, ouros ο ακλιτος θεος, καὶ τῷ νῷ συνῳδειν. λογέται καὶ κατα VOW
μόνον ὑπὸ τῶν Ψυχων γνωριζεσθαι.᾽ “Prock in Theol. Plat. p. 921,
The union of the first father (Saturn) and the first of the unpol-
luted gods, is transcendent; and hence this stable god is called, by
the gods, “ silent, and is suid to consent with intellect, and to be
known by souls through intellect alone.”
* Kes μοι δοκεῖ δια τούτων παλιν ο Πλατῶν τα αὐτὰ Aeysiv ὑστερον Todt
πὸ τῶν θεων πεφασμενοῖς. καὶ ἣν EXEIVOL παντευχον προσειρήχοισι, TAUTY
πανοπλία παντελεῖ χεχοσμενὴν εὐφημι. ΕΣ
Kas γαρ δὲ ἐαντευχος, evowAsos, εἰκε θεῃᾷι. ,
rocl.in Plat. Theol. p. 994.
_ And hence, Plato appears to me again to assert the same things
which were AFTERWARDS asserted by the gods. For what they
have denommated, furnished with every kind of armour, this he
celebrates, by the being adorned with an all-perfect and complete
armour. |
“ For being furnished with every kind of armour, and being
armed, he is similar to the goddess.
Chaldean Oracles, which were either delivered by Theurgists,. under
the reign of the emperor Marcus Antoninus, or by Soroaster.
_. Concerning ideas, as proceeding from the intellect of Jupiter,
the artificer of the universe : =
Nous πατρὸς ἐρροιξήσε νοησας axpcods βουλῃ
Παμμορφους ἰδεας. πηγὴς Se pias axowracas
Ἐξεθορον" πατροθεν yap env βουλητε τελος τε.
(AN ἐμερισθήσαν vespeo mugs μοιρηθοισαι,
Ess αλλας vospas* κοσμῳ yap avak πολυμορῴῳ
Προυθηκεν voepoy τυπον αφθιτον ov xara xoo poy :
ἴχνος ἐπειγόμενος μορῷης μετα κόσμος ἐφανθη,
Παντοιαις secs κεχαρισμένος, ὧν μια πηγή,
EE yg ροιζουνται μεμερίσμεναι αλλαι ἀπλῆτοι,
- Ῥηγνυμεναι κοσμου περὶ σωώμοισιν, αἱ περὶ χολποὺς
Σμερδαλεους, σμηνεσσὶν εοἰκυιοι Φορεονται;
Τραπουσι περι τ᾽ ads παφασχεδοὸν αλλυδις aAAY.
‘he
by Theurgists, or Zoroaster. 249
Ἑννοιαι voepas πηγὴς πατρικῆς awe, πολὺ
“Ζραττομεναι mupos ανῦος ἀκοιμήτου χρόνον, ἀχμῃ
Αρχεγονους ens πρωτῇ sarpes εβλυσε tas δε
AuroreAns πηγὴ. Procl. in Parmenid,
The intellect of the Father made a crashing noise," understand-
ing, with unwearied counsel, omniform ideas. But with winged
speed they leaped forth from one fountain: for both the counsel
and the end were from the Father. In consequence too of being
allotted. an intellectual fire, they are divided into other intellectual
forms: for the kmg previously placed in the multiform world, an
Intellectual incorruptible impression, the vestige of which hastening
through the world, causes the world to appear mvested with form, and
ete with all-various ideas, of which there is one fountain. From
this fountain other immense distributed ideas rush with a crashing
noise, bursting forth about the bodies of the world, and are borne
along its terrible bosoms, like swarms of bees. They tura them-
selves too on all sides, and nearly in all directions. ‘They are ἴῃς
tellectual conceptions from the paternal fountain, pluckmg abun
dantly the flower of the fire of sleepless time. But a self-perfect
fountain pours forth primogenial ideas from the primary vigor of
the Father.
An oracle addressed to the intellectual. gods :
Os τὸν υπερχοσμιον watpaxoy βυθὸν eave veourres. Damasc,
Ye who understand the supermundane paternal profundity.
Concerning that intelligible which is co-ordinate with intellect ;.
Ov QYEU νοῦς ἐστι VONTOU, OU “χωρὶς ὑπαρχε!.
mr x Procl. sn Plat, Theol. p. 172.
For intellect is not without the intelligible; it does not subsist
separate from it, |
Concerning intellect. ; |
Tov δὲ voes mas yous θεον, Damascius,
Every intellect understands deity,
Concerning fountains and principles :
πασας πηγας TE καὶ apyas
4ινειν, wes τε μένειν αὐκνῳ στροφαλιγγι. Procl. in Parmenid,
All fountains and principles rapidly whirl round, and perpetually
_ abide in ‘an unsluggish revolution.
Concerning the multitude of rulers:
Troxeitas αὐταῖς apyicos αὐλῶν. Damasc. in Parmenid, ᾿
The ruler of the 1mmaterial worlds is subject to them.
a einem
* The crashing noise, signifies the procession of ideas to the formation of
the world. ᾿ ᾿
250 Chaidean Oracles.
Αρχας αἱ BAT QOS Epya νοησασα! VOTH, .
Δισθητοις ἐργοις καὶ σώμασιν ἀαμφεκαλυψεν.
“Διαπορύμιοι ἐστῶτες haves τῷ warps καὶ τῇ υλῇ;
Και τα ἐμφανὴ μιμηματα τῶν adavov ἐργαζόμενοι,
Και τ᾽ adavy εἰς τὴν εμφανὴ χοσμοπομαν eyypadhorrss.
Damasc. rep: ἀρχῶν.
Rulers who understand the intelligible works of the Fathér.
‘These he spread like a veil over sensible works and bodies. ‘They
are standing transporters, whose employment consists in speaking
to the Father and to matter; in producing apparent imitations of
unapparent natures; and in inscribing things unapparent ἴῃ the ap-
parent fabrication of the world. ne,
* ταξεως ᾿αφομοιωτικῆς ἔργον προς THY γοεραν povada THY δημιουργικῆν
aveAxsi τὰ μετ᾽ αὑτὴν, ὠσπερ aAANS (ταξεω() πρὸς τὴν νοητὴν; ἣ τις ἔχε!
᾿ διαπορθμιον δυναμέν, ὡς οἱ Geos λέγουσι παντῶν ἀπ᾿ exeivys ᾿ τῆς VANS,
καὶ παλιν Ox EXEIYHY τῶν παντῶων. Procl. in Parmeni
Concerning fontal time :
Πηγαῖον ἀλλον og τὸν ἐμπυριον κόσμον ayes. Procl. in Tim. p. 952.
Another time which is fontal, and the leader of the empyreas
world. . ΝΜ
Concerning Time :
Os γε θεουργοι ὕεον αὐτὸν εἰναι φασιν, καὶ ὑμνοῦσι mperBurepev xa
VEWTEQOY, καὶ κυκλοελιχκτὸν δῶν θεὸν xo αἰώνιον, καὶ YOOUNTe τὸν συμπαντα
τῶν EY τῷ κοσμῳ χινουμενῶν ἀπαντῶν αριῦμον. καὶ πρὸς τουτοῖς ἀπέραντον
δια τὴν δυναμιν. καὶ ελικοειδὴ φασι μετὰ τουτων. Procl. in Tim. p. 244.
Theurgists assert, that Time is a god, and celebrate him as both
older and younger, 88 ἃ circulating and eternal god ; as understand-
ing the whole number of all the natures which are moved in the
world; and, besides this, as eternal through his power, and of 2
spiral form.
Concerning the fontal soul : ,
Apdny ἐμψυχουσα acs, wup, asdepa, xoopous.
Simplic. in Phys. p. 145.
Abundantly animating light, fire, ether, and the worlds
The speech of the soul of the universe, respecting the fabrica-
tion of the world by Jupiter :
Mera de πατρικας διανοιας, ψυχὴ ἐγώ vou,
Θερμὴ ψυχουσα tx παντα, κατεῦετο yao .
Novy μεν evs ψυχῃ Ψυχὴν δ᾽ evi σωματι ἀργῷ
Ἡμεων eynatelyxe πατὴρ ανδρων τεθεων τε. Procl.in Tim. p. 124.
I, soul, reside after the paternal cogitations, hot, and animating
all things ; for the Father of gods and men placed our intellect ih
soul, but soul he deposited in sluggish body.
}
by Theurgists.or Zoroaster. . | 251
Concerning natural productions, and the soul of the world:
Συνυφισταται yap τὰ φυσικὰ epya τῷ voepw Geyyes
Tov πατρὸς. ψυχὴ γαρ ἡ κοσμησασα τὸν peyay
Ουρανον, καὶ κοσμουσὰ μετὰ TOU πατρος.
Κερατα δὲ και αὐτῆς ἐστήρικται ave. Procl. in Tim. p. 106,
, Natural productions consubsist in the intellectual light of the
Father. For it is soul which has adorned the mighty heaven, and
ich adorns it in conjunction with the Father. But her horns are
blished on high. ᾿
Concerning Nature : :
Ἄρχῳ δ᾽ av φυσις ακαματὴ κοσμων τε καὶ ἐργῶν,
Ovpavés οφρα Gees δρομον αἴδιον κατασυρῶν. :
καὶ ὁπως ἂν αἱ ἀλλα! περίοδοι πληρωνται ἡλίου, σελήνης, ὥρων, γυ-
τος, ἡμέρας. Procl. in Tim. p. 4 and 328.
nwearied nature rules over the worlds and works, and draws
downward, that heaven may run an eternal course ;,and that the
other periods of the sun, moon, the seasons, night and day, may be
accomplished.
Kas targus ἡελιὸς περι xevrgoy owas elas ελθε.
And that the swift sun may as usual revolve round the centre.
My φυσιν ἐμβλεψεις, εἰμαρμενον ουνομα tye de.
Procl. in Plat. Theol. p. $17.
You should not look upon Nature,,for her name is fatal.’
Concerning the light above the empyrean world:
Ey rourm yao τὰ arunwra τυπουσῆαι. | Simplic. in Phys. p. 143.
In this light, things without figure become figured.
Concerning the universe :
Nou yap μιμήμα merci, τὸ δὲ rex ev τὶ σώματος exer
: rocl. in Tim. p. 87.
It is an imitation of intellect, but that which is fabricated pos-
sesses something of body.
.' ZupBora γαρ πατρικὸς νοὸς ἐσπειρεν κατὰ κοσμον.
The paternal intellect disseminated symbols through the world.
Concerning the composition of the world from the four elements,
by the Demiurgus.
Toy ολον xo poy ex πύυρος, και UdATOS, καὶ YS,
Kas παντοτροφου aidons moses. :
He made the whole world from fire, water, earth, and all-nou-
rishing air.
* This alludes to the intimate connexion between Fate and Nature. For
Fate, as we have before observed, is the full perfection of those divine illu-
ininations which are received by Nature.
253 | ~ Chaldean Oracies
0 womrns 0f avreupyor τεχτηνατο τὸν Noo mor,
Kas τις πυρὸς ογκος δὴν erepes’ tabe wavta
| Avroupyay, wa compe τὸ xoopsxoy exrororeuby, |
Koopog wv’ ἐκδηλος, καὶ pn φαινηδ᾽ usevotes. Procl. in Tim. p. 154,
The artificer who, self-operating, fabricated the world. And
there was also another mass of fire. All these he produced, self
operating, that the mundane body might be conglobed, thatthe
werld might become manifest, and that it might not appear meg
branous,’
Concerning the seven firmaments, the heavens, heavenly bodies,
ether, air, earth, and water: - a
Extra yap εξογχώσε πατὴρ στερεωματα κόσμων, a
Tov οὐρα» κυρτῳ σχήματι περικλεισας. Damase. m Parmenid,
The Father gave bulk to the seven firmaments of the worlds,
aud mclosed the heavens in a convex figure :
Enyfe δὲ καὶ πολὺν ομίλον ἀστερῶν ἀπλανῶν
May Tacs ἐευκογῷ πονήρα. .
Πηξῃ δὲ πλανὴν οὐκ exoucy Φερεσθαι. ;
To sup pos To Kup averynac es. Procl. in“Fim. p. 280,
He established the numerous multitude of inerratic stars, not-by
a laborious and evil tension, but with a stability void of a wander.
ing motion ; for this purpose compelling fire to fire,
EE αὐτοὺς (planetas)} esteerycey, εβδομον ἡελιου
ἈΙεσεμβολησας πυρ. Procl.m Tim. p. 980.
He made the planets six in number, and for the seventh, he
hurled into the midst the fire of the sun.
To ατακτον aurwy εὐταχτοῖς ἀναχρεμασας Savas.
_ He suspended the disordered motion of the planets im orderly
d zones.
ty a
Aibepios τε δρομος, καὶ μῆνης ἀπλετος ὁρμὴ,
Hepios τε ροαι. Procl. in Tim, p. 457,
The ethereal course, and the immense impetus of the moon,
and the aerial streams. | :
ΔΛιθηρ, nase, πνευμα σελήνης, aepos ayes. Procl. in Tim. p. 257.
O zther, sun, spirit of the moon, and ye leaders of the air.
Hanoy τε xuxAwy, καὶ μηναίων καγαχισμὼν ᾿
Κολπων τε ηερίων.
Ailpns μερος, ἡελιου τε καὶ μήνης οχέτων NTE ἡερος. :
rocl. in Tim, p. 257,
Of the solar circles, the lunar rattlings, and the aerial bosoms.
* Asevery deity is a self-perfect unity, all things must be as much as pos
sible united: for union must vecessarily be the offspring ef unity. we
or Zoroaster. | 253
The portion of zther, of the sun, of the rivers, of the moon,
and of the air. |
Kas πλατὺς ἀὴρ, μήναιος Te ὄρομος καὶ πολὸς NeEAs0I0.
Procl. in Tim. p. 257.
The broad air, the lunar course, and the pole of the sun.
Tlup πυρος εξοχετευμα ι
Και πυρὸς ταμιαὰς. - Procl. in Tim. p. 141.
, The sun is a fire, which is the channel of fire; and it is the disw
pensator of fire. , ΕΞ
Ζῳων δε πλανωμένων ὑφέστηχεν exrader.
He constituted the heptad of wandering animals.
Γην ev perm τιθεῖς, υδωρ δ᾽ ev γαιας κολπόις,
Hepa δ᾽ ἀνωθεν τουτων.
Placing earth in the middle, but water in the bosoms of the
earth, and air above these.
* Tous τυπους τῶν χαραχτήρων, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ϑειων φασματων εὖ τῷ ἡ
aubeps φαίνεσθαι, τα Aoyse λέγουσιν. Simplic. in Phys. p. 144.
The oracles assert, that the impressions of characters, and of
other divine visions, appear in ether.
“Os γε μυστικώτατοι τῶν Aoywy, καὶ τὴν ολοτήτα αὐτοῦ (8018) τὴν εν
τοῖς ὑπερχοσμιοις καραδεδωκοισιν. &X85 18 οἡλιακὸς KOT LOS, Xas TO OAC
φως, ὡς as τε χαλδαιῶν φήημαι λεγουσι. Procl. in Tim. p. 264.
The most mystic of discourses inform. us, that the wholeness of
the sun is in the supermundane order. For there a solar world
and a total light subsist, as the oracles of the Chaldeans affirm.
* 0 αληθεστερος NMOS συμμέτρει τῶ χρόνῳ Ta παντα, “* χρόνου χρογὴς
ων ατεχνως," xara τὴν περι αὐτοῦ τῶν θεων ομφην. Procl. in Tim. p.
949.
- The more true sun measures all things together with time, being
“ truly a time of time,” according to the oracle of the gods re-
specting it.
* O δισκος ems τῆς ἀνοαιστρου φέρεται, πολὺ τῆς amAavous ὑψήλοτεροις,
xo cuTw be των μεν πλανωμένων οὐκ εξει τὸ μέσον, τριων Os τῶν KOT LWP
κατα τας τελεστικας ὑποθέσεις. Julian. Orat. V. p. 334.
The orb of the sun revolves in the starless, much above the in-
erratic sphere. Hence, he is not the middle of the planets, but
of the three worlds, according to the telestic hypotheses,
Concerning the middle of the five mundane centres:
* Kas πεμπτον μεσον αλλον πυριοχὸν ενθα κατεισι
Μεχρι υλαιῶν ζωηφορον πυρ. Procl.in Tim. p. 172.
And another fifth middie fiery centre, where’ a life-bearing fire
descends as far as the material channels. :
Concerning the summit of the earth:
* Anrws δ᾽ ουν οἱ τῶν στοιχειῶν αἰθερες, we φησι τὰ λογιαι, exes,
Olympiod. in Pheed.
VOL. XVIE . Οὐ. NO. XXXIV, S
854 Oracles by Theurgists,
The ethers of the elements, agreeably to the oracles, are there.
Concerning matter :
, * Exe μαθησομεθα, δια παντὸς του κόσμου τὴν υλὴν διήκειν, ὥσπερ καὶ
os beos φασιν. Procl. in Tim. p. 142.
. We learn, that matter pervades through the whole world, as the
_ gods also assert.
* Concerning evil :
ὁ Τὸ κακὸν ἀμενηνοτερὸν τοῦ μὴ ONTOS ἐστιν, κατα τὸ λογιον. Procl, de
Providen.
Evil, according to the oracle, is more debile than non-entity.
Concerning the aquatic gods: τ.
* To ενυδρον, ews μὲν τῶν θείων, τὴν αχωριστον emoraciay evdeixvuTas
του υδατος. διο καὶ τὸ λογιον UdpoBarynpas κάλει Tous Jeous τουτους.
Procl. in Tim. p. 270.
The aquatic, when-applied to divine natures, signifies a, govern-
ment inseparable from water; and hence, the oracle calls the
aquatic gods water-walkers.
Concerning Typhon, Echidna, and Python:
. “Otis taprapou καὶ γῆς τῆς συξυγουσὴς τῷ ουρανῳ ὁ τυφων, ἡ ἔχιδνα, ο
πυθων, o10v χαλδαΐκη τις τριας εἐφορος τῆς araxtous πασὴς δημιουργιας.
Olympiod. in Phed.
Typhon, Echidna, and Python, being the progeny of Tartarus,
and arth, which is conjoined with Heaven, form, as it were, a
certain Chaldaic triad, which is the imspective guardian of the
whole of a disordered fabrication. .
Concerning the origin of irrational demons :
* Axo τῶν aepimy ἀρχόντων συνυφιστανται οἱ ἀλογοι δαίμονες, διο Χά
“Τὸ λογιον φησιν,
‘+ Heglay ἐλατηρα κυνῶν χθονίων τε καὶ υγρων. Olympiod. in Phed.
Irrational demons derive their subsistence from the aerial rulers,
and hence, the oracle says, “ Being the charioteer of the aerial,
terrestrial, and aquatic dogs.” -
Concerning terrestrial demons : :
Ou yap χρὴ xsivous σε Brewey πριν cope τελεσῆῃ. 7
Tas ψυχας leryovres aes τελόέτων ἀπαγουσι. Procl. in I. Alcibiad.
' The earth, according to Plato, in the Phedo, is every where cavernous,
like a pumice-stone; and its true summit is xtherial.—Agreeably to this
theory, which probably is of Egyptian origin, and which we see was adopted
by the Chaldeans, we only live at the bottom of four large holes in the
earth, which we denominate the four quarters of the globe; and yet fancy,
as Plato observes, that we inhabit the true summit of the earth. For far-
ther particulars concerning this curious theory, see my Introduction to the
Timzus of Plato, and Notes on Pausanias. |
or Zoroaster. ᾿ BBS.
It is not proper that you should behold them, till your body is
purified by initiation : for these demons alluring souls always draw
them away from mystic ceremonies, .
Concerning divine names ;
Ἄλλα ἐστιν ουνομιοι σέμνον ἀχοιμητῷ στροφαλιγγμ
Koopous ενθρωσκων, κραιπνὴν δια πατρὸς evirny. Procl, ἴῃ γα.
There is a venerable name with a sleepless revolution, leaping
into the worlds, through the rapid reproofs of the Father, ἐ
Ἐστι yap ονοματα παρ᾽ ἐκαστοις θεοσδοτα,
Auvapsy ey τελεταῖς ἀρρῆτον ἔχοντα.
There aré names of divine origin in every nation, which possess
qn ineffable power in mystic ceremonies.
Concerning the centre: |
Kevrgoy ag’ oy, και πρὸς 0, μέχρις av τυχὸν ΝΞ
Ioas sacs. τοῦ], in Euclid. p. 48. '
The centre is that from which, and to which, (the lines) as far as
they may happen to extend, are equal. |
Concerning prayer :
+. A πυριθαλπὴς ewoia πρωτιστὴν ἔχει ταξιν.
Τρ wups yap βροτος ἐμπελασας Geolev φαος εἐξεις
Axbuvoyss yap βροτῳ xeasmvos μάκαρες τελεθουσ: —
εν ΄ Procl. m. Tim. p, 64.
A fire-heated conception has the first order. For the mort
who approaches to fire, will receive a light from divinity; and he
who perseveres in prayer, without intermission, will be perfected
by the rapid" and blessed immortals. _ |
Concerning divine natures, and the manner in which they ap-
pear to mankind : — oo ΜΝ"
Ασωματα μεν ἐστι τὰ θεία παντα. os
Σωματα δ᾽ ev auross ὑμῶν evexev-evederas, |
My δυναμένων κατασχεῖν ασώμρτους τῶν σωμᾷτων,
Aa τὴν σωματικὴν, εἰς ἣν ἐνεχεντρισθητε φυσιν. :
ΝΞ ᾿ς Ριοοΐ: in Plat. Polit. p. 359.
All divine natyres are incorporeal, but bodies were bound in
them for your sake ; bodies not being able to contain incorporeals,
tbrough the corporeal nature in which you are concentrated,
Tlug sxadov σχιρτηδὸν ex’ yepos οἰδμα τίταινον,
_H καὶ πὺρ ατυπωτον, obey φωνὴν προθεουσαν,
Ἢ φως πλησιον, ἀμφιφανες, ροιξαιον, ελεχθεν.
Αλλα καὶ ἱππὸν ιδειν φωτὸς πλεὸν ἀστραπτοντα,
Φ »
" By the rapid, the oracle means, according to Proclus, the intelligible
gods. ᾿
B56 Oracles by Theurgists,
H καὶ καιϊδα boois voroig exorcoupevoy ἐππου,
Ἐμσυρον, καὶ χρυσῳ πεπυκασμενον, και πκαλιγύυμνον,
H και τοξευοντα καὶ ἐστηωτ᾽ ἐπι νώτοις.
Procl. in Plat. Polit. p. 380.
A similar fire extending itself by leaps through the waves of the
air; or an unfigured fire, whence a voice runs before ; or a light
held near, every way splendid, resounding and convolved. But
also to behold a horse full of refulgent light; or a boy carried on
the swift back of a horse—a boy fiery, or clothed with gold, or on
the contrary naked; or shooting an arrow, and standing on the
back of .the horse. |
* Παρακελευονται οι Geos
Nosw μορφὴν φωτος προτεθεισαν. Procl. in Crat.
The gods exhort us to understand the forerunning form of light.
. Concerning the mystic ceremonies of Apollo:
“Ὁ θεουργος o τῆς τελετῆς τοῦ Απολλωνος προκαθηγουμενος, απὸ Tew
᾿καϑαρσεων ἀρχεται, καὶ τῶν περιρανσεων.
Auros δ᾽ ev πρώτοις sepeus πυρος epya κυβερνων,
Κυματι ραινεσθω παγερῳ βαρυηχετος αλμὴης, ὡς φήσι τὸ λόγιον.
; Procl. in Crat.
The Theurgist who presides over the mystic rites of Apollo,
begins his operations from purifications and sprinklings.” “ The
priest, in the first place, governing the works of fire, must sprin-
‘kle with the cold water of the loud-sounding sea,” as the oracle
Bays. 7
' Concerning the human soul, its descent, ascent, body, &c.
Try ψυχὴν ἀναπλησας epwrs μεν Bade. Procl. in Plat. Theol. p. 4.
. Filling the soul with profound love."
Νοησασαι τὰ egya του mat pos
Moiens εἱμαρμένης τὸ πτερὸν φευγουσιν ἀναιδες.
Ev δε Gam κεινται πυρσους ελκουσαι ἀκμαιους,
Ex πατροῦεν κατιοντας, ap’ ὧν ζνχη κατιόντων
Ἐμπυριων δρεπεται καρπῶν Ψυχοτροῷον ανῦος. Ε
Procl. in Tim. p. 321.
᾿ ΒΥ understanding the works of the Father, they fly from ‘the
shameless wing of fate. But they are placed in God,” drawing vie
gorous torches descending from the Father: and from these the
soul descending plucks empyrean fruits, the soul-nourishing flower.
* Profound love must be our guide to the beatific vision of the intelligible
prorld: and Plato informs us, that a better guide than’ this cannot be
ound.
'* The soul, when united with deity, energizes supernaturally: and is‘no
longer self-motive, but is wholly moved by divinity. :
: er Zoroaster. 457}
Kay yap τηνδε ψυχὴν ιδῃὴς ἀποκαταστασαν,
Λλλ᾽ αλλὴν evines πατὴρ ἐναριθμιον εἰγα!. 7
Though you should perceive this particular soul restored to its
pristine perfection, yet the Father sends another, that the number
may be complete.
H pada δὴ κειναι γε μακαρτατα εξοχα πασεῶων
Ψυχαων ποτε γαιαν as’ ουρανοῦεν προχεοντάι.
Keivas δ᾽ ολβιαι τε, και οὐ Para νηματ᾽ eyouras
Οσσαι an’ αἰγληεγτος, avak, oelev nbs καὶ αὐτου
Ex διος ἐξεγένοντο, Mibou xparepys ux’ αναγκῆς.
᾿Π Synes. de Insom. p. 153.
Those are in the most eminent degree the most blessed of all
souls, that are poured forth from heaven on the earth: but those’
are fortunate, and possess ineffable stamina, who are either pro-
duced from thy lucid self, O king,’ or from Jupiter, through the’
strong necessity of Mithus.
Myre xarvw νευσεῖς εἰς Tov μελαναυγεα κόσμον
Ns βυθος αἰεν απιστος, ὑπεστρωται τε καὶ Adys,
Αμφικνεφης, ρυποῶν, εἰδωλοχαρης avonros,
Kpepvodys, σκολιος, woopoy βαθος, asey ελισσῶν
Ales νυμφευων ἄἀῷανες δεμιας, apyov, ἀπνευμῦν. ‘
Synes. de Insom. p. 140.
Nor should you verge downwards into the darkly-splendid
world, whose bottom is always unfaithful, and under which is
spread Hades:* a place every way cloudy, squalid, rejoicing in
images, stupid, steep, winding, a blind profundity, always rolling, '
aways marrying an unapparent body, sluggish, and without
reath.
Kai ο μισοφανὴς χοῦμος, xou ta cxodia ρεῖθρα, ᾿ς
ὙΦ᾽ ὧν πολλοι κατασυρονται. rocl. in Tim. p. 330.
And the light-hating world, and the winding streams, under:
which many are drawn down.°
Ελπις rpepeto σε πυριοχος ayyeAinw evs χώρῳ.
pet Olympiod. ia Phredon., at Brocl. in I. Alcibiad.
Fiery* hope should nourish you in the angelic region.
Toss δὲ διδακτὸν ἐδωκε φαους γνωρισμᾶα λαβεσθαι.
Tous δὲ καὶ ὑπνώοντας ens ἐνεκαρπισεν αλκχῆς. Synes. de Insom. °
ῥ
a
* Apollo, :
5 Se the exposition of Psellus. |
The winding streams signify the human body, and the whole of gene-
ration externally placed about us. .
+That is, divine hope: for the ancients assimilated a divine nature to
8. ᾿
"Ὁ
258 Oracles by Theurgists,
To these he gave the ability of receiving the knowledge of light,
which may be taught ; but to others, even when asleep, he extend-
ed the fruit of his strength. ἢ
δ Ou yag ἐστιν εἐφικτα ra bese βροτοῖς τοις σωμα νοουσιν, ,
Αλλ᾽ ὁσοι γυμνητες avo σπευδουσι πρὸς υψος. Proc]. in Crat..
Things divine cannot be obtained by those whose intellectual eye
ts directed to body : but those only can arrive at the possession.of
them, who, stript of their garments, hasten to the summit.
Meyvupevay δ᾽ οχετων πυρὸς apbirou εργα τελουσα Ὁ
™ x pos af Procl. in Plat. Polit. p. 399.
Rivers being mingled, perfecting the works of incorruptible fire.
"Iva py βαπτισθεισα χθονος οἰστροις, καὶ ταῖς τῆς φυσεως αναγκαις
(ως φησι τις των θεων) ἀποληται. Procl. in Plat. Theol. p. 297.
, Lestbeing baptized in the furies of earth, and in the necessities"
of natnre (as some one of the gods says), it should perish.
* As μεν ἐρρωμενεστεραι ψυχαι δι᾿’ εαυτων θεωνται τὸ αληθες, καὶ εἰσὶν
ευρετικώτεραι, * σωζομεναι δι᾽ αυτὴς aAxns,” ὡς φησι τὸ Aoyioy.
Procl. in I. Alcibiad.
More robust souls perceive truth through themselves, and are of
& more inventive nature ; “ such a soul being saved (according to
the oracle) through its own strength.” ;
* φευχτεῦν, κατα TO λογιὸν,
. Τὸ πληῦος των ανὔρωπων τῶν ἀγεληδὸν ἰόντων.
ο΄ Procl. in I. Alcibiad. .
According to the oracle, we should fly from “the multitude of
men going along m a herd.”’* |
* Ὡς your φησι καὶ τὸ λογιον, oudevos evexey ἀλλου amooTgeperas θεὸς
ἀνδρα, και νεας επιπεμπεὶ ATPAMUS, ὡς OTAY ἀτάχτως και πλημμελως srs .
τα θειοτατα τῶν θεωρήματων, ἡ τῶν ἐργων, καὶ τὸ λεγόμενον, ἀμυήτοις
᾿στομοισιν, ἡ ἀνίπτοις ποσι ποιησομεῦα τὴν avodoy. Των yap ουτω μετιον-
τῶν, ATEASIS μὲν εἰσὶ διαβασεις, κεναι δε αἱ ορμαι, τυῷλαι δε αἱ aT Oars.
ΝΕ Procl. in Parmenid.
As the oracle, therefore, says, “" Divinity is never so much
turned away from man, and never so much sends him novel paths,
‘as when we make our ascent to the most divine of speculations, or
works, in a confused and disordered manner, and as it adds, with
unhallowed lips, or unbathed feet. For of those, who are thus neg-
ligent, the progressions are imperfect, the impulses are vain, and
the paths are blind.”
* That is, some men acquire divine knowledge through communitating
with divinity in sleep. |
* He who voluntarily mixes with the multitude, necessarily imbibes puer-
ile notions, and engages in puerile pursuits, | ᾿ς
Cd
or Zoroaster. - 259
* H τελεστικὴ ζωὴ δια rou θειου wupos αφανιζει τας ex τῆς γενεσεῶς
απασας κηλιδας, ὡς To λογιον διδασκει, καὶ πασαν τὴν ἀλλότριον, ἣν ἐφειλ-
χυσατὸ τῆς ψυχῆς τὸ πνευμα, καὶ ἀλογιστον φυσιν.
: Procl. in Tim. p. 381)
The telestic life,* through a divine fire, removes all the stains,
together with every foreign and irrational nature, which the spirit
of the soul attracted from generation, as we are taught by the ora-
cle to believe, .
* Αξιωμα tours πρῶτον λήπτεον' wees Osos ayabos, καὶ τῶν λογιῶν αξιω-
ματι μαρτυρούντων, εν οἷς αἰτιῶμενα τὴν τῶν ανθρωπων ἀσέβειαν φησιν»
Oud ors was ἀγαθος θεος εἰδοτες αταλαάεργοι νηψατε.
Procl. in Plat. Polit. p.355. .
_ This axiom then must be first assumed : every god is good, and
the oracles witness the truth of the axiom; when accusing the im-
piety of men, they say, “ Not knowing that every god:is good, ye
are fruitlessly vigilant.” .
* Avdpos sspou σωμα δυνάμεις οἰκοδομουσί. Boeth. de Consol.
The powers build up the body of the holy man. *
* Te τῶν θεων λογια φασὶ, ors dia τῆς αγιστειας ουχ ἡ ψυχὴ μόνον, αλ-
λα και τα σώματα βοηθειας πολλης και σωτήριας ἀξιουνται.
Σωζεται yap (φησι) καὶ τὸ πικρᾶς vans περιβλημα βροτειον. os Asos
σὙπεραγνοῖς παρακελευόμενοι τῶν θεουργων κατεπαγγελλονται.
, Julian. Orat. V. p. 334.
The oracles of the gods declare, that, through purifying ceremo-
nies, not the soul only, but bodies themselves become worthy of
receiving much assistance and health: “ for (say they) the mortal
vestment of bitter matter will, by this means, be preserved.” And
this, the gods, in an exhortatory manner, announce to the most holy
of ‘Theurgists.
* Qui autem A DEO TRADIT! SERMONEsS fontem per se lau-
dant omnis anime empyrias, id est empyrialis, etherialis, materialis :
et hunc sejungunt ex tota Zoogonothea, a qua et totum fatum sus-
pendentes, duas faciunt σειρας, id est ordines, hanc quidem animalem,
hang autem ut diximus μοιραιαν, id est sortialem, fatalem. Et ani-
™ Thatis, alife consisting in the exercise of divinely mystic ceremonfes.
3 This sentence is, by all the editors of Boethius, erroneously ascribed
to Hermes Trismegistus. I say erroneously, because Philosophy is made
to utter it, as the saying of one greater than herself. But since Philosophy,
according to Plato, in the Banquet, ranks in the demoniacal order, it is evi-
dent, that one greater than herself must be a god. As the sentence, there-
fore, is clearly oracular, I have not hesitated, from the peculiar sanctity of
its meaning, to insert it among the Chaldean oracles.
s . -᾿
460 an Chaldgzan Oracles
mam ex altera trahentes, quandoque autem fato servire, quando
irrationalis facta, dominum permutaverit, pro providentia fatum. __
Procl. de Providentia, apud Fabric. in Bablioth. Grae,
| vol. viii. p. 486. |
_ The oracles delivered by the gods, celebrate the essential fotin-
tain of every soul, the empyrean, the etherial, and the material.
This fountain they separate from the whole vivific goddess (Rhea);
from whom also, suspending the whole of fate, they make two
ries, the one animastic, or belonging to soul, and the other be-
longing to Fate. ‘They assert, that soul is derived from the anima-
stic series, but that sometimes it becomes subservienf to Fate,
when passing into an irrational condition of being, it changes its
lord, viz. Fate for Providence.
* To λογιον φησι τας ψυχας avayouevas τὸν παιοινα αδειν.
ὙΦ * ™ Olympiod. in Phed.
The oracle says, that ascending souls sing a hymn in praise of
ο.
᾿Πβρυδε υπερβαθμιον ποδα ριπτων xara τὸ λογίιον εἰς τὴν θεοσεβειαν.
Damascius in vita [sidori apud Suidam.
_Nor hurling, according to the oracle, a transcendant foot towards
piety."
* To γε Tos πνευμα Touro To Ψυχιχον, o καὶ πνευματικὴν ψυχὴν προση-
γορευσαν οἱ ἐνδαιμόνες, και θεος και δαίμων παντοδαπος, καὶ εἰδωλον γινε-
ται, καὶ Tas ποινας εν τούτῳ Tives Ψυχή. χρησμοι τε yao ομοφωνουσι
περι αὐτου, ταις ὀναρ φαντασίαις THY exes διεξαγωγὴν τῆς ψυχὴς προσει-
καΐζοντεςι ; Synes. de Insom. p. 139.
This animastic spirit, which blessed men have called the pneumatic
soul, becomes a god, an all-various demon, and an image, and the
soul in this suffers her punishments. The oracles, too, accord with
this account: for they assimilate the employment of the soul in
Hades to the delusive visions of a dream. ἦ
* Responsa szpe victoriam dant nostris electionibus, et non soli
ordini mundalium periodorum: puta quando et dicunt: Te spsum
‘widens, verere. Et iterum: Extra corpus esse te ipsum crede, et
es, Et quid oportet dicere, ubi et egritudines voluntarias pullulare
nobis aiunt ex tali vita nostra nascentes. -
Procl. de Providentia. p. 483
The oracles often give the victory to our own choice, and not to
the order alone of the mundane periods, As for instance, when
they say, ‘‘ On beholding yourself, fear.” And again, “ Believe
reel
3 x Nothing so requisite as an orderly progression to the acquisition of a
ivine life. . ᾿
* For he who lives under the dominion of the rational Jife, both here
and hereafter, is truly in a dormant state. |
_ from fydus. . 261
yourself to be above body, and you are.” And still further, when
they assert, “ That our voluntary sorrows germmate in us as the
growth of the particular life which we lead.”
Oracles of uncertain or imperfect meaning :
Τ᾽ a xo τὰ ρήτα συνθήματα κοσμου.
The ineffable and effable ἡ impressions of the world.
vrreyss αὐτο, λαμβανουσα αἰθρὴς pepos,
Hediov τε, Σελήνης TE καὶ OTR ἥερι συγεχόνται.
He collected it, receiving the portion of zther, of the sun, of
the moon, and of ‘whatever i is contained in the air.
Kas ἐφανησὰν ev αὐτῇ yr ἀρετὴ καὶ ἢ copia,
Καὶ ἢ πολυφρων arpexcic.
There appeared in it virtue and wisdom, and truth endued with
abundance of intellect.
Ex τωνδὲε pees τριαδος δεμοις πρὸ της OUTHS
Ou πρωτης, αλλ᾽ ou Ta μετρεῖται.
From these the body of the triad flows before it had a being,
not the body of the first triad, but of that by which things are ἡ
measured.
Tepos wpwros Spopos, ev δ᾽ apce μέσω
Hegsos, τριτος aAdos, ος ev πυρὶ τὴν χθονα θαλπει.
The first course is sacred, the aerial is in the middle, and there
is another as a third, which nourishes earth in fire.
Ολοφυης μερισμος, καὶ ἀμεριστος.
An intire and impartible division.
«ἄφομοιοι yap saurov, exesvos emenyomevos
Tov tumoy περιβαλλεσθαι τῶν εἰδωλων.
For he assimilates himself, he hastening to invest himself with
the form of the images.
Eocapevou παντευχον ary φωτὸς χελαδοντὸς
Αλκῃ τριγλικῷ νοῦν, ψυχὴν θ᾽ οσπλισαντα.
Hayvrosoy συνθημα βαλλειν φρενι.
Myd ἐπιφοιταν ἐμπυριοις σποραδὴν ὄχετοῖς
Adda στιβαρηδον.
‘Nor to approach in ἃ. scattered manner to the empyrean chan-
nels, but collectively,
EEE ᾿
The following Chaldean oracles are extracted from the treatise
of Lydus, De Mensibus.
* χρὴ δὲ χαλινωσαι Ψυχὴν βροτὸν ovra vonrov,
Οφρα μὴ eyxupoy χθονι δυσμορῳ, αλλα σαωθῃ. p. 2.
i. e. © [tis requisite that [man] being an intelligible mortal, should
bridle his soul, in order that she may not incur terrestrial infelcity,
but may be saved from it.”
Conformably to this, Socrates, in the Phedrus, represents the
3
262 | Chaldean Oracles
soul as resembling a winged chariot, the charioteer of which is
intellect, and the horses are the powers of the soul. Hence Ly-
dus introduces the above oracle by observing as follows: tperAas
yae exew τὴν ψυχὴν δυναμεις ὁ εν φαιδωνι (lege φαιδρωνι) Swxgarns wa-
ρκδιδωσιν, ἡνίοχον μὲν τὸν γουν, ἵππους δὲ τας της uyns δυναμεις. ταυτῷ
καὶ χαλινῶσαι τὴν ψυχὴν θεσπιζει Ta λογια.
Lydus farther observes, that the oracle delivers to us the whole
soul asa divine triad. For it says:
*Yuyatoy σπινθηρα δυσι κρασαι ὁμονοιαις
νῷ καὶ νευματι (lege πνευματι) θείῳ, ed οἷς τριτὸν αγνὸν ἐῤῶώταά,
συνδετιχκὸν παντῶν ἐπιβητορὰ σεμνὸν ἐϑηκεν. Ρ.358.(. ὁ.
i.e. “ [The Demiurgus] having mingled the vital spark from two
according substances, intellect and a divine spirit, he added, as the
third, to these, pure and holy love, the venerable charioteer that
binds all things together.”
Again, Lydus (p. 20.) observes from Proclus, in his Hypoty-
is of the Philosophy of Plato,' that the summit of intelligibles
is the intelligible triad, containing in itself the cause and essence
of all powers, as Parmenides says. For all intelligibles are com-
prehended in this triad, and every divine number proceeds in this
order, as also the Chaldean * says, in the Oracles: soreov τοινυν, ors
τρεις τριαδας ο Τίμαιος παραδιδωσει, καὶ μάρτυς o Πρόκλος ev Trotuxwoes*
τῆς ἤλατωνοὸς Φιλοσοῷφιας φασχῶν, OTs ἡ τῶν νοητῶν ἀκρύῦτης (τριὰς CUTE
γοητὴ) καὶ μονας ἐστιν, ἐνας yap TUyyavey δυναται εν εαὐτη, τὴν πασῶν
δυναμεων αἰτίαν ἔχουσα καὶ οὐσίαν, ὡς φησιν o Παρμενιδης. παντα yap
τὰ γοῆτα ev τῇ τριαδι περιέχεται, καὶ was ὁ θειος ἀριῦμος εν τὴ rakes
TAUTY προεληλύθεν, ὡς καὶ αὐτὸς ο Χαλδαιος ev τοῖς λογίοις. ᾿
But the oracles are as follow: ;
καὶ παλιν"
τῆς δὲ yap εν τριαδος κολποισιν exapyel’ «παντα)
τῆς δὲ yae ex τριαδὸς παν πγέευμα πατὴρ ἐκερασε. 7
i.e. “ All things are governed [by the father] in the bosoms of
the [intelligible] triad. :
And again, “ The father mingled every spirit from this triad.”
In the next place, the Oracle says, that souls which are return-
~ ing to their pristine condition, i. 6. to the highest felicity of their
nature, transcend Fate.
Ov yap ug’ ειμαρτὴν ἀγελὴν πιπτούσι θεουργοι. '
i.e. “ Theurgists do not fall so as to be ranked among the herd
that are in subjection to Fate.”
The words of Lydus are, raury τας ἀποκαθισταμενας ψυχας υὑπερ-
’ This work of Proclus is not extant.
51, 6. Julian the Theurgist, who lived under Mareus Antoninus for an
account of whose writings see Suidas.
from Lydiis. 7 τς 968
βαινειν τὴν εἰμαρμενὴν φησι τὸ Aoyiov; by which it is evident, that for
“μαρτὴν in the above oracle, we should read εἰμαρμενης, were it not
‘fur the metre. |
Farther still, Lydus observes: ors ἡ σεληνὴ προσεχως εἐπιβεβηχε
TOY γενήτων παντι καὶ πανζα κυβέρναται τα τῇδε evapyws ὑπ᾽ αὐτῆς, ὡς
τὰ λογια dacs ᾿
Νυμφαι πηγαιαι, καὶ ενυδρια πνευματα παντα,
καὶ χθονιοι κολποι TE καὶ ἡεριοι καὶ ὑπανγόοι;
μβήναιοι πάσης ἐπιβητορες 4d επιβηται,
VANS ουρανιοις τε καὶ ἀστεριας, καὶ αβυσσων. Ὁ. 82.
i.e. “ The moon ‘proximately rides on every thing generated,
and all these terrestrial natures are manifestly governed by her,.as
the oracles say : :*
Fontal nymphs, all aquatic spirits, and monthly terrestrial, aerial,
and splendid bosoms, who ride on all matter, viz. the celestial and:
starry matter,’ and that which belongs to the abysses.”
In p. 83. Lydus informs us, “ that Dionysus, or Bacchus, was- |
called by the Chaldeans Jao (instead of intelligible light) in the
Pheenician tongue, and that he is frequently called Sabaoth, such
as he who is above the seven poles, i. 6. the Demiurgus.”
os Xardasos τὸν θεον (Asovucoy) Taw λεγουσιν, (αντι rou, dws vonroy) Ty
Φοινικων γλωσσῃ, καὶ Σαβαωθ δὲ rodAdayou λεγεται, οἷον 0 ὑπὲρ τοὺς
ἑπτὰ wodous, τουτέστιν ὁ δημιουργας. ᾿ς
And lastly, in p. 121, he says, ‘that the number 9 1s divine, re-i
ceiving its completion from three triads, and preserving the summits
of theology according to the Chaldaic philosophy, as Porphyry
informs us.” Θεῖος ο τῆς evvados ἀριθμος ἐκ τριῶν τριαδῶν πληρουμιενοξ,
καὶ τας ἀκροτήτας τὴς θεολογιας κατα τὴν Χαλδαΐκην φΦιλοσοφιαν (ως
φησιν o Πορφυριος) αποσωζων. ΕΣ
It appears to be a circumstance of a most singular nature, that
the oracles respecting the divine orders, which were delivered by
Chaldean ‘Theurgists, under the reign of Marcus Antoninus,
should be, im every respect, conformable to the Grecian theology,
as scientifically unfolded by Plato. That this is actually the case,
every one who is capable of understanding the writings of Plato,
and his most genuine disciple Proclus, will be fully convinced. ‘The
philosophic reader, who is desirous of obtaining a partial convic-
tion of this extraordinary fact, may be satisfied by perusing my In-
troduction to the Parmenides of Plato.
It may, indeed, be clearly shown, that the most ancient poets,
priests, and philosophers, have delivered one and the same theology,
a TD
* The celestial and starry matter is called by the oracles primogenial mat+ —
ter, as Lydus elsewhere infurms us ; τὴν πρωτογενὴ vAny, ἡν καὶ ἀστεριαν καὶ oupar
VAN καλει τὰ λογιᾶ. Po 24. "
(
264 . Chaldean Oratles.
though in different modes. The first of these, through fabulous
names, and a more vehement diction; the second, through names
adapted to sacred concerns, and a mode of interpretation grand
and elevated; and the third, either through mathematical names, or
dialecticepithets. Hence we shall find, thatthe ther, Chaos, Phanes,
and Jupiter of Orpheus; the father, power, intellect, and teice
beyond of the Chaldwans ; the monad, duad, tetrad, and decad, of
Pythagoras ; and the one being, the whole, infinite multitude, and
sumeness and difference, of Plato, respectively, signify the same di-
vine processions from the ineffable principle of things.
_I only add, that Fabricius seems to have entertained a very
high opinion of these oracles, and to have wished to see them in
that form in which they are now presented to the English reader.
For thus he speaks (Biblioth. Grec. tom. i. p. 249.) ““ Digna autem
sunt prestantissima hc prisce sapientie apospasmatia, que post.
clarissimorum Virorum conatus etiamnum eruditorum industriam
et ingenia exerceant, adeo multa adhuc restant in illis notanda, quz
-ab interpretibus male accepta, et quia argumentum-de quo agunt
peucis perspectum est, inepta plerisque vel sensus expertia viden-
tur.” And in page 250, he expresses his wish, that some one
would consult the writers from which Patricius made his collec-
tion (a great part of which, though unpublished, are to be met:
with in various libraries), and not negligently consider the places of
the authors where they are to be found.
But whatever merit there may be in the preceding collection
long experience has taught me to expect from mere verbal critics
nothing but impertinent and malevolent censure, in return for la-
borious exertion and valuable information. However, as these men
may be aptly compared to the mice that mbbled the veil of Mi-
nerva, I soothe my resentment with the consoling assurance of the
goddess herself (in the Battle of the Frogs and Mice) that,
“To such as these, she ne'er imparts her aid.”
_Manor Place, THOMAS TAYLOR.
Walworth.
‘
| 2965 ee
(OBSERVATIONS :
ON SOME
LINES OF HOMER.
Severa. of the commentators and editors of Homer seem to
have been of opinion that many lines, both in the Iliad and Odys-
sey, were not the production of that poet, but of later rhapso-
dists, who endeavoured to imitate Homer’s style and manner in the
descriptions or narrations they iatroduced. In some instances these
opimions appear to be well founded, while in others they rest only
upon vagee conjectures and partial notions of the structure of his
verse. Of those that have been condemned by some critics and
defended by others, I know none that deserve a fuller investigation
than the lines commencing with the 56th of the 15th book of the
liad, and endiug with the 77th.
"Oge’ ἡ μὲν μετὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
ἜΛλθῃ, καὶ εἴπῃσι Ποσειδάωνι ἄνακτι,
Tlavodpevoy πολέμοιο, τὰ ἃ πρὸς δώμαθ᾽ ἱκέσθαι"
Ἕκτορα δ᾽ ὀτρύνῃσι μάχην ἐς Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,
“Adres & ἐμπνεύσῃσι μένος, λελάθῃ δ᾽ ὀδυνάων,
Al νῦν μιν relpovar κατὰ φρένας" αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὺς
Adris ἀποστρέψῃσιν, ἀνάλκιδα φῦδϑαν évdpcas’
Φεύγοντες δ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ πολυκλήϊσι πέσωσι
Πηλείδεω ᾿Αχιλῆοε" ὁ δ᾽ ἀνστήσει ὃν ἑταῖρον
Πάτροκλον» τὸν δὲ κτενεῖ ἔγχεϊ φαίδιμος “Ἕκτωρ
Ἰλίον προπάροιθε, πολεῖς ὀλέσαντ᾽ αἰϑηοὺε
Τοὺς ἄλλουε, μετὰ δ', νἱὸν ἐμὸν Σαρπηδόνα δῖον.
Τοῦ δὲ χολωσάμενος xrevet “Exropa dies ᾿Αχιλλεύε.
"Ex τοῦδ᾽ dy τοι ἔπειτα παλίωξιν παρὰ νηῶν
Αἰὲν ἐγὼ τεύχοιμι διαμπερὲς, εἰσόκ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὲ
“Dor αἰπὺ ἕλοιεν, ᾿Αθηναίης διὰ βονλάε.
Τὸ πρὶν 8° οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐγὼ παύω χόλον, οὔτε τιν᾽ ἄλλων
᾿Αθανάτων Δαναοῖσιν ἀμννέμεν ἐνθάδ' ἐάσω, ᾿
Vpiv γε τὸ Πηλείδαο τελεντηθῆναι ἐέλδωρ"
“Os οἱ ὑπέστην πρῶτον, ἐμῷ δ᾽ ἐπένευσα κάρητι
ἬΜματι τῷ, ὅτ᾽ ἐμεῖο θεὰ Θέτις ἥψατο γούνων»,
Δισσομένη τιμῆσαι ᾿Αχιλλῇα πτολίπορθον.
- So far as I can form an opinion οὗ these lines, they appear to me
to be the production of some later peet, who was qualified ocither
a?
i
266 τς Observations on some
by his judgment or knowledge of Homer's, style and manner, to
supply any deficiencies in the works of that immortal author, The
verses alluded to ¢cqntajn a confidential communication from Jupiter
to Juno, of the principal events that were to take place in the history
.- of the war till the capture of Troy; and this communication, jt -
may be observed, is voluntarily made at a time when Jupiter was Dut
partially reconciled to Juno, in consequence of her asseveration that
she had not instigated Neptune to assist the Greeks.. It is nat con-
sonant with the distrust he uniformly entertained of her, and the. sus-
picion that must have rested upon his mind, notwithstanding. her
solemn declarations that she intended to deceive him, to make sech
an unreserved and open communication of the most important events
of the war. The constant dissensions between them; the irritating
jealousy of Juno; her endeavour to pry into all Jupiter's schemes,
and eager wish to thwart his favorite measures; made him very
reserved towards her, particularly in what regarded the discomfiture.
of the Greeks. Homer was more attentive to uniformity of character,
than to make Jupiter depart from his usual coldness and severity of
manner towards Juno, when he knew that, although she might not
have instigated Neptune, her constant aim and purpose were to assist ᾿
the Greeks, not more out of favor to them, than opposition to himself.
But there is one part altogether inconsistent with the. design of the
_ poem, and quite beyond what the poet ever intended to communicate
to bis hearers. The expression iszeiod«’ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
Ἴλιον αἰπὺ ἕλοιεν, ᾿Αθηναίης. διὰ βονλάς.
The subject of the Iliad, every one knows, was the anger of Achilles,
and its consequences to the Greeks. The action of the poem, there-
fore, terminated properly with the reconciliation of that warrior with
Agamemuon, the discomfityre of the Trojans, and the death of
Hector. The recovery of Hector’s body by the aged Priam, and even
the account of his fall, are, strictly speaking, episodes, not necessarily
connected with the subject of the poem. It never was the intention
of the poet to describe the capture of Troy; nor does he, in any
other place, say by whose means it was to be taken. The whole nar-
ration _is, indeed, clumsily put together, and exhibits none of that_
judgment, clearness, and nice discrimination of character, for which
Homer is so justly celebrated. Besides these ohjections of a general
kind, there are others founded on the structure of some of the verses,
the use of particular words, and certain grammatical distinctions,
hitherto unnoticed, so far as I know, which, in my opinion, provg
~
Eines of Homer. - 267
incontestably that the lines are spurious. In vetée 57, the conjunction
wai is the first of the foot, and placed before εἴπῃσι. It was ον»
dently a rule with Homer, never to place this conjunction before a.
word beginning with a vowel or diphthong, as the first syllable of the
foot. I am aware it will be said by the supporters of the digamma,
that εἴπῃσι was pronounced with it, and that, therefore, there is here
no violation of the rule. This is a point which, I apprehend, so far as
Homer's poetry is concerned, will never be satisfactorily ascertained.
It is a mere assumption, unsupported by any thing like positive evi-
dence, and arose from a misconception of the nature of his versifi-
cation. If the rules I have elsewhere laid down for the structure of
his verse be correct, it will be evident that if he did use the digamma,
it was not with the power of a consonant. But leaving this as a
disputed point, I shall proceed to notice some other errors.
In the following line the article τὰ is employed in an unusual way,
---τὰ ἃ πρὸς δώμαθ' ἱκέσθαι. In almost every place where the article,
as it is called, was used by Homer, it was in the sense of a demonr
strative adjective, or relative pronoun; most commonly the first, and
seldom or never employed in that sense, especially when separated
from a noun by some intervening words, without the particles μὲν,
δὲ, or γὲ, thus :—
ὁ μὲν αὖθις ἔβη θεός. 1]. P. 82. He, the god, &c.
~— τόδε μοι κρήηνον ἐέλδωρ. 1]. A. 504. Accomplish this, my desire,
τὸν κτάμεναι μεμαὼς ὅστις τοῦ γ᾽ ἀντιὸς ἔλθοι. Il. P. 8. When
it is used without these particles, it is generally as an adjective, proe
noun, or relative.
᾿Ασκάλαθος, τόν φησιν ὃν ἔμεναι ὄβριμος Αρης. 1]. Ο, 112. Whom
furious Mags galls his.
I am indeed of opinion, that Homer never used it in the manner of
the Attic writers, but always as a pronoun; and that, wherever it is
. prefixed before a word, and cannot be so rendered, it ought to be
expunged. In the following sentence it is demonstrative—
Αἴαντι δὲ μάλιστα δαΐφρονι θυμὸν ὄρινε,
Τῷ Τελαμωνιάδῃ. 1]. Ξ. 459. Of that Ajax, the son of
Telamon, in contradistinction to Oilean Ajax.—ézei τὰ χερείονα νικᾷ.
Il. A. 576. Since these bad practices prevail Adda τὰ μὲν πολίων
ἐξεπράθομεν, τὰ δέδασται, 125. But what we plundered from the
cities, these have been divided.—Ovéde perarpéwerat φιλότητος ἑταίρων,
τῆς ἣ μιν παρὰ νηυσὶν ἐτίομεν. 1]. 1.626. There are a few instances
in which the article is not employed in the usual manner, the correc
260" - Observations on some
ten of which is easy; thus—ds ἔφατο" δεῖσεν δ' ὁ γέρών. Tl. A. $8:
read δεῖσεν δὲ γέρων, as suggested by Heyne; πολλὰ δ᾽ ἔποιτ᾽ ἀπάνευθε
κίων ἡρᾶθ' ὁ γοραιὸς, 86, read, hedre γοραιὸς. In verse 11, τὸν Χρύσην
rine’ ἀρητῆρα, should probably be τοῦ Χρύσην, ἄς. kis priest
Chryses. Τοῦ should, according to the doctrine I have stated, be
accompanied with ye, but this particle would require a transposition
ef the words: the line is as unmusical as any in the whole poem, and
prebably requires correction, the more especially as ὁ yap, in the fol:
lowing verse, coming immediately after ’ArpeiSys, would lead one fo
refer it to that name, did the context not point out the connexion.
The use of the article appears originally to have been δεικτικὸς, to use
ἃ scholastic expression, to point to some person or thing to which the
hearer’s attention was also called by appropriate gestures. From
being confined at first to objects in view, it came by degrees to be
applied to persons, or things, just mentioned or alluded to in: the
course of conversation ; and lastly, ina more general and indefinite
way, when speech became more elliptical, more metaphorical, and
eaused particular rules to be applied to general cases; or, in other
words, made this pronoun, which was at first employed to mark indi-
vidual objects without naming them, point out abstract ideas, and
objects that presented themselves to the mind, without any referenee
to a particular designation. In Homer’s time αὶ was never used with-
eat an immediate reference to the object; but, in after times, it came
te be.associated with certain words which had originally required it
te point them out in a more definite manner, and continued to be
,used with many of them as a part of the established idiom of the
janguage. In line 58, where it is employed, had the verse proceeded
from Homer, he would probably have made it τάδ' ἃ πρὸς δώμαϑ'
ἱκέσθαι. There is another objection, however, to this line. Every
attentive reader of the Iliad knows that when a message is sent, or a
communication made, the very words of the. message or communis
cation are employed by the messenger. If then Jupiter had so ex
pressed himself to Juno, respecting the mission of Iris to Neptune,
we should have found him, in all probability, repeating the same
words when he gives her his orders to that god. But this is not the
ease, 85 may be seen in the following lines. His words are—
eh Βάσκ᾽ Ἶθε, Ἶρι ταχεῖα, Ποσειδάωνι ἄνακτι,
‘ Πάντα τάδ᾽ ἀγγεῖλαι, μηδὲ ψενδάγγελοε εἶναι.
. Παυσάμενόν pew ἄνωχθι μάχαο ἠδὲ πολέμοιο
Ἔρχοσθαι μετὰ φῦλα θεῶν, ἣ οἷς ἅλα Stay. [ἔ[ἔ58.
4
ς |
Lines.of Homer. 269
In v. 60, λελάθῃ governs the genitive; λελάθῃ δ᾽ ἀδννάων. The pas-
᾿ sage is quoted by Damm, in his Lexicon, *ubi,” says be, “hoc.
preter. perf. m. conj. est activé positum pro ἐπιλησθῆναι ποιήσῃ, ut
Apollo Hectorem oblivisci faciat dolorem ex vulnere. Possit tamen ut.
intransitive sic intelligi, ut Hector obliviscatur, ut sit Aor. 2. m. con}.
cum reduplicatione lonica.” It does uot appear to me that λελάθῃ
can be either the subj. of the perfect middle, or of the 2d Aor,
middle, with the lonic reduplication. The perf. m. of this verb is
λέληθα, und with the Attic writers uniformly governs the accysative.
Καὶ λεγόντων, ὅτι ob AeAn Gare ἡμᾶς, Demosth. περὶ παραπρεσβ' dere
μηδὲ ἕν σε λεληθέναι. Xen. Cyr. λεληθέναι σέ φημι. Soph. Ged. Tyre
366. It cannot be the subj. of the 2d Aor. m. as that would be
λέλάθηται and not λελάθῃ, but it.was probably intended for the 3d.
aing. subj. of the 2d. Aorist active, by reduplication for λάθῃ. This
tense, however, uniformly governs the accusative, and not the genitive.
Νέστορα δ᾽ οὐκ ἔλαθεν ἰαχή. Il. Ξ. 1. οὐδ᾽ Za “Arpeos υἱόν. P. 1.
How this word, in this place, should have escaped the notice οὗ cri-
ties, appears to me incomprehensible. It is one proof among many,
how little attention has been paid to the language of: Homer.
There is avother decisive proof in verses 65 and 68, that the
whole passage is an interpolation by some later poet, strangely igno-
rant of Homer’s style. The former runs {{ι||5--- Πάτροκλον, τὸν δὲ
κτενεῖ ἔγχεϊ φαίδιμος “Ἕκτωρ. Krevet occurs no where else in the whole
of the Iliad and Qdyssey, except in these two places, In all others
we have the genuine Ionic future crevéw, formed by an elision of the
a, from κτενέσω. Thus,—«reréer δέ με, γυμνὸν ἔοντα. 1]. X. 124. οὔτ᾽
αὐτὸς κτενέει. 2. 156—185; αἱρήσειν, κτενέειν δὲ παρ᾽ αὐτόφι πάντας
᾿Αχαιούς. Il, N. 42. νῆας ἐνιπρήσειν, κτενέειν δ᾽ ἡρώας ᾿Αχαιούς. O. 702,
These examples will be sufficient to show that «xrevei could not have
proceeded from Homer, but from one better acquainted with the Attie
than the Ionic dialect. |
The next suspicious circumstance is the penult, of Ἰλίου long in
vy. 66, Ἰλίον xpoxdpodies © Hermaan, who has perhaps written more
upon Greek prosody than any other person, and with no great δ»
cess, as he has never established any thing like sound general prin-
ciples, but merely arbitrary notions, says, that the accent here length-
ens the short syllable. This is, indeed, an easy, convenient, and sum- ἢ
mary way of getting over the difficulty. There can be little doulit
that the reading, if the verse was genuine, ought to be, Ἰλιόθι προπά-
poe. The same correction is mecessary in ©. 104, Ἰλέου προπάροιθεν,
VOL, XVII. Cl. Jl, NO. XXXIV. T
ἃς, 3
ΝῚ
970 Observations on some
Ἰλιόθι προπάροιθεν»---ἀηὰ in X. 6. Ἰλιόθι πρὸ occurs in O. 557. In
7. 478, there is an error where Ἰλίον is also met with: ὧδε βίην τ᾽
ἀγαθὸν, καὶ Ἰλίου Ide ἀνάσσειν. Heyne recommends here a string of
digammas, as unharmonivus as can well be imagined, ῥιλέον Fede
ξανάσσειν. If any one can be persuaded that the Greek language, in
Homer's time, required the digamma in all these words, and that it
was pronounced in each with the power of a consonant, I can only
say that he has an ear not of the most delicate kind; and that he
would equally relish the Aberdonian dialect in our own country, where
the digamma seems to have taken its last refuge. The line should
undoubtedly run thus— .
wde βίην ἀγαθόν re καὶ Ἰλίου ἶφι ἀνάσσειν.
The καὶ, which was long in the 2d. foot before a vowel, is thus made
short, and the re occupies its proper place, rendering the verse much
more harmonious. The quotation here reminds me of proposing a
construction in the two preceding lines, which would have come
better under the observations made upon the use of the article. The
lines are—
Ζεῦ, ἄλλοι re θεοὶ, δότε δὴ καὶ τόνδε γενέσθαι
Thad’ ἐμὸν, ὡς καὶ ἐγώ περ, ἀριπρεπέα Τρώεσσιν.
The construction should be δότε καὶ τόνδε, παιδ᾽ ἐμὸν, and not as |
Heyne, τὸν παιδ᾽ ἐμὸν γενέσθαι, ἅς. ‘Grant that he also, my son,
become, as 1, the hero of Troy.’ In Iliad P. there is a series of
errors in the proper name Πάνθοςς Wherever it occurs in the oblique
cases, the diphthong or long vowel fornrs the second syllable of the
_ foot, and is made long before the next word beginning with a vowel.
To those, indeed, who have paid little attention to- Homer's versifi-
cation, or are so influenced by names, or so wedded to their preju-
dices, as to view every new idea, however well supported, with sus-
picion or aversion, this will probably appear no mistake. But if these
persons would be candid for once, and examine the matter coolly,
they would perhaps find that they and others, by whose opinions they -
are willing to be led, are likely, in this caseat least, to be in the
wrong. The nominative of this noun is Πάνθοος, not Πάνθος: this is
evident from the accusative Πάνθοον, in I’. 146.
Οἱ δ᾽ ἀμφὶ Πρίαμον καὶ Πάνθοον ἠδὲ Θυμοέτην.
In P. 9. we have οὐδ᾽ ἄρα Πάνθου υἱὸς ἐνμμελίης ἀμέλησε.
Bh 23. ὅσσον (ὅσον) Πάνθον vies éippediae φρονέουσιν.
In both these the reading should be Πανθόον, which makes the diph-
thong short before the next word. In the Princeps Ed. of Homer, it
Lines of Homer. 271
may be remarked, there is only one p in ἐνμμελίαι (ἐῦμελίαι). In v. 40,
the same error occurs, Πάνθῳ ἐν χείρεσσι βάλω καὶ Dpdvrids δίῃ, read "
Πανθύῳ ἐν χείρεσσι.
In O. 71. we have a very extraordinary grammatical blunder, an
adjective i in the neuter gender agreeing with a feminine noun, Ἰλίον
αἰπὺ ἕλοιεν.
From the general observations made upon the inconsistency of the
narration, and those more particular criticisms upon violations of the
versification, and the singular use of certain words, it will, I should
think, be evident that these lines ought not to be ascribed to Homer.
1 do not think that in the whole compass of the Iliad, so many errors
occur in any one book as in these few lines, and none of so gross and
palpable a nature; and yet they have been strangely overlooked by
all who have examined the passage. It is, indeed, not a little sur-
prising that, while so much attention is paid in England and on the
continent, to prepare correct editions of the Attic poets, so little has
been done for Homer, the prince of pcets. I believe it is a general
opinion, that his language is very easily understood, and that little
more can be done towards elucidating his poetry than has already
been done by Heyne and others. I have no wish to disparage the
labors of that eminent scholar, but I must be allowed to assert that
his knowledge of Homer’s language and versification appears to me
often incorrect. If the observations I have just made have any foun-
dation, it will be clear how much has been overlooked which a dili-
gent and able critic should have investigated. In my judgment,
Homer’s language is less understood than that of any other Greek
poet. It requires a much more minute knowledge of the principles
of the Greek language, to understand him thoroughly, than is com-
monly imagined, much more than for any succeeding poet; and that
must be sought, not in the usual sources of criticism, but in himself.
The fundamental error has always been to assimilate his language
with that of the Attic poets. Instead of examining it-by them, theirs
should be examined by him,. and thus the distinctions, which hold in
so many instances, may be correctly traced.
College, Edinb. Feb. 1818. G. DUNBAR.
ἊΝ ΝΕ 272
Φ΄
BISHOP PEARSON’S
“orks,
CHRONOLOGICALLY ARRANGED.
[Continued from No. XX XIII. p. 170.]
>i Ga
NO. Iv. b.
TO HIS REVEREND AND MUCH HONOURED FRIEND,
DR. DILLINGHAM,
Vicechancelor of y* University of Cambrige
Sir,
I xnow nothing but your former civilities which could have per-
swaded mee to hope or expect any such favour as you are pleased
to expresse in your letter. If you have not γ offer of a more
worthy person to performe y° Commencement-dutyes, I shail be
much encouraged to adventure it under your conduct. The
Question which 1 have now concluded to make a position on (if it
may be accepted) is,—
Regimen Monarchicum est 5. Scripturue maximé conforme.
For γ᾽ rest I shall take care to send downe such a number as
you mention against y* day, and shall desire your favour then, 88
to one of that number: and in all things shall endeavour to give
you satisfaction, as becometh him who 1s already sensible of -your
great kindnesse, and shall ever be your faithfull friend-and servant,
May 25." “ Joun PEARSON.
| —— >i a ‘
[Dec. 21, 1671.—Agreed by the master and seniors (of Trin.
Coll. Camb.) that Dr. Burrow be chosen College Preacher.
Jo. Pearson.]
2 Perhaps 1659. The expectation of meeting with a copy of the Coneie,
which I have read, induced me, not to insert this inedited letter ig 4s
proper place. <A copy of it will be seprinted in the Appendix to this ar
rangement, as soon as it can be procured.
Bishop Pearson’s Works, ec. 273
NO. XIV.
VINDICGIR'
Epistolarum
S. IGNATII.
AUTORE
JGANNE PEARSON?
PRESBYTERO.
ACCESSERUNT
ISAACI VOSSII
EPISTOLE DUE
ADVERSUS .
DAVID BLONDELLUM.
* * * * *
S. Chrysostomus, etc,
CANTABRIGIZ:
Typis Joann. Hayes ;? Prostant Lendini, apud Guil. Wells et
Rob. Scotty, ad Insignia Principis in vico Wittle Britain dicto.
1672,
* Syll. Epist. T. iii. p. 94. Pearsonus, Anglorum doctissimus, molitur
Apologiam pro Ignatii Epistolis contra Dallaeum. J. G. Greevius Nic.
Heinso, Traj. ad Rhen. a. d. rv. Kal. April. crorccnxx1.
* The venerable and learned Dr. Routh, in the preface to his collection of
the valuable remnants of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, enumerates, amongst
other fragments which have lately been brought to light from the dark
recesses of libraries, “ Origenis excerpta, quibus 4 γνησιότης epistolarum
Ignatianarum, firmissimi propugnaculi ordinis episcopalis, et porro alterorum
Sacrorum ordinum, omnino stabilitur. Etenim, cum harum Epistolarum
duas ῥήσεις Origenes ita clare et dilucide protulisset, ut vel importune urgen-
tibus effugium praecluderetur, nonnullis a criticis objectum est, opuscula
ipsa, In quibus extant haec Ignatiana, ah Origene merito abjudicanda 6888 :
Latini enim potius scriptoris esse videri, quam e Graecis in sermonem
Latinum translata. Quorum hominum argumentis cum obviam ivisset
magnus Pearsonius, haud tamen succubuit adversariorum pertinacia, inter
alia de interpretum ejusdem Origenis ambigua fide mussitantium. Postea
vero ipsa quoque Graeca Origenis, in quibus laudatur unus ex duobus illis
Bpatianis locis, idemque etiam a defensore Ignatii Nourrio olim ferme
abdicatus, [in Apparat. ad Bibliotb. Max,-Patrum, c. vi. p. 176. Paris, 1694. ]
Jnventa et in vulgus edita sunt; atque“isile crisis est Pearsonii insigniter
firmata. Et qui scriptor Origeni videbadgr ‘esse Ignatiis, eundem profecto .
dicerem semper mihi fore Ignatium, donec'tela in eas 6 istolas cusa fuerint
fortiora, quam sunt vetera illa aut nova.” Pagr, ad Reliquias Sact, Py.xx,
π.
274 Bishop Pearson’s MVorks,
The two following letters are now first published. .
CLAUDIO SALMASIO ISAACUS VOSSIUS S.
Vint partem libri D. Blondelli de Episcopis. Vult in illo
probare Episcopos a Presbyteris distinctos fuisse et praelatos iis
demum saeculo tertio. Utque id adserat vix dixerim quam vio-
lentas addat interpretationes multis auctorug locis, qui per se
satis plani sunt, si aliter intelligantur. Primo quidem saeculo
fuisse eosdem presbyteros et episcopos, non illi opus fuerat osten-
xxii. The passages alluded to by Dr. Routh are,—1. Origenis prolog. in.
Cantic. Canticorum, T. ili. p. 80. col. 1. ed. Benedict. ‘ Denique memini
aliquem sanctorum dixisse, fenatium nomine, de Christo: Meus autem amor
crucifirus est.”—Sic Ignatius in Epistola ad. Rom. p. 60. Is. Vossit. =p. 40.
Smithi, Ὁ ἐμὸς ἔρως ἐσταύρωται. 4. Origen. in Ὁ. Luc. hom. vi. p. 938. col. 2."
“eleganter in cujusdam martyris epistola scriptum reperi, Ignatium dico
episcopum Antiochiae post Petrum secundum, qui in persecutione Romae
ugnavit ad bestias: Principem saeculi hujus latuit virginitas Mariae.”—
Echedae Grabii: Καλῶς ἐν μίᾳ τῶν μάρτυρός τινος ἐπιστολῶν γέγραπται [τὸν Ἰγνά-
τιον λέγω τὸν μετὰ τὸν μακάριον Πέτρον τῆς ᾿Αντιοχείας δεύτερον ἐπίσκοπον, τὸν ἐν
τῷ διωγμῷ ἐν Ῥώμῃ θηρίοις μαχησάμενον") καὶ ἔλαθε τὸν ἄρχοντα τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτον
ἡ παρθενία Μαρίας. Ignatius, in Epist. ad Ephesios, p. 27. Ἔλαθεν τὸν ἄρχοντα
τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτον ἣ παρθενία Μαρίας : Vide Coteler. adl. p. 446. Dr. Routh
states, that the original Greek of the testimony in favour of Ignatius,
which is cited by Nouray, has also been discovered. I shall, however, wait
with considerable anxiety for farther information on this point.
3 This has been recast by the Bishop; the original title pages of which
a specimen is preserved in a copy, which formerly belonged to this prince
of Theologians, ran thus :—
VINDICI£E
Epistolarum
S. IGNATII.
| Autore
JOANNE PEARSON, ;
| PRESBYTERO. .
8. Chrysostomus, etc,
CANTABRIGIZ,
Typis Joann. Hayes, Celeberrime Academie Typographi. .
Prostant Londini etc.—mM.pe.LXXxII.
* Maximam partem graeci contextus [a p. 932 ad p. 971. ed. Ben.]
Gallicanis et Anglicapis codicibis ad suos usus eruerunt Combefisius et
Grubius. Ruaeus, * ᾿
a
Chronologically’ Arranged. 275
dere ; egerat id jam ante satis superque Walo Messalinus:* quod.
vero secundo et tertio saeculo factum esse probare conetur, id
satis mirari nequeo. Nullum attulit.exemplum aut argumentum
quod me potuit inducere ut id crederem. Et certe mirari subit.
qui fieri potuerit ut in tot millibus locorum nihil reperiatur unde
probari possit plures simul Episcopos fuisse in eadem urbe; id
quod tu ex Clemente Romano et aliis probasti fuisse primo
saeculo et fortasse initio secundi. Quare autem ejus rei exem-
plum non habemus in secundo, multo minus tertio saeculo? Nam
si unus presbyterorum appellari potuerit Episcopus, quare non
omnes simul Episcopi dicti fuissent? Cum autem ejus exemplum
non habeamus, adparet secundo, magisque multo tertio, saeculo
episcopum semper appellatum fuisse τὸν προεστῶτα τοῦ πρεσβυτε-
piov. Itatempore Ignatii nemo Antiochiae Episcopus dicebatur
quai solus Ignatius, Smyrnae nemo praeter Polycarpum, Hiera-
poli solus Papias, etc. Ex omnium praeterea ecclesiarum succese
sione adparet illum ordinem simplicem fuisse, nusquam autem
duplicatum aut triplicatum. Sed quid Ego haec ad ‘Te, vir incom-
parabilis? Epistolam Ignatii ad Magnesios in qua illa verba
habentur quae petis, mitto. Videbantur mihi illa [p. 31. ed. ..
Is. Voss. p. 21. Smmith.] οὐ προσειληφότας τὴν νεωτερικὴν τάξιν posse
etiam explicarit de juvenili Damae Episcopi ordinatione, ut
2 Timoth. 11. 22. vewrepixds guventlem significat. In hac eadem
epistola est Jocus ille unde Blondellus probare conatur Epistolas
has serius esse scriptas quod ibi arguat quosdam, qui dicant λόγον
ἀπὸ σιγῆς produsse. [Conf. Is. Voss. ad 1. p. 34=23.] Id ille
putabat ex haeresi Valentint esse desumtum. Pace tamen tanti
viri liceat mihi ab illo dissentire. Nemo veterum est qui dicat
Valentinum Zonas istos ex nihilo creasse, sed omnes, puta Ire-
naeus, Tertullianus, Theodoretus et alii, in eo conveniunt ut dicant
illum veterem opinionem resuscitasse et ex plurium haeresibus
genealogias suas et μύθους istos ἀπεράντους condidisse. Quam mag-
nam partem istorum /Sonum desumsit ex haeresi Basilidis, ita
alia ex aliis mutatus est [f. mutuatus]. Neque verum est Valen-
tinum immediate statuisse λόγον ἀπὸ σιγῇς prodiisse, ille λόγον
produxit ἐκ τοῦ vod καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας. Aliam itaque haeresin hic
indicat Ignatius, quae fuit prior et simplicior illa Valentiniana.
" Walonis Messalini (i.e. Claudii Salmasii) de Fpiscopis et Presbyteris
contra ἢ). Petavium Loiolitam dissertatio prima. L. But. 1641. p. 166. In
his “‘ Apparatus ad Libros de primatu,” Salmasius states, “ Episcopi secundi
vel tertii saeculi singulares in singulis Civitatibus urdinabantur. qui pluribus
przessent Presbyteris. Quod genus ignotum fuit Apostolis quamdiu Eccle-
sias rexerunt,” This gave rise to ἃ controversy replete with erudition ang
asperity. ;
376 Bishop Pearson's Works,
Sed nihil aeque miror in D. Blondel/o, quam quod ille putet Tgna-
tium nullas scripsisse epistolas. Vellem scire quid dicturus sit de
epistola Polycarpi, in qua ejus epistolarum fit mentio? Sed haec
non puto egere confutatione, cum sciam te in his longe alia sentire
atque ile. B/ondellus partium studio σοφὰ saepe φάρμακα solet
Immiscere scriptis. Conatur ostendere Episcopos et Presbyteros
eosdem fuisse prioribus duobus saeculis a Christo nato. Prodiit
non ita pridem in Anglia, edente Se/deno, Eutychii historia Patri-
archarum Alexandriae ex Arabico translata’ quae egregie huic
adversatur opiniont.
Eidem Idem.
Mitto reliquam partem epistolae Ignatianae ad Magnesios,
Mitto quoque Eutychium Seldeni, quem tibi, coram cum essem,
promiseram. Utinam is auctor extaret Graece. Ita enim et plus
auctoritatis obtineret et certius in multis mentem ejus adseque-
remur. De veritate tamen Scriptoris non dubitandum puto.
Neque enim illa Arabibus rerum Christianarum peritia ut talia
fingere potuerint. Miratus sum cum primum legerem in eo
“fp. xxxit.] nullum fuisse Episcopum in provinciis Aigypti -usque
fd tempora Demetri Patriarchae (ita vocat Episcopum, qui
Alexandriae electus est anno CLxxv) quod etiamsi ita intelligatur
tanquam nullus fuerit episcopus qui diversam habuerit potestatem
ab altis presbyteris, non tamen id faciet ad opinionem Blondelli
firmandam, qui serius id factum putaret. Clementem enim
Alexandrmum primum esse qui Episcopos alios a presbyteris esse
dixerit : [Strom. vi. p. 793. Potter.} illum autem στρωματεῖς scrip-
sisse anno cxcil. Atque nunquid ille, quem Eutychius vocat
Patriarcham, erat Eprscopus? Qui itaque ἤθη potuit ut nullus
in A'gypto fuerit episcopus, cum tamen X. ante illum patriarchas
numeret? Cum enim patriarchae vocabulum inventum sit tum
cum episcopis 4118 subordmarentur episcopi, non potuerunt alio
quam episcopi nomine adpellari, idque praesertim saeculo secundo.
Proculdubio itaque hoc eo modo capiendum est quod in tota
fEgypto nullus alius ante Demetrium fuerit episcopus quam
8618 Episcopus Alexandrinus. Sed utcunque statuatur nullum
in Aigypto fuisse Episcopum, imo ne Alexandriae quidem, ex eo
ipso quod addiderit ix provinctis Aigypti, non immerito colligit
quispiam in aliis locis fuisse episcopos, qui differrent a presbyteris
ut Antiochize et alibi. Praecipuum argumentum quo pugnat
* Eutychii Egyptii,—Ecclesiae suae Origines. Ex ejusdem Arabico nune
primum typis edidit ac Versione et Commentario auxit Jounnes Seldenus,
Londini. .
| Chronologically ‘Arranged. | 27 7 |
Blondellus est quod auctores saeculi secundi, qui sunt pauci, nul-
lum alium in ecclesia ordinem agnoscant quam presbyterorum et
diaconorum. Nescio an hoc movere debeat, nam omnino videntur
presbyteris accensiti fuisse episcopi, non tanquam singularis aliqua
ecclesiae τάξις, sed tanquam pars presbyterii. Ejus rei manifestum
habemus exemplum in ipso illo Alexandrino Clemente, qui cum
Christianum clerum in episcopos, presbyteros et diaconos distri-
buat (alibi tamen [Strom. vii. 930. Potter.] inquit κατὰ τὴν ἐχκλη-
clay, τὴν μὲν βελτιωτικὴν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι σώζουσι εἰκόνα" τὴν ὑπηρετικὴν
[δὲ] οἱ διάκονοι, ubi duas tantum in ecclesia τάξεις recenset.) Om-
nino itaque Episcop.* accensentur presbyterio tanquam et ipse
presbyter non aliter ab us differens quam solet Princeps senatus
ab reliquo senatu. Sed hoc forsan verum erat: tempore Cle-
mentis cepisse episcopos non amplius subjici presbyterio et tyran-
nidem quodammodo in ceteros presbyteros exercere, de quo Ori-
genes gravissime conqueritur. aneo itaque in sententia tna et
manebo semper jam secundi saeculi initio singularem episcopa@im
fuisse supra presbyteratum.
[ 1673, March 16. Dr. Pearson, Bishop of Chester, preach’d ;
a most incomparable sermon from one of the most learned Divj
of our Nation.” Memoirs of John Evelyn, Esq. Vol. I. p. 438:
NO. XV.
To Mr. HENRY ATKINSON, att
his house att Rippon-Parcke,
. Yorkshire.
ΟΝ , 1679.
Finding it under my Predecessors hand that hee had dis-
charged Mr. -Brockhall of y* Curateship of Patrick-Brompton,
Sept. 4, 1672, and receiving a good Testimoniall of y* unblameable
conversation of Mr. John Place, and upon examination finding
him fitt to discharge γ΄ duty, [have given him yt Curateship under |
my Episcopall Seale. But because I understand γ' Mr. Brockhall
hath officiated since the time of his discharge: I desire γ᾽ hee
may receive y° money usually allowed for y* Cure, according to y®
time w® hee hath officiated. And yt Mr. Place may receive y°
same allowance for y* future. At y‘ leisure I should bee glad to
see you, y' wee might conferre about y° nature of y' Lease, w I
understand you manage for y° benefitt of γ᾽ relations. In the
mean time 1 rest your very loving triend
Joun CEsTRIENS.
* De terminatione lujus vocis non liquet.
278 -Bishop Pearson’s Works,
NO. XVI.
A
SERMON
Preached
NovEeMBER V.
MDCLXXITII.
AT
The Assey-Church in WESTMINSTER.
BY
JOHN Lord Bishop of CHESTER.
LONDON: Printed by Andrew Clark, for John Williams, juntor,
at the Crown in Cross-keys Court in Little Britain. 16783.
4°. pp. 1—25.] . |
[On the opposite page, |
Imprimatur,
Humfr. London
& Noremb. 1673. |
— ὦ...
NO. XVII.
ARTICLES
OF
ENQUIRY
conceming
MATTERS ECCLESIASTICAL
within the Diocese of
CHESTER,
In the
PrimaARy- Episcopat VISITATION
of the
RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD
JOHN
Lord Bishop of CHESTER. _ - .
Anno Dom. 1674.
Lonpon:
Pnuted by Jon. WILLIAMS, Jun’, MDCLXXIV.
| | ;
Chronologically Arranged. 379
The Tenour of the Oath to be Tendered to the Church-wardens
and Side-men. : .
You shall swear, diligently to enquire, and true Presentment
make, of all Defaults and Offences against the Laws Ecclesiastical
of this realm. In which you are to take Direction from these
- Articles. And that you will not Present any Person out of Ma-
lice or Ill-Will, nor spare any out of Fear or Favour. So help you
God.
ARTICLES
OF
ENQUIRY
within the
Diocgsse of CHESTER.
Tit. I. .: ee
Concerning Churches or Chappels, with the Ornaments, Furni-
ture, and Possessions, belonging to them.
I. Isthe Fabrick of your Church (or Chappel) with all gi
appertaining to it, kept in good repair within and without, m suc
order and decency, as becometh the House of God?
II. Is there in the Church (or Chappel) a Font of Stone stand-
-ing in the usual ancient place, with a Cover to it, for the Admi-
nistration of Baptism? Is there also a convenient Communion
Table, with a fair Carpet of Silk, or other decent Stuff, in the
time of Divine Service ; and with a fair Linnen Cloth at the ti
of adminvistring the Sacrament? What Cup, Chalice, Patm,
Flagons, have you, belonging to that service ?
I. Have you in your Church (or Chappel) a convenient seat
for the Minister to read Divine Service in? And a pulpit witha
_ decent Cloth or Cushion for the same?
ΙΝ. Have you a large Folio Bible of the last Translation, with
two Books of Common Prayer well-bound, one for the Minister,
the other for the. Clerk? Have you the Book of Homilies set
forth by Authority, the Book of Canons, and the Table of Degrees
prohibited in Marriage ? ,
V. Have you a Register Book of Parchment for all who are
Christned, Married, or Buried in the Parish? Doth your Minister
every Lord’s day in the Presence of your Church-Wardens set
down the Names of Parties, with the Day, Month, and Year of
each Christning, Marriage, or Burial? Is the Transcripts thereof,
every Year, within one Month’ after the Twenty-fifth of March,
carried into the Bishop’s Registry? ..
480 Bishop Pearson’s Works,
+ VI. Have you a Paper-Book in which the Names of Strangers
who preach or officiate in the Church (or Chappel) are set down ;
and another Book for the Church-Warden’s Accompts?
VII. Have you a fair Surplice for the Minister to wear at the
times of his publick Ministration, provided at the Charge of the
arish ?
VIM. Have you a Chest with three Locks and Keyes to kee
the Books and Ornaments of the Church? Have you a Bier wi
a black Herse-cloth for the Burial of the Dead?
IX. Is the Church-yard sufficiently fenced with Walls, Pales,
or Rails, and decently kept from all Annoyance or Incroachments ὃ
Are the Trees therein preserved ?
X. Is the Mansion-House of your Minister, with all other
houses thereto belonging, kept m good Repair? Have any of
them been pulled down or defaced? Have any Incroached upon
the Land thereto belonging, or felled the Trees thereon growing ἢ
XI. Have youa perfect Terrier of all Glebe-Lands, Gardens,
Orchards, and Tenements belonging to your Parsonage or Vi-
᾿ carage ; as also an Account of such Pensions, Rate T'yths, and
Vorgons of Tyths, or other Yearly Profits (either within or with-
‘on Parish) as belong thereunto? Have any of the same been
withheld from your Minister? And by whom, as you know, or
have heard ?
XIE. Have any of the ancient Glebe Lands belonging to your
Parsonage or Vicarage been taken away, or exchanged for other
‘without the free consent of the Incumbent, and Licence from the
inary? Have any Inclosures been made m your Parish, to the
iment of the Church, by the decay of Tillage, and converting
_ *Arable Land into Pasture? By whom hath the same been made? .
And how many years since ? And how much is your Parsonage or
Vicarage damnified thereby in the yearly value thereof; as you
know, believe, or have heard? .
_ XIII. Have any new Pews or Seats been erected in your
Chancel, or in the Body of the Church (or Chappel) without
‘leave from the Ordinary ? _
Tit. 11.
Concerning Ministers.
I. Is your Minister, Curate, or Lecturer, Episcopally Or-
dained ? :
I]. Hath he been licensed to Preach by the Bishop or either of
the Universities ? ee
III. Is he defamed or suspected to have obtained his Orders or
Benefice by any Simoniacg’ Compact? |
~
Chronologically Arranged. 28
‘ IV. Doth your Minister diligently read Divine Service, and
preach every Lord’s-day in the Church, unless hindered by sick-
nesse, or reasonable absence? And im such cases doth he procure
some lawful Minister to read Prayers, to Preach, and perform
other Ministenal Duties ἡ ΝΕ
V. Doth your Minister in the Morning and Evening Service,
in the Administration of the Sacraments, and in performing other
Religious Offices appointed by the Church of England, use the
respective Forms in the Book of Common Prayer, together with
all those Rites and Ceremonies which are enjoined in this Church?
And doth he make use of the Surplice when he reads Divine Ser-
vice or Administers the Sacraments ἢ
VI. Doth your Minister diligently Catechize the Youth of his
Parish? Doth he prepare and procure them (as occasion is
offered) tocome and be confirmed by the Bishop? And doth
he endeavour to reclaim all Popish Recusants, and all Sectaries in
your Parish, to the true Religion and Worship of God, as & is
established by Law ? : )
VII. Is your Minister a man of a sober, unblamable and exem- -
_plary life? Is he grave, modest, and regular in his outward de-
meanour and apparel, according to, the Constitutions of the-Churth?
Or is his carriage, conversation, or company im any kind whatso-
aver disorderly, or scandalous, and unbeseeming his Calling and
harge ὃ
Vill. Is your Minister ready to visit the Sick, and to Baptize
Infants in danger of death, being so desired? Is any Infant, or
more aged Person in the Parish yet Unbaptised by his default? ὦ
Doth he duely Administer the Blessed Sacrament of the Lond’g-—
Supper, Three times every year, at the least, whereof Easter tote .
one? Doth he baptize with Sureties ?
IX. Doth your Minister marry any persons at Uncanonical
Hours, not between eight and twelve, or in private, or such as aré
under Age, not having the Consent of their Parents and Guardians ?
Doth he marry any either without Banes first published three
Sundays or Holy days in the Church; or without License so to
do; or with the Liceuse of any other than the Archbishop, Bishop
of this Diocese, or his Chancellor? | :
X. Doth your Minister duly bid and observe Holy days and
Fasting days, as is appointed ? And doth he then use the Forms of
Prayer prescrited by the Church? Hath he taken upon him te
appoint any private Fasts or Religious Exercises without lawful
Authority? Doth he.or any other Minister or Lay person in your
Parish hold any unlawful Conventicles or Meetings under pretence
of any exercise of Religion?
XI. Is your Minister constantly Resident among you? Hath
282 Bishop Pearson’s Works, — -
he a Curate conforming to assist him in his absence or presence ?
Doth he carry himself in all things as an able and discreet Mi-
nister, and conformable to the Church of England? Doth he serve
any more Cures besides that of your Parish, on the same day?
What is the name of your Curate, and what yearly Stipend doth
your Minister allow him ? .
If. Is there in your Parish any Lecturer; what is his name ?
Doth he read Divine Service before his Lecture, as by Law is re-
quired; and is he Conformable to the Discipline of the Church
of England ?
) Tit. ILL.
Concerning Parishoners.
I. Are there any in your Parish, who are reputed Hereticks or
Schismaticks refusing Communion with the Church of England ?
Any impugners of the Religion established of his Majestie’s Su-
premacy, or of any the Laws, Rites, and Ceremonies Ecclesiasti-
cal? Have any spoken or declared any thing m derogation, or to
the depraving of the Form of God’s Worship in the Church of
England, and Administration of the Sacraments, Rites and Cere-
monies prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer as it is now
established by Law? |
If. Are there any in your Parish, who lie under a common
fame, or vehement suspicion of Adultery, Fornication, or Incest ἢ
Are there any common Drunkards, Swearers or Blasphemers of
God's holy Name and Word? ΝΣ
ὄν ILI. Are there any Excommunicate persons, or any who coun-
_ ~femance, or keep company with them?
IV. Do any of your Parish prophane the Lord’s day by neglect-
ing of publick Holy Duties, or by doing the Works of their ordi-
nary Calling, or using unlawful Recreations, or permitting their
Children or Servants so to do? Do they duly observe other Holi-
days, Festivals, and Fasts appomted by Authority ?
V. Do all those who inhabit in your Parish duly resort to your
Church, (or Chappel) and continue there during Divine Service,
Sermon, and other Holy Duties, with that Reverence, Order and
Decency, as befits devout Christians? Or have occasioped Riot,
Clamor or Fighting in the Church at any time? Are there any
Recusant Papists or Sectaries in your Parish? Do they, or any
of them keep any Schoolmaster in their House which cometh not to
Church to hear Divine Segvice, and receive the Holy Communion ?
Vl. Are there any in your Parish who refuse to have their
Infant-Children Baptized by your Minister? Or do they keep
them unbaptized any longer than the Church allows? And what
Chronologically Arranged. | 288 ΄
Infants, or more aged persons, are there in your Parish unbap-
tized ?
VII. Do all your Householders duly send their Children, Ap-
prentices and Servants to.be catechized? And do they take care
Bishop ‘occasion is offered) they should be confirmed by the
isho
tf Is there any person in your Parish being Sixteen years
of age, who refuseth to receive the Blessed Sacrament of the
Lord’s Supper, at least three times every year? whereof Easter to
be one? And do all receive this Sacred Mysterie with that out-
ward gesture of Humilitie and Reverence as becomes them, meekly
kneeling upon their knees ?
IX. Are there any in your Parish who are known or suspected
to be unlawfully married, contrary to the Laws of God and this
Church? Are there any (who being lawfully married and never
divorced) do yet live asunder ? Or any rwho being lawfully divorced,
do live together again? Or being separated for Adultery, have
afterwards Enter-married with any other, during the life of their
First Consort ?
X. Are there any married Women in your Parish, who after
their safe Delivery from Child-Birth, neglect to make their humble
and publick ‘Thanksgivings to God, decently apparelled, according
to the appointment of the Church? Or refuse to pay the Offer-
ings according to custom ἢ
XI. Are there any of your Parish who refuse to pay their
Easter Offerings, and other Duties to your Minister? Or to pay
the Rates assessed on them, for the repair and provisions of the
Church?
XII. Do you know, or have you heard of any Patron, or othen δε."
‘Person m your. Parish, who having the gift of an Ecclesiastical
Benefice, hath made gain thereby upon any Bargain, either for
Money, Pension, Lease, Reserve of Tythes, or Glebe, or other
Simoniacal Compact whatsoever ?
XIII. Do any among you refuse to Bury their Dead, accord-
ing to the rites of the Church of England? Are there any Wills
of Deceased persons unproved, or Goods not administred? Do
you know of any Legacies given to your Church, not yet received
by you, or detained from you, or not applied to the uses ap- -
pointed ?
Tir. IV.
Concerning the Officers belonging to the Church.
I. Are the Church-Wardens of your Parish, yearly choten
according to Law? And are there Side-men appointed to assist
them, for the due ordering of the Church?
™
284 Bishop Pearson’s /Vorks,
If. Have the former and last Church-Wardens gives up their
Accompts to those that succeed them, together with all Monies
and other things belonging to your Church (or Chappel)? .
III. Have you a Pareh-Clark, aged one and tweaty years at
least, who is of sober life and good report? Is he chosen by your —
Minister, and approved by the Parish; and is he able for Reading,
Writing, and Singing as a Clerk? Are his Wages duly paid him ?
ΙΝ. Doth he or your Sexton take care of your Church, to keep
it lockt, and clean, to open the Doors, and ring the Bells in due
time, to call the Inhabitants to the Worship of God? Also to ad-
monish them by Tolling of a Pasting-Bell for any that are dying,
thereby to meditate of their own Death, and to commend the
others weak condition to the mercy of God?
Tit. V.
Concerning Alms-houses, Schools, and School-masters, Phisicians,
Chirurgions and Midwives. ᾿
I. Is there any Hospital, Alms-house, or Free School founded
in your Parish not of the King’s Foundation? Are they so ga-
verned and ordered in the use and Revenue as the Founders
appointed, according to set Ordinances and Statutes which have
been made concerning the same ? .
If. Doth any man keep a publick or private School ia your
Parish? Is he or they licensed and allowed thereunto by the
Bishop? Is he of. sober, religious, and exemplary Conversation ?
Doth he instruct his Scholars in the Catechism and Religion of
the Church of England? Is there any Woman that taketh ppon
her to instruct and educate any young Maidens? Doth she resort
duly, and bring with her to Divine Service, upon the Lord’s day
~ and Holidaies, all such Young Maidens as are committed to her
care?
11. Do any in your Parish practise Phisick, Chirurgerie, oF
Midwiferie, without License from the Ordinarie ? |
“
The Minister of every Parish may join in Presentments with
the Church-Wardens and Side-men, and if they will not present, '
then the Ministers themselves (being the Persons that have the
chief care of the suppressing of Sin and Impiety, in their Parishes)
may present the Crimes aforesaid, and such things as shall want
due Reformation. Can. 113. Jou. CESTRIENS. ~
The Ministers of every Parish are desired to give inthe Names
ofeuch of the younger surt, in their several Parishes; as they judge
fit to receive Confirmation from the Bishop. |
FINIs,
Chronologically Arranged. 285
NO, XVIII.
{Epistola Reverendi admudum jn Christo Patris Joannis Pearsont,
τς Episcopi Cestriensis, ad V. Cl. Edvardum Bernardum.]
[Josephus contra Apion. 1, 1833. ed. Hudson—xa} τούτων (ray
βιβλίων) πέντε μέν ἐστι τὰ Muiotws, ἃ τούς Te νόμους περιέχει, καὶ τὴν
τῆς ἀνθρῳπογονίας παράδοσιν, μέχρι τῆς αὐτοῦ τελευτῆς. οὗτος ὁ χρόνος
ἀπολείπει τρισχιλίων ὀλίγον ἐτῶν. ὀλίγῳ in editis Josephi. |
D1x1, mi Bernarde, locum illum adversus Apionem multum.
D. Vossio favere: nec aliter nunc sentio. Vox τρισχιλίων ferri non
potest: mendum enim est, licet antiquissimum. Apud Eusebium
1. 8. ς. 10. legitur τρισχιλίων, et Ruffinus habet tria millia; ex quo
Eusebii loco colligit Beda Eusebium et Josephum breviorem tem-
porum seriem quam in L.XX. Editione vulgo fertur comprobasse.
Sed neque Eusebius, neque Josephus, neque Veterum quisquam
tria tantum millia annorum ab Adamo ad mortem Mosis numera-
bat. Quidni autem pro τρισχιλίων legamus τετρακισχιλίων ; cum
insolens non sit, ut unus numerus millenarius aut centenarius pro
alio scribatur. Sic Antiq. }. 10. c. 11. pro τρισχίλια legendum τε-
τρακισχίλια" in verbis Eupolemi apud Cl. Alex. pro δισχίλια legendum
χίλια, et p. priori in verbis Demetrii τετρακόσια pro τριαχόσια,
Neque mirum est Josephum tot pene annos numerasse, cum eo
ionge antiquior Demetrius ab Adamo ad mortem Mosis $895. ni
fallor, numeravit, cumque Eupolemum, qui pauciores numeravit,
ipse Josephus dicat Sacras Scriptvras recte intelligere non potuisse.
Quin igitur Josephus putaverit tempys ab Adamo ad niortem
Mosis parum defecisse ab annis 4000, dubitari vix potest.
Duplicem tu hic objicis dissensum, unum a numero 2000. an-
norum Sacerdotum, sive Politize Judaicz, alterum a numero 5000.
historiz : sed neuter rem conficere videtur. Non prior, quia
numerus annorum ab Adamo ad mortem Mosis, quicunque tandem
sit, dissidere a numero Politiz Judaice non potest, qui ab eodem
ferme tempore incipit, quo alter desinit, Si Josephus plures an-
nos Politie Judaice, ad honorem gentis sux, tribuerit, quam
“Oportuit; id non probat priorem supputationem falsam fuisse, aut
a mente Josephi alienam. Non posterior, quia numerus ille 5000.
annorum eundem terminum non habet cum illo 2000. Hic enim
desinit cum ultima destructione gentis et templi, ille cum chrono~-
Jogia S. Scripture, que ad eam minime pertingit. Et cum uter-
que numerus rotundus sit, pro exacto neuter haberi debet; sed
uterque alicujus additionis aut detractionis capax censendus est, nt, -
revera numero 9000. aliquid detrahi debere certum est, licet idem
asseruerit ante Josephum Philo. :
VOL. XVII. Cl. Ji. . NO. XXXIV. ΚΤ.
286 - Bishop Pearson’s Works,
Dixi Berosum, cum Abrahamum post Diluvium decimum voca-
vit, Cainanem non excludisse; neque que habes de γενεαῖς id
probant. Epiphanius, inquis, sententiam tuam tuetur, quod non
video. Numerat ille quidem yeveds 10. a Noé usque ad Abra-
amum : sed uterque, tum Noé tum Abraamus exclusive sumitur.
JEtas ehim Noachi ad priores 10. γενεὰς, Abrahami vero ad pos-
teriores 14. a Mattheo numeratas, pertinet. Ea certe rhens
Epiphanii, qui non longe ab initio Panafii εἰκοστὴν γενεὰν Thar
memorat, et Abrahami εἰκοστὴν πρώτην, cum circumcists est.
Revera Epiphanius expresse tradit, Arphaxadum genuisse Caina-
nem, Cainanem Salam, idque quater totidem verbis facit, bis in
Ancorato, bis in Panario, et numerum annorum eum exhibet, qui
sine annis 130. Cainanis stare non potest.
Quod Eusebius non omiserit annos Cainanis adbuc puto, nec
Syncelli verbis moveor. Quid dixerit Anianus scio: neque minus
credo Eusebium annos Cainanis numerasse, imo fortasse eo magis.
Nimis longa esset dissertatio, εἰ de hac re disputare instituerem.
Scaliger certe pessime fecit, cum priorem Lusebiani Chronici
Librum adeo negligenter transivit, ut omnia pene Syncelli Eusebio
tribueret, et nobis nescio quem pro Eusebio daret. Excutienda
fuit versio Hieronymi, non rejicienda et nihili habenda.
Cogitationum tuarum prior, inquis, nititur loco Clementis sed
correcto, non prout apud eum extat. Interim ipse locum ita ex-
plicas ut correctione non indigeat, Ita correctio explicationem,
explicatio correctionem excludit. Vide an locus ejusmodi pro
fundamento poni debeat ; presertim ex libro tali qualis ille Στρω-
ματέων esse Cognoscitur ; in quo omnium hominum sententiz colli-
guntur et coacervantur. Unde ipse Chronologicum suum tractatum
sic concludit, p. 341. Kal τὰ μὲν περὶ τῶν χρόνων διαφόρως πολλοῖς
ἱστορηθέντα, καὶ πρὸς ἡμῶν διατεθέντα ὧδε ἐχέτω. "
Quid multa? Quoniam de typothetis loqueris, omnino nollem
Dissertationem hanc tuam hoc loco imprimi. Satis esse opinor δὶ
lectionem ex conjectura tua natam cum illa Vossii nude proponas,
et quecunque habes ad eam confirmandam idonea, in Annotationes
conjicias. Numerus variarum Lectionum satis amplus esse videtur,
nec disputationibus intervenientibus augendus, presertim ubi Ani-
madversionibus ad finem Operis locus relinquitur. Certe cum
annorum humerus apud Josephum, tum in Grecis tum in Latinis,
tam foede corruptus ubique fere esse videatur, ego vix quicquam
statuere audeo, priusquam omnes varias Lectiones intueri liceat
Habes sententiam, Vir doctissime,
Annici tui,
| Joan. CresTRIENSIS.
Cestria, Jan. 3. 1679.
[Edidit 7. Hearne,.Oxon. 1739. 8vo.]
Chronologically Arranged. 287
| NO. XIX, ΝΞ
DISSERTATIO
EPISTOLARIS
DE
Juramento Medicorum,
QUI
"OPKOS ‘INMOKPATOTS
Dicitur :
In qua Venerabilis Vir
Dom. BALDUINUS HAMEY, M.D.
Veterem coulgarem V ersionem «mprobans,
_ Akam substituit Novam; * * * * *
Editore ADAMO Uittleton, S.T. P.
we * % % *
| LONDINI:
Prostat apud Guilielmum Birch, * * 1693 [4to.]
{ Balduinus Hamey, Medicus clarissimus juxta atque eruditissi-
mus, Hippocratis jusjurandum levissima mutatione pristino nitori
restituere, et suam Coo ἐπένοιαν vendicare satagebat. Sibi autem
‘parum confisus virorum aliquot doctissinorum, inter quos com-
paret PEARSONUsS noster, hac de re seutentias exploravit. Hic
Theologiae Princeps voculam xe} transponendo amici sui interpre-
tationem roborat, et Venerabilem Hamey, utpote ἄδελφον ἄρσενα,
antecessoribus suis pulmam praeripuisse jure promunciat. Que
autem melius de hac lite statuat lector, praemittendam esse duxt
junisjurandi partem primam, e recensione quam ineunte anno 1674
fecit vir optimus, Balduinus Hamey ; et argumenta item ex ejus-
dem diatriba, necnon e responsione ad Professores Leidenses
(Gct. 23, 1675.), quibus innituntur ratiocinia sua, delibavi. Ag-
men claudit PeEarsoni epistolium.] |
‘WMOKPA TOTS “OPKOS.
ὌΜΝΥΜΙ ’AncdAawa ἰητρὸν καὶ ᾿Ασκληπιὸν, καὶ “Pyselay, καὶ Πανά-
κειοιν, καὶ Θέους πάντας καὶ πάσας ἵστορας ποιεύμενος, ἐπιτελόα ποιήσαιν͵
‘ δύ ‘ > \ @& / ‘ ‘ 4 . hina’, Ace a
κατὰ δύναμιν καὶ κρίσιν ἐμὴν ὅρκον τόνδε καὶ ξυγγραφὴν τήνδε" ἡγήσεσθαι
μὲν τὸν διδάξαντα ἐμὲ τὴν τέχνην ταύτην, ἶσα καὶ γενέτῃσιν ἐμοῖσα, βίου
'κοινώσασθαι," καὶ χρεῶν" χρηΐζοντι μετάδοσιν ποιήσαισθαι," καὶ τὸ γένος
τὸ ἐξ ἑωυτέου ἀδελφοῖς σον ἐπικρινόειψ ἄῤῥεσι. Καὶ διδάξειν τὴν seyyes
288 . Bishop Pearson’s Works,.
ταύτην, hy! χρηΐζωσι pavbavey, ἄνευ μισθοῦ καὶ Evyypagiigy παρωγγελίης"
τε καὶ ἀκροήσιος, καὶ τῆς λοιπῆς ἀπάσης μαβήσιος, μετάδοσιν ποιήσεσθαι
υἱοῖσι τὸ μασι. καὶ τοῖσι τοῦ ἐμὲ διδάξαντος" καὶ μαθηταῖσι συγγεγραμ--
μένοις τε καὶ ὠρκισμένοις νόμῳ ἰητρικῷ" ἄλλῳ be οὐδενί, * * »
LECTIONIS VARIETA§.
* ἡγήσασβαι editiones; ἡγήσεσθαι maluit Hamey, sibi suffragante
non uno MS. ὃ κοινώσεσθαι et “ ποιήσεσθαι inter v,1. Methomii.¢ ἣν
MSS. quidam. “ παρακλήσιος alii. ¢ ποιήσασθαι MSS. et editiones
pleraeque.
HAME!H ENARRATIO.
" χοινώσασθαι et infra ποιήσασθαι" Ita in omnibus hodie exem-
plis, nullo etiam refragante MS., ad Autoris mentem consone lo-
quuntur. [κοινώσεσθαι vero et ποιήσεσθαι inter varias lectiones ex
J. H. Metbomio enumerat .4. Liitleton.] κοινώσασθαι 1. 6. Juro—
existimaturum quidem me illum, qui me docutt hanc artem,
similiter (vel, pari /oco cum) ipsis parentibus, vita me communi-
casse (i. 6. vitam mihi impertivisse): τὸ ἶσα, praeeunte Homero,
non nisi Adverbialiter, hoc loco, construi potest; Il. E, 7}.—Nobov
ἔτρεφε δῖα Θεανὼ Ἶσα φίλοισι τεχέσσι--Ν, 176.—O δέ μιν τίεν ἶσα
τέκεσσι. Odyss. A, 483.---ΟΑσχὲ ζωὸν ἐτίομεν ἶσα θεοῖσιν. Theocrit. Idyl.
XVI, 1835.-- σέθεν δ᾽ ἐγὼ ἶσα καὶ ἄλλων δινάσομαι ἡμιθέων.---Ν ες
sine ratione Cous dixit stmililer; cum nullum simile git simile, sed
idem, nisi sit dissimile: si [f.sed] haec vita, de qua loquitur, dissimilis
est naturali; siquidem καλῶς vivitur illa; naturali, ἁπλῶς καὶ ἶσα
τοῖς ἀλόγοις. Voluit Vir summus, communem omnibus Parentibus
honorem, sibi etiam tribui. IJé/is a prole sua ob acceptam Vitam:
sii a discipulis, ob traditam, vitae instar, Ariem. Igitur plane
et pulchre dicitur uterque βίου suos ἶσα κοινώσασβαι. [Idem infra
in epistalio sentit PEArsoNus; sed leni transpositione, ἶσα καὶ y.
pariter ac, locum complanare tentavit, cw adstjpulantur vetus.
tissnni codices apud Metbomium in Comment, p. 76. probante
Hamio,| Sed voce βίου Hippocratem de gictu loqui yolunt -
Medici Latini: vita enim, qua viyimus ζωὴ, et guam yivimus, βίος
dicitur. Vox autem illa utrumque denotat [Hesychius, Blos, ζωὴ;
wepioucia.|; at haec periodus, quae de ciéa tantummodo versatur,
significationem necesgario restringit: et continuo sumptum iri
Artem pro Vita, ac Praecepturem pro Parente, ac Disctpulum
pro £lzo, nullus vel leviter inter legendum dubitare potuit. Versio
autem Latina sic se habet; Jura—me aestimaturum Praecep-
torem Parentibus esse parem: juro me illum victu' communicatu;
rum, et indigenti necessaria traditurum. Ex tribus primis verbis,
ita separatim positis, fit purus putus Soloecismus Graecus: "ica
enim pro ἶσος nullius classici autoris est. In reliquis est σαμτολογία
Chronologically Arrangéd. 289
hon -frigida, fateor, séd mire gestiens et-faceta. Nunquid enim qui -
‘pavem, victum praebet, non praebet necessaria? Nunquid, qui
vitam dat, non debet necessaria, ut duret? Quo alias ubera edito
foetu? Annon igitur, πτερυγίζοντος potius pulli est, quam ἀντιπελαρ--
γοῦντος discipuli, Praeceptore suo, uno verbulo laudato, eodem
halitu crepare, de eodem sustentando 3 postque per nescio quam
ἐπανόρθωσιν eidem indigenti necessaria polliceri ? :
* χρέων χρηΐζοντι μετάδοσιν ποιήσασθαι, discere cupienti requisitorum
coptam fecisse ; in Jucem scilicet, aut vitam edito, vitalia contn-
-buisse : λαμπάδα φέρειν καὶ μεταδιδόναι, illo aevo eleganter dicebatur.
In hac pericope Discipulus Praeceptoris sui beneticia grate éandi-
deque profitetur. In sequenti Didascali vice functurus sibi ere-
dita traditaque pari honestate imperturum idoneo Discipulo—jurat.
Missis βίου καὶ χρεῶν vocabulis, τὴν τέχνην pro vita substituit, xa
διδάξειν ταύτην, et μετάδοσιν wolycecbas jurejurando asserit ;. unaque
χρεῶν τούτων numerum init: nimirum facturum μετάδοσιν παραγγες
Aing τε καὶ ἀκροήσιος καὶ τῆς λοιπὴς ἁπάσης μαθήσιος. Hinc quid per
ρηϊΐζοντες in primo Articulo sit intelligendym, abunde per τὸ ἣν
χρηΐζωσι μανθάνειν in secundo explicat; ac τὸ μανθάνειν denique, ceu
summum desideratum, in χρεῶν censu hic recenseam. Ita ut tan-
dem concludamus, Artis Medicue rite docendae discendaeque desi-
erlum, unicum esse utriusque Articuli argumentum, et ne unum
in iis, de Victu eoque pertinentibus reperiri posse vocabulum,
Praeterea Versio oulgaris Senis illius praeclari verbis moribusque |
dissona : ille enim composuit sua nervose, eleganter, breviter ; sine
mercede quoque docuit ; ac alibi toties fuit sponte naturae ag:Azp-
γύρον, Magnanimum et ἀμότάπτωτον ac omnis fallaciae hostem acer-
rimum.—Deinde, de jurgjurando res est, quae ab omni memoria
sacra; et hoc porro illiusmodi, ut quivis Graece sclens juransque
illud jure pium aestimet: Postremo ut tibi, Divine Senex, qui
prae omnibus mortalibus, in minimis maximus, tuosque solitus
(Πρ οὶ decomposito, omnia, προ-εξ- ευχρινήσαντας λέγειν καὶ ποιεῖν,
placuerit σολοικίζειν, ταυτολογεῖν, immo ἀκυρολογεῖν, in prima statim
parte “Opxou tui sanctissimi, mihi saltem non fit verisimle. BAL-
DUINUS HAMEY.
Epistola Reverendi admodum Viri,
Domini JOHANNIS PEARSON,
Episcopi Cestriensis.
+ Cujus Initium videtur deesse, qued ne quidem ulla sit Cumpellatio.
Prima que occurrit in hoc Juramento particula καὶ, omnis in ex-
panendo difficultatis occasionem praebuisse videtur. Dum enim
illa praeponitur τῷ βίου κοινώσασθαι, priorem pericopen wom
290 Bishop Pearson’s Works,
continere integrum putarunt [nterpretes, et τὸ, βίου xonacestar pro
secunda Juramenti parte habuerunt. Quod si xa) praeponeretur
τῷ γενέτῃσι elegantiae tanthm caused, et post ἐμοῖσιν eximeretur,
recta βίου κοινώσασθαι conjunctione destituta necessarid ad priora
‘epectarent ; nec partem juramenti per se efficere possent. Jam
verd particulam xa} suo loco dimotam, et malé τῷ βίου pracfixam
esse omnino sentio: eandem τὰ τῷ γενέτῃσι, γονεῦσιν, ἢ evacsy.*
Sunt enim hec excerpta nihil alud quam veteres Gossae,
‘ad marginem Hippocratis primim βου ρίας, atque inde cum
Tebfe, quem respiciunt, ad finem Juramenti, uti moris erat,
‘BGA positae. Unde liquido apparet vetustissimos codices hanc
["Foa καὶ -yeveryow ἐμοῖσιν} exhibuisse, et βίου κοινώ-
cartes immediate post ἐμοῖσιν sequutum esse. Sic igitur recta
lego et interpretor, “Ὄμνυμι, ᾿Ηγήσεσθαι μὸν τὸν διδάξαντά με τὴν
ταύτην ἶσα καὶ σιν ἐμοῖσιν βίου χονώσασθαι, Juro, me
ὀπῆς gui me hanc Artem docuit nom minus quam Parentes meos
‘witam tributsse pataturam. Εἶδες tue acamini debeo: reliqua
‘eum vulgo imterpretum capio. Nostram senteniam habes, Κ
doctissime, mihtque amicissime. Donet te Deus long’ acetate,
‘veget& et a cruciatibus liber& senectute, uti optat ac precatur,
Multis Nominibus tibi devinctus,
April. 10, 1674. _ JOHANNES Cestriensis.
Ejusdem Carmen Encomiasticum.
Qui Divo Lucae sumptus; oper4mque loc4sti
Hippocrati: Medico commode utrique facis.*
Tempus edax rip4 Divi consumpserat Andem
_ Chelsensi : adveniens Tu dare promptus opem.
Et (οἱ, in Latio, sacrum maculaverat" Opxoy
Non consulta satis Graeco- Latina manus.
[' Sic glosee, quas ex antiquissimis Reginae Galliae codicibus exscriptas
cum J. Heurnio, M. D. communicavit J. J. Scaliger : tou καὶ γενίτῃσιν (sic, sed
Τιυητῆσιν D. R. ad Tim. p. 66. voluit certe γεννήτησιν} γονεῦσιν, ἢ συγγενέσιν οὕτως
᾿Αττικῶς λεγόντων [λέγονται Ib.) ὡς καὶ Φιλήβων ly Κῤλακί φησιν" ᾿Αλλ᾽ οὐδὲ γεννητὴν δύνας
μαι εὑρεῖν σὐδένα τῶν [Ἔχ τῶν supplet 1΄. H. ad Aristoph. Plut. 935. τοσούτων, eat
[apa γ᾽ T. H. ib.) ἀκείλημμαι μόνος, Kasi 'Ῥίνθος ἐν τῷ κερὶ «ἧς ᾿Αττικῆς συγηθείας
φησίν" Οἱ μὲν οὖν ix τῆς αὐτῆς φυλῆς, φυλέται λέγονται" of δὲ ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς φρατρίας, φρά-
φορες" οἱ δὲ ix τοῦ αὐτοῦ γένους, γοῦκαι, Vide Heurnii Opera T. 11. p. 160. Pro
Φιλήβων, Φιλήμων scribendum censet T. H. ad l.c. sed de Κόλακος auctore, Phi-
lemon fuerit, an Menander, non temere affirmat. -Jambos minus feliriter
tentavit Lusacius apud D. R. 1]. c. qui pro ‘P:v9e¢ reposuit Εἰρηναῖος, et banc
tmendationem probavit Koenio in Praef. ad Greg. p. xviii. ] :
Balduious FLA Phil-Evangetieus Medicus. A. Littleton.
-
2 « Tra fert Campanae donatitiae Iuscriptio, D. LUCK. Medico Evangelivo
Mey ue). D.” ΑἹ Litthton. ©
~
ἂν.
Chronologically Arranged. 201°.
Huic quoque succurris; Fideique Artisque Magistris
_ Nil, Te Discipulo, vis periigap tuis.
ὁ, quid es meritus? Medicorum nomina tanta ΄
ater, habere tym, dignior ynus erig.
Εν ΕΝ J. Cest.
——i <a *
NO. XX.
Sancti Cecilii | ΝΕ
CYPRIANI
. OPERA
RECOGNIFA ET ILLUSTRATA
Per :
JOANNEM OXONIENSEM Episcopym.
Accedunt ;
ANNALES CYPRIANIC(,
3 SIVE at
Tredecim Annorum, quibus S. Cyprianus inter Christianos versatus.
est, brevis historia Chropologice delingata
Per Joanney CestRrizNsemM.’ (pp. 74.]
OXONII
E THEATRO SHELDONIANO ANNO CIOIOCLXXXI.
1686, July 16. Bishop Pearson died at Chester; see Appendix,
which will be jngerted in a future No. “ Tyo cininent Bishops
died this year, Pearson Bishop of Chester, and fell Bishop of
Osford. The first of these was in all respects the greategt
Divine of the age: a man of great learning, strong reason, and
of aclear judgment. He was a jadiciqus and graye preacher,
more instructive than affective ; aud a man of a spotless life, and
‘of an excellent temper. His book on the Creed is among the
best that our church has produced. He was vot active in his dio-
cese, but too remiss and easy in his episcopal function; and was
‘a much better Divine than a Bishop. fie was a speaking instance
of what a great map could fall to: for his memory went ‘from him
so entirely, thgt he became a child some years before he died.”
. Buraest’s Hist. of bis wy times. Vol. 1. pp. 694, 695. K
9
ΌΝ
COGS τ οδὸ ἂν «Ὁ, 4
᾿ See Porson's Letters te Archdeacon Tvavis. p, 80, 5.
992
COLLATIO ᾿
CODICIS HARLEIANI 5674.
CUM ODYSSEA EDITIONIS ERNESTINE 1760.
No. x.—(Concluded from No. xxx1t1. p. 101.)
ΟΔΥΣΣ. M.
99. ἱκώστω, sed ἡ super w.
125. μητέρα τήν.
181. sine δὴ citat Scholiastes. In
fine note mez lege, “ Thucydid.
}. 110.”’ ΄
234. ἡμεῖς μέν.
249. in marg. ὕψοθεν διχῶς :
212. ὕμιν et μ suprascr.
443, lege ἐδούπησα. Voluit for-
tasse librarius ἐγδούπησα. Sed quid
hic codex legat infra O. 478.
nunc non memini. Certe qui-
dem ἐνδούπησε habet Apollonius v.
"ArtAm.
ΟΔΥΣΣ. N.
88. ἔτεμενιν. ex emend.
96. Nunc video, quid Aristo-
phanes voluerit. Distinxit post
ϑυγοίτηρ et sequentia cum versu
sequenti conjunxit. —-
147. Schol. Townleiani codicis
ad Il. I. 584. ὁ δὲ vixcdiue ἐπὶ ἀρτί
μειδος" καὶ γὰρ λέγει φησιν ab ty
ἐγὼν ἴρξαιμει διοτριφὲς ὡς ἀγορεύεις"
ἀγνοῶν ὅτι κελαινιφίς ἐστιν : '
194. Vulgatum citat ApoHonius
V. ᾿Αλλοειδία.
227. Voluit, credo, 199. sed nota
est exadversum v. 221.
295. glossa πεπλογμένων.
296. εἰδότε Schol. cum glossa, ἐγώ
τε καὶ cv. Hec explicatio semper
dualem indicat, Scholiastes ad
Sophocl, Elect. 738. κἀξισώφαντις
primum legitur in Francofurtana.
Sed recte Brunekius ex Aldina et
Florentinis scholiorum editionibus
ἰξισώσαντε retraxit.
800 αἰεὶ text. In m. ye. ὥγχι-
$32. ? omittit Schol. ad K. 277.
338. 1. Qbirevers.
358. ante ageixerrss adde διδόναι.
ΟΔΥΣΣ. 5.
206. Falsa sunt que dixi de
manu recenti. Varia lectio, si
non est ipsius scholiaste, est certe
non multo junior.
223. οὐ ῥηξηνορῃη Apollon. in v.
huc per errorem traductum e 217.
231. καί σφιν potius pertinet ad
233. pro καἰ ῥα.
255. post “ schol.” adde *editis,”
S05. init. lege dpecpecs.
328. in marg. ἐπακούση ἀρίσταρχος
ἀφιστοφείνης ἐπακοῦσκι :
$35. lege πολύμηλον.
349. ἀρφιστοφάνης κεφαλήνδε.
352. Ovens’ ts Apollonius θύρηϑ᾽
se Apollonius. ῥύρηϑ᾽ ἴα in Hesy-
chio corrigendum pro δύρηϑεν ne
dubitassent quidem viri docti, si
Meminissent, quomodo « et »
permutari possint. Generalis est
regula, ut linea supra literam,
si ea litera sit consonans, sig-
nificet ὦ» si vocalis, », ἐστί 6, g.
PIO ἐστιν et πραιροῦνται PIO wapate
φοῦνται. Sed, cum duz vocales
concurrent, huss τεσ non-
Collatio Codicis Harletuni.
nunqaam objiviscuntur librarii, ut
facillime alter potuerit ϑύρηϑε pro
bvguiss dare. alter pro ϑύρηθεν acci-
pere. Eustathius ad Od. A. p.
1406, 58 — 41, 40. καὶ mapa, προιό-
os ἔγωγε μολόχης. Vox ista wana
eo solicitos habuit editores, ut
asteriscum apposuerint. Notum
est τοῦ se et ἐῶν Ac ductus esse si-
millimos. Cum igitur prior li-
brarius scripsisset πόλι (i, 6. waz),
alter legebat wd et scribebat
πάμα. |
353. δρίος text. et schol. sed v
super / in textu.
S88. αἰδήσομαι erat, sed nunc
αἰδίσσομα:ι, hoc solum in marg.
$94. of supra τοί.
396. suprascr. ἐνδύσιες με.
402. jos, sed ov super os
405. xredreses et os SUper as.
4783, adde, “ » eraso.”
474. ye. οὐ τείχεσσιν, sed ov super-
impositum. Voluit nempe τού-
Lies γροιπτίον, ov τείχεσι.
ΟΔΥΣΣ. O.
10. ov
nius v.
47. weneoupey.
348. nite a
344. lege ὅν.
362. οὕνεκ᾽ αὐτή μ᾽ ἔϑρεψεν.
422, δ᾽ ὄπειτα.
452. κατ᾿ ἀλλοθρόους Apollonias
Vv. "AAPes.
459. ἴωτο Schol. Venet. ad 1].
Δ. 486.
μὲν καλὼ et τῆλ᾽ Apollo-
ΟΔΥΣΣ. I.
18. ἑλών.
46. αὗτις.
v
131. sin” drs σῶς.
293
147. ἀχνύμενοι. ᾿ ᾿
9217. φήνοι αὐγυπτιικοὶ Apollonius
Vv. Duyn. ‘ . ἮΝ
239. ἀθετεῖ διονύσιος :
. 251. lege 250.
$30. non omittit μὲν, sed habet
᾿ οὕνεκα μὲν τηλέρεχχος. .
391. ἔξδνοισι.
481. Textus lectionem xolses τ᾽
ἐμνήσαντο citat Apollonius v. Keires.
Per errorem igitur refert Villoiso-
nus ad H. 138. ,;
ΟΔΥΣΣ. P.
39. κῦσσε.
86. χλαίνας.
116. δουρικλειτόν.
141. τῶν.
187. λιπέσθαι. :
217. ἀγηλάζει Apollonius in vs .
237. ἀείρας MS. sed ἐφρείσεες Apol-
lonius V. ὠριφοῦδες. |
267. sisexiss. Apollonius v. ὑπερο-
warlouire.
359. ἐπαύετο.
405. prepone +¢’.
ΟΔΥΣΣ. =.
ye: Tie ἀφροδέτη Cavederese
supra νῦν est ye. your.
στῆναι δύναται.
init. κλησίέην.
ἀγορεύεις Εἴ οἷς SUPEF εἰς»
ἔλλαιβεν-,
omittit.
196.
238.
240.
᾿ 293.
570.
399.
412.
OAYZX Τ᾿
40. Error. Lege “τοὶ pro
4“ οἵ. 33
67. ἐπιπεύεις Apollonius im v. -
77. lege ἴοι xsv.
172. Nullum vestigium vaviz
‘204
lectionis apparet in loco; sed di-
:a6ree laudat xgivec
pra ad γ. 287. simul citans λέμε
vyeiay 6 8. 90]. ᾿
293. κατα; σχιλέριο.
249. 10” apcascag (sic.)
250. ματα Apollonius v. éey-
seven’ Hunc et sequentem mittit
“Τα. ᾿
. 983. εἴ a mM. pr.
804. iow ine
we Apollonius νυ.
$72. sed interpr. Acsdegeivras
384. sixtaw et s super εἰ»
387. ἐξιχεύατο πολλόῇ»
980. σκότον.
4.386. ἴχνια.
478. οὐδ᾽ αὖτ᾽ et χοροὶ οὐδὲ Apol- |
lonius ν. édgiews
5Z5. παρέ. .
O29 ἀπείσιι Dany Spas inter ἢ at
546. ixagiov κούρη. ΝΕ
578. διιεύση text. sed εἰ propius
inspicies, videbis eadem manu su-
prascriptum «is.
586. pro “in marg.”’ 1. “supra.”
OATES. Y.
8. γίλων τε.
46, ϑνητός ἰστι-
83. ἔχιν.
. 98. μερμήριξε ἃ τὰ, pr. & ex e-
mend. ae
155. δήν.
168. pita wees.
176. sed primo, ὋΣ opinor, erat
κατίδησαν.
212. et sic Apollpnips in y.
221. sed ἀλλοτρίησι ex emend.
206. sed ‘ede alditum supra
et hoc signum « infra Jin. :
BRD. γε. daresevore BNBTA πκτρὺς
Scholiastes su- ἢ
. 5
᾿ Collatio Codicis Harlgianj. Σ᾽
dete. Ita lege.) ' ae
$17. τάδ' “itn. 1:
328, sit.
847. adde “ex ragura.
OQATEE. ®
61. lege ous PRO ye >.
99, $v én’.
1602. γήμεξ, sexe,
218, ἔφρᾳ μ᾽ iy ἃ τὰ. pre
$52. τόξου et sic etiam 425.
OATEE. ΣΧ’
19. εἴο.
94. iva OUSe
97 ταρινδισέῳ avdyxy Schol.
Venet. ad Il. J. 986. sed βιαίως
Codex Townleianus.
50. γέμειν».
72. οὐδοῦ ἐπί. ΕΝ
83. δηνηϑεὶς et suprascr. ἰδνωϑθεΐς.
99. θεείου. ᾿
109. θελαμονδ᾽.
126. δεγκὸν ex emend. ejusdem
mannps. In marg. δεινόν.
148. χερσί τι.
182. &#' in marg. pro var. lect.
ut puto, sed πη. recenti.
$35. torre. |
352. μετὰ δαῖτας.
443. πασίων. ,
469. τόδ᾽ ἱστήκη ἃ Τὰ. pr. in sheni-
καὶ Mutatum, quod ex ἐστάκειν de-
prayatum suspicor. ὦ
ΟΔΥΣΣ. ¥.
75. αὐτῆ. : -ς
99. μεταλλαῖς prope ad latus.
147, κούρων Apollonius y. xayges.
283. γήρα ὑπὸ.
298, γυναῖκες ex emend, fortasse
recenti.
Ν
990
283. οὐ γάρ μὲν δωόν γε κιχεῖς.
285. Inter ὑπάρξει et » fluctuat.
$03 εἰμεὶ μὲν Apollonius v. ᾿Αλύ-
Barres, MS. Harl. εἰμῆ μὲν, quod
idem est.
373. ἀμείνονα.
521. ἀπιμπαλών.
542. xvorspose
On Literary Coincidences. -
ΟΔΥΣΣ. Ὡ.
45. ἀλείφατι et ἐλαίῳ suprascr.
63. δὲ additum ex recens.
24.3, ἀδαημονίης ἔχε, et in marg.
ye. ἀδαημοσύνης cum explicat. ἀνε-
πιστημοσύνης.
Atque ita tandem spero, me nullum fere gravius peccatem in hac
‘collatione reliquisse ; omissiones non preestabo. Si quis tamen has
‘quoque una cum errafis meis corrigendas suscipiet, is sciat se gratam
rem et mihi et reipublice literarie facturum ; leniter an acerbe faciat,
nihil prorsus mea refert, modo vere; aliquid forsan ipsius referat, si
modo mavult ceteris lectoribus videri hoc onus suscepisse studio literas
juvandi potius quam smulum deprimendi.
RICARDUS PORSON.
,
ON LITERARY COINCIDENCES.
No. 11.—[Continued from No. XXXII, p. 19.]
IN Diario novissimo, p- 19. col. 1.
1. 19. post xv. adde.
Ibid. col. 2. 1. 29. post vocem,
veneno, adde,
IT. ii. 28. Post hoc (vehemens lupus ut) sibi εἰ host?
Fratus, pariter* jejunis dentibus acer,
Pracddium regale loco dejecit.
Si quis versum duodetricesimum
sic reformaret; Post hoc vehemens
lupus ut, sibi εἰ hostt tratus part-
‘ter, sententia curreret Hquidior,
nec verborum collocatio hec ab
Horatii more abiret; conjunctio-
mem enim verbo non numquam
postpenit, etc.—PRAF. P. Xv.
.HgReDIs ATTIC que superset
admotationibus ilustravit bael
Fiorillo, etc. Lipsiz, 1801.
/
Totum locum sic lego et distingue:
Svlenne autem nostro et aliis, eon-
junetionem,que praecedere debuit,
postponere. Exempla ex Horatio
attulit Bentleius, Ὁ. 304. [ad Serm.
{1.iii. 215.] P. 166. * Mate. R. B.
Nimirum hance distinetionem im-
probat,sed emendationemistactam
relinquit Vir summus.
D. Ruhnkenii Historia critica
eratorum Grecorum; 1768.
Maty’s Rev. for July, 1783.
Month. Rev. for Aug. Sept. 3789;
296
FIORILLO.
A pro Εἰ legitur in Fragmento ex
Euripidis Aegeo. Fr. Musgrav. n.
111. ΕΣ μὴ καθέξῃς γλῶσσαν, ἔστι
σοι κακά. Scribe: Ei) ΚΑΘΕΞΕΙ͂Σ
γλῶσσαν, ἔστι σοι κακά. Ei enim in
Atticis poétis semper cum indica-
tivo occurrit, nunquam cum sub-
juactivo. vid. Aschyl. Prometh.
343, 345, 686. Euripid. Androm.
206. Herc. fur. 1120. cum opta-
ti¢o invenitur in Eschyl. Prometh.
477. Euripid. Hippol. 1240. Herc.
fur. 1110. Electr. 97,422. Pari
modo corrigendum Fragmentum
Philemonis, quod effugit diligen<
tiam Bentleii, Emend. in Menandr.
p. 123 (129. ed. Traj. ad Rhen.).
th 51-2.
emorabilis est Pindari locus
apud Herodianum in Diatrib. II.
Anecdot. Villois. 543.95. ἰάχει
βαρύφθεγκ᾽ ἀν’ ἀγέλαν λεόντων.
Haec tam corrupta sunt, ut nihil
intelligas. Scribe me auctore:
Ἰάχει βαρυφθεγκτᾶν ἀγέλαι
λεόντων. p. 70.
In fragmento ex Aristophanis Co-
moedia Δαιταλεῖς inscripta, legitur
(Brunck. T. II. p. 286) Ἡμῶν ἴσως
ov καταπλαγήσῃ τῷ χρόνῳ: Haec
sensu carent. Scribe:
Ἦ ΜΗΝ ἴσως LY καταπλαγήσει
τῷ χρόνῳ. Compara queso, Nub.
862, 1244. p. 75.
On Literary Coincidenves:
Feb. 1796; Jan. 1798; Jan. 1799}
Appendix ad Totipit emendationes
in Suidani; 1790. ΝΞ
Aristotelis de Poética liber; cara
T. Tyrwhitt, 1794: ὌΝ
Indices ad Pindari carmina ἃ Fio-
rillo confecti; 1799. _
Ei in the Attic Poets.is used with
au indicative: Esch. Prom. 343,
345, 686. Eur: Andr. 206. Herc.
Fur. 1120: and with an optative,
sch. Prom. 477. Eur. Hipp. 1240,
Herc. Fur. 1110. El. 97. 422.—
Musgrave has published ei μὴ
xabéins, AEgei fragm. El. for
καθέξεις, and Bentley has commit-
ted the same error in correcting
Philemon, p. 151 (ed. Cantab.). °
Month. Rev. for Sept. 1789, p.
242. ;
Βαρυφθέγτας, βαρυφθεγτᾶν ayédat
λεόντων ἰάχει, Fr. Pindari ap. He-
rodian, Grammat. T. 11. p. 95.
Anecdot. Villois. Indices ad Pind.
Heynii.
—in the third fragment of the
Δαιταλῇς, whoever will compare
Nub. 865, 1242, will think it ought
probably to be corrected thus, Ἢ
μὴν ἴσως σὺ καταπλαγήσει τῷ χρόνῳ.
R. P. in Maty’s Rev. for July,
1783, p. 68 (Tracts p. 37.). -
Equit. 569. Κοὐδεὶς οὐδεπώποτ᾽ αὐτῶν τοὺς ἐναντίους ἰδὼν ἠρίθμησεν.
Equidem si apud Aristophanem,
in Trochaeo, spondeus in impari
sede invenitur, non dubium est,
quin versus corruptus sit. Credidi
versum -ita emendandum esse:
ΚΟΥΤΙΣ οὐδεπώποτ᾽. p. 75.
—Itis astonishing that Mr. Brunck
should let the spondee pass in the
first place, and not alter it to
Kotris. Ib. p. 67 (Tracts p. 34.)..
On Literary Coincidences.
FIORILLO.
787. Τοῦτό ye τοὔργον dAnfés
titiosus est. Aldina editio: Tourd
yé σον rovpyay ἀληθῶε--- ΜῈ vides
tur legendum esse, Τοῦτί γέ τοί σου
ροὔργον ἀληθῷ----ὃϊς ipse Aristu-
phunes, ead. fabula, v. 1054. P. 88,
201.
ἐστὶν γενναῖον καὶ φιλόδημον--ἴῃ
ΑἸυ8,Τοῦτό γέ σου" τοὔργον ἀληθῶς
—read, τοῦτο γέ τοι cou τοῦργον
ἀληθῶς----ν!άς infra. 1054. [οἱ RP.
Suppl. ad Pra&v. in Eur. lv, vi-ix.
Ibid. p. 66 (31.). =
In Pac. 183. Ὦ μιαρὲ, καὶ τολμηρὲ, κἀναίσχνντε ov,
. καὶ μιαρὲ---
Jejuna est tautologia. Restitue:
70 BAEAYPE, καὶ τολμηρὲ ---
Sic Aristoph. Ran. 4656. * * *
In Avib. 1478. locys est, ut ega
puto, corruptus. Ait Chorus:
Totro μέν ye ἦρος αἰεὶ----
Brunck. in nofis, p. 103. ““μέν γε.
Sic C. Vulgo posterior particula
omissa cum metri labe.—-Meljus
forte legeretur vitato hiatu, τοῦτο͵
μέν τ᾽ Gp ἦρος αἰεί." Vide, an legen-
dum sit Τοῦτο τοῦ μὲν ἦρος αἱεί.
In lis enim que sequuntur additur,
τοῦ δὲ χειμῶνος πάλιν. p. 88.
τοἸπβίοδα of 71 μιαρὲ καὶ τολμηρὲ---
we must read on the'same autho-
rity [Suidas, v. peapol.]*O βδελυρὲ,
to avoid tautology. Compare Ran.
405, 466,—P. 07 (35,).
——Mr. B. is not quite satisfied with
this verse, and therefore proposes
Totro pévr’ dp—The common read-
ing is Τοῦτο μὲν ἦρος ael—read,
Τοῦτο τοῦ μὲν ἦρος, which answers
to what follows, Τοῦ δὲ χειμῶνος
p- 65 (29).—[Dr. BENTLiY ha
made the same emendation.] —
Pratinas apud Athen. XIV. 624.
Μὴ σύντονον δίωκε μήτ' ἀνειμένην |
Ἰαστὶ Μοῦσαν, ἀλλὰ τὰν μέσαν véws ,
ἄρουραν aiddice τῶι μέλει, Σίμων.
Bene Vir doctus, v. 2. corruptym
οὖσαν, restituit in Μοῦσαν. Aliud
vero quid mutandum aut adden-
dum esse nego. Legendum sine
dubio quomodo in Athenzo est,
mutato tantum accentu, νεῶν.
Aristophanes, Nub. 1115. Πρῶτα
μὲν, ἣν vedy βούλησθ᾽ ἐν ὥρᾳ τοὺς
ἀγρυὺς Ὕσομεν----ϑὶς e Codd. recte
edidit Brunck. P, 103.
[Toup. in Suid. T. 11. P.iv.] P,
479. 1. 18. Μοῦσαν optime emen-
davit Noster, in ceteris non weque
felix. Lege, Ὁ | 7
ἀλλὰ, ray μέσαν ΝΕΩ͂Ν
*Apoupay, αἰόλιϑε τῶι μέλει---- ὁ
Νεῶν est participium verbi γεᾷνς
Aristoph. Nub. 1115.
Πρῶτα μὲν yap ἦν NEAIN
βούλησθ᾽ ἐν ὥραι τοὺς ἀγρούς.
Ita recte Brunckius ex MSS,
duobus, quibus accedit Baroce:
xxvii. R.P. Append. pp. 488, 9.
ew?
Uf In Maty’s Review, transcribed by R. Fiorillo, σὸν is an error of
the press, which, with others, has been corrected by our late deeply
regretted PROFESSOR in our copy.]
\
4
298
FIORILLO.
᾿ Memorabilis in hanc rem m est Η.
Stephani obeervatio, in Thes.
Gr. T..4. p. 794. Ego, ait, in an-
tiquioribus et fide dignioribus
diversorum poetaram scriptis ὅβ-
‘¢ βιμοε potius quam. ὄριβρειμος obser-
vasse mibi videor. At immemor
optimae observationis, in Eschylo,
Agamemn. 1420. edidit ἄπολις
δ᾽ ἔση, μῖσος ὄμβριμον ἀστοῖε. et in
Sept. ad Theb. 800.
πέπτωκεν ἀνδρῶν ὀμβρίμων κομπάσ-
ματα.
Stephanianam lectionem omnes
retinuerunt, ipse — Brunck. in
loco e Sept. ad Theb. petito
edidit ὀβρέμων, quam lectionem
usurpavit Cl. Schutz, qui tamen
in Agamemn. (v. 1422). conserva-
᾿ vit lectionem Stephanianam. Idem
vitiosum scribendi genus observavi
ἰδ Enripide. In Orest. 1465.
lepitur. ed. Musgrav. (1455. R. P.]
; Ἰδαῖα μᾶτερ, μᾶτερ
‘OBPIMA, OBPIMA.
at in Ton. 215.
Τὶ yap, κεραννὸν ἀμφίπυρον, OM-
BPIMON. vid. Brunck. ad Eurip.
_ Orest. 1463. pp. 107-8.
In Euripid. Alcest. 245. legitur:
Ὅστις aptorns AMIIAAKON ané- -
ov. Legendum vero deleta litera μ,
XTIAAKON. vid. Schol. Sophocl.
Trachin. 120. Brunck. ad Sophocl.
Ged. Tyr. 472. Simili modo in
Euripid. Iphig. Aul. 124. Καὶ πῶς
᾿Αχιλεὺς, λεκτρ᾽ ἀμπλακὼν, Legen-
dum est, λέκτρ᾽ ἈΠΛΑΚΩΝ, nam
Marklandi emendatio—)éxrp’ (i.e.
κατὰ λέκτρα) ἀμπλακέων, dura est,
et participio Ionico nullus locus
eoncedendus in Scena Attica. In
Heachyli Eumenid. 935. accurate
Hermanns edidit ἀπλακήματα, m
᾿ /
Mn Literary Coincidences. -
Mr.G. has H,.Stephens to defend his
ὄβριμοε, in preference to Σ
Ego in antiquioribus et fide digni-
oribus diverzorum poetarum exem-
plaribus scriptis ὄβριμος potius
quam μοε rvasse mihi
videor. Thesaur. 1. ἢ. 794. Yet
in his own Eschylus, Agam. 1420.
he has edited, pioos ὄμβριμον
ἀστοῖς, and in Sept. Theb. 800..
ἀνδρῶν ὀμβρίμων κομπάσματα.---
In the latter place, Brunck hes
given Ὀβρίμων, and is followed by
Schutz, who has, however, care-
Setly preserved ὄμβριμον in the
former, 1422. The same varia-
tion is observable in Euripides |
Orest. 1466. [1455..] ὄβριμα." Jon.
415. Ομβριμον. Month. Rev. for
Aug. 1789, p. 107.
—in the Alcestis of Euripides we
find ἀμκλάκειν, as it is edited.
245. ἀρίστης ἀμπλακὼν ἀλόχον. In’
Euripides, Iph. in Aulide, 144.
Musgrave should have proposed
-- λέκτρων ἀπλακὼν, instead of
A. ἀμπλακὼν, and then his correc-
tion would have been infinitely.
preferable to the old reading, and
to Markland’s λέκτρ᾽ [scit. κατὰ
λέκτρα] ἀμπλακέων. This Ionic
participle he is also desirous of
introducing into Alcestis, 245. Ὃς
ἀρίστης ἀμπλακέων ἀλόχου, which
* Conf. Brunck, ad lec. 1463.
On Literary Coincidences.
FIORILLO.
omnibus enitn aliis edd. erat
ἀμπλακήματα. Reddenda vox et
sana in Tragic’ Supplic. 238.-ubi
vulgatur:
κακεῖ δικάδει τἀμπακλήματ' ὡελόγος.
Scribe: τἀκλακήμαθ"---ΡΡ. 108-9.
forms but a rough anapestic: the
metre is not mended, and the dia-
lect is violated. Musgrave’s read-
ing, ex MS. if he had omitted the
M in ἀμτλακὼν, restores the verse:
Ὅστις: ἀρίστης ἀτλακὼν adéyov, AB
Mr. Wakefield has very adisonsly
published the lime.
for Feb. 1796, p. 132. [Trach.
120, ad (Ed. Tyr. 472, are men-
tioned in the same note, #schyli
Suppl. 238. τἀκλακήματ, ed.
Edinb. 1795, which is also in the
margih of the learned Dr. Need-
hain’s copy.]
In Euripid. Iphig. Aul. 352. edidit Musgrave,
Δαναΐδαι δ᾽ ἀφιέναι
ναῦς διήγγελον, μάτην δὲ μὴ πονεῖν ἐν Αὐλίδι.
Ubi omissum X. scribendum enim
ναῦς duf'yyedAoy, sequitur enim εἶχες
et παρεκάλεις. Imperfectum hujus
verbi eccurrit in Herc. Fur. 554.
Helen. 626. nunquam vero, quan-
tum scio, aor. 2. Similis error latet
forte in Ipbig. Taur. 939.
Ταῦτ᾽ dp’ ἐπ᾽ ἀκταῖς κἀνθαδ᾽ ἠγγέληε"
μανείς.
raro aor. 2. passivi in Atticis Tra-
gicis invenies, Legendum itaque:
ἠγγέλθης. cuf. Hecub. 591. 672.
fEschy]. Choéph. 739. Agamemn.
302. Euripid. Hecub. 727. Orest.
1529. 1018. Sophocl. Electr.
1341. 1462. Ged. Tyr. 604. Fere
semper aor. 1. a Tragicis usurpa-
tum esse, preter Etym. M. pag.
154, 424, 503, 817, 883, monuere,
Piersonus ad Moerin, pag. 207. et
Valck. ad Eurip. Pheen. pag. 306,
(sic) P. 109.
The reading is indisputably διήγ-
γελλον, for εἶχες and παρεκάλεις
follow.—The Imperfect occurs in
Eur. Herc. Fur. 554. Helen. 626 ;
but-the second Aorist in no other
passage.
It will not be foreign to our pur-
pose, to cotrect a passage in the
Iph. Taur. 939, which may seem
‘to defend προσήγγελεν.
Tair’ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀκταῖς κἀνθαδ᾽ ἠγγέλης
ανείς.
This second Aorist passive is not
to be found in the Tragedies. It
must be changed into ἠγγέλθὴης,
which is used in the Hecuba, 591.
672.
In the verb ᾿Αγγέλλω, if they use
an active Aorist, it is always the
first, ἤγγειλα, which occurs in Es-
chylus. Choéph. 739. Ag. 302.
Eur. Hec. 727. Or. 1592, (1575)
[Med. 1018.] (1007.) Soph. Elect.
1341. 1462. CEd. Tyr. 604. Pbid.
p- 99. This preference of the first
Aorist has been noticed by ancient
and modern critics:—Moeris also
not unfrequently, and Pierson in
299 ᾿
onth. Rev. —
, 400
“Ὁ FIORILLO,
fe”
In Athenxeo, Lib. XIV. pag. 697
(695.). Scolion legitur venustissi-
«δι, editum quoque a Brunckio, -
in Analect. T. 1. pag. 154. et Il-
+.gen, in Scoliis, p. 31.—Credo Sco-
lion εἰς scribendun et distinguep-
dum esse:
"Ex γῆς χρὴ κατιδεῖν πλῤρν
εἴτις δύναιτο, καὶ παλάμην ἔχοι"
ἐπεὶ Δ᾽ ΑΝΕΜΠΟΡΟΣ γένηται,
τῷ παρέοντι τρέχειν ἀνάγκη.
Putat Jacobs. in Animadv. ad An-
thol. T. I. P. i. p. 294. (enf. Ad-
dend. ad Ilgenii Scol. pag. 256.)
post ἐκ γᾶς omissum esse vocabu-
Jum, quod versum expleverit, ut
esset Alcaicus. At nihjl deesse
puto. Est enim primus versiculus
Glyconicus Antispasticus dimeter
Acatalecticus, qualis ille Simonidis
ap. Plutarchum, in Consol. ad
Apollon, T.I. pag. 297. ed. Wit-
tenbach.
“Axpaxrot δὲ μελῃδόνες.
et notus Horatii, Lib, }. Od. LI, 1.
Sic te diva potens Cypri.
Miror vero, neminem, quantum
scio, animadvertisse, versum ter-
tium vitio laborare.—Versu tertio,
spondeus, Lyrica omnino defendi
potest auctoritate. pp. 118-9.
Suavissimus est Lycophronidis lo-
cus apud Atheneum, Lib. XV. p.
670, quem, cum vitiosus sit, male
intellectum esse, quid mirum ?—
Venijt tamen mihi in mentem, dum
meliora dabunt acutiores, conji-
cere [v. 2.]; καλὸν POPHMA, et
fotum locum sic scribere;
@n Litcrary Coincidences, —
his Notes, p. 207, afler Valekenaer
in E. Phen. 979. p. 356. Ibid. p.
101.
—Scolion, or song for the table,
preserved by Atheneus, XV. p.
695. A,and may be found in some
of the collections of Lyric frag-
ments, and in Brunck’s Analecta,
1,154. iv. It appears mutilated,
as well as corrupt, and may be thus
emended 3
Α δηλο»] ἐκ γῆς χρὴ κατιδεῖν πλόον
εἴ τις δύναιτ᾽ ἂν, καὶ παλαμὴν ἔχοι"
ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἂν ἔμποροε γένηται,
τῷ παρέοντι τρέχειν ἀνάγκη.
We have added “AénAoy at the.
beginning, which completes the
verse, and may easily have been
lost in the καὶ τάδε; and we have
changed δύναιτο into δύναιτ᾽ &y,
and δὲ ἐν πόντῳ into δ᾽ ἂν ἔμπορος.
It must be remembered, however,
that the age and the author of this
Scolion are equally uncertain. Jt
is not clear even that the Alcaic
stanza was intended. The first
line might have been a Glyconi¢
Antispastic dimeter acatalectic.
So Simonides ap. Plutarch. Con-
solat. ad Apollon. vol. i. p. 297,
edit. Wyttenbach. yo
' “Anpaxroe δὲ μεληδόγες,
And so Horace, I, iu, 1. .
Sic te Diva potens Cypri.
In the third verse, also, the Spon-
deus may have been an allowable _
licence jn a Scolion. Month. Rev,
for Jan. 1798, p. 10. ΝΕ
Lycophronides, as far as we can
recollect,' is quoted only in one
other place of ‘Atheneus, in which
the same liberties with respect to
metrical arrangement are observ-
able. |
FIORILLO.
1688 avatiby
καλὸν ΦΟ
4 “gal τὴν
On Literary Coincidencea, :
801
σοι ῥόδον
, καὶ πέδιλα, καὶ κυνέην,
θηροφόνον AOTXIAY, ἐκεί μοι νόος ἀλλῇ κέχυται,
- ἐπὶ τὰν Χάρισι φίλαν παῖδα καὶ καλάν. ...
Aliud _hujus poets fragmentem e
Clearcho laudat Athenweus, Lib.
XIII. pag. 564. B.— Wakefieldio,
qui in Diatribe in Eurip. Hecub.
. 14, legendum venset παρθένων
PYZO®OBON; At mhiniime opus,
ut illius conjecturdm sequamur,
quia lectio vulgata optimum dat
sensum. ‘Tum etiam vox φύβη, si
capillum significat, nunquam in
compositione occurrit; semper
ponitur χαέτη, κόμη, βόστρυχος,
πλόκαμοε, aut aliad verbum. Amor
ictus σοκόμας, ab—Euripide,
Ipk. Auk 545. .
- ὅθι δὴ
Διδνμ' Ἔρως ὁ ΧΡΥΣΟΚΟΜΑΣ
T6f ἐντείνεται χαρίτων.
Precipue vero Apollo. Eurip. Ion.
903. | | ke
Ὦ Aarois rai:
πρὸς τάνδ᾽ αὐγὰν αὐδάσω.
ἦλθές μοι ΧΡΥΣΩ͂Ι XAITAN
αρμαίρων.
enf. Iph. Taur. 1244. Supplic.
078. Troad. 255. etc. Diana vero
in Eurip. Phen. 200.
Μήποτε, μήποτε τάνδ᾽
Ὦ πότνια XPYZEOBOLTPYXE
Ὦ Alos ἔρνοε"Αρτεμι,
Δουλοσύναν τλαίην. -
Philoxenus, Dithyrambographus,
in Cyclope, apud Athen. Lib. XIII.
p. 563. A.
Ὦ καλλιπρόσωπε,
ΧΡΥΣΕΟΒΟΣΤΡΥ͂ΧΕ, Γαλάτεια,
Χαριτόφωνε, κάλλος ἐρώτων.
ΥΟΙΧΥΠ. Cl. Jl.
Pheeniss. 200.
. * #
P. 121. and Month. Rev. for Jan. 1799, p. 99.
He (Mr. Wakefield) proposes to
ray (Hee, 155.) a MEY poms
ffs, instead of χρυσ ν.
This emendation is liable to ob-
jections. ist, There.is no such
word as χρυσόφοβον.---Φ Αγ, There
‘are no similar compounds of φόβη,
Coma.—-3dly, The heroes aud he-
roines of antiquity are celebrated
by the Poets for their Ξανθοὲ πλό-
kayo, but not for χρύσεοι. Te
speak of Euripides alone: the ad-
jective Ξανθὸς, - ξανθὴ, ξανθὸν, is
joined to the substantives, Béorpu-
xos, Kdun, Πλόκαμος, or Xatrn, ac-
cording to their respective gen-
ders.— Golden hair, however, with
him, (as it should be,)is solely the
attribute of. Divinity !
Creusa thus addresses Apollo,
Ton. 903.
-- * * * .
So Apollo is styled Χρνσοκόμαςε, in
the Suppl. 978. Iph. Taur. 1244.
Troad. 255.
The same epithet is also applied
to”Epws, in Iph. Aul. 548.
ef. *
Diana is also thus invoked, Eurip.
¢ *
Ibid. pp. 95—97.
Mr. W.’s third instance is from
the Cyclops of Philoxenus, and
may be thus arranged :
% * *
Ibid. p. 100.
NO. XXXIV. X
‘
1
ee
FIORILLO. ti as
Sie videtus Philoxeni locus resti-- The second is, om Lycophro-
tuendus. Mihi, iterum iterumque nidee ~The whele . ε, with
Lycophronidis fragmentum ceagi- the metres pro igested,
dorenti, nihil matandum videtur. should stand thus::’
Locus modo recte exbibeatur: - ᾿ + AAfGeay γὰρ, καθάπερ
veal ΟΣ, ἐν τῶε πρώτωι τῶν
oe ' ΞἘρωνικῶν, Λνιρφρονίδην élp_ctits
φησίν , ΝΣ
Obre παιδὸς ἄῤῥενοε, οὔτε παρθένων
808
ϑ᾽ «© *.
τῶν χρυσοφόρων, οὐδὲ γυναικῶν βαθνκόλπων
καλὸν τὸ π
—Singulari etiam modo ἀγάλματα
κόμης, Euripides dixit in Electra
Vv. 875. .
= ——ola δὴ ᾿γὼ καὶ δόμοι κεύ-
θουσέ μοι
'κόμης ἀγάλματ᾽ ἐξενέγκωμαι.
Ibid. 878.
Σὺ μὲν ἀγάλματ᾽ ἄειρε
᾿ κρατί
Unde forte corrigendus v. δ86.
ubi legitur:
ὯὮ καλλίνικε, πατρὸς ἐκ νικηφόρου----
---ὐεγὼς, Ὀρέστα, τῆς ὑπ᾽ Ἰλίωι
μάχης ες
δέξαι κόμης σῆς βοστρύχων ΑΝΑ-
AHMA'
A. Duriusculus est—
hic Anapeestusin fine Iambi. Scribe:
δέξαι κόμης offs βοστρύχων ATAA-
MATA.—pp. 197, 8.
. ἀλλὰ κόσμιον ποφύκει.
ἧ γὰρ αἰδὼς ἄνθοε ἐπισπείρει. pp. 125,6.
Ibid. p. 99.
This passage (Hipp. 82.) brings
to our recollection a corrupt verse
in the Electra of Euripides: in
which, instead οἴἀναδήματα, which
closes the iambic with an obtrs-
‘sive anapest in the fifth place, we
venture to propose, (v. 886.)
_ "Opéora, τῆς ὑπ᾽ Ἰλίῳ.
μάχης,
Δέξαι κόμης σῆς βοστρύχων ἸΑΓΑΛ-
MATA. — Ibid. p. 97. [Kai
τῶιδε κέρδει κέρδος ἄλλο, τίκτεται,
read, Δέξαι κόμης σῆς τόδ᾽ ἀναδήμα
oon — Ν᾿. P. Tracts, p.
190.
Aristoph. Lys. 519. Ὁ δέ μ᾽ εὐθὺς ὑποβλέψας ἔφασκεν" " κ᾽ εἰ μὴ ror
στήμονα νήσω. ι
ΟΡ librarii errorem, Viri docti Με. Brunck rightly observes, that
veram lectionem non adsequuti the copula has no business before
sunt. Credo legenduin esse : el; he therefore reads, Ὁ 8 ἔμ᾽
Ὁ δ᾽ ἔμ᾽ εὐθὺς ὑποβλέψας “AN εὐθὺς ὑποβλέψαε φάσκεν ἄν" El μὴ
ἘΦΑΣΚ᾽, εἰ μὴ τ΄. σι ν. Ρ. 135. τὸν στήμονα νήσεις (νήσειε from ἃ
MS.).1 should rather read, Ὁ δ᾽
Ep εὐθὺς ὑποβλέψας ἂν ἔφασκ᾽- El
μὴ. εἴο.--Ε. P. in Maty’s Rev.
,; July, 1783. p. 61 (21, 22.) .
* In MS. formerly the property of Kuster ἔφασκεν is wanting; ‘Dr.
BENTLEY suggested δεινόν.
On Literary Coincidences:
FIORILLO.
80S
ΝΕ Thesm. 225. Οὗ yap, μὰ τὴν Δὴμητρά γ᾽, ἐντανθοῖ μενῶ.
Ne minimam quidem hoe ἴροο
particula ye ‘vim . habet,—Ubi
acumen Brunckii tT Legeadum sive
controversia: Οὐ yap; Νέὰ vey
ΔΗΜΗΤΡ᾽, ἜΤ' ἐνταυθοῖ ata
Aristophanes talem emendationem
postulare videtur, nam ia Nub.
814, alts ** * * Vesp. 1442.
**** Aves 1443.—pp. 135, 136,
E mea opinione locus quoque cor.
ruptus. 1 Equit. 460.
Tauri, μὰ τὴν Δήμητρά, μ᾽ οὐκ ἐλά»-
θανε .
τεκταινόμενα τὰ πράγματ᾽" ἀλλ᾽
ἠπιστάμην
γομφούμενά γε τὰ πάντα καὶ κολλώ-
peva.—Onnnino illud γε ἃ libra-
rio rotrusum, deest etiam in anti-
quis Edd. Legendum puto :
γομφούμεν᾽ AYTA πάντα καὶ x.
Id. ibid.
The particle is here of no force,
nor is it in the earlier editions, at
least it is not in the Basil 1532.
There can scarcely be a donbt, I
think, but we must read, Οὐ γὰρ,
μὰ τὴν Δήμητρ᾽, ἔτ᾽ ἐντανθοῖ μενῶ,
to any one who will consult Nub.
814. Vesp. 1442. Av. 1335.—Ibid.
p. 65 (30.)
—in V. 463. for γομφούμενά ye τὰ
πάντα καὶ κολλώμενα,---τοδὰ [ομ-
φούμεν᾽ αὐτὰ πάντα.---Τῆε Junte
edition of 1515 omits ye.—How
emphatical is this ye! How har-.
monious is the rhythm of the
verse ! Quanti fecisset istud Ie vir:
doctissimus, si ex Heathii, νοὶ Any
gli cujusdam fodinis esset effoe«
sum! — Month. Rev. for Sept.
1789, Ρ.. οὔϑιδ
Lysistr. 82. Γυμνάδδομαί ya, καὶ ποτὶ πυγὰν GAXopan .
quo pertinet illud ya Laconicum ?
scribendum sine dubio :
γνμνάδδομαί TE,—
Admonet ceterum, commovetque
hic locus, ut simde vitium exhi-
beam. In
Mr. B. reads ya Laconice [ya R,
B.] IF should prefer Γυμνάδδομαέ
re,—as it is quoted by Eustathius,
p. 1570.—Maty’s Rev. p. 65 (31.)
Equit. 608.--- Ἠνάγκαϑεν ἔπη λέξοντάς γ᾽ és τὸ θέατρον πκαραβήναι.
—corruptela sic tollenda: ἠνάγ-
καϑεν λέξοντας ἔπη ΠΡῸΣ τὸ θέα-
Τρον παραβῆναι. His scriptis vi-
co —auctorem argumentt in Aris-
toph. Nub. comprobare emenda-
tionem nostram. Magna preterea
accedit auctoritas ex Acharn. 628.
Οἴπω παρέβη ΠΡΟΣ τὸ θέατρον
λέξων. et Pac. 735. αὑτὸν ἐπήνει
ΠΡΟΣ τὸ θέατρον παραβάς.
Simili: modu particula ye ab im-
perito’ librarie mtrusa, sensum
turbat in Ran.
Read Ἠνάγκασεν λέξοντας ἔπη
xpos τὸ θέατρον, as it is quoted by
the author of the argument to the
Nubes. Acharn. 629. Οὔπω πα-
ρέβη xpos τὸ θέατρον λέξων. Pac.
735. Αὐτὸν ἐπήνει πρὸς τὸ θέατρον
παράβας. --- Ibid. p. 64 (98.)
Suppl. ad Prar. Iv=lx. [p. 56. in
Schol. sic habetur ἡ. A. é. a. τ. 0.
x. vi. p. 462. R. B. in margine ex-
empiaris ed. Bas. 1547.]
804
FIORILLO.
On Literary ‘Coincidences. ;
τ...
Ran. 1055. "Ἔστι διδάσκαλοε, ὅστιε φράδει' τοῖς δ' ἡἠβῶσίν ye Φοιηταί.
scribe, —— τοῖσιν δ᾽ ἡβῶσι π.---
p. 251.
The particle is interpolated by
some later editor. Read rotéw
δ᾽ ἡβῶσι.---Τ θὰ. ΕΙΣ
Thesm. 149. Χρὴ τὸν ποιητὴν ἄνδρα xpos τὰ δράματα.
Quando nomen ἀνὴρ ponitur cum
substantivo, nullus locus concedi-
tur articulo. τὸν ergo insertum ab
imperito librario. Lege: Χρὴ yap
ποιητήν. Hoc melius quoque cum
sequentibus coherere videtur.-~
p- 152.
Athen. xiv. 622. B.- Latet
hic quod Casaubonus non obser-
vavit, particula carminis Ithyphal-
lici, sic forte restituenda :
‘Avéyere — — — — εὐρυχωρίαν
᾿ ποιεῖτε τῷ θεῷ"
ἐθέλει γὰρ ὁ θεὸς ὀρθὸς ἐσφυρωμένοε
διὰ μέσον βαδίϑειν.
In primo versu desunt verba non-
nulla. Forte vox ἀνάγετε erat
repetita, sed semper deest κῶμον,
aut simile quid.—p. 158.
Verbum κολάω, κολάϑω, Comicis
Atticis valde tritum. Vid. Aristoph.
Vesp. 244. Equit. 455. — Theo-
pompus apud Suid. v.”Arrss.
Κολάσομαί ye σὲ,
ς Καὶ τὸν σὸν Αττιν.
Ῥ. 161.
Gravissimo enim errore Interpre-
tes ad Plinii Epistol. Lib. 1v. ep.
8. et Fabricius, Biblioth. Grec.
Ty vu p. 710, ed. vet. confu-
when ἀνὴρ is joined with a 50»
stantive, it is not, I believe, capa-
ple of the article. The τὸν ts, I
believe, the insertion of a later
editor, without any authority; I
would therefore read, Χρὴ yap
roinrhy—which connects better
with the preceding verses. Ibid.
Ρ. 67 (84.)
_ "Avadyere
(f.’Avdyer’, dvayere κῶμον,) ebpu-
xuplay .
Ποιείτε τῷ θεῷ"
Ἐθέλει γὰρ ὁ θεὸς ὀρθὸς ἐσφυρωμένος
Διὰ μέσον βαδίξειν.
Versiculus, quem ab iambico dis-
tinxi, Phallicus κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν dice-
batur.—TyRwHitT ad Aristot.
Poét. p. 130126. [rat θεῶε ποιεῖ-
re, inter colloguendum commoditus
disposuit R. P. vide Adyss. p. 140.]
Eq. 456. Mr. B. seems somewhat
uncertain about the word κολᾷ.
There is no reason for change.—»
κολωμένους ought to have been
restored, Vesp. 244, instead of
κολουμένους, which cannot possi-
bly come from κολούω, or indeed
any other word. Theopompus
apud Suidam v. “Arris. Κολάσο-
pal ye σὲ, Kai τὸν ody” Arrive
Maty’s Rev. p. 67 (33, 34.)
Denique Herodem lambograpbum
cum Herode Attico gravissimo
errore confundunt, Interpretes
Plini, et Fabricius Bibl. Gr. v1.
On Literary Coincidences.
τς FIORILLO.
dere Herodem Atticum, cum anti-
quo et incognito fere Herode Iam-
bographo,—p. 171.
Plinius, Aristarchi summi _ critici
Judicio neglecto, qui Simonidem
et Hipponactem Iambographorum
principes esse ait, vid. Proclus
Chrestom. pag. 342, et Grammat..
Biblioth. Coislin, pag. 597, pal-
mam in hoc poeseos genere tradit
Herodi. Ait enim: Ita certe sum
etc.—Ibid. .
Multa ad landatum locum Plinii
moliuntur Interpp., satisque osten-
dunt, se de Herode Iambographo,.
ne fando quidem quidquam audi-
visse.—p. 172.
Restant pauca tantum fragmenta
e Mimiambis ap. Ioann. Stobens.
Serm. LXxI. p. 439. LXXVI. p.
453. XCVI. p. 530. ΟΧΥ ΤΙ. p. 591.
S. Maximum, T. 11. Opp. p. 636.
Zenobium Cent. v1. 10.—Ibid.
Etym. M. p. 411, 41. Ζήτριον διὰ
τοῦ i συνεσταλμένον, καὶ παρὰ
"HPOAOTM®:, "Αγ᾽ αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ Φή-
τριον. "Ἔστι δὲ χολιαμβικὸντε μέ-
τρον. Nomen hic Herodis Mimi-
ambographi, ia Herodoti transiit.
da menduso Ἠροδότῳ, herebat
Wesselingius, in Dissert. Hero-
dot. p. 29. Idem Etymologi locus
induxisse videtur Scaligerum ad
Varronem de L. L. pag. 149. ut
Jamborum scriptorem Herodotum
vocaret.—p. 173. ἢ. 1.
Atheneeus Lib. 111. 86. B. * * * *.
Ἡρώνδα: δὲ ἐνΣυνεργαϑομέναις Προ-
σφὺς. κλ. Is. Casaubonus negat se
alibi Herondam Comicum iovenire.
At, non Comicus, sed ut ex subjec-
to Choliambo - patet, Iamborum
scriptor Herodes, qui patreonymica
et Doribus propria forma, ‘Hpérdas -
305
p.. 710.—D, RUHNKEN.
Cr. Orat. Gr. C. ἡ.
Nobis satis certum videtur, Simo«
nidem et Hipponactem fuisse,:
4808 cum Archilocho conjungunt:
Lucianus Pseudolog. p. 163, Pro-
clus Chrestomath. p. 342, et
Grammaticus Bibl. Coisl. p. 597.
Sed ecce! Plinius, neglecto Aris-
tarchi judicio, iambographorum.
principem ponit Herodem, Iv, .
Ep. 8. Ita certe sum etc. D, R..
Ibid. xc1x.—in iambis palmam
defert.—Ibid. c.
Iaterpretes multa ad bunc Plinii
Jocum moliuntur, satisque osten-
dunt, se de Herode Iambographo
ne fando quidem quicquam aud
visse. Ex ejus Choliambis rah
menta supersunt apud Zenobium
VI. 10. Stobeum S. LxxI. p.
439. LXXVI. p. 453. XCVI. p. 530.
CXVIII. p. 591. et Maximum T.
II. p. 636. Nomen ejus abiit in
notius Herodoti apud Etymolog.
M. p. 411, 41. Ζήτριον διὰ τοῦ
i συνεσταλμένον, καὶ παρὰ Ἡροδό-
ty’ “Ay’ αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ θήτριον. ἔστι
δὲ χολιαμβικὸν τὸ μέτρον. In men-
doso Ἡροδότῳ herebat Cl. Wes-
selingius Diss. Herodot. p. 29.
Idem Etymologi Jocus induxisse
videtur Scaligerum ad Varron. de
L. L. vi. p. 149. ut Iamborum
scriptorem Herodotum vocaret.
Athenzus 111. p. 86. laudat Ἡρών»-
Say ἐν Σννεργαϑομέναις. ubi Is.
Casaubonus negat se alibi Heron-
dam Comicum invenire. Verum
non Comicus laudatur, sed, ut ex
subjecto choliambo apparet, Iam-
tronymica «οἰ - Dorioua -
‘boram scriptor, Herodes, qui pa-
ΒΔ
Hist.
* ο᾽
906
FIORILLO.
dicitur ; quod bene vidit Salmas.: forna
Exercitatt. Plin. pag. 113. Hem-
sterhus. ud Callimach. fragm. pag.
590. Valeken. ad Sebol. in Eurip.
‘Phoen. p. 764. et ad Fheocriti
Adoniaz.—p. 267. Fhid. et p. 174.
CURZ CRITICZ IN COMI-
CORUM FRAGMENTA AB A-
THENZO SERVATA. AUC-
TORE AUGUSTO MEINEKE.
BEROLINI, 1814. VENDITUR
IN BIBLIOPOLIO ‘MAURE-
RIANO. 8vo. pp. 1—78.
Bionic Comic. ap. Athen. p.691.
a. qui locus ita scribendus erat :
ἀκήκοας σὺ, δέσποτ᾽, ἤδη πώποτε τὸ
θυμίαμα τοῦτο; p. 7.
Aristopk. Equ. 569. veram lec-
tionem servavit Ravennas,—p. 8.
On Etterary Coincidences.
dicitur: quod:
bené vidit Saimasius Exerc. Ph-
nian. p. 111.. lam nomingm
formam illustrarent -Hemsterbu-
sius ad Callimach. Fragm. p. 590.
et Valckenarius ad Schol. in ἔπι».
rip. Pheniss. p. 764.[Coaf. D. R.
ad Xenoph. pp. 174, ἢ. 2. et 175,
ἢ. 1. Mem. re 48] D. R. Ibid.
XCIX, C.'
Valckenarius ad Or. de Phil. Ma-
ced. indole,—L. Bat. 1784. R. P.
ad Toupit Emend. in Suid. Oxon.
1790.
G. Hermannus de metris; Lips.
1796.
Hepheestio; cura Geisford. Oxon.
1810.
R. P. Adversaria ; Cantab. 1812.
’"Achxoas ov, δέσποτ᾽, ἤδη πώποτε
Τὸ θυμίαμα τοῦτο; R. P. Advss.
». 140.
Versum codex Ravennas emenda-
tum exhibet, Hermann. de metr.
p. 117. ed. 1.
" If R. P. had favored him with a sight of his MS. Adversearia,
Fiorillo would, doubtless, have added another jewel to his tract by
correcting p. 178, VIII. 3. ὡς τυφλὸς ὀὐπ᾽ ἐκεῖνο τοῦ βίου καμπτήρ. or
otal κεῖνο---, and would have added a fragment of Amphis 6 κωμψδως-
ποιὸς Athen. VIII. 336. C. ‘Fhese verses, which had
rightly arranged by Meretus in Var. Lect. X1X. iti. (Vol. I. p. 476.
ed. D. R.), were cited by Bern. Martinus in his Ver. Lect. il1. ix.
p- 147. onanointed and unassoiled: vide Dawes Misc. Crit. p. 216.
On the passage from Lucretius v. 882. the editor might have remark-
ed; Mors cum MS. Herl., cui edd. quas sequitur R. B. ad Hor.
Epod. xiii, 12.; et recte, si quid video, modo forma prisca gucé, unde
defluxit lectionis varietas, restituatur. To which he might have add-
ed: Io Chius apud Anal. Gr. Τ. 1. p. 161.1. Πίνειν καὶ παέξειν καὶ
ra δίκαια φρονεῖν. Ib. p. 162. it. Πίνωμεν, παίϑωμεν, trw διὰ νυκτὸε
ἀοιδή. Conf. Inscript. ad Sardanapal. apud Arrian. Aristoph. Achara,
983. Alexis apud Athen. VIII. 336. E, F. Hor. Carm. I. ix. 18. Teo
the passages from the New Testament, which allude to this formula,
subjoin 1 Cor. xv. $2. φάγωμεν καὶ πίωμεν .---“ But we mast not re-
peat sacred words with an unlicensed tongue.” -
¢
On Literary Coincidences.
MEINEKE.
Epickarmus apud Plutarch. Cons.
Apoll. p. 110. a. σννεκρίθη καὶ διε-
κρίθη, κἀπῆνθεν, ὅθεν, ἦνθεν, πάλιν"
Γᾶ μὲν εἰς yay, πνεῦμα δ' ἄνω" τί
τῶνδε χαλεπόν ; οὐδὲ ἕν,---Ὁ. 9.
Alexis apud Athen. p. 66. F. per-
peram legitur:. τοῦ Aewxordrow
πάντων ἐλαίον Σαμικοῦ. Repo-
Nendum Σαμιακοῦ.---. 12.
Repone οὐ pro ety!—Antiphanis
loco, p. 226. d. p. 16.
Aristoph. Pac. 380. Scrib. ἀλλ᾽,
ὦ μέλ’, ὑπὸ τοῦ Διὸς ἀμαλδονθήσο-
μαι. p. 16.
Alexis apad Athen. p. 107. ς.
Alexidis corruptissimos versus sic
restituendos judico: κρεάδια, πο-
dap’, ὠτάρια, ῥνγχητιγά, Ὕξειον
ἡπάτιον ἐπικεκαλυμμένον" Αἰσχύ-
verac δὲ πελιδνὸν ὃν τῷ χρώματι.
p. 16.
P. 837. ο. Quintum ᾳολον. ec-
loge sic exhibe: ἰδὼν δ᾽ ἐκεῖ θύ-
ovra τὸν νεωκόρον. ν. 9. Inserta
post καταγώγιον particula ἂν, meo
quidem judiciy nihil preeterea erit
novandum. p. 34.
P. 368. d. Initium enti The-
opompt: ὁ μὲν ἄρτος ἧδύ. p. 35.
P. 417. c. Si quid mutandum in
Eubuli loco, malim utique: zo-
νεῖν μὲν ἄμμες, καὶ φαγεῖν μέγ᾽
ἀνδρικοὶ---Ὁ. 37.
P. 426. c. Anaztlas. Repone:
καί τοι πολύ γ᾽ ἔσθ' ἤδιαν" ob yap
ἄν ποτε "Exwvoy ἂν τρὶς ὅδατοε, οἵ-
vov δ᾽ ἐν μόνον. p. 37.
BOG
δὲ
L. C. Valcknarius * * *
» .
In Alexidis versu Σαμιακοῦ pro
Σᾳμεκοῦ, R. P. Advss. p. 58.
Hermann: de Metr. p. 154.
refinge ex Suide Edd. Med. et
Ald. v. Teropycw. “AX, ὦ per,
ὑπὸ TOY Διὸς ἀμαλδννθήσομαι.
R. Ρ. δὰ Toup, p. 497.
Αἰσχύνεταε yap πελιτνὸν oy τῷ
χρώματι. Sic versus restituendus,
repetito ὃν ex ultima syllaba
κελιτνόν. Pierson. ad Mer. 3
Coaf. Edind. Rev. No. V. p. 190.
R. P. Advss. p. 65.
Ἰδών τ᾽ ἐκεῖ θύοντα τὸν νεωκόρον.
mox lege καταγωγεῖον. R. P.
Advss. p. 101.
Ὁ μὲν ἄρτος ἡδὺ, R. P. Advss. p.
109. |
Tloveiy μὲν ἄμμες καὶ φαγεῖν μάλ᾽
ἀνδρωοί. R. P. Advss. p. 116.
ov yap ἄν ποτε “Exivoy ἂν τρεῖς
ὅδατος, οἵνου δ' ἐν μόνον. R. P.
Advss. p. 118.
(Phrynichus Σ. Tl. apud Raknk. Lexic. Plat. p. 20. (p. 23. Bekker. }
ἀκταίνω.--- Πλάτων ἐν τῷ Φαίδωνι, ὡς ἀπὸ περισκωμένουι In Philoso-
phi Phedone quum frustra verbum ἀκταινῶσαι queratur, vix dubi-
tari potest quin ἐν τῷ Φάωνι reponendum sit, que fabula etiam aliis.in
locis cum Pheadone ἃ \ibrariis commutata est.
Vide Wyttenback. ad
Platon. Phed. p. 265. cll. Porsono ad Euripid. Med. p. 409. b.
p- 40. [Adde Ecoperdi Emead. UB. 5.})
-
308
_ MEINEKE.
Pherecrates apud Sxidam T. III.
p- 661. et Schol. Aristoph. Av.
859. A. φέρ' ἴδω" κιθ ὃς τίς κῶν»
xeoros ἐγένετο; B.‘O Πεισίον, Μέ-
Ans. A. μετὰ δὲ Μέλητα ris; "Ἔχ᾽
drpéu’ ἐγῴδα Χαῖρίε ἐστι.---ἰ τὰ
scribendus hic locus, quem infe-
liciter tractavit Jo. Toupius
Emend. in Suid. p. 562. Lips.
[Vol. II. p. 307. Oxon.] p. 40.
Pherecrates apud Suid. T. Ill.
Ρ. 601.—Constat autem, si quid
video, glyconeis polischematistis,
quoe ita scribendos judico:
—u-u τοῖς δὲ κριταῖς
τοῖς νυνὶ κρίνουσι λέγω
μὴ ᾿πιορκεῖν, μήδ' ἀδίκως
κρένειν' ἣ, νὴ τὸν φίλιον,
‘ ν els ὑμᾷς ἕτερον,
της λέξει πολὺ τού-
tov κακηγορίστερον.---Ὁ. 41.
P. 473. 6. Eubuli versum, et me-
tro et sensu jubente, ita concipio :
ὁ δὲ κάνθαρος πάλαι κενὸς ὧν Enpai-
vera. p. 43.
Fragmentum e Villoisoni Anecdot.
Gr. T. IT. p. 93. ita legendum vi-
detur: νῦν Λεώφιλος μὲν ἄρχει,
Δεώφίλος δ' ἐπικρατεῖ Λεωφίλῳ δὲ
πάντα κεῖται, Λεωφίλῳ δ᾽ ἀκούεται.
Ρ. 69.
P. 555.a. In Eupolidis loce ne
litera quidem mutanda est. Dis-
tingue: ᾿Αλκιβιάδης ἐκ τῶν γνναι-
κῶν ἐξίτω. Τί ληρεῖς ; Οὐκ οἴκαδ'
ἐλθὼν τὴν σεαυτοῦ γυμνάσεις δά-
papra; -p. 56.
Eupolis apud Plutarch. Sympos.
IV. 1. p. 662. E. et Macrob. Sa-
turn. VII. 5. Βοσκόμεθ' ὅλης ἀπὸ
παντοδαπῆς, ἐλάτης, πρινοῦ, κομά-
pow re Πτορθοὺς ἁπαλοὺς ἀπὸ τρώ-
On Literary Coincidences.
In margine exemplaris sui [Toupe?
Emendat.] notaverat Musgraviuz,
Ὁ Πεισίον MéAns. Recte. Cetera’
ita reformanda sunt, Ὁ [lecofov:
Μέληε" pera δὲ Μέλητα rls; "Ἔχ
ἀτρέμ' ἐγῷδα. Χαῖρις. ΝΣ
Ἔστι καὶ ἕτερος, αὐλητής. Quo-
modo distinguitur apud Scholias-
ten. R. P. ad Toup. p- 481. “
Φερεκράτης ΚραπατάλοιὉ
-- τοῖς δὲ κριταῖε
rois νυνὶ κρίνονσι λέγω
μὴ ᾿πιορκεῖν, pS ἀδίκως
κρίνειν, ἣ, νὴ τὸν Φίλιον,
μύθον els ὑμᾶς ἕτερον
Φιλοκράτης λέξει, πολὺ τού-
του κακηγοριστότερον.
R. P. apud Gaisford. ad He-
phest. p. 355. κακηγορίστερον
Elmsleius ad Acharn. 730.
Ὁ δὲ κάνθαρος πάλαι κενὸς ὡς Ene
μαίνεται. R. P. Advss. p. 127.
Archilochus Herodiani in V. etc.
Νῦν Λεώφιλος μὲν ἄρχει,
Λεώφιλος δ᾽ ἐπικρατεῖ"
Λεωφίλῳ δὲ πάντα κεῖται,
ΔΛεωφίλον δ᾽ ἀκούεται. ν"
R. P. ϑυρρι, ad Pref. xxvi.
Lond. 1808. [Vir doctissimus,
ni fallor, proposuit, ἀκούσεται,
quod mallem; ut, Μηῃτέοχος δ᾽ ol-
μώξεται. in |. c.] |
᾿Αλκιβιάδης ἐκ τῶν γυναικῶν ἐξίτω 3
Τί ληρεῖς; Οὐκ οἴκαδ᾽ ἐλθὼν τὴν
σεαυτοῦ γυμνάσεις γύναικα; R. Ῥ.
Advss. p. 133.
Βυσκόμεθ᾽ ὕλης ἀπὸ παντοδαπῆς,
ἐλάτης, πρίνου, κομάρον re, Π|τόρ-᾿
θους ἁπαλοὺς ἀποτρώγουσαι, καὶ
πρὸς τούτοισιν ἔτ᾽ ἄλλα, Οἷον κύτιε-
σον, φάκον εὐώδη, καὶ σμέλακα τὴν
On Literary Coincidences:
MEINEKE.
γουσαι, καὶ πρὸς τούτοισιν ἔτ᾽ ἄλλα,
Κύτισον τ᾽ ἠδὲ σφάκον εὐώδη, καὶ
σμίλακα καὶ πολύφυλλον, Κότινον,
σχῖνον, μελίαν, πεύκην, ἁλίαν (νοὶ
μυρίκην), δρῦν, κιττὸν, ἐρείκην,
Πρόμαλον, ῥώμνον, φλόμον, ἀνθέ-
ρικον, κισθὸν, φηγὸν, θύμα, θυμβρά»..
pp. 58, 59.
[Eupolis apud Schol. Aristoph.
-Nub. 550. p. 357. Scribe: κἀκεί-
vous ἐγὼ τοὺς ‘Irxéas Luveroinca
τῷ φαλακρῷ τῷδε, κἀδωρησάμην».
Ρ. 62.]
P. 569. a. Eubulus v. 10. sq.
Scribendum conjectura longe cer-
tissima: ᾿Ἑλλάδος ἔγωγε τῆς ra-
λαιπώρον στένω, Ἣ Κυδίαν στρα-
τηγὸν ἐξεπέμψατος Ac ne dubites
de emendationis veritate, vide
mihi Euripid. Iphig. Aulid. 370.
Ἑλλάδος μάλιστ᾽ ἔγωγε τῆς ταλαι-
πώρον στένω, Ἣ θέλουσα δρᾷν τι
κεδνόν. pp. 64, 65.
Ῥ, 581. ο. [D.] Macho: sine con-
troversia scribendum: ἐν exvroro-
μίῳ μετά τινων καθήμενος. p. 67.
Aristophan. ap. Polluc. VI. 49
(50). Scribendum videtur: Τὸν
σαπέρδην ἀποτῖλαι χρὴ, Καὶ κατα-
πλῦναι, Καὶ διαπλῦναι. Nisi forte
reponendum est: Καὶ καταπλῦναι,
κἄτ᾽ ἐκπλῦναι, Καὶ διαπλῦκαι. Ρ. 71.
Suidas T. III. p. 469. de Tima-
gora narratur: οὗτος πρεσβευτὴς
wepgbeis—ot μόνον χρυσίον ἔλαβε
παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλὰ κλίνην πολυτελῆ
καὶ στρατιώτας θεράποντας. Re-
pone στρώτας θεράποντας e Plu-
tarch. Pelop. p. 294. E. unde hic
Suide locus desumtus est. Cfr.
Athen. p. 48. d. p. 72.
309°
πολύφυλλον, Κότινον, σχῖνον, pe-
λίαν, πεύκην, ἁλίαν, δρῦν, κιττὸν,
ἀρείκηκ, ΠΠρόμαλον, ῥάμνον, φλό-
μον, ἀνθέρικον, κισθὸν,- φηγὸν, θύώ-
μα, θύμβραν. Gaisford. ad He-.
phest. pp. 277, 278.
[κἀκεένους τοὺς Ἱππέας Σννεποίησα
τῷ φαλακρῷ τούτῳ, κἀδωρησάμην..
Hermannus ad |. c.]
In Eubuli versu miror Marklan-
dum non vidisse -expungendum,
tum Euripidis auctoritate, tum
metri jussu, importunum istud
περί. R. P. ad Iph. Aul. 370. in
Advss. p. 250. quem conf, ad
Aristoph. Av. 813. ᾿
Ἐ» σκυτοτομίῳ μετὰ τινῶν καθήμε-
νος R. P. apud Walpole Com.
Gr. Fragm. p. 29. et Advss. p.
138.
Τὸν σαπέρδην ἀποτῖλαι χρὴ, Kai
καταπλῦναι, ΚΑΙΤ᾽ E ΥΝΑΙ,
κιὃ. R. Ρ. Advss. p. 282. |
Inter ista dona miretur aliquis
numerari κλίνην πολυτελῆ, καὶ
στρατιώτας θεράποντατ᾽ --- Suidas,
certe quem hic sequutus est, 4ε--
derat orpéras θεράποντας. [De-
inde citat], Alhenai Epitom. I.
p. 48. ἢ. Eustath. in Hom. Il.
ἢ. p. 1510, 8. Plutarch. in Pelo-
pida p. 294. E. in Artax. p. 1022.
E. Valck. ad Or. de Phil. Maced.
indole p. 272. [Ne vero de hoc
quisquam dubitare posset, Photius
in v. Τιμαγόρας, a quo sua mutu-
310
MEINEKE.
[P.642.[F.] _Alexidis fragmen:.
tum ad senarios iambicos revocan-
dum videtur: τράπεξαν ἀρτέον ---
--ἀπονίψαοθαε δοτέον, προσοισ-͵
réos Στεφανὸς, μόρον, σπονδὴ, λι-
On Literary Coincidences.
avit Suidas, ‘Srpéras θεράπονταε
diserte ὀχ θεῖ.) .
[ἀρτέον Τράπεδαν' ἀπονίψαε Soré-
ον" προσοιστέοε Στέφανοε, μύρον,
σαονδὴ, λιβανωτὸς, ἔσχαρι« Ἴρά-
γήμα δοτέον ἔτι, πλακοῦντοε &-
atéoy. R. P, Adves. p. 141.]
βανωτὸς, ἐσχαρὶς, Δοτέον, τραγή-
par’, ἔτι πλακοῦντοε ἁπτέον. p. 72.)
P. 700.c. adducor fere, ut ’A»-
τιφάνης δ᾽' Ἱππεῦσιν At
scripsisse putem. Arntiphenis
Equites citat ipse Athenceus. p.
508. b. p. 75.
1} shall not trespass farther upon the limits of your Journal by
adducing instances from those critics, who have treated disparagingly
certain names and works, in order that they might borrow from them.
with less danger of detection. Such, for instance, as Pope’s obliga-
tion to his ““ old friend or foe, the redoubted John Dennis,” as speci-
fied in Porson’s Tracts, pp. 318—320. The Critic of Newcastle
also, who divided the credit of feeble attack upon Bentley with the.
prevailing party of the day, cannot be wholly absolved from this im-
putation ; “like many others, he borrowed Bentley's ideas concerning.
the digamma, and the ictus metrici, and repaid him with abuse.”
Dawes, however, experienced similar treatment from the Editor of
the Greek Orators, who, in his account of the Miscellanea Critica,
paid a few faint, half-faced cempliments to the critical sagacity
evinced in the fifth section, of which he afterwards availed himself
without any ceremony; see PR&F. to a new edition of the Mise. Crit.,
pp- xi—xiv. where you will have “at one view the Zoilus and the pla-
giary, the carping, superficial critic, and the low paltry thief.” It
has also been asserted that Voltaire depreciated the works of our im-:
mortal Shakspeare, ‘‘ that he might be at liberty to pilfer from him‘
with the greater security.”
Cambridge, 12th March, 1818.
Fortasse ᾿Αντγιφάνηε, ut supra XI.
Ρ. 503. Β. R. P. Adves. p. 148.
CAPUT MORTUUM.
8511. |
LATIN PRIZE ESSAY.
Oratio in Curid Cantabrigiensi hadita, Comitiis maximis,
A.D. 1810. Auctore T.S. Hucues, Collegu Divi
Joannis Socio.
Utrum majori prudentia, eloquentia, fortitudine, patrieque amore,
M.T. Cicero, an Comes CLagenponianus, temporibus gravissimis, Rem-
publicam administrarit?
Cranissimonum hominum meritis debetur posterorum vene-
ratio ; presertim vero qui in perditissimis sue patria temporibus,
infracti animis, et proposita tenaces, virtutis cursum constanter
tenuerunt, et reipublice vulnera sanirunt, vigilando, agendo, bene.
consulendo: in eorum factis coasiliisque contemplandis, si ad
commune bonum spectatur, exercenda est in primis juventys ;
humane enim rationis optima exercitatio est humane nature inves-
tigatio ; quippe quz non modo sapientiores homines efficit, verum
etiam meliores; hinc illa vox adyti dignissima sapientissimum,
omnium Socratem judicavit, qudd hominem maluit quam res,
contemplari. Hujugmodi studiis non modo vis animi et solertia
acuitur, sed et hinc malorum detestatio, illiuc bonorum admiratio
exoritur, unde fons ipse virtutis et doctrine nascitur zmulatio : ut.
enim iste color visul magis convenit qui pulchritudine et amonnitate.
sua oculorum aciem delectat simul ac reficit, ita ille exercitationes,
et disciplinz animi prestanliores sunt habende que qu&dam per-
fuse voluptate et admiratione conjuncte, ingenium acuunt, mores
emendant, virtutem pectoribus insivuant. [nest gratia virtuti, inest
vis admirabilis que ad se voluntates nostras vehementer attrahit, et
ad actionem impellit, sive exemplo ante oculos posita sit, sive
historicis exarata chartis, vel poetarum carminibus depicta ; quare
cunctis feré gentibus im usu fuit res gestas Heroum literarum
monumentis mandare, ut bas juvenes, per lubricas et proclives.
adolescentiz vias, diligentids intuentes, ingenuis. artibus incum-,
berent, et suis ipsi civitatibus presidium et ornamentum adjicerent.
His igitur de causis non sine optimo consilio nobis propositum est,
Ciceronis et Comitis Clarendoniani virtutes rationis trutina expen-
dere, et, quoniam veluti adamante adamas expoliri, ita vir viro.
optimé illustrari possit, eos ipsos sap’ ἀλλήλους ponere, ut de
meritis rerum ab tis gestarum judicium exploratius proferamus :
horum autem uterque philosophica scientid, oratoria vi, politica.
solertia, forensi genere dicendj, magnitudine auimi, ingenio
excelso, δοιὰ sui seculi principes, rerum administrationem pert-
culosissimis temporibus fortiter susceperunt, et gubernaculo assi-.
}
$12 Latin Prize Essay.
dentes, navem reipublice per civiles fluctus, dum is parebatur,
perité et animose direxerunt ; alter autem, in δ, quam totes ser-
vaverat, patria, perditissimi civis gladiis est oppressus , alter ab
aulicorum turpissim& factione ipsoque adeo principe optim) cujus-
que et fidelissimi parum studioso, in exilium actus est, ibique
supremum diem obit. Restat jam ut utriusque res gestas breviter
percurramus, qué melius alterum cum altero componere et propria
utriusque merita percipere possimus.
Prior tempore, posterior forsitan virtutibus erat, M: T. Cicero,
vir sine dubio nulli wtatis sue secundus, quippe qui nec generis dig-
nitate, nec patriis honoribus, nec corruptelarum illecebris, tanquam
adjutamentis innixus, vi proprié eloquentie, integritate animi, urba-
nitate morum, cognitione rerum,summum attigerit honoris fastigium,
et adeptam sine insidiis auctoritatem in augenda patriz majestate
exercuerit. Hic igitur a tenero ungui optimis usus preeceptoribus fis
studiis operam seduld navabat que possent ad eas res gerendas quas
jam tacité moliebatur animum informare: quamdiu Respublica
bellis civilibus lacerata, armorum potius strepitu quam toge officiis:
gerebatur, ad ruris solitudinem confugit et perennibus se studis
eontinuit: mox sedato paulisper armorum tumultu, Romam petit,
ét causam 5. Roscii, contra Syllam jam imperio potitum et insa-
tiabili sanguinis cupidine furentem, felici eventu suscepit ; binc
metu Dictatoris in Atticam se recepit et ibi ingenium plurimis
- artibus, omnigen4 scientia, congressu philosophorum, et scholaran:
disciplinis limavit et perpolivit: deinde Romam, post mortem
Syllz advectus est, ac jam innocentes defendendo, sceviendo in
melos, leges tuendo, reipublice consulendo, omnium ordinum
animus miré sibi conciliavit et omnes -civitatis magistratus, novus
homo, populi non eblanditis suffragiis, sed liberis et enucleatis, suo
quemque anno gessit et ornavit. Questor m-Sicilia, rempublicam
caritate frumenti graviter laborantem ex uberrimo isto tractu -aluit,
nec provincie nocuit ; aded ut propter hec et alia optima in rehus
gerendis consilia, inauditis hononbus a Siculis cumulatus sit.’
fEdilis factus luxuriam illam et inanem prodigalitatem, que cum
isto muuere plerumque conjuncta erat, nec sine sociorum cede et
rapm4& comparata, quoad potuit, coercuit, et spectatissimum pre-
buit exemplum modeste liberalitatis, et sumtis pro facultatibus
Instructi. Pretorif auctus-dignitate nihil otii sibi concedendum
ratus, gnaviter operi incubuit, sociis oppressis patrocinatus est, et
Romanum nomen a criminibus vindicavit: ‘ Accusavi,” ut ipsius
verbis utar, ἐς de pecuniis repetundis, Judex sedi, Pretor quesivi.”’
“Jam vero fastigio dignitatis Consulatu potitus, qua curf, qué pru-
dentia, qua fortitudine urbi invigilabat, insidias preecavendo, tem-
pora arripiendo, consilia exsequendo, occupando inimicos! quam
ceelest: pene impetu eloquentiz fulmina in pestilentissimas conju-
Latin Prize Pssay. 313
ratorum manus jaculatus, Catilinam, scelus anhelantem, furentera
audacia, profligavit! ut primus ‘ Pater Patriz’ meritd appellatus
fuerit. Quibus tamen rebus gestis, ab impii sceleratorum manu
iv exilium actus, eam secum tulit bonorum omnium sententiam, ut
discessio ejus tanquam secessus ab urbe virtutis haberetur, re-
ditus in patriam triumphi similis, ac potids omni triumpho major
esset. Postea Ciliciam proconsul nactus provinciam, diligentissimé
preceptoris sui Sceevole exemplum in Asiaticos secutus est ; quame
vis enim suscipere noluit officium, suscepti eum nunquam pertesum
est; 2s alienum provincie summis viribus levavit; Ciliciam et
Cyprum calamitate famis liberavit; ex manibus Asiaticorum, qui
suos oppnimendo immensas opes congesserant, quzstus scelera-
tissimos extorsit; ob cladem Parthis infestissimis Romano nomini
hostibus illatam a militibus salutatus Imperator est; leges suas et
majorum instituta incolis servavit; facilis erat adeuntibus, clemens
miseris, in omnes comis; nec publicé nec privatim illi erogatus
est nummus in provincia; imd munera sibi lautissima cum summo
populi consensu honestissimé oblata, et honores sibi decretos,
‘statuas, fana, τέθριπποι,᾽ omnes uisi verborum prohibuit. His
igitur laudibus cumulatus Romam iterum profectus est, et iis se
immiscuit tempestatibus que jam urbem ex fundamentis quasea
bant: et Pompeio victo, et Czsari victori diligebatur ; Cesare
autem interfecto reipublice procurande rationem, acclamante
populo, recepit: Antonio furore plusquam Clodiano imsanienti
fortissimé obstitit, nullam locum pretermisit monendi, agendi,
providendi, et de industria laboravit ut zternd oblivione occulta
esset priorum discordiarum memoria. In hac cura atque adminis-
tratione, ea vita, que 81 ili ponenda esset (ut ipsius oratione utar)
preclaré secum actum putavisset, Antoni gladiis abrupta est, et in
lis ipsis rostris, in quibus ille rempublicam constantissimé consul
defenderat, positum caput illud fuit a quo erant multorum civium
capita servata. ‘Talis erat M. ‘I’. Cicero; in quo tamen, magna
cumulato gloria, quedam inerant infirmitatis humanw,macule que
summo ejus nitori aliquantulum officere videantur.
Jam ad eum transeamus cui neminem vel in priscorum vel recen-
tiorum temporum annalibus anteferendum esse censeo, ComITEM
CLARENDONIANUM : qui quidem, ut eum viri laudatissimi verbis
collaudem, inter juris peritos erat cloquentissimus, iuter oratores juris
peritissimus. Hujus viri adolescentia levibus quibusdam juventuti
propriis erroribus (vitiis enim omnino caruit) adumbrata est; bas
autem maturus anuis ita correxit atque expulit, ut clarior videretur
et nobilior assurgere : foro destinatus est, et in furensi marte plu-
rimum valuit; latissimam integritatis, solertie, sedulitatis famam
consecutus : fervido autem flagrans ingenio, judicio exquisito excél-
fens, sacra libertatis flamm4 et purissimo amore patriz accensus,
$14 Latin Prize Essay.
hese studia arctiora quidem omisit, ut in hatias rerum
sequor vela daret. tn Senatum Anglicanum cooptatus tam acer-
rimum se populi libertatis vindicem preestitit, qudm regise preero-
gativee, quee dicitur, justissimum defensorem: quod patet ex oratione
primum 1}} habita in Seratu, qua contra’ tribunal istud exeerandum
tam felici sané exitu invehebatur, quod sibi auctoritatem in verba
hominum et opiniones tam iniquissimé arrogaverat; patet ex e&
vigilantia qua innotuit chm eorum preses constitutus est, quibus
commissum erat molestissimas Cune Eboracensis injurias inves-
tigare, judicum de navah pecunia delicta recensere, et alia sane
plarima magni momenti negotia peragere tum publica tum privata :
Ta quibus omnibus tam seduld et enixé in populari jure vindicando,
tam modesté et reverenter m regi majestate tuenda elaboravit,
ut eum rex ultro sibi accersiverit, miri foverit benevolentia, et in
posterum habuerit consiliorum participem, in prosperis rebus et im
adversis socium, quodque regibus vel rarissimum est, amicum.
In hac autem amicitid consociand4 nescio an ipsi an Carolo magis
in laudem cedat, qudd ille seumm4 vocis atque animi contentione
Ecclesie sanctissimas leges et institutam Episcoporum auctoritatem
constantissimé defendit, hic eum ob hane rem precipué in deliciis
habuit et laudibus cumulavit: jam vero publicis fungi munerbus,
lisque frui honoribus, quos ambitiosi plerumque aucupattur, sepie-
simé recusavit Hydius; utilitate Principis gloriole insgnibus et
ambitioni suz anteposit4. m omni rerum discrimine liberum regi
consilium obtulit μηδὲν ὑποστειλάμενος ; cui quidem si -infelx ille
princeps pots quam sue animi impatientie et effreenato ardort,
aut uxoris intolerande superbie paruisset, mirum ni populo gra-
tissimo imperfsset, regnique excidium et carnificis secures ἐν
fasset. Gliscente tandem civico tumultu /Erari Cancellarius et
Yegia secretis consiliis factus est; quibus preclarissimé functas
est muneribus, donec sceleratissimo regis parricidio pollutis impi-
orum civium manibus, nullus jam esset in republica Britannic&
honestis consiliis locus: fidem autem quam patri prestiterat,
eandem etiam filio preestitit; principera solio et patria exulantem
per omnia itmerum et pelagi pericula secutus.est, eique in summa
rerum et consiliorum bonorum inopia unus optime consuluit, scrie
bendo, legationes obeundo, nibil non ferendo, modo ei reditum sd
patrios Penates comparare posset: hoc autem miri potius Dei
benevolentia quam humanis rationibus effecto, justa et merita
Spectate fidei premia, factus Comes Clarendonianus, accepit,
quem jam antea in exilo regni sui Cancellarium rex creaverat.
am vero Clarendoni gloria, titulis amplificati, opibus instructi,
* Anglicé, ‘The Marshal’s Court.’ -
Latin Prize Essay. 315
auctoritate summi, ed quidem major jumine effulgebat, qué diffi-
cilius est animum humilem in secundis, quam fortem in adversis
rebus servare : cursum autem virtutis et justitize constanter tenuit;
adversis nimia divitiarum et potestatis blandimenta animum invic-
tum gerebat: quamvis erat natura pauld ispeundior, tamen affectus
ceteris imperitantes de industria vicerat; in patiendis laboribus anima
erat prope ferrei; amicitiarum, quas nullas sola utilitas conglu-
tinabat, admodum tenax; boni publici tenacior; neminem enim
amicorum auctoritate su& civilibus ornavit officiis, quorum inso-
Jentia rerum, imperitia, inertia, vel quibuslibet vitiis, quid caperet
detrimenti respublica : aliorum immodice ambitioni fortiter obsti-
tit, alios factionum vi petitos animosé defendit; Ecclesiw Angli-
can ritibus perpetud adhzsit, sed nec acerbé nec maligné in eos
seevilt qui alios colerent: auctoritate qua plurimim apud regem
valebat, in augenda populi libertate; consilio apud Senatum, in
tuenda regia majestate, usus est: sed, ut de Druso scripsit Pater-
culus, in 118 ipsis que pro Senatu moliebatur, plerumque habuit
Senatum adversarium : regi optima et exploratissima dedit consilia,
nec data imputavit, sed el, non sibi famam ex lis confectis petiit :
legum majestatem et populi voluntatibus et potestate regis supe-
riorem vindicavit: sua fretus honestate vite et morum :temperan-
tia, luxui isti et contemtui bonorum qui, septis pudicitie effractis,
in effoemimatum optimatum gregem laxis,se immiserat habenis, viri-
liter adversatus est: factionibus intrepidé obstitit, tam civium
prava jubentium ardori, quam odio atque minis potentiorum prave
consiliantium imperterritus ; corruptelis eum cedere integritas,
calumniis honesta animi superbia vetuit. Sed nec vite innocentia,
neque omnes ejus illustrissime virtutes, infidi et ingrati principis
favorem diu retinere valuerunt, qui voluptatis soldm studiosus,
faciles Aulicorum insidiis aures prebuit, et Clarendono ridiculo
impudico, et salsis dicteriis petito, vafrAé scurrarum dicacitate et
aculeatis facetiis lacessito, calumnius malevolorum et maledictis
onerate, non modd non injuriarum propulsator, verum auctor extitit,
et eum virum, honoribus detractis, etiam regno expulit, cujus po-
tissimdm consiliis ipse solium avitum postlimini jure obtinuisset ;
moestissimo hinc exemplo docens, quam infirmis plerumque inoita-
tur fundamentis ista fortuna qua gratia regum altissiné et pul
cherrimé ‘sit extructa. Clarendonus autem morbo laborans et
fractus annis, quamvis calamitatibus invictus, accusatus crimine
perduellionis et nactus judices iniquissimos, necessitati paruit, et in
Galliam advectus est: ἰδὲ pest multa infortuma que fortissimé
pertulit, otio tandem parto, ea habuit ex studus solatia que rebus
adversis laborantibus unicum ferunt remedium: hic vite sug perk
culosissimis negotiis versate historiam conscripsit, et tristissimd
istiuy moths civici annales, quorum pars magna fuit, ad finem. pers
$16 Latin Prize Essay.
duxit: quo quidem opere, sive materiem ipsam et argumentug,
sive scriptoris ingenium ac virtutem spectaveris, nescio an -apud
veteres etiam! qui res suis gestas temporibus descripserunt, quic+
quam dicam preclarius aut splendidius extitisse. ΄
Ciceronis et Clarendeni vitas xstimantibus hec nobis primo in
limine occurrunt, quéd alter insatiabili Jaudis cupiditate gloriam
meritd adeptam inmminuisse quodammodo videtur; alter modesté
et humiliter se gerendo, ampliorem famam assecutus est: 1116
nimiam suarum rerum gestarum jactationem animo indulgebat,
quam quidem feré omnes ejus redolent orationes: ipse sibi aperte
plaudere non erubescebat, quin et amicum Lucceium, res Romanas
conscripturum, in se laudando et Historie et Veritatis fines exce+
dere hortabatur ; aded ut jure videretur non tam reipublicee quam
8101 consuluisse: hic autem vero φιλόπατριξ, reipublice inserviens,
sui oblitus, detrectabat laudes, non arripiebat 3 ‘convicts sese et
maledictis aliorum lubentissimé opposuit, modd ex consiliis aliquid
utilitatis patriz proflueret. Uterque animum avaritiz turpitudine in-
contaminatum ostendit ; ille, muneribus rejectis, que pretia virtutis,
hic, que premia sceleris haberentur: neuter eorum civitatem
suam belli periculis implicuit; sin verd Ciceronem laureate i-
tere, et supplicationis decrete gloria decoravit, non minds m
honorem Clarendonu cedit qudd injustissimo isti bello. contra
Batavos suscepto obstitit, unde messis satis ampla malorum_patrie
redundavit. Ciceronis eloqhentia ardens erat et elata, literis .et
disciplinis elaborata, ornamentis plena, reconditis argumentis οἱ
sententiarum summo splendore instructa: quem vero -vivida vis
animi, actionis dignitas, ingenii acumen, ad summum oratorie
laudis fastigium tulerunt, eundem sepe detrudebant scurriles face-
tie, contumeliarum acerbitas, et acerrima objurgatio non tam
idonea ad avocandum sceleratos a nequitia, quam adigendum .im
apertum scelus et omnia perdite et desperate libidinis .facinora-:
Clarendoni autem oratio gravior erat, et mitior, et consilii plenior.;
ad docendum, sinon ad delectandum, aptior; nec infuscata erat
malevolentia, nec mendaciis corrupta, nec artificio simulationis
adumbrata ; sed metu omnino libera, simplex, sincera, fortissima
in virtute defendenda, tum solim infirma visa est, si quando δὴ
suas laudes predicandas vocaretur : longé mihi absit, ut berentem
Ciceroniano fronti coronam, in Catilinaria. isté conjuretione. tam
multé laude adeptam, detrahere audeam; quicquid provida sa-
pientia, quicquid cure et vigiliz, quicquid liberrima malorum
indignatio, quicquid vis eloquentia-postulat, ei omnia tribuantur ;
sed neque pretereundum esse censeo, quod Senatum Cicero Catj=
line hosti et parricide obstrepentem, quod Populum Romanum
furibundum in conspiratos, sibi. amicissimum habuit,; quéd Ca
tonem aliosque acerrimos adjutores nactus est, qudd sua ipsius
Latin Prize Essay. S17
vita a Catilina petita arctissimis erat vinculis cum salute reipub-
lice devincta: Clarendonus autem a Senatu proscriptus et po-
pulo rerum. novarunr studiosissimo suspectus, officio tamen satise
faciendi cupidys, quamvis de regiis fortunis desperaret, integritatis
iter fortissimé mgressup est, et omnia maluit pericula, vel etiam
mortem ipsam obire, dum officio satisfaceret, quam vitam et ho-
nores cum sceleris ignominia conjunctos assequi: spem tamen
vultu pre se tulit, aliorum auimos excitavit, seduld operam navavit
ad dissidia sarcienda; nec dubium est quin regnum ex belli ore
atque faucibus eripuisset, msi Regis ipsius imprudentia, temeritate
conjugis, aulicorum invidia, consilia ejus fuissent interrupta, et
spes omnis sanande reipublice penitus extincta. At si quis‘Cice«
roniana consilia. Clarendonianis preponenda esse censebit, quia
Rom. Civitas, debellaté conjuratorum manu, pristino suo statu
salva gavisa est, Anglicana autem, interemto Rege, gravissimis
laboravit calamitatibus, pauld iniquids quidem judicabit ; ut omit-
tam enim, qudd maltd quidem facilius est paucorum et perditissi-
morum hominum insaniam. coercere et restinguere, quam toties
feré populi et Senatfis voluntatibus obsistere, meminerit iste velim,
Ciceronem summa preditum auctoritate omnes reipublice vires
effundere potuisse, et militum arma eloquentiz fulminibus adjun-
gere ; Clarendonum nihil nisi consilium proferre, quod seepissimé
neglectum vidit; meminerit etiam, Romane Libertatis columnam
Tallii auxilio in tempus fultam et sustentatam, non aded munitam
esse contra Tyrannorum impetus, quin citd fracta et. omnino
obruta in pulverem disjecta fuerit; Clarendonum autem, qui filio
occisi Principis et heredi Imperii paterno ammo invigilavit, qui
eum in exteras et hostiles terras secutus est, qui scriptis redivivum
erga regiam majestatem amorem civium suorum pectoribus in
flamimavit, qui Carolum ab tusidiis maternis, que summo opere ac
studio eum Roman superstitionis erroribus implicare volait,
tutum et regnandi capacem prestitit, nen modo patriam suara
adjuvisse sed eam etiam in perpetuum conservasse. Cuivis autem
facile pateat, etiamsi ‘patrie amore Clarendono posthabendum
neget esse Ciceronem, eum revera quid esset e republicd mints
iptellexisse : non enim veterem illum statum reipublice quem tot
illustrissimi heroes sanxerant vel etiam morte sacraverant, defendit,
sed ἀριστοκρατίαν quandam summis viribus auxit et firmavit, qud
posset ipse honores et potestatem ampliorem assequi: Senatul in
populi libertatem grassanti plus zquo auxiliatus est; Syllanas
etiam leges, quibus proscriptorum filis interdictum est a Senatu et
publicis muneribus, abrogari noluit ; quo nihil certé crudelius esse
potuit : pestilentissimorum homuncionum Antonii, Vatinii, Gabinit
causus publicé suscepit, quorum scelera et flagitia ipse hberrima&
pris indignatione persecutus est; quo nihil imhonestius, nthil
VOL. XVII. Cl. Jl. NO. XXXIV, xX
$18 Latin Prize Essay.
civium moribus nocentius; presertim vero cim Gabimi cause,
dum ullam partem libertatis teneret,” se nunquam patrocinatu-
rum esse, Attico suo aperté professus est: sed voluit hoc sané
Pompeio gratificari: ubi igitur erat illa libertas, ille honestius
amor patsiz, qui religionem illi injicere debuit, ne in aucupanda
Viri potentissimi gratia, leges antiquissimas confunderet, nequitie
et audacie claustra perfringeret, et ipsa reipublice fundamenta
convelleret? Sed timuit: ubi igitur erat politica illa solertia. que
prohibere debuit, ne tot tam adulatorias Jaudes, honores, titulos,
imperia, magistratus uni deferret, et in tantam potestatis altitudi-
nem unum tolleret jam nimium (ut Q. Catuli verbis utar) liber
reipublice, ut necesse esset aut bonis moribus et patriis legibus,
aut Pompeio Magno offenderet: in tuend autem hac Pompei
auctoritate, quacum suam ipsius conjunctissimam nimirum senait,
contra Cesaris violentiores impetus, arma cepit. Quid ergo?
Pompeianis victis, cum ceteris fortasse in alias gentes se recepit,
subsidia, arma, viros contra tyrannum et oppugnatorem patriz
comparavit, vel Catonis exemplo, extincte reipublicte superesse
noluit: immo, victori humillimé occurrit, supplicavit, acta lauda-
vit, clementiam celebravit, et collum servitutis jugo libentissimée
summisit : vix autem in Ciceronis vita politicé aliquid constans ac
sui simile invenies; ipse etenim qui in epistola ad Atticum scyibit
se Pompeium cognovisse hominem integrum et castum et gravem,
in alia eum reprehendit tanquam ὁμολογουμένως τυραννίδα συσκενοαι-.
Céuewoy, quin et alias ἀπολικώτερον nominat. Est etiam ubi et
Cesarem et Pompeium fcedissimarum in patriam insidiarum accu-
sat, et in eorum “ societatis et scelerate consensionis fidem” gra-
vissimé imvehitur: piget autem alios hujus viri (quem tamen
omnes clarissimum extitisse fateantur necesse est) sive errores sive
Vitia ex humane nature infirmitate profluentia describere; juvat
potius prestantissimis Clarendoni virtutibus pauld diutius immo-
Fari, quem non facilids a constanti integritatis cursu quam Solem
a semit@ vis ulla dimovisset : clm primdm cure civitatis regendz
animoum contulit, seduld elaboravit in iis rationibus investigandis
quibus potissmum hoc nostrum floreat imperium: has autem
probé intellexit conflatas esse e regif prerogativa quam vocant, et
auctoritate Senattls, arctissimé inter se devinctis et zequo libramine
compositis. Hanc igitur societatem, hec vincula sanctissima vir rei
politice peritissimus pro virili constrinxit, iisque seditionibus ac
populari tumultu disruptis, rege denique ipso parricidarum manibus
trucidato, ita non ‘Tyranuidi isti-cui perduelles falsd libertatis
vocabulum obtendebant adblanditus est, ut patria, opibus, uxore,
liberis relictis, hostiles inimicitias, gravissimam paupertatem,
discrimina formidolosissima, omnia denique Fortune adverse tela
patienter tulerit, hujus scilicet ynicé studiosus, ut quam patri prestj-
Latin Prize Essay. 319
terat, eam filio servaret fidem. Rebus autem feliciter compositis ac
Principe jam incolumi reverso, redditus est patriz Clarendonus ;
qu jam viribus pollens, operam enixé dedit ad jurgta componenda,
et civilis belli cicatrices sanandas: itaque, eo duce, auctoritas
Senatfis intra fines coercita est; prarogativa regia confirmata ;
Ecclesiz sanctitas, legibus majestas restituta; revocata in forum
fides ; summota e Curia discordia ; sublata lege ultionis cupiditas,
et deleta dissidiorum memoria. Rebus ita se habentibus, si quera-
tur quid e statu tantz dignitatis et auctoritatis Clarendonum sum-
movere posset, respondere licet, ipsius constantia: nam cm
populus, a civilis discordiz miseriis vix animis collectis, vehementi
erga regem amore impulsus, tanta ei vectigalia expendere voluisset
quanta eum’ supra leges et justos regiz potestatis limites con-
stituere valuissent, Clarendonus, quamvis erat a regis secretis’
consiliis, quamvis et necessitudinis et affinitatis obstrictus cate-
nis, salute reipublice suis commodis prelaté, Senatum prohibuit
ne iterum in eas ipsas calamitates incurreret, a quibus modo tam
feliciter fuerat liberatus. O facinus preclarum! O exilium
hine indigné comparatum, ipso illo iljustr1 Ciceronis exilio quanto
splendidius !
His igitur animo excogitatis, haud sané mirum existimabitis,
Academici, si, absoluté comparatione Ciceronis et Clarendoni,
hunc ili anteponendum esse judicabo : Clarendoni autem spec-
tatissima erga regem fides, et honestissimus amor patrie, hinc
mihi preclarior et constantior videtur extitisse, quia vere pietatis
et Christiane religionis cultu purissimo innixus est; hic scilicet
latissimé in ceteras virtutes effusus, omnes animi perturbationes,
aversas a ratione et mentis inimicissimas, zgritudines, formidines,
cupiditates levavit, hic animum e4 fortitudme muniit que rebus
adversis depressum erigeret, elatum secundis temperaret, hic
denique ad res humanis altiores impulit. Ciceroniana autem
ἰδία celebrata philosophia, que falsd “ὁ mater omnium bene
factorum beneque dictorum appellata erat,” nequiit eum inter.
fluctus et procellas reipublicz stabilem ac constantem servare ;
que scilicet ei precepit extinctum una cum corpore esse animum,
ideoque virtutem nullam aliam mercedem laborum periculorumque
preter hanc laudis et gloriv desiderare.'
* Cic. in orat. pro Arch. poetd.
ae aoe rey
320
PTOLEMYY.
Bry the difficulty of procuring books for occasional reference in a
village remote from any public library, a literary friend in my neigh-
bourhood was lately induced to quote Ptolemy’s Geography through
the medium of Maginus’s Latin translation, (quarto, 1597.) Having
heard this circumstance, I immediately placed before him the great
‘“* Theatrum Geographia Veteris,” published by Bertius ; containing,
among other works, the Greek text of Ptolemy; and a Latin verston,
illustrated with Mercator’s maps. My friend wishing to possess the
Greek text of Ptolemy in a cheaper form, (for the copy of Bertius
which I placed before him, cost eight guineas last year at Payne’s in
Pall-Mall and another copy has, I understand, been sold at a atill
higher price ;) consulted Mr. Dibdin’s “ Introduction to the Greek
and Latin Classics,” respecting the different editions which that
ancient geographer has undergone—but found, to his surprise, that
the ingenious bibliographer had totally omitted (at least in the second
edition of his excellent work) even the very name of Ptolemy. I
could only furnish an imperfect notice of the πος
Cl. Ptolem. Cosmogr. &c. ἃ Calderino; cum tabulis 27. Rome,
1478, fol.
Cosmogr. (Latiné transl.) a Jacobo Angelo et Beroaldo,
(25 or 27 plates) Bononie, 1462—1482. -
Geographie lib. viii. &c. per Petrum de Torre. Rome,
1490, fol. (With the same maps as in the. edition
of 1478.)
————_ Geograph. a Pirckeymher. Lugd. 1541, fol.
This list I bad formed from different catalogues ; but it struck me
that an application to some of your correspondents might obtain fer
my friend the information on this subject which he so much desires."
A gentleman who in the year 1816 visited Paris, assures me that
Mons. Walckenaer, a learned member of the French Institute, (whose
researches on ancient geography have been mentioned in the Classical
Journal, No. XXXII. p. 257.) possesses every edition of Ptolemy
hitherto published; a collection formed at considerable expense.
Should this meet the eye of M. Walckenaer, and induce him to favor
us with a list of his different editions, it would gratify many besides
May 12, 1818. PHILO-PTOLEMEUS,
_* We refer our Correspondent to Dr. A. Clarke’s Bibliographical Dic-
tionary, where he will find a notice of several other editions. Εν.
321
NOTICE OF .
An“ Inquiry concerning the Site af ancient Palibothra.”
By Lieutenant Colonel WiLLiaAM FRANCKLIN. 460.
. two parts. London, 1815—1817.
WE are fully authorised, from the dimensions assigned by Strabo,
ent Arrian, and others, to suppose that the ancient Palibothra, a
celebrated city of India (intra Gangem), once covered in length ἃ
space equal to eighty stadia, or about ten-miles. . But this computa~
tion, restricted to what may be styled the city proper, does not in-
clude its suburbs or environs; which, according to the Sanscrit Pa.
ranas, extended westward to the almost incredible distance of
seventy-six miles. However exaggerated this statement may. he, it is
certain that Arrian describes Palibothra as the greatest of Indian
Cities ; peylorny δὲ πόλιν Ἰνδοῖσιν εἶναι Παλέμβοθρα καλεομένην, ὅζα,
(Hist. Indic. cap. 10.) And his authority for this description appears
to have been Megasthenes ; sent as ambassador from Seleucus Nica
tor to that, king whom his own subjects called Chandra-Gupia, but
- the Greeks, Sandracottus, This monarch held. his court at Palibothra,
which Ptolemy honors with the title of a-royal city, Παλιβάθρα Baol-
Aetor,’ (lib. vii. Asie Tab. x.) We cannot entertain a doubt that the
Indian metropolis was of. considerable extent in its most florishing
state, and fullest population; when it was (as Colonel Francklin
says, Part I. p. 82.) ““ competent to provide the immense forces, said
by Quintus Curtius to have assembled in Bengal, in order to oppose
the intended invasion of Alexander the Great.” .
Anticipating, however, some objections, our isgenious author en-
-deayours to justify the statement of vast extent assigned tu ancient
Palibothra by the Puranas. He examines the dimensions of Delhi
and of Gour in, India; also of Jedo in Japan, to mde through the
-main street of which at a moderate pace, occupied that accurate and
-latelligent traveller, Keempfer, one entire day. (Amo:nit. Exot. p.
482.) ‘Fo this argument of comparative magnitude, Col. F.
another—‘ That the Hindoo sovereigns were never accustomed to
-repair the houses or cities erected by theis forefathers, under tbe
impression that they would still bear the names of those who built
them, not of the sovereigus who put them into repair; in conse-
quence, every prince raised a structure for himself. ‘The royal palace
thus erected, became surrounded by the buildings connected with or
dependent on the prince; by which means an individual residence
swelled imperceptibly into a large town ; which was still increased at
each extremity by the people, stretching around, like ‘their native
banian-tree, extending itself from ‘tlre trunk into numerous branches
and ramifications.” (Part L. ἢν 834.)
¥et so complete has been the destruction or deeay of the ancient
capital, Palibothra, that geographers and antiquaries. have been
922 Notice of an Inquiry, &c.
hitherto unable to ascertain with precision even the place of its ori-
ginal situation. We find, accordingly, that many able writers have
indulged various conjectures respecting this subject, and that Canofe,
Patna, Allahabad, Rajemahal, and Bhaugulpoor, have been each, at
different times, supposed to represent the old metropulis. The re-
searches of Col. F., undertaken for the purpose of determining its true
position, were partly made in 1811 and 1812, and still further prose-
cuted in 1814 and 1815. Of those researches the. work before us
contains an interesting account, with the author's arguments to prove
that the ancient Palibothra lay within the limits of a modern district
called Bhaugulpoor. in confirmation of his opinion, he quotes the
authority of Greek and Latin Classics, and of Sanscrit manuscripts,
and details the result of his own observations actually made on the
spot. ‘ Palibothra,” says Arrian, “‘ capital of the Prasii, and the
Erentest city of India, is situate at the confluence of the Ganges and the
abees, third in rank among the Indian rivers.” Colonel Franck-
lin remarks, (iu the Appendix, Part I. p. 77.) on the authority of his
friend Colonel Stuart, an accomplished Orientalist, that the river
which Megasthenes, or his Greek attendants, hellenized into Errena-
boas, was most probably the Aranya Bhowah, called (in Sanscrit)
also Chandun, which, according to the description, and the map pre-
fixed, must have flowed into the Ganges, having nearly intersected
the ancient city of Palibothra; perfectly corresponding to the ac-
count given by Arrian, as above mentioned. We may also trace to a
Sanscrit origin the Greek name Palibothra ; as the city so called was,
says Col. F. (p. 6.) “(με royal seat of the Baliaputra Rajahs, a
dynasty named from their great founder and ancestor Balt. And
this royal residence,” adds he, ‘‘ was at or near the modern village of
Ο ugur, a place about four miles to the westward of the mo-
dern town of Bhaugw! gor.” This position, in our opinion, the inge-
‘nious Colonel establishes satisfactorily, from various cireumstances :.
besides the co nding names of those rivers near the confluence
of which Bhaugulpoor now stands, he adduces the collateral evi-
-dence of two remarkable towers at Vasu Paduka; of a plate or in-
scribed tablet deposited there, and, if the date be accurately explained,
above two thousand three hundred years οἷά. The second part of
Colonel Francklin’s “Inquiry” contains, in the form of a regular
journal, the details of bis personal researches and observations. It is
illustrated with several engravings, maps, views, inscriptions, &c.; and
. furnishes a much greater variety of interesting particulars than the
limits of this notice will allow us to enumerate, relating not merely to
the immediate subject of his inquiry, but incidentally to the manners,
customs, and superstitions of the Hindoos.
To our author we shall take this opportunity of acknowledging
many literary obligations. His “Tour in Persia,” composed when
he had scarcely attained the age of manhood, is still considered by
those best qualified to judge, as exhibiting a very accurate represen-
tation of that country: it has:not been superseded in public. estima-
E. H. Barkeri Epistola Critica, Gc. 8428
tion by the more ponderous and costly works which have since treated
of the same subject, and it has gone through various editions in
English, French, and German. His “ History of Shak Aulum,” (the
celebrated emperor of Hindoostan,) and his memoirs of that remark-
able character “" George Thomas,” have afforded us much entertain-
ment; and to Colonel Francklin’s versatile ingenuity we are indebted
for several curious observations on the ‘ Plam of Troy,” within a few
years the subject of 50 much learned controversy. We have not for-
gotten the pleasure received from his translation of the ‘“ Loves of
Camarupa and Camalata ;” and we trust that he will not be content
with having ascertained the site of ancient Palibothra, but still em-
ploy his pen in diffusing entertainment and instruction.
“---- ------ - ο------- ------ ---- ΟἹ
E. H. BARKERI
| Epistola Critica ad T. Gaisfordium, ὦ
DE FRAGMENTIS POETARUM MINORUM ἀκ.
PARS SEPTIMA.
Simontpis Fr. exevi. “ Apostol. Prov. xv. 97: Περιαγειρόμενος
φύλλοις βάλλεται καὶ ἄνθεσιν" ἐπὶ τῶν νικώντων ἐν ἀγῶσι, περιαγειρο-
μένους δὲ ἔλεγον τοὺς ἀθλητὰς, of μοτὰ τὴν νίχην περιαγόμενοι κα περιπο-
ρευόμινοι, ἐλάμβανον, οἱ μὲν ζωνὰς, οἱ δὲ χιτῶνας, of δὲ πετάσους, of
δὲ ἄλλα γε ἅττα. “Oley Σιμωνίδης περὶ Αἰτύλου φησὶν οὕτως
τῇ δὴ τῶν γῦν τοσάσδε ποετά-
λοισι μύρτων ὃ στεφάνοισι ῥόδων ἀνεδήσατα
γίκας ἐν ἀγῶνι περικτιέναν ; "
Vide Suid. in Περιωγειρόμενοι.᾽" Gaisford. Adde Phot. Glossa hee
Rubokenio ad ‘Timazi Lex. p. 216. “ omnino vel Ἢ Boéthi, vel
ex alterius Lex. Platonico derivata esse videtur ;” sed, si V. D. ia
animum revocasset, que ex Eratosthene sumta ap. Schol. ad Eurip.
Hec. 574. extant, suam forte sententiam mutasset. Omnino cf.
Tzetz. Chil. xin. 475. περὶ *’Ayupredreav. Pro verbis, ὅθεν ΣΊμα-
viins περὶ Αἰτύλου, Suid. habet, ᾿Δετίλλου sine wept, Phot. περὶ Aerie
Aov, et Phot. Cod. D. *Aeriarou, omisso περὶ, quas lectionis varie-
tates notare debebat Gaisford. Godofr. Olear. Nott. ad Suid. :—
“ Au Σ᾽ πύλου ἡ de quo v. infra.” Locus, ad quem nos remittit
V. D., ad hec Suide scriptus est verba, * Sixvalyy πόλις, καὶ
© Sixvaos, ὄνομα τόπου, } ποταμοῦ. Apud quemnam vero auctorem
* Voces asterisco notat2 in H. Steph. -Thes. G. L. desiderantur.
$24 | E.H. Barkeri Epistola Critica
Suid. -Xvevrlyy scriptum reperisset pro Urbis nomine, ego: qui
atem nDescio; sed suspicor eum scripsisse * Σιπυλήνη, subandite
v. πόλις, 1. 6. Sipylus urbs; gentile enim legitimum * Xissy-
ληνὸς est, non * Σιπυλῖνο. Ergo Olearius Simonidem περὶ
Σιπύλου, Phrygie urbe, versus illos composuisse arbitrabatur ;
et quidem Poetas veteres multa de hac urbe dixisse, eruditis
satis notum est: Plut. adv. Stoicos T. x. p. 378. Reisk. Εἰ
δὲ οἱ ποιηταί σε πείθουσι λέγοντες, ὡς ἐκ θεῶν προνοίας ἀνατροπὴν
εν ἣ παλαιὰ Σίπυλος τὸν Τάνταλον κολαζόντων, x. τ. A. Sed
Simonides proculdubio non loquebatur de Sipylo, in qua urbe
Judos celebrari solitos esse 6 nullo veterum auctorum testimonio
probari potest, sed de quodam homine, qui vel in gymnico certa-
mine competitores, vel in bello hostes vicisset. Jam vero pugnam
contra hostes, non certamen cum competitoribus, (ad quam tamen
sententiam probandam aliquantulum valet, valeatque, quantum
valere possit, Photii, Apostolii, et Suid testimonium, apud quos
agitur de ἀθληταῖς.) in animo habuisse poetam satis ostendit v. repi-
χτιόνων, quod de certamine cum competitoribus dici non potest:
Τίς δὴ τῶν νῦν τοσάσδε πετά- Λοισι μύρτων, ἢ στεφάνοισι ῥόδων ἀνεδή-
coro Νίκας ἐν ἀγῶνι περιχτιόνων; Mihi autem multum diuque de
hac questione mecum reputanti nulla probabilior se obtulit con-
jectura, quam hec, ad quam illa Qlearii recta nos duxit, “Ofey
Σιμωνίδης Σιπύλου φησὶν οὕτως : περὶ et a Suida et a Photii Cod. D.
abest. AITTAOT, que lectio in Apostolio reperitur, et XIMTAOT
facile in MSS. permutari -potuisse, agnoscent forte rei paleeogra-
phice periti. Σιμωνίδης Σιπύλου, Simonides, nempe filius Sipyh,
de quo opportunissime dicit Suid. Σιμῳνίδης, Μάγνης, Σιπύλου,
ἐποποιός. Γέγονεν ἐπὶ ᾿Αντιόχου τοῦ Μεγάλου κληθέντος, καὶ yey
τὰς ᾿Αντιόχου τοῦ Μεγάλου πράξεις, καὶ τὴν πρὸς Γαλάτας abn be
«μετὰ τῶν ἐλεφάντων τὴν ἵππον αὐτοῦ ἔφθειραν. inc sua sumsit
docia in Violario p. 388. ubi pro Νόγης corrige Μάγνης. De
hoc igitur Antiocho Magno in versibus illis lgqui videtur Simoni- —
des ille Magnesius. Fatendum tamen.est G. Cuper. Obs. iv. 13.
p. 447. longe aliter Suide verba accepisge :— \
' Td est, vertente Porto: ‘ Simonides Magnesius Sipyli F. vere
sificator. Fuit temporibus illins Antiochi, qui Magnus vocabatur.
-Et Antiochi Magni res gestas scripsit, et pugnam cum Galatis ab
60 commissam, cum ejus equitatum cum elephantis profligarunt/
Sed quod pace Viri Eruditi dixerim, multa hic errata sunt. Mié-
γῆς enim 2sxvAov indicat hunc Simonidem Magnesia ad Sipylum
uvium sita esse orlundum, quam alii Magnesiam περὶ» πρὸς Shrv>
λον, vel ὑπὸ, ἀπὸ, quarum particularum forte una excidit, Σιπύλού
vocabant, [scribere debebat V. D. ὑπὸ Σιπύλῳ, non ὑπὸ ΣΙ πύλου :
“Ἃ Σίπυλος, Urbs Phrygie alio nomine * Τάνταλις. “O ᾿Σίπολος,
et τὸ * Σίπυλον ὄρος, Mons Sipylus, unde Μαγνησία ὑπὸ Σιπύλῳ.
ad T. Garsfordium. 325
1,, Holaten. ad Steph. B.] Deinde ἐποποιὸς non est versificator,
xed Poeta heroicus. Tandemque dubiuwn est, num Antioch
eqnites simul et elephanti a Gallis sint profligati, aa vero Gallorum
elephanti in fugam conjecerint equitatum Antiochi. Huc accedit
Antiochum Magnum Seleuci Gallinici filium, regnaum adeptum
primo in superiore Asia, et Aigypto, inde cum populo Romane
bellis gestis in Elymaide occisum a barbaris esse, nec videri contra
Gallos bellum sumsisse, vel tam infeliciter pugnasse. Et mihi qu
dem nonnunquam suspicio est oborta, Suidam more suo Antiochos
confundere, et quse Soteri conveniunt, Magno tribuere. Unde
euim Gallis elephanti, quas Syrie Asizque reges habuisse plurima
exempla docert, cum contra eorum equitatus Livio xxxvil. 40.
nec non aliis laudetur? Quod ubi magis magi considero,
putabam, scribenduna esse, τὴν ἵππον αὐτῶν ἔφθειρε, "Quando eoruma
(a. Galaterum) equitatum elephantis profligavit.’ : Nam hoc est,
qued Lucianum narrantem de Antiocho Sotere audivimus; eum
n. cogsilio Theodote Rhodii elephantos in equites, et currus immi-
_sisse. Deinde, ut ut Simonides vixisse Antiochi Magni tempore
dicatur, potuit nom modo prelium Soteris describere, verum. etiam
illi iaterfuisse, quia ab anao primo Soteris usque ad primum Magn
nondum LX. anni sunt, illudque in ultimos ejus annos, per xix.
enn imperio prefuit, incidere potuit.”
Sed, ut. Cuperi conjecture prorsus adversatur vulgata Suide@
scriptura, Σιμωνίδης Μάγνης Σιπύλου, Magnesius a Sipylo, cum
Grace diei non possit Μάγνης Σ᾽ πύλου pro Μάγνης ἀπὸ Σιπύλου, sic
nostre interpretationi, (que et Van Goensii Diss. de Simonide
Pp 33. est, Jacobsiique ad Anthol. T. vi. p. 271. et Harlesn ad
abric. Bibl. Gr. ap. Gaisford. p. 353.) Μάγνης, Σιπύλου, Magne-
sius, Sipyli F. aliquantulum obstat, et quod Σίπυλος pre proprio
virt nomine nusquam alibi Jegatur, et quod Suid. hic dixerit,
Σιμωνίδης, Μάγνης, Σιπόλου, pro ordine illo, quem semper; quod
quidem noverimus, secutus esse videtur, quemque Greci sermonis
indoles postulat, vempe, Ziswvidns, Σιπύλου, Μάγνης. Ut paucea
quedam exempla afferamus, idem dixit, Σιμωνίδης Κρίνεω, "Apope
yivos, non Σιμωνίδης, ᾿Αμοργῖνος, Kplvew: Σιμωνίδης, Aewxpemous,
᾿Ιουλιήτης, non, Σ᾽ μωνίδης, ᾿Ιουλιήτης, Aswwgewots: “Σόλων, ᾿Εξηκε-
στίδου, ᾿Αθηναῖος, non. Σόλων, ᾿Αθηναῖος, ᾿Εξηκεστίδου. Non autem
continuo sequitur Simonidem Magnesium, ἐποποιὸν ἃ Suida et
Eudocia dictum, omnia sua heroico metro composuisse. Nam
ad hunc Epigramma illud, metro elegiaco scriptum, ον}. p. 39}
ed. Gaisf., fe Gallo et. leone.referendum esse, vidit Jacobs. a
Anthol. T. vi. p. 271. xiii. p. 953. atque ante eum Van Goens.
Dias. de Simonide p. 33. quibus addas Harles. ad Fabricu
Bibl. Gr. (ex Apostol. per errorem, a Gaisfordio sileatio pretese
missum, περὶ Βωιτύλου, pro x. Air. afferentis) ap. Gaisford, p. 353,
326 Loci quidam Luciani
Cum vero in poemate illo, in quo Simonides Magnesius -Antis-
chi Magni res gestas descripserat, mentio. elephantorum, quos
consilio ‘Theodote Rhodii hic in Galatarum equites et currus iat-
miserat, proculdubio facta at ad Simomidem forte referendz sunt
glosse Hesychii: ’Ayyoris: @ τοὺς ἐλέφαντας τύπτουσι σιδήρῳ, pro
quo T. Hemsterh. ap. Albert. Addend. ad Hes. maht ἀγγόῤεης,
vel ἀγγόρπη. ᾿Ορπησίδηρος" ἐν ᾧ τὸν ἐλέφαντα rowrovel.. “ L.“Opay
σίδηρος, ᾧ τ. ε. τ. Spintu aspero notavi. propter significatum, tan-
quam ab dere, vel ἁρπάζω, rapio. Et forte ποῦ male quis suspi-
caretur, pro ὅρπη leg. agxy, et ob vitium scripture mutasse locum
hanc vocem.” Palmer. Non ignoramus quidem ὁ dialecti¢a
pronuntiatione apud Magnesios ὅρπην dici potuisse falcem, quam
ceteri Greci ἅρπην appellabant, ut apud quosdam recive :
ὅρπαξ pro dpwat, (Hesych. “Opxy§: θρασὺς ἄνεμος, ubi v. Albert.) -
doragls pro doragis, ὁστακὸς pro ἀστακὸς, (v. Nov. Thes. Gr.-L.
p- 245. not.) 'Opydayn, Minerva, pro ᾿Εργάνη, ὁρκάνη pro ἑρκάνη:
sed prestat tamen voc. ὅρπη intelligere pro ὅρπηξ positum, vel
potius credere Hesych. ita scriptam reliquisse. hanc glossam, “
ang’ σίδηρος, ἐν ᾧ τὸν ἐλέφαντα τύπτουσιν, quam Librarii imperiti
mutarunt in id, quod hodie vulgatur, ᾿Ορκησίδηρος. αὶ, in ὅρπηξ, a
sequente 3, in σίδηρος, facile absorberi potuisse, omnes vident.
Jam vero ὅρπτηξ Hesiodo “E. x. ‘H. ii. 86. Virga est aculeata,
boves incitant, Euripidi autem Jaculum venatorium. Vide H.
Steph. Thes. Ind. v. “Ognyé.
| E. H. BARKER.
Thetfordia, Marti tt. A.D. mocccxvill.
LOCI QUIDAM LUCIANI EMENDATL
ATQUE EXPLANATI
A JOANNE SEAGER, A.B.
BICKNOR. WALLICE IN COMITATU MONUMETHIR RECTORE.
No. v11.—{Continned from No. XXXII. p. 236.]
AsInus. p. 584. [126. E, ed. Salmur.] ἐγὼ δὲ (Lucius, puta, in asi-.
num mutatus) ἀνυπόδετος ἀσυνήθης ἀπιὼν, πέτραις ὀξείαις ἐπιβαένῳων,
τοσαῦτα σκεύη φέρων, ἀπωλλύμην. καὶ πολλάκις προσέπταιον, καὶ οὖκ ἦν
ἐξὸν καταπεσεῖν. καὶ εὐθὺς ἄλλος ὄπισθε κατὰ τῶν μηρῶν Exace ἀεὶ ξύλῳ,
Legendum censeo, καὶ οὐκ ΕΦΘΗΝ καταπεσεῖν καὶ εὐθὺς ἄλλος ὄπισθε.
κατὰ τῶν μηρῶν ἔκαιε ἀεὶ ξύλῳ: Simulac cecidissem, statim alius, Sos
And no sooner had I fallen than another struck me, dc. “A)os, quia
alter loro ducebat, alter a tergo agebat. ταῦτα πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν ἐννοοῦν
μενος, ὁρῶ ὅτε οὐδὲ προσεδεδέμην dvderi, ἀλλά με ὁ σύρων ἐν ταῖς —
Emendati atque Explanati. 327
ὑδοῖς ἱμὰς wapexpéuaro. τοῦτό pe καὶ παρώξυνεν ws μάλιστα πρὸς τὴν —
φυγήν. Ρ. 591. (1835. A.ed. Salm.)—«al ῥήξας τὸν ἱμάντα, ᾧ διηγόμην,
καὶ ἀνασκιρτήσας, ἴεμαι δρόμῳ εἴσω, ἔνθα ἐδείπνουν οἱ κιναιδοὶ σὺν τῷ
δεσπότῃ τῶν ἀγρῶν. p. 608. (158. Ο. ed. Salmur.)
ASINUS. p. 584. [127. C. ed. Salmur.] ἐπὶ τούτῳ, ἡμέρα τε ἦν ἤδη,
καὶ ἡμεῖς ὄρη πολλὰ ἀνεβεβήκειμεν. καὶ στόματα δὲ ἡμῶν δεσμῷ ἐπείχεέτο;
ὡς μὴ περιβοσκόμενοι, τὴν ὁδὸν ἐς τὸ ἄριστον ἀναλίσκοιμεν. ὥς τε ἔστην
τότε, καὶ ἔμεινα ὄνος. Asini forma permansit, quia capistrato rosas
comedere non licebat.
ASINUS. p. 585. [128. B. ed. Salmur.] τὰ δὲ ῥόδα ἐκεῖνα, οὐκ ἦν ῥόδα
ἀληθινά. ἀξ ἦν ἐκ τῆς ἀγρίας δάφνης φνόμενα ῥόδα ἐκεῖνα.
Postrema ῥόδα ἐκεῖνα ejicit Reitzius. Insuper, rescribendum AAA’
ἦν ἐκ τῆς ἀγρίας δάφνης φυόμενα. .
Astnus. p. 586. [129. A. ed. Salmur.] ὁ δὲ, ἐπειδὴ εἶδε δρόμῳ ἀπιόντα,
ἀνέκραγε λῦσαι τοὺς κυνὰς ἐπ’ ἐμέ. οἱ δὲ κύνες, πολλοί τε ἦσαν καὶ μεγάλαι,
καὶ ἄρκτοις μάχεσθαι ἱκανοί. ἔγνων ὅτι δὴ διασπάσονταί με οὗτοι λαβόντες.
Melius forsitan transponerentur ὅτι δή.---ὄγνων δὴ ὅτι διασπάσονταί με
οὗτοι λαβόντεε.
AsiNnus. p. 587. [131. A. ed. δαϊηνυτν.} Lucius in asinum conversus,
Onere gravatus, in via consulto cadere decreverat, et mori potius
quam resurgere. sed fato alterius asini exterritus, qui, quum eodem
roposito sarcinis succubuisset, cruribus succisis, et parte sarcinarum
in Lucium translata, adhuc vivus e loco precipiti dejectus est, consi-
lium mutavit. ἐγὼ δὲ ὁρῶν ἐν τῷ συνοδοιπόρῳ τῶν ἐμῶν βουλευμάτων τὸ
τέλος, ἔγνων φέρειν εὐγενῶς τὰ ἐν ποσὶ, καὶ προθύμως περιπατεῖν, ἐλπίδας
᾿ἔχων πάντως ποτὲ ἐμπεσεῖσθαι els τὰ ῥόδα, κὰκ τούτων, εἰς ἐμαυτὸν ἄνα»
σωθήσεσθαι. καὶ τῶν ληστῶν δὲ ἥκονον, Os οὖκ εἴη ἔτι πολὺ τῆς ὁδοῦ, καὶ
ὅτι καταλύσουσιν λοιπὸν, ἔνθα καταμένουσιν. ὥστε πάντα ταῦτα δρόμῳ
ἑἐκομίξομεν, καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἑσπέρας ἤλθομεν εἷς τὰ οἰκεῖα. Scribendum
existimo, ὥστε πάντα ΤΌΤΕ, δρόμῳ ἑἐκομίϑομεν, (ego Lucius scilicet, et
equus qui alteram partem sarcinarum asini demortui gestabat.)
ASINUS. p. 590. [134. C. ed. Salmur.] αὐτοὶ δὲ ἀναπεσόντεςε, ἐδείς
πνουν. καὶ ἐπειδὴ νὺξ ἦν, ἀτηέσαν, os τὰ λοιπὰ ray σκευῶν ἀνασώσαιω
Fors. ὡς τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν σκευῶν ἀνασώσαιεν.
AsINus. p. 596. [140. E. ed. Saluaur.] ἐχρὴν δὲ ἄρα κἀνταῦθα ὥσπερ
᾿ Κανδαύλῃ, κἀμοὶ γενέσθαι. ὁ γὰρ ἐπιστάτης τῶν ἵππων τῇ αὐτοῦ γυναικὶ
Μεγαπόλῃ y με κατέλιπεν. hdd, τῇ μύλῃ μὲ ὑκεξεύγννεν, ὥστε ἀλεῖν
αὑτῇ καὶ πυροὺς καὶ κριθὰς ὅλαι. Mallem: ἐχρῆν δὲ ἄρα κἀνταῦθα,
“ EP Κανδαύλῃ, κἀμοὶ γενέσθαι.
ASINUS. p. 599. [148. A. ed. Salmur.] εἰ δέ ποτε, οἷα κάμνων καὶ
ἀχθοφορῶν, καταπέσοιμι, rére δὴ τὸ δεινὸν ἀφόρητον ἦν. οὗ γὰρ ἦν καταβὰς
τοῦ χεῖρά μοι ἐπιδοῦναι, κἀμὲ χαμόθεν ἐπεγείρειν, καὶ τὸ φορτίον ἀφελεῖν,
dy wore καὶ δέοι. ὁδὲ, οὔτε κατῆλθεν, οὔτε χεῖρα ἄν ποτε ἐπέδωκεν,
ἀλλ' ἄνωθεν ἀπὸ τῆς κεφαλῆς, καὶ τῶν ὥτων ἀρξάμενος, σννέ-
κοπτέ pe τῷ ξνλῷ, ἕως ἐπεγείρωσί με αἱ πληγαί.---Ηος loco mul-
tum laborarunt viri doeti; sed labore, ut mihi videtur, successu
carente : alia igitur tentanda via est. lego τότε δὴ τὸ δεινὸν ἀφόρητον ἦν.
EY γὰρ ἦν, KATABANTA, χεῖρά μοι ἐπιδοῦναι; κἀμὲ χαμόθεν ἐπεγεί-
328 Loci quidam Luciani
pew——. x. τ᾿ A. optime convenit hec lectio verbis Apuleii. Metam. 1.
7. de eadem re; Cum deberet esregins agaso manum porrigere—
ASINUS. p. 619. (166. E. ed. Salmur.) καὶ μύρον ἔκ τινος ἀλαβάστρον
προχεαμένη, τούτῳ ἀλείφεται, κἀμὲ δὲ μυρίθει. ivy δὲ παλαιῷ
πολλῷ ὑποβεβρεγμένος, καὶ τῷ χρωτὶ τοῦ μύρον οἱστρημένος, καὶ τὴν παι-
δίσκην ὁρῶν πάντα καλὴν, κλένομαι.----““ Mira phrasis (σῷ χρωτὶ τοῦ μόρου)
quid est χρῶς pipov? “ Du Soul.”—épwre τοῦ {μύρου proponit Guietus,
χρίσματι τοῦ μύρον Reitzius.—Legendum, nisi fallor, καὶ τῷ χρῷτε ὙΠΟ
᾿ τοῦ μύρον olorpnpévos.
JUPITER confutatus. p. 639. (185. A. ed. Salmur.) καὶ Σαρδανῴκα-
hos μὲν ἐβασίλενσε, θῆλυς Sy. Περσῶν δὲ τοσοῦτοι καλοὶ κἀγαθοὶ ἄνδρες,
ἀνεσκολοπίξοντο πρὸς αὐτοῦ, διύτι μὴ ἠρέσκοντο τοῖς γιγνομένοιε. ἵνα δὲ
ὑμῖν μὴ τὰ νῦν λέγω, καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἐπεξιὼν, τοὺς pay πονηροὺς
“ψοῦντας, καὶ τοὺς πλεοκέκτας, ἀγομένους δὲ καὶ φερομένους τοὺς χρηστοὺς,
ἐν πενίᾳ, καὶ νόσοις, καὶ μυρίοις κακοῖς πιεβομένους.
_ Emendare velim, διότι μὴ ἠρέσκοντο τοῖς γιγνομένοις. ἵνα LE ὑμῖν μὲ
τὰ νῦν λέγω, καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἐπεξιὼν, κι τ. Δ. Ut preteream, ὅς. Net
to mention how things are going on in the present times, ὅζο.
JUPITER Tragedus. p. 643. (p. 188. B. ed. Salmur.) ὦχρός τέ σε
εἷλε rapetas.—Me judice sine causa gov pro σε legit Grevius. ut enim
quod vult detur, μὲν omnium esse casuum, tamen genitivum esse pon
puto in illis Homeri verbis ὦχρός τέ μιν εἷλε παρειάς. ([], Γ΄. v. 35.) sed
et ibi, et in hoc Luciani loco, ante παρειὰς subaudiendum esse κατὰ,
non dubito.
_ JUPITER Trageedus. p. 643. (189. A. ed. Salmur.) Quum Jupiter,
Minerva, et Mercurius, inter se, versibus omnes, collocuti sint, Mi-
nerva, si fides editt. habenda est, Jovem sic rursus compellat : κοηέμεσον
Opyay εἰ μὴ κωμῳδεῖν ὥσπερ οὗτοι δυνάμεθα, μὴ δὲ τὸν Ἐὠριπίδηκ ὅλον
καταπεπώκαμεν, ὥστε σοι ὑποδραματουργεῖν. Ἥρα. ᾿Αγνοεῖν ἡμᾶς
ψομίξεις τὴν αἰτίαν τὴς λύπης, ἥτις ἐστί σοι ;--- τες quidem nec Persone
Palladis nec ante dictis conveniunt. Si Minerva loquitur, qui sunt
οὗτοιῖ ~Praeterea revera ipsa Jovi ὑπεδραματουργήκει isto, versu, ” Awod-
λον, οἵοις φροιμίοις ἄρχῃ λόγων! Profecto omnia a κοέίμεισον ὀργὴν
usque ad ἥτις ἐστί σοι, Junoni tribuenda sunt. Ita οὗτος erunt Mi-
_perva et Mercurius ; nec quidquam salebrosi relinquetur..
JUPITER Trageed. p. 647. (191. Ὁ. ed. Salmur.) xalyot ταῦτα cur
δοκεῖ, ἅπερ καὶ τούτῳ. |
Leve mendum ; ταῦτα pro ταὐτὰ eadem.
Jup. Trageed. p. 669. (207. A.ed.Sa’ «.) ἐγὼ, inquit Neptunus,
'τὰ μὲν ἄλλα, ὑποβρύχιός εἰμι ὡς ἴστε, καὶ ἐν βυθῷ πολιτεύομαι, kar’ ὁμαν-
τὸν εἰς ὅσον ἐμοὶ δννατὸν, σώθϑων τοὺς πλέοντας, καὶ παραπέμπων τὰ
φλαῖα, καὶ τοὺς ἄνεμονς καταμαλάττων. .
Interpungendum, καὶ ἐν βνθῷ πολιτεύομαι καθ᾽ ἐμαυτὸν, εἰς ὅσον ἐμοὶ
δυνατὸν σώϑῳων τοὺς πλέονται, &c. Hoc manifestum omnibus putassem,
nisi Reitzii notam legissem.
_ _ GALLUS. p. 718. (240. D. ed. Salmur.) ὅτι μὲν οὐκ οἰκόσιτος ἦν χβθὲε,
οἶσθα. Eéxparns γάρ He ὁ πλούσιος ἐντυχὼν» ἐν ἀγορᾷ, λαυσάμεπον ἥκει»
ἐκέλευε τὴν ὥραν ἐπὶ τὸ δεῖπνον.. Lo
Emendati atque Explanati. 329
Ante ὥραν intercidisse videtur numerus aliquis ordinals, ἐβδύμην
puta, vel ὀγδόην. |
GALLUS. p. 720. (246. B. ed. Sahnur.) τὸν δὲ πλοῦτον ἐκεῖνον διασκε-
δάσαςε, ὑπηνέμιον φέρεσθαι παρεσκεύασας. dptt σοι ἀλόγως ἀγανακτῆσαι
κατὰ σοῦ δοκῶ, ὡς τριέσπερον ἂν ἡδέως ἔτι εἶδον τὸν ὄνειρόν μοι yerd-
ἐνὸν "
᾿ Magis placeret‘OE τριέσπερον ἂν ἡδέως ἔτι εἶδον τὸν ὄνειρόν μοι γενό
μενον; Siretiueatur ὡς, ponatur nota interrogatiomis post δοκῶ, et post
γενομένον plena distinctio.
GALLUS. p. 730. (253. A. ed. Salmur.) ‘Eépwy ὅτι εἰ μὲν τὰ συνήθη,
καὶ ταὐτὰ rots πολλοῖς voulorpe, ἥκιστα ἐπισπάσομαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους és
τὸ θαῦμα. ὅσῳ δὲ ἂν ξενίδοιμι, τοσούτῳ καινότερος ὕᾧμην αὐτοῖς ἔσεσθαι.
διὰ τοῦτο καινοποιεῖν εἱλόμην, εἰπόῤῥητον ποιησάμενος τὴν αἰτιάν. F,
ὅσῳ δὲ ἂν ξενίϑοιμι, τυσσύτῳ Σ ὥμην αὐτοῖς ἔσεσθαι.
GALLUS. p. 731. (254. C. ed. Salmur.) τί οὖν, πότερος ὁ βίος ἡδίων
σοι ἦν, ὅτε ἀνὴρ ἧς, ἣ ὅτε σε ὁ Περικλῆς Grvev; Are. οἶδας οἷον τοῦτο
ἠρώτησας, οὐδὲ τῷ Τειρεσίᾳ συνενεγκοῦσαν τὴν ἀπόκρισιν ; Mi. ἀλλὰ κἂν
σὺ μὴ εἵπῃς, ἱκανῶς ὁ Ebpenldns διέκρινε τὸ τοιοῦτον, εἰπὼν, ὡς τρὶς ἂν
θέλοι παρ᾽ ἀσπίδα στῆναι, ἢ ἅπαξ τεκεῖν. Are. καὶ μὴν ἀναμνήσω σε, ὦ
Μίκυλλε, οὐκ εἰς μακρὰν ὠδίνουσαν. ἔσῃ γάρ ποτε γυνὴ καὶ σὺ ἐν πόλλῇ
τῇ περιόδῳ πολλάκις.
Mallem καὶ μὴν ᾿ΑΜΥΝΗΣΩ σε, ὦ MixvAAs.—Ulciscar te pro σκώμ-
. peor tuis;—non impune feres hance irrisionem.
GALLUS. p. 745. (264. E. ed. Salmur.) over τὰ Σίμωνος (Sutoris
derepente inaurati) πάντα ἐν βραχεῖ δεῦρο perevnveypéva. μετοίσω γὰρ
αὐτὰ παρελθών. ὁ δὲ, αὖθις περιτρώξεται ἀποπίνων τὰ xarripara.—Gre-
vius et Jensius ἀποπινῶν, ‘Sordibus purgans,” legunt. Guietus et
Gesneras drorefvwy. Conjecturam meam, nec mirum, his omnibus
prefero: ὁ δὲ αὖθι περιτρώξεται, ᾿ΑΝΑΠΕΙΝΏΝ, τὰ καττύματα. ‘dve-
πεινῶν est Iterum eeuriens. Comica hyperbole, sutor esuriens coria
afrodit.
' GALLUS. p. 748. [267. A. ed. Salmur.] ἄριστον γοῦν (inquit avarus,
Simon.) ἄγρυπνον αὐτὸν φυλάττειν. ἅπασαν περιείμι διαναστὰς ἐν κύκλῳ
τὴν οἰκίαν. τίς οὗτος.; ὁρῶ σέ γε, τοιχωρύχε, μὰ Δία. ἐπεὶ κίων γε ὧν τυγχά-
γεις, εὖ ἔχει. Puncta δὰ hunc modum disponi velim: ὅρω σέ γε, ὦ
τοιχορύχε. μὰ Δία, ἐπεὶ κίων γε ὧν τυγχάνεις. εὖ ἔχει.
IcCAROMENIPPUs. p. 751. (269. A. ed. Salmur.) Οὐκοῦν τρισχίλιοι
μὲν ἦσαν ἀπὸ γῆς στάδιοι μέχρι πρὸς τὴν σελήνην, ὁ πρῶτος ἡμῖν σταθμός.
Τοξοπάυτι haud dubie: πρὸς τὴν σελήνην, “OY (ubi) πρῶτος ἡμῖν
στάθμος.
ICAROMENIPPUS. p. 755. (272. B. ed. Salmur.) ἐγώ σοι peréwpds
εἶμι ὑπὸ τῶν λόγων, καὶ πρὸς τὸ τέλος ἤδη κέχῃνα τῆς axpudcews μηδὲ
πρὸς φιλίον με περιΐδῃς, ἄνω ποῦ τῆς διηγήσεως ἐκ τῶν ὥτων ἀπηρτημένον.
Concinnius esset, Μὴ ΔΗ πρὸς φιλίου με περιΐδῃς, ἄνω ποῦ τῆς διηγή-
δεων ἐκ τῶν ὥτων ἀπηρτημένον. ΄
ICAROMENIPPUS. p. 759. (277. A. ed. Salmur.) Menippus de vartis’
variorem philesophernm sententiis disserens, ait, τί δ᾽ εἰ ἀκούσειαν, ὦ
Gavpacle, περί re ἰδεῶν, καὶ ἀσωμάτων, ἃ διεξέρχονται, ἣ τοὺς wept τοῦ
990 Vindicia Antique.
wépards τε, καὶ ἀπείρου λόγους ; καὶ yap αὖ καὶ αὕτη νεανικὴ αὐτοῖς } .
τοῖς μὲν, τέλει τὸ πᾶν περιγράφουσι, τοῖς δὲ, ἀτελὲς τοῦτο εἶναι ὕπολα
γνουσιν. οὗ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ παμπόλλους τινὰς εἶναι τοὺς κόσμουε ἀπεφαίνοντο,
καὶ τῶν ὡς περὶ ἑνὸς αὐτοῦ διαλεγομένων κατεγίγνωσκον. Emendo, Οὐ
μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ παμπόλλους ΤΙΝΕΣ εἶναι τοὺς κόσμους ἀπεφαίνοντο.
ICAROMEN1PPUS. p. 775. (290. D. ed. Salmur.) οἱ μὲν, (ait Lyne)
κατοικεῖσθαι τέ pe φάσιν. οἱ δὲ κατόπτρον δίκην ἐπικρεμᾶσθαι τῇ θαλάσοῃ.
Restituendum: καὶ οἱ μὲν κατοικεῖσθαι γέ με φάσιν, κι τ. Δ. -: ..
VINDICLE ANTIQUE.
No. IV.—[Continued from No. XXXIII. p. 127}
Sucu is the simple and perspicuous account of the Organon of Aris-
totle, given by a philosopher who understood and taught his philoso-
phy, and such will be the account given of it by every intelligent
scholar, who studies it with attention. This sublime philosophy had
for its object the discovery of truth, passing from objects of sense to
those of intellect, and ascending “ through nature up to nature's God.”
No man ever entertained higher notions of the dignity of the human
soul than Aristotle, which he considers to be an emanation from the
Deity necessarily indestructible and immortal; and of the supreme
Ruler of the Universe his ideas were elevated in the highest degree.
“‘ God (says he) is a Being eterna], a pure energy without latent
power" or material form—without dimensions— indivisible—not liable
to suffering—unchangeable, of itself all-wise—the first mover, itself ~
immoveable,—the origin (or maker) of the heavens and nature—the
most excellent and happiest of beings.”
Ὁ Θεός ἐστιν οὐσία ἀΐδιος, καὶ ’Evepyela ἄνευ δυνάμεως καὶ SAns—
ἀμεγέθης---ἀδιαίρετος --- ἀπαθὴς---ἀναλλοίωτος---καθ᾽ αὑτὴ» νόητος, πρῶτον
κινοῦσα---ἀκίνητος---ἀρχὴ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς φύσεω----διαγωγῆς ἀρέατης
καὶ ἡδίστης. ' ἷ
The man who had arrived at this idea of the Deity, had neither
trifled with words, nor reasoned falsely. He was taught by his master
Plato, that the end and scope of true philosophy is preparation for
another state of existence, for he calls philosophy—peder) Θανάτου,
Kal χωρισμὸς τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος. “The contemplation of death,
and the abstraction of the soul from the body.” And accotdingly,
in many parts of his philosophical writings, he repeats, that there ts
no certain science of things changeable and perishable, but only of
such as are necessarily unchangeable and eternal.
: Or power unexercised. See No, I, for the import of δύγωμες,
Vindicta Antiqua. 331
‘It has already been observed that the philosophy of Aristotle is not
censured by those who understand it; but by those who confess that
they are unacquainted with the subject, and yet seem under some fatal
necessity of continually recurring to it, and finding fault with that
which they admit they do not comprehend. The Scotch metaphy-
sicians have for more than half-a century distinguished themselves by
such attacks; and lords of session,” professors of Scotch universities,
divines and physicians, have vied with each other in vilifying the
precepts of antiquity and extolling the excellence of what they term
modern philosophy. Those who in thfat part of the island affect to
guide public opinion as reviewers, with a very natural .combination of
ignorance with.arrogance, assure their readers that Aristotle was a mere
driveller ; and a writer in the Edinburgh Review lately asserted that the
lowest of our pamphieteers of the present day would be ashamed of
having written his Politics. With equal truth and deeency might
they assert—that the meanest Edinburgh sign-post dauber would be
ashamed of the works of Apelles—their fabricators of “ shapeless
sculptures” for thelr church-yards, of the productions of Praxiteles
and Phidids—or Mr. Walter Scott of the poems of Homer and lyrics
of Pindar. These reviewers censure the anciént philosophers with
as much decision as Swift’s Captain of Cavalry sums up the worth
of the classics in the well-known lines—
~ “© Your Omurs and Noveds, and Blue Turks and stuff,
By Jove they don’t signify this pinch of snuff :” |
“πα their acquaintance with the authors they condemn appears to
be not more extensive, unless in so far that they correctly spell their
proper names.
ς΄ The Scotch metapbysicians deny that the syllogism can extend our
knowledge ; they say that it conducts us.as in a circle to the ve
point from which we set out; and Dr. Reid says, that ‘the slow
progress of useful knowledge during the many ages that the syllo-
istic art was most highly cultivated as the only guide to science, and
Its quick progress since that art was disused, suggest ἃ presumption
against it, and this presumption is strengthened by the puerility of the
examples brought forward to illustrate its rules. The ancients seem
to have had too high notions of the force of the reasoning power in
man, and of the art of syllogism as its guide. Mere reasoning can
carry us but a very little way in most subjects. By observation and
experiments properly conducted the stock of human knowledge may
be extended without end: but the power of reasoning alone applied
with vigor through a long life, would only carry a man round like a
horse in a mill, who labors hard but makes no progress. There is
indeed an exception to this observation in the mathematical sciences,
The relations of quantity are so various, and so susceptible of exact
mensuration, that long trains of accurate reasoning on that subject
θὰ illustrious exception will naturally and readily occur to the learned.
reader,
$32 Vindicie Antique.
may be formed, and conclusions.drawn very remote from the first
principles. It is in this science and those which depend upon it, that
reasoning triumphs; in other matters its trophies are inconsiderable.
If any men doubt this, let him produce im any subject, a train of rea-
soning of some length leading to a conclusion, which, without this traia
of reasoning, would never have been brought within human sight. . .
I do not say there are none such to be produced im other sciences,
bat I believe they are few, and not easily found.” ;
This extract deserves particular attention. It occurs in a small
tract already noticed, which he calls an Analysis of Aristotle’s Logic,
of which some of his cotemporaries have said that the reasoning is
very acute und conclusive. By aseful knowledge, Dr. Reid, as a
disciple of Bacon, no doubt understood whatever contributes to pro-
motion of the ““ opes humana,” as chemistry, mechanics, and what
are called the useful arts of life; and to these every one who has ac-
quired but a slight knowledge of ancient philosophy knows that the
perfect syllogism was never applicable, for there can be no strict de-
monetration of things mutable, as all corporeal botlies are. Of these
we must judce by their accidents—and syllogisms formed concerning
them are called dialectical, and are probable in various degrees,
according to the nature of the component propositions. Now it is
demonstrable that in the formation of conclusions in experimental
philosophy, we must necessarily syllogise either really without béing
acquainted with, or using the terms of the art,—or formally according
to rule. The natural legic the followers of Bacon call induction ;
but induction merely exfends to propositions, as shall be noticed
more particularly hereafter. The very simple examples brought to
illustrate the rules of syllogism, are calculated to convince the learner
of the certainty of the art when the rules are justly applied : but Dr.
Reid was very much mistaken if he believed that by these rules we
cannot arrive at truths of the highest nature—that is, truths having fer
their object mind.
‘* Mere reasoning,” says the Doctor, ‘‘ can carry us but a very lit-
tle way in most subjects ;” but how shall the observations and experi-
ments, which he adds may enlarge the stock of human knowledge ad
infinitum, be carried on without reasoning, and connected reasoning
too, from certain facts drawing certain conclusions—and what.is this
but to syllogise?_ ‘‘The power of reasoning alone,” says he, ‘ ap-
plied with vigor through a long life, would only carry a man round
like a horse in a mill.” In reasoning there must necessarily be a sub-
Ject of reasoning; but how the power of reasoning alone could be ap-
p&ed with vigor through a whole life, if by the expression js meant
reasoning without any subject—is not by ordinary minds to be com-
prehended. Philoponus, who understood and taught the philosopby
of Aristotle, tells .us that the syllogism is formed by the διάνοια or.
iscursus Mentis, and is the motion or progress of the mind from
what is kuown, to that which was not at first known, but becomes
incontrovertible by the operation of the mind. Ὁ γὰρ συλλογισμὸς,
Vindicia Antique. : 333
κίνησίς ἐστιν ἀφ᾽ ἑτέρον εἰς ἕτερον, ἐκ γὰρ ἄλλου ἄλλο σνλλογέϑεται, καὶ
ὃ ἦν οὐκ δεδομένον.---Ῥλϊοροαὶ Ῥγοαινεῖμα ad lib. primum de
Analyticis Prioribus.
Such is the account of the syllogism given by one of the most
learned of Aristotle’s commentators—Such is the account given by
Galen—the geometer Proclusu—Ammonius— and Simplicius—and in
short by all who understand his language and philosophy, who agree
in saying the syllogism is, what the Scotch metaphysicians, who con-
fess they have never studied the subject, with great confidence aver
that ἐξ ts not, the organ of true philosophy, and the means of accu-
rately distinguishing truth from falsehood. —
The definition of the great first Cause, the Supreme Being, given
by Aristotle as above quoted, will be admitted to be just, in so far
as it goes, even by those who have enjoyed all the advantages arising
from Revelation, and to this exalted idea of the Creator he could not
possibly arrive by any other means than by reasoning from the pha-
nomena of nature to their divine Author. Had his reasoning been ia
any part of the progress false, the conclusion could not have been
true: but when we see him describe the divine attributes with an
accuracy that never bas been surpassed, and which commands assent,
we must admit that his reasoning powers were very strong, and well
directed to the most sublime of all objects.
Another Scotch metaphysician, Dr. Gregory, tells us, ‘that he
knows very little of the Physics of Aristotle and Mr. Hume ; or of the
‘medical system of Galen: that he is not in the least sorry for his ig-
norance; for, judging of the whole from the part be understands, he
presumes with confidence that were ἐξ all intelligible it would not be
worth understanding; for this he is sure is the case with the part
which he does understand—while from finding the directly con-
trary quality in the specimens of the works of Archimedes and New.
ton which he does understand, he unavoidably presumes the same
with respect to the great bulk of them which he does not under.
stand.”—Introduction to Philosophical and Literary Essays, p. 170,
Had the Doctor pointed out the passages in the Physics of Aris-
totle or medical writings of Galen, which he really understands,
and are not worth understanding, we could better judge of the sound-
ness of his reasoning: but as those who do understand the writings of
the philosopher and the physician, speak of them in terms of the
highest approbation, all we can gather from the Doctor’s censure is,
that he is no competent judge of the subject. Of this he affords us ἃ
very convincing proof, p. 73 and 4 of the same Introduction. “1
regret that so much bad reasoning and imaginary knowledge, and se
many pretended discoveries in this part of science (Metaphysics) have
during many ages been successively obtruded on the world: for this
has not only corrupted the science, and retarded its progress, but
almost brought it into general contempt. The very name of it, which
to say the truth is of itself almost ridiculous, and was given originally
VOL, XVII. Οἰ. Jl. NO. XXXIV.
334 Vindicie Antiqua.
by mere accident to certain lucubrations of Aristotle, is very comt-
‘monly regarded and employed as a term of contempt and reproach.
‘* These lucubrations of Aristotle, which, in consequence of their
having been composed or published after his books on Physics, got
the title of METAPHYs1Cs, are of as little value as his Physics, and |
worse can scarcely be said of them. A great part of them, indeed, dif-
fers very little from the doctrines comprehended under the title of
Physics in the works of Aristotle; so very little, indeed, that I am
confident many persons, both good scholars and men of science, might
read whole pages selected promiscuously from his Physics and Meta-
physics, without knowing or thinking it worth their while to inquire
which was which.”
If Dr. Gregory, as he admits, knows very little of the Physics of
Aristotle, how comes it that he can pronounce so decisively upon the
great similarity existing between them and his Metaphysics? It may
be very true that one page of Aristotle’s writings may appear very si-
milar to another to those who understand neither of them ; but to say
that good scholars and men of science cannot immediately distin-
guish between his Physics and his Metaphysics, is just as extra-
vagantly absurd as it would be to affirm that neither are to be dis-
tinguished from his Analytics or Topics. Neither is it true that the
title of Metaphysics was accidentally given to these lucubrations, as Dr.
Gregory affirms, but because the subject is altogether different from
thefiof Physics, and relates to beings which do not come under the
ceffiizance of our senses. Aristotle calls his books which treat of the
Science of Universals and the Causes of things—the first or most
excellent philosophy, and his successors Alexander: Aphrodisiensis
and Philoponus gave them the title of Metaphysics for the express
purpose of showing that they relate to subjects beyond the natural
phenomena with which we are conversant, Simplicius, after informing
us of the proper subjects of natural science, goes on to say that what-
ever is abstracted from matter—the pure energy of mind, &c.—this, says
he, the Peripatetics call Theology—the first. philosophy and Meta-
physics, as being constructed so as to extend beyond corporeal things.
Ὅσον δὲ περὶ τὰ χώριστα πάντη τῆς ϑλης εἴδη, καὶ τὴν τοῦ νοῦ καθαρὰν
ἐνέργειαν. . .« . «Τοῦτο Θεολογικὸν---καὶ πρώτην φιλοσοφίαν, καὶ
META TA ΦΥΣΙΚΑ καλοῦσιν, ὡς ἐπέκεινα τῶν φυσίκων τεταγμένην.----
Simplicius in Libros Phys. Auscultat. . . |
These Scotch metaphysicians, altogether ignorant of the philosophy
they condemn, think it quite enough to quote the dicta of one another
as unexceptionable authority. We have, however, one exception in the
author of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, Mr. Dugald Stuart; for
he quotes the words of Aristotle, and sometimes translates them very
fairly. He however believes with Dr. Reid that the logic of the an-
cient Peripatetic is something worse than useless, and that Bacon was
the greatest of philosophers. It is not a little whimsical that while
all these Caledonian sages agree in representing many of the works of
Aristytle as trifling and useless, they differ toto cele-with regard to
Vindicie Antique. 335
the merit of the books. ‘ Philosophers (says Dr. Gregory) in every
age have done justice to the logic of Aristotle, which indeed may
fairly be regarded as one of the most profound and perfect investi-
gations that the world has yet seen of any part of the philosophy of
uman thought. It shows in the clearest light the acuteness of his
nderstanding, the force of his mind, and his capacity of close and
patient thinking: for by such thinking alone, that almost perfect his-
tory and theory of some of the most profound and abstruse operations
of the human mind must have been accomplished.” . In reading this
passage we are almost tempted to believe that Dr. Gregory had read
and really understood the Organon: but how shall we reconcile it
with the quotations given above, or with the fact that the book in
which it occurs was published in 1792, and dedicated to Dr. Reid, |
whose account of the merits of Aristotle’s logic 1s exactly the reverse
of what is here given ?
In one respect Mr. Stuart’s late publication deserves particular at-
tention, Having learned that induction was quite familiar to Aristotle,
he makes an attempt to prove that the ἐπαγωγὴ of the Greek was
altogether different from the induction of Bacon. ‘‘ The passages
(says Mr. Stuart) in which Bacon has been at pains to guard against
the possibility of such a mistake, (that is, the supposition that his in- .
duction is the same as that formerly in use) are so numerous that it is
surprising how any person, who had ever turned over the pages of the
Novum Organum, should have been so unlucky as not to have lighted
upon some of them. The two following will suffice for my present
purpose. ‘ In. constituendo autem axiomate, forma inductionis alia
quam adhue in usu fuit excogitanda est. Inductio enim que pro-
cedit per enumerationem simplicem res puerilis est et precario cou-
cludit. At inductio que ad inventionem et demonstrationem scien-
tiarum et artium erit utilis, naturam separare debet per rejectiones
et exclusiones debitas; ac deinde post negativas tot quot sufficiunt,
super affirmativas concludere; quod adhuc factum non est, nec ten-
΄ tatum certe nisi tantummodo ἃ Platone, qui ad excutiendas definitiones .
et ideas, hac certe forma inductionis aliquatenus utitur. Verum ad
hujus inductionis sive demonstrationis instructionem bonam et legi-
timam, quamplurima adhibenda sunt, que adhuc nullius mortalium
cogitationem subiere: adeo ut in ea major sit consumenda opera,
quam adhuc consumta est in syllogismo. <Atque in hac certe induc-
tione spes maxima 5118 651."
“- Cogitavit et illud—restare inductionem tanquam ultimum
et unicum rebus subsidium et perfugium. Verum et hujus nomen
tantummodo notum esse: vim et usum homines hactenus latuisse.”
That Bacon was neither acquainted with the Greek Philosophy,
nor the language in which its precepts are conveyed, was stated, and
‘the reasons for the statement given, in the second essay. There is
reason to believe that he did not know of the existence of such a word
as ᾿Επαγωγὴ in the Greek language, and that his reference to Plato,
who alone he says used to a certain degree his mode of induction,
336 | Vindicie Antique.
had been occasioned by his finding the word inductio in the Latin
translations. That induction never did and never can proceed upon
a simple enumeration is self-evident; for such enumeration néver can
lead to any conclusion, whether precariously or with certainty: and
he therefore calls that puerile which never had existence; and his
idea of separating nature by proper rejections and exclusions, and
after the negatives are cleared away to draw a conclusion from the
affirmatives left, amounts merely to saying in other words, that in
forming propositions we must be careful to reject the false, and draw
our conclusion from such as are true. Had it been true, as he asserts,
that correct induction was not in general use until his time, how
comes it that we have such models of correct reasoning, when he
would have us believe that mankind were so ignorant as not to know
how to form correct propositions? When he speaks of separating
nature, he perhaps alludes to some process in chemistry, which will
produce various combinations and appearances ad infinitum, and
might continue to amuse triflers for thousands of centuries, were our
earth so long to endure; but when he seriously tells us that none,
Plato excepted, had ever made the necessary rejections, and exclu-
stons, in order to enable them to discover the truth or arrive at de-
monstration, he manifests a degree of ignorance and assurance un-
paralleled, and altogether disgusting.
According to this doctrine, truth remained necessarily unknown
until the time when Bacon began to teach what he had never learned,
and, like his admirers of our times, to censure what he did not and
they do not understand. It has already been shown, that although
he very boldly censured Aristotle, and condemned the syllogism, he
‘appears to have been altogether ignorant of the fact, that correct
induction is necessary to the formation of every true syllogism, and
consequently that true induction must have been known and used
before the formal syllogism. Indeed his assertion that induction was
‘merely known by name, and that until his time its power and wse had
remained unknown,—in other words, that men had no power or means
of acquiring knowledge until he told them how to set about the task,
—is in itself so glaringly false and so monstrously absurd, that it is
astonishing it could have been entertained patiently for a moment by
men of but ordinary acquirements and common observation. But let
“his admirers say what meaning they attach to his expression, “ Induc-
tio, que ad inventionem et demonstrationem scientiarum et artium erit
utilis, naturam separare debet, &c.” Is it not clear that by the word
‘natura he here means sensible objects; and yet he tells us that no
man has used this analytic process, unless Plato in his doctrine of
definitions and ideas, the proper subjects of a science purely intel-
lectual? Strange it must appear if we are to suppose that Plato only,
of all men, used this really efficient mode of acquiring knowledge,
that Aristotle, his most highly favored pupil for twenty years, and of
‘whom his master speaks as the most highly cultivated genius he had
ever known, a pure intelligence, νοῦς καθαρὸς, should not have com-
-
Vindicia Antique, 337
prehended its excellence:—but the truth is that the assertion is
hazarded without the smallest foundation; for every scholar knows
that the reasoning of Aristotle is more strict, and his style more di-
dactic than Plato’s, and, that, each having in view the discovery of truth,
or real science, their manners are characteristically different. The
whole passages upon which Mr. Stuart relies, as proving that the
induction of Bacon was a process of reasoning entirely new—some-
thing which he thinks deserves the title of a superior species of logic, ~
—amounts, as has just been observed, in plain language to this, that
true conclusions can only be drawn from true propositions.
And now let us attend to the author’s proof that the ἐπαγωγὴ of
Aristotle is entirely and essentially different from the induction of
Bacon. ‘ That I may not (says he) be accused of resting my judg-
ment entirely upon evidence derived from Bacon’s writings, it may be
proper to consider more particularly to what the induction of Aris-
totle really amounted, and in what respects it coincided with that to
which Bacon has extended the same name.
‘* Our belief (says Aristotle in one passage) is in every tnstance
founded either on syllogism or induction.” To which observation,
he adds in the same chapter, ‘‘ that induction is an inference drawn
from all the particulars which it comprehends.”* It is manifest that
upon this occasion Aristotle speaks of that induction, which Bacon,
in one of the extracts quoted above, describes as proceeding by sim-
ple enumeration ; and which he therefore pronounced to be a puerile
employment of the mind, and a mode of reasoning leading to uncer-
tain conclusions.”
The author proceeds to give from the works of Wallis an inference
by induction thrown into the syllogistic form, which he says exposes
the puerility and precariousness of such an argument. ‘‘ The induc-
tion of Aristotle when considered in this light, is indeed a fit compa
nion for his syllogism, inasmuch as neither can possibly advance us a
single step in the acquisition of new knowledge. How different from
both is the induction of Bacon, which, instead of carrying the mind
round in the same circle of words, leads it from the past to the fu-
ture, from the known to the unknown?” When we read such a pas-
sage as this, a question naturally arises, Did Aristotle in his reasqnings
arrive at the knowledge of the most sublime truths; and if he did,
how came his pursuit to be successful, if his means were altogether
unequal to the attainment of the object in view? The matter comes
to this issue :—if the censures of the Scotch metaphysicians be just,
Aristotle was a poor driveller, who from his gross ignorance could
not possibly write any thing deserving perusal ; if we admit that he was
the most correct reasoner of ancient or modern times, and that bis
works contain more valuable information than is to be found in the
writings of any other man, we must conclude that the censures of
these gentlemen proceed from ignorance. Mr. Stuart’s following
* First Analytics, chap, xxiii. vol. i. p. 126. Edit. Du Val.
338 Vindicte Antique.
remarks, before, like a young Edinburgh lawyer, he arrives at the
conclusion that “enough and more than enough has been said, 10
show the validity of his assertion, that the induction of Bacon was not
known to Mristotle,” render it necessary that to the import and true
signification of the word 'Exaywy) we again recur. ᾿
It is to be regretted that Mr. Stuart did not give the original of the
passage from the 284 book of the first Analytics, which he thinks
manifestly shows, that by ἐπαγωγὴ Aristotle means an induction by
simple enumeration, which Bacon pronounces to be puerile; because
the chapters of Aristotle’s Anialytics have been differently numbered
by editors. The English quotation given by Mr. Stuart certainly has
no equivalent passage in the Greek or Latin of Duval, 1 Analyt. 23
chap. p. 126; but if it had, and the phrase ἐπαγωγὴ ἐκ καθόλου fre-
quently occurs, how shall we from that expression infer that Aris-
totle’s induction proceeded by simple enumeration? The expression
simply implies, that in forming propositions all the circumstances
connected with the propositions must be carefully considered, to see
that nothing superfluous (a fortiori nothing false) be admitted and
nothing essentially necessary be left out. That it may not be said
that this is extending the sense of Aristotle beyond what his words
will bear, I refer to the following passage from the 23d chap. 1 Ana-
lytics. A edit. Weckeli. Francofurti. 4to. 1577, in which he mi-
nutely describes what steps are necessary to enable us to form just
propositions. Σκεπτέον οὖν εἴτι περιεργὸν εἴληπται, καὶ εἴτε τῶν
ἀναγκαίων παραλέλειπται" καὶ τὸ μὲν Geréov-rd δὲ ἀφαιρετέον, ἕως ἂν
ἔλθῃ τις εἰς τὰς δύω προτάσεις" ἄνεν γὰρ τούτων, οὐκ ἔστιν ἀναγαγεῖν»
τοὺς ὄντως ἠρωτημένους λόγους.
‘<We must therefore see, in forming propositions, whether any thing
superfluous has been assumed, or any of those things absolutely
necessary has been omitted ; and this last is to be assumed, and the
other removed, until we arrive at the two propositions. For without
these operations, it is impossible to arrive at aconclusion really just.”
The passages that occur in the works of Aristotle, in which he lays
it down as an incontrovertible axiom, that all our knowledge must in
the first instance be derived from correct induction, are so numerous,
that to quote the whole would be to copy over a very considerable
part of his Analytics, and works comprehended under the title of Orga-
non, as well as his Metaphysics. The passage already given directly
proves that his idea of induction was correct, and has never been
improved upon: but as in the present day it is denied that what of
necessity has ever been the first step towards the acquisition of know-:
ledge, was understood until the time of Bacon, it may not be impro-
per to lay before the reader a few extracts, which, according to the
common acceptation of words, establish the fact beyond contradiction,
that in this instance no room for discovery was left to the moderns.
Our senses, according to Aristotle, furnish our first elements of
knowledge; and to form correct propositions is the first necessary
step towards science. If, therefore, any sense be wanting, the seience
depending upon the information to be derived from that sense must
Vindicia Antique. ὦ - 330
also be wanting, seeing we acquire knowledge by induction or de-'
monstration. But demonstration relates to universals, and induction‘
to the comparison of particulars ; so that it is impossible to form any
true theory of universals unless by induction. Such is the general’
sense of the following passage from the Analytica Posteriora, I.i. c. xix.
Φανερὸν δὲ καὶ, ὅτι et res αἴσθησις ἐκλέλοιπεν, ἀνάγκη καὶ ’Emcorhpny
τινὰ ἐκλελοιπέναι, ἣν ἀδύνατον λαβεῖν" εἴπερ μανθάνομεν ἢ ἐπαγωγῇ,
ἢ ἀποδείξει. "Ἔστι δ᾽ ἡ μὲν ᾿Απόδειξις ἐκ τῶν καθόλον" ἡ δ᾽ ἐπαγωγὴ ἐκ
τῶν κατὰ pépos* ἀδύνατον δὲ τὰ καθόλον θεωρῆσαι εἰ μὴ δὲ "Exaywyis
ἔπει καὶ τὰ ἐξ ᾿Αφαιρέσεως λεγόμενα, ἔσται δι’ ᾿Επαγωγῆς γνώριμα, ἐάν
τις βούλῃται γνώριμα ποιεῖν ὅτε ὕπαρχει ἑκάστῳ γένει ἔνια, καὶ εἰ μὴ
χωριστά ἐστιν ἣ τοιόνδε ἕκαστον"---ἐπαχθῆναι δὲ μὴ ἔχοντας αἴσθησιν,
ἀδύνατον. Tév γὰρ καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἡ ΑἸἴσθησιε" οὗ γὰρ ἐνδέχεται λαβεῖν
αὐτῶν ἐπιστήμην οὔτε γὰρ ἐκ τῶν καθόλον ἄνεν 'Exaywyijs, οὔτε διὰ
τῆς ἐπαγωγῆς ἄνεν Αἰσθήσεως.
These words leave no room for doubt whether the ἐπαγωγὴ οὗ Aris-
totle was merely a simple enumeration, as the followers of Bacon
assert; and we also learn from this passage the true import of the
word Theory, which by our modern philosophers is altogether mis-.
understood. Theory is a connected chain of reasoning from establish-
ed facts—and these facts ascertained by induction—so that Theory
must apply to all human knowledge: but at the present day it is
fashionable to consider theory and hypothetical opinions as converti-
ble terms, having no necessary connexion with experience.
A consciousness of ignorance, or doubt according to Aristotle, is
the first step towards knowledge—and Diaconus, in his prolegomena
to the Epitome of his Logic, observes very concisely, that by frequently . '
exercising our minds on subjects at first not understood, we arrive at
science ; for without doubt, there would be no inquiry or investigation ;
and without investigation, no discovery—éx τοῦ πολλάκις ἀπορεῖν ebroe
pia γεννᾶται" εἰ μὴ yap ἀπορήσει res, οὔτ᾽ ἂν γένοιτό wore Ξήτησις. εἰ δὲ
μὴ ξητήσεις, οὐκ ἄν ποτε εὕροι.--- δὰ the Peripatetic philosophy been
liable to the imputation of rashly assuming as true, conclusions not
established by satisfactory evidence, Διαπορῆσαι κάλως ἔχει would not
have been one of the chief precepts of their schools. But when we
find Aristotle defining art to be the general comprehension of like
things from many repeated conclusions of experience, we cannot
doubt that the rejections and exclusions of his induction were correct ;
and that the "Exaywy) of the ancients was indeed a process of reason-
ing no less rigid in the formation of propositions than our modern
induction. Γίνεται yap Τεχνὴ, ὅταν ἐκ πολλῶν τῆς ᾿Ἐμπειρίας ἐννοημά-
των, καθόλου γένηται περὶ τῶν ὁμοίων ὑπόληψις. Metaphysics, lib.i. 0.1.
The writer of these sketches censures freely, what he conceives to
be highly reprehensible, the attempt to disparage ancient philosophy,
made by men who admit their ignorance of the subject, and if they
did not admit, would betray it in every sentence. Mr. Dugald Stuart
tells us that Dr. Reid did not study the works of Aristotle he analysed
for his friend Lord Kaimes, because he despised them, or words to that.
4
8340, Emendationes ac Varietates Lectionum ;
effect; and with such an argument’ we scarcely know how to deal.
It is in effect saying, I have looked over these works of antiquity, I
find 1 do not understand them, | therefore hold them in contempt,
and condems them as useless. This is in fact the sum and substance
of what the Scotch metaphysicians urge against the learning of ancient
Greece. They will not take the pains necessary to understand it,
and, like the fox in the fable, they call that unworthy of attainment,
which, owing to their own want of capacity or exertion, is beyond
their reach.
παν σαὍασασὍσὍσὍΎΎασῪΣσΆΆννν
ΨΑΒΙΞ LECTIONES
Ex MSto. Nn. 2. $2. Bibl, Publ. Cantab.
“Scroxusa ex Manuscripts Libris collecta in eschyli TRa-
Gc@D1As tres. Prometheum. Septem apud Thebas. Persas. Ac-
cesserunt his Emendationes quamplurime in easdem Trageedias;
quibus antiquissimus poeta mizifice illustratur, cum antea deprava-
tissimus circumferretur.
Typographus Lectori, 5. Ὁ.
Franciscus Robortellus Utinensis, cujus doctrina singularis om-
nibus est perspecta, allectus nostrorum typorum elegantia ad nos
transmisit Grecum commentarium in tres Aischyli tragoedias, quem
ipse ex plurimis manuscriptis libs collegerat: eum igitur illius
nomme tibi largimur, amice lector, speramusque pro tua singulari
‘humanitate, te et illi qui tam preclaras explicationes collegit, et
nobis, qui pulcherrimis his typis excudimus, gratiam habiturum.
Magoum enim ex hoe libello capies fructum, in quo ne longior
sim explicando; illud unum summatim affirmo, cum antea et de-
pravatus multis mendis, et obscurissimus esset hic poeta; facile
hoc adjumento te omuia consecuturum. Emendationes partim ex
ipso commentario, et libris manuscriptis ipse Robortellus excerp-
sit: partim suppeditate nobis sunt a Ludovico Castelvitreo Muti-
nensi viro doctissimo ac nobilissimo, qui et ipse cum antiquis
exemplaribus contulerat Tragoedias has tres; σύν τε δύ᾽ ἐρχομένω
non temere dixit Homerus; animadvertes enim horum duorum
insignium virorum, qui animis inter se conjunctissimi sunt, opera,
ac labore Aischylum illustratum. In reliquas ‘Frageedias nihil se
ad HEschyli P.V. gar
adhuc nactos affirmarunt, quod in paucis exemplecibus vetustis
descripte reperiantur; quod vitio majorum nostrorum, aut nimis
acri potius judicio contigisse putamus: it. enim tres has magis
admirati sunt, majoreque studio interpretati. Vale. Lutetiz,
MDXLIix.”
[Sequuntur emendationum pagine 9, quarum singule duas
coluinnas continent, et Stanleianas paginas magnitudine fere
equant. Fuerunt initio, pp. 13, ut ex numeratione liquet: sed
avulsa sunt duo folia, emendationes a Theb. 517. ad Pers. 482, ed.
Pors. continentia. AMicvs.]
Emendationes ac Varietates Lectionum in Eschyli Tragadiam
qua inscribitur Prometheus.
Adverte, Lector, nos secutos numerum pagellarum Aldinarum.
Pagella 6. a. γηρύεται
Υ. Ο. μέλειν ἐπιστολάς. ὀργῆς τε θρασύτητα.
προσπατταλεύσω. Pagella 7. β.
βροτῶν μορφήν. | Ψευδωνύμως σε δαίμονες
Pagella 6. β. ἐκκυλισθήσῃ τέχ νη ς(ϑἰο). τύχης.
σταθευθός. ex emend. ejusdem manus.
ἀπηύρω. παμμῆτόρ᾽ τε γῆ.
γέον "κρατῇ πάσχω πρὸς θεῶν.
πονεῖ μάτην οἵαις ἀνίαισι
αἰεί τοι ἀεθλεύσω
ἔμελλε λαχεῖν ἄλλος. δεσμὸν ἀεικῇ
Pagella 7. α. φεῦ φεῦ τὸ παρὸν.
ποῖ ποτε μόχθων
τούτῳ πέρ βαλεῖν. τῶνδ᾽ ἐπιτεῖλαι.
ψάλια δέρκεσθαι. ταῖσδ᾽ ἐπέξευγμαι
θεῖνε, καὶ πασσάλευε. πεπασσαλευομένος
κοὐ μα τοῦτ᾽ οὔργον τόδε. Pavella 8 mw
ἄρασσε μάλα age ve - β. ]
νωϑέ ἔστερος δ bg. see ue δακρύων debent deleri.
“πλὴν Tour’ ay
ye αὖ αὖ κατοκνεῖς κρατοῦσ᾽ οἰκονόμοι
ὑποστενεῖς. ἀΐδου τοῦ γεχροδέγμονος.
βάλλε. πὰ ἐπιγεγήθῃ
μηδὲν § κέλευε μοὶ ἐς AYP ἴων
κάτω ΝΜ σκέλη χρίκωσον ποινᾶς τέ μοι δοῦναι
οὐ μακρῷ δ χρόνῳ Pagella 9. a.
ὅμοια μορφῇ τῆσδ᾽ αἰτίας
842 Emendationes ac Varietates Lectionum
χρῇ σε τέρμα κέλσαντ᾽
ταύτη ῥεχθῆ
σιγᾶν BAYT AXY
αἱμύλαις δέ μου μηχανάς.
Gor’ ἀμοχθεί.,
Pagella 9. B.
ἡ μὴ δὲ μήτηρ.
ὡς οὐ κατ᾽ ἰσχὺν,
δὲ
λόγοισιν ἐξισουμένου
χράτιστον δέ μοι
μελεμβαφής"
φυτεῦσαι νέον.
Pagella 10. α.
ἐῤῥύθμισμαι
φλογωπόν
οὐδ᾽ ἔνεστιν.
ἄθλου δ᾽ ἔχλυσιν.
γουθετεῖν τε.
ἑχὼν ἥμαρτον.
ὠόμην τοιαῖσί γε
Pagella 10. β.
καί τοι τὰ μὲν παρόντα
αἰθέρα θ᾽ ἁγνόν.
πρὸς σι σε προμηθεῦ.
νέμοιμ᾽ ἢ σοί
σοι αριταγλωσσεῖν:
ὅτε; ἐστι βεβαιότερος.
Pagella 1]. a.
μεϑάρμοζε.
μακχρὰν a ἀπωτέ ἐρῶ
τ᾿ ἀπίχειρα γίνηται.
ζημία προστρίβηται.
ἄγαν λαβ Fpeer eee
ἑκτὸς ζημ
Pagella 11. β.
μηδέν σοι μελησάτω
γαμφηλαῖσι συρίζων φόβον.
Pagella 12. a.
_ παρήωρον δέμας.
ἐν τῷ προμηθεῖσβαι
Pagella 12. β.
μοι τόνδ᾽ ἐβώύξας λόγον
λευρῶν γὰρ οἴμων.
ψαύει “πτεροῖς.
Χο. στένω σε τὰς
ὄσσων ῥαδινῶν.
ζεῦς δ᾽ ἰδίοις γόμοις
θεοῖς τοῖς πάρος. ᾿
μεγαλοσχήμονά τε. x ἀρχαιο-
πρεπῆ
στένουσι τῶν σῶν.
μάχαν ἄτρεστοι
οἱ γᾶς ἔσχατον ἀμφὶ μαιῶτιν
τόπον πόρον debent deleri.
sov ἄνθος
ὁδικρίμνονΡ οἱ οἱ (sic)
ὁπόσοι τ᾽ ἔποικοι
ὀξυπόροισι. non ὀξυπρώροισι.
δαμέντ᾽ ἀκαμαντοδέτοις.
μόνον δὴ πρόσθεν ἄλλο"
εἰσιδόμην δεν.
ἄτλανθ᾽ ὃς ὑπείροχον αἷὲν
Pagella 13. a.
γώτοις ὑποβαστάζξει
μήτοι Ady
συννοίᾳ δὲ
καὶ γὰρ οὐκ εἴδυίαισιν (sic)
Tay βροτοῖς
φρενῶν ἐπηβόλους.
λέξω δὲ μέμψιν
εὔνοιαν ἐξηγοῦμεν. -
Pagella 18. β.
μνήμην θ᾿ ἁπάντων
ἐξεῦρον τἄλας.
καὶ πόρους ἐ ἐμησάμην
οὐδὲν, οὐδὲ φάρμακον
οἰκείων ἀκεσμάτων.
οἷς τὰς ἁπάσας.
ἐξαμύνονται
Pagella 14. a.
σπλάγχνων τελειότητα.
χρυσὸν τέ τις
κολροὺ πέρα.
ad Hschyli P. V.
τῶνδε σ᾽ ἐκ δεσμῶν.
τελεσφόρος.
xgeivas πέπρωται
ἐκφύγοι γε τὴν πεπρωμένην.
μηδὲ λιπάρει.
Pagella 14. β.
καὶ βίας ἐκφυγγάνω
καιρὸς γεγωνεῖν.
᾿Ηδὸ τι θαρσαλίας |
τίς δ᾽ ἐφημερίων
ἄχικυν, ἰσόνειρον
τόδ᾽ ἐκεῖνό γε
λουτρὰ "
ὑμεναίουν
ὅτε τὰν ὁμοπάτριον
ἔδνος ἤγαγες ᾿Ησιόναν
Pagella 15. a.
ποιναῖς ὀλέκη
ἐνέξευξας εὑρών.
πολύπλακτοι πλάναι.
γεγυμνάκασι
εὐγμάτων. ἄναξ,
κλύεις φθέγγμα.
Pagella 15. β.
ἔτυμα προσϑροεῖς
Φοιταλέοισι
τί με. αἱ μοι.
φράζε τε
λέξω τορῶς σοι.
βούλημα μέν.
Pagella 16. α.
τοῦδε τοῦ δωρήματος
λέγουσ᾽ αἰσχύνομαι
ὄψεις Ob
πολαχτίσῃς.
Pagella 16. β.
Χρισμοὺς ἀσήμους, δυσκρίτους.
ἦλθε βάξις.
κεράστης δ᾽ εἰς
ὀξυτόμῳ
πρὸς εὔποντον
πχερνείας ῥίος
Pagella 17. a.
γῆν ἐκ γῆς
εἰπεῖν ἔτι
οὔποτ᾽ οὕποτ᾽ ηὔχουν
ἰὼ ἰὼ μοῖρα.
καὶ φύβου τὴς εἶ πλέα.
᾿Ηνύσαστ' ἐμοῦ.
τὸν ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτῆς
ἁλίστονοις πόδας
Pagella 17. β.
"Hts δ᾽ ἄραξιν ποταμόν.
ναύτῃσι μητρυιὰ
ἐπῶν προοίμια.
Pagella 18. a.
πόνους φέροις
αὕτη γὰρ ἦν μοι
τέρμα τὸ προκείμενον
πάσχω κακάς
SH τέξεται
αὐτὸν bx γόνων.
Pagella 18. β.
δωρήσομαι
φράσαι σαφηνῶς.
φλαγώωπάς.
δρακοντόμαλλοι
Pagella 19. a.
γρύπαρ φύλαξον,
ἕως ἂν ἐξίκῃ
σεπτὸν γῆλος
οὗτός σ᾽ ὁδώσει
πλείων ἢ θέλω
Pagella 19. β.
κληϑήσηται
κώνοβας ἐσχάτη
καρπάσαιτο
πλατύῤῥους
οἱ ᾿
ἄρει δαμέντων.
343
$44 Emendationes ac Varictates Lectionum
Pagella 20. a.
αὕτη κατ᾽ dpyos
γνάμαν δυοῖν.
βασιλικὸν τέξει γένος.
Pagella 20. β.
μήποτέ μ᾽ ὦ μοῖραι
λεχέαν διό
εἰσοροῦσ᾽ ἰοῦς.
γάμῳ δαπτομένην.
ἁλατείαισι πόνων
ὄμμα προσδέρκῃ με.
als ἄπορα πόριμος.
τοῖον ἐξαρτύεται
ὕρπνουν.
αὐτὸς ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ
Pagella 21. a.
τοῦ ποσειδῶνος
ζηνός τινα
δυσλωφοτέρους πόνους"
ᾧ θανεῖν.
οἱ προσκυνοῦντες.
τὸν ἐφημέροις.
κομπεῖς λόγους.
καινὸν ἀγγελῶν
ἐκβληθῇ κράτους
Pagella 21. β.
ἀνιστορεῖς ἐμὲ.
ἀλλάξαιμ᾽ bya.
ἢ πρι φυῆναι
τοὺς ἐμοὺς λέγω
Pagella 22. a.
τι πευσεῖσθαι πάρα.
οὐκ ἔνεστ᾽ αἴκισμ᾽ οὐδὲ
μαλθάσῃ κέαρ λιταῖς.
ἀτὰρ σοφίξῃ
σχέψαι δ᾽ ἐὰν μὴ τοῖς.
πεισθῆς λόγοις
αἰετὸς λάβρος.
μέγα ῥάκας.
ἐχϑοινηθήσεται.
ἀμείνον ἡγήση.
οὐκ ἂν καίρια.
εἰδότι τι μοι.
πρὸς ταῦτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐμοὶ
Pagella 23. a
ix πυϑμέ!
αὐταῖσι ῥίζαις, πνεῦμα.
“Egy. τοιάδε μέντοι
τὶ γὰρ ἐλλείπει.
Χο. εἰ τάδ εὐτυχῇ
“Eg. ἀλλ᾽ οὖν
ἄλλο τι φώνει.
ὅτῳ ἐπείσεις, (sic), οὐ γὰρ δή.
κ᾿ οὐκ ἔνεστι νόσος
πῆμα δῆτ᾽ εἰσέβαλεν.
Pagella 28. β.
εἰδυῖαν γὰρ καὶ οὐκ,
καὶ μὴν ἔργω τ᾽ οὐκέτι
σεσάλευται
ἀντιδειχνύμενα.
τεύχουσα φόβον
μητρὸς θέμις. "
Emendationes ac Varietates Lec-
tionim in Tragediam Es
chyli, ἑπτὰ ἐπὶ θήβαις :
Pagella 25. 8.
αἰτία θεοῦ
σώματος πολὺν
ἤδε τόνδε
Pagella 26. a.
πρὸς δ᾽ ἅρμ᾽ ἀδράστου
Pagella 26.. β.
καὶ τῶνδε καιρὸν ὡς
μή μου πόλιν
καὶ δόμους ἐφεστίους.
ἐλευθέραν δὲ γῆ
πολὺς ὅδε λεώς
ἐγχρίπτεται
Pagella 27. α.
εὐτρεπὴς
τίς ἀρ' ἐπαρκέσει
θεῶν ἢ θεαινῶν
ad Aischyli Septheb. | 345
βρετέων δ᾽ ἔχεσθαι
ἴδετε παρθένων
πόλισμα κάδμου.
φόβον χαλινοί.
προπέμπονται στρατοῦ.
πύλαις ἑβδόμαις
λύκειος γενοῦ
ὦ φίλτατ᾽ ἄπολλον
ex διόθεν
μάκαιρ᾽ ἄνασσ᾽ ὄγκα.
ἐπιῤῥύου.
Pagella 28. a.
τελειάς TE γάς.
οὑς φιλοπόλιες
μήτ᾽ ἐν κακοῖς
ἐν εὐεστῇ φίλῃ
διαδρόμους Boas.
Pagella 28. β.
ἤκουσας, οὐκ ἤκουσας
ὅτι τε σύριγγες
“πυριγενετῶν
ἀλλ᾽ ὄκκα θεοὺς
ἀστυδρομουμένην πόλιν
κ᾽ ἀκχαλεπᾶς
Pagella 29. a.
ἀποστέγει
τιθῆς
aomanitere
στένει πόλισμα
ὦ ξυγγένεια.
ὥσπερ ἄνδρα.
Pagella 29. β.
λέγοις ἂν
δουρηπλήκθ᾽ ἁγνοῖς.
κἀγρίοις ποιφύγμασι
ἀμφιτειχῆ.
ὥσπέρ τις τέκγων
Pagella 30. a.
πανδημεὶ
πολισσοῦχοι
θεοὶ
ἐμβαλόντε ἄροισθε
περιῤῥηγνυμένων
βαρείας ros τύχας
χλαυστὸν
ὡὁμοτρόπων
Pagella 30. β.
ὑπὸ δορὶ
ἀρτιτρεφεῖς
δυσμενοῦς ὑπερτέρου
ἀλγύνει.
ἀκρυτόφυρτος.
κοινοπήμονες νέαι
τλήμονας
ὅτι ποι
Pagella 31. a.
εἴληχε πάλον
θείνει δ᾽ ὀνείδει
τοιαῦτ᾽ ἀγυτῶν
οἰδίπου τέκος
ux ἀσπίδος τόδε.
ὅστις βοὴν
χαλινῶν ὡς.
Pagella 81. β.
ὑπέρκομπον
μεσημβροιναῖς θάλπαις
Pagella 32. a.
ἀνδράσι βουλευμάτων
γίνεται κατήγορος διδάσκαλος
πολυφόντου βία.
ὅλοιθ᾽ ὅς
Pagella 32. β.
ἐπεύχομαι τώδε μὲν εὐτυχεῖν
τοῖσι δὲ δυστυχεῖν debet deleri.
ὑπεραυχαβάξουσ᾽ ἐπὶ πόλιν.
ἱππομέδων σχἥμα.
μέγας κτύπος.
ἅλω δὲ πολὺν
ἔφριξα
Pagella 58. α
ἔνθεος δ᾽ apy.
πυρπνόον
οἷδε ζῆνα
εἰκὸς δὲ πράξει
346 Emendationes ac Varietates Lectionum -
ἀεὶ ζεύς τε δύσθροα βάσματα.
ἐερώτερος. πέρσαις εἴποι
Foliis ἀυοῦμοι revulsis rursus in- χὐον lay ἡγεμόνες δαίμονες.
cipit MS. a “ Pagella 50. β. Pogella. 53. a.
βοιωτῶν «χθονὶ οἷον οὕπω
σπερχειὸς ἄρδει. ἡ φίλος. in fine secundi τ versus
πόλισμ' debet deleri. -
μαγγητικὴν δὲ γαῖαν, ἠδὲ βάσκε περῶν.
τ εἰαῖον τ᾽ ὄρος. πᾶσ᾽ ὥλετο. .
ων δ᾽ lay ‘Hy. βάσκε περῶν ἄκακε bap
“γυχτὶ δ᾽ ἐν ταύτῃ διάγοιεν δαμάρτια.
σεσωσμένος κυρεῖ. ἐξέφθινϑ' ai. ;
Pagella 51. α. δα. ὦ πολλὰ πιστῶ:
πίπτον δ᾽ ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοισϊ λεύσων δ᾽ ἃ ἄκοιτιν.
ατέσκηψε θεός. πρευμενὴς ἐδεξάμην.
δυσπόνητε δαῖμον Pagella 53. β.
οἱ ἐγὼ τάλωινα. ταχέως καλεῖσθε
τοῖσδε τοῖς πεπραγμένοις. ᾿ς ἐστὶ δ᾽ οὐκ εὐέξοδος
δεῦρ᾽ ἐμοῦ πρόσθεν μόλῃ , ἐντύχοι "βροτοῖς
προπέμπεσθ' ἐς δόμους. βίοτος ἣν ταθῇ.
ὥλεσας ws ἕως τ᾽ ἔλευσας
Pagella 51. β. ar. ὦ βροτῶν
eves δνοφερῶ εὐτυχῆ πότμων.
ξέρξης μὲν γὰρ ἤγαγε. ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ..
δαρεῖος᾽ μὲν οὐ Pagel a 54. a.
τότ᾽ ἀβλάβη πᾶς τις ᾧχετο στρατός.
πεζούς τε γὰρ Hy δυοῖν στρατευμάτων
γαχτ᾽ αὐτόν. τοσόσδε yy ἤνυσε meoay
πρώτόμορφοι φεῦ. ; ἔζευξεν ἕλλης
λειφθέντες πρὸς ὧδε παμπήδην λαὸς πᾶς
βαρὺ & ᾿ στρατὸς debet deleri.
Pagella δῷ. α. κενανδρίαν στένειν.
πρὸς αὐδὰν ie. ἄσμενοι μολεῖν
οὐδέτι ΄ ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἔμπας
δασμοφοροῦσ' δεσμώμασιν.
προσπίπτοντες. Pagella 54. β.
τὰ περσῶν σώματα. | wer’ οὐκ εὐβουλίᾳ
ὅστις ἔμπειρος πολὺς πλούτου πόνος.
δαίμον᾽ οὐριεῖν τύχης. ἀνανδρίας Umer.”
ἐν ὄμμασιν ἀνταῖα. ἐξεκένωσε πεσὸν
Pagella 52. β. | πάσης ἀσιάδος βμηλοτρόφου.
ἀνθεμουργοῦ ἰθυντήριον.
ἐν φύλλοισι θαλλούσης ; Pagella 55. α.
. ἐπευφημεῖτε. ; ἀρταφέρνης
γύναι πρέσβα.. ἔκυρσα πάλου.
-
ad Eschyli Pers. 347
λόγων τελευτήν.
ἀλλ᾽ εὐσταλῇῆ τοι
βλέποντα, συμβαίνει γάρ.
Pagella 55. β.
ἑλλάδ᾽ οὐ θεῶν
τοιγὰρ κακὸν δράσαντες
χρηπίς ἐστιν.
θῖνες νεκρῶν τε.
τρισπόρῳ γένει.
τ᾽ ἀπιτίμια.
Pagella 56. a.
εὐφρόνοις σὺ moduivoy
πρέσβεις χαίρετ᾽
μέλλοντ᾽ ἔτι
ἐσθημάτων κλύουσαν
δαρεῖος ἔσχε χώρας
ἀποφαινόμιεθ᾽ ἠδὲ νόμιμα.
ἀχελωΐδες εἰσί.
Pagella 56. β.
πλατὺν αὐχόμιναι
γᾶξος ἠδὲ μυχών.
σφετέραις χερσὶν
ἀνδρῶν τευχιστήρων
παμμίκτων τ᾽
τὰ δ᾽ αὖ ἂν φέρομεν
ἀνδρῶν τῶν οἰχομιένων
κατὰ μοίρα
οὃς νῦν δαίμων
ya δ᾽ αἰάζει
τᾶν ἐγγαίαν ἥβαν
Pagella 57. α.
ξέρξα κταμέναν
ἀνδαβάται γὰρ
μαρυανδινοῦ θρηνητῆρος
δύσθροον αὐδάν.
Χορ. "How τοι
λαοπαθῆ τε βίξων
γόον ἀρίδακρυν
᾿Ιὼν γὰρ
᾿Ιευονὼν ναύφρακτος
πάντ᾽ ἐχπεύθου.
σούσας, πελάγων
. ἀγδαβάτας ψάκμις
Pagella 57. β.
ποῦ δὲ σεβάλχις ἢ λελαίαται de-
bet deleri. |
ἣ δυσαίχμας
τῶν περσῶν αὐτοῦ τὸν σὸν πιστὸν
ὅτ᾽ ὀφθαλμόν.
οἰτυβάνορατ᾽
ὦ ὦ δαΐων. Χορ. πέρσαις ἀγανοῖς
ἀγαθῶν ἑτέρων ὑπομιμνήσκεις
πρὸς κακὰ λέγων
τόλμαν αἰχμῆς
ἀλλ᾽ ἀκόσμιος τροχηλάτοισιν
βεβᾶσιν ἀνώνυμοι"
ἀκρόται στρατοῦ.
Χορ. ἰὴ ἰή. ἰώ. Ἰώ. Ita reliqua:
ὦ δαίμονες der ἄελπτον κακόν.
γέαι νέαι
Ξερ. πῶς δ᾽ οὐ;
Pagella 58. a.
Χορ. τί δ᾽ οὐκ ὅλωλε μεγάλα
Fiep. ὁρᾶς τὸ λοιπόν.
Χορ. ὁρῶ spd. Hep. τάνδ᾽ ὀίστο-
δέγμονα
Χορ. τί τόδε λέγεις. - Hep. σεσω-
σμένον θησαυρὸν βέλεσι. Χορ.
βαιά γε ὡς ἀπὸ πολλῶν
Ξερ. ἐξεσπανίσμεθα ἀρωγῶν
᾿Ιαόνων λαὸς οὐ φυγαίχμας,
ναῦφρακτζον (SIC), ἐρεῖς ὅμιλον;
Χορ. πακπαὶ renal.
Ξερ. καὶ πλέον, } παπαὶ μὲν οὖν,
λυπρὰ χάρματα δ᾽ ἐχϑροῖς
καὶ σθένος γ᾽ ἐκολούσθη,
ἄνια ἄνια κακά.
Bep. μέλαινα δ᾽ αὖ μεμίξεταί μοι
στονόεσσα πλαγά. Χορ. καὶ
στέρνα
Bep. ἄνια.
Χορ. καί μοι γενείου ὕπερθε
λευκήνη τρίχα xorre.
Ξερ. ἄπριγδα ἄπριγδα.
Χορ. ἀΐτει δ᾽ ὀξύ. Hep. καὶ
τάδε ἔρξω.
Χορ. πέπλον.
Εἰερ. ἄνια.
. Kop. καὶ ψάλλ᾽
348 Miscellanea Classica.
Bap. ἄπριγδα μάλα γόεδνα ᾿ Pagella 68. β. °
διαίνου δ᾽ ὄσσε. . βάρισιν ὀλλομέναισι
‘INIS.” .
(Hane collationem, quam mihi in notitiam pertulit Amicus, opti-
marum presertim lectionum sobole longe antecellere animadversu-
ros alios eque ac me facile videbam; et non paginas solum, sed
versus etiam non semel prave notatos corrigere per se Ipsos posse
censebam. Meum enim solenne illud retinens, ut hoc monimen-
tum ex omni parte integrum tuear, que mutatione aut additione
indigebant, ea ne attigi quidem, aut de iisdem quenquam admonen-
dum putavi. In hoc tamen rectene an secus sentiam, tu, lector
benevole, causa cognita dijudicabis. T. K.]
MISCELLANEA CLASSICA.
‘No. IV.—[Continued from No. XXXIITI. p. 39.]}
I. IN a note of Brunck’s on Soph. Ant. 573, ἄγαν ye Xuweits, cal σὺ,
καὶ ro σὸν λέχος, the following werds occur: “ τὸ σὸν λέχος non valet
nuptia tue, sed nuptia quas crepas, τὸ ὑπὸ σοῦ ὀνομαξόμενον λέχος, ut
bene Scholiastes exprimit. Sic EL 1110. οὐκ οἷδα τὴν σὴν κληδόν᾽. Phi-
loct. 1251. τὸν σὸν ob ταρβῶ φόβον. Eurip. Heracl. 285. τὸ σὸν yap
“Apyos ob δέδοικ᾽ ἐγώ." Perhaps this may serve to illustrate an expres-
sion in the Second Epistle of St. Peter, iii. 14, τὸν δὲ φόβον αὐτῶν μὴ
φοβηθῆτε, μηδὲ ταραχθῆτε : ‘timorem, quem isti vobis incutere vo-
lunt.” I know not whether an expression in a passage of Livy, to be .
cited hereafter for a different purpose, may be considered as parallel:
‘“‘nihil ad vocem cujusquam terroremve motus, in Quirinalem collem
pervenit.”
II. ‘The women (of Thebes), whom Du Loir praises for their
beauty, are secluded with greater care than those of any other Gre-
cian city.” Quarterly Review, No. XXXIII. p. 265, Art. Dr. Clarke’s
Travels. The reviewer adds, that this peculiarity is mentioned also
by ancient authors. For the beauty of the women alluded to in the
first part of the sentence, we have also ancient testimony. Ai δὲ
γυναῖκες τῶν Θηβαίων τοῖς μεγέθεσι, πορείαις, ῥυθμοῖς, εὐσχημονέσταταί
τε καὶ εὐπρεπέσταται τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἑλλάδι γυναικῶν. Μαρτυρεῖ Σοφοκλῆς.
Θήβας λέγεις μοι ταῖς [τὰς] πύλαις ἑπταστόμους,
οὗ δὴ μόνον τίκτουσιν αἱ θνηταὶ θεούς. '
Dicearchus de Statu ατεοῖθ. I owe the above citation to Brunck,
Soph. Fragm. Incert. XCIX. |
HI. Brunck, in his edition of Sophocles, bas a léng note on El. 1393,
ἀρχαιύπλουτα πατρὸς eis ἐδώλια. He might have quoted a parallel ex-
Miscellanea Classica, 349
pression in Thuc. VIII. 29, where the writer is speaking of Iasus, the
seat of the rebel Amorges: παλαιόπλουτον yap ἦν τὸ χώριον.
IV. The following anecdote occurs in Sir John Carr’s Travels in
Spain: “A young man who was intended for holy orders, and who
had distinguished himself in the defence of Gerona, made his way
through the hostile force to Tarragona, for the, purpose of being
ordained by the archbishop. As soon as the ceremony was over, he
returned back, passed unobserved by the enemy into the besieged
city, and resumed his station in defending it to the last extremity.”
p- 292. In the British Review, to which I owe this citation, this act of
courage is compared to that of the Roman Senate putting up to auction
the ground on which Hannibal was encamped. It bears a closer re-
semblance to an exploit recorded in Livy, V. 46. performed during the
siege of the Capitol by the Gauls. ‘‘ Sacrificium erat statum in Qui-
rinali colle genti Fabis. Ad id faciendum C. Fabius Dorso, Gabino
cinctu, sacra manibus gerens, quum de-Capitolio descendisset, per
medias hostium stationes egressus, nihil ad vocem cujusquam terro-
remve motus, in Quirinalem collem pervenit: ibique omnibus solenni~
ter peractis, e4dem revertens, similiter constanti vulta graduque, satis
sperans propitios esse deos, quorum cultum ne mortis quidem mety
prohibitus deseruisset, in Capitolium ad suos rediit: seu’ attonitis
Gallis miraculo audaciz, seu religione etiam motis, cujus haudquaquam.
negligens est gens.” Liv. ut supra.
V. To the instances of metrical lines adduced in former Numbers,
may be added the following, for the last of which the writer is in-
debted to a friend :
ob μέμφομαι, φαίην ἄν. ᾿Αλλὰ τοῖς repi— Plat. Crit. 12.
καρποὺς τρέφουσα τῷ κρατοῦντι λαμβάνειν, Xen. Cc. v. 7.
δῆλον γάρ ἐστι τοῖς ᾿Ολυνθίοις, ὅτι---- | Dem. Olynth. i.
τακεινὸν, οὐδὲ τῆς πόλεως ἀνάξιον. Dem. Cor. 31. ad fia.
VI. The use of ἔδρακον, ἔπραθον, ἄς, among the early Greeks is
similar to that of cruds for curds, brust for burst, (Dan. brast) among
some of the provincials of our own country.
. Vil. Longinus (xliv. p. 165, Tonp:) writes: ‘Oot δὲ ἡμῶν ἐκά-
grou τοὺς ὅλους ἤδη βιοὺς δεκασμοὶ βραβεύονσι, καὶ ἀλλοτρίων θῆραι Bar
νάτων, καὶ ἐνέδραι διαθηκῶν, x. τ. A. . The latter part of this passage is
perhaps a poetical quotation, standing originally thus:
΄ ἀλλοτρίων βῆραι θανάτων, ἐνέδραι διαθηκῶν.
-
So in Xen. Cc. iv. δικαίως μοι δοκεῖς, ἔφη, ὦ Κῦρε, εὐδαίμων εἴναδ
ἀγαθὸς γὰρ ὧν ἀνὴρ εὐδαιμονεῖε᾽ the conclusion easily resolyes itself
into the form of a tragic γνώμη:
elvay’ ᾽γαθὸς yap ὧν ἀνὴρ εὐδαιμονεῖς,
VII. The following passage of Homer, II. Y.
VOL. XVIL 6... NO. XXXIV.” «4«.Δ΄
360 Miscellanea Classica.
μὴ of ὕπορθε
γαῖαν ἀναρρήξειε Ποσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων,
οἴκια δὲ θνητοῖσι καὶ ἀθανάτοισι φανείη
σμερδαλέ᾽, εὐρώεντα ------
is thus translated by Cowper:
——— lest Neptune, o’er his head’
Shatt’ring the vaulted earth, should wide disclose:
To mortal and immortal eyes his realm
Of horror, thirst, and woe.
I quote this on account of a curious error into which the translator has
fallen: finding the word eipwerra rendered, ia the Latin version, by
‘‘seuta situ,” he has mistaken the latter word for “siti,” and trans-
lated accordingly.
IX. Perbaps the idea of Cowper's fable of the Nightiagale and: the
Glow-worm was suggested by a well-known Greek epigram on the
Nightingale devouring the Grasshopper, of which a version may be
seen among the translations at the end of-his thied volume.
X. The American grants of hand to new citizens remind us of the
complaint of the soldiers in Tacitus, Ann. i. 17, ‘“‘trahi diversas ip
terras, ubi per nomen agrorum, uligines paludum, et inculta montium
aecipiant.”
XI. There is a class of Greek feminine names of places ending in
avea, or oveca, which have been somewhat indiscriminately spelt with
ἃ single and a double σι As they are mostly, if not all, derived from
adjectives in oes or οὖς, it would perhaps be as well to write them
uniformly with a double a, except where reason can be alleged to the
contrary: thus, ᾿Αργινοῦσσαε (ἀργινόεντα Κάμειρον, Il. B. 656), Οἱ-
γοῦσσαι, Σκοτοῦσσα, Τειχιοῦσσα, Δριμοῦσσα, &c. Μαράθουσα, from its
similarity te Μαραθὼν, might be allowed to retain its stngle σι In edi-
tions and manuscripts, there isa similar variety of spelling where a pro-
per name occurs containing.c in its terminating syllable. Thus Μύλασα
and Μύλασσα, ἸΠάρνασος and Πάρνασσος, 'Epeaos and Ἐρεσσὸς, Τευμησὴς
and Τευμησσὸς, Συρακούσαι and Συρακαύσσαι, ᾿Ιάλυσος and Ἰάλυσσρς,
and even Πελλοπόννησος, Πελοπόνησος, and Πελοπόννησσος. So
Μεσήνιοι and Νέεσσήνιοι. The island Lampedosa was, perhaps, Aap-
πετῶσα; uuless Artosto’s orthography, Lipadusa, should incline us
rather to fix upon Λεπαδοῦσσα (sc. λεπάδων πλήρη»).
XII. A writer in the Quarterly Review (No. XXEX. p. 252, art.
Malcolm’s Persia) remarking on the propensity of ‘all rude nations,
and the vulgar of every age and country,” to ascribe their populer
customs and monuments of antiquity to those heroes of history with
whom they are best acquainted, observes, “To Solomon every unr
claimed act of magnificence or wisdom is ascribed by the modern
Arabs; and to Jemsheed, the Solomon of the Guebres, the establish-
ment of their ancient customs would be attributed witheut apy very
scrppulous oxamination into the agreement of dates aud. circum~
Miscellanea Classica. 951
stances.” Thus “in the south of Scotland, any work of great labour’
and antiquity is ascribed either to the agency of Auld Michael,” (ΜΕ
chael Scott the wizard), ““ of Sir William Wallace, or of the Devil.”
Notes to the Lay of the Last Minstrel, p. 253. Thus also, according
to the Hon. Mr. Douglas on the Modern Greeks, the celebrated
remains of Grecian architecture are uniformly ascribed by the vulgar
to some imaginary Coustantine.—He says, that a monk, who conducted
himself and his friends around the scenery of Thermopyle, told them
that it was celebrated for the death of a giant named Leonidas.
XIII. Hooke, in a note relating to the secular games of the Romang
(Rom. Hist. Book iv. c. 12.) speaking of the difference of opinion
maintained among critics, as to whether these games were celebrated
every 100 or every 110 years, states, that neither of these periods
was much attended to. Yet, by making a conjectural selection from
the various periods of celebration given by him from ancient writers,
we shall arrive at a tolerable degree of regularity. Thus:
The first were celebrated U. C. - 298
Fhe second -“- - - - - 408
The third - - - - - 518
The fourth - - - - - 608 or 623
The fifth - - - - = - 798
Fhe sixth - - - - - 800
The seventh - - - - - 84ὲ
The eighth - - - - - 957
The ninth - - - - - 1000
The tenth - - - - - 1157
Arranging together the periods distant by 110 or 200 years, we
have 298, 408, 518, 628, 738; 408, 608; 800, 1000; 957, 1157.
It is easy to eonceive that the true period of the celebration might
have been a matter of dispute; that different opinions might predo-
minate at different times, and that this diserepancy might affect the .
celebration of the solemnity. Thus 298, 408, &c. would agree with
the period of 110 years; 957 and 1157 with that of 100. The date.
1000, which comes between the two last, may be accounted for on
the supposition that the emperor Philip, under whom the games of
that year were celebrated, was a partisan of the last-mentioned opinion,
and that he reckoned, not from the year 298, but from the year 100,
in which, according to this caleulatien, the first festivity ought to
bave taken place; or perhaps from 300; which would account also
for the date 800. Or the circumstance of its being the thousandth
year of Rome might induce Philip to disregard the common
calculations. This again might be treated as an irregularity by
Honorius, under whom the last secular games, those of 1157, were:
performed; the date of whieh was perhaps calculated according to
the same period, but from a different epoch, viz. 957. Whether the
games were celebrated in 608, or 628, or both, 1 am at a loss to de-
cide. We are teld, that they were sometimes renewed within ἃ leca _
Ν
352 Miscellanea Classica.
period than either 100 or 110 years by the emperors, for purposes of
their own, under pretence of false calculations; but the nearness of the
two dates above mentioned renders the supposition, as applied to this
case, very improbable. There is little less than 200 years’ difference
between 608 and 800; little more than 100 between 738 and 841;
little more than 110 between 841 and 957. These observations are
merely thrown out as conjectural possibilities; I know not whether
they are likely to afford any light to future investigators. |
XIV. In the eulogy of Simon the son of Onias, Eccles. chap. 1. wv.
6, 7, it is said, ““ He was as the morning star in the midst of a cloud,
and as the moon at full: as the sun shining upon the temple of the
Most High.” Perhaps the emphasis of the latter simile may be illus-
trated from the following passage of Josephus, descriptive of the ex-
terior of the temple: Πλαξὲ χρυσοῦ στιβαροῖς κεκαλυμμένος παντόθεν,
ὑπὸ τὰς πρῶτον ἀνατολὰς πυρωδεστάτην ἀπέπαλλεν αὐγὴν, καὶ roy
βιαδομένων idety ras ὄψειε ὥσπερ ἡλιακαῖς ἀκτῖσιν ἀπέστρεφε. Jos. de
Bell. Jud. v. 14. Josephus, it is true, is here speaking of Herod’s tem-
ple; but it is possible, that even before his time the exterior of the
temple might be overlaid with some material, though not of equal cost-
liness, yet of sufficient splendor to justify the above allusion. We
are told that the spies, whom Cortes sent to make observations on the
city of Mexico, were so struck with the dazzling exterior of the walls,
that they ran back exclaiming, ‘‘ that the walls were made of silver.”
XV. The following expressions, in Bailey’s Hieroglyphics, struck
the writer as of doubtful Latinity: Primum per te suffcerent,
p- 12, 15: docerentur, p. 13, 3: accommodatius, p. 13, penult.:
percipiamus joined with contemplemur, p. 14, paragr. 1, 1. ult.:
fuit, p. 15, 3—16, 183—19, 7—-26, 13—28, 8—49, antepenult.—61,
ult.: videbit, p. 15,7: posse, ἢ. 18, not. |. penult.: dum, p. 20, an-
tepenult.: coluerunt, p. 25, 1: fieret, p. 25, 11: videret, p. 26, 6:
the order of the words, p. 28, 2: an, &c. p. 35, 7, 5644. : contineri,
p. 38, penult.: probabile, p. 39, 10: solere, p. 850, 13: potuit, p. 45,
4: quando, p. 58, not. 4, ). 1: est, p. 64, 2: communen, p. 33, not.
1, 15: subjiciam, p.71, not. 1. 8. The diction of this essay appears to
be in a great measure an imitation of that of Cicero, with an intermix-
ture of Terentian phrases and commentatorial Latin. The prefatory
epistle is particularly Ciceronian.
XVI. Mr. Franks, in his prize Essay on the Magi and the Star in the
East, among other ancient traditions relative to the disappearance of
the star, mentions the following : “The account given by Gregory of
Tours surpasses every other in boldness and improbability; accord-
jug to lim it was precipitated into a pit, being there invisible to all,
except the pure in heart. Yet this strange tradition was prevalent in
the time of Maundrell, to whom the identical pit was shewn.” And
he refers to Calmet in Matt. ii. and Spapheim, Dub. xxvii. 9, and ‘to
Maundrell’s Journey from Aleppo to Jerusalem, p. 87. ed. 1707.
Moore, in bis Lalla Rookh, relates a stratagem af the impostor of
Miscellanea Classica. 358
Khorassan, the hero of one of his stories, which may .be recounted in
the words of d’Herbelot, as quoted by him in a note: ‘ Il amusa pen-
dant deux mois le peuple de la ville de Nekhscheb en faisant sortir
toutes les nuits du fonds‘d’un puits un corps lumineux semblable a
la Lune, qui portoit sa lumiére jusqu’a la distance de plusieurs milles.””
And in another note, ‘‘ According to Richardson, the miracle is per-
petuated in Nekscheb. 4 Nakshab, the name of a city in Transoxiana,
where they say there is a‘well, in which the appearance of the moon
is to be seen night and day.’” These appearances may be accounted
for, as I have somewhere seen one of the kind accounted for, from
physical causes.
XVII. Mr. Hughes, in the notes to his prize poem of Belshazzar’s
Feast, speaks of the walls of Babylon having served as an enclosure for
game to the kings of Parthia about the end of the 4th century (p. 48) ;
and again, of the palace of the Parthian monarchs having been built
by Chosroes in the beginning of the 6th century. For Parthian quere
ersian.
XVIII. In Asch. Pers. Xerxes is called.ypvoovdpou γενεᾶς ἰσόθεος φῶς.
I know not whether the meaning of the epithet χρυσονόμον is to be
illustrated by a passage quoted by Southey in the notes to the Curse of
Kehama (vol. i. p. 153.) from Symes’s Ava: “" Every thing belonging to
the soverign of Ava has the addition of shoe, or golden, annexed to it;
even his majesty’s person is never mentioned but in conjunction with
this precious metal. When a subject means to affirm that the king
has heard any thing, he says, ‘it has reached the golden ears ;’ he
who has obtained admission to the royal presence has been ‘at the
golden feet.’ The perfume of otto of roses, a nobleman observed one
day, ‘‘ was an odour grateful to the golden nose.”
XIX. Thereisa characteristic feature in Virgil’s Georgics, which Ihave
not seen noticed elsewhere. It is the recurrence of a particular orna-
ment, which we may call accumulation ; a successi6n of brilliant parti-
culars, poured forth one after another without intermission, and produ-
cing the effect usually caused by a number of small beauties rapidly
following one another. Such are the descriptions of the invention of arts
and sciences, of the storm, of the symptoms of a storm, and of the
protigies which accompanied the death of Cesar, in the first book; of
spring, of the creation of the world, and of the pleasures of a country
life, in the second; of a horse-race, of the life of the Scythians, and
of the pestilence, in the third; and many other passages. I have
heard the same species of beauty noticed in Homer, and the conclu-
sion of the 12th Hiad adduced as an instance of it; the description of
the Messiah ascending his chariot in the 6th book of Paradise Lost,
was also cited as a passage of the same kind.
XX. In a former number, a passage from Josephus (Bell. Jud. vi.
1. 5.) was quoted as parallel to the following, in Dryden’s Absalom
and Achitophel : ΕΝ .Ν
$54 Miscéllanea Classica.
A fiety soul, that, working out its way,
Fretted the pigmy body to decay,
And o’eritiform'd the tenement of clay.
.. A writer in the European Magazine (Aug. 1808), has quoted the
following passage of Shakspeare, as containing a similar idea to Dry-
en's:
Th’ iacessant care and labor of his mind
Hath wrought the mure that should confine it in
So thin, that life breaks through, and will break out.
Shakspeare, 2d Part of Henry IV. act iv. scene 4.
The exclamation of Ajax in Sophocles (22 θάνατε, θάνατε, «. τ. A.)
was quoted in apposition with the lines of Milton, “ And over them
triumphant Death his dart,” &c. In Rev. ix. 19, we read— And in
those days shall mén seek death, and shall not find it; and shall wish
to die, and sleep shall flee from thein.”
XI. I crave the reader's indulgence for the following attempts
in Greek verse.
1. John Gilpm was a citizen
Of credit did renown;
A trainband captain eke was he
Of famous London town.
Πάλάι vdr’ ἦν res Λονδίνὴης κλείνῃ πόχει
ναϊὼν ἀνὴρ, ὄπαρχοὲ ἀσνεῖον στρατοῦ,
| _ ΓιϑΔκῖνος, ἐμκόροισιν ἔνδοξος μέτά.
4. 111ὰ5 Minor; sive, Pugna Critico-Poetica. _ τς
Horrida Romuleum certamina pango duellum. Ennins.
Μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ καὶ ὀνείδεα κριτικοῦ dvbpés,'
Μώρον θ᾽, ὃς φρεσὶν ἧσιν ἐπίστατο καλὸν ἀείδειν"
of πρχεμῳ ξυνέβησαν ἀεικελίης wept λώβης.
Eix’ dye, Μοῦσά, τι συγγραφέας ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι;
βίῤλιον ἀκριτόμυθον, ὃ δὴ φρένα Μώρον ἔῤρεχθε,
βάλλον yur πυκιναῖσιν ὀνείδεσιν, ὥστε λέοντα,
ὧν ποτε δὴ λάων μεγάλη Is, fe βελεμνῶν,ἨἮ
πλῆξ᾽, ἀδινὸν δ' ἤλγησε κυλινδόμενος περὶ χαλκῷ" ᾿
ὡς τόγε Μώρον θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὄρονσεν"
ὀχθήσας δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν"
7D μοι ἐγὼν, ὅτι με Σκοτίης ἐξ ἠνεμοξσσης
ῥέξε κακὸν, πάτρῃ μάλ᾽ ἐοικὼς hepoerdel, .
ὀὐτιδανός" μέλλει δέ τ᾽ ἐλεύθερον οὗτος Ἔρωτα
obs ἔρξαι δεσμοῖσιν" ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐκ Μιλητόϊο
εἶμι παλαιῆε σπέρμ᾽, ἄνδρων ἐξ αἰχμητάων»
τῷ οὔτις μοι ἔκηλος ἐπεύξεται' abrap 6 πάντας
σίνει ἀτασθαλίῃσι" μένει δ᾽ εἰ δή μιν ἐάσω
arsed se 2
e -» ast Caan ».
ἐν Gade
scribebat.
Miscellanea Clesstca. 353
μαίνεσθαι, raya xev ἀπολᾶσδεναι ἔργον ἀοιδῇ.
τῷ κοῦραί μοι πᾶσαε ὀλοίατο, ἠδὲ yoraires,
εἰ μή μὲν λώβηε ἀποπαύσομαι' οὐδὲ κακὸν ot
σχήσει, ὅτ᾽ ἐκ λόχον αἰὲν Gxorridesy μενεαύνοι, '
eihupsevos νεφελῇ᾽ ἐν γὰρ φάει. αὐτὸν ὁλέσσω."
*H ῥα, καὶ ἐς πόλομον προκάλχένσατο κριτικὸν αἶνον"
aid’ dpa, «ριτερὺς alyos dvyvare’ τῶσε δ᾽ ἄρεσκε
χώρῳ ἐνὶ ῥητῷ ξυμβλημέναε ἀλληλοῖίιν.
Τὺ μὸν ὄνειρα poniBby dpnpdres aiperdevre
βήτην ἐο xéd ov, Erapos 5° Ewer’ dpporepotiy
διργενήο' "Epare δὲ νοήσατο Sia θεάων,
αἶψα δ' ᾿Αθηναίην trea πτερόεντα προσηύδα -
Ἦ μὲν δή μοι παῖδα φίλον, θεὰ éBoysiwkrpn,
ὁρμῶντ᾽ és πόλεμον προτιύσσομει' atrip ἐμοὶ κὴρ
ἄχνυται ἐν στήθεασι" θεοῖσε γὰρ cinédos αὐδὴν
. ἔστι, θεοῖσι δὲ κῆρα, καὶ ἰβαρόεσοαν δοιδήν"
οὐδ᾽ ἄλλου τέως τόσσον ὀδυροίμην' κέλεται. δὲ
ῥῦσαί μὲν θυμύς" σὺ μὲν ἐκ πόνου ἀργαλροῖο
viov Aaepréw radaxéiptey ἐξεσάωφων"
τές νύ μοι ἀμφιεκούαῳ ὠγάσσεται dvép’ ἰδειδόν; .
_ Bev δ᾽ ἠμεέβετ' ἔπειτα θεὰ γλανκῶπές ᾿Αἰθήνη"
Ἦ μάλα δὴ καὶ ἐμοὶ γόσε εἴη, πόγνια Μοῦσα,
ἀνέρος ἀποφθεμένον sokvwphypovds, be περὶ πάντων
ἔστι τε, καὶ πάνγευσιν ἀνάσσενας, οἵ μεν Ὀκήδοι
πολλοὶ ναέουσι Tker(y $n wueradvtcoy’
ot πᾶσιν φυλακὴν ἐπὶ σογγραφέεσσιν ἔχσυσιν,
ἀλλοτρίοε δὲ κακοῖδιν ἐκευκόμενοι yavdwyrut.
GAN’ εἴ δυί τι μέλει, ἴομον" καιρὸς yap ἔπειγει.᾿
Τὸ μὸν dp’ &s εἰκοῦσαι ds’ οὐρανόϑυν καταβήγην.
Mapos δὲ πρῶτος προσεφώνεε κριτικὸν ἀνδρά"
Ἐγγὺς ἀνὴρ, δὲ ἐμὲ βλάψαν, πολλοὺε δὲ καὶ ἀλλοὺς,
Βύρυνα τ᾽ dvriéevr, καὶ ὠμύμονα Μογγαμεραῖον"
τῶν οἷοε πρύστησιι" νὺ δ' ἄθροα πάντ᾽ ἀκογέσευν
Τὸν δὲ Καληδόνιος φρονιμώτερος ἄντιον ηὔδα"
“Hows, οὐκ ἔθος ἐστὶν, οἱ ἕν γεγάασιψ,
ἀντιβίοιο ἐπέεσσιν ἐνίσσεμεν, ἀἐλχὰ μάχεσθαι.
“ἢ: ψάτο' τὸν δὲ βαλεῖν Μῶρος μολέβῳ πνερόεντι
ὥρνντο' καί κεν ἔπαυσε γραφῆς, εἰ μή μεν ᾿Αθήνη
φθῆσε παρισταμένῃ, μολεβὸν δ᾽ ἔκλεψ᾽ ἀπὸ κηλοῦ.
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αϑηναίην προσέφη ᾿Ερατὼ ἑλικῶπις"
Τοῖοι πάμπαν ἐοῖςν, ὅτε μαχεσαίατ᾽, ἄοιδοι.
“Ὡς φάτο' μείδησεν de θεὰ γλανκῶκις ᾿᾿Αθήνη.
Μῶρον & αὖ βαλέειν ὡρμήσατο κριτικὸς dv he"
καί ny ἔπεφν᾽ (οὐ γάρ x’ ἅλιον προέηκε βέλεμνον),
ΜΕΝ
5 δὴ ἔκ λόχου ably ἀκοντίζειν μι αἴνει Elxopives νεφολῇ.. Ecilicet quad enacyue
$56 | Miscellanea Classica. '
ἀλλ᾽ Ἐρατὼ περίβη, μόλιβον δ᾽ ἔκλεψ᾽ ἀπὸ κηλοδ. °
Μῶρος: δ᾽ ἐῤῥίγησεν" ὁ δ᾽, εἰ ἑτεὺν τόγ᾽ ἴδοινο,
oxéxrero’ παντὰ γὰρ ἐν Σκοτίῃ βρότοι ἀμφιβολοῦσι»
ἀλλὰ & φῆ ληθῇ μολέβον βάρος οὐκ ἐπιθεῖναι. .
Kal vi κεν ἢ ξιφέεσσι συνέδραμον, ἠὲ μολίβδῳ
αὖθι νέον’ τόσση γὰρ ἐπῆν Eps ἀμφοτέρωθεν"
εἰ μὴ ᾿Αθήνη, παιδὶ περιδδείσασ᾽, 'Ερατώ re, -
παρστήτην, φυλάκεσσιν ἐοικυῖαι πολιήταις,ἢ
κάἀδδ' ἄγον ἐκ πεδίου" τετέλεστο δὲ ἔργον" Apnos.”
XXII. The following are a continuation of the parallel passages.
1. Crimine quo merui javenis, placidissime Divaém,
Quove errore miser, donis-ut solus egerem,
Somne, tuis? Tacet omne pecus, volucresque, ferzeque,
Et simulant fessos curvata cacumina somnos,
Nec trucibus fluviis idem sonus; occidit horror
Equoris, et terris maria acclinata quiescunt. Stat. Syly.
-..-.- thrice did the Sun
Cheer all the world but me, thrice did the Moon
With silent and bewitching darkness give
A pause of rest to every thing but Aphror. . ——-
The fish, the beasts, the birds, the smallest creature,
And the most despicable, snor’d securely,
The aguish head of every tree by.Holus
Was rock’d asleep, and shook as if it nodded.
The crooked mountains seem’d to bow and.slumber,
The very rivers ceas’d their daily murmurs;
Nothing did wake, but the pale Moon, and {,
Paler than she. . Cowley’s Love's Riddle, act iv. sc. 7.
Ferro atque audacié via est, quamvis per confertos hostes.
- Liv. xxii. 50.
Ferro rumpenda per hostes.
Est via, qua globus ille virhm densissimus urget :
Hac vos et Pallanta ducem patria alta yeposeit.
- : εὖ Virg. ZEn. x. 372.
3. Εἰρωτᾷς μ᾽ ἐλθόντα, θεὰ, Oedvy;. .° .. Hem. Od.E.
Extemplo Turni sic est affata sororemi
Diva Deam. ———— γι. En. xii. 138.
4. A ship is termed ‘horse of the floods.” Lord Kaimes, Sketches,
p. 156, speaking of the figures of Icelandic poetry. ===
1 φυλάκεσσι---πολιήταιΞ. Ang). Bow-street officers. = |. og,
2 The laws of the digamma have not been. accurately observed in this
composition: those who are dissatisfied with the omission, will, we hope, by -
proper correetions, restore.the true redding in the requisite-places. The cir-
cumstances. of_the story also, we believe, are not narrated with perfect his-
torical accuracy : how far the licence of poetry justifies the deviation, we
Teave the reader to determine. .
Miscellanea Classica. 357
----.-...:----.- οὐδέ τί μιν χρῆν
νηῶν ὠκυπόρων ἐκιβαίνεμεν; αἴθ' ἁλός ἵπποι
ἄνδρασι γίγνονται
5. Οὐδ᾽ εἴ μοι τόσα δοίη, ὅσα ψάμαθός τε κόνις τε,
οὐδὲ καὶ ὡς ἔτι θυμὸν ἐμὸν πείσει’ ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
πρὶν γ᾽ ἀπὸ πᾶσαν ἐμοὶ δόμεναι θυμαλγέα λώβην. Hom. ΤΙ. I.
Hom. Οα. A.
᾿ καί μ' οὔτι μελιγλώσσοις πειθοῦς
ἐπκαοιδάϊσιν θέλξει, στερεάς τ᾽
οὔποτ᾽ ἀπειλὰς πτήξας, τόδ᾽ ἐγὼ
καταμηνύσω, πρὶν ἂν ἐξ ἀγρίων
δέσμων χαλάσῃ, ποινάς τε τίνειν
- τῆσδ᾽ αἰκίας ἐθελήσῃ. sch. Prom. 179, ed. Blomf.
6. Abde caput, Benace, tua et te conde sub amne,
Victrices nec jam deus interlabere lauros.
racastorius, Syph. i.
Nec qui late, Benace, ad odora
Porrigeris nemora, et densam interlabere laurum.
Parkes, Trip. ap. Mus. Crit. tom. i.
7. γνναικὸς ὧν δούλευμα, μὴ κώτιλλέ με. Soph. Ant. 756.
—— Degen’rate man!
“Thou woman’s property! what mak’st thou here?
᾿ς Dryd. En. v.
, cuperem ipse parens spectator adesset.
Virg. En. x. 443.
8. πον
Sic videor duro posse placere patri.
Ipse necis cuperem nostre spectator adesset.
-Ov. Ep. Can. Mac.
9. ᾿ Falsus erit testis, vendet perj uria summa
Exigu4 ——-———— Juv. Sat. xiv. 218.
When perjury, that heaven-defyi ing vice,
Sells oaths by tale, and at the lowest price.
Cowper, Table Talk.
——_—__———— Alea turpis,
Turpe et adulterium mediocribus; hc eadem illi
Omnia cum faciant, hilares nitidique vocantur.. Juv. Sat. xi.
———*— that confident address,
Those habits of profuse and lewd expense,
That scorn of all delights but those of sense,
Which, though in plain plebeians we condemn,
With 80 muc reason all expect of them. -
Cowper’s Tirocinium.
tum cardine tellus
Subsedit, veteremque jugis nutantibus Alpes
Discussere nivem. -~——
10.
1].
Cason. 1, 892.
358 | Miscellanea Classics.
Dire earthquakes rent the solid Alps below,
And from their sammiits shook th’ eternal snow.
Dtyd. Georg. i.
The original is simply “ insolitis tremuerunt motibus Alpes.”
So Statius:
trepidavit humus, motusque Citheron
Antiquas dedit ire pives. -- —— Stat. Theb. iii. 37.
AsI have noticed an unauthorised addition of Dryden's to the text
of Virgil, I may observe, that the line in the 6th Eol,
And through the matted gtaes the Βάυδα gold shail creep,
is not in the original. There is a moré ludicrous interpolation in the
8th Eneid. Virgil says,
-- ο΄. passimque ativenta videbant
Romanoque foro et liratis tugire Cuirinis. 361. '
Which Dryden thus improves :
Once oxen low’d, where now the lawyers baw.
14, Vilis Europe, pater urget absens,
Quid mori cessas? petes hac ab orne
Pendulum zon bene te secutae- __ .
lidere collum. Hor. Lib. iii. Od. 27, 1. 57.
Mammon, in Cumberland’s Calvary, tempting Judas Iscariot to de-
stroy himself says:
Behold
This cord, a relic of thy Master's bonds ;
A legacy most opyior'tunely left
To heal thy cares, and récompénse thy love:
Ii tied his Timbs let it encase thy throat. Calvary, B. vi.
13. Claudian thus describe’ the deity of the Po ring from his
stream, on the news of the defeat of Alaric :
Dixerat: ille caput madidis sublimé Huentis
Extulit, et totis lucem spargentia ripis ᾿
Aurea roranti micuerant cornua vultu. - - - «
Fultaque sub gremio ¢zlatis nobilis astris
/Etherium probat urna decus. - - - - - - - -
Sic fatus, Ligiites Venetosque erection aininés
Magné voce eiet. Frondeiti ripts
Colla levant, pulctrer Ticinus, εἰ Addua visu
Cerulus, et velox Athesib, tirdusyue meata
Mincius, imyue névem Lonvargens ora Timavus.
Chad. vi. Gons. Hon. 160.
Sb Pope in Windsor Forest, commemorating the general pacification
of Europe:
In that plest monet from his cosy bed
Old father Thames adwanc’d bie Were’ feeds
Miscellanea Classica. 359
His tresses dropt with dews, and o’er thé streain .
His shining horns diffus’d a gelden gleam:
Grav’d on his urn appears the moon, that guides
His swelling waters, and alternate tides: - - -
Around his throne the sea-born brothers stood,
Who swell with tributary urns his flood:
First, the fam’d authors of his ancient name,
The winding Isis, and the fruitful Thame:
The Kennet swift, for silver eels renown’d ;
The Loddon alow, with verdant alders crown’d ;
Cole, whose dark streams his flow’ry islands lave ;
And chalky Wey, that roils a milky wave:
The blue transparent Vandalis appears, &c.
Pope’s Windsor Forest.
For the similarity (or rather imitation) in the first lines of these two
passages, I am indebted to a friend ; as also for the words of a passage
from Tasso, which will hereafter be quoted.
14, ————— et Nar vitiatus ofloro
Sulphure --
_ Claud. Cons. Prob. et Olyb. 266.
And hoary Albule’s infected tide |
O’er the warm bed of smoking sulphor glide.
Addison, Letter from Italy,
15, Sic fatus, crdceis rorantes ignibus hortos
Ingreditur, vallemque suam, quain flammeus ambit
Rivus, et irriguis largum jubar ingerit herbis. —
. Claud. de Laud. Stilich. ii. 467.
A similar fiction occurs in Southey’s Thalaba.
A Fount of Fire, that in the centre play’d,
Sptéad all atoand its wond’rous rivulets,
Aad warm’d the garden with the heat of life.
Thalaba, Book x.
16. ἃ (vitia scilicet) οὕτω χαλεπῶς ἄρχει τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὧν ἂν ἐπι-
νρατήσωγσιν, ὥσθ᾽, ἕως μὲν ἂν ὁρῶσιν ἡβῶντας αὐτοὺς καὶ δυναμένους ἐργά-
ἔεσθαι, ἀναγκάξουσι φέρειν, ἃ ἂν αὐτοὶ ἐργάσωνται' ἐπειδὰν δὲ αὐτοὺς
'ἀδυνᾶτδυι ἀϊσθωντὰι ὄντας ἐῤγάθεσθάει διὰ τὸ γῆρας, ἀπολείπουσι τούτους
κακῶς γηράσκειν, ἄλλοις δ' αὖ πειῤῶνται δούλοις χρῆσθαι. Xen. CEcon.
1. 22.
Thiis las some résemblance to the thought of Gray:
Light they disperse, aiid with them go
The summer friend, the flatt'ring foe ;
By vain Prosperity receiv’d,
To her they pay thelr vows, and are again believ’d. |
| Gray’s Hymp to Adversity.
17. Statius, in his Achilleid, thus describes the effect produced oa
360
Miscellanea Classica.
Achilles by the sight of the armour which Ulysses exhibited before
At ferus Eacides radiantem ut commus orbem =.
Celatum pugonis sevis et forte rubentem
Bellordm maculis, acclinem et conspicit bastam, ἡ
Infremuit —— --.-.--
Ut leo, materno cum raptus 8}» ubere mores
Accepit, pectique jubas, hominemque vereri
Edidicit, nullasque ruit nisi jussus in iras,
Si semel adverso radiavit lumine ferrum,
It jurata fides, domitorque inimicus; in illum
Prima fames, timidoque pudet servire magistro.
Ut vero accessit propius, luxque emula vultum
Reddidit, et similem tandem se vidit in auro,
Horruit, erubuitque simul. — Stat. Achill. ii.
So Tasso, describing Rinaldo’s emotions at the sight of armour,
displayed before him by Ubaldo, compares him to a war-horse roused
from habitual indolence by the sound of a trumpet; and then pre-
ceeds:
18.
Hamlet. ——
Intanto Ubaldo oltra ne viene, e Ἶ terso
Adamantino scudo ha in lui converso.
Egli al lucido scudo il guardo gira ;
Onde si specchia in lui qual siasi, e quanto
Con delicato culto adorno, spira
Tutto odore e lascivie il crine e Ἶ manto;
ΕἸ ferro (il ferro aver non ch’ altro mira
Dal troppo lusto effeminato acanto)
Guernito ἃ si, ch’ inutile ornamento
Sombra, non militar fere ornamento.
Gierus. L. Canto xvi. st. 29.
OL. ἡ δ᾽ ὠφέλησις ris θύραεισι κειμένου ;
ΙΣ. κείνοις ὁ τύμβος δυστυχῶν ὁ σὺς βαρύς.
ΟΙ. κἄνεν θεοῦ τις τοῦτό γ᾽ ἂν γνώμῃ μάθοι.
Soph. Ged. Col. 401.
There’s ne’er a villain, dwelling in all Denmark,
But he’s an arrant knave.
Horatio. There needs no ghost, my lord, come from the grave
19.
To tell us this. Shakspeare, Hamlet.
-queis modo liberi
Festo choreas agmine plausimus,
Delphines insultant plateis,
Et vacuas spatiosa cete
Ludunt per aulas, ac thalamos pigree
.Pressere phocre.
Casim.
Stanleti Note quedam tn Callintachum. 361:
and in their palaces,
Where luxury late reign’d, seasmonsters whelp'd
And stabled. ————- Milton, Par. L. Book xi.
20. Alterno redeunt choro
Risus et Gemitus, et madidis prope
Sicci cum Lacrymis Joci.
Nascuntur mediis Gaudia Luctibus. Casim,
Still, where rosy Pleasure leads,
See a kindred Grief pursue ;
Behind the steps that Mis’ry treads,
_ Approaching Comfort view. Gray.
21. Attonite novus hospes aure. Casim.
Cerulez novus hospes aure. Lawson. Od. ad Cometam.
22. Frustra: nam in urna surdus et immemor
Jacebo pulvis. ———___-__- : Casim:
Heu nos in urna surdus et immemor :
Pulvis, fugato Sole, jacebimus. Lawson. ibid,
23. And the long grass o’ertops the mouldering wall.
Goldsmith’s Deserted Village.
And seas of sand o'ertop thy mould’ring wall. ᾿
: Heber’s Palestine.
CECILIUS METELLUS.
eo
---ςς---Ἐς-ς-ς-ςςς .-ςς-.-.---.-ς--.---τ |
STANLEII NOTZ QUEDAM IN
CALLIMACHUM.
No. L1.—{Continued from No. XX XIII. p. 197.]
Εἰς “Aprepiy.
2. ᾿χαγωβολίαι Per λαγωβολίαν quamlibet ferarum venationem
κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν intelligit, ut annotat Interpres : lepus enim inter feras,
quz in venationem cadunt, excellit; quo sensu (ut Ritterhusio
placer) Oppianus, lepores, θήρης ἐρίδωρον ὀπώρην dicit ad fin. lib. ni.
8. ἐψιάασθαι.) In alio (inquit Robertellus) scribitur ὑψιάασθαι,
prior verd lectio multo melior¢ loquitur enim de Diana Callina,
chus, cui cure est:
Καὶ χορὸς ἀμφιλαφὴς ya ἐν οὔρεσιν ἐψιάοσθαι.
362 Stanleii Note quadam in Caliimachum.
i.e. Junctarum tnter se manuum chorus, et ludere in monttbus;
est enim ἐψιάασθαι ludere, ui est in p Odyss. in extremo feré:
Οὗτοι δ᾽ ἠὲ Odpyos καθήμενοι ἐψιάασθων. B.
7. Καὶ πολυωνυμίην. Hominum multitudo exoptatissima numinibus
gloria. Onomacriti (vel, ut alii, Orphei) hymnos mitto, qui Inev-
Jentissimum hujusce rei specimen prebent; et de Astrochitonis
nominibus quadraginta plus minus carmina, ubi Bacchus μύστιδι
(ut ait Nonnus) Φωνῇ precatur, moneo. Habentur in Dionysiac.
40. Ab hoc ritu [sis μυριώνυμος dicta est. S.
14. ἀμίτρους.] Schol. ἀζώστους, μὴ διαιπαρθενευομέγας. μίτρας γὰρ
ἐζώγγυντο, ἃς ἔλυον ὅταν ἔμελλον διαιπαρθενεύεσθαι optime {nec enim est
quod Barthio displiceat). Homer Il. A. Μῆσε δὲ παρθενίην ζώνῃ,
Gloss. ἀντὶ τοῦ διεπαρθένευσεν, zonam, qua precincta nova nupta,
solvebat maritus. Festus Pomp. Cingulo nova nupta praecinge-
batur, quod vir in lecto solvebat ; factum'ex lan4 ovis, &c. Varro
γεροντιδιδασχάλῳ. ᾿
Novus maritus tacitus taxim pxoris solvebat cingulum.
Idem apud August. :
Virgini uxori zqna solvitur.
Que zonam solvit diu ligatam—
Plut. ἔλυε τὴν ζώνην ὁ νυμφίος, quod Theocr. Id. 10. λῦσε μίτρην.
Hinc apud Grecos “Aprepis “υσιζώνη, que Latinis Juno Cinzia.
Festus. Cinzia Junonis nomen sanctum habebatur in nupitis,
quod initio conjugti solutio erat cingult quo nova nupta erat cincta.
Arnob. lib. iv. Unztonibus superest Unzia; Cingulorum repliea-
tront Cinzia. Gratiarum aone solute cur? Vid. Lamb. in Horat.
Carm.1. 30. )
E contrario λυσιζώνους Greeci puellas Venerem expertas vocant
(Muret. in Catull.) Suid. λυσίζωνος γυνή" ἣ ἄνδρι πλησιάσασω al rs
παρθένοι μέλλουσαι πρὸς μίξιν ἔρχεσθαι ἀνετίθεσαν τὰς παρθενικὰς αὐτῶν
ζώνας τῇ ᾿Δρτέμιδι.
16. ἐνδρομίδας.}Ὡ Qua sunt ὑποδήματα θηρευτικὰ εἰς τὸν δρόμον ἐπι»
τήδεια. Ea Pollux ita describit: Κοῖλα, sis μέσην κνήμην ἀνήκονξαι,
δεσμῷ ἀκριβεῖ περεσταλμένα. Latiné semiplotia dici annotat Pet.
Crinitus dc Poetis Latinis.
20. πολέσιν δ᾽ ἐπιμίξομαι.]7 Ovidius eodem genere dicendi
utitur, Fast, 1.
Stanleit Note quadam in Cailimachum. 368
pattens cum terra deorum
Esset, et humanis numina mixta locis.
41. ὀξείησιν ὑπ᾽ ὠδίνεσσι.} Περὶ τῆς Εἰλειθυίας vide Callimachi dis-
cipulum Apollonium lib. 1. Argon. et Scholiasten ejus.
Oppianus Hal. iv.—péye δή τι περιτρομέοντι ἐοικὼς
*/N3iveox—comparatio frequentissima. Vehementes. dolo-
res doloribus parturientium comparari solent, ut passim in Scrip-
turf. Ps. xli. 7. Eccl. xiviii. 21. Isai. xii. 8. Mich. iv. 9.
1 Thess. v. S. et Hom. 1. 4. B.
28. πατὴρ: δ᾽ ἐπένενσε γελάσσα;.} Olli subridens hominwn pater,
94. &éfew.} Vid. Nonnus in Joann, cap. νὴϊ1. τον θεὸς ποιησὸς ἀκξή-
ϑης Σαμορείτοις et ἀτιφτάλλειν eodem sensu Theocr. Adyll. 15.
*"Apcwha κάντοσσι καλοῖς ἀτιτάλλει "Αζωνιν.
Laetini codem sepgu Magture. Nonius Marcellus intespretatuk
Mactare, honorave ; item magis augere. Cic. de Rep. Ferunt
leudibys, mactant honortbus. Lactantius Firmianus, lb. v. de
Justitié, v. cap.§. Eas laudant et honoribus mactant, ut eorum
eremplo ceteros eliciant. B.
41. Λευκὸν ἐπὶ x. τ. λ.} Catullus, studiasus -Callimachi imitator, -
‘wn Phaselo:
Comata syloa : nam Cytherio in jugo
τς Loquente sape sibilum edidst coma.
47. Νήσῳ in Μιπάρῃ x. τ. 7 Diod. Sic. hb. v. de Lipareis i in-
sulis, sios τὸν ἀριῆμὸν x. r.A. Strabo, lib. vi. "Exadgiro δὲ πράτερον
Μελιγοῦνις.
57. Ave δὲ Tpwvaxply] Sicilia, a tnibus ὥχροις, seu promontoriis,
sic dicta, Lilybeo, Pachyno, et Peloro. Schol. Apol. iv. Argon.,
Justin. Epit. iv. Hist. Verba hec sunt: Sictlse postea Trinacria
nomen fuit. Postea Sicania cognominata est, &c. Inde ab Op-
piano tplvaxpis νῆσος vocatur. Claud. De Consul. Mall., trifidam
Sicaniam dicit. Latini similiter Triquetram appellfrunt, teste
Servio. Ovid. Fast. iv.
Terra tribus scopults.vastum procurrit in @quor,
Trinacria a posttu nomen adepta loct.
60. σίδηρον ᾿Αμβολαδὶς τεχύποντες.)] Virg. Georg. iv.
Tuli inter sese πιαρνᾶ vi brachia tollunt
In numerum.——— quod Schol. ἐχ διαδοχῆς.
364. Stanlett Note quedam in Callimachum:
Q5. καὶ οὐ μύοντα λαγωόν.] Quem Nicander δερκευνῆ, Suidas ex-
ponit παρὰ τὸ δέρκειν εὐνάζοντα, qudd dormiens nihilominus videat.
Alias ἀσκαρδαμυχτὸν, i.e. inconvenientem dicimus.. Oppiat.
ov ποτε γὰρ δὴ
Ὕπνον ἐπὶ βλεφάροισιν ἀποβρίξαντες ἕλοντο.
Somnus Leporinus in proverbium quoque abiit, ut dicatur λαγώς
καθεύδων, ἐπὶ τοῖς καθεύδειν προσποιουμένων, ut alt Suidas.
96. “Torpixos.] Optima Scholiasten emendavit Ritterhusius,
dum pro ταχύτατον reposuit τραχύτατον vel τρηχύτατον" neque enim
celerrimum animal est Hystrix, séd asperrimum facilé ; τρυχὰς ἔχον
ὑὸς, ἃς ἐν τῷ διώκειν ἐξακοντίζει κατὰ τῶν διωχόντων (Suid.) quod idem
et Aristot. ix. Hist. Anim., et Atheneus v., et Plin: c. xxxv. et
Solinus, Oppianusque Cyneg. 11]. et Isid. xii. 2. de illis referunt. B.
101. μελαμψηφίδος Avadgov.] Schol. ποταμὸς Θεσσαλίας" sic et
Apolloni Prolegomena, γενόμενος δὲ ἐν τῷ ᾿Αναύρῳ ποταμῷ" tort
οὗτος Θεσσαλίας: Nicholaus Lorensis ver probare conatur per
Anaurum nihil aliud intelligi quam magnum torrentem, quorum
ia Thessalia undique montibus cincté magnam esse copiam veri
simile est. Miscell. Epiphill. v. 21. quem sis adeas. B.
102. xspawy δὲ x.7.A.] Ubi Scholiastes hoc thnquam novum
notat. Multi tamen auctores etiam foeminis cornua attribuerunt,
ut Pind. Olymp. 3. χρυσωκέρων ἔλαφον θηλεῖαν. Quanquam Pollux
τῶν ἐλάφων ἀκέρως ἣ θηλεῖα, et Aristoteles De Part. Anim. iii. 1.
ubi causam reddit | cur cervi tantim cornua habeant, cervée non
item. B.
E Suida, *Acxyrav χρυσῷ παμφανόοντι κέρας.
126. κείρονται.) Trischleni versio babet, Trucidantur item senet
super filtis, sua metrica, Orbanturque senes matresque— .
Nec significationem verbi κείρομαι nec sensum percepit poets :
χείρομαι enim vult tondeor, ut sepius apud Homerum xslpagta
κόμην, et in Epigr.
“Ημετέραις βουλαῖς Σπάρτη μὲν ἐκείρατο δόξοιν,
Interprete Cicerone,
Consilits nostrts laus est attonsa ‘Laconum.
Fugit eum mos veterum, qui amicos coma tonsa lugebant. 5.
Sic apud Theocritum Cupidinis necem Adonidis lugent, κειράμε-
yos χαΐτας ; Achilles apud Homerum ἀπεκείρατο χαίτην, [1|αὰ ¥;
Quod coma togs# funus honorrunt veteres, nimis potam,
_ Stanler Note quedam in Callimachum. 365
136. ὅστις ἀληθής.) Sic Plaut. Mostellar. Ego verum amo:
verum volo dict mihi: Mendacem odi.
156. ἔργα.] Vulcanius ἔργον deductum existimat ἀπὸ τῆς ἔ ἔρας,
i.e. a tellure, et proprié ἔργα. significare τὰ κατὰ τὴν γεωργίαν,
ut in hoc loco. Ritterhusius verd ad illud Oppiani, Hal. i.
— ἴογα τ' ὀνισκῶν,
ἀπὸ τοῦ ῥέζειν τὸ ἔργον derivat; quia (inquit) et nomen ἔργον, uti et
verbum ἐργάζεσθαι absolutum spe rem divinam significat, ut La-
tunis quoque operari et facere.
160. d8npaylys.]Voracitas, que et Oppian.(Hal.i.) ἀδήφαγον οἶστρον.
189. τὰ δὲ dea] Φάεα pro diebus, et Hymn. in Cerer. 82.
ὁ δ᾽ ἐννέα φαΐεα κεῖται.
Loquendi modus a Latinis etiam usurpatus. Catull. xvii,
Placabis festis luminibus Venerem ;
Et Ennius, δὲ te secundo lumine hic offendero, S,
911. ἶσον φάεσσι φιλῆσαι. Amor oculorum velut proverbium .
guoddam celebratur Oppian. Hal. i.
καὶ φάεος γλυκερώτερα καὶ βιότοι. 8.
Huc facit quod Hebrexi de re quam quis diligenter et cum curé
custodit dicunt, διαφυλάττειν ὡς κόρην ὀφθαλμοῦ. Deut. χχχὶϊ. Sirac.
svii. Prov. vii. Psalm. xvi. Vid. Muret. Var. Lect. ix. 1., et
Q15. ᾿Αταλάντην.] Atalante duz fuerunt; altera Schoenei filia,
lasii altera, quam et Callimachus in Diane comitatu recenset ;
ejusdemque meminit Apollonii Scholiastes, et prolixe Elianus,
Var. Hist. xiii. init.
253. Ψψαμάθῳ σον] Rom. ix. 17. ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς bargooys, et
Gen. xxx. 12. Greg. Nazianz. Orat. De Spiritu Sancto: Ne
tlla quidem scire possumus qua ante pedes sunt; nec arenas
marium, guttas pluvia, aut dies ev? rumerare. Frequenter τὸ
ἡμαθῶδες ut Anacr, Epigr. xxxii, et τὰ appaxdasa pro infinito
accipiunt. . Alexis Comicus in Hippisco apud Atheneum vi. 5.
-et Eupol. in fabulé que Χρυσοῦν Γένος inscripta fuit, apud Schol,
- Aristophanis, in Acharnensibus v. 3. ad vocem Ψαμμακχοσιογαφγαρα,
de quo Macrob. Sat. v. 20., Desiderius in Chiliad. arithmetic&
terminatione Arenaginta ex Athenzo. B.
265. ᾿Ωαρίων. Catullus de Coma Berenices, QOarion ; Nicand.
Theriac. Pind. et alii. Vid. Politian. Obsery. Syll. i. 59.
YOL, XVIT. Ομ“. ΝΟ. XXXIV, QB
366
COMMENTATIO
AD INSCRIPTIONEM ACTIACAM,
AUCTORE CLARISS.
Je F. BOISSONADE,'
AD INSCRIPTIONEM ACTIACAM |
COMMENTATIO
p p
V. REV. P. P. DOBRAEO
REI EPIGRAPHICAE
PERITISSIMO
ALMAE CANTABRIGIENSIS
ORNAMENTO.
Vir doctissimus, Facultatis Literarum Parisine Decanus, et Aca-
demiz que ab Inscriptionibus Humanioribusque Literis nomen habet
socius, Barbizus de Bocagio, singulari, quz_ipsi ingenita est, huma-
nitate, inscriptionem Grecam, a V. Cl. Pouquevillio, Gallico Con-
sule, an. CIDICCCCXIII Actiiinventam, mecum communicavit, quam,
‘si vellem, explicarem et commentario illustrarem. Occasionem ex-
eolendi studii epigraphici, quo fui semper mirifice delectatus, oblatam
™ Cum Valpius, vir amiciss., mihi significasset in eo esse se ut Ephe-
.meridi Classice meam de Inscriptione Actiaca Commentationem inse-
reret, guam Elolstenianis Epistolis a me nuper editis comjtem feci, pete-
retque ‘correctiones et supplementa ocyus mitterem, si quid forte id genus
“haberem ad manum ; viro optimo et mihi faventi sic parui, ut nihil in ipso
textu immutarem, nisi σφάλματα paucula typographica, notulasque tantum
nonnullas ad calcem adponerem. Paris. Jan. mpcccxviul. |
Comment. ad Inscript. Agtiacam.
omittere nolui, et intra octiduum in consessu Academiz hoc qualecum-
que demum est dissertationis vernaculo sermone recitavi, quam nunc
edo Latine, nonnullis subinde auctam observatiunculis. Sed, inquis,
quorsum hec temporis mentio in opere non coacto? Ut, re non felj-
citer gesta, excusatior ideo videar, cum paucos saltem male perdide-
rim dies. En ipsa inscriptionis verba, ex Pouquevilliano autographo,
descripta fideliter.
1, EPI JEPAPOAOY TOI ADOAAQNI TOI 1. Hierapolo Apollinis Actiaci Phile-
ΟΣ
AKTIOI ΦΙΛΗΜΟΝΟΣ ΠΡΟΜΝΑΜ
2. AE ATHTAPOXOY NIKIA ΑΛΥΖΕΙΟΥ͂
SYMI"POMNAMONODON AE NAT
SIMAXOT TOY APISTOKAEOS Az
TAKOY ΦΙΛΟΞΕΝΟΥ͂ TOT HPAKAEI
4. TOY SOITIANOS TPAMMATEOS AE
TAI BOTAAI ΠΡΟΙΤΟΥ͂ ΤΟΥ AIO
5. ΠΕΙΘΕΟΣ MATPOIOAITA ΚΟΥ͂ΡΟ-
ΠΟΥ 9 EAOZE TAI BOTAAI KAI
6. ΤΩΙ KOINOI TON AKAPNANAQN ΓΡΟ-
ἘΕΝΟΥ͂Σ EIMEN KAI
7. ἘΥΕΡΓΕΤΑΣ TOY ΚΟΙΝΟΥ͂ TON A-
KAPNANON KATA
8. TON NOMON AFASIAN ΟΛΥΜΙΠΩ-
NOX ΠΑΤΡΗ I"
9,.OF'AION AEYKION TOTS rOralor
AKIAIOTS PQOMAIOTS
10. KAI EIMEN ΑΥ̓ΤΟΙ͂Σ KAI EKTONOIZ
EN AKAPNANIAI ΑΣΦΑΛΕ
11. IAN ΚΑΙ ATOZ KAI XPHMASI KAI
KATA TAN KAI KATA
12, @AAASZAN KAI ΠΟΛΕΜΟΥ KAI
EIPANAZ KAI Az KAI
13. OIKIAZ EIKTIZIN KAI TA AAAA
TIMIA KAI ΦΙΛΑΝΘΡΩΙΤΑ
14. MANTA OSA KAI ΤΟΙ͂Σ AAAOIZ
ΠΡΟΞΕΝΟΙΣ KAI
15. EYTEPTETAL2 TOT KOINOY TON
AKAPNANON
16; YT APXE!.
3.
‘ mone, Promnemone
2, autem Agetarocho Niciz F. Alysio,
Sympromnemonibés autem Nan-
$. simacho Aristoclis F. Astacio, Phi-
loxeno Heracli-
4. ti F. Phetiane; Ab actis autem Se-
natui Preto Dio-
867.
ὅ. pithis F. Matropolita; Curopi-:«-
Placuit Senatui et
6. Communi Acarnanensium Hospites |
esse et
7. Benefactores Communis Acarnanen-
sium, secundum
8. legem, Agasiam, Olympionis F. Pa-
trensem, P-
9. ublium, Lucium, Publii FF. Acilios,
Romanos,
10, et esse ipsis posterisque in Acarna- ©
nia securita-
11. tem et ipsis et rebus ipsorum, terra
atque ἡ
12. mari, et in bello et in pace, et soli
et .
13. domicilii possessionem, et cetera
honorifica atque commoda .
14. omnia queecumque et aliis Hospiti-
bus et
15. Benefactoribns Communis Acar-
nanensium
16. contingunt.
ACARNANENSIUM hoc decretum, ni fallor, usque dum unicum est.
Ex Thucydide’ novimus quidem ipsis cum Atheniensibus atque Am-
braciotis foedera fuisse pacta, sed ipsa feederum acta perierunt. Non
ω
diffiteor rem ipsam de qua decernitur, προξενέαν nempe et εὐεργεσίαν,
; j
a eee
“ * 1S, 68: II, 114.
368 Commentatio ad
vulgarem esse et jam aliarum notam inscriptionum formulis ; sed si
nihil via obtulerit quod sit notabile, per diverticula forte oberravisse.
proderit.
Vers. 1. ἘΠῚ IEPATIOAOY. Etsi ἱεραπόλος ipsa formationis vi
possit esse omnino sacerdos et sacrificulus, crediderim tamen hic esse
proprium κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν sacerdotis Apollinis Actiaci nomen. Idem no-
men titulusve reperitur in pulchro Geloorum decreto * cujus adponam
prima verba: .
ἘΠῚ IEPATIOAOY APIZTIQNOZ
TOY IXTIEOY
Agnoscitur et in hac Sicula wnseriptione:*
ἘΠῚ YEPATIO .
TOY ®IAOAA .
Sic Ἱεροθύτης pro titulo est, in duobus decretis, altero Agrigentine-
rum,’
ἘΠῚ IEPOOYTA
NYM®OANPOY ΤΟΥ ΦΙΛΩΝΟΣ,
altero Melitensium : *
ἘΠῚ IEPOOYTOY IKETA IKETOY. .
Et cum Philemon Hierapolus in ipsa decreti fronte primus nominetur,
statuendum est apud Acarnanenses Hierapolum fuisse eponymum,
quemadmodum Athenis Archontum primus fuit eponymus ; > Spartz
primus Ephororum;° Agrigenti et Melite Hierothytes, Gelz Hiera-
polus, ut patet ex modo adlatis inscriptionibus ; Byzantii Hieromne-
mon, quod notissimum est ex Decreto illo insigal apud Demosthenem,’
ἐπὶ ἱερομνάμονος Booroplyw. Van Dalius,’ Falconerius,® Patinus,’° alia
exhibent horum Eponymorum exempla.
Vers.1. IEPATIOAOY TOI ATIOAAONI. Nullus dubito quin
pro TOI reponendum sit ΤΩΙ. TOI errore legitur vel lapicide vel
descriptoris. Td 1 per omnes versus conspicitur : TOI forma est scri-
bendi longe antiquior nec hujus loci. Notanda syntaxis, ἱεραπόλου τῷ
᾿Απόλλωνι τῷ *Axrig, pro ἑερ. τοῦ ᾿Απόλλωνος τοῦ ’Acriov: quo etiam
ΟΣ Ap. Castell. Inser. Sic. p. 78; Taylor. ad Demosth. Coron. p. 189, Harl.,
etc. * Ap. Castell. p. 81, etc, ὅ Grut. p. 401; Castell. Ὁ. 78, etc. *Grut.
p- 400; Castell. p. 76, etc, “5 Cf, Wessel. Observ. 11, c. 25; Villoison, Mém.
de l’Acad. des B. L.,t. XLVII, p. 2995. ©Cf. Van Dal. l.c. p. 757. Vive
Apvpvenpa. 7 De Corona §. 27. ὃ Dal. ]. c. p. 280. Cf. Castell. 1. c. p. Ixiv.
9 Inscr. Athlet. τ VIII, Thes. Gron. p. 2316 ἢ. *° In Suppl. Poleni. τ. I,
,}» 1067.
Inscriptionem Aetiacam. 369
modo inferiuslegitur versu, γραμματέως τῷ βουλᾷ, pro yp. τᾶς Bovdas. 1116
dativi usus loco genitiviet in optimis invenitur scriptoribus. Vir Greece
doctissimus hanc syntaxim apud Thucydidem non semel. animadvertit,
quam et alicubi elegantiam vocat. Recentiores sepicule elegantias
dicendi quasdam in veterum scriptis sibi fingunt, que null sunt :"
equidem in hoc dativo varietatem syntaxeos, non elegantiam esse
dixerim. Quidquid id est, Plato nonnunquam tertio casu sic utitur,
et Heindorfius, optimus Philosophi editor, ex ejus scriptis exempla_
collegit ;* utuntur et Demosthenes,* Plutarchus,* Dionysius Halicar-
nassensis,> Pindarus frequenter,° Euripides, Aristophanes,’ alii. In
Argumento Pluti, Chremylus dicitur ad Apolliuis venisse μετά τινος
αὐτῷ θεράποντος, ubi Hemsterhusius, asserto dativo, addit: ““ erudi-
tos viros nonnunquam fefellit hzec loquendi ratio.” Et re vera Tay-
lorum fefellit, qui, cum in Leocratea Lycurgi® τῶν συνηγόρων αὐτῷ ris
legisset, et ad dativum offendisset, genitivum αὐτοῦ reponere voluit.
- Augerius, qui quos edidit scriptores egregie corrupit, a sanissimis his
verbis manum non continuit emendaturientem, et textui pessimam su-
amque lectionem, τῶν συρηγορούντων αὐτῷ intulit. At alibi Lycurgus?
dixit, τὸν πατέρα αὐτῷ, quod Augerius intactum reliquit. Marklandus,
Tayloro Grece doctior criticusque felicior et prudentior, ad eamdem
formulam impegit. Nam, apud Lysiam,’° πρὸς τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν le-
gendum esse conjecit pro vulgato ἡμῖν. Saltem loci sententiam probe
intellexit, a qua erravit Latinus interpres.- Dositheus in fabula Cervi'*
scripsit, ἐμπλακέντων αὐτῷ τῶν κεράτων ἑάλω, ubi Valckenaerii editio .
αὐτοῦ exhibet, non satis diligenter. Ceterum hic locus parum facit
ad rem; nam αὐτῷ aptius struetur cum ἐμπλακέντων quam cum κερά-
των. Inscriptionis Coreyree, quam Montefalconius ‘* edidit primus,
hoc est initium: ᾿Αριστομένης ᾿Αριστολαϊδαλεὺς didwre τᾷ πόλει τῶν
Κορκυραίων els τὰν τῶν τεχνιτᾶν μίσθωσιν τῷ Διονύσῳ ἀργυρίου Ἰζοριν-
θίον μνᾶς ἑξήκοντα. Editor vertit: ‘‘ Aristomenes Aristolaidaleus dat
urbi Corcyrzorum et Baccho in mercedem operariorum argenti Co-
rinthii minas LX.” Addidit ef ante Baccho, quod dativi rg Διονύσῳ
rationem non caperet. Aristomenes ille minas LX. non urbi dedit e¢
"Vine Appenpa. ” Ad Theat. §. 5.Cf. et ad Sophist. §. 2 3 Leptin. ¢.
$9, ubi Wolf. p. 274. *de Aud. Poet. c. 5. ubi Krebs. p. 180. * De Com-
pos. 19. ubi Schef. p. 268. © Ol. 9, 24. P. 9, 192, 213. Cf. Boeckh. ad N. 8,
10. 7 Cf. Brunck. ad Thesm. 1054. ὃ 4.16. %§.95. "5 contra Alcib,
Aewor, init. 1 ap. Valck. Opuse, t. J, p. 249. ᾿ἦ Diar. Ital. p. 412.
370 Commentatio ad
Baccho, sed urbi tantum, in mercedem τῶν τεχνιτᾶν τῷ Διονύσῳ, ope-
rariorum Baccho vel Bacchi.' Jam norunt omnes, qui fuerint ho-
‘mines 11 veteribus of Διονυσιακοὶ τεχνῖται dicti, et of περὶ Διόνυσον
τεχνῖται, οἱ τεχνῖται τοῦ Διονύσον (vel ut hic τῷ Διονύσῳ), οἱ Διονυσο-
κόλακες; et si quis non statim meminerit, adeat Morisanum,* Chishul-
lium,? Maffeium,* Corayum,’ et Wyttenbachium ° in primis. Mara-
torius 7 quidem pro τῷ Διονύσῳ edidit T2 ΔΙΟΝΎΣΩ, Dorica. secundi
casus forma, et Mustoxydius, vir doctissimus, hanc lectionem huper
est secutus.®° Sed non satis cautns uterque fuit. Nam in reliqua in-
scriptione, quamvis Dorica, genitivi comparent ἙἙλληνικοὶ, τοῦ τόκον,
Θευδώρον, Meprirov, ᾿Αλκέμον, ἑκάστον, ἐνιαυτοῦ, etc. Scripsisset
auctor τοῦ Διονόσον, non τῶ Διονύσω, si voluisset uti genitivo: ser-
vanda ergo prime editionis optima lectio τῷ Διονύσῳ. Observandum
insuper Corcyrzas inscriptiones, quas usque dum habemus, omnes
formam genitivi communem ubique exhibere, Doricam nuspiam.
Etenim qui Dorice loquebantur populi, non omnibus omnes Doricis
formis utebantur;; sua sibi quisque habebant propria. Actiaca nostra
inscriptio in genitivo diphthongum ov prefert constanter ; et Pindarus
quoque genitivum Δωρικώτερον in ὦ desinentem fugisse videtur.?. Ma-
nuscripti codices nonnunquam in utraque scriptura variant, et ple-
rumgie tertius casus, utpote rarior,"° eligendus est. In Leptinea" li-
bri nonnulli pro τὴν πόλιν ὑμῖν exhibent τὴν πόλιν ὑμῶν, ubi criticus
summuus ὑμῖν retinuit. Achillis Tatii vulgatus textus '* exhibet, τῶν
Θερσάνδρον χωρίων : malim codicum lectionem Θερσάνδρῳφ. Et alibi
idem auctor scripsit "5 δούλη τῇ θεῷ, quod pretulerunt editores varie-
ἴδ] codicum τῆς θεοῦ, quam ipse reperi in codice Veneto CDIX.
Colophonienses hac syntaxi maxime delectatos fuisse et sibi quasi pe-
culiarem habuisse e Lesbonacte "* conjicere possumus, cui σχῆμα Ko-
λοφώνιον dicitur; et hzc adfert exempla: χάλινον τῷ ἵππῳ, ἀντὶ τοῦ
ἵππον" ἡ κεφαλὴ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπον. Forte pronomen
mihi hoe est σχήματι intelligendum Militis Plautine initio:
“Nam ego hance macheram mihi consolari volo.”
~
αἰ Ving Appenpa. 7 Ad Marm. Regin. p. 62. sqq. 3 Antiq. Asiat. p. 107.
4 Tradutt. Ital. p.128, 5 ad Plut. Alex. 72. 6 Anim. ad Plut. de Util. cap.
Ρ. 87. Ε. 7 Thes. Inscr. p. 688, 2. ὃ Illustraz. Corcyr. p.171. 5 Cf. Herm.
de Dial. Pindari p. xi;, Boeckh. ad Nem. 8, 10. "9 Cf. Schef. ad Dionys.-Hal.
de Comp. p. 268. Ving Appenna. 18. 39. Wolf. *2 VII,7. Ππ VII, 18.
* Περὶ Σχημ. Ὁ. 181. Cf..Brunck, ad Thesm: 1054. - -
-
'Inscriptionem:Actiacam. $71
Quidni? cum eadem sit in eadem fabula * construetio :
“ Nam illic est Philocomasio custos meus conservus.”
Et rursus :*
| Quis erat igitur?— Philocomasio amator.”
Martianus Capella sic legitur in Gceziana :3 “ Non dispar lum (Mer-
curium) forme desiderabilis grataque luculentas in Manticen quoque
guccenderat. Nam et nobilitas generis illam, quippe Pronea major
est filiarum, et previdum perspicatioris ‘prudentie commendabat in-
genium :” que ultima vox male fuit ab editore omissa. Si Martianus
Greca voluisset Latinis literis representare, Pronea esset pro Προ-
volg; sed res non ita se. βαρεῖ. Varietas Pronoe quam Walthardi
textus exhibet ad veram lectionem Pronee ducere debuit editores.
Mantice, Μαντμὴ, Pronee, Προνοίας, filia natu major Martiano dici-
tur, ingeniose satis,—Sed antequam alio pergam, adponam ineditam,
ni fallor;.inscriptionem Arte anno MDCCCXIV repertam in templo
τῆς Παρηγορίας a V. Cl. Hugone Pouquevillio, Pouquevillii supra lau-.
dati fratre, cujusque apographum a Barbizo de Bocagio, viro beni-
gnissimo, habui:
TO KOINON TON AIAKONON ZAPAT'ET TEI
ANOYBEI ΑΠΌΧΡΑΤΕΙ ΚΑΝΩΓΌΣ ἹΕΡΕῪΣ
ΣΩΤΩΝ ΚΑΛΛΑΙΣΤΡΑΤΟΥ͂ ΔΙΌΔΩΡΟΣ ἮΝ
MENANAPOY ΑΝΤΙΠΑΤΡΟΣ
ΠΑΣΙΩΝΟΣ ΕΥ̓ΝΟΥ͂Σ ΑΠΟΛΑΟΦΑΝΕΟΣ
KPATHY HPAKAEITOY HPAKAEITOZ
KPATHTO® ΑΓΑΘΙ͂ΔΑΣ KAAAIKPAT
EO TIMOAAMOZ ΣΩΣΙΣΤΑΡΑΤΟΥ͂
AIOIZIOY..2+2002005 |
Tila, de qua agimus, syntaxis tertii easus pro secundo conspicitur in
verbis AIAKONON ZAPATIEI κτλ." Legendum APIIOKPATET, quod
nomen non semel in inscriptionibus corruptum est ;" et forte ΣΩΤΊΩΝ
pro ΣΩΏΤΩΝ ; delendumque in TNITZTAPATOY prius ἄλφα. In
vitiosa voce AIOIZIOY latet forsan vel ΔΙΟΝΎΣΙΟΣ, vel potius AAI-
ΣΙΟΥ͂ mensis nomen.
Vers. 1. ΤΩΙ ATIOAAQNI ΤΩΙ AKTIOI. De Apoelline Actiacu
nihil habeo quod afferam novi: videndi sunt igitur Suetonii interpre-
2 γ.371. ἦν. 1415. 3 P.15: coll. Walth. p. 6. * Vive AppENDA.
> Cf. Gruter. p. 84, 4; Spon. Miscell. I, art. 5, p- 685. Polen. ; Cuper. Har-
pocr. p. 505, 506. Poleni.
3974 Commentatio ad
tes," Fabricius ad Dionem Cassium,” Tristanus ad Augusti nummos,
ceteri.
ΟΣ
Vers. 1. ΠΡΟΜΝΑΜ, compendio facile obvio pro Προμνάμονοι.
O .
Sic ATOPAN pro ἀγορανόμον legitur in inscriptione quadam Fur-
montiana.? Philemonis τοῦ Προμνάμονοε, et collegarum Nausimachi
et Philoxeni, τῶν Συμπρομναμόνων (quas voces nondym innotuisse
puto), munus cujus fuerit generis dicere non valeo. Nuperrime Leé
tronnius, vir egregie doctus, cum sibi Hieromnemonis officium denuo
tractandum sumsisset, obscurum argumentum multa luce perfudit,
simulque nostros illos Προμνάμονας attigit.
Vers. 2, ATHTAPOXOY NIKIA: forte, ’Aynradéyov? In hac
elliptica formula auctor inscriptionis non sibi constat, articulo modo
addito, modo omisso. Sic in inscriptione Messanensi * ante patris
nomen articulus modo legitur, modo non. H. Stephanus ° articuli
Omissionem apud poetas licentiz, apud prosaicos scriptores librario-
rum oscitanti fere semper tribuendam‘esse credebat ; quod vix ad-
miserim: tot enim sunt exempla, ut neglectum articuli auctoribus
ipsis plerumque imputari velim. _Deest et articulus in hac inscri-
ptione Thermitana :°
Latinus interpres absurde vertit: ‘© Demosthenes princeps senatus
salve.” Demosthenis hujus mater Archebula vocabatur. Nec com-
paret articulus in illo Smyrnensi lapide forte non genuino :
BOTAOS EFOIEI
ΣΜΥΡΝΕΟΥ͂
ἘΝΘΑΔῈ ΤῊΝ IEPAN KE®AAHN ΚΑΤΑ ΓΑΙΑ ΚΑΑΥΠΤΕΙ
AN4PQN ΗΠΡΩΩΝ ΚΟΣΜΗΤΟΡΑ ΘΕΙ͂ΟΝ OMHPON
ΒΟΥ͂ΛΟΣ ΕΓΌΙΕΙ
MEAITAS ᾿
Poinsinetus de Sivriaco” extrema pessime vertit: ‘‘ Boulus faciebat
Melitensis.” Cumque fuisset ob id merito reprehensus, contendit
τ August. ο. 17,18. * Lib. 51,§.1. * Ap. Corsin. post Notas Greoor.
Diss. 5, p. Ixxxiv. * Castelli Inscr. pag.8. ° ad Thucyd. init. 6 8}. Castell.
Iascr. p. 44, 17. 7 Nouv. Recherch, ἡ. 189, 162.
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 9378
ΜΕΛΙΤΑΣ esse pro ΜΕΛΙΤΑΣΙΟΣ: quod est absurdum omnino.
MeXiras nomen est Buli matris. In fronte epigraphes Smyrneum
patrem, in infima parte matrem Melitam Bulus nominavit. Nugulas
ineptas (ut cum Capella’ loquar, qui nec hic satis est sanus, saltem
in Geesiano exemplo), et deliria deridicula Poinsineti et Swinii omitto,
quos transversos egit levissimum apographi mendum, TAIA pro
ΓΑΙΑ, quod facile corrigere potuissent, si linguam Grecam primo-
ribus attigissent labris, vel Anthologiam” inspexissent, ubi bi duo
versus emendatiores dudum leguntur. Leguntur et in aliis nec raris
libris, quos indicat vir eruditissimus in Commentario ad Analecta
Brunckiana, quem tamen Gruteri p. 1129, 11, mentionem omisisse
velim: nam ibi tantum reperi P. Titidii Capitonis epitaphium, quod
jam Gruterus lectoribus apposuerat p. 1043, 2, cuique primus Ho-
merice illius inscriptionis versus fuit assutus. Capitonis hoc epita-
phium μετρικὸν καὶ ἄμετρον describam, in quod, post factas emenda-
tiones, nonnulla restant adhuc observanda :
EN@AAE THN IEPAN KE®AAHN
KATA TAIA KAATITTEI
ΑΝΔΡΟΣ ΘΕΙΟΥ͂ ΠΟΥΒΛΙΟΥ͂
ΤΙΤΙΔΙΟΥ͂ KAPITQNOS
ΟΣ ΠΕΡῚ MEN NOON ΕΣΚΕ BPO
ΤΩΝ EPI 416Ρ4 ΘΕΟΙΣῚΝ
ΑΘΑΝΑΤΟΙ͂Σ ΔΕΔΩΚΕΝ TOI OF
PANON ΕΥ̓ΡΥ͂Ν ΕΧΟΥ͂ΣΙΝ
ΤΕΥ͂ΞΕ ΔῈ TONAE ΤΑΦΟΝ ΣΟΣΘΡΕ
ΠΤΟΣ ΝΩΝΙΟΣ APTEMNN
Pro ἀθανάτοις δέδωκεν, proponit editor ἀθανάτοισιν ἔδωκε. Fateor sic
quidem melius procedere versum; sed ad minutias metricas parum
attendisse auctor videtur.. Nihil ergo mutarem in Grecis. Sed La-
tina sunt pessima: “....qui ultra mentem habuit mortales, ultra sacra
Diis immortalibus dedit qui latum ccelum habitant. dificavit autem
hanc sepulturam Sostreptus Nonius Artemon.” Verterim hoc fere
modo : “ qui homines ingenio superavit, et eximio cultu Diis immor-
talibus debita sacra persolvit. Posuit autem hoc sepulcrum. twws
alumnus Nonius Artemon.”. Σὸς θρεπτὸς divisim legendum. Frequens
in inscriptionibus alumnorum vernarumve mentio. Unam adferam
Bebii in Glyconem,? quz est celeberrima, et, ni fallor, falso ‘suspecta :
a Νασσανο ππ πμσππππασποσι
Ὁ Pag. δ. 6αεν. * Epigr, ἀδεσπ, ὅ00, 3 Anth. Lat. IV, 829.
374 Commentatio ad
Verna puer, puer o mi verna, quis, ah! quis ab aura
Te in tenebras rapuit ? Perditus heu ! morerer,
Ni tecum assidue loquerer, ni sepe jocando
Fallerer. Hinc dum te continuo aspicio,
Semper ero tecum: et si me sopor occupet, umbram
Te umbra petam. Ergo unquam ne metue abs te abeam.
Nonnulle sunt in variis apographis scripture varietates ; qua mihi
placuit elegi lectionem. In verbis hinc dum te continuo aspicio mira-
bile est Burmanni Secundi acumen. Cum in medio lapide circulus
exstet depressior cum foramine vel foraminibus, credidit, et Reinesius
quoque crediderat, hc foramina facta fuisse ad immittenda suspira
lacrymasque ; et hinc, id est, ab hoc foramine, Bebium Rufum Gly-
conem suum continuo aspicere. Quid fuit unquam ridiculum magis,
quam hunc Bebium, hominem, puto, sanz mentis, sibi fingere, qui,
ore foramini adposito, suspiria eructabat, cavens anxie ne extra fistu-
le marginem evolarent; vel qui sedulo oculum cavo applicabat, ut
manaret per jussam rimam lacrymula, vel suum, 81 posset, Glyconem
aspiceret? Tam inepta cura a dolore aliena est. Credo per hoc fora-
men liquores forte fusos fuisse, vel florum caules ad tempus insertos.
Versiculus,
Hinc dum te continuo aspicio,
alio modo capiendus videtur, isto scilicet : “ Ex hoc loco, ex hoc se-
pulcro tuo, cui insideo, te continuo aspicio, te, cujus suavissima
imago meis usque obversatur oculis.”
Vers. 2. AAYZEIOY. Acarnaniz urbs ᾿Αλύϑεια ex Stephano et
aliis nota est. Stephanus ἐθνικὸν exhibet ᾿Αλυφεὺς et ᾿Αλυφθαῖος ; ex
nostra inscriptione aliam formam discimus. Si Berkelio ad Stepha-
num credendum est, forma ᾿Αλυφιαῖος in Thucydidis libro VI. eX-
stat, quam tamen frustra quesiveris. Berkelium in errorem traxit
Palmerii male intellecta nota ad Diodorum.? Vocem in Diodoro cor
ruptam Κλνξαῖοι Palmerius emendandam censebat legendo ex Thu-
cydide I, ντι., ᾿Αλνθιαῖοι. Non invenerat nomen ᾿Αλνϑιαῖοε Palme-
rius in 'Thucydide* sed ’AAveia, et hinc τὸ ἐθνικὸν ’AXvetator ducere
volebat. Czterum Diodoro formam ᾿Αλυφαῖοι recte restituit Wes-
selingius. 4 .
Vers. 3. AXTAKOY. Notissima est, vel ex Stephano, Acarnanix
urbs “Acraxos, cujus inter ἐθνικὰ est nomen ᾿Αστάκιοε : et hic fere puto
legendum AXTAKIOY; nam heminibus reliquis epithetum gentile
eaters πεπι ιπανσππσυσπὐπ ον σ πὐπσυ΄σ “παπὐσο όδσο
* Exercit. p. 140. ad Diod. 18, ς. 11. ? 7. 6. $1.
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 375
jungitur, non ipsum urbis nomen. Nomen urbis eodem modo repo-
nere voluit, sed frustra, vir doctus* in hac inscriptione Clarkiana :*
TEIMO@EOS ΔΑΣΈΙΟΣ XAIPE
TEIMO@EOS O ΠΑΤΡΑΣ ΟΣΊΟΣ ONS TAIZAE ΔΑΣΕΙ͂ΟΣ
TPIS AEKATAS ETEQN TEPMATIXAS EOANES
A TAAAN GIKTEIPQ ΣῈ POATKAATSTAI EVI TIMBAI
NTN 4E ΣΥΜΗΡΩΩΝ XQPON EXOIX ΦΘΙΜΕΝΟΣ.
Versu secundo τρεῖς δεκάδας, et quarto σύγ᾽ ἡρώων legit feliciter, sed
in primo infeliciter Τιμόθεος Πάτρας, ὅσιος φὼς, παῖς δὲ Δασείον. Ti-
motheus of Patra, αὐτὸ est ipsius versio, firmari videtur allegato
Strabone ;? sed Straboni [arpaevs, non Πάτρα urbs vocatur. Num
Strabo quoque erit corrigendus, et Πάτρα legendum pro Πατραεύς 2
Servanda Geographi, servanda et lapidis lectio, vertendaque : Timo-
theus patrie pius civis, vel Patra, si urbs Patra quedam exstitit ;
quod nunc querere non vacat. “Ὅσιος φὼς dicitur eo modo quo κρα-
racé φὼς, non φῶς, quod male editur, in hoc Theodosii Diaconi versu :*
“Apri, κραταιὲ φὼς, ἄναξ οἰκουμένης.
Fogginus vertit, 0 potens lumen, confusis diversi generis nominibus ὁ
φὼς et τὸ φῶς : ut Latina cum Grecis convenirent, vertere debuit, 0
potens vir. Conferri potest locutio non absimilis βιολόγος φὼς in pul-
cherrima inscriptione, quam post Corayum, ° edidit Jacobsius et op-
time interpretatus est,° qramque iterum exhibebo, paucula etiam no-
taturus :
THN POAAOIS AHMOIEI ΠΑ͂ΡΟΣ FOAAAIZ ΔῈ ΠΟΛΕΣΣῚ
ΔΟΞΑ͂Ν PNNAEZTZAN ENI ΣΚΗΝΑΙ͂ΣΙ ΛΑΒΟΥ͂ΣΑΝ
ΠΑΝΤΟΙΗ͂Σ APETHS EN ΜΕΙΜΟΙ͂Σ EITA ΧΟΡΟΙΣῚ
ΓΌΛΛΑΚΙΣ EN ΘΥΜΕΛΜΑΙΣ ΛΑΛΟΥ͂Χ OTTN ΔῈ ΘΑΝΟΥΣΗ
_ ΤῊ 4EKATH ΜΟΥΣΗ ΤΟ AAAEIN XOPOS HPAKAEIAHS
MEIMAAI BAXIAAH ZTHAHN ΘΕΤῸ BIOAOIOL ΦΩΣ
HAH KAI NEKYS OTSA ISHN BIOL EAAAXE TIMHN
MOTSIKON ΕΙΣ 4AM EASON 30M ANADATZAMENH.
᾿ς ΤΑΥ͂ΤΑ
OI STSKHNOI SO? ΛΕΓΟΥ͂ΣΙΝ
ET¥TXEI BAXIAAA OTAEIZ ΑΘΑΝΑΤΟΣ
ees ee σι ππσασσσσσσσσοανσαν
» Mus. Crit. Cant. t. I, Ρ. 296. * Vipe Appenpa. * XI, c. 9. ὁ. ὃ. |
4 Acroas. IV, 1.- 5 ad Plutarch. τ IV, p.351. © Litterarische Anal. t. I, pi
104. Vive ADDENDA. | |
376 ᾿ Commentatio ad
Corayus conjecit legendum TH N, id est, τῇ ν, et AABOYTZH, wt
syntaxis sequentibus conveniat. Sed mutatio TH pro ZAN, ad quam
in auctore scripto non multum offenderem, ob iutricatiora szpe fins-
lium compendia, in lapide audacior nimis esse videtur. Jacobsius
hanc conjecturam calculo suo comprobat; saltem non refutat: equi-
dem nihil mutaverim. Non raro auctores illi saxei constructionem
invertunt, et a casu alio ad alium delabuntur. Mutantur casus in
lapide quem V. Ampliss. Faurisius de S. Vincentio in libello rarissimo
vulgavit :'
6 K
ATPHAIO? AIOKAEIAOP _
OSTIS EZHSEN ETEA IZ
HMEPQN 4AEKAPENTE
ATPHA AIOKAHS KAI
ATPHAIA TEPTIA TONEIX
XAPIN ΜΝΗΜΗΣ E@HKAN
ΓΕΈΓΝΝΗΤΑΙ ΕΙΣ TO OTE (Leg. rEFH...)
NEPIZ ΟΠΟΥ HPAKAHS
HMEPA A®PO4EITHS HP
PATH Υ7ΠῸ ΘΕΩΝ ΚΑΛΟΥ͂ ᾿
MENON PTOINN
‘Post grea vitio constructionis inducitur ἡμερῶν. Inscriptio Syracu-
sana* eamdem exhibet enallagen':
X ENZOTSA XPHSTH Θ᾽
KAI ΑΜΕΜΠΤΟΣ ΕΖΗΣῈΕ
ETH E MHNEX 4 HMEPA
IX 2
(CSE ENTE TT oe
= Notice sur J. Fr. F. St. Vincens. 3. Castell. p. 168,29. * Formula X 9,
id est, χθονίοις θεοῖς fuit illustrata a Marino, Inscr. Alban. Ρ. 183, qui huac
lJapidem exhibet :
ΘΕΟΙ͂Σ ΧΘΟΝΊΟΙΣ
I’. ΠΛΩΤΙΟΣ ΙΟΥ̓́ΣΤΟΣ ~
I’, PANTION ZOcIMA ᾿
ΑΔΕΛΦΩ ZHCANTI
ETH IA. ΜΗΝΑΟ ἘΞ
ΜΝΉΜΗΟ XAPIN
Pro ZOcIMA legere vult Ζωσίμῳ: sed potuit esse nomen Ζωσιμᾶς : quidni?
cum alibi occurrat. Suidas; Ζωσιμᾶς᾽ ὄνομα xipiov.—VIDE ADDENDA.
@
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 377
Usus sum lectione optima apographi Mariniani.’ Castellus edidit
ΧΕΩΖΟΥ͂ΣΑ, et prodigioso nomini prodigiosam apposuit versionem
_Cheozusa. Σώξουσα est probum genuinumque probe feemine nomen.
Participia sepe pro nominibus propriis fuerunt usurpata. Insectam
quoddam veteribus dictum fuit ᾿Επιβάλλον, quod nomen Bastius*
aliquamdiu corruptum putavit. ‘“Epplamov τοῦ ᾽Ἐπιτυνχάνοντος nomen
exstat in Reinesii syntagmate,? et EIITTYIXANON in inscriptione
puper vulgata.* Apud Reinesium legitur " inscriptio monumenti quod
Euticus Eronti (Ερῶντι) .suo verne alumno posuit. Apud Fabret-
tum ἢ Cesaris villicus quidam Astrapton (Αστράπτων) vocatur. Ibi-
dem Frontina’ Cornelie Auranusa (Αὐξανούσῃ) et Gemina® Eliz
Auxanusa, et Menophilus® Αὐξάνοντι filio, et apud Sandrium *° Πε-
φιλημένη Agathopodi dicant monumenta. Nominantur alibi Vibia
Colenda** Benegestus.’* Et huc referenda ᾿Ακουμενὸς, ᾿Αλεξαμενὸς,
᾿ Δεξαμενὸς, et suspectum viris doctis, at sanum, ut videtur, Φρασᾶς ;*3
atque illa vulgariora, Restitutus, Restituta, Benedictus, Benedicta.
Quodque ad rem plus etiam facit, fuere, Stephano teste, tres urbes Σώ-
Govoae dict. Addere fert animus epigraphen aliam, ubi Anatellon
CAvaré\Awy) nominatur, quam cum non omnino fideliter et lectionis
varietate incertam Gruterus ** ediderit, diligenter ad ipsa saxa qu in
Museo Regio Parisino '* servantur, collatam bis exbibebo ; eam enim
bis in monumento Anatellon incidi curaverat ; de qua inscniptionum.
iteratione egregia cum inodustria Marinus non uno in loco ad 5008
Arvales egit :
D M "» ἢ μΜ *
M. AVRELIVS M. AVRELIVS, AVG. L
ANATELLON ANATELLON
AVG, LIBVIVVS FEC VIVVS. FECIT. 8181. ET
SIBI. ET AEFLANIAE AEFLANIAE. DEBEIA |
DEBEIA. CONIVG1 BENE CONIVGE BENE. MERENTI
MERENTI ET LIBERIS ET LIBERIS. ITEM. LIBERTIS
ITEM LIBERTIS LIBER | LIBERTABVSQVE
TABVSBVSQ POSTERISQ POSTERISOVE EORVM
EORYM :
~
eer eI
1 Iscriz. Albane, p. 183. * Epist. Crit. p. #6. 3 p. 503,29. 4 Classical
Journal, vol. 5. p. 144. 5 Pag. 625, 47. © Inscr. dom. p.3,9.- 7 P. 141,
xvii, ὃ P. 141, 150. 9 P. 589, civ. 19 Post Oderici Dissert. p. 370.
κι Fabr. ibid. p. 254, 57. 12 Ibid. p.251,30. "3 Anal. Epigr. inc. 721 ὁ,
14 P, 603,35. "ἢ Num, 98 et 102.
$78 Commentatio ad
Non procul ab epitaphio Anatellontis lapidem’ alium legi ob nomen
Diadumeni (A:adovpévov) huc referendum, quemque ineditum esse
puto:
DIs MANIBVS
LVCIO. VNGONIO
DIADVMENO
MANLIA. SEXTI. FILIA
FLORA. CONIVGI
SVO. BENEMERENTI
FECIT
Addam vicinum* lapidem jam a Sponio’ editum, sed non satis dili-
genter :
DIIs MANIBVS
CALAIL. APONI DIS
PENSATDRI. VAN ΧΧΧΧ
POSVIT LANVARIVS
ET SYNERVSA
CONTVBERNALI
BENE MERENTI
Sponius dedit Υ. A. ΧΧΧῚ et SYNERVS. Lapis prefert que protuli.
Synerusa est Συγεροῦσα. Sponius quoque scripsit emendatius Ὁ15-
PENSATORI: at in lapide o accedit ad formam litere pD; quod facile
est obvium, jamque fuit animadversum a Marino ;" et vice versa oO pro
Ὁ scribebant, ut in inscriptione jlla operis musivi doctissime a Vis-
contio V. 8. illustrati :
PEO
xXx
A@St cui non satis apte vindicata videbitur enallage syntaxeos in λα-
βοῦσαν et θανούσῃ hac varietate casuum in saxis ignorabilibus, adpo-
nam Sophoclis, scriptoris castigatissimi, ex Electra 5 verba:
Ὕ πεστί μοι θράσος
ἁδυπνόων κλύουσαν
ἀρτίως ὀνειράτων.
Nec melior est casuum concordia in hoc Antigone loco :°
. ᾿Αγνῶτ᾽ ἀκούω φθόγγον ὀρνίθων, κακῷ
Κλάξοντας οἴστρῳ καὶ βεβαρβαρωμένφ.
*Num. 115. 1014. 112. 3 Miscell. sect. vi. Ρ. 1073, 4. -edit. Polen.
* Prefat. ad Arval. p.39. $v. 4T2.ubi Brunck, ὅν. 1001.
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 970.
Jam esset ulterius progrediendam ; volo tamen antequam a Basille
monumento discedam, Jacobsii notata symbola mea augere, verbum
solemne εὐψύχει temere sollicitatum et formulam οὐδεὶς ἀθάνατος illus-
trandi causa. Gruterus* protulit Japidem extremis his inscriptum
verbis, _que iotacismus adulterat: EYYYXI TEKNON ΟΥ̓ΔΙΣ
A@ANATOY. Et apud Bonarottum® legere est: EYYYXI LE-
KOYNAA OYAIZ AOANATOZ PHIITANA.—OYAIZ AOANA-
ΤΟΣ apud Gudium quoque p. 371, 2. Et lapis Latinus Gruteri
Ρ. 928, 6.
FVI. NON SVM
ESTIS. NON. ERITIS
, NEMO. IMMORTALIS.
Vide et Vonckium Specim. Critic. p.135. Auctor inscriptionis apud
Odericum,* pro imperativo infinitivum adhibuit, raro in lapidibus εχ-
emplo: ©. EY+YXIN K. Sandrius* Jacobsius* et Marinus ° alia
dabunt, hic autem exquisita. Non abludit ex alio lapide 7. versus iste:
Οὐδεὶς yap δύναται Μοιρῶν plrov ἐξαναλῦσαι,
Scripsi Μοιρῶν pro vitioso MOIPON. Νήματα et λίνα Μοιρῶν illus.
travi ad Eunapium.® Μοιρῶμ κλωστῆρα dixit alius epitaphista;° et
illum ipsum Μοιρῶν μέτον sepius exhibet index Analectorum Jacob-
sianus, et nuper obtulit nobis vir egregius in epigrammate Furmon-
tiano.*° Conferam etiam primum elegantissimi Severe epitaphii *” | dis
stichum :
᾿Αθάνατος μερόπων οὐδεὶς ἔφν. Totde, Σεβῆρα,
Θησεὺς, Αἰακίδαι, μάρτυρές εἶσι λόγον.
᾿ Ignoscat mihi humanus lector observationem unam insuper addenti
de Psello, quem illa locutio monumenti Actiaci, Ναυσέμαχος ᾿Αστάκονυ,
mihi in mentem revocat, et cui obiter prodero. Sub finem libelli de
Lapidibus scriptores recenset qui lapidum virtutes explicare conati
sunt, inter quos e recentioribus memoratur ὁ ἐκ τῆς ᾿Αφῤοδισίας ᾿Αλέ-
ξανδρος : codex Parisinus 1630 tollit prepositionem, et optimam r re-
stituit formam ᾿Αφροδισίαδος.
' Vers. 4. ΦΟΙΤΙΑΝΟΣ Pheetiis Philoxenus ille fuit oriundus.
a
1 P.701, 6. Ὁ Vide Oderic. Diss. p. $36; Morisan. Marm. Regin. p. 480.
3 Diss. p. 181. 4 Post Oderic. p. 38%. 5 ad Anal. Epigr. inc. . 721 ὁ.
6 Iscriz. Alb. p. 98, 129; Frat. Arv. p. 8348. Vine ADDENDA. 7 Ap. Marin.
Iscr. Alb. p. 180. * P. 924, 295, 576. 9 Jacobs. Anal. t. XII, p. 819.
10 Wolf. Litterar. Analeké. t. I, p. 960 1: Anal. Epigr. inc. 648,
380 Commentatio ad
Φοιτίαι, πόλις ᾿Ακαρνανίας, Stephano Byzantio teste. At in Htolia
ponit Polybius.'. Pinedus et Holstenius Stephanum esse corraptum
putant, atque e Polybio emendandum. Sed, quod svepius critici fa-
ciunt, emendant que non egent emendatione. Polybius enim ipse
Stephano favet; quippe qui Ltoliz Φοιτίας adscribit, quod fuerat hac
tempestate urbs illa Acarnanensibus armorum vi ab /Etolis rapta.
Alioqui notissimum est eas urbes, que regionis sus finibus sunt pro-
xime, sxpissime ab auctoribus regioni vicins adscribi.* Epitheta
gentilia φοιτιεὺς et goircos a Stephano recensentur, quibus ex hac epi-
graphe tertium addamus, φοιτιάν. ὦ Lingua Greca alia habet ejus
dem forme gentilia, ᾿Ακαρνὰν, Αἰνιὰν, ᾿Ατιντὰν, ᾿Αθαμὰν, Acar. Sue
perest adhuc Achezi fragmentum ἐν ’Aede:* credo ᾿Αϑᾶνας trage-
diam fuisse cujus chorus ἐξ ᾿Αξάνων constabat.
Vers. 4. TAI] BOYAAI, adscripto lara, quod neutiquam notavis-
sem, ni meminissem inscriptionis, in qua vertenda vir doctus ob hujus
scripture vulgatissimee ignorationem prorsus cecutivit. Lapis mati-
lus his incipit verbis,s IAJIEI KAI TIOAE] KOINQNOYZAI THs
OXIAX, que sic vertuntur: Iliensi εἰ urbi participes sacrorum.
Credidit interpres a mulieribus κοινωνούσαις monumentum poni: .sed
qui credere potuit, cum statim Ἵππαρχος nominetur? KOINQNOY-
LAI, nempe κοινωνούσᾳ, pendet a voce πόλει, vertendumque, suppleto
ΔΗΜΩΙ ante IAIEI: Populo Ilicnsi et urbi participi sacrorum.
Vers..5. ΜΑΤΡΟΠΟΛΙ͂ΤΑ. Marpéxodts, urbs Acarnaniz, et gen-
tile MarporoXirns e Stephano nota sunt.
Vers. 5. KOYPOTIOY 0. Hic loci temporis mentionem factam
fuisse puto, et Kovpoxoy mensem esse Acarnanensium quemdam.’°
Multa jam mensium nomina nummi nos et marmora docuerunt: iq
litera 1 latet forte diei nofatio. Nec omittendum in apographo ali;
quid lacunosi esse videri inter KOYPOTIOY et 2.
Vers. 6, ΤΏΙ KOINQI. To κοινὸν, commune Acarnanensium. To
Κοινὸν, ἡ Κοινωνία, ubique hoc sensu reperjuntur in nummis, lapidi
bus, librisque. Retnesius,’ Wolfius,° Schwebelius,? Fischerus,"° alii
de hac re scripserunt, et ipse nopnulla olim monui ad Philostratum.”’
Vers.6. ΠΡΟΞΕΝΟΥΣ EIMEN KAI EYEPIETAY. De προξέ-
Ν
ΕἾΝ, ς. 68,7. cum nota Schw. 23. Cf. Belleyg Académ. des B, L., t. XXX, p.
263. 5 Cf. Lecronn. in Diario doctorum Jan. 1817, p. 41. 4 Schol. ad Orest.
v. 383, 5 Voyage de la Troade, t. III, p. 30. © Vip—E Appenpa. 7 Synt.
Inscr. p. 868. ὃ ad Liban. Epist.p.30. 9 ad Onos. p. 107. .*° ad Critan. 11.
ar p, 343. .
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 381
vow lectorem remittam ad Larcherum;' et ad Kenium,’ Beckium-
que,’ qui multos ipsi indicaverunt scriptores, a quibus hoc muneris
fuit diligenter illustratum.* Glosse Herodotez ad librum vi.: Πρό-
ξενοι, of προστάται πόλεων καὶ φροντισταὶ καὶ ξένους ὑποδεχόμενοι. Co-
dex Parisinus 1630, idem codici illi Antonii Eparchi, cujus Wesselin-
gius in prefatione ad has Glossas meminit, et de quo legenda omnino
Letronnii viri amicissimi et doctissimi ncta in Diario doctorum ;° co-
dex igitur 1630, pro ξένους vitiose habet ξενίαις. De altero titulo Ev-
epyérov preclara est Wolfii, ad Leptineam ° annotatio. Ia lapidibus
literatis frequenter illi duo.tituli, ut in hoc nostro decreto juncti re-
periuntur; v. c. in Agrigentinorum decreto supra adlato,’ ἔδοξε rg
ἁλίᾳ.... EIMEIN ΠΡΟΞΕΝῸΝ KAI ΕΥ̓ΕΡΓΕΤΑΝ Δημήτριον.
Eumdem Demetrium Melitenses decreverunt * ΠΡΟΞΕΝῸΝ EINAE
KAI EYEPYETHN. Delii parem Clinodemo, Siphnio honorem pu-
blice tribuunt.? Conferende sunt, si tamen in re non obscura tantam
diligentiam adhibere necesse est, ‘inscriptiones Corcyree plurime a
doctissimo Mustoxydio ouper collectz,’° in quaruin una vox Πρόξενος
a Polycarpo Bulgari, Corcyreorum episcopo, italice vertitur cittadino,
quo@ Ciampius jure reprehendit. Nuper a Leakio, viro honoratissimo,
vulgata est *‘ de eodem argumento inscriptio, quam et hic exhibebo ob
eximium dialecti Beeoticee exemplum, et miram in plurimis cum nostte
lapide conspirationem : -
Θ I Oo =
TIOYXAN ΑΓΑΘΑΝ AAETYAPA -
XONTOZ EAOZE TY AAMYE¢
XOMENIQN ΑΓΕΔΙΚΟΝ ΔΑ.
@ITAO HOAEIA ΑΠΑΔΕΞΑΝ
APEIAZ FPOZENION EIMEN x
H EYEFTETAN TAZ ΠΌΛΙΟΣ E¢
XOMENIQN KH AYTON KH ΕΣ
TONQS KH sIMEN ΑΥ̓ΤΥ TAz
uy ΓΥΚΙ͂ΑΣ ἘΠΑΣΙ͂Ν KH AZ@AAI
αν KH AtEAIAN KH AZOYAIAy»
xy KATATAN KH KATA @AAAT
! Ad Herodot. VI. §. 57, not. 83. *ad Gregor. Corinth. Dial. Jon. ὁ.
162. 3 ad Aves. 1022. Vins Appenpa. * fév. 1817, p. 101. © P. 288.
7 P. 368. 5 Cf. supra p. 368. 59 Marm. Oxon. p. 156. 19 Illustras. Cercig’.
p- 186, 192, 196, 201. ** Classical Journ. t. XIII, p. 382; t. XV, p. 164.
VOL. XVII. Cl Jl. * WO. XXKIN. χτι
382 Commentatio ad
caN KH POAEMQ KH KATAZIO
«ΑΣ xHTAAAAA OFOTTA
TYZ AAAYE ΓΡΟΞΕΝΥΣ xa
EYEPrETHS .
Adponam editoris doctissimi interpretationem : Geos τύχην ἀγαθήν.
᾿Αλεύα ἄρχοντος, ἔδοξε τῷ δήμῳ ᾿Ορχομενίων ᾿Αγέδικον Δαφέτου Aiodéa
ἀπ᾽ ᾿Αλεξανδρείας πρόξενον εἶναι καὶ εὑεργέτην τῆς πόλεως ᾿Ορχομενίων
καὶ αὑτὸν καὶ ἐκγόνους, καὶ εἶναι αὐτῷ γῆς καὶ οἰκίας ἔμβασιν, καὶ ἀσφά-
λείαν, καὶ ἀτέλειαν, καὶ ἀσνλίαν, καὶ κατὰ γῆν καὶ κατὰ θάλατταν, καὶ
πολέμον καὶ κατασιωπῆς, καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ὑπύσα τοῖς ἄλλοις πρυξένοις καὶ
εὐεργέταις. Cuncta fere eruditissime vertit vir honoratissimus. Θειὸς
pro Geds Bocotorum esse et Cretensium novimus ex Apollonio Dyscolo
et Hesychio. Τιούχαν admirationem movet. Y pro ὦ in TY AAMY
et in AYTY, alibi in Holicis locum habere ostenderunt grammatici;
et apud Viscontium V. S. inscriptionem aliam Orchomeniam vidi in
qua Ευβωλυ est pro Εὐβούλω et ev ἔρχομενυ pro ἐν Ἐρχομενῷ. De
HOAEIA fateor me dubitare. Ky pro καὶ exstat et in inscriptione
illa apud Viscontium. In ΕΣΓΟΝΩΣ cri ce esse σφάλμα vel typogra-
phi, vel scalptoris, et legendum EXTONOY. FYKIA® pro οἰκίας
yulgarem exhibet τοῦ δίγαμμα forn xm et permutationem vocalis ν et
diphthongi οἱ, ut infrain TYZ AAAYY pro τοῖς ἄλλοις. ΑΕ morator
me vox ΕΠΑΣΙΝ, cujus rationem originemque nou capio: ceteroquin
86 8118 non est incertus, cum tof sint formula similes, ut mox plenius
notabitur ad versum Actiaci nostri lapidis decimum tertium. In ver-
sione pro ἔμβασιν, malim ἔγκτησιν, que vox est in talibus propria ;
et forte in ipso textu reponendum ET KTAZIN. Jam si forte lapi-
cida dederit ET TAZIN, vel quod imprudens a vera lectione aberrave-
rit, vel quod Baeoti homines sic scriberent et pronuntiarent, quis von
intelligit quanta in his literarum ductibus attritis et fere erasis simili-
tudo sit EYTAZIN inter et ETIAZIN?? Cum voce ᾿Ασουλέαν contule-
rim τὸ covyypagus inscriptionis Orchomeniz quam Viscontius mihi
olim legendam permisit. KATAZIQITA® divisim scribere malim,
κατὰ owas, vel κατὰ σιωπᾷς.
Vers. 8. ΠΑΤΡΗ, ἹΠατρεὺς fuit Agasias, quod est gentile urbis
Achaice Πατρῶν.
Vers.9. ΠΟΠΛΙΟΝ ΛΕΎΚΙΟΝ TOY? NOMAIOY AKIAIOYS.
Non deest copula inter Πόπλιον, Αεύκιον : nam supra Ναυσιμάχου,
Φιλοξένου nomina non arctius juncta synt.—Acilia gens in historia
celeberrima est, sed Publius et Lucius Acilii ipsi sunt ignoti, mihi sal-
ry an 7 om
** Ving Avpenwa, 2. 398.
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 989.
tem. Ad constructionem, Πόπλιον, Λεύκιον ᾿Ακιλίους, nemo, puto,
offendet. Barthelemius inscriptionem Latinam, in qua explicanda
multi cecutiebant, SEX. L. M. IVLIEI C.F. PARENTIBYS SVEIS,
recte legit’ SEXius, Lucius, Marcus, Julit; aliamque contulit.
Addam Ciceronis* verba pari structa modo: ““ Duo propugnacila
belli Punici, Caius et Publius Scipiones. “Ὁ
Vers. 10, 11, 12. ΑΣΦΑΛΕΙ͂ΑΝ..... EIPANAY. In his formule
sunt styli politici et actorum publicorum. tolorum decretum*
Telis ἀσφάλειαν καὶ dovdiay.tribuit. Et Hellanico,’ cui tam antiqua
facta tam diserte narranti fides vix esse potest, Greci dicuntur, post
Trojz expugnationem, Enez et fuge sociis. παρασχεῖν τὴν ἀσφάλειαν
ἐξ ἁπάσης ἧς ἐκράτουν γῆς cai θαλάσσης. Est et aliud decretum ὃ quo
Hermio cuidam civitas quedam permittit εἰσπλοῦν καὶ ἐκπλοῦν καὶ πο-
λέμου «ai εἰρήνης ἀσυλεὶ καὶ ἀσπονδεί. Vide et supra inscriptionem
Orchomeniam p. 381.
Vers. 13. KAY ΓΑΣ KAT OIKIAZ EIKTIZIN. Legendum om-
nino ΕΓΚΤΗΣΙΝ. Prius ἰῶτα deleto τοῦ γάμμα capite exstitit; alte-
rum peperit scalptoris inscitia et pravus iotacismi usus. Quam sepe
sic permutata fuerint ἡ et ε quis nescit? Hac observatione utar ut
emendem Porphyrium ad Marcellam’ sic editum: ‘Eay οὖν dei μνη-
μονεύῃς ὅτι, ὅπον ἂν ἡ ψυχή σου περιπατῇ καὶ τὸ σῶμα ἐνεργὸν ἀποτελῇ»
θεὸς παρέστη μὲν ἔφορος ἐν πάσαις σον βουλαῖς καὶ ταῖς πράξεσι: lege-'
‘Yim πάρεστι, quod firmatur.his verbis ejusdem libri:® πάσης πράξεως
καὶ παντὸς ἔργου καὶ λόγον θεὸς ἐπόπτης παρέστω καὶ ἔφορος. Sed gra-
vius ulcus inest Frontonis® huic loco: [εἰ δὲ] παρὰ [σοῦ] πεμφθέντας
παιδὰς ἐδόμενος πρὸ [σέμην]... Interpres cl. vertit: “ Quod si, per-
pensis his omnibus, mancipia nihilominus a te missa recepissem.”
Ἰδόμενος interpretatur perpensis his omnibus, quod nemini puto pro-
babit, nec ipse sibi, puto, probavit. Locus integritati fere restitue-
tur, legendo ἡδόμενος, id-est: ““ Si missa abs te mancipia libens lu-.
bensque recepissem.” Statim Italus editor lacunam his verbis textui
temere insertis supplevit: ποέαες φροντίσιν ἐμὲ δάκνεσθαι χρῆν ; πῶς 8
ἂν ἀμειβησαίμην ; Profitetur quidem Fronto alicubi’® se τὴν φωνὴν
ὀλίγον δεῖν βάρβαρον esse; attamen niminm ejus patientia modes-
tiaque abutitur editor, imwani isto barbarismo ἀμειβησαίμην sophistes
non inelegantis crationem fede maculans. -—Eadem permutatio τῶν ἢ
1 Mém. de l' Acad. des Inscr.t. XXVIU, p, 579, et Voy. en Italie, Ὁ. 334.
2 Parad. I. 3 Vive Appenpa. * Chish, Antiq. Asiat. ‘5 Frag. 69. ° Grut.
p. 419,2. 76,12, δ(. 20. %p. 448 Maii. p. 287 Nieb. 7° P. 380 M. p.
34 Nieb.,
384 Cammentatio ad
εἰ « barbaram vocem φωνίεντα pro φωνήεντα peperit in inscriptione
Memovniz statu, quam Instituti Egyptiaci socii, V. Cl., in preecla-
sigsimo opere vulgaverunt.' Sed cum non uno hoc levissimoque vitie
inecriptio laboret, illam obiter emendabo et iaterpretabor. Versus qua-
tuor primos, nam ceteros ut insanabiles omitto, sic legentibus appo-
suerunt viri clarissimi, avec guelgucs-uns des mots séperés et restétués:
GHKEY E@NNIENTA OEA POAOAAKTYAOY HN
ΣῊ MHTEP KAYTE MEMNONE EAAOMENDN ΟἹ AKOYZAI
ΣΉ E@NNEI AYKABANTI EPI KAYTOY ANTONEINOY
AYTOKPATOPOX KAMEN YT’ATNN TPIS KAI AEKA EXONTI.
Versibus tam barbare et tam ἀμέτρως restitutis notam hanc appende-
runt: Il résulte de U'examen de cette inscription, qu'un personnage, dont
le nom est probablement effact, est venu pour entendre, οἱ ἀκουσαι, ls
voix εἰ les oracles du célébre Memnon, fils de ἢ Aurore, déesse aus
doigts de rose, sous le régne du tres-illusive empereur Antonin, lors-
que ce souverain étoit consul pour la treizicme fois: λνκάβαντει περὶ
κλυτοῦ ᾿Αντωνείνον traréy τρὶς καὶ δέκα ἔχοντι. Quis Antoninorum
‘toties consul fuit? Sed tali interpretationi refellendz non perdendum
est otiolum. Ut inspexi tres priores versus, ut statim correxi, et
Caussino, viro literarum Arabicarum et Grecarum peritissimo, αὐτο»
σχέδιον emendationem ostendi:
ΘΗ͂ΚΕ, LE QQNHENTA GEA POAOAAKTYAOY HOT
ΣΗ MHTHP KAYTE MEMNON EEAAOMEND MOI AKOYZAI
THE ΦΏΝΗΣ AYKABANTI TEPIKAYTOY ANTONEINOY.
Sed in ultima linea mihi herebat aqua. AYTOKPATOPOE metro
adversabatur; m KAMEN, vocem μὴν latere suspicabar; YHA-
ΤΩΝ chronologici quid imnuebat: sed me non extricabam. Confugi
ad lapidis delineationem quam Girardus, vir el., diligentissimo graphio
exhibuit, non multum inde subsidii sperans; nam vix credebam com-
mentatores, Girardi socios, non potuisse omnino verba lapidis legere,
et portentosas voces αὐτοκράτορος, καμεν, ὑπάτων ex ingenio protu-
lisse. Vidinon sine gaudio lapidem ipsum meam trium priorum ver-
suum lectionem plane firmare, et hoc ipsum φωνήεντα habere. - Pre
MHTHP lapis quidem prefert MHTEIP, alio iotacismi genere, quo
KI locum rod ἡ occupat, quodque plurimi jam ilustraverunt, inter
quos Viscontius, V. S., ad Herodis Triopium.* Lapis exhibet CEA-
* Descript. Génér. de Thebes, p. 106.
> Pag. 62. Theodosius Diaconus hoc vitio purgandus est, Expugo.
Cretzx III, 133: ΗΝ
-
Inscriptionem Aciracam. 3865
AOMENQ, frequenti τῶν, A dt A, ob forme sitmilitudinem, -permuta-
tione, de qua Viscoatius todem in opere’ et Viltcisonus* egerant.
Pro ΣῊΣ @QNHE AYKABANTY, ia lapide mutilo et cortapto legi,
CHG @0N YKABANTI. Quam féi restitutio certissitna ext:
nam € et € facile posse confunidi quis non videt? et notavit duduts
Viscontius, ibidem.? Zosime,* ut quidem nunc editat legimus, ‘Ein-
τίμιος vocatur Romanus homo, qui Aur. Victori,® in veteribus edt-
tionibus, Septimius <dicitur. Pravam lectionem, ‘Ewiripws, quod
nomen nunquam. Romanum fuit nec esse potait, peperit forma τοῦ
ojypa tunata. Scripserat Zosimus’ C6ITTIMIOC, quod abiit in
E€€IITIMIOZ, mox e correctione in € ITTIMIOC, et dein in GIUTI-
‘MIOC, ex alia correctione. Quartum autem versum sic im lapide
foveni : post lacunulam, litera exstat quz ad τὸ P quidem accedit,
sed et τῷ & similior est syllabe ME in EEAAOMEND; deincepe legi
‘perspicue, ΚΑΤ KAMENI ΠΑΧΩΝ ΤΡῚΣ KAI AEKA EXONTI.
Lacunulam suppleo insertis syllabis ΤῺ AG; in KA pro KAI erosum
I restituo; pro MENI, credo lapidem olim exhibuisse vel exhibére
ebuisse MEINI, pro ΜΗ͂ΝΙ; et jam habemus integrum et optimum
versum ;
τῷ SeKATQ KAc ME.NI ΠΆΧΩΝ TPIE KAI ΔΈΚΑ EXONTY
Ita autem hos versus, qeibus Viator Memnonis statuam alloquitur,
vertendos censuerim: “ Fecit te vocaiem dea roseos habens digitos
Aurora, tua mater, nobilis Menon, aventi mihi audire tuam vocem,
anno nobilissimi Antonini decinio, menseque Pachon diem decimum
tertium numerante.” Dies Pachon x11 cata Maii octavo fere cons
Setechectoenstasisthtetemitatruttnirtinsteieio
ΠλοδεαῤΧὸν ἐξαίροντα Ῥωμαίων κράτει.
‘Ravendant apres, Bebé wi sebsum : -sed facilior et verior estethendatlo mea,
wpéry. Porphyrius- a] Marceliam § 91, θεῶν μὰν συνόντων api) τὰ ἀγαθά:
scribe, πράξει. Alibi αἰδό iotacismi medo in hac diphthongo peccatum est.
Marsiaus in Arvalibus p. 288 edidit inecriptionem, ctyus hic est versus:
NHAHSe GANATON TORY SBA KAIPMON RESIE. ,
-Rossius legit μὲν dwilpes, certaimente wnportuns, quod est verfamente pessi-
mum. Lege omnino μοι ἀκαίριος. Natn ceastanter εἰ et o permnutantur.
Hujus inscriptionis versus alius lacunula laborat:
MOTNON. AHMETEPON BAIH ΟΥ̓́ΝΟΜΑ ΦΩΝΟΙ.
-Rossius conjieit SAM ΠΈΤΡ., sono ingratissimo. Inserta vox Aleos auribus erit
gratior.
1 Pag. 68. "Μόν, He P'Inw. classe Δ΄ Ἡνοῖ. t. TE, p. 120. +P. 11, 41, οὐ 0,
> Epit. 35, 8.
«a
386 Commentatie ad
venit :' sed quis sit Antoninus ille ex hac sola temporis nota indicare
non valeo. [dem ille mensis Grutero fuit incognitus,* qui lapidis
cujusdam ΠΑΧΩΝΙΑ vertit Pachonia: recte Scaliger diem Pachon
undecimum esse intellexit, Παχὼν 24. Jablonskius, quod miror, cre-
,dere videtur mensem Παχὼ» in hoc lapide vocari Ilaywria.* Eodem
fere modo tempus signatur in alia Memnonii inscriptione, cujus ulti-
mos tantum adponam versus :*
Κοιράνω ᾿Αδριάνω πέμπτῳ δεκάτῳ ἐνιαυτῷ.
(φωτὴ a δ' ἔχεσκεν Αθυρ εἴκοσι καὶ πίσνρα.
εἰκοστῷ πέμπτῳ 8° ἄματι μηνὸε Αθυρ.
Cur autem tertius versus superioribus sit additus, aliis eruendum re-
liquit Jacobsius. Novi virum doctum qui inde novis quibusdam
opinationibus fundamentum querebat. Equidem rem esse non diff-
cilem admodum reor. P. Balbinus, cujus hec est inscriptio, Memno-
nem audierat die mensis Athyr xxiv, et die insequenti xxv _ lapide
versiculos inscripsit;* vel, cum scripto illo versu quo diem ΧΧΙΝ
signabat, comperisset se erravisse, altero versu verum diem, nempe
XXvV, restituit. Non pauci exstant lapides sic facti correctiores. In
lapide nostro Actiaco versu decimo isra fuit additum. De emen-
dationibus hisce videndus est Marinus in Inscriptionum Albanarum
Syntagmate.° Vir doctissimus istum ibi apposuit lapidem ;’
Q. HORTENSIVS. Q. DL
ALEXANDER
SEXTILIA Ρ. L. MOSCHIS
SEXTILIA. P. L. ALBA. MATER
P. SEXTILIUS. PANCHRES. TVS
P CALLVS
‘* Forse, inquit Marinus, 9. HORTENSIVS Quinti et Dectmé ledertus,
e PANCHRESTVS Pater: ma l'ultima voce CALLVS, che ci sta sola,
cosa vorra ella significare?” Equidem puto hic esse lapicidse emen-
dationem. Cum scripsisset imprudens vulgare nomen Panchrestus
(Πάγχρηστος), meminit serius homini non Panchresto, sed Pancalo,
(Πάγκαλοϑ) esse nomen, et in ipsa correctione erravit, L male duplic
cato. Legitur et ibidem ille lapis :°
τ Vide Lu Nuuse, Acad. des B. L., t. XVI. M. p. 189; Morcelli Menol. t.
II, p. 102. * P. 814, 2. 3 Glossar. voc. Egypt. in Tues. H. Srepuanr t. ἢ,
Ῥ. ccli. edit. nove Londinensis. * Jacobs. Anal. t. VIII, p. 823. * Vink An-
pENDA. °P,24. 7 P,88 δ P.2T. . -
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 387
dD ὃ Μ
ANNAEAE FELICVL
“ aE. FECIT. Τὸ FLAVIVS
VESTALIS. CONIV
GI. BENE. MERENTI —
€VM.QVA. VIXIT. AN
N18. XXI. IPSA. VIXIT
ANNIS ΧΧΧΧΙ. @™
T. FLAVIVS, VESTALIS {RA
VIXIT ANNIS XX. COMPAT)E
Ad ultima Marinus hanc adscripsit notulam: “ Leggo cum Patre,
con cui Felicula passd 20 anni, e 21 col marito, avendone avuti di vita
4t. Mimbroglia la riga penultima, e parrd difficile a credersi che
εἰ sia per errore.” Et hic esse puto emendationes. Non annis xx1
vixerat cum Felicula conjuge Flavius Vestalis, sed xx; jamque in-
sculpto priore numero, alter, qui erat verus, e correctione fuit addi-
RA .
tus. Et verba COMPATE , explico non cum patre ; nami sic perit
A; sed cum patera, quod esse formulam puto dedicationis."
Insuper notabo in extremis inscriptionis Memnonii vocibus, τρὶς καὶ
δέκα ἔχοντι, elisionem neglectam fuisse. Hagenbuchius* animadver-
tit Grecos vocales, quas synalephe elidunt, scribere non esse
solitos. Sed ipsi adversatur Memnonium hoc hemistichium ; adver-
santur et Gruterianum epigramma ab ipso tractatum,’ ubi Ἡρώων.
κάρυκα ἀρετᾶς in principio dactylici legitur; et marmor Taurinense *
ubi δεύτερα ἔταξε; et lapis Muratorianus * ubi ταῦτα ἐπέγραψε πατήρ.
‘Sic autem incipit illud epigramma apud Muratorium:
ΠΗ͂ΝΟΣ μὲν γενετῆρες, ἐπεὶ γέρας ἐστὶ θανοῦσι,
κείροντες κλαίεσκον ἀναισθήτῳ περὶ τύμβῳ'
ψυχὴ δ᾽ ἐς τὸ δίκαιον δ΄ἔβη.
ἘΣ ΨΙΡΕ Appenpa. * Epist. Epigr. p. 835,74. 3 Ρ. 152. * Marm. Taurin.
τ, I, p. 169; Anal. ἀδεσπ. 563. Cf. et Jacobs. ad 561. ὅ P. 2061, 1.—Jacobs,
Anal. τ. XIII, p. 802. Vine Appenpa. © Hac locutio non facile obvia, apte
conferetur cum istis Philonis V. Mos. p. 624 C. προασπίζοντος καὶ τὴν χεῖρα ὑπε-
$88 Commentatio ad
Jacobsius ὁ conjeetura sua edidit racdds, et imprudens θανόντων. Quid
mon recepit Fleetwoodii conjecturam, σκῆνος, que et mihi dudum in
mentem venerat? Certe ΣΚΗ͂ΝΟΣ propius ad ΠΗΝΟΣ accedit quam
παιδόε." Σεῆνοε, quod Hesychius vertit per σῶμα, reperitur, sed cum
meendo scripture, in hae inetrica lapidis Townleiani epigraphe :*
EIFEIN ΤΙΣ AYNATAI
ΣΚΕΝΟΣ ΛΙΠΌΣΑΡΚΟΝ
ΑΘΡΗ͂ΣΑΣ EITEP ΥΛΑΣ
H ΘΕΡΣΙΤΗΣ HN ῶ
FYAPOAEITA
Ceterum oxfvos ἃ Fischero* et Jacobsio* fuit illustratum, ut nihil δά.
dere habeam, illud tamen, nempe σῶμα vel σκῆνοε et Κὑνχὴν szepissinte in
lapidibus opponi, quod etiam Fleetwoodium juvat. Exempli causa
adferam inscriptionem parum adhuc notam, quam Leakius V. D.
ZEgis Macedonie descripsit, atque nuper Ephemeridi Classice in-
seruit :᾽ |
“Hie wérpos κεύθει Γραφικοῦ δέμας, els Μακάρων Se
Ψυχὲν θεσκεσίην θῆκε Θεὸς πεδίον,
Οὕνεκεν ἦν κανάριστος, ἐν ἠγαθεοῖς δὲ πολέταιε
Πρῶτα φέρων," πινντῆς κῦδος ἐκαρπίσατο.
Eijaro δ᾽ αὖ Μακάρεσσι καὶ ἱμερτὴν παράκοιτιν
Τοῦδε λαχεῖν τύμβον, γήραος εὖτε τύχοι.
Χαῖρε, Γραφικέ.
ρέχοντος τοῦ Δικαίον. Mangeius edidit ὑπέχοντος, et proponit ὑπερέχοντος, quam
conjecturam recepit Dablius in Chrestomathia p. 157. Sed jam editio Pa-
risin&, e qua locum descripsi, ὑπερέχοντος recte exhibebat. Verba ὑπερέχειν
τὴν χῶρα docte illustravit Hamsterhusius ad Luciani Tim. §. 10. cui adde Je-
‘cobsium ad Phiedimi Epigr.$ ; Westerhovium ad Ter. Andr. IT, 1,40. Vivz
ADDENDA.
*Vipe Appenna. * Dallaway Anecd. of the Arts, p. 880. 3 Indice ad
Axioch. * Anal. t. XII, p. 30. 5T. XIII, p. 343; t. XV, p. 164. 5 πρῶτα
φέρων pro φερόμενος locutio est ἃ multis usurpata scriptoribus. Doctissimus Ti-
marionis interpres, qui nullius meminerat loci cum hiec auctoris sui 8. 8. verba
ederet, τόππος αὐτῷ τὰ πρῶτα φέρων, plurima inveniet exempla in meis ad Eu-
‘papium annotationibus p. 175 et 567 ; quibus addo τὰ πρωτεῖα φέρειν ex Hora-
polline I, c. 27, ἃς scholiaste Euripideo ad Orest. 900, viderido et ad v. 1947: _
locutionemque non absimilem, ἄκρα φέρων σοφίης, e Gregorio Naz. in Murat.
Ahecd. Gr. p. 56: conferatur quoque Jacobsius V. D. in Litterarische Azal,
t. J, p. 102.
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 389
Et hic sponte ponendum se preebet lapis ille Ravennensis nec semel
nec bene tentatus :"
2 _EN ΣΩ͂ΜΑ ΚΡΥΓΤΕΤΑΙ KAT
. . . STO ΘΕΙ͂ΟΝ H YYXH MEI
‘Commenta interpretum non vacat repetere. Propono:
(Πὺ παιδίου μ) ἕν σῶμα κρύπτεται κάτω,
(ἔβη δὲ πρὸ)ς τὸ Θεῖον ἡ ψυχὴ pé(ra).
Tmesis ἔβη--- μέτα pro μετέβη lectorem, puto, non morabitur. Lo-
cutio proba est et alibi * oecurrit : |
| Οὐκ Eaves, Πρώτη, μετέβης δ᾽ ἐς ἀμείνονα χῶρον.
Nec omittendus marmoris Elginiani insignis in Athenienses ad Poti-
dzam crsos versus, a Thierschio, viro eruditissimo, feliciter resti-
‘tutus :5
AIOEP MEM ΦΣΥΧΑΣ ὙΠΕΔΕΞΑΤῸ ΣΟματα δὲ χθών:
Ῥτουῖ dixit incertus poeta in Analectis :*
Χθὼν μὲν ἔχει δέμας ἐσθλὸν, ἔχει καλὸν οὐρανὸς Frop.
Alia hujus ἀντιθέσεως exempla priebent Analectorum epigrammata
incerta 680, 688, 700, 721 ὃ, 722, ad quorum ultimum confer Jacob-
siam. Adde Philippi Epigr. 84, et e Latinis poetas Anthologiz Bur-
manniane.*
Syllabz in elisione scripts aliud etiam exemplum exhibebo ex in-
scriptione ab Akerbladio, viro doctissimo et amicissimo, vulgata,® bi
κήρνκι ᾿Αθανάτων, in quo notanda synalephe rarissima vocalis ἰῶτα i
dativo. Atque ibidem legitur κόσμον δὲ αὑτοῖς. Sed utilior mea erit
opera, si versum imperfectum,
. . κασίγνητοι καῖδες πατρὸς ἐξ ᾿Αγασίππονυ,
supplebo. Qué fuit proposita emendatio, Avo κασίγνητοι, Ἰηδιυυ
poeta nobis non exhibet; nam est duerpos. Malim Οἵδε κασίγνητοι,
hi fratres Agasicratés mempe et Agasicles, qui statim nominantur.’
Nec non in scriptis codicibus apostrophis hegligitur, quod jam ob-
servavit ad Plutum * Hemsterhusius.
Tandem ad ETKTHSIN decreti: Acatnanensis redeo, observaturus,
quo emendationem stabiliam, vocem illaim hic esse omnino propriam
et péculiateis. Clinodéemiis jam” adlatis a Deliis THX KAI ΟἸΚΙ-
A ENKTHXIN obtmet, αἱ et Hermins, quem et supra adduxi,'° éy-
: Cf. Rubbius ap. Oderic. Diss. p. 288. * Anal. Brunk. Epigr. inc. 727.
3 Acta Philolog. Monac. t. II, p. 415; Classical Journ. τ. XIV, p. 186. Vive
Avbrempa. 4 Epigr. 689. 5 IV, 2 et 37. © Dias. sopra due laminette, p. 48.
7 Ving Anpewpa. ὄν. 1338. 9 Pag. 381. ὅθ Pag. $83.
900 Commentatio ad
γείων ἔγκτησιν. Byzantii in decreto apud Demosthenem * Athenies-
sibus dant ἔγκτασιν γᾶς καὶ οἰκιῶᾶν, Conferenda insuper tria Corcyre-
orum acta publica apud Mustoxydium,’ ubi similem reperire est for-
mulam, et lapis Orchomenius quem supra’ descripsi. His scriptis,
accepi a Letronnio, viro amicissimo, qui mea recitantis audierat, no-
fulam, qua in usum lectorum utar: ““ Herodote * d&vdpi“EXAnre δεινῷ
τε καὶ σοφῷ δοὺς ἐγκτήσασθαι πόλιν ἐν Θρηΐκῃ. Cette legon ὦ &té recue
por M. Schweighacuser, au lieu de ἐγκτίσασθαι, ἀξ) ἃ blamé par Vale
kenaer. Au reste, la confusion de κτῆσις, κτίσις, κτῆμα, κτέσμα, n'et
pas moins commune. Jl y aun exemple de la premicre dans Strabon:’
νῦν δὲ κῶμαι, κτίσεις ἰδιωτῶν. Il faut lire κτήσεις avec Siebenkers.
Voy. Dutheil, notes de la traduction. Dans Isidore de Chares,’ je
lis, Ἴχναι πόλις Ἑλληνὶς, Μακεδόνων κτίσμα, au lien de κτῆμα."7 Hac
tenus vir doctissimus, qui rursus Strabonem suum adducere poterat,
αὶ δ nuper Coraius cra pro κτίσμα, e Cluverii et Siebenkesii con-
Jectura, reposuit. Et permutationem vocum κτίσις et κτῆσις illustra-
vit Sturzius,? qui in Stephano Byzantino, pro Ἑλλανικὸς ἐν Κτήσεσιν
ἐθνῶν καὶ πόλεων, nihil fortassis interesse credit utrum cricece au
κλήσεσιν legatur: equidem Κτίσεσιν verum esse puto, et unice verum.
Vers.13. TA AAAA ΤΊΜΙΑ KAI ΦΙΛΑΝΘΡΩ͂ΠΑ TIANTA
OZA.... YTIAPXEI. Verba illa ra τίμια καὶ φιλάνθρωπα in bis for-
mulis sunt propria et sepe occurrunt: rarior est locutio, πάντα ra
φιλάνθρωπα καὶ καλῶς ἔχοντα, in Fodere inter Marmora Oxoniensia.
Romani Teiis scribunt *° conaturos esse se ra eis τὸν θεὸν τέμια καὶ ra
els ὑμᾶς φιλάνθρωπα συνεπαύξειν : sic Etoli'* decreta omnia sanciunt
in Teiorum gratiam facta περὶ τῶν φιλανθρώπων. Polybius’? ait se de
Locris bene fuisse meritum, παρεσχῆσθαι χρείας αὐτοῖς ἀναγκαίας,
propter quod ipsum Locri πᾶσιν ἠμείψαντο τιμίοις καὶ φιλανθρώποις.
Quo loco fere crediderim ipsa nobis apposuisse Locrorum decreti
verba. Nam formule id genus in hac re peculiares erant. Clinode-
mus ** enim a Deliis honoribus mactatur, ἐπειδὴ χρείας παρέχεται καὶ
κοινῇ τῇ πόλει καὶ ἰδίᾳ τοῖς ἐντυγχάνουσιν ς Mendiceus,"* quod χρείαε
διατελεῖ παρεχόμενος τοῖς ἐντυγχάνουσι» : Demetrius ab Agrigentinis,"
* De Corona §. 27. * Illustr. Corcir. p. 188, 197, 201. * Pag. 8381. *V,
23,11. °V, c. 3, §. 2, p. 152. Sieb. p. 808, Cor. 5 T. II, Geogr. Min. p. 8.
7Vipe Appenpa. ὃ V. p. 203. Sieb. p. 388 Cor. ° ad Hellan. p. 87, 88.
*°Chish. Antiq. p. 103; Hessel. pref. ad Gud. Inscr. *** 4; Cuper. Let-
tres, Ὁ. 105. 1: Chish, p. 104, 12 9. ο..5. 13]. ind. supra p. S81. '* Marm.
Oxon. 157. "5 Supra p. 381.
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 391
cum certiores facti essent ipsum πολλὰς καὶ μεγάλας χρείας παρεσχῆ-
σθαι: Atheniensis populus a Byzantiis,* quia πολλὰς καὶ μεγάλας χρείας
καρέσχηται. Quid sint illa τίμια καὶ φιλάνθρωπα inquirenti, monstrabo
decretum Delphorum?* qui Philippo cuidam Calymnio et posteris ‘ejus
dant προξενίαν, προμαντείαν, προεδρίαν, προδικίαν, ἀσυλίαν, ἀτέλειαν
παντῶν, denique τὰ ἄλλα ὅσα καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις προξένοις καὶ ebepyéracs®
et hic obiter notandum deese vel ὑπάρχει ut in nostra inscriptione ;
vel δέδοται, ut in decreto Deliorum de Clinodemo, καὶ ra ἄλλα πάντα
ὅσα Sé5orai καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις προξένοις καὶ εὐεργέταις" vel γέγραπται, ut
in binis Corcyreis inscriptionibus ;? non autem ὑπάρχονται, ut in hoc
Corcyreo lapide,* rai τὰ ἄλλα τίμια ὅσα καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις προξένοις καὶ
εὐεργέταις ὑπάρχονται, ubi Tegendum forte ὑπάρχοντι. Ceterum in
illo decreto Delphorum nihil est fortasse manu supplendum, estque
ellipsis, ut in illo Corcyreo,’ εἶμεν δὲ αὐτοῖς γᾶς καὶ οἰκίας ἔγκτασιν, καὶ
τὰ ἄλλα τίμια ὅσα καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις προξένοις καὶ εὐεργέταις, et utin Decreto
Orchomeniorum quod adtuli p. 382. Intelligo igitur τὰ τίμια καὶ
φιλάνθρωπα de honoribus illis et prerogativis quorum in Delphico
lapide mentio fit, ad quem conferendum est Bysantiorum decretum
apud Demosthenem, et illud quo. jam supra° usus sum, ubi civitas
Hermio tribuit xpofevlay, πολιτείαν, προεδρίαν, ἀτέλειαν χρημάτων
πάντων ὧν ἂν εἰσάγωσι καὶ ἐξάγωσι ἐπὶ κτήσει, ἐγγείων ἔγκτησιν, δίκας
προδίκουε, ἔφοδον ἐπὶ τὴν βουλὴν καὶ τὸν δῆμον πρώτοις μετὰ τὰ ἱερά :
que postrema iis addantur exemplis quibus similis formula in decreto
Byzantiorum Demosthenico a Tayloro vindicata fuit et asserta.
Vers. 14. AMOIZ. Duo λάμβδα sic copulata, ut ad formam τοῦ
M aecedant, pepererunt alibi vocum AAAA et AMA permutationem,
de qua supra monui.” Hine corrigenda inscriptio Sicula male edita,°
KAMIZ
TPATOZ
PATOPOZ
et male versa: Camistratus Ratoris F. Scribe KAAAIZTPATO2,
et ΡΑΤΟΡΟΣ verte Rhetoris. In Gruteriano lapide " variatur inter
ΓΡΑΤΊΛΛΗ et FPATIMH: illud pretulerim.
1 Demosth. Coron. §. 27. * Villois. Acad. Inscript. M. τ. XLVI, p. 326 ;
Wessel. ad Herod. I, 54.—-Vide et Mustox. Idlustr. Core. p. 191. 3 Mustox. I.
Cc. p. 188, 192. 4 Mustox. p. 201. 5 Mustox. p. 197. © Pag. 883. ad Holsten.
7P. 13. Vide et ad Pseudeodiogen. in Notitiis Mss. τ. X, p. 225. * Castell.
Ῥ. 168, 37. " P. 685,12.
S92 Addenda ad
ADDENDA.
P. 368. De Ephoro Spartanorum Eponymo ef. et Larcheras ad
Herod. I. § 65. not. 178. p. 315.
P. 369. ‘‘ Nothing is more customary amongst critics, than to
say of a phrase or construction which sins against the rules of gran-
mar, that it is cleganter, or subtiliter, or exquisite dictum :” ANONYM.
in Museo Crit. Cantabrig. T. 2. p. 321. Ipsum me non semel %
loqui memini, et ob id elegantiarum studium a viro doctissimo olm
reprehendi et amice castigari.
P. ib. Hanc interpretationem verborum, τῶν ταχνιτᾶν τῷ δι-
ονύσψ, quee est unice vera, jam invenerat Biagius, Monum. Gr. Na.
p. 106.; quod proximis hisce diebus serius animadverti. Ibi Bia-
gius et de τοῖς τοῦ Διονύσον τεχνίταις nonnulla notavit.
P. 370. In Alcesti Euripidea 323 videtur dativus hoc modo pos-
tus doctissimo Professori displicuisse, qui, pro
σὺ δ', ὦ τέκνον pot, πῶς κορευθήσει καλῶς ;
legendum conjicit,
σὺ δ᾽, ὦ τέκνον, πῶς μοι κορευθήσει καλῶς ;
Equidem verba τέκνον μοι, nempe τέκνον ἐμὸν, affectus tenerrimi plem
esse puto, cum in altera lectione pronomen langueat fere παραπλῆρυ.-
ματικῶς. Nec Viro Reverendissimo, qui nuper Reliquias Sacras
magna cum diligentia collegit et illustravit, facile assentiaz, cum (T. £.
p. 203.) in Origenis Epistola ad Africanum (p. 221, 2. edit. Westen.)
nit librarium Bodleianuin pro, διελεγόμην τῷ ἑταίρῳ ἡμῶν Βάσσψ, pe-
suisse, ἑτέρῳ ἡμῖν, sed frustra: nam, repudiate solemni errore érépy,
dativum ἡμῖν ipse quidem preetuletim.
P. 371. Viscontius V.S. me monait fere malle-se legere KAN
TIQI, et dativos hosce non ad vocerh διακόνων referre, sed ad subat-
ditam ἀνατίθενται. Et hev interpretatio non mihi displicet ips:
tram Κ ἀνωπὸς hominis nomen est, puto, rarissimum ; et insupetr Kase-
wes ille patre careret suo, cum ahi suum habeant nominatum, ‘Seti
Callistratum, Diodorus Menandrum. -
P. 375. De Clarkiana hac inscriptione vide que nuper notavit
Jacobsius, vir eruditissimus, in Addendis ad Anthol. Palat. p. civ.
P. ib. Plura de Basillee Epitaphio promisit dicturuin se Heinri-
chius in Wolfii Litter. Anal. T. 1. p. 484., quite non patienter ex-
‘spectant qui Heinrichii doctrinam norunt. Et nunc lege que ruteus
commentatus, est Jacobsius in Appendice notarum ad Anth. Palatin.
Ρ. 970.
Inscriptionem Actiacam. 393
P. 376. Moschopulus mw. Ly. p. 87.
Ζωσιμὰς, κύριον.
P. 379. Viscontius V. S. me docet plurima id genus exempla ab
eodem Marino fuisse collecta in Dissertatione posthuma reperiunda
in viri doctissimi laudatione quam nuper scripsit Abbas Coppius.
ΟΡ, 380. Notandum est, Viscontius ait, illa ἐθνικὰ in αν desi-
nentia ad eamdem pertinere regionem: tolorum nempe propria et
Acarnanensjum fuisse videntur.
P. ib. Meam de mense Curopo opinionem Viscontio probavi;
mihique vir doctissimus hanc notam misit. ““ Κοροπαῖος cognomen
esse Apollinis discimus e Stephano Byz. in Κορόπη, et Nicandri The-
riacis 614., cujus lectionem frustra Stephanus sollicitat. In urbe
Apollini sacra non mirum est mensem ab Apolline nomen habere.”
P. 381. Et de Proxenis vide Paciaudium, Monum. Pelop. T. 2.
p. 157.
, P. 382. Im his conjecturis me prorsus falsum fuisse, et ἔμβασιν
Leakii errore typorum positum videri pro ἔμπασιν, et in textu ΕΠΑ-
ΣΙΝ stare posse, ostendi in notis ad Herodiani Ἐσιμερισμοὺς, quas
typis Valpianis describi curo mox vulgandas, pag. 31. Nuper,
cum legerem Rob. Walpolii utilissimum opus de Grecia, vidi p. 465.
virum doctiss. eumdem mihi errorem erravisse. Pro EJIAXIN, ait
esse seribendum EKTAXIN, quod, puto, ipse negabit, inspecta mea ad
Herodianum nota.
: P. 388. Sic et Valerius Max. vi. 8. 1. ‘ Viguit in nostra civi-
tate Tiberii et Caii Gracchorum summa nobilitas.”
ΠΡ, 386. Et sic nunc sentire Jacobsium didici e viri doctissimi
notis ad Anthol. Palat. p. 964.
P. 387. Not.1. Viscontius interpretationem hanc meam calculo suo
Gomprobat, sed non item alteram. In verbis, T. FLAVIVS VESTALIS
VIXIT ANNIS xx., non correctionem esse putat, sed epitaphium T.
Flayii Vestalis junioris cujusdam. Cum similia additorum epitaphig-
rum exeppla non rara sint, sententiam libenter muto. >
P. ib. Not. 5. Iterum edidit Jacebsius in Appendice Anthol. Palat.
Nr. 290, iterumque scripsit παιδὸ»--- θανόντων. ͵
P. 388. Not. τὸ δίκαιον non aliter posuit Nilus Narrat. p. 54. ed.
Possin. κατέλιπεν ὑμᾶς ἀναιρεῖσθαι μέλλοντας ἀβοηθήτους ἡ βεία πρόνοια,
καὶ τοῖς ἀναιροῦσιν οὐκ ἀντέστη τὸ δίκαιον.
P. ib. 4. Jam certum est. σκῆνος ἴῃ inscriptione soribendum esse.
Etenim hanc lectionem exhibet Sponius, testis oculatus, Itiner. F’, 2.
p- 267. edit. Hag. 1724.
304 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
P. 389. Not.2. Thierschii lectionem recepit Jacobsius qui hane
inscriptionem inseruit notis ad Auth. Palat. p. 972.
Ῥ, ib. Not.7. Jacobsius qui hoc epigramma ex Akerbladii libello in
Addenda sua ad Anthol. Palat. p. 100 intulit, legit αὑτοκασίγνητοι,
quod et ipse malim. Ibidem notat κήρυκι esse dactylum, quod nos.
puto; pronunciavit auctor: κήρυκ᾽ ἀθανάτων. |
P.390. Vir doctissimus Radulfus Rochetta me monuit in Diario
Fruditorum Nov. 1817. p. 676. Berkelium olim κτίσμα apud Isido-
ram pro κτῆμα legisse.
_ SS wns
OBSERVATIONS ON SOME
QORATIONS ASCRIBED TO CICERO.
No. I.—[Continued from No. xxx}. p. 152.]
ORATIO PRO M. MARCELLO.
SUMMARIUM.
M. Ccravprum Mancettum M.F.,.plebeii generis, (v. ad Orat. de
Harusp. resp.-c. 6, p. 324,) sed multis Senatoriis imaginibus: nobilitati,
inter plerosque cunstat, vim omnem consulatus sui, quem a. U. 708, 4.
Chr. 51, ex cptimatium sententia magnifice gessit, in oppugnanda
Casaris dignitate et ambitione consumsisse. Hic tum in Gallia octe-
vum annum ex triumphorum opportunitate materiam quzrens reipubl.
-evertendz, nihil omittebat, quo in Urbe defensores absentiz suz et
majoris victorie adjutores pararet; obligavitque sibi ita quam pluri-
mos. Sed Marcellus, nullo corruptus pretio, palam animoseque 5656
opposuit illis, ac referendo dicendoque in Senatu imprimis hee egit:
ut Cesari, prorogationem provinciz petenti, succederetur ante exactum
alterum quinquennium ; ut absentis ratio ne haberetur Consularibug
comitiis; ut colonis, quos Cesar Novumcomum nuper majori juré,
quam Pompeianis placeret, deduxisset, illud jus adimecretur: quibus-tr
uctionibus adeo collegam, Ser. Sulpicium, clarissimum juris consultum,
virum aquicrem et pacis studiosiorem, habuit adversarium. IJtaque
Marcellus; quum ad arma iret civitas, partes Pompeii sequutus est, sic
tamen, ut non multum interesset rebus gerendis. Neque enim cons
sittum belli ita, ut gerebatur, gerendi, nee copias Pompcianas, nec
genus exercitus probabat, ct in sera quadam providentia, sicut plerique
ejusdem partis, omnem poncbat sapientiam. Et ‘recte vidisse eos, qui
cxitus esset futurus, fortuna-prelii Pharsalici docuit a. U. 706.
Jam victa et debilitata pars ctiam magis, quam antea, dissidere coepif
consiliis: alii, noyjs copiis in Africa contractis, tellum renovare ; alii,
Summarium. 895
quiorum in numero fuit Cicero, fidei et clementia victoris se commit-
tere. Marcellus autem dignitatem suam tueri se non posse ratus, si
penitentiam faterctur, in Italiam redire noluit, sed Mitylenas migravit,
urbem Lesbi ornatissimam, liberam, ab armis remotam, doctorum Gree
corum celebritate florentem, oblitusque suorum, obliviscendus et illis,
statuit ibi dolorem a republ. captum liberali otio et intentioribus stu-
diis consolari. Nam diu ante bellum haud infimus ipsi locus concede-
batur Rome. inter vratores, quam artem in illa literarum luce nemo
exercere potuit sine elegantia doctrine.
Ad eum, hoc voluntarium exsilium sine ulla patrie cura ferentem, a
Cicerone, quicum ei a puero familiaritas et communium studiorum
commercium fuerat, missz sunt quatuor epistolz (ad Famil. 1V,7—10)
quas in hac Farragine nostra sequitur una ipsius Marcelli, qua ad
deperditam quandam Ciceronis respondet, paulo negligentius, sive
festinanter, exarata. Hisque paucis monumentis -et aliquot narra-
tionibus historicorum nobis utendum est ad ista omnia, que scripsimus,
cognoscenda, quoniam nihil ejusmodi reperitur in hac Oratione. ili
Joci sunt apud Hirt. B. G. vir. 53. Col. in Epp. ad Famil. vrit. 8.
Cic. Brut. c. 71. ad Att. V. ur. Sueton. Cas. c. 28. Plut. Pomp.
p- 650. Cas. p. 722. Dion. Cass. xu. 58 seq. Appian. B.C. 11.
25 seq. Quibus jungendus est locus Senecz Cons. ad Helv. c. 9:—
“ Brutus in eo libro, quem de Virtute composuit, ait se vidisse Marcel-
lum Mitylenis exsulantem, et, quantum modo natura hominis pateretur,
beatissime viventem, neque umquam bonarum artium cupidiorem,
quam illo. tempore. Itaque adjicit, visum sibi se magis in exsilium
ire, qui sine illo rediturus esset, quam illuin in exsilio relinqui. O
fortunatiorem Marcellum, eo tempore, quo exsilium suum Bruto ap-
probavit, quam quo reipublice consulatum! Quantus vir ille fuit,
qui effecit, ut aliquis exsul sibi videretur, quod ab exsule recederet "
gui in admirationem sui adduxit hominem, ctiam Catoni suo mirane-
dam! Idem Brutus ait, C. Cxsarem Mitylenas pratervectum, quia
non sustineret videre deformatum virum. Illi quidem reditum impe-
travit Senatus, publicis precibus, tam sollicitus ac moestus, ut omnes”
illo die Bruti habere animum viderentur, et non pro Marcello, sed pro
se deprecuri, ne exsules essent, si sine illo fuissent: sed plus multo
consequutus est, quo die illum exsulem Brutus relinquere non potuit,
Ceasar videre. Contigit enim illi testimonium utriusque: Brutus sine
Marcello reverti se doluit; Cesar erubuit.”
Fuit huic Marcello patruus, C. Marcellus, Ciceronis in auguratu
collega ; tum frater patruelis, hujus filius, eodem prenomine, Marci
in consulatu successor, quem eadem in Cwzxsarem tentavisse legimus :
sed is, exorto bello, timidius in Italia manens, medium se gessit. Cic,
ad Fumil. xv. 7 seqq. ad Att. x. 13 et 15. Suet. c. 29. Appian.
ς, 20 seq. Alius C. Marcellus nostro fuit frater germanus, quo Con-
sule a. U. 705. exarsit bellum, in quo una cum Lentulo collega fortu-
nam Pompeii ad exitum usque vite sequutus, periit. Hirt. B. G. vir.
60. Cic. ad Att. rx. 6. Appian. 11. 33.37. De reliquis propin-
gujs, quos pumeyo plures fuisse vix dubium est, silent scriptores, neg
406 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
quisquam illorum nominatim memoratur in epistolis, unde tamen ex
verbis quibusdam suspicio oritur, eos M. Marcelli parum studioses,
nec de cjus reditu soallicitos fuisse. Frater patruelis vero et multi
amici ac familiares, in iisque Cicero imprimis, omni modo laborabant,
ut contumaciam viri frangerent, primo spem impetrabilis venia a
Cesare ostendentes, mox, postquam Senatus consulto impeJrata erat,
amicum ad maturandum reditum exhortantes.
Nam, quum Cesar exeunte Maio a. U. 708. ex bello Africano rever
tisset, paucis illis mensibus,’ quos ante, quam in Hispaniam proficis-
ceretur, in Urbe transegit, ud mentionein Marcelli, a Pisone in Senatu
factam, suppliciter deprecaute patrucle ct universo Senatu, repente
decretum est de ejus in pristinum locum restitutione. Czsar enim,
Hon immemor quidem veteris inimicitiz, et consulatu Marcelli compe-
ratione Ser. Sulpicii acriter notato, tamen publicts desidertis cedendum
duxit, simul singulos, quasi de re dubia, sententias rogavit; sive ut
Senatui antique libertatis simulacrum preberet, seu quod Marcellum
putabat hoc beneficio libentius usurum, si a republ. potius quam a
Dictatore datum esset, seu quo certius, guid nonnulli sentirent, intelli-
sere posset. Igitur dixcrunt deinceps Senatores, et cum sententiis suis
gratiarum actionem ad Csesarem cunjunxerunt. Sed jucundius erit,
rem*totam Ciceronis verbis ex epistola ad Sulpicium cognoscere,
Famil. 1v. 4. fere med. ‘‘ Atque hoc ipso melior est tua, yuam nostra
conditio. Uno te vicimus, quod de Marcelli, college tui, salute
paullo ante, quam tu, cognovimus: etiam mehercule, quod, quemad-
modum ea res ageretur, vidimus. Nam sic fac existimes: post has
miserias, i.e. postquam armis disceptari coeptum est de jure publico,
nihil esse actum aliud cum dignitate. Nam et ipse Cesar, accusata
acerbitate Marcellt, (sic enim appellabat,) laudataque honorificentissime
et zquitate tua et prudentia, repente preter spem dixit, se Senatui
roganti de Marcello ne hominis quidem causa negaturum. Fecerat
autem hoc Senatus, ut, quum a L, Pisone mentio esset facta de Mar-
cello, et quum C. Marcellus se ad Czsaris pedes abjecisset, cunctus
consurgeret, et ad Casarem supplex accederet. Noli quzrere: ita
mibi pulcher hic dies visus est, ut speciem aliquam viderer videre quasi
reviviscentis reipublice. Itaque quwm omnes ante me rogati Casari
Bratias egissent preter Volcatium: is enim, si eo loco esset, negavit
se facturum fuisse: ego rogatus, mutact meum constlium. Nam statu-
eram, non mchercule inertia, sed desiderio pristine dignitatis, in pet-
petuum tacere. Fregit hoc meum consilium et Cesaris magnitudo
animi, et Senatus officium. Itaque pluribus verbis egi Cesari gratias ;
meque, metuo, ne etiam in ceteris rebus honesto otio privarim, quod
erat unum solatium in malis.”
Accepto hoc nuntio, et novis cobortationibus amicorum, reditum
cogitare co-pit Marcellus: sed, velut tarditate delectatus, iter in annum
709 distulit. In eo itinere quum mense Maio in Pirezeum devectus
esset, ab uno comitum suorum, Magio Cilone, obscuram ob caussm
noctu interfectus est, et ab Sulpicio illo, qui tum Proconsul Achais
forte Atbgnas venerat, in loco Academie humatus. Qua de re hujup
-
Summarium. a 397
litere exstant accurate scripte ad Οἷς. inter Famil. rv. 12. Cf. Liv.
epit. cxv. et Valer. Max. rx. 11, 4. Percussorem homini immissum a
Cesare, ut vulgus pessima quaeque cupidissime credit, recenti re haud
dubie fuerunt multi, qui suspicabantur. At talem suspicionem diluit
glim M. Brutus, et, qui id refert, ipse Cicero ad Att: x11. 10; ac,
ne quis eam hodie renovandam putet, vetant leges historiz et mores
Cesaris. - . -
.+Nunc pauca subjicienda sunt de hac Oratione Pro Μ. Marcello,
non ut prestantiam ejus et artem explicemus: id enim quodammodo
fécimus in Comnientario: sed ut summam rerum vel potius senten- |
tiarum, quas Orator tractavit, leviter perstringamus. Ista de inscrip-
Uione quidem mirum est, neminem Interpretum quicquam aanotasse,
quz ex certa consgetudine Romana: promittere videtur defensionem,
quum Oratio nihil aliud contineat nisi gratiarum actsonem ad Casa*
tem, ambitiosissimis laudibus Imperatoris refertam, .propter quas de
plerorumque judicio in Panegyricis numerari solet. Ipsius Orationis,
statim apparet, duas esse partes. Prior pars capp. 1—6, tum res
maximas bello gestas, tum clementiam in victos, qualem et nuper alii,
et modo Marcellus expertus est, extollit, sic utroque genere laudum
‘comparato, ut bellica gloria Czsaris, quamvis ad perennem memoriam
rorsus eximia, excellentiore animi magnitudine obscurari, et ille, tot
hostium fortissimus victor, se ipsum hodie multo gloriosius vicisse
predicetur: qua omnia Intpp. admirantur, tamquam sapientissime
et ingeniosissime tractata. Posterior pars inde a. c. 7. versatur in
tefutanda suspicione quedam Casaris et metu insidiarum: quasi ipse
§n sententia sua, conquerens de acerbitate Marcelli, se hoc viro reductu
parum tutum, et aliorum quoque occultis insidiis-obnoxium dixisset,
tum et contemptum moriendi pre se tulisset; unde via patebat ad
hortandum Dictatorem, ut vite et saluti suse consuleret, sine qua nec
respubi, recreari et restitui, neque ipse veram et solidam gloriam apud
posteros consequi pusset,
Ceterum magistri eloquentiz inter se certant, utrum hic senten-
tiarum novitas, pulchritudo et gravitas, an eloquutionis virtutes, ele-
gantia, compositio et dignitas, majorem laudem mereuntur: attamen
consentiunt omnes, hanc Orationem in numero prestantissimarum
summi Oratoris habendam esse. Id unum quidam reprehendere ausi
sunt, quod tantus vir et Consularis pluribus locis in tam bhumilem
Casaris adulationem se demiserit: quam maculam alii Ciceronis,
tempori cedentis, arti tribuere, alii turpioribus exemplis posteriorum
Cesaris annorum comparandis elyere videntur. Sunt preterea, qui
disputent, ad quodnam genus causarum potissimum pertineat Oratio.
Sed et illam reprehensionem, et hanc dubitationem non nimis gravem
aut utilem studiosis eloqyentiz esse, nunc castigationes nostre demon -
strabunt. | ; ᾿
VOL. XVI. Cl. Jl, NO. RKRAWN, AN
808 On the Orations aseribed to Cicero.
DiIvTURNI silentii,’ Patres Conscripti, quo eram his. temporibus
usus, Don timore aliquo, sed partim dolore, partim vereoundia, ἄπουν
hodieraus «ies attulii; idemque initium, que vellem, queeque sen-
* Diuturni silentii—more dicendi) Haud dubie, qui dies finem δον
silentii, idem dies habet loquendi initium. Verum necessaria videbatut
forsan altera pars periodi ad ambitum verborum elegantius complendum ;
id quod ita factum est, tnterpositis pluribus loquendi formulis, ut, quum
auribus blandiantur numeri, delusus animus jejunitatem sententis minus.
sentiat: Diuturni silentii finem hodiernus dies attulit, idemque initium dicendi,
Atque ne ista quidem*omnia, quibus hec sententia suffarcinata est, suopte
ingenio Auctor invenit, sed ex eadem illa Ciceronis epistola adumbtavit,
quam universe Orationis fundum esse diximus. Nam in dolere hie non
alia vis videtur inesse, quam illic in desiderio pristina diguitatis: quod
tamen quum litteris de Cesare pfivatim scriptis conveniat, non orationi
ad ipsum Cesarem habite; admodum optes, ut alio sensu hic accipi doler
possit, vel de pcenitentia susceptarum partium Pompeianarum, vel de
amicorum per illa tempora amissorum desierio. Ita vocabulum vage
significationis offensionem Czsaris haberet minorem, satisque bene junetem
esset cum verecundia, quod verbum, 51 optimis Interpretibus credimas, ad
eandem peenitentiam pertinet. Sed, ut intelligatur, quo pertrahere. tices?
temerarios sensus talium scriptorum; age, nonnulla ex Abrami animed,
versionibus excerpta ponamus. “ His temporibus, ait Cicero, nan hoc temp
pore ; quia tempora calamitatem aliquam indicant, aut saltem periculum,
Tempora itaque reipubl. appellat tempus bellorum civilium, ‘ut i id
ambiguo ludere videatur. Ac volunt aliqui, Oratorem de industria hane
amphibologiam sectari, ut et iterum et tertio in eodem loco: ut quum dixit
partim verecundia, non solum quod vereretur apud Cesarem dicere, contra
quem arma susceperat, sed etiam quod puderet ipsum deformats reipubl:
et Curiz-dominatiope whius oppressz: Item, quum ait, tantum in summe
potestate rerum omnium modum ; ubi verba rerum omnium, si ad modum refer
rantur, Cesarem non mediocriter commendant; sin ad potestatem, ejus
tyrannidem et nimiam potentiam carpunt. Sed non doleo, me esse paallo
tardiorem, ne possim vel ausim tam subtiliter et enucleate ista disquirere »
neque facile mducor ut credam, aut tam scurrilem fuisse Ciceronem, ut
Cesarem in Senatu palam haberet ludibrio, et victus inequitaret victeris
cervicibus, aut Cesarem tam mucosis fuisse naribus, ut ista non persesitiee
ceret, si vel minimum irrisionis et amphibologiz redolerent.” Jam recen-
tiorem Interpretem imprimis diligentem audiamus, Ferratium, numquam
rius audita proferentem :—“ Quinam hic dolor, quenam veretundia tanta
uit, ut Cicero, rogatus suo loco sententiam, aliis tacitus assentiretur? Sie
explicat Commentator: Desiderio pristine dignitatis, unde delor ; verecundia
loqui coram eo non audebat, contra quem armis pugnasset. An solus Cicero ex
Pompeianis patriz ac Senatui restitutus fuerat, ut eum solum tanta ceperit
verecundia? an vero.desiderare pristinam dignitatem poterat, nisi et Ca»
sarem odio haberet, qui eam eripuisset, et victis omnia reddi cuperet, inter
fecto Cesare, qui vicisset? Opera pretium est diligenter animadvertere,
qua ratione pro Marcello dicturus éxordiatur: Diuturni silentii etc. Hee
est propositio exordii, quod desumit ἃ causis silentii sui, qua simul testatur,
se non amplius taciturum in posterum: Tantam enim mansuetudinem etc.
manifeste ‘leclarat, cur in posterum etiam tacere nolit, quod Cesaris man-
suetudo dicere cogeret pene invitum. At qua in re tantam in Casare
mansuetudinem Oratot predicat? M, enim Marcello vobis etc. Janz intel-
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationsbus Ciceron. 899
tirem, meo pristino more dicendi. Tantam enim mansuetudinem,
tam inusitatam inauditamque clementiam, tantum in summa potestate
rerum omnium modam, tam denique incredibilem sapientiam ac
~
ligimus, veniam Marcello datam initium Ciceroni attulisse dicendi suo
pristino more, que vellet et quz sentiret. Pergit itaque exponere causas,
quibus adductus hucusque tacuerit » Dolebam enim ac vehementer angebars
guum viderem—/fortuna: nunc scilicet satisfactum est de Uolore; quid |
deinde de verecundia ? Nec mihi persuadere poteram, nec fas esse ducebam—
distracto. Pudet enim nos illud facere, quod fieri nefas ducimus.” Nunc
dimittendi tandem essent lectores, incertiores hercle quam venerant, nisi
in reliquis vocabulis exordii etiam aliud quiddam notandum haberem 3
jicet inhumanum sit, omnia severius persequi in principio accusationis.
De illo loquor preterito eram usus, quod minus commode junctum est
verbo attudit, quod ἢ. }. non aoristum seu preteritum est, sed presens ret
perfecte ; qua potestate proxime accedit ad alterum presens affert. Hoe
vero quid rei sit, Si.quis ratione non perspiciat, cujusvis recentioris linguz
exemplo monitus sentiet. Ut, si hec ita vertaftur Gallice: Ce jour FINIT
enfin le silence, que j’avors GarDe’ depuis long temps: nemini, puto, hee
translatio placuerit, qui recte dicidit scribere.
Tuntam erim—praterire possum) Clementie specimen dederat Cesar in
Marcello Senatui et suis Penatibus restituendo; illa ergo tamquam inusi-
tata inauditaque praedicari recte potuit: sed qua ratione hoc tempore
sapientia ipsius laudetur incredibilis, ac pene divina, id equidem me non
videre fateor. Hoc igitur ne molestum videatur, et nihil nisi verborum
Ciceronianorum aucupium ; statuat, qui volet, Cesarem in ea oratione, qua
Marcello veniam dedit, excellentis cujusdam sapientie documenta exhi-
buisse, non tantum virtute Marcelli agnoscenda, sed etiam de multis huma~
nis divinisque rebus disputando. Sed silentio preterire non possum ea
verba, in quibus versutam ambiguitatem a nonnullis quesitam esse vide-
bamus, tantum ἐπ potestate rerum omnium modum, que dupliciter offendere
oportet eum, qui in Cicerone legendo accurate versatus est. Nam primum
nullo exemplo apparebit, ita simpliciter ab illo dici solere modum pro mode~
tratione vel actione moderandi animi; nec talis usus defendi poterit loco
Terent. Andr. I. 1.68. Scias posse habere jam ipsum vite sua modum, ubi
Donatus adscripsit, Modum : moderationem, regisnen. Altera offensio est in
ancipiti collocatione verborum rerum omnium: que quamvis non dubites
quin Auctor ad modum retulerit, tamen, ut idem facerent ceteri, non nisi
subjuncta explicatione cogi poterant. Nam optime dici constat potestatem
rerum omnium, quum usitatuin sit dicere, omnia relata ad unum esse, ut de
hoc ipso viro loquitur Cic. ad Famil.1v. 9. Ex hac autem duplici casti-
gatione oritur simul alia itidem duplex. Nam si quis putet, Oratorenr
unxisse in summa potestate rerum omnium, additis duobus vocabulis plus
ille tribuit Cxsari, quam Cicerone dignum esset facere, apud Senatuny
dicente, et ipsi Dictatori gratum vel tolerabile auditu esse posset. Conf,
pro Ligar. c. 4. init. Ciceronem, sed multo cautius, loquentem. Sin
autem rerum omnium modum conjungas, Orator in eandem reprehensionem
incurret, quam antea merebatur in divina sapientia ; siquidem eo une di¢
omnibus in rebus moderationem prestare non licuit Casan. Itaque sin-
gulis partibus pertodi excussis, suspiciv nascatur necesse est, hic quidem
non loqui Ciceronem, pro uno aliquo beneficio publice gratias agentem,
sed hominem, sub umbra scholz in leudatione omnium Vittotom Wagpr
viri occupatum.
400. On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
ne divinam, tacitus nullo modo preterire possum. M. enim Mar-
cello vobis, Patres Conscripti, reique publice reddito, non solum
illius, sed meam etiam vocem et auctoritatem et vobis et reipublicw
* M. enim Marcello—restitutam puto) Omittamus, quod Orator. qunc
propemodum omne Czesaris meritum ad semet ipsum refert, suamque
vocem civitati redditam, ut precipuum ejus meriti fructum, extollit: in qua
conformations sententiz .parum modestiz inesse dixeris. At postremum
verbum puto haud feliciter electum videtur, multoque aptius futurum fuisse
sentio aut intelligo. Quod enim de propria voce ct auctoritate dicitur, id
plane ejusmodi est, ut in ev non opinio quedam, sed certa persuasio, sed
certus animi sensus locum habeat. Longe diversus est usus istius verbi in
Epp. ad Fam. 111. 10. extr. de Pompeio:—“ Si merita valent, patriam,
liberos, salutem, dignitatem, memet ipsum mihi per illum restitutum puto,”
—i.e. hunc virum pre ceteris auctorem restitutionis mez fuisse existimo.
Talis autem locus, nisi me omnia fallunt, hic memoriz Auctoris obversa-
tur. .
Dolebom enim—comite αἰ φταοίο) Pleraque horum sic, ut cum Grevio
posui, 8 scriptore posita esse nun dubito. Sed dubitari saue poterit de his
verbis, virum talem, qui in cadem causa esset, in gua ego fuissem : quorum
faciles in promptu erant variationes, ut, virum talem, qui, S. guum, in eadem
causa, fuisset in gua ego,—vel, qui in eudem causa, in qua ego, fuisset ete.
uum non satis placeant verba, in eadem re et tempore diversa, esset,
ΗΝ neque in toto loco veteres libri inter se consentiant. Sunt enim,
gui prabeant, virum talem in eadem causa, in qua ego fuissem, non in eudem
esse fortuna, quod mireris Ernestio probari potuisse, aut, oirum talem, quum,
8. tum, in eadem cuusa fuisset, 5. esse etc. Nec desunt MSS. qui omittant
priora illa, guum viderew, que tamen perbene serviunt rotundande periodo,
neque obsunt sententia. Contra in omnibus libris comparet illud, πές
miki persuudee poleram, quod importune interjeetum, olim Faerno displi-
cuisse refert Ursinus. Rectissime: nam illi sententiz, versari me in nostro
etc. non magis congruit verbum persuadendi, quam paullo ante putandi,
Sed hoc quoque copia et numero orationis capti vix sentimus: eademque
re factum videtur, ut in extremis neminem adhuc offenderit inutilis appen-
dix, quasi quodam socio et comite. Que adjectio tamen speciem vitiosi
tumoris in corpore habet: quid enim aliud est studiorum emulus quam
socius εἰ comes? Nam si forte Auctor scribere voluit, comife cursus seu
itineris, ombis censura nostra ad ea pertinet, que scripsit homo, non qua
ortasse voluit scribere. Atque he quatuor. periodi mihi quidem satis erant,
ut, quum eas ante hos Guinque annus, quamquam aliud ageng, legissem,
huncce Oratorem non Ciceronem, sed quasi quendam Ciceronmfanum esse
judicarem; de quo judicio me reliqua attentius legentem demovere non
tuerunt testimouia veterum, velut Nonii voc. emulus p. 289. et Prisciani
VI. p. 715., ἃ quibus ex hoc ipso principio nonnulla laudantur. Ibi alter
horum Grammaticorum affert vetere pro veteri, assentiente Heusingero ad
Off. 1. 35, 11. '
Ergo et mihi mea etc.) Postquam ter appellavit Patres Conscriptos, con-
versus tandem ad Cesarem jllud incipit exsequi, quod modo ordiebatur de
restitutione vocis sux, Sed male iteratur copula et ante mea, etsi eam
exhibent plurimi codd. Gruteri et aliorum. Simili vitio librorum plero-
rumgue omnium mox in editt. et multis codd. scriptum fertur ante ix
ournibus, ubi mediam vocem delendam esse jam P. Victorius accurate docuit
y.c. xvi. 6. Deinde omni ahext ἃ quatuct Oxon. net take,
Wolfius de Quatuor Qrationibus Ciceron. 401
conservatam ac restitutam puto. Dolebam enim, Patres Conscripti,
et vehementer angebar, quum viderem, virum talem, qui in eadem
causa esset, in qua ego fuissem, non in eadem esse fortuna, nec mihi
persuadere poteram, nec fas esse ducebam, versari me in nostro
veteri curriculo, illo zmulo atque imitatore studiorum ac laborum
meorum quasi quodam socio a me et comite distracto. Ergo et
mihi mez pristinze vite consuetudinem, C. Cesar, interclusam ‘aperu-
isti, et his omnibus ad bene de omni republica sperandum, quasi
signum aliquod sustulisti.
Intellectum est enim mihi quidem in multis, et maxime in me ipso,
sed paullo ante omnibus,. quum M. Marcellum Senatui reique pub-
licze concessisti, commemoratis presertim offensionibus,' te auctori-
* Commemoratis presertim offensionibus) Plures ediderunt presertim etiam
offensionibus, ex paucioribus membranis, in quibus forsan duo Oxonn. sunt,
unde enotatur commemoratis etiam. Neque vere languida πῶς particula
addita multum de venustate sententia detrahet, quam satis corrumpit
istud presertim, minime suo loco positum, uti tota sententia huc violenter
tracta est ex Jaudate epistole verbis, accusata acerbitate Marcelli. Suboluit
aliquid illius rei Patricio, singularis et sui prorsus judicii viro, cujus. et
alibi mirabiles correctiones adscripsimus. Is h.}. aliquot periodos monet
non optimo ordine collocatas videri, atque ita corrigendas :—“ Intellectum
est enim, mihi quidem in multis, et maxime in me ipso paullo ante, sed
nunc omnibus, quum M. Marcellum s. P. Q.R. et reipubl., commemoratis
presertim ejus offensionibus, concessisti, te auctoritatem hujus ordinis
dignitatemque reipubl. tuis vel doloribus vel suspicionibus anteferre. Et
ille quidem fructum omnis ante acte. vite hodierno die maximum cepit,
cum summo consensu Senatus, tum przterea judicio tuo gravissimo et
maximo. Vere fortunatus, cujus ex salute non minor pene ad omnes,
quam ad illum ventura. sit, letitia pervenerit; quod ei quidem merite
atque optimo jure contigit. Quis enim est illo aut nobilitate, aut. probi-
tate, aut optimarumi artium studio, aut innocentia, aut ullo genere laudis
prestantior? Ex quo profecto intelligis, quanta in dato beneficio sit laus,
quum in accepto tanta sit gloria. uidem nullius tantum est flumen,
etc.
Ez quo profecto intelligis etc.) Ex Cesarisne judicio, quod, nescio quo
usu, dicitur mazimum ὃ an ex Senatus consensu in deprecando? an denique
ex hac utraque re, tum alieno judicio, tum suo? Nihil horum penitus
probari potest, modo grammatica ratione, modo sententia repugnante ; ut
facile sit videre, quam hac inscite consarcinata sint: cui malo mederi
transpositione sua studuit Patricius. At quid intelligit profecto Cesar ?—
Mazimam, inquit, in dato beneficio laudem esse, quum in uccepto tanta sit
gloria. Hic nos profecto nihil Cicerone aut Cesare dignum preter νος»
ula reperimus, et ne hec quidem aptissima rebus. Non quzram, cur- in
priore membro positum sit Jays, in posteriore gloria, quum inversa hee
non minus vera videantur: sed propter formam minime placent het,
in dato, in accepto, quoniam significatur ratio dandi et accipiendi. Nam
non alio pertinent verba in accepto, quam ad illum ipsum consexsum
Senatus ; unde jam assequi licebit divinando, quid sibi his omnibus veluerit
Declamator. Nempe ex eo, quod tantum glorie sit in accepto benefcio,
intelligi pose ait, guentum in dato eo sit laudis: indeque possumus suspi-
cari, quid Auctori fraudem fecerit, pro formula transitionis ponenti er gua
402 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
tatem hujus ordinis dignitatemque reipublice tuis vel doloribus, vd
suspicionibus, anteferre. Ille quidem fructum omnis ante actz
wtatis hodierno die maximum cepit, quum summo consensu Senatus,
tum preterea judicio tuo gravissimo et maximo. Ex quo profecto
intelligis, quanta in dato beneficio sit laus, quum in accepto tanta sit
gloria. Est vero fortunatus ille, cujus ex salute non minor pene ad
omnes, quam ad ipsum ventura sit, letitia pervenerit: quod εἰ
quidem merito atque optimo jure contigit. Quis enim’ est illo aut
nobilitate, aut probitate, aut optimarum artium studio, aut innocentia,
aut ullo genere laudis prestantior ?
Nullius tantum est flumen ingenii,' nulla dicendi aut scribendi tanta
vis, tanta copia, que non dicam exorvare, sed enarrare, C. Czsar,
ut simul oblique spectaret remotiora hec, quum in accepto ete. Certe mibi
hoc ius In mentem venit, turbate oratiouis causam inquirenti ez
ingenio Auctoris. Nam, ut criticam artem apud probum scriptorem male
e nisi in locis corruptis cum ipso certes scribendi ἔδει δῖα ; ita nec
indocti scriptoris latentem sensum indagare poteris, nisi illius ingenium
tute ipse induas, et stilo imitere infantiam.
_ Est vero fortunatue—prestantior) Equidem putabam, alia omnia potion
jure laudanda esse in tali homine, quam fortunam ; tum, sive vero legas,
seu vere cum u.8. Ps. vehementer friget transitio. Ac librarius cod. 1.
acripsit enim, alius imperitior St. ideo. Tum qui erunt isti Omnes, ad quos
non minor pene letitia de clementia Cesaris pervenit? Populum seu
plebem Romanam dicas, si notum vocabuli usum spectes: at quum le-
tandi materiam dederit hic ipse Senatus, in quo habita fingitur Oratio, eo
tempore vix cuiquam preter Senatores letitia tribui poterat. Eam ob
causam, opinor, Heumannus sic scribendum conjiciebat: non minor pene
ad omnes, quam ad illum, venture sit letitia. Aliud addebat Ernestius, sine
dubio legendum esse épsum, non illum, quia paullo ante precessisset Fortw-
natus ille; nimis polite. In seqq. preeclara est phrasis, quod ef quidem m.
aigque 0. jure contigit: attamen paullo obscurius est, quid significet Quod ;
utrum, salutem ipsum adeptum esse, an, ex ejus salute Jetitiam ad omnes
pervenisse. Utrumque, respondet Patricius, sed posterius magis. Et facile
credimus, hanc Auctoris mentem fuisse, que grammatice ration! magis
congruit et contextui verborum proximorum. Ad summam denique hee
fere unica sunt per totam Orationem, in quibus aliquid memoretur de Mar-
celli rebus et virtutibus; ea autem apparet ess¢ ejusmodi, ut mirum sit, ni
quivis scholasticus tiro nostre ztatis, nulloque ingenio, similiter laudare
quemvis Caium aut Sempronium sciat. Nihil quidem vulgatius in scriptis,
vam probitas et jnnocentia, aligque preclare virtutes, que eodem spiritu
addi potuissent, ut gravitas, justitia, temperantia, fides, modestia, nisi hye
omnia continerentur tralatitia clausula, udlo genere laudis prestantior. :
8 Nullius tantum est etc.) Nuillius hominis, credo, intelligi voluit Decla-
mator, ut seorsum sequatur flumen ingenii, eodem modo, quo in Orat. post
Red. in Sen. c. 1. ubertas ingenii: neutrum exemplo Ciceronis, qui uber-
tatem et flumen dicere selet non ingenti, verum orationis vel verbors
Dein alii, ut Gravius, dederunt nylli, ex codd. aliquot, quibuscum faciunt
C.H.8., sed non elegantius vulgata reliquorum MSS. lectione, pro qua
nudlius scripturus fuisset Auctor, si penitivos dicendi et scribendi post sub-
stantivum ponere maluisset. Mox C,H.8.T. tantague copia, uti editt. ante
Gruterum ; quod presferat recepto, qui volet. | ες
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationibus Cicercn. 408
Tes tuas gestas possit. Tamen affirmo: et hoc pace dicam tua:
nullam in his esse laudem ampliorem, quam eam, quam hodierno die
coasequutus es. Soleo spe’ ante oculos ponere, idque libenter
,crebris usurpare sermonibus :.omnes nostrorum imperatorum, omnes
ceterarum geutium, potentissimorumque populorum, omnes clarissi-
morum regum res gestas cum tuis nec contentionum magnitudine,
nec numero preliorum, nec varietate regionum, nee celeritate confi-
ciendi, nec dissimilitudine bellorum posse conferri; nec vero disjunc-
tissimas terras citius cujusquam passibus potuisse peragrari, quam
Tamen affirmo, et hoe pace etc.) Olim vulgo, Tamen hoc effirmo, et hos
pace dicam tua, inepta pronomiais iteratione. Neque vero minus ineptum
est, quod omnino pacem prefatur apud Cesarem. Nam qui hujus viri
ingenium et sapientiam novit, eum opinabitur non indignatione sed leni
risu excepturum fuisse ea; que statim ex Stoicorum disputationibus de
laude hodierni diei exaggerantur. Itane vero in omnibus factis Cesaris
i est,.quod majorem laudem mereatur, quam quod hodie (hodierno .
die oratorii soni causa magis placebat) fecit de M. Claudio Marcello, quum
hominem sibi jam non metuendum, si modo umquam valde metuendus
ora (Epp. ad Fam. vir. 10.) in patriam reverti patitur? Non sum nesciua,
quid audere liceat panegyriste ; video etiam ambitiosam exornationem
Dellicarum laudum Cesaris, qua deinde rursus premitur nimia hodierni
drei gloria: neque tamen ambigam, quin, si Cicero hac effutivisset, pru-
dentiores auditores preter Crispinos nonnoullos eruditum Consularem risuri
essent. Praterea Ernestius correxit omplioren ea, quum MSS. omnes
reebeant ampliorem quam eam quam, de qua junctura idem Editor monuit ed
Or. de Har. resp. c. 1. ubi minus erat necesse. Nimis autem ingrata est
illa scabrities, etsi guam non raro ponitur post comparativos. Alque hoe
de h. 1. nostrum est judicium; alia prostant in diobolaribus editionibus,
quarum nunc copia certatim τ, tur, emitur. Una earum nuper
€x hodierno die te cognoscere jubebat, quantus vir fuerit Cicero, qui ad tam
subitam occasionem tam bene dicere potuerit. Igitur bardus iste ne sciebat
quidem, quomode litters mandarentur orationes Ciceronianz.
* Soleo idgue libenter etc.) Levius quiddam hic animadvertendum
est, in principio deesse dativum alicujus pronominis; unde male ambiguum
fit, sibine rem an aliis hominibus ante oculos ponere soleat. Dicitur qui-
dem satis Latine, pone seu. ponite ante oculos, sine tiki aut vobis, ut pro
Deiot. c. 7. Philipp. II, 45., ubi nihil aliud subaudiri posse apparet.
At durius refingebat Patricius: Soleo, sepe ante oculos ponens, idque
(8. atque) libenter, crebris usurpare sermonibus; sed recte videtur ille sen-
sisee, pronomen id serius esse inculcatum. Ad reliquam periodum, que
non macite tractata est, comparant Intpp. similem locum Or. de L. Manil.
c. 10. ‘ Qui seepius cum hoste conflixit, quam quisquam cum inimico con-
certavit; plura bella gessit, quam ceteri legerunt; plures provincias can-
fecit, quam alii concupiverunt ἊΝ Quamquam de hoc ipso loco id judicium
probamus, quod in Orat. ¢. 30. pronunciatum est de illo pro Rosc. Am,
c. 26. Pest paullo omissum in uno Oxonn. petuisse habet, qe placeat; et
rectius adeo fuisset posse. In fine assentiendum est Victorio V. L. xxx1v. 6
et ceteris Viris doctis, qui pro illustrate legunt lastrate, i.e. obite, quod
etiam pier ue Oxonn. tuetitur: sed cur sunt Ernestio mendosum videstur,
et quid hic loci sit conjunctivo, plane non aseequor. . -
404 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
tuis, non dicam cursibus, sed victoriis, lustrate sunt. Quse quidem‘
ego nisi ita magua esse fatear, ut ea vix cujusquam mens aut cogitatio
capere possit, amens sim: sed tamen sunt alia majora. Nam bellicas
laudes solent quidam extenuare verbis, easque detrahere ducibm,
comimuuicare cum multis, ne proprie sint imperatorum. Et certe in
armis, militum virtus, locorum opportunitas, auxilia sociorum, elasses,
commeatus, multum juvant: maximam vero partem quasi suo jure
fortuna sibi vindicat; et, quicquid est prospere gestum, id pene
omne ducit suum. At vero hujus glorise, C. Cesar, qusm es paulle
ante adeptus, socium habes neminem: totum hoc, quantumcumque
est, 4 certe maximum est, totum est, inquam, toum. Nihil sbi*
ex ista laude centurio, nihil prefectus, nihil cohors, nihil turma de-
cerpit; quin etiam illa ipsa rerum humanarum domina, Fortuna, in
istius se societatem gloriz non offert; tibi cedit, tuam se esse totam
et propriam fatetur. Numquam enim temeritas cum sapientia com-
miscetur, nec ad consilium casus admittitur.
* Que quidem—fatear—imperatorum) Cicero dicturus erat, ni fallor,
Que nisi quie—fateatur—amens sit: nimirum displicet oratio ad primam
ersonam retracta. Neque accommodatum est ad sententiam, deinde
egimus, Quidam solent, Quis enim ignorat, Quosdam esse insrpientes, 8, ῥεῖ
ταῦ 84. solere et dicere et facere inconsiderate, qu nemo curet ens
existimator? At ne quid dissimulem, hanc ipsam particulam admiratur
Buchnerus, vir temporibus avorum nostrorum celeberrimus Latine elc-
quentiz laude, qui artificia oratoria hujus Scriptionis illustravit insigni
copia vocabulorum. Is igitur, “Ne parum honorifice,” inquit, “de re
militari deque victoriis Czsaris sentire videretur Tullius, et ita Casarem
sibi infestum redderet, non dixit: Ego ita sentio, sed alii, nec plerique, sed
quidam ; ut ostenderet, errare eos potuisse, et falsos esse judicii sul, ut
paucos.”
* Nihil sibi—casus adnrittitur) Non opus est, declamatorium colorem et
frigus in bh. 1. arguere, postquam nuper exempla ejusdem pravitatis casti-
gavimus plurima. In proximis Grevius rescripsit, twam se esse totam εἰ
propriam fatelur, non sine optimorum codd. auctoritate, nec invita, ut
quibusdam visum est, sententia, si tuam interpreteris tui arbitrié 8. tn tus
potestate positum (pro L. Manil. §. 47.) quum in altera scriptura, que #
omittit, ¢uam referendum sit ad gloriam. Jam que adduntur, nimis futilia
sunt, nec ferenda in Cicerone, paucis ante annis imperatore. Quidni enim
sepe casus admittatur ad consilium # Nemo id ex omnibus Senaforibus
pulchrius norat Cesare, qui ipse scripserat B. Gall. vi. 30. “ Multum
quum in omnibus rebus, tum in re militari potest fortuna: nam, sicut
magno accidit casu, ut in ipsum-—sic magne fuit fortune,” etc. et cap. 88.
“ Hic, quantum in bello fortuna possit, et quantos afferat casus, cognosci
potest.” Et B. Civ. 111. 68. ““ Fortuna, que plurimum potest, quum it
reliquis rebus, tum precipue in bello, parvis momentis magnas rerum
commutationes efficit.” Ac sane, si numquam illis in rebus casus et for-
tuna cum sapientia commiscetur, in rebus autem bellicis pleraque sibi via-
dicat fortuna ; pro insipientibus Fortune filiis habendi erunt omae’, quot
quot umquam fuerunt, clari imperatores. ᾿
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationibus Ciceron. 405
- Domuisti gentes‘ immanitate barbaras, multitudine innumerabiles,
locis infinitas, omni copiarum genere abundantes; sed tamen ea
vicisti, que naturam et conditionem, ut vinci possent, habebant.
Nulla est enim tanta vis, que non ferro ac viribus debilitari fran-
gique possit: animum vincere, iracundiam ecohibere, victoriam
temperare, adversarium nobilitate, ingenio, virtute prestantem, ᾿
2 Domuisti gentes—abundantes) Non debent hec verba sine plausu
transmitti, utpote prorsus ad Ciceronis similitudinem delecta et composita.
‘Quare’ etiam ab aliis sunt sepe laudata, et a Ruhnkenio comparata ad
similem locum Velleiti de victoriis Tiberii et Drusi Neronum, 11. 95.
Sed tamen ea vicisti etc.) Ante hoc tempus ea vicerat Cesar, que ab
homine possent vinci: at hodie semet ipsum vicit, animum vicit—Quid?
hum animus humanus eam habet naturam, ut vinci nequeat? Cur ergo
philosophi et poete nos jubent animum vincere, mentem compescere, frenis
regere alque catena? nisi forte nobis imponunt onus, quod natura nostra
suscipere recuset. Sensit hoc ex parte Orator; nec tantis auctoribus se
opponere ausus, postremis verbis imperfectam relinquit antithesin vel ejus
vim obscurat, quum hominem, animi sui victorem, simillimum deo appellat.
Ita, opinor, scribunt, qui nondum sapere didicerunt, et perplexos sensus
suos speciosis verbis exprimere. Cujusmodi est etiam incommoda αἰτιολογία :
Nulla est entm tanta vis, (vett. editt. addunt tanta copia,) gue non ferro
etc. Quasi nihil non ferro ageretur in vita, balistisque aut pulvere nitrato
summa vis queque debilitari posset. Atque has nugas nobis Ernestius,
emendare conatus, aliquanto magis nugatorias reddidit, ex editt. nonnulis
scribendo, ut vinci vi possent. Immo melius mox sustulisset viribus, quam
illud huc intulit. Dein victoriam temperare, constructio est non modo non
Ciceroniana, sed vix Romana; siquidem temperare significatu moderandi 8.
modum ponendi cum tertio casu construi solet. Ibidem quod subjicitur,
amplificare ejus pristinam dignitatem, dumtaxat amplificandz periodo insep-
vit: quippe nihil legitur a Cesare factum attollendi Marcelli causa; et, .
si quid factum esset, legeretur haud dubie in bac ipsa Oratione. Eo tamen -
potissimum fulcro niti videtur illud simillimum deo, tametsi etiam ex Or.
pro Ligar. c. 12. duci poterat: “ Homines ad deos nulla re proprius acce-
dunt, quam salutem hominibus dando” vel ex nobili dicto Gracorum,
Θεοῖς ὅμοιοί dopey εὐεργεσίᾳ, De Cesare vero, dei simillimo, apud sagaciores,
spero, eadem notatio valebit, quam fecimus ad Or. post Red. ad Q. ς. 8.
‘p- 118. et, ut illud nimium est, sic parum honorifice vir eminentissimus et
summus tantum comparatur cum viris summis. Adeo rudis manus modo
auget dignitatem nostram, modo extenuat, prout epitheto plurium aut
pauciorum syllabarum aliove complemento eget. Ceterum omnis. hic locus
a Lactantio 1. 9. affertur, sed principio sententie ad meliorem flexum
reducto. Ibi quum de Hercule et laboribus ejus loquutus est, hac addit s
‘¢ pera sunt ista fortis viri, hominis tamen : ila enim, que vicit fragilia et
mortalia fuerunt: sulla enim est, ut ait Orator, tanta vis, que non ferro |
ac viribus debilitari frangique possit ; ut animum vincere, tracundiam cohi-
bere, fortissimi est, αὐ ille nec fecit umquam, nec potuit. Hec gué
faciat, non modo ego cum cum summis viris compero, sed simillimum deo
sudico. Vellem adjecisset de libidine, luxuria, cupiditate, insolentia; ut
irtutem ejus impleret, quem similem deo judicabat,” etc. Placerent in
is variationes guedam, at animum, et non modo ego, nisi memoriter fact
viderentur. Sed faciat accedit plurimorum codd. 86 αἱ, ubi alii facit, quod
minus Latine edidit Grevius. ἘΞ
-
406 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
non modo extollere jacentem, sed etiam amplificare ejus pris-
tinam dignitatem ; hee qui faciat, non ego eum cum summis virm
comparo, sed simillimum deo judieo. Itaque, C. Ceesar, bellice
tus laudes celebrabuntur ills quidem non solum nostris, sed pene
Omnium gentium literis atque linguis, neque ulla umquam ztas de
tuis laudibus centicescet: sed tamen’ ejusmodi res, nescio quomeda,
etiam quum leguntur, obstrepi clamore militum videntur et tubarum
sono: at vero quum aliquid clementer, mansuete, juste, moderate,
sapienter factum, iv iracundia presertim, que est inimica consilio,
et in victoria, quee natura insolens ct superba est, audimus aut legt
mus; quo studio incendimur, non modo in gestis rebus, sed etiam ip
2 Sed tamen—obstrepi—diligamus) Unus inter Oxonn. lectionem exhi
fortasse optet quispiam, vbstrepit clamor militum εἰ tubarum son
modo cum Patricio currigatur rebus. Et videtur alium quoque librarmum
pupigisse ista poetarum et labentis Latinitas structura verbi obstrepere, ut
9 hunc infinitivum activum poneret. Conf. Valer. Max. ΥἹΙἍ1. 15. 8.
et Tac, Hist. 11.44. Non dubitandum autem de veritate vulgatz Icctionis;
nec scio, unde Editor quidam dederit obrui, nisi et hoc ex alicujus emen-
‘datoris ingenio fluxit. Sed qualiscumque horum verborum Latinitas est,
senteptiam ipsam ineptam reddit antitheton, Quo studio incendimur non
modo etc., quod, accuratius excussum, optime quidem sonare, sed vahis-
simum esse reperies. Nam quid tandem hee verborum copia significat?
Imperatorie laudes tue semper manebunt; sed tamen ejusmodi res eo etiam
tempore, quo leguntur, clamor et senus tubarum quodammodo circumstreptt: σῇ
sero quum aliquid clementer etc. factum legimus, summo incendimur studio;
neque id modo in rebus factis, sed etiam in fictis! Scilicet laborabat Decla-
mator, ubi in apodosi reddendum erat aliquid, quod clangori tubarum non
exiliter responderet, verbaque dedit legentibus, ut ἰδία patio solet, verbib
abunodantissima. Annon vero et in bellicis rebus cognoscendis maximo
sacendimur studio® Imperator nullam occasionem habet clementer, man-
suete, juste, moderate agendi? ut plane mittamus misere debilem vocem
sapienter, pluribus locis hic moleste inculcatam, Num bero bellice laudes
modo iis rebus continentur, que a ducibus in acie et ardore preelii fiunt ?—
Aut ego horum omnium nihil intelligo, aut ea pueriliter eloquutus est
-Aucter, in que cogitande inciderat. Quin etiam in clausula, que sequitur,
Ut ces εἰς. fecit imprudenter, quod omisit quodammodo. Cicero certe hon
sine causa id verbum addiderat in loco, quem nostri fontem fuisse nemo
non concetlet, de Amicit.c.8. ‘ Nihil est enim amabilius virtute: nihil,
quod magis alliciat ad diligendum ; quippe quum propter virtutem et pro-
bitatem cos etiam, quos numquam vidimus, quodammodo diligamus.” Hic imi-
tator addidit sepe, omisit guodammodo, de quo hec bene monuit interpres,
Minos: “Multo majore studio complectimur eos, quos vere videmus,
quam eos, qui numquam fuerunt, aut qui absentes laudantur. Neque adeo
pretermittendum illud, guodammodo diligamus. Quos enim numquam
vidimus, non diligimus, si stricte et proprie vim verbi accipiamus: nempe
ignoti nulla cupido; amor a visu ortum habet, oculique ipsi sunt in amore
11.068 : ergo quodanunodo diligimus,” etc. Hac quum scripsissem, in aliquot
priscis editt. vidi guodammodo diligamus, notatum et nuper ex H. CH. Ps.
le ex tisdem MSS. duo pro rebus gestis, i.e. vere historie, habent verts,
alii duo certés; ex correctione utrumque. :
Wolfius de Quatuor Orattonibus Ciceron. 407
fietis, ut eos sepe, quos. numquam vidimus, diligamus! Te vero,
quem presentem intuemur, cujus mentem' sensusque et os cernimus,
ut, quicquid belli fortuna reliquum reipublicz fecerit, id esse salvum
_ * Mentem—et os cernimus ut) Probamus hanc Ernestii scripturam et
interpretationem. Ut quidem non videtug habere, quo referatur: sed
refertur ita ad nomina superiora, quasi Auctor dixisset: Quem cernimus ea
mente et sensu esse. Durum videbatur, puto, Auctori, mentem alicujus et
sensus cernere ; nec immerito, etsi Panegyricus scriptor seculo deformate
linguz non dubitavit mitissimos sensus Principis intueri, Eumenius in Con-
stantin. Aug. c. 20. Ita vero hic in aliud incidit durum, sed argutius
dictum, os cernimus, h.e. vultum talem, ex quo summa bonitas elucet et
clementia. Durum, inquam: ἀκατάλληλος enim est constructio, os cernimus,
ut—velis, Atque hoc sensit haud dubie Faérnus, quum corrigeret sensus
€0s cernimus. ΝΕ
Parietes—gratias agere gestiunt ) Sine idonea causa Ernestius ex duobus
codd. scripsit videntur; idque adeo, si necesse esset, levissimum esset
eorum, que in his verbis notanda sunt. Etenim impense mirarer, &,
detracto Ciceronis nomine, elegantiori judici placeret paries gratias ageré
gestiens. Non, quod omnino supra prosam dictionem assurgant muta ef
sensu carentia, tali poetico colore inducta; sed quia non illa guidlibet
audendi potestas scriptoribus omnis ordinis conceditur, idque genus figu-
sarum multas et proprias habet cautiones. Objiciunt quidem Viri docti
Plinium Panegyr. c. 50., assiduum, ut videri voluit, Ciceronis emulatorem,
apud quem tecta Urbis sentire ac letari videntur, guod niteant, quod fre-
quententur. Addunt etiam posteriores Panegyricos, Plinii rursum imita-
tores, apud quos item tecta videntur commoveri et altitudo culminum attolli,
atque ipsa gentium domina Roma immodico gaudio elata etc. et alia his non
dissimilia. Vide Mamert. Geneth]. Maximiano dictum, c. 11. Incert.
Paneg. Constantino Aug. c. 19. Verum talium locorum vel maximus -
numerus non docet, ita loquutum esse Ciceronem, neque efficit, ut illud
servato virilis eloquentie pudore dictum videatur. Nam, ut verbo com-
plectar omnia, aliud est, inanimatis sensum hominis tribuere ; aliud, adji-
' cere lingue et orationis usum, et quecumque homines facimus in sensis
animi exprimendis. Ita enim ratio est comparata, ut, si hoc in genere
unum gradum addideris, sepe id, quod antea sublime erat, insulsum et
joculare fiat, et, ut Longinus ait, κακόζηλον καὶ μειρακιῶδες, ὑπὸ περιεργίας λῇῆγον
a. Igitur negabo et pernegabo, istam imaginem non modo Cice-
ronianam esse, sed talem, tam audacem, ne δρυΐ ullum quidem scrip-
torem ex illo antiquiorum et classicorum ordine reperiri. Nimirum longe
modestius est hoc, quod Greeci usurpant, τοὺς τοίχους, τὸν καιρὸν; aliasque res
multas, μονονουχὶ φωνὴν ἀφιέναι ; et proverbiali quidem dictione, qua et
lapides et aliz res sensu carentes vulgo dogui dicuntur: contra inepte decla-
matorium est, si apud Eumenium pro restaur. scholis, c. 15. ἐρεῖ qguodam-
modo veterum scholarum parietes et tecta consurgunt, aut hic Porcii Latronis,
vel potius ignoti Rhetoris, ab Abramo collatus locus Declam. in Catil.
§. $6. Putate, cives omnes ob retentam vitam ac libertatem suam, Penates
pwblicos pro conservatis focis atque aris, parietes Urbis pro propulsato teter-
rimo genere vastitatis, ferme incredibils gaudio exultaturos. Denique ex
comparatis his locis nihil aliud discimus nisi usitatam lecythum scholz ;
nee putandum est, additis illis, ferme, quodammodo, videri, gestire, quidquam
tolli de ineptiis, quas habent parietes exsuligntes et gratias agentes.
408 On the Orations ascribed to Cicero.
velis, quibus laudibus efferemus? quibus studiis prosequemur ? qua
benevolentia complectemur? Parietes, medius fidius, ut mihi videtur,
Quod brevi tempore—suis sedibus) Non liquet, quam sententiolam ἢ. |.
disperdiderit preclarus artifex: utrum intelligi voluerit illam auctoritatem
clarissimi viri, scil. Marcelli, an pristinam auctoritetem Curia sive Senatorum
populi Romani. Posterior quidem ratio digniorem gratias agendi mateniam
daret parietibus, nec in proxime prioribus verbis ulla facta est Marcelli
mentio: at sic nimis contorta fieret relatio τῶν suorum et suis ad Senatores
ro Ciceronis candidissimo genere scribendi. In priore autem ratione
acilius illa pronomina referrentur ad hominem eum, qui semel Scriptoms
mentem occupavit quamvis ita etiam aliqua balbutie offenderet illa excto-
rifas FUTURA in his sedibus, i.e. redituru tn Curiam. Hunc tamen sengum
fateor mihi preferendum videri, si de Auctoris mente queratur, quam
recte divinasse puto Abramum, cujus hec, partim ridicula, annotatio est
ad ἢ.].: “ Parietes hujus Curie tibi gratias agere gestiunt, quod Marcellus
ille, vir summe auctoritatis, brevi tempore futurus sit in his sedibus majorym
suorum et suis, i.e. in Senatu, ubi tum majores Marcelli, tum M:
ipse, magna auctoritate dixerunt sententias: auctoritas, metonymice, pro
atore magnz auctoritatis. Tropus frequens, ut pro Milone: Hac tents
virtus ex hac Urbe expelletur, i.e. Milo tanta virtute preditus. Sic Horat.
Virtus Scipiade et mitis sapientia Leli, i.e. Scipio fortis et Lelius sapiens.
Item, Narratur et prisci Catonis sepe mero incaluisse virtus. Homerus II.
Tliados et alibi, βίη Ἡρακληείη, i.e. Hercules robustus. Igitur illa axctorites
idem erit atque Marcellus ille tanta. auctoritate preditus.” Jam et aliorum
opere pretium est cognoscere opiniones, imprimis P. Manutii. Is, “σης
locum,” inquit, ‘‘ vacare mendo, vix mihi quisquam persuadebit. Qui sunt
enim isti Majores? Si parietun, quid absurdius? Quorum igitur? Pra-
terea, majorum suorum, unde pendet? Si enim conjungatur cum illa oweto-
ritas, quod postulare sententia videtur; illud per se non‘consistet, ef ssis
sedibus: nam particula εἰ exigit hunc ordinem, in his sedibus mayorum suorum
εἰ suis. Magna sane perturbatio: nisi si quis dicat, quuin sensus tribu-
atur parietibus in 60, gratias ogere gestiunt, iisdem posse tribui, majerum
suorum.” Qui hac ante oculos habebat, Patricio videbatur hic sensus esse
posse: ‘‘ Brevi futurum, ut vetus illa auctoritas reviviscat in Curia, hoc
est, regnet in illis sedibus et suis et majorum suorum: id autem est, ‘in
illis ubi et ipsa sedit, et majores ipsius sederunt. Habet enim auctoritas
et sedem suam, Curiam scilicet; et majores suos, qui illam pepereruat,
et eandem hanc auctoritatis sue sedem Curiam habuerunt. Ita mejores,
snea quidem sententia, non ad parietes referentur, sed ad auetoritatem,
qu est a veteribus Romanis illis, tamquam a parentibus et majoribus
suis, ad posteros propagata.” Sed, quum hodie fere doctissimus quis-
que in I. F. Gronovii sententiis acquiescat, tota apponenda est dispu-
tatio egregii Viri de ἢ. 1. ex Observatt. 1v. 16., postquam Plinianum
locum, quem ante attulimus, tractavit, sic pergentis: ‘Non possum
hic oblivisci verba Ciceronis, dudum eruditis agitata, Parietes etc. De
quibus quod negat Maoutius, locum vacare mendo, video magnam sane
perturbationem doctissimi Viri. Quare Hotomanus Obss. rv. 8. ita trans-
nit. Illa majorum nosirorum auctoritus in his suis sedibus futura sit.
ce et Barthius Adverss. xx. 2., preterquam quod delet particulam ue,
“Qui sunt, inquit, illi suoruwm et suis? Latet medius fidius aliquid, nec
Ipsum futura satisfacit. Audacior aliquis hzc considerans reponendum
argutetur: quod breoi tempore futura sit alia auctoritas tuis in his majorum
suorumn ef suis sedibus. Sane ita Joquatur eleganter et adulatorie. Quidquid
Wolfius de Quatuor Orationibus Ciceron. 409
hujus Curiz tibi gratias agere gestiunt, quod brevi tempore futura sit
‘illa auctoritas in his majorum suorum et suis sedibus.
faciet vulgate lectioni patronus, docendi tamen prius erimus, que sift
Parietum illa tanta nobilitas, ut majores ipsorum sint optimi summique cives.
An leges, tuorum et tuis?” Hee pluribus 116. Quod causatur opinienis
esse, μέ mihi videtur, ceterum jurisjurandi, fallitur. Neque enim absurdum
est jurare quem, sibi videri. Quid? Judices nonne jurati judicabant?
et quidem non per hercle aut medius fidius, sed nuncupstis verbis et con-
ceptissimo jurejurando. An igitur hi parum memores erant religionis sue,
quoties pronuntiabant videri? Sed etiam, si dicas. medius fidius miht
videtur, non aliter Latine dicitur, quam per intellectum particule. fnte-
grum est enim: Jia me dius Fidius juvet, ut mihi videtur. Sic hec pars
salva est. De reliquis ita sentio, mutandum nihil esse, et illa, majorum
suorum, non ad parietes, sed ad auctoritatem; magis tamen ad sensum,
quam ad vocem referri. Significat, futurum brevi, ut, respubl. restituta
sit In potestatem bonorum seu optimatium et Senatus. Is ordo splendor
et dignitas precipua populi Romani, regum concessus Cinee visus; penes
eum ordinem Prouprie auctoritas. Pro Bextio tamquam συνώνυμα ponit: ss
modo esset in regubl. Senatus, si majestas populs Ro . revixisset. Patres
auctores fiebant eorum, que jubebat populus, et bene Pfudentius: Vera
ratus, quecumque fiunt auctore “Senatu. Curia porro sedes erat augustissima
auctoritatis populi Romani, quia Senatum accipiebat, quia Patres omnium,
quz rite a populo fiebant, auctores. Tum eam non habebat, quia summum
jus nondum.erat redditum Senatui, sed manebat penes victores. Itaque
auguratur Cicero, propediem Senatum illa pristina et antiqua auctoritate
fore in his majorum suorum et suis sedibus ; et τὸ suorwm respicit non tam
vocabulum auctoritatis, quam rem et personas eo vocabulo designatas.
Majores enim illorum, quos decebat esse Senatores populi Romani, eas
sedes summa cum dignitate tenuerant; et ipsos Senatores, qui nunc
essent, easdem, tamquam suas et majorum suorum, pari cum dignitate
obtinere republ, restituta oportebat. Illa auctoritas igitur, Senatus illa
pristina auctoritate, illi auctores populo Romano rerum recte gerendarum
cum Justa majestate sua brevi erunt, inquit, in his majorum suorumn et
suis sedibus.” Hactenus ille: post que, sane satis prolixa, Senece et
Curtii locos profert, quibus impeditissimam structuram magis illustret.
Quz an scripturus fuisset Vir prope omnium, quos novimus, Latine lingue
scientissimus, si ista tot a nobis detecta vestigia scholastice opere depre-~
hendisset, judicent, et totam de ἢ, 1. controversiam dirimant lectores, qui
Ciceronem et bene scribendi leges doctrina et usu cognoverunt.
410
PROFESSOR DUPORTS
GREEK PRAYER BOOK.
Tre Classical Journal * has contributed to keep alive the
memory of Professor Duport, as one of the largest dealers, if not
in original, in translated Greek, since the revival of learning.
Amongst other books in the Press, lately advertised, 1 saw with.
some pleasure his Greek Prayer Book, new Edit. (The Editor,
by the bye, will do well to prefix a short Notitia Literaria of
that “everlasting Grecian.”) And with a view to show what
curious matter will be preserved in the reprint announced, allow
me to beg insertion for two or three striking samples below.
- Some astonishment may be excited in the mind of any ingenuous
reader, to whom the subject is new. For complete information,
such a reader is earnestly recommended to Burn’s Ecclesiastical
Law, vol. ii. under the title of Hetipays.
ΝΣ Yours, &c. |
29 May, 1818. SIDNEYENSIS.
1. Office of Charles I]. for the thirtieth of δῦσα, thus intitled
in the Greek of Duport, 1665.
ΤΥΠΟΣ SAHMOSIAS ΕΥ̓ΧΗ͂Σ, ἥ χρηστέον κατ᾽ ἔτος ἔν τῇ τρια.
κοστῇ ἡμέρᾳ IANOTAFIOT, ἡμέρᾳ δηλαδὴ οὔσῃ τοῦ Μαρτυρίου τοῦ Βασι-
λέως ΚΑΡΟΛΟΥ͂ τοῦ πρώτου.
2. Office of Charles II. for the twenty-ninth of May, thus in-
titled in Duport.
ΤΥΠΟΣ ΤῊΣ ΠΡΟΣΕΥ͂ΧΗΣ per’ Εὐχαριστίας, 4 χρηστέον κατ᾽
ἔτος τῇ εἰκοστῇ ἐννάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Μαΐου μηνὸς, ἡμέρᾳ δηλαδὴ οὔσῃ τῆς
τε τοῦ Βασιλέως γενετῆς, καὶ τῆς ἐπὶ τὰς Βασιλείας αὐτοῦ αἰσιωτάτης
᾿Επανόδου.
When the reader has compared these titles as deemed sufficient
in the reign of Charles II. with the improved forms (now in use)
as accommodated to James II.’s wishes; let him contemplate
spr renner en 5...
~ Vol. XIII. p. 185.
Lexicography. | 4it
the mild spirit of the following prayer, and in the Greek version |
of # by Duport take a specimen of the talents of the Professor.
“0 God, who by thy divine providence and goodness didst
this day first bring into the world, and didst this day also bring
back and restore to us, and to his own just and undoubted rights,
gur most gracious sovereign Lord thy servant King Charles; pre- |
serve his life, and establish his throne, we beseech thee. Be unto
him a helmet of salvation against the face of his enemies, and a
strong tower of defence im the time of trouble. Let his reign be
prosperous, and his days many. Let justice, truth, and holiness ;
Jet peace, and love, and all Christian virtues, flourish in his time.
Let his people serve him with honour and obedience; and let him
so duely serve thee on earth, that he may hereafter everlastingly
reign with thee in heaven, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”
ΘΕΟΣ ὁ τῇ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ καὶ ἀγαθωσύνῃ σου ταύτῃ τῇ. ἡμέρᾳ πρῶτον
μὲν εἰς τὰν κόσμον ἐξήγαγες, καὶ δὲ καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ ἐπανήγαγές τα
χαὶ ἀποχατέστησας ἡμῖν, καὶ τοῖς νομίμοις, καὶ ἀνενδοιάστοις αὐτοῦ
δικαίοις τὸν χαριέστατον ἡμῶν ΔΑὐτοχράτορα Δεσπότην τὸν δοῦλόν σοὺ
KAPOAON τὸν Βασιλέα: Διαφύλαξον τὴν ζωὴν, καὶ βεβαίωσον τὸν
ὑρόνον αὐτοῦ, Sequelae σου Γίνου αὐτῷ περικεφαλαία τῆς σωτηρίας κατὰ
τοῦ προσώπου τῶν ἐχθρῶν αὐτοῦ, καὶ πύργος ἰσχύος καὶ περιοχῆς. ἐν τῷ
καιρῷ τῆς θλίψεως" Εὐοδωθείη ἡ Βασιλεία αὐτοῦ, καὶ ai ἡμέρα; αὐτοῦ
ἀχηθυνθείησαν" ᾿Αχμάζοιεν ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῦ δικαιοσύνη, ἀλήβεια, καὶ ἁγιότης,
εἰρήνη, καὶ ἀγάπη, καὶ πᾶσαι ai Χριστιανικαὶ ἁ ἀρεταί; Δουλεύοι τε αὐτῷ
ᾧ λαὸς αὐτοῦ, τιμήν τε καὶ ὑπακοὴν αὐτῷ ἀπονέμων" καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτω σοι
τροσηκόντως δουλεύοι ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὥστε μεταταῦτα εἰσαεὶ συμβασιλεύειν
σοι ἐν γῷ οὐρανῷ, δι ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν. ᾿Δμήνγ.
Ferre mS
LEXICOGRAPHY.
Tr cannot much surprise men accustomed to literary composition,
that lexicographers should indulge in murmurs at the drudgery of
their undertaking, and, as Dr. Johnson says in the preface to bis
Dictionary, ‘‘ sometimes faint with weariness under a task which
Scaliger compares ‘to the labors of the anvil and the mine.” But
412 Leatcography.
ἐξ much surprised me, I confess, to discover, near the conclusion
- of that admirable preface, some, passages which might seem,
borrowed from a preceding writer, did we not know that Johnson
neither required assistance, uor would condescend to avail himself
of another person’s words or thouglits, without due acknowledg-
ment of his obligation. The coincidence to which I allude is
this: —Johnson says, “ If our language is not here fully displayed,
I have only failed in an attempt which no human powers have
hitherto completed. If the lexicons of ancient tongues, now im-
mutably tixed and comprised ina few volumes, be yet, after the
toil of successive ages, inadequate and delusive; if the aggregated
knowledge and co-operating diligence of the Jtalian academicians
did not secure them from the censure of Beni; if the embodied
critics of France, when fifty years bad been spent upon their book,
were obliged to change its ceconomy, and give their second edition
another form; I may surely be contented without the praise of
perfection,” &c. Now let the reader look into Chambers’s Dic-
tionary of Arts and Sciences, (seventh edition, folio, 1751.) and
in the preface he will find the following passage: “ It is not
without seme concern.that [ put this work into the reader's hands;
a work so seemingly disproportianate to any single person’s: ex-
perience, and which might have employed an academy. What
adds to my apprehensions, is the scanty measure of time that could
be employed in a performance which a man’s whole life “scarce
appears equalto. ‘The Vocabulary of the Academy della Crasca
was above forty years in compiling, and the Dictionary of the
French Academy much longer: and yet the present work will be
found more extensive than either of them,” &c. . With their mur-
murs the dictionary-makers sometimes blended an affectation of
contempt for their own task: thus Johnson defines Lericographer
“a writer of dictionaries, a harmless drudge,” &c.; and Grub-
street, a place “ much inhabited by writers of small histories,
dictionaries, and temporary poems ; whence any mean production
is called Grub street—but
. Kaig’ Waxy,” ἃς.
To the plagues of lexicography an allusion is made with some
degree of feeling, where one would scarcely expect to find it,
under the article igyptus, in Nicholas Lloyd’s edition of Stephens’s
“¢ Dictionarium Historicum, Geographicum,” &c. (Oxon. 1670.
p- 34,) Having quoted Suidas, the author proceeds, “ Huic affine
est Agyptius laterifer, Αἰγύπτιος πλινθοφόρος, Arist. in Avibus.
Quadrare videtur in sordidum atque infime sortis hominem ; vel
potius in eum qui molestis negotiis (puta LEx1C1s ‘CON FICIENDIS)
premitur.” V.D,
413 ες
᾿ΒΙΒΙΙΟΑΙ, CRITICISM.
ON THE FIRST CHAPTER OF ST. MATTHEW.
ii amen
I BEG leave to send you a few general remarks on the first chapter
of St. Matthew’s gospel, and particularly on the Greek words
βίβλος yevteews of the first verse of this chapter, chiefly intending
to show that the Hebrew Translation of γενέσεως by Munster,
Hutter, and others is erroneous, and proposing a different Hebrew
rendering ; and if you think them worthy of a place in the Clas-
sical Journal, I shall feel obliged if you will insert them.
The Gospel by St. Matthew is generally, and may be justly,
considered as the most ancient book of the New Testament, of
which it forms the first in order. It has been thought by many
learned men, from some passages of the Fathers, as of Jerome and
others, that this book was originally written in the Hebrew tongue,
by the inspired evangelist, for the use of the Jews; and that it
was, not long after, translated into Greek, as found in the Greek
New Testament in the present day. But it seems now generally
agreed that there is no gaod foundation for this opinion, and that
it was at first written by this inspired writer in the Greek tongue,"
or in that language in which all the other books of the New Tes-
. tament were to be written, and thus to be placed in the sacred
canon of Scripture. And this latter opinion seems the more pro-
bable, from the consideration, that, from the death of our Lord,
the Christian church, which, though some of its converts were
Jews, was chiefly to be formed from among the Gentiles, was
then appointed to be the depository of the oracles of God, then
taken from the Jews, who were accounted no longer worthy of a
* Gualtierius observes, “ Extra omnem igitur controversiam hoc primum
esto; Evangelium Matthei Grece scriptum vere auctori illi tribuendum esse
cujus nomen habet prefixum.” In Crit. Saer. vid.
VOL. AVII. ΕΟ. i. NO. XXXIV. 2E
4
414 Biblical Criticism.
charge which they had not faithfully kept; and that the knowledge
of the Greek tongue, which was also known to the Jews, had
been so extended by the conquests of Alexander, that it was the
language then most generally understood throughout the Gentile
nations among whom the gospel was to be preached: and St.
Paul seems to comprehend the whole world under the denomina-
tions, Jew and Greek, or Jew and Gentile. Rom. 11.9, 10.
‘It therefore seems to have been appointed of God that the Old-
Testament Scriptures should be written originally in the Hebrew
tongue, or in the Jews’ language ; and those of the New Testa-
ment in that of the Greeks: and that the inspired writers should
Write the sacred books of Scripture, as moved by the Holy Spirit
in those languages, or in the languages in which they now exist in
the Hebrew and Greek Testaments. And I need not mention the
small portion of the Old-Testament Scriptures, which was written
in the Chaldee dialect during or after the Babylonian captivity, as
an exception ; as it was but a very small part, and that in what
may be considered a dialect of the Hebrew then well understood
by the Jews. See Vitring. Obs. Sacr.
In the present remarks, I wish to submit, for the consideration
of the reader, a few observations on the first two words of the
‘Greek Testament ; and particularly on the Hebrew rendering of
them which has been adopted in the Hebrew translation of the
first chapter of St. Matthew’s gospel, by Munster, Hutter, and
others, which seems to me neither to be correct, nor agreeable to
‘the sense of the Greek text as now existing in the New Testament.
The first chapter of St. Matthew’s Gospel ‘constitutes, as we
have seen, the beginning of the New-Testament Scriptures, the
‘second volume of the book of God, of that Divine Revelation
graciously communicated to man for his comfort, guidance, and
direction during his abode in. this world, in this state of trial
aud probation, in his pilgrimage towards his eternal habitation.
These two volumes, or the Old and New-Testament Scriptures,
were given to him in progressive order, as it seemed best to Al-
mighty wisdom: and they seem to be spoken of im the inspired
writings as the figurative breasts of the church, which yield the
milk of the word for the nourishment of the Lord’s people.
Song 1¥.5; vii. 3; 1 Peter 11.2. Bo. Hall ta loc. They. are
Bibhcal' Criticism. 415
said by the inspired Solomon to be ‘twins: “ their similarity,
agreement, and correspondence show them to be twins; and their
nature and subject clearly demonstrate that they are descended
from God, and given to the true mother-church, the heavenly
Jerusalem which is the mother of us all, Gal. 1v. 6; of which the
prophets and apostles were members.” Vid. 4 Brief Outline
of an Examination of the Song of Solomon, 1817. p. 394.
“ They are, as it were, twins, or a pair of sisters, between whom
there is the most intimate affinity and affectionate connexion; and
the truth of the one is confirmed by a certain correspondent agree-
ment of the other, the one exhibiting the word of prophecy, the
other the fulfilment thereof.” ibid. p. 239.
The prophetic connexion of. the two Testaments is very evi-_
dent. In the Old Testament the disobedience of man to the
commands of bis Creator, and his consequent fall, are declared ;
and his restoration to the favor of God, through the Saviour of
the world, is fully foretold m many most beautiful and consoling.
prophecies. And the New Testament commences with a descrip-
tion of the incipient fulfilment of these prophecies, or with a
description of the origin, or of the genealogy, the conception, and
birth (with the preceding and attendant circumstances of the
‘Jatter) of Jesus Christ, the expected Saviour of man, who was to
be born of a virgin and to be called ΝΣ, Immanuel, or Em-
manuel, or God with us: and the history of his life, death, and
resurrection evidently demonstrates that God was in him, recon-
ciling the world unto himself. 2 Cor. v. 19.
_ 'Fhis description is contained in this first chapter of St. Mat
thew’s gospel, on which, as found in the English Bible, I now pre-
ceed to say a few words, before the more particular consideration -
. of the first two Greek words, and their Hebrew rendering as
above proposed. |
This chapter begins thus, “The book of the generation of
Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham: ” and these
words seem to be a portion of the inspired book or gospel, and to
give a general outline of the contents of that portion of it which
is contained in this first chapter. For the second verse begins with
the Patriarch Abraham, as the remote Father of our Lord after
the flesh, to whom it was promised, that ia hum all chs τον. «δ.
a
416 Biblical Criticism.
the earth should be blessed, Gen. x11. 8, namely, in the Messies,
who should descend from him ; tracing the regular lineal descent
of our Lord from him, through David, and down to Joseph the
husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ,
@—16: and the Evangelist, having taken a general view of the
number of generations (by a particular reckoning which may pro-
bably hereafter be satisfactorily accounted for) from Abraham to
Chriet, 17, proceeds to speak of the manner in which the miracu-
lous conception, and birth of Jesus took place, and to declare that
he should be the Saviour of his people, 18—21; according to the
prophecy of the prophet Isaiah, that a virgin should be with.child,
and bring forth a Son, who should be called Emmanuel, or God
with us, 22—25: and the chapter ends with the birth of her
first-born son, who was named Jesus, 25 ; or with the visible pro-
duction of the person mentioned in the preface. I would there-
fore conclude that The book of the Generation, &c. or the preface
contained in the first verse, means to import that what follows in
this chapter is a description of the generation or production of
Jesus Christ, and showing that he was descended from David and
Abraham according to the promises made unto the Fathers ; a. de
scription which must necessarily not only show that these circum
stances took place, but that they were accurately fulfilled accords
ing to the prophecies of the Old Testament concerning them :
and this description seems to be fully given in this first chapter,
and to constitute the subject of it.
That this conclusion 1s correct seems probable from the follow-
ing additional observations arising from a more particular view of
the Greek original, which begins thus : . -
Ver. 1. Βίβλος γενέσεως ᾿]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ, Kc. giving the preface
above stated. Then, vers 2, the Evangelist proceeds, ’Afpadp
ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ισαάκ, &c. informing us that Abraham begat Isaac, &c.
and that Jacob; the father of Joseph; begat this Joseph the hus-
band of Mary, of whom ἐγεννήθη was begotten, or born, (genitus
ἔα, Erasm.) ᾿Ιησοῦς 6 ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστὸς, 2—16. And, Βανίης,
reckoned the number of generations, he thus begins the 1818}.
verse.
18. Τοῦ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἡ 4 γέννησις, which our translators render
“« Now the birth οἵ" ει. The: word birth, im this glece, may
Biblical Criticism. — τ 417
mean the conception, unless it be with the context considered as
giving a general outline of the remaining part of the chapter, in
which case it will refer-to the natural birth, or the bringing forth,
mentioned in the last verse of the chapter: and indeed the word
may signify either the one or the other. But the evangelist having
related the natural generations, how one begat another in the usual
way, seems now to contrast the preternatural or miraculous beget-
ting of the second Adam, the man Jesus, of the virgin Mary (and
he was to be the seed of the woman, Gen. 111. 24; or, without
the knowledge of man,) as by the overshadowing of the Holy
Spirit of God, v. 20. Luke 1. 35: and if so, the conjunction
δὲ might be rendered but, as by the following authors, and the
verse would read thus: But the begetting, &c. The Vulg. ren-
ders. “‘ Christi autem generatio ;” Mont. “Αἱ Jesu Christi gene-
ratio ;” and Erasmus “ Jesu vero Christi nativitas.” 3
And, in the twentieth verse, Joseph is informed how the virgin
Mary, his espoused wife, had become with child, before they caine
together, or without the knowledge of a man, Luke 1. 34.; and
it is said, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν, ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου, which is
rendered by the Vulgate “ quod enim in ea natum est, de Spiritu
est Sancto,” and by Mont. “genitum,” by Parkh. Ler. Gr. in
Devan, “ begotten in her,” and the Engl. Translators ‘ that which
is conceived in her,” &c. which gives the sense, while Mont. and
.Park. are strictly literal. |
And in the twenty-first verse, he is told of the birth of Jesus
or of his production into the world, thus: τέξεται δὲ υἱὸν, &c.
Pariet autem filium, Vulg. Erasm. Mont. “ And she shall bring
forth a son,” &c. Engl. “and thou shalt call his name JEsus ;
for he shall save his people from their sins,” or, be shall be their
Saviour.
Then the Evangelist, in the 22d and 28d verses, informs us, that
all this was done that the prophecy of our Lord by his prophet
(Isaiah v11. 14.) might be fulfilled ; that even a virgin, or a very
virgin, or the virgin, (as, inthe Hebrew, the word moby, ghalmah,
rendered virgin, has an emphatic Γ he prefixed, being ΠΌΣΗ,
haghalmah, and therefore literally renders ipsa virgo: the LXX
render it 4 παρθένος, and so: St. Matthew, in exact agreement with
the Hebrew) should be with child, and bring forth a son who
418 Biblical Criticism.
should be called Emmanuel: and, in the 24th and 25th verses,
that Joseph was obedient to the commands of God by his angel,
and took unto him Mary his espoused wife; but knew her not till
she had brought forth her first-born son, whom he called Jesus.
Thus was the book, or the description of the origin, or first ap-
pearance of Jesus in the flesh, finished. Therefore this chapter
seems to be a whole, and to give a complete description of every
thing intended by the Spirit of God, as intimated in the preface
contained in the first verse.
We shall now proceed to the more particular considesation of
the words βίβλος γενέσεως.
In the beginning of this first chapter, verse first, we read Βίβλος
γενόσεος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ : which passage is thus properly rendered
by the Vulgate, “ Liber generationis Jesu Christi; and by the
English translators, ‘ The book of the generation,” &c. but which
when more literally rendered, will read, 4 book of genesis, or of
the generation, &c. This last most literal rendering of βίβλος, as
here presented without the article, is given in the Spanish and
French versions found in the Polyglott of Hutter, of 1599, thus;
Span. “ Libro de la generacion,” &c. Fr. “ Livre de la généra-
tion,” ἄς. though the Italian version is there rendered “ 1 Libro
della generatione ;” as in the English, “‘ The book,” &c.
᾿ The Syriac version of βίβλος, according to remellius, 1 15 ΝΠ,
cethaba, which he renders “ descriptio generationis,” &c. observ-
lag iu the margin “NID, cethaba, ad verbum, scriptum genera-
_ tionis: sic enim est Βίβλος. 1. WDD, sepher, liber :” and Guid. Fa-
bricius adopts the latter rendering 10 his Latin version of the Syriac
of 1583, which reads, “ Scriptum generationis.” So that, accord- ᾿
ing to Tremellius, the Syriac word cethaba, used as the rendering
of the Greek word Βίβλος, is considered as meaning a description,
@writg, or a book, in the sense of the Hebrew word sepher, as
commonly used among the Hebrews; which seems to be a very
rational interpretation, as it is to include in the description a de-
scendjng line of genealogy of a Hebrew family, leading to the dis-
tinguished person whose generation, or production, with various
Connected circumstances, is to be pointed out: and “DD is the
.Hebrew word adopted by Munster, Hutter, and others, in their
Hebrew versions of this passage, and that very geoperly, 88 seems
~——ee
Ν
Biblical Criticism. 419
apparent from the sense of the Hebrew root from which it comes:
. , Now the noun DD, sepher, commonly rendered book, comes
from the root WD, saphar, which signifies to number, enumerate,
relate, write, describe, &c.: and signifies an enumeration,
a relation, writing, or description; aad therefore a book, a letter,
or other writing, in which any thing is described, related, or enue
merated, however long or short that wmting or description may
be. Hence, in Deut. xxiv. J, the dsl of divoreement is, ia
the Hebrew original, sepher, or book, or writing of divorcement ;
which is rendered βιβλίον by the Lx x, or bellum, as by the Vulg. ;
and in 2 Sam. x. 14, ὦ letter written by David is, in the He-
brew, sepher, and rendered by the Lxx also βιβλίον, libellum, but
by the V ulg. and “Mont. epistolam, and in the English Bible, &
deiter: aud in the Greek of the Gospel by St. Matthew, x1x. 7,
the writing of divorcement is called Βιβλίον ; which is rendered by
the Vulg. and Mont. libellum, a litle book, or writing; and, ix
the English Bible, writing: and the short writing, or deed of pur-
chase, is called in Jeremiah the sepher, or book of purchase, which
is also rendered βιβλίον by the Lxx, and librum by the Vulg. Pag.
and Mont. Jer. xx x11. 14.
So that the Greek word βίβλος of this first verse seems to signify
a book, writing, or description ; and it is commonly rendered into
Latin by liber or libeilus, and by the former in this place, which
is therefore rendered Liber generationis, or “ The book of the ge-
neration” of Jesus Christ.
That diber is a proper Latin rendering, seems probable from
the following considerations ; which I wish to lay before the read-
er, as Castalio has asserted that it doés not give the sense of biblos
in this passage.
That fiber and its diminutive dibellus have been used in nearly
the same sense as sepher of the Hebrews, and βίβλος and βιβλίον
of the Greeks, seems evident from the above quotations. And the
name liber is thought to be derived from the use made by the an-
cients of the Aber or bark of trees, in which they wrote before the
invention of paper and parchment. ‘ Putant hoc nomen ab eo
ease, quod veteres in libris arborum sive corticibus seribebant.” V.
Sero. in Virg. Zn. 11]. in Fabri Thes. Erud. Schol. Gesner. See
also Littleton. . Pliny informs -us, frees M: Varro, that pager wea
420 Biblical Criticism.
not used until after the building of Alexandria in Egypt: and that,
before that time, they first wrote in palm leaves, and afterwards in
the barks (libris) of certain trees, &c. Hist. Nat. Lib. x111. cap.
ΧΙ.
_ Therefore, the substance on which they wrote having been called
liber, when they wished to see the writing, whether long or short,
whether in one or more pieces of bark, or on whatever subject,
they would naturally say, “ affer dibrum,” or “ bring the bark.”
So that this name would literally signify the bark, and figuratively
the writing contained in it; and a congeries of written leaves of
bark would form a work written, or a book, as we now say.
The same reasoning is also applicable to the Greek word fi-
βλος, when considered as signifying a book or writing. of any kind,
as taken from the Egyptian Papyrus, the βύβλος or βίβλος, on
which they formerly wrote: and we are informed by Herodotus,
that the lonians called their books diphthere (i. e. Skens,) because
anciently, from want of Papyrus, they used the skins of goats and
sheep; and that, in his time, many of the Barbarians, or men of
other nations, wrote upon such skins. Vid. Herod. Lib. v. 58.
Johan. Schweighaeuser. Paris, 1816.
Therefore Liber, as well as “IBD, sepher, and βίβλος, may sig-
nify either a letter, or a book ; that is, a shorter or longer writing,
on whatever subject it may be written, and whether it be a writing
of divorcement, a deed of purchase, a writing of genealogy, or |
birth, or a relation of the precedmg, attendant, and concomitant ὁ
circumstances of the latter.
As a codex or book it is often used by the best classical authors ;
hence Librum componere, conficere, edere, emtttere, evolvere, le-
gere, &c. vid. Ainsw. et Fabr. Thes.: and that it signifies avy
shorter writing, as for example, a letter, seems apparent from the
above quotations, and from the following observations of Faber,
and the passage of Nepos which he has quoted. ‘ Ceterum Li
ber non pro codice -tantum aut volumine (ein buch), sed et pro
breviore scriptura, e.g. epistola, ponitur. Ita Nepos, 6, 4, 2,
Librum gravem multis verbis conscripsit, in quo summis eum effert
laudibus. Per ibrum literas intelligit.” Fabr. Thes. Erud. -
Schol.
And under JibeHus, the dirowutine of liber, he observes, “ Sicut -
Biblical Criticism. ὁ. 421
autem Liber, ut diximus, pro qufvis scriptura, ita et bellus usur-
pabatur. Libellos vocabant paucorum versuum carmina,” &c. Ibid.
These brief remarks, showing that ber may, as sepher, and
biblos, signify any writing, whether long or short, or of whatever
_kind, I beg leave to offer as a full refutation of the following as-
sertions of Castalio, in interpreting the passage now under consi-
deration ; “ Liber non declarat enumerationem sive nomenclatu-
ram aut librarium, quod Hebrei vocant DD, id quod interpretans
hic auctor vocat βίβλον. His rendering of βίβλος γενέσεως we
shall see hereafter.
It is said to be βίβλος γενέσεως, or the book of the generation of
Jesus Christ, and the noun γένεσις, as coming from γίνομαι, which
signifies to be born, to be begotten, produced, &c. vid. Schleusner,
may bear the senses of descent, or genealogy, generation, birth,
&c.; and is commonly rendered generation, nativity, descent,
origin, &c.: but here it seems to signify the generation, origtn, or
production of Jesus, the seed of the woman.
Therefore, the passage βίβλος γενέσεως seems to express, that
the narration which follows in this chapter is a book, writing, or
description of the generation or genesis of Jesus Christ the Lamb
of God. And this description contains an account of his lineal
descent after the flesh, his γέννησις, and birth, including the chief
a
circumstances connected with them, and the particular manner in -
which those wonderful events were brought about; and showing
that they happened according to the prophecies of the Old-Testa-
ment Scriptures, and that he was also to be called our Emmanuel,
which was expressive of the Divinity which he also possessed : all
which constitute the business of this first chapter.
In this view, this first verse, which reads thus, “The book of
the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abra-.
ham,” may be justly considered as giving a general outline of the
contents of the first chapter of this Gospel, of which chapter it is,
as it were, the preface, and most probably was so intended by the.
Holy Spirit, as above observed.
That the words generatio in the Latin, and generation in the
English translation, are correct, and convey the same sense as
γένεσις in the Greek, appears evident from the significations of the
Latin word genero, from which they are derived; which, accord-.
423 Biblical Criticism.
ing to Ainsworth, are to beget, conceive, bear, or bring forth, δε:
and though the English word generation is said to be derived from
the French génération, the origin of the latter from genero will
not be called in question. We secordingly find m Johnson, that
the English word generation signifies “ begetting, or producing, 2
family, race, progeny, &c.
- The reader will particularly observe that γενέσεως 16 ‘in the sin-
gular number. And it is rendered in the singular by the greatest
umber of the translators from the Greek. But though it is sin-
gular, and had been so rendered by the Vulg. &c. and afterwards
by 50 marty interpreters, the Hebrew translators Munster, Hutter,
end others, seemingly from attending to the two following erro-
neous translations of the L.XX. in the Old Testament, Gen. n. 4,
v. 1, where the plural rmvpn is rendered by the Greek γενέσεως in
the singular, have ehosen what seems to me an improper word,
aud have used the plural number, as I shall now endeavour
to point out: thus conveying the erroneous idea that the Evange-
hist is describing the generations descending from, instead of those
deseending to our Lord.
Now, according to the sense of βίβλος γενέσεως above giver, it
means a book, or description of the generation of Jesus Christ ; or
of the manner m which our blessed Lord took upon hin our
human nature, with the anfecedent and attendant circumstanees :
ἃ book of the generation of Jesus himself, and not of any genera/
tions proceeding from him. And though it evidently appears from
the various passages of Greek authors mentioned in the Lexicons,
and from the Greek translation of the Old Testament by the
LXX., that γένεσις may not only signify the genealogy, or line of
ancestors leading to a man, but also the list of generations pro-
ceeding from him ; yet in the Hebrew translation, there may be a
well marked distinction, the former bemg expressed by TT ND,-
molidah, or FVD, moledeth, and-the latter by HW), toledah, or
nrtan, toledoth. I am aware that foledah, the singular of tole-
doth, commonly rendered generations, is not found in the Hebrew
Senptures in the singular form: but the reason seems evident,
because in all the places where this Hebrew noun is used, it ought
to be in the plural: number, as speaking of more generations than
oné. But being ia the feminine form, its singular may be easily
Biblical Criticism. 423
found, and x is. indeed given by Pagninus in ‘his hes. Ling.
Sanct. | | .
Now in rendering the singular γενέσεως into Hebrew, Munster;
in 1582, has chosen the word TWN, toledah, and rehdered
MDW, toledoth, in the plural namber : and he has been followed
by Hutter in 1599, and by the Rev. Richard Caddick in 1798,
and in the Hebrew translation begun in.1813; and this rendering
seems to be universally approved. But the reasoning above
given and that.which now follows be correct, this rendering 18
erroneous, both as to the word itself, and the number in which it is
given. | .
In the first place, the strictly literal rendering of the Greek text
has been shown to be, a book of genesis, or of the generation of
Jesus Christ; as importing a description, or narration, of the
generation of Jesus himself; and not of any generations proceed-
ag from him, which the word toledofl would signify, according to
the sense in which it is generally, if not universally, used io the
Old Testament, as I shall now endeavour to demonstrate.
The Hebrew word iTY1, toledah, is a noun feminine signify.
ing a.generation, (see.Pag.) and in the plural generations, namely,
those proceeding from a person; but not the generations leading
to the production of the individual himself :. so that man,
toledoth, in the plaral number, signifies a succession of generations
from the person spoken of; or, as thus stated by Parkhurst,
“ PATON, generations, successive productions, or occurrences.”
-Heb. Lexic. . | ᾿ Ν
The words moledeth and toledah come from the Hebrew root
1%, jalad, which signifies to beget, generate, bring forth; and
also to be born, &c. Burt. Lex. Therefore a proper word from
this root will give a very correct rendering of γενέσεως in this place;
though MIAN, toledoth, does not seem to be that word. I am
aware that Munster has examples in the LX Χ. for rendering
γενέσεως by NY, toledoth, in the plural number; or rather for
considering that the singular γενέσθως is a proper rendering of the
plural ¢oledoth, and particularly in Gen. 11. 4, where mention is
made of the generations, or successive productions of the heavens
and the earth, There we read in the English translation, “ These
ere the generations,” that is,“ of the heavens and of the-earth:;” net
~
424 Biblical Criticism.
as if they were produced by the heavens and the earth, but as
intimating that the visible heavens and the earth, and all that they
contain, were successively produced by God, the Almighty Creator
of all. But the LX X. render, not literally, but according to their .
opinion of the sense, and say, Atrn ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως, or this is
the bouk of the generation, &c. thus rendering the Heb.. word
, by the singular γενέσεως, and exhibiting their reason for
the title which they have given to this first book of the Holy
Scriptures, and by which it is called at this day. But this rea-
dering is not correct, and does not give the full sense of the
Hebrew, which wishes to mark the succession, or order in which
they were created. And that this is the sense of the Hebrew word
toledoth, seems fully demonstrated in the fifth chapter, ver. 1., of
of this book of Genesis (as well as in many other places of Scrip-
ture), where the short writing of the generations of Adam, or of
the successive generations dtscending from him, (and he had 20
ancestors) is called a book, and where it is said to be the book of
the generations of Adam; DIN MTN “BD ΠῚ Zeh sepher toledoth
Adam: or “ This ἐς the book of the generations of Adam,” as
rendered in the English Bible. But here, also, the LX. render
the plural ¢oledoth by the singular γενέσεως ; calling these. genera- ᾿
tions of Adam the generation of men, ἀνθρώπων : or intimating
what they considered to be the sense, or that it was the book of
the origin of men, “ Latine, descriptio originis,” &c. Grotius.
But that this translation of toledoth by the singular γενέσεως is
erroneous, seems virtually acknowledged by the LX X., in Gen. v1.
9, by their rendering in the plural number, calling them ai γενέσεις
Nae, the generations of Noah: as also in x. 1, 32. x1. 10, 97,
and in other places.
Wetstein, having given the rendering of Gen. v. 1. hy the LXX.,
thus shows that Aquila renders in the plural; and uses a different
Greek word for toledoth: “ Aquila vero: τοῦτο βιβλίον γονημάτου
᾿Αδάμ." Nov. Test. Gr.
The learned and enlightened Schleusner, in his much valued
Lexicon, has given three significations of γένεσις, the first and
third of which are worthy of particular notice in the investigation
of this subject. “1, generatio, nativitas, ortus, etiam origo.”
And he observes that in these senses it answers to the Hebrew
Biblical Criticism. 425
word moledeth in the following passages; Respondet hebraico
nyo in vers. Alex. Genes. xxx1., 18. Ruth. 11. 11.;” and it
_ does also in that of the Roman; and also in other places of Scrip-
ture, in both these versions: and, as I consider the sense of γένεσις
in the passage now under consideration as coming under this first
signification, I am so far supported by him in the opinion that
moledeth is a proper Hebrew rendering ; though he, considering
genesis as coming under his third signification, which we shall soon
see, prefers ἃ different Hebrew word, or follows the authors above
‘mentioned, whose rendering seems to be erroneous in this place.
Therefore NT5W, moledeth seems to be the word, which should
be used in the Hebrew version of the passage now under consider-
ation; which seems the more probable, as it is not only a noun
signifying nativity, progeny, kindred, &c. but is also of the Hiphil
form, and the same as the fem. singular in constr. of part. Hiph.
of the verb ‘J, and therefore bears in its signification the causing
to produce or bring forth; so that ΠΡ “DD may include not
only the list of ancestors leading to the person whose generation is
to be described, but also the other previous, collateral, and attend-
ant circumstances of his conception and birth; which may be cone
sidered as the full sense of βίβλος γενέσεως in this place.
It therefore, seems probable, that niin “WD, sepher moledeth
will give the exact Hebrew rendering of those two words; as sig-
nifying the book of the generation, 1. e. of the begetting, or of the
causing to produce and bring forth Jesus Christ the Lamb of God,
at his first entrance into this world; as it were by tracing through
the descending line of genealogy, even to the time when the virgin
mentioned by Isaiah brought forth her first-born son, whose name
was called Jesus, ver. 25: in this way showing his ancestors from
Abraham, through David, and leading to his conception and nae
tivity, with all the collateral and attendant circumstances; and, as
we have before noticed, showing the mauner in which those won-
derful events were brought about.
The third sense of γένεσις, as given by Schleusner, reads thus
“< Ipsum genus et prosapia, familia, ordo et series eorum, qui sunt
ex eadem stirpe prognati. Matth. 1. 1. βίβλος γενέσεως, descriptio
generis, series méjorum, i. 6. genealogia, que formula respondet
hebraicee* myn Gen: v. 1.” So that he considers that, wm (hia
426 Biblical Criticism.
passage, Liblos geneseos signifies a description of the race, or ἃ
series of the ancestors, i. e. the genealogy of our Lord; and that
this form answers to sepher toledoth in Hebrew ; quoting Gen. v.
1. where the list of the successive generations of Adam is said to
be sepher toledoth, or the book of the generations of Adam: thus
approving of the Hebrew rendering of Munster, Hutter, &e.
which seems also to be approved of by all the other interpreters
which 1 have seen; though evidently erroneous.
But to this Hebrew rendering they have been most probably led
by the paraphrastic translation of the LX X. of the passage just
quoted, which has been already noticed; where they render
by γενέσεως in the singular number, whereas it should be
γενεσέων in the plural.
But though the LXX. render the Hebrew words moledeth and
toledah by the Greek word genesis, there seems to be an evident
distinction in the signification of these words in the Hebrew, which
points out when the one is proper, and when the other, in speak-
ing of the generation of a person, and the line of genealogy leading
to that person, and of the descents or generations from him or
from another person: which are very different, though this dif-
ference seems not to have been noticed by the interpreters above
mentioned, the former including the line of ancestors or of the
generations leading to the person spoken of, and the other that
of the generations proceeding from him or of the sons of his family
in genealogical order.
That this distinction in the Hebrew rendering of this passage is
not attended to by interpreters in general seems evident, as they
generally refer you to the above passage in the Old Testament, or
to Gen. v. 1., where the generations from Adam, or his generations,
are called the toledoth of Adam, as being similar to the generatton
of the second Adam, or Jesus Christ, in Matt. 1. 1., where his an-
cestors are mentioned. But the difference is most evident. ‘The
ancestors of our Lord lead on to his production ; but the generations
of Adam, who had no ancestors, are his offspring, and successive
descendants. ‘Iherefore there is a manifest difference between
γενέσεως, as the book of the generation of Jesus, and γενεσέων as that
of the generations descending from a person,.as were those of
Adam ; the former evidently ugnifying. the genetia ot generation
Bablacal Critscism. 427
of the man Christ Jesus, or his own production or bringing forth,
v. 18, 25 :.and it is not sufficient that the series of our Lo:d’s ances-
tors are mentioned, unless the mode of his production or appearing
in the world be also given, all of which seem to be included in the
words βίβλος γενέσεως ; and ulso in the Hebrew words sépher
moledeth, their legitimate equivalents in this. place: whereas the
Hebrew word toledoth, the plural of toledah, when speaking of
persons, regularly means, as far as I have examined, the succeed.
ing generations descending from the person spoken of, and most
particularly so in the 5th chapter of Genesis, ver. |., quoted by
Schleusner and other translators, they being the generations of
Adam who had no ancestors. Nor would the description of
the γέννησις and birth alone, without the line of ancestors showing
the descent from Abraham and David, have been sufficient.
Therefore, it is not βίβλος γενεαλογίας, or @ description of the
genealogy alone, nor γεννήσεως of the begetting (vid. Matth. 1. 2,
8, 18, 20.) or bringing forth; but it is βίβλος γενέσεως, two words
which may include all those senses, and may import a description
of the origin and production after the flesh of the great person
spoken of, including every thing which is connected with them;
and therefore the genealogy, begetting, and birth of Jesus - the
Lamb of God, even from Abraham unto the time when his
mother Mary brought forth her first-born Son, who was called
JESUS.
I shall now conclude by stating the Hebrew rendering of this
passage, as found in the translations of Munster, Hutter, Caddick,
and that of 1813, London; and giving some various readings,
with some very brief remarks.
_ Munster renders WOT yur niin QD, sepher hattoledoth,
&e. or literally in English, A book, or The book, of the genera-
tzons, &c.
But, besides his thus erroneously rendering toledoth, in the
plural number, he has prefixed an 7}, of which there seems to be
no example in the Hebrew Scriptures, and for which there seems
no necessity in this place ; the words sepher toledoth being always
found without any such prefix.
Hutter renders ΠΥ ΔΠ Ἵν, sepher toledoth, or book of the
generations, &c. without the Ἢ "prefixed.
428 Biblical Criticism.
Caddick renders as Hutter; as do the Translators of 1813:
only they omit the second vau in ¢oledoth, usmg the masoretic
point instead of it, as is occasionally done in the Old Tes-
tament.
So that they all render toledoth, in the plural number, as if the
original words had been βίβλος γενεσέων ; which I have above coa-
sidered as an incorrect rendering, and as conveying an erroneous
idea, and now beg leave to ask :-—Shall we not rather render
Mey yw myo BO? Or, sepher moledeth, &c.?
Munster, without making a distinction between the generation
of Jesus and the succeeding generations of Adam, has, as we have
seen, rendered FYI DO, considering γενέσεως as having the
sense of toledoth in this place ; and his Latin translation is “ Liber
generationum,” or the book of the generations, the exact sense of
his Hebrew: and, believing the opinion of the Jews that wherever
toledoth is found, it signifies both the nativity and events, thus im
terprets, “Sic liber generationum Jesu Christi veluti titulus est
nativitatis et actionum Jesu Christi :” and he has been followed in
this opinion by many learned men. Menochius observes on Lider
generationis, ‘Quasi dicat, liber de vita Christi: nam syn
tholdah apud Hebreos, Grace γένεσις, significat non solum genera-
tionem, sed totum etiam vite cursum, et quicquid homini accidit
in vita,” &c. Vel, “ Hec est enarratio, sive descriptio, et cata-
logus eorum, a quibus Christus. secundum carmmem originem duxit,”
&c. In. Bib. Mar. But though toledoth may signify the succes-
sive productions of things as well as of men, I have shown that it
ig an improper word in this place: and though yévedss may ub
doubtedly signify the origin, descent, genealogy, nativity, &c. of
‘men and things, the sense is, in this passage, restricted to the gene-
ration of production: of Jestis; but with βίβλος, including the pre
ceding and accompanying events, &c. as above noticed.
Castalio, consideritig that the Greek word βίβλος is intended to
convey the saime sense as the Hebrew sepher, in this place, and that
the genealogy of Jesus is intended, renders, enumeératio generis.
But the genealogy of Jesus is not the only, nor the chief, business
of this chapter, as it only occupies the first sixteen verses; though
γενέσεως has been considered as conveying this idea by thé greater
Dr. Burney’s .Eibrary. 429
number of interpreters: and had this alone been meant, it would’
no doubt have been βίβλος γενεαλογίας, &c.
_ Wetstein observes on βίβλος γενέσεως, “ Licebit ergo interpretarr
seriem personarum generatarum, a quibus originem trahit Jesus ;
ut intelligatur titulus esse non totius Evangelii, sed tantum Genea-
logiz a commate 2 ad 16.” Here this much valued and learned
author has accurately pointed out how far the genealogical recken-
- Ing goes, or that it proceeds to the 16th verse inclusive; but had
this been only intended, would it not have been biblos genealogias?
Vid. Nov. Test. Gr. |
Tirinus interprets, ‘‘Catalogus, vel descriptio genealogie.” Jn
Bib. Max.—Tertul. “ Liber geniture.” Ibid.—Luc. Brug. “ Pro-
geniei.” I[bid.—/Eth. “Descriptio generationis,” &c. [bid.—Es-
tius, “Non est sensus, hoc Evangelium esse librum generationis
Jesu Christi. Phrasi enim Hebraica, liber accipitur pro quovis
scripto, slve parvo, sive magno, quo aliquid describitur, narratur,
gut recensetur. Refertur ergo non ad totum Evangelium, sed ad
hoc initium, quo genealogia Christi continetur. Ita Gen. v.” &c.
Thid. But the reader hath seen that more than genealogy alone
seems intended: as also, that the reference to the generations of
Adam is erroneous.
Grotius renders, “ Descriptio originis.”
K ATON.
REPORT FROM THE COMMITTEE
On Petition of Trustees of the British Museum, relating
to the Collection of the late Dr. BURNEY.
Ordered, by the House of Commons, to be printed, April 17, 1818.
A
IN proceeding to lay before our readers a copy of this report, .
Wwe cannot but regret, that the Committee have not furnished a more
full and satisfactory account of a Library, which, as a collection,
long and deservedly celebrated, both at home and abroad, merited
not only an accurate, but also a very particular, detail of its con-
VOL. XVII. Cl. Jl. NO. XXXIV. 2F
450 Dr. Burney’s Librarg,
tents. We have reason to believe, that the evidence laid before
them was of a nature to have satisfied most amply the just curio-
εἰν of all classical readers, as well as to put the nation at large in
possession of materials for forming a very correct judgment on the
extent and importance of the purchase, which, on ther recommen-
dation, has been made for the public. We, among others, must
allow ourselves to express our disappointment,—since many curious
perticulars, at once valuable and interesting to the student, the bib- |
iographer, and the collector, might naturally have been expected
to have found a place in such a document. :
In a Classical Journal, too, we may fairly be pardoned for
Jamenting, that no catalogue of the library of so distinguished a
scholar as Dr. Burney has been printed. Such a publication might
have served as an excellent guide to future scholars,—since his col-
lection was, beyond dispute, the most complete for every purpose
of classical investigation, which was ever amassed by a private
individual :—formed at once with admirable judgment, with inces-
sant care, and unsparing liberality. It was the library of a scholar
for a scholar’s use,—io which every book was purchased with a
definite object,—and, in the whole collectively, there was so strong
a mutual dependence and relation, as rendered it well worthy of
being kept, in perpetuity, “‘ entire and undivided.” Such, indeed,
seems to have been the wish of the gentleman, to whom the library
descended as an inheritance ; nor can we be surprised at the exist-
ence of such a feeling, when we recollect how very long it must
be, before any student shall again enjoy both the means, and the
Opportunities, for accumulating such literary stores,—embracing
every useful production on criticism and philology, all the standard
books of reference, and all, which best illustrated the language, or
the history, of the two greatest nations of antiquity.
We are patriots enough to rejoice in the retention of such trea-
sures among ourselves; and we heartily congratulate the ‘Trustees
of the British Museum on an accession, which, not to dwell upon
its riches in other departments of literature, is to that establishment,
in the class most appropriate to the object of our Journal, perhaps,
the most important, which could have accrued to them from any
single purchase. Some of the most considerable deficiencies in
their library have thus been supplied,—and an extensive assemblage
added of those minor works, and parts of works, which have been
seldom edited, are of rare occurrence, and are scarcely known,
indeed, to the generality of collectors. In connexion with his own
favorite study, the Greek Drama, especially, Dr. Burney had the
reputation of possessing every author, and every edition, which had
been published,—and the books in this class were rendered doubly
valoable by the fruits of his own labors.. We certainly could have
and the British Museum. 431
much wished, that the Report had spoken, even.with more copious-
ness, respecting the collection of the ““ Fragmenta Scenica Greca,”
compiled by Dr. Burney with almost incredible diligence ; and,
derived as these fragments are from the most varied sources,
methodised with ail his own matchless talent for arrangement.
Cordially do we trust, that some youthful scholar of high promise,
and of industry to vie with the original designer, will avail him-
self of the abundant materials, now rendered accessible to him,
for completing so great a work :—a work in itself monumental,—
and one, which might arouse his best ambition,—since, if ably
executed, it could not fail to transmit his name to posterity in
honorable union with that of CoarLes Burney.
We hope, that the officers of the British Museum will be enabled
soon to gratify our curiosity by a catalogue of the books with Mss.
notes, and of the classical and theological κειμήλια, with which
this purchase has enriched the national repository. For the assist-
ance of editors, as well as of students, it is most desirable, that the
catalogue should be prepared with more than common accuracy,
and comprise al] the information, requisite to direct and facilitate
their respective researches. It should contain also a correct enume-
ration of the several subjects of critical disquisition treated by this
assiduous scholar in his own voluminous Adversaria. |
The catalogue of the Manuscripts, we particularly hope, will do
complete justice to this extraordinary collection ; and, if τὸ be drawn
up by any one, who can pronounce on the literary value, as well as
the palzographical character, of each volume, the publication will
at once reflect honor on its author, and deserve the gratitude of
-every reader. No better model can, perhaps, be suggested than
the excellent one furnished by Professor Gaisford, in his Notitia
of the Mss. purchased from Dr. Clarke for the Bodleian Library.
Jn indulging this hope, we trust, that an opportunity will be taken
for speaking most fully of the two manuscripts, which were the.
boast of the Deptford collection ;—we mean of course the ‘Towne-
Jeian Ms. of the Iliad, and the Ms. of the Greek Orators. Their
age we believe to be far greater than is attributed to them in the
Report, which, in referring the former to “ the thirteenth, or be-
ginning of the fourteenth century,” and the other to a date still
more recent, to our minds, indeed, has robbed them, in the eyes
of the world at large, of a considerable portion of their former
reputation.
With respect to the latter of these two, the late Dr. Raine has
printed his opinion, that it “ seems to be of the twelfth, or, at the
atest, of the thirteenth century.” This statement not only comes
from ἃ scholar, but rests, as we have grounds for believing, on
judgment, from which there can be uo appeal—that of his friend,
4332 Dr. Burney’s Ltbrary,. |
Professor Porson. No one, who has read the encomisstic lan-
guage of Heyne, in the Prolegomena to his Homer, [Tom. I. xvi.
xvii. and Tom. III. p. c.-cvii.] or of Noehden, in the Appendix
to bis Commentatio de Porphyrii Scholiast. in Homerum, can for
@ moment doubt, that the Copex BuRNEIANUS—for 80 we
shall now term it, iu the confidence, that it will ever hereafter be .
80 designated—has claims, from its age and from its character,
to far greater distinction than it has received from the Report. .No
one will presume to challenge the competence of this able critic
to form an adequate estimate of the intrinsic excellence and autho-
rity of the venerable manuscript in question; and he asserts his
conviction, that it is the identical one, from which the Victorian
Scholia were originally transcribed, and at a time too much ante-
rior to the period, in which the great Florentine scholar lived. ‘This
circumstance, in the way, in which Heyne has detailed it, seems in
itself to secure to this precious volume a date far earlier than the
one now assigned to it.
We have been thus minute, in justice to Dr. Burney, who paid
so large a sum for the manuscript,—as well as to the English. pab-
dic, to whom it may now be said to belong, and in whose estimation
‘we wish it to retain all the high worth, which really belongs to it,
and which on the continent it is acknowledged to possess. With
many apologies, however, for so long a preface, we now beg leave
to let the Report speak for itself, and to lay it at once before our
readers.
THE COMMITTEE, to whom the Petition of the Trustees of the
British Museum, submitting to the House the propriety of pur-
chasing the Collection of the late Dr. Burney, for use of the
Public, was referred, ἣ
Have directed their attention, in the first place, to inquiring into the
component parts or principal classes of literature, of which this library
Consists; secondly, into their value; and thirdly, .as to the importance
of purchasing the whole, at the public charge, for the purpose of adding
it to the Collection, now existing in the British Museum, having ascer-
tained, that Dr. Burney’s executor was unwilling to separate one portion
from the rest, or to treat for the sale of the Collection otherwise than
as entire and undivided.
One of the large classes consists of Manuscripts of classical and
other ancient authors; among which that of Homer’s Iliad, formerly
belonging to Mr. ‘Towneley, holds the first place in the estimation of
all the very competent judges, who were examined by your Committee ;
although not supposed to be older than the latter part of the thirteenth
or beginning of the fourteenth century, it is considered as being of the
earliest date of the Mss. of Homer's Iliad known to scholars, and may
be rated as superior to any other, which uaw exists, at least in England ;
and the British Museum. 433
it is also extremely rich in scholia, which have been hitherto but par-
tially explored.
‘There are two copies of the series of Greek Orators, probably written
in the fourteenth or fifteenth centuries, of which that upon vellum was
brought to this country by Mr. Cripps and Dr. Clarke, and is esteemed
as extremely valuable: an account of the Orations, contained in it, was
drawn up by Dr. Raine, late Master of the Charter-house, and of the
collations, which he had made in comparing it with the Aldine edition.
This manuscript of the Rhetoricians is indeed one of the most impor-
tant manuscripts ever introduced into this country, because it supphies
more lacune than any other manuscript; there is eontained in it a
portion of Isveus, which has never been printed: there is only one
printed oration of Lycurgus in existence, which is imperfect, and this
manuscript completes it; there is also an oration of Dinarchus, which
may be completed from this manuscript. |
Among the rarer manuscripts in the Collection, there are two beaw
tiful copies of the Greek Gospels, of the tenth and twelfth centuries.
The Geography of Ptolemy is another of the’ finest Mss. enriched with
maps, which, although not older than the fifteenth century, yet, from
the circumstance of all the other known copies of this work in the
original language being in the collection of different public libraries
abroad, the possession of this copy is rendered particularly desirable.
There is likewise a valuable Latin manuscript of the Comedies of
Plautus, written in the fourteenth centery, containing twenty plays;
which is a.much larger number than the copies already in the Museum,
or those in foreign libraries in general contain, most of which have
only six or eight, and few, comparatively speaking, more than twelve
plays. A beautiful and correct manuscript of Callimachus of’ the
fifteenth century ; a very fine copy of Pappas Alexandrinus’ collection
of Mathematical Treatises, of similar date ; and a manuscript of the
Asinus Aureus of Apuleius, an author of extreme rarity, deserve also
particular notice. The whole number of manuscripts amounts te
about 385, but those above mentioned are the most important and
valuable. 3
Exclusive of the manuscripts already noticed, there is a very large
humber of Memoranda and: Criticisms, in Dr. Burney’s own hand
(exclusive of the Fragmenta Scenica Greca, and books with Dr.
Burney’s own notes); three or four articles of which seem nearly pre«
parted for the press. In this part of the Collection, there are several
small Lexicons of the Greek Dialects, with numerous remarks on
‘ancient Authors; the merit of which, though certainly considerable,
can only be thoroughly appreciated: by patient investigation.
Thete are also many original letters of Isaac Casaubon, who ΤΉ -
tained an extensive correspondence with many of the learned men of
his time, whose letters to Casaubon have never been published. :
Among the printed books, the whole number of which is from 13,000
(ὁ 14,000 volumes, the most distinguished branch consists of the Col-
“΄ .
434 Dr. Burney’s Library,
lection of Greek dramatic Authors, which are arranged so as to pres
sent every diversity of text and commentary at one view; each play
being bound up singly, and in so complete but expensive a manner,
that it has occasioned the sacrifice of two copies of every edition, and
in some instances of such editions as are very rare: the same arrange-
ment has also been adopted with regard to Harpocration, and some of
the Greek grammarians; and both the editions of, and annotations:
upon, Terentianus Maurus, are particularly copious and complete. It
appears indeed, that this Collection contains the first edition of every
Greek Classic, and several of the scarcest among the Latins, and that
the series of Grammarians, Lexicographers, and Philological writers, in
both languages, is unusually complete. ‘The books are represented to
be generally in good, though not in what may be styled brilliant, con-
dition; the whole being collected by Dr. Burney himself, from the
different great libraries, which have been of late years brought to sale,
inning chiefly with the Piselli Collection.
o enable the House to form an opinion upon this branch of the
Collection, your Committee subjoin the words of one of the witnesses,
whom they examined; who says, ‘‘ The great feature of this eminent
Scholar's library is that part, which relates to Greek literature, whether
ancient or more recent. In this respect it is probably the most complete
ever assembled by any man, as it comprises all the materials requisite
for classical criticism. In Latin Classics, and in the criticism connected
with Roman literature, it is not so copious as in the Greek ; but never-
theless it contains a number of rare and valuable books, which would
considerably enrich the stores deposited in the Museum.” ἫΝ
The same witness, with reference to the collection of Memoranda
above alluded to, further says, :
- The books with manuscript notes may be divided into three por-
tions ; first, those, which have their margins more or less crowded with
remarks, collations, &c. in the hand-writing of many very eminent
scholars, viz. Bentley, Burmann, Casaubon, &c.; secondly, the books
with manuscript notes by Dr. Burney. The greater portion of the
books thus enriched, are the Greek Tragedians and the ancient Greek
Lexicographers. To illustrate the Greek Drama, and to add to the
stores of the ancient Lexicographers, Dr. Burney seems to have
directed the greatest portion of his industry ; and to any future edition
these remarks and additions would prove a most interesting acquisition.
Another important portion of this Collection may be called the Vario-
rum Collection ; this is, perhaps, one of the most remarkable series of
books in the whole library: in it, Dr. Burney has so-brought together
the comments and notes of many celebrated scholars upon several
Greek, and particularly the Dramatic Writers, that-at one view may be
seen almost all that has been said in illustration of each author: it
extends to about 300 volumes in folio and quarto. One portion of this
remarkable Collection consists of a regular series of 170 volumes,
intitled Fragmenta Scenica Greca, which comprises all the remains of
and the British Museum. 435
the Greek Dramatists, in number not less than 300, wheresoever they
could be traced.” .
The great copiousness of Dr. Burney’s Library in Greek literature
may be collected at once from the following comparative statement of
the editions of several Authors, in that Collection and in the Library of
the British Museum.
AUTHORS, &c. BRITISH MUSEUM. DR. BURNEY.
_ Works entire or in part.
Eschylus 2 « « 18 Editions, ’ 47 Editions,
nacreon Α ον. 17. -- 46 —
Anthologia — . . i9 -- 89. “--
Apollonius Rhodius . 4 -- 12. --
᾿ Archimedes. . 9. -- 5 --
Aristeenetus . 8. - 6 -ῷ
Aristophanes. : 25 -- ma —
Athenzeus «oe . δ — 10 —
Athenagoras ὃ Φ ° 4 — 9 —
Callimachus . . . F-— 16 “5--
Chrysoloras e e 8 9 — 16 —
Demetrius Phalereus 4 “--- 10 —
Demophilus. ‘ - 2 — 5 —
Demosthenes . . . 13 — 50 --
Dion Niceeus Μ . . -- 2—
tymologicum Magnum . 2 — 5 —
Euripides ᾿ e ™ e 46 _ 166 —
Gaza. . . ° . 1 -- 2:1 —
Gnomici Scriptores . . 6 — 14 —
Gregorius Cerinthus . 1 - 8. =
Gregorius Nazianzenus . 14 — 2 —
Homer . » . . 45. — 87 —
Isocrates . . . . lb -- 30 —
_ Sophocles . . . 16 — Ι0.2 —
Another, and ἃ very different, branch of this Collection comprises a
numerous and rare series of Newspapers, from 1603 to the present
time, amounting in the whole to 700 volumes, which is more ample
than any other, that is supposed to be extant. A large collection of
between 300 and 400 volumes in quarto, containing Materials for a
History of the Stage, from 1660 to the present time, and particulars
relating to the biography of Actors, and persons connected with the
Stage, may be classed after these daily journals.
Dr. Burney’s collection of Prints has been principally made with
reference to this object, comprising the most complete series, that pro-
bably exists of theatrical Portraits; beginning in the latter part of
Queen Elizabeth’s reign, which is the Period of.our earliest engravers
436 Dr. Burney’s Library, gc.
of portraits, such as Geminie, Hogenburgh, Elstracke, and the three
Passes, and continued to the present time. The number of these thea-
trical Engrasiogs is about 5,000, many of which are bound together in
ten volumes ; besides these, there are about 2,000 other engraved Por-
traits, principally of Authors, Commentators, and other learned persons,
With respect to the value of the Manuscripts, the Homer is rated by
the difftrent witnesses at from 600]. to 800]., and one of them sup-
. posed it might even reach so high a price as 1,0001.; the Greek
Rhetoricians are estimated at from 340]. to 500]. ; the larger copy of
the Greek Gospels at 2001.; the Geography of Ptolemy at 651., and
the copy of Plautus at 50]. Oue witness estimates the whole of the
ancient Manuscripts at upwards of 2,500l.;"and an eminent Book-
seller at 3,000. The set of Newspapers from the year 1603 to the
present time, is valued at from 900 guineas to 1,000.
The books with manuscript notes, together with Dr. Burney’s
Variorum Compilation, including the Fragmenta Scenica Greea, are
estimated by one at 1,000]., and by another as high as 1340].; who
likewise computes the Materials for the History of the Stage at 140].
The Prints are judged to be worth the sum of 450]. ; and the Book-
seller above referred to, who has examined the whole (except the
engravings) for the purpose of enabling the present ‘proprietor to set a
value upon them, estimates the printed books in the Library at 9,000l.,
some other books in his study adjoining and a great number of tracts
at 500]. ; and the whole, exclusive of the prints, αἵ 14,500].
A considerable expense would necessarily attend ‘the selling of this,
or any other library, by public auction, which usually amounts either
to 15 or 174 per cent. upon the gross produce of thé sale; but your
Committee having questioned the last witness alluded to, Mr. Payne,
found it to be his opinion, that the net money ‘price of the, Library in
question, after deducting all expenses, might amount to 14,5001.
The persons examined by your Committee, as being particularly
competent to assist them in forming their judgment, have been, Henry
Ellis Esq. the Reverend Henry H. Baber, and Mr. Smith, from the
British Museum ; Richard Heber, Esq. the Reverend T. F. Dibdin,
the Reverend J. Cleaver Banks, Mr. Payne, and Mr. Evans; the sub-
stance of whose testimony your Committee have endeavoured to put
the House in possession of. .
The importance of acquiring for the British Museum a Library,
stored with such Hterary treasures as have been enumerated, is suf
ciently apparent from what has been already stated ; but itis obvious,
that in purchasing the entire Collection much more will be bought than
it will be necessary to retain; and that a considerable number of the
printed books being duplicates of those already in the British Museum,
must be sold again ; and that this cannot be done otherwise than at the
expense of 173 per cent. upon the produce of such sales, whatever the
amount may be. It is also to be borne in mind, that, even if the pur-
chase should be completed without delay, these duplicates could not
On the Ancient British Language, §c. 43%
be’sorted and examized, so as to bring them to sale in the course of.
the present session. |
Your Committee therefore suggest, that, for the ensuing year, the net
amount of such sale (which may be estimated at from 3,0001., to 4,0001.)
should so far be refunded to the Public, as to go in diminution of the-
annual grant to the British Museum ; and also, that, in consideration
of so ample and costly an accession being made to the existing stock
of Books, it may be proper to suspend or reduce, for a time, the
annual grant of 1,000]. to the Book Fund, with the exception of such-
rts of that annual sum as are applied in subscriptions to Works now
in the progress of publication.
Upon the whole matter, your Committee venture to recommend as
the result of the best consideration,’ which they have bestowed both
upon the importaace and just value of the entire Collection, that the .
Proprietor, being ready to dispose of it for the sum of 13,500L., it will
be a very material addition to-the public stock of Literature, and pur-
chased at a price, which cannot be deemed unreasonable. |
nn ----------------------------------
LETTERS ON THE ANCIENT BRITISH
LANGUAGE OF CORNWALL.
LETTER I.
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION,
You may recollect, that in the course of our correspondence,
I formerly made some allusion to that dialect of the British which,
till a comparatively recent period, was the vernacular idiom of
Cornwall. You had the goodness to express satisfaction with that
part of my letter, and to suggest, that from the opportunities which
my present residence afforded, I might collect such information as
would enable me to prepare a paper οἱ the subject, which, as you
then expressed it, would be new and interesting. Convinced of the
difficulty of the task, and of my own imability, I delayed for a time
complying with the flattering request. But at present I avail my-
self of a few weeks of leisure to write to you on the Cornish dialect,
while I trust that you will be indulgent, even when some of my
opinions may not appear to be sufficiently established, or may be
different from those which you may entertain on some critical points.
I shall, however, derive the more pleasure from this pursuit, as,
438 On the Ancient British
exclusive of a fondness for philology, I am persuaded that the
theory and investigation of languages is intimately connected with
the religious and political history of nations, through all the pro-
gressive stages in which men arrive from the lowest barbarism to
the most refined civilisation ; or from the fables of legends and
romances to the calm and authenticated narratives of the historian.
It is the theory of language, which often thus confirms their truth.
{ am therefore so far from thinking that such studies are trifling
and uninteresting, that [ am inclined to consider them as important
in the highest degree, as well to the profound and accurate scholar,
as to the man who, with inferior erudition, is possessed of a more
captivating style and a more brilliant fancy. A person who is
either unacquainted with the memorials of former ages, or who
only views them with indifference, and at the most with idle curio-
sity, is like a stranger who might enjoy the advantages of foreign
travel, and yet feels not any desire to examine the novel and various
scenes by which he is surrounded. Among those, however, who
devote themselves to literature, there are but few who endeavour
to trace the rise, progress and extinction of languages, the variety
and intricacy of dialects, and how words and expressions in their
transition from one age and country to another, may become so
disguised, altered, and modified in their structure and appearance,
that it is scarcely possible to recognise them under their actual
concealment. Hence antiquayian research is generally limited to
the investigation of the usages of distant periods, and to ascertain
the object and original utility of ruinous edifices, which still seem
to attest in their decay the proud extravagance of their former pos-
sessors, and the instability of buman ambition. Such a study is
also more amusing than that of the history of any language ; for
while we survey a mouldering castle, or handle the rusty armour
of our ancestors, we forget the uninviting nature of our subject, we
contemplate as it were a renewal of their departed greatness, and
are alive to all their feelings of martial glory. But the study of
language is of a more sober and philosophical cast ; and while it
borrows no external embellishments, it patiently proceeds through
all the ramifications of etymology, till it establishes some most.
4mportant point, either in tracing or negativing the connexion that
Language of Cornwall. — 489
may have formerly existed between different countries. Such
researches are not only uncommon in ordinary cases, but they
become still more so, when the subject is one like the Cornish
tongue, about which so little is known, and which has seldom, if
ever, excited any interest.
- For these reasons I shall have need for much of your indulgence
in the following letters. The written remains of Cornish are few
and scattered ; and, as far as | know, even these have not been
elucidated with the attention they. deserve. It seems also to be
silently consigned to oblivion by the learned, and even in the dis-
tricts where it was last spoken, there is little or no information to
be obtained. The very few, however, who have written on the
Cornish, as I shall endeavour to show hereafter, have done it in an
unsatisfactory manner. In such a want of materials, therefore;
there must necessarily be much room fur conjecture, which, when
successful, may deserve encouragement; and when it fails, may
still have a right not to be treated with severity of censure.
Itis unnecessary to enter into a long history of the Cornish tongue,
as that may easily be learned from Dr. Borlase, or any of the other
historians of that county. - With respect to the period of its extinc- .
tion, I must indeed: differ from’ some of them, and of this 1 shall
take notice in the proper place. The Cornish is a dialect of the
Celtic, or the ancient language of Gaul and Britain. Before the
Roman invasion of the latter, it was spoken in its greatest purity ;
‘but from that period it seems gradually to have admitted a great
number of foreign words and idioms. During the revolutions
which succeeded the destruction of the Roman power, the British
dialects became still more corrupted. In the central and more
fruitful parts of the island, the Saxon, the parent of our modern
English, prevailed ; and the Celtic was driven to Wales, to Ireland,
to Scotland, to Cornwall, and to Britany. The population of Bri-
tain was then scanty, and divided into petty communities. Hence,
like all barbarous nations, who have much unappropriated land,
and but few motives to attach them to their soil, the Britons retired
in a mass before their Saxon invaders, and sought the most distant
and inaccessible parts of the country. Many of them must have
perished by the sword, and a few might have continued among the
440 ; On the Ancient British
conquerors, who were settled in the most desirable districts ; hence
there would scarcely remain any vestige of the former inhabitants.
This exactly happened to the Saxons; and as to the Britons, dimi-
nished as they were in numbers and resources, the places to which
they retired would be fully adequate to supply their wants, It is
therefure uunccessary to suppose any particular cruelty, or a gene-
sal extermination by the Saxons, to have produced these effects.
It is always better to have first recourse to ordinary causes; and
here the common desolations of war were sufficient for the result.
The present gradual disappearance of the aboriginal Americans
before the European colonists is a striking parallel of my conjecture.
When afterwards, in consequence of those calamitous times, the
several British tnbes had been separated from each other, in the -
extreme and remotest parts of their islands, all communication by
Jand and sea between them became difficult: a voyage from the
coast of Scotland to Britany must have been even more tedious
and formidable than one would now be from the same to the West
Indies. ‘The natural consequence of this insulation of the different
Bnitish tribes was also a progressive change in the respective die-
lects: local and political secession will always produce the same
effect ; and though it is but a few years since the establishment of
the independence of the United States, yet they have already adopted
many particular and local terms, which are not used in this country.
The Greek dialects and the Scottish of Burns are in reality but so
many incipient languages. Spanish and Portuguese, however,
afford the fullest illustration of my remark. When the Moors con-
quered the Peninsula in the beginning of the eighth century, it had
but one language, which probably continued the same, with some
Moorish corruptions, till the foundation of the Portuguese mo-
narchy, by Count Henry, in 1112. Here political separation was
Immediately productive of a revolution in speech. Provincialisms
at first exist ; and national pride, wishing to be as independent iu
tongue as in dominion, polishes them, increases the native idioms,
borrows from others ; and if a few good writers are produced, they
form a standard, and a new language is imperceptibly created.
. From this period of Saxon ascendancy, the Cornish may there-
fore be-said to have existed as a language of itself ; and according
Language of Cornwall. 441
to this theory, the Gaelic, the Irish, the Welsh, and the Armorican;
are of the same date. And happy had it been for the Britons of
those disastrous times, if the dismemberment of their country had
not been attended with more lamentable consequences! Of the
languages which thus arose, | am induced, on many accounts, to
believe that the Welsh is the purest, or approaches nearest to the
ancient Celtic ; and also that the Cornish is the most tinctured
with foreign idioms. Wales was an extensive and nearly maccessi-
ble principality ; its coasts had little to allure the intercourse of the
fereign merchant, and a-succession of bards and other writers,
together with the service of the church performed in its national
tongue, without interruption, have stamped a durability upon it,
which cannot be claimed for any of the other British dialects. None
of these causes operated in favor of the Cornish. ‘Its tm early
attracted’ the Phoenicians and the Greeks to its shores ; and there
#8 also conclusive evidence, that the mines were warked by the
Romans for some centuries. When Galgacus tells his soldiers, in
Tacitus’s Life of Agricola, that if they were conquered, the Romans
would compel them to labor in the mines, it was probably with
reference to those Cornish mines which were then in their posses-
sion. Cornwall has also produced few or no bards to record the
achievements of its ancient heroes ; and though its saints have been
numerous, it is te tradition, and not to any legends in Cornish, that |
we are to apply for any account of their holy lives and conversa-
tion. It does not appear that the Scriptures were ever translated
in it, and it had ceased to be used in the churches long: before its
extinction. All this sufficiently accounts for the fluctuation and
eorruption of the Cornish beyond any of its sister dialects; and
that, while some of these latter are still spoken, and even florish,
the former is unequivocally dead.
Such then appears to have been the origin of Cornish as a distinct
fanguage ; and in the next place, it may not be difficult to assign the
period when it was spoken in its greatest purity. History and
tradition mention Tintagel Castle, in Cornwall as the birth-place
of Arthur; and at the distance of a few miles, a place called
Slaughter Bridge is- still shown as where be received his mortal
wound. ‘Though much may be exaggerated, yet it is impossible
442 On the Ancient British
that the whole of the history of that hero should be false. ἢ would
therefore conjecture, that the age of Arthur was the most florishing
era of the Cornish tongue. 1 say conjecture, since the oldest MS.
remaining in it, is of the eleventh century, when, through the lapee
of ages, wud the political revolutions which had subsequently hap-
pened, it must have already much degenerated from that which was
spoken dunng the chivalrous reign of Arthur.
On a refereuce to the history, the divisions of territory, and the
encroachments of the Saxons in those times, I am inclined to think
that Cornish, since it became a separate language, was never
spoken to the eastward of the river Exe. The conquest of Cor-
wall by Athelstan, in the tenth century, forms a remarkable epoch
in its history. That prince, having overrun the two western coun-
ties, terminated his campaigns by a successful expedition to the
Scilly Islands. It is to his arrangements that we owe the modem
boundary of Cornwall, as he is said to have confined the Britons
to the west of the river Tamar. It is remarkable, that few or no
Cornish proper names are to be found on the eastern side of that
river ; which leads to the inference, that Athelstan adopted some
thing like the cruel modern system of driving," with respect to the
old inhabitants, who, that they might leave the country open for
Saxon colonies, were thus forced to retire into Cornwall, and
thence partly to emigrate. If it had not been so, why should not
the hills and valleys of Devon have retained their ancient names,
as well as those of Cornwall, since the substitution of the English
language? This latter county has indeed retained nothing of its
former dialect, but those very proper names.
The Commish language does not seem to have materially suffered
from the Norman conquest ; the leading feature of which was
rather to effect a change of proprietors, than to introdice any
foreign colonies. On the contrary, the commerce and customs
of a few Norman adventurers would soon assimilate to those of the
country where they had been transplanted.
The Cornish people, however, being thus politically united to
the English, their language must have now gradually declined.
* The driving of the inhabitants, as happened during the recent invasion
of Portugal by Massena, and the expedition of Napoleon to Moscow.
ι
Language of Cornwall. 443
The gentry would, from interest and loyalty, become Anglicised as
much. as lay in their power; and the language. of the country being
thus confined to the common people, would not only be unculti-
vated, but ‘proportionally degenerate. ‘This 1s the certain fore-
runner. of the extinction of any language : thus it was when the seat
of empire was removed to Constantinople, till Latin became that
barbarous mass of sounds from which the modern languages have
emerged; and thus at this moment English is insensibly gaining
ground on Welch. In some parts of Monmouthshire, where. it
was spoken within the memory of man, it is no longer understood.
It is so in Cornwall :—nothing remains in those counties but the
proper names; and in some parts of the principality, it 15 thought
Ὁ part of gentility in many families not to allow children to learn
the vernacular tongue. ᾿
- hese causes combined to confine ‘the Cornish within narrower
limits, and to corrupt ‘it more and more in every succeeding
generation. Hence it is not .surprising, that under disadvantages
like these, it should have produced no writers of any note. The
oldest Ms. in it is a Vocabulary of the eleventh century, which
4uas discovered in the Cottonian library ; and as it could not have yet
been materially corrupted, it may be esteemed as the most valuable
remaining. The next in point of antiquity is supposed, from in-
ternal evidence, to belong to the fifteenth century: it is in verse,
and contains some Ordinals, or rude sacred plays.
It is probable, that from this time till the Reformation it gra-
dually declined, when it received a shock from. which its extinction
became inevitable. Instead of acquiring a translation of the Scrip-
tures, like the Welch, the Cornish churches were ordered to use
the English bible and liturgy. Whatever might have been its
injustice or inhumanity towards the existing generation, there can
be no doubt that this order was effectual towards the extension of
English, and that it was politic towards the union and consolidation
of the empire. Subsequent to this period, we have another Ms. of
an Interlude on the Creation of the World and the Deluge, by
William Jordan, of Helston, in 1611. This is the most recent
Cornish book that I know extant.
The rapid declension of Cornish begins from about the middle
‘of the sixteenth century. If the following fact can be relied upon,
446 On the Ancient British ;
it is obvious that it had been till then the established vehicle of
communication. Dr. Moreman, then vicar of Menhinict, near
Liskeard, taught the inhabitants of his parish the Losd’s Prayes,
the Creed, and the Ten Commandments, in English ;:and he lived
about the latter end of the reign of Henry VILL. If therefore this
vicar was obliged to teach in English such common things to his
parishioners, Cornish must have prevailed among them at that time.
And as the English language in its progress travelled from east to
west, it could not have then penetrated far, as Menhiniot is im the
eastern division of the county. But in the sixty years since that
time till William Jordan, the declension must have been rapid
indeed. His Ms. cannot be considered as classical, when we
advert to the growing ascendancy of the English language,’ and
that the speaking of Cornish was confined to the lower orders.
If he wrote it as it was then spoken, it must be very corrupt; or
if he did not, he must have had recourse to the more correct, but
then extinct, diction of former ages. I am led to this inferenee
by the assertion of Mr. Carew, who published his Survey of
Cornwall in 1602, and by Norden’s History m 1610, both previous
to the composition of Jordan’s Ordinal, who concurred in repre
senting the Cornish as then confined to the western hundreds, and
in danger of being soon utterly abandoned. Even these wratess
avere not well acquainted with that language, :f we may form am
opinion from some incorrect derivations.
From this time, the history of the Cornish is that of its final
extinction. Dr. Borlase has, however, preserved a few facts
relative to it—such as that in 1640, Mr. William Jackman, the
* Carew, who published his Survey of Cornwall in 1602, from the inae-
curacy of several of his derivations, seems to have known but little of the
language. The following passage is characteristic of its declension. ‘ The
principal love and knowledge of this language liveth in Dr. Kennall, the
civilian, and with him lyieth buried; for the English speech doth still
encroach upon it, and hath driven the same into the uttermost skirts of the
shire. Most of the inhabitants can speak no. word of Cornish ; but few are
ignorant of the English: and yet some so affect their own, as to a stranger
they will not speak it: for if meeting them by chance, you inquire the way
er any such matter, your answer shall be, ‘ Meca na vidua conse sausack’—
“1 can speak no Saxonage.” Survey of Cornwall, p. 60.
Language of. Cornwall. 445
chaplain of Pendennis Castle,’ administered the sacrament’ in
Cornish in the neighbouring parish of Pheoch, because the old
people. were not sufficiently acquainted ‘with English. When
Mr. Ray visited Cornwall in 1662, he found. but one person who
could write in it; and that, as few of the children could speak
Cornish, it would soon-be lost.t. A little later, however, a Cornish
germon was preached, in 1678, by a Mr. Robinson, at Landewed-
nach, vear the Lizard. Ip 1700 it was still spoken by the fisher-
men and tinvers of Paul and St. Just. The last authentic account
we have of the living Commish is in a letter of the 10th of March,
1701, from Mr. Lhwyd, who compiled a Cornish Grammar,” to
his friend Mr. Tonkin, in which he says, that it was then retained
in only five or six villages near the Land’s End. Mr. Lhwyd’s
authority as an archeologian stands so high that it cangot be con-
troverted ; but though an impure Cornish might still have been
spoken for some few years. longer, his visit in Cornwall may be
reckoned as the period of the extinction of that language. The
claims of the noted Dolly Pentreath, and the other scattered notices
about it, appear to be so very equivocal, as to require a separate
examination. .
It is evident from this hasty historical sketch, that the Cornish
is very ancient, and that it loses itself in the barbarous ages which
preceded the era of chivalry and romance. Several of the proper
names convey to us a memorial of the Druid superstition, and are
probably much older than the birth of Christ. Hence, when we
contemplate some of the wild and romantic scenery of Cornwall,
the mind is filled with awe in reflecting that some thousand years
ago it made the same impression on our less favored ancestors,
and that, notwithstanding various revolutions, religious as well as
(tlt LT
_® According to his Itineraries, which have been published by Mr. Scott,
¥:A.S., “ Mr. Dicken Gwyn was considered as the only person who could
then write in the Cornish language; and who lived in one of the most
western parishes, called St. Just, where there were few but what could .
speak English, while none of the children could speak Cornish ; so that the
language would soon be lost.” Ray’s Itinerary, p. 281.
. 3 Archeologia Brit. p. #25.._—The Preface, p..€22, seems intended for
Cornish. Ep. |
VOL. XVIL. Cl, Jl. NO. XXXIV. ᾳ ἃ
446 Orn the Ancient: British ©
political, the names, which they then gave it as expressive of their
feelings, have remained as immutable as the base .of those clifis;
which seem to have been providentially placed as a barrier sgamst
the fury of the Atlantic.
This rapid sketch must be considered as introductory -to ‘my.
following letters, in which I shall discuss some peculiarities of the
Cornish idiom, and of its affinities, immediate as well as remote,
with other languages. You will excuse the above historical details,
as several parts of my subsequent theory are founded upon them,
and without such an explanation would not have been -easily un-
derstood. I hope, also, that it will have taken something from the
dryness inseparable from philological topics.
LETTER II.
PHENICIAN, WELSH, ARMORIC.
Tue languages, which are considered as more immediately con-
nected with the Cornish, are the Welsh and Armoric, or Bas Bre- .
ton. It is not however my intention to enter here fully into the
mutual affinities of the three, or to explain what are the various
peculiarities of terms, grammar, or idiom, which have stamped on
each its essential differences. Little is known about the Armoric
in this country, though it is commonly said, that the Welsh and
the Bas Bretons can converse together. ‘There are some instances
of the kind mentioned in the histories of Cornwall; but as‘ they
rest on the testimony of illiterate persons," there remains much
doubt upon my mind. Contrary to this; Mr. Scawen has told us
in Borlase, (Nat. History, p. 318.) that “ the radicals are so much
* A sailor from Mount’s Bay, in 1746, by Captain, afterwards Admiral,
Barrington ; and another, a smuggler from Mouse-hole, who was met by Dr.
Pryce in 1790, and who had conversed with the Bas Bretons, at’ Morlaix, in
1730.—Hitchin’s Hist. of Corn. Vol. I. pp. 225 and 230.-7 | ΝΕ
We have met with emigrant naval officers from Britany, who perfectly
understood almost all the Welsh words, The difference consisted: in the
infiections. Ep. -- :
‘Language of Cornwall. 447
alike in all, that they are known and admitted by the inhabitants of
either country; but their grammar has so varied, that they cannot
converse :” and [ am inclined to believe him, from the Armoric
specimens that Ihave seen. It is nevertheless easy to reconcile
these contradictions, though he says they cannot-converse, which
merely implies, that the languages are different, but by no means
that the natives of both countries might not understand each other; ~
which indeed generally happens, when the languages are radically
the same, as when a Spaniard is not at a loss to know the meaning
of an Italian.
If I am not mistaken, some part of the Church service’ is per«
formed in Armoric, (at least it was so before the Revolution,)
which obliged the priests tu be conversant in it, as well as in
Freuch. I must however candidly own, that 1 am ignorant whe-
ther there are any literary remains in that dialect, or on what subjects.
Yet I should suppose, that, like the Cornish, it has never been
much.cultivated, and that it is not more copious, but is merely
limited to express the wants of a rude agricultural people.
_ Hence among these dialects, the Welsh undoubtedly elarms the
pre-eminence. It is spoken over a larger extent of country, and
having been adopted for the language of poetry, and consecrated to
the service of religion, in a trauslation.of the Scriptures, it has sur
vived to this day. The fragments of Welsh poetry still remind the
patriotic inhabitants of the glories of heroes born in better years, and
of that minstrelsy which has so often excited posterity te emulate
the achievements of departed valor ; but in Cornwall, no such causes
have operated to keep the language alive. This latter country lost
its independence early, the fame of its warriors was either forgotten,
or else no bards arose to sing of them, except in other tongues ;
and thus the want of a native literature accelerated its extinction.
The Cornish is described by Mr. Scawen, a high authority on
this question, as “ elegant and manly, pure, short, and expressive.”
I also readily agree with him, that it is not so guttural as the
Welsh, or rather, that it is very μια, if δὲ all, guttural; and that
* Sermons are probably still preached in Bas-Breton; but in a Romam
Catholic country they are not integral parts.of the service. Ep.
448 On the Ancient British
notwithstanding our defective pronunciation it is far from being
inharmonious. But I must disagree with his assertion, that “ it
is a tongue, as used in Cornwall, most like the Phenician.”* This
seems to rest on no better grounds, than that Cornwall was an-
ciently visited by Phenician traders to purchase tio; but it is not
credible that so limited an intercourse would have had such a de-
cided influence on the vernacular tongue. If this were to be
proved, it should be done by a collation of the two languages, and
by producing a number of radical words, common to both ; but tll
this is the case, it is but fair to refuse assent to a merely specula-
tive and improbable theory.
Mr. Polwhele, in his History of Cornwall, speaks of the “ great
affinity of the Welsh with the Phenician.”* He produces two
quotations, which apparently establish this; but as he owns that
they are copied from one of the Bath Guides, you will allow, that
I ought to have a more unexceptionable authority, before I can
give it my assent. .
But to whatever cause this comparative softness of the Cornish
may be attributed, it certainly appears more pleasing than the
Welsh, as far as sounds are concerned. This will be evident on the
slightest glance at the structure of the words in both; and even
now the pronunciation of the proper names in Cornwall becomes
familiar by practice, and is much less offensive to the ear than many
of English derivation.
Dr. Pryce, M.D. of Redruth, in Comwall, published an Essay
on the Cornish Language about 25 years ago. It is not my ins
tention to enter largely into the merits of his work, though I can-
not pass unnoticed a passage of his preface. ‘‘ The Chaldean,
Syriac, Egyptian, Arabic, Phenician, Celtic, Gaulish, Welsh, and
Cornish languages, are all derived from the Hebrew tongue ; and
in their descent one from the other, in travelling from the east to
the west, they have branched themselves into 80 many dialects,
from one and the same root.” It is indeed evident, that some of
the above are derived from each other ; but it is a stretch of inge«
. , . nentutnennteanenannen, °
* Borlase’s Nat. History of Cornwall, p. $14.
* Polwhele’s History of Cornwall, Vol IIL. p. 46.
Language of Cornwall. — 449
nuity to assert that the Cornish is mediately descended from the
Hebrew ; for, as 1 will show hereafter, the roots common to both
are too few in number to lead to any such conclusion. It is pos-
sible that Hebrew was the primitive language of mankiud, though’
I must own that I have my doubts whether it had any existence
before the Israelites grew into a separate people. Chaldee is so much
like it, that it seems to be no more than a dialect of the same tongue,
and this with Phenician and Coptic, were probably more ancient.-
This does not necessarily mean any more than that the language was
changed, though many of the ancient roots might have still remained
common to them all. As believers in the Mosaic account, we may
admit that these languages may be traced to the general confusion
at Babel ; and thus have a satisfactory reason why a few Hebrew
words may still retain the same meanings in the Celtic and its dia-
lects. Without this, I do not apprehend it to be possible to re-.
concile the striking similarities which often occur in the languages
of nations, who have either never had any ‘intercourse with each.
other, or, if they have, it has been in ages too remote either for
history or tradition. This is not, however, applicable to those’
Janguages, which are indebted for their origin to natural causes,
such as the lapse of time, the national tasté, political changes, and
the progress of foreign commerce; so that the systematic disguise
of words, and the deviations of grammar, may be traced in almost
every page, as between the Hebrew and Syriac; the Greek and
the Romaic; ‘the Latin and the Italian. These latter are now |
spoken, yet they may hereafter vanish from the living catalogue,
aod make room for descendants, which are not yet in existence.
Much has been written about the trade of the Phenicians in
Britain: I am willing to believe, that those mercantile adventurers
resorted to our shores; but so few monuments of them remain,
that it is not likely that they ever formed there any considerable
establishment, or carried on more than a desultory trade in tin.
Even the cessation of that trade must have happened early, and
cannot be of a later era than the fall of Carthage. It is therefore
not probable that such trausient visitors should have left any im--
pression on the language of the natives, when scarcely a vestige
can be discovered to prove that they had any settlement in the
country. The barrow, the deserted entrenchment, and the ruined
450 On the Ancient British
castle, generally survive, when the language of their founders has,
like them, ceased to exist. Hence it is as preposterous for Mr.
Scawen to attribute the comparative softness of the Cornish to ἃ
Phenician intercourse, as it would be for a modern traveller to
imagine that the English factory had operated a certain revolution
in the Chinese language at Cantos.
Like all other foreigners who visit any country, the Phenicians
may have left some traces of their language in Cornwall; and per-
aps even more than is to be found in the Cornish that was spoken
at a mure recent period. But I must own my scepticism, when
I read, that there was a Phenician colony at Hartland point, on
the British Channel, a most inconvenient station for those early
navigators; or that the Start ts still a memorial of their goddess
Astarte. Tle same may be said of the Phenician etymology of
Hamoaze, and a few others.
Pen means an eminence in Cornish,’ and is usually applied in
proper names to that part of the hill, which is near the brow of its
declivity. I think that this is very likely to be derived from the
Phenician pinnah, which signifies the same. - To this authority of
Mr. Polwhele in his Historical Views of Devon, (p. 172.) it may
be added that it comes from the Hebrew 139 he saw, and that the
same idea of a hill is preserved in the classical oxomsd and specula ;
and in some measure also in the modern, vista, vue, view. If any
remains of the Phenician are to be found in any part of Europe,
it is in the Spanish Peninsula; and accordingly pena and penedo
in Spanish, and penta and penedo iu Portuguese, mean a rock or
rocky hill. It is a negative proof of this derivation, that the word
is not used in Greek, Latin,* Italian, or French; but Venedh, a
mountain, occurs in Borlase’s Vocabulary.
- The well-known word fre, a house or village, is also said to be
originally Phenician from tira, a castle.” This is probably the same
as the Hebrew “AX a rock, and is also the name of Tyre, and well
agrees with the locality of its rocky situation. How far this
may be the origin of the Comish tre, I know not, though I confess
that it is not improbably Phenician. If. that people ever had any
‘ * In Welsh it is head. Eb.
? May not the Apennines have the νότος ongal Bx.
τς Language of Cornwall. =: 401
facturies in Britain, the name of ‘tira, might have been. very pro-
τ perly given to places suited for habitation and defence; an idea
which is now applied tu a fort in’ the interior of America. The
natives might: probably imitate: the Phenician buildings, aud give
them the same name, which in process of time would lose its first
meaning of a castle, when applied to the residence of a peaceful
husbandman. ‘This is conjecture; for it is better in etymological
. difficulties to acknowledge them, than to risk any of. those fanciful
suppositions, which only expose their author to ridicule. . It 1s
therefore with this reserve, that I adopt the derivation of -tre from
tira. If it is correct, the word must have been singularly corrupt
ed from its primary signification; as at present, though Tregony is
an exception to this, it denotes single houses in .the country, and
sometimes villages ; but in all cases it is without any reference to
. their local situation. |
It is not only true, that the Phenician remains.in Cornish are
few, but they become still fewer by the imperfect acquaimtance we
-have with the former, and by the scanty fragments which have been
handed down to us of the latter. It is, therefore, possible that
- there may be many Phenician derivatives, now so disguised m their
. meanings and orthography, 88 to be no longer discoverable. In
such a scarcity of materials, it is better-to close this examination
of the two languages; though some more fortunate: scholar. may
hereafter be possessed of such superior documents, as may evable
. him to prosecute the analogy with success.
Mr. Scawen’s opivion, that the comparative sweetness of Cor-
- mish above that of the other Celtic dialects is owing to its Phemi-
cian mixture, is very doubtful.. It would .be far more rational to
account for it on the supposition, that languages in the progress
of. their derivation from the same source, assume, from natural
though perhaps unknown -causes, their peculiar characteristics of
smoothness or roughness, poverty or copiousness. Thus, cultiva-
tion has reudered the German more copious, and less disagreeable.
The Syriac, Arabic, and Persian, though related to the Hebrew,
have in the course of ages acquired very different degrees of
smoothness. The provimciahsms οὐ the Latin; exclusive of any
external cause, have thus grown and been modified into the pecu-
liarities of the modern languages. It is to this alone that we are
452 On the Ancient British Language, §c.
indebted for the volubility of the French, the feminine softness of
the Italian, the austere gravity of the Spanish, and the nasal sound
which continually distinguishes the Portuguese.
The Punic was a dialect of the Phenician, and some remains of
it may possibly be concealed in the Cornish. There is part of a
scene in it in the Poenulus of Plautus, (act v. scene 1.) which
has often unauccessfully employed the ingenuity of critics. I have
no doubt that it is very corrupt, as might be expected, after having
passed for more than 2000 years through the.hands of editors who
knew nothing of Punic. [t is remarkable that several Latin words
are scattered in it, and that in the middle, the followmg come to-
gether :
Misti Atticum esse,
Concubitum a bello cutim beant. _ |
I think that all these were originally Punic words, which, from
their resemblance to Latinity, were thus ridiculously metamorphosed,
as we shall hereafter see m the Anglicised names of Camel, Lizard,
and Port Isaac. I find init the Comish words cuth, old, and éen, a
man; and chym lach is exactly like the idiomatic Hebrew phrase
72 DY," Arise, go; the classical Bacx’, is, and Vade, age: but
I know not that the Punic bas the Hebraic meaning. Might not,
however, these resemblances be accidental, and the whole be a
mere gibberish of Punic and Latin, thrown together by Plautus in
one of his sportive moments? But this is conjecture; I confess myself
unable to understand that fragment ; and if it is ever understood, it
must be by a patient collation of it, with the modern languages of
the coast of Barbary, and with the vulgar Arabic, which is still
spoken at Malta; nor would I have even mentioned it, were it not
to observe, how little affinity I could discover on comparing it with
the Cornish Vocabulary.
P.S. In my next letters, I shall consider the subject as con-
nected with the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English, French, and other
languages, with Orthography, the Digamma, compound words ;
then proceed to other historical and philological Particulars on the
Cornish Dialect. .
"1 Sam. 1x. S. Jonah, 1. 4.; and passim. Hom. 1]. 11. 8.; and Vieg,
EN. Tv, 228.
~
, 453
.
nn
ADVERSARIA LITERARIA.
No. XVII.
_FABULARUM UTILITAS.
Carmen in Acad. Paris pramio dignatum.
Now siné consilio vite documenta beate
Uuhia inclusit figmento docta vetustas.
Nos quippe-illecebris captandos esse sciebat,
Et ridere magis ficta sub imagine verum.
[lla voluptates perituraque gaudia mundi
Effugienda monet, dum nobis improba narrat
Carmina Sirenum, malefidaque pocula Circes.
Nam prope Surrentum, maguo si credis Homero,
Tyrrheno fluctu qua tunditur insula, sedem
Sirenes posuere, vagis mala dulcia nautis :
Quos simul insidiis forme et modulamine vocis
Allectos, traberent per saxa infamia mille
Naufragiis, scopulosque humanis ossibus albos.
Has impune tamen, defensus munere cere,
Oras preterit, Sirenum victor, Ulysses.
ες _Eminet haud procul bine (est idem testis Homerusy
Insula quam tenuit Circe, Circe improba Solis
Progenies, Circe metuenda potentibns herbis.
Si qua procella furens, si quod male numen amicum
Ferret inexpertos infesta ad httora nautas, '
Hospitibus magicos dabat, hospita barbara, succos.
(Quum dira incautis hausissent pocula labris:
Heu prave allecti comites prudentis Ulyssei,
Sumserunt varias, animantia vilia, formas.
Hic referens ursum, rugit ferus ore cruento ;
Ile, lupi ritu mittit longos ululatus : ΝΣ
Alter et immundi grunnit sub imagine porci.
Suspéctos latices et perfida munera solus,
Artes arte domans, cavit Laertius heros. .
Si leve decutias, tegitur quo fabula, velum,
Austera hic precepta latent sub cortice blando ;
Et Flaccus merito cecinisse videtur: “ Homerus ἢ
Grandibus in scriptis, quid turpe, quid utile, quid non,
Plenius ac melius Chrysippo et Crantore dixit.” |
Ν _ M. BIGNAN.
454 A dversaria Leteraria. |
_ Invidi Supplicium.
Quon pas felicem conspexerat invidus : Orcum
Ecce, velut rapido fulmine tactus, adit.
Tnfera pallents completur curia.costu ;
Sisutur ille sacros judicis ante pedes.
Fatalem dextra Minos jam concutit ummam,
Supplicia exquirens crimine digna gravi.
An Jabra precipiti fugiet liquor arida lapsu ?
Contiguam an fallent poma repente manum ?
An saxum inimane ad montis fastigia trudet?
Volventurne cita pendula membra yota ἢ
Imo renascentes eterno vuluere Hbras
Et rediviva ferox viscera vultur edat !
“Non ita: muluplicem vario pro crimine poenam
Inveni,” Stygius tunc dominator ait.
“« Infernas ergo sedes, mea regna, relinquat
Atque iterum ad superos protrahat iste diem.
Cordaque, cernenti felices undique, tundat
Vulture Tartareo ssvior invidia.”
Enigma.
Nocti invisa, mese genitricis funere nascor :
Corda secat forceps; me vorat ignis edax.
Danaé, ex Simonide.
Acaristus Danaén, post aurea furta Tonantis,
Jusserat invisa cum prole furentibus undis
Immiti, in syrtes horrendaque saxa ferendam.
Arcam igitur ferro solidam et compagibus arctis
Meesta subit Danaé, parvumque sub ubere natum
Ipsa tenens, ponto objicitur rapienda minaci.
Jam fluitans tremulo tranquilla per equora motu,
Hinc illinc ventis fertur ratis: et modo dextra
Parte micat surgens, modo levam ostendit; at intus
Ambo infelices jactantur carcere duro. :
At postquam magno cum murmure turbidus auster
Insonuit, motis et fluctibus zquora late
Intumuere, genas lacrynus pertusa, necemque
‘Non sibi sed nato metuens, premit anxia mater
Filioluus ad pectus, mullique sopore jacentem
, Talibus alloquitur : “ Quantos ego, nate, dolores
᾿ Sustineo, vexata omai in discrimine vite,
Filiaque infelix, matrumque misercuma water \
_ LG.
Adversaria Literaria. ᾿ 455
Tnterea irato securus in equore dormis,
Nec curas vasto reboantes gurgite Huctus,
Nec conjuratum coeli pelagique {urorem :
Dorms purpureo tectus velamine ; dormis
Pulchra reclinatus materno in pectore colla:
Ab! si tantorum non esses ipse malorum
Nescius, hunc forsan lenires, nate, dolorem ;
Flensque simul, lacrymisque rigans puerilibus ora,
Preeberes misere solamina dulcia matri.
At potius molli, proles carissima, somno
Perge trui: pariter sopitis dormiat equor
Fluctibus, et teneant hostilia flamina venti.
Tuque mez genitor sobolis, tu Perseos ayctor
Jupiter, hos luctus, hoc lamentabile fatum
Verte, precor: vel, si temeraria vota videntur,
~ Ob natum insontem miserande ignosce parenti.” fF. Al.
Schotiastes in Plutum Aristophanis (vs. I.) emendatur.
᾿Ακαυδᾷ δὲ οὐ διὰ τὴν MAXHN, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ ἐπαχθὲς τῶν δεσποτῶν.}
“ Ante legebatur nullo sensu μάχην" emendationem [τύχην] ἃ L.
Kustero comprobatam adoptavi. Τύχην conditianem, sortem servi-
lem vocat: ut ad v. Ql. οὐδὲ μὴν δούλοις ὀνειδίζουσα τὸ τῆς τύχης
ὑποδεές. Τύχαι παρ᾽ * Ἑλλησιν, inquit Schol. Eurip. ad Hec. ν. 865.
καὶ αἱ ταπειναὶ τάξεις τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ ὑποτεταγμέναι, καὶ αἱ ὑψηλαὶ καὶ
᾿ ἐκικρατοῦσαι- ubi, quas dudum pro πράξεις reposueram, τάξεις Clare
eontirmat Cod. D’O. Diosogenes apud Stob. Παντοδαποὶ Bios καὶ
ὕχαι ἀνθρώπων" ᾿Γύχην inter alia Suidas interpretatur ἐπιτήδευμα."
EMSTERHUSIUS. Τύχην lectio, quam comprobavit Kusterus,
est ex conjectura J. C. Pauwii, sensui potius quam ductui lite-
rarum morem gerentis. Lege, una tantum litera commutata,
AAXHN. Ceterum confuse sunt voces τυχεῖν et λαχεῖν in Soph.
Antig. 699. ubi vide Brunckium, ut et ad Electr. 364. In Antig.
987. δίκη impressorum est, codicum omaium τύχη. N. A.
Remarks on a Passage in Stobaus.
Tue following passage in Stobzus ἘΠ]. I. 52. p. 296. ed. Heeren,
must be very obscure to readers unacquainted with the philosophy
of Plato; and the obscurity of it is greatly mcreased by the m-
correctness of one word, the emendation of which will restore tt to
its true meaning.
Oi μὲν γὰρ εὐθὺς τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτῷ τῷ σώματι τῷ ὀργανικῷ συνοι- '
κίζουσιν, ὥσπερ οἱ πλείστοι τῶν Πλατωνικῶν' οἱ δὲ μεταξὺ τῆς τε ἀσωμά-
του ψυχῆς, καὶ τῆς ἀγγελιώδους αἰθέρια “καὶ οὐράνια καὶ xveugatine
Ἃ
456 Adversaria Literaria.
περιβλήματα, mpans core τὴν νοερὰν ζωὴν, προβεβλῆσθαι μὲν ᾿αὐτῆς
φρουρᾶς tvexey [λέγουσι], ὑπηρετεῖν δὲ αὐτῇ καθάπερ ὀχήματα, συμμέτρως
δ αὖ καὶ πρὸς B στερεὸν σῶμαι συμβιβάζειν μέσοις τισὶ κοινοῖς -
μοις αὐτὴν συνάπτοντα.
This ;us-age in its present state is unintelligible, owing to the
word ἀγγελιώδους ; but if ὀστροώδους is substituted for it, -the true
meaning of the whole will be according to the following transla-
tion: ‘Some immediately conjoin the soul to the organic body,
as most of the Platonists. But others say, that between the in-
corporeal soul, and the testaceous body, ethereal, celestial, and pneu-
matic garments circularly invest the intellectual: life, and surround
it as aguard. They add, that these vestments are subservient to the
incorporeal soul as vehicles; and that they are commensurately
adapted to the solid body, conjoining this soul to it, by certain
middle common bonds.” -
The term ὀστροώδης is very frequently used by Platonic writers
to denote the human body; and was originally derived by them
from the Phedrus of Plato, where speaking of the felicity of the
soul in a former life, when she was united to divinity, he says
“δα she was then liberated from this external body, to which we
are now bound like an oyster to its shell.” καὶ ἀσήμαντοι τούτου ὃ
viv δὴ σῶμαι περιφέροντες ὀνομάζομεν ὀστρέου τρόπον δεδεσμευμένοι.
By the immortal soul therefore in this passage, Porphyry means
the rational and intellectual part of our soul; and this, according to
the best of the Platonists, is united.to the testaceuus body by two
media, an etherial and a pneumatic vehicle, in the former of |
which the rational soul eternally resides, and in the latter she
suffers the punishment of her guilt.
THOMAS TAYLOR.
Classical Criticism.
It is observed by Mr. Blomfield (Gloss. Ausch. Theb. ad v. 965.)
that ἐν is to be there rendered simul ; and the same remark is made
by Professor Monk in his notes on the Electra of Sophocles (v.
713.) Some have hence concluded that the particle ἐν may by
some unaccountable transformation be changed, on occasion, into
an adverb, and used as ὁμοῦ might be, entirely losing its nature as ἃ
preposition. If these critics had expressed what I apprehend to
be their meaning with greater strictness and accuracy, that mistake,
which introduces an anomaly into the regular structure of the
Greek language, only to be paralleled by the antiptoses of the
scholiasts and grammarians, would not have arisen.
Mr. Blomfield refers (evidently with approbation) to Mr.
Elmsley’s note on the τὰ \we of the Haipas Tyrannus of |
Adversaria Literaria. 457
Sophocles, where this usage of ἐν is very rationally accounted for
from the explanation of Hesvchius. The words of the lexico-
grapher are. ᾿Εν δὲ, πρὸς τούτοις δὲ, ἐν αὐτοῖς δέ. and I am persuaded
that in all the passages where ἐν occurs in this signification, the
ellipse may be satisfactorily supplied in nearly the same way as in
the last of these expressions. In the C&dipus Tyrannus ν. 27. ἐν
“ wouross”” δ᾽ ὁ πυρφόρος θεὸς completes the sense, and so in the same:
play, v. 179. Qidip. Col. 55. supply ἐν ““ aéra” ‘Trach. 207. ἐν δὲ
“τούτοις τοῖς ὕμνοις, Or to the same effect. Ag. 675. ἐν δ᾽ ““ ἄλλοις
τοιούτοις." Viewing the verse cited by Mr. Blomfield (on sch.
‘Theb. 965.) as it stands detached, Kaxy piv ὄψις, ἐν δὲ δειλαῖαι φρένες,"
I would supply ἐν δὲ τῷ αὐτῷ σώματι, or something similar. ‘The
line from whence his remarks arise, ἐν δὲ καρδία στένει, seems to me
to correspond exactly to the expression in the Persz (1. 11.) ὀρσολο-
πεῖται θυμὸς “ ἔσωθεν.᾽ So also his quotation from Callimachus, ἐν δὲ
σὺ πολλή. ‘The passage stands thus (Callim. Hymn: in Dian. 138.)
"-- μέλοι δέ μοι αἰὲν ἀοιδὴ,
τῇ evs μὲν Λητοῦς γάμος ἔσσεται, ἐν δὲ σὺ πολλὴ,
dy δὲ καὶ ᾿Απόλλων---κ. τ΄. A.
and the particle ἐν, in each place where it is repeated, appears
manifestly to have the same government as ἔνι (in the second line),
that is, to signify ἐν τῇ ἀοιδῇ. |
The passage from [heocritus: (Idyl. 2. 67.) belongs to a class
of expressions frequently occurring in Herodotus ; as for instance;
(Erato cap. 11.) καὶ δή χού σφι καὶ ἄλλοι ἠγορόωντο, ἐν δὲ δὴ καὶ ὁ Φω-
καεὺς στράτηγὸς Διονύσιος x. τ. A. It may seem strange to translate
such phrases, “ many others, and among them, Dionysius,” because
Dionysius is meant to be distinguished’ particularly from those
others; but when we consider that the word ἄλλος 15 frequently
redundant, we shall find that even such a construction of the sen-
tence would not do much violence to the idiom of the Greek lan-
guage. Plato has (in Gorgia) ‘Ywb τῶν πολιτῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ξένων.
(See Mr. Elmsley’s note on the Cédipus ‘l'yrannus of Sophocles
1. 7.) But we may perhaps better understand in such instances as
that now under consideration, by δὲ τούτοις τοῖς λέγουσιν ; and so for
others of the same nature. There are yet two passages remaining
more difficult, | think, to explain than any that have been already
noticed. They are to be found in the 420th line of the Antigone
of Sophocles, ἐν-δ᾽ ἐμεστώθη μέγας Αἰθήρ᾽ and the 713th line of the
Electra of the same poet, ἐν δὲ πῶς ἐμεστώϑη δρόμος Κτύπου κροτητῶν
ἀρμάτων. Still though ἐν should here be allowed to have the sense
of “simul,” it might be resolved into ἐν δὲ τουτῷ τῷ ypdvw.' -
MUSCOLOGUS.
. ‘
* We wish our correspyndent to consider whether ἐν nay nut iu sume of
those instances be a part of a following verb, from which tt ts seqareted by
- tmesis; and whether there are not such verbs 08 lpyacsve WA lessee. “Eo,
"
458 Literary Intelligence.
MS. Note of Markland in the 2nd part of Toup on
Suidas. From the Burney Collection in the British
Museum.
"OR αὖ λόγος σοι τοῦ πρὶν εὐγενέστερος κὠκεῖνος ἦν ἄριστος. This
would have been an excelleut performance, had it been carried on
with the same judgment in all its parts as it is with skill in some.
His confidence, especially in conjecturing on passages of Scripture,
shows that he is but a young critic, as does likewise his speaking
so disobligingly of learned men, and so vauntingly of himself.
Time will correct all these things.”
Resemblance between Horace and Ferdusi.,
Horati Carm. I. i. 35.
Quod si me Lyricis vatibus inseris,
Sublimi feriam sidera vertice.
Compare with these lines, the following beautiful couplet of
Ferdusi, quoted by Sir William Jones, Persian Grammar, p. 45.
Ed. 1804.
πϑϑ yp SF Spt yd een
99 φὰν οἱδ.} ᾿Ξ = a
““If I could sleep one niglit on thy bosom, I should seem fo
touch the sky with my exalted head.” M
Literary Jntelligence.
LATELY PUBLISHED.
No. V. of Stephens’ Greek Thesaurus is just published.
Nos. I. to V. contain about 5000 words omitted by Stephens.
A few Copies belonging to deceased Subscribers may be had. at
1/, 3s. Small, and Ql. \Os. Large Paper. The prices will soon he
Literary Intelligence. — 459
raised to 12. 58. Small, and 2/. 125. 64. Large. The whole will
be completed in about 25 Parts. Total present Subscription,
large and small, 1085.
‘The Copies printed are -strictly limited to the number of Sub-
scribers. ᾿
A plan of the work may be-seen in No. X XV. of the Classical ὃ.
Journal, or may be had on application, or by letter post-paid, at ἡ
‘Tooke’s Court.
Any Subscriber not having yet received his Copy, must attribute
the delay, not to any inattention on the part of the Editors, but to
their not having been favored with any reference in London, where
the numbers might have beer sent on publication, and the Sub-
scription received. A line'addressed to Mr. Valpy, [Post paid],
ooke’s Court, London, shall receive immediate attention.
Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits de la Bibliotheque du Roi,
&c. T. 10. Paris. Imprimerie Royale. 1818. 4to. Premiére
partie, pagg. vit+ 492. Seconde partie, pp. 298.
is new volume of a very important collection contains Σ΄
1. Définitions: ouvrage du Séid Schérit Zéin-eddin Abou'lha-
san Ali; par M. Silv. de Sacy.—2. Livre de Calila et Dimma,
etc.; par le méme.—3. Le Parangon de la Science par le Vizir
Abou 'lfazl. etc.; par le méme.—4. L’Electuaire des Coeurs, tra-
duction Persanne du livre Indien intitulé Hitoupadésa ; par le
méme.—5. Notice sur les quatre Livres moraux attribués ἃ Confu-
clus; par M. AseLt-Remusat.—6, Adgition aux différentes no-
tices surles traductions des Fablesde Bidpai; par M. S. pr Sacy.
_——7. Notice de louvrage intitulé Liber de Dina et Kalila, etc. ;
par le méme.—8. Notice de trois MSS. Latins contenant les Let-
tres ἃ Etienne évéque de Tournai; par M. Briau.—g. Notice
des Lettres Inédites de Diogéne le Cynique, contenues dans les
MSS. 1353 et 398 du Vatican; par M. BoissoNnaADE. .
Psaumes nouvellemeut traduits sur l’Hébreu et mis dans leur
ordre naturel, avec des explications et des notes, etc. 3 vol. 8v0.
aris.
Banquet de Léontis; par Madame WyTTENBACH, néeG....
Paris, 1817. 1 vol. 1gmo. pagg. νἱῖ - 106.
The author is the wife of the celebrated professor Wyttenbach.
Einladungsschrift zu den auf den 11, 12, 13 und 16 Marz fest-
gesetzten QCiffentlichen Priifungen und Progressions feyeilichkei-
ten im Gynmasium zu Fraukfurt am Mayn; Von D. Fr. Chr.
Mattuiat, Professor und Director. Veberzwey stellen im
F&schylus und Horaz. &c. Frankf 1818. 4°. pagg. 20.
.Mémoires Historiques et Géographiques sur |’Arménie, suivis
du texte Arménien des princes Orpélians, par Etienne Orpélian,
et de celui des Géographies attributes ἃ Moyse dc Khoren & wo
460 Literary Intelligence.
Docteur Vartan, etc.; le tout accompagné d’une traduction
Frangaise et de notes par M. J. Saint Martin. Paris. T. 1.
in 85. pagy. xii +450.
. Joachima Lelewela Pisma Pomniéjsze Geograficzno-Histo-
ryczné. 1. Historja Geografji. 2. Wiadomosé Historycsna, ὁ
Starozytnych Miarach Diugoséi. 3. Wiadomosé o Narodach, az
do Wieku Dziesiatego we Wnetrzu Europy Bedacych. 4. Sto-
sunki Handlowé Fenicjan, Potém Karthagow z Grekami. 5.
Opis Skythji Herodota. W Warsawie. 1814.
| Historyka ‘Tudziez o Latwem i pozytecznem Nauczaniu His
torsi; przez Joacn. LELgeweta. W Wilnie. 1815. .
Συλλογὴ ᾿Ἑλληνικῶν ἀνεχδότων x. τ. A. σπουδῇ ᾿Ανδρ. Μουστοξύδευ
καὶ Ane. Σχινᾶ. Τετράδιον ε. ᾿Εν Βενετίᾳ, 1816. 8°. This num-
ber contains ᾿Ολυμπιοδώρου Σχόλια εἰς Φαίδωνα, ᾿Αγωνύμου σχόλια εἰς
τὸν αὐτὸν διάλογον, and Παράφρασις εἰς τὰ Κυνηγετικὰ τοῦ ᾿Οπειανοῦ.
[We expect the sixth number, which will be the last.]
Traités d’'Hippocrate du Régime dansles Maladies Aigiies ; des
Airs, des Eaux et des Lieux, avec le texte Grec, les variantes, etc.
etc.; par M. le Chev. de Mercy. Pans, 12°. 1818. pagg.
Ix +681. :
La Luciade ou |’Ane de Lucius de Patras; avec le texte Grec
revu sur plusieurs maopuscrits. Paris. 12mo. 1818. pagy.
xxn +321. (The editor and translator is said to be M. Cour-
RIER.)
Ὁμήρου ᾿Ιλιὰς, παραφρασϑεῖσα καὶ ὁμοιοκαταλήχτως στιχουργήθεϊῖσα,
μετὰ προσθήκης ἀναγκαίωνρκαὶ ἐπκωφελῶν ὑποσημειώσεων, x. τ. A. παρὰ
Γεωργίου ἱΡουσιάδου τοῦ ἐκ Κοζάνης. ᾿Εν Βιέννῃ, 1817. 8°. 11. 1, 2,
εἰ 8.
Meletemata e Disciplina Antiquitatis; opera Εμτῦ. ὕπευζ-
ERI. Pars altera. Lips. 1817. Contents: 1. De Corinna et
Erinna poetriis commentatus est Frid. Theoph. Welker. 2. Lectt.
Plutarchearum Specimen scripsit G. H. Moser. 3. Varte
ΡΣ et Observationes in Aristotelis Ethic: ad Nicom. I. scripsit -
. Zell. ᾿
Μ. Acci Plauti Captivi, ad Metrice legis normam recensita
et observationibus aucta, quam pro specimine academico publico
examini submittit J. Bosscha, (preceptor schole Amstelodamensis.)
‘Fraj. ad Rhen. et Amstelod. 1817. 8° pagg. xv1+ 234.
mongst the annexed dheses we have distinguished particularly
the following : “ Woltio V. Cl. contendenti, apud Horat. 1. O. 1,
29. pro me legendum esse fe, nos quidem minime assentimur.—
Falsa sunt que de tormentis narrantur quibus necatus tuerit Regu-
lus.—Falluntur qui terre motum, quo eversa sunt fundamenta
Hierosolyma, quum eam urbem instaurandi Judzis potestatem fe»
cisset Julianus, miraculo atque ordinano Numins interventul tre
Literary Intelligence. 461
jbuunt.—Tullum Hostilium fulminis eliciendi experimenta tentan-
tem periisse probabile est.—Platonis Apologia Socratis diserta
est et eleganter scripta. Vere tamen de ea judicat Cassius Se-
verus ap. Senec. pref. lib. 111. Controv. Eloquentissimi viri Pla-
tonis oratio, gue pro Socrate scripta est, nec patrono nec reo: digna
est,” ὧς.
Recueil des Historiensdes Gaules.et dela France: par M.J. J.
Barat, ancien. Religieyx Bénédictin, Membre de ]’Académie des
Tnscriptions et Belles Lettres, etc. Tom. xvii. Paris, 1818. folio.
. pagg. xivii +865. )
‘This volume contains: Gesta Philippi August descripta a
Magistro Rigordo ; Gesta Phil. Augusti, auctore Willelmo Armo-
Ti¢o; ejusdem Philippidos libri x11.3 ASgidu Parisiensis Caro-
Jinus, εἰς. ; Gesta Ludovici.VIII., auctore anonymo ; Gesta Ludo-
ici VIII., auctore Nic. de Braia ; les Gestes de Phil. Auguste,
extraits des Chroniques de St. Denys ; ; les Gestes de Louis VIII. ;
Genealogia Rollonis, primi. Normanniz Ducis; ex Benedict Pe-
.troburgensis Vita et Gestis Henrici II, Anglie Regis; ex Matthai
Paris Majoris Anglicana Historia ab anno 1201, usque ad ann.
1296 ; etc. etc. etc.
Cornelius Nepos; with English Notes ayd Questions. By the
-Rev. C. Bradley, M. A. Price 3s. 6d. bound.
A Neat Edition of the Greek Septuagint, with the ‘Apocrypha ; ;
from the Oxford edition of Bos. ‘This Edition is hot-pressed, and
handsomely printed in one volume 8vo. for use in Churches, Chapels,
_.as.avell as the library. Pr. 1/. 8s. bds. -
;Edueatibn in Public Schools ; Containing Four Tracts, for and
against—from the Edinburgh Review, the Classical Journal, the
.Pamphleteer, and also Dr. Vincent’s celebrated Tract. Price 5s.
duod. bds.
‘Horace, with English Notes to the Odes, Critic ‘al and Expl.
matory. Pr. 5s. 6d. bound.
IN THE PRESS.
Literarum Grecarum et Artis Medice Amatoribus 5. ἢ). Caro-
lus Gottlob Κύμη, Professor Lipsiensis. Grecos de medicina
-8¢riptores, inter quos haud pauci vel antiquitate, vel eruditione ex-
cellunt, ἃ. medicis et philologis nostre etatis non tam assidue, ut
par. eat, tractari, sed fere neglectos et oblivione sepultos jacere, et
Ipse animadverti, et mecum plures viri docti conquesti sunt. Cu-.
jus τοὶ causam cum neque in Grecarum literarum contemtu,”
TO medicjs nostris falso exprobrari clarissima exempla docent,.
. OVI, Cl. J, NO.KXKW. - ah
462 Literary Intelligence.
neque in artis medicz injusta zstimatione, sed m ed potissittitiin
querendam esse intellexissem, quod paucorum taritum medicortin
editiones sunt, qaw aut sine offensione legi, aut facile parari posdsint,
constitui onmnes medicos Grecos deinceps edere.
In hac editione testum Graecum, ad fidem optimorum exemplo-
rum describi curabo, eique subjungam versionem Latinam. Sm
gulls scriptoribus listoriam literariam premittam, ex Jo. ALB.
“ABRICII bibliotheca Greca quidem petitam, sed passim auctatn
etemendatam. Deinde adjiciam apparatum criticum, partim ex
editionibus vetustis, partim e codicibus manuscriptis haustum, cath
virorum doctorum emendationibus, quas animadversionibus a J ANO
‘Cornnaro, AnutT. Foesio, Jo. FREINDIO, GuENZIO, CLiF-
τονχο, Meinomio, Trittero, Herinca, Bernarpo, Wit-
LETIO, CoRAyYo aliisque ‘conscriptis inseram. Denique Greecite-
tis medice mdicem universalem addam, cujus specimen tantaum
Foesius exhibuit.
_ Edentur autem forma octonaria majore, quali excusus est ΤΡ
PiuTarcuus WytTENBACRII, hoc ordine: GALENUS primas
omnium prodibit, non quod nesciam, primum H1ipProcratt locum
deberi, sed quod duo fere sxcula elapsa sunt, post novissimam
operum GALEN, que etiam philologis utilissima sunt, editionem,
quam Ren. CHARTERIUS curavit. Sed GALENUM proximus
HiprocratTEs excipiet, quem sequentur reliqui deinceps, X ENo-
CRATES, DioscoripDEs, ARETZUS, Rurus Epuesius, ALEX-
ANDER APHRODIsig&us, et Cassius Fexiix, NIcANDER,
fEtius AMipENus, Pautus AciNeva, OriBasivs, Neme-
sius, Nonus, Pattapius, DemMetkius PEPAGOMENUS,
Diocires Caryétios, PairAretus, STEPHANUS ATHE-
NIENSIS, SIMEON SETAuS, Moscuion, et qui Nicet# ¢ol-
lectione, primum e bibliothece Medicee ditissimo penu a Coe-
CHIO partum evulgata, continentur SoRaNusS et Orn1BASIUS, de-
nique PsELLus, THEOPHILUS ProTosBaTHARIUS atque Jd.
ActuaRius. Claudent agmen Erotian1 atque GALENT glos-
sarla.
Cum jam per plures annos hoc opus molitus fuerim, non temere
pollicer! possum, sine intérthissione Vdlumina singula deinceps pro-
ditura esse, ita, ut intra unius lustri spatium tota series absolvatur.
Et GaLEn us quidem proximio abhine anno ptodibit, relrquotum
singulis annis quatuor aut quinque télumnia edehtur. |
Sed cum in votis esse debeat, ut de magnis stihtibus fuic open
impendendis sécurus essé tt ethtoribus pretium quam fieri putest
Minimum constituere possim, omnes litéertrutn Grécaram δὲ dftis
miédice amatores observaitter invito, ut hoihina sud, que operi pre-
qui fecerint, his singula plagularudi alphabeta, que a ty dgraphis
fgentur, apud me, aut apid Proximum i libétaridid prof-
teantur, et substriptiche sila retemtichem spdtteinn “Quod
Literary Intelligence. 468
qui feceriht; his singula plagularum alphabeta, que a typographis
vocantur; modo idoneus subscribentium numerus fyerit, uno tantum
VALLENS! 8. JOACHIMICO cum octo grossis mounete Saxonicé
{t Speciesthaler Conv. Geld), constabunt. ‘Terminus subscrip-
tidnis postremus constitutus est ad nundinas paschales proximi
anni.
Ceteriim sf hoc consilitin quam plurimis probatum esse intellexero,
non tam mea catisa, quam literarum Grecarum et eruditionis me-
dice gratia immense letabor.
Scr. ipsis Cal. Novembr. A. R. S. cIoocccxvit. in Univers.
liter. Lipsiensi.
Mr. ELMSLEy’s edition of the Medea of Euripides, with an
ample Commentary, is nearly ready for publication.
The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacra-
ments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according
to the use of the-united Cliurch of England and Ireland: with
translations into the Greek, Latin, Italian, Spanish, French, artd
German languages.
Dr. Carey has in the press an improved edition of his largér
work on Latin Prosody and Versification. '
PREPARING FOR PUBLICATION.
A Classical and Topographical Tour in Greece, during the years
1801, 1805, and 1806: By Epwarv DopweEtt, Esq. A long
residence iti Tutkey kas enabled thé autho? to exahitne, and the
assistance of a first-rate artist to illustrate, the topography of that
seat of early history. Greece, including Peloponnesus and the
Ionian Islands, were the particular objects of bis tour; in the
course of which many districts, unexplored by modern travellers,
have been penetrated, and remains, hitherto unknown, visited, and
inost faithful drawings made of their actual state. The result of
Mr. Dodwell’s observations will be produced as speedily as the
very complete manner, in which it is intended to illustrate them, will
allow ; and it is presumed that the whole will foria a work of tlie
highest interest to the general readet, as well as to those of mort
profound classical research. To be’ published in two volumes,
quarto, with not less than 100 engravings. ;
Many of the drawings made by Mr. Dodwell and his artist being.
upon a scale which, consistent with their extreme accuracy, will
not allow of reduction to the size of a quarto volume ; it is intend-
ed to publish a separate work, consisting of sixty views of the most
464 Note to Correspondents. |
celebrated scenes and monuments of Greece; in which fac-similes
of the drawings, taken and colored upon the spot, will be pro-
duced. of the siz& of Stuart’s Athens; forming a complete series of
all that now exists of Grecian antiquity. ‘Ihe plates will be un-
dertahen by the most eminent artists. ‘The whole to be completed
in twelve parts, the first of which will be published early in the en-
suing year, and the price of each will not exceed two guineas and
ahalt. ‘The publishers presume it will be unnecessary to enlarge
further upon a work of such strong interest—as specimens remain
at 46, New Bond Street; where a book is kept for subscribers’
names, who will receive their impressions precisely in the order of
their subscription.
Fetus Testamentum Gracum, cum Variis Lectionibus. Edi-
tionem a Ros. Houmes, S. T. P. inchoatam continuavit J.
Parsons, ὃ. T. B. Tomus Secundus. 1818.
The tirst volume published by Dr. H. contains the Pentateuch
only: the second, by the present Editor, contains all the Histori-
cal Books of the Old Testament from Joshua to the Second
Book of Chronicles inclusively, and is enriched with the Collations
of many scarce and valuable MSS. in addition to those introduced in
the former volume. Perhaps in a future Number we may be able
to give a more satisfactory account of this publication.
NOTE TO CORRESPONDENTS.
᾿
Although we have given an unusual quantity of matter in this
No. several valuable communications are necessarily postponed.
Their authors will willingly submit to the delay, when they see
our pages adorned with an article containing so much learned and
judicious criticism.as that of Professor Bo1ssoNADE.
--“-ο»- <a
END OF NO. XXXIV.
β
°° ing °
- -
amen +
ΡῈ
ETT
NL
Yur MIUn
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11