Skip to main content

Full text of "Tracts and miscellaneous criticisms of the late Richard Porson, esq"

See other formats


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 maiginalia 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 tliis resource, we liave 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 individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm 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 attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming 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 liabili^ 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 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 

i%r25(^<j^ djz^i/iyy *s/cyx)C 

V/f '// '. /r/'/, , 7///'/// : ////f//// 












Rev. THOMAS KIDD, A.M. Trin. Coll. Cavp. 


rmnmo bt richaud attd authuii tailor, uiofr-LAiiB, 



I ■ • K I 

/ lo7243'' 

. > 













P ABFACB xxxiii-xcix 

Addbnda xcix-dv 

'EpitBfh on Alexis . 3 

Review of P. II. of V. I. of Schutz's Eschylus .4-10 

Review of Brunch's Aristophanes 1 1-37 

Review of Weston's Hennesianax ; etc 38-47 

Review of Huntmgford's Apology for the Mo- 

noetrophics 48-53 

ThelearoedPig 54,5 

Notae breves ad Clerici elBentUH Epistolas — 56 

Review of Roberison^s Parian Chronicle 57-83 

Review of Dr. Edwards's Pseiido-Platarch. de 

Educatione Liberorum 84-102 

Corrector Lectori FirgUU Londmiemis ; cura 

Heyne 103-107 

Review of Mr. A. P. Knight's analytical Essay 

on the Greek Alphabet 108-150 

JbhnJfic. Dawes on the Hiatus 15 1-153 

Nursery-song 154-157 

Siq>plementa ad Indicem Brunchianum in So- 

phoclem, 8^. 158-168. ad Euripidem Bechii; 

169, 70. ad Simplicium in Epictetum, 171- 

178. ad Cebetis Tabulam, 179-182 158-182 

Laconae Lqiidis Jj^yptiaci conjecturis suppletae 183 



Addenda ad Appendicem in Toupmm Suida 
KusTERJANi Emendatoremy 184-188. ad Co- 
micorum Graeconim Fragmenta, 189. ad Prae- 
fationem in Euripidem et Supplementum, 
190-199. ad Hecubam, 199^ 200. ad Ores- 
tern, 200-202. ad Phoenissas, 202. ad Mede- 

801,203-206 184-206 

AdIUada 206,7 

Ad Psendo-Solonem 207 

AdiEschylum 208-215 

AdSophoclem 216-222 

Ad Euripidem 223-227 

Ad Comicum incertum 228-231 

AdTheodecten 231 

Ad Moschiona ibid. 

Ad Platonem Comicum 232 

Ad Athenaeum 232-249 

Ad Anaxandriden ;, 249 

Ad Menandrum et Philemona 249-255 

AdTheocritum 256 

Ad Toupii Curas posteriores in Theocritum. ... 256^ 7 

Ad Alexandrum ^tolum Parthenii 257 

Ad Anthologiam 257-259 

AdHerodotum 260-262 

AdThucydidem 262,3 

Ad Platonem 263-275 

Ad Xenophontem 276 

Ad Theophrastum 276,7 

Ad Fragmenta Pythagoreorum 277 

AdAristidem 278 

AdPausaniam 279,280 



Ai Hqphaeationem 281 

Ad Harpocrationem »^ ibid. 

Ad J. PoUucem 281-283 

Ad Hesychium 283,4 

AdPhotium 285 

AdSuidam 285-287 

Ad Etymologuin Magnum 288,9 

Ad Codicem Alexandrinum 289-^2 

Ad Codicem Cantabrigibnsbm ^.. 292-296 

Ad Codicem rescriftum 297, 8 

Ad Codicem iy=:MS. Cantab. Kk. 6. 4 299,300 

Detached Observations 302,3 

AdEnnium 303 

AdTerentium 304-307 

Ad Cic. Tusc. Disp 307, 8 

AdLivium 308 

AdVirgilium 308,9 

AdHoratimn 309 

AdJuvenalem 309,10 

Ad Priscianum : 3 1 0, 1 1 

Ad M. A. Muretum 312 

On Bp. Pearson ibid. 

Bentleius Millio 313 

Boyle against Bentley 313,14 

R. B/s Reply to Boyle 314-16 

Swift's Tale of a Tub 316,17 

Lewis on Churches 317,18 

Mr. Pope .-• 318-320 

On Bp. Warburton's Tracts 320^22 

Ad Musgravii Dissertationes Duas 324-326 

Anderson's Poets 326,27 


• •■ 


De Obitu immatoro Raphaelis 327-^29 

letter to the Rev. Dr. Davy 330-332 


Sir John Hawkins v. Dr. Johnson 333-352 

Reproof valiant to Mr« Travis' Reply churlish 352-^68 

Errata. Addenda. Corrigenda. 369-^80 

Auctarium 381-393 

Indices 394-407 








Richard Porson, the subject of this hasty 
sketch, was born at East Rnston in Norfolk, 
on Christmas-day*, 1759* He was the eldest 
of three brothers-f-. His father, Mr, Huggins 

* R. P. was wont to speak of his birth day with grati- 
tude and triumph. On the same day Sir Laac Newton 
was bom, 1642. They were of the same College ; and 
the mortal remains of R. P. rest near the statue of this first 
of philosophers in the Anti-chapel of Trin. Coll. Cam- 
bridge; while those of Richard Bbntlbt lie without the 
nuling, on the north-side, of the altar. 

t Henry, his second brother, was settled in a taim in 
Essex, and died early in life. Thomas, his youngest bro- 
ther, kept a boarding-school at Fakenham, and died in 
1792. His sbter was married to Siday Hawes, Esq. of 
Coltishall in Norfolk. His mother died in 1784, aged 57; 
and hb father in 1805, in the 74th year of his age. 

b For son J 


Porsofiy who was Parish-Clerk, and much 
respected) initiated him in the rudiments 
of his native tongue, and in the common 
rules of arithmetic. At nine years of age 
R. P. was sent to the Village-school, kept 
by a Mr. Summers, where he continued 
three years. The Rev. Mr. Hewitt^ Vicar 
of the Parish, heard of R# P.'s extraor- 
dinary aptitude in acquiring and retaining 
whatever he was taught, and undertook to 
give him a classical training. During Iiis boy- 
hood R. P. was inured tp a pastoral life» and 
afterwards, I am told, to the labours of the 

Proofs of a serious turn of thought in bis 
early years are still extant; they are in the 
shape of hymns and grave reflections ; but in 
no respect remarkable except in tracing out 
the adorable nature of the first cause. 


In August, 1774, Mr. AWn6-, of Grosvenor- 
Place, an opulent and liberal gentleman, sent 
R. P. to Eton, and the late Sir George Baker 
contributed most generously towards his con- 


tinuance in that illustrious school. When he 
entered Eton, R P. was wholly ignorant of 
quantity ; and, after he had toiled up the ar-* 
duous path to literary eminence, he was often 
twitted by his quondam school-fellows with 
those violations of quantity which are com- 
mon in first attempts at Latin verse. Our 
Greek Professor always felt sore upon this 
point. One of his best friends and greatest 
admirers has preserved a copy of verses, 
which, indeed, evince the rapid progress of 
his mind, but would not do honour to his 

The Rev. Doctor Davies^ late Provost of 
Eton, when Head-Master, presented R. P. with 
a copy of Toup's Longinus as a mark of his 
regard for a ^^ good'' exercise. This book^ 
R. P. was wont to say, first biassed his mind 
to critical researches, and Be NT ley and 
Dawes cherished and confirmed that strong 
propensity : the rest he gave himself. 

At this time R. P. was deeply smitten with 
a predilection for scenic exhibitions ; and a 

b 2 sort 


iBort of drama, composed by R. P. while at 
Eton, is still in the possession of certain La- 
dies*. — He collated the MS. fragment of Xe- 
nophon's Anabasis, which he lost with other 
memoranda at Oxford, and amused himself 
with examining a MS. containing some of 
Seneca's plays, and others fathered upon 

At Eton, the powers of memory, which he 
occasionally discovered, are almost without 
parallel. The instances are numerous, and 
well attested. 1 shall specify one. In going 
up to lesson he was accosted by a boy in the 

* A gentlewoman, whom I should esteem it an honour 
to name^ has many unrivalled specimens of R. P/s pen- 
manship ; they are intended for watch-papers, and consist 
chiefly of those moral sentiments from the comic and tragic 
poets which vicissitudes in life had deeply imprinted on his 
memory: or such passages as Eur. Med. 193 — 206., ac- 
companied with Dr. Johnson's translation which first ap- 
peared in Dr. Bumey's History of Music, V. ii. p. 240.; etc. 

t Optimse in his Tragoedise^ TroadeSj Hippolytus^ Thy- 
e^teSj Hercules PurenSy Medea, Agamemnon, (Edipus. 
H» Senecse sunt, et nunquam Choro finiuntur. Incer- 
torum auctorum, Phaenissce, Hercules in (Eta, Octnvia — 
quae Choro finiuntur. Ricardus Bbntlbius. 



form, " p., what have you got there ? '* " Hor 
race:'' it was instantly taken from him, and 
another book dexterously slipped into its 
place, with which R. P. proceeded. Being 
" set on'' by the Master, he read and con* 
strued Carm. 1. x. very regularly. Observ- 
iqg the class in a titter, the Master said, ^^ P., 
you seem to me to be reading on. one side of 
the page, while I am looking at the others 
pray, whose edition have you?" P. hesitat- 
ing — " Let me see it," rejoined Doctor D., 
who, to his great surprise, found it to be an 
English Ovid. R. P. was ordered to. go on ; 
which he did, easily , exactly,, and promptly^ 
to the end of the ode» About this period 
R. P. was prone to a spirit of intolerance, 
which often discomposed his nights; and he 
experienced great difficulty in mollifying and 
subduing this inclination. What a lesson to 
learn is toleration ! 

Towards the close of 1777 he was admitted 
undergraduate of Trin. Coll. Cambridge. In 
1779 R. P. begaa more systematically his 
critical career. Two corrections made in. this 



year occur in pp. 256. 303. (Theocr. Id. i, 
66. Virg. ^n. 1 1 1, 702.). They were very gene- 
rously imparted to me by his old school-fellow, 
and unshaken friend through a bitter lite, the 
very learned and amiable Doctor Good all, 
Provost of Eton. This excellent man would 
have honoured me with a paper containing 
many other corrections made by R# P. about 
this time; but it is mislaid. In Sept. 1781, 
R. P. was elected Fellow of that noble Society. 
The interval between this date and 1785, 
when he took the degree of A.M., seems to 
have been assiduously employed in highly 
useful but ungainfbl pursuits. It was a sea^- 
son, which he recollected with pleasure ; and 
would, at times, fondly wish to live over 
again : — Pieriosque dies et amantes carmifia 
nodes. In 1791 his fellowship ceased; 
on which heart-rending occasion he used to 
observe, with his usual good-humour (for no- 
thing could depress him), that he was a gen* 
tleman living in London without a sixpence in 
his pocket. Shortly after R. P. was elected 
Greek-professor. The letter, addressed to his 
principal elector, in which R. P. notices botii 



events, will, I trust, see light on some future 
day. Other letters from R. P. are in private 
hands, which do honour to his heart as well 
Bs to his head. 

In 1795 R. P. married Mrs. L nan, who 
sunk under a decline in April 1797- This 
event is deeply to be regretted, since during 
this short period he evidently became more 
attentive to times and seasons, and might have 
been won by domestic comforts from that 
habit of tipling, which was doubtless as much 
a disease as the gout, and must have tended 
to impair a constitution naturally vigorous. 
Alas ! xS^ Tig auror, xSg rig m *Aro rov xorw 

R. P. entertained an utter contempt of mo- 
ney; he was independent of circumstances. 
He left worldly things to worldly minds ; his 
thoughts were elsewhere. 

In company R. P. was the gentlest being I 
ever met with ; his conversation was engaging 
and delightful ; it was at once animated by 



force of reasoning, and adorned with all the 
graces and embellishments of wit. These 
Attic nights are gone ; ^' but they have left a 
relish and a fragrance upon the mind, and 
the remembrance of them is sweet/' He 
possessed a heart filled with sensibility ; he 
was at all times willing to assist his fellow* 
labourers; and no scholar ever consulted him, 
who did not leave him instructed and de- 
lighted^. It may not be improper to select 
ah instance of his instantaneously passing from 
one subject to another, which was like it, by 
way of illustration. It may be thought un- 
worthy of narrative, »XX* SfiMg ^^iurm. In 
Oct. 1800, two friends looked in upon R. P. 
at his chambers in Elssex-Court, Temple, and 
seeing his favourite MS. spread on the table, 
one of them observed, I am at a loss to per- 
ceive how you can decy pher these characters ? 
R. P. intimated that the text of this codex 
was comparatively perspicuous. He then pro- 
duced a MS. of John Chrysostom abounding 
in cramp contractions, and, turning to the be- 



^nning, read the first five lines which gave 
the title of the work : — they were astonished 
at the ease with which he unfolded the termi- 
nations. R. P. remarked that our D"^. and 
(>*• are as much abridged, only far more 
common; but, determined to make himself 
thoroughly understood, he requested his friend 
to shew him a guinea ; which was done. R. P. 
inquired if he had ever noticed the letters on 
ihe brim. He answered in the negative; 
R. P. then expounded the legend. His friend 
remarked, that if he might have all the gulp 
neas of those who could not make out the in- 
scription, he jshould be extremely rich. Yes, 
replied R. P., and you would be in the situa^ 
tioQ of the hero, who Postulat ut capiat ^ qtuB 
non intelUgitj arma. His critical excursion 
appended ad Medi 139* 140. exhibits a fair 
specimen of hb manner of discussing with 
friends literary inatters ; it is adamant of the 
firmest grain wrought to the highest polish. 
Indeed, every thing he said and did was 
fraught with the most scrupulous regard for 
plain dealing. Truth was considered by 
R.P. as the basis of excellence; it was the 



object of all his inquiries ; he felt pleasure in 
the search, and satisfaction in the vindication 
of this rare article. If detected in the slightest 
error, he would thank the individual who 
pointed it out, immediately amend it, and 
publicly confess it. 'TLym ilfii riv niirn^ fit» 
ikiy^fiipTWff is T$ (Ml 0X9 A( XfyoijEU* 9^f«V V <Xf* 
yikfTWj if ng [m^ k>JiS%g xkyou Ovk knii^rtifw 
jE4iyr iktyxfiifrmif 9 %k%yliaifrm* p»%i^ov yag avti 
ayet6of nyovfiMh otrofTig /ctsi^or ayetfiov f mi airif 
iMrcLkXaynffeu %axoi tov [ityierovj n <ftXXoi oraX- 
Xofai* cSii9 yag oifiMs rotrovtov Kcutiv Ufcu iffigm^ 
aij#, S^o¥ io^a '^tuing* Plato Gorg. 285. E. 
Laemar. = 123. Routh. = 58, 9* Findeisen. 
R. P. also contended that truth in every 
department of human knowledge was mighty^ 
and, in spite of all artificial objects, would 
ultimately prevaiL Kai srori [mp rttgoLjfgnftM 
htMPv^i r^y «vrS; iifafnu ^(^ ^i sroXvy %foW 

xantyofu^iTcu to ^f^iviog. Polybius. 

Amongst others, who paid their respects to 
the MSS. of Pseudo-Shakspere, in Norfolk* 
Street^ R. P. was prevailed upon by a friend 



to visit them. After looking at them for a 
short time, R. P. turned aside to survey the 
vindow and the room. Astonished at this in* 
difference, Mr. L requested him to put down 
his name among those of behevers in their ge- 
nuineness. At first R. P. endeavoured to ex- 
cuse himself, as not being an Enghsh anti* 
quary: at length, being importuned in a most 
pcessing manner, he said, '^ Mr. I., I detest 
£rom the very bottom of my heart subscriptions 
of all kinds, but especially subscriptions to ar- 
ticles of faith/' R. P/s friend turning to him 
said, ^^ Mr, P., you will always be nn hu- 
mourist.^'— -Indeed, in all matters R. P. shud- 
dered at an oath : he deemed it a wanton pro- 
£uiation of the name of our Creator i he conr- 
tended that his bare word was sufficient And 
I would have taken his bare word in the most 
momentous concern. But in these degene^ 
rate days ^^ words are very rascals, since bonds 
disgraced them.'' 

In examining an unsound passage he was 
most cautious ; be investigated, balanced, and 
•reconciled. . He frequently caught at once 



the ultimate mark^ at which he was aiming, 
and which it required the utmost nicety to hit. 
Some would overshoot it, others fall short of 
it ; but his movements towards it were deli- 
berate, the effect of each step was watched, 
his eye was wary, and his aim unerring. 
The sense being ascertained, the word, which 
was suggested, might not suit the context : 
the word being fixed, the metre might not 
admit it His emendations satisfied the style, 
the sense, and the verse. — But, when he could 
not restore, he never disturbed. Coiijectural 
criticism, if I understand the expression, it 
not regulated by any perceivable law ; it is 
under the dominion of hazard; it is ^^ a hit 
made at a venture,'" — a game at chance: 
whereas in R. P/s cures there is a correct 
leading principle, which influences his deci- 
sions; he propounds the degree of evidence 
which can be collected; weighs every au- 
thority, however feint, or complicated, or 
contradictory ; calls in the aid of paleogra* 
phy to criticism, and elicits by dint of pain- 
ful thinking, and severe discrimination, illu- 
mined by genius and taste, the efifect de- 


sired^. It may be asked, Why all this parade 
about the recovery of a few old facts ? What 
is there in truth which is not old f The 
grandest discovery ever made by human in- 
tellect, — the nexus natura^ — was the demon- 
stration of a fact as old as the creation.-r-- 
Newton himself did not make the truths 
which he has established ; he pointed them 
out to others, from whom they had been 
concealed. — In these severe investigations 
Dawes did not distinguish sufficiently be* 
twe^fi an useful hint, and a general prin- 
dple ; he tried but seldom how fiir his pre* 
cepts would hold good. Bentley would, 
at times, lighten upon a passage. His cor- 
rections, in general* cost him too little trou- 
ble^. The day after he had received a copy 
of Dr. Davies's first edition of Cic. Tusc^^ 
R.B. talked over with the editor the si}b- 

* If critics of nearly the same growth did not feel and 
understand in the same way what was wanted, their coin- 
ddences could not be accounted for ; see R. P.'s PR. ad 
App. in Toup. p. 434. Lagomarsini ad Poggian. Epist. 
▼ol.n. p.216. 

t See R. B/s Letter to T. H. pp. 88. 1 12=288. 317. 

X See Epist. Clerico^ p. 208. 




Stance of all the emendations, which he was 
prevailed upon to subjoin to that edition. In 
the days of their friendship, J. Markland pre- 
sented R. B« with a copy of his Statii SyhkBf 
which he looked over with J. M. and suggest- 
ed those brilliant restorations, which are re« 
gistered in the margin of a copy in the cus- 
tody of a friend*. As to Scaliger, he 
seems to have been formed of " the porce- 
lain clay of human kind :'' in his restitutions 
6%ioif u «»} tSeroj^^of icrri. In R. P. there was 
invariably ^^ a presiding principle and prolific 
energy/' In that celebrated canon, viz. If 
an iambic verse in tragedy end in a word^ 
which makes a cretic, and the word preceding 
it consist of more than one syllable j the ffth 
foot is not a spondee^ — R. P. has marked the 
limits, and reconciled the seeming exceptions ; 
his proofs hang one upon another by a con- 
necting thread ; the perusal of his accurate 
arrangement, and nice distinctions, is one 
continued exertion of the mind ; in reading 

* Afterward this amiable scholar was induced, to attacb 
hiixiself to Bp. Hare^ and to share the credit of unsuccess- 
ful resistance against the great BentUy with t^t party. 



this disquisition we are iiot suffered to be idle 
or superficial. He gave up, 1 believe^ the 
metrical armngement of the choral odes as a 
hopeless business. — If his life had been pro- 
longed for about six years, R. P. would have 
become r^^ 'EXXo^^ ^^mjgtt na) x^ofjMypv* be 
would have given us some sure, sound, and 
rulmg principles, which might have been safe- 
\j left to their own operations*. But the 
prime grace of the Attic year is cut off: — 
the sun of criticism is set, and in its de- 
scent left the western^ hemisphere in a flood 
of glory. 

On 25 Sept. 1808, on Sunday night, ex- 
actly as the clock struck twelve •!•, R. P. 
changed his existence, without a struggle, in 

* ^iCii ffi Ti^ ToDroy fiakono olo¥ iyxofav 'KoaJig r^; ToXeo^, 

XifMa. Plato de Legg. T. ii. xii, 961. C. H. St. 

t See Dr. Adam Clarke's << Narrative of R. P.'s last ill- 
mess and death/' — " Our prophet is no more ; and where 
shall we find his mantle ? Where shall we look for his cri- 
tical acmnen, for his rapid perception, for his unerring sa- 
gacity, for his inexhaustible memory, and for his solid 
judgement ? " Quart. Rev, V, 1 ?• 



the forty^ninth year of his age. Such was the 
tvdmouria of our lamented Professor : 

ixivj^ofiMi i\ Kttigio^ ^^fiynt ^^^^^9 

.SschyL Agam. 1294. 

His remains were removed from the Lon- 
don Institution, then in the Old Jewry, to be 
interred in the Anti-chapel of Trinity College, 
Cambridge. The service at the grave was 
read in a most impressive manner by the pre- 
sent Lord Bishop of Bristol, Master of our 

The inscription engraved in brass on his 














It was not judged proper to print the Report 
signed with the names of his medical friends» 
amongst which is that of Dr. Babingtanj a 
physician not less renowned for his professional 
skill than for his humanity and extensive be* 

Epaminondas^ when upbraided by a wight 
with celibacy, pointed to the battle of Leuctra 
as his genuine offspring, which would not 
only survive him, but be immortaL In like 
manner, should a peevish and morose prattler 
inquire what moniment of Uterature R. P. had 
erected to perpetuate his name to posterity ; 
it may be answered with sadness, but with 
truth, Pauca quidem ingenii sui pigncra re^ 
liquitj sed egregia^ sed admiranda : — the Let- 
ters to Travis J Preface to Euripides^ ed. 3., 
note on Med. 139) 140., and the conjectural 
supplement of the Rosetta stone will hand 
down his name as a Critic till time shall be no 

If it were required to produce instances of 
restoration wrought by this second Bentley, 

c which 


which cannot be contested, the emendation 
of Hermesianax^ p. 41, might, I humbly pre- 
sume, be placed foremost ; then Eur. Helen. 
757., (p. 226.) ^chyli Suppl. 675. 312, 3- 
Pers. 321, 2. The wounds, which have been 
unmercifully inflicted on these passages, are 
beyond the reach of aid from MSS. It would 
be blameable to omit the restoration of Alexis 
apud Athen. iii, 107- F. (Adverss. p. 60.) 
which turned out to be, as nearly as possible, 
the reading of the Venetian MS. ; and that 
of Lyncus apud eund. vi, 138. E. (Adverss. 
p. 87*0* But to do justice to these emen- 
dations the tenor of the context ought to be 
stated, the probable causes of the corruptions 
explained, and the grounds, on which the 
emendations rest, as connected with Greek 
paleography, pointed out, which require types 
cut for the purpose. 

I cannot help remarking with great con- 
cern that some of our countrymen, who have 

* 7/ Spi), fti) fariXotcoftM. — ^was the form of the emenda- 
tkm, if I remember right, before the appearance of Cod. 


• * 


risen to eminence since his departure, seem to 
grudge him the tribute of their applause. 
Called upon, as I am, to deliver an opinion, 
which is done with sincere respect for their 
profound erudition and unwearied research, I 
must confess that at this exigent moment the 
loss of R. P. cannot be supplied ; that with 
him true criticism expired ; and that the stars, 
which adorn our hemisphere in his absence, 
shine with those rays which have been princi- 
pally borrowed from him. 

Esteeming, as I do, the real critic to stand 
foremost in the noble band of scholars, and 
to be incomparably the most useful labourer 
in the harvest of Theology, I consider any 
injury offered to so illustrious an individual 
as interesting to society, A Lady, whose 
life has been devoted to the reformation and 
comfort of the poor, and the honour of our 
religion, has intruded upon our patience, with 
all the solemnity of oracular decision, a scur^ 
rilous libel unthought of, uncalled for ; and 
insulted his memory with a comparison which 
would degrade him, I revere the lustre shed 

c2 by 


by Religion on the unsullied virtues of females ; 
I only not adore the lovely graces of female 
devotion*, as much as I abhor the malignant 
tongue of female slanden Pray, i^hat autho- 
rity have you for the foul expression " gross 
sensuality?'' None whatever. He had one 
failing, but he was so great a man that I shall 
soon forget what it was. 

"Ear tj iv¥our6ai Xo/^^ot/jECfyoy ^f^iiy* 
'O Xo$iogS¥ yag^ i^p o Xo$iogovfMPog 

As to " corrupt principles/' what do they 
imply? his critical morality? an invincible 
love of truth? an inflexible probity? uur 
wearied exertions in the cause of litera- 
ture? Or do they import a want of belief 
in the evidences of Christianity? An unbe- 
liever, Madam, would not have exposed the 
blasphemous manner, in which Lord Shaftes- 
bury derides the holy Scriptures. A ridiculer 

* See Dr. Parr's Discourse on Education. 




of the sufferings of the christian Marlyrs 
would not have observed concerning St. Cy- 
prian, that " the merits of the martyr threw 
a shade over the defects of the author, and 
the veneration, that ought to have been con* 
^ned to his piety, was extended to his writ- 
ings/' — ^An infidel would not have asserted 
>^ that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, which 
attested the ' mission of Jesus, were truly the 
witness of God, which he witnessed by his 
Son */' No, Madam ; an unbeliever has no 
concern with the doctrines of Christianity. 
A. P. was, and he wished to be considered, a 
Christian. If you had witnessed the horror, 
with which he received the foul charge of 
being a suspected unbeliever, when discover- 
ed to him by a friend with the utmost deli- 
^^cjy you would not have fiilminated against 
him such anathemas : — if you had seen him 
in the season of affliction, when the prospect 
of nothing but a " steril promontory" was 
lying before him ; — if you had heard him at 
this moment of dismay recite with inexpressi- 

* Letters to Trsvis, pp. 258. 266. 398. Pale/s Mor. 
and Pok't. Philos. ii. 109. 

' ble 


bl« fervour and solemnity the third chapter 
of Job ; you would, 1 doubt not, have been 
touched with other emotions than those of 
theological hatred. Yes, Mudam, if you had 
ever been present, when he quoted with per- 
fect relish from Tillotson, Barrow, Barclay's 
Apology, Chillingworth, and St. Augustine, 
passages hardly to be equalled in any lan- 
guage, you would not, I am sure, have applied 
to him these hard, unchristian words. Cease 
then to profane the memory of Por son with 
such unsparing reproaches. — You may say 
that his religious creed resembled that of Dr. 
Samuel Clarke * : you are at liberty to think 
80. Will you contend that Dr. Clarke was 
not a Christian ? Such uncharitable sentiments 
belong not to me. " Though truth in those 
controversies can only be on one side, sin- 
cerity may be on both. And I will enjoy the 
holy hope, that by an equal sincerity, through 
the power of that blood which was shed 
equally for all, both parties may at last find 

* Nomen viri docti, acuti philosophi, et theologi sobrie 
philosophantis, canim et sanctum mihi habetur. 




equal mercy*/' I can make no apology for 
these strictures : I leave them to the closet, 
and to self-examination. — ^The revered name 
of my friend is safely lodged in the sanctuary 
of my heart, " never, never to be torn from 
thence, hut with those holds which grapple 
it to life/' 

26 April, 1815. 


• Horsle/a Charge, p. 74. 






N.B» Am ttUriim u fr^ixtd to ihi articUi eomiamid m tku 

*u Alexis: *AmfoHifaTos. 

XME English venes were given by the late Rev. If^. 
OoUm^ B.D.9 Senior Fellow of Trm. CM. and R^;iOi 
HebewoProfiBssoTj tp be trannlated into Greek trimeter 
lambice by die candidates for one of Lord Craven'a Uni- 
/vcrsity-seholarships which was then vacant. Being on a 

^ There are other effbsioos of bomour and of the specks of com- 
position which is chieflj acceptable to that stirring family, the editors 
of our ephemeral journals. I have eiamined the quotations from 
Latin and Oreek writers, with which they are sprinkled, for emenda- 
tioos; and for nothing else; for he uniformly advised me not to read 
Newspapers. I bewail the unpropitious hours, in which four of 
these papers were written. His mind must have been overclouded. 
Certain of the Jesuits have attempted the same perilous analogies, 
wluch are contained in three of them. But this kind of writing 

•snoot be defended by example. 



visit to Mr. Knight's at Milton^ near Cambridge, Mr. C. 
accidentally took up a stray No. of the ****** Ma- 
gazine, and in turning it over he lighted on this epitaph ; 
transcribed it^ and applied it to this purpose.— With this 
account Mr. C. favoured me^ if I recollect aright^ in 1798; 
I have consulted most of the Journals from their com- 
mencement to this period, but, with pain I state it, to no 
purpose. At the time it was generally attributed to Mr. 
C. ; and R. P. always suspected it to be the ofispring of 
his muse. About three years before his dembe R. P. showed 
me the foul copy, which exhibited his first expressions and 
corrections made in the examination-room before he re- 
wrote it, and permitted me to take a sort of fac-simile which 
is mislaid. The paper was embrowned with age. It would 
be highly ungenerous to point out the Homeric metre of 
one word, chose niceties of Attic orthography which he 
had not then attained, and the violation of a recondite 
property of Iambic metre, which R. P. discovered about 
three years afterwards. He communicated it with his 
oldest and most intimate firiend, the Rev. Dr. Goodall, 
who in mentioning it to his pupils never omitted to attri- 
bute it to its rightful owner '*'• Suffice it to state that this 
attempt was made by a Junior A.B. nearly thirty-four years 
ago, and it will scarcely be doubted that this A.B. was 
R. PoRsoN t • Other juvenile exercises by R. P. are still in 

* See Mus. Crit ni, 390. 

t EAchyl Septheb. 633. fiXmrm/tm m»XXlirfmf$9, m^^irmii «ij^^^u« 
venilequidemillud, »ed GaoNOVii juyenis, Mark!. Prj£F. ad Stat. 
SylT. ZY.— Commeotationei juyeoili quidem, veruotamen joTenis 
Uemsterhutiii D. R. Elog. p. 84. ed. S. 



. About this period^ 1782^, R.P. proposed to repub- 
liah BudcBUs* commentaries of the Greek language ; he 
would have verified the references, added short notes, and 
a good index. This project, if it had met with due en- 
eonragement, would have banished from our public schools 
FtgeruSf which is^ comparatively^ a bad book. But he was 
thwarted in his views. 

*ii. Review of the second part of the first volume of 
Schutz's EschyUis. Mr, Maty'5 Rev. June, 1783^ 
pp. 433 — 436. 

In his Review for March^ 1783^ p. 268^ Mr. Maty 
notices, no doubt with R. P.'s permission, that a scholar of 
Cambridge ** is preparing a new edition of Stanley's 
JEsckyluSy to which he proposes adding his own notes^ in 
three volumes, and ufill be glad of any communications on 
the subject, either from Englishmen or foreigflers." And in 

his Rev. for Oct. , p. 328, Mr. M. informs his readers 

that this scholar is '^ the author of the excellent Review of 
Brunck's Aristophanes. To him^ therefore^ to whom the 
edition of iGschylus is now entrusted, the learned will send 
their notes^ which (I forgot to mention before) may be ad- 
dressed tome.'' — Solicitous to collate the celebrated FictO" 
rian MS.^ then at Florence'*', which Professor Salvini had 
inspected for the use or curiosity of Doctor Askew, R. P. 
proposed to visit this repositor}*^ once the seat of Medicean 

^ This far-famed Codex Las been lately seen at a low tavern in 
Switxerlaod, and is now, perhaps, consigned to that iame andemt vault, 
WhertMU the kindred of the Capiat lie. 



magnificence^ and to collate this MS. ^^ at an expense not 
greater than that^ for which the tadc could have been per* 
formed by a person-on the spot/' After some dbcussioii, 
in which a genuine critic, well known in the Primrase 
Path as |rell as the Fbsse and the Watling Street, gaf^ I 
am concerned to say, his decided opposition^ it was sug- 
gested by a grave man, and most wonderful scholar^ then 
perching on {he pinnacle of power, that R. P. might coU 
lect his MSS. at home*. This is alluded to in a note to 
his letters on Travis, p. 57* Alas ! how marred and stinted 
haih his greatness been I 

About this period R.P. commenced a correspondence 
with David Ruhnkeniusf, whose preface to the second vo- 
lume of Hesj/chiuSj and historical disquisition on the Greek 
oraiors, he had read with delight. R. P. stated that he was 
about to undertake an edition of Eschylus, and requested 
to be honoured with any fragments of this parent of Greek 
tragedy whicl^ occurred in D. R/s body of inedited Lexi- 
cons and Grammarians that bear the stamp of authority^. 
The editor of the Strasburg Sophocles had drawn the 
most valuable glosses Jn his Lexicon Sophocleum from tins 


* Be not dismayed ; we bare Dr. Arbuthnot and Mr. Travis's aa- 
thority for this combination ; ** the accurate Mr. Heame of Orfordy 
who colUcted the Bodleian MSS. for us ''—Gulliver decypher*d, I, Sf. ; 
and, «< Pappldaum^ G. T. his collection of the BerUn MS.'' Index 
to Sd ed., letter P. 

t See Wyttenbach*s Vita Ruhnkenii, p. S33. Saxii Onomasticon, 
VIII, 461. 

t Satis notom est eum suo sibi labore thesaorum comparasse ern- 
ditionis Gr«cse e yeterum Grammaticorum scriptis nondom luce do* 
natis, qoa diTersis in Bibliothecis, maiirae in Regia et C<fenobii8aii- 
germanensis senrantur. Bmackii PR. ad Soph. 4t0. vi, viii. 



source. Not wUling, howevtr, to take advantage of D. R/s 
unsospeetiiig goodness without submitting to him his pre- 
tensions for the tasky he sent this restorer of Plato a spe- 
eunen of his progress in emendatory criticism. In the first 
he achieved a restoration of .Sschyl. Suppl. 675«7^ which 
had been begun by Stanley, and^ by acddent^ successfully 
foBowed up by Pauu/y and approximated to by Heath. 
The Hght borrowed firom this passage he reflected upon 
Plutarch^ who had been wofiilly mutilated^ Eroi. p. 758. F., 
and made these two authors amicably conspire in healing 
and strengthening^ each other*. The other sample related 
to m manned firagment of Hermesianax, 89, seq. which 
was in aibstance the same as the Latin note at pp. 4 1,2. of 
these tracts. — ^D. R. showed this letter to his fiivourite pu- 
pil^ lVyitenbach\, who applauded the good service done 
to Eschylus and his old friend Plutarch : yet in the excel- 

^ This emendation has been referred to in his note ad Fh, 800. 
mnd ablj stated bj a learned br^er in M. Rev. for June, 1807, 
pp. 589-30. K, Hot, Carm, iv, xiii, 7. had famished a model 
of criticism, misnaroed conjectural, on the same treatise of Plutarch 
wl|ich R.P. has outdone. In the sanje waj B. P. made whole a 
psssafje in Dionjsins of Halicamassus in his Diatribe ad Euf. MetL 
tS9y 140. This restoration he had allowed to lie bj him for more 
dian four years. I put a copy of Valckenaer's CaUimachea into his 
bmods about the close of 1799 or at the beginning of 1800, some time 
before it was regularly imported into this country ; in turning over 
the leaves he stumbled upon Valckendar*M attempt to correct the pas* 
sage. Surprised at V.*8 failure, he produced a scrap of paper, upon 
which his emendation had been registered, and requested me to take 
a copy of it in bar of accidents. 

t Cetenim cognovimus novam item iEschyli editioncm institui 
Cantabrigiss a Rack Porsono, ¥• CL de cujus acumine et doctrina 



lent edition of this moralist.^ it has unaccound^bly escaped 
his memory; see Vol. iv. p. 29. ed. 4to=:p. 42. 8yo; At 
to the other correction, W. intimated to D. R.^ who was 
of a most conceding disposition^ that he had anticipated 
nearly the same alteration— |^o;^oir §Ivm 'AvixXm 

but this otder of the words is not sanctioned by any MS. ; 
whereas R. P.'s arrangement is countenanced by Bessarw*s 
CodeXf and transcribers would naturally prefer h^p^ or 
W.'s IxP^' to the less common but appropriate word Sxft^ 
Surely this is using another Critic's mental progeny^ '' as 
gypsies do stolen children— disfiguring them to make them 
pass for their own.'' Our professor^ however^ has very 
generously g^ven W« the chief merit of this palmarian 

In his answer addressed 

^' Viro praestantissimo 
Richardo Porsono 


David Ruhnkenius," 
the beginning (^ which I have already recorded, D. R. sent 
him eight leaves of foolscap, folded in a quarto form, and 
^owded with unpublished renoains of E^hylus, which had 
been extracted from his Thesaurus. The vacant spaces of 
the autograph were occupied with R. P.'s remarks. 

In the year 1797 or 1798 a calamitous event took place; 
9si§ TovTo y* 'E>JJivaw iqoii — and well they may. A fire 

bene nos sperare jubeot egregia qutedam speciroina^ privatim nobis 
cognica, necdum in Fulgus edita. Bibl. Crit. P. vilT, p. 140. This 
epistola cntica, of which R. P. had not preserved a copy, wil], I trast^ 
find a place io W.'t promised correspondence of Dovid Rnknkgmta, 



broke odt^t the house of a relative, with whom R. P. had 
been passing a few days. It irrecoverably destroyed thb 
eominuiiication of D. R. ; the exquisitely beautiful tran- 
acript of the Galean Photius, which by indefatigable per- 
severance he replaced ; a copy of Kuster^s Aristophanes, 
the margins of which were crammed with collations, notes, 
and emendations, which could not be retrieved ; and other 
literary treasures. In returning to Town the day before 
this disaster happened, R. P. paused three or four times on 
the road, deliberating whether he should return for his 
books and papers, and once actually turned his horse to- 
wards Merton. Unfortunately, however, he persevered on 
hb journey, and in the following night devastation accom- 
plished its hideous work. — ^When his affectionate friend. 
Doctor Rainey i ^IXrarov ^nyiifMe, whose loss is bitterly 
bewailed by every lover of learning, profane and sacred, 
opened to him this wofiil business, R. P. inquired if any 
lives had been lost: Dr.R. replied in the negative. ^' Then," 
in the' generous exaltation of despair, he sud, ^' I will tell 
you what I have lost — twenty years of my life I 

To each his sufferings : all are men 

Condemn'd alike to groan ; 
The tender for another's pain, 

Th* unfeeling for His own." 

*iii. Review of the Siraslmrg Aristophanes f ; 4 Veil. 4to, 
and 8vo, 1783 : by R.F.P. Brunck; Argentorati, 1783. 

This article was drawn up in one night, and a portion 
of the following day. He possessed at this time only the 

t This article is printed from a copy which was revised by R. P. 
The most useful parts of it have been done into Latin by the accu- 
rate Gotqfr, Henric, Sch^fer: Class. Joomal, ix, 136 — 143. 


xl PHEf ACK# 

AUine^ first Basils and Cambridge c^jitionB of Ailrtophaiies^ 
and consulted the first aad second Juntas, in the Hbrariea 
of his firiends. A copy of the first Junta, which had been 
picked up for a trifle in the neighbourhood of Saxi Wii^ 
moor J WIS given R. P. by the Rev. Cleaver Banks, whom he 
always mentioned with the most affectionate regard, and 
generally added, ^ Banks* library is my library.*' His ae> 
curate knovdedge of .the local situations, customs, and opi* 
nions, of the virtues, vices, and political animosities, which 
prevailed at this «ra, excited earnest hiqpes that R.P.^<^nld 
luwe given us a pbefbctt edition of this eomic Poet.-^Gfttk 
Wakefield^ J however, had an unconquerable distaste for 
this standard of Attic purity; that distinctness and vivacity 
of character in the dialogue ; that stately movement of his 
own metre ; and that glow of genius, that etherial fire in 
his choral odes, which, at times, transported Ihe poet be- 
yond the limits of his usual execution, had no charms tot 
G. W. — Not that I wish to defend every atom of the poet. 
What he says about Agatho in the Thesmophoriazusse 
might have been entirely in jest ; and might, in that de- 
graded state of society, have been pleasing to Athenian 
ears : still I cannot help turning aside firom it with loath- 
ing. The retouched comedy of ^'the Clouds obscured, I 
fear, the brightest star of the Achaian firmament;" it 
sowed a seed, which did not immediately quicken, .but 
which would not perish ; and ^adually prepared the. way 
for the accusers of the first of moral philosophers. In this, 
however, G. W. was not singular ; for the scenic enter- 
tainments of our national bard have even been designated 
—fountains of impurity; and I have met with a parage 

• Letters td Mr. Fox, pp. 175, a. 



onthis ral^ect taken from a primitive father, ^' which 
woqU make the hassocks at the Tabernacle, like the chairs 
io Diodesian, jump for joy.'' See Theodorus Hyriacenus, 
Ep. XXX. in Qotitia MSS. Paris. 

Plato also does not escape the indevotedness of G. W. ; 
he had little or no share in his esteem : and no wonder ; 
for Plato was a great admirer of Aristophanes. This first 
of Pagan sages, concerning whom we hear so much, and 
know so little, had rivetted the affections of our Professor 
for the last six or seven years of his life. In depth of 
thought R. P. deemed him without a rival ; but his text, 
he observed, teemed with interpolations. Quo magis his, 
qui altioris Critioes studio ducantur, dies noctesque dabo- 
randum est, ut assidua lectione in justam Platonis consue- 
tudinem veniant. 

iv. Review of Weston's Hermesianax; — April, 1784, 

pp. 238—243. 

♦ V. Review of Huntingford's Apology for the Monosiro- 
pAic5,— Aug. 1784, pp. 93—96. 

If the character of Dawes, as a critic, had been treat- 
ed with due respect, this article would not have been 
thought of. R. P. considered the making of Greek verses 
as wholesome exercise ; it requires extensive reading and 
retentfve memory ; and produces a fadlity in the applica- 
tion of those nice discriminations of style adopted by the 
Homeric, tragic, and comic poets, which have been pointed 
out by master-artist't. - R. P., however, iid not encourage the 

d publication 


publication of such attempts. Fot ^^ all that is good in the 
modem composition of ancient Greek is good for nothing ; 
for, unless such composition be a cento^ it can never cer- 
tainly be correct ; and if it be a cento^ where is its value?" 

•vi. The learned P^.— April, 1785, pp. 289, 90. 

^ vii. Short note% appended to Le Clerc and Bbntlbt's 
fc//i?rs.— April, 1786, pp. 255, 7, 60. 

viii. Notes hrevesf adYjeaof\ioxi€\% Anahasin\ 4to et 8vo, 
1786, pp.xli — ^lix. ; et ^'Lectori, si qms erit, S." Not», 
quibus literaW. adscripta est, viro eniditissimo, Gualtero 
WMter^ Aulse Clar. Cantab, baud ita pridem Socio, et 
Etymologici conditori acerrimo, debentur. Vivusya- 


* ix. Three panegyrical Epistles^ Hawkins v. Johnson.—- 
Gent. Mag. for Aug. 1787> pp. 651-^. Sept. pp. 751 
—3. Oct. pp. 847—9. 

Since whatever is connected with the name of Johnson is 
interesting to Englishmen, these critical eflusions of R. P.^ 
drawn up under the roof of his friend and defender at Green- 
wich, and abounding in that radness and force of pleasantry 
so i^uliarly his own, have found a place in the Appendix^ 

t A copy of these notes enriched with MS. additions is amongst 
the reserved books which belonged to R. P. On this account it did 
not become me to reprint the Cambridge impressioii. 

X. N6t€e 


X. NotiB breues ad Toupii emendaiiones tn Suidam 
A. R. P, C. S. S. T. C. S. [i.e. A Ricardo Poraono 
CoUegii Sacro-Sancttt Trinitatis Cantabrigifle Socio.] ; 
Pp.431— 506. Dabam LoisJmt IJuUi 1787. Prodi* 
enint Oxan. 1790t. \ 

[In indioe rerum et verborum memorabilium comparent 
addenda ^% oMrigenda ad notas uncinis inclusa.] 

xi. Beza's MS. and Dr. Kipling — Strictures on Mr. Tra- 
vis. Gent. Mag. Oct. 1788, pp. 875—877. 

xii. Case restated between Mr. Travis and the writers he 
oppases^^HtQ. 1788^ pp. 1063^ 4. 


'''xiii. Review of Mr. Robertson's ^^ Parian Chronicle:** 
Lond. 1788. Month. Rev. Jany 1789, pp'. 690-^7. 

xiv. On fhe authenticity of 1 John, v. 7. G. M. Feb. 1789, 

pp. 101—105. 

Having been informed that about this time a letter con* 

t The delay attending this new edition of Tottp't notes is alluded 
to in the jostljT celebrated Rev^cf Glaste*t Greek traobladon of Saqi- 
son Agpnistes; speaking of a canon, which subsequent inquiries must 
for e?er tend to elucidate and con6rai, the sagacious critic adds, this 
** remark would have been unnecessary, if the notes on the new edi- 
tion of Toup on Suidas had appeared from the Oxford Pres^.** Month. 
Re?. Sept. 1789. p. 244. See also the same on vv. ^55, S4tf. R. P. 
tt(t Or, 1023. As these notes operate powerfully on the sale of Toup, 
I was induced not to repablish them. 

d 2 taining 

xliv PREFACE. 

taining strictures upon the ^^ Essay on the transfiguration 
of Christ/' 1788^ had been addressed to the Right Reve- 
rend and learned author, hy ^ a Mr, Parson/* and also 
inserted in one of our Monthly Miscellanies, I ventured to 
mention the matter to my friend, and added that diligent 
inquiries had been made after this article, but to no pur- 
pose. R. P. recollected the feet, but did not appear to me 
to own himself to be the author of the remarks : he inti- 
mated that the letter alluded to was written by a friend ; 
and that the good Bishop admitted that it contained the 
fortiter m re, but lamented a scantiness of the suaviier m 

XV. A doubtful text of Scripture in the Complutensian 
edition. G. M. April, pp. 297— 3Q0. 

xvi. Character of R. Stephens as an editor of the N. 7. 
—May, ^p. 386—88.^ and June, pp. 512—18. 

xvii. Ideal MSS. quoted hy JIfr, Travis.— Aug. 1789, 

pp. 690—97. 

*xviii. Reproof valiant to Mr, Travis'ai Replj/ churlish. 

Feby 1790, pp. 128—133. 

This letter has been reprinted in the Appendix, pp. 352 
—368.; and the seven letters preceding it, emended and 
enlarged, form the five first of the following collection. 
The short account of Beza's MS.f and of the commence- 
ment-speech was, for obvious reasons, omitted. 

t See pp. tM— 90. 


P&BFACE. xlv 

xix. LetUrs to Mr. Archdeacon Travis, in answer to his 
defence of the three heavenly witnesses, 1 Johoj v. 7* 
By R. PoBsoN. 8vo. pp. i — xxxix. pp. 1 — 406. Lond. 

^I consider Mr. Porson's answer to Archdeacon- Travis^ 
as the most acute and accurate piece of criticism which 
has appeared since the days of Bentley. His strictures 
are founded in argument, toriched with learning, and en- 
Kvened with wit; and his adversary neither 'desenres nor 
finds any quarter at his hands/' Gibbon's Miscell. vol. i. 
159^ 60. See also G. Steevens on Shakspere^ iii, 68. 
This is the meed of well-earned fame; it is, however, 
doubted whether this could have been extorted from Mr« 
Gibbon's candour y if he had not felt himself defended by 
accident in this reply. Of Dr. Bentley *s ^^ Remarks upon 
Collins,'' which from ^^ the many just observations they 
contain, the ready and clear solution they give of scfveral 
difficulties of great moment, and the spirit of sound criti- 
cism and true learning which pervades the whole*," are 
entitled to a place on the same shelf as R. P.'s letters, 
Mr. Gibbon very coolly observes, they are *' fall of learning 
and scurrilityt :*' with as little precision might a reader 
say. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Em- 
pire abounds in eloquence and indecency. Indeed, the sly 
way of insinuating objections in the room of fair reasoning, 
when Christianity is concerned, and the confounding of the 
different ages and merits of the ancient Fathers render the 

* The late deeply regretted Bishop of Londou's pref. to Emhir 
Tkeol. pp. ix, X. 
t Misc. II. 193. 



caution once given by a great statesman^ *^ never to believe 
Mr. Gibbon when he speaks about priests^'* necessary to 
all bis readers. I will add another remark of that great 
orator and acute discemer of literary merit : ^^ Gibbon," 
says Mr. Fox, " has quoted many books as authority, of 
which he had only read the preface. He produced a sin- 
gular instance of this, where Gibbon had quoted a passage 
as being in the ihird book of a writer, whose work is di- 
vide4 into two books only. Gibbon was. led into this error 
by the translator of the prefiEice of the book quoted, who, 
'n tranacribing the passage, had made the same mistake." 
In this quotation I am obliged to trust to memory. As to 
his style, much as he sometimes admired it, R. P. was wont 
to remark that it would be a good exercise for a school- 
boy to translate occasionally a page of Gibbon into English. 
I have collated the first five letters in this volume (pp. 
1 — 132.) with those seven which first a|^eared in the Gen- 
tleman's Magazine and were addressed to Mr. Urban. It 
would have been a waste of time and paper to record the 
improvements made by R. P. in bis revbion of this collec- 
tion : suffice it to state, that wherever Mr. Urban's printers 
have been more watchfiil than those employed by Mr. Eger- 
ton, I have not been negligent of their fame. I have also 
verified soase of the references made by R. P., and have 
added a few extracts from Dr. Bjbntley. 

PRBF.iii. 1.6. "restored" [but not correctly] "by — " 
viii. n.* In the year 1716-17 Dr. Bentuby, being candi- 
date for the Regius Professorship of Divinity in the Univer- 
sity of Cambridge, read this probationary lecture, which 
R. P. had perused. 
— 1. 16. " volume" p. 544. 4to ed. 


PREFACE. xlvii 

xviii. i. 14. Cic. Divin. inCsecil. iv.SOO. ed. Gnsv. 1.20. 
" coUection*' pp. 1—132. 

son. 1. 19. and p. 37. ^^ but let them not measnra all 
others by their own narrow and partial inquiries.'' R« B. 
against Collins, p. 110. 

xxi. 1.19. dele "his" 

xxii. L 19. If R. P. had willingly engaged in a critical 
investigation of this verse, and not considered himself 
bound to trace the wily mazes of his feeble antagonist^ the 
disquisition would have been contracted into a compara-) 
tivdy narrow compass, and would have been conducted 
with becoming gravity. In its present form, bits of the 
finest temper and of imperishable substance are in it; and 
those, who lament the absence of satisfactory evidence^—; 
I dare not call them fools, but this I think. 
When foob are thirsty, they would fain have drinlu 

xxiii. 1. ult. Boileau [P. P. D.] 

xxiv. 1. 10. Vindication, p. 51 [quoted^ I suspeot^ from 

■ 1. 17* [ — nulla admiratione dignum foret, cum.ftm- 
tium et torrentium aqua juxta naturam terrse, per qmm 
curmnt, saporem mutare soleat, — UOrvilln Sicula^.p.36« 
Ut cum in sole ambulem, etiamsi aliam ob causam ambv- 
lem, fieri natura tamen ut colorer. Sic cum istoa libroi 
ad Misenum (nam Romse vix licet) studiosius legerim^ sen-) 
tio orationem meam illorum tactu quasi colorari. Cic* do 
Qrat. II. xiv.] 

XXV. 1.7* Cic. Divin. in Csecil. x. 312. [Quam turpe 
est iis criminibus alterum condemnare, qus si tibi objki- 
antur, ea dissolvere non possis ? Lamlin. in Cic. ad At- 
tic. 1. 18. p. 137. Gr^&v.] 

Xlviii PREFACE* 

XXV. 1. 20« Ludovicus Vives de Iradendin dueiplitiit^ V. 

XXIX. 1. 10. [In imitation of Hierocles, who *^ ausu plane 
oioiwo, et reliquis Christiahismi hostibus intacto^ Apolloninm 
Tyaneum- Christo Deo noetro comparavit, aequavit, pnetu- 
lit.'' P£ARS0Ni Proleg. de Hierocle, p. 20. conf. pp. $7^ 8.] 

xxxi. note, read " p. 70." 

xxxiv; 1. 6. On that jityful occasion R. P. would proba- 
bly have substituted the following passage for the motto : 
Quo, moriture, mis, majoraque viribus audes ? Fallit te in- 
eautum pietas tua. 

XXX. I. pen. etult. Voltaire to Rousseau. [P.P.D.] 

P. 1. R. P.'s Character of Beza's MS*, and the Editor, 
by which this letter was introduced in G. M. pp. 875, 6., 
is here omitted. 

P. 5. I. If (xpovoi) see pp. 103, 6. and T. H. ad Ari- 
stoph. Plut. pp. 178. 407. 

P. 6. I. 9. Here begins the second letter in G. M. Dec. 
1788, pp. 1063, 4. 

P. 9. 1. 14. see p. 14. 

P. 13. 1. 24. Cic de Divinat. if. 10. 

P. 14. s pp. 299,300. G. M. Apr. 1789. I. 3, 4. An- 
stoph. Ran. 930, 1. yi) rov^ 9fo^, iywy oJv ^HSi) iror^ iir 
ftMttft^ XP^' nntros hv^imnf&a, Equit. 1290. H irftAXaxi^ 
hinf)^tata'$ ^forrlci ov^ry^/ujei, icai ^ittiflfnj^y ^* Conf. Epi-. 
charm. q>ud R.P. Suppl. ad Hec. 1169. I. 19. See Tra- 
vis's dedication prefixed to his first and second editions. 

P. 16-^8. The third letter in G. M. Feb^' 1789, 
pp. 101—105. 

P. 18. 1.21.*** 

P. 19. 1. 13. Hor. Serm. ii. v, 20. r^Adtti Sy x^r »«) 
Humgov ixXo iror* lfrA]|f. Odyss. r..l8. 

P. 20. 

PE£FAC£. xlix 

P. 20. note f. See the seventh letter in G. M. Aug. 
1789, p. 691. 

P. 24. note, 1. penult. Hor. Epist. ii. ii, 211. << The 
ckne of one of those long and bright days has not the 
flame and heat of no<Hi, and would be less pleasing if it 
had. And I know not why it may not be true in the criii" 
cal as well as moral sense of the poet's words,I«eiiior— — /' 
Hurd to Warburton in W.'s Life, p. 100. s p. • . 

P. 25. 1. 3. Sbaksp. Henry IV, P. ii. p. 86. 

P. 33. 1.20, 1. CaluU. Nupt. Pel. et Thet. 407, 8. 
Qutte nee tales — Edd. Quare nee nostros R. P. in G. M. 
p. 104. 

P. 41—^2. the fourth letter in G. M. April 1789, 
-pp. 297—300. 

P. 46. 1. 16. Poole's Synopsis, ix. p. 3547, 66. 

P. 50. 1. 7.^-serve your best thoughts as gypsies do 
stolen children, disfigure them to make 'em pass for tbeir 
own. The Critic. 

n. f. 1. 6. Dr. Bentley, 1 suspect. 

P. 51. 1. penult. Eurip. Fragm. incerta cxu. Tinrm 
if flfv, iitget^i od i^uXov^ixa. tractant fid>rilia fabri : Hor^ 
Epbt. II. i. 1 16. 

P. 54—61. the fifth letter in G. M. May 1789, 
pp. 3%, 7» 

1.2. [Legion-Club] 
1. 9, 10. Swift. 

P. 60. 1. 12. '^ Mr. Griesbach'' — this paragraph is placed 
after << R. Stephens— Cymbeline [ii. i.] '' in G.M., p. 388. 
1. ult. Bentley upon Pseudo-Phalaris, PR.xcissxlvii* 

P. 61. 1. 23. the sixth letter begins in G. M. June 1789, 

pp. 512-518 = 61— 87. 

P. 62. 

1 PE£FAC£. 

P. 62. I 23. Cicero • • • 

P. 64. 1. 9. Gen. xlix, 6. 

P. 66. 1. 21. « marked ir'' G. M. 518. 

Pp. 70. 76. 87. '^ H. Stephens, becoming unfortunately 
deranged in his intellects towards the close of his fkys, 
destroyed many of his MSS. [Bayle Art. Anacrmm^ ed. 
Ibtterd. 1702. Note L.]" 3d ed. p. 260. Mr. Travis 
was indebted to a friend for this reference. 

P. 77. 1. 15. Cic. Divinat. in Cscil. ix. p. 309. 

P. 82. the notefj which occurs in 6. M. pp. 516^ 7* 
forms part of the Postscript to this letter, pp. 96-*88. 

P. 84. 1. 19. Bend, ad Hor. A. P. 441. p. 705. a. 
ed. ult. 

P. 92. 1. 15. Burke • • • 
. P. 98. 1. 11. Callim. hymn, ad Joy. 65. 

P. 94. 1. 4. read « pp. 159, 358, 855,—" 

P. 95. 1. 19. Hear what R. P.'s great predecessor pnK* 
nounced more than seventy years ago : ^^ The New Testa* 
ment has been under a hard fote since the invention of 
printing. After the Comphienses and Erasmus, who had 
but very ordinary MSS., it has become the property of 
booksellers. Bob. Stephens^ edition, set out and rq;u- 
lated by himself alone, is now become the standard. That 
text stands, as if an apostle was his compositor. No hea* 
then author has had such ill fortune.^ etc." This is owing 
to the general inability of the editors, not to the decays of 
time. The Pope's Vulgate was ^' reoensed and adjusted'^ 
by mere theologiiins ; and the Greek text of the Protestant 
Pope^ Robert Stephens, was, in general, setded by him* 

t Dr. Bentley*8 letter to Archbp. Wake, dated ** April the 15th, 



adf. In thtt early ages the Scriptures were eagerly sought, 
and frequently transcribed. The vast body ^^ of Varioui 
Readings in them is not a desirable good, but an evil by 
accident; in Tract of time it was hardly avoidable, from 
Human Nature and Circumstances of Things*." The 
number, however, of good MSS. still extant, and in course 
of multiplied variations, furnish alone a decisive proof, if 
proof was wanted, that '^ the New Testament has suffer- 
ed less injury by the hand of Time than any Profane Au- 
thor f/' That illustrious Critic and Theologian, L. C. 
VALCKSNABft, made a mock defence of Dr. Whithf^i 
spiendid paradox ; but the posthumous specimen of those 
excellent annotations, which that revered scholar bad made 
on the text of the New Testament, evinces the great 
ntilitv of various lections taken from MSS. and the Fa- 
then in recovering the genuine context, when the inves- 
t^alimi is conducted by a head stored with the history of 
the GredL language, trained in the principles of Criticism 


and in the application of paleography to this service, and 
ittlnenced by a heart devoted to the interests of common 
Christianity. Surely it is desirable that the progress of 
biblical literature should keep pace with the growing im- 
provements in Criticism^ — ^Allowing those essential doo- 
trmes, which are the objects of our faith, to have been at 
well understood in the early ages as they are in our times, 
it is submitted that human learning would be nobly em- 
ployed, as the handmiad to Religion, in proving the au- 
thenticity, and unfolding the difficulties, of the sacred wri- 
tings^ as w^ as in furnishing additional evidence from weD- 

* RI. B£/t aasirer to Dr. Mkldieton, p. 39. 

t Remarks upon CoUiat, p. 101. 


Ill PK£fAC£. 

interpreted Scripture in support of those articles which are 
to be measured not by the soundness of metaphysical dis*^ 
eussion, but by the strength of religious persuamon. In- 
deed^ when the singularities of idiom and of. st^ in the 
original language of the N.T. are considered^ and the 
decision of a Scholar on this pointy who had traced the 
Greek language from its rude beginnings to its decline 
and decrepitude^ is gravely weighed, I am willing to be- 
lieve that discoveries in the revealed word are as inex- 
haustible as the Divine bounty in which it originates. 
Be it also remembered, that David Ruhnjuenius, when 
pressed by a friend to apply himself sedulously to sacred 
criticism, very modestly replied that he had not as yet pro- 
ceeded farther in that route than to Demosthenes ;— and 
that R. P., whose table was seldom without a copy of 
Wetstein, had examined only three passages critically :— • 
hence it is collected that in this field, in which our ances- 
tors have laboured with so great success, we still *' may 
start a variety of game in every bush, if we will but take 
the trouble to heat for it*/' Much, I fear, is to be suf- 
fered before those speculations will be endured^ much less 
realised. A burning fiery fiunace must be traversed before 
a proper direction will be permitted to be given to human 
learning by the good liking of our governors. — I will sub- 
mit a case; whether it be authentic or not, the ipdivi* 
dual, vihom it may concern, can best determine, A late 
Prelate, venerable in years and in piety, was disposed to 
hold out a helping hand to individual energy in the good 
old cause of literature and reUgion ; this benevolent design 

* Sir J. Newtan*i answer to Dr. Bentlej on another occasion pre- 
served in Bp. Waison^i Cbem. Essays, nr, S57, 8. 


PREFACE. liii 

waa dieekad by a confidential agent^ who intimated the 
great danger of encouraging a scholar^ who '* read Greek 
in Mr.Poi^8on'8 method (what a compliment 1)/' ^^ If bo/' 
leplied the good old man, ^' I am sorry for what I have 
already done ; but * * *** the blank may be easily filled 
upL SucceaaleM virtue I illustrious disgrace ! When, bow- 
ever, the natural infirmities of age render worth of every 
kind a prey to delusion, any error of judgement, though 
terriiying in its consequences, is of secondary consideration ; 

tis tSX}! Sirarroi Iwn^ y^yvrai itar^q 
Zius. ov yoi^ ifio'iSitei awSyfioTui /3^oro7;* 
xiv tjooo'if xav tayeoo'iv, oux SpxiXkutai, 

May this unconscious vender of incense, which pains the 
aense, feel no compunctious visitings in his last awful mo- 
ments; may he depart in peace ! — Sed quid ^go haec autem 
nequidquam ingrata revolvo? Quidve moror? si omnes 
uno ordiue habetis Achivos^ Idque audire sat est ; jamdu- 
dum sumite poenas. 

P. 101. the seventh letter in G. M. Ajag. 1789, pp.690 

P. 104. '^ I have stiU a scruple— my conjecture.^'— 
note * in G. M. pp. 690, 1 . is here reprinted in the Post- 
script, pp. 132, 3. 

P. 106. 1. 17. retractation G.M. 

P. 1 10. note, 1. ult. Congrevt's Way of the World. 

O these deliberate —>! when they do choose, 
They have the wisdom by their wit to lose. 

Merdu of Venice, ii, ix. . 

P. 118. notet, "XL** G. M. p. 694. whether correctly 
or not I cannot^ at present, aacert^i as the Journal is 


Uv PR£FAC£» 

not befiore me. In D. R/t Prjcf. ad Heqfeh. p. vin. 
there is a reference to ^^Athntumu ix. p. 501. F/' vrfaere- 
as in the cancelled leaf it isj ^^A. xi. — ;'' this is right. 

P. 120. 1. 11. <^ But then, whether, as I said, I was 
misiaken in th$ Naiureand Fbrceofmjf Proofs, or rather 
in the Nature and Force of my Adversary ; I leave that to 
the judgement of others." Bentley on Psen^Phal. p.27. 
Permit me to observe that R. P. sometimes fells into the 
strain of his great model, and has unintentionaUy ensnared 
certain contemporaries by allusions to passages which, he 
took for granted, were well known to his readers ; ad Or. 
273. R. P. adds, ^^ Ceterum verissime observat Reiskius 
Euripidem facile potuisse soloecismum et sibila Comicorum 
effiigere, versum sic concinnando : *JEx xufUenw yif 6f& 
yalsSpniv witif aS. Certe Aristq>haius, Samiyrionis, Strat- 
tidis, aculeos potuit contemnere, si sic omnia (fisdsset.^^ 
His friend^ in Crit. Rev. for Nov. 1800, p. 244. affected 
to think that R. P. had, in good earnest, sanctioned this 
transposition ! After giving vent to his critical acrimony, 
he has added a saving clause, of whidi he might anul him« 
self, if hard pressed.— Would any scholar resolve R. B.'s 
opinion of Jb5€pA Scaliger^s alteration ad Manil.iv, 901. 
into an approbation of tiie suggestion of that Pamcs op 
Critics ? ^^ Contemnere potuisset Scioppios, Titios, et Pe^ 
tavios; si omnia sic dixisset.''— or understand Juvenal's 
Sat. XIV, 123, 4. Antoni gladios potuit contemnere, si sic 
. Omnia dixisset I as a rapturous panegyric of Cicero's O ibr- 
tunatam natam, me oonsule, Romam.— -When Mr. Fooie 
observed to a gentieman, who had been enlarging upon the 

* Sec G. W.'t letters to Mr. Fox, p. 177. 



mimerauB domestic virtues which senred to compensate fbr 
the homely appearance of his c4>naort,-*^^ What a thou* 
sand pities it is that the Grecian Helen was not more like 
her ! for if she had^ Troy most certainly would never have 
been burnt ;''•— the good man^ doubtless^ did not constme 
this into a flattering opinion of his l^y 's personal attractions. 
Permit me to proceed a little farther. From the stric«« 
ture upon Mr. Brunck's note ad Bacch. 1123^ which ap* 
pears in R. P/s appendix to Toup's emendations, no com- 
petent judge could collect that R. P. considered the two 
▼erses either as anapflestic, or as allied to the melic systems* 
R. P. also designates Ammonius, vir metri callentissimus, 
ad Hec. 269. ed. T. and^ from Longinus, or his interpo- 
lator^ Mjf odx ^ i^^f ib« 671. No person, howevo*^ 
fvho has waded through that gentleman's notes, ean mis- 
take the main drift of these compliments. In the Letters 
to Mr. Travis, p. 228^—*^ Having been extremely fmd t^f 
Oregory^* — ^*^^ P- ^72. — ^^ my fawmrUe Gregory*'— the 
allusion to— ^'^ Haec ex Gr^;orio Nazianaeno, quern semper 
IB ddidis habui"^s obvious to every residetit member of 
sur University. Once more, and I have done. In retail- 
ing the sallies of R. P.'s exquisite humour, great pains 
should be taken to give the truth, and the whole truth. 
In the Month. Rev. for May 1811, p. 58, the following 
exertion of courtesy is attributed, and with truth, to R. P. 
^^Mr. S. is indeed a wonderful writer; his works will be 
fead when Homer and Virgil are ibrgotleft : " to which 
add, ^^ bat not till then." Oompare this with another 
spedmen of undeserving praise from a different quarter : 
^* A tragedy (the Carmelite), — the beauties of which, we 
will venture confidently to assert, will be admired and felt, 



when those of Shakespeare, Diyden, Otway, SoiUiieme^ 
and Rowe, shall be no longer held in estimation.'' 

P. 131.1.3. Shaksp. K. Lear, p. 297, perhaps also in Dry- 
den's Don Sebastian, as it occurs in the Renegade, A.u,9Ciu 

F. 132. the account of a '^ commencement speech" in 
G. M. p. 697* is omitted here. 1. ult. altered from, Unum 
hoc maoeror et doleo tibi deease, Terenti. C. Qesar. in 

P. 135. Shaksp. Henry VIII. iii, i. 

P. 136. note * ^< Here, Mr. Urban, I take my leave. I 
ought now to examine the versions and citations of ancient 
author^, to which the defenders of the verse have appealed. 
But I fear I grow tedious to you and your readers : 1 am 
sure I grow tedious to myself. However, lest Mr. Travis 
should regret my silence, you may present my compliments 
to him, and inform him that I shall again do myself the 
honour of calling on him at a proper time and place. In 
the mean while, I remain, Mr. Urban, his and your very 
humble servant, Cantabrigibnsis.'' — ^The seven letters 
following were written from short hints in the Utile study at 
Eton in the course of a fortnight, while R. P. was on a visit 
to bis dearest and oldest friend, the Rev. Dr. Goodaix. 

P. 137* 1. 2. D. Augustinus de doctrina Christiana, II. 
xi. 15. ^^ speaking of the several versions of the Holy 
Scriptures, adds. In ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala 
ceteris pneferatur, nam est verborum tenacior, cum per- 
spicuitate sententi«<i— which Dr. Bbntlbv corrects thus^^ 
I$ta ceteris praeferatur, ftc^e est verborum tenacior f" — : 

t Casley's preface to bis Catalogue of the Kiiig*» MSS. ; see also 
Ei. Bb.'8 answer to MiddUton^ pp. 18, S6y 48. R. B. seems tp have 
believed in the existence of ** the Latin Italic *' in 17 Id ; see his re- 
marks on Collins, P. i. p. 81. 



licet oouies, qui hodie manent codices, in contrarium eant. 
Sabatier. For Itala Archbp. Potter^ or a friend, substi- 
tnted usUata^j which is, it must be confessed, somewhat 
violent and arbitrary* Illa^ however, which was R. B/s 
emendation, as Sabatier testifies f, might very pardonably 
be expanded into Italn. Critics have taught us how easily 
Italas may become Itlas^ and thence illas. Jul* Fronti- 
nus 1. 12, 2. ed. 1779* Caius Caesar, cum forte consceU'- 
dens navem lapsus esset, Teneo te, terra mater y inquit : 
qua interpretatioue effecit, ut repetiturus Mas, a quibus 
pjofidscebatur, terras videretur. Scribendum Italas. J3tt- 
herius apud Oudendorp. Cur. post. R. P. observed to a 
friend, that KAAAICTfll in Pollux, ii,§112, had been 
altered from KAAAleTfll, which had been corrupted 
fi^mi KAAAIAI Till the genuine reading. And 

oonversely, the proper name IstroSy Histras, or Hystros, 
had slily supplanted istos in Juv. vi, 204, which is 
not an uncommon case {. Bentley, after the most scru- 
pulous researches, was convinced that this version had 
no existence whatever, as appears from his Letter to 
Wetstein, and from fragments of his correspondence with 
the very learned and laborious society of Benedictines of 

* " Since the publication of that volume^'' [Michaelis ob the 
N. T.] '* I have had the honour to receive from the Bishop of Ox- 
ford another conjecture : for Itaia his Lprdship would read utitata : 
so Augustine himself elsewhere calls the old Latin version^ and also 
vulgata, as does Jerom : ** Lardner, T. v. p. 397. The learned and 
able Dr. Manh, the Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity in ocrr 
University, tbink^ not unfavourably of this conjecture: see his 
Michaelis, V. ii. P. ii. p. 6SS. 

t Pr£F. generalis ad Bibl. sacr. Lat. versiones, xxxi, and ad 
T. Ill, pp. XX, xxni, xxvii. 

t See Schradcr, Emendat. p. 158. 

e St. 


St. Maarf. As these scraps have not been reprinted bv a 
friend who is by many degrees fitter for this task than my- 
self^ and whose name I should be most happy to mention^ 
I determined to submit R.B.'s arguments on a subject to 
whicli R. P. has so forcibly alluded. After stating his re- 
covered readihg of St. Augustine^ R. B. proceeds to prove 
to that communicative and usefiil Body the non-entity of 
this far-famed version : Unde i^tur notitia et nomen istins 
Itaik^ processit primo^ et inter eruditos inolevit ? Nimi- 
nim ex linico S. Augustbii dicto in libello jam citato, ubi, 
plmimum, incfuif, jtwai interpretum nuiMrasUaSy coUaiis 
codidbus^ inspecta atque discussa * * ^ * *\ti ipsis antem 
interpretationibus Itala ceteris pneferatur, etc. Ita edi- 
tiones Augustini exhibent universe^ Itala ceteris prcefera- 
ttir, et httic soli loco, hoic unico vocabulo taiita res inniti- 
tUr: vestram fidem! ({uatt ihfirmo tibicine fiilta! Quid 
enim si ego dixero codices hie mehdosos esse ? Quid si non 
dixero tahtiim, M et ai^mentis prorsus evicero? Et 
pirhicipio qindem, quis illud satis emiretur, nusquam alibi 
in tot s|>issis voluolinibus sanctissiiriunii Patrem banc //a* 
lafti vel nientiofhe dl^natam eMi ? 

xxii. lllud quo^tie mecum perpendite: Itala^ inquit, 
ceteris pnB/eratur. subauditur utique versioj translatio, 
interpretation Atqui^ Itala versio, plane poetica est dic- 
tio;, nee in soluta oratione locum habet. Itala regna, 
ItaUe vires J Itala virtus % poetarum sunt, qui nomina gen- 
tilia pro possessivis§ ponere amant. Sed si hoc in animo 
habuisset Augustinus, non Itala, sed Italica dixisset ; et 

t See Sabatier Pa. ad T. ill. p. xvirr. 

I £n. Ill, 185. Ilor., xv. IS, 4. ^ti. xil, 827. 

§ Cuii^. R.B. ad Ilor. Carm. U, liii, 8. 



sic locuti sunt omnes^ vel a Ciceronis setate^ qui solute 
sermone loquebantur. * Mendosus ergo locus est^ nee Au^ 
gustinus hie posuit liala. 

XXIII. Admitting, however^ Dala to be the true readings 
Dr. B. contends that either the context furnishes ground 
{or a suspicion of corruption^ or that the words of this 
eminent Father are not capable of a consistent sense. 
Noiiiie cum prioribus pugnat ? Primo jubet Augustinus 
plures interpretationes inquireret numeroeitatem illanim 
plurimum juvare: mox vero edicit, ut Itala interpre- 
tatio ceteris profferaiur, Hoccine ut tam absurdum de- 
derit magnusf Augustinus? Si enim Itala ista ceteris 
pneferenda erat^ firustra utique et inepte praeciperetty 
ut ceterae ill» conquirerentur. * • • Dr. B. then pro- 
ceeds to make good his supposition 3 St. Augustin recom- 
mended the Italic version as preferable to the rest; 
but adds^ that in emending any copies the Crreek MSS. 
ought to be consulted^ and in case of discrepancies, the 
Latin should ^ve way to the Greek exemplars. Tliis pre- 
ference tends either to weaken the eredit of the supposed 
Italic version, or implies that the worse Greek copies pre- 
served the genuine readingSr Si enim, ut docet Augusti- 
nus, Itala ilia et verborum teria^ est, et perspicuiiaiem 
sententicB servat; quid amplius in interprete desideran- 
dum ? Cur hujus loci oblitus At^;ustinus, Latinos quoslibet 
emendandos esse jubet P Qtds vero in Latinis varietatibus 

f " He was, iodeed, in his day, a burning and a shining light; and 
he hai been ever since, by his writings, one of the brightest lumina- 
ries of the Latin chorch." Dr. HanUi^i sermon appended to the 
second edition of his translation of Hosea, p. 14. 

I In p. XXV, praceperait in order to mix it with the web of Saba- 
tier's context. 

e 2 titubare 

Ix P11EFAC£. 

titubare possit, si unam illam Latinam, sive Italam ha^ 
beat; nee yerbis^ nee sententia aberrantem ? Hsc, opinor^ 
euruarotra sunt, et Augustino indigna. 

XXVI. In promptu est altera, eaque melior et genuina ; 
nuUo ncgotio, sponte sua mihi succurrit. Lego itaque, 
^ In ipsis autem interpretaiionihus^ illa ceteris prcefera- 
tur, Qvs, est verborum tenacior cum perspiCuitate senten- 
tUe.* — ^Videte quam exigui jactu pulveris quantse turbae, 
quanta certamina consilescant: 

P. 156. 1.5. Ovid. Met. i, 190, I. 

P. 158. 1. 15. Hamlet, p. 270. Ed. Pr. 

P. 163. Eur. Helen. 1633. see Valckenaer's Pr. ad 
Hipp. XXI. 

P. 165. 1. antepen. Hor. Carm. iii, xi. 35. 

P. 172. 1. 18. Shaksp. Hamlet, p. 271. 

P. 173. 1.16. -fin. II, 65. 

P. 180. Shaksp. Cymbeline, p. 382. 

P. 181. 1. 15. Menagiana T. iv. p. 263. ed. Paris. 

P. 205. 1. 2. Aristoph. Acharn. 151. 

P. 216. 1. 4. See Bp. Watson's Apology of the Bible, 
p. 34. 

P. 220. I. 18. Odyss. P, 218. Conf. R. P. ad Ph. 1415, 

P. 227. U 19. Does Sir I. N. mean Dr. Bentlby? 

P. 236. 1. 10. Eur. Or. 725. 

P. 243. 1. 3. Eloisa to Abelard, 66. It may be ob- 
served that the Parody, Eloisa en dissabeUe, has been ge- 
nerally ascribed to R. P. Anxious to ascertain the fact, 
and, if true, to possess myself of a copy, I put the ques- 
tion to my friend, and begged him to fovour me with the 
sight of a copy. R. P. very handsomely refused to accede 
tb the latter part of my request; and the substance of his 




answer to the other is contained in the sequel of a note 
written by himself on the fly-leaf of a copy of a work en- 
titled " My Pocket Book," 9", 1807.; which may be seen 
in the library of the London Institution. '^ Such is the pre- 
sent eagerness of the puhlie for anecdote, that, let an ano- 
nymous author tell the most scandalous and improbable 
falsehood of a known character, there will be no lack of 
readers to swallow it. In pages xii and xiii of the preface 
to this book, the author charges the present Greek Pro- 
fessor of Cambridge with writing a parody on Pope's Eloi- 
sa. This statement is certainly false ; for the parody in 
question was printed for Faulder in 1780, as appears from 
die Critical Review for December 1780, and from the 
Monthly Review for February 1781*. if therefore Mr. 
Porson wrote that parody, he must have written it when he 
was an under-graduate, many years before he became 
Greek Professor. But if the author should say^. that he 
only meant that the person who wrote the parody is now 
the Greek-Professor, I shall pass over the clumsiness of 
the expression, and only desire him to produce his prooiis 
of the latter fact. This I know, that I have several times 
heard Mr. P. seriously disown all share whatever in the 
composition of that parody, and all knowledge of its au- 
thor." Another poem entitled ^^ An Epistle from Oberea, 
Queen cf Otaheite, to Joseph Banks, Esq." 1774, has 
been improperly attributed to R. P. It was written by a 
late Member of Parliament well known in the walks of wit; 

* It was thus announced in a sale-catalogue of the library of the 
late Col. Stuart for June and July, 1814; " 3457. Porson's Eloisa en 
Dishabille (privatelv " [re-] " printed) 1801." The siftht of this no- 
tice gave great pain to our Professor, and induced him to expostu- 
late with tlic compiler of the catalogue, who certainly was not aware 
of the unsoundness of the tradition. 



nor was it R. P.'s only ^^ favourite modern poem," as 
those friends^ who have heard him recite passages from 
The Pleader* s Guide ^ etc., can testify; Vos meministis 
enim, Danai, et memorare potestis. 

P. 257. by night (Luke xi. 5.) : 

p. 262. See a woful instance of the neglect of Matt. 
Prior's caution in a letter to a reviewer inserted in a morn- 
ing paper, Apr. 3, 1806. 

P. 263. 1. 4. Tertullian then 

P. 274. 1. 3. Hon Carm. iv. iv, 43, 4. R. P. ad Ph. 
216. 1. 18. same 1. 21 * * * 

P. 304. 1. 1. calls 

P. 311. 1. 21. Shaksp.'s Hamlet, iii, 4. not in the re- 
print of Ed. Pr. p,271. 

P. 318. 1. ult. Juv. Sat. VI, 283, 4. 

P. 319. 1. 24. Virg. Buc. viii, 108. 

P. 322. 1. 18. 358. 1. ult. Bishop Porleus. 1. 24. The 
late Duke cS Grafton. 

P. 324. note. Much Ado about Nothing, p. 108. ed. Pr. 

P. 326. 1. 9. Juv. Sat. viii, 181, 2. 1. 21. Calvin, Hors- 
ley, the Rev. Wm, Jones, etc. 

P. 332. 1. 23. Swift, * * ♦ 

P. 359. 1. 17* (see p. 151.) Isaiah xxxvi, 6. 

P. 361. 1.4. Tale of a Tub, p. 168. ed. 1704. 

P. 367. 1. 16, see Serm. i. 184. 1. 23. II. B. 128. JIoX- 

P. 379. 1. 15. P. L. VIII, 503. 

Pp. 239, 286, 7. 382, S.—'' if this reading were once 
IN [viz. in Jerome's age, — which Cyprian's Bible as well 
as Jerome's information assure us of] we are bound in jus- 
iice to believe thai it was in from the beginning; — tm- 



tess the putting of it in, at some later period^ can be proved 
by some better argumenty than unfair and violent construe* 
turns. Bp. Horsley apud Travis^ p. 384^ 3d ed. << That 
renowned champion of Orthodoxy" has stated this argu- 
ment more discreetly in a sermon preached at Bromley in 
Kent; Vol. i. p. 182. It is deeply to be regretted that 
this sorry Critic should have been permitted to use the 
authority of that great name :-»Our Church could but ill 
spare such scholars as Horslet and Dampisr in the hour 
of her visitation. 

P. 389. 1. 20. Tracts, 345. ' 

P. 396. 1. 11. Cicero pro Archia iv, p. 298. 1.21. 
cor. 347. 

P. 397. 1. 8. Tracts, p. 346. Horsley has given us hb 
own exposition of the entire passage, 1. c. pp. 182—4. 

P. 398. 1. 21. * * * 

P. 399. 1. 13. In a MS. which arrived in this country 
about fourteen years after the publication of these letters, 
the words stand thus ; in ol rgti; f !<r}y ol fMLfrvfovms* ri 
wvwfia' TO uSfio^* xai ro aXfMi' xa\ ol rgtl^ tU ^i ev i\(riv. In 

other two MSS, ori rgiT^ I. ol fu.* ro mfa* xa) ri uSooj* xa) 
ri oSyM' X. r. A. 

P. 405. note*, 1. 2. Bp. Hallifax. 1. 4. Bp. Watson. 

P. 406. 1. 3, 4. Dr. Johnson * * * 

N.B. In replying to the third edition of Mr. Travis's 
Letters, R. P. calculated the possible loss of temper, and 
the certain loss of time ; and wisely resolved to relinquish 
the humiliating task which could add little or nothing to 
his fame or to this Answer. 

A MS. version of the Gospels in the Gothic dialect, 
written, it is supposed, by Ulphilas Bishop of Moesia, 



about the year 360 or 370, is preserved in the public H« 
braiy at Upsal. R. P. was wont to remark that in an age, 
which teems with literary and religious impostures, a pre-p 
tended counterpart to this Codex may probably be ex- 
humed from an obscure comer of an unexplored Cloister, 
containing, at least, the Catholic Epistles, and furnishing 
irrefragable evidence in defence of 1 John, v. 7> This mis- 
chievous and impious knavery, might be a bait for the hasty 
admirers of Mr. Travis ; but it would speedily be brought 
to shame by the keen, deep searchings of real criticism. 
When I reflect with fear and. trembling on the skill, which 
can extract poison from the most wholesome plants, as 
well as the propensity of certain reformed females, who are 
termagant divines, to exceed all the bounds of truth and 
decency in aspersing or misrepresenting this great man, it is 
but justice to his friends, the first ornaments in Church and 
State*, to assert, which I do most solemnly, that R. P, has 
repeatedly averred, with an elevated warmth, and a severe, 
impressive earnestness, which are felt at this moment, that 
<^ there are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible 
than in any other book whatever f." It has been often 
asked. What service these letters have done to our holy 

• Of those personages I have hut a vtTy imperfect knowledge, but 
more than enough to support my assertion. — He was endeared to the 
Fellows of his own College ; whom I should thiuk it an honour to 
pame. In this point, I imitate, as far as I can with propriety, the 
example of the ancients, — not to sacrifice to heroes till after suu- 

t See Sir I. Newton's remark to Dr. Smith, when he was writing 
his commentary on Daniel, recorded in Bp. Watson's Apology of 
Christianity, p. 84, and in his Sermon preached in the Chapel of 
(he lAMidon Hospital, pp. 7, 8. 

religion } 


religion ? It han hindered one of its cardinal doctrines 
from being supported by falsehood; — let it be defended 
with fair argument and genuine Scripture: ^^ I would not/' 
says that able and mtrepid Theologian, Professor Marsh, 
^^ convert Oti; into Owv, John i, i., or 6 eSv into Jv 6, Rom. 
ix, 5., in defiance of MSS., fathers, and versions, in order 
to weaken the doctrine of Christ's Divinity ; nor would I 
retain, in defiance of the same authority, 1 John v, 7- in 
order to support that doctrine/' 

In 1792 appeared Schawls collation of the only MS. of 
Hesychius extant, cui hoc nomine plurimum debemus. It 
confirmed an incredible number of emendations which had 
been made by R. P. ; and assisted him in extricating from 
the misapprehensions of Musurus glosses which he had 
pronounced incurable. 

*xx. Review of Dr. T. Edwards' edition of [Pseudo-] 
Plutarchi de educatione liberorum liber. 8^. Cantab. 
Month. Rev. July, 1793, pp. 257—264. 

♦xxi. Corrector Lectori [Ftrgilii Londinietisis, cura 
Heyne; 4 voll. 1793; — corrigenda et addenda adnotas 
uncinis inclusa ; — errata quce in textu occurrunt. 

A very learned and perspicacious Scholar had under- 
taken to correct the Press ; after the third or fourth sheet 
of the Index, which was'^jprhited first, the office devolved 
upon R. P.f* The booksellers were Messrs. Payne (ft 
name to be praised, as often as it is mentioned,) White, 
Faulder, and Edwards. 

t For these particulars I am indebted to my friend £. M. 



In *^ a short*' and offensively inaccurate ^' account* of 
the late Mr. P.," it is stated that ^^ in this edition the late 
Mr. Steevens counted four hundred and eighty errata^" — 
Gilb. Wakefield told Mr. Fox, p. 66. that Mr. S. had de- 
tected, he thought, ** 900 errors'* — . Mr. S., whose eye 
was uncommonly nice and faithful, and who has registered 
with a pencil in the margins of a copy of Warton's Pope, 
formerly in his collection, many hundred typographical 
errors, said, if I mistake not, in an auction-room, that 
he had reckoned up 600 errors, more or less. '^ But," 
says an excellent scholar, ^^ whatever might be the num- 
ber of errors, no blame attached to Mr. Porson ; he has 
been heard to declare that the booksellers, after they had 
obtained permission to use his name, never paid the slight- 
est attention to his corrections f." See also ^' remarks 
on Dr. Combe's statement,'^ p. 13. by a friend, who has 
pflten repressed pert pretence, and magnanimously stood 
forth the eloquent advocate of depredated merit {. It is 


* To this tissue of falsehoods and trashy published in 1808, a new 
title-page and preface (pp. i — xii.) were attached in 1814. I am, 
I hope, misiofonned that this is the production of a dignitary of our 

t Mus. Crit. Ill, 395. 

I This encourager of rising genius first mentioned with honest 
pride the name of Pawton in the Month. Review; see N« Jan' 
1785, p. 68. This slight aberration was, perhaps, occasioned by the 
cramp hand of that great scholar; but the same misnomer occurs in 
the Codfessiou of Mr. Ireland jun., a copy of which R. P. used to 
carry about with him, observing to his friends that he had been ap~ 
pealed to by a person who could not spell his name. It may be 
added that R. P. was wont to ridicule the apologies of the believers 
in those forged papers, who contended that, though Shakspere did 



to be regretted that R. P. did not subjoin to this republi- 
cation those short notes, which he had foftnerly meditated 
on Heyne's Virgil. 

*xxii« Review of Mr. R. P. Knight's Analytical essay on 
the Greek Alphabet; 4\ pp. 136. Lond. 179K Month. 
Rev. Jany 1794. pp. 7—26. April, pp. 379—385. 

The questions proposed at p. 1 13, have been, in a gr^at 
measure, answered by Mr. K. in the very learned and use- 
ful Prdegomena to Homer reprinted in Class. Joum. xiv, 


In 1794 came out the plays of Aristophanes, which bad 
received great benefit from an imperfect collation of the 
Ravenna MS. by P. Invernizius. It completely establish- 
ed ninety-six of the emendations made by Dawes, and 
gave the greatest authority to many of R. P.'s restitutions. 
Irascor codici Ravennati, qui toties quidem alias mihi mea 
prseripuerit, nunc vero eandem lectionem, quame.Siiida 
me Comico ledditurum putabam, impudenter sifai arzpga- 
ritf. The negotiations entered into to secure a safe asy- 
lum for it in this country, split upon a trifle. Since that 
time it has absconded. 

not write them ; yet he might have written them ! — In the dedict- 
tion prefiied to Warbarton*s two tracts, 1789, p. 156. n. 1., in Brit. 
Crit. Jan7 1794, p. 49. Feb', pp. 123, 137. Apr. p. 4S4. and Aug. 
1796, p. 102. note, Dr. Parr has applauded R. P.'s matchless attain- 

t The treasures of this incomparaf)le MS. took full possession of 
his mind for a time; he talked about it at home and abroad; dwelt 
upon its intrinsic value day and night. 


Ixviii PREFACE. 


gu»— 1795.J 

^' This very handsome and well-printed book appeared 
without the name of any editor in the title^ without a line 
of preface^ without a single note^ without the scholia^ and 
without the fragments*/' It was printed from the text of 
Stanley corrected by R.P. ; and Mr. Schutz very slilyf 
enriched the second edition of his text, which was design- 
ed for a lecture-book, with many of the corrections.— 
After the original proofs of the first five or six plays had 
been regularly sent to R. P., they suddenly stopped ; and, 
some time after, this impression came forth. It hf^ been 
said, with what truth I know not, that the paper- appro- 
priated for the real edition, had been ingeniously enough 
employed for this copy:(. However, after a considerable 
interval had elapsed, the booksellers ascertained that the 
smaller editipn was in existence. 

' A few copies of the ChoephortB Glasg, apud Foulis, 
1777* may occasionally be met with. The text in the 
main agrees so exactly with R. P.'s true edition, '^ that it 
was manifestly taken from it. The very date betrays a 

• See the Month. Rev., Feby 1796, pp. 191—136., which was 
drawn up by that great man and 6rm friend of our Professor the Rev. 
.Dr. Charles Burn RY, who had frequently congratulated the friends 
of Greek literature upon this expected edition from the Cambridge* 
prees; see M. Rev. for April 1785, p. 295; May, p. 368; Aug. 
pp. 106, 7. ; and July 1789, p. 10. 

t By way of reparation Mr. Schutz has enumerated the termina- 
tion u of the second person singular of the present passive and fu- 
ture middle forms, as well as »«ly«, mi^urm, etc. among the various 
readings furnished by the Glasgow-copy. 

. t For this fact I am indebted to my friend £• M, 



firaiid ; for Mr. Porson was at Eton in 1777/' There is 
another impression of this play by the same printer in the 
same year : but it professes to be ex editione Stanleiana, 
and " is totaDy unlike the former*/' 

xxiii. JEscHYU Trag<edim Sbftbm, — 2 VoU. SP. Glas- 
gue: excudebat Foulis, 1794. Veneunt Londini^ apud 
T. Payne ; etc. 1 806. 

This is the genuine substratum of R. P/s projected edi- 
tion ; it was given to the world with his knowledge^ and, 
after unce^ising importunity, with a sort of half-faced con- 
sent. The proprietors waited for R. P.'s short notes and 
hb collection of the fragments ; but his friends began to 
be impatient, and the booksellers acquiesced. — Afterwards 
R. P. frequently and earnestly conversed about his intend- 
ed preface to this edition. R. P. had arranged the mate- 
rials in his mind ; I heard him twice detul the substance 
of them. When entreated to favour his pupil — the public 
—with a sight of it, he would, at times, promise to try — 
^^ but I hate and abhor composition f." Besides, the 
TowNLBiAN and Clarkian MSS. of the Ilias and of part 
of Plato had arrested his attention so strongly as seriously 
to interrupt his ordinary disquisitions ;(. , 

* See by all means Correspondence in the Month. Rev., Jiine 

t At Eton R.P. was inclined to use the exercise of a frieiuJ, ra- 
ther than endure the drudgery of composition. He would transcril>e 
it faithfully, without even noticing the faults: if, however, his opi- 
nion were requested, R. P. would give it and support it most satis- 

I Since his decease we have been favoured with valuable colla- 
tions inserted by the learned Peier Victariui in the margins of his 

books ; 


Jnne, 1795. About this period it was reported that 
R. P. had addressed a letter to the very acute and judicious 
author of the Evidences of Christidimty concerning his ap- 
peal to certain suspicious testimonies^ which, instead of 
strengthening, would weaken the body of evidence in the 
opinion of the greater part of readers. R. P. informed me 
that the rumour was unfounded. 

*xxiv. Nursery-song. Mom. Chron., 13 April, 1796. 

XXV. ETPiniAOT EJLIBH.— Londini : 1797. 

This edition, in every respect w6rthy of the other hope 
of criticism, did not escape the carping reprehensions of 
ill-advised and unworthy resentment. A scholar f, whom 
R. P. sincerely esteemed for his domestic virtues and inde- 
pendent spirit, but to whom he was not ready to impute 
the gift of divination, fielt indignant that his name was not 
recorded in the prefiace and notes on Hecuba, as it had 
been once in the Appendix to Toup. This is the fountain 
from which all these waters of bitterness flowed. Whatever 
Mr. W. might think, it was, on R. P.*s part, an earnest of 
tenderness ; 

Bella geri placuit nullos habitura triumphos ? 

Besides, Aoi^o^eitrtai S* ov Tpiiru 

iiiSgoig xonpreigy wrxtq oL^fncmXi&ctg. Ran. 857. 

books; and we ardently hope that at a period not very distant we 
shall be enriched with the notes left by Muretos in the vacant space* 
of his books, which, at his death, were removed to the library ot' 
the Jesuits* College at Rome. 

t Tanta in eo mutandi libido fuit, ot hoc iptora eum delectaret, 
mutare, etiamsi caasa non easet. 



R. P. seldom condescaided to elucidate* where the text 
was sound; when he did, like the immortal Scaliger, he 
was rigidly faithful ; ^' surely no man ever construed like 
Porson: iroAX^ j^ri m^ reXmrrahv 6Tiyeyy)}j(M(."— Here 
existed no ground for complaint. Quid sodes tu de 
me? nisi ispum de te et tuis silentium in criminis spe- 
dem trahatur, quod non extra oleas et c^ris fines va- 
garer, te et tua citaturus. Sunt enim qui hoc indig- 
nantur^ sc in cujusris argument! scriptis subs laudes non 
reperiref. A few days before this extemporaneous effort 
appeared, R. P. met the author at the shop of his friend 
and bookseller, Mr. Payne { : they conversed together very 
amicably on literary matters. They afterwards sauntered 
down to Egerton's ; thence back to Charing-Cross, where 
they parted as friendly as possible, each to his business or 
amusement. Shortly after this R. P. left Town for the 
country-house of a friend, where he was informed that W. 
was ^^ coming out with something against him.'* At this 
news R. P. Was surprised ; tbotigh Aot afraid, he was cu- 
rious. He returned to t* own immediately, where he found 
all the world, that is, about twenty or thirty individuals 
open-mouthed about this eagerly-expected pamphlet. At 
length the awiiil moment arrived; and the Diatribe extem- 
poralis was ushered into public notice, as if it were destined 
to succour a sinking age, and to annihilate the dearty- 

• Pa£F. ivii, ed. 1. 

t R. B. Clerico, p. 209. 

X At this shop, which is the conflui of learning, R. P. formerly 
discussed with G. W. a passage iu Eur. Ion. 1198. See Cr. Rev., 
June 1802if p. 126. 



earned reputation of R. P.* A copy was immediately fbr-' 
warded to our Professor, who at this time was in a very 
languid state, owing to the oppressive heat of the atmo- 
sphere. He, however, talked it over, and proved that there 
was as little skill in the execution as prudence in the de- 
sign ; and intimated that a column or more in a morning 
paper would be amply sufficient to show that in all the pa- 
rade of critical sagacity there was scarcely one grain of so- 
lidity.— *A sincere and able friend answered Mr. W. more 
to his conviction than his satisfrtcuonf. Mr..W<, fully 
predetermined in his mind to urge on his own strictures 
without the least regard to the answers of others, attempt- 
ed to renew the attack in a contemporary journal X» — But 
** anger has some claim to indulgence, and railing is usu- 
ally a relief to the mind/' 

His readers have complained, and with reason, on the 
conciseness of his notes. He ^' seldom explains his own 
canons so copiously as might be expected, but studies bre- 
vity too much, and does not sufficiently consult the appre- 
hension of common readers §/' Hec. 347 =3424 He al-^ 

* R. P. beloDged to a dab consisting of seren and a president ; — 
their r^ulation was, to have no regulation. On the eve of this stu- 
pendous tract making its appearance tlie members happened to 
meet^f and in the course of the evening the President proposed that 
every member should give a friend, and accompany it with a suit- 
able passage or sentiment from Shakspere; which was agreed upon « 
When it came to R. P.'s turn, " I'll give you," said he, " my friend 
Gilbert Wakefield; — ' What is Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba?"' 

t Month. Rev., Jan^, Febi^, April, July, Aug. 1799; and Fe[>' 
1800. Sed apud iosanos, et in eo, quod semd dixerunt, obstina- 
tos, nihil momenta rationum valeot. 

t Crit. Rev., Nov. 1800; Jao% Feb% April, 1801. See Letters 
to Mr. Fox, p. 177. 

§ Letters to Travis, pp. 87, 8. « , 

t^REFACEi Ixxiii 

lu^ to ah accurate and refined application of a canon to 
Uie tragedies, which, about fourt^n years before this pe- 
riod, he had investigated and tried by facts,, and not by 
the illusive and baseless fabHc of metaphysical specula^^ 
tions. The authorities, which were supposed to militate 
iagainst it, were numerous and Unmanageable*. Ni vis 
boni In ipsa inesset forma, haec formlun fextinguerent. He 
received abundance of letters concerning it : one acousl^ 
him of plagiarism, see P. xxxivi } another did him the 
honour to be his antagonist in print, but R. P. would not 
do him the honour to be his, Ut, cum victus erit, tecum 
certasse feratur. At length a German critic f of great 
acuteness and metrical subtlety extorted from him that 
portion of the supplement^ which in exactness of research, 
nice perception of wrong, and cl^ahiess of induction, is 
almost without a parallel. The generoUs Herman was 
Wont to do it justice in his lecture-room; it has been 
hinted that this indefatigable editor had in contemplation 
a defence of the anapest in the third place. — Our deplored 
Professor vouchsafed to run it over with me ; and what I 
then heard, to hiy good use, I remembered ;(• 

♦ In Brit.Cr., Dec. 1797. lEschjl Pen. 321, and Suppl. 206. were 
cited, and properly, as exceptions. See Suprt. >cxxv, vi. ed. 1. 

t Homo nc.que meo judicio stultus^ ct suo valde sapiens. Cic de 
Orat. I. S9. Indeed R. P. had no great opinion of the metrical sci« 
ence of the German editors. He once closed an interesting convert 
sation about them with the line of Cratinus, which he recited with 
particular emphasis ; Ovtm 2* tUh SmCm^t*), «^«Mri^«^«^ yim A^^Sv, 

t All his communications with me were iy^faliy/imTm, except 
Achxi fr. ap. A then. xi. 466. F., the imitation of Phocylidcs* saw, 
with the English translation ; and the following query at the end of 
a letter, " Appendix to Milton, pp. 604, 605. Will hfx*k*f^ *" ^^^ 
first chorus of the Antigone furnish any defence of Milton's )tv^ 
h or is %wx^i^ itself faulty or suspicious?'' 

f xxvi^ 


XXVI, ETPinUOT OFESTHS. Londini: 1798. 

xxvH. ETPinUOT 4^0INISSAL Londini : 1799. 

xxviii. Review of ^^ The Sovereign ; *' by C. S. Pybus, M. P. 
M. Rev. Dec. 1800, pp. 276—80. 

This tnily neal specimen of playful critidsm is too 
closely connected with the political lucubrations of Lou- 
reniius Musambertius to be inserted in this collection. 
On first qiening this splendid volume in the presence of 
one or more friends^ and reading a few lines^ R.P. said or 
sung, / 

** And wbeo the pie was opeo'd. 
The birds began to sing; 
And is not this a dainty dish 
To set before a king? ** 

xxix. Collatio codicis Harleiani 5674 cum Odyssea edi- 
tionis Ernestince 1760. Oxon. 1801. 

The Grenville Homer, to which this collation is ap- 
pended, was printed at the Clarendon-Press for the three 
noble brothers^ and R. P. was prevailed upon by the pre- 
sent revered Bishop of St. Asaph*, a friend to literature 
and religion, t<) examine the well-known Harleian MS. for 
ibis purpose. As the editor cannot becomingly praise liv- 
ing characters, however good and great, he may be per- 
mitted to own with gratitude the undeserved humanity of 
the late Marquis, which fell like the dew of heaven on his 

* Since writing the above this venerable Prelate has paid the last 
debt of nature. He was a determined encourager of Greek ; '' and 
in spirit and in truth he had learned Christ." 




necessity; it came so opportunely and in season. Yes, 
noble Marquis, xihtreu tro) iivt^iirlu iv ri ^furigcf oixcp 
lo'a«} eofetyfairrof, 

XXX. ETPiniAOT MHJEIA. Cantabrigiae, 1801. 

In 1801 — 1805 Professor Schweighaeuser favoured the 
world with an edition of Athenaeus. A MS., which had 
been imported from Greece by Cardinal Bessario, and in- 
humed at St. Mark's, Venice, found its way to Paris du- 
ring the revolution. It is the archetype of all the known 
transcripts of the Deipnosophist in Europe. Apprized of 
this acquisition, the editor sent young Schweig/uBUSer to 
inspect it. The time allotted for this occupation was too 
short ; though it proved to be quite sufficient to lessen the 
admiration due to '' the prophetic eye of taste'' which had 
r^ved unnumbered beauties inherent in fragments pre- 
served by Athenaeus. If our Professor's short notes on 
Athenaeus had been published in 1798, or 1799, he would 
have been justly hailed '' a diviner without magic, and a 
prophet without inspiration," if they had formed hb only 
legacy to mankind.-^R. P. requested his learned and good 
friend, the Rev' Richard Heber*, to examine certain frag- 
ments with this codex during a short visit to Paris, from 
which our gifted critic collected that more might have 
been done to his cost ; and that young Schweighaeuser had^ 
without knowing it, been very merciful* 

* Thjr volumes open as tby heart| 
Delight, amusement, science, art. 
To every ear and eye impart ; 
Yet who of all, who thus employ them. 
Can, like the owner's self» enjoy them? 

f 2 [Eoai' 

Ixxvi PREFAC15. 

[EuRiPiDis Trag(EDia. — Lipsiae, 1802.] 

xxxi, ETPinUOT EKABH. Cantabrigiae, 1802. 

xxxii. Acceduni Supplemenlum ad prafaticnem et ad- 
denda ad notas. SP. Londini: 1802. 

This second and somewhat improved edition of the sup-r 
plement was printed with a new title-page, for the use of 
those who had become purchasers of the former edition of 
the Hecuba ; an instance of editorial probity well worthy 
to ^e imitated by our German brethren. Actuated more 
by a love of honesty than of book-making, Mr. Wotton 
published in a separate form, for the accommodation of 
those, who were in possession of the first impression^ 
^^ Additions to the second edition of his Reflections upon 
ancient and modern learning ;'' in which Dr. Bcntley's 
immortal dissertation upon the epistles of Pseudo-Phalaris, 
Themistocles, Socrates, Euripides, and fables of Maop first 

A large-paper copy was inscribed to his munificent pa- 
tron, the late Sir George Baker, BRITANNIARUM AP- 
XI ATP fill another to that keen discerner of ancient art, 
that intuitive perceiver of Phidian graces, the late Charles 
TowNLY, Elsq.; and one of the copies upon vellum was 
presented to a strenuous friend at Cambridge. 

^xxxiii. John Nic. Dawes lo the editor of the Monthly 
Magazine, M. Mag. Dec. 1802. pp. 375, 6. 


PREFACE. Ixxvii 

xxxW. R. P/s Greek inscription for the Bust of Ceres : 
July 3, 1803. Mus. Crit. Oct. 1814. iv, 559, 

R. P.'s Latin inscription for the fragment of the statue 
of Ceres^ which was brought from Eleusis^ and placed in 
the Vestibule of the University Library at Cambridge. 








XXXV. R. P. to A. DalzeL Essex-Court, Sep. 3, 1803. 
Mus. Crit. March, 1814. in, 330-37. 

In the Crit. Rev. March, 1805; pp. 225-38. is an in- 
teresting account of Mr. R. lValpole*s specimens of scarce 
translations evidently drawn up from a conversation with 
which the Editor had been indulged by R. P. In this and 
other similar instances * of friendly zeal in the cause of an- 
cient learning R. P. rivalled his great model. Doctor Bent- 
ley, who in 1722 had imparted in an interview with the 

* It is not certain that a conference of the same kind did not take 
place in drawing up fur die British Critic the accounts of the strictly 
similar impression of the text of the Codex Cantabrigiensis superin- 
tended by Dr. Kipling, and of Wakc(ield*s Lucretius. Compare 
>!•'. for April 1794, pp. 36*2, 3. with Tracts, pp. 293—6. Pkap. ad 
Eur. P. xviii.; and N°. for May 1801, p. 459. with Tracts, p. S39. 
K.P. ad Med. 629. H. P. pointed out an t'mendaiijii of a Greek epi- 
graiu to an occasional writer in the Monthly Mag., wiiich I shall not 
put dowO| as I have not an opp>rtunity of verifying the reference. 




Editor of ^^ Memoirs of Literature/' v. 2^ pp. 7—11 .re- 
marks upon a passage in Virgil's fourth eclogue^ v. 45.^ the 
substance of which was afterwards given in a note on Lu- 
can's Phais. iv^ 125. 

A. P. apud R. Walpole ad fragmenla Comicorum 
Grcecorufn. Cantabrigiae : 1805. To these are append- 
ed translations by the late Mr. Cumberland^ from which it 
is evident that this indefatigable and pleasing writer had 
profited greatly by*the collection of fragments b^un by his 
illustrious ancestor; see R. B. Millio, pp. 18^ 43., Ber- 
nardo, p. 171<> apud Kuster. ad Suid. v. Siei^eovofsvoi. In 
the Observer, however, vi, 81, 2. Mr. C. has unintention- 
ally misled his English reader; ia^ao'eig rov aiga To¥ xoivoy, 
is the language of Tragedy ; conf. Gnom. Poet. Gr. p.l91. 

Herodotus.— Tom. I. Edinburgi: 1806. 

The sheets of the first volume were looked over by 

About this period R. P. appeared inclined to give us a 
dissertation upon the utility of verbal criiicism. 

[EuRiFiDis TRAGKEDiiB. — Edidit Ricardus Porson A. M. 
— T. I. 8°. Editio in Germania altera correctior et auc- 
tior indicibusque locupletissimis instructa. Lipsiae — 

In this second foreign edition the Hecuba was reprinted 
from the Cambridge republication with all the additional 
improvements of the preface ; and the other three trage- 
dies fi*om copies which had been presented at different 
times to the learned F. Jacobs, in which were a few MS. 



notes inserted in the margins by our Professor, but which 
are omitted in the posthumous impressions.] 

xxKvi. ETPinUOr EKABH.—lmptmis G. Wilkie et 

J.Robinson, 180S, 

This third edition appeared without the title-page. 


Quatuor fabulis, postquam typis repetitae erant, accedet- 
Praefatio auctior aliquanto et emendatior, cum Indicibus 

— iota in textu scriptoris reddendo semper adscripsit 

Additamenta ad notas ed. 3. ; *2. 88=86. *169. 219= 
215. 245 = 241. 257=253. *254, 5. 264=260. (295. 
conf. ad Or. 792.) 323=319. *335=331. 362=358. 
447=443. 458=453. 539=533. 584=578.604=598. 
624=618. 711=^705. 734=728. 768=762. 788=782. 
quater. 793=787. 801=795. 894=888. 987=979. 
1046=1038. bis. 1050=1042. 1061 = 1053. 1078= 
1070. 1098=1090. ter. «1 138= 1130. 1149=1141, 
aliter digessit et auxit. 1169=1161. 1265 = 1257* 

^xxxvii. SvvFLEMEVTAad Indices BruncVn in Sophoclem; 
— ad Beckium in Euripidem; ad Simplicium in Epic* 
tetum et ad Cebeiis Talulam ; quae amicorum in usum 
recudenda curavit, et ex collationibus ab Hieronymo 
MiBO et Laica Holsienio factis varise lectiones, quas ve- 
teres et probas existimaverat, in margine exemplaris ad- - 
nota^t R. P 




^jcxxviii. CoNJBCTUiLE, quibus lapidis iSgyptiaci quadra^ 
lis litteris incisi lacunas supplere mira sagacitate molie« 
batur R. P, April 23. 1810. 

^xxxix. Scripiores in Scholiis ad Platonem Lugduni Ba^ 
tavorum nuper editis allegaii. 1 sent this article to the 

W Classical Journal for Sept. 1810; it is reprinted in this 
collection^ pp. 270*^75. 


Prctfatio et Sffppiemen/Knt.— ^Lpndini, Id. Jan. mdcccxi. 

If R. P.'s life had been prolonged to recast this preface 
and supplement^ they would, I believe, have been incor- 
porated. When a pasted copy, which had been arranged 
in this manner, was showi^ |q R. P^ it certainly met with 
his approbation, 

Additamenta ad Pa. ed. 3. vii, * = viii, • ix, 25 =x, f. 
in Suppl. ed. 3. xvi, 2\ =:xvii, 20. xviii=xix, * . xxivss 
XXV, * • X3^xiv, S^ii^xxxvii, 8, 18. xxxv, 25, 6:;?xxxix, 1, 
2. xxxvi, 10=;xxxix, 16, 7. xxxviii, 7^ et xxxix, 13. et 
25, 6,=xli, 14, et xlji, 6, 8, 9. 25, xl, 2=5Xiiii, 15, 6. 
xKi, 4=xlv, 19—27. xliv, 18=xlviii, 15. xlv, 13=:xlix, 
16. xlvi, 14=1, 19, 20. liv, 26::*lviii, ult. et lix, 1—7. 

ETPiniJOT OPESTHS. Londini, 1811. 

Additamenta Pp. 3, 4, 5,; vss. 35. 49. 79. 92. 122. 
128. 141. 143. 154, 156. 219. 221. »228. *229. 248. 
864. 339. 390, ♦SOS. *401. *404. 412. 428. 470, 476, 
485. 499. *528. ♦536. 557. *581. 585. *589. 59^. 613. 
646. »658. 719. *721. 780. 792. 922. 929. 1001. 1037, 
\m. 1194, 1241. 1248, 1259, ♦1363. *1279. *1338. 



ETPinUOT 4^0INISSAL Londini, 1811, 

Additamenta et correctiones ; 488. 655 margini Ed. 1. 
B92. Kingius conjicit xiyd itaqaov ed. 2. ; restitue exedA, 
Kingius conjicit xayoo ti fuvj hpwv, Valckenaerius x&yco 
T«j«v. 1093. 1172. 1252. 1277,8. 1353. 1373. 1396 
ceyglav yfvt/v ed. i. 1. 5. et sic Valckenaerius ad 1. 1464. 
oy^xeed. 1,1.8, 1772. 

[438. — *^ ad Med, 284,** nescio quid errati subest. 
Immb Porsoni in animo fuit Musgravii rationes trutina 
castigare ^^ ad Med. ^84"; sed, mutatp forte consilio^ 
censurani in Iph. Aul. 124. destinavit.] 

ETPinuOT MHJEIA. Londini : 1812. 

Additaipenta ; 34. bis. 50 atnij ed, 1. 51. 1. 3. (to) ed. 1« 
♦107 et 109. p. 19, III. •193. 264. 269. ♦285. *340, 
♦360. •363. 365. ^369. ♦385. •402. 426. ^444. ♦451. 
*457. 468. ^521. ^528. 530. 564. 577. 585. 588. ♦593. 
♦600. •625. *646. 659. 666. 675. ^727. ♦737. 750. 
*766. ^770. 809. ^815. ^816. ♦836. 914. ^940. *972. 
973. *982. *1005. 1022. PluL 529. ed. I. ^1034. 1048. 
1060 Thgarrai ed. 1. 1104. 1180. *1216. *1237. 1258. 
♦1269. ♦1276. 1308. ♦1330, ♦1375. 1393. 1. ult. t^m 
ed. 1. ♦1394. 1396. 

xl. RiCARDi Porsoni ADVBRSARiAf Sumptibus CoUegii 
S.S. Trinitatis Cantabrigiae 1812. 
These fragments were arranged and printed under the 

f This volume has been lately reprinted at Amsterdnra for the 
Booksellers at Leipzig, Leyden, Uome, Florence, Hamburgh, Vien* 
fia, and Paris. The Appendix and Propempticuni are of little or no 
value, the paper is wretched, and die whole transaction is truly 


auspices of his learned successor^ and of Ihe Rev. C. J, 
Blomfield, A. M. the deservedly celebrated editor of Es- 
chylus. It is earnestly hoped that the world will be fi^ 
voured with another volume of emendations drawn from 
the margins of our late Professor's reserved volumes, which 
axe happily in the Library of that noble Society. His 
beautiful transcript of the Galean Photius is amongst them. 
His papers on Aristophanes have been intrusted to my 
much-valued friend, P. P. Dobree, A. M. Fellow of Trin. 

Whether R. P. left a transcript of the Hippolytus pre- 
pared for the Press, I cannot ascertain. There was a copy 
of Portus' Doric Lexicon in the London Institution, in 
which were loose papers of R. P. 

A copy of the Ajax of Sophocles, which was in the col- 
lection of the universally-regretted Dr. Raine, is emended 
throughout by the pencil of R. P. This eminent teacher 
had employed himself in moments of lebure upon a sche- 
diasm on the use of the Greek accentual marks, in which 
R. P. was often consulted. The papers were well calcu- 
lated to bcilitate the attainment of this necessary branch 
of Greek literature. — Indeed the benevolent emotions, 
which actuated that family in consulting the comforts, and 
in promoting the literary views of our lamented Professor, 
entitle the name of Raine to be inscribed on the same 
column as that of PoRSON. 

R. P. meditated a supplement to Kuh$Uus* Pausanias, 

* The hints registered hy R. P. in the margins remind us now and 
then of what A. Geliius said of Nigidius Figulus; ** anguste perquatu 
et obscure dissent, ut signa rerum ponere videas ad subsidiimi 
luttgis memoriae su« quaro ad legeiitium disciplinam.*' 


Iiy which Faems* edition would have been rendered use 

R* P. presented the editor with his interleaved copy of 
Dawss^ on condition that he would undertake an edition 
of the Miscellanea Critica. He submitted to him his pa- 
pers on the most arduous part of this province in July, 
1808, when R.P. very kindly intimated that he would eom- 
munieate a few notes ! — It is now in the Cambridge-press. 

Beferenoes to communications y most of which have appear" 

ed since R, P.*s decease. 

R. ?• in Malone^s supplement to Shakspere, i, 367. 

Amongst other scholars, who had promised to contri- 
bute to the Museum OxoniensCy the very learned and 
highly respected Bishop of St. David^s expresses his obli- 
gations '^ viro eruditissimo R. Porson, qui huic open ob- 
servationes in loca quaedam Euripidis destinavit.^' Oxonii 
Apr. 1792. ' 

— apud Gilb. Wakefield ad Eur. Ion. 1198. Lond. 
1794 (Conf. J. H. Monk, ad Hipp. 1343. Adverss. 270). 

ETPiniJOT innoATTos ste^anh^opos f. h. 

i^erton. 4^ Oxonii, 1796. 

—Vs. 1444. add. 

N. B. About 1797i a passage from y//apAro*5 epistles 
was quoted in a note to * * * Part of *' the Pursuits of 
Literature;'^ it is not sense, as it stands in the editions. 
A gentleman of extensive reading and literary reputation 
consulted R. P. about it, who suggested an easy emenda- 
tion that removed every difficulty. In the next edition 


Ixxziv PREFACE. 

* this restoration appeared to take its place coolly and silently. 
Since that impression the passage has either absconded^ or 
I am not sharp-sighted enough to find it in the copy which 
1 have examined. 

- — Rev. Dr. C. Bumey, Month. Rev. Feby 1799 ♦, 
p. 203. 

■ ■■ S* Weston — Horatius cum Grsecis scriptoribus col- 
latus; 1 80 1 . In a subsequent edition of this diatribe, R. P. 
is alluded to ad Carm. I. xxxviii, 2 (Adverss. p. 119.). 

— — - G. L. Spaldif^. R. P. at the request of a friend 
collated the ancient MS. fragment, in the Library of St. 
John's Coll. Cambridge, for the use of the editor : see 
Vol. II. Pr. iv. Lips. 1803. R. P. also collated an Ox- 
ford MS. of one or more Orations of Demosthenes for the 
late Dr. Raine. R. P. transcribed certain inedited Orphic 
hymns for the use of F. Jacobs. 

£. D. Clarke, LL. D. The Soros of Alexander. 

Camb. 1805. P. 158. 

J. Hodgkin's Specimens of Greek Penmanship. 

Aug. 1805. The small letters in the first table were care- 
fully copied from a sample which R.P. wrote before Mf. H. 
for that purpose. 

G. BurgeSy A. M. virum doctrina, probitate pr»- 

stantem, ad Eur. Troad. 447. Cantab. 1807. 

■ apud virum eruditissimum et amicissimiun Caro^ 
lum Burney in Tentamine de meiris ab iEschylo in cho- 
ricis cantibus adhibitis. Cantabrigiae : 1809. 

P. V. p. 7. Pers. p. 15. Suppl. p. 32. 

Greek Marbles — ^by JS. D. Clarke, LL.D. Cam- 
bridge: 1809. Pp. 6. 50, 1. 56. 65. 

* I have placed che Journals chronologicaily. 


i^refaCb. Ixncv 

apud P. Elmsley ad Aristoph. Acharn. 1809; v. 
612. [Edin. Rev. xxxvii, 67.]. Advss. p. 200. 
-^— — Edinburgh Review xxix^ p. 159. xxx, 320. 
Classical Journal, i, 28. ii, 329. 343. 

H^AISTinNOS ErX£/P/J/OiV— cura T. Gaisford, 
A.M. Oxon. 1810. 

Pp. 10, col. 1, ct 2. 27, 2. 39, 2. 40. 45, 1. bis. 

52, 2. 216. 222 (Daw. M. C. p. 222.). 240. 243. 245. 
264,5. 270. 272. 278. 286. 288. 292. 296. 316. 327. 
330, 1. 337. bis. 341. 355. 358. 364. 

cobus Biomfield A. B. Cantab. 1810. 

^ apud C. J. B. 2. 17. 44. (et in Glossario) 60. 128. 

322. 330. 337. 358. 594. 650. 701. 953, in Glossario. 
992. 1051 in Gloss. 

apud T. Gaisford, Graecarum litteranim apud Ox- 

onienses Professorem ad Euripidis Supplices ; vol. i. Oxon. 
1811. R.P. 19. 110. 200. bis. 298. 659. 759. 909. 968. 
1079. 1111 (pp. 206.bi3. 207,8.). 

ad Iph. Aul. vol. ii. 27. 629. add. 633, 4, 1, 2. 

add. 638. &70. add. 1247. 1341. add. 1400. 

ad Iph. Taur. 49.add. 238 (R. P. ad Ph. 22.). 610. 

Quarterly Review vi, 396. ix, 215* [Adverss. 

47]. 228. 

cobus Henricus Monk A. M. etc. Cantabrigiae 1811. 

* I am in donbt about the date, as the Journal is not within reach. 



apud J. H. M. ad vas. 2. 77. 176—266. 182. 216. 

301. 877. 493. 505 (conf. Addend.). 529. 582. 648. 698. 
725. 818. 959. 1018. 1251. (Advens. 271). 1397 (ibid. 

Classical Journal vii, 97— '104. 

— — p Edinburgh Review xxxYiii^ 497. 502. 

A. M.— Cantabrigiae 1812. 

vss. 17. 414. 946, Glossario [Edin. Rev.xxxviii, 


Classical Journal x, 297, 8. xii,393. xiii, 141, 2. 

Museum Criticum i, 4 [rSF R. P. apud M. D.]. 

68. 119. 122. 

Claiss. Joum. xiv, 248. 456-^458. xv, 178. 181 


Mus. Crit. II, 220. in, 283—291 [ex Miltoni ex- 

emplari]. 330--337. 391-^98. 

Class. Joum. xix, 65. 114, 15. 

Mus. Crit. IV, 559. 

Class. Journ. xx, 401, 2. 

— — apud 7. Gaisford ad Theognid.-«-Oxon. 1814. 
702. ad Solonis Fr. p. 836. xiv. ad Minmermi Fr. p. 425. 

apud virum doctissiinuin et mihi amidssimum, 

Edvabdum Maltby, ad Morelli Lexicon Grssco-Proso- 
diacum; 2 voU. Cantab. 1815. pp.32. 52. ter. 103. 
137. (?) 299. 435. 461. 526. 603. 605. 689. 823. 830. 
927- 1007.* 

— - Classical Joum. xxii, ji27, 8. 

* I have Dot seen the new edition of the Ferut by the very learn- 
ed editor of Eschylus. 



Ab to the present collection, part of it, viz. from pp. 2 
— >157* was made during the life-time of our Professor^ 
and submitted to his inspection. No doubts were enter- 
taiiibd^ knMiceming the genuineness of the articles; but I 
was anxious to obtain his sanction, which was not with- 
held.«>I b^ leave to tender my grateful acknowledge- 
ments to the Rev. Martin Davy [M.D.], D.D., Master 
of Gonville and Gaius College, Cambridge, and to the Rev. 
Edward MaUby [E. M.*], D.D., for their invaluable 
contributions ; to the Rev. P. P. Dobree [P.P.D.], Fellow 
of Tm. CoU. Camb., who, to oWi rei r&v flkm iiywfuvos 
xoiv^, supplied me with numerous and most important 
papers^ and to the very learned and communicative Greek 
Professor of Oxford, who furnished me with the long- 
soi^t^for extract from Lewis' Essay on the consecration 
of Churches; to R. Duppa, Esq., the biographer of Ra« 
phaei, for favouring me with R. P.'s autognqoh; to Mr. E. 
H. Barker f for procuring me a sight of the printed intelli- 
gence in that work ; and to the Rev. Dr. S. Parr, the 
Champion of ancient literature and humanity, who honour- 
ed me with a copy of emendations for which I had lan- 
guished more than righteen years. 

h Toio'i Seivoi; ivfjiiv oix iwiXscrgVf 
d>Ji o^oy oJ^ T(m}0'iy* Arairws Si <''^ 

' The following synopsis of emendatory criticism was sub- 

* Our lamented Professor was with his sincere friend [E. M ] 
about Midsummer 1804/ and again in the autumn of the foUowing 
year; staying about ten days at each time. During these visits the 
corrections with which I have been favoured were communicated. 
See Index, v. Porson. 



]ji:XXVill PREVACl&k 

tnitted to R. P. in April 1808, with which he was highly 
gratified. — Here allow me to express my sentiments of re-^ 
gard for the House of Lackington, Allen, etc*^ as well for 
the facility of access to their valuable repository, with 
which I was at all times indulged during my residence in 
Town ; as for allowing thems^Wes to be prevailed upon to 
make the first ofier of part of Bbntlbt's Library, which 
fell into their hands at two different times, to the Right 
Hon^*^ the Tnistees of the British Museum^ in preference 
to private collections of less extensive utility. They be- 
haved most handsomely on both occasions ; they know- 
ingly disposed of the volumes for less than a moiety of the 
sum which they could have gained for them from other 
quarters. It is but justice to thb Hoilse to add that when^ 
in the heat of negotiation^ it was insinuated that the value 
of the collection was greatly diminished by ui individual^ 
who had previously inspected them, they replied in the 
spirit of a better age, that the books were their property^ 
and that they were not answerable to any person for the 
access which they had given that individual to them. Still 
this supposed KA'AA ISTON "ONEU OS would have damp- 
ed his zeal in the good old cause, if he had not been com- 
forted and encouraged to persevere in it by the cheering 
approbation of Doctor Rainb and Professor Porson. 

I almost forgot to mention that in conversing with a 
North Briton concerning this naiUmal acquisition^ R. P« 
portrayed the prominent features of Bentley's literary cha- 
racter with a justness and familiarity, which so warmed 
the plain, honest hyperborean, that, before they parted, 
he ventured to inquire if Dr.Bentley were npt a Scotchman, 



PREFACE. Ixxxiz 

Aristopb. Ed. Kuster. ——Ed. Ba&. 1547. 

Flatus. PIutuB. 

453. TpoTCOMv i¥- arrfCalro-^ lege, T. iv anjaoiro — et Bic 

ad Ph. 581. Suidas. 

510. haofelfuniv r Jo'oy airov. iiavel^Af */ ^crw aitif, 

PR.lii. [Cod. R A v.] 
770, Tracts^ p. 20. 'Ev$nxyv[Mvos vel •yoV y 

785. EvinKyvfMvos hcaaros ad 

Fh. 1263. xAfitnjy itoX^v Steph. Byz. T. 

835. dirikiitey ad Hec. 1 Mp. dtiXntty 

Nub^. Nubes. 

B67' Ka) rcJy xpsiJLavrpuJy w xpifMiipos secondam corripit^ 

rpl^wy rwY htdSs on the aa- ut xpiiypvL et pleraqoe 8i« 

tboritj of Pollux, x, 157. milia apod Nostram; forte 

tee Tracts, p. 28. igltur xo) reSy x^\LaApwif oS* 

"gut rpKutv rm Mii$. Im« 
mo vero xo) rm xpi(Mffrfo5v 
oJ rp, r. g, Pollux enim 
lib. z. notat Ariftophanem 
in Ns^fXoi^ xfS[Murrp(i/f dix« 
870. *l}ou\ xpsfM t(!;~ad Itgd, xpsfiai wg 

Med. 675. 
1040 Pr. xliv. xo} ro7if yo/4rO<f xo} ra7ip Jtxdu; 

ISte. oiJ ydp rot iiiig ycr^y lege, 00 yif rot' wW^ >tff'' 
o'C'nirfs0'9a/rcxa}fl'a're<ir9au ^* opa rvittiO'SeJ y vel 0*1 
Pr. xliv. nuV. 

* " Bentleius, su minus alioqui critlcQi, sed nuHiui aact(>ritatis in Ari- 
itophane, ad qoem mioime imbutos Attici lennonit cognitione accemiu" 
Herman, ad Nub. 325. 






1399. Sir ifyWf cJ xoiywy htm 
x4y^|nB&^ Med. 1314. 


5dO. *Avaftn'fambhos9 xuvwv 

App. 488* 
^QOfl^w Ph. 740. 

Ko} 431 rlipia'as ^tws ouoroig 
Yiyvedovfi^Bilial^afi Prjbf. 

roifr' foSufMiy. l£<}/fa^ 

II ■• 

R1CAHDU8 Bbntlbivs. 

KOimv A Mnp'i'] a lege, X^ycuy 
p. 81 (357). 


[355. *H yiv— We *w— HTN 
— f7»er GeUii MS. F^rif . 

372. seq. rouroi^ au^Wf Koeutis 
avau^w xav4<^ ro rptrov 

rt ftoX«ijy Kxi TTXMMY- 
XA^C ra^ rifunpaf at 
rrji ifpnfownv BOprtj idem 
550. lege xvvm 

631. fiavrnfuS 
948. leg. ipytHy op ^cria 
961. dele, i}y 

1042. toXtctv 

1051. xa) ov r/ ^pivcts oStws 

aitois ysvyououg i^sSi^a^as -, 

Ysyvaiovs t^B^i^a^as MS. 

Barooc. [vide ep. ad Mill. 

p. 19.]. 
1058. £7ra hicl^as Uip^of, 

MS. recte, si leg. ti$iliaia 
1087. "i^Sa-iv tt vcl roTirir J* 

1095. 1^, iXfiyo} 


Equitei. Equites. 

ixMneifilKas ad Or. 1279. ^l^- 1^> fxxixoS^ipca^ Suidat 

in dyoKiKcipyjnas 
Koft^ roirr HSfAttt rcLvro, r^ 319* Scribe^ xcl[ji.k, y^ Zilo, 
Ai", cJcTf xxtaYiXtay Pr. tw^^ i^pavg — vel, xa/xl roSfr' 

[342. rol xa) ifttOiBtis, d^to7( 
iftov Xsystv !varti] 
*£i is^wrarov xoiatf o'OffSs ys 4 1 9. ^Ci h^iurrarov xpias* ^^ 
'^pwo^o'M Pe. xli. fc?; ye ifpoiv^w tig fb. 

dde; 215 (457. Br.) 
'Hydf/xaCcv Xi^ovrag iitu irpos 505. P. 56. (Arg. ad Nub.) in 
TO iiarpovitapaCiivou' Tracts^ Sch. sic habetar^ ijya!)ocaC^ 
p. 28^ Pr. Iv. Xi^orroLf i^ v*^^ ro iianrpw 

iroLpaC^veu* Tidep,4<S2(Pflc« 
Tracts p. 34. 569. KoSfis 

T? [ilv haitolvri *A. ad Xen. 7&>. lege, Tj Jwvdi^ jutiy 'A, 

Anab. vii. 527> 6. 
Orcc;^ Itf'o/xai Tracts, p. 35. 1253. lorojxai Suidas : recte« 

Achamenses. AchameDses. 

Ohotfg i^x'^V ^^^ ^^i^f '^^S 18. 71 dele, et sid Soidas t. 

0^^^ — ^Tracts, p. 29. *PiS«TO]Liai 

^jprr iv ad Mod. 863, 16I— fwyr' iry vel J/ conf. 

ad Ecclet. 646« 

W^Kkf ydp M* ^hof Tracto, 270. lege, itoXXui yip lrf*^i« 

p. 32. oy,-— et Swdas 

nittfup^jiv Pe, xjnri. ['Aire- 706. Lege, xiitsficp^eiiMiv, wth 

fi>ig^aro Lex. SangBrmi p. rou lUpyvvi^* see Tracts^ p. 

421.] 199. 

|y ifyrffliApp. 472^1 855. ir 1^ V^J Bq[.474. ir 



RiCABDUi PoKsoiruj. 


322. BouXojxai yt irctXiy jemS 
JljbuJy IxScJy Etr) rwg xaSU] 

xovg xoixif n iroiYiffou. xovs, xaxoV ri iroiiicrau. 
ad Hec. 116^. 

rvpawtKoi, ad Hec. 788. 


Ti 0*01 itOT Srf ovofjJ ; Tracts^ 

p. 35. 
i] yap gKyeyoir ionv njv ij/xc- 

pav roLUTrjv irwi. 
'AXX', J ftix' yVo TOT Aw; 

d|/MX^vy^crolJMl App. 497- 
ar/a\wiusv 'HMBICac/. App« 

496. Tracts, p. 187. 
*4[1C xoxoVoi rixc; aioriy |y ij|x7y 

Brunck. Tracts, p. 25. 
do'iupoiciy ^xSt; i9|x}y 
trfd^tts rov olv 

A^cuc App. 480. 
oi^ayoyr' ad Ph. 1398. 


505. rvpayyixi. 


184. Ti o-o/ *or' Jot' oyoft'j 

Suidas V. fua^ol, 
346. alfc jttoi yeyoir lh7v r^v 

ifpjpay 'teuitrjy itOTe. 

379- '*?g' — f**X*, iwro AioV 7* 

0^, vel, iti rou Aio; 
398. dyaXoSfuy jjiiils aei 

495. leg. xaxoVof Agnoscit et 

582. legeifjxiy 
1018. oTy Aid. 470 (928.) et 

473,4(1022. Br). 
1144. Suidas legit a^ivs 
1165. oliifoyr 


Hec. 208. 

TJ; ito^ Sffff i iMVtrofiAvrtg 277. ris *or lo-fl* — leg. o/JoCa- 
^b'n'o;, ip opst^dnisi ad nj; ut ipori^os, opc^oitMy 

Hesychius; Spy if ultimam 
producil supra p. 37 1, 6 
(At. 70.). 
384. lege, eyrjyritiiMia 

iyyirtidiuSa, Tracts, p. 35. 

ropymrr^Xopaffminnf/ol. Pi. 491. topytirtoX\ 

111* et ita Suidas. 



Aves. Ayes. 

•SvtKOL Koster 5 R. P. ad OA. i. SIJ. oiv Ifsxa — ^lege, oJysxa 

'^vpaxoffitfj. Tracts, p, 35. 1297* lege, IvpoKOcrltff 

xaXo7 tig avi^ou'gwv ad Hec. 1313. xaXolrig dvipwitwy 

wGg, p. 83. 

Trupiywv 1 3 46.— rr«^wy wy 

01; ^ oiiiii k^opyMy ibid. 01/ f aJSi^ i^ipi/M, R.B. e Sea* 


vorv yap P^Ms lorl ng, 134g. trcBvc; yof PpaStig Icrl 

Tooro row y^h ij^^. Tracts, p. 1478. Toffro rw ^uh ^pog 


Ecclesiazusflc. Ecclesiazasse. 

aftiwv Brunckius} App.480. 13. dfeiufv Faber; recte, p. 

517. V. 8. (Thesm. 216. 

ix}cXi^0'(ao-ou0'*O0xadOr. 1427. 16I. lege, BKKXT^viaa-ovff oii 

Suidas V. *Axpi^oi 
ipdplois ad Hec. 987, 283. Suidaf Id i^fnefyrpix^iy 

ante v. uirayygXTOj habet 

opipioig et itirraXov UyixA 

Suidaf ill itdrraKov, 
ypi^wiMLi Pb. 1t» 514. lege, yj^crw^i 

— dv kntoviu ad Med. 863. 646. lege, dp kicerovinv vel 

litevMri Attice 
To7|f f JffWTfo-iy f Tracts, p. 30. 6Q7 ToTj svifpeffia-tv ^axoXou- 

liropia'' ad Xen . Anab. V. 42 1 , 820. k'topKr Scaliger apud R. B. 


iarar ad Or. 1 645. 837. lerracr' Scaliger apud R. B. 

fciyrceu ad Hec. 1 149. 839. (ppiysrou Scaliger apud 

R. B. 


RiGARDUi Poisoinrs. RiGAKDUs Bbvtlbios. 

ThesmopboriazusaB. Thesmophonazusac. 

XS^ yap tronjr^y— Tractf, p. 34. 156, %pi} yif roiijtify 

293. ad Med. 822. 293. P. 472 (Pdc. 978.) 

Oiturmt htolria^ Pr. il. 555, Odtwror stoli^cr 

557' Pr* x1« 557. Giynasus uno venu 

dvodcr^vrtos ttg si Kuster^ ad 6I8. avai(r^ifrfo$ [ih tl 

Hec. 1 l6g, p. 82. 

iiaifitreu Kuiteri Pr. liii. 665. 'Kfyvxa Scaliger et GryD»> 

us 5 lege^ dvaip^vat 

709. App. p. 485. 709. m ^ay ydp k^ri Gryn. 

lege, '0,S iirarr' op sari. 

^Oms y'— Branckiut 5 Pr 89O. *0«ti^ y 


^ffv^i — > iruXo^i Branckius; 1016. ^uviyM — tvxi^o 

App. p. 480. 

1133. Branckios) ad Hec. 1133. r dele 

101 8. 

Lynstrata* Lysistrata. 

488. DawrsM.C. 199. Maith. 488. R. B. e cod. olim Ktute- 

Baper. riaDo 

499, 500, 1. Tracts, p. 21. 499, 500, 501. Idem Codex. 
530. e MSS. Branckius ; 530. xaXu/xfta fopoi^ 

Tracts, p. 22. [Verbum is- 

tud cam dativo occurrit Ran. 

1165. *Eyut vuvfful tw^e y \ 

Liv. III. 41. NegaDt se pri* 

vato reticere. R. P. in mai^. 

exemplaris ed. Kust. penes 

Coll. SS. Trin. Cant.] fwj 

Xj^f^jf hi Eur. SuppL 454. 
6\6. Pr. liv. 616. iiflpss MS. olim Kuster. 

fiAfSi alii 


RiOARDUt P0BSOHU8. R|CA10|7t BlVTlllUl. 

LyaUtrata. LynstxntB, 

962. ad Hec. il^. p. 81. 982. xup^ivu. Idem MS. 

p) fiXijoiyf ad Hec. 1174. 1035. |x^ fiiXijV—- ^X^oioMr, 

vel fiX^troy vdL ftk^^ftt 
[Advens. p. 284. apnd Polluc» x. 43. R. B. ad 

T. H. p.94=295.] 
IbUL 1 16. ArUtophams lodii 
* sic distinguendus^ 

Kol harrixCovi* Ipwiuv Kou SiacrixSofV ifdSiJi^v 

Hirra rTJf l^aifti^o^. Hdyta r^f l^wft/^o^. 

App. p. 436. R«B. ad T. H. p. 103=rl84. 

N* B. I have omitted to mention that I used the Cam* 
bridge edition of the Hecuba* 

At p. 189. it is stated that his illustrious and benevolanl 
friend had anticipated five restorations >vhich occur in 
R. P/s appendix to the Critic of Cornwall; it may not 1m 
impertinent to enumerate a few emendations of the text of 
an ignoble poet, suggested by Mr. Tyrwhitt*^ which had 
been preoccupied by a Critic who ranks with the revivers 
of the old Latin poets — N» Heinsius and Withofius.— 
^^ In Mathematics the same discoveries have been made by 
different men, who seem rather to have coincided with, 
than to have followed, each other.'' So it is in real Criti- 
cism. After the celebrated Thomas Tyrwhitt had pre- 

* The brother of the venerable R. Tyrwhitt, Fellow of Jesus CoU. Cam- 
bridge ; ZnkS rSf y*(t9p Z^xH T itti^m, If imithntp BU» I^vS^mt* iymfp 
Jkmktii* T§yf t iv rt/$mt ifrrtt ^nkS, 


pared for the press his preface to Pseud-Orpheus de Lapu 
dibuSj a copy of that poem edited by Gesnerj which had 
been bequeathed to him by his regretted friend S. Afttf « 
grave, came into his possession. In the margin Mr. T. 
found twenty of his emendations completely confirmed by 
this Critic, and five corroborated in part ; one also of the 
former^ as he learned firom the margin, had been antici- 
pated by Kocn, which had escaped Mr. T.'s notice : '^ Hie 
igitur utriusque, tarn Koenii quam Musgravii conjectu- 
ras simul subjiciam ; mihi ipsi serio gratulaturus, si quan- 
tum de inventionis gloriola amisisse videar, tantum roboris 
et firmitatis suspicionibus meis ex conspirante taiium v\^ 
rum judicio accessisse existimetur." It is gratifying to our 
best feelings to see mind conspiring thus with mind in the 
great work of emendatory criticism. It would, doubtless, 
have afforded this pre-eminent scholar and accomplished 
gentleman additional satisfaction to see his rectitude of 
thinking established by another acute veteran in literature, 
Jb. Schrader; whose Obs. and Emendat. had not &llen 
in his way*. I have noticed the instances of trifling, as 
well as of important, coincidence. 

Tyrwhitt, 178K ScuBADBR. Obsefvat. 1761. 

fimendat. l??^- 
Malim sic. Ep;^0|x* ss dx^wpsi" 155. ^Epx^^C es dxpupeiar, 
ef,¥ [ Keen, ad Greg. Pr. ad Em. vii. 

p. 73.] 

* This will appear from their remarks on v. 527. 
Tyrwbitt. Schkadbr. 

— Tt^fXit T nhm. Sic edidi ex 527. fidenter corrigimus: Ti^«xj* 
conjeccura Gesneri. Editt.A. 1. t hhta Obiervat. p. 77. nam 
ct MS. Paris, babent Mm. Reg. ezhibet Inim Pa. ad £mea- 

dat. LTj. 




retcribere malitn rrrXsiorfi, 
[rarXriurrt. V. Argonaut. 
437 et 1347. Mofgr.] 
X'ffOf [propias ad litteras] 
Non dubito scribeDduin esse 
'Rpifrta yoLp ^ij irojuitay Jiro- 
rpoiuom sotxa^ [Masgr.] 

Minim profecto unde invectam 
sit Domen UaXofii^^ao, re- 
damante cum maxime me- 
tro. Sed caecum plane opor- 
tet esse qui semel monitus 
non videt rescribi debere 
UpiaiLiSao, i.e. Helen! ; de 
quo modo locutus est^ et cui 
omnia quae sequuntur unice 
con?eniunt. [Musgr. et Ko- 
en. p. 124.^ 

— pro §iunf omnino reponen- 
dum est sjjs : 

airaia'o'orra . 

[oTrroy Musgr.] 

Lector etiam non monitus re- 
ponat Tiipcryfixixo, ne versus 

Metro convenientius esset 0*^1- 
criv, [Musgr.] — Sed quid 
Hcree hie agunt ? £t quis 
rwv ywMOLkoywrtwv eas 
panti filias diiit ? Non du- 


375. rtrXfiwn vn. 

377. X^'^wy ibid. 

385. Ipsa res^ et carminis lex 
corrigere jubent: *Ep7tvri 
yip irj itifjLfgay iitarpopi^orrt 
soixag ibid. 

388. Quis Palameden ratem 
fecit Apollinis institutionibus 
eruditum ? Ne plura : cor* 
rigo^ Uptapu^ao aroLOppwof'^^ 
HeUni prUdeniis, etc. %t. 

455» Poeta scripserat^ iijs /xij- 

rpofi XV. 
480. dvato'^oyTa 

VIII. [Musgr.] 
499. wrrov viii. 
505. Ils^onjia^ao viii. 

560. arfio'iy. Sed graviore 
morbo poeta laborat. Horis 
enim nullus in bac de cura- 
lio fabella locus est. Quid ? 
quod Hymn, xxxii, 1. di- 


TTKwaiTT. Son ADia. 

bitoreponeodumesseAupai. concur, ivycf^'^ipif BifMio$ 

Awm scilicet crwxrem circa ico) Tflivog iyaxros, Ne moU 

vkguUa compmgere proba- ta: restituo, «*££ iv^i^yyuoy Au- 

biliter dicanturj eaedemeti- paw — ^Ut autem voWoio 9u- 

am maris JUim poetice, nee yeurfts hie vocantor Auf ai, 

invenuste, appellentur. £t tic Eur. Hec. t. 444. Avpa, 

qaidem sic appellaatur in itorfuis aUpa, et hymn, 

hjmno, qui Orphei Tocatur> lxxx, 1. Aupou *orroyEYi7s, 

Lxxx* T. 1. Aopeu voyroys- ZsfupinSis, Tin, ix. [Conf. 

V9is» ZtfvfitiiiSg n^pofoFTou. Bernard^ Reiskio, p. 409*] 

mpitr^yjiiW^ Grcum'Urens, 596. in Reg. oonvenientius 

Sic MS. Paris. [nXPIo'fUf- metro^ ttpi^ri/MX^^^^' 

y(Wtra, Musgr. conf. Bernard. Ibid . 
Reiskio, p. 409. D. R. ad 
Tim. p. 122.] 

MoUius esset — [uXin yXuxS' 663. [uXm yXjontpf 

Cum primus in apBcrxtu apud 685. a poeta soriptnm fiiit, 

nostrum^ et alios^ credo, dfMiCi^hiif dp^acicu. 

semper corripiatur, malim Ibid, 
scribere ofirOiCij^i^y a^n^a^ 

Restitui ij^f^ij ex Editt. A. 1. ^8. ij^f/)} e Reg. libro repo- 

et MS. Paris. Stephanu^, nendum pro tiv y Mii^ 

opinor, primus invexit rov lti. 
y ihr^. Nescio unde. 

Delevi n post x.opsvvvvicu aoc- J2G. Mpivvwieu pi^ii^ouStof 

toritate MS. Paris. quod liber Reg. suppeditat. 


In the inestimable appendix to the Exerciiaiiones in 
Eur^idem, printed at Leyden 1762^ Musgrave has no- 


ticed thirty-one restorations '' quae Lipsiensis subtile sem- 
per^ aliquando etiam felix^ ingenium occupaverat/' And 
since Reiske had (1763) tarnished his critical reputation 
by his frolics upon Sophocles*^, the learned annotator on 
Euripides thought proper to preserve those unconscious co* 
incidencies^ '^ quia in hac sylloge rationum momenta ad- 
jecta sunt, quibus Reiskiaiia destituuntur ^ deinde^ ifA 
novo Auctori libentius assenauri videbantur, qui Reiskio 
forte diffiderent/' 

Emendations gained in a different way would have bean 
appended by way of contrast : since, however, this volume 
is already swelled to a size which was not foreseen, they 
will probably find a place in the sixih number of the Jlfu- 
seum Criticum. 

* Reiskii io Sopboclem iibellus bic omoium riiu cxccptus est. 
D. R. apud Ttttman. p. 19. 

I' ■ ' "^ 


P. ix. 1. 8. East-Raston n. 1. 1. birth-day 

P. xiii. 1. 15. — About 

P. xiv. 1. 17. again Pieriosque 

P. xvi. 1. 5. — He I. 6. qfier sensibility ; insert and the 
tearful Muse of Euripides improved in him the sacred 
source of sympathy. He was also the most generous and 
manly of Critics ; warped by no petty jealousies, he — 

P. xvii. 1. penult, after dealing, insert. He never dis- 
graced the seat of criticism with affected dignity and spe- 
cious conceits ; '* Truth— 

P. xviii. 1. 6. *Eyco /uiy-r-l. 8. «T tij ti ft^— 9. ftfyroi 

— 1. 14. 123. 1. 15. dele R. P. a. c. t. tr. and insert, 
Happily for mankind truth possesses a capacity of unim- 


paired existence ; and R. P. resolutely maintained that its 
energies ****** were* 

P. xix. 1.3. dele window and — substitute painted glass 
which admitted a ^'dim religious light'' into 

P. xxi. 1. 9, 10. r. whom they had eluded. 1. 16. after 
passage, insert. He often arrived at results by intuition } 
on wluch account his — 

P. xxii. I. ult. r. mind, and will not suffer his readers 

P. XXV. 1. 16. If those proo6, on which R. P.'s convic-*- 
ticm of the spuriousness of Iph. AuL 1532 — 1629. was 
erected, had been laid before the public, this investiga- 
tioa would have occupied, if I may be allowed the expres- 
sion^^ the first niche ; it was his grand discovery, and his 
own exclusive property. R. P. would have given a disser- 
tation on the Rhesus. 

P. xxvi. 1. 12. r. Lynceus n.* re-appearance 

P. xxvii. 1. antepen. libel, 

P. xxviii. 1. 4. Pray, Madam, 

P. XXX. 1. 10. insert y I feel it my bounden duty, Madam, 
to add another fact, for the truth of which I pledge my 
existence ; and in doing that I hope I may be permitted 
to expect full credit from your readers. A would-be trans- 
lator of Plato, who ^^ without staying to learn even the in- 
flexions of Greek words, has plunged to the very bottom of 
Pagan philosophy f," dared to revile his Redeemer by an 
appellation too horrible to be exhibited. Shocked by this 

Sroneness to blaspheme from the mere love of blaspheming, 
I. P. reprobated the fell impiety in a torrent of keen, re- 
sistless eloquence which would have searched the heart and 
reins of the most besotted enemy to our holy religion. 
The occasion, you will allow, would justify the application 
of St. Paul's rebuke of Elymas the sorcerer.-— 

f It is said that the Hierophant of this mystic celU who Is hand and 
gtore with Plato, oncn raminated with tranquU satisfactioo on the glo* 
rioat uncertainty of the meaning of Ahm* it was supposed to teem with 
recondite lore, which the lovert cftoisdom would accept with gratitude. 
At length R. P. was consulted, and at the touch o^ Ithuriers spear the 
gratifj^ng delusion vanished. This threatened ruin to the craft; but 
their apprehensions were soon dispeUed by the iosinaation that poor 
Ponon wn» OQC of the maUvolent and unenUgktened* See D»R, ad h. in 
Cer. 1«2. 

P. xxxvi. 


P. xxxvi. ]. 10. dele on and r. to Travis, 1. 18. tragedy, 
I. 19. Grammarians that he had copied from MSS. in fo« 
reign libraries, and that — n. X 1* ult. ed. 4to— 

P. xxxvi, 1. 14. HesyckiuSf dissertation on the Diony* 
My and — ^1. 15. delight*', add as a note : *R. P. was wont 
to applaud D. R.'a animadversions on Xenophon's Memo^ 
rabilia, particularly note on in, ix, 6., — his edition of 
C f^. PaterculuSf especially notes on i, 5, pp. 20, 21 (Ad- 
verss. p. 55.) and — 7, p. 26 ; R. P. warmly recommend- 
ed D. R.'s analysis of the meaning of iyaXfLa ad Tim* pp. 
4 — 8, refers to it ad Hec. 1255., and used to point out to 
friends his restoration of Eupolis which has since been 
published by Professor Gaisford ad Hephcest, p. 278. 
[Sueton. de illustribus Grammat. p. 949. ed. Oudendorp. 
Ilavl^ aytifjLa — lege, iyaXfM. R. B.] ; but R. P. esteem- 
ed that upon iotkXog pp. 136 — 139. a model; he deem- 
ed D. R.'s alteration of Asclepiades' epigram at the 
conclusion to be an improvement, not a restoration, I 
suggested that Scaliger had left in the margin of his 
copy of the Greek Anthology ^ SaXXco — which, he thought, 
would turn out to be nearer to the true reading.*-As 
an instance of R. P.'s readiness to promote general lite- 
rature, an anecdote is subjoined, which, on every other 
account, ought to have been suppressed. A collection of 
D. R.'s tracts, printed at Leipzig, arrived soon after the 
publication of a similar work in this country, which con- 
tained Dissertatio de tutelis et insigntbus navium. Not 
having been heard of before, it was read with avidity. 
Shortly after R. P., handing a copy to the editor, observed 
that he would find in it something new, and pressed the 
expediency of reprinting it immediately. It was replied 
that a friend had furnished him with a copy already, and 
submitted that from internal evidence it was suspected hot 
to be D. R.'s. The celebrated Professor, no doubt, had 
communicated the extracts from inedited Lexicons and 
Scholia, and had retouched the Latinity, but nothing 
more. This suspicion has been confirmed by the learned 
Wyttenbach in Bibl. Crit. P. xii. p. 90. '^ quam [disser- 
tationem] non in Ruhnkenii scriptis censendam esse judi- 
cabamus ; quod memineramus^ eum aliquando nobis nar- 
rare^ illam dissertationem^ quamvis suo auspicio et auxiliOf 



tamen ab ipso Ehsched^o sciiptam esse ; ita ut haic libelli 
proprietas et auctoritas relin(}uenda esset.^ 

P. xxxviii. 1. 9. ixi^^ 

P. xxxix. 1. 19. ^ generous exakatibn of despair/' 

P. xl. 1. 1. and Kuster's editions 

P. xl. 1.23.-^ing*. add a; a note: *V\nt Aristophanea vir 
doctiis, homo facetus^ po€ta in primis bonus; et propter 
purissimum Attici sermonis saporem ipsi etiam Platoni 
oommendatissimus; sed idem fuit libcrrimi oris scurra, et 
viris se longe majoribus indignis modis insultavit. Phik>- 
aophos et poetas omni genere conviciorum et conturaelia<* 
mm vexavit ; dummodo risum spectatoribus excuterct^ ne-^ 
mini parcebat; nihil priratum neque publicum, sanctum 
nemie profanum curab^t. R. P. PnBlectiOy pp. 14, 5. 

P. xli. 1. 4. Paris. Vol. vi. p. 3. 

P. xlii. 1. 4. value ?"* • R. P. being asked his opinion 
respecting a modem Latin poem, is said to have very 

Knntedly replied, '^ that there was in it a great deal from 
orace and a great deal from Virgil, but nothing Horatian 
and nothing Firgilion" C. J. xxii, p. 227* 

Ibid. 1. 13. These short notes were written at the re* 
quest of a &vourite bookseller, the late Mr. Nicholson, of 
Cambridge. II. T, 74. MA4r ol fth xoXfovo-i teo), ii^qts 

P. xlv. n.* U antepen. Enchir. 

P. xhri. 1.4. merit*: * See Pref. to '^ Translations 
chiefly from the Greek Anthology"— London. 1806^ P.xliii« 
This lover of literature was anxious to be introduced to 
R, P. Once or twice Mr. F. put himself to great inconvc'^ 
iiience for the sole purpose of meeting R. P. Numerous 
appointments were made, and always broken. At length 
on a friend remonstrating with R. P. on bis shyness, he 
very tersely observed, that he did not wadt to be stared at. 
This is deeply to be deplored. If 1 had been aware ttikt a 
^legislator so addicted to Greek could be found in those 
d&ys, I might have solaced my woes by fancying, at least, 
that I lived in the age of Periaes. — I am no politician ; my 
fervent prayer is that that grim tyrant, whose soul is incar- 
nadined with humait blood, may not contaminate our soil: 
—the murder of fVrighi pleadf^nmipet-loi^ed agaitist 

P. xiix. 


P. xlix. 1. 25. deky Legion-Club^ and substitute Shaks. 
Macbeth, IV. i. [P.P.D.] 

P. xlix. 1. 26. r. Swift, Legion-Club 

P. Ix. 1. 26, r. dishabille, 

P. Ixiii. 1. 7. that 8. this 1. 23. 2. 

P. Ixv. after I. 9. insert; Prcelectio in Euripidem re- 
cUata in Scholis PuhluAs Cantabrigiis 1792. Gr€Bcarum 
lUerarum Professionis adeunda causa. This exquisite 
diatribe was pre&yed to the Adversaria printed at the Uni- 
versity-Press, 1812. 

In the same year appeared Schow^s^-^ 

P. Ixvi. n. 1. penult. " of certain believers 

P. Ixvii. 1. 15. restitutions. 

P. Ixviii. 1. 7. Pauw 

P. Ixviii. n.*, 1. 6. add^ ; as well as the publication of 
Photius' Lexicon from the Galean MS. for Febi^ 1796, 
p. 136, and Aug. 1799, p. 444. 

P. Ixxi. Porson" : — jxa. 

P. Ixxv. 1. 21. r. Richard Heber^ Esq. 

P. Ixxvi. n. 1. 5. r. N®. 

P. Ixxvii. 1. 18. after R. P. insert. Compare pp. 233. 
235. 237, 8. with Adverss. pp. 33. 42. 76. 

In discussing the construction of the third verse in the 
Alcaic stanza, R. P. did not accede to the distinction made 
by an illustrious scholar in M. Rev. for Jan^ 1798, between 
the third line of the Greek and that of Horace ; and could 
not admit the alterations and arrangement of the Scholion 
in Atheu. xv, 695. A. which occur at p. 10. He then 
gave me, written with a pencil, the shattered, but beauti- 
ful, fragment of Alcseus alluded to by Plutarch, preserved 
in the Etymologicon MS. Paris.y and printed in the last 
excellent edition of Hephaest. p. 337* 
f'Ef flora) * 8f ivoraTay tnov 
{i)ythar' svt^iAo^ V^i^ 

These participles are too often substituted for each other. 
Iph. Aul. 801. wg nws Ayji^ ogviff Ixro^evcp Aid. supple, 
ljk$ywa Scaliger ad Cfatull. p. 37=44. Lege, dg m%ey 
Aifia, iLiyiii^ owidi vr. R. P. ad Med. I.^ see Adverss. 
p. 221. i^topn* Av. 698. oSrog 8s x^' vrs^Wi i^tyets — 


fi»tX^tU Suid. ed. Mediolan, v. Xoo^. — On one oci^asion t^ 
for a moment, rather displeased my friend by importuni-* 
ties touching Pholius and dissert, de Iph. AuL^ and by 
intimating the loss we should suffer, if he should be re- 
moved hence before they appeared ; R. P. was silent : not 
knowing how to resume the conversation, I repeated, if we 
' are bereaved of them, what will become of us ? R. P. re^* 
buked me by replying, '£]xou iavovro^ yaia fti;^^eo irvqi' 
see Sueton. Nero C. Caes. xxxviii. Lucan, perhaps, re«* 
collected this fragment Pharsal. vu. 654. — ^trahere omnia 
secum Mersa juvat, gentesque suae miscere ruinse : Clau- 
dian in Rutin, ir. 18. Insontesque meae populos miscere ru- 
inae ? Everso juvat orbe mori : — Ovid. Met. vi, 543. si 
non perierunt omnia meciun; — but, as parallel passages 
too frequently resemble parallel lines, I have done. Mil- 
ton has cai^hc the spirit of Alcaeus in his L'Allegro, v. 

Tracts, p. 188. 1. 13. insert. Vide Heusinger. ad Cic. de 
Ofiic. l.xxxii, 13. Arpinaiium Ibid. 1. vii. 3. Epp. ad Attic. 
IV, vii. De Legg. 1. • . .fraudium Id. de Offic. in, xvii> 
11. locupletium Ibid, ii, viii, 7> ni^ xix, 1. ad Attic, vii, 
vii. Panium Caesar de Analogia secundo dixit, sed Vcrrius 
panum sine j. Charisius. Principium Cic. de Offic. 
l.xxxix, 9. Sapienlium Ibid. in. iv, 1, et4. Livius> An- 
iemnatiumy Capenatium, Fideftatiumy Privemaiium. At 
Lamm semper, non Lcariumy teste Bentleio, exhibent co- 
dices probae notae in Sueton. Domitian. xvii. ; vide In- 
script. apud Pagi ad Baron, p. 14. Cent. 2dae, Marmor 
Ancvran. 81. 

P. 200. I. 10. Sic x«po5(ri xgoj crs. Soph. Tr. 285., 
"//xouo-i R. P. ad Or. 1645. oirAoy Hec. 14. Pr. xviii=xx., 
ftrXa in textu : tooj Virra Aj. 969. Pr. xx\'iiit=xxx ex MS. 
Harl.; sedr/ ^tol ad Hec. 1214 = 1206; vide ad Eur. El. 
275. in Adverss. p. 272. 

P. 331. 1.9. expectatio*: add as a note: ♦Si igitur 
plus spatii ad cogitandum habuissem, magnam fortasse 
adversariam contra me pavatam haberem expectationem ; 
quam vincere aut aequare omnino desperassem ; quam de- 
nique opimus esset efliigere triumphus. Pfcelect^ p. 4. 



( 2 ) 

STRANGER, whoe'er thou art, that view'st 

this tomb. 
Know, that here lies in the cold arms of death 
The young Alexis : gentle was his soul 
As sweetest music : to the charms of love 
Not cold, nor to the social charities 
Of mild humanity : in yonder grove 
He woo*d the willing Muse : Simplicity 
Stood by and smil'd : here ev'ry night they 

And with the Virtues and the Graces tune 
The note of woe ; weeping their favourite 
Slain in his bloom, in the fair prime of life : 
" Would he had liv*d ! '* — Alas ! in vain that wish 
Escapes thee : Never, Stranger, shalt thou see 
The youth ; — he's dead : — the virtuous soon- 
est die. 


( 3 ) 

n EEINE, rovTov otrrtg ztcrogizg ra^Qif$ 

Ovi* fjv a0aK'xrog Kvr^iiog rsgrvof /3gXg/, 
Ovi* av TugetfCB rov <piXctv0gcinrov r^oTOff 
AgdfMv ^* Ira^igojv* aXX* bzbiv ah(rog x»rx 
*Exov(r»v BZ^TiTfiffi Moy^ay H^ritrrorrig r 
EygXa 'Xct^cttTTaff * ah iKct(rr7jg evOciii 
'ifvKTog ^ugoviTatyy al '^6ra/ n xai xctKai 
'JLcL^ing avvoff/jiKfja'civ" eira rof (pi\of 
WoSovff Bgairrfiv iv(r0§o&f f/,BXuiiccy 
*Ov agri ^ctXXovr fjpivo) xctt^eo fiiov 

EJ^g^^ar A/J;?;-— Eie'ET EN ZnOISIN HN- 

IlB^BvyBv' ov yag fJi^TiTor bio'O'^bi vbo¥* 
TlbOvti^ ill — Td^iirra 'Kat^tFypw o\ ^yct6oi. 

R- PoRsoN, Dec. 2, 1781. 

( 4 ) 

Art. I. Christiani Godofr. Schiitz in iEschyli 
Tragctdias qucB supersunt ac deperditarum 
Fragmenta Comment arius. Vol. I. in Pro- 
metheum vinctum et Septem adversus 
Thebas. Halae, impensis Joannis Jacobi 
Gebaveri, 1782. Pagg. 412. 

In my* Review for February last, I gave an 
account of the first volume of Mr. Schutz's 
^schylus, or rather of half the first volume, 
as the two parts of this work already pub- 
lished compose but one volume, and are 
intended by the editor to bind up together. 
The annotations comprise something more 
than four hundred pages, and are taken up 
in explaining the difficult passages, in vindi- 
cating or censuring, as occasion requires, the 
plot, conduct, and expressions of the author, 
and in proposing and defending his own 

* [Though the editor seems tto speak in the following 
article, he is indebted for it to a gentleman qualified for 
much higher pursuits than these. MATr.] 



emendations, where the discussion of the 
reasons was too long to be commodiously 
subjoined to the text. He has not busied 
himself in this commentary with collecting 
similar passages from other authors, that 
being a labour he reserves for his historical 
apparatus. To his notes on the Prometheus 
Mr. Schutz has annexed five excursions. 
1. The history of Prometheus, his genealogy: 
various accounts of the quarrel between him 
and Jupiter, etc. 2. On the account of Atlas, 
given by the chorus, vs. 425 — 435. 3. On 
the invention of Fire, attributed to Prome- 
theus. 4. On the wanderings of lo, as re- 
lated by Prometheus ; a geographical disser- 
tation. 5. On the design of the Drama, and 
its management. Mr. Schutz thinks the 
design was to inspire the audience with a zeal 
for liberty and a detestation of tyranny. In 
the Septem a. Theb. he has been less liberal, 
and given us only two excursions. ]. The 
history of CEdlpus and his family. 2. On 
the design and management of the Drama. 
I am, I must confess, rather at a loss to know 
why these observations are separated from 



the main body of the commentary. They 
would have been as easily read, or turned over 
without reading, if they had been inserted 
in their proper order. Nor can it be said that 
they exceed the length of the other notes so 
much as to render this process necessary. 
Neither of the excursions of the second play 
is so long as the note on Prometheus, vs. 49* 
The third note on the Prometheus scarcely 
contains a page. Perhaps, as the learned 
editor professes in his preface (p. viii.) dili- 
gently to have imitated Mr. Heyne's method 
of publishing and commenting, he was led 
by his example in this instance. Mr. Heyne 
in his edition of Virgil (an edition which, 
says Mr. Brunck*, deserved better paper) has 
subjoined both the various readings and ex* 
planations to the text; and consequently has, 
with reason, thrown the longer dissertations 
to the end of each book. But this reason 
cannot be alleged in Mr. Schutz's case, who 
has printed only the various readings in the 
same page with the text. With respect to 
the annotations, they are in general learned 

[♦AdEur, Bacch.486.] 



and judicious ; and display a competent ac- 
quaintance with other authors, and, what is 
of more consequence, with his own. That 
miserable critic Pauw, in whom singular 
ignorance and as singular arrogance were 
combined, Pauw, I say, having observed 
that all other authors, that speak of Prome- 
theus's punishment, mention Caucasus as the 
place of confinement, could not persuade 
himself that iEschylus would differ from such 
a cloud of witnesses in so material a point, 
and proposed some absurd emendations to 
reconcile his author with the multitude. But' 
Mr. Schutz has actually observed, p. 10* 
that, though it be not necessary for the an- 
cients to be always consistent in their Mytho- 
logy, yet iEschylus is not in this matter at 
variance with other writers, or at variance 
only in part. For, according to -^chylus, 
Prometheus is twice bound ; first to a rock 
in Scythia, next to Mount Caucasus. This 
appears from Mercury's speech to him (vs. 
1025—1029), where he is told that Jupiter 
with thunder would rend the rock to which 
he was now affixed, and cast him down into 
Tartarus ; from which, after many years, ho 



should again emerge to light, and be con- 
tinually preyed upon by Jupiter's eagle. 
Though -^schylus has not mentioned the 
place of this second confinement, yet it is 
manifest from a passage in Attius (who trans- 
lated the Prometheus solutus), that Prome- 
theus was represented as bound to Caucasus ; 
and that Attius did not change the scene of 
action, Mr. Schutz has proved from a passage 
of Cicero (Tusc. Quaest. ii. 10.). Mr. Schutz, 
in his second excursion, proposed to read, 
vs. 428 — 430, *'Ar'Kav6\ o; aJav^ uT$i§ij(^a>v <r0ivog 
'KgaraiOh igdviov n toXov Nd$ro<; [€^c/}a;v] vTotrri'^ 
m^u. where the editions have aisr urtigoxfift 
and omit iguieiK 

There is a very corrupt and difficult pas* 
sage in the Sept. a. Theb. 

Kai rov <rov uv6ig TgotrfMgov disX^toUj 

A/V r iv rikivrlj rivofju iviarifjuivogf 
Mr. Brunck (mindful of the poet's obser^ 
vation, Ulcera possessis alte suffusa medulUsj 
non leviore manuj ferro sanantur et igni*) 

[ * Claudian, in Euirop. U, 13^ 4.] 



inserts his conjecture in the text, Ka) rov aip 
uv0ig ofMcTTogov K(txoppo6iv. This emendation 
Mr. Schutz justly thinks too bold, and mo- 
destly proposes his own conjecture in the 

TLou rov jTov »v0ig 'Jtgoo'fMgov Ig aiiX^eop 

. Avtrri^vov ccvru rovvofJUj etc. 

Yet this does not seem entirely to remove 
either the difficulty or the corruption. 

I shall now take the liberty of making a 
few addenda and corrigenda for the use of 
the learned editor, if he thinks them worthy 
of being noticed in an Appendix. H. Stephens 
(n. on Prometheus, v. 28.) had observed that 
some MSS. had i^fivgojj but that Eustathius 
preserved the vulgar reading. The place in 
Eustathius, which gave Abresch (Observ. on 
^sch. p. 4.) so much trouble, is in Iliad H. 
p. 675. 1. 49. — Prometh. vs. 541. The editor 
has been led into a mistake by too close an 
adherence to Brunck's edition. A line is 
wanting to complete the antistrophe, as will 
manifestly appear to any one who shall only 
compute the number of verses. Thi? defect 
should have been marked with asterisks. Mr. 



Brunck has since corrected his error in a note 
on Euripides, Bacch. 1164. — Vsm 795. *Hf 
lyyga^u ^ fJLtifiM'iv iikroig fguir ^ Grave on 
the tablet of thy memory/ Mr. Schutz gives 
us a list of similar passages from Bern. Mar- 
tinus (Var. Lect. p. 205.), but I am surprised 
he should not see that the example from 
Aristophanes (Vesp. 536.) is nothing to the 
purpose. He has quotedt /u^ifi^avHt yga^^oifg^ 
tyti instead of [juvrtfioffvM yga^lfOfuu 'ym* nvhich 
simply signifies, ^ I will write memorandums/ 
— He is also mistaken when he says that all 
the MSS. and edd. have in Sept. a. Theb. 
vs. 55. IXiiTOPj whereas Aldus and Robortellus 
have fX/Tor. 

It is strange that in the same play, vs. 582, 
he has proposed as his own conjecture,*H ^uo9 
igyofy which is the reading of Robortelluss 
edition. The vulgar reading is, H roioif i^yew. 

On the whole, I hope this edition will 
meet with encouragement from the learned ; 
as the author has manifested no inconsider- 
able degree of abilities and diligence in the 

Trin. CoU. 
May 29^ 1783. 

Art. XIIL 

( 11 ) 

Art. XIII. Aristophanis Comoedice ex optimis 
exemplaribus emendatcB studio Rich. Franc. 
Phil. Brunck, Argentoratensis. Tom. IV. 
LysistratOj Thesmophoriazusaj Rana, Plu^ 
tusy Latine pagg* 182. Tom. I. Prafatio 
Editoris, 10. Eadem Fabulce^ Graece, 295. 
^0^^^, 291. Tow. II. EcclesiazusajNubeSy 
Aves, Vespa, Latine, 199- Graece, 310. 
Not(ej257. Tom.lll. Equites^Achamenses^ 
Pao:, Latine, 128. Graece, 205. Fragmenta^ 
209—291. iSlotcEy 162. Addenda Frag- 
mentis^ 163 — 172. Addenda notis in om- 
nesfabulasj 175 — 228. Index verborum 
{not paged)j I68. Ato and Svo. 

Sefore I give an account of the editor's 
merits, it may not be improper to say a word 
of the excellencies and defects of the author; 
especially as some modern critics have thought 
proper not only to greet him with the title of a 
scurrilous and indecent buffoon, but to wonder 
how such monstrous farces could be endured 
by tb^ chaste ears of an Attic audience. That 



many should have been greatly exasperated 
with Aristophanes, for publicly exhibiting So- 
crates on the stage, and making him speak 
and act in a manner most inconsistent with 
his known character, is not surprising ; but 
as the accusation urged by some against the 
poet, of being instrumental to Socrates's 
death, has been substantially refuted by 
many critics ; so the pfesent editor has very 
judiciously observed, with regard to the other 
part of the charge, that Socrates is not so 
much the object of ridicule in the comedy 
of the Clouds, as the philosophers in general, 
who, of whatever benefit the lessons and ex- 
ample of Socrates himself might be to the 
state, were, from their idle lives, their minute, 
ridiculous, and sometimes impious disqui- 
sitions, highly prejudicial to their disciples, 
and, by consequence, to the public. If, says 
Mr. Brunck, Aristophanes had really in the 
smallest degree contributed to the death of 
Socrates, it is not credible that Plato would 
have introduced them in his Symposium, 
sitting together at the same table ; it is not 
credible that he would have been so great an 



admirer of him as to write an epigram in his 
praise, containing a most extravagant com- 
phment, — Missa igitur hac faciamus. Of the 
indecency, which abounds in Aristophanes, 
unjustifiable as it certainly is, it may however 
be ' observed, that different ages differ ex- 
tremely in their ideas of this offence. Among 
the ancients, plain-speaking was the fashion ; 
nor was that ceremonious delicacy introduced, 
which has taught men to abuse each other 
with the utmost politeness, and express the 
most indecent ideas in the most modest lan- 
guage. The ancients had little of this. They 
were accustomed to call a spade a spade ; to 
give every thing its proper name. There is 
another sort of indecency, which is infinitely 
more dangerous; which corrupts the heart 
without offending the ear. I believe there is 
no man of sound judgement who would not 
sooner let his son read Aristophanes than 
Congreve or Vanbrugh. In all Aristophanes^s 
indecency, there is nothing that can allure, 
but much that must deter. He never dresses 
up the most detestable vices in an amiable 
light ; but generally, by describing them in 



their native colours^ makes the reader dis- 
gusted with thera. His abuse of the most 
eminent citizens may be accounted for upon 
similar principles. Besides, in a republic^ 
freedom of speech was deemed an essential 
privilege of a citizen. Demosthenes treats 
his adversaries with such language as would, 
in our days, be reckoned scurrilous enough ; 
but it passed, in those days, without any notice 
or reprehension. The world is since greatly 
altered for the better. We have, indeed, re- 
tained the matter, but judiciously * altered 
the manner. In the management of his* plots 
too, it must be owned, Aristophanes is some- 
times faulty. It ought however to be ob- 
served, that his contemporary comic poets 
did not pique themselves upon the artful 
management of the plot. Aristophanes has 
therefore the usual faihng of dramatic writers, 
to introduce speeches, and even scenes, not 
much conducing to the business of the drama. 
But if the only use of the plot be, as the 
great Bayes has decided, to bring in good 

♦ ♦ [In omitting this line, Maty*s printer assumed, I 
suspect^ an undue authority.] 



things, our poet will stand totally clear on 
this head of the charge, and the Knights 
may be mentioned as an honourable exception 
even to this censure, as the design of the 
play, to expose Cleon, and to turn him out 
of his place, is admirably supported from 
beginning to end. — ^To sum up Aristophanes's 
character, if we consider his just and severe 
ridicule of the Athenian foibles, his detesta* 
tion of the expensive and ruinous war in 
which Greece was engaged, his pointed in- 
vectives against the factious and interested 
demagogues, by whom the populace was 
deluded, " who bawFd for freedom in their 
senseless mood \' his contempt of the useless 
and frivolous inquiries of the Sophists; hig 
wit, and versatility of style ; the astonishing 
playfulness, originality, and fertility of his 
imagination ; the great harmony of versifi- 
cation, whenever the subject required it, and 
his most refined elegance of language; in 
spite of Dr. Beattie's dictum, we shall look 
over his blemishes, and allow that, with all 
his faults, he might be a very good citizen, 
and was certainly an excellent Poet. 



The learning, industry, and sagacity of 
Mr. Brunck are well known to the literati, 
by his elegant editions of some of the Greek 
tragedies, the Analecta Veterum Poetarum, 
and ApoUonius Rhodius. The present vo- 
lumes are nearly of the same size with the 
Analecta ; but the type, in which the text is 
printed, is the same with that of the Greek 
tragedies. I am told most readers com- 
plain of the diminutive size of the character, 
and I must confess I should have been better 
pleased if the editor had employed the same 
type . in this work as in the Analecta ; it 
would have spared the reader's eyes, and, 
perhaps, have rendered the typographical er- 
rors fewer than they are at present. Mr. 
Brunck has had for the use of this edition 
(besides all the former editions of any conse- 
quence) the collations of many manuscripts ; 
in the Plutus, Nubes, and Ranie, five (the 
collation of one does not appear but in the 
Addenda) ; in the Equites, Acharnenses, 
Aves, and Lysistrata, three ; in the Vespae, 
Pax, and Ecclesiazusae, two ; in the Thesmo- 
phoriazusa;, but one. By the help of these 



ftianuscripts, the observations of critics, and 
his own reading, he has been enabled not 
Only to purge the text from innumerable 
usurpations, but sometimes to supply chasms 
in it: an instance or two of which I shall 
give in the progress of this article. The 
ingenious critic apologizes (or rather does, 
not apologize) for having left some faulty 
readings in the text (which either critical 
sagacity, or the assistance of MSS. would 
have removed) on account of the great hurry 
in which he was obliged to write his notes. . To 
me, I own, this reason seems not entirely satis- 
factory. — "Quod olimlibrorum descriptoribus 
seepissime evenit, id et ego quandoque passus 
sum; nee hujus inconsiderantiae necesse duco 
ut me purgem, veniamque petam ; quin mi- 
rari subit laetarique bonam fortunam fre- 
quentioribus istiusmodi lapsibusmihi cavisse; 
maxime quum recorder, partem baud mi- 
nimam istarum fabularum a me descrip^am 
itcrum fuisse, dum in Museo meo vel ludebat 
filius mens, quo animuni meum nihil magis 
advertit oblectatque, vel confabulabanturbonl 
quid am viri, qui quot fere die bus horisque 

c matutinis 


matutinis ad me visere solent." — ^Tantamne 
rem tarn negligenter ? I think in such a case 
I should have sent Master Brunck out of the 
room. Pugh! says Mr. B. (or I suppose 
would say, if he read Shakspeare) " He talks 
to me that never had a son.'' But to be 
serious : What right has any man to publish 
a work of this kind in a hurry ? Mr. B., I 
believe, is not in that unfortunate situation, 
which some learned men have experienced, 
to be obliged to publish as fast as the avarice 
or tyranny of booksellers required. There 
have too been some writers who, in publish- 
ing a book, have had a provident eye to the 
future, and taken care to reserve a sufficient 
quantity of additions to adorn the second 
impression. But this gentleman's character 
and circumstances will not suffer us to enter- 
tain the slightest suspicion, that he will ever 
change from Mr. Brunck into Simonides. 
(Vid. Aristoph. Pac. 697.) — Mr. Brunck, in 
his notes, is frequently engaged with the 
Parisian Professor, and the flower of the 
French critics, as he calls them, (to wit) 
Messrs. Vauviliiers and Dupuy, the former 



of whom lately published an edition of So* 
phocles, the latter has passed some censures 
upon Mr. Brunck's critical works. Thus far, ^ 
perhaps, he may be readily excused, *Cl^ 
^X vicoi^yjuy^ aXXa rtfjuoj§efj(,mg : but I am at a 
loss to account for the asperity with which 
he treats Kuster and Bergler, to the latter of 
whom he is scarcely more merciful than he 
was to Mr. Shaw in his edition of ApoUonius. 
Bergler with him is fungus, stipes, bardus, 
and what not. If Mr. B» is better qualified 
than Kuster and Bergler to publish Aristo-» 
phanes (as doubtless he is by far), " let him 
give God thanks, and make no boast of it;" 
but why triumph over men who are not in a 
condition to return the attack ? Ilatfg, r»v\ 

VTSg ifTTy uy»i Kuroj^. 

I now proceed to give some instances of 
the improvements made in this edition. The 
plan of the Lysistrata is as follows : the 
women, grieved at the long continuance of 
the war, seize the acropolis, where the public 
money was kept, and resolve to keep the 
men at a distance till a peace shall be con- 

[» Pac. 648, 9.] 

c 2 eluded 


eluded. Upon this a dialogue ensues between 
Lysistrata and Probulus, the heroine and 
hero of the play. 

anxXsicrars fjf^^Xo7g. In some other editions 
it IS printed ttjv toXi9 fjfjuSp aTexXutrnri roig 
fu^Xdlg. Mr. Brunck has inserted very justly 
Dawes's emendation in the text, "On ^»- 
Xo/^B¥»i 71JV ToXin fifMv aTSxXuo'ari role's fMyXoitriv* 

The corruption, no doubt, arose from the ex- 
planation of the scholiast being written above 
the text : h ^oXi; of itself signifies the acro- 
polis. I cannot help submitting it to Mr. 
Brunck's judgement, whether in Plutus 772, 
instead of the vulgar reading xXssvov miov, we 
should not read xXtiPfjp toXsv from Stephanus 
Byzant. v. 'A^^va/. But perhaps Hemsterhuis 
has sufficiently defended the other reading ; 
for I must own, though with the utmost fear 
of incurring Mr. Brunck's displeasure (vid. 
not. in Plut. 3270) that I am not possessed 
of Hemsterhuis's edition. 

▼• 498* *Hfiils ufJMs a-mcoiiiv, IIP, vfjalg ; A. i^fjitls l^im^* 

17. (TxrrAi^y yv 
A. "AXX* eanhxrioi raur' l<rr]y ![Uor H. N^ r^v J^- 


*AXX' uroiizria is a conjectural emendation, 
first inserted in the Venetian edition ; inge- 
nious enough, but wrong. The first edition 
has 'AXX' aToxrfa, which comes nearer the 
true reading, restored by Mr. B. from two 
MSS. *AXXa ^otfiTea,. — But the MS. not only 
amends but supplies the text: for Mr. B. has 
inserted the following verse upon the authority 
of the MS. after verse 498. 

A. 'Clg (ratdfifTH k(x,¥ (mi (SiXif. 11. Aam yi Xf- 
yuq. A. 'Ayayaxr€7g' 'AXX« t. etc, 

Mr. Brunck is not in general very gracious 
to Kuster, when he finds him negligent ia 
smaller matters. But what would he have 
said had he known, that in the very manu- 
script*, which Kuster used, not only the true 
reading of the third verse was preserved, but 
the second verse fairly and plainly written? 
— ^Though he might have guessed something 
of the kind from the scholiast, to whose 
words a part of the verse in question is pre- 

V. 519^ 'O ii fj(J ev0vg vroSXi'^ug i^ucxiv* 
Kt\ (Ml Tov (rT7i[M¥ex, vTio'oi). — Mr. Bruuck rightly 
observes, that the copula has no business 

[* Now in the library of Trinity College^ Cambridge.] 



before $1 ; he therefore reads, *0 ^ s/t iv6vt 

(vfio'stg from a MS.)' I should rather read, 'O 
if tfi! Bv6vg vTO^Xi'^ug av t^utrK' £/ f/^^ etc. 

▼« 529^ S6({« ^. XiWKa, Sly oS Kordparey 11. <noo7rm *yw^ 

A* Koii Toma xaAu/tjxaTa ^ept 
J7ep} r^y xf^oXijv* jtt^ vuv ^fipi)v* oXA.' e! tout* iynrihiv croi. 
J7ap* e/xoD tout) to xaXujx/xa XaSdv^ '^^X^f '^^^ irtpliou irepi T^y 

To enter into an examination of the tau- 
tology, the absurdity, the metrical defects, 
and the want of syntax in this sentence, as 
it now stands, would waste too much time 
and paper. Suffice it to say, that the editor 
has happily restored the genuine text by the 
aid of MSS.* 

A. ^cira. n, 2oi 7', of xctro^pocrsy (riu^Si *yci 

yyy ^«J7v. A. ^AKTC f/ rSr ifMcdiiov troh etc.* 

In the Nubes, after v. 969- Mr. B. has 
inserted a verse, which Mr. Valckenaer first 
discovered to belong to this place (from 
Suidas, V. %^a^g/y.) 

£1 Se Ti; auTouy jSeoftoAo^^fuo'ftiT', ^ xafi^tiiv riva xajXT^y^ 

\AMi ^il^asy iv ^* dpiJLOviai$ ^la^coy ^ O'l^yia^ooy.] etc. 

m — ■ — — 

[* (juibuscum concordat MS. Trin. Coll. Cantab. 
Jlf Pf Append* ad Taup. in Suid, p. 503.] 




The Eccles. v. 621, 622. stand thus in the 
common editions : 

17. Ov)^ (Mt^ovvrai* B, Dtp) trow, U. rou jdi^ ^uyxaraSapii!v. 
B. Koi (TO I roiouTov uweif^u. 

Instead of this latter fragment, Raster's 
edition has, KaJ coi ro te^} r^iroiit ^^ fji.aiyjiirSai. 
These Mr. Brunck has restored to sense and 
metre by sHghtly altering the reading of the 

MS. n. Ot^^i fjuoLyjivrttiy B. rif^i ri\ 11. Qdppu^ 
fMj iii(nj% liy\ fMtyjivroLi. B. Ili^i rJf ; Yl. ri [mi 

In the Thesmophoriazusae, the women are 
gathered together to consult about some me- 
thod of punishment for Euripides, who had 
so grossly traduced and scandalized them on 
the stage. When the assembly is met, the 
herald speaks to this effect, (v. 372.) " Hear 
€very one ; the female senate decreed (Ti- 
moclea was president, Lysilla clerk, Sostrata 
speaker) to hold an assembly early in the 
morning, on the middle day of the Thesmo- 
phoria :" 'ExxXfjo'sa^y rolsiy %oj6%y rlj fjuitrt} ray S^cr- 
fjuo^o^ioiVi ?y aX/f icd^ fifuv (r^oXfj' So Kuster's 
edition. Davies (on Cicero de Legg. I. 10.), 
and Spanheim (on Callimacb. H. in Jov. 84.) 



quotes the latter verse to prove that aXiy may 
be joined with a nominative. Dawes (Misc. 
Grit. p. 235.), perceiving a solecism in this 
reading, tacitly altered it to %ly olxig — But 
the sense of the passage is not at all assisted 
by this alteration. ^* The senate decreed to 
hold a meeting-T— if there in leisure ; " rather, 
" if there should be leisure .'* Neither could 
the herald be ignorant, when he proclaimed 
this, whether they had sufficient leisure or 
not. The first edition (by Junta) has h aXi^"^* 
ifiliv tr^oK^** which approaches very near the 
true reading restored to the text from the 
MS. p fiMKio'd' fjfM¥ cxfiX^' *' on which day we 
are most at leisure.'' The third day of the 
Thesmophoria was a fast (vid. Athenaeum VIL 
p. 307. F.), 

In the Pax, when Trygaeus and the chorus 
are drawing the goddess Irene out of the 
welly the chorus exclaims, v. 496- *n; xazov 
ii rivsg eltrh Iv ijfMv. Mr. B.'s MS. had 'Clg xazov 
c$ ring ilcnv iv fjfUM. of which, he says, he could 
make nothing for a long time, till he luckily 
fQund the true reading in Suidas, v. »a»o¥op 

f [Junta has, ?/Aiy <rxo^. R, P.] 



*Cl{ xaxovoi rmg iltnp iv ifjup. " There are cer- 
tainly some disaffected people among us/' 
And so the scholiast seems to have read in 
his copy, as one may conjecture from his 

In the Equites, v. 1300, etc. the triremes 
are in great agitation, upon hearing that 
Hyperbolus is going to petition for a fleet, 
and they vow that he shall never command 
them. But, says one, who had never come 
near man, ^' if the Athenians consent to this 
motion,'' — 

£ij TO Oijo'fiov TXeoua^en^y ij 'xl rm <re[jLvmv ^eeov. 

In which words there is neither sense nor 

Whoever has a mind to see what the critics 
have written about it and about it, may con- 
sult Petit (Leg. Attic, p. 79-)> *Dorville and 
Salvini (Miscell.Observat. Vol. III. p. 401. 2,), 
Dawes (Misc. Crit. p. ^252.) : Mr. Brunck has 
restored from conjecture, ioK$7 — TXeovtrug^ re- 
ferring to Vesp. 270. " I advise that we sail 
either to the Theseum, or the temple of the 

* [A mistake for " Dukcr.'' R. P.] 



Eumenides, and take refuge there/' The 
emendation is ingenious and certain, nor does 
it the less honour to Mr. Brunck's sagacity, 
that Reiske had already proposed the same in 
the Acta Lipsiensia for July 1750, p. 419* 

Eq. 751. OvK av »a6i^oifjt,fj¥ sv aXXof X^g^V* 
*AXX' $lg TO TgO(r6i j^gfjv Tag$7vai \ riiv Uvuxa,. 

This Demus says to ^goracritus, who had 
requested him not to hear the cause in Pnyx. 
The commentators have been led into gross 
errors by a slight corruption in the text. 
Mr. B. has elegantly restored, ig ro ^goo'Sif 
<* as formerly.'' 

Nub. 339« Kitrr^uv refjud^fi fjt,tyoiXa¥ ayoL^avj 
K^ioL r ogvidiu Ki^Xoi¥. The metre is defective 
by half a foot. In Kuster's edition: »§%» r 
i^nhioi y% xi^i^oiv. Mr. Brunck has thrown 
out 7«, and replaced the true reading upon 
the authority of Athenaeus and Eusiathius, 
xiy^tsy^av. It doubtless escaped his notice, that 
H. Stephens had made this emendation in his 
Ap. to Greek Thes. p. 1228. To the autho- 
rities mentioned, he migh! have added the 
testimony of tlie Etymologus M. whom Pha- 
vorinus has transcribed p. 1060. ed. BasiLl541. 



Having quoted at random these few in- 
stances, in which the text of the author is 
improved ; I now pass to the invidious and 
unpleasant task of marking some of those 
places, where the learned editor has either 
made the text worse, or left it faulty. One 
great defect I cannot help remarking in 
Mr. B. which is, his being in general too 
sparing of his explanations. As he has* omit- 
ted to publish the scholia together with the 
text, he ought to have made some amends 
for this defect in his notes, and also to have 
been more curious in noting the parodies of 
the tragedians and other authors in which 
Aristophanes so much indulges himself. These 
will appear to some grave omissions — but the 
oversights I am going to mention, Mr. B. 
would, without question, have entirely sup- 
plied or corrected, if he had allowed himself 
a little leisure for another revisal. 

He has publicly testified that he has a great 
dislike to the particle yj, and accordingly 

* [f^ As he has most unaccountably^ and to the full 
success of his work fatally , omitted"— The words printed 
in Italics were inserted by Mr. Maty.] 



has, with great justice, frequently expunged 
it; but he should have done it much oftener, 
and I will give a few examples where it ought 
to be thrown out, as perfectly useless both to 
the metre and sense. 

Nub. 86.9- ^o4 raiv x§if4,»6gSv i r^lScjv rSv 
w^aJi. Mr. B. inserts y« here after rivj to 
make the verse agree with Dawes's canon. I 
had rather read xg^fiucrgSif on the authority 
of Pollux X. 157. and so perhaps the scholiast 
read,v.Pierson onMoeris, p. 242. — 1216VAti- 
gv6gioi(ra,i y% fMXKov^ fi fryiiv r^tky^rat,. As the 
penultima of ur€gv6gtoi(rai is long, the yg ought 
to be expunged. — Ran. 1055. "'Eo'ri hicLrxaXoi^ 
ccng ^^a^sr ro7g J' ^CStriv y% Toi9ir»L The 
particle is interpolated by some later editor. 
Read ro7<r/v i* nZiori. — Equit. 508. 'Hyayxa^sy 
%xfi Xi^ovrag y ig ro ^t(x.Tgo¥ ragaSfjvai. Read 
'Hvay^a^gy Xi^ovrag i7rn 'X'gog ro ^sargo¥, as it is 
quoted by the author of the argument to the 
Nubes*. Acharn. 629. OSxv TugiGfj xfog to 
^MTgop Xi^ofv. Pac. 735. AvTO¥ ixjvu xgog ro 
^iargov xa^dCug. There is another passage in 
Aristophanes where Tgog is to be restored in- 

* [Conf. R, P. Suppl. ad Praef. Eur. lv=lx.] 



Stead of jJg, Acliarn. 392. *Cig (rK7i'\pt¥ ay ayir 
irog HK itrii^Brui. This Mr. B. quotes in a 
note upon Nub. 465. (where r. i^ro-^oiLai for 
c^oiMLt from Suidas, v, S,^a 71) to show that 
the particle ay may be joined with a future 
indicative, a point I shall not at present dis- 
pute, but the validity of this example to 
prove it. If the learned critic had looked 
into any of the three first editions of Suidas, 
V. S/erv^oj, or P. Leopard. Emendat. xiii. 8. 
he would have found it thus quoted, 'n^ <r«?- 
^/y aym Zrog i xgotrii^tretij which is the true 
reading, changing only aym into ayiy, or, as 
Mr. Brunck would write it, iydv. 

Acharn. 18. Ovratg Htj^Oiiv vto xonccg y% rag 
h^^vg. As the penultima of Kovlag may be 
made long, vid. Lysistr. 470., the yt may be 
safely ejected on the authority of the scholiast 
and the first editions of Suidas, v. pvxrofMit. 

Av. 1478. Tiro [JLiv yi ri^og aU) —Mr. B. is not 
quite satisfied with this verse, and therefore 
proposes TSrofjuivr a§ — The common reading 
isTSro fM¥ ^gog ah) — read,T?ro rSfji^sv ^jo;, which 
answers to what follows, TJ i\ ^stfieivog. — 

Eccles. 701. To7g i' Burgtrictv y axoXfifiSvng. 



yi is of the editor's insertion. Read, To7; iw- 

Thesmoph. 225* Ob y«f , fjM ttip AfifjLfjT^oi y , 
%vroLv6oi (Jt^ivi. The particle is here of no force, 
nor is it in the earlier editions, at least it is 
not in the Basil. 1 532. There can scarcely 
be a doubt, I think, but we must read, Oi 
ya^, fjt,a r^y Afjfjt,fiTg\ tr \v7av6di fjt^ivZ^ to any 
one who will consult Nub. 814. Vesp. 1442. 
Av. 1335. I shall quote the middle example, 
\ju rot, (MX, rri¥ ^fjftfiTg , tr %¥7Ctv0oi fj(,tHtg. 1 o 
show of what signal use it is sometimes to 
compare an author with himself, I will give 
another example. Thesmoph. j630. Ocf liofj 
ri Tg£ro¥ h; irmftsv; Mr. B. has aptly quoted 
Nub. 737. ^Bg lioifj ri fjt,svTot x^Zrojf Jy; riTgurop 
h ; but, what is surprising, did not see that 
the verse in question wa^ to be amended thus: 
0io licjf ri fjLivroi T^Srov ?y ; as it is quoted by 
Suidas, V, TgoTipu. 

Ibid. 443. *Oxiyoif» inKtt y uvrri *aj?X^oV pri'- 
fji^drm. Why does Mr. B, follow that bard us, 
stipes, fimgus, etc. Bergler with his yg? Why 
not htKct xavrn — Lysistr. 82. Tvfjt^miiofjMl yi 
f^ Tor) Tvyap aXXofjt^at. Mr. B. reads ya La- 



conice^ I should prefer TviJi.mliofji.cti n — as 
it is quoted by Eustathius, p. 1570. 

Mr. B. sometimes quits the editions, at least 
those which I have, to wit, Aldus, Basil. 1532, 
and Kuster, without giving his reader notice, 
as for instance, Nub. 826. 1302. Ran. 320. 
376. 1406. Probably he does this on the 
authority of MSS. (perhaps of other edd.); 
but such variations ought to be accounted 
for in the notes. 

He sometimes erroneously follows Kiister's 
edition ; as e. g. Plut. 197» ^H ^n^riv oh (Sicjtop 
ahra rov ^109. In the preceding editions it is 
thus ; '^H ^TjtriVj ix uvcn (Bicjtov avra rov (SioPj 
where avrSj not slmtj ought to have been 

Nub. 1329. JV^' for o7(r6\ from Kusten 

Eq. 787* TSto yi rZ^yov ak^doig i<rri¥. — ^In 
Aldus, Tiro yi crov rSgyov uXfj^ag — read, TSri 
yi Toi oTH rSgyo¥ aXfi02g — vide infra 1 054.'^ 

Mr. Brunck generally shows a great respect 
for Dawes, and follows his emendations; but 
I think he sometimes rejects them without 
reason, and sometimes does not give them 
all the support they might have ; e. g. the 

* [Vide R. P. Suppi. ad PrKf. Eur. lv=lx.] 



emendation on Acharn. 271, is confirmed by 
Suidas, V. A(zfji.iij^cj¥ . that on Pac. 188. by 
Suidas, V. [jt^totfoi. Of the first I shall give 
but one instance ; Plut. 392. as a MS. has 
ro7o¥^ it ought to have been inserted in the 
text. The assertion of Mr. B's, that there are 
a hundred exceptions, is rash ; I do not be- 
lieve there are six. I remember one in the 
Rhesus, but easily to be altered. The verse 
from the Phognissae is no proof at all ; that 
from the Bacchae very little ; in the example 
from the Acharn. 903. read 'O To7og irog Aa- 
fict^og. — vid. Nub. 1270. Ta ToTaraSra XS^f^^^i 
80 far from 'O Tolog not being admissible here, 
it is almost necessary, on account of the apo- 
dosis, 'O hmg*. — I will give two instances of 
Aristophanes's exactness in this particular : 
Ran. 1200. *Ato Xfjxv6iH rag tnig T^aXoyug iitt^ 
^6i^u. So a MS. has it. ; rightly, as appears 
from the next verse, 'Ato X^xy^/« av rvg Ifjuig ; 
— Aves 1419. 0^5 Ta^scrTiP' aXX' or« y^gfjj iel 
Xiytip. UrBgaPj mgZp ^$7, It is plain, that in 
the first verse we must read om 3g7, ^gfi xiyBip, 

[*Conf. R. P. ad Ph. 892. 1718. I am grieved that 

the former Ime had been attempted by Ruhnkenius ad Rut. 

Lup. p. 54.] 




jiot only for the reason above given, but also 
because j(^fi never governs a genitive case in 
the Attic poets. ITie only example, I believe, 
that can be produced to the contrary, is Eu- 
ripides Orest. 667 (659-)' ^'* XS^ ^i^M ; but 
that is to be altered into iii ^i\w on the 
authority of Plutarch. Op. Mon p. 68. E. 
Aristotel. Ethic, ix. 9** 

Eq. 400. yipolfjbfip iv K^arivov m^iop. I much 
question whether this can signify una de pel- 
libus Cratini. L. Bos's emendation ip K^ar/W 
(Animadv. p. 8.) seems to me to admit of no 

lb 456. Mr. B. seems somewhat uncertain 
about the word «oXa. There is no reason 
for change. The Attics only use the middle 
future of this verb. xoKoifiipovg ought to have 
\\een restored, Vesp. 244, instead oi KoKovfJAPOv^^ 
which cannot possibly come from xoKovoiy or 
indeed any other word. Theopompus apud 

* [Et quod Aristophanem attinet, anno 1794 codicb 
Raveimatis coUationem edidit Invernizius, quae istam 
einendationem confirniavit. Ipse tandem r/ Sii ^IXaw in- 
yeni in MS. quein voco L. R. P. ad 1. c. } quern cpnf. ad 
Eur. SuppL 799.] 

D Suidam, 


Suidam, v. Arrtg. JLoXdcofJiMi ye ^s, Kai to¥ ^op 
"Arrtv *. 

Thesm. 149- ^§^ ^op Totfjriiv ctviga x^og rei 
^^ajEtara— -when apfjg is joined with a substan- 
tive,Jt is not, I believe, capable of the article. 
The Tov is, I believe, the insertion of a later 
editor, without any authority ; I would there- 
fore read, X^i yoLg xottjT^f — which connects 
better with the preceding verses. 

In so long a work, it is impossible but some 
little inaccuracies, respecting the niceties of 
metre, must escape an editor, however dili- 
gent or sagacious. 

Eq. 569. T^ovi$)g ouisTciror avrSp — It is 
astonishing that Mr. Brunck should let the 
spondee pass in the first place, and not alter 
it to KovTtg. 

Ibid* 1256* ^O'x'titg yipojfji^ai cot ^a^fog vroy^a^ 
^vg hxm. The metre of this line is redundant 
(the first syllable of 4>avoj being long), though 
Valesius (on Harpocration, p. 228.) and 

* [MS. Leid. apud Hemsterhusium ad Arlstoph. Plut. 
p. 435. et MS. C. C. C. Oxon. habeiit^ xoKxa-Ofuai y icra), 
quod leviter mutatum in KOAASOMAI S'ErU, genuinam 
dabit lectionem. R. P. App. ad Toup. in Suid. p. 459.] 



D'Orville (on Chariton, p. 5.) quote it without 
suspicion. Amend it from Suidas, v. Oa^o^i 

Pac. 185. T/ ffoixor i<rr) rovvofju, oiz i§i7gi 
fjLiBLfoiraro; . An iambic with seven feet. Correct 
it,T/ (Tol rot itrr ivtfjt!^ ovx igtlg ; as Suidas quotes 
it v. fjiiu^oL I will take this occasion to ob- 
serve, that a httle above, instead of '^Ct fj(,tag\ 
za) ToXfjt,T}fi, — we must read on the same au- 
thority, ^H ^hxvok, to avoid tautology. Com- 
pare Ran. 465, 466. 

Av. 385. 'AXXa fjUTjv ov^ oiWo (rot nf» rgoiyfjC 
rivavTicjfjitdet. A spondee in the fifth place. The 
fir:^t editions have IvavTicitJusSa,; read Ivi^vncifAifia. 

Ibid 1297* ^vgaxovtriof i% Kirra,* Mui/oLg i* 
ixu A ere tic in the second place ; r. 2t;fa- 
xotriof. Eapolis quoted by the Scholia. 2t;- 
faxorio^ y toiK%u, fj/tx ay y^iyif To7g xvpiiioio't rolciv 
It) ruv ru^sofv. In Kuster's edition it is cor- 
rupted into Iv^uxovcrtog. 

Tlie.^m. 23 i. BovXa ^%oi<ra<r6on t^avrov; u 
ioKtli (pgfg. A syllable too much ; correct it 
slightly, Bot^Xg^ ^iSi(r6(x.i. — Eccles.369« Lysistr. 
742. ^n Torwa EiXeiSvta —without an elision ; 
that the first syllable in roTvia may not be 

D 2 made 


made long contrary to the author's custom. 
To (piigfMtj(^S» o'ov Tfip 90ffo¥ [Jt^u^cif Toitt*. If any 
thing is to be altered, I should rather suppose, 
'AXX' ought to be supplied at the beginning 
of the verse. A similar omission has happened 
in the Aldine edition of Euripid. Phoeni^»s. 
1806 (1775), and in many editions of our 
author, A v. 1693. *AXXa yuf^iKnv xi^aviia iorm 
ng iivgo fMt. (ita leg. ex Schol. in v. )565.)*t- 
The Index is a repetition of Kuster's, but 
very much improved and enlarged. The 
Latin interpretation, which the learned editor 
has altered and corrected in an infinity of 
places, is, as far as I have consulted it, per- 


spicuous and accurate. In the Fragments, 
perhaps, something more might have been 
done. But as I have not now either leisure 
or inclination to undertake a minute exami- 
nation ; I shall only just observe, that in the 
Gerytades, part of the twenty-first fragment 
is repeated in the Incerta, No. 41. whtre 
instead of pifjuara — ifiCaTrofAsvoij we must 
read p?/c6a t$ — ifASa^Trofjt.ivov'^ from Atheriaeus, 

* [A mistake. The passages are right as they are. R. P.] 
[See Advers. p. IS?.] t [iiuSearriiuvQs is right. R. P.] 

p- 367. 


p. 367, and that in the third fragment of 
the Aa/raX^j, whoever will compare Nub. 
865. 1242. will think it ought probably to 
be corrected thus, *H fi,fjv tirojg ov xaruTXuyia'u 
rZ xjS^pw. Fragm. incert. 133. is a parody of 
Euripides apud Plutarch, de Lsid. et Osirid. 
p, 379. D.» 

♦ [R.P. adHec. 1255 = 1247.] 

( 38 ) 

Art. III. HermesianaT ; she Conjecture in 
Athenaum atque aliquot Poetarum Grce^ 
corum Loca^ qucc cum corriguntur et ex- 
plicantur^tum Carmine donantur. A adore 
Stephano Weston, S. T. B. Coll. Exon. 
in Acad. Ojcon. Soc. et Eccles. Mamhead 
in Agro Devon. Rectore.pp. 124. Nichols*. 

The author of this book, in a prooemium, 
where he explains the nature of his under- 
taking, has the following paragraph : Tota 
artis criticoe materia in tres partes distribuitur, 
ut debeat monstrare prim urn principia et 
causas scribendi recte, quse philosophica dici 
potest, deinde de consuetudinibus, praescriptis, 
moribus, eloculionibusque versari, quae hi- 
storica appellari solet; denique de correctione 
agere ex collationibus MSorum, optimisque 
editionibus librorum impressorum exquisila, 
necnon de conjecturis tractare, variS, eru- 
ditione et editorum acumiue excogitatis, 

* [This article is by a friend. Matt.] 


REVIEW OF Weston's hermesianax. 39 

quam hypotheticam appellare possumus. In 
this publication, Mr. W. professes to deal 
only in the hypothetical sort of criticism ; 
and further observes, " plus in bon^ (conjec- 
ture) laudis, qua 01 in mala vituperationis^ 
esse." Whether he will have any cause to 
avail himself of this plea, my readers may 
determine for themselves, from the specimens 
I shall hereafter produce. It must be owned^ 
even by those who disapprove of his conjec- 
tures, that they are often supported with 
learning and ingenuity, and they who are 
dissatisfied with his criticisms cannot com- 
plain of his want of civility, that great 
opprobrium of the sect. But, generally 
speaking, there is not that felicity in his 
emendations, which instantly compels the 
reader's assent, and supersedes the necessity 
of a long defence, or explanation. Mr. W. 
is somewhat unlucky in setting out with a 
fragment of Hermesianax, (Athena^i p. 597) 
which has come down to us in so wretched 
a state, that, after the labours of the best 
critics, Casaubon, Heringa, Ruhnkenius, etc. 
it still abounds with corruptions. It is not, 



therefore, to be wondered at, if Mr. W. has 
done but little towards restoring this fragment 
to its first integrity. His best conjecture is, 
I think, that on v. 83. I shall, therefore, 
transcribe the lines. Aflter enumerating the 
most famous poets that were lovers, Herme* 
sianax proceeds to shew, that even philo- 
sophers, in spite of their gravity, were " the 
sons of women." Ovi\ fjutp ou^ irotroi erxXfj^otf 

/MfOP^ i$t¥0¥ y ^Xfi0¥ V<P* fl¥io^O¥. FoT Ovit Oi iu¥0¥y 

to avoid the repetition of the same word, 
Mr. W. reads» O^^ o7^ ai¥0¥. This seems 
perfectly right (though not having either 
Lennep or Ruhnkenius at hand, I am not 
certain whether this conjecture has been 
anticipated or riot) ; but in the verses imme- 
diately following, Mr. W. is less happy. I 
shall quote the passage, and, for particular 
reasons, subjoin a Latin commentary. Otti 
fM¥ ^»fj(0iO¥ fj(0a¥ifi xctriifia'i 0ia¥ovi Ilvd»yogfj¥9 
%XiKoa¥ MOfi'^a ysaffjutrgifjg Ev^ajCteyoy* »») kvkXo¥ 
ocro¥ 9regi<ooiXXirat alSfigf Ba/^ r sy (f^o^^gif vwtr 
* [f^p^/Myoy membranse. Schweigh.] 

Weston's hermesianax. 41 

V.89«seq. Corruptissimus locus, et qui sen- 
su et rhythmo omnino vacat. Prima egregie 
emendavit A. Heringa, 0?« i* ij^x/yi^w, op — , 
quod cum CI. Westonus se vix capere fateatur^ 
judicium ejus desidero. Ut antea, 0^19 fMtPtn 
mccriificrij sic nunc, Oiiw '^X^h^^ ^0^ fUHik 
Planissimus vero sensus. Quam violento igne 
Socratem Venus irata calefecit. Sed inter* 
jecta adhuc medicinam implorant. Rescri- 
bendum ex verissim& Wyttenbachii emen* 
datione, Oiiv if f;^Xi^ysy, 09 t^o^op tyj^fi ^AmKkm 
^AvO^Mm liven ^Afxgarfj %¥ iro^lfj^ Kvrgtg fi^fiviovara 
xvgog fjt,mi. Paullo quidem aliter (si rite audita 
recordor) verba constituerat Wyttenbachius, 
ita nempe ; 6|. tlvui 'Avok'kmf "Ej^gfjtr kvO^mr^p 
— Sed alterum ordinem praetuii primum ob 
numerorum facilitatem, deinde ordoy quem 
ille sequitur, in nuUo, quantum sciamus, MS. 
comparet ; alter vero in Codice Veneto, teste 
Ruhnkenio ; postremo cum verbum lyj^n 
paullo rarius sit, eo proclivius erat librariis 
vulgatiorem formam supponere. Sophocles 



E^ectr. 35. XPH /mi toiu,v6' o <I>0IB02. Zt 

nvnt TUX,*- O^^- ^^'- 87> 4>OIBni rt xoifuu 
jct^ 7sy^0'& a^vA/^yc;, Ug [A4>ij rot, 70XX f j^siy or 
£ SEX PH ««»(») Tavriyy f X^lfi ^auXay. ApoUon. 

Rhod. 1 . 301 . •£«/ ^«X« ^i|ia OOIBOS EXPH. 

In Simonides's epigram, (ap.Athen. p. 125.) 
Mr. W. p. 14. adopts Brunck's emendation * 
oi Ix^vpdfi for *tK»fi^0fi. A large part of the 
book (to p. 72) is, as the title-page seems to 
promise, employed about the fragments of 
the poets quoted by Athenaeus. The rest is 
taken up with ApoUonius Rhodius, Aristae- 
netus, Aristophanes, Asclepiades, Babrius^ 
Euripides^ Longus, Orpheus, Plutarch, So- 
phocles, Theocritus, Xenophon, etc. I shall 
produce some examples of Mr. W's conjec- 
tures, as they occur in order. 

P. 40. In the epigram of Hedylus, (ap. 
Athen. p. 486.) it is strange Mr. W. should 
mistake the sense, vhen he had Pier^jon's 
note on Moeris (p. 413.) before him. The 
cause, however, seems to be the expression 
AttrCiOv fjt,6rgov(r(t^ or the o'^tjf/M vgog ro (rfifMnvo- 
fi,iPQ¥j as the grammarians call it. That the 

♦ [An. Gr. 1. 146. cv.] 


Weston's herm£SIanax. 49 

reader may judge, I will subjoin the middle 
distich in the original, with a literal interpre- 
tation in English, and Mr. W's Latin version ; 

H; roie aroh Ila^/^, ^ugov fji.irgova'a ^v£i¥*, KtJrm 
Tog^vgifig Ai(rCto¥ i^ viXov. By whom the cup 
of purple glass, which measured the fragrant 
wine J is dedicated to thee^ O Venus. Mr. W 
reads, Tl^ro is olIl»^ifi — , XiTrai, et i| viXoug. 
Adstitit huic Faphia halantes emensa culullos^ 
et capiunt Lesbi pocula sex calices. Ex Grsecis 
malis Latina fecit non bona. This error is 
the more extraordinary, as Pierson had 1. c. 
quoted two epigrams, one of the same He- 
dylus, where the same expression ^H; xfTrai 
occurs. With equal success Mr. W. p. 53. 
has attacked a fragment of Plato, the comic 
poet, which stands thus, in the editions of 
Athenaeus, p. 677« Ka/ro/ ^ogiln yXirrat iir 
vToififji^ao'if, Sri^ayouff i' vro yXokriftriVy on ^ipfiri 
rov. As this passage is produced to prove the 
use of a chaplet called hypoglossis^ it is dear 
that vvo yXdrnfa-tv must be joined in one word. 
In the former line Mr. W. reads yXd^cet^j 
which spoils the metre, without improving the 

* [Malim tamen^ furpoth dvosrra. Adven. p. 129.] 


44 HEVIEW 07 

sense. In the second, ^n^d^cvg i* viroyXiifTriia^ 
Sr$ mvnrt tov. This line too is defective in its 
metre, which, however, is easily amended^ 
by correcting, as the syntax requires^ oray x. 
As to the other emendation, though, perhaps, 
examples of a similar pleonasm might be ad« 
duced, they ought very sparingly to be ob- 
truded on authors from conjecture : besides, 
a smaller alteration will be sufficient if we 
read 'Xn^vowrfi* ixoyXonrltrtf orap r. Coronis 
ex hypoghssd factis caronati potatis. When 
the word was once, by the carelessness of 
transcribers, separated, thus Inpavcvg f v. 
it was easy to make the other mistake. P. 72. 
Mr. Weston favours us with two conjectures 
upon Apollonius Rh. I. 36H. and 672. in the 
former hivrotf for hiofiiVj and in the latter 
xXvcr^anif for Xtvx^crip. 

P. 110. Mr. W. gives us an inscription 
from Wheeler, p. 77- H TEPOTSIA KTPON 



explains aXsi'4^«yra, qui urbem dealbasset et 
calce splendida et pretiosa citra comparC" 
tionem cedificia obduxisset. I shall further 
observe, that if the atoXii^, which is inserted in 
brackets, is meant for an emendation, nothing 
can be more erroneous, as it is plain that 
nOAEI THN ought to coalesce into one word, 
nOAEITHN, u and i being perpetually con- 
founded in MSS, and inscriptions. 

P. 114. Mr. W. presents us with an elegant 
conjecture (if it did not recede rather too far 
from the vulgar reading) upon a corrupt and 
mutilated passage in the author, de Lapidibus, 
of whom Mr. Tyrwhitt has lately given us so 
excellent an edition ; v. 38. — xtti rovroto xusc^ 

roh(r<rt. Mr. W. reads Bfi(r$6* TITHN It 
ATAPIION a«. and quotes ApoUon. Rhod. 
L 182. seq. 

P. 121. In the following passage of The- 
ocritus, M^ fJt.oi ySiv risXoTo;, jct^ fMt j^^vtraot 

Mr. W. proposes, as a conjecture, XPTSEI* 
ATAAANTH2* Er^y, &c. which Reiske had 

♦ [ATAAANTAX Weston.] 


46 R£VI£W OF 

anticipated, and inserted in his edition ; as 
Mr. W. finds out in his Index v. Reiske. He 
or Reiske ought to have produced some ex- 
ample of the ellipsis of /Et^Xa, not to mention 
that the second hne is almost tautology, if we 
admit this emendation: if 1 thought the verse 
stood in need of any alteration, I should in* 
finitely prefer Pierson's, KP0I20I0 raXa^ra, 
especially as this conjecture gained the appro- 
bation of Jortin (praef. to Fawkes's transla- 
tion). But the vulgar reading is perfectly right, 
unless we suppose Euripides to have been 
a less accurate poet than Theocritus. Med. 
ap. Grot. Excerpt, p. 197 (542). En?, ^ lfMiy$ 

cai f/'iXogj E/ fji^ii 'vi<rn[Mq ij rvyri yivotro fMn. Here. 
Fur. 649 (645) M^ fjboi fjLfjr ^Atniiriiog rw^avvi- 
iog oXQog Ufiy Mil yoyffoZ idfAurct TXtjofj^ Tug ^Cag 
avrika^ih. Might not any one say of these 
passages, as Pierson says of y^^v<rua raXmroL^ 
" Frigida sunt y^\)(rog \y Jo^o/;," or '* Frigida 
sunt y^xxFoxi ieifjuara, rXiigiiy cum aliquid speci- 
alius dicere debuisset pocta.^*' The happiest 
conjecture, I think, in the book, with which 
I shall, therefore, conclude this account, is 


Weston's hermksianax. 47 

upon Xenophon, Synipos. I. 8. AvroXvxog fM¥ 

iUogt xnreKXi(rdfi(ra¥. Mr. W. reads, with great 
probability, Strxsg uyoii^ comparing; Xenophon 
Hist.Gr. iv. p. 511. ed. 1625. o l\ Oa^^a- 

Ca^o; nxi¥ %YJ»¥ (rroKti^ toXXou a|iay — K»Tix?j90^ 
ovf Kc/A (tvrog^ icrt^ ^^X'^^ ^^i^^S ^^^ Aristo- 
phanes Eccles. 529. 

As the author professes, in his title page, 
to have turned some of the Greek into Latin 
verse, I should produce a specimen of his 
performance in that way ; but, to speak in- 
genuously, I thmk he has been impolitic in 
choosing such difficult and unpromising ori- 
ginals. Without doubt, the fault is in the 
materials, not in the artificer. To translate 
Hermesianax, or Hedylus, to any purpose, 
he should have first been sure of iheir sense. 
Even the great Grotius himself, when he 
translated the scattered fragments of Gre(»k 
poets, committed a multitude of the grossest 
mistakes. But had Grotius succeeded ever 
so well, that success could give no inferior 
critic or poet a reasonable pretext to follow 
his example. 


( 48 ) 

Art. IV. An Apology for the Monostro- 
phicsj which were published in 1782 ; with 
a second Collection of J\ J onos trophies. By 
G. J. HuNTiNGFORD) A. M. Nov. Coll. 
Ox. Soc. Nichols*. 

Mr. H* is determined, as appears from this 
publication, not only to let criticism see that 
he has many arrows -f- still remaining in his 
quiver, but also to make her feel by sad 
experience, that fragili queer ens illidere 
dentem Offendet soHdo^ For my own part, 
without presuming to usurp the office of a 
moderator in this dispute, I shall, with Mr. 
H's good leave, make a few short remarks 
on one or two assertions, which, I confess, 
he seems to me to have thrown out at ran- 

* [I am indebted to a friend for the following criticism. 
t [Pindar Olymp. IL 149.] 
X [Horat. Senn. IL i. 77, 8.] 



dom, and not to have considered with a due 
degree of attention and accuracy He will 
view what I shall offer in the light of a 
friendly, even if mistaken, attempt to set 
him right; an attempt not altogether need- 
less, because the higher we rate an author's 
abilities, the readier we are to receive and 
propagate his errors. ? 

1. One of the arguments, on the strength of 
which Mr. H. (p. 54.) suspects Homer's right 
to the hymn to Ceres, is a little extraordinary; 
** because, instead of uirs (Hymn 479-) Pau- 
sanias (Corinth. 14.) quotes hlli%.'' Etymo- 
logists know, that the Latin word dico is 
literally from the Greek hUoiy the root of 
ieUwfii ; and Mr. H. knows, that Caesar ofteil 
uses demonstravimus very nearly in the same 
sense with diximm. — Therefore, the only le* 
gitimate conclusion was, that Pausanias has 
preserved the genuine and more poetical 
word, instead of the gloss or explanation. 
So in Sophocles Philoct. 426. instead of the 
common reading, O/^/" 16' avrcug hli «Xfi|a^, 
Mr. Brunck will probably give us in the 
text of his new edition, the variation which 

£ WO 

50 K£VI£W OF 

we find in the Scholiast, Of/xoi iu' aZ rdi' %l%^ 

2. (p. 125.) " The mere ipse dixit of the 
pedantic Dawes must give place to two po* 
etical authorities.'' The first is QovKviiifip 
Oxifov KiKgoTiifi9 TO yivog^'. The second^ Tho- 
mas Scholasticus ; 2f7d wo¥ov^ ^^Km^ AnfM<r6$¥$g' 

I am happy that 1 can augment the number 
of Mr. H's examples. Antholog. V. p. 396. 
ediu H. St. (=An. Gr. ii. 470.) 0ouKviiifif% 
SXfX/^fy top piop* fJ9 if fQijcr^i — but whenever the 
word Kviog or its derivatives occur in ancient 
Greek poetry (and they occur very frequently) 
they have the v invariably long. In what 
■licenses three epigrammatists, who wrote 
long after the purity and perfection of the 
Greek poetry were entirely lost, may indulge 
themselves, is of no consequence; and as for 
Thomas Scholasticus, his taste may be 
guessed from his joining Thucydides and 
Demosthenes in the same encomium with 
Aristides, a decision almost as judicious as 

• [R. P. ad Ph. 540.] f [An. Gr. III. 265.] 

J [Ap. Gr. III. 125.] § [eouxu8%y l,edd.] 


huntingford's apology. &% 

would be that critic's who should rank ValckeJ 
naer and Dawes in the same class with Barneif 
and Pauw (vid. Apology, p. 5.). If Mr. H* 
believes that every license, which the later 
epigrammatists take, may be allowed in a mo^ 
dern poet, he will find it difficult to cdmtnit 
any errors in quantity, as there is scarcely d 
violation of metre which may not be de* 
fended by the example of one or other of 
these poetasters*. When an imitator of the 
ancients unites in his own compositions all 
the different dialects and metres, which the 
Greek language admitted ' through the space 

* A young poet the other day shewed me some Latin 
Asclepiads, one of which concluded with the word frate^. 
I objected to it as being a false quantity ; but he socm 
convinced me, that ^^ my pedantic ipse dixit must ghre 
place to poetical authority," by producing the following 
epigram of Palladas (Anthol. H. St. i. 42. p. 63. ss 
Brunck, ii. p. 4 1[^.), in which a just t&ste, refined wit, and a 
scrupulom regard to the exactness and graces of versifica-* 
tion, are equally conspicuous. 

*Hv & piXos t) XaSri, AOMINE OPATEPj twWj lyfa'^w. 

*Hv 8* aS jxij Ti Xagjj, to <PPATEP tm ^uivoy. 
"Una yotq xou tolvtol ra fVjfMLTa' avrap iywyn 
Ovx MeXco JO MINE' ou yap txto AOMENAL 
[Conf. Mureti Opera, III. 27.] 

E 2 of 


of a thousand years, it is not easy to decide 
'what system of prosody or style he may have 
formed for his own use. What would Mr. H. 
think of a foreigner, who, by way of writmg 
English monostrophics^ should studiously coU 
lect and mingle the phraseology, diction, and 
prosody of Chaucer, Shakspeare* Milton, and 
Pope, et turn mirifice speraret se esse locutum ? 
In my judgement, therefore, Dawes's observa* 
tion has not been materially hurt by what 
Mr. H. has advanced. — Dawes does not say 
that there is no example to be found of the 
license that Mr. H. defends, but that who-p 
ever takes such a license is ignorant of 
quantity ; as ignorant, I may add, as he 
would be, who should make iTuga$ (New Mo- 
nostr. p. 20.) an anapaest, yuxofv (p. 30.) or 
^vj^fii (p. 36.) an iambus, or el trv (p. 38.) a 
spondee. Part of Mr. H's civility to Dawes 
has been alreadj^ quoted. The paragraph 
concludes uith saying, that " he is positive, 
hasty and wrong in more passages than in 
one.'' Without entering on a long defence 
of Dawes, I shall venture to urge one plea in 
his favour. He wrote in his youth some 


huntinoforb's apology, 53 

Greek verses, full of mistake in syntax and 
dialect, though faultless^ I believe^ in point 
of metre. But afterwards, becoming sensi* 
ble of his error, he quitted what he esteemed 
so idle and unprofitable a study, and chose 
rather to read good Greek than to write bad. 
An example of candour and prudence well 
worthy to be imitated ! 


( 54 ) 


This gentleman professing himself to be 
extremely learned, will have no objection to 
find his merits set forth in a Greek quotation : 

which, no manner of doubt, he will immedi- 
ately translate for the amusement of the di- 
lettanti who visit him. 

The well-earned admiration this pig meets 
with from a sensible and discerning public, 

* As it is possible that the pig's Greek may want rubbing 
up, owing to his having kept so much company with ladies, 
the ckien Sfavant has kindly communicated a translation. 
This, though not very elegant, and probably made from the 
Latin, as it does honour to the ingenuous beast, and shews 
that he is above any sentiment of envy on this occasion^ 
I shall insert. 

A gentle pig this same, a pig of parts. 
And leamM as F.R.S. or graduate in arts ; 
His ancestors, 'tis true, could only squeak. 
But this has been at school— and in a month will speak. 


tH£ LEAttNEX) PIG« 55 

puts me in mind of a pleasant story told by 
Liician, at the beginning of the first Prome- 
theus*. One of the Ptolemies was, it seems^ 
very desirous of gratifying the Egyptians 
with the sight of something new : for this 
purpose he introduced into the public games 
he was exhibiting a black camel from Bactria 
splendidly caparisoned, and a man half black 
and half white ; but far from giving the 
monsters the applause they deserved^ the 
Egyptians, who, as our sneering author says, 
were a people, who did not like thing9 because 
they were 7iew and uncommon^ but rather 
delighted in Jifness and propriety^ were 
frightened at the camel and fairly hissed the 
man. The consequence of this uncourteous 
reception was, that the camel (who was 9 
camel of spirit, and very worthy to wear a 
bridle from the stable of Cambyses, as we 
are told she did) died of grief. The man siate 
was, if possible, harder; for he was given to an 
opera singer, who had sung well at a great sup- 
per, at which Theocritus and the members of 
the tragic and comic Pleiades were present. 

• (T. 1. 4.] 


( S6 ) 


[Notae breves ad Clerici et Bentleii epistolas, 
quas ex apographo Askeviano exaratas in 
aspectum lucemque Anglica censura pro- 
tulit R. P. (H. Maty's Review, April 1786, 
pp. 254r— 261 = 1.98— 211. Burney.)] 

P. 255=200. 2<4Kr^, ut Euripidea verba § 
usurpem, mihi erit aTOKgi<rt(. % Apud Plu- 
tarchum T. ii. p. 532. EL 

Ibid, =201. Ita enim pro imperio jubes*, 
minasque addis regaiiter. *Ovid. Metam. 

ii. 397. 

Ibid, -f P?^'ff »^^ ^zvOSv? -f Laert. i. 101. 

P. 257 = 204. * a(p6o¥ovg U¥ai Mov^iv ^vgttg. 
* Diogenian. iii. 23. 

Ibid, -f- oXoeug fiȴsat^ -f- Theocrit. xi. 11. 

P. 260 = 209. dicis * id devo vens. * Perhaps 
a mistake of the copier for diris. 


( 57 ) 

^ _ 

Art. IX. The JP avian Chronicle. 

DiCBNDVM est mihi ad ea qucB a te dicta 
sunt^ sed ita^ nihil ut affirmem ; quceram 
omnia J dubitans plerumque^ et mihi ipse dif-- 

Having already given a concise account* 
of this learned and ingenious work, we shall 
briefly state such doubts as have arisen in 
our minds, on reviewing Mr. Robertson's 
arguments ; and submit them to his impar* 
tial consideration. If we before omitted any 
observation of moment, from a desire of con- 
tracting our article into as small a compass 
as possible, we shall now endeavour to com- 
pensate for the neglect. 

Objection I. The characters have no cer- 

* tain or unequivocal marks of antiquity . This 

seems rather to be an answer to a defender 

of the inscription, than an objection. If a 

zealous partisan of the marble should appeal 

* [Month. Rev. Oct. pp. 351—357.] 


58 REVIEW OP eobehtson 

to its characters and orthography , as decisive . 
proofs of its being genuine, it would be pro- 
per enough to answer^ that these circum- 
stances afford no certain criterion of authen- 
ticity. But in this word certain sculks an 
unlucky ambiguity. If it means demonstra* 
tive, it must be allowed that no inscription 
can be proved to be certainly genuine, from 
these appearances ; but if it means no more 
than highly probable^ many inscriptions pos- 
sess sufficient internal evidence to give their 
claims this degree of certainty. The true 
question is, Has not the Parian Chronicle 
every mark of antiquity that can be expected 
in a monument claiming the age of 2000 
years ? The letters F and I are, by Mr. R's 
own confession, such as occur in genuine in- 
scriptions ; and to say in answer, that an im- 
postor might copy the forms of these letters 
from other inscriptions, is already to suppose 
the inscription forged, before it is rendered 
probable by argument. The learned author 
of the Diiisertation seems to betray some 
doubt of his own conclusion ; for be adds, 
j). 56, ^ that the antiquity of an inscription 



can never he proved by the mere form of the 
letters^ bectf^ise the most ancient characters 
are as easily counterfeited as the modern/ 
But this objection is equally applicable to all 
other ancient inscriptions, and is not to the 
purpose, if the present inscription has any 
peculiar marks of imposture in its characters 
and orthography. * The characters do not 
resemble the Sigean^ the Nemean^ or the De- 
Han inscriptions/ Mr. R. answers this ob- 
jection himself by adding, * which are sup- 
posed to be of a more aucient date/ The 
opposite reason to this will be a sufficient 
answer to the other objection, * that they do 
not resemble the Famesian pillars or the 
Alexandrian MS/ If* they differ in many 
respects from the M armor Sandnicense^ they 
may be presumed to agree in many. * They 
seem to resemble , more than any other^ the 
alphabet taken by Montfaucon from the 
Marmor Cyzicenum/ Thus it appears that 
the Parian Chronicle most nearly resembles 
the two inscriptions, to whose age it most 
nearly approaches. 



When Mr. R. adds, that the letters ' are 
such as an ordinary stone-cutter would pro^ 
bahly make^ if he were employed to engrave 
a Greek inscription^ according to the alpha-' 
bet nox& in use^ he must be understood cum 
grano salis. The engraver of a fac^simile 
generally omits some nice and minute touches 
in taking his copy; but, even with this 
abatement, we dare appeal to any adept in 
Greek calligraphy whether the specimen 
facing p. 56, will justify our author's obser- 
vation. ' The small letters (o, e, a), inter* 
muted among the larger^ have an air of af' 
fectation and artifice' Then has the greater 
part of ancient inscriptions an air of affecta- 
tion and artifice. For the o is perpetually 
engraved in this diminutive size, and a being 
of a kindred sound, and e of a kindred shape, 
how can we wonder that all three should be 
represented of the same magnitude ^ In the 
inscription, which immediately follows the 
marble in Dr. Chandler's edition, No. xxiv, 
these very three letters are never so large as 
the rest, and often much smaller ; of which 



there are instances in the three first Unes. 
See also two medals in the second part of 
Dorville's Sicula, tab. xvi. num. 7- 9- 

* From the archaisms^ such as, iy AvKOfgua^j 
\y TLv^ikoi^j ifju TLagofh etc. etc. no conclusion 
can he drawn in favour of the authenticity 
of the inscription.* Yet surely every thing 
common to it, with other inscriptions con- 
fessedly genuine, creates a reasonable pre- 
sumption in its favour. * But what reason 
could there be for these archaisms in the 
Parian Chronicle ? We do not usually find 
them in Greek writers of the same age^ or 
even of a more early date.* The reason is, 
according to our opinion, that such flr- 
chaisms were then in use : this we know from 
other inscriptions, in which such archaisms 
(or, as our author afterward calls them, bar-- 
barisms^) are frequent. Nothing can be in- 
ferred from the Greek writers, unless we had 
their autographs. The present system of or- 
thography in our printed Greek books is out 
of the question. Again, * The inscription 
sometimes adopts and sometimes neglects these 
archaisms^ as in lilies 4. 12. 2? 52. 6*3. 67^ 



This inconsistency either is no valid objection, 
or, if it be valid, will demolish not only al- 
most every other inscription, but almost 
every writing whatsoever. For example, in 
the inscription just quoted. No. xxiv. we 
find roN (BounXict 1. 20. and oraM wifjunjiy !i4f. 
A little farther, No. xxvi. 1. 31. we have IT 
Mayvnciot^j 57* 73. 81. iK Moyyffitriu;^ and 
106* 108. IKT Mayvfitr/ag. The Corey rean 
inscription (Montfaucon, Diar. Ital. p. 420.) 
promiscuously uses iKia¥u^ofjuas and iTiaviU 
^ofitai. In English, who is surprised to find 
has and hathj a hand and an hand^ a use-- 
ful and an useful^ in the works of the same 
author.^ We could produce instances of this 
inaccuracy from the same page, nay from the 
same sentence. 

* The authenticity of those inscriptions^ in 
which these archaisms appear ^ must be esta^ 
blishedy before they can be produced in oppo^ 
sition to the present argument.' This is, we 
cannot help thinking, rather too severe a re- 
striction. If no inscription may be quoted, 
before it be proved genuine, the learned au- 
thor of the Dissertation need not be afraid of 



being confuted, for nobody will engage with 
him on such conditions. Perhaps the reverse 
of the rule will be thought more equitable : 
that every inscription be allowed to be ge- 
nuine, till its authenticity be rendered doubt-, 
ful by probable arguments. We will con- 
clude this head with two short observations. 
In Selden's copy, 1. 26. was written nOH2IN» 
which the later editors have altered to IIOI* 
H2IN, but without reason, the other being 
the more ancient way of writing, common in 
MS3. and sometimes found on inscriptions. 
^See G. Koen's Notes on Gregorius de Dia- 
lectis, p. 30*.) In 1. 83. the Marble has KaX- 
xiovj for which Palmer wished to substitute 
KaXX/ow. Dr. Taylor refutes him from the 
Marmor Sandvicense^ observing at the same 
time, that this orthography occurs in no other 
place whatever, except in these two monu- 
ments. Is it likely that two engravers should 
by chance coincide in the same mistake, or 
that the forger of the Parian Chronicle (if it be 
forged) should have seen the Marmor Sandn 

* [See Bastius ad 1. c. et Photii Lex.] 



vicense, and taken notice of this peculiaritj 
with the intention of afterward employing it 
in the fabrication of an imposture? 

We will now consider, more briefly, the 
other objections. 

II. * // is not probable that the Chronicle 
was engraved for private use. I. Because it 
was such an expense j as few learned Greeks 
were able to afford.* If only 'dfew were able 
to afford it, some one of those few might be 
willing to incur it. But let Mr. R. consider 
how likely it is that a modern, apd probably 
a needy, Greek should be more able to af- 
ford it in the last century, than a learned 
Greek 2000 years ago! 2. ^A manuscript 
is more readily circulated* Do men never 
prefer cumbrous splendour to cheapness and 
convenience? And if this composition, in- 
stead of being engraved on marble, had been 
committed to parchment, would it have had 
a better chance of coming down to the pre- 
sent age ? Such a flying sheet would soon be 
lost ; or, if a copy had, by miracle, been pre- 
served to us, the objections to its being ge- 


niiine would be more plausible than any that 
have been urged against the inscription. 
What Mr. R. says about the errors to which 
an inscription is liable, etc. will only prove 
that chronological inscriptions ought not to 
be engraved ; but not that they never were. 
We allow that the common method of writing 
in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus was. not 
on STONES. But it was common enough to 
occur to the miud of any person who wished 
to leave behind him a memorial at once of 
his learning and magnificence. 

III. This objection, that the marble does 
not appear to be engraved by public author 
rity^ we shall readily admit, though Bentley 
(Diss, on Phalaris, p. 251.) leans to the con- 
trary opinion. In explaining this objection, 
the learned dissertator observes, that though 
the expression, cL^yfivrog \fju lik^my would lead 
us to suppose that the inscription related to 
Paros, not a single circumstance in the hi* 
storv of that island is mentioned. But this 
expression only shews that the author was art 
inhabitant of Paros, and intended to give his 
readers a clue, or parapegma, by the aid 

F of 


of which they might adjust the general chro* 
nology of Greece to the dates of their own 
hiatory. ^ It is as absurd as would be a 
marble in Jamaica containing the revolutions 
of England.' We see no absurdity in sup- 
posing a book to be written in Jamaica, con- 
taining the revolutions of England. The 
natives of Paros were not uninterested in 
CTents relating to the general history of 
Greece, particularly of Athens ; and how can 
we tell whether the author were an ingui* 
Unas or a native of the island ; whether he 
thought it a place beneath his care, or whe- 
ther he had devoted a separate inscription to 
the chronology of Paros P 

IV. It has been frequently observed^ that 
the earlier periods of the Grecian history are 
involved in darkness and confusion. Granted. 

It follows then, that an author ^ who should 
attempt to settle the dates of the earlier /?e- 
riodsy would frequently contradict preceding^ 
9nd be contradicted by subsequent y writers : 
thai he would naturally fall into mistakes^ 
and at best could only hope to adopt the most 
probable system. But the difficulty of the 



iaskj or the imposbibiliti/ of success^ art not 
sufficient to pfove that no man has been rash 
or mad enough to make the attempt. On the 
contrary, we know that many have made it. 
What a number of discordant opinions has 
Mr. R. himself given us from the ancients con* 
cerning the age of Homer ! This considera* 
tion will in part obviate another objection! 
that the Pariail Chronicle does not agree with 
any ancient author. For, if the ancients con^ 
tradict one another, how could it follow mofe 
than one of them ? and why might not the 
author, without any imputation of ignorance 
br rashness, sometimes depart from them all ? 
If indeed he disagrees with them when they 
are unanimous^ it might furnish matter for 
^suspicion ; though even this would be far 
from a decisive argument, unless the ancients 
were so extremely unlike the moderns, as 
never to be fond of singular and paradoxical 

V, This Chronicle is not once mentioned 
by any writer of antiquity. How many of 
those inscriptions, which are preserved to the 
present day, are mentioned by classical au- 

F 2 thors ? 


thors? Verrius Flaccus composed a Roman 
calendar, which, as a monument of his learn- 
ing and industry, was engraved on marble, 
land fixed in the most public part of Preneste. 
{Fragments of this very calendar were lately 
dug up at Preneste, and have been published 
hy a learned Italian *• Now, . if the passage 
of Suetonius-f-, which informs us of this cir*- 
cumstance, had been lost, would the silence 
of the Latin, writers prove that the fragments 
were not genuine remains of antft]uity ? It 
may be said, that the cases are not parallel, 
for not a single author mentions the Parian 
Chronicle, whereas Suetonius does mention 
Verrius's Roman Calendar. To this we answer. 
It is dangerous to deny the authenticity of 
any monument on the slender probabihty of 
its being casually mentioned by a single au- 
thor. We shall also observe, that this fact of 
the Hemicyclium of Verrius will answer some 
part of the dissertator's second objection : 
* The Parian Chronicle is not an inscription 


* [Cura 9t studio Petri Francisci Fogginii ; Roms, 
'1779. forma maxima.] 

t [Verrii Flacci vita; p. 964. ed. Oudendorp.] 



that might have been concealed in a private 
librari/J Why not ? It is of no extraordinary 
bulk ; and might formerly have been con- 
cealed in a private hbrary, or in a private 
room, with as much ease as many inscriptions 
are now concealed in very narrow spaces. 
But unless this monument were placed in 
some conspicuous part of the island, and ob- 
truded itself on the notice of every traveller, 
the wonder will in great measure cease, why 
it is never quoted by the ancients. Of the 
nine authors named in p. 109, had any one 
ever visited Paros ? If Pausanias had travelled 
thither, and published his description of the 
place, we might perhaps expect to find some 
mention of this marble in so curious and in- 
quisitive a writer. But though the inscrip- 
tion existed, and were famous at Paros, there 
seems no necessity for any of the authors, 
whose works are siill extant, to have known 
or recorded it. If there be, let this learned 
antagonist point out the place where this 
mention ought to have been made. If any 
persons were bound by a stronger obligation 
than others to speak of the Parian inscription, 



they must be the professed chro]K)logers : but 
ftlasl we have not the entire works of so 
much as a single ancient chronologer ; it is 
therefore impossible to determine whether 
this Chronicle were quoted by any ancient. 
And supposing it had been seen by some an^ 
cienty whose writings still remain, why should 
be make particular mention of it ? Many au« 
thors, as we know from their remains, very 
freely copied their predecessors without nam* 
ing them. Others, finding only a collection 
of bare events in the inscription, without hi- 
storical proo& or reasons, might entirely 
oeglect it, as deserving no credit. Mr. R. 
seems to lay much stress on the precisCj ex^ 
act J and particular specification of the events, 
p. 109. But he ought to reflect, that this 
abrupt and positive method of speaking is not 
only usual, but necessary, ip such short sy- 
stems of chronology as the marble contains, 
where events only, and their dates, are set 
down, unaccompanied by any examination 
of evidences for and against, without stating 
any computation of probabilities, or deduor 
|ioo of reasons* When therefore a chronolo- 


gical writer had undertaken to reduce the 
general history of Greece into a regular and 
consistent system, admitting that he was ac- 
quainted with this inscription, what grounds 
have we to believe that he would say any 
thing about it? Either his system coincided 
with the Chronicle, or not : if it coincided^ 
he would very probably disdain to prop hid 
own opinions with the unsupported assertions 
of another man, who, as far as he knew, was 
not better informed than himself. On the 


other hand, if he differed from the authority 
of the Marble, he might think it a super* 
fluous exertion of complaisance, to refute, by 
formal demonstration, a writer who had chosen 
to give no reasons for his own opinion. — ^We 
shall pass hence to objection 

VII. -With rei^pect to the parachronisms 
that Mr. R. produces, we shall without heai- 
tat ion grant, that the author of the inscrip* 
tion may have committed some mistakes in 
his chronology, as perhaps concerning Phi- 
don, whom he seems to have confounded with 
another of the same name, etc. But these 
mistakes will not conclude against the anti- 


quity of the inscription, unless we at the 
same time reject many of the principal Greek 
and Roman writers, who have been convicted 
of similar errors. We return therefore to ob-- 

VI. Some of the facts seem to have been 
taken from authors of a later date. We 
have endeavoured impartially to examine and 
compare the passages quoted in proof of 
this objection ; but we are obliged to confess, 
that we do not perceive the faintest traces of 
theft or imitation. One example only deserves 
to be excepted, to which we shall therefore 
pay particular attention. 

^ The names of six, and, if the lacunae are 
properly supplied, the names of twelve cities, 
appear to have been engraved on the Marble, 
exactly as we find them in ^Elian's Various 
History. But there is not any imaginable 
reason for this particular arrangement. It 
does not correspond with the time of their 
foundations with their situation in Ioi)ia, with 
their relative importance, or with the order 
in which they are placed by other eminent 



The chance of six names, says Mr. R., being 
placed by two authors in the same order, is 
as 1 to 720; of twelve, as 1 to 479,001,600. 
* It is therefore utterly improbable that these 
names would have been placed in this order 
on the Marble^ if the author of the inscrip^ 
tion had not transcribed them from the hi^^ 

On this argument we shall observe, 1 . That 
the very contrary conclusion might possibly 
be just, that the historian transcribed from 
the inscription. Yet we shall grant that in 
the present case this is improbable, espe- 
cially if the author of the Various History be 
the same iElian, who, according to Philostra- 
tus, Vit. Sophist. II. 31. never quitted Italy 
in his life. But an intermediate writer might 
have copied the Marble, and iElian might 
have been indebted to him. 2dly, We see 
no reason to allow that the lacuna are pro-' 
perly supplied. Suppose we should assert, 
that the names stood originally thus, Miletus, 
Ephesus, Eryth.reE, Clazomenae, Lebedos, 
Chios, Phocaea, Colophon, Myus, Priene, Sa* 
mos, Teos. In this arrangement, only four 



names would be together in the same order 
with iElian ; and from these Miletus must be 
excepted, because there is an obvious reason 
for mentioning that city first. Three only 
will then remainy and surely that is too slight 
a resemblance to be construed into an imita-* 
tion. For Pausanias and Paterculus, quoted 
by our author, p. 154, have both enumerated 
the same twelve cities, and both agree in 
fdaciog the five last in the same ordery nay, 
the six last, if Vossius's conjecture, that 
TEUM ought to be inserted in Paterculus* 
after Myun TEM, be as true as it is plausible. 
But who imagines that Pausanias had either 
opportunity or inclination to copy Paterculus? 
3dly, Allowing that the names were engraved 
on the Marble exactly in the order that ^lian 
has chosen, is there no way of solving the 
phaenomenon, but by supposing that one bor- 
rowed from the other ? Seven authors at least 
(Mr. R. seems to say more, p. 154, 5.) men- 
tion the colonization of the same cities ; how 

• p. IV. Myuntem, ErythramJ Teiim inseri vult Vossiiw, 
Reete. Nunqaam enim Teus in recensione XII. civitatum 
JoBicanim omittitur. D. R. ad I.] 



many authors now lost may we reasonably 
conjecture to have done the same ? If there- 
fore the composer of the Chronicle, and iElian, 
lighted on the same author, the former would 
probably preserve the same arrangement that 
he found, because, in transcribing a list of 
names, he could have no temptation to de* 
viate, and the latter would certainly adhere 
faithfully to his original, because he is a no« 
torious and servile |)lagiarist. Mr. R., indeedf 
thinks, p. 158, that if a succeeding writer 
)]ad borrowed the words of the inscription^ 
he would not have suppressed the name of 
the author. This opinion must fall to the 
ground, if it be shewn that iElian was accush 
tomed to suppress the names of the authors 
to whom he was obliged. iElian has given a 
Jist of fourteen celebrated gluttons, and, else- 
where, another of twenty-eight drunkards 
(from which, by the way, it appears, that 
people were apt to eat and drink rather too 
freely in ancient as well as modern times); 
and both these lists contain exactly the same 
names in the same order with Atheneiis. Now 
it is observable, that fourteen names may 



be transposed 87,178,291,200 different ways, 
and that twenty-eight names admit of 
different transpositions, etc. etc. -Lilian there- 
fore transcribed them from Atheneiis ; yet 
^-lian never mentions Atheneiis in his Various 
History. So that, whether JEAmn copied from 
the Marble, or only drew from a common 
source, he ipight, and very probably would, 
conceal his authority. 

VIII. The history of the discovery of the 
Marbles is obscure and unsatisfactory. 

In p. 169, it is said to be ^ related with 
suspicious circumstances^ and without any of 
those clear and ^inequivocal evidences which 
always discriminate truth from falsehood.* 
The question then is finally decided. If the 
inscription has not any of those evidences, 
which truth always possesses, and which 
falsehood always wants, it is most certainly 
forged. The learned dissertator seems for a 
moment to have forgotten the modest cha- 
racter of a DOUBTER, and to personate the 
dogmatist. But waving this, we shall add, 
that, as far as we can see, no appearance of 



fraud is discoverable in any part of the trans- 
action. The history of many inscriptions is 
related in a manner equally unsatisfactory ; 
and if it could be clearly proved that the 
Marble was dug up at Paros, what would be 
easier for a critic, who is determined at any 
rate to object, than to say, that it was buried 
there in order to be afterward dug up? If the 
person, who brought this treasure to light, 
had been charged on the spot with forging it, 
or concurring in the forgery, and had then re- 
fused to produce the external evidences of its 
authenticity, we should have a right to ques- 
tion, or perhaps to deny, that it was genuine. 
But no such objection having been made or 
hinted, at the original time of its discovery, 
it is unreasonable to require such testimony, 
as it is now impossible to obtain. ^ There i$ 
nothing said of it in Sir T. Roe's negotia^ 
tionsJ What is the inference? That Sir 
Thomas knew nothing of it, or believed it to 
be spurious, or forged it, or was privy to the 
forgery ? Surely nothing of this kind can be 
pretended. But let our author account for 
the circumstance, if he can. To us it seems 



of no consequence on either side. * Peitese 
made no effort to recover this precious relicj 
and from his composure he seems to have en* 
tertained some secret suspicions of its authen* 
ticity.' Peiresc would have had no chance of* 
recovering it after it was in the possession of 
Lord Arundel^s agents. He was either a real 
or H pretended patron of letters, and it became 
him to affect to be pleased that the inscrip-« 
tion had come into Elngland, afid was illus^ 
trated by his learned friend Selden. John 
F. Gronovius had with great labour and ex- 
pense collated Anna Comnena's Alexiades, 
find intended to publish them. While he was 
waiting for some other collations, they wfercf 
intercepted} and the work was published by 
another. As soon as Gronovius heard this 
unpleasant news, he answered, that learned 
men were engaged in a common cause ; that 
if one prevented another in any publication, 
he ought rather to be thanked for lightening 
the burthen, than blamed for interfering. 
But who would conclude from this answer, 
that Gronovius thought the Alexiades spu- 
rious, or not M orthy of any regard ? 

Mr. R. 


Mr. R calculates, that the venders of the 
Marble received 200 pieces But here again 
we are left in the dark, unless we knew the 
precise value of these pieces. Perhaps thej 
might be equal to an hundred of our pounds, 
perhitps only to fifty. Beside, as they at first 
bargained with Samson, Peiresc's supposed 
Jew-agent, for fifty pieces only, they could 
not have forged the inscription with the clear 
prospect of receiving more. Neither does it 
appear that they were paid by Samson. It is 
fully as reasonable to suppose fraud on the 
one side, as on the other; and if Samson, 
after having the Marble in his possession, re- 
fiised or delayed to pay the sum stipulated, 
he might, in consequence of such refusal or 
delay, be thrown into prison, and might, in 
revenge, damage the Marble before the 
owners could recover it. 

We own this account of ours to be a ro- 
mance ; but it is lawful to combat romance 
with romance. 

IX. The world has been frequently imposed 
upon by spurious books and imcriptionSj and 
therefore we should be extremely cauHotti 



with restard to what we receive under the 
venerable name of antiquity. 

Much truth is observable in this remark. 
But the danger lies in applying such general 
apophthegms to particular cases. In the first 
place, it must be observed, that no forged 
books will exactly suit Mr. R's purpose, but 
such ^s pretend to be the author's own hand^ 
writing ; nor any inscriptions, but such as are 
still extant on the original materials, or such 
as were known to be extant at the time of 
their pretended discovery. Let the argument 
be bounded by these limits, and the number of 
forgeries will be very much reduced. We are 
not in possession of Cyriacus Anconitanus s 
book ; but if we were governed by authority, 
we should think that the testinionv of Reine- 
sius in his favour greatly overbalances all that 
Augustinus has said to his prejudice. Thq 
opinion of Reinesius is of tlie more weight, 
because he suspects Ursinus of publishing 
counterfeit monuments. We likewise find the 
most eminent critics of the present age quot- 
ing Cyriacus without suspicion, (v. Ruhnken. 
in Timaei Lex. Plat. p. 10. = 15. ed. nov. 



hpud Koen, ad Gregor. p. 140.) The doo* 
trine advanced in the citation from Hardouin 
is exactly conformable to that writers usual 
paradoxes. He wanted to destroy the credit 
of all the Greek and Latin writers. But in- 
scriptions hung like a millstone about the 
neck of his project. He therefore resolved to 
make sure work, and to deny the genuineness 
of as many as he saw convenient ; to effect 
which purpose, he intrenches himself in a ge- 
neral accusation. If the author of the Dis- 
sertation had quoted a few more paragraphs 
from Hardouin, in which he endeavours, after 
his manner, to shew the forgery of some in- 
scriptions, he would at once have administered 
the poison and the antidote. But to the 
reveries of that learned madman, respecting 
Greek supposititious compositions of this na- 
ture, we shall content ourselves with opposing 
the sentiments of a modern critic, whose 
judgement on the subject of spurious in- 
scriptions will not be disputed. Maffei, 
in the introduction to the third book, c. 1. 
p. 51. of his admirable, though unfinished, 
work, De Arte Criticd LapidariA^ uses these 

o words : 


words : Inscriptionum Grace loquentium 
commentitiasy si cum Latinis comparemus^ 
deprehendi paucas : neque enim ullum om- 
nino est 9 in tanta debacchantium fahariorum 
Uhidine^ monumenti genusj in quod ii sibi 
minus licere putaverint. Argumento est^ 
paucissimas usque in hanc diem ab eruditis 
viriSf et in hoc literarum genere plurimum 
versatis rejectas esse^ falsique damnatas. 

We here finish our exceptions. Much 
praise is due to the Author of the Disserta* 
tion for the learning and candour so conspi- 
cuous throughout his work. Even those, who 
9re most prejudiced against his hypothesis, 
will read his book with pleasure, as well for 
the taste and erudition displayed in treating 
the msdn quei^ion, as for the entertaining 
discussion of incidental matters. If we seem 
to have assumed more of the style and tone 
of controversy than suits the impartiality of 
judges, we plead in excuse, that we intended 
only to animate, in some degree, a subject, 
which, to the generality of readers, must 
appear dry and tedious. If the author should 
pay any attention to the hints which we have 



thrown out, and publish the result of his 
thoughts on them, we shall coolly reconsider 
his arguments, refellere sine iracundia^ et 
refelli sine pertinacia parati *• 

In the emendations of the 11th and 78th 
lines of the inscription, the genius of the 
Greek language requires us to read, Ilava- 
6fi¥0Lt» and aviCfiy for Ila¥adfj¥uiKO¥ and avs- 

* [Cic. Tu5C. II. ii. refellere sine pertinacia^ et refelli sine 
iracundia p. Edd. refelli s. p. et refellere s. i. P. Manutios.] 

t See Month. Rev. of Glasse's S. A. v. 322. 

G 2 Art. 

( 84 ) 

Art. III. Plutarchi de Educatione Libera^ 
rum Liber y Grace et Latine. Variorum 
Not as adjecitj suasque Animadversiones 
immiscuitj Thomas Edwards, LL.D. 
in usum studiosa Juventutis. 8vo. pp. 190, 
of which 60 are Text. 3s. 6d. sewed. 
Cadell, &c. 

This tract on education, attributed to Plu- 
tarch, has been several times published by it- 
self, for the use of learners, as we conjecture, 
rather than for the purpose of displaying the 
editor's critical talents. The style, though 
not very elegant, is commonly easy; the 
maxims are plain and obvious ; and the text 
Seems to labour with few signal corruptions*. 
Whether it be the genuine work of Plutarch, 

* When wfe say this, we rather speak of the state^ to 
which the text might be brought^ by a proper use of the 
helps, which MSS. and criticism would afford, than of the 
state in which Dr. Edwards has suffered it to remain. 



may admit of a doubt. To us, we must own, 
notwithstanding the praises that have been 
given to it by respectable writers, it appears 
much inferior to Plutarch in force of reason- 
ing, in spirit of language, and in the learning 
of the allusions. Muretus* therefore has 
suspected it, and M. Wyttenbach-f- has not 
scrupled to pronounce it spurious ; which we 
think Dr, Edwards would have done right to 
mention. The sentiments of such men, whe- 
ther they can be refuted or not, should never 
be suppressed. 

Dr. Edwards acquaints us, in his preface, 
that he had meditated an edition of the whole 
second folio volume, which contains what are 
commonly called the Moral Works of Plu- 
tarch : but being disappointed in his hope of 
MS. collations, without which nothing worthy 
of the approbation of the learned could be 
expected, he desisted from his undertaking. 
Not to be wholly inactive, however, he pub- 
lished this treatise separately ; to which he 

♦ Var. lect. xiv. 1. 

t Biblioth. Crit. part iiit p. 89. where he promises to 
make good his assertion in his edition of Plutarch. 



has added Xylander s version, and such ob- 
servations of other editors, as he thought 
most conducive to the illustration of the au- 
thor. In his own notes, he professes to have 
had two objects in view : first, to supply the 
defects of his predecessors ; and secondly, to 
explain and defend the late M. Lennep's sy* 
stem of the tenses. 

The first thing that strikes us in the notes, 
isy that some are in English and some in La- 
tin. This is a practice which we shall never 
fail to reprehend. When an editor produces 
any observations, which merit the notice of 
the learned, (and every editor ought to be- 
lieve at least as much,) let him converse in 
the common language of the learned : — but 
when an author writes on a subject of learn- 
ing chiefly for the benefit of his countrymen, 
let him compose wholly in his mother-tongue. 
Perhaps Dr. Erdwards was induced to write 
his notes in this piebald and patchwork man- 
ner, by the example of his father's Theocri- 
tus*: — but it is a fault which we neither can 

* See our Review of Dr. Edwards's Theocritus, vol. Ixi. 
p. 321. 


Edwards's plutarch. 87 

nor will excuse in any of the family. Fallit 
te incautum pi etas tua*l 

Neither can we say that we have no ob- 
jections to the matter of the notes, from the 
two opposite circumstances of deficiency, and 
redundancy. The first care of an editor 
ought to be to settle the text, so as to pre- 
serve a due medium between rashness and ti- 
midity. Dr. Edwards is certainly far enough 
removed from the former of these imputa- 
tions, but not equally so from the other. He 
is contented with approving the readings of 
the MSS. or easy and probable conjectures 
formed on their traces : but this approbation 
being placed in the notes, young readers will 
seldom take the trouble of recurring to it, 
till they are in utter despair of a remedy from 
any other quarter. In a book declared to be 
published /or the use of studious youth, as 
many difficulties should be removed as pos- 
sible. Where the text is printed by itself, the 
best method perhaps would be that which has 
already been adopted by many editors, viz. 
to insert in the text that reading, which, from 
reason or authority, seems indubitably cer- 

* [Ma. X. 812.] 



tain, with the discarded reading in the mar« 
gin ; and, if a probable, but* not absohitely 
certain, reading be proposed, to set it in the 
margin with some mark denoting the degree 
of authority or credibility to be allowed to it. 
Thus the reader would have before him, as it 
were, a history of the text, and could seldom 
fall into error but through his own negli- 

It will naturally be asked. Who shall de^ 
cide what reading is indubitably certain? 
This decision must be in a great measure left 
to the discretion of the editor. What ! are 
we to give every man, who sets up for a critic, 
an unlimited right of correcting ancient books 
at his pleasure ? Not at his pleasure, but in 
conformity to certain laws well known and 
established by the general consent of the 
learned. He may transgress or misapply 
these laws, but without disowning their aur 
thority; No critic in his senses ever yet de-r 
clared his resolution to put into the text what 
he at the time thought a wrong reading ; and 
if a man, after perusing the works of his au- 
thor perhaps ten times as often as the gene^ 
rality of readers,— after diligently comparing 


Edwards's plutarch. 89 

MSS. and editions, — after examining what 
others have written relative to him professedly 
or accidentally, — after a constant perusal of 
other authors, with a special view to the elu- 
cidation of his own, — if, after all this, he 
must not be trusted with a discretionary 
power over the text, he never could be qua- 
lified to be an editor at alL Whatever editor 
(one, we mean, who aspires to that title,) .re- 
publishes a book from an old edition, when 
the text might be improved from subsequent 
discoveries, while he hopes to shew his mo- 
desty and religion, only exposes his indolence, 
his ignorance, or his superstition. Dr. Ed- 
wards, after having, in his note on p. S, ap- 


proved an emendation by Casaubon, (wflri/- 
9r6ifrig for isri/sroyrgj,) rejects it in his Addenda 
with this grave remark : * I grow daily more 
sensible of the great caution which is requi<p^ 
site in adopting emendations.' This emenda- 
tion has at least the warrapt of a MS. Now, 
if ireiTovng had been the common reading, 
which makes very good sense, and a MS, 
gave vrsixoifregj the same remark, inverted, 
would be equally just. The truth is, some- 


times two readings have such equal claims, 
that it is very difficult to give a decisive pre- 
ference to either. In this case, what blame 
can an editor deservedly incur, who inserts 
one in the text, if he faithfully informs us of 
th? other ? 

We shall give a specimen or two where, 
as we think, Dr. Edwards might safely have 
been bolder, without incurring the censure of 
rashness. In p. 8. xm yag to ^6og itrn roXu^ 
j^mop. Here all the editors, from Xylander 
inclusively, saw that the addition of %6og was 
necessary. Dr. Edwards thus ratifies their 
opinion : * Other copies have n^og : both (so 
far) rights for I would recommend xa) yag 
TO Ji6og i6og itrr) xokoyj^movJ If it were too 
much to give the additional word a settled 
habitation in the text, it might have been 
allowed to creep in between brackets. 

In p. 11. the words ivfovg »m still keep 
their place, to the utter extinction of the 
sense; while Dr. E. is contented with ap- 
proving the emendation of Schneider and 
Westhusius imoifrngai. 

P. 15. Speaking of the injudicious conduct 



Edwards's PLUTiCRCii. 91 

of parents, the author says, *Emre yag iliong^ 
al(r0ofJLiifoig fiuXXov uvro7g rovro XiyovTOfyf Tf^v Ivlm 

rourotg iwirgixovin rovg xuliag. Some MSS. 
have altrffofiivrnj which, as Dr. Exlwards ap* 
proves it, he might more pardonably have 
admitted into the text, than have left non-^ 
sense in its place. One MS. gives al(r06fAifOi 
uXXej¥j whence M. Brunck reads, with the 
slight addition of a letter, sliorsgy ij aiffOofuvoi 
oixKm — ^This, however, has not the good luck 
to please Dr. E. ' Friget Brunckii emendatio.' 
In spite of this censure, we must own that we 
think the correction true, as far as it goes, 
but, perhaps, it conveys not the whole truth. 
The right reading seems to be, *EvioTs yag 
ilioreg avroif ^ ul(r6ofii¥0$ aXXm rovro 'kiyovrm. 

P. 42. Karexgoi^aro might have been re- 
stored without scruple for Kunxgu^droj and a 
note might have been added containing some 
account of the word : see Valckenaer on He- 
rodotus, iii. 36. 

P. 54. Hgoppilji>vg iKrglQovtnv. The author 
is so seldom guilty of indulging himself in 
the luxury of an elegant phrase, that Dr. £. 



ought to have justified him better than bjr 
quoting Schneider's note, with one example 
from the stupid play of Christus Pattens : 
for that example belongs of right to Euri- 
pides, with whom the writer of that drama 
has made very free. 

P. 20. <Pgo¥s7 manifestly signifies the same 
as fciya ^^onl. Dr. E. quotes a passage from 
Henry Stepheqs's Thesaurus, in which that 
learned man entertains some doubt of the in- 
tegrity of the text. It would have been more 
useful to tyros, if he had referred them to 
Sylburgius, who, in his Appendix to Pausa- 
nias, p. 927* produces some passages from 
his author, where the same ellipsis is observe 
able*. We shall quote the first as a speci- 
men, ^goiffi^ag i% l(p' aprZ^ lL$L^y/iiofioif — ii'ai'- 
ricL iwjg0fi ¥OLVfjLaj(fl(rai. I. 12. p. 30. 

In a book intended for the use of young 
men, though we by no means recommend an 
injudicious and undigested mass of common- 
place, yet we think it useful and amusing to 
mark the similar passages that occur in other 
authors, whether such similarity were the ef- 

* Bos in his Ellipses has quoted two of them. 



feet of chance or design. Schneider thinks 
that he sees the vestige of an allusion to the 
poets in p. 21. "O ye fjt^ijv xoXefjuog j^^sifidppov 
itKfjv X. r. X. He might have seen something 
more Uke one in the preceding sentence : o 

77i¥ lvi(rrfififj¥. Not unhke Menander (Fragm. 
ed. Cleric, p. 254.) EJ raXX' k^ui^ilv o wokvg 
iic^6B¥ yj^oitog 'HfMivf TO yi* ^gonlv itr^aXiimgop 
^oiu. Passages to the same purpose might 
be quoted, but they are too well known, from 
Euripides, Ovid, and others. P. 36. "Hit) ii 
Tivag \yu uio¥ Turegag, oig ro Xiav ^i\u¥ rou (Mi 
(pi\u¥ alrio¥ xaritrrfj. This was a saying of 
Theophrastus-f- in his book De AmicitiA^ as 
we learn from Plutarch Cat Minor, p. 777. B« 
It might have been mentioned, on occa-^ 
«ion of the saying attributed to Theocritus 
the Chian Sophist, p. 45. that the same verse 
of Homer was applied by the Emperor Julian^ 
when he was invested with the purple. 
We have said that we thought Dr. E. some- 

♦ [See Supplem. ad Praef. in Hecub. xvi.=xvii.] 
t See M. Ruhnken's note on Rutilius Lupns^ p. 23. 



times redundant. We shall reduce our cen- 
sure to two parts. He frequently quotes 
Stephens, Hoogeveen, and Viger, to explain 
the most obvious words and phrases. Who 
would have thought that a note translated 
by Girard, from the Scholiast on Aristophanes, 
was necessary to explain the meaning of the 
\vord sycophant f We are sensible, however, 
that a great latitude must be allowed in this 
respect; since that which is clear to one, 
may be obscure to another. Some may 
therefore, perhaps, be so far from thinking this 
minuteness superfluous, that they may even 
commend it as necessary. 

We must, however, confess that we are 
totally unable to find out the necessity or 
propriety of illustrating Lennep's system of 
tenses in a book designed to teach Greek to 
the learners of that lan2;uage. Mere learners 
cannot be edified by being told what a pro- 
digious number of Greek roots formerly grew 
in the land, when they are informed at the 
same time that none are now remaining. 
Some of the grossest of the mistakes, which 
prevail concerning the tenses in our common 


Edwards's plutarcii, 95 

grammars, might occasionally be rectified : 
but to proceed any farther ought to be re- 
served for those who have made the philoso- 
phy of language their study. It can only 
perplex young understandmgs, who ought to 
know that a thing isy before they inquire 
why it is so. Such remarks, therefore, ought 
very sparingly to be introduced in noles. 
If a critic should choose to favour the pnbUe 
with a description of this nature, let it be 
unmix d zvith baser matter : or, if he has not 
materials enough to make ^justum volumen^ 
he might throw them into the form of an 
appendix, by which means the connection of 
the parts would be better presen ed. Suppose 
a reader, without caring much about Plutarch, 
or at all about the notes, should nevertheless 
be very curious to understand Lennep's hypo- 
thesis of the Greek tenses illustrated by Dr. 
Edwards ; — he would have to toil through a 
hundred and thirty pages of miscellaneous 
matter, and to pick up the scattered frag- 
ments of which he was in search* 

Dr. Edwards will, perhaps, ask. What great 
harm is in all this, if the remarks themselves 



be true, curious, and useful? Let us then ex-< 
amine some of the principles which he has 
laid down on the subject. The only genuine 
tenses are said to be six in each voice, i. e. 
rpi r present, future^ perfect, 7 
C imperfect, aorist, pluperfect. J 

In the active voice, therefore, these tense^i 
are thus supposed to be formed: 


Irvxsofj srusrftf'a, iruxsav* 
In the passive^ thus : 

TuriofMLij TwntrofMth rvTMfJMij 
irvwi6fA>ii¥y irvTiirafATjff IrvnoLf/Ufiv. 
As for the rest of the tenses» the aorist 
and second future active, the aorists and 
futures commonly called passive, he disposes 
of them in this manner. The future second 
active is a non-existence; the second aorist 
active is an imperfect from an obsolete radix; 
the aorists commonly called passives are im*- 
perfects from verbs in p, whose present 
tenses have absconded, and the future pas- 
sives are futures from the same antiquated 
roots. The paulo-post-futurum is only the 
future passive with a reduplication. 


Edwards's plutarch. 97 

We shall take the liberty to add our senti- 
ments on this ingenious hypothesis, as far as 
we agree with it. 

First, we allow that the second future ao 
tive has no existence, which was also the as* 
sertion of Mr. Dawes. Secondly, we aUow 
that the middle voice (if by the middle voice 
be meant a set of inflections differing by a 
native and inherent force from the active and 
passive voices) never did nor can exist, and 
that irv^oLfjLfi^ is truly and properly an aorist 
passive. Without making, however, any par- 
ticular objections to the foregoing scheme of 
tenses, we shall content ourselves with raising 
our doubts on some incidental points either 
implied in this statement, or connected with 
it and produced in other parts of, the notes. 

We are told, p. 64, that every circumflex 
indicates a contraction; and p. 107$ that the 
CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT is u fuost important 
key to the original Greek language. 

Flavia the least and slightest toy 
Can with resistless art employ*. 

Therefore, * as every verb first ended in m^ 

• [Atterbury.] 

H thus 


thus we must derive $[/u$if» : — fLtn^^^ fiBfuroi, 
^/idptco^ i[/ut¥$»9 if/uumt ifi,iifa ; ^ and therefore 
comes it, that /ccsTyai in the infinitive is circum* 
flexed :^ — but then, it seems to us that ifA$7va 
in the indicative should be circumflexed, for 
ifiiiva would, as far as we can see, have its 
accent on the antepenultima, and consequent- 
ly its contraction would make it %[/ui7va. In 
virtue of this persuasion, the Doctor will not 
allow iitiK» and $7ra* to be aorists, but makes 
them perfects by dint of his own authority. If 
this be the case, he must exterminate f 1x0^9 
or issue a mandate that it may be every where 
altered to i/t^v^, or mm^. 

Why must iXi/^jyr come from Xu^nfM? 
Because it cannot come from any thing else. 
We have looked through the notes,"^ and we 
really cannot find any other reason. Asi^^nf^i 
too, we are told, comes from 'ku^iot. Why } 
Caret responsio. Similar to this is another 
fency, that iarnza and other present tenses 
of the same form are not derived from the 

* [The aorist tlira is never used by Homer , nor^ I be- 
lieise^ till the time of the Ptolemies* R. P.] 


Edwards's plutarch. 99 

perfect iW^^a, but that the perfects are 
formed from them. These two positions re- 
semble each the other so nearly, that we 
shall venture to ask the following parallel 
questions : If iXBi<p6fiVi \r(i')(fin^% '^^^^xfinu and 
a great number of Uke words do not belong, 
as tenses, to the train of Xi/t«, ritrtroi^ l^iyv% 
etc. by what means came thej to bear so ex- 
act a relation to them ? If itrrtiKaff ztzgdyo^, ri6» 
9fiKaify and the like, be not formed from ItrrnKa^ 
etc. how did they obtain their resemblance to 
the more simple verbs trroiay «f a^«, 3^Fa«, etc.? 
In p. 162, we are told, from Scheidius, that 
r/^jyp is contracted from r/^sfjcti. Then it 
would be TiSitfA^i ; and the contraction u^fu 
would be circumflexed, to the manifest de- 
triment of that important key. 

Since there must no longer be any second 
aorist, Dr. Erdwards directs all the participles, 
taken for participles of the second aorist, 'to 
be construed as of the present tense. If any 
person will take the trouble to turn to the two 
passages, p. 8, and p. 34, he will find that 
the context not only permits, but demands, 
a preterit sense. 

II 2 Dr. Ed- 



Dr. Edwards is a little less sanguine here 
than in general ; for, after allowing that in 
this very tract a passage occurs where the se- 
cond aorist is manifestly contradistinguished 
from the present, he supposes that at first 
(i. e. before we can tell what they did) they 
used this form in a present sense, but after- 
ward applied it as an aorist, for the sake of 

If we suppose the accents to be infallible 
guides, (and infallible we must suppose them, 
unless we mean to find fault with the editor^s 
circumflex,) the participle XaC&9 cannot be a 
present, because it has an acute tone. It is 
to no purpose to answer, that at first it was a 
paroxy tone, but was altered for convenience ; 
because a circumflex might be placed for 
convenience over a syllable where it could 
claim no right from a contraction. 

Dr. Erdwards has now and then given us an 
observation on other authors. Callimachus, 
says he, has a passage in his Hymn on Jupi- 
ter, 55, which has in vain exercised the wits 
of the critics ; 


Edwards's plutarch. 101 

This difficulty he solves by his panacea, of 
an old verb in jct/i r^a^sp> which makes trgoi^ 
(psgt and which verb he proves to have ex- 
isted from rgoi^sv, nutriti sunt. For our part, 
we shall be contented, in company with 
Messrs. Lennep and Ruhnken, to believe 
that the verse is spurious. In Homer's Hymn 
to Ceres, 211, 

Dr. Edwards would read, instead of itr/fig 
ivBxsvf otriijg Ittisv. ocifjgf i. e. puris manibus : — ^ 
but where does he find such an ellipsis of the 
word ^s)g ? Vossius in Ruhnken*s note pro- 
poses o(n7}g WiSfii which seems too learned. 
We believe that Mr. Tyrwhitt's conjecture, 
as it is the most easy, is most likely to be true. 

In the foregoing remarks, we have given 
our opinion without reserve, but, we hope, 
without incivility. If any apology, for the 
degree of freedom which we have used, be 
thought necessary, we shall quote the follow- 
ing passage from Dr. Edwards's note, p. l62. 

' I shall close this note with an excellent 
passage from Lennep; in which he justly 


102 Edwards's plutarch. 

cautions us against paying an implicit de- 
ference to the decisions of the ancient qr the 
modern grammarians. — Id nimirum semper 
tenendum est in hoc studiorum genere^ pa-- 
mm, aut nihil fere^ vidisse grammaticos ; 
tarn veteres^ quam recentiores : adeoque nuUo 
modo eorum placitis esse standum ; nisi tum^ 
quando ex ipsa lingua natura petita esse ea 
appareat. Neque enim ad grammaticorum 
regulas lingua fuerunt condita; sed ex lin^ 
guiSf multo usu populorum jam tritisj et ex^ 
cultisj reguUe tandem sunt formata. In quo 
aperCf difficili admodum^ qui ingenium suum 
fxercueruntj eorum unusquisque^ pro sua sa- 
pientia^ successum habuit ; alius meliorem^ 
alius deteriorem : cumque nemo rectam viam^ 
qua procedendum esset^ videretj sed singuli 
leges sancirentj quas conjectando prasertim^ 
putarent probabiles ; inde nata fuerunt tot 
anomalia^ quas si linguarum naturam peni^ 
iius inspexissent, facile animadvertissent pro- 
cul a Unguis removendas esse/ 


( 103 ) 


[scilicet Virgilii Londiniensis, cwra He yne; 

Avoll. 1793.] 

Cum in hac editione excudenda ipse correo- 
toris tantam, non editoris partes susceperim^ 
nihil de meo addendum putavi, prseter pau- 
cas quasdam viroruoi doctorum conjecturas*, 


* [Addenda ad notas et corrigenda uncinis inclusa.] 

Buc. IV. 45. sandyx pascentes] Fuit vir doctus^ qui iia-> 
scentes conjiceret: — Scilicet fuit is Bentleius in 
Bibliothique Angloise T. i. p. 186. (Memoirs of 
Lit.) [et ad Lucan. IV. 125.] 
V. /!8. montesqueyerisilvaeque] Markland* ad Stat. II. 
Silv. by 13. conj. montesqne^ firciSj silvasque^^ 
[Imo Marklandus legit n^oniesqueferos, sed errore 
typomm /eras excusum est in ed. Burman.] 
[Heynii incuriam jampridem redarguerat R. P.; 
*^ I follow Markland's emendation, which Mr. Heyne 
has misrepresented. He imputes to Markland an 
absurd reading, montesque, feraSj silvasque^ and 
condemns the emendation for the aukward arrange- 
ment of the mourners, in putting the wild beasts 
between the mountains and woods. I mention this 
oversight^ merely to strengthen an opinion^ which 

I hare 


quas mihi yisus est Heynius ideo praeteriissd, 
quia nescireU Miram fortasse nonnullis ac- 
cidet. Addenda ad Indicem seorsum collor 

I hmire long entertainedj and shall always resolutely 
defend, that all mbn are liable to error.'* 
Prbf. to Letters to Archdeacqn Travis, p. xxxiii.] 
Ai% IL 196. lacrimis<{ue coaclis] coactis Heinsio aceeptum 
ferendum.— Probat quoque ' [Tyrwhittus apud] 
Dawes. Misc. crit. cum Burgess. V. C. p. 886. 

V. 35. At procul excelsd] e celso Wall, [quod mavult 
Bentleius ad Lucan. III. 88.] 

VII. 26. Aurora in roseis] in croseis conj. Schraderus 
ad Musseum p.289.[et jfientleius ad Lucan. IV. 125.] 
Conft IV, 583. Stat. Sylv, 1, ii. 45, Te potius 
.prensa veheret Tithonia biga. crosea corrigit R.B. 
4Sii. VIII. 246. trepide/2/que] vulgQ trepidant^ quod Rom^ 
quoque exhibet : recte, si quid videp, modo que ab* 
sit. Abest etiam a Rom. et aliis quc^ [BJt sic citat 
Menagiv» ad Malherb. p. 330,] 

|X. 467* Euryali et Ni^i.] An hoq hemistichium ex 
interpretamentp \ci margine adscripto 8ul)natum ? 
[Sic censet auctor libri, cui titulus, Lettres de 
quelques Juifs d M, Fbltaire.'] 

773. Unguere] [Tingere Bentleius ad Lucan. 
III. 266.] Conf. R. B. ad Hor. Carm. II. i. 5. 

XI- 309. Ponite ;] — Melius Biu-gess. V. C. ad Dawes, 
p. 6. [imo Dawesius ipse in curis secundis] divina* 
vit, male suppletum esse versum, cum pqcta tan-r 
turn apposuisset Ponite^ 



can, non sue singula loco intexi. Sic igitur 
res se habet. Typographi initium laboris sui 
ab Indice fecerunt, qui proinde totus excusus 
erat, diu antequam Addenda in manus eo- 
rum pervenirent*. Quod ad operam meam 
attinet, quamvis omni studio enixus sim, ut 
quam paucissima menda relinquerentur, ve- 
reor tamen, ne plura supersint, quam aut ego 
ipse aut lectores velint. Nullum tamen, ut 
spero, mendum tanti moment! invenietur, ut 
lectorem mediocriter doctum morari possit. 

Miserat Heynius una cum Additamentis et 
Correctionibus brevem Praefationpm, quam 
Typographi seposuerant, toti scilicet open 
jam absolute praeponendam. Sed cum caeteris 
omnibus excusis, praefationem quaererent, 
pusquam in venire potuerunt. Si tamen bene 
memini, hacc fuit ejus summa: Erditorem, 
quodcunque ipse ex propria lectione aut ex 
virorum doctorum monitis observasset, id 
omne huiq editioni annectendum curasse. 
Hanc igitur iis sive negligentiam, sive infeli- 
citatem, doctissimus Heynius, qua est aequi« 

* Video etiam post secundas curas quaedam verba omitti, 
r. g. janitor, quod occurrit Ma. VI. 400. VIII. 296. 



tate, condonabit ; et mihi ignoscet, si manum 
suam paulo intricatiorem me non ubique as* 
secutum esse viderit. 

[Operarum correctiones^ quas inter legendum chartula^ ex- 
emplari suo reperta, R. P. manu propria enotaverat^ hu- 
manitatU studiosia denegare nohii.] 

Errata, quts in textu occurrunty lector benevolus sic 

corriget : 


Buc. ver. Buc. ver. 

IV. ei.yastidia VIII. 81. eodemqu^ 
V. 7. Silvestris IX. 41. populics 

VII. 24. pinu. 51. ego 

41. 49. 57. 64. m /i- . X. 17. poefta 
tulo THYRSIS. 


IaI. ver. Lib. ver. 

I. 61. iTipofiidt 390. Mine 

222. Stella 405. annum 

305. gland^s III. 147. quoi 

307. grttibua 250, pertentet 

397.yerri 414. odoratam 

II. 267. quo mox IV. 255. corpora 

287. Terra 261. quondam 

328. retonant 




LH. ver. 

I. 251. ob from 
349. atquf 
506. alt« 
II. 145. Hi5 
491. Instot 
701. ducitts 
711. servrt 
772. umbra 
798. Con&ctam 
III. 205. primum se 
328. Hermioncn 
334. Chaonios 

380. Satumia 

381. Principio Italiom 
526. mero 

IV. 536. Quo5 

589. decorum 
V. 542. cflfflo 
VI. 122. Itque 

221. Purpureasque 

245. comua 

303. corpora 

691. dimifnerans 

703. videt 

850. c^lique 

882. fodere/ 
VII. 511. 6 speculis 
VIII. 3. acrU 


Lil. ver. 
VIII. 67. iEnean 

280. interea propior 
710. toidis 
IX. 93. hfiic 
392. vestigia 
442. Rutuli 
462. Tumtts 

X. 232. Rutulfit 
381. Aunc 
802. Furit 

XI. 53. crudeltf 
123. Tumo 
166. QtMKl 
193. alif 
250. adtraxerJt 
524. semi/a 
601. obverius 
671. revohitus 

XII. 465. congressos. 
554. i£ne^ 
728. Emicat hie 

Vol. pag. V. 

IV. 24. 1. Aerfos 
106. 3. hor/ulus 
185 • In Luciumj v» 3. 

186* 5* J^ra 


( 108 ) 

Art. IL An Analytical Essay on the Greek 
Alphabet. By Rich. Payne Knight. 
4to. pp. 136. 15s. Boards. Elmsley. 17.91. 

For the seeming minuteness of this and si- 
milar investigations, the author of the pre- 
sent work makes the following apology, which 
we recommend to the attentive consideration 
of all whom it may concern ; 

• I cannot indeed but think, that the judge- 
ment of the Public, upon the respective me- 
rits of the different classes of Criticks, is pe- 
culiarly partial and unjust. 

* Those among them who assume the office 
of pointing out the beauties, and detecting 
the faults, of literary composition, are placed 
with the orator and historian in the highest 
ranks ; whilst those, who undertake the more 
laborious task of washing away the rust and 
canker of time, and bringing back those 
forms and colours, which are the subject of 
criticism, to their original purity and bright- 
ness, are degraded with the index-maker and 



antiquary, among the pioneers of literature, 
whose business it is to clear the wav for those 
who are capable of more splendid and ho- 
nourable enterprises. 

* But, nevertheless, if we examine the ef- 
fects produced by these two classes of Cri ticks, 
we shall find that the first have been of no 
use whatever, and that the last have rendered 
the most important services to mankind. All 
persons of taste and understanding know, 
from their own feelings, when to approve, and 
disapprove, and therefore stand in no need of 
instructions from the Critick; and as for those 
who are destitute of such faculties, they can 
never be taught to use them ; for no one can 
be taught to exert faculties which he does not 
possess. Every dunce may, indeed, be taught 
to repeat the jargon of criticism, which of all 
jargons is the worst, as it joins the tedious 
formality of methodical reasoning to the trite 
frivolity of common-place observation. But, 
whatever may be the taste and discernment. 
of a reader, or the genius and ability of a 
wmer, neither the one nor the other can ap- 

110 EfiVIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

pear while the text remains deformed by the 
Corruptions of blundering transcribers, and 
obscured by the glosses of ignorant gram-* 
marians. It is then that the aid of the verbal 
Critick is required ; and though his minute 
labour, in dissecting syllables and analysing 
letters, may appear contemptible in its ope« 
ration, it will be found important in its ef- 

* The office, indeed, of analysing letters 
has been thought the lowest of all literary oc- 
cupations; but nevertheless as sound, though 
only the vehicle of sense, is that which prin* 
cipally distinguishes the most brilliant poetry 
from the flattest prose ; and as, in the dead 
languages, all sound is to be known only 
from the powers originally given to the cha- 
racters representing the elements of it ; to 
analyse these characters, and to shew what 
their Powers really were, is the only way 
to acquire a knowledge of those sounds in 
which the antient poets conveyed their sense. 
A successful endeavour to obtain this end 
will not, I flatter myself, be deemed either 



trifling or absurd in this age of taste and 

The work is divided into seven sections, of 
which we shall, in due order, endeavour to 
give our readers a general idea. 

In Sect 1. Mr. Knight laj's it down for a 
principle, that the first signs or notes of ar- 
ticulation among the Greeks were three ; one 
labial, P, one dental, T, and one palatine, G 
(as pronounced by us before the vowels A, 

0, U.). To these were soon added three 
others, nearly akin to the former, B, D, K. 
After giving us the history of these six con- 
sonants, with respect to the various changes 
which they have undergone, both in form 
and power, during their passage through so 
many ages and nations, Mr. K. proceeds to 
the examination of the three aspirates; 

1 . the common aspirate, or H, which, being 
added to each of the labials or dentals, 
makes three more consonants, %j ^> ^ ; .2. the 
digamma, the power of which is nearly the 
same with our W; and, 3. the letter S, which 
Mr. K. calls the dental aspirate. He next 



gives an account of the five Greek vowels j 
one of whicb^ the A, he derives from the 
Phoenicians ; and the other four he supposes 
to be of Greek invention. 

Sect. II. contains a system of metrical 
quantity, partly deduced from the foregoing 
observations, and partly from the practice of 
Homer, on whom Mr. K. bestows the follow-^ 
ing encomium : 

* As the Greek Alphabet was adapted to the 
language^ and not the language to the alpha- 
bet, we shall find the practice perfectly accord 
with the theory, unless where local or vicious 
habits corrupted it. Even there we have the 
peculiar advantage in this language of possess- 
ing the Works of a poet (the most elegant, 
correct, and perfect of all poets), who lived 
before many such habits had been formed, 
and whose writings, therefore, though defistced 
by the varnishes of criticks, grammarians, and 
transcribers, are composed of materials so 
pure and simple, and executed with such pre* 
cision and regularity, that we can still trace 
the minutest touches of the master's hand, 


ON T!i£ GR££K ALPHABET. 113 

and ascertain, ivith almost mathematical cer- 
tainty, the principles* upon which he wrought. 


* 'This character of Homer's poems may^ perhaps, 
startle those who are accustomed to receive their opinions, 
ready formed, from the iiitile, but pompous, assertions of 
certain self-created judges of literature ; whose deciaons, 
to the disgrace of the age^ are not unpopular/ 

With all due fear of this fidmination before our eyes, we 
cannot but think this character of Homer a little over- 
rated. Homer's poetry, however exalted and embellished 
by learning and genius^ must partake of that rudeness and 
simplicity which are always incident to the infancy of lan- 
guage and of society. The champions for Homer, who 
attribute to him all possible perfection, who find in him 
not only all other arts and sciences, but also a philoso- 
phical grammar^ and a philasophical system of metre, 
ought to be able to give a satisfactory answer to the fol- 
lowing questions : 

1. Who was Homer ? 

2. Of what countrv was Homer ? 

3. When did Homer live ? 

4. Was the art of writing known in Homer's time, or 
not in use till after his death ? 

5. Are the Iliad and Odyssey^ as we have them at pre- 
sent, wholly written by the same person ? 

6. Were the se\'eral parts of them arranged by the au* 
thor in the same order in which they now appear ? 

We feel no pleasure in scepticism : but, (as Dr. Johnson 

I observes 

114 REVIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

For this reason I shall admit no general rule 
or principle of metrical quantity that is not 
justified by the practice of Homer ; having 
found that his practice is always founded 
upon reason and analogy, whereas that of 
later poets was often regulated by local and 
temporary habit/ 

On this ground Mr. K, builds three gene- 
ral conclusions : 

* 1. A single vowel, representing a single 
act of vocal^ utterance or expiration, must 
necessarily be short, unless lengthened by a 
succeeding pause or obstruction of utterance; 
for the proper definition of a short syllable 
is, one that occupies only the time usually 
allowed to a single act of vocal utterance ; 
whereas a long one is that which occupies 
the time usually appropriated to two ; either 

observes on Shakspeare^) no question can be so innocently 
discussed as a dead poet's pretensions to fame ; and the 
queries^ which we have proposed^ at least might serve to 
repress the triumph of those sanguine projectors, who, on 
the sole foundation of Homer's works, would erect a system 
of language : — a task which they themselves own to be a 
matter of extreme nicety and difficulty. 



by being really a coalescence of two, or else 
by being delayed or impeded by some ad- 
scititious pause or obstruction. 

'2. A single vowel before a single mute 
consonant must necessarily be short, unless 
there be a pause between them ; for, as the 
consonant terminates the sound without add- 
ing to it, there will of course no pause accom- 
pany it. If, however, a second mute conso- 
nant follow, either in the same or a different 
word, the syllable, though not the vowelf 
will necessarily be long : * 

* 3. A single vowel followed by an aspi- 
rate or liquid, either in the same or a different 
syllable, or even preceded by one in the same 
syllable, may be either long or short, since 
the constrained expiration, employed in 
sounding the aspirate or liquid, is a continu- 
ation of the vowel sound differently modified 
by the approximation or compression of the 
organs of speech, and may therefore be short- 
ened or lengthened arbitrarily, according as 
the constrained expiration is continued for a 

greater or less time. When two aspirates 

or liquids come together, or one of them be 

1 2 joined 

116 BETIEW OF knight's £SSAT 

joined to a mute consonant, this constrained 
expiration will naturally be lengthened or 
obstructed, either of which will prolong the 

The reader will easily observe that, in 
oopying these passages, we have only endea- 
voured to state Mr. Knight s opinions in his 
own words, omitting the arguments by which 
they are supported, the corollaries that he 
deduces from them, the collateral illustra- 
tions, answers to objections, etc. If we have 
room and leisure, we may perhaps hereafter 
briefly touch on some of these subjects. 

The remainder of this section is chiefly occu- 
pied in examining the nature of the digamma; 
that instrument, by whose aid Dr. Bentley, 
Mr. Dawes, and other critics have proposed to 
work such miracles on Homer's poetry ; to 
make those verses, which, for several thousand 
years, had been cripples, and had wanted their 
due complement of feet, move as nimbly as 
if nothing ailed them ; nay, to restore to life 
and vigour even those which wanted a head. 

There arises a doubt on the subject, to 
which, as far as we can find, Mr. K. has not 



attended. Dr, Bentley would restore the 
figure of the iColic digamma in the Iliad and 
Odyssey. Dawes thinks that a sign of the 
same nature ought to be inserted for the in- 
struction of modern readers : but he appre- 
hends that, in Homer's time and country, 
though the power of the digamma existed, the 
use of the character was unknown. Now, if Ho- 
mer wrote his own poems, (a point which Mr. 
K. does not venture to decide,) this question 
would certainly furnish ample matter for specu- 
lation. It will not be amiss to shew how fifty or 
sixty thousand digammas should desert all at 
once, and escape detection for so long a time. 
Mr. Knight, with Mr. Dawes, supposes 
the true orthography of nouns now ending in 
tv^ to be £F2 or £W2, and the cases to be 
EW02, EWI, EWA, etc. In the genitives 
of the patronymics, the poets had the privir 
lege, it seems, of using indifferently the 
Ionic and i£olic ; 

'^ jind if folks ask the reason for* i, 
Say one was longj and t'oiher short^.*' 

Thus, if they wanted to begin a line, Ar^ iwi- 

[• Hudibras.] 

118 EEViEW OF knight's essay 

iicif and UfiXiWiitcif presented themselves ; if to 
end a verse, ArgiWii»woj and IIijXsw^dMWo. 
Their prerogatives did not stop here. They 
had another resource in the method of spell- 
ing their words. For instance, if they di- 
vided their genitive cases in this manner, 
Ar^f-wo;^ then the second syllable is short, 
and the patronymic must be formed in iifi^ : 
but, if the digamma were added to the former 
syllable, that syllable became a quasi-^i- 
phthong ; and, being long, required the pa- 
tronymic to be formed in luifig. It appears, 
therefore, that the same word in Homer's 
verse has four several metres : 1. ar | js | wi 
i£w I 0. 2. ^i^Y' I f ^ I ^(l I i^oj. 3. oir I ^sw | i* 
a I daw I 0. 4. dr \ giw \ 7 \ £ \ iie^. Such 
are the liberties which poets enjoy ; Sed 
Grady guibus est nihil negatunij et quos 
Agii "Agig decet sonare*. 

Mr. K., however, has some scruples con- 
cerning the latter termination, and thinks it 
not improbable that the genitive awo might, 
by apocope, be reduced to aw. Mr. K. ought 
to prove that the Greeks ever ended a word 

[♦ Martial. Epigr. IX. xii.] 



vith the digamma. Till this be done, his 
ArgiWiiaw, ayrow, etc. make rather an un- 
couth figure. 

In antient declination, the digamma, ac- 
cording to Mr. K., appears to have been the 
characteristic letter of the oblique cases in the 
masculine and neuter words terminating in og 
and vij and in the feminine in oj, uu vg^ » or 19, 
though it is only wanting to sustain the me- 
trical quantity in the ^olic genitives plural, 
such as, vvfi^(tFa)¥j etc. The genitive of mas- 
culines in OQ was at first ofo, (in Ionic, oio) 
then 00, 0, and of, which afterward became 
cv. On the strength of this hypothesis, Mr. K. 
instead of *lxiov Tr^o^d^oidiv and iv^'^lov xrafii^ 
voto, wiites ¥iXioio ^goTcHgoiffiv and an'^ioTo 
KTUfiiifoto* (Ought it not to be xro^fjumFo?), 
If Mr. K. had recollected two passages in the 
Odyssey, we suppose, he would have applied 
the same*, specific : AZga, To^g AloXoFo fjufj^iya^ 
7^7170^0^, B^p uq AloXofo kXvtu iafjuuro^. Od. 

K. 36. 60. In a similar manner, he reduces 
the instances, in which oov occurs, to the re- 
gular inflection, hOFO. 

From the equivocal power, which the di- 
A f gamma 

liQ BEVXBW OF knight's ES84T 

gamma possesses of lengthening either of the 
syllables, to which it is joined, proceeds that 
inversion of prosody, which is observable in 
some words, as in viFog*^ KgofiFovo^^ which, in 
modern orthography, may indifferently be re- 
solved into ¥fio^i yf^, and K^oyfoyoc, Kgopimvog. 

Mn K. examines the declinations of many 
other words, with a view to his system of 
Homeric prosody. It would be too tedious 
to give all his instances in detail. The par-r 
ticiples he supposes to have originally ended 
in ay;, fy;, and ofg. He dissents therefore 
from Dawes, (and, as it should seem, from 
Markland,) who believed that all these wprd) 
once had r in the nominative. 

Sect. III. The author endeavours to rectify 
the orthography of Homer's words, by tct 
storing the aspirates according to the direc- 
tions of the metre. Mr. K. would replace the 
passage in the ninth Iliad which Aristarchus 

* This cannot be denied to be a most convenient privi- 
lege for a poet^ who^ by the aid of such a licence^ could 
of the same word make a pyrrichius^ an iambus^ and a 
trochee. By a similar process, Mr. K. solves the phseno- 
in^na of jxt/Mcoro; and fMfM&ros^ 



expunged, thinking, perhaps, that Phoenixes 
intention of murdering his father was too 
horrid an idea to be presented to the reader's 
mind. To introduce this discarded passage, 
however, Mr. Knight would himself expunge 
the 457th verse, and, in its place, imme* 
diately insert the four banished verses. In 
this section, also, Mr. K. tries his hand on 
many Homeric words, Mhich have been reck- 
oned the cruces Grammaticorum. "Arti^ 

a(t(roifjbfi¥, acruTO. aaoiro^y doioirog. avfiPod$if$ ssrfyf- 
j/oSs* iiof, Hog. ^su^, iuicj, isiiicceifj iuvog, are a 
few words, out of a much greater nunjber, 
which Mr. K. attempts to analyse, to reduce 
to their antient etymology, and to restore to 
their primitive orthography. We shall insert 
one specimen of his skill in this way : 

* 'E^^ — |- EF02 : wherefore the first sylla- 
ble is frequently long and the second short. 
Barnes, indeed, supposed that iojg €7^, at thp 
beginning of a line, was an amphibrachys, 
equal to a dactyl; and Clarke, still more 
absurdly, that it ought to be pronounced as 
^ spondee, by a sort of metathesis, Scrs iyd*. 

^♦Odyss. J,90/ 


122 REVIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

The learned author of the book upon Rhythm 
would, in one place, divide the intermediate 
long syllable in a manner which I avow my- 
self incapable of exactly comprehending*; 
and, in another, elide the first syllable -f-, as 
the Dorians frequently did ; but, nevertheless, 
without extending the third in consequence 
of it, as he must do to fill the metre. All 
these refined conjectures are, however, su- 
perfluous, if we read the word in its original 
form and antient letters. In some passages, 
indeed, we find it in one syllable, as, 

Teo 8* fOD$ fiiv f ferlrovTQ ■ % 

"Etog ftriv (al. |*Jv) iv *Oprvy/ij — 1| 
^Eoog fiiv yip rt dtotwi— ^ 

* But in each of these there is something 
redundant. In the two first the particle fih 
encumbers the sense as well as the metre ; 
and, ii^ the third, the pronoun should be 
changed from pv to the old regular form s — • 

^ ♦ Lib. Sing, dc Rjthm. Graecor. p. 37.* 
' t Ibid. p. 142/ ' X Odyss. B. 148.* 

' § Odyss. O. 231.* ' II Odyss. E. 123.' 
' % lUad. P. 727/ 



I-EF02 h'EN OPTTriHI*. The fourth has 
been corrupted by two different readings, fikp 
and yag being (as has frequently happened) 
joined in the text, the first of which is, in 
this instance, the best — I-EF02 MEN TE 

* In another passage of the Odyssey ig on 
is written for |-EF02 — •*'H^^« ^ ig or uotiog 
iv) [LsyciigoKny asihvf^ instead of H20IE A' 
hEF02 AF0IA02— and though [Thomas] 
Bentley found «W in a MS., Clarke did not 
chuse to adopt it, because Eustathius and the 
Scholiast have ig ort' 

In the fourth section, the author farther 
pursues his employment of examining the 
derivations and declensions of Homer's words, 
and of rectifying, here and there, some slight 
corruptions which he apprehends to have 
crept into the text of his favourite poet. He 
properly enough observes ' that the writers, 
who succeeded the Macedonian Conquest, and 

* Did Mr. K. ever meet with the pronoun I thus cut 
pff, and nothing left of it but the aspirate ? (Rev.) 
' t Odyss. P. 358/ 


124 REVIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

considered the later Attic as the universal 
dialect, and standard for purity, were not 
likely to form very accurate notions of the 
style of Homer ; for instead of considering 
their own grammatical flexions as corruptions 
of his, they considered his as licentious or 
poetical deviations from their own ; wherefore 
they began their researches at the wrong end, 
and consequently, the farther they pursued 
them, the farther they were from the truth/ 

Mt. K. then produces a passage, of which 
he pronounces the general sense injured : 

* This is in the 2 2d Iliad, where Hector, 
certain of his death, on finding himself op- 
posed, unassisted and alone, to Achilles, saysi 
(v. 300.) 

OuV ^(Xffi)* f yeip pa irdXai ri y% ^IXrtpov f fy 
Zi)y{ Tff Ka) Ail^ uiei ixy\^iXiopy oT/tu ircepo^ ye 
Jlpi^pong iipiarai' nlv aZri fu fjjnpot. Kiyavu, 

* Which, in its present form, literally sig- 
nifies — Evil death is near me — not even se^ 
parate — nor refuge — for it was indeed for^ 
merly agreeable to Jupiter and Apollo^ who 



before cordially defended me ; but now Fate 
overtakes wie. Instead of which, by only 
dropping the conjunction from the negative, 
and transposing a particle, we have 

Nth 8f Sp eyy66i /xoi ^avaros xoxi^, of; U r Avtvinf^ 
Owx aXfij y«^*— ^ pa frdkeu riyt ^Iknpov ^ty, etc, 

* Evil death is near me — not even separate ; 
for no refuge. — It waSj indeed^ formerly 
agreeable to Jupiter and Apollo^ etc. etc.* 

We here take the liberty of stating a trifling 
difficulty that occurs to us. Is the particle 
9 aspirated ? Or ought it to have the digamma 
prefixed ? Or is the delay, which may be 
supposed to take place in consequence of the 
pause, sufficient to make the short syllable 
y«f long ? For unless one of these three sup- 
positions be allowed, we frankly confess that, 
to our eyes and ears, the second foot of the 
verse seems very like a trochee. 

Now that his hand is engaged in this bu* 
siness, Mr. K. very liberally dispenses the di- 
gamma to all the words which want it ; inso- 
much that he prefixes it even to agtarov^ and 
will not suffer the first syllable to be long, 


126 REVIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

because all the MSS. and editions read syrt^* 
9CPT0 agi(rTO¥ without elision ! 

It is impossible to follow the learned au-* 
thor through this section, unless we nearly 
transcribe the whole. It consists of twenty- 
four examples, each of which contains two 
or more words, alike in their modern ap- 
pearance : but, by the help of declensions, 
conjugations, and (above all,) the insertion of 
aspirates and digammas, Mr. K. discriminates 
their meaning and pronunciation. We can- 
not say, for our part, that we feel any lively 
approbation of Mr. K.'s exertions on this sub- 
ject ; we shall therefore copy two of his ex- 
amples without any animadversions of our 

♦IX. 1. 





















* The forms and flexions of these verbs are 
obviously pointed out by the sense and metre. 
From the first came AHMO:S, or AEFM02, 

a people ; 


a people; and from the fourth, probably, ifif^g 
or AETM02, /b^ which some antient gram- 
manans, however, derived from iaicj or AAFfi, 
to burn*; in which case it must have been 
written AEFM02 ; and this may possibly be 

^ XIX. 1. Aij, gen. X«oj leo AlFS, gen. AlFOS. 
2. \i$y gen* )Jros Icevis AINS, gen. AINTOS. 

The first occurs only in the nominative and 
accusative singular in Homer, the latter of 
which is xlvct-f in our present copies; whereas 
it ought to be AIFA according to the rule of 
flexion here stated. In a passage of Calli- 
niachus, however, cited in the Venetian scho- 
lia, we have the dative plural XJio-a-iXj that is, 
AIFE2I, which proves that the N, in the ac- 
cusative, is a corruption, introduced to sus- 
tain the syllable rendered defective by the 
loss of the F, 

* I have ventured to suppose that the N 
ought to be added in the second, not only 
because it is a word of the same signification 
and etymology as AINON, but because this 
letter has been dropped, as before observed, 

^* Schol. Ven. in II. 6. 240.' ' f H- ^. 480.' 

X Ibid. out 


out of many words, which in antient Inscrip 
tions are formed with it/ 

In Example XXII. Mr. Knight quarrels with 
the word igvfjM^ (which occurs in the editions 
of Homer* for defence^) because Igvoi does not 
signify to defendj but to draw. He therefore 
would substitute pvfjua ; or, as he would write 
it, PTFMA. To this emendation we beg leave 
to make two objections: — first, Mn K. cannot 
prove that pve^ and igvof have not originally 
the same meaning : — secondly, he is bound to 
produce an instance of the word pvfjut in Ho- 
mer himself: — but what need of alteration ? 
Mr. K. confesses that the word tgvfjua is used by 
later writers to signify defence ; and is not So- 
phocles one of these later writers ? Yes : but 
luckily the verse from Ajax, Ugog l^vfia Tgoiofv^ 
will equally admit pvfiu. Let Mr. K., then, 
amend the following passages : 

iEschyl. Elunenid. 704. (704.) 

Euripid. Med. 602. (597.) 

4»vyai t rvpawovg iraXaSf tgVfMi Sa)/xao'i« 
Bacch. 55. 

» II. J. 137. [t *5<r«j. R. P.] 



From igvf^x is formed the adjective lgv[i¥ogf 
which occurs in Euripides Helen. 68, and 
three times in Lycophron. Homer also 
employs the epithet igva-irroXig^ but that 
Mr. K. alters to pvvftrixroKig : for it is pro- 
bable, he thinks, that some copiers or stone- 
cutters first changed PTFMA to PTEMA, 
and that the next transcribers, or readers^ 
not knowing what to make of PTEMA, 
changed it to Sf^y^. Thus the Greeks cor- 
rupted their language by the addition of a 
word of nought. 

In the last example, Mr. K. commits two 
small mistakes. He makes cZtriv in Herodotus 
to be a contraction of 20FOT2IN, and ac- 
cuses Valckenaer of making it an abbreviation 
of <rfi0ov(n : — but Valckenaer says nothing of 
this sort ; he only observes that it is put for 
ffn^ovtriK Tlie truth is, <roi is the primitive of 
triidot)^ as otikH of aXfi0Af9 Km of x^iidu^ vS of Vfi6ti Z 
but the lonians could never contract trowovtrip 
into <rei<n¥. If such a contraction existed in 
any dialect, it would be in the Doric. 

Sect. V. contains Mr. K.'s system of the 

K flexions 


flexions of the verbs, with some remarks on 
Dr. Clarke and Lord Monboddo. 

* Those who wish to know the progress and 
detail of these great discoveries, will consult 
the printed works of these learned persons/ 
(Hemsterhuis, Valckenaer, Damm, etc.) • par- 
ticularly the Analogia Graca of Lennep. I 
shall here only give the result of them, in a 
short table, showing how the middle voice 
and the second futures and aorists have been 
formed out of different themes of the same 
verbs, only fragments of which have conti- 
nued in use. These fragments I shall place 
under their proper heads, and with the proper 
explanations, leaving the spaces of all the ob- 
solete forms, except the first, which is the 
theme itself, void/ 

Mr. K. then gives us a paradigm of the in- 
dicative and infinitive modes in the active and 
passive voice. We shall be contented with re- 
presenting the indicative mode ; at the same 
time begging pardon of Mr. K. for spoiling 
the look of his scheme, and assuring him that 
we shall faithfully adhere to his system. 


ox TliE GREEK ALPfiA&Kt. 131 

Active Voice. 

Present Imperf. rvrrc^y rvirc^j rvric^y rv^m^ 

Past Imperf* irvrrovj Irtyrovj vulgarly the 
second Aorist. 

Future Imperf. rvra-ofi rvrSy the Attic fu- 
ture contracted from rumtrot (the 
root ruTrioj). 

Aorist, Irv^tnt. 

Present Perf. tirvrit (the root tv^oj) con- 
tracted from rsrJ«*a, and adopted 
for the middle voice ; rirv(pa (root 
Tv^of) contracted from rirtJ^sxa. 

Past Perf. Ir^TvrBifi contracted from Irtrvri'* 
xsiVj and adopted for the middle voice; 
irirvcpuvy contracted from inrv^KSiVm 

(In the active voice, no past future.) 

Passive Voice. 

Present Imperf. rvrrofjuti, rvro/MU, rvviopuii^ 
Tv^0iofjuai ; — rwrtifAi and rv^Stifji^i^ ao* 
tive forms used in a passive sense. 

Past Imperfect, irvtro[j(,fi¥.'^rt/TofAii9, vul- 
garly the second Aorist. irtJ^yr (root 
TvvnfJif) vulgarly the second Aorist. 

K 2 irv^6n9 

132 EEVIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

irv^Snv (root rv^dfifji^i) vulgarly the 
first Aorist. 
Future Imperf. ru^l/ofjuai. — rvrovfjiMh the At- 
tic future contracted from rvria-cfjuat 
to rvriofjuttij and thence to the pre- 
sent form* which is called the se- 
cond future middle. — rv^OfitrofjiMi 
(from the root rv^^iofjuai). 
Aorist, irt^afjufivj adopted for the middle 

Present Perf. rirvf4,[Miiy contracted from 
nrvTUfjuaiy which seems originally 
to have been nrvrixafji^ai. 
Past Perf. inrvfjufAfjVy which has been con-* 

tracted in the same manner. 
Past Future, rfrin|/o^i. 
The reader, who has leisure and inclination^ 
may compare this system with that of Dr. 
Edwards, of which we gave an account in 
our 11th volume, New Series, p. 257. We 
think, as we then said, that Dr. Edwards 
rightly discards the second futures : but this 
does not materially injure Mr. Knight's hy- 
pothesis, as they may be spared as a super- 
fluity« He justly censures Lord Monboddo 



for his extravagant idea that jSgC^jtg/, rerg^^u^ 
etc are present imperfects of new themes, 
(BiSfixat, rtr^nyju^ etc. and for his still more 
extravagant notion that Jx^Xaro and figngufrro 
are Aorists. On the first of these heads, 
Mr. Knight candidly defends Dr. Clarke* 
against the learned judge ; who seems to lose 
both his good sense and his temper, whenever 
he finds the editor of Homer in his way. 

[* ^^ Amongst Dr. Clarke's papers was found a letter of 
that great Greek scholar Dr. Bentley to him, expressive of 
his concmrence of opinion with him upon the formation of 
the tenses of the Greek verbs, which he has so fiilly illus- 
trated in a note on the first book of his edition of Horner.'^ 
Anecd, of distinguished Persons^ vol. ii. p. 314. That 
Dr. Bentley did accede to Dr. C.'s philosophical distri- 
bution of time, as well foimded, I mean not to dispute : 
but that HE sanctioned the theory as applicable to the Greek 
tenses, I am not prepared to believe.] 


( 134 ) 

Review of Mr. Knight's Analytical tlssay 
on the Greek Alphabet concluded. 

We have already given an abridged account 
of the first five sections of this work. The 
sixth and seventh are devoted to the exami^p- 
pation of some (supposed) ancient monuments 
produced by M, Fourmont in the French 
Academy of Belles Lettres and Inscriptions*, 
and of the Lacedaemonian decree against 
Timotheus, which has been lately republished 
separately at Oxford by a learned and re-^ 
tpectable prelate. 

Mr. Knight's examination of the first of 
these subjects tends to prove that the lists of 
Spartan priestesses, etc. which M. Barthelemy 
has endeavoured to illustrate, are forgeries of 
M* Fourmont. He informs us, that many of 
the objections, which he here states, were 

» Tom. XXIII. p. 394—421. At the end of the 
volume, are added facsimiles of the inscriptions^ which 
Are «lso Qppi^ 9t the end of Mr. K/s Essay, 


REVIEW or knight's E88AT. 135 

first put together for the use of M. d'Han- 
carville, author of the RScherches sur les Arts 
de la Gr^cCy whose defence in reply to thein 
his remaining observations are intended to 

Since these monuments, which, if they 
were genuine, would require particular notice 
in such a book as Mr. K/s, are tacitly, 
throughout the work, rejected by him, it 
doubtless became his duty to declare his rea- 
sons for dissenting from so many learned 
persons*, who have without scruple appealed 
to these inscriptions as undoubted specimens 
of the most antient method of writing. 

When M. Fourmont returned from Greece, 
he professed to have discovered a copy of the 
laws of Solon ; and to have employed 2000 
men in digging the ruins of Amyclae, where 
he found monuments of greater antiquity 
than any hitherto known. Of these he pub- 
lished a few specimens, but did not proceed ; 
and he left his MSS. in the King's library, 
whence other specimens have been published 

[* Valckenaer ad Adoniaz. Theocr. p. 275., and ebe- 
where^ and^ if I mistake not^ David Ruhukenius.] 



ID the TraiU Diplomatique^ by the Benedio 
tines, and in the Mimoires of the Academy, 
by Abbe Barthelemy. A large volume of 
MSS. is shewn in the library : but that, Mr. K. 
thinks, is not the collection which Count 
Caylus excuses the Academy for not pubhsh- 
ing, on account of the enormous expense 
which it would require. This reason Mr. K. 
treats as frivolous ; and he thinks that a free 
examination of what is published will betray 
the concealed reason for withholding the rest. 
He says that the laws of Solon, and the 2000 
men employed at Amyclae, are now given up ; 
it being discovered that all Peloponnesus 
would scarcely have afforded so many la- 
bourers ; and he was informed by the late 
Mr. Stuart, who followed Fourmont, that 
Fourmont employed as many men as he 
could collect, — not to discover inscriptions, 
but to break in pieces those which were aU 
ready brought to light*, 

* If these facts be authentic, we, for our part, should 
scarcely desire more evidence to persuade us that the inscrip*- 
tions in question are forgeries; since, of these three circum* 
stances, the first two shew the most deliberate fiEdsification, 
and thQ third manifots a violent dread of det^tion. 



The inscriptions published contain speci- 
mens of writing, from King Eurotas, seven 
generations* prior to the Trojan war, down 
to Philip of Macedon. We might therefore 
expect to find great variety in the form and 
use of the letters, but they appear to be 
the same person's writing and composition, 
M. Fourmont's Sigma, which is taken from 
the Gortynian medals, is really an Iota, and 
the title is to be read, Mr. K. says, FOPTTNI 
(for Togrvvlafv) not rOPTTN2. This confor- 
mity is badly explained by the permanence 
of the Lacedaemonian manners and customs, 
which were twice changed during the above- 
mentioned period; first by the invasion of 
the Dorians, and afterward by the institutions 
of Lycurgus. The forms of the buckles, on 
which two of the inscriptions are engraven, are 
totally unlike the simple round shields of the 
antient Greeks; they are in absurd and fanciful 
shapes, and are unfit for purposes of defence. 

Fourmont discovered a temple dedicated 
to the Goddess ONGA or OGA, which no 
other traveller has been able to find. Want* 

* Pousan. Lacon. sive Lib. III. p. 204, 205. 


138 REVIEW OF knight's ESSAT 

ing an antient name for the Lacedasmonlans, 
he gave them, in his inscription, the title of 
IKTEPKEPATEE2, because Meursius pro- 
duces a short article from Hesychius, ^ImrtvKgm^ 
n7g. Aouccjftg. and concludes that the Lace- 
daemonians were once called 'ItcTivjcfartlg. 
Fourmont alters the orthography a little : 
(perhaps he intended to read IKETEOKEPA- 
TEE2.) but the learned men, who have lately 
edited Hesychius, agree in supposing that a 
Laconic word has been joined to its explica- 
tion ; and that they ought to be separated 
into *lscriv. xgara*. Numberless instances are 
found in Hesychius, in which the name of a 
people is thus subjoined to a word, in order 
to denote that the word was chiefly used by 
that people. Indeed, Hesychius is so corrupt 
an author that, when he is a sohtary witness, 
his evidence ought to be received with great 
caution. Mr. K. in a different part of this 
chapter, objects (and, we think, justly,) to 
another of Fourmont's inscriptions : in which 
the word BAFOS is used for trrgarfiyo;^ and 
defended by the authority of the same Hesy- 

[* See Hering« Obtenrat. p. 219.] 



cblus. Mr. Larcher, in the notes to his 
translation of Herodotus, not suspecting 
either the inscription or Hesychius, would, on 
their authority, introduce the word jSayoS 
into a Greek epigram* on Leonidas, instead 
of rat^yoxi^ a word quite proper and poetical, 
confirmed by Suidas in t, rai,yd%. 

The next inscription is a catalogue of the 
priestesses of Amyclaj, beginning about the 
same time with the dedication of the temple. 
The priestesses are called MATEPE2 KAI 
KOTPAI TOT AnOAAnN02, for which 
neither M. Bartbelemy, nor the author of 
the RSchercheSy has been able to produce any 
authority, except a correspondent title in the 
modern French convents of nuns, Les Mires 
et les Filles du bon Dieu ; whence Mr. K. 
suspects that the French title gave birth to 
the Greek. 

Mr. K. next objects to the orthography 
and declension of many of the proper names, 

* Antholog. III. c, 5, p. 204. ed, H. Steph. — [An.. 
Gr. II. 162. VIII. 1. pen. Bentlby corrected in the mar- 
gin of his copy ed. jild, ifj^eio to ^ouTpv^ov eixoVa ^ ?^»I^j— 
I have seen in the margin of a copy, ed. H. St. ravurpi^og 
tUova ^po$ji ^ wu^S&npv^w gl, iaffv^ fi»i6J] 


140 REVIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

such as AgifriTotfiigOy AgitntofMizoy KaXitctfarOf 
&c. M-hich, according to Fourmont, are the 
genitive cases of the words which we now 
write^ A^itrtxfigogy Agnrrofjua^ogy KaXXiKgxrfigj 
etc. The termination of other nouns, which 
ought to be in iog, is also, in these inscrip- 
tions, made fo without the Sigma. The in- 
terpolation of the vowels Mr. K. attributes to 
Fourmont's study of Hebraisms, after he had 
learned, from Josephus, that the Jews and 
Lacedaemonians derived themselves from a 
common stock. We think with Mr. K. that 
this interpolation seems utterly to subvert the 
analogy of the Greek language. 

To mark the period of the Dorian invasion, 


the terminations of the names of the priest- 
esses are changed from what Fourmont 
thought ^olic or Ionic to Doric. Hence 
AMTMONEE, in the beginning of the in- 
scription, afterward becomes AMTMONA : 
but the two Epsilons for an Eta are unautho- 
rized by antient monuments, and are ex- 
pressly contradicted by a passage of Plato*. 

[« 0\i yoif H ixfiiLS^Ay oAX' £ ro waXouiv. Cratyl. p, 63. 

fdd. Ba8.=274. F. Laemar.;=II. 426. H. St.] 



The dialect, too, of the antient Laconians 
was the iEolic ; for Strabo tells us that the 
fugitives, who were driven out of the Pelo- 
ponnesus by the Dorians, founded the first 
iEolian colonies in Asia. 

This monument would have fixed so many 
events to their proper dates, that it must 
have escaped all travellers and antiquaries, 
though it existed in one of the most cele- 
brated temples and most frequented pro- 
vinces. Mr. K. answers an argument of a 
similar nature, brought against the Parian 
Chronicle, (a monument which he declares to 
be undoubtedly antient;) adding that M. 
d'Hancarville has shewn that Fourmont's in- 
scription fixes the reigns of the fabulous kings 
of Lacedaemon to the period in which Lydiat 
and Marsham would place them ; which, says 
Mr. K. it would naturally do, having been 
fabricated from their writings, and from those 
of Cragius and Meursius. 

Mr. K. then reasons on two suppositions ; 
the first, that the Cadmean was the primitive 
alphabet of Greece ; the second, that the Pe- 
lasgian preceded it ; and he concludes that 



the inscriptions appear to be false on either 

The shield containing the pedigree of Te- 
leclus might be found in Meursius, from 
which it only differs in a K for a X ; and in 
the barbarous genitive AABOTA2. (Bayotf 
we have already mentioned.) 

In two other inscriptions, containing lists 
of the kings, senators, and magistrates of 
Sparta, during the Messenian war, Mr. K« 
finds many causes of suspicion; some fur- 
Dished by Hesychius, some relating to the 
orthography and inflexions of the words em- 
ployed. He observes that the form of these 
inscriptions is not less extraordinary than the 
substance; they being both signed by the 
public secretary, and authenticated by the 
public seal. 

In a votive shield inscribed with the name 
of Anaxidamus, the son of Zeuxidamus, the 
pedigree is thus continued : Anaxidamus, the 
son of Zeuxidamus, the son of Anaxander, the 
«on of Eurycrates* This pedigree, differing 
entirely from that given by Meursius from 
Pausanias, has afforded matter of much 



triumph to the defender of these inscriptions : 
— ^but Fourmont, carelessly casting his eye 
on Meursius, and observing Anaxidamus, son 
of Zeuxidamus, to follow Euryates and Anax- 
ander, without regarding the words ex alterd 
familidj confounded the two royal houses. 
This argument appears so clear and cogent, 
to us at least, that we think it must decide 
the fate of the inscription*. 

Several other objections are brought against 
the authenticity of these monuments, which 
certainly render them extremely question- 
able ; and, if they be really genuine, we wish 
them with all speed an able defender to sup« 
port their credit. 

The seventh section of Mr. K.'s Essay con- 
tains a criticism on the decree of the Lace^ 
dsemonians against Timotheus. This decree 
being itself the record of a curious fact, and 
at the same time a monument of the antient 

* We shall take the liberty of correcting two slight 
errors in this page of the work, (128,) one probably the 
fault of the printer, the other Mr. K.'s oversight. In 1. 9. 
read Anaxidamus for Archidamus^ and in 1. 12. for ' the 
son and grandson of Theopompus,' read, ^ the grandson 
and great grandson of Theopompus.' 


144 RETIEW OF knight's ESSAY 

Spartan dialect, has been frequently the sub« 
ject of learned observations. Joseph Scaliger 
attempted to give a complete copy of it in 
his notes to Manilius^; as did also, about^the 
same time, Isaac Casaubon, in his animad- 
versions upon Athenaeus-f*. James Grono- 
vius gave the readings of a different copy in 
the preface to the fifth volume of Greek An- 
tiquities. ChishuUlj:, assisted by this colla^ 
tion, then endeavoured to restore it ; and in 
the year 1777 the learned Dr. Cleaver, bi- 
shop of Chester, republished it at Oxford with 
a new commentary and collations. 

Mr. K. first represents this famous decree 
as it stands in the edition of Glareanus, with 
the marginal variations ; next as it is given 
by Gronovius; thirdly, as the bishop of 
Chester has published it, with the various 
readings of the Oxford MSS. ; and lastly, as 
the learned prelate himself would read it. 
Mr. Knight decides, however, that most of 
the bishop's emendations are either unneces- 

♦ Astronom. V. 324. p. 426. 
t Deipnosoph. VIII. II. p. 613. 
X Antiquit. Asiat. p. 128. 



84ry, or tend to eject every curious proviDcinl 
peculiarity that is not readily understood, and 
to fill its place with a word from the known 

The Bishop would write Tipuorsog for T//xa- 
fitogy Ki^Agtltf* (as we suppose) for x^da^i^i^ 
and liZfTog for fiZOci : but Mr. K. thinks that 
this difference was confined to the pronuncia*- 
tion alone, and did not affect their orthogra* 
phy. Are we then to suppose that, in all 
the places in which Aristophanes employs th^ 
ff for the ^, he only means to accommodate 
the Lacedaemonian pronunciation to the Attic 
orthography? If we be certain of any things 
we are certain that they at least wrote r/i; -f* 
for S^€o;, though we are willing to grant Mr. K., 
but for anodier reason, that the Lacedaemo- 
nians did not write Tifjuo^iog in this decree* 
Mr. K. objects to /xutro;, because it would con^ 
found fiu6og with a different word, but his own 
fUTu is liable to the same objection. We think 
that no doubt can be entertdbned of i^uavorarag^ 

*- [Salmasius de Hellen. p. 82. solus restituerat riy m^ 
<rip$i$y. Valck. ad Rover. LXXVII. 

t [Valckenaer. ad Rover. LXXIII. et ad Adoniaz. 
pp. 277. 287.] 

L which 

146 REVIEW OF knight's essay 

which is also approved by Mn K. : but we 
cannot agree with his arifjt*a<ri$ for irifMuriu*^ 
as the present time seems necessary. Out 
of To/ray Others have made to/a^f, with which 
Mr. K. is not contented, preferring ToTray, 
which is put for rdiiravy which is put for to/Vo- 
e(i¥. We are almost tempted to suspect some 
grievous mistake of the press in this passage. 
After iiioj(^0ai follows ^a or ^a^ , which the 
editor of the decree rejects: but Mr, K. 
thinks that it related either to the senate 
which enacted, or to the senator who moved, 
the decree ; probably to the latter. Allowing 
this, what part of speech is pa or pag ? — That 
our readers may judge what clear, pleasant, 
and consistent things various readings some- 
times are, we will give them a very short 
passage of this famous decree, accompanied 
with the needful collations. The first we take 
from Glareanus : 

Tig) rovrm rov (itttnXMv^ »a) rov p^rogog^ fjuifi^ 

This is plain, correct, and elegant; and, 

« [iriijMi Valck. ad Rover. XXVII.] 



if it be not the genuine reading, cannot be 
far from it : — but, if any man likes marginal 
readings better, let him take the following : 

These various readings are also very good* 
The Oxford edition reads thus in the text — 

x€g)^ rovroiv rog ^(Krikiot,^ xtti rog ipogog fJf^ipf^ 

Various readings. 

54 Aiioxrui al. ^^' (poig BodL ^ vr\g al. 

^'^ fjbifjb'^ccron al. 

James Gronovius has made his copy mofe 
intelligible, but he does not seem to have ri- 
gidly adhered to MSS. He, too, has inserted 
^av. Perhaps tlra (from Glareanus's ura) 
might serve, if Mr. K's idea be approved. 
'ETayaxarai is written in most MSS., which 
Mr. K. derives from oiKoq^ care^ uvaxeig^ care* 
Jtdly ; whence IrctvoLxiu^ or -xaAr, Ivavaxatrm^ 
6Tava»arai. Such violent straining to make 
the text literally agree with the reading of the 
MSS. would be justly liable to suspicion in 
any ancient Greek author, whose works had 
been transcribed by Greek copiers, and had 

L 2 come 

143 RETISW OF knight's ESSAT 

come down to us in a tolerable state of cor^ 
rectness :— but^ when we consider how mise- 
rably the Latin scribes mangled or murdered 
the Greek passages which their authors 
quoted ; many of which are left in a despe- 
rate condition, unless we shall light on MSS. 
of greater age and worth than we have hitherto 
had the good fortune to find; in this labyrinth 
of various readings, or rather of varieties of 
blunders, it would be rash to promise our- 
selves a clue to direct us always to the ge- 
nuine reading. In caseq of dialect, particu- 
larly, these MSS, of Bo'ethius ought to be 
discarded as incompetent witnesses. We 
shall only add that the late Mr, Toup, having 
Occasion to speak of this decree, on which he 
would probably have tried his skill, if he had 
not found the errors too numerous and obsti- 
nate, dismissed it, only calling it corrupto 
corrupt ius. {In Suidam^ v, X/a^f/F*.) 

Lest it should be said of us that we are 
apt enough to object to the opinions of others, 
without giving them an opportunity of making 
reprisals, we will present Mr. K, with the 

♦ [Vol. 11. p. 377. cd, Qx.] 



latter part of the decree, as we think it pro*- 
bably ought to be read : 

ra» 'ipiiKX Xfigioiv ixrafMyra rag mg^rag vvoKwuf 
fMvo¥ TOf ixra* orcjg izcurrog ro roig xoKsog fi»gog 
cgHf ivXaSfitcts Irraf Sra^ray lirt^igiv rs riv ik,m 
XMhify n riv fi^n xarro rag igBrug z>Jiog kyorrm. 

If we be right in our conjectures, several 
emendations of other critics are wrong; if we 
be wrong, we are not likely to be more uj> 
fortunate than they have been : — ^but we are 
at a loss to understand Mr. K's meaning, 
when he calls ragugireu the Laconian form of 
the second aorist subjunctive middle. 

We could make several other remarks on 
this Essay, and might propose several other 
objections : but we must noM- dismiss it with 
a general, but short, character. 

The author is a man of reading, learning, 
and inquiry. His taste and knowledge seem ' 
to predominate rather in the antiquarian's 
province, as it is generally called : — rbut, 

* [Bentley seems to have admitted Twp ^rropap, ad 
Hor. Serm. 1. iii. 47.] 



when he traces the history of language, and 
the etymology of words, he gives too much 
scope to conjecture and imagination. In the 
execution of his plan, he unnecessarily con- 
tracts his foundation, by building only on 
the ground-work of Homer ; and, while he 
denies that particular changes of sourids and 
words can take place except in one certain 
prescribed mode, he allows too little to the 
changes, caprices, conveniences, etc. which 
produce the fluctuations. We have, however, 
perused his Essay generally with entertain- 
ment, sometimes with instruction and appro- 
bation ; and Mr. K. may deserve, at least, 
this praise, that the errors in his research are 
sometimes more to the purpose than the suc- 
cessful inquiries of others. 

P. S. We forgot, when we treated of the 
word^'EPTMA in our last number, to observe 
that a kmdred form, 'EPT2M0^2, occurs in 
the newly-discovered Hymn to Ceres, attri- 
buted to Homer, 230. 


( 151 ) 

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 

I AGREE with Mr. Cogan, that the 
passages of Euripides and Sophocles suffi- 
ciently defend one another, and prove, at 
least in poetry, the legitimate use of the verb without the participle &¥. 

My friend Mr. C. Falconer, jun. pointed 
out to me another mistake in Mr. Person's 
note, which Mr. Cogan has omitted to cor- 
rect, either through forbearance or oversight. 
If in Euripides, Androm. 1116. we read 

[Ey|a/ro Oo/f »] 8rv;^f }l a)y sy ifjurvgoigt there 

will be an hiatus valde dejlendusj which Mr, 
Porson will, I dare say, retract, when it is 
mentioned to him. I draw this conclusion 
from two of his own notes, one upon the 
57 1st verse of the Hecuba, where he quotes 
with approbation my namesake's (Dawes. 
Misc. Crit. p. 216, 217) censure of a similar 
mistake of King's; the other on Orestes, 

V. 792, 


V. 792, where Mr. Person proposes a conjec- 
ture to remedy the same fault in a comic 

While I am on this subject of the hiatus^ 
it may not be improper to rescue another 
passage from the attacks of critics. Machon 
(Athenaeus xiii. p. 580. D.) tells us, that 
Gnatha^na, seeing a young butcher, said to 
him, Msi^axioy Kotikoq^ Pfi(r\ vSg iortigj (pgoMTov ; 
" My pretty lad, tell me how you sell (your 
meat)/' Your readers, sir, who recollect 
Shallow's questions, " How a good yoke of 
bullocks at Stamford fair?'' *^ How a score 
of ewes now*?" will readily agree, that wSg 
itrrfiQ is at least good English. But Lennep, in 
a note upon Phalaris, p. 95. 1. will not allow 
it to be good Greek ; so corrects it to Woti 
ioTfjg, and falls into the error I have just ex- 
posed. Mr. Jacobs, in a note upon the An- 
thology, approves of Lennep's correction. 
Let us try to defend the vulgar reading by a 
quotation from Aristophanes, Eq, 478. USg 
vvv Tvgog iif Boiarotg mtog ; but, see what a 

general prejudice has taken place in behalf 

» [Shaksp. 2 Hen. IV. 2.] 



of rocov against poor rZg ! Gerard Horreus 
would read tocou if o rvgogm This conjecture 
Pierson (on Moeris, p. 424.) refutes by pro- 
ducing Acham. 768. T/ ^ aXXo, Meyagol rSg 
trlrog afwo; 5 to which when your readers have 
added a fragment of Strattis (apud Polluc. 
iv. 169.) Ta y oi\(piff vfiiv xSig %itoi>.ovf ; rirro- 
^m ^^ayjMv fi0aikt<rrcL ror zo^ivov^ they will con* 
sent to let Machon and Aristophanes enjoy 
their old reading. 

Oct. 11. 1802. I am, Sir, etc. 

John Nic. Dawes** 

* [See R. P. ad Hcc. 782. p. 51. cd. 3.] 

[This correspondent was very handsomely invited to con* 
tinue his communications. The epistle^ turned into Latin> 
would have found a place in the Addenda ad Hec; which 
was appropriated to high matter seasoned with a little 
wholesome chastisement,] 


( 154 ) 

To the Editor of the Morning Chronicle. 

As a learned friend of mine was rum- 
maging an old trunk the other day, he disco- 
vered a false bottom, which, on examination, 
proved to be full of old parchments. But 
what was his joy and surprise M'hen he dis- 
covered that the contents were neither more 
nor less than some of the lost tragedies of 
Sophocles ! As the writing is diiBcult, and 
the traces of the letters somewhat faded, he 
proceeds slowly in the task of decyphering. 
When he has finished, the entire tragedies 
will be given to the public. In the mean time 
I send you the following fragment, which my 
friend communicated to me, and which all 
critics will concur with me, I doubt not, in 
determining to be the genuine production of 
that ancient dramatist. His characteristics 
gre simplicity and sententiousness. For in- 


stance, what can be more simple and senten- 
tious than the opening of the Trachinice ? — 
" It is an old saying that has appeared among 
mankind, that you cannot be certain of the 
life of mortals, before one dies, whether it be 
good or evil/^ These qualities, too, are con- 
spicuous in the following Iambics, which con- 
tain a seasonable caution to parents against 
rashly trusting children out of their sight. — 
Though your paper is chiefly occupied in plain 
EngUsh, you sometimes gratify your learned 
readers with a little Greek : you may there- 
fore give them this, if you think that it will 
gratify them. For the benefit of those whose 
Greek is rather rusty with disuse, I have added 
a Latin version, which, I liope, is as pure and 
perspicuous as Latin versions of Greek Tra- 
gedies commonly are, 

I am, Sir, &c. 

S. England. 



KPTCTAAAOnHKrora rgirrt/Xfii ^^ poag 

AXX , Ai roxstg^ o<ro$g fi%¥ ovra rvyj^ctnh 
''Otrosg i% fMi% ^Kaar^fMtT tvriz¥ov trvo^p 
*Hf ivrvj^ug s!ij(fl<r6i rag ^vga^ oioug 
To7g T(ti<r)¥j iv <r^oig h iofMtg ([>vX»<rctrt. 

* [xotgatMou in qiubusdam exemplaribus, Alterutnim 
probum est.J 



Glacie-durata triplices pueri fluenta 
Tempestate sestatis radentes pulchras-plantas 

habentibus pedibus, 
In vortices ceciderunt, ut sane accidere solet, 
Oranes : deinde effugerunt reliqui. 

Sin autem inclusi essent vectibus, 
Aut pedibus labantes in arido campo, 
Auri ponderis sponsione libenter contenderem 
Partem aliquam juvenura servari potuisse. 

At, O parenteSf turn vos, quibus esse contigit, 
Turn vos, quibus non contigitt germina pul- 

chros-filios-procreantis segetis. 
Si Felices optatis extra-domos itiones 
Pueris vestris, bene eos intra domos servate. 


( 158 ) 


[^Supplement um ad prceclaram Sophoclis Edi^ 
tionem^ cura R. F. P. Brunck.] 

Lector meminerit,in priori* Scriptorum In- 
dies me quaedam correxisse, qusedam addi- 
disse; alterum non tanti putabam. — Verba, 
quas addidi in minore editione omissa, fo* 
lium integrum majoris conficiunt. 




AcKSODORUS, C. 1051. 

iEscHYLUs, T. 733. C. 1047. 1049* Aj. 722. 784, 
833. E. 137. 286. '^yaftcVvovi, C. 929. 'Ettt^ M 

ByiSagj C. 1375. 'HKiacnVy C. 1248. Op^<r<rou$, Aj, 
134. 815. 'hpslais, C. 791. 7$iyev«/a, Aj. 722. Av- 
xoupycoy C. 668. "OwXcov xg/trw, Aj. 190. [iJfOjttijJfi] 
A. 966. *iXoxT^, Arg. Philoct. 

♦ [Scriptorum Indici et Additamento has notulas ad- 
junxerat Porsonus.] 



Agathon, Tr. 633. 

Alc^us, T. 56. 153. C. 954. 

Alcman, C. 1248. 

Anacreon, a. 134. 

Androtion, C. 698. 711. 1051. 

Antimachus (Triclinio Callimachus, sed lAale, ut liquet 

ex Suida w. Trcbpos* TaXaliroDpog, Scholiastis ad Eurip. 

Or. 392. ad Aristoph. Plut. 33.) C. 14. 
Apollodorus, C. 55. 57. 702. Tr. 262. ev tj EiSxio- 

Sijxi,, A. 980. fv Tji nspi dfwv «f , C. 489. 
Apollonius Rhodius (^ApyofauT.) E. 445. 745. 
Aratus (*aiy.) Tr. 122. 
Archilochus, E. 96. 
Aristarchus Tegeata, C. 1320. 
Aristides^ T. 249. 
Aristocrates, Tr. 265. 
Aristophanes^ vit. Soph, (locus plenior exstat apud 

Dion. Chrysost. LII. p. 553.) Aj. 745. {Barpixpis) 

E. 147. AgwraSij, E. 289. "Hpaxn, C. 791. iVf^e- 

Xai$, C. 698. ilxowra, T. 82. (^^ijrO Tr. 394. 

Aristoteles, T. Arg. 1516. C. 698. 

Aristoxenus, vit. Soph. 

Arizelus, C. 91. 

astydamas, c. 57. 

Bias, A. 175. 

Callimachus, T. 919. C. 3. 311. 489. 510. (1621. 
vide Bentleii Fragm. 83. et Suid. v. Moucrai xftAa/.) 
A. 264. 629. Tr. 7. 308. Aj. 26. in fine tow /3' t«# 
AlriooVy C. 258. iv rta y toov Alrloov, A. 80. 

Carystius, vit. Soph. 

Chilon^ a. 175. 



COMICT^ C* !?• 
CoM(£DIA^ Aj. 257* 

Crates Athenibnsis^ C. 100. 

Cratinus^ a. 404. Jlur/yj}^ Aj. 105. Xilpcovt, C. 477« 

Crbophylus (Oi;^aXa/a( dkia-u) Tr. 265. 

Ctfriorum auctor^ E. 157. 

Dbmosthbnbs^ T. 56. (et sine nomine de Cor. p. 269^ 19« 

ed. Reisk.) A. 320. 
DiciEARCHUs^ T. Arg. Aj. Arg. 
DiDYMUs, C. 155. 237. 761. A. 4. 45. Aj. 405, 
DiNiAS^ h ^ 'AfYo>^^v, E. 278. 
DioNTsius Thrax^ Aj. 1052. 
Epicharmus^ Aj. 1074. 'Afiixcoy Aj. 722. 
Epimenidbs^ C. 42. 
euphorion^ c. 681. 
EUPOLIS^ Mapix», C. 1600. 
EcjRiPiDBS^ T. 264. (firagm. inc. Musgr. 164.) A. 781. 

Tr. 169. Aj. 833. 'Amyivti, A. 1348. Bixxctn, 

A. 1146. J/xTUi, Aj. 787. *Exi€ji, (sine nomine fa- 

bula) T. 842. Aj. 520. 953. '/xfr/criv, C. 220. 7t. 

^oXuTcfy Tr. 29. (sine n. f.) C. 228. A. 61. Aj. 265. 

A'uxXonri^ Aj. 190. K§ri(r(rM$, Aj. 1295. Mniiiioi (sine 

nom. fab.) Aj. 554. (sine nom. fab. et poetse) C. 171. 

Tr. 29. ngarrt(ri\icpy C. 9. ^iXoxitjti^ Ph. 1. 1>oi- 

vlc<rM$ (sine n. f.) A. 100. 
HSRODIANUS^ ev Ta € T^; KaioXov, C. 195. 
Herodorus (vide Wesseling. Dissert. Herod, p. 22.) 

Tr. 253. 
Hbrodotus, Aj. 508. Ph. 201. (vide V. 77. II. 171.) 

h7i^, Tr. 169. 



Hesiodus, T. Arg. C. 1211. 1670. A. 418. 718. 1180. 
Tr.39.56. 112.265.517. 1090. Ph. 137.456. E.86. 
539. Iv 'Hoious, Tr. 1 164. 

HiERONYMUS, vit. Soph. 

Hippocrates, Aj. 51. 

HoMERus, T. Arg. 16. 27. 151. 159. 166. 194. 370. 656. 

733. 749. 913. 930. 1244. 1271. C. 71. 131. 195. 

281. 378. 380. 619. 630. 668. 1541. 1584. 1670. 

A. 15. 117. 304. 336. 338. 521. 582. 672. 677. 970. 

9S.>. 1030. 1034. 1139. 1348. Tr. 7. 13. 19. 50. 94. 

122. 169. 205. 281. 327. 508. 550. 556. 633. 680. 

708. 779. 788. 888. 931. 1010. 1071. 1159. 1259. 

Aj. Arg. 1. 7. 19. 26. 118. 125. 161. 176. 190. 253. 

292. 299. 308. 447. 478. 491. 499. 501. 514. 545. 550. 

574. 602. 615. 651. 731. 801. 832. 866. 1063. 1079. 

1 1 13. 1269. 1358. Ph. 94. 212. 391. 456. 489. 561. 

695. 784. 859. 959. 1025. 1048. E. 4. 9. 19. 45. 54, 

94. 129. 137. 147. 157. 176. 197. 204. 267. 300.320. 

418. 434. 445. 645. 706. 708. 881. 977. 1005. 1056. 

1075. 1128. 1137. 1294. 
Incerti Poetae (Hymn, in Apoll. Anthol. Stcph. p. 58.) 

T. 151. Orpheifrag. 1.) C. 9. 155. 171. 1375. A. 615. 

Tr. 296. Aj. 157. 

Ineertus Scriptor, Aj. 235. 

Interpretes autiqui Sophoclis, C. 388. 390. 681. 944. 

E. 488. 
IsocRATKS [ev Uagcttvsa-ti irgoy Jijfw'wxov, p. 3.) Tr. 1 12. 

IsTER, vit. Soph. C. 4-. 57. 681. 698. trtft twv 'AraxTm, 

C. 1051. h7-na.rm'Arax,T!0Vf C. 1059. 

LiBAMius, Aj. 235. E. 520. 

LuciANUs, £.708. (sine nomine) E. 1146. 

Lycophron, A. 1199. 


M Lysimachides^ 


Ltsimachidbs^ C. 55. 

LysIMACHUS AlEXANDRINUS^ h Tm 1/3' rm¥ BifidixSiVf 

Menandbr^ a. 134. (sine nomine^ vide Frag. Cler. p. 34.) 

T. 1191. fv NauxXi^fOiy C. 1375. 

Mbnscrates^ Tr. 352. 
Nbanthes^ vit. Soph. 
NlCANDER^ (6i}giax. 448.) A. 117. 
NtmphodorUS^ ly rm \y' rwv BoiqSsi^ixooVy C. 337. 

Phbrecratbs, E. 86. 

Phbrecvdes, T. 775. C. 472. Tr. 352. E. 504. 
Philbas^ Aj. 879. 
Phii^emox Comicus^ C. 42. 

Philochorus, T. 21. C. 698. iv rg /3' twv 'ArOBoof^ 
C. 100. eVTp TerqoariXu, C. 1047. 

Philoclbs, C. 1320. 

Phylarchus^ C. 39. 

PiNDARUs, T. 899. Aj. Aig. (lyA^.) Aj. 154. E. 1026. 
fox.) Tr. 742. naiSuTiv, Tr. 169. (/7u9.) T. 1187. 
£. 696. 

Pius, Aj. 405. 

Plato, E. 801. 

PoLBMO, C. 39. Iv ToJ irpog TifjLouoVy C. 100. ev toi; xpo^ 
*EpoLro<riivYiVy C. 489. 

Praxiphanes, Sophoclis interpres, C. 899. 

Sappho, Aj. 627. E. 147. 

Satyrus, vit. Soph. 

SiMONiDEs, Aj. 377. 740. 

Solon, A. 7 1 1 . Tr. 1 . 

Sophocles (vide Fragm. inc. 92. ed. Bnmck.) E. 184. 
'Afi4np6(OVt, C. 390. (Amyivriy 803. E. 893.) Javajj, 
Aj. 1. 'Ewtyimg, C. 378. 'Epeurraisy C. 481. eafw- 
fi$i, vit. Soph. Oau^CpoLj C. 378. 7fixXs/a, C. 791. 


Kufjuxioigy (sic enim lego pro Iv Toi$ Koaiuiruli) A. 328. 

A'loffi;, C. 684. Smlilmtoo, C. 9. Aj. 190. TpnTroXifUf, 

C. 504. TvfjLTavKTTOLlsy A. 980. *t6po^iffng, A. 1. 

Ph. 1197. 
Synesius, T. 240. 287. 
Thebaidis parvae Scriptor^ C. 1375* 
Theocritus, A. 349. 
Theognis, (v. 417.) C. 1225. 



iEscHYLUs, T. 21. 80. 180. 863. A. 154. 560. Aj. 75. 

E. 122. 157. 
Agathias Scholasticus, E. 150. 
Aristides, a. 356. E. 682. 

Aristophanes, T. 1463. A. 356. Tr.394. Aj. 103. E.472. 
Euripides, T. 1235. A. 174. 1 133. Tr, 593. Aj. 75. 

290. 596. 1043. E. 957. 977. 
HoMERus, T. 1228. A. 100. Aj. 189.485. Ph. 334. 

1325. E. 149. 730. 
IsocRATEs, T. 67. Aj. 290. 
LiBANius, A. 748. 1021. Aj. 678. 
Lycophron, Aj. 434. 
Metrodorus (tacito nomine) T. 577. 
Philo JuD^us (Ed. Londin. T. II. p. 85.) Aj. 131. 
Philostratus, Aj. 176. 906. 
Planudes, Aj. 1085. 
Plato, A. 894. 
Solon, T. 1528. 
Synesius, Aj. 678. E. 977. 
Thucydidbs^ a. 1 10. 130. 259. 




ifi^lpirrosj Aj. 134. 
af^(plmif^i, C. 1312. 1478. 
Aj. 724. 

ifJLfloTOlMfy C. 473. 

4fi4)iTp^j, Ph. 19. 

^^iXo/yeiy, A. 118. 

iv geminatur^ T. 139. 339. 


iv per fere, fortasseofiy aut 
per verbum soleo redden- 
dum. Ph. 290. 

iv cum verbis aut participiis 
prsesentis tempori8^C.76 1 • 
Ph. 1058. 

iv potentiate a librariis omis- 
8um, C. 42. 205. 565. 
1172. 1418. Aj. 921. 
Ph. 895. E. 914. 1022. 

^*ypro(Jiv,Aj. 1085. Ph. 

av accusativi nominum pri- 
ms declinationis corripi- 
tur in melicis, E. 1239. 

avayxa^eiv^E. 221.256. 

avoeyxaio;, Aj. 485. 803. E. 

^vayxa/fio;, Tr, 723. 

avayxiif T* 877* C. 293. 

Ph.538. 922. 1025. 1340. 
E. 309. xar oLvayxiiVytPgrej 
Ph. 206. 
^viyuv, Tr.211. Aj. 131. 
Ph. 866. 

StvayiyvwcrxuVj T. 1348. 
dvayvosy T. 823. 1383. C. 

fltyaSf/xyujxi, E. 1458. 
Stva^o^f Tr. 825. 
aml^ioo, Tr. 702. 
avaiiifjMy A. 286. 
avaiSeia, E. 607. 
ay0ti$ii;,C.516.863. Ph.83. 

E. 622. 
&voui»Sy T. 354. 
ivatptlvy T. 1035. Tr. 558. 

Aj. 237. E. 1140. 
avatxotXiivy C . 1 37 6 . Tr . 910. 

E. 693. 
ayoiKYip6(r(rei¥, T. 450. 
avoixiyfiVy Tr. 1259. 
avaxlvYi(n$j T. 727. 
&mxXaluyy Ph. 939. 
avaxoJsiy, E. 81. 
avaxou^ll^uvy T. 23. 
avaxou^KTi^y T. 218. 

avaxTtfy primores civitatisj 
T.911. C.831. A. 988. 


eivoLXvx\si<riaiy Ph. 800. 
ivaxwxvstvy A. 423. 1227. 

aVOLXOO^VJBtVf £. 732. 

avoLkxitMaviiVj Ph. 1249. 
ayoAyijTOf, Tr. 126. Aj.946. 
avoL\yr^T(0$y Aj. 1333. 
ivctXxiCy E. 301. 
edfoXoooy secunda longa, T. 

1174. Aj. 1049. 
avi\v<ri$y E. 142. 
ocvaiLiyloLj Tr. 519* 
avajuttyvueiv^ E. 715. 
ecvoLfji,ilJi,vrj(niuVy T. 1133. 

«y«v8po?, T. 1506. C. 939. 

Tr. 308. 
mvavlpcoTO^y Tr. 109. 
avoLveaxTsuriaiy Tr. 396. 

dvi^ios, C. 1446. A. 694. 

Ph. 439. 1009. E. 189. 
dvo^icos, Ay \S92. Ph. 686. 
dmicoLvm.CA 1 13. Tr. 1 262. 
dvofKOLuha, Ph. 638. 878, E. 


dvotfjriirruvy E. 729. 

fl2v«Tvc7v, T. 1221. Aj. 274. 
dvoLTToXeiv, Ph. 1238. 
dyiymiiJUy A. 1307. 
avotWTUffiv, A. 1009. 
avaTTt5<r<re4V, E. 639. Hip- 

ponoo^ 1. 
AyufipogyTr. 1103. 
•Jvaf /}ft)jTO^, Aj, 646, 

dvipiifMg, T. 167. 179. E. 
dvotpr^YWin, dvetpi^c^my T* 

1075. Aj.236. 
c£vapTa?«y, Aj. 987. E. 848. 
dvaptriog, Tr. 64 1 . 858. Syn* 

dipnis, 1. 
dvap^luy A. 672. 
dveta-vaVy Aj. 302* 
avaa^ojTO^^ A. 1186* 
^vi(r<r«v,Aj. llOl.Ph. 140. 

E. 841. 
dvioTouri;, Ph. 276. 
dvioTOTosj C. 429. A. 673. 

Tr. 39. 240. 
dvaoTsvi^uVy Aj. 931. 
dvourrivsiVy Tr.939. Ph. 737* 
dvoLOTpi^uvy Ph. 449. 
dvarrpo^y A. 226. 
«ya(rxrroj,C. 1652. Tr. 721. 

Ph. 987. 
dvoKTwl^eiVy T. 1352. E. 1 133. 

dvaroipia'a'eiVy Tr, 218. 

dvetreiy A. 485. 

dmri^J^m, C. 1246. Ph. 

dvirXyifJUy C. 239. 
avaroj, C. 786. 
dvar^iiPtiVy A. 1275. avrj- 

T^oipa, Tr. 1008. 
dva6^riro$y Aj, 715. 

dvavioi, C. 1274. 1404. 



Tr. 861. 968. Aj, 947. 

E. 1283. 
dvapahiiv, C. 1223. 
avlgelay E. 983. 
dv^ff^kartlvy T. 100. 
avSfi<piofo$, A. 1022. Ph. 

dvS&riVy Ph. 1 153. 
flfvffijtti, Tr. 767. 
dvixrixf C. 883. 
dvtxros, T, 429. A. 282. 
dviXiFioTosy Tr. 673. E. 186. 
d¥tfiiu$y Tr. 953. 
dvtwl(p»ovog, Tr. 1033. 
dviqifriaiy Tr. 1304. C. 209. 

dvip^wimj Ph. 625. 
dvsv(ptifuuy, Tr. 783. 
avffp^eiv^ pro Sx'iVy C. 674. 

pro dvarixkavy Tr. 204. 

pro Ti/Mcy^ Aj. 212. eSvep^ffi 

Aoyo^^ C. 1573. 

a»«X«<r*«»^ A. 467. Tr. 276. 
Aj.75. Ph.411. E.)028. 
dvi(piXos, E. 1246. 
dviixeiv, Tr. 1018. 
ay^xfCTTOj, T. 98. Aj. 52. 

Ph. 186. E. 888. 

dvYlXOUCTOSj E. 1407* 

ay^Xio;^ C. 676. 
dinifupoa>f Theseo. 

dv^vifios, C. 677 1 

ay^yvTO^y E. 167* 

fl^y^ prseterquam in meliris 

primam semper corripit^ 

C. 630. 1486. Tr. 391. 

Ph. 212. dvrip 7Sf, ego, 

T. 534. 815.829,1018. 

1136. 1464. C. 649. 

1329. 1472. 1618. A. 

1034. Tr. 1175. 1201. 

Aj. 78. 446. 822. Ph. 

1036. 1375. et passim. 
dviipitftosy Tr. 247. Aj. 603, 

aylanTOftai^ Tr. 778. 
dvtihy Tr. 1089. 
dviripog, A. 960. 
ay«;;e<r«ai, E. 43. 
dviloTrifjLi, C. 645. A. 518, 

1096. Aj. 1231. 
«yj' c5y, quiOy guapropter, 

T. 264, C. 275. 953, 

A. 1068. 
dviuy media longa, Aj. 973. 

1005. 113^. 
away, A. 319. 550. Aj. 266. 

273.994. Ph. 906. 

dviapSi^j A. 316. 

«'yiV«, T. 270. 1277. 1405, 
C. 1608. A. 579. 1101. 
Aj.476. 1214. Ph. 639. 
764. E. 516. 721. 

dvlxrifro^y C. 1515. 1568. 

A. 781. Ph. 78. 


aVlTTTOf, C. 899. 
aviwTCLfLOHy Aj. 693. 

avi(miiJi,i^ T. 1200. C. 276. 

1286. Tr.979. Aj.788. 

Ph. 666. E. 138. 
dvKTToguVy T. 578. C. 991* 

Tr.317. Ph. 253. 
dvorjfroiy Aj. 162. 

avoiOL, A. 603. E. 920. .1054. 

avo /y 61 v^ C. 515. Aj. 344. 
dvoUraog, T. 182. 
dvOl[MOXT)y Aj. 1227* 
dvoKTriovy A. 272. 
ivo\So$y A. 1026. 1265. Aj. 

avoXoXu^fiy, Tr. 205. E. 750. 
dviiMiXo^j JSigeOj 1. 
dv6[ji[iaro$y Ph. 856. 
avo^j, C. 142. Tr. 1096, 
dvovriro^y Aj. 758. 1272. 
avo^SoOv, T.46.51.829. 

ayogfMSy T. 423. 

avoVio?, T. 353. 1289. 1361. 

C. 281.946.981. 
dvoaicosy Ph« 257. 

ivouj, A. 99.281.562. Aj. 

dvralcty (vXij)^,) A. 1308. E. 

avraxoueiv, T.544. Aj. 1 141. 
^KTo/uLff/gecrSai^C. 814. 1273. 
Ph, 230. 

dvroLiJ^6yt<rtatiy A. 643. 

dvTAvloTafMUy Tr. 441. 

dvravdaVy E. 1478. 

dyraaoy C. 1445. cum geniti- 
ve, A. 982. 

fltvTfi^fflv, C. 999. 1279. A. 
1053. E.377. 

avref^xa, A. 47. avTf»gijo-f- 

T«i, Tr. 1184. 
dyrsgel^Wf Ph. 1403. 
ayrfp^o|xai,Ph. 893.Creusa4. 
dvri^coy C. 1651. Ph. 176. 

avT^Aioj, Aj, 805. 
avT^pijf, E. 89. 
ama^fiv, T. 192. Aj. 492. 

Ph. 809. E. 869. 
dvriSalvuVy E. 575. 
amS/Scofti, C. 232. A. 1067. 
«Vi5pay,C. 271.953. 959. 


dvrltuposy E. 1433. 

avTixtJ^fiv, C. 99. 1680. Ph. 

dvTiXiyuVy T. 409. 
dvTtXoyelVy A. 377. 
avrlXvgogy Tr. 643. 
avTiooraTsIy, Ph. 640. 
oLvrlicaniy Syndipnis, 3. 
ayrlicoiXo^y A. 125. 
amisair^nvy Ph. 584. 
avrmfimy, T. 306. Tr.542. 



ArrlirtT^g, C. 192, 

avTi'xXrj^y A. 592. 
iyrlinmv,?h.3l6. E.592. 
dvrixga>fo§y Tr. 223* 
Arri(rxaaTO$f Tr. 770. 
irrlcraifMSy £• 57 1 • 
imrff/yfiVj A. 714, 

dyrnloiy Aj. 1086. 
ivrlrrrKO^, A. 134. Ph. 693, 

£i{vr/4)oyo;^ Ph. 1156. E.248. 
fllvTKf avfiy, A. 27 1 . Tr. 1 114, 

Aj.773. Ph. 1065, E, 


ivTi^aiquVj A. 149, 
ivrXiiVy E, 1291, 


( 169 ) 

[Nota ad Euripidem a Beckio male omissa.l 

Bacch. 1330. 

Intercidisse orationem Agaves, quod su* 
spicatus erat Tyrwhittus, certissime ostendit 
Apsines Rhetor qui earn duobus locis com- 
memorat; sc. p. 723. Ed. Aid. sraj a rf Euj i- 

Tfjg (Mtnctg kolI ymgicuca, rov xcuia in(rT(t§fj(,%¥09 
^ctTfiyo^ii fjikv iuvTfigy iXiov it xtvel, Iterumque^ 
p. 724. Tovrov rov r^oxov xBxtvfjxiv Eu^ix/)^; osktop 
iTi ru YlBvSa Kivriirm fiovXof/^Bvog. ixatrrov yoig 
uvTOv ray fiBXeHv rj f/*f}Tfjg ly Todq XH^^^ xgarovtra 
Kot^' iKatTToy avrS^v oIktI^btoh. Habet et Luci- 
anus in Fiscatore versum quern bine desump- 
tum suspiceris : sc. 


Hanc orationem integram habuisse videtur 
Pseudo-Gregorius, ex eaque sumsisse duo 
Christi Patientis tragoediaj versus 1309, 1310. 

Ila;; Kctl ysy fj ivcTfjyog svXaCovfJt,iyfj 

Jl§og (TTi^ycc ^Sfjt,(t$ ; rUd {l\) S-^^v^^w rgo^oy ; 


170 notje ad euripidem omissjb. 

Ion. 1016. 

Legendum, auctore CI. Snapio CoUegii 
Regalis apud Cantabrigienses olim Praeposito : 

Cujus perelegantis sane emendationis noti- 
tiam Viro Eruditissimo Thomas Morell S. T. P. 



( 171 ) 




ffug, oia, rotavTfjg ooov xat rotovrm to locorum inter- 

* A '^ ^ * ^ 'i?-^-i'^ vallo.pertot gente«, 

$ff¥Cif¥j XOCi itgrtJV EXXada, Ta^ttKO- saUcictincoluiDel 

/xiVaj alrovg. Kai iiKMTfig ^^^ ^ '^^^y^o^^t^ 

OVTOg oibiXatTTOg iCrai* XCti TrPttr^ incomiptus hicfu- 
fi \ >y/ \ ^u y '^ *"^» «* If gmtus ido- 

^SVTfig Cf^ilOyj^iOig* XUt (pvXa,i rOfV neus, et cuttot fi- 

^vXccx^ig lioff^ivm ruTTog. ^ UoXXug ewToduTdi^ 

rOlOUTOg, 'EN flSVrOi rcug /XOV- lO in civitate, pate- 

^ »M ^ / *- \ ^ bunt. Arcorruptit 

Vfi^OUg XOAiTBtUSgi rati ftiV XOSmv in civitatibus abi- 

>A^y ^ V*/ tinebit ille Dubli- 

a(pj^$r(tijr§(tyf^uTa>i^,ovT$ a^itrxm T^f^i^^^^n^^m 
To7g xaxaig ^oXirBvofJLivotg. ovts au- »«: placet ipse 

^ , , , , * V \ / pravitcivibut, nee 

to; iXeiVOig aPB(rX0fJ(,Btl0g, OVTB OVVa^ biilliplaceaDt,ne- 

~ ~ / V que possit ille bis. 

fLBvog Toig Tuv roiovrm aex,ov<n¥ n ^^i in prava civi- 

^t(rrO¥ XcCi Cuifl(MV(t. ilOj POvhnlv ut slmul fidem ve- 
/ • \ ^ / recuDdiamque ser« 

T^a^jxara etovvura, Ta^»irovf/,ivogj vet. luquetuper- 

^f . ^ > ' » » v.... seHi-ns inanem in 

it f^6¥ dvvuTog itrrivy tig aXXfjv ^ .,„„ admoncDdis 

test, in aliam rempublicam commigrabit ; quemadmodum idem noster 

3* xai delet Collatio Holsteniana. 9, !^i| 


^^^iKTfjrog, Tfjg AofAfiTiaVOV rV^CCyvU Epictetus^damnaU 

dog xarttyvovgj aro rrjg Foffttjg de,Rom4Nicopoiiq 

adv¥UT0g9 Afg vro rttytOlf rt XPVhrj^ munimaliquemtc 
\ ^ » ^ / « *** occultabit, pulve- 

(r$raij top XOHOgrO¥ tXKAtVOJP' tOCVrOV^ rem eritani: sa- 
ri Ka) Tm £xXmy Sv &y ivvaiTO,^ q3*p?t«crit!^: 
rijg ibayayloLg Wifj(,iXofJi,€yog' xotj tam iiwtitutioocm 

VayrUVOV VVXrag Ku) M& flf/,ifia¥ nootudiequeobser. 

*« » / \ ^u vabit, apud sqos 

CKO^OfP, iV (rvyy6¥$tOC, XOH pXotg, consanguineo., a- 

xa) rM-i ro7g toX.W ^^ fov rsgjo^;^^^^ 

^OPUTicrOi TTpdhg ayuSij, Tfjg avrOV incidat nej?otium, 

^^/ ^ , \\\ » quodsuoadiumeo' 

OiOfliVfJ (TUVBPyna^g. TOXXai ds Xar to isdigcat. Inci* 

»\r\ / -|c/ duDt aattm ctiam 

aurag Irctg roictvrag] ivgitrxovrat inhuiusmodirebus- 
woXiTiiag ? trvfiCovXiig i%o[L%¥ai r/- ?u** cmi Tu^i <»nsi" 
¥og K(ti (rvnpyuag Trurrrigi tj ^-t;/^ 35 ^'o ^t adiumento fi- 

A / \ ^ A/ i< / deli indigeaot, aut 

iraUSiOLg xai ragUfAVfftUgf fj fi^iy^^t commiseratione et 

*^ \ '^ m. " \^/ consolaiione, aat 

rov <ruyxivdu¥BV(rar on xai rovro pericuiomm cti.m 

won TO X(t6nX0¥ UrOCyOPeVBU Kay participatione;Dani 

N \ e m0 % J ^ m* \ cthocinterdumpo- 

U,%¥ XOLTO, pOV¥ O^VTM ^POVOJPIJ TU, stulat officii ratio. 

/ '^ r^*'^ ^ f ^'t .^Etqood si quidem 

irgayflUTttf Tea 0gy Z^^^^ 0/^0- *" ex veto succedunt 

Xoy{i¥, k^ l¥TgixvfA.U yctXnviZv. ^ZT^^^u^^^ 

rot. Ei i\ iioi rOV UX^PVXTOV to- medics inter wtu- 

„ ^ , '-J, ^ antes fluctas tran* 

XSfJUO¥ TOV TaPOC (pv<n¥ ptOV XPOg quillltate' utatur. 

\ v-.^' \^ /I/ Quodsi vero prop* 

T0¥ XUTO, ^VfflVi Xtt^l T6)V [LlBvOV- terimplacabilebel- 

ro^f^w^og Tovg yh((>0¥Tag,^ xa) iv<r^^'Z:^^:^^Z 

ySPfj TPOCrrixTf} Tivd* ol uXy kvo^ vitasecundumnatu- 
%r ^ mt ^ \ \ it \ / rain,ethoininumte- 

OitXiafVTSg, Xa,l TtJV i¥(rTa^<n¥ OiuXV' mulentorum adver. 

sus sobrios, incidant 
fravia nonnulla ; taoc quidem, si qui periculi fbrmidine deseruntiastitutum« 

27. hif^Xoufitvog 30. omittit?rou 

32. xoc) xuToi ru$ TOiouira^ 37* orav 

38, VKayogiuji^ 46, ir^iTiplTru 46. um^uXuayns, 



woXiTsiag axoistxvvvrigi u,oirfi¥ ay- iici^tvanumfuisw, 

\ e ^ »^ / f %> quern prae se tule- 

TfjV VTigO§Cif¥Tig %Kiy*)^0¥r(X»l* Ol dS 50 rant, iliius content 

* / / \ #*« tam : qui vero na* 

ftf; yvfima-iof x^^f^etioh kcu rotg viorib,S casibu.l>ro 
cxXfigorigoig cvyyvf^vourralg srgo- "crcitatione muiH 

6vtJU0TiP0¥ <rV[MrXBXOU,i¥Oij ig K(tl quam in grymiuwio 

«« / / r \ / cum ferocioribus ad* 

ro; yVfJUVUffittPyri X^L^i^ vr$§ rOVrOV vcr8arii8,alacriori a- 

cfj^XoyB7», olro, ii }» ' OJ^vf^icf 55^^:^^;:^^^ 

,' , j»yji \>*y|/ ''** *® nomine habe* 

TiVdV^ aXX iV^mctg ZOLi aXfJ0Bi(tg ant; bi^etutinO* 

^ / v A A /^^XT V ^ » lyropicis certamini- 

^XfJgeJfJUan. KAAO N 0$ Z(tl %¥ bus coronabumur, 

ToXXo) (p0OyOV<n ru ZCLTOL ^VertV j8ou-60v>t«etveritati8comp 

/ ^ / ' / » / plemento. CoiiTi* 

AOfJ(,iVQif QfjIP^flBTPiOV TOLggJ^UV BOtVTOV* MiETveroetiaminU* 

V ^' »/^ > ^ N /_ libus rebuspublicis, 

KOH TO eXoCTTOV 6V TifllJ ftiV fMCXltrTCb, in ^„i,,us ^^jti invi! 

xa} gK ror^ aXXo^^ ii rolg \zrog, ^^°' «\ ^"» »«.<^"°- 

» ^f/ ^fyi/ \ dumnaturamviver© 

ayaxft/vra* o^a;; av o (p6o¥og zctra, studet, moderate te 

N % \ / ^ / gerere ; et in hoDjore 

TO OVVCtrOV [LiT^lOCQUTO. Xa^TOI esquidemmaxiracysed 

» • ~ «/ \ ^ / et in omnibas rebof 

CVX uyvoa, on XCti fieTgiO<pgO(rV¥fl extemis, parvoem 

^oXXdxtg 06OVOV ie^(JUV¥ IVitmCtL c?nt«itum; quoin* 

^^ ^ \ \ \ V ywB. etiam, qnate* 

ffOLTO. Xa,X09 0% xa,l TOL XPOg rovg nus fieri poasit, tem- 

\ / / ^ \ \ peretur. QuaiDquam 

OVPOCCTag TgO<rXgOVfJUara>3 xa^t rOLg nonignoro, mcdenip 

iCTTU^oxaXovg xappfjcnocgj i¥ ^oi^no^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^, 

TOiOUrOtg ZatPolg (LvXttrTltrSa^l TOp- bi invidiamcontrax- 

,, ^ ^ i^ fi , \ i8*e. Oportebit porro 

pOj6i¥* iPOC^f ZOt¥ (TVLuQo^tVfl Tl OVCT^ in huiutmodi tempo* 

\ \> »/'f9 \ ribas ofiensiooea po* 

;^ff6f, f/,71 Tfl¥ Uma¥ O iXlBXfig tcntum. et rusticam 

in dicendo liberta* 

tern, etiam atque 

etiamcavere; ne, si quid incidat graye, id merito accidisse viro bono 

49. oTO^ffixvvoucri xal 54, yvfivauriaf^eo ^, u.ro6roa¥ 
62. TO ora, 67* S^ijxvy iinairaa'aTO fiovoy 
69. iroocxpoCfJMTa irpig rov^ ittfiara^. 


iJ^1/9 ig igifMVPra ^fjgia rOL^t- Tideatur, qoi belliia% 

f /«, ro p««ijif T, ««)^ axov- cri tresis!; 

tfTdjr. OfjXoP ai, on TgaVPUV aw- proficiicatiir. Illud au- 
X > / /^ / tem intelligitur, non 

^ ^*^ A ' CM \ as mitigari humiliter 

m¥ iXtvhgiaP ^ iaVTOV r^oh- te jereodo, aut tuam 

iovrtt^ tAfJTi rolg XOXahf %avrO¥ so |PS'»« Hbertatem pro- 
/ • ' ' , ', dendo,autaduIatoruiii 

ffVPTarrOVrtti Ufjri iP Xoyotf rSPh «"*«' *« adiunjrendo, 

/9V ff \«J / sive verbis, sive factis. 

jtt^ri ll' If yy* yaf OnOVP rOV- Qui enim honim ali- 

p. 153. r^p raOip, i^aJXi^ rh s.^rra^r/.*, ^.t^'a^d^ttr^P^"; 

Xa} rip ^OXvU/MTiMP l^iZfie^yh. didit imtltutum suum, 

r '^ *b aj ' et indigDum se reddi* 

dit qai in certatoram Olympicorum nuoiero ceoseatur. 

75. ^ om. 76. dXoyiOTov rt xa) yLWfiS^^. 79. a ri^y 


rl uic exemplar!* Simpliciaiii Commentarii inserttim est 
supplementum stellis inclusum et an^Jilhv numeratuin, quo 
lacunam p. 153 f ex MS. Parisino Bibliothecae olini Regiae 
1959 explevit Schweigfueuser in sua editione Argent. 1800. 
Idem supplemcntum cum ex aliis et melioribus libris postea 
inter collationes ab Hieronymo Mceo et Luca Holsienio 
factas inventum sit (vide catalogum Codicum Dorvilliano- 
rum^ nunc Bodleianorum^ p. 52^ 53.)^ visum est eas colla-- 
tionum istarum varias lectiones in margine adnotare^ quae 

* [In Bibliotheca Instxtutionis Litterarue apud Londi- 
nienses adservatur.] 
t [Edit. D. HemsU; L. Bat. cl3L3CXL.] 



tuto in textum inferri posse videantur. Addita sunt etiam^ 
quae in fine Cebetis Tabulae plerisque editionibus derant*. 
Etiam in Simplicio triginta et septem voces^ quae in omni- 
bus editionibus, ne Schweighceuseriana quidem excepta, 
defecerant^ Collatio Holsteniana suppeditavit^ p. 5 1 . Res- 
tat^ ut codicis lectiones^ quas mutavimus^ breviter indi- 

2. TOirairrig 6$oD xal rocouraov iivoov mavult Schweigi* 

19. avTog 6 'Ett. pro 6 auroj 'Efr, est conjectura Schw. 

2 1 . 6? sWi MS. Correxit Schw. 

32. rag roiairag omittit MS. addidit Schw. ToXiriiaiMS. 

42. roD xard ficnv filou ifplg rh frapoi ^vciv MS. et Col- 
latio Holsten. Praepositiones xara et irapa transposuit Schw. 

51.1. penult. Supple ex Collatione Holsteniana; ru irapd 
^6<nv TpcoTOv exxAivcfv, xai oihoogToov holtoL ^6civ dpiytfriM* hi 
TceiXoog etr) toO frot^ovrog dveXiiv tijv oi^fffiv Tcp toiovtco iraga" 
TcektviToHy eaog iv hd rrig rmv iraqd, ^u(riy exxX/creo)^ x,a6aq6ii$ 
iKirrfimog yevijTai irqog t^v t^^ tvayaoylag, 

56. ^oXm MS. et 72. o'u/xSaiij. ((rujxSa/yei et •^oAA^ Coll. 

* [Utrum alteram e fortuito an dedita opera praetermiserit 
PoRsoNUs^ nescio ; haec vero crasis, satis certo scio, non 
semel in MSS. pervetustis comparet; JEn, VII. 262. Db- 
RiT in Codice Mediceo a manu prima scriptam legimus ; 
conf. Geo. II. 233. Hor. Serm. I. ix. 56; et Virum utris- 
que litteris tum sacris, tum profanis praestantem, Edvar* 
dum Maltly, voces deesscy deeram^ etc. apud probatos 
auctores esse disyllabas Iv iragigycp monmt Porsonus. In 
hujus scriniis maxima minima persequenti^ ne nostram di- 
ligentiam desideret lector, hoc idcirco^ pusillum quidem 
et leve^ non incuriose mihi prsetereundum esse censui.] 



Cum e plerisque MSS. folium excidisset^ et in editis omni'* 
bus legeretur^ dXXei xai Btvo^m rou^ [uvglovg hxihov^ hia-ooa-t^ 
nai Tttiv 'OXxjfjLitiaoy e^ex^gup^^ conjecit Woifius^ xai h 'Okufi.^ 
%loig avexi}g(!;^ti}, et ita vertit^ Q'^'^ ^^ Xenophon^ decern 
illis Grcecorum millilus conservatism Olympico prcBConio 
est omatus. Unde vero hanc historiam rescivit Woliius ? 
Woliii tamen conjecturam secutus est Dacerius in Gallica 
versione. Quin et nuper in appendice ad Gallicam suam 
Herodoti versionem Vol. VII. p. 680. haec habet Larcherus: 
" Olympiade XCVI. 1. X6nophon proclam6 aux jeux 
01}'mpiques pour avoir sauv6 les dix-mille. Simplicius in 
Epictetumj pag. 153." Istam lacunaniy ait Schweig- 
hseuser^ p. 3.^0. ex Optimo codice nostro Pa, qui continuo 
tenore ea omniay quce hie adpostiimus^persequitury explere 
nobis contigii : quod et vobis eojucundius accidit, et lec» 
itn-ilnis hujus libelli eo gratius Jviurum confidoy quod cum 
per se pulcerrimum est argumentum hoc ipso loco a Sim^ 
pHcio tractatum^ turn vero miro quodam respeclu ad teni^ 
pora simillima eis, quce haud itfji pridem ipsam nostram 
rempublicam oppressam tefiuerant, memorabile. 

Sedy dum chartse aliquid supcrcst^ duo vel tria alia Sim- 
plicii loca breviter illustremus. 

P. 223. Tragici cujusdam versus, ToXjuuw xareix'Tv, /a^ot' 
oux u<r)v ^eoi, Kaxoi yoig ethv^ovvTzg ixiTrXYirrowri /xf, 
propter impietateni^ credo, Eiu-ipidi tril)uit Barnesius. 
Sed scribendi color longc ab Euripideo distat. Legeu- 
dum vero, IxwX^ttouo-i, non IwiwXijTToycn. Hi tamen, 
81 minus Euripidei, sunt certe versus. Idem euim alibi 
Barnesius dupliciter peccavit ; cum proverbium, a Sim- 
plicio p. 267 • usurpatum, Sio xakSog ffgijrai, ori ij X'^^i 
hiywif rqitml^^ ^oryij; ovSiy Sia^e^ii, prime senarium, 



deinde Euripideum^ facit. Et senarium quidem fecit^ 
sed Comicum vocat Salmasius de Usuiis^ p. 353. Simi* 
letii Bamesii errorem^ utcunque a re prsesenti alienunij 
non injucundum erit notare. Inter fragmenta Euripidei 
Alexandri citat et hoc e Galeni Vits scriptore : Sii S) oj 

scrip torem se invenire non posse queritur Musgravius. 
Is est Renatus Charterius^ qiii splendidam Hippocratis 
et Galeni editionem procuravit. Locum scilicet hunc^ 
e Caii oratione pro Lucilla apud Stobsum LXVII. 
p. 424^ 27. depromtum, Charterius ad Euripidis Alex- 
andrum retulit^ quod ejus fabulae versus a Stobaeo jam 
antea laudatus esset^ *Ek toov Ojxo/coy oi xolm\ ya^u^ 

P. 269. ouS? yoig irqog OeaogiMvas kolI IIo^oifMvai hl^S 4 f^^S 
cuxelaxrey xa) rigv fiayngix^v xaxorrp^v/av^ aXket, wgi^ r^^^v 
TO dTo^jiiov dvu^eLmtjirav. Multum molestiae doctissimo 
Schweighaeusero facessiverunt isti Theorion&s et Paxa-- 
mones ; et in his quidem verum quasi per transennaro 
vidit; in illis prorsus a scopo aberravitf. Lege Btagt' 
uiv(x$ xou Ua^iiMvs J. PaxamuSf ut recte conjicit vir doc- 
tus^ est '0^{/a^n^'lX(vy et aliorum libronim scriptor idem^ 
qui ab Athenaeo^ Geoponicis et Suida laudatur. Thea* 
rion pistor fuit Socratis et Aristophanis tempore cele- 
berrimus, a Platoiie in Gorgia memoratus^ a Themistio 
et ssepius ab Aristide. Athenaeus III. p. 112. tum Plato* 
nis^ tum Aristophanis et Antiphanis loca protulit, Anti- 

* Advers. pp. 277, 8. 

t Et sic correxit Holsteiiiiis cum relatione ad Athenaeum. 

X Advers, p. 66. 

N phanis 


phanis versus^ cum nondum a criticis persanati sint^emen- 
datos apponam : ♦ * * fpoo$ yag iv rig Bvytvijg yeyw^ Ju- 
yoiT flcv i^ekitiv wot* ex rri^h ariyriif *Og«y fiiv a^v^ 
Xivxoiroofji^ovgy Itvov KaTUfiiri^ovTag ev xuxvai^ ht^SSoig* 
*Op£v Si /xog^^y xgtSivois ^XXay/xevou; MifM^fJio. X^^S^^ 
'ilrrix^;^ ou$ Sijjx^rai; Otoig(ao¥ TSii^ffv. 


( 179 ) 


• • • • 

lieliqua Greece quce 


• • • • 'Ayvooucn yap, 

on ov ymron %k xdKeip kyaOov. 

v'kovrov ii icrn voXXoug KTfjcrafJLi' 

sgyojVf oio¥ Xiyoif Ik rou rgoiiio¥ah 

Kcti (Tv^o^avTilv, xa) axocrsgshf 
Koi gf aXXoj¥ voXXoi¥ xcci [Myfif^^i^i 

"Etrrt ravrcc ; 

£i rolvvv ymrcti \k xolkov ayc^ 
6ov fjt,7iff%¥, citmg iiKog' xXoSroc 
ii yUircti iz xaxcip ipyoi¥* aro- 
yxfi fjLfj Bivai kyaffov ro¥ xXoilroy : 

IvfJuCaivit ovTCitg \k toutov tov 
Xoyov r 

'AXX' ovi\ TO ^go¥i7y y% ovi% 
iixatoTgayuv ovk itrn xTTitrcurOcn 
tx xuxcip i^ym' ejiravrojg i\ ouii 
TO aitxuv xa) a<p^ove7vj ix xaKm 
tgyoif¥' ovi\ wroL^yjiv oifjucc tS 
avTai ivvuvTUi. 'X'Xovtov ^6, xa) 
io^avj xa) to vixavf xou ra Xoi*xa 

N 2 

Ex Ftrsione Ludowiei 


nim ijrooreiiiy boDam 
ex malo fieri nequa- 
qtam. Moltoi autem 
videre lieet in dWitia- 
mm posseisiooem ex 
pefsimis ac turpiMi- 
mis faciaoriboi dere- 
nisae, relati proditio- 
nibiif, deprflsdatiooi- 
but, homicidibyCalam- 
iiiis, rapiois, alitiqiit 
oompluribus et prafif 

Jtaret ett. 

ex malo bonum nallani 
proTenit ; divitia two 
ex maltt facinoribof 
proveniunt ;divitiai Be- 
quaquam boaoni eaaa 

Sic ex iito tennona 

Cfltenim, ae Sapi- 
eotia qaidem et lutti* 
tia ex malis operibot 
■oqairi potest: neque 
sipientia ex bonis. Si* 
quidem ip»a eadem «• 
mul consistcre non 
possuot. Divitiasvero 
et gloriam et victorias, 
et reliqua id genus, 



OO'a TOVTOig TOLgOLTXfl(ri»^OvitV »AH multm com praviUte 

%/-.-*.—.' ^ *" > cuiqiiain coDtinjcere 

Xvit uvugx^iv rm af^a f^tra xa- „ih7i prohibct, Qq.. 

xiag roXXJjg. S^rn ovz ap ^ ravra C^"^' h«j neque 

, ' ^ J , , ^/ ^ bona neque mala cen- 

ayCwCCf OVTi KCLKCL* aXXa rO (DptH seantur. Csterum Sa- 

M / > ^^ xv*-* pientia Huntaxat bo- 

9ii9 iM90V ayct00¥i TO 0% a^gO¥UV num : Insipieuiia vera 



'hcaveig [lOi ioxug XiyUV^l^flV. Recte, inquam, et 

ir mihi dicere Tiderit. 



QuoMODO in gratiam eorum^ qui Heinsianam Simplicii 
editionem possident^ ea quae deerant^ recudenda curavimus, 
idem quoque in Cebetis Tabulae e melioribus editionibus 
fine explendo faciendum duximus. Restate ut duo vel tria 
ex pnecipuis loca indicemus^ ubi ex MSS. Parisiensibus^ 
unde hoc supplementum provenit^ vel ex aliis melior lectio 
restitui possit. 
P. 3. 1. 12^ 13. Lege cum omnibus MSS. et plurimis 

edd. rlvtf xal tror {<ray. De isto usu particulse xoi vide 

Phoeniss. 1373. 
7. 19. friKgo) MSS. et edd. 
11. 23. ifin MSS. et edd. meliores. 
15. 3. TovTovg duo optimi MSS. 
19. 6. Ex duobus optimis codicibus xo) aSti$ ixiroi^o-ci Sia« 

Xiyeaiat legendum cum Gronovio et Johnsono. 
21. 21. Post Q-KOTuviv ex coiijectura addidit Sch. Koti 



23. 15^ et seqq. In MS. Parisini scriptura repraesentanda 
erravit Gronovius et soloece edidit Schweighseuser ib fu) 
4 MiTavoia axnm airi ru^g e<rireu awarni^aireu Venim 
idem Sch. in Addendis monuit MS. Par. sic habere : 
avTw mro rup^i} ex vgooufiaoog awtavrrfl^accu Unde ipat 
legit wKnuyrji Ix ic. a*. Verum perspicue kgenduro^ &¥ 
fti} 4 MtroLVOia avrm riyi^ ix vpomfio'taig cwmrniirMra et 
delendum a%o, utpote ex altera praepoAitione ortum. 
Nempe ita scriptum erat; iv fi,^ ii fktreatota aitf 

rvp^i} ffx irgoaificeaog (njvarriia'ae'a, alter flcriba lectiooem 
superscriptam bona fide in verborum ordinem reccpit. 
Saepissime confunduntur cognatae prsepodtiones^ ut tig et 
ifgls, afro et ex. Aristoph. Nub. 1299. Oux amiM^u 
o'auTov ex r^^ oixlag. Sic edd. et MS. quern smum Bnnck- 
ius vocat. At codex DorviUianus^ quern ad Pbitum eon- 
tulit Hemsterhusius^ diti pro ex habet. Utminque co- 
dicem hoc ipso tempore ante oculos et in manibua habeo. 
27. 9. Tres optimi MSS. Iltqiirarmoty lit lege et verte^ 

Philosophi dismrsivu 
29. 1 . Tag Toiroov xaiot^ixois lvva[jLeis MS. Par. recte. 
33. 25. xai xaXXamiiTfjiov edidit Schw. ex MSS. 
37. 18. ai pro ccf est Typographi error. 
41.21. Post *08u§/xoy addidit Schw. ex MS. Meibomiij 

xa) T^v *7Veji)^avg«ay. 
49. 1. ol fiiv onreyvaiCfiivoi omittit ed. Paris. 1557. et pro 
lis recte substituit MS. Meibom. kvvrig xa) raga^g, 
post quae fhistra jxeo-rol intrusit Schw. ut ipse postea in 
Notis ad Athenaeum agnovit. 
53. pen. roig vo^' avr^f e MS. Meib. edidit Schw. et de- 
inde ar^rjjovg e Wolfii conjectura. 



59. 27. Post aivBpag addit OvSiv, ex Meibom. MS. Schw. 

61. 24. Lege cum aliis edd. ?^i). Deinde 1^ Sn, nam 
Sreof iarhy quicquid dicat Schweighaeuser^ soloecum est : 
Ut et hrlararrou pro marontrcu p. 69. 14. 

63. 1 • Videtur legendimi ; ori oi (iiv ev rw irpircp mpiSoXto, 
fli fMfih iXkOf rom T^tp^oixriv, ori ou ^rpoo^roioOvra/ ya 
twlTTOffien a oux oiSotriy. oi Si f y rw Sevre^co ^rf^iSoXop^ a 
xo) frgoairoiovyral yi er/oToo'Sat^ oux oiSotriv. 

lb. 18. ioiv [u^ oSrco^roi^e xa) ivhoLTfiSvfre ex edd. et MSS. 
revocavit Schw. et mox 65^ Id. to l^v post fxi/ycp. 

65. ult. Lege ex MS. Paris, cum Gronovio et aliis^ ro xa- 
x&^ Tolwv Qy xox^y eorr to $e tj^v ov xaxiv ioriy. Deinde 
pro ^^ lege dty. Quod ne tironibus mirum accidat^ sciant 
has particulas in MSS. facillime et saepissime coniundi. 
Nempe si scriba properans A. pro X in XM legit, con- 
sequens est ut errare pergat, et pro M legat M. Ran. 
547* Ov ypig S^ yffXoioy {y, et metrum et sensus postulat 
inf quod ex MSS. Brunckius restituit. 

69. pen. n/xwyra/ ri ex MSS. Schw. Mox post iMfw 
i|ddidit Idem flyai to ex edd. et MSS. optimis. 


















« ^ W 2 •< 
O ^ "^ - H 

** CS WK »* 



2 H SS 'O 







W H e, O W^W ft. ^ ^ 

yVM MM * ^ w W 

H -* ^ H 



^ •» M 






X ^m 











^ .4 


^ At 


( 184 ) 

Addenda ad Appendkem in Toupium 
SuiDiE KusTERiANi cmendatorem. 

Ad Partem primam. 

[P. 436. !• 11. Aristophanis locus sic di- 

Ket4 hourriyjoovff ogifji^ip 

R. B. in Epist. ad T. H. quam D, R. lau- 
dation! suae hujus Belgii Varronis subjecit, 
p. 103=306. Burney.] Conf. Advers. p. 284. 
Toup. p. 64. 1. penult. Lege, ''O^ ia-r i(f> oZ 
9iw nv Tvgog oi^iog. This is the man in 

whose * corn was so cheap. 

[P. 439. 1. 10. 20<P02 quoque MS. Harl. 
P. 440. 1. 7. Conf. R. P. p. 450. 1. 20. et ad 

Orest. 1623. 
Ibid. 1. 21. a^ayvicrai vide p. 236. (i. e. 
V. 545.) R. B. " Andreas Doz&neSi qui 
Graecas in Cantabrigia literas jamdiu 
sumnia cum dignitate docet, e cathedra 
legendum hie monuit a^ayviVa/, non a(pa- 
wVa/, metri id ratione postulante.^' E mar^ 

* [Anglice auppleas^ Mayoralty^ 1813.] 



gine exemplaris Soph. ed. H.St, quern con- 
fer ad 1. p. 36. 
P. 443. 1. 18. Ant. 645. (psruu p. 71. (i. e. 

Aj. 1296.) (piTVirag R. B.] 

Toup. p. 96. 1. 14. vogvBiOi(nv a^, quomodo 
conjecerat Toupius, dant ambo Schw. MSS. 
jCtaX' ex versu superiore in hunc defluxit. 

P. 444. L 12. — ** but what Baudius said of 
Erasmus seems applicable to him : tnagis 
habuit quod fugeret^ quam quod sequere^ 
iurJ' Cent. ii. Epist. 27. p. 198. ed. Hack. 
L. Bat. 1650. borrowed from Cicero ad 
Att. VIII. 7. quoted by Domitius Marsius 
apud Quinctilian. VI. 3. 108. Macrob. Sa- 
turn. II. 3. Ego vero quem fugiam habeo, 
quem sequar non habeo. E pagina pura 
vol. IX. p. 146. 0pp. S. Johnson, in Bibli- 
otheca Institutionis litterarioe apud Londi- 

[Toup. p. 166. 1. ult. Conjectura ad Aris- 
toph. Tliesm. 170., quam denuo inculca- 
vit P. II. p. 611., PoRSONUM non valde 
repugnantem habuit, praesertim propter 
Hor. Carm. III. vi. 22. Motus doceri 



gaudet lonicos Matura virgo et frangiiur 
artubus : banc enim lectionem maluit Ari- 
starchus alter Cantabrigiensis. Bentleius 
autem ad L, '^frangitur artiiSjUonartubusy 
oportuit ;' at, Vir praestantissime, disces- 
seris facile sententia, si meminisses Virg. 
Geo. III. 84. micat auribus, — et ad Ma- 
nil. V. 152. projicti'ipstt reposuisti, FRAC- 
Tique placent in moUia gresbus.] 

Ad Partem secimdam. 

[P. 449. 1. 11. u$ TO (pig R. P. ad 1. 

P. 457. 1. 24, 5. II. T. 302. Soph. (Ed. Tyr. 

P. 460. 1. ult. Heathius etiam ad Eur. p. 172. 

afj(,iZTO¥ interceperat.] 
P. 462. 1. 16. ovxiT i(rr , iti) Alvog — R. P. Ad- 

vers. p. 225. 

Ad Partem tertiam. 

[P. 472. 1. 9. Equit. 674. 1255. rj 'yog£ R. B 
P. 474. 1. 12. Zenobius 475, 1. 8, 9- Bar- 

rovius in Praelect. ad Euclid, p. 297. 
P. 476. 1. 19. Vide omnino Advers. p. 245.] 



Toup. P. 346. 1. ult. Toupii conjecturam 
raagnopere confirmat MS, A. oa-o fMv (sic) 
P.P.D. Tyrwhitti autem emendatio Por- 
soNO maxime arrisit. 

Ad Epistolam criticam. 

[P. 484. 1. 5. Vide R. P. ad Med. p. 19= 
21. 1. 20. 

P. 485. 1. 12. Lege'fl; aVa^r ag itrn rokfi^n^ 




Ibid. 1. 20. 'Eogazag R. P. ad Ph. 1367. 

P. 486. 1. 13. ravTU, K»v fxaroF irfj fiiSg tri 

R. P. apud R. Walpole ad Com.Gr. Fragm. 
p. 37.] 

Ad Cur as novissimas. 

[P. 496. 1. 8. Rectissirae fjf^tlg agnoscit Scho- 

Hastes ; ^viriong publice, rgocroioig privatim, 

illct. R. B.] 
Ibid.l. 14. yctXa6fj¥ov jctuo^ — recte MS. A. apud 

[P. 497. 1.11. Lege ' AXX\ S fj^ix\ vro L^o^y k. 

vel, uri rot; A/o; a. R, B.] 

Toup. p. 151. Immo vocabulaENixo civi- 




pridem typis exhibenda curaverat Gwv€'' 
nazzius. Enixo el ^^t/^^io subdubitanter pro- 
posuit Vir eruditissimus; ad Civitium quod 
attinet, Editores acerrimi, alter ambove, 
nullidubitabant, ^' quin ad hunc plane mo^ 
dum aniiquitus scriptum legeretun' Ci- 
cero, judice Charisio, p. 1 1 1 ., rationis me- 
mor parentium saepe dicit. Sallastius Ju- 
gurthalxxiv. 1. ed. Cortii,neque-quisquam 
hominium satis placebat — e membranis 
protulit, et in Pandecte Digestorum civita^ 
tiumt hareditatium subinde occurrere tes- 
tatur Scaliger App. ad Virg. 357> 8=96.] 
Operae pretium est paulisper immorari, 
ut emendationes palmarias, a duobus criticis 
recte indagandi vi erutas, amice conspirantes 
suspiciamus. Nimirum Viri primores signi- 
ferique enixe secum cogitaiido, et de textus 
veritate singulari solertia argumentandocrebro 
eaiidem reminscientesipsi,utaiunt,acu tetige- 
runt; etenim quid investigent, et qua via insis- 
tant,pedetentiin quasi et sedato nisuadcurant 
et rectam nacti, pro se quisque, Sa^eg iuvog amjh 
rurrn^^ scopum petunt, et ad eum certa sagitta 
pertinguQt. Omnibus innotescit T y r w h i t* 



TUM, qui litteras honesta quadam et ingenuo 
homine digna voluptate excoluit, et te, 
sancta anima, oiidKof yvfitrsav n (pitrsv habentem, 
quinquies* utrumque in eadem cogitandi ves- 
tigia incurrisse. Verumenimvero vulnera 
scriptis impressa acutissime tarn videbant 
quam explicabant; et sanas lectiones, non 
eas nudas et sine uUis adminiculis expositas, 
sed inconcussa firraitate munitas subjiciebant, 
ut suo nomismate, ^ [Mvoig ogdaig xoruo'h ^ccCi 
xixwiofvitrfiivoigy statim agnoscerentun 

Addenda ad Comicorum Gracorum Frag^ 
menta, cura R. Walpole. 

P. 7- PlatOy 16. Scrrsg TgAyfJuarog. [P.P.D.] 
P. 34. Bentleii emendationem saepe laudare 

solebat R. P. [P.P.D.] 
P. 46. i. e. Philemon Stobaei XXX. p. 133. 

Grot. Transponenti mihi tres versus 6, 7» 

8. aXX« XS^f^^^* KFTIV \q rfi¥ (tUgtO¥^ post OUK 

tyjn ercifTrjgia¥ v. 12. pene assentiebatur 
Porsonus. [P.P.D.] 

• Conf. T. T. et R. P. ad P. I. 38. 1. 1 1. ii. 312. iii. 
107. 1. 21. et 298. iv. 528. 


( 190 ) 


[iv. 1. 6.= IV. 8. Inter quos Ifintertonus ad 
Hesiodi 0pp. 1. 293. Actum quoque ege- 
rat R. P. in notis ad Xenoph. Anab., Ap- 
pendice ad Toup., Epp. ad Travis., et cen- 
suris hoc fasciculo repertis.] 

V. 1. 4.= V. 7. Bacch. 765, 6. x^^mig r W 

iofv TXaftrtriji igaxo¥Tig l^i^aiigwov XS^^' Clan- 
dianus in Rufin. 1..95. linguisque trisculcis 
MoUia lambentes finxerunt ora cerastae. 


[1082. Transpositione leni repone, Al6fig f 

1132. Quam emendationera bene inchoatam 

reliquerat Parisinus Professor ad Soph. Ph. 

374., tacite perfecit R. P. ad Hec 1050= 

Ibid. not. 1. 3. = VI. senarii sede P. vii. 1. 26. 

" 283/' recte, posito duos esse versus 270. 
P. vi. 1. 5. Eur. Electr. 882. Lege, Ac|a/ xo- 

l^n^ (TTig ToU imififJM ^OffT^VyOif. [P.P.D.] 



VIII. 1. 24= IX. 10. Post K^iwofLicc. insere 
ex Addend, ad Pr. " In iEscbylo Pers. 
463. K^ioKOTovtn recte dat Scboliastes.*' 

[P. X. n. 1. antepenult, corrige, oZrog xx. 1. 2, 
oirXaedd.] xix. 1. 12.= xx. 1. 17- commu- 
nes 1. 24.=xxi.l.3. Hippol. 602. xxi.1.8. 
=xxii. 1. 16. et quintasede [xxiv. 1. 25. 
Here. XXVI. 1. 20. A/t^f,] xxvii. 17. 
¥%x^o}f ; in corrigendis et in ed. 2. Supple- 
ment. [XXXIV. 1. 18. KCCKCC. XXXIX. 1. 16. 
tvxfj^Btg XL I. 1. 14. TO aiv,^ XL. 1. 6.= 
XLiii. 1. 21. dele punctum post Ji [lii. 
1. antepenult. VjCta;] 

xi. 1. penult. oififMgof Tgi^ii¥ (Sio¥ Porsono 
non displicuit. 

xiii. 1. 2, 3. When I said that transposition 
was a very safe remedy, I did not mean 
that people might transpose as they liked. 
R. P. to Dalzel, Mus. Crit, iii. 334. 

XV I. Ex supplement seorsum edito lege^ 
1. 3. Nunc vero, 5. judicarint, 6. exeat, 
8. fallam, 9> 10. de/enda [nihil autem prorsus 
delevi — ], 12. curavi, 20. anapaesticorum. 

[xvii. 1. 23. et apud eundem i. 23. D.] 

XIX. 12, 13. " Aristophanis'' [Lys. 507.] 

" versus 


" versus mendosus est.'* Lege^ xm ;^oyor 
iina^ofii6* vfiiv [Soph« Ph. 41 1« corrige, 

[P. XIX- 1. 5.= XX. 1. 10. " De Metro lam* 
bico apud Lyricos, lambographos, Hippo- 
nactemque, et illius imitatores, plura ad 
explendam omnem omnium expectation 
nem, Editio, quam parat (R- P.), nova sup- 
peditabit/' C. Burneius Lectori, Ixxx. 

P. XXIII. 1. 13. Vide ad Orest. 1333. 

iElian. H. N. VII. xxxix. 'O i% EvgiTi^fis 

''EXa^O¥ y 'A^oum XH^^^^ ivOfia-e^ ^tXasg 
Kegovtra'afj tip o'^cc^omi av^^iroutn a^9 

" Cum enim jUlianus*' [hos] tres versus ex 
Iph. A. citaverit, qui in dramate nostro, prout 
nunc habetur, non comparent; cumque hi 
tres versus Dianae totam tragoediae constitu- 
tionem exponenti aptissime congruant; quis 
dubitet totam eam scenam abusque versu 
1541 spuriam esse, et a recentiori quodam, 
xiescio quando, certe post -^liani tempora 
suppositam?"' Aliis et aeque validis tormen- 
tis totam istam scenam impugnaverit, et ve- 



ritatem ex dramatis personis, ut vocant, vel 
invitis expresseritPoRSONUS, nisi consilium 
sua mors peremisset. 
xxiv. 17, 18. Lege, T//ta er^i <t>oi&ou uerrgob^ 

%mlm. [P.P.D.] 

L ult. Aj. 1008. [?croy yi TiXa^F, 

R. B. Conf. App. ad Toup. in Suid. 

p. 447.] 

xxviii. 1. ult. KUTtfjLo§^oLfj(,fi¥ Scaliger, Lege, 
xArtfM)g^afArj¥ uto rov fMgy¥Vfi,t. alioqui de« 
esset hie incrementum aoristi. Hesyebius, 
amfJuogZa^fJifflfj liazgviru ex hoc loco* R. B. 

XXX. 1. 26. " Soph. Aj. 969. n^; itjrx—" 
[ex MSS. Harl. et V. et duobus Brunckii ; 
ad Hec. 1214=1206. T/ ifjr»—ex edd.] 

xxxii, iii. R.P. Epistola (to DalzcU Mus. Crit. 
III. pp.330 — 336.): ibid^ p. 337- frag- 
mentum Sophoclis apud Plutarch. 11. 463. 
F. 468. B. 923. quo amicorum ingenia 
pertentare solebat R. P., recte disposuit 
Brunckius ; Il^x^ai' t/«jo7j* xKv^ovtn (pa^fjboi^ 

* Quanto in taedio vivendum erat, si ut ceterae aegritudi- 
Des, quae nos infestant rarius^ ita hi quoque quotidian! 
famis et sitis morbi, venenis ac pharmacis amaris essent 
abigendi. Utopis lib. ii. 

O zosg 


mo4; Xfi\fi9. Prius enim morbum quam re^ 

medium afierre neces^e haberet poeta tra« 

xxxvii. 1. 15. [870. oUt w Scaliger.] Ibid. 

L 24. Schoi. MS. Cantab, ad Aristoph. Piut. 

268. proxime vero, sv 2o^o»Xsi iigfirmi Tig) 

rev iifMv Sts »a) ^go^yv ttrri . iio %ou fiagvf$rau 

Hujus notitiam debeo P.P.D. 
xl. 1. 5, 6, 7. Aj. 1101. Legendum, ^'E^urr 

uMctruf Sp Sy tjytf ctKoffsp ; II. B. 557* A/»g 

y f« ^aXoLfMPog ay if ivoKouiiza fnot^j — (£>d. 

C« 664. Qagtrilf fjui¥ ovv Koivivyi rng ifi^g lyci. 

£Conf. Hermann, apud Erfudt ad Soph. 
EL 350.] Philoct. 22. "A fMn rgo^iTJm (r7ya, 
0fif^eLi¥ii¥ ix,u — fm subaudita, ut me monuit 


1. 11, 12, 13. Hec. 717. 'Hf^ug fMftZf 

iS[ii¥9 oiy iyl/av(rafii¥, Androm. 347* ^ivyu 
TO TOVTJjg a'S^gO¥* aXX' i'^iwircn. Iph. A. 
531. ILctf/H ug inri(rrr^¥ S^u^a, kSt i^l/iverofjiMi. 

xliii. 1. 4. Kii¥^ f^firgl. Ad vers. p. 275. 

xliv. 1. 23. Menandri fragm. incert. 143. 
p. 238. Cler. fiiuyi. Vide Philemonis fragm. 
incert. 36. — Infra 147. p. 240. lege, fiii 
y i¥ ai. deleto «i^, quod cum yi stare non 



potest) quamvis alterutrum per se rectissi- 
mum sit : et No, 185. p% 255. tiiu y% yAyt^ 
(pixoo W/. [P.P.D.] 
xlvi. Lege, 


Toi» Zov6o¥ IrraXBZTgvcj ^tirm rig itrnf og¥ig» 

Oux Unr»X€Krgvo¥ag y%j [Mt, Ai\ cv rgdyiXcUpovu 
ft / 

^ — 1.6." hie est unus e quindecim tetrametris 
iambicis'' catalectis, quos sic restituit R. P., 
"O'^u ds ^BifMvog pt^strov (riKvovg^ fior^f orciga9$ 
cn^a¥6vg iM¥j [»^iW, poioifp^^ zofiogrop IxrfH 

rvofj %o^i»9 yjikihovng^ rirrtyoe^f ifj(,C§u€ia. 

* Ala subaudito ; Nicophofi in Sireoibus apud AtheUr 
VI. 269. E. 

TAaxoti^ iauriv haiUiv xfX;t>rrco. 
Shaksp. Merry Wives of Windsor, A. V. Sc. V. Let the 
sky rain potatoes ; let it thunder to the tune Green sleeves ; 
hail kissing-comfits^ and snow eringoes;-^[£. M.] 

O 2 Irurtc 


A^o'r ouziT ovoug OiO orrinK itm rov 9i»UTov. 

oTov Tig iTi0vfis7 Xa€s7v. A. xaxov [ftsv] our jco- 

10. 1/ fifi yoig n^j ovK av \iti6v[MV¥% ov9 ar fdasra- 

lycj is T0¥ oXiyov yj^ovov yj^ncct^ oUpuXofAfi^ ay* 
B. Kotyo^ys TcCig aKkaig voXstri igSif raZra, xXi^y 

A. rouroig vro^g^si t»ut\ tTtii^ rovg htovg cu 


B. cimXau(ra¥ »ga tri^ovng vfi^g ig ev(piig. A. ri9 r/; 
15. B. Atywtrov avrSv r^r xoX/r TiToifiKa^ a,¥T 


4. XfXiJoi'flt; Scbweighaeuser e conjectura, 

8, de hoc non liquet, sed vix fieri potest quin 
vulgatam, i/ hiavrovj servandam duxerit 
Porsonus, vel ex ipso Athenieo xi v. p. 653. 
F. quern locum confert Brunckius : — on i\ 
fy ToJig *A6fi¥aig AIHNEKEI2 ?^ay al otS^ 
g»i Toitrah [ict^Tv^tl ' Agi<rro^x¥fig sv Clgatg. 

9. xaKO¥ [/tgy] ov¥ MSS, 11. ro¥ oXiyo¥. Sic 
notavi. Sed forsan legebat rovr cum 


Brunckio. 12. xa<yuy$ — 'AOnvH* Brunck. 



14. axiXaya'ar— A. r/37 r/; Br. [Hasc 
P.P.D. sed quod ad personarum distribu- 
tionem spectat, dubitanter.] 

xlvi. 1.8. Kol) i^ zixgoLTai* ro X$S»vmtov Iftrs^u 
(Ttanr^. To fM9 iff 'kt€avcifTO¥ tovto apud Hero- 
doti III. 110. ed. Aid.* AiCa»on'0¥ za) Xi- 
SavofTog* Suidas. 

Ibid. Si prima dipodia tragici tetrametri in- 
tegris vocibus continetur, secundus pes est 
trochaeus: Iph. A. 1340. hy/x^y.Siri (mi /xf- 
Ka6g» — ubi si legeris ityoCkkffdoi vvv fji^iXaSgct 
— metruin pessundabis. Hinc cadit emen- 
datio Marklandi 1341. nW i\ ^ivyug; lege, 
Ti iii rf «yov, (p^vyug ; 'A;^/XXga Toy}l liilv «!• 

xlvii. 1. 12. Lege, ernlj^ciffiiVf S ytȴcc7op i/^^x^ 
Irog. et retrahe fugitivum illud si ioxii ad 
1407* et sic dispone, r?; rATgag" aXX* ii Jo- 
»i7 Tavra ig^v, oTAfcrreg uviagt ernlj^t Tgotrzv^ 
ff-a; x,^o¥n. Voce oTdftrng solus utitur S(h 
phocles; (Ed. Tyr. 1336. Aj. 1179- 

* Quamvis det eadem pauIo ante 107. rov/x/y yi Ai^dt- 



xlviii. 1. 22. [dissyllabon ad Xen. et Toup. 
disyllabon ad Eur.y maluit R* P. Vide 
Bast. £p. Cr. 40. Schaff. ad Julian, 


xlix. 1. 11. Scribe, Ka^xi, fn A/^yroSr iigcurt — 
vel» KdfM TOUT iigatri TuvrOf Pfi APj H. R. B. 

[lUud in primis notanduin Porsonum, 
primocretico quasi absciso, hujusmodi ver- 
sus y.%KTiK^ agfiovicjk efiundere solitum.] 
1* Aj. 205. N5f ydg o iuvoc^ /tcsyoc, t!ffLOXgaTfjg 

R. B. Vide R. P. (to Dalzel, 1. c. p. 333, 4.) 
lii. L 10. Thesm. 890. "Otrng y R B. 
liii. 1. 26. Erra hia^ag TLigtragj fJUT^ tout in^ 

fivfiilv liiiaia MSt Barocc. recte, si legas 

l^irMa R. B. 
— - L 29* R* B. in margine editionis Bas. 2« 

et in Ep. ad Mill. p. 19- 

liv« 1. 6. HgOTSgov y ufi^oig d^o t£v xoXfo/i^ oi ir^(- 

$rQiig flasrara/vrf; R. B. 
— 1. 12. " ad Toupium,'' p. 436. 
pvi. Hunc locum e vetustatis ruderibus efFos- 

sum et aifabre elaboratum, si fas esset^ 

reposuisset Porsonus; sed pendent opera 




-^1. 2. To§nvToXvg»(jnrtioTfiyo/* et ita Suidas 

R. B. 

— 1. 13. restituit [i. e. Kusterus] 

Iviii. L 20. Conf. ad Orest. 672. ed. 2. 

— 1. 25. Ad Plut. 258. ut postea me mo- 
nuit R. P. 

Lx* L 4* Et eundem locum annos abhinc 
plus minus nonaginta emendandum monu- 
erat Aristarchus Cantabrigiensis. " P. 56. 
(ed. Bas. 2.) sic habetur ^yayxa^ev xi^oprag 
Ivri Tgog T. 6. X. vide p. 462. [i. e. Pac. 735.] 
R. B." 


In Tcxtu. 

373. 4=369. 70. ay^r oir 418=414 Koit^, 
661=655. r/^f S ToiXouvuy diversam ortho- 
graphiam quorundam vocabulorum non 

In Notts. 

Ad V. 323. 1. 7. corrige " ad'' 6l8.— 1. 7- cor. 
744. 788.=782. col. 2. L 18. dispone, Vesp. 
1429. (=1420 ed. Kusteri, qua plerum- 



que usus est R. P.) p. 50. col. 2. L 31. 
corr. 35. 958. [Seneca Here. CEteo 26l. 
Immane, dirum, horribile, quo viso Hercu- 
les Avertat oculos; R. B.] 1269=1261. 
col. 1. I. l6. cor. quod ad Orest, 6l4y 


[207* col. 2. 1. 10. Kgovtrag lectio vulgata ; 
sed TXfi^ag auctoritate niti, quae tunc tem-f 
poris non erat in promptUt inter colloquen- 
dum se suspicari mibi innuit.j 

[229* 1. !• iyiu»¥ Jortinus^'\ 

339* 340. aXkov ^'Ers^oy. Suidas v. aXXo m^ or. 
Ubi in Menandro lege, ovk aXX* oriovf in^opy 
et in Cratete, wacriv Xoyo; aXXo; o^ itruv-^ 
(versus Aristopbaneus.) Aristophan. apud 
Athen. iii. 117* C. Vemosth. pro Rhodiis 
p. 117. n. 42. ed. Par. =198, 20. Reisk. 
sed c. Spud. p. 591* antep. ubi irsg oiKKot, 

. woKy\M MS. August, recte «r«^* arra Reisk. 
p. 1031, 23. Plato Cratyl. i. p. 438. D, 
JI, St.=92, 56. Fischer [P.P.D,]. 


402. Hesychius : TLgoff^t^slg xoppxg. ofMlag 
oKKijikM Koi^m poii. TLgotr^igfia-Koggoig* MS. 
Lege wgotr^t^Big xogag. ofjuciag d. Kogotg. ex 
Euripidis 1. c. [Recte ; desumta est glossa 
e Lexico Tragico. Intelligit Grammaticus 
in Euripide non construi rgoa-^tgilg cum yu- 
kt), sed absolute capi pro, invicem similes. 
Error natus est e varia lectione. R. P.] 

Fortasse k. p. ex xoggofv^ sic : praeterea le- 
gend um videtur dxXfiXaig. P.P.D. 

[412, Soph. Aj. 1028. r^v rv^fl^ e conjectura 
reposuerat R. B.] 

[499- De Baccharum versu vide Plutarch, in 
Vita Solonis non longe ab initio.] 

663. col. 2. 1. 23. " Scoti quidam"' — inter 
cjuos Vir loco illustris, sed in his rebus 
paulo c^i/ifAa^io-rigog, J* MonboddOy nomen 
suum profitetur (Or. and Prog, of Lang, 
vol. ii. p. 158.) 

813. oi(riSua [jLumX)g R.P. teste P.P.D. ; post 
Hermannum ad Hymn. Orpb. xlv., qui 
conjectando subinde %^fjv »(pa»ro¥ (pUg. 

^98. Photius Lex. $(mgo¥ xiXiv0o¥. icrTfgtov ir) 
ivcTfiag Hop. 



TogdcifjMTay sicubi occasio feret, candid e 
laudabo : si forte generosam animam pla- 
care mihi possim. ^^ Ex consuetudine 
scriptorum, banc rem tractantiuni, rescri- 
bendum dico a^Kmmj pro agscrrc^p* et segre 
negites, si consulas Iph. Aul. 28. Horn. 
Od. S. 218. Ap. Rbod. ir. 460. 960. 
Theocr. xiii. 17- xxii. 99. cum Orph. 
Arg, III. 563.'' Gilb. Wakefield ad calc. 
Lucre t\i, E margine exemplaris quod a 
PoRSONO acceptum cum editore Lipsiensi 
benigne communicavit Fr. Jacobus. 
Pag. 19. col. 2.=p. 21. col. 1. " Melan- 
choly is it to reflect, that the arrow which 
has stuck in the eagle's wing, is tipped with 
the eagle's feather." Morad Bey, apud 
Captain Wilsons Campaign in Egypt, 
p. 65. 

S2. l.=23, 2. rag zt^»Xag rSv xKnovw. Ion 
Chius Athenaei iii. 91- E. et aJiorum, de 
quo loco Valck. ad Ph. 1185 (1194) 
zgittreropofv recte pro ^jj^/wf. [P.P.D.] 

[300 et 1314. Euripidis prima tentamina 
in quibusdam exemplaribus ed. nov. e suo 
loco exciderunt.] 



385, 6. R. p. to Dalzeh I c. p. 334, 5. 

675. Oppido, quam opportune, licet obiter, 
de impotente Hermanni ambilione edisserit 
titandi libidine inspersis semel atque ite* 
rum vendicat ; deinde Attico lepore verba 
tribuit Germaniae Prisciano rei metric® 
peritissimos spolianti, mutilanti, laceranti, 
qualia eum secum loqui fingeremus. Auc- 
toritatibus porro errabundum et sine di- 
ploide a recta grassantem via, tanquam 
fuste, verberat. Veruntamen quam illae 
Hermanni metris ab uno et altero mirifice 
commendatis sint utiles, sua verba com- 
mpnent : " nostra numerorum doctrina 
quum non sit e poetarum exemplis hausta, 
ne refelli quidem exemplis potent" 152. 
At tandem Hermannum quantum hie ope- 
ns fiat, poenitet; et, re perspecta, "quae turn 
feci piacula, data opportunitate expiabo, 
sed sic ut neminem domi suae secum lo- 
quentem introducam, domum kevertab 
MiMUS*?*' Praeclara vero vox, et magno 

* De productionibus ob csesuram p. 698, Versu primo 
prolog! Laberiani apud Macrob. Saturn. II. vii. Bentleiua 
eonrigit^ Necessitas^ cujus curms transversi impetum. 



viro digna; quae maximam leetitiam nee 

opinanti lectori objicit, et quam summa 

cum voluptate recitare solebat Vir pnsstan- 

58. coL 2. =57* col. 1. ^T [M9 y»g clare habet 

Codex Clarkianus^ anno 896 exaratus ; sed 

r£¥ cum vulgatis omittit. 
[822. iEschyl. Pers. 348. ''Etrr Sg 'AOn^Zf itrr 

arog6tirog Wxi;. 830. Callim. Fr. CIV.— 

101.=48. adde 593. $Z vvp L. Aid. 


In II. A. 193. M^ est trocbaeus, qua analogic 
Xiofg et Xaoc, et multa alia. [P.P.D.] 

Schol. Venet. ad II. A. 137. Prior locus est 
Aristoph. Plut. 468. Br. ubi avopaifM* et 
o, r/ ay vfMf ioxtl (em. ab eadem manu^ 
iox^) Cod. Tbapn/.-—— Posterior est Thesm. 
536. Idem Codex recte haSowrat. 


Schol. B. 3S3. ^7o¥ y% ^dv Vn yXZa'frdj xay-* 
figthrou Tioyoff K»r» EviroX/y optime Cod. 



Townl. Male rem gessit Grotius Excerpt, 
p. 507* verba Eustathii (i. e. Scholiastae) 
cum Eupolidis versu conjungens. Eustatb. 
p. 231, 18. ed. Rom. In^otvovcn i\ xcu ro 
Tov l^vToXtiog. oiov yt xotxrrt y\i(r(f dvOgtiTOV. 
UTig fjbi¥ X. (p. a. ^f aZdig Tii0n xiyc^v fit-' 
fivcjfJLBy. P.P.D. 
Schol. N. 257* lEiUgsrling. XAfXyofitSa fiii tclOuv 
o^ovXofjMii. MS.Townleianus £u. olc^ptxS Xvo- 
fLtffa. Herodianus Villoisoni Anecd. Gr. 
T. II. p. 88. vug Evgtrtiif Kura$. ^lo^nxoig* 

XuojEtg^a Lege utrobique"^Ift;yr xoftXvofjL^erOx 

(Ml fJi^oi,6ii)fi et confer Ion. S9^. fMi,6{ivj ut 
recte editur apud Euripidem, babet Hero- 
dian. et primo babuit TownL sed mutatum 
in vo^6uv. [P.P.D.] 


Versus de annorum bebdomadibus apud 
Brunck. Poes. Etbic. pp. 77> 8. Soloni 
suppositos esse evincit, inter alia, pbrasis 
tgKog odovrm de dentibus usurpata ; quippe 
quae non denies^ sed lahra^ dentes quasi 
sepientia, significet. [P.P.D.] 




P. V. 2. oii^goTO¥ P.P.D. R. Pm ni animi Mor, 
XafjLTgoi fjiMgrvgiit lectionis sanitati consu- 
lentia hoc modo dlgessit : "ACgorov * arav- 
figo^of. Hesychius. "A^^orog ign/juiu Eustatb. 
ad II. E. 953, 42, ^ASgoTfi »v^' Alc^vKog^ 
otS§oTC¥ ilg lgfifjuioL¥ Phavorinus [ex Philemone 
procul dubio, qui ex eodem fonte ac Schol. 
TownL ad 1. c. 78. bortulos suos irrigavit]. 
U oigXfi Tov Ugofji^fiOMg ' — aCgOTOv $tg igfifjui»¥ — 

Suidae MS. in Bibliotheca C. C. C. Oxon. 
[et MS. HarL] 
354. Tt^Sva ^ovgov^ Strug ivritrrri htoig. Contra 
Junius nostras, " Your zeal in tbe cause of 
an unfortunate prince was expressed with 
the sincerity of wine, and some of the so- 
lemnities of reUgion/' Vocabulum all 
omnibus editionibus excidissevidetur; deest 
saltim ad explendam oppositionem quam 
— " some of the solemnities" — diserte po- 
stulat [De hac emendatione certiorem me 
fecit R. P. anno 1793.]. 




488. Miy'lTrof/i,iio9Tog. (^67* etiam Bumeius.) 



420. nAH20EI2A volebat R. P. Adverss. 
p. 156., ut putat P.P.D. 


54. uvofjuia Aid.; dele at male repetita, et 
lege,ar dvofitvu^ et pro oT^, otfiai [Eum. l68. 
ui^ovfjLiov. 263. Zi^vfii0¥» 361 • tmviofMut. 
949* rirayfjbicj. Suppl. 117. &f«Copa. Haec 
omnia Aldus. Contra in Hesychio V. *Op^- 
X^rutj recte emendatum est ofMCdfjuot pro 
'fjuivoi. Denique oJJxai similiter extritum est 
Aristoph. Pac. 1285.] P.P.D. 

592. Kgdrfi Agam. 259. Soph. Ant. I66. 
Eur. Hipp. 5. [E,M.] 

P 947. 


947« *H ^(rrai r&X% n iH roXifMv asgicrfiui ¥$09*. 

[E.M. et P.P.D.] 
984. ioguK»967* [Mg^. [E-M. et P.P.D.] 


55. Lege rO'NON. Sophocles (vid. Lex. 
Soph. V. >|/a««Xa) — '^az»Xouxfl^ Mnngigy 
alyU t ivifiaerTihov Toifov ograXi^ti^ ivot^ 

(paUoitit. Musgr. in notis MSS. apud R.P. 


147* Dele argovOHvj quod interpolatum est ex 
Homero, II. B. 31 1, et seqq.f [P.P.D.] 

1393. iioerioTAf yam trr. Semper iiotriorog^ et 
^ioerioTog Attici> nunquam sine 0*. In si- 
milibus structuris, Attici ad nominativum 
quam citissime revertuntur; dicunt scil. 
insert y StrrBg 'HyiXo^og fj[Mv xiyuv. (Aris- 
toph. Ran. 305 ) non -;^af. I ones obliquam 
constructionem continuant. [P.P.D.] 

1553. vgog fifMP i. e. Itrn. dele xccr. zdr.X 


♦ [Edin. Rev. xxx. 320.] 
t [Adverss. p. 157.] 
X [Adverss. p. 158.] 



I6l6. «ap)S(r/ySuppL230* [E.M.etP.P.D.] 
16*28. Schol. MS. Gottingensis ad Pind. Pyth, 

II. ult. Totiirug. lege rratiro^.* [P.P.D.] 
1660. ^igog optime Schutzius citans Pers. 823. 

Euripides Ino Stobaei x. et xci. (xciii. 

Grot.) irii roS lliAfMurdt iverrfipop ^igog* 



142. iUlf.'j' 

Havrofv y arifMv ovj^ ogoffJi^ivfiv rttrgog 

[E.M. et P.P.D.] 

542. oSpig IfMiio'i. [Photius . "Opg. Ixruvovtri 
xara ro rnxov. sic MS. Repudiavit igitur 
conjecturam in Choeph. 928. Adverss. 
p. 160. P.P.D.] 

* [Adveres. p, 158.] 
t [Advcrss. p. 159.] 

p2 ad 



JEschylus Vrometh. soluto Strabonis iv. 183 

=252. Ox. ¥i(piXfi¥ y vmgtr^ipj n^kii ^yoy- 
yv\m mrg^p — irura tru Bakiv. — Quum enim 
Tragici nunquam vocem, quae tribrachyn 
efficiat, in quinto loco posuerint, non potes 
legere, crgoyy. w^. ti . In Sophocle Athe- 
naei ii. 51. D. (Fr. xl.) pro yoyyvXovy 
Eustathius ad IL A. p. 835, 9=769, 3. 
e'TgoyyvXov. yoyyvhofp (sic) Lexicon Sangerm. 
(Bekker, Anecdot. p. 36l.) Plato Cratylo 
275. B. Laem. pro o'rgoyyvhov MS. olim 
Clark. yoyyvXo¥. Versus postremos emen- 
daverat Leopard. Emendat. V. xvii. 136. 


^schyl Plutarchi de Exil. p. 603. A. (Valck. 

Hippol. 744.) 'OTMO'S AE' EO'TMOS. 

Conf. Sophocl. Plutarch. Demetr. p.911.C. 

(Brunck. Fragm. lvi.) [P.P.D.] 

* [T^yywAiov MSS. Strabonis.] 


( 213 ) 





Andron. Halicarn. 
Anonym! Poetae 

DioNYs. Pbribgbta 

Epaphroditus ad Calli- 





4^fv& xoii NtSS^y Pr. 435. 

Ag. 831. BarrgloLis Eum. 

26. Prometh. »ug$. Pr. 94. 

Prom. Xuo/xfVflo Pr. 510. 
T. 404. P. 349. 
P. 41. Pr. 128. 
P. 185. 

Pr. 400. 625. P. 41. E.599. 
T. 169. 553. 
P. 2. 836. Ag. 67. 
Pr. 224. 617. 
Pr. 365. T. 103. 
Pr.367. Ch.436. E. 21.30. 
P. 941. 
P. 409. 
Pr. 788. 

E. 2. 

Pr. 438. E. 629. 

Pr. 625. 

P. 659. 

Pr. 450, P. 65. 








Th. 103. 275. 365. 708. 775. 

781. 984. P. 181. 716. 

Ag.171.545. Ch.73.I49. 

Eum. 47. 276. S. 322. 

Eurip. Hecub. Pr. 852. 
P. 719. 778. 
E. 189. 

P. 150. 466. 719. 
Pr. 134. 792. T. 806. Ag. 

185. 947. Ch. 276. S. 80. 

(male pro Pindaro Pr. 35 1 .) 

Pseudo-Hesiodus E. 431. 
Pr. 379. 
Pr. 7. 35. 86. 100. no. 139. 

171. 185.261. 284. 309. 

365. 378. 580. 592. 653. 

684. 725. 753. 939. 966. 

T. 2. 101. 116. 158. 169. 

176. 177. 181. 225. 257. 

274. 307. 332. 353. 383. 

387. 417. 430, 548, 645. 

726. 828. 920, 1019. P. 8. 

95. 114. 309. 346. 569. 

604. 996. Ag. 145. 196. 

202, 734. 1126. Ch. 20. 

58. 230. 276. 643. E. 45. 

117.234. 589. 595. 786. 

S. 32. 90. 140. 839. 
Pr. 578. 
T. 102. 
T. 170. 




Pr. 378. 


P. 747. 


S. 444. 


Pr. (351.) 367. 397. 405. 

551. 788. 889. T. 396. 

Ch. 323. 731. E. 2. 11. 

S. 1078. 


Pr. 886. 


T. 599. 756. 


Ag. 171. 


T. 169. 


Ch. 323. 


Twfoi Pr. 128. 435. 'hetytf 

(sed per errorem) 576. 

T. 130. P. 181. Ag. 33. 

E. 510. S.498. 


Ch. 294. 


Ch. 731. 


Pr. 420. 


P. 302. 


( 21^ ) 

SoFHOCL£sae2.^$CHYLi/miVa/2oneiit /o/i/m 
$e contuUtj quo alludere videtur Aristo- 
phanes Ran. 803, etc. ed. Kust. longe 
seem Euripides {Adverss. p. 224.). 


74. ecL Br. ngx et dele 75. quod ex Suida v. row 

Ka0fiMvro^y glossema esse liquet. [P.P.D. 

Quicum mire consentit R. B.] 
719* Musgravio legenti aQurov ilg Sgof non 

repugnat. [P.P.D.] 

959. ^•a^* <V^'« Similis varietas in fragmento 

Promethei Soluti -^Eschyli, ubi Strabo iv. 

p. 183. ed. Cas. dat ra^* oTittj Dion. Hal. i. 

p. 34. ed. S)^lburg. iw oti». Vide Leopard. 

Em. V. 17. [P.P.D.] 

1136. Tgug oXovg '^Ef tigog iU igxrovgov Ifjufju^^ 

¥ovg x^ovovg. — Demus i[j(,fji,fiyo¥ yj^oMoit in tra- 

gico sermone mensem significare posse : 

. sex menses sunt a vere ad Arcturum, non 

tres. Lege ex MS. Trin. Izfjunvovg. 


Musgr. 1310. XflfrXa^iX ^' ai/A^rovcrir . 




300. aTov«; r . Aid. 1. avTov Sitrr infra 385, 6. 
iVri praecedente futuro construitur cum 
infinitivo pnesentis vel aoristi, non item 
futuri. [P.P.D.] Conf. Valck. ad litro- 
dot. III. 155. 

547- £vovg • 

702. ov ¥Bugog 

704. yag uhg o^Sv 

743, 4. fL»Xi(rT iyoff fjbuX$crr» ^ (pro oirafrig) 

1266. AA et M, AI et N a librariis perpetuo 
confunduntur : roixha fi^n *l Awm t. omnes 
editiones et MSS. ; bine TA'MA" dextre 
Reiskius.* Eupolis apud Stobaeum i v. p. 53. 
Gesn. 31. Grot. aXX* axot^sr, S^ittra), sroX- 
Xa xa) ^vvUts Xgrifjuar — raXhu lectionis va- 
rietas ; unde S ^iarasj TA'MA' i\ lvn%r% 
'Pfifji^aT Porsonus. Vide R. Walpole Fragm. 
Com. pp. 5,85. — Conf. Aristoph. Nub. 575. 
Pac. 603. iEschyl. Suppl. 915. Corrige, 

* [Advcrss. p. 168.] 




HSg y ouj^i T»fjL (ykojikoff tv^ltrxm ayof ; vide 

CEd. Col. 831. iEschyl. P. V. 197, 8. 
Aristoph. Lys* 713. Eur. Heracl. I76. 
Hesychius v. TXuxv^gcvgor ra ip o!x^ (pgov' 
govvTBgf x») ivdop fMikirog ovTsg — fJUiXiOvrtg MS. 
lege, ME'NONTE2, et insere ol ante ra sr 
04Xf. Vide Valck. ad Rover, xlv. 

[E.M. P.P.D.] 


4. oirng ixfiv (arti^'' pro glossa suprascriptum, 
et in ung depravatum, locum vocis l^fip 

40. u6' oirrovira — vid. Aj. 1334. (ed. Musgr.) 
(Ed. Tyr. 525. ^scbyl. Agam. 1405. 



85. Dele versum ex interpretatione vocis 
olyfifMcOok natum. [P.P.D.] " Dele hunc 
versum'' R.B. 

292. ra l\ T.» [E.M.] 

* [AdversB. p. 174.] 



554. XvTfigtov Xvvrifj^ay quasi 'Kvrov^ dissolvihle. 


562. Sana est lectio Codicum ror vurgZov fjvixa 
(rrpKoH i. e. J/a sive xara, attended or cow- 
d acted by my fathen [E.M.] 

715=717. ed. 3. Lege cum Aldo et MSS. x^' 
trr^i \. e. xou Sirreg, quod et Schol. confirmat, 
si modo o(ra» corrigis pro oVa av. [E.M.] 

743=745. Lege, hvvcLiT oiv ayivfiTov w. ex 
Suida Edd. Med. Aid v. 0![m$*. Agathon 
apud Aristot. Movov ya^ avrov xcCi &10; o'ri- 
gitrxBTah *AyiyfiTa TomVf acrtr dif tj TrsTga^ 

yfjuim. [E.M. Conf. Pearson. Episc. ad 
Symb. p. 579. ed. pr.] 

♦ [Edin. Rev. xxix. 159. Ad Eur. Suppl. 604. p. 104. 
ed. Oxon. Adverss. p. 175. Philostrat. Icon. II. xxiii. 848. 
UquoL Se trgotref^ifrrai rm fiooftM jS^e^i} ayew^. veoyev^ emcn- 
dandum putabat Piers. Verisim. p. 234. Litterarum vesti- 
giis propius paulo insistens euyevri extudit Reiskius in sua 
^^ iniqua et proterva recensione'' libelli illius aurei (Act. 
Erudit. m. Mail, 1753. p. 284.): nPnT(frONA optima 
Koen. ad Greg. p. 322.] 


220 AD AJAC£M> ETC. 


Aj. 1 19. Musgr. fi recte Br. ex 5 MSS. 

122. ed. Musgr. Ifirec. Schol. drrszo) it IfMtot^ 
xou ^'EMIIA*. Infra 564 lege cum Reiskio, 
%[Mra KSh coUato Suida v. rnK^g. [P.P.D.] 

51 6. Br. Lege, Kai fAfjrig aXkri [M>7g<t to¥ ^u- 
irayra n [E.M.] 

678. Lege, 'EyS^, [E.M.] 

921. axfji^r (2v [P.P.D.] 

1252. 01 yoig (p^ovouvng 6v xgdrovtrt rciifra^ov 
Eustath. II. 831, 2. ed. Bas. pro Archie- 
piscopi ipsius verbis cepit Abb. Barthelemi 
Dissert, in Inscript. antiquam 1792. p. 24. 


1093,4. Br. TXft/aJgj (cum Br.) It ugxi El. 186. 

1329« «a) TavXav $(r0$ rfitrie fJunroT ''^AN tv^m 

Conf. Append, ad Toup. p. 445. 
142 1. Musgr. pro KAA* ogS lege KOI'ir o^S. 


* [Advcrsi. p. 183.] 




16. Musgr. ^ovktviTOf. 21. recte se habet 
^vvaTTircv [xovrsrop pro zavriov MSS. in x 
Chionid. Athen. in. p. II9. F. P.P.D.] 

lb. Afg Ipravff Iva Ou zaigog oxvuvi iirfiif 

45. ^ofxiMg [quam sancivit R.B.] 

87. l(rcfMi§ air, coextended with the earth. 

113 etc. o^Sir\ "Yxdir deleto 114. Neque 
enim verum est Erinnyas adulteriis et 
ejusmodi levicuhs puniendis immorari ; 
quippe quae caedium et incestuum ulciscen- 
dorum satagerent. [Nil ad rem infra 2/6. 
ed. Br.] [P.P.D.] 

123. u06cjrara — ieivSgi ismngofy iimrttrtt di- 
cunt Attici. 

145. og rSv olzgSg {aiKug 7) COnf. 103. 

242. I. E. If I possess any good, may I en- 
joy it. [P.P.D.] 244. TTg^yyaf yoAav^ my 
fostering parents. [P.P.D.] 

693. a0X* uTig jfofi. vig scilicet in Tcy, hoc in 
vun migravit. 

772. Male Valck. ad Phoen. 358. Sensiis 

enim postulat yaf> neque unquam jungun- 

tur oli\ xm. [P.P.D.] 



820. Recte Dawes. ia-ofMn Ivpo^xog [P.P.D.] 
909. recte o>p». Angl. idea [P.P.D.] 
1107. recte Schol. ^ctoirriJ^ [P.P.D.] 
1137. «^fiXic paulo melius [P.P.D.J 
1319- recte Heathius ex Scholiastis XilaifMif 
facit i$Zaif^fif. Vide p. 49- 


Sophocles Galeni (Bentl. Ep. ad Mill. p. 59= 
52. ed. Cant) 


^ifjL^il (Ti figoPTfig — [P.P.D.] 

Apostol. Prov. VII. 95. 'EKxccgTUTa ^oZf^ ypoi^ 
roq oiy yuoir ctvn^. Restitue ex Sophoclis 
Inacho apud Stob. xlvi. p. 179- Grot. — 

AKTVig ^ va^oii^ioLi \k xd^TCL ^a7oJ¥ yVAfTO^ CCf 

yivoir avfig. 


( 223 ) 


79» oerrif J, Porsonus*, conferens Soph. A ntig. , 
707 — 9« et mo^L 80. ofjuig ex membr. 

m—266. ed. Valck. 

188. X^^S^^^ 192. dfJt/jri(rj(^ojf 209- ^oifjC 21 6. 

4(ai TagoL "TSUKag* [^fcsivojv igafi,0Lh kH&i ysvoi^ 
. fjfMv] ipa — vid. Schol. Aristoph. Vesp, 748. 

219. confer Aristoph. Athenaei iv. 133. B. 

(Advers. p. 69.) 224. /xgxir??; 227.c06¥<rot 

232. vugoi(pgm [P.P.D.] 


Eur. Iph. A. 630. ed. Markl. 

Hunc versum dele, deinde lege, dcletis 
etiam 635 — 7- 

KAT. Of cr^Sag — 


flZOf^i ¥ 

Tgog orrigva vgoorSoiXcff [vel -CaXi?] 

* [Omnino confer Adyerss. p, 217.] 


224 AD IPH. AUL. £T TAUB. £TC. 

KAT. oiKX\ S rUfOf, yffi^ [RP.D.] 
Ibid. 970. OF v^in \q Ogyya; 

\\6u^ (poyovy %ri>Ciinf alfMcro^ XjS^^^* 


Ibid. 994. t^ionfi alioSg opufi! Ij^. ix.* prodibit^ 
misso pudore. [P.P.D.] 


Iph. Taur. 48. seqq. tSk ^ — trraSfMVj Mopog 
XfiXfT^^a/ (TTvXog ug — sic lege et interpunge, 
lit fiiCXfifjbipov sit nom. [vel ace] absolutus; 
trrvkog ilg legebat R. P., quod me monuit 
Cleaver Banks. [P.P.D.] 


Euripides ed. Beck. — Bacch. 8. rv^ofji^iy aigcv 
legisse videtur Plutarch. Solon, init. sed 
hac voce nunquam utunturTragici. [P.P.D.] 

Bacch. 184. ed. Br. Palmariam emendatio- 
nem fiisafg Miltono surripuit Barnesius; 
(vide R. P. Jodrell. Illmtrat. of Euripides^ 

* [Adverss. p. 254.] 



vol. 11. p. 335. ed* 2.) Barnesio Brunck- 

ius. [P.P.D.] 
192. ed. Beck. &io^ ay 
263. TfK ivtro'sCsiag 

310. Br. Aiowg Stoh. MS. A. apud Grot* ad 
Lxxiy. d^govuv Salmas. apud eundem ad y. 
Idem ig ^j oveTih— aXX* si — di), roSro— coUato 
Menandro Stobaei criii. p. 455, Grot. 
(Cleric, p. 30.) [P.P.D.] 

458. ed. Br. recte Abresch. sltriCn^^ 


490. Beck, j-f y a^. y«, rof air. [vid. Barnes.] 


623. Beck. Euripidis aetata non utebantur v. 
Bdz^fig hoc sensu ; forsan Baxj^ivg. 


631. Beck. <pMvm (iig) [P.P.D.] 

633. icifjuar [P.P.D.] 

636. Dele n^rvyfig ex -ritn natum, et lege JroX- 

aym. de vocum positione non decernit 
R.P.) [P.P.D.] 
1049. Citat Schol. Hephaest. p. 8?. 32. ed. 
Pauw. ayxog v^iK^nfMaf^ og€<rt vigiigofiof. 
In eg r. propendet R. P. ob ^schyl. Theb. 

Q 495. 


495. Apoll. Rhod. III. 1085, Eurip.Cres- 
phont Fragm. 12. [Adverss. p. 267*] 


1058. Fortassis ''OSSOIN 'AePfrN. Sed 
bona satis lectio Sva [sic] /xotfw. [P.P.D.] 

1059. Recte Heath, i^ [P.P.D.] 
—1251. evp&ngog. [P.P.D.] 


757. ovIfEXmr aXX«— 
iltrcgSp (piXovg^ ^ 

oviif y$ Aldus ; i. e. ov^ivo 


793* Beck. iraUg it tcv nf — m^ et toi^ saepe 
confunduntur ; vide p [P.P.D.] 

1443. A^»«oyrf fJMgfiaigovTt conf. 22. ^XoMt — 
et 23. [E,M.] Praeterea audivi legere 
Porsonum itayj^wc¥ yfyvy. [P.P.D.] 



Euripid. Stobaei p. 429=293. Grot. (Valck. 
Diatr. 272.) TE'KNA, KA'N AMnSfN, 
orrts — Idem Euripides Electr. 633. MS. ». 

AAAnN yag liiop—W* AIAQN. Musgr. 
iovXuf, proxime vero. legendum enim 

AMn'nN. R.P. 

XPI'2T02 nA'SXflN. 

60. Hec. 730. | 64. A gam. 620. | 70.ib.596. 
I 74. ib. 602. | 78. ib. 603. | 278. Hipp. 
1290. I 334. Troad. 769. | 1124 Hipp. 
1182. 1 134.5. Hhes. 931. | 1366. Rhes. 
939. I 1444. Tr. 1254. | 1446. N.B. Eu- 
ripidis ? I 1453. Rhes. 809. | 1455. ^ch. 
Ag. 1496-9. I 1460.Ag. 1500,1.-1506. 
Hec 1. I infra, 2021,2. | 1512. Tr. 743,4. 
I 1699. Tr. 1287, 8. | 1723. Rhes. 444. | 
1727. Rh. 450. I 1729. iz*^ Rh. 504. | 
1772. Rhes. 977. 8. | 1779- Rhes. 994, 5. 
Hec. 32. ut infra, 20l6. | 1801. Rhes. 
665y 6. I 1865. Rhes. 52. 1883. Med. 
1928. Rh. 149. [P.P.D.] 

Q 2 DION. 

( 828 ) 


335 ed. Reisk. 596* Morell. 

^E'SnOINA X. r. X. Primum videamus quid 

habeat editio Veneta, p. 401. a. 


avoiva }l a^acrSp vera aSfipaiofv voXh fMi Vsiyt 
a»0gcifT6. ovzir tlcrh izslva ismrorxi. ig xa) xa 
Xo9 ffov (pamroci ro Pidgtop. »X\» fjt^tff %K\fi(m¥^ 
ro¥. xct4 Tivcapigop »}<rj^O¥. zobXog Si o TUgativg * 

ir» ii ig iv) irvfjupogaTg, avtxilgnrc xa) roifafov 
wg ^ouriv \crri9 u xouki. xai vig olyi XifMirrown 
$Mi potrovin ' xa) to tXsov* avrSp amXXurat fiigog 

Versus sunt veteris cujusdam Comici, ex fa- 
bula ante Lysandri victoriam scripta, quos 
citat Dion J ut fortunae mutationes osten- 
dat. In primo delenda particula et legen* 
dum aut iiavoip areuriifi aut, quod paullo 
melius videtur, iitrrotpa voXiWf rorn 'A^9- 
mlm ToXig. In secundo recte, opinor. 



Valckenaerius*, ig in xaXcv <rov (p. r. f. In 
tertdo supplendo, utpote quern ipse Dion 
imperfectum reliquerit, nemo adhuc vires 
suas expertus est. In quarto yin conjecit 
Valesius, yvn Valckenaerius -f*, neuter recte. 
Sed egregie mox Valckenaerius, tlyji /mpj in^^ 
Giiira ^g, ig %. tr* a. bene etiam, zairougapov y^ 
ig ^atrivj s. s. «. Sciendum estenim non raro 
ita curvari in scribendo literam i, ut prope 
ad figuram rov c accedat. Ne longe abeam. 
Supra Orat. xxxiii. p- 397. pro eo quod 
edidit Morellus, cicr6* okog 'koiioguv Ixaiiou 
recte Viri docti, iV^' o Xoiiogi7f /. sed erral 
Reiskius, cum Venetam et Morellianam 
consentire ait. Veneta enim habet, Strff 
oKog iogu¥. Sed quid, inquies, isto yvjtn faci- 
enius ? In locum suum reponemus, et fagiti- 
vam vocem, quae bine excidit, retrahemus 

[M¥ iti$afdi7<r» i\y ig w) frvfi/pogoCii *, an- *y\iyi^ 
xsigttro. xa) rcvgttvcv y ig (pacnp k. t. X. 
Exciderat vox, yvp^j quod libranus cum ani- 
madverteret, margini notam adscripsit, qua 

* [Ad Callimachea, p. 24.] 
t [Ad Hippol. 210.] 



monere voluit, in textu reponendam post 
evfi^geug ; sed signis fortasse parutn di- 
stincte positis deceptus alter, non pro addi- 
tamento, sed pro emendatione accepit. 
Delevit igitur voXig et yvfii inseruit. 
Jam videamus, quomodo sese ex emendatio- 
nibus, cum nostris, tum alienis, totus locus 

AimrciPtt voXicifj vorn iOiimim xoXig* 
ig ifj »uXo¥ orov (pocmrui ro yieigiop * 

aXtrti it rig tw roidif %(rj^ aXXfi ToX/f ; 
xa) rovgavou y\ ig (pacrhj iffriv iy xaXSi* 

Koi %ms, olye Xi|x«oTTOU(ri xa) vocoua^iy xai to irXeov auroov 
aWxXurai jtte^oc uiro rmv difatv ^ tcov t&woov ; 

Quae rubrica* exarata vides, e Diogene La* 
ertio VII. 67. desumsi. Ista quidem omi- 
sit DioHj ut proposito suo prorsus con- 

♦ [!• e. 5. xaXis y 6 Ila^tvm' insigne lacunae exple- 
mentum litteris nibris enotatur. Vide Gaisford. ad He- 
phaest. p. 216.] 



traria. Parthenon enim ejus temporibus 
et diu postea integer mansit et inviolatus. 
[Hoc fragmento altius excusso et nitidissime 
exarato amicum sibi carissimum donavit, 
acerrimum Graecarum litterarum cultorem, 
patronum, vindicem, Cantabrigiae nostras 
decus, et delicias, ac CoUegii Gonvilli et 
Caii Magistrum, — Martinum Davy, 

S. T. P. Ta Uga ioPTtt rgfiyf/tMra UgoiiTif a¥0g«i- 

Theodectcs Strabonis xv. 695, ed. Paris. = 

Moschion Stobsei cxxiv. p. 620, 13=515, 
Grot. Irap yag fi xgipoutm za) t» iiilm TLou rd^ 
fittga (pgoviog ai<r6ti<ng (p6ag^9 To irSfia MHpou 
ru^iv iikfi(p6f rirgov. ed. princeps (apud 
Burneium M.R. Aug. 1799* p. 434) nii»9. 
Lege rag niopdg. Nempe ex iiof' evanuit 
ultima syllaba, compendio scripta. R.P« 
[De ifitopy fiiof' Valck. ad Herodot. 11. 138. 



Plato Comicus apud Aspasium, sive quein ali- 
um, ad Eth. Nichomach. i v. 7« p« 58. a. • . 

fiiyo^A^yri. i)a rofZrtt zou crKcSrrovinv uvrovg ol 
Ko$iMivroioi. ^ HXaratp fy Hgi(r<oiv<rt* 

"Ka/gag^f o$fAah fiira/Tirriva'ag uvroff iiOMXi" 
fjuoucitrag rh 

Touro yag Aaxavsg sto/ouv, iyxgaru»f r$v» tuu 
zo^ng/av irayysXKofi^ivoi. Conf. Lex. San- 
germ. p. 474. " Aj^jSofJuti avrov rS pvr^ 

AD ATHENJEUM, cd. CasGubon. I6l2. 


MS. A, sive codex Veneto-Parisinus, quantum 
ex Schweighaeusero judicare poterat R«P. 
est saeculi undecimi. 

lib. pag. 

I. 7. E- 4. niu 

8« ciTo^i(r»g. Suid. lTil^i<rag 

8. A. 9- J^* ii^ l}i Adverss. p. 45.] 

* [Xcdptif, ni animi fallor^ recitavit R.P.] 

I. 17- 


lib. pag. 

I. 17* £• Eupolis ToXX^v yt XazKOTge^zriaf itrraf 

fig^ro7(r$¥ Bvgm. — mox recteSchw.ex MSS. 

20, B. 9* Versus anapaesticus Aristopha- 
neus [Vide Adverss. p. 48.]. Conferebat 
R.P. Eupolin Prisciani p. 1330 Putsch. 
=285. b. Aid. ibi legens, 
rSg ovf ovK a¥ rtg ofjLtXSp yftl^ot TOi£i$ toXii ; 

1. 28. D. Antiphanes — 

Kai mrv KJt^iov, za) (rxaf/i^afpiag [sic MSS« 

Poll.] OVOVj 

Ka) zdgi. M. xa) xgofi^f/i^vop 

^»fjuo6g. xa) xocvXov ix K. 

Kai 4r. ^vfiov ri rSp 'Xfi^firriaff. sic totidem 

Uteris Pollux vi. 67. deinde lege, og. n 

II. 36. C. Legendum e MS. et Suida v. 

Olfog^'^Ov EKnoPTsg. [vide de K et IC infra 
ad XI. p. 500. B.] Vox nihili est utmovrti. 
43. F. 7. EuBULUS — TO [fjLip y*] vicitg 

Tcvg avro fjuopof vmrrot^ ivgtrixovg roiiivj 

/ y f 
rC¥0 Ot¥^9 

Pro ^iX^Tog MS. o^iXi* [i. e. Ophelion, Co- 

II. 47. 


lib. pag. 

II. 47* E. 4. Quae de Nicostrati fragmento 

queritur Casaubonus, ita Kustero arrise- 
runt, ut totidem pene verbis sententiam 
neque honestam neque veram repetive* 
rit ad Suidam v. KXairfimvg izgari^ngogj 
ubi Cratini fragnientum utpote neque 
sanabilem neque explicabilem dioiittit. 
Sed salva res est, modo legatur xarayng. 
Versus sic disponendi : fjLugaxiOf i\ Kara 
rvj(fl¥ vTMr»a(f>iCfcagTO¥ n, »ij(^X»fJbvi»fJbi¥0¥9 
xar&yug* ec9ayx6<nro¥. Domum ducis. 
In Cratino lege cum Piersono ad Mcerin 
p. 391* Xj7^e7c ixfi^if. ytXoiog %(rrm xkuedt^ 
pfii KvQivm. [Quomodo in notis ad Ari- 
stophanem ineditis correxerat Bent- 
lei us. T.K.] 
64. A, 1. ^goj(fiff 

III. 74. A. 1. forsan, 

^Avn^&vfig %¥ Kt6ago^iSiy 

Hesychius. crruXiap. r^v fjutxgap pa^fou 
*avTi^a¥fig iv 'K.i6a(A>iSi. frustra Musurus 

* Sic MS. 


lib. pag. 

*Agi^Topa¥fi^9 unde in Comici fragmenta 

male illatum est verbum. 
[hi. 87. F. 4. Posidippus: Adverss. p. 60. 

III. 99* F. 6. Cratinus. * Oiv(r<r€V(nv 

mff m TavTOLg sXa^v 

Sic ista tria fragmenta, quorum secundum 
exstat apud SchoL Aristoph, Vesp. 708, 
postremum apud Athen. ix. 385. C. D. 
= 150 Aid. PoUucem vi. 69. p. 607. 
Hemst. cohaerebant in oratione Polyphe- 
mi ad Ulyssis socios. 
[In postremo fragmento, lin. 2. X»aT kvO^or- 
KiSig^ quod, nescio unde petitum, propo- 
nebam, non damnabat Porsonus — xoir %^ 
(TxogoiaXfjifif forsan verum putabat, collate 
PoUuce, ubi Aldus, x»r ig c%. P.P.D,] 
III. 100. A. j(^o§ra^ofjL$¥*'ATU(nv — [in hoc igi- 

* ;(ogra^^j(tfyoi daily fare, Siavt/jxfvoi feasting, 
t iruf loTji forsan verius putabat R. P. 
X xir Mfcixlirm^ [vd xotr ] R. P. 



lib. pag. 

tur tandem acquievit, cum fluctuasset 
Adverss. p. 6l. P.P.D.] 
III. 105. A. 8. Epicharmus: Adverss. p. 64. 
117. C. 2. Crates 

U KsA^ rig nf^iga s vid. Hesy- 
chium V. '£y Ks^ r. i. 
C. 5. Aristophanes 

hviiUL KguTfiTi T% rit^iyfig iXt^aPTiPOv 
kafJUTgop iMfM^iP ixopcifg xagaGiioXtifiiPOVf 

V. 1. larh 9 Athen. edd. MSS. i. e. ian. 
V. 2. fi¥ ed. Cas. m MS. rs addit MS. 
[v. 3. de fxop^sy non liquet P.P.D.] 

III. 1 17* EL 5' "Ag nf fitrn T»v6* 9 pd^apog^ tiv 

IQm x£^^^9 ^^ y^S ^^* Edd. 
Hinc repone. 

B. par X£^^^^ y^S ^^' ^* ^' 

IV. 132. F. 7. Menander Trophonio. Con- 

jecturam Bentleii, verba si ii ug tgx*' 
rai ejicientis plane confirmat MS. A. 


AD ATH£N£UM. 237 

lib. pag. 

in quo legitur /mLXXov xgotnii^nr yj^rm 
agxuitxog (sic). 'X^rai est scholion interli- 
neare, quo notabatur, rgotrsii^aro valere 

r^o(riij(^sTUij prceferre solet [rgcinii^aTo] 
ut recte Schweighaeuserus. 
IV. 172, et XIV. 644. Menander [No. 156. 
BentL] v. 13. recte MS. A. »<t) »ij^'k»g 

Tguynfjutra. V. ult. 1. iuxvil fiBXixfixm rag 
[vi. 224. D. 10. Amphis; corrige, XaGuv r 

VI. 225. C. D. Xenarchus, 

I. 0/ [iXv recte MS. A. 
13. ¥iK^og o7a omittunt, it ante rtg addunt, 

ambo Schweighaeuseri MSS. 


izstro fLirtt rip \yfiw¥^ fio£ ii ng 

viofgf vio^g' oX — confer Aristoph. Acharn. 

1175. Tbesm. 248. ed. Br. 
16. Kara, rSv V s^ifuofv Ma^dmf. hoc ex 

Casauboni, illud ex Grotii conjectura. 

VI. 242. E. 7. "OXoXy; ovrog {sldvg) %(rri¥ 

oXoXvg MS. A. [Vide Phot. v. 'OXoXou;. J 
F.4. Kasviug Casaub. — £g¥a (ToifM¥og) 



lib. pag. 

MS. uterque : Epitome Htescheliana ; 

[vi. 243. F. 6. o^civ$ij si memini, R.P. Vide 
Adverss. p. 82.] 

VI. 248. E. 2. i^fitrip, ST/Xay^ayojEtoi. i^ MS. 
Ep. MS. A. : — iJvai ^fM ir. lege, 7/, 2^, 
fjt,fl iriXa¥6(i¥ciffiMs. Infra x. 427- F. 4. iv\ 
i^fl, (Mi y^^ffnq [Vide Adverss. p. 87.] 

VI. 262. E. 1. Epicrates iutrxgeiTcif 

i i\ jff^axifl sic Aldus p. 91* 45. unde fe* 
cerat Porsonus, o it Xfi^^fiy ^afS. quam 
conjecturam vero proximam esse evincit 
MS. Mus. Brit, lectio x,^a -a/y sro/i? i. e. 
;^oXaF. [Vide Adverss. p. 89.] Gramma- 
ticus Sangermanensis apud Montfaucon. 
Bibl. Coislin. p. 484. Koppiers. Obs. 
Phil. p. 23. citante R. P. x^^^^^ ^^ h^^' 
^^itrOdi. *AvT$^oivfii. [xfi^»^ Strato Athen. 
IX. 382. C. P.P.D.] Nempe comoediam 
Avavrgttrcv alii Epicrati, alii Antiphani 
Mox forsan legendum judicat R.P. 

Kcn Xoif/uvgov fifiSv og a» 
* [Vide Gaisford. ad Eur. Suppl. p. 208.] 



lib. pag. 

VII. 280. F. 1. KtrofMvovg. [ut omnes MSS.] 
VII. 301. D. 3. Inter paucas adroirabilis est 

emendatio Valckenaerii Ep. ad Rover. 

p. 45. AABi:, MO'2XE, TO'N 

VII. 310. E. 2. Archestratus Bentleii tcov^ar- 
TsKiQciifi verisimile videtur KP. [De 
confusione yetrr vide infra ad Etymol. 
M. p. 262, 4.] 

VIII. 336. C. Amphis : 

'O 6a¥arog ^iS&varog icrriff n^ a^tt,^ ug 

seu, — itrff^ asraf iaf rig kroOavi). Luc ret. 
III. 882. Mortalem vitam mors cum 
immortalis ademit. R.P. in Censore Cri- 
tico {Brit. Critic^ Matfj 1801. p. 45905 
e Mureto Var. Lect. xix. iii. (Vol. ii. 
p. 476. ed. D.R.), et Grot. Excerp. 
p. 519. 
VIII. 343. B.7. [MS.A. ^ N/xXou (sic) /3/a, 
unde Ns/Xot; Schweighaeuserus, conferens 
VI. 240. F. cui assensisse Porsonum non 

dubito, quamvis id diserte notatum non 


240 AD ATH£N£UM. 

lib. pag. 

inveniam. Certe damnabat Valckenaerii 
conjecturam K^/cmu, in Epist. ad Rov. 
p. 65. P.P.D.] 

IX. 384. F. 6. Philippides 

yikifTfuf [iilimi) forsan leg. R.P. [vide 
Adverss. p. 112. n^%m% conjectura est 
Dorvillii ad Chant, p. 145. P.P.D.] 

IX. 392. £. ult. Eupolis f4,MgdTr 

iiklyft y pro okly oirr in Aristoph. Vesp. 
55. fJt^irgta roi pro fMrgt arra Nub. 1 1 37* 
R.P. [Vide ad Etymol M. p. 262, 4.] 

IX. 396. C. 7. Alcffius ; vide p. 187. 

IX. 396. D. 4. Heniochus 

Supra 1. 23. E. 6. Philonides. Aristoph. 
Equit 1151. 
I X . 404. F. Dionysius. [Vide Ad verss. p. 1 14.] 

TO ouT¥C¥ ^ {$$r(i %ioor ) ^yyji^^uv xomf 
av [jLip yag if ng tout ST/bXsyjf fM¥0¥ 
TOv^O¥ 'Jtointrcn zttrot, rgiicov^ ^£g i$7 rUot, 
TgoTCP mgfiOuvcbi *, iitrxcT — ^ 

* Pro his fi ro iii^vof MS. A. 

* Hie subdubitabat RP. — mox ay (mi 

rgotiiff ni fallor, legebat 

IX. 409. 


lib. pag. 

I X. 409. F. 1 . iigitrrvKO'TEi ['O HAFS] wg$$7K$ 

[Vide Adversa. p. 229.] 1. 3. forsan otaJj i- 
¥cvg. HesychiuSjUvigimig* ivigoufitvog nin 
ralgj fi dvigog pgovfi(r$p s;^Apy Ta7g. ut recte 

W. DD. pro Hifi rSg -^EXONTES 

X. 4l6. D. 4. Alcman. 

Pifgag lira kb rgBig^ •rs^o^t 

»»i nrguTov TO '^rfjg oxa 

ovK itrn. 

^ yjUfiMyff sro^ ay MS. A. 

* TO figozag aXX* bI fCtf MS. A. [Vide Gais- 
ford, ad Hephaest. p. 243.] 
X. 421. E. 9. 

Tovi) i\ fuo'Tov Heringa Obs. Crit. p. 279* 
(fiBp MS. A.) 
X. 446. D. 8. Menander 

A. *£XXs£o^oy fiifi xdiroT fsr/f^, ^Aftria; 
C. AreuTh A. IlaX/y oZf it76i* fjuaivu yeig 

Primi versus emendatioHeringae debetur, 
p. 241, Bentleii vestigia prementi. MS. 
Athenaei, teste Jacobo Granovio^ Infani. 

R Emend. 


lib. pag. 

Emend. Menandr. p. 82. habet, sra0-«y 

• • • * 

fluxit ex aXXiKogop Qs i. e. oXXsxo^oy 

• • * • 
sic in Porsoni nota ad Orest. 418. pro 

xuxSg ilrcip typothetae dederant z<tSzSg 
sixain P.P.D, 
XI. 466. F. 8. Achaeus. 

TO ygoifjt,fJba (paifotif ^ 

^ ovf fj TO, S-' V rdgB(m¥j ov zaTovirsw cujus 

etiam absentiam indicant* 

^ ^aim¥ Toupius ad Suid. ii. 552. 

2 m, V, TOTT r (i. e. ro, r 'T) MS. A.— 

MS. A, in loco, oJ, non o, scribit, 466. 

F. 10, 12. 467. A. 2, sed 467- A. 6, 

habet o cum editis. 
XI. 47 1» E. 5. MS. A. yola mt^nfLirioq s ^m^ 

lege Z yaTa KEPAMf, TI'S 2E Q^i- 

ib. F. 2. Wirnmrov (et sic Cor ay us) 
X. 482. D. Ephippus 

V. 2. recte Casaub. Koruy 

V. 3. xark iiix^of 

V. 4. roi zn^oufiit MS* Supple 


lib. pag. 

[v. ultimo q. annon EvgtT/ifi¥ legerit R. P. 
Certe vel hoc vel Evgmifii legendum. 
XI. 495. C. 2. recteCasaub. KAEITAPX05. 
Vid. infra E. 9. 

E. 6. MS. A. KOd Tfiyuifig i. e. xarn^ 

XI. 500. B. ult. 

Nempe erravit Athenaeus, 2KT- 
002 in Ephoro pro 2I2T4)02 

XII. 513. D. Sophocles Iphigenia 

Tirgct, r§axi(r6»i y¥fi(r/ov (pgo^fifMLTog . 
i. e. iii rov vovv Tgog avig) rg<mir6ai axo rod 
y¥fi<rsov ^govfjfjutrog^ StrTsg TovXuroug re trS'^ 
fjuct Tgog 'Jtir^cf, r^iinmi arc rov yvriirlov XS^ 

XIII. 568. E. ult. u(ps(n¥ itrr^agy otrttg — Nus- 
piam corripitur prima in otog^ quamvis 
saepe corripiantur oUg r« et roiovrog. 

XIII. 569* A. 3. 'EXXaJo; %y^i kiig raXairoSgotf 

r2 5— 

244 AD ATll£NieUM. 

lib. pag. 

i» — Parodia est Euripidis Iph. A. 371. 
de Cydia v. Ruhnken. Hist. Orat l x x i v . 
XIII. 569. C. ult. «;tjoi'^\ 

ag MS. A. Conceditur ilia elisio. 
XIII. E. 4. rgSTO¥ (fi^t^m) recte Casaubon. 
XIII. 570. F. Laudabat enim, si memini, 

Porsonus egregiam illam emend ationem 

Fr. Jacobsii pro QtZf restituentis *020N. 

06oy ro fi^. Aid. et M S. A. unde recte Schw. 

o(ro}f ro fju. [P.P.D.] 
XIII. 579* A. 1. srXijyii' (ixarigou) — Hanc vo- 

cem e conjectura addit R P. [M.D.] 
XIII. 580. D. 6. %gi^i» 

E. 2. iroXumfiiv »v ug 

y omittit MS. A. 

XIII. 581. C. 5. ^aXxorvrog r/; o'^ig u^viig 

E. 2. K(tOir7rk(r6(M 

F. 2. ixurtjti fiTs7y. lonice : ita 


F. 3. iioKifJtM^CP. 

XIII. 582. E. 4. ragrnf^. aphaeresi proriraj- 
Tfifiog. ut rjasri^a i. e. nrgart^a. 

E. 6. i y ig ktiiyy. {ig MS. A.) 



lib. pag. or 

XIII, 58 2, F. 3. on rov fjuiyav xor l^tx^trrriv «a- 
ri^uys i. e. Tor , opt 

F. 4. ftsXi om. MS. A, totum ver- 
sum Epit. lege, ivfitrofjuBvog^ X^^^ 
oo¥uag T I. 

XIII. 583. D. 3. [MS. A. pro ir) riiv aTy diog% 
dat ixBion y$<tio$og — J 1. o$og «t/ rtiv my itmp 
vel itruv ixi rtiv aJy oJog. Prius melius. 

XIII. 587- F. I. [ItrfffMug it »a) Nca/^a »ara- 

Kotrtrv^ag iV\ xou — sic suppletur hiatus ex 
MS. A. 
XIII. 598. A. 2. Kw^6ro. 
Supra XIII. 577» E? F. 

cyfi^ ^ii(ri% xntrGiimi r% roy Afifd^firglov^ sic 

lege, coUato Lennepio ad Phalarin p. 332. 
XIII. 598. E. 3. Hermesianax 

Lege Evgmifi in vocativo. 
XIII. 598. antep. rvzva. 
XIII. 598. ult. MS. A. o/JiytF. R. P. ad Weston. 

p. 40. 

XIII. 599* A. 7* Oidf i* ix,^$ii/ii,i¥0¥ Vioyfif *^yff^^ 



lib. pag. 

MS. A. (et Ven. apud Ruhnk.) etc. 
vide p. 41. 

XIII. 599. C. 2. if 'E(pvgfig \Qio» 

XIV. 640. B. 4. 

1. ^otr^m n trag^ rs^s/ya, — 

S a 

2. iAotr^m ri riguva trug^ — 

3. Mo0';^APy riguvu o'^ff, 

4. iAc<rj(^ap Tig»t¥»i tragztg. 
Eurip. Bacch. 1125. ed. Brunck. 

tragzag HivSiatg. lege ob metrum 

XIV. 641. (male not 637). C. 1. 

XIV. 642. E. [vide ii. p. 58. A. etR. P. Ad- 
veilss. p. 55.] 8. ^omxixov [Casaubon.] 

XIV. E. 9* iTgta rgayii(i,ct6* fjxe 

[Nenipe MS. sir irgiot rgetyrifMtToi &\ i. e. 


iirgicby rgayfjfji,aTa ?«i. fjzi CorayuSj non 

• • • • 

Valck. ad Phoen. p. 66. 

XIV. 644. F. 6. MS. A. x,»$girirov xscct \g mrrif 
rim. — lege> to¥ ufitiira, ^uigiT3r\ ovx lag 

ritTM nvd. 



lib. pag. 

Nempe $ in rirtBiv omissum, ex margine 
in locum alienum irrepsit. [Vide Ad- 
verss. p. 142.] [E.M. P.P.D.] 

XIV. 645. E. pen. avrh recte : male Schw. 
avrSv. deinde /xj^tf* a^fioviSv — [M.D.] 

XIV. 646. F. 7- 'Si»g$rojv fjLi ¥OfjLi^si MS. A. 
1. ME'N ''OZEI 

XIV. 661. B. 6. MS. A. svTuxtgMg. Lege, ero- 
Kigo^trsv itHzrov. Sed locus, qui valde cor- 
ruptus est, mutilus videtur. 

XIV. 662. C. 6. oLvoLyiy^afi^fLid' — i.e. Nomina 
nostra non publicis tabulis in foro et si- 
miUbus locis inscripta, sicut aliorum co* 
quorum. [M.D.] 

XIV. 662. D. 

rot, fjt,6yi(rru — xotra rav6* ; — Moira ; rovg 

Vide Adverss. pp. 94. 144. 

XV. 665. D. 3. tnroviii fjus ijifi MS. A. lege, 



lib. pag. 

[Vide Suppl. Praef. ad Eurip. Hec. p. 44 
XV. 668. A. 2. KVfifiig i\ ng] (r^ugo¥ kgOgovroUf 

( «r s^av recte Corayus et Ja- 

cobsius. R.P.) 

C. 4. fortasse, kou ^Irragj^of — vid. 
infra p. 691. C. 9- 

XV. 677* B. 1. crtpdvoug 6* vroyXtinrmvj orap 

%'ifflTi TCUy 

o'Ti^avoutrff Schw. post R. P, ad Weston, 
p. 44. 

XV. 684. B. 6. MO'a r% » ola o?; Schweighaeu- 
seri membranse. Lege, KOfAOIS — 

XV. 693. C 1. ^ WTO n 

2. h fov fjtkv ay(t6ov iatfMVog itgei^ 
riirrot, yag 

4. 9 TOU ii 

5. MejX$(rB*¥<tvr^v — »cbr%xorr^%¥ [i! 
vvo n supra iv. 157- A. 3. 
XIII. 578. C.6. D. 8, 

* Cantenis. 

XV. 700. 


lib. pag. 

XV. 700. B. l.^regs^.'^^L Racket'' [rvg fji^iv wi^ 
Tog vSgi^ovtra Xen. Memorab. ii. i. 30, 
Vide Adverss. p. 148. et de fiv et zv con- 
fiisis vide R P. ad Odyss. E. 206.] 

XV. F. 7. R. P. ad Hec. 2. ed. 3. 


Anaxandrides Stobaji xxxxx. 237. 41, 
(xLi. 159. Grot.) 

Sic Trincav. Gesn. Grot. 
ig aQte haGc^v pessime infercit Brunckius 
Gnomic, p. 184. Porsonus, o X. rctg. yag 
XaGiv. vocula transposita, in qua collo- 
canda multum licentiae sumere observa- 
bat recentiores comicos, (Adverss. 292.) 




Bentl.No.31. Cantab. 1713. Ed.Gesneri2, 
ubi locus primum est vulgatus, habet 
o'fMKgo¥ 3 — recte igitur Bentleius. 

No. 34, 


No. 34. Bvgoi^ oiv iv rotg roi^$¥ [ut MS. apud 
Brunck. ad Eccles. 82.] 

Bentl. No. 39- Qvyarig* ap a. repetita parti- 
cula [ut legit Pauwius Philargyr. p. 22.] 

P. 56. Cler. SchoL ad Plato. (Phcedo. p. 
382. A.) p. 10. lege, k») Mimvigog iv rS 
MVTOV TifLugovfiAvia * II^o^ Tfig *A6^¥ag A AI- 
MONAFS, yiyig Irn Totravr ; o[lov ydg 
icrup ilnzovtoi tra. Ter. Heautontim. i. i. 
10. Nam pro deum atque hominum 
Jidem^ quid vis tibi ? Quid quaris ? an- 
nos sexaginta natus esj autplus^ ut con- 

ibid. Pugione p. ^. Cler. ohy^ o6%f &¥ Sfifi¥ nrv- 

P. 41. J. 5. Bentl. " Non est proceleusmati- 
cus.*' Adverss. p. 292. Lege, o Xoyi<rf4,S 
i^cKp. [T.K.] 

No. 91- Bentleii conatum inter felicissimos 
numerare sole bat R. P. 

98. xa) regihojcecrejintv. Anti-Atticista San- 
germ, p. 99* ^BoicBiv xa) ^€pi(raiy xar ivis/uv 
Tov u TO 9r,sg$BV6yzu¥ ^s7o¥ za) zaffngm. 
'Ag»g»g Kafj(/xvXioj¥i. 

101. A. M XJ^lgi TXuziga. F. zai av. A. toX- 



'ko<rri (ut recte editur apud Priscianum. 
roXXocrS y^om Aristoph. Pcfc. 558. «rgi 
Cratin. Jun. A then. xi. 460. F.) 
[127. 1. 12. xuxov improbat R. P. posthum. 
ad Eur. Snppl. 1089. Qui nescio an ali- 
cubi legit ?v uga, ut Eurip. Troad. 412. 
Hoc equidem malim. aga e Schol. et 
Rav. reddendum Aristophani Equit. 384. 
ut recte Br. Ibid. 936. inserit R. P. ante 
uTorviyBifig. P.P.D.] 
128. Dudum exstabat (rvf^fjiMyfivui in Sylburgii 
coUectaneis. [Imo in addendis ad ed. 
Paris. 1629. pp. 70, 71. P.P.D.] 
191. Recte Stobseus, riiv yoig ofji^voiav 

— Fragm. incert. 34. p. 208. Cler. to ^//su- 
iog [ut Valck. Diatr. p. 258. A.] vel ypBviig, 
pro rtffam^ quod ex ri6(t¥arigo(.v natum est. 
132. p. 236. Cler. tXjjv 'iregogy og av jf 
P. 254. V. 480. Jg? yoig ir. 482. avrm 
No. 227. (ayaffci) rci x/av aya6a. (Schol. Plat, 
p. 14. Adverss. p. 130.) 

231. ov KCCi T« 

235. Vox iafjiM^ Hippocrati, Herodoto, Thu- 
cydidi, Platoni usitata, nunquam nisi in 
locis aut mendosis aut suspectis apud 



Tragicos vel Comicos reperitur. «ou^iV- 
fMLxa Schol. Venet. ad II. O. 393. sed 
recte ^iXxriigia Schol. JEsch. P. V. 373. 
Hinc emendandus locus ^schyli apud 
Plutarch, de Consol. p. 106. C. cavig [m- 
yi<rTC¥ (p»gfj(Mzo¥ ^vfiTolg xaxSv. (Vide Praef. 
ad Eur. Hec. p. x. not. ed. 1811.) 
[Scriptores recentiores, et ipse Plutar- 
chus, Yoci (pagfiaxovj quae sua setate in 
malam partem fere accipiebatur, iu/jm 
adjungebant, ad toUendum dubium*.] 

238. Recte Bentl. i ii fji i^Mk. 

239* Totus locus spurius est. 

264. p. 278. Cler. Plauti Cistellaria est versio 
Fabulse, unde desumtum est hoc frag- 
mentum ; vid. Act. I. Sc. i. 91* et Lam- 
Ammonius p. 42. ed. Valck. 

Tfig. Verba videntur esse Menandri 
P.P.D. [nOinN J. Pierson.] 
Idem p. 67. 1. 5. dele E^I2 TH'N ex var. lect. 
orta, et^'EKTHN servato, assume duas 

* Haec, quae uncinis indusi^ non nisi diu po6t audita de- 



voces ex MS. Mus. Brit et lege, a^SjMr- 
wo^, ixTfiv It) iUa — Polyaenus III. p. 218. 
ed. Casaub. 289- Masvic. Chabrias die 
Bdedromionis XVI. pugnare decrevit^ 
ou ?v fjLsa rm X0' fjLvtrrfig/m. Person us, 
tS¥ A0. i. e. A0fi¥if<n. 

Photius V. CKv^gog' iyi ^ ay^oixou 8f ya^^^> 
(rxvOgog^ rixgog, ^uitifXog. [MS. Galeanus, 
^uiTXo i. e. ^uiejXog. Ridiculam lectio- 
onem, (pssieixoyogj quam exhibet Her- 
mannus, idcirco memoravi, ut simul mo- 
nerem ambo Hermanni apographa de- 
scripta esse ab hominibus palaeographise 
prorsus ignaris, et Dresdense (quod sig- 
natur D.) passim interpolatum e Suida. 
Porsoni apographum nunc penes Coll. 
Trin. subinde emendationes exhibet: 
V. c. in 2ra^/to7(, quam infra vide suo 
loco. P.P.t).] Vertit Terentius Adelph. 
V, iv. 12. Ego ille agrestis^ scevus^ tris- 
tisj parous^ truculentus^ tenax-^^ 
Adversaria, p. 294. v. 4. u S Photius 
v. (rTgoCii<rar de voce (rrgoSiXog conferaa 
Phrynicbi 2. 11. p. 63. Lex. Rhet p. 302. 
5. " Forsan rgotriSaXiv** inter lineas hisce 



oculis egomet vidi, et fragmentum emen- 
datum coram exscripsi. Paucis abhinc 
annis (1800) Vir summus banc conjectu- 
ram manifesto reponendam judicavit. 
7. Nuperrime consilium mutavit, et am- 
yjitrdm Normanni solertia erulum maluit 
R.P. ; quod per elbpsin defendas. Hujus 
form8e antiquissima exempla praebent 
Homerus II. A, 582. B, 10, J5, 75, etc. 
Marmoris Sigaei primaria inscriptio 1. 8. 
Monument um hoc, detritum licet atque 
corrosum, eruditis Graecae antiquitatis 
scrutatoribus in Musa^o Elgeniano 
reservatum esse gratulamur. Sed mu- 
tatione non opus est; %<rrou roX. aXX* Itrrot 
rg, xavTog avrij^fiv. Soph, Ph. 893« *AFr«- 
j(fiv 0vy(tTg6g* Iph. A. 1367' M^r avri^ou 
Tov y Troad. 722. %ou -^rvi Ta7, rovit avrs- 
X,ov. Aristoph. Acharn. 1121. Vide quo- 
que Lex. Sangerm. p. 408. 




P. 326. ed. Cleric. 

[ovT SpsXog *oviiiv Bv yeygafjufjf,ivfig yga^iig^ 
No. 274. ri xXiov roiovfJi^Bv ; oviiv 

TO iivigov rouro* 

282. lav oJg ^sv €;^o^€y, To7<rii [Afiiiv X^eifji^ifiit^ 

285. Versus 6 — ^9 post 12 ponendos esse su- 
spicanti mihi non repugnabat R.P.; nihil 
tamen plane decernens. 

Clericus Praef. ad Philarg. pp. 39, 40. Cujus 
maligne excusando accusat Bentleium, 
error nuUus est. Non hunc versum, sed 
primum totius fragmenti Callimachei 
CXLV. *EGi6fji.oirif y fio7 emendat Bent- 

Stobcei Flor. 453, 4. Grot. [Ta Tvj(,fif (pi^nv is! 
flTrsctfg Tov siysv?.] Dele haec et iv 'Hwo;^« 
supra. Vide p. 455, 25. 

* De otJggy subdubito. P.P.D. 




1. 66. Lege, n£ TCTK* £f ?#/» Um Am^Hf 
irtuurBj — ^Haoc correcdooem condiscipiilo 
sibi caiissimo anoo 1779 memoraTit 

XXIII. 46p FMif'W Mtu nil ygtipfim, ri 0m *ri- 

x(Mri x't^" Lege* ^ sons Torxoi- 

21 X' [ELM. et P.P.D.] 

Ad Toupii euros posteriorts in 

P. 15. 1. 22. adde, et Eustatk. in Iliad. B. 

235. pw 21 1. L lilt. Pherecrates i* 'Ayfuit 

apad Said. y. 'An*. SchoL in Aristoph. 

Elccl. 355. 
P. 17- 1. 18. Sed vulg^atam lectionem Caili- 

machi recte defendit Valcketutrius ad 

Theocrit. Adoniazus. 40. p. 347- 
P. 18. 1. 2. adde Homer. D. F, 57. Piutarch. 

II. p. 112. D. ap. 739. JF. Alexin apud 

Jthen. IV. 4. p. 134. A. 

P. 31. 


P. 31. 1. 25. Kdgxmg 9^' ixovr ij^vog ff — VaU 
ckenctrius ad Euripid. Phoeniss. 196. ut 
sit ^^[^^^ 'AXzfjiMVixov, de quo vide Toi^ 
pium supra vi. i. p. 13. 

1. penult, sed ita prius ValcieruBrius ad Eu^ 
ripid. Phoeniss. 277. p- 100. a. 

Alexander .^toliis Parthenii (Galei Scriptores 
Mytholog. p. 372, 3) p. 372. ult. Uiigfh 
^n$ — p. 373, 7- pro ^dXicfffig lege rgari^ 
^fig. ib. 5. b. Hgixev oZcov Pierson. ad Moe- 
rin p. 194. [P.P.D.] 


I. 47»=iii, 5. An. Gr. Brunch. 
Owjj aX/j — ^] Malim, H ohy^ £Xig — 

• 83=1, 417* Si^ ^6 rl¥tf Muit^ av rixoig 

. 115=11, 433. 'O ^0^0^—] Lege, Ei 


II. p. 130. =111, 164. lS»ig^¥fi r»vT$a'(ny, iTi<r»o^ 

Tog — Episcopus ille est Dioscorus Alex- 
andrian Patriarcha, sicut observavit La- 
crozius Hist, au Christian. d'Ethiop. et 

s d'Arni. 


d'Arm • i v • p. S6 1 . laudatus a Wesselingio 
ad Diodor. Sicul. T. ii. p. 595. non lau- 
datus aG i66o/io Histor. Rom . T. i v . p. 568 
— 9- eandem observationem proferente. 
— ^p. l60=II, 22. LIX, h»KaZfjuoL — igccsgi^ — 

m. p. 205= 1, 200. XV. Mvafjuct^ roit —*2oi[JM 

ex Suida v. ia^mv et v. fieveiai'og legen- 

dum, quod fere perspexit Kusterus ad 

locum posteriorem. 
— p. 2 17= 1 1 1,63. Lx X T X. *Hv £§» — *' 

ex Ilerodoto i. 8. Opsopoeus. 
— p. 236.= II, 139. XXIX. 'Hi'/jea (rev ia- 

xgvroi Kara yfioiioq iigia tbvj^^ov, iuffiax^vra 

— Tsv^of Suid. V. ii^sd. 
—p. 276.= I, 136. MoXrng » ov *Xfi0fi~ 

*X?y«F Suid. V. (MikiFfi. vide Toup. Cur. 

Nov. p. 98. x^tfg/ soloece ex 3 MSS. JSrww- 

ckius I. p. 136. Sed legendum X^yii. 


IV. p. 353.=iii, 222. cccxxxvii. Htri^^ 
igutrTm — *Ex Platone infra p. 421. = i, 
170. VII. 

VI. p. 419=Illj 54. LIX. *afJt,sgyo[Aim' — *a- 
fjuiXyo[L6PO¥ " Suid. v. TrflJ|. 

—p. 436 


— p. 436= Til, 44. l^€^oC€u i^etroSsi Suid. 

in V. 
— p. 441 = 111, 118. XXV. 7- «/s6g7o — ifjuolo 

VII. p. 459=iii> 77. XIX. ^uvi^r/aow^a— Le- 

gendum, trwi'^icicvira ex Suida in v. 
— p. 461=111, 114. XIII. 3. Theocrit. 

VI. 17. 
— p. 463=111, 40. XX. 4. Ov Xci0e' Si 

hoc epigramma citat Hephastion p. 54.* 

pro Ou X(i0B legendum est, IlaT; are, aut 

forsan ita fuerat in epigrammate, quod 

compilavit Agathias. 
— p. 468=11, 87. XVIII. 3. adde disti- 

chon ex Suida v. Xvyiiva. Toup. Cur. 

Nov. p. 93. 
— p. 471=1- 15. L.2. *rvzm — *7riz^oi recte 

Suid. V. JiafjLvgog ii' . 
Euenus Parius epigr. v. apud Br. i, l64. 

coUato JD.jR. ad Rut. Lup. p. 39- lege, 

h hiog n y^vTfi frng fctr^i roivra XS^^^^* 


[* Gaisford. ad I. p. 92.] 

t [Notas breves in Anthologiani cum gratia impetravi 
e Viro natalium splendore^ et ingenuarum artium scientia 
nobili, Reverendo Gualtero H. Aston^ S. T. P.] 

S 2 AD 


[l« 56. ravru yag riv roL Tgoxtxgifjtfiva 'EOnNTTA 

TO dgj^aloVf TO f^\)f TliXo^yizovy to i\ 'EXX^yr/- 

K0¥ Uvog — Conjecturam meam, E0NEA 

probare videbatur R.P. Istae repeti- 

tiones solennes suntHerodoto: vid.i.75, 

et84. P.P.D.] 

!• 182. ouToi jpost ci (tvTo) habent non solum 
Ask. Pass., sed et Aldus et omnes edi- 
tiones ante Gronovium, credo etiain> 
omnes MSS.; certehabet Arch.; corrige 
igitur in textu, os avro) ouroty ifjuo) — 

IV. 148. lege, TovTOug ^ iJiXa^ai^nj Ik r?^ j^ci^ 
go^f (T^iag idfiirovg s| fMigug iiSXov " Vide 

Adverss. p. 44. 

[Qusedam de indole Codicis Herodotei 
" ArchJ' ab editoribus designati, et in 
Bibliotheca CoUegii Emmanuelis Canta- 
brigiae adservati, in pura pagina praefa- 

Hie liber olim Gulielmi Sancroft^ Arehie- 
piscopi Cantuariensis, a Thoma GaleOj 
sed valde negligenter, longe diligentius 



in usum editionia Wesselingianae ab Au" 
tonio Askew collatus est, ut tamen non 
pauca omiserit, qusedam etiam minus 
recte notaverit. Quod in omni fere col- 
latione fit, prsesertim in ea, ubi magna 
variarum lectionum pars ad dialecti ra« 
tionem vel servatam vel neglectam per* 
tinet. Quid mirum igilur, si dativum 
lonicum fji^m^ip ex Arch.^ ut vocatur, nos- 
tro IV. 43. (hujus MS. pag. marg. 258.) 
enotavit, eundem viii. 51. (p. m. 478.) 
non enotavit? Aliam leviculam Askewii 
omissionem exempli gratia notabo. InHe- 
rodoto IV. 94. ita notantur variae lectio- 
nes in ed. Wess., cum anteaZa^Xj/F le- 
gcretur : " ZaX/tof/i'. Arch. V. Vail, ora 
Steph. Pass. ZaA^|/v Med. Ask.'* Sed 
haec nota sibi contradicit. Lege SaXjxo- 
^19 Med. Ask. Hoc vitium, in erratis 
sublatum, retinuit Borheckius. Quod 
de ora Steph. ait WesselingiuSy verum 
est de Gra^co-Latina Stephani editione, 
non de Grseca ; ubi est 2»XfM^t»y quod 
etiam habet Arch, in margine (p. m« 



254.) Totam igitur notam sic refinge : 
" :ZoiXfMliv Arch. V. Vail. Pass. l»Xfio- 
l^y Arch, in inarg« Med. Ask. ora Steph/' 
Dignus certe hie codex, qui, si iterum 
edetur Herodotus, pauUo accuratius ite- 
rum examinetur. Numerus marginalis 
paginam indicat editionis Genevensis 
16 18. 


I. 1. divvara — our Public Library 
read so : though, asone of them is Hudson's 
Clar.y it may be already noted in his edi- 
tion, which at present I have not by me. 
[Conf. Xen. Anab. p. 23?. 1.5. ed. 
Cantab. Valck. ad Herodot. iii. 6l. ad 
Hipp. 370. 'Alvvarn mon • am rov a^u- 

TOig ThfiSmrsKoTg avr) iysKwVf fj^dXi^'Ta h ir) 
ToivTfigrngXi^etifg, Lex. Seguerian. p. 342]. 



In MS. marked Nn. 3. 18. in the Public 
Library, Cambridge> and the same as 
Hudson's Clar.y is a curious reading, 
VIII. 93. OJ y iv ri 

TUj^KTfMt »»hXovTeg^ ig re T§og rij 

fMVVVyia, iiOVUtnaXOV *0MTgO¥ •riUrSimfmnt, 

tv6vg Ijfoi^ovv ig ro ct,<rrv. 

It is no objection to this reading, that it is 
in the margin ; for all the marginal read- 
ings are added on a revisal by the same 
hand from a collation of other MSS. 
[A/oyv0'/(txoy ro b rSi Hn^oLiil 0s(trgo¥ Cass.'\ 


Hipparch. 2. F. Laemar. UoX/rif fjuh f/xf rs 
Ko) (rSy Hiantrr^arov ds mil rov %* 4>/Xa/- 
iavog 'IrTToigj^Uj S^ rSp Tl6i(n(rTgdrou Tdiioif 



rov i» ^iTjtiim ^Irritfyff^ Metirsius in Pi- 
sistrato, p. 4., Simson Chronic. 3425. ed. 
Wesseling. Conf. Spon. de Pag. Atticis 
p. 38, 9. Steph. v. ^$Xatiai^ et Heringa 
Obs. 236. Quod reduxerat Meursiusy 
confirmat Scholiastes Platonis nuper edi- 
tus L. Bat. p. 85. ^iXouim] ^iXatiuh in- 
ficg Alyntiog. Sed quid ultra operam et 
oleum perdimus? Insurrexit Taylorus*^ 
nostratibus Platonis otrlm kou U^m i^fiyn- 
ri(j ivfi0i(rraTog^ qui vertendo enarrat, 
" My fellow citizen, and likewise yours, 
Hipparchus the son of the Philaedonic 
Pisistratus, and the eldest and wisest of 
the sons of Pisistratus. [" Quis autem 
GEdipus hoec versionis aenigmata inter- 
pretabitur ? Aut quid tanto molimine li- 
bri in linguam magis familiarem transfe- 
runtur, si Graeca intellectu sint facilia, 
Anglica intelligi non possint?'* ourug 
araXaiTejgog ro7g roWoig h ^firtitng rlig aXfi^ 
6uagf KOU STi ra troifLci (mLWov rgixovrai.^ 

* [** Self-created Polytheist of Great Britain/' R.P.] 



Timaus in Lex. Plat. v. 'E;^iyyt;o». ro dic2 
tiimoti a^io» cvreig x»XS. ^^ In xdku 
intellige nxarctp.. Quo magis suspicor^ 
hanc glossam non aliunde migrassef sed 
in Platone corruptam latere." D.R. 
Optime: integram enim vocem subglos- 
sa delitescentem Vir eruditissimus, nuper 
Oxonii decus, eruit: Alcib, 1. S3, A. Lai*- 
mar. *A(r([>aXfig yoig a iyyvfirfig. Repone, 
ix^yyvog. Hoc quidem sane luculenten 
Suidas, *Ej(iyyvog. c wr^aXrig iyyvfirfigj o 
isnrio'Teafga^iog. MS. Clarkianus vulgatam 
exhibet. [Eur. Med. 388.] Hanc cer- 
tissimam emendationem mecum commu- 
nicavit, et suo calculo comprobavit R.P. 

Euthyph. p. 48. B. In Schol. initio pro Usttig 
et UtrOsvg lege HirOtig. 

Phileb. p. 160, 12. Bas.=78. E. Laem. »cu 

av fM¥ iroxviv %(png avr^Vf %y» ^i rohfaf^ 
rm droffSfrat Xiy$f. aTroxvoig p. 217f 10. 
Aldus, iroxmig "E^fif MS. Clarh^ unde 
legendum minima mutatione asro»ra!<rcM 
(png — nusquam voce droxpSp utitur Plata. 
Vide D.R. ad Tim. p. 42. [P.P.D.] 



De Repub. iii. p. 440. B» ^tiura^ it hu 

restitue, Xvyil^ofjuivog {writhing himself 
into all postures) e Schol. p. 156. Phot, et 
Suid. Conf. H. St. Thes. T. in. 1078. 
G. et Ind. v. Avyi^ofULi. In Themistio 
XXII. p. 278. A. apud Piers, ad Moer. 
197* repone, Xvyi^^ativfiv. (Conf. Bastii 
ep. cr. p. 46). [E.M. et P.P.D.] 

VII. p. 486* D. nyei<r6eM ȴ avrov vontntv^ aXX* 

ov» Sfd^fM^triv fiicifgilv^ voficii MS. C. C. C. 

Oxon. ; conf. si tanti sit, Port Royal 

p. 401. [E.M.] 
Legg. V. p. 605. D. (D.R. ad Tim. 192) 

yi»i6}Jov€ dudum emendaverat Lambinus 
• ad Horat. Carm. Saec. 12. [P.P.D.] 
Legg. XII. p. 687* B. ^A^y altrxjgoi^ »g»v[jui¥o^ 

«ai ivittifMva 6a9(tT09. Lege, i^vvfjutvog fd^ird 
KOKfii — Photius, iM%n. (iagiatg n zatticL. iv 
¥OfMtg TiXarofv^ fj^ira tuutm fju.ti fi*. a. Conf* 
D.R. ad Tim. p. 50. [P.P.D.] 




a Euthyphron p. 1. a. 
^ Apologia 8. a. 
y Criton 20. h. 

i Phaedon 26. a. 
s Cratylus 58. a. 
r Theietetus 83. a. 

( Sophista 113. a. 

)| Polidcus 136. b. 

Pattnenides 154. a. 

1 Philebus 173. a. 

iOL Symposium 198. 1, 

1/3 Phsedrus 224. a. 

ly Alcibiades 1, 248. b. 

ii Alcibiades 2, 263. a. 

If Hipparchus 269. b. 

ir Amatores 273. a. 

i% Theages 277. a. 

I1J Charmides 282. a. 

i9 Laches 295. a. 

K Lysis 307. a. 

xa Euthydemus 317- &• 

K^ Protagoras 336. a. 

xy Gorgias 368. i. 

xS Menon 404. «.f 

Desunt Hippie duo, IoDi 
Menexenus^ Clitophoiij 
Timaeus, Kespublica, 
Critias^ Minos, Leges, 

Epinomis, Epistolae 








89 omittitur 

/iv 328 
ft§ 336 
fu 344 
jitr 359 

A 367 
jbbii 375 
fiA 383 

N 391 

97 in numertndo |s|((398 

105 *893 |s|,9406 


xa 152 

x/3 160 

xy 168 

xS 176 

x« 184 

x^ 200 

x0 216 

Aa 232 

XjS 240 

Xy 248 

x§ 256 

x« 264 

Ar 272 

X? 280 

Aq 288 

X0 296 

jx/3 320 

t [Vide Gaisfordii Catalogum apprime utiletn, pp.68, 9.] 

* [Codicis membranacei PlatonisVoX. I. ed.Alditueex- 

hibentis, et forma quatn in folio vocant, baud ite pridem 

Chrkkmii hodie in BUiUolhecee Bodtekaue Ke(/w.^Ai(p ad- 




Scholion aureum ad Plato nis Apolog. MS. 
p. 9. a. 7. ed. Aid. 10- 13. Bas. 7. 48. 
Laemar. 359- E. H. St 1. 19- C Forster. 
p. 63. 11. Fischer. 76. L penult 

rU ^^ 0^ Kofjuy^fog ; (rSig av ^ ) rig igoiro 'harng ' 
^ *Trok%rrokoyoi* yvciffAiiidrfig* 'EvgiViiAgiaro^ 
(puvi^cifv' xa) avrog V iiofMXoyilrttt o'tcfivag'^ 
iLarcLkafJu\foavo6(raig* yj^ifMU yag avrovf ^fio'h 
Tov erifiMTcg roit crgoyyvXaft. Tovg 90vg }f 
ayogatovg r^rrov fi *Ki7vog Toti. *Agt(rTcivufM>g ^ 

rguit (pouriv avrop yintrOou * ho rov (iio¥ Kurirgi" 
^$9 ingag tovS^ * oi yag nrgait yivvdfMvoi to^ 
fOVPTigj irigoig KCLgxovtrOtn Tagil^outriv * ig $/X&* 
Ypgog^ Vf Tfit Tgcirfit Ttg) ifJUsgSv tarogil* ravr^i 

^'^ i§ »a) *H^a»XS (ppitr) yivvfiffiivai * rgug i\ ^*X^ 
vtovg * OiXiTTov T0¥ roig E^f ovXov igafjMctvlayoih' 
i^t(rafit90¥' xa) ^Agagortt liioig n kou tov Targog 
igafjMiriif hfiymitrfJAfov* luti rgirov 0¥ *AtoXXo^ 
icigog fM¥ l^ixo(rrgaro¥ »aXf7* ol it ng) AizaU 

^^^;^oy OiXiraigov* xaT%\xX^gM(ri i\ xa) rfjv Af- 



yuvuv ig Qioyivtig ^<rh U rail Ttft Aiyiivfig * 
xoifMniureti }S% on »a) to rJig "Elgfiiffig KoXotrtnxop 
iifl7gi¥\ayo^XfMt. EuxoXtg AvToXvxai * HXarcitf 

* ^eig u¥ omittit MS. * fffcn^alg MS* 

^ pfiyovm * fl>/Xo;^»f og 

In margine ejusdem Codicis p. 306. b. 
29* script um est manu valde inelegantly 
quinque tamen fortasse saeculorum; 
[Lach. 255. B. Conf. Charmid. 238, F. 
Odyss. P. 347.] ^Htrtoiov ro ptirov ['Hft. 
315.] rSg in o (ro<pog * Ofju^gov ugfixiVf ayvoS :-* 
Notam hanc mecum humanissime com- 
municavit, sed communicatam agnoscere 
me remoratus est. (CnV. JRet;. April, 1804» 
p. 464.). 


*erp A.'cbHX€i pi' *id>i <xxxi rp Vd>OY 


Ep'CD r'lMA.1 l<Tl'CDMS.eT€ll<OCMOY 





Vid. Dorvillii Animadv. ad Chant, pp. 49^ 
50. Arethas presbyter, non mortuus est, 
sed Euthymium Ce^sarese Archiepisco- 
pum anno Christi 911 mortuum funebri 
oratione laudavit, eique successit. Hujus 
Arethoe notarius Baanes quidam librum 
scripsit anno 914, & Montefalconio Pa- 
loeogr. Grsec p* 43. memoratum. Ibi 
enim pro 'A^ira legendum *Agifia, Vi- 
detur enim Arethas anno 889 privatus 
fuifise, posteu inter 889 et 896, diaconus, 
inter 896 et 911, presbyter> tandem 91 1 
archiepiscopus factus. [P.P.D.] 



[nuper editis Lugd. Bat. 1800]. 

*AISXfNHS 6 Z'axgoTixJj Ka)jJai p. 139. 
"AISXTAOS 149. rxavxan HorvMi 14. if 'Afi^Mfotv 
(Sept. adv. Theb. 592—) 149. 

"Aisnnos 78. 

* [Vide Diarium Enidit. (Class. Journal^ III. pp. 619 




"AAESlSi Katpuxk 140. 


*AAKMAfnN 6 I7oJay(fgfio$ 77. 

"AM^IS 'Axxol 128. 


* AUOAAd AllPOX 'Equiqalos 6L Kupivahi 196. 



*APlST(yBENOS 103. 

'APIST04»A'NHS 35 bis. 160. 168. 

*APISTOTE:aHS 30. 77. 204. 206. 253. &xfoitna>i f. 98. 

^dixwy 0. 68. ^Sixoi^ NtKOfiotxiioig 17 L fAeyakoig 

171. Xoyix^i TfqayiumiSii 131. . 
'^P/^TOO^ii'iVHr 35 bis. 160. 168. 212. 'Ait4ia^i 87. 

£aSuXfiov/oi; 12. Bargix'^^S ^7. 170. Ffoi^oi; 

98. riifai 136. Ja«TaAiu<riy 136. ES^yi}! 8S. 

86. OfffT/xo^io^ouo-M^ 85. 88. 6f<rfM^ia^- 

(Tai; j3. 16. A\^i(rrq&T%i 147. NifiXais 35. 

nxoureot 35. 95. Ufwywai 94. l'<^i 36. T«- 

7i|ViOTdE!f 43. 97. TfAfuo'tf'fOo'iy 85. 
'.4P-Yr^O-X05'94. 134 
'APXT'TAS 176. 

B/Prryl/01' 61. 

[J/l"MO/ 2. 38. 39. 43. 44. 45. bis. 79. bis. 85. bis. 88. 

94. 116. bb. 122. bis. 139. 141. 143.] 
JHM&SeENHS 71. 84. 156. Kar 'Ag^trroyilrovog 10. 

Kot' ^Afiirroxf&rovs 10. 84.89. Kctr 'A<p^w 240. 



wofetwfmrSilet^ 10. 35. 86* ^iXnwwutm 84. Kara 

TlfMKfatTOVS 148. 

JfJTMOS 6. 14. 220. 

AIKAtAPXOS vtf) fMwrtx&v aymmt 103. 

AIorENIANO'S 135. 138. 226. (rine ncmi. 191.) 

AlCfAnPOX ire;) MiA^ou 139. 

MONVSIOS 6 'i^Xixo^Muro-fv; 166. 

jorp/^ 11. 134. 


'tamEAOKAirs 124. 

'EUtrPAMMA 101. 

'EnfXAPMOS 14. 103. 127. 

'EPATOSBE^NHS 35. 6 1 . 250. 

^EPMinnOS *Aivivois yofeuf 123. 

•EriiOlOi' 135. 

''ErnOAlS AtrrokSxut 211. J^/xoif 139. ilfo^xM 7* 

Tlfwrwakrlois 139. ^/Xoi; 139. 
'ETPinfJHS 142. 167* (sed b locus est Sophodis) 190. 

sine nom. (Phoen. 479.) 'Av^futSa^ 43. 'iliTi<(. 

«i|< 114. 115. 127.211. Iwwokkm 70. Ktfi> 

xktBiri 94. Aoifj^las irgokiym 61. MeXay/inn|i 68. 

Mi}Sffai 135. mXiMW 137. T^iXf^cpi 50. IN)/mmoi 

137. 4>;(i^»i 119. 
"E^OPOS a Icrrogiw 94. 97. 

ZlTNIlN 77. 

'HPAKAEtAHS 6 novrixof 61 . 



'HPA'KAEITOS 27. 171. 
HPC/JOTOS 13. 87. 136. 149. 185. 
HSro JOS 53. 191.237. 


eE(y^PASTOS 222. |y ^avifMt 242. xsgl ficun\ilci^ K\i* 

irglaov 185. ^ ^t/rmv 169. 

eOTKTJfJHS 42. 48. 101. 161* 172. ^. 89. n. 89. 

'lA'MBAIXOS 34. 176. 
"IBTKOS 40. 


'innOKPA'THS 135. 

* inn n' NAB 121. 

ISTPOS 'Hkidxois ll.''inN ^qovfoig 
IIIN (pgovgolg 185. 


KAE:aPXOS 68. 137. 167. 'iljXfirlXai 227. 


KPA'THS AafiiM 40. 

KTHXl^lTN 6. 

KPATVNOX 139. BovxiXotg 94. Jgearkm 40. 'O/fc- 

^aXi)i 139. iluAafai 133. JCe{^u<ri5. *'/2^ai^ 88« 

KPATrNOS 6 vea;Trfgo; 91 . 

KfiMAPXOS 1 1 . 
KflMIlUtA 54. 

AAKfiNnN aa-fietra 223. 

ATKorpros 158. 


MATNHS ngoourrgiai 33. 

MANESn" Alyvirrtaxois 202. 

MA' PKE A AGS 206. A\iioirixoi$ 207. 

MBfNANJPOS 14. 'AlsKfois /3. 69. '^KSfoyuyoo* 33. Jf»- 
(TiSaZ/xovi 36. *£avToy rifMogoufi^ivan 10. 6fo$o- 
^ovftlv)]! 12. 142. 'Eyp^ei^idicoi 18. KaTa^ffu- 
Sofufvcoi 29. Kixqv^akoot 12. 142. UkOKlm 12« 
Z'wfgfluo'i]! 27. *T$g/ai 10. Xfjgat 18. 

NIKOKAirS (TijttoxX?^ MS. Clark.) ^v t«i ir «f»f/«; 13. 
{NI'KANJPOS) 6 9vaTeigi)voj 90. 
NIKA'NflP 'Akt^avdgov pirn 61. 

MEN04»A'NHS 6 Koko^ivtos 172. 

8EN04»irN 59. (79.) 156. 168. •^vagotrfi 79. 

*OATMni(yjnpos 53. 

^OMHPOS 10. 24 bis. 26 bis. 32.35. 47. 59. 66. 69 bis. 
71. 74. 78. 182 bis. 191. 240. 251. 82. 88. 
89 bis. 93. 132. 134. 146. 149. 161. 163. 165 
bis. 173. 175. 

HAPOtMlAl 66. 
nAA'rnN n^lai 9i. ecaiT^cw 133. 190. Ju<ri8i47. 

iVo/toij 129. NiiMov f 60. H. 28. Ti 1 1 . il«^- 
jxfv/Siji 73. 128. i7oAiT6r«i 14. 35. 81. 93. 128. 
TifjiMlm 13. 

UAATUN (6 xctiftixo;) 77. I7g8ijTa»J >39. 

UAOfTAPXaXlS. 106. 122, 

UAllTrNOS 172. 

nOATJEfKHS •OvofUMTTixoi^ 70. 



tlPO'KAOX 19. 155 bis. 156. 199. 207 bis. 
TITOAEMAFOS (6 yeooygifos) 206. yffojygafoujxfvcov A 

179. yearygoi^ixmv htiyrjireaov * 138. 
nTOAEMAFOS iMv<rixis 161. 

SIMflNtAHS 103. 145. 192. 

SCfAflN 182. 201. 'Ex^elcus 86. 182. 249. 

2:0<P0KA ITS 36. 135. ^Tam yloxgai 188. 'Aft/pieigimi 
Sotrrjgixm 53. JaiSaActfi 145. Arifi,vlat$ 133. 
Ki]SaXiettyi 90. NaimXlon 93. Oi3/to$i 10. i^oui- 
^X/a> xarairkeovTi 43. TgmXcot 188. 

ZT^ZTiVOZ' iiCt«r§/oij 4. 

STPA'TTI^ noraixolg 98, 

TAF^'PAroS 145. 

TIMAroS 144. *7. 68. 

TfMflN 6 StXXoygafog 200. 

TTPTAFOS 78. 220. 

'TUEPfAHS Tcqls '^gioToyf /rova 40. KatT* 'i4gi0To^wvrof 


4^£P£ KPA'THX Mvgixrixavigiirog 245 . -X«/gcoyi 35 . 

4>EPEKtAHS 11. 

4>IAH'MnN riiM)$ 94. "HgoHTi 33. 

^IA(ySTPATOS Wig) yu/tvacrrix^j 146. 

^lAtfXOPOS 'AMlos a. 249. 

^rj/l/JS" 103. 

A^PHZ'A/O^Z' 188. 235. 
XPfSinnOS wtg) dek^ros 61. 

*npir£NHS 237. 

T 3 AD 



Xenoph. Hierone p, 908. E. ed. Par. 1625, 
Athen. iv, 171. F. =47. 33 Aid., Stob. 
XL VII. 349. 21,consentit ed. Trincav. ; 


[Vide Adverss. p. 73.] [M.D.] 


Theophrastiis Charact. xiv. p. 68 ed. Need- 
ham. Lege ex emendatione Corayi et 
Schweighauseri 'yimoris (vide patris notas 
ad Athenaeum, xiv. p.66l. E.Tom, v 11. 
p. 682.) 'HJu yi rm ''ASTPaN ''OZEI, 
ore if! Kou o\ aXkoi Xiyova TH^2 FH'^S 
(ria'a'fia'). Sic mMachone Athenaei xiii. 
p. 577. F. roZr \<pn, TA' A AN NOMrZEIN 
ioKU fM>t (raTT^oraroif ^avrup toXv. Sic MS. 
Venet. cum antea esset iox%i vofjui^uv. 



Quod sensus et metrum postulat, repo- 
suit LennepiuSj tovtj t^tj, TA'AAN, 
"OZEIN iozslfMt. — (Haecinscripserat Por- 
sonus exemplari edit. Needtiam in Bibl. 
Trin. Coll. Cant.) 



Apud Diog. Laert. iii, 107. 1.6,7- H. St. 

TBTUiiivrai ya§ av ravrag vro. Lege, x)^ 
%vy 'ATTArXAS, quod Doriensibus 
idem est^ quod ceteris Graecis avrtj avrfjg. 
[Conf.Valck. ad Rbver.Lxxiv. Koen. ad 
Greg. 167. Valck. ad Adoniaz p. 206.] 

Hipparchus Pythag. apud Gal. p. 1'2. ed. 
Cantab, rl i\ mo rm ixrog irtigrfifJi^iHt Kara 
rag iTOfJuGg/ag — Corrige, n Xiyoj rwico r. t. 
gT, «axa; — Ibid. 1. 19- (rvif 6iSiv r^oru — re- 
pone, kvSim quod cum o-vOtm facile per- 
mutatur. T. H. ad Lucian. 1. 513. Ibid. 
1. 25. tZ^i rov rgiroy, — ^vgirov rg.. Idem. 
[E.M.] l^Avffganrog Evgsrogj rvyjfi Evgircg^ 
oifOfAa ^vgiTog: Itt) rm peltrra f^iraSaXXofJi^B' 
mv Kou currafifjufjrm av0g(iitm. Lex. Sangerm. 
p. 404.] 




Aristides pro Quatuor viris iii. 474, 475, 
Canter, (ii. 286. Jebb) A Lachete sep^ 
timus archonEubuUdes; ab Eubulide oc- 
tavus Theodotus ; ofjuov rs yoi§ s^ Ka) iiKOi 
ct (TvfMravrsi ag^ovng. Imo, quiim bis nu- 
meretur Eubulides, sunt xiv, non xvi. 
Quoties enim apud veteres legitur m 
annos fuisse inter A et B, et n inter B et 
C, colligendi sunt inter A et C non 
m+n sed m+n— 1; unus enim annus bis 
numeratur. Lege ergo ex MS. Trin.Coll. 
Cant, ofjuov reryagBg ku) iiKcc. qui tamen 
vulgatam in margine habet pro v. 1. 
Et sic proculdubio habebant Jebbii 
MSS. quamvis ille ediderit, oimv 6$ xcci 
ritrirugsg Hkci. cum hac nota. " Ita 
Palmer, et MSS. Coll. Nov. Bar. 7. 
Vulgo o^otJ TB Ko) g| Ku) Jgxa." ry (i. c. 
rr) et 7 sa^pe confunduntur. [Vide supra 
p.259.adAthen.vii,310. E.2.etp.240. 
ad IX, 392. E. ult.] Callim. Ep. xlix. 
citat Ernestus aryk^ctyov ex MS. — MS. 
scilicet habet ary^^ttyov ut emendaverat 
Bentleius. [P.P.D.] 





II. 16. p. 146 J^ Kiihn. MSS. Facii, rjl roXsi 

^(mt) ov i\ Tgoc'roiova'i ctKoZtn Xoyov. Lege, 

— 29. p. 178. o(roi Mtvvuti n — (V^ide ad Hec. 

— 35. p. 195. K(M Tgo(rBX»vvov<riVi oig i^triruKraij 

TBTci^rfjv, KUTBgya^^ovraiTY. AHl [riXtj MSS. 
Facii) — TB ifj sa3pissime apud Pausaniam 
occurrit: ut iv, 314. 3, ubi legendum 

T^O TB ifl 

III. 14. 240. Pro ENAHAAnN lege EN 

AHAAnN. Supra lin. 26. Aldus non 

alyiraiHv^ ut ait Kuhnius, sed ocyiraiSv 

i. e. avaiiv [Cum Sylburgio igitur lege- 

h?it PorS07lUS KdXovfJLBVOvl. 

IV. I. p. 281. lege, o KXbUov i. e. KXxtvov. 

282. ^y Vitrei ^ 'Y^gfJUBleio iofjuoug^ Af]ovg ts 
KiXBvda AafJt^ar^og — ^Xvuiicif KXBivoio yom 

IV. 2. init 282. pro vou iif lege trrouiii — 




[cum Valck. ad Herodot, iii. 115) 

V, 7. 389- TorafMiv in r% \^ avrov piopre^v. Repone, 
•EHTA' Conf. Herodot. vii,129.[E.M.] 

V. 11. prop. fin. p. 400. r^ i\ agstrrsga rov fiiou 
j(^iig) mtrri 

X. 17* p- 836. [Dice re posses, Bizoci ko) rt* 
TgdMotriovg^ vel nrg. kou uk. sed nemo un-'. 
quam vel dixit vel scripsit, s/xor/ Koi r^rga- 
xotriov^ vivTfiKovrit* .^ Duplex scilicet erat 

lectio» ivpog 0% ig{ / > 

X. 29. p. 870. Lege [cum V. D.fapud Valcke- 
naer. ad Herodot. iv, 78. p. 317, 52] 
xa) avriip fiyfjt^mg-^EM. P.P.D.] [Pra- 
terita enim passiva vel activam, vel pas* 
sivam, vel utramque significationem ha- 
bent, prout habet pra*sens. — ^Jam cum 
ayofjiMi active usurpetur, eadeni res est de 
fiyfjuai.— Hcec ex recordatione P.P.D.] 

* [Haec ex recordatione. P.P.D.] 

t [71 if. Addenda et emend, ad Lucian. I. 237.] 




P. 31, 9. ed. Gaisford- Lege, "Viix^^. P.P.D. 
Probabat R.P. [Vide Pierson. Verisim. 
p. 132.] 


Harpocratio ex Suida interpolatus vv. iTtir^o- 

V. ^vcTig Harpocrationem transcripsit 
Photius, non Suidas. 
Archippus Harpocrationis p. 226. 

a9roioKifM^U¥y {tiro, ioKspua^isv) ttuXsv. 

AD POLLUCEM, ed. Hemstcrhus. [P.P.D.] 


VI. 58, 59- Pherecrates ; — Piersonus in mar- 
gine exemplaris, vct^a roitn vorafMitnif 
ixij^vvr avT ocrgoiKm.l Male, ob ictum 
sive accent um metricum. R.P. 
Ibid. TtvrXoKr/r ly%iKei» Piersonus] recta; 
quanquam nonnihil dubito an vera scrip- 



tura sit iyxj^Xvsa vel -Xua, penult, pro- 
ducta. R.P. 

VI. 62, p. 601. 4. aXX' fi/W iitroj. ut trochai- 

cum efficiat, delet aXX' vel 6/V — Pierso- 
nus.] Nil opus; duodimetri esse possunL 

VII. 24. p. 703, 2. So^oxX?; i\j 'io^ orov xgiOei- 
Cfig omv — eW ovov Aldus ; lege \v) ovov R.P. 
c6i§a(r^o§ov KgiSivrATeiXoy' yE.schyl.Agam. 

VII. 72. 739> 3. ^igtrvj^^ovc* Piersonus; quo- 

modo multos abhinc annos emendaverat 

VII. 96. 755. ult. KiKgv^eix$ou Piersonus.] 

Male; secundam in xexgv^aXov produ- 

cunt Attici. R.P# 
IX. 13. p.983. ky^oictirrii Pierson.] Tragica vox; 

Aristoph. Thesm. 58. ed. Br, 
IX. 28. 995. ult. rov vaii' ay<a Piers.] De sensu 

fragmenti non liquet. R.P. 

IX. Q5. p. 1035. 10. av Js {yi) [^oi Pierson. ; 
recte proculdubio. R.P. 

IX. 72. p. 1042. penult, rovr avro ^gdrroj ho- 
£oX«. Piers, iv' oGoTJiv — ] legendum i6* 



oSoXoi. Hoc ipsum a te eiigo^ duo obolos. 
r^krruv dicitur, qui vectigal exigit ; 
r^a,rr%(r6m, qui pecuniam suani repetit. 


X. 18. p. 1161. Lege vel Xayuvov vel ray^yvov. 


1. 11. "Afax/. recte Heinsius, £yi. Auxoh 
vsg^ IC in |< mutato. (MS. -(rmeg per of.) 

516. V. *A^yei^ovTfig. Rectissime Kusterus, 
ut patet ex Platonis Cratylo p. 56, 40 
Bas. =267. C. Laemar. — In Hesychio 
lege el§ifj(^rig pro fj^sfMg. 

603. L 4. MS. ' Arfiiivovoirov. Lege oirfASvov 

697. Lege, 'Rd^vvdn^f. ^Ȥvv0^mi. et in Alcao 
Athenaei x. 430. C. fjbedv(r0fiv MS.A. 

838. V. yXvK. %i. CoUato Schol. Aristoph. 
Vesp. 220. cum Schowio, lege, %ieivto¥ 
acrv Xi'TOvcruij Ka) igoireguv "A^aiov. Finis 
hexametri cum alterius initio. 

II. 94. 1. ult« 1. KACCiSo^vvg. 

Schow. p. 525. 1. ult. fji^eigf fji^fjv. Glossa 




852. V. Uavixtov. Hermippi verba lege ; 

kou TTgocxs^oiXaiov, $¥ ig r^y 9(tvv ifJUTfiifi(rag 

1068. 10. n^«royi/va7«6f.— MS. jEtyTay fiyfjuivoi 
yvfouKtg. L. jEtiair— yuvar^a (de iiyfjuipog 

conf. R. P. p. 280.) 

1103. V. pa^itniaf0fiy»i. L. rig y»g oiv 'Ayr) pa," 
(paniog o^u6vfJt,i sia'ogciv '^EX0oi rgog ifiag ; 

II8I9 14. V. %iagios. — Bv^oiifrsoi post f;^«Fro 
omissum, post sic) collocat MS. — Lege, 
iTts) oi Bv^dvttoi XsttS vopLnrfJuartAf ai. xou 
fX. i;^«?*'ro. — h tS est. v. 1. eaque men- 
dosa pro XsrrS. 

1254. 1. 8. Glossam, qude in MSto sequitur, 
sic lege ; — cngnvisKtKoufju, qui est scrip- 
toris error pro tsj t. i. e. Lat. perpendi-- 

1437. 4. Soy m. MS. 1. iSr 




In Codice Galeano Photii legimus, 


quae sic digere, 

<rra6fLovg. * Agstrro^diffjg iv Agdfjbaa^v. 
** »vro7g cro^fjuclg i^iSaXs rovg trsttyovug" 
i(r& rolg ^Xuoig. [E.M«] 

In eodem codice vtto explicatur per oX/yoi^. 
Vide Comicum incertum apud Athen. 
XV. 693. B. emendatum Adverss. 147. 



Suidasi. p. 97* 'AXXa yaj. am rou ii. Ev^oXig 
'RttTTcng. avagicTfiTog cj¥ kcu ov}i\v fieSgeitxcifg 
aXXa ydg <rTi(pa9ov %yj»f Hactenus supple 
ex Lexico Sangerm. apud Ruhnken. ad 
H. in Cer. 200. Deinde adde {nxdrav 
K^/ria] aXXd ydg »6ufJt,ov9T6g avigig — Lo- 
cus est p. 502, 14. ed. Bas. prope init. 

p. 132. 


I. p. 132. Kust. V. 'AjEtaX^g/a^ Kigag. Hex- 
ameter sumtus est e Fabula de muribus 
rustico et urbano. Fabulator MS- Bod- 
leianus apud Tyrwhittum Babr. p. 11. 

6£rA2 ig xgog cru \a¥ iX6fig flsr ifMv^ ig 
6iXeig ktromvcTf}. Initium fabulae, hexa- 
metro versu scriptae, exhibet Suid. v. 
irctigsifj, — Recte igitur MS. C.C.C. nostro 
hexametro pneponit h fjiv6oig. 

II. p. 193. V. GuMOfi^cti oKfi* x,^gci fjbavtKSg. i. e. 
0iu(rM fjuamXij. yfi^u fjMvixS. ex Cod. Gale- 
ano Photii, qui habet 6ioi(roj[j(,aioXfji x^S^* 
(jimvikZi. [E.M.] [Et in Photio GlcctrM 
fjuam'Kff corrigit Lobeckius apud Schleus- 
ner. Cur. Noviss. p. 57.] 

II. 6Q. V. firif¥fifjt,imif. Lege proxinie ad Kus- 
tcri mentem, v»§oi rSv firijvfifj(,ive^¥. sxeXsui, 
sc. Simonidem Scopas. Cic. de Orat. 11. 
86. fabulam narrans, reliquum a siiis 
Tyndaridisy quos ceque laudasset, pe- 
483, 768. v.v. fjudKoi^m vfitroi et ig Xtetv, Ci- 
tatur Parmenides mendose utrobique. 
In priore loco lege e Photio, 'Agfjt^iviag. 

Is erat 


Is erat Thebanus, et de patriae suae anti- 
quitatibus scripsit. [Vide Athen. i. 3J. 
A.] — In posteriore loco repone Ila^jxfiy/- 
ifis. Verba sunt Platonis, Parmenid. 
p. 141, 38. Bas. 222. Fischer. 
698. V. ovog Xu^ocg MS. C.C.C. et Photius, 
S^oj^fj. pro ijiim. Lege fj ^ oXii t. 
III. 75. V. ^evrerccXavTog. to vifrt argiTTOv tti* 
gBlrui Tu^oi ro7g 'Arrixolg. lege, ne apice 
quidem mutato, ro i" i. e. litera g, non 
niimerus v. 
16 1. V. IlfoJ/^oy. Photii Galeani ope lege, 
AoDvai H^oiiKOv Iv tSv ^iXcjv roiv cSiv hi. Vide 

Toup. Cur. Noviss. ad Suid. l6l. [E.M.] 

305. V. ffuffcn, Ed. Mediolan. aXXo^c* '^irdyrm 
sic^ spatio interposito 
h\ * r«y y^Scrroi. Lege, 

aXX' Of ^dyruv 'ASTH^N \Z(rroi (relcrat ku) 

'x'go<rK»xi(ra(r0ui^\ "jtAvtracrh J.a. conf. Aris- 

toph. Plut. 507. 

584. V. ^ct(rKoiXm. Locus Agathiae pertinet 

ad narrationem de oraculo Lacedaemoniis 

Ithomen oppugnantibus reddito. Pausan. 

Messen. 13. p. 310. 




Etymol. M. 31. 15. MS. D'O. xXar^ i. e. 
nxdruv. Mutatis igitiir distinctionibus 
lege, TTo^io'TSgof^ * Agsaro^dpfig. HxdrMv, 
*'b* — Versum ex Platonis Cleophonte ci- 
tat Eustathius ad Odyss. B. p. 1441, 26. 
— p. 137- 44. pro w^a, 1. if' i. e. b fingtaxolg 
ex MS. Dorvill. Locus est v. 401. Vid. 

— 262, 4. pro tv6* lege rof* AroXXuviei sc Arg. 
IV. 777> ut quam proximo Dorvillianus, 
Si enim fi superne acutior, inferne rotun- 
dior scribatur, fit signum quod notat vel 
^Xtog, vel 'AtoXXo^f, vel 'AoroXXa/i'io;. f Oni- 
Hemsterhusianij pp. xli — XLiv.cui ad- 
jungit T. K. Montefalcon. Bibl. Coisl. 
pp. 765. 767*] Hinc permutatio w. 
TjXiog et 'AToXXfl/wof, quae Rnhnkneium 
torsit Ep. Cr. 11. p. 203. Hinc etiam 
infra p. 797? 33, pro on ^poiccxu, legen- 
dum 'AtoXX^woj* ^ot¥a iccxri. (MS. Dorv, 
'AtoXXJwo;, compendio scriptum, et (po- 



poiaxfi.) "*'Or/ scilicet ita fere scribitur/b, 
unde natus error. Ceterum falUtur lexi- 
cographus; non enim apud ApoUoni- 
um, sed apud Nicandrum Theriac. 146. 
leguntur ista. 
712, 42. Haec verba non leguntur in Alex- 
ipharmacis. Lege ex MS. D'Orvilliano, 
Iv r^ Xiy€i¥, (ey^ X') pro $9 roig aXs^i^gfM' 


quod ex codice alexandrino suis 
characteribus expresso in lucem protulit 
Carolus Godofredus Woidcy 1786. 

Act D. Apost. xxviii. 26. male impressum 
fixfiroifng pro ^xiromg^ quod recte habet 
[D. Petri Epist. 1. i. 2. rXfi^vvfisifi Haec a manu 
recentii R.B.] 

[i Tim, iii. 16. Qc- — Circulo o digitis de- 
trito admodum et exolescente biduum 
sese maceravit R. P. Pro virgula supra, 
ut solet, elegantissime deducta, liuea 

V crassa 


crassa profecto ac rudis comparet, et vice 
diametri tenuis intra circulum venustis- 
sime depict! punctum pinguius et hodie 
flavescens exit ; acie vero intentissima 
illud curiose perlustranti lucida tela diei 
adeo aberrare et omnia prorsus confun- 
dere cceperunt, ut oculis dolentibus sese 
quicqaain,quod vellet, vigilantem vidisse 
somniaret. Longe aliter R.P. evenit; 
Toiv Ir * A AAOEI'A/ vnrXacfiivoif ix Aiog ig^ 

m' ille textum OCe^XMepcueH 
a manu prima fuisse diserte scriptum 
certo pronunciavit. Cum ©c saepius 
desit quam abundeti mihi in mentem 
venit ©c OC prae oculis librarium ha- 
buisse» et priorem incuria omisisse: de 
hoc ne verbum quidem R.P. ; sed inter 
loca, qu'<e vivida quadam memoriae vi 
confestim et quasi sponte depromta, ad 
Eur. Ph. 5.* non multo post enotabat, 
Suidam v. Iox^ojp citavit; et deleto iV. hunc 
articulum sequenti subjungendum mo- 

* Aristoph. Pac. 938. 3^ £v Oils 6«^p Victorii codex ; 
vide Acta Philol. Monac T. I. Fasc. in. p. 403. 

nuit ; 


nuit ; deinde pro pV maluit Qso^j vel 0fo^ 
sicut habent Scholiastes Soph, ad £1. 
698. et ipse Pindarus Pyth. ii, 91. 
Vide infra &so^ ; in priore loco Suidae 
MS. Harl. vulgatam exhibet. — Nisi Her-^ 
mannum Venema, virum doctissimum in 
eandem conjecturam incidisse nuperrime 
viderem, mea sane hasce chartas neque 
perdiderim nec.purpurae pannum de meo 
adsuerim : Opusc. p. 2 14, In Diodori 
Sic. I, 56. ed. Bipont. Mfcoiofjifjcnv sv ^or 
6'aig ralg kat AiyurroF toXc^if Upov rov 
fji^y^itrra vag ixMro^g rsf/t^c^f/^svov. Pro Ugov 
Qeov rov fffp quod facile retraxit doctissi- 
mus Eichstddt. — Exemplaria vetustissii- 
ma Latine versa quod sine varietate 
prajbent. De sensu parum aut nihil 
refert ; " cum personam circumlocutione 
significant Gxaeci, quam citissime ad 
ipsam personam revertuntur/' "^Og non 
TO ptirov^ sed to cfifjuamfi^^oy respicit. Si 
iterum prodiissent Epistol<B ad Travis 
Slum baud paulo auctiorespcontroversiaip 
de Professioqe fid^i catholicaey quaiq 
jussu Hunnerici Vandalorum regis Car^^ 

u $ thaging 


thagine habuerunt African! Episcopi, 
baud indiligenter retexere voluerit, et in 
bunc textum dissertationem pro appen- 
dice adjungendam curaveritVir summus. 
Meminisse bbet in Museo Britannico 
asservatum esse foliorum syntagma a 
diversis Codicibus MSS. abscissorum; 
in antiquissimis I. D. Joan. v. 7. nee 
vola nee vestigium; in recentioribus 
margini adscriptus apparet; in novissi- 
mis de margine in orationem ipsam ir- 


T. Be z IE fait. 

R. P/s opinion of this MS. may not be un- 
acceptable to certain readers : * * * ♦ 

* [I ta officio nobiscum (Benedictinis) certavit (Richardus 
Bendeyus), ut petentibus duntaxat copiam nobis codicis 
iieri^ totum suis descriptum impensis ad nos miserit. 
Sabatier pnef. ad Bibl. sacr. Lat. veniones^ T. in. 

p. XXXV.] 

« It 


^^ It abounds, says Academicus, with 
absurdities. So does almost every an- 
tlent MS. A MS. may be, upon the 
whole, of great authority, and yet have 
many absurd readings. The greatest 
fault of our MS. is, that it is also full of 
interpolations. Yet even these are often 
^ curious, as they are supposed to be 
taken from apocryphal gospels. Another 
mistake your correspondent has copied 
from Wetstein (who though an excellent 
collator of Greek, knew little of Latin 
MSS.) that Beza's MS. follows a strange 
and uncouth system of orthography. 
But his examples will scarcely make 
good his assertion. The words tempt a^ 
tio*^ quotiensy thensauruSy intellegOy are 


* Hoc in omne genus MSS. animadverti^ tarn veterrimis 
mille et ducentorum annorum, quam recentioribus, vel 
temptare scribi, vel rarius temtare ; nimquam, quod hodie 
obtinet, tentare. Bentlbt on Terbnt. Phorm. iii. 3. 
19. [See also Brit. Crit. for April, 1794, p. 362. At 
certain periods scribes pretended great veneration for 
forms well stricken in years, and affected to lisp the jargon 
of Evander's nursery. One sect had an undue predilection 
for P ; another for B ; and a third for the aspirate. This 



80 written in many, if not in most, old 
MSS.; tempto and intellego vou may 


bad taste^ however^ tends not to impair the value of Latin 
MSS. In the celebrated fragment of Livy occur emPius, 
sumPtus^i A mutilated copy of Cicero's Orations against 
Anthony^ which is supposed by Muretus to have been 
written abciut the middle of the ninth century, and greatly 
resembles in the form of the characters the Florence Pan- 
dects, &embo's MS. of Terence, and the MS.f of Cicero's 
Epistles collated by P, FictariuSy furnishes instances of 
extravagant attachment to antiquated and even rude forms 
in iemPiare^ solemPnia^ somPnum ; aPsum^ oPiineo, 
scriBtura, oBtcare; aecum^ relicuumy which Dr. Bentley 
has restored to Lucret. IIL 648. ; locuniur, cottidie; and, 
through some unaccountable fantasy, latHrones, laiHrocU 
nia. ( Hammonius occurs in the Dresden rescript of Cicero's 
EpistleSk) Still that sagacious scholar asserts, non facile cre- 
diderit quisquam, quam multa temere addita, quam multa 
corrupta ac depravata legerentur in omnibus aliis libris^ 
quae hujus ope expleta, refecta, sanata et integritati suae 
restituta sunt J. Mercennarium is, I suspect, in Faemi's 

• Giovenazz. XLIX. 

"i quibus tamen ego codicibus,<^»non tantum tribuo, quantum uni 
'illi^ omnium^ quotquot ubique terraruro, idem epintolarnm co^us 
continentes, exstaut, vetustissimo (et ex quo caeteros otnncft> qui us^ 
quam sunt, tamquam e fontc ac capite manasse, et Angelus Politia- 
nus et Pfrtrus Victorius memorise prodiderunt), qui Florentise in 
Mediceo-laurentianse bibliotbecas pluteo XLix. adservatur, numero 
IX. extra notatus : Lttgomarsini ad Pugiani Epist. 1. 1B9. 

t 0pp. V. II. p. 976, 7. See also Lagomarsini ad Pogiani Epist. i. 

208. et inter errata Vol. iv. p. 80. 



find in Davies's edition of Cicero, Tusc. 
1. IV. 12.; quotiens is frequent in in- 
scriptions : 


edition of Ter. Adelph. iv. ii. 2, The letter I is often 
substituted for E3 Antiqui NI pro NE ponebant^ qua par- 
Ucula plenus est Plautus. Servius ad Ma. III. 686. In- 
stances of E for I appear in the Medicean MS.^ except 
in spolia. Calciarium is in the Florence Pandects ; calci- 
amenta appears in Isidorus; and bbnificio* is preserved 
on a marble of the Augustan age, and benwoleniia, malivo- 
leniia, in the best MSS. of Cicero. I have seen clodus more 
than once in old Latin MSS. ; but the references are not at 
hand; and, if derived from x^^h ^^ ^^ probably its pristine 
form. The use of C for Q as well as for G in good Latin 
MSS. and inscriptions is too common to merit notice. 
In Fastis Capitolinis ad A. U. 296. legitur Q. FABIVS. 
M. F. K. N. — Qempe Marci JUius, Kaisonis neposf. In 
the old grammarians we meet with Kalumniam, Kalen^ 
das, Kaput, MagiKa ; in Fastis Verrii Flacci KARNP i. e. 
Karmejitalia ; nee desunt nummi, et saxa, ubi legitur 
Kartago, KaruSy KarissimusX* In D. Heinsius's Exerc. 
Sacr. p. 524. ed. Cantab. BAEPOMEN for BAEHOMEN 
is a mere slip of the pen or of the press ; but amongst the 
enormous blunders made by scribes in copying the Greek 
citations in Priscian, the following instance will not admit 
so charitable a construction; P. 71 Aid. =731 Putsch. 
Alcaeus vtri} pro ys^^ posuit. In an excellent MS. it stands 

* See Fabrett cap. in. Dum. 323. 

t Noris ad Cenotaph. Pisan. 384. 

X Fogginius ad Verr. Flacc. p. 9. 



scriptions: thensaurus is in Faeraus's 
edition of Terence, without doubt from 
the Codex Bembinus, the oldest MS. 
extant* I am persuaded that the 
other peculiarities mentioned by Wetsteia 
would be found, upon examination, to 
stand upon equal authority. The truth 
is,Wetstein wa3 rather prejudiced against 
this MS. Mr. Griesbach, who is more 
candid, says (Symbol. Crit. p. cxvii.) 
that it has a great quantity of very an- 
cient and good readings. [Doctor Kip- 
ling's edition of the teat of this noble 
fragment exceeds Doctor Woide's im^ 
pression of that part of the Alexandrian 
MS. containing the N. T. in splendor 
and in accuracy.'] 

nepe pro nepes^ i. e. vi}^ pro vi}^; vel vnipjts. The tranr 
flcribere of Latin MSS.^ whenever stopped by a Greek 
quotation^ seldom performed their task like good work- 




[The CODEX RESCRIPTUS, of which Dr. 
Bentley speaks so highly in bis letter to 
Archbp, Wake, p, 230,* was greatly es» 
teemed by R. P. If his wishes to revisit 
Paris during the hollow truce in 1802 
had been gratified ; on that joyful occa- 
sion, he assured me, it would be the first 
MS. that he should inspect, and that 
the Anti' A tticista (which has lately been 
printed by the laudable zeal of Emch 
nuel Bekker) would be the next. It 
may be collected from internal evidence 
that the former was written before the 
fourth century. On the demise of a 
venerable character in the Church, the 
event was sometimes registered in the 
margin of those august monuments of the 
Christian faith. The departure of a Pa- 
triarch of Alexandria, the Blessed Tho^ 
mas or Timothy (I speak from memory), 
towards the close of the third century, 
is recorded in the margin of this MS. 

* See also BUmolwu Evaog. Quadr. cDXCix— ^di. 


300 MS. ly. 

gent proofs of sameness. — It is equally 
true that R. P. did not approve the ap- 
plication of Dr. Marsh's theorem to de- 
termine the identity of MSS. by a coin- 
cidence in their readings : and Dr. 
Milner, in his Strictures, p, 252. has 
expressed in substance R. P/s senti- 
ments on this point ; ^^ the mathemati- 
cal theorem, he signified, was totally in- 
applicable to the purpose. A multitude 
of considerations, he said, were necessary 
to form a correct judgment on MSS. 
which could not possibly be reduced to 
any theoretical computation of that 
kind/' — I have repeatedly attempted to 
elicit his opinion concerning Dr. Marsh's 
general Hypothesis touching the origin 
of the three Gospels. He was uniformly 
an unbeliever in it, R. P, accounted 
for the verbal coincidences very differ- 
ently. — 
I consulted R. P. three or four different 
times, about that principle of scriptural 
interpretation, as an universal property 
of the Greek language, which the late 


MS. iy. 301 

pious and humane Granville Sharp jir^t 
steadily applied to certain texts as ad- 
ditional testimonies to that fundamental 
doctrine — the Divinity of our Saviour : 
R, P. was silent. I can, however, state 
from very good authority that in con- 
versation with certain friends R. P. inti- 
mated his distrust of the canon, and 
assigned reasons for his apprehensions, 
which appeared decisive to competent 
judges. At this time a pamphlet ap- 
peared, which was entitled Six more 
Letters to Granville Sharp, and written 
in the spirit of certain tracts which had 
been published about the close of the 
seventeenth century. The author of it 
makes irreverent sport truly, but is ex- 
ceedingly shy of the main question. 
This effusion was attributed to R, P., 
who did not feel disposed to thank his 
friends for the compliment*] 


( 302 ) 


The original of yXvMvg was itvXzvg^ whence 

iXiVKVfj yXivzvgf y^^vKug — yXiVMf sweet 

0, jj, TO was Tog^ rjji to • whence Tig^ etc« [Conf. 

H. St. tract, de Orthographia, p. 2.] 
iyti lonice iyw^ i. e. xiym, the speaker'^. 
%a i. e. i9 d — iv the old preposition, which 

probably was wc — iig$ «;» w* in Lat. on 

Ugog Tm fiiSpy and rgog fitSu are both good 

Greek, but the former is the more fami^ 

* [" In the infancy of speech there might have been 
no occasion for the first person, or any such word : the 
verb was ahvays used in the third person, as we call it — ^for 
the nominative case was always expressed although the 
speaker was talking of himself." Capt. G. Brown, 32, 3. 
— ** This is the case in the language of New Holland. 
One of the natives, when he was in England, was asked^ 
Do you eat fish ? The answer in his own language was 
Batmeehng eats fish." Dr. Vincent, p. 19. T.K.] 



liar expression, and never used by the 
Tragic writers. 
MiK signified originally in the first place ; 
{[juiigy fi^lcLy fM¥) ; ds in the second place 
(contracted from iio). T.K. 
In Tragicorum et Coraicoruni lambicis, 
Trochaicis [et ni fallor addebat Anapae- 
sticis] articulus semper fere ictum metri- 
cum habet, nisi ubi versum inchoat. 
[Hinc emendabat Eur. Bacch. 192. ixx' 
ov^ ofMwg 6iog ky nfLtiv lyfii pro av o ^so;.] 
Vox emphatica rare ictu caret in lam* 
bicis. [P.P.D.] 


Ennius apud Jul. Rufin. p. 222 ed. D. R» 
Ut ego plectar, tu delinquas : tu pecces, 
ego arguar. [P.P.D.] 



AD TERENTiUM Fr. LindenbruchU i 

Paris. 1602. 

P. 13. 1. 29. Ambigue extulerat Menander* 

*£yi! ff i6fi»a iovXo¥ OPT iXiufitgop. testibas 

Aristotele Elench. Soph. 1. 3. Theone 

Progymasm. c 3. p. 36. 
P. 14. 1. 8. "hunc*' Lege huc^ ex Adelph. 

V. i. 13. 
P. 20. 1. 49—51. Cicero Div. in Caecil. 7- 
P. 27. 1. 33. "ad illud spectat,'' i, 2, 21. 

ibid, 42. " ut Cicero'* in Verr. iv. 12. 

Minus c2arum putavit fore quod de — 
P. 55. 1. 46. " Plautus in Aulularia** iii. 6. 

P. 104.1.12. Phorm. I. i. 7. 1. 14. "in An- 

dria*' iii. iii. 26. 
P. 105. 1. 29. " in Aulularia" in. vi. 23. 
P. 246. 1. 5, 6. 
Poeta apud Donatum ad Terent. Adelph. 1. 1. 

18. e^iT-K d>ix[o'c**'exeic rv- 

XOYMe'MCJDM; Ferre potes domi- 

[» Hkc an recte descripserim nescio. P.P.D.] 




nam, salvis tot restibus, uUam ? (Juve- 
nal. VI. 30.) — Stobaeus lvii. p. 376. 

48. TXsTjf rfj¥ tfaXarra)', ff^omv¥ wXou' 

Poetaibid. Ilufjt^iXog yctfjuu. yafji^slrof. xa) yag 

fliUfjtri fLi. [P.P.D.] 

P. 307. 1. 32. " ut Plautus'' Amph. 1. 2. 28. 

P. 345. 1. 36. Paucos ad Andr. iii. 26. 6. 

[Insignem Bentleii emendationem, qua 

ApoUodorum restituerat, vehementercom- 

probabat R. P. — BAIQE ed. 2. pro 


P. 447. !• 25. MS. Lindenbu. tu es corsali 

saxa peresa. \_Lucretius : Nee mare 

quae impendenjt vesco sale saxa peresa. 

1. 326. Lucilius apud Festum : Nunc ad 

te redeo,ut quae res me impendet, agatur. 

P. 520. 1. 17, 18. Cic. Divinat. in Q. Caecil. 

9. ibid. 1. 28. " Martialis'^ I. 41. 
P. 564. Apud Eugraphium ad Heaut. v. 1. 
occurrit iTXPXITPOCXOYexX le- 
viter corruptum ab 

ITXpxiTpOCXOYexx lege, 





AD TERENTiUM, cx ed. R. B. Cantab. 

Andr. 1. v, 7- " Mutavit'' absolute sumit et 
Acidalius ad Patercul. 1. 8. explicans 
" id/' eo, ob id. 

Eun. IV, vi, ad v. 7- — Academicus*. * ut 
sagaciter divinarat. V. Acidalius ad 
Veil. Paterc. \. 18. Quare actum egit 
malignus ille plagiorum Bentleianorum 
insectator, F. HariuSy quum banc emen- 
dationem pro sua venditarit. 

Heautontim. 1. i> 38. Hunc versum ad £.t- 
vium II. 40. ita citat Vir inaximus, 
J. F. Gronovius. Sine, sine vacuum 
tempus etc. Pro dem babet duih 
Mureti editio. 

11, iii, 50. "Ovid. Trist. iv, ii, 34/' adscrin 
psit R. P. Liv. II, 23. iii, i> 83. 
" Quaeso'' MS. Parisiensis teste Bucretio 
apud Acidal. ad Patercul. ii. 38. 

IV, i, ad V. 15. "Acidalius ad Patercu- 

lum»" ♦ L 18. 

• •• 


viii, 10. " Apud me'' Acidalius ad V. 

PatercuL 1. 18. 
Phorm, h iv. 52. "apud PalmeriumV *ut 

laudat Lambinus ad Plant. Trin. iv, ii, 

II, i, 36. " Apud Asconium* * ad Ciceron. 

Verrin. iv. 12. 
iii, 40. " en'' pro " hem" Asconius ad 

Cicer. Verrin. iii, 39. 

Infronte ExemplarisTvsc. Disp. a Davi- 
sio ed. Cantab. 1738. hac a manu R. P. 
adscript a sunt. 

Bentleii Emendationes ad 1. 44. p. 22, 5.] 
Quid audio ? " Matrem appellat (Poly- 
dorus Ilionam) quia natura; sororem^ 
quia et setate multo grandior, et paren- 
tis loco ipsum educarat." Qui tam falsa 
et inepta aut scripsisse aut scribere po* 
tuisse Bentleium credidit, is cum Gulu- 
elmo Hayleio *, poetarum et criticorum 

* Vide Life ofCowper, ubi de antiquonun vel veris 
vel fictis Epistolis disserit Heyleius^ Vol. I. p. xxvi — ^xxxi. 
8vo. 1806. Inter alia modestise et humanitatis specimina 
haec videbis P. xxx. ^^ That imperious Patagonian po* 
lemic'^ de Bentleio dictum. [L.L] 

X 2 pessimo, 



pessimo, de inscitiae et malevolentise 
palma certare poterit Lege, transpositis 
vocibus ; " Sororem — quia natura ; twa- 
tremj quia et aetate" — Sic habet prima 
editio ; et sic recuderunt Oxonienses 
Alium obiter notabo hac occasione erro* 
rem, ab Oxoniensibus preetervisum. In 
Epistola ad Davisium, p. 1. 1. 4. a fine, 
male impressum est perfecta pro jper- 
spectCy quod recte habet editio prima. 


Liv. Hist. ed. Gronov. 1679. n. 22. not. 2. 
adde CiBlium ad Ciceron. viii. 2. Ci- 
ceronem pro P. Sext. 68. Gellium tit. 
1. 14. X. 43. forte temere ii. 31. 


Geo. I, 17. 

tua SEU tibi Maenala curae, 

Adsis o Tegeee, favens. Schraderus Obs. 

p. 24. 


p, 24. [P.P.D.] Hanc emendationem 

firmat et valde probat Brunckius. 
JEn. Ill, 702. Lege, 

Immanisque Gela fluvio cognomine 
dicta. R. P. 1779. 
IX, 711. Lege, 

magnis quam molibus arte 

Constructam ponto jaciunt super : ilia 

apud Maty (Rev. June 1785, p. 434-). 

De emendatione nuUus dubito ; utrum 

PoRSONi sit, non liquet. 


Carm. i. i, 5. Si vitata rotis — Withofius. 

Serm. ii. iv, 32. Murei* Baian^/^ melior, Lu- 
crina peloris; SnapiuSj vide p. 170. 


Sat. 1, 157« Et latum media sulcum qe ducit* 
arena — i. e. quae ducit [P.P.D.] 

[* qui ducit — Ruperti; conf. Class. Journal, xv, 178.] 



IV, 24. patria contra Marklandum tuetur 
Schraderus Obs. L 2. p. 19* 

X, 20. a limine cum MSS. Oudendorp. ad Cae- 
sar. B. G. II. 24. 

XIII, 65. miranti recte defendit Jartinus 
E^cles. Hist. i. p. 7. 

XIII, 70. miniisj quomodo Scholiastes legisse 
videtur. Jortin Elccles. Hist. Vol. i. p. 8. 

XIV, 74. nidos lege ex codice Perizoniano 
cum Schradero Obs. i, 6. p. 70. nidos 
quoque in Lucano ix, 903. pro natos 
reponendum ex Claudiano vi, 5. vidit 

XV, 124. Bistones MSS. teste Viro docto in 
Act. Lips. a. 17^9- p- 383. quod pro- 
bare videtur Schraderus Obs. i. i. p. 4. 
banc lectionem ipse e MS. proferens. 
125. Saurornatave 4 MSS. ubi supra. 


Didymus apud Priscianum de Ponderibus, 
p. 1350. Putsch. "Ivvsg xa) 'Arrtxc) m ivo 


r&Xayra iGiofio¥ fifji^iraXapTovy kcu rovg rto'" 
tro^ag iif^iov Tnyji^^ xifMrrfjv fifji^itmSufji^iip^ 
xo^uTig ^fitriv. ^HgoioTog xgofigig to ivitxo^ 
Tovg. *la,itig b rS xig) [Mvtrtxfig. 'Eti^^ii 
Tgiro¥ iifMToiioy^ am rou ivo fifji^arv xoiag. 
Pro portentosis istis, ivivcarovg. *laifigj 
restituit Porsonus apud Gaisford. ad He- 
phaest. p* 40. %» ii Barovtnaifig* Sed in- 
super suspicabatur, vel legendum esse 
'HXioiMgog pro *Hgoiorogj vel si hoc ser- 
vandum sit, excidisse quaedam ; ut olim 
fuerit, 'HgoioTog * * * * 'HXtoiofgog, 
9rgo6i)g — [Et hoc omnino praeferendum. 
Nam ex eodem Prisciano, hunc ipsum 
Didymi locum excitante paulo ante 
p. 1347* liquet, turn Herodoti aucto- 
ritate usum esse Didymum, tum ple- 
niorem subjunxisse locum de leone au- 
reo (Herodot, i, 50.). Ceterum Tf^Mr- 
TTfip (nriOafMiv optirae legit P. E. (i e,, ut 
puto, Elmsleius) in Ephemeride dicta 
The Classical Journal, No. X. p. 335. 
simul notans, Herodotum ii, 106. re- 
spexisse Didymum.} 


( 313 ) 


Ad M.A. Muret. V.L. Libros xv. Antver- 
piae, ex offic. C. Plantini 1580. adscrip- 
serat R. P. 

1. 12. Adde Cnemonis historiam apud Helio- 
dorum ^thiopico primo. Tennis his- 
toriam narrat Scholiastes ad Homer. 
Iliad. A. 38. Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 232. 


Upon Bishop Pearsons exposition of the 
Creed ; ed. 6, fol. Lond. 1692. P. 128, 
line 6. from the bottom of the note, the 
word NOT spoils the sense, and contra- 
dicts the fact. It is rightly omitted in 
the four first editions. See the preface 
to Berriman's dissertation on i Tim. iii. 

[* See Crit. Rev. for Dec. 1804, p. 411. I am an- 
swerable for all the blunders in that account of the Grbn- 
viLLB Homer.] 




P. 15. Ox. 13. Cant. In Bentleium ferocissi- 
me invehitur Barnesius ad Euripid. 
Fragm. p. 442. [In eodem opere Bent- 
leii librum impudenter compilat Barne- 
sius, notatus a Valckenaerio Diatrib. p. 3. 
C] Confer nunc Bentleii Dissertario- 
nem de Epistolis Pseud-Euripideis, pra;- 
cipue pp. 120, 121. ed. 1697- et Viri 
Summi lenitatem mirare. \^Epistola prU 
vatim ad Barnesium scripta^ (Bentl. 
p. 121.) erat ipsius Bentleii, et hodie ex* 
Stat apud Virum laudatissimum Car. 
Bumeium. P.P.D.] 

boyle's examination of dr. bentley; 

ed. 1699.* 

P. 164. The readers of this book would be 


[* On the fly-leaf of a copy^ which I have seen^ is the 
following notice : '^— in lajdng the design of the book, in 
writing above half of it, in nviewmg a good part of the 


314 bentlby's answer to botlb. 

much obliged to any person, who could 
give them any information concerning 
this Chlontuachonthlus. [L.L] 

bentley's answer to boyle; ed. 1699- 

P. 20=15 ed. Dr. Salter, 1777. Mr. Boyle and 
his assistants are so often in the wrong, that 
it is barely doing justice to defend them 
when they are in the right. Boyle used 
the Franckfort edition of Stobaeus fol. 
1581, in which the collections of Sto- 
bans J Antonius and Maximtis are blend- 

rest, in transcribing the whole, and attending the press, 
half a year of my life went away.'' See Vol. I. p. 46. 11^ 
21. V.p. XV. of Mr. Nichols' ed. of Atterbury's Works. 
By Francis Atterbury, D.D., 
from title-page to p. 60. 

pp.90 112. 

133 184. 

217 230. 

and from pp. 231 266. 

The ejuunination, however, of R. B.'s dissertation upon 
the fables of iGsop has been generally attributed to Dr. 
Freind. The very ingenious Dr. Aldrich also smoked and 
punned plentifully on the occasion.] 


BENTLET's answer to BOYLE. 315 

ed together, so that the title of Stobaeus, 
where the quotation from Phalaris occurs, 
is in other editions the 84th, but in the 
Franckfort the 218th. The 217th title 
belongs to Antonius and Maximus, and 
there is found the same quotation. The 
singular coincidence of the number 2 1 8 
led Bentley into this mistake. [L.I*] 

P. 141 = 101. Soph. El. ai Tovs Aldus, legen- 

ai roug cciixcifg fivfitrxoprag ogoir\ 

ixhr et versus qui post ogart sequitur, 

delendus. Neque enim adulteriis et 

ejusmodi nugis immorabantur, in caedi- 

bus et incestu puniendis satagentes Fu- 

rijB. [P.P.D.] 
P. 142. penult. = 102, 21. A parody of Eu- 

ripides in that very scene, »a) ^vfjupfitrov^t 

irofoi fMi. [P.P.D.] 
P. 159=114. Thersias=Thersander.] Of this 

Prof. Porson found no instance. [P.P.D.] 
P. 236, 1. 24=169, 20. Read, 

P. 303, 


p. 303, 20=219,8. For Sannyrian read 
Susariany and see above, pp. 202, 211 
= 144, 151. [P.P.D.] 

P. 330, 23=s237* 1* antepen. Compassion. 


P. 355=256. [An. Gr. i. 196.] imwrofitpog 
MSti Vatican! servabat R. P. cetera ut 
apud Gaisford. ad Hephaest p. 10. 


P. 425=306. Hesiod. 0pp. et D. 649. ^«^o- 

^i(rfi,i¥og [P.P.D.] 


Introduction to the Tale of a Tuby p. 51. first 
ed. ' " Fourscore and eleven Pamphlets 
have I writ under three Reigns, and 
for the Service of six and thirty Fac- 
tions."' Gulliver's Travels, vol. i. p. 22. 
first ed. " On each side of the Grate was 
a small Window not above six Inches 
from the Ground : into that on the left 
Side, the King's Smiths conveyed four- 
score and eleven Chains, like those that 



hang to a Lady's Watch in Europe^ and 
almost as large, which were locked to 
my left Leg with six and thirty Pad- 
From the curious coincidence of the num- 
bers in these two passages, Professor 
Porson inferred that both were written 
by the same person, that is, that Swift 
was the author of the " Tale of a Tub.'* 



Lewis' Historical Essay on the Consecration 
of Churches, p. 41. " For he alone who 
is the only and best Son of the best and 
greatest Father, in compliance with his 
Father's love to Mankind, most willing, 
ly cloathed himself with our nature, who 
were bury'd in Corruption, and like a 
careful Physician (who for the Health's 
sake of his Patients looks into the wounds, 
lightly stroketh the Sores, and from other 
many Calamities attracteth Grievances 


318 pope's epilogue to his satires. 

upon himself) he himself hath saved us" 

Hippocrates de flatibus T. I. p. 295. 

ed. Foes. p. 339. ed. Mack. Vienn. 1743. 
(Euseb. p. 373. C.) Gregor. Nazianz. 
Or. T. p. 12. D. X. p. 173. A. Plutarch. 
Quaest. Rom. in fine p. 291. C. Lucian. 
bis Accus. non longe ab initio p. 283. 
Aid. [II, 793.] Tzetz. Chil. vii. 990. 
Simplic. in Epictet 37- p. 212. 

KR. pope. 

'^ As hog to hog in courts of Westpfaaly.*' 

Epilogue to the Satires, ii. 171* p. 336. 
Vol. IV. ed. War ton J] One would hard- 
ly suspect that the property of " This 
filthy simile, this beastly line,'' may 
be contested. This, however, has been 
the case, as appears by the following 
faithful extract from Mist's Journal, 
Saturday, Feb. 18, 1721. p. 694. " On 
Tuesday-Night last at the Theatre ia 
Drury-Lane, | was acted a Comedy, 


pope's epilogue to his satires. 319 

called the Refusal, or the Ladies' | Phi- 
losophy, which was stolen from a Co- 
medy lately acted | in Lincoln's Inn 
Fields, called No Fools like Wits, which 
was I stolen from a Comedy called the 
Female Virtuoso's, which | was stolen 
from a Comedy of Moliere, called Les 
Femmes Sca\vantes. Such Authors as 

this Mr. D s says are fed | like hogs 

in Westphalia, one is tied to the tail of 
another, | and the last feeds only upon 
the excrements of the rest, | and there- 
fore is generally when full grown, no 
bigger than | a Pig." — Pope was a dili- 
gent reader of Mist's Journal ; witness^ 
his Quotations from that Journal of June 
22, 1718, and May 8, 1728, in the Tes- 
timonies of Authors prefixed to the Dun- 

ciad. Vol. V. p. 3/, 38. Now if D s 

means, as it probably does mean, the 
redoubted John Dennis, it is rather cu- 
rious that Pope should be indebted for 
so singular an idea to his old friend or 
foe. The number 1718 is, I believe, a 
false print for 1728^ as it stands in the 


320 warburton's tracts. 

folio edition, Proleg. p. 75, printed in 
or about 1735. [L.I.] 
[" Our modern authors write Plays as they 
feed Hogs in Westphalia; where but 
one eats Pease or Acorns, and all the rest 
feed upon his and one another's Excre- 
ments. — So the Spaniard first invents 
and designs Plays ; the French borrow 
from them, and the English from the 
French." Butlers Remains^ Vol. ii. 
pp. 496j 7» The Editor suspects that 
Mr. Pope had seen either Butler's ** ma- 
nuscripts, or had taken a Hint from 
some Conversation with Bishop Atter^ 
bury J who had been favoured by Mr. 
Longueville with an inspection of them/' 
And Warburton seems to have coun- 
tenanced this suspicion ; see W.'s Lett, 
to Hurd, p. 288.] 

Written on the fly-leaf of a Copy of the 
" Tracts by Warburton and a WarburtonianJ' 

N.B. These two Tracts by Warburton, Mis- 
cellaneous Translations and Critical En- 

warburton's tracts. 321 

qiiiry, complete the edition of Bp. W/s 
Works published by Bp. Hurd. [L.I.] 
[Warburton's Specimen * of a new edition of 
Velleius Paterculus appeared in Bibl. 
Britannique, T, vii* 264. — " which/' 
adds his late biographer, " M'as then 
communicated to his friend Dr. Middle- 
ton ; who advised him very properly to 
drop the design, * as not worthy of his ta- 
lents and industry,' " which,'' he says, 
" instead of trifling on words, seems cal- 
culated rather to correct the opinions 
and manners of the world." If it be 
allowed that words, " to all moral pur- 
poses," are equivalent to deeds, it will 
hardly be contested that they have con- 
siderable influence on the sentiments 
and habits of mankind. If verbal cri- 
ticism " embrace the whole circle of hu- 
man knowledge," it cannot be contempt- 
ible ; — and if it be calculated to give 
a proper bias to cultivated understand- 

* This specimen has been referred to with approbation 
by Ruhnkenius in his valuable edition of V. Paterculus, 
l.xvi. p. 65.. 

Y ings, 



322 waebueton's ikacts. 

ings, it might have conduced to tutor 
W/s " voracious appetite for knowledge, 
and to produce a better " digestion*. 
The unworthy antagonist of Bentley, 
however, had no predilection for an ex- 
ercise, by which the native vigour of 
W/s genius would have been trained and 
disciplined, and from which his friend 
and director might have profited great- 
ly -f*. In his two pamphlets, from which 
Dr. Bentley 's Proposals for printing a 
new Edition of the Greek Testament and 
St. Hierom's Latin Version " received a 
great shock in the eye of the world J,'' 
Dr. Middle ton was assisted by the learned 
Dn Ashton, then Master of Jesus-Col- 
lege, Cambridge. Indeed, our matchless 
Critic might, with justice, have retorted 

* Memoirs of Cumberland^ p. 28. 1st ed. 

f <M ought to caution you against tnisting to the trans- 
lations of Middleton : they are all vile^ and many of them 
unfeithful." Mr. Fox to Trotter, vol. ii. p. 492. Perhaps 
the memory of Dr. M.'s friend alone is concerned in this 
well-founded assertion. 

I Dr. Wilkins's Letter to Bp. Nicholson dated '^ Lam- 
beth-House, Dec. 24, 1720." 


waeburton's tracts. 323 

upon his disingenuous adversary the 
sweeping assertion — that he published 
" other men's labours, and reserved the 
whole reputation of them to himself*/^— 
It may appear a httle extraordinary that 
Dr. M., who was at that time sinking to 
a degree of scepticism wholly inconsist- 
ent with revealed religion, should all at 
once start up, and with a grave coun- 
tenance advocate the text of R. Stephens ; 
but " the musical Conyers' was a desig- 
nation which could not be pardoned ; it 
must be resented at any rate : si non 
nocuissetj mortuus esset. — Another fa- 
cetious friend of Dr. Bentley, Mr. Pope, 

"^ I proceed not to higher matter at present. See the 
able^ but lenient^ sentence passed upon another work [Life 
of Cicero] by an illustrious scholar, who knows when to 
doubt, and when to decide ; Prjef. ad Bellenden, pp* m% 
iv. — The following lines are affixed as a motto to a pam- 
phlet published in 1719, and purporting to be an answer 
to Mr. Miller ; it was probably drawn up under Dr. Befd^ 
ley's inspection ; at leasts he was occasionally consulted : 

"Avegi \;Av^g) /xffv] ATAHTHPI Sfo) y&V 9\(nvi<pv(rav, 
*A>X ofjM rm ^vcSof ^(o y^o; ixirrratro. 
Athen. vni, 337. E, F. An. Gr. ni, 234. 

Y 2 <c ij^J 


" used to teir Warburton, " that when he 
had anything better than ordinary to say, 
and yet too bold, he always reserved it 
for a second or third edition, and then 
nobody took any notice of it/' Accord- 
ingly in the first edition of the Dunciad, 
P. tried the public taste for slander; 
and succeeding beyond his most sanguine 
hopes, he, diffident creature, added a 
fourth book*, in which he gratified the 
ignorant and malicious by assailing men 
of real learning and worth, amongst 
whom he very properly ranked Dr. Bent- 
ley. The Doctor being informed that 
Mr. P. had abused him, replied, " Ay, 
like enough : I spoke against his Homer ; 
and the portentous cub never for- 



Pausan. Eliac. 13. p. 484. recte Musgravius 

♦ [See Mr. Pope to Warburton, ix. 351.] 
t [** Mr. Pope's verses are pretty ; they are not the 
translation of Hdmer, but of Spondanus."] 



in opusculo, quod valde commendare 
solebat R.P*, p. 127. rgo ravrfig pro 

Herodot. vi, 127. recte Gronovius judicata 
vocem oToyovov excidisse (vid. Musgr. 
pp. 178—184.). 

Pausan. Corinth. 19* p. 152. (Musgr. pp. 
185, 6.) Lenius est, ig M^icifPi rS Ki/trov 
xa) roig aToyopoitri ro opofMt Xf/^^yai rS?; 
/3. ^. utionica paragoge utaturPausanias, 
quod semel atque iterum fecit Plato. 

Idem Eliac. 18. 424. (Musgr. pp. 193, 4.) 
MS. Facii, ix rSvii h yi^og ifaf;^?? yo- 
vouiTfig Tfig vr\g C. Lege, K. »a) rolg t. ?r 
yivog i^(tgxflg f» Tovovirfjg rtig uri^ 0». 
Nempe cum %x ante Tovovtrng omissum 
esset, librarius A, errorem corrigens, no- 
tam hujusmodi •/. ante vocem Topoutrfjg 
posuit, et aliam, ei similem, in margine, 
cum s« roi^., quibus hoc volebat, " U insere 
ante yov/^ (sc. ante yovovartig). Librarius 
autem B, quum ix yop. %xto¥ legisset,et no- 
tam textui appictam vel praetervidisset, 
vel neglexisset, effecit quod hodie vulga- 
tur. Neque mirum U omitti anteTopoutrng, 


326 Anderson's English poets. 

cum mox ex parte MSStorum evanuerit 
ing ante CmvSpo^. Praecipuam emen- 
dationis partem fecit et egregie defendit 
Musgr. p. 194. [Legendum autem To- 
yoiWft duplici litera* quippe contractum 
e TofUtrtra II. B. 573.] 

[Written on a blank- leaf prefixed to the sixth 
Volume of Dr. Anderson's Edition of the 
English Poets. L.I.] 

The Editor has with singular good feith sup- 
pressed above seven hundred of Dry^ 
den's verses, to wit, the twenty-seventh 
idyUium of Theocritus with the transla- 
tions from the third and fourth books 
of Lucretius. If the indecency of some 
passages was the cause of their sup- 
pression, why were not the verses against 
the love of life and the fear of death re- 
tained ? Dr. Anderson has also omitted 
near two octavo pages of preface ; but 
to be consistent, he should have can- 
celled the paragraph, in which mention 



is made of that part of the third book. 
However, to make Dryden some amends 
for depriving him of his own^ he has 
given him two poems that are not his ; 
Tarquin and TuIHgj and Suum Cuique. 
Suum Cuique was written by some 
stanch Jacobite, but I know not whom ; 
Tarquin and Tullia was written by 
Arthur Mainwaringj who afterwards 
turned Whig, and expiated his youthful 
heresy in the Medley, See Malone's 
Life of Dryden, p. 546. 
The accuracy of the editor is equal to his 
good faith. P. 679m Horace de arte 
Amandi, for Ovid. 

• « 


* Cum minus robust^ valetudine uteretur 
Raphael^ effusius quam vires suae fere-* 


[* The ingenious and spirited biographer of Michael 
Angela applied to R. P. to express in Latin, for his use, 
the cause which^ humanly speakings hastened Raphad'a 



bant, veDeri operam dedisse videtur, 
unde calorem et debilitatem consequi 
nihil mirum. Medici (pluralem enim 
Vasari numerum adhibet, alii unum 
modo memorant) existiroationi sus et 
qusestui fortasse metuentes, si tanto viro 
mortem accelerasse crederentur, banc ex- 
cusationem prsetexebant, se a Raphaele, 
qu^ erat verecundi^, veram febris causam 
celatos esse, caloremque ex alia et ordi- 
naria eausa ortum putantes, sanguinem 
misisse, et s| a^aigictatg curasse, aliter 
facturos, si sibi rem candide, ut erat, 

dissolution. Our deeply regretted Professor, though per* 
sonally unknown to Mr. Duppa, complied with his request 
in the most handsome, that is, in his usual manner : he im* 
mediately cleared his table of a learned load, and, in Mr. D.'s 
presence, clothed in a Roman dress the verbal communi* 
cation. R. P. requested leave to correct the proof, which 
contained this notice, as he " cared not to be answerable 
for any nonsense but his own/' For the notice of this piece 
of good service I am indebted to that profound and acute 
scholar, the Rev. P. Elmsleyj and for the insertion of it 
here to Mr. Duppa, who very generously intrusted me with 
R. P/s autograph. The accentual marks were, no doubt, 
adapted either to disguise the favour, or to harmonise it 
with other extracts cited from modem Latin-writers.] 



naiTdsset. Quicquid est hujus, ex ambi- 
guo sermonis usu, gravis error prognatus 
est et vulgares libros pervagatus; Ra^ 
phaelem scilicet non, quod verum esse 
jam vidimus, ex nimia veneris indulgen- 
tia, sed ex turpis morbi contagione mor« 
tern obiisse. lAft of Raffaelloy p. 24i 



[Congratulatory Letter to the Rev. and 
learned Martin Davy*, D.D. on being 
elected Master of Gonville and Caius Col^ 
legej Cambridge.^ 

Dear Doctor, 

I heartily congratulate you, 

and your friends, and the College, and the 
University, on your well deserved promotiont 
XfiTJi r$ troti fMv *£XXa3^, *^Waiog ii ci'f. I shall 
not trespass upon your time with a long let- 
ter, occupied as I take it for granted you 
must be with the circumstances attendant on 
your elevation, and with the swarm of ad- 
dresses that invade you from all quarters. 
Neither shall I amuse myself with foretelling 
the future glories of your reign. I never but 
once ventured on a similar prediction, and 
then my success was such as completely dis- 

* [See Tracts, pp. 231. 247. bis. 276.] 

t [Iph. Aul. 1407. Zij^oD Sf Edd., ZijAw yf— is quoted 
hy Matthew Bust of Eton in his dedication to Abp. Abbot 
of quasi-Iambic verses written by John Metropolitan of 
Euchania or Eochaita; 4to. 1610.] 



couraged me from setting up for a prophet 

again. But a passage from Cicero"*^ had long 

lain rusting^ in my mind^ which passage I had 

almost despaired of introducing, when lo ! the 

occasion, which the gods hardly durst have 

promised to my wishes, revolving time threw 

in my way^!. ErSt tibi gravis adversaria con- 

stituta et parata, incredibilis quaedam expec- 

tatio : quam tu una re facillime vinces, si hoc 

statueris, Quarum laudum gloriam adamaris, 

quibus artibus eae laudes comparantur, in iis 

esse laborandum. *********** 
♦ «««««««##«#♦#« * * * 

is gone to Brighton for the benefit of his 
health, which had been for some time in a 
very precarious state ; but I learn that he has 
found, what he could not, it seems, find in 
London, a physician, whose prescriptions have 
done him some good. And now we are talk- 
ing of physicians, I have been lately studying 
anatomy. The last subject I cut up was 
human nature ; and I discovered, that all the 

* [Ep. ad Curio. I. iv, 1 19. ed. Benedict, 
f — ^^^ suffer it to rust in his possession,'' Letters to 
Travis, p. 217. 
t Mn. IX, 6, 70 



wars, and murders, and bloodshed, and quar- 
rels, and cruelties, that are incident to sickly 
mortals (mortalibus sgris"*^) arise from their 
follies, and vices, and crimes ; and if the doc- 
tors would undertake to purge and correct 
the humours which feed those follies, pamper 
those \dces, and engender those crimes, the 
fee must be large indeed, that I should grudge 

*la^0ii zaMTfira xeu artigag (pgivag avigSfj 
TloWovg ap fuarfiovg Mm fJUiyaXovg i^i^f. 

But I am committing the very fault I pro* 
mised to avoid. I wish you long life and 
health to wear your new dignity to the mu- 
tual satisfaction of yourself and the public, 

and I remain, 

Dear Doctor, 

Your faithful friend, 
Essex Court, No. 5. and humble servant, 

June 3, 1803. ^ 


♦ [Lucret. vi, i. Virg. Geo. i, 237, etc.] 
t (Theognb apud Brunck. Gnom. poet. Gr« 424.— ^onf* 
R. P. ad Taup. p. 463, Adverss. 313.] 

( 333 ) 


[Fr(w» the Gentleman* s Magazine for Auguit^ 1787, 

pp. 662, 653.'] 

** To attemper our admiration^ be has however thought fit to note 
the slumbers even of thb great genius — and this not in a style of 
perfunctory disquisition, but with such a degree of asperity as 
critics discover when they are criticising the works of a rival." 

Hawkins V. Johnson. 44S. 

Mr. Urban, Aug. 3. 

PIavb you read that divine book^ the ^^ Life of Samuel 
Johnson, LL.D. by Sir John Hawkins, Knt. ? '' Have you 
done any thing but read it since it was first published ? 
For my own part, I scruple not to declare, that I could 
not rest till I had read it quite through, notes^ digressions^ 
index, and all ;— then I could not rest till I had gone over 
it a second time. I begin to think that increase of appe- 
tite grows by what it feeds on'*'; for I have been reading 
it ever since. I am now in the midst of the sixteenth 
perusal; and still 1 discover new beauties. I can think of 

[*ShakBp.'8 liamlet, p. 154. £d. PR.] 



nothing else ; I can talk of nothing else. In short, my 
mind is become tumid, and longs to be delivered oftkam 
many and great conceptions* with which it has laboured 
dnce I have been thrbugh a course of this most perfiect 
exemplar of biography. The compass of learning, the ex- 
tent and accuracy of information, the judicious criticisms^ 
die moral reflections, the various opinions, legal and poli- 
tical, to say nothing of that excess of candour and charitj 
that breathe throughout the work, make together such a 
collection of sweets, that the sense aches f at them. To 
crown all, the language is refined to a degree qfimmacu^ 
late purity J and displays the whole force of turgid elo^ 
qutnceX. Johnson, to be sure, was thought for a while to 
have a knack at life- writing ; but who, in his senses, would 
compare him to our Knight ? Sir Thomas Urquhart, in 
the account of Crichton, (which the Knight has given us^ 
304. because it is so intimately connected with J6hnson's 
life,) kondersponders it pretty well; but even he must 
yield the palm. 

Read Hawkins once, and jou can read no more. 
For all books else appear so mean, so poor; 
Johnson's a dunce ; but still persist to read. 
And Hawkins will be all the books jou need§. 

* Hawkins v. Johnson, 959. 

t [The traces of this are, I suspect, in our national bard ; the 
passage, however, is not at hand: 

'* When I have thought on what would charm the sense. 
Till it would almost ache with tenderness.'' 

Mountaineers, iii, i.] 
Jlbid. 367. 

§ [Altered from a passage in the Duke of Backingham's Essay on ' 



Sir John has, in his own person, verified a reflection of 
Johnson's upon that charming writer Sir Richard Black* 
more (and he too was knight and bookmaker), ^^ He wrote 
on as he had written before, and neither turned aside to 
■often his critics by civility, nor repress the^l by confuta- 
tion/' See also what our biographer says to the same 
purpose, but in terms much more elegant, 349. Now ob- 
serve, Mr. Urban, how exactly this has been Sir John's 
case. The witlings and critics of the day combined to run 
down that excellent book the ^^ History of Music,'' in five 
volumes quarto ; and their malice prevailed so effectually, 
for some time, that people who had any regard for their 
reputation were ashamed to have the book, or to know 
any thing about it. But Sir John was steady to his reso- 
lution ; he wrote on as he had unit ten before; and pre- 
sented the publick with this last best gift*, which not only 
sells itself, but is the cause of selling the Knight's other 
works. Horv was my heart dilated^ as my friends can 
testify it was, with the news of this Life being translated 
into the Russian language f! I am credibly informed, 
that since the publication of this Life, a copy of the ^^ Hi- 
story of Music" has risen, first from half a guinea to twelve 
and six pence, next to fifteen shillings, nay, that even a 
guinea has been paid for a set handsomely bound in mo- 
rocco. So that the bookseller, instead of losing two 
hundred and fifty pounds, b likely to lose not above two 
hundred and thirty, or two hundred and forty, at most. — 
I beg pardon, Mr. Urban, for this rapture. But I cannot 

• [Milton, P. L.T, 19.] 

t This mat told me, hut the fact wants confirmation. Hawkins v. 
Johnson, 950. 



govern my imagination^ whenever I think or q>eak of that 
great man. However, as I disapprove of genera) criticisBij 
I will try to check my enthusiasm, and point out some feir* 
of the numberless beauties that shine through this iiiiiiii<« 
table performance. Of the Knight's learning, which some 
prophane critics have been hardy enough to question^ no' 
Zoilus will dare to doubt in future, when he learns^ from 
the Life of Johnson, 4. that struma signifies the king^s 
evil ; and, from a long Latin note, that other people have 
been afflicted with it besides the Doctor. But the passages 
quoted from Latin authors are numerous, though, it must 
be owned, very happily applied, 19. from Erasmus's Col- 
loquies, to prove that dutiful children wait upon their pa- 
rents : 312. from Archbp. Peccham ; 347* a new quotation 
from Ovid. ; 470. we are informed to our unspeakable 
comfort, that to appose means to put questions; and 
this is cleared up beyond a doubt by seven lines fi*om 
Ingulphus*. 505. 581. Next come Magna Charta and 
Justinian's Institutes. Of Magna Charta Sir John has the 
same opinion with that loyal subject Oliver Cromwell^ 
whose poetry on the occasion is well known. But the 
Knight, as his manner is, has greatly improved upon Old 
Noll's language. Besides these damning proofs, the work 
abounds in such flowers as these : Temp. Car. /• Tetnp^ 
Car, IL Dictamen. Verbatim et literatim. Sui generis. 
Notanda. Fide supra in not. Rx relatione Peter Flood. 
Exemplars. Quoad the per sofi. Eindentia rei. Ex cat he" 

* Some people may enviously suggest, tliat for this citation the 

Koight is indebted to his most dutiful son and squire, in whose Dfe 

of Rnggle, p. hiii. it occurs ; but I cannot see what they would gpt 

by it, if the fact were allowed. Is it not all in rbe family ? and 

with whom can a man make free, if not with his relations ? 


IlA^klN^ V. JOHNSON"; 337 

d¥a. Testamentary dispositions in extremis. Inops conit/tia * 
I should be glad, after this, to see the wretch that will 
dispute Sir John's Latin. As for his Greeks the proofs are 
not indeed so many, but equally strong. 

Aod when one*8 proofs are aptly chosell^ 
Three are as valid as three dozen*. 

318. 562. myops or liear^sighted persons. Seized with 
a paralysis, 461. Nb^ yag ff^rrai. The meaning is (says 
Sir John) For the night cometh. And so it is, Mr. Urban. 
I should now go on to the other beauties of this book, but 
I am distracted with the variety of subjects that call for 
notice, and consequently for admiration^ One particular 
I must mention. Whoever buys this Life, buys the pith 
and marrow of Johnson at the same time ; for the Knight 
has, with great art, inserted in his work the substance of 
the ten volumes. I cannot but laugh when I think whiit 
simpletons the booksellers are to sell the Life separately 
from the Works. Do they expect that any body will buy^ 
at a great price, in ten volumes, what he may have so 
much cheaper in one ? Never was a king in Christendom 
better bit than they are. I shkll take my leave at present) 
but next month, if you have room to spare, 1 shall resume 
the pleasing task of criticising this delightfiil book. I 
shall display its beauties ; I shall vindicate it from the ob- 
jections of the envious and ignorant ; for such there are ) 
and you, Mr. Urban, I fear, have not done justice to the 
Knight's merit. Lastly, with all due deference, I shall 
beg leave to propose a few corrections and amendments^ 
It is doubtless of the utmost importance to know what al-« 

•[ ] 

z t^rations 

538 PANEGTltlCAL £PI8T£]^ ON 

tmtions hafe been made in the second editicm ; t shall 
therefore give the reader a collation of the principd pat- 
sages where I have noted any variation. No apology needs 
sorely to be made for descending to such seemingly minute 
particular9.^-The different editions of so valuable a book 
have full as good a right to be collated as the MSS. of a 
musty old classic, the editions of Shakespeare, or even of 
Ignoramus itself. In a statue from the hand of PhicBas^ 
I would not, if I could help it, have a single toe-nail 
amiss*. And, since the smallest speck is seen on aiowf*^ I 
am persuaded that the Knight himself will not be displeased 
with a freedom which proceeds solely from esteem. 

Sundry Whbrbof. 

[fVoiii the same tisefid Mucellamf for September 

1787, pp. 751—753-3 

It is mj wish, mj plan, 
To lose 00 drop of that immorbil roan. 

Currick ex relatumcSin John Uawkiks, 195. 

Mr. Urbin^ Sept. 17. 

Thbrb was an ancient sage Philosopher, by name Ari-* 
stotle, whose soul has since transmigrated into Lord Mon- 
boddo. An admirer of this same Aristotle said, that ^' he 
was the scribe of Nature, dipping his pen into the mind.'' 

♦ [Sec Foote's *' Taste-T t [Ony, fab. xi.J 



^he Greek*^ an Oxford scholar of my acquaintance informs 
me, is the motto to the Variorum Shakespeare. This 
KoRciBLB AND JUST BXPREssTON is vastly like what Gar- 
rick says in Sir John^s excellent book, 443. Sha'kespearBy 
when he sat down to write, dipped his pen into his own 
heart. Might we not say of the Knight with equal force 
(2nd just ice J '^ that he is the clerk of biography, dipping 
his pen into the Statutes at large f*^ Since I had tbe 
pleasure of writing to you, Mr. Urban, I have been listen^ 
ing to the opinions of yoUr readers on the subject of my 
letter, and I find that the greater part of them treat it 
with ridicule or neglect* The supercilious lip of scotn 
protruded itself, 564. But I have at the same time r^ 
ceived the flattering news that Sir John himself (satis est 
Equitem mihi plauderef) b highly pleased with my well^ 
meant, though humble attempts, to illustrate and vindicate 
his writings ; attempts, let me tell you, by no meana 
needless ; for in these licentious times^ when 

The baby beats the nurse, and quite athwart 
Goes all decorumt 

the very schoolboys take a pride to gird at their elders and 
betters. I protest what I am going to relate is an absolute 
fact. Soon after the publication of Sir John's book, a 
parcel of Eton boys, not having the fear of God before 
their eyes, &c. instead of playing truant, robbing orcfaard^^ 
annoying poultr}', or performing any other part of their 
school exercise, fell foul iti print § upon his Worship's 

•r ] 

t [Hor. Serm. I. x. 76.] 

X [Shake8peare*s Measure for Measure, p. 63. ed. PR. repr.] 

( Sec the Microcosm, No. xxxri. p. 407., 

2 3 censure 


censure of Addison's middling style, and even sneered at 
the story of the Quaker, which I hold to be as good a thinig 
as any in the volume. But what can you expect, as Lord 
Kaimes justly observes, from a school where boys are taii^it 
to rob on the highway ? In my last, I promised you a col- 
lation of the two editions of Sir John's work ; but this I 
shall at present defer, and only give you my remarks on a 
irariation of which yOu have already taken notice in yoilr 
Magazine for June, p. 522^ 

In this age, which is so sharp-sighted in detecting 
forgery, I may perhaps be carried away by the prevailing 
rage ; but I cannot help thinking, that the whole addition 
in pages 585-6 is spurious, and did not proceed from the 
pen of Sir John Hawkins. The Knight's style is clear and 
elegant; this account^ cloudy, hiconsistent, and embar- 
rassed. But I shall content myself with asking a few 
queries upon this important paragraph. 

Qu. I. Would a writer, confessedly so exact in his choice 
of words as the Knight, talk in this manner : While be 
was preparing — an accident happened — ? As if one should 
752 say of that unfortunate divine*. Dr. Dodd, an accideni 
proved fatal to him ; he happened to vmte another man'a 
name, &c. 

Qu. II. Would not Sir John have told us the name of 
the person who is so darkly described in this narration } 
He is not usually backward in mentioning people's names 
at full length, where any thing is to be said to their cre- 
dit. . 

Qu. III. Would he not have told us something more 
about the important paper of a public nature, which he 
missed after receiving a visit from Mr. Anon}inous ; or 



would he not rather have inserted it in the Life^ as it pro- 
bably would have filled a page or two ? 

Qu. IV. Where was this parchment-covered book, which 
Sir John happened to lay his fingers upon ? was it lying 
carelessly about in the room^ or concealed in a desk ? In 
short, was it in such a place that a common acquaintance, 
as I suppose Mr. Anonymous is represented, could have 
easily carried it off? 

Qu. V. How did Johnson learn (not surely from his eye- 
sight), before the Knight could convey his prize away, 
(con V£Y Ihe Wise ii call*), that his fnend was taking such 
kind care of his property ? You see, Mr. Urban, how mi- 
serably this story hangs together. 

Qu. VI. If the fact was exactly as it is here stated, how 
came Johnson to be so exceedingly provoked, that, as we 
are left to collect from the sequel, the Knight durst noj^ 
approach him till he was appeased by a penitential letter ? 

Qu. VII. What is become of this penitential letter ? and 
how happens it to be omitted, if such a letter was ever 
written ? Sir John would certainly ha,\e fed us with so nou- 
rishing a morsel (46) in a genuine account of this accident, 
partly to swell the volume, and partly to furnish the world 
with a perfect model of precatory eloquence , 270. 

Qu. VIII. Would not the Knight also have favoured us 
with Johnson's answer in detail, without apologizing for 
the omission, by saying, that it would render him suspected 
of inexcusable vanity ? If the answer was, as the defenders 
of the authenticity of this paragraph, I am told, affirm it 
was, melius est pcenituisse quam nunguam peccdssefy it must 
be owned that it is enough to make any body v^in. I sh^ll 

*[ ] t[ ] 



attempt a translation for the benefit of your mere Engliali 
readers : There is more joy over a sinner that repmUeik 
than over a just person that needeth no repentance^ • And 
we know, from an authority not to be disputed, that JbAn-r 
jen was a great lover of penitents. Life, p. 406. 

God put it in thj iniiid tn take it hence, 

That thou might'st win the more thy [Johnson's] love, 

Pleading so wisely in eicuse of it. 

% lien. IV. fp. 95- ed. pr. repr.] 

Having, I flatter myself, fsdrly got rid of this interpola-* 

tion, I shall venture to hint my sentiments upon a contrary 

ftnlt, an omission. In the Life, p. 460, 461, we have an 

ample description of a watch that Johnson bought for 

seventeen guineas ; but, just as we expect some important 

eonsequence from this solemn introduction, the history 

breaks off, and suddenly opens another subject. Now^ 

Mr. Urban, some days ago I picked up a printed octavo 

leaf, seemingly cancelled and rejected. It was so covered 

with mud and dirt, that I could only make out part of it^ 

which I here send you, submitting it to better judgement, 

whether this did not originally fill the chasm that every 

reader of taste and feeling must at once perceive in the 

history of the watch. It is more difficult to find a reason 

why it was omitted. But I am persuade^ that the person, 

who is the object of Sir John's satire, was so hurt at the 

home truths contained in it, that he tampered with the 

printers to have it suppressed, 

*«*»#*»*» u ^ J ijpyg^ touching this watch 
filready by me mentioned, I insert a notable instance of 

♦ [St. Luke, X?, 7.] 



the craft and selfishness of the Doctor's Negro servant. A 
few days after that whereon Dr. Johnson died^ this artful 
fellow came to me, and surrendered the watch, saying at 
the same time, that his master had delivered it to him a 
day or two before his demise, with such demeanouf and 
gestures, that he did verily believe that it was his intention 
that he, namely Frank, should keep the siime. Myself 
knowing that no sort of credit was due to a black domestic 
and favourite servant, and withal considering that the wear- 
ing thereof would be more proper for myself, and that I 
had got nothing by my trust of executor save sundry old 
books, and coach-hire for journeys during the discharge of 
the said office ; and further reflecting on what I have oc- 
casion elsewhere to mention, viz. that, since the abolishing 
general warrants, temp. Geo. III. no good articles in this 
branch can be had any longer in England, I took the watch 
from him, intending to have it appraised by my own jew* 
eller, a very honest and expert artificer, and, in so doings 
to have bought it as cheap as I could for myself, let it oost 
what it would. Upon my signifying thb my intention to 
Frank, the impudent Negro said, ^ he plainly saw there 
was no good intended for him;' and in anger left* me. 753 
He then posted to my coDeagues the other executors ; and 
there being in thj people of this country a general propen- 
sity to humanity, notwithstanding all my exertions to coun- 
teract the same both in writing''' and otherwise; this being 
the case, 1 say, he had found means to prepossess them 
so entirely in his favour, that they snubbed me, and in- 
sisted with me that I should make restitution.' Finally, 

* See Sir John*8 proofs, that e^ery prisoner ought to be convicted, 

and every convict hanged, 521 —S. 



though perhaps I should not have been amenable to any 
known judicature by keeping the watch, I consented, being 
compelled thereto, to let this worthless fellow retain that 
testimony of his master's ill-directed benevolence in extrer 

w * * ^? -K 

You perceive, Mr. Urban, that in these remarks 1 have 
been content humbly to imitate the Knight. He has, to 
the eternal honour of true criticism, thrown out some in- 
terpolations, and recovered some additional passages in 
his edition of Johnson's Works. Of the first sort is the 
Qonduding sentence of the Preface to Shakespeare, which 
Sir John, purely by his own judgement and sagacity, saw 
was spurious, and had been inserted, without Dr. John-r 
son's consent or knowledge, in order to pay one Steevens 
a compliment. This being, as doubtless it was, Sir John's 
opinion, I cannot see why his enemies should cry out so 
loudly upon this falsification, as they call it. They say 
that Sir Jqhn, in order to give some colour to this fiaudu- 
lent omission, pretends to print bom tl^e first edition, which 
wants this paragn^h ; though at the same time he follows 
the last editions throughout the rest of the Prefece. They 
lay, besides, that personal quarrel and private spleen — ^but 
what signifies it what such fellows say ? J[n the other part 
of criticism Sir John is equally eminent. He has restored 
to Johnson what a less acute critic never would have re-i 
stored ; the Apotheosis of Milton and the Review of Burke. 
And here again come those impudent wits, and tell us, with 
^ sneer, that these were not written by Johnson, but one 
by Guthrie and the other by Mr. Murphy. I am told, in- 
^^j that Mr. M^rphy has owned the Review of Burke 



to be his. But I must beg his pardon for acquiesdng in 
the decision of the Knight^ rather than in Mr. Murphy's 

Dares he think his bare word so proper to decide as 
The delicate taste of Justice Midas*? 

A few more instances of Sir John's critical discernment 

I shall reserve for next month. 

Sundry Whbrbof. 

[^F^om the same for October^ IJSJ, pp. 847 — 849.] 

" Mj character cannot be completely ruined, till myself step for- 
ward in its defencef.** Ex ore Sir John Hawkins. 

Mr. Urban^ Oct. 26. 

X Two canons of criticism are undisputed ; that an author 
cannot fail to use the best passible word on every occasion^ 
and that a critic cannot chuse but know what that word is. 
And if these rules hold good in words^ why not in sen- 

* [ ] You have read about Justice Midas, 

Mr. Urban. He was an excellent judge of music ; and gold-headed 
canes as well as gold watches stuck to his fingers wherever he went. 

f ['' A learned Prelate accidentally met Bentlcy in the diiys of 
Phalaris; and after having complimented him on that noble piece of 
criticisoQ (the Answer to the Oxford Writers) he bad him not be 
discouraged at this run upon him : for tho' they had got the laugben 
on their side, yet mere wit and raillery could not long hold oat 
against a work of so much merit. To which the other replied, 
" Indeed, Dr. S. [Sprat], I am in 00 pain about the matter. For I 
hold it as certain^ that no man was ever written out of reputation^ hut 
by himself J^ Warburtoq on Pope, iv, t59.] 

I Note on the Danciad| II. 1. 



lences ? These points being granted^ it follows^ that when- 
ever Sir John Hawkins, in quoting any part of Johnson's 
Works, adopts a reading diflerent from the editions, it is 
to be replaced in the text, and the other discarded. Now 
to apply. We read in the vulgar editions of London, vol. xi. 
' p. 319. ^^ And fixM on Cambria's solitary shore/' But 
how much better is Sir John's reading (56) ! ^' And fix'd in 
Cambria's solitary shore." I would not believe that Johnson 
wrote otherwise, though Johnson himself should affirm it. 
Again, in the last number of The Rambler, vol. vii. p. 395. 
Johnson says, or is made to say, '^ I have endeavoured to 
fefine our language to grammatical purity.*' How tame, 
dullp flat, lifeless, insipid, prosaic, &c. is this, compared to 
what the Knight has substituted (291) — grammar and 
pwriiy I A fine instance of the figure Hen dia duoin I like 
Virgil's pateris et auro*; or like — but I will not overpower 
yon with my learning; or, more properiy speaking, with 
mj lettered ignorance ^ tor that is the statutable phrase, 
and so it ought to have been printed in the verses on Le- 
vett, vol. xi. p. 366. upon the authority of the Knight 
(555), instead of lettered arrogance : Lettered ignorance 
is a beautifiil oxymorony and hints that people who affect 
to be men of learning, may be very ignorant notwithstand- 
ing. Examples, I suppose, will occur to every reader. 
Here I cannot help hazarding, though somewhat out of its 
place, a conjecture of my own upon a passage in Sir John's 
w:ork (311), '^ Among men of real learning there is but 
848 ^me opinion — " Ought it not to be, ^' Among us* men of 
real learning" — ? In the same Rambler, Johnson says, 
'^ On this part of my work I look back with pleasure, which 

• {Virg. Geo. II, IW.] 



DO blame or praise of man shall diminish or augment." 
Here the Knight has excelled himself. He has made an 
emendation hardly inferior to some of Warburton's upon 
Shakespeare, and, by thromng out two idle words, has re- 
stored the sentence to its original vigour — ^^ no praise of man 
shall diminish or augment." From this passage, thus cor- 
rected, we learn that praise, when bestowed by some peo- 
ple, is a disgrace ; a truth which the world never thoroughly 
perceived before some executors of their friend's fame ap- 
peared. Critics in a dead language, when they dislike the 
common text, quarrel with the careless or faithless tran- 
scribers. My spleen is not less moved by those negligent, 
or worse than negligent, rogues, the printers ; who have 
given us, in the preface to Johnson's Dictionary, vol. ix, 
p. 221. the following paragraph: ^^ — In gathering the 
authorities, I forbore to copy those which I thought likely 
to occur whenever they were wanted. It is remarkable, 
that in reviewing my collection, I found the word sea un- 
exemplified." Now would you believe, Mr. Urban, that 
not a word of this is genuine ? No. The true reading, or 
nearly the true reading (for the Knight (344) has not fa- 
voured us with the exact words) runs thus : ^< So near, per- 
fection have I brought this Dictionary, that, upon a review 
of it, previous to my drawing up the preface, I am unable 
U> detect the casual omission of more than one article, the 
appellative ocean." You, I daresay, Mr. Urban, and 
many others, had no more wit than to imagine that John- 
son was rather confessing his weakness than exulting in his 
strength ; that he meant to show how the most common 
things may escape our notice, and therefore says^ *^ In re- 
viewing my coDectioD^ I found the word sea unexemplified." 



See, Sir, how grievously you were mistaken. Johnson^ in 
the sentence we have retrieved^ boasts of the perfection to 
which he has brought his work^ in the modest style of 
Exegi monumentum — : and it was not the word sea tui* 
exemplified that made the single faulty but the appellative 
OCEAN omitted. 

The next part of my task I would gladly decline^ of pro- 
posing some corrections in Sir John's work. I shudder at 
my own rashness ; but, since I have begun, it is too late 
to retreat. P. 3S4, '^ I once travelled with Richardson in 
the Fulham stage-coach.'' Tell me the truth, Mr. Urban, 
is there not something in this sentence that grates upon 
your round and religious ears ? If the date of the fact were 
settled, I should pronounce at once, that Sir John wrote, 
^^ My oum coach being out of order , I once travelled" — A 
like omission has happened (419), ^M retired and staid in 
the outer room to take him home." Read boldly, '^ to 
take him home in my own coach" Whoever is well ac- 
quainted with the Knight's writings^ knows that he never 
misses an opportunity of using the pronoun of the first 
person. It was on this ground I offered my first conjec- 
ture. Thus we find, from the beginning of the volume to 
the end, not only my own coach, but also, my servants. 
MY servant, my lands, my country-house, my gate in 
the country, my gardener. While i was chairman. 
Intelligence in my judicial capacity. Kelly practised 
under mb. A bill found before me. I have discharged 
debtors [i. e. as judge, not as creditor] . my discourse with 
Lord Rochford. my conversation with a nobleman. Bi" 
shop Hoadley himself told mb [what he had told all the 


world before] . Sir John (386) has given a list of the books 



in ana, but h&s forgotten one of the most famous, called 
Jomilleriana. This is the more extraordinary, because he 
is indebted to it for two of his best stories in pages 192 
and 348 ; and the Knight is a man of such nice honour^ 
that he never borrows from an author without acknow- 
ledging the obligation. Witness Mr. Boswell, Mrs. Piozzi, 
the Gentleman's and European Magazines, &c. 

Did I tell you, Mr. Urban, that Sir John has a delicatt 
hand at a compliment ? If I told you so, I told you nothing 
but the truth. Out of fifty proofs I shall produce two. 
P. 211, Dr. Hill obtained from one of those universitiet 
(St. Andrew's), which would scarce refuse a degree to ai^ 
apothecary's horse, a diploma*. The civil things that 
Johnson said of Scotland were highly grateful and honour- 
able to the natives, or Mr. Boswell would not have re- 
corded them. But, in my mind^ the Knight is far superior 
to his model both in sentiment and language. By the way, 
I marvel* that Sir John, upon mentioning Dr. Hill's knight- ^^^ 
hood, did not add some remarks upon the prostitution of 
this honourf, and lament that it is so often conferred on 
the most worthless of mankind. Our present excellent 
Laureat informed His Majesty, that there was no true glory 
in the American war^ (which I fiilly believe). The lines 

* See p. 311. '' Among men (read, Among us men) of real learn- 
ing, there is but one opinion concerning Lambeth degrees, &c. — A% 
they imply nothing more than farour, they convey little or no he- 

f Compare the account of a lawyer's progress, pages 14, 15. 

X '^ Amid the thunders of the war 
True glory guides no echoing car.** 

[T. Warton's Birth-day Ode, 1795.J 


350 PANEOrElCAL £PISTt£ 6li 

were loyal and poetical ; but they show no better Uian il 
gilt two- pence when placed by the side of our Knight's 
compliment* Speaking of Dr. Dodd (52 1), he says, that 
he was not. an object of tHAT clemency which nifi ica^ 


I was luckily within hearing when Sir John^ upon read* 
ing my second letter^ employed that forcible and just ex- 
pression which I have chosen for my motto. Every word 
that issu^ from those lips is as precious to me as if it pro* 
ceeded from Dodona's oak^ or any other oracidar timber ; 
I therefore bade Jackey set it down ) my son^ Mr. Urban^ 
a dutiful and ingenious lad* He is scarcely turned of five^ 
and-twenty, and has already published Tom Thumb with 
copious Prolegomena^ notes^ and a; glossary^ accurante 
Johanne Sundreio Whereof Arm. The saying, however^ 
is not quite true^ unless it be taken cum grano salts {the 
meaning whereof is, with a grain of salt). For it seems 
at first sight to signify^ that whoever defends his own cha- 
racter, completely ruins it; which is contrary to fact and 
experience. Indeed^ if we allowed the additions in the se- 
cond impression of Johnson's Life (particularly in p. 585-6) 
to be Sir John's own^ two aukward consequences would 
follow. That however dead to shame, or callous to re- 
proof, some men pretend to be^ they have feeling enough 
to be hurt at whispers against their moral character ^^ and 
imprudence enough to make matters worse by attempting 
to vindicate themselves. A lose action is a disorder of 

* " Mjr reason for mentioning these particulars is, that the trans- 
action wbich so disturbed bim maj possiblj be better known than 
chc motives tliat actuated me at the time,'' £d. 9d. p. 585. Note. 



ike mind; and, next to the folly of doing it^ is thefoUy 
that defends it*^ I had long admired the specimens of Sir 
John's critical talents^ and was resolved, so far as my slen- 
der abilities would permit me, to follow his example. 

Nod ita certandi capidus, quam propter amorcm 
Quod te imitari, areof : 

And, I hope, I proved in my last that the story of convey- 
ing the book was an inipudent forgery, contrived by the 
Knight's foes to make him seem to bear witness against 
himself. We must, therefore, seek another interpretation 
of the hereinbeforementioned apophthegm. The true sense 
I take to be this. That a man's case is indeed desperate 
when, having no advocate to undertake his defence, he is 
obliged to step forward in person to defend himself. But 
Sir John's merit b sueh, that it animates even strangers 
to plead his cause. Though I trust there are within the 
realm five hundred as good friends { of Sir John, and abler 
defenders than I am, yet I cannot help being a little vain, 
when I reflect, that while the publick was passing its cen* 
sures on the Knight with the utmost freedom, and wrni- 
dering how he could have the front to traduce himself in 
print, I alone had the courage to step forward the cham- 
pion of a person whom, I am in doubt, whether I value 
more as an amiable man or a sprightly writer. Nor has 
my vanity only been gratified. Sir John has just sent me 
a second-hand copy, almost as good as new, of Walton's 
Complete Angler, ed. opt, 1784. In return for this act of 
generosity, which no father has ever shown to a son, no^ 

i- [La<»%t. Illy 5, 6.] 




brother to a brother^ I do hereby assure his Worship^ thai 
when any other friends of his die^ whether he 'be dis-** 
posed to carve them as a dish fit for the godsy or hew 
them like a carcase for the hounds^^ I shall be ready to 
exert my utmost powers in his behalf^ against all his ene- 
mies open or secret* 

Sundry Whsrbof. 

^ [Sbaksp/s Julias Cssar, II, i:] 

[TAe eighth Letter to Mr. Travis inserted in the 
Gentleman* s Magazine for February ^ 1790> 
pp. 128 — \3i J which makes no part of the collect 
tion reprinted by R.P. in the same year."] 

128 "I confess my suspicioDS did not carry me so far, as to conjecture 
that tbis venerable champion would be in such a mighty haste to 
come into the field, armed only with a pocket-pisiol, before bis 
great blunderbuss could be got ready, his old rusty breast-plate 
scoured, and his cracked head-piece mended/' Swur. 

To the Rev, Mr. Travis. 

I AM not ill-satisfied with the opinion of my letters which 
you have adopted from your friend Kuster. I expected no 
better sentence firom such ignorant and corrupt judges. It 
was likewise a brilliant thought of Kuster^ to urge me with 
the authority of a bodi^ for which I have always enter- 

ka. Travis's reply churlish*. 353 

Uined and avowed the profoundest contempt. He quotes 
a passage from your work, which, he says, he cannot help 
believing. I cannot help his belief, nor my own disbelirf* 
For I am infidel enough to think, notwithstanding what he 
says, that he has not read my letters either with great at- 
tention, or with any attention at all. Else he most have 
seen, that, far from making Stephens a cheat, I expressly 
disclaim the supposition. 1 accuse him of nothing but in? 
accuracy and typographical error. I say that he restored 
th^ MSS., which he had borrowed from the King's library^ 
as became an honest man and a grateful subject* While 
you maintain, that he never restored them^ but carried 
them off to Geneva, and lent them to Beza ; and this in 
spite of Stephens's own evidence to the contrary ; in spite 
of his advertisement at the end of Beza's first edition. 
^* The MSS; cited in the notes are all those which are ex- 
tant in the King of France's library." This advertisement 
you, indeed, p. 130, interpret with your usual knowledge 
and dexterity. You msdie it signify^ that Stephens lent 
those, very MSSi to Beza. In that case, Stephens ought 
to have said : ^^ The MSS. cited in the notes are those 
which were extant in the King of France's library, till I 
stole them for the service of my pious friend Beza." 
Which brings the worse charge against Stephens ; I, who 

* [he sent me word, if I said his beard wras not cut well, hee wes 
ill the niiiide it whs: this is called the retort courteous. If I sent 
him word againc, it was not well cut, he would send me word lie cot 
k to please himself: this is called the quip modest. Ifagaine, it 
was not well cut, he disabled my judgment: this is called the repiy 
churlish. If againe, it was not well cut, he would answer I spake 
not true : this is called the r^roqfe vaUant. Shaksp. As you like it, 
p. 200.] 

2 A only 


only suppose him to have misplaced a semicircle by chance ; 
or you, who suppose him to be first a thief, next a liar, and 
lastly impudent enough to publish his theft to the world ? 
It is you. Sir, not I, that make Stephens a cheat. But 
you were determined to load me with the severest reproach 
you could invent; and, to insure success, you imputed 
your own principles to me. Or perhaps you defend Ste- 
phens's reputation from the attacks of others, merely to 
have the pleasure of murdering it yourself. 

I come now to the immediate purpose of your letter. 
And here let me bestow praise where it is due. I congra- 
tulate you upon the more moderate style you have assumed. 
To me it is indifierent whether this be owing to my re* 
proof, or to your own reflection. Whatever be the cause, 
I am equally well pleased with the effect. TheJIaming theo« 
logue^ who so lately scorched us in the meridian, now sinhs 
temperately to the West, and is hardly feU as he de^ 

The proof of the inaccuracy of Stephens's edition in this 
129 place consists of two parts. 1. That it is morally impo8si«^ 
ble for the same editor to find seven MSS. of the N. T. 
all agreeing in a reading which is supported by no MS. 
whatever, Greek or Latin, that any other critic or editor 
has collated. 2. That ffour of the very MSS. used by 
Stephens have since been found in the French King's li- 
brary ; that these omit not only the words Iv rm ovgavtol, 
1 John V. 7, but also to the words h rrii fil in the next 
verse, inclusive; and therefore that the semicircle in 
R* Stephens's edition ought to be transposed. 

•r ] 

t [See Addeoda, Corrigenda to p. 7%, of R.P.'8 Letters to Mr. 




The second part of thb proof you have thought iit to 
controvert ; how justly we shall see presently. I will first 
endeavour to clear the question from that heap of rubbishy 
with which you have industriously encumbered it, and then 
to examine your objections. 

1. Le Long says, that Stephens's N" 4^ is the King^t 
MS, 2871. N"5, 3425.* N^ 7, 2242. NMO, 2870.* 
To which Wetstein adds^ that Stephens's N^ 9 is now the 
Coislinian 200, and that NM5 is the King's MS. 28()9. 
which, however, Stephens did not collate to the Catholie 

2. But according to you, ^^ Le Long affirms, that ther< 
are Only four of the rc^al MSS. containing the Catholie 
Epistles, and that these four were u^ed by R. Stephens/^ 
If Le Long affirms this, he certainly had lost either blU 
memory or his senses, or he was fond of lying for its own 
sake. For he had read Simon's Critical History, who 
quotes several of the King's MSS. different from these 
four. He had read a dissertation upon 1 John v. 7> lately 
published by Abb^ L. Roger, who makes the same appeal* 
Why then should he tell a notorious as well as a needless 
lie? How would his opinion of four certain MSS. be 
helped by the poverty, or hurt by the wealth, of the li* 
brary ? But you have mistaken Le Long's words ^^ // n*y 
a que quatre MSS. du Rot, qui contiennent les Episires 
CanoniqueSy $, e, 5> h numerotBs 2871, Wc." Now, Sir, 
if he had meant, that only four of the MSS. then (1720) 
existing in the King's library, contained the Catholic Epi-* 
sties, instead of $, e, ^, i, he would have said 2871, 3423, 
2242, 2870, Hi3 real meaning, as is plain from the con- 

* Printed in Einlyn by misukc 3445, tSrS. 

2 A 2 text. 


text, is, that, of the eight MSS. which Stephens borrowed 
from the royal library, only four contained the Catholic 
Epistles. Therefore^ says Le Long, by what I found in 
the King*s MSS. [used by Stephens], I determined what 
must have been in the copies that Stephens procured else" 

3. *' Wetstein,*' you proceed, '^ makes the whole num- 
ber to be no less than eight ; and says that Jive of them 
were formerly used by R. Stephens." If Wetstein made 
the number eight hundred, he would not contradict Le 
Long. Neither does he profess to have collated all the 
MSS. in the King's library. He only asserts that there 
are eight MSS. of the C&tholic Epistles in the King's li- 
brary ; which, though 1 have no great opinion of your mo- 
desty, I hope you will not venture to deny. 

4. '^ Mr. Griesbach contradicts both the former testi- 
monies, and makes the number of MSS. nine^five of which 
he assigns to Stephens.'' To ripen these assertions into 
contradictions, you ought to produce an expression of this 
sort from Le Long, Wetstein, and Mr. Griesbach, severally : 

{four "^ 
eight V MSS. of the Catholic Epistles^ 
nine J 

and the library conUuns no more." The only place of 

Le Long which seems to say any thing like this, I have 

explained ; and 1 defy you to point out any place in the 

others, that has the least tendency to such an assertion. 

You seem to have forgotten (if indeed you ever knew) two 

of the most common rules of criticism : Quipauciora me* 

moratj plura non negat ; qui plura memoral, pandora non 

negat. You might have given the lie to Wetstein and 

Mr. Gries- 


Mr, Griesbach, from their own words; for^ on 1 John 
V. 7^ they both quote two King's MSS. from Simon's au- 
thority^ which are not included in their general list. But 
since you seem so tickled with this palmarian argument^ 
I will improve it for you. " Le Long," you say, ^^ makes 
the whole number of MSS. to h^four, Wetstein eighty and 
Mr. Griesbach nine. Now, it is certain that the whole 
number of the French King's MSS. containing the Catholic 
Epistles is not less than twenty : therefore Le Long, Wet- 
stein, and Mr. Griesbach, are liars, &c. ; R. Stephens infal* 
lible; and 1 John v. 7. genuine. 

5. You wfsely suggest a doubt whether the Codex 
HafnieTisis ought to be comprehended in Wetstein and Mr. 
Griesbach's number. At vel dubitasse, mi homOj iam 130 
insigne oKqurlas ^' imperitice specimen esty ui prceterquam 

in tno lilro par nusquam viderim*. You doubt whether 
the Codeac Hqfniensis Regius, a MS. in the royal library at 
Copenhagen, be a MS. in the royal library at Paris 1 Hoc 
serio quenquam dixisse, summa hominum contemptio est\. 

6. *^ Le Long says, that No. 2878 is one of the MSS. 
used by Stephens, and contains the Catholic Epistles ; 
which Wetstein and Mr. Griesbach both deny." For 2878, 
read 2870, and then see what you can make of your con- 
tradiction. If you had consulted the Journal des Savans, 
instead of Emlyn's Reply, you would have set Le Long at 
variance with himself, as well as with others. For he there 
makes Stephens's No. 10 the King's MS. 2870 in the 
body of his letter, but 2878 in the table subjoined. 1 won- 
der too, while your hand was in, that you did not find other 

* Bbntley in Menand. p. 62 or 73. 
t Flint N* U. xxxvii. 9. 



contradictions in Le Long's account^ partly to himsdf^ as 
when he calls the same MS. 3445 in the body of his letter^ 
and 3425 in the table ; partly to Wetstein and Mr. Gries- 
baeh, as when he makes Stephens's No. 8 the King's MS. 
2361 9 which they both make 2861. Have yon swom^ Sir^ 
to wage immortal war with slips of the pen and press ? Or 
is' it your resolution to exempt not only R. Stephens^ but 
every other person^ from the possibility of typographical 

7. Flushed with this victory over the printer, you sink 
deeper by floundering in the mud*. *' Le Long asserts, 
that the MS. in the royal library marked if neither was 
used by Stephens, nor contained the Catholic Epistles^ 
vrfiich they (Wetstein and. Mr. Griesbach) both affirm." 
I am tired of confuting such ridiculous objections. There 
is no MS., Sir, in the royal library at Paris, marked it, nor 
indeed with any of the Greek numerals by which R. St^ 
phcns distinguished his copies. All that Le Long asserts 
is, that he looked in the King's library for such of the 
MSS. as had been there from the time of Henry H. ; that 
of these he found eleven, eightf of which eleven appeared 
upon examination to be the same that Stephens used in his 
edition. The table at the end of Le Long's letter is made 
by Le Long himself, partly from fact, and partly from con- 
jecture. I had freely allowed that Le Long had committed 
some trifling errors ; but I maintained, and still maintain, 

* [Dryden*8 Cymon and Iphigeoia.] 

f But perhaps eight is a slip of the pen or press fur tix. Unac- 
countable blunders often happen in printing. Thus Mill. Prol. ISf 1, 
lays nofcem instead of tret ; as Beogelius rightly observes on Romans 
xii. 11. 


MR. Travis's reply churlish. 359 

that they do not aflfect the main point in debate. How- 
ever^ to cut off all pretence for chicanery^ I will mention 
all the errors that I can detect in Le Long's account. He 
is mistaken^ or at least incorrect^ 1. in saying that he 
found the eight* royal MSS. which Stephens had borrowed^ 
when in his table he specifies no more than six, Nos. 3, 4, 
5, 7> 8^ 10. He 16 mistaken, 2. in saying that Simon 
quotes the words h np yvji from a Colbertine MS. ; for 
Simon quotes them from the King's MS. No. 2247. 3. In 
making No. 15 contain only seven Epistles, when it is 
plain, from Stephens's margin, that it contained also the 
Apocalypse. 4. In making No. 16 contain two Gospels^ 
which contains only the Apocalypse. 

8. "AXKcov lor^i;, aMs eAxtci ^futfi^f. You have im- 
puted an absurd assertion to Le Long in your book, p. 128, 
as if he had said, that all the fifteen MSS. used by Ste- 
phens were in the King's library, and were marked widi 
the corresponding Greek numerals. If you are at liberty 
to fasten any nonsense upon an adversary, no dodl>t you 
can easily conftite him. 

9. You struggle hard to produce a contradiction about 
No. 7, but with better intentions than success .-^I take 
the case to be this. The King's MS. No. 2242 was di- 
vided into two volumes, both marked with the same num- 
ber. The first part contiuns the Gospels, the second the 
Acts and Epistles, excepting the three last Catholic Epi- 
stles. Le Long seems to have made his table not upon the 
spot, but after leaving the library, and to have supposed, 
from Stephens's margin, that his No. 7 did not contain 

• See note +, p. 358. 
t [Eur. Fr. incerC. CCXI.J 



the Acts. For Wetstein o b ae ivcs , that Stephen! did nM 
eotUte this MS. to the Acts. You aflBrm the contrary, 
I did expect, that a critick, so hot upon the scent for C0117 
tradictions, would have found a fresh disagreement between 
Wetstein and Mr. Griesbach, who says of this same ^, semel 
a Siephano cUaiur in Aclis (xvii. 5.)* Wetstein knew 
that it was once cited upon Acts, but he knew that it was 
131 a mistake for No. 1, (the Comp. ed.)« The objection that 
Wetstein's ( contains less than Le Long's (, is too frivo- 
lous. — ^What three Epistles are these ? Even those long 
voluminous compositions 2 and 3 John, and Jude. Wet- 
•tein's words are, coniinei Acta^ Episiolas CanonicaSy ei 
Paulinas. If he had said, septem Episiolas Cmionicas^ it 
would have looked more like a contradiction. Yet even 
this might be foi^ven, and charitably imputed to haste or 
forgetfulness, except by that mirror of accuracy Mr. Travis, 
who in critical morality is a perfect Stoic. He knows not 
how to wink at human frailty^ or pardon weakness that 
he never felt*. But i^ this. Sir, the hard task imposed 
upon editors and collators, that their eye-sight, their me- 
mory, or their pen, must never mislead them r that no 
error of the press must escape thera ? Are they fools, liara, 
or cheats, whenever they fail? Your beloved Stephens 
then, and even another person whom you love better than 
Stephens, must take their share of the same reproaches. 
For Stephens often positively affirms (to use your fevour- 
ite expression), that such a reading is found in his No. I, 
when the Complutensian reading is quite different. So 
that, if Stephens had not told us that his No. 1 was the 
Complutensian edition, you could have proved, ^fyoiufcon- 

* [Addison's Cato, v.] 



trddictionj that it was a different copy. At present I see 
no remedy to save Stephens from the imputation of lying. 
The other person, at whom I just now hinted, is the Author 
of some letters to Mr. Gibbon in defence of 1 John v. 7. 
In that matchless treatise, p. 295, it is positively affirmed, 
that Stephens's No. 16 contained the Acts. I positively 
affirm the contrary. If I had your candour, I should treat 
that author as he has treated Le Long, Wetstein, and Mr. 
Griesbach. But my candour is content with supposing it 
9 misprint for No. 14, 

If you had the candour in your heart, which you have so 
often in your mouth, that you have made the very word 
odious (which was an excellent word before it was ill 
sorted* )9 she would teach you to charge no man with ab- 
surdity or falsehood, till you bad tried every probably sup- 
position to make his words rational and coniistent ; she 
woidd teach you not to wring a contradiction out of two 
testimonies, because one says less or more than the other ; 
she would teach you not to be severe upon pardonable and 
unimportant mistakes ; she would teach you (and illustrate 
the doctrine by your own example) not to be unmerciful 
upon authors, because their printers happen to be dull or 
lazy rogues, and put one letter, figure, or word, for another. 

Let us return to Wetstein's ^. Mr. Griesbach, finding 
this MS. marked No. 2242 upon the Gospels, and 2241 
upon the Epistles, seems to have suspected some mistake, 
and therefore says doubtfully on the former Reg. 2242^ 
nunc 49, ut videtur, aut etiam 47 ; on the latter, Reg. 2241^ 
nunc ut videtur 47. But if he had compared Wetstein^s 
note on 1 John v. 7, he would have seen that 2241 wi» a 
ffdse print for 2242. 

•[ ] 

10. Witk 


10. With respect to Stephens's No. 15^ if Le Long had 
added, that it Contained the Apocalypse, there would have 
been no real difference between him and Wetstdn; Le 
Long, presuming that Stephens collated the MS. throogh*^ 
out, says, from the evidence of the margin, that it only 
contained such and such Epistles« WetBtein, finding the 
MS. itself, says that it contained more, but was not ool<^ 
lated to the other parts of the N. T. And then poor Le 
Long, forsooth, must suffer for having a better opinioa 
of Stephens's accuracy, than &ct and experience wiH jus- 

11. What you say of Stephens's No. 14, is true, but 
nothing to the purpose. I take for granted that Wetstehi 
is in the wrong, and that his errors are properly corrected 
by Mr. Griesbach, Symbol. Crit. p. cxliv — cxiviii. But 
because Wetstein judged wrongly concerning a eoUatioti 
that he received from others of a MS. that he never «aw, 
how does it follow that he could not judge rightly of the 
MSS. that came under his own inspection ? Except this 
single instance, all the examples you bring of Mr. Gries- 
bach's dissent from Wetstein are lighter than air, and t6 
mention is to refute them. 1 . He contradicts Wetstein, 
because he has collated a MS. which Wetstein either did 
not see, or did not examine. 2. He contradicts Wetstein, 
because, the MSS. being lately arranged in a new order, 
he cannot positively tell what the present number of one 
of them is. 3. He seems inclined to differ from Wetstein 
concerning the identity of Stephem's No. 9 and Coistin. 
200. A short observation will clear up these matters. 
Mr. Griesbach collated none of these MSS. which Le Long 
and Wetstein affirm to have been used by Stephens (except 

No. 8); 


No. 8). He might perhaps look at them in a cursory 132 
manner^ without any design of making extracts or memo- 
randums. His aim was to examine such MSS. as either 
came afterwards into the library^ or had escaped Wetstein's 
diligence. He therefore speaks diffidently on the subject 
of the Coislinian MSS. Siephani 6y ut opinatur fFetstetH. 
Seeing likewise an apparent inconsistency in Wetstein's wo 
count of No. 7^ he intimates a doubt which a farther in« 
quiry would have dispelled. 

The remainder of your letter is a tiresome repetition of 
what you before borrowed from Martin. The substance 
of it 18^ that Stephens had fourteen MSS. to the Gospels^ 
ten to the Acts^ twelve to the Epistles^ and four to the 
Apocalypse. You afterwards repeat the same assertion in 
another form^ and palm it upon us for distinct evidence. 
Doubtless Stephens had as many MSS. if his mar^n never 
errs. But I informed you before, that his numbers are 
frequently confounded. I now inform you farther, that, 
of the numbers quoted by R. Stephens to the Gospels, 
Nos. 10, 11, 13, 16; to the Acts, 8, 14$ to the Epistles, 
2, 12, 14, 16; and to the Apocalypse, 5*-, 1 1 ; are spu- 

Wetstein discovered, in his Prolegomena, 1730, p. 22— 
27, that Stephens's No. 2 was the same MS. that Beza 
gave our university. An anonymous opposer soon appeared, 
who, to prove the contrary^ produced twenty instances, in 
which, according to him, they varied. Whoever desires to 
see what Wetstein answered, may consult the second edi- 
tion of his Prolegomena, p. 28 — 38. I wish no greater 

* A mistake for 15, as I have obserred, Gent. Mag. vol. Lix. p. 513. 
[•p.67«L.toTr.] Ste B^gelias on the Apocalypse, iii. 18, xix. 14. 



harm, Sir^ to your admirers^ than that diey may q>prove 
of this anonymous gentleman's arguments. If yoo had 
been then alive, you would have added, in aid of this cri- 
tick's reasoning, that Stephens's No. 2 contained the Epi- 
stle to the Romans, and therefore^ beyond coniradiciion, 
must be different from Beza's MS. which contains only the 
Gospels and Acts. 

All this trumpery about Stephens's margin rests upon a 
modest assumption, that Stephens could not commit a ty- 
pographical error, 1 produced, out of a great number of 
examples, and shall now briefly recapitulate, as many as I 
thought sufficient to confiite so extravagant a position. 
Matth* xxiv. 20, il marked in the margin. 1 Pet. iii. 1 1^ 
iyciSov (ifTi)0-«re» omitted in the text. Apocalyps. p. 176-*- 
177> eighteen various readings of the Complutensian edi- 
tion omitted^ and, of the nineteen marked, two inaccurate^ 
and two frdse. The semicircle three times omitted ; in one 
place twice printed, and the figure of reference once misi- 
placed (correct my former collation.) Apocalyps. xv. 2, 
^KM ix Tou X'^YM^^^ airotiy for nei ^ix roS x* ^^vrw.' 
When you have shewn that Stephens's margin is correct in 
all these particulars, I will endeavour to exercise your sa- 
gacity with a few more of the same kind. 

You might have spared yourself all this letter-huntings 
if you had applied your assumption at first, and reasoned 
thus : The MSS. produced by Le Long and Wetstein are 
not the MSS. used by Stephens; for those omit from in 
ccelo to in terra, inclusive ; but these only omit in ccelo. 
You have, indeed, repeated a part of this argument in your 
last letter, where you say, that all Stephens's MSS. re- 
tained in terra. The only witnesses you can bring to this 



assertion are Stephens's margin and Beza's note. The 
appeal to Stephens's edition^ when the question is^ whether 
that edition be erroneous or not^ is too gross a banter upon 
common sense. Nor can Beza's testimony be of any 
weight, till you can prove that he had the actual use of 
Stephens's MSS. But this you cannot prove, without 
making Stephens a thief and a liar. And when you have 
ruined his character, we will consider how much credit is 
due to his evidence. 

You play your old game, when you say, ^^ chat the charge 
i^;ainst Stephens is, that he collated his MSS. unfaith" 
fully ;" and afterwards, '^ that we accuse R. Stephens 
and T. Beza of a deliberate falsification of Scripture." I 
have told you over and over, that I only suppose R. Ste- 
phens to have committed an easy, and to appearance a 
small mistake. And I suppose, with Wetstein, that Beza 
adopted the mistake. 1st a typothetce aberratio fraudi 
fait T. BexcB. If it be a deliberate falsification of Scrip- 
ture to err in noting the various readings, God help the 
wicked ''^ ! For there never was a more abandoned set of 
men than the greatest part of editors and collators. The 
word uffaithfully is capable of two senses. If it means 
negligently J imperfectly j erroneously, I agree that Ste- 
phens collated his manuscripts unfaithfully ; but, if it 
meaxia fraudulently, I have acquitted him of that imputa- 

Supposing that I surrendered Stephens's No. 7^ what 133 
would you gain by it ? Nothing, unless you could shew 
that Nos. 4, 5, and 10, are different from the numbers 

^ [If Sacke and Sugar bee a fault, HeaTen heipe the Wicked: 
Shakspere's Ist P. of K. Henry IV. p. 59. ed. pr. repr.] 




marked by Le Long as corresponding. But this yoa have 
not attempted to shew c{ No. 4; nor can you shew it of 
No. 5, and 10^ without retreating to your strong-hold^ the 
infallibility of Stephens and his compositors. And if you 
call this arguing, you may argue till doomsday. You are 
indeed in a distressing situation ; for, if one only of the 
MSS. quoted by Le Long be one of the MSS. quoted by 
Stephens, your cause will be as eflfectually ruined, as if the 
whole seven were found. If you can confute the single 
proposition, that the King's MS. formerly 2871, now 106^ 
is Stephens's No. 4, you will perform more service to your 
darling verse, than you have performed in your whole book 
and your last incomparable letter, Fof Le Long, Wetstein^ 
Mr. Griesbach, and the compilers of the catalogue of the 
King's MSS.^ are in a provoking agreement concerning 
this MS. and, what is more provoking, are not contra- 
dicted by Stephens's infallible margin. Attempt tken this, 
confutation without delay. Silence will he a prof^ of con^ 
scious impotence. And attempt it with candour and se^ 
riousness. Tinselled phrases and empty sarcasms will 
have no effect but to double the load that now lies heavy 
upon youf. In the mean time I abide by my first position^ 
that the MSS. numbered 4, 5, 7, 10, by R. Stephens, are 
the same with the French King's MSS. which, in the time 
of Le Long, were marked 287 1, 3425, 2242, 2870. You 
have said nothing in answer to these affirmations of Le 
Long and Wetstein, that has not furnished fresh proofs of 

* Quartus ex eoruin nuiuero quos RobertusStephaous sdhibuit, 
T. 11. p. 19. 

t This fustian, with much more to the same purpoftc, may be fouud 
ID Mr. Travis's peroratiofiy p. 1S6, 369. 



the assertion which I formerly made^ ^^ that you possess 
not even the rudiments of criticism*.^' 

I have now^ Sir^ I think^ with wonderful patience and* 
politeness^ replied to all your objections. I might indeed 
have excused myself from the task, If^ however^ you coii>- 
tinue, as you threaten^ to abuse Mr. Urban's indulgence, I 
shall not condescend to honour you with a second reply, 
unless you submit to a certain previous condition, which, 
to me^ a[^ars reasonable. 

In every controversy, the disputants on either side ought, 
before they resume the subject by way of defence or tf^ 
fence, to acknowledge all the mistakes of which they have 
been convicted by others ; and all in which they have de>- 
tected themselves. Now, Sir, I have fairly staked my ve^ 
racity on several points, which materially affected your 
cause and your character. Since you have neither defended 
your assertions, nor confessed your mistakes ; you ought 
to look upon the attention I have here paid you as a signal 
exertion of humility. You are a culprit at the bar of the 
publick. You have no right to an hearing till you have 
purged yourself from the former accusations. These I shall 
now state again, and leave them to the judgement of the 
reader. You asserted 1 . that the Latin copies in 1 John, 
V. 8. read {with so few exceptions as not to merit notice 
added in the 2d ed.) tres in unum sunt. 2. That they 
invariably retain the clause. 3. You assert, by implica- 
tion, that most of the Greek MSS. which omit the seventh 
verse, retain h nii yr[i in the eighth ; 4. that Wetstein 
allows six MSS. to retain the disputed verse. I asserted, and 
I still assert, 1. that no Latin copy whatever, retaining the 

• [p. 38. Lett, to Tr*] 



clause^ reads tres in unum sunt, but all simply tres umad 
sunt ; 2. that a very great number (as far as I can goeat^ 
'a considerable majority^) omits the clause. 3. That no 
Greek MS.^ which omits the seventh verse^ retains h nfi yifi 
in the eighth ; and 4. that Wetstein affirms four of the aix 
MSS., to which you appeal^ to omit the disputed verse | 
and professes to believe the same of a fifth. Besides these 
particular charges^ I scattered a general accusation through 
my letters ; that you had borrowed the greater part of your 
book from Martin^ taking upon trust his fiiu^ts and quota- 
tions. That this blind adherence to Martin had led you 
into many errors^ some owing to the original, and some to 
the Englbh translation. Unless you make haste to defend 
or confess, the publick will not fail to condemn your ob- 
stinacy, and take your silence for the certun token of a 
rotten cause and a guilty consdenoe. 


P.S. tn Vol. LIX. p. 515, [=p. 77. Lett, to T.] ft* 
4, 5, 7, 10, 15, read 4, 5, 7, 9, 10. 

* Five to three in the LouTain editions, and about three to tw6> 
in above fift^ copies that 1 have collared. 



K.B. It would be advisable to intermiz the additions, alterationt,. and 
corrections of my own mistakes, as well as those of the press, in 
their proper places, before this volume is looked over, otherwise 
the secvnd Index will be of little use. 

X» 2. V. 12. Would yet he had lived. Shakqiere, Meas* for 
Meas. IV. iv. 

P. 3. V. 3. Soph« Ant. 650. 10. oixouo*! %ctfpV aperai rdSv 
if^omy. Phrynichu» %. Q. 72.. v, IJ. read, Tiflmf;^' i ^* r.— 
ov 01 Of Of ^iXoSciv, dvoSr^cmi irio^. — or, as it is somewhere cited, 
2y ydf fiXet ro dshv^ diroir^oTcu viof. So wise, so youDg, they 
say, do never live long. Sbafcsp.'s Rich^* IIL iii| i. Short 
sucnmers lightly have a forward spring. Ibid. 

P. 10. 1. 4. ♦ • ♦ 

P. 13. 1. 14. Lucian. ii. 680. iyti y^P* ^S ^ Kftifuxo^ l^> 
ary^^iKOs fiju^i, r^y axifi^v anif^y Xtyum. vide sapra, p« 54. 
We call a nettle, bat a nettle; Sbaksp.'s Coriolaiitis^ A., ii. 
Sc i. Mundungus, having occasioa for a spade, called out, 
" Slave, bring me my upheaver of the earth.*' 

P. 15. 1. 15. '' That bawr*-.^Milton*s soonet xii» Q, ed. 
T. fyarton^ta in &. P.*s Letters to Travis, p. 379. '* Who 
would be w."— " That"— cdd. 

P. 18. 1.2. Ter. Aodr. i. v, 18. ibid. 1. 7. Sha)upeie*8 King 
John, A. III. Sc. iii. 

P. 19. 1.5. Apud Demosth. in Neseram, et Athen. ziu, 6] 2. 
F. [P. P.D.] a^ oJx »' Crrotii Excerp. pp. 737. 845. R. B. 
MilHo, p 77. ed. Cantab. Tal* oix v. Grataker. Opp. pos tb. 
c. zii. Grot. Excerp. 441. ibid. 1. 14. Shaksp. Much ado 
■bout nothing, iii. 3. give Heaven thanksy and make dq boast 
of them— As yoo like It, 111, 5. ibid. 1. 18. In Febi^ 1806 

2b I was 


I wat lamenting to R. P. the loss of a great statetinan in the 
hour of hit oountiy'a clanger ; R. P. interrupted me by reciting, 
— — «'«wffy icaS*, (3 fhroV Epft^, fti} Xiyr 
aXX' Ik riy drip ^KsTifOv, olhftp Srr, §lvau xdrw. 
o(S /ap ^fjJrtfOg It irr instvof ir^pt dxxd cos. 
dtr dtv oSv ><^f^i ixilpoy, 
xil ita»wpyos ijv, Sr l^iy, 
xa) \ikos, xa) ovMfdmjf, 
xoLi xtfxijtpoyy xo) ripaxtfoifp 
raSV (iiraj^eltearra fw) 
toig ctaotw koihpilf. 
I was thankful for this sally, though made to my cost, as I 
gained from it a line which Aristophanes would have owned. 

P. 20. Plutarch, ii. 144. A. uto «'oXiv ed. Bas. which Hem- 
sterhusius in his copy of that writer has rendered, sub ipaam 
areem; see Wyttenfaoch ad 1. vi, ii, p. 897* 

P. 25. 1. II. • ♦ ♦ ♦ ibid. K 18. Dunciad, iv, 251, 2. 
P. 26. 1. 6, iwil R. B, and irXt^dcraf was restored by that 
promising critic, D'Amaud de jure senrorum, p. 57. which ap- 
peared Leovardise, 1744: '' mihi consultum fore videtur ad 
Thesd fiinum navigare, ibique supplices sedere.** 

P.34. xoXao-ofu y irw Lex. Sangerm. p 46l . v.'^Amjv. (-*>). 
Conf. R. P. apud J. H. Monk, ad Hipp. 505. The trifling 
aberration of this MS. may senre to illustrate R. P.'s notion of 
the origin of what is become, by accident, the middle verb, 
xoKcUopLcu =: xoXa<rta ME'. 

P. 36. 1. 2. r. ^dpiiaxov cou — . xa2 tlpd rig yskoTog larpos* 
uil^ifof fUt^OY ri voon^jxa iroiw. Plato Protag. p. 294. edd. Bas. 
= 205. G. Lsemar. = 1. 340. D. H. St. et apud Muret. V. L 
xji. i. A passage (Soph. Fr. inc. %,) conveying the same sen- 
timent is used by R. P. ad Med. p. 20 s 22 == Adverss. 111. 
P. 195. 1.8. r.Oy;^t— . 

X N.B. The only typographienl ern>r, which I have been abte to detect 
in the OrenvilU Homer, is t1. B, 279. ;^X«vMlTif — : in other pHicet a 
leHer has now and theo slipped out of the fext of the smell copies, which 
appears io its piece in the presentation*roluines: e. g. II. P, 558* r»x**t 
ed. mis. tm^^ ed. splendida. O, 913. s^sr'uf ed. m. itfmriut ed. tp. | it 
is leie faultless than the fisoltless Glasgow. 

P. 6a. 


P. 62, 1. uU. r. ^/uia^Adverss. p. 280. 

P. 40. 1.9 Sbaksp. Merry Wives of Windsor, ed. PR. 
repr. p. 47. Ibid. 1. 13. Adverss. p. 138. 

P. 44. 1. 10 oVoyXonviViy Schweighaeuseri membranae. 

P. 46. 1. 8. Verisicn. p. 47. Ibid. 1. 14. R. P. ad 1. Wakef. ad 
Here. Fur. 647. 

P. 48. f— after " 149.'* add, R. P. was partial to tbis figure 
of speech ; " Thus far [ have written to convince my enemies 
bow mistaken they were, when they asserted that my bolt was 
shot, and that I had nothing more to advance. I can truly say 
with Pindar, that [ have still under my arm a quiver, stored 
with darts, which sound to the intelligent, but to the mul- 
titude require an interpreter.** Fusius quidem prolixiusque 
banc annotationem deduximus : cum quia primum hoc sped* 
men et quasi pignus nostrarum in Flaccum emendatiooum ao* 
curatius mihi tuendum eratj tum ut vel bine sciant, si qui in 
bis nostris examinandis ingenii aleam subibunt, adhuc plures 
sagittas, xcltsL rov Ulvidpov, in pharetra superesse, quibus recte 
dicta, si usus ferat, defendere valeamus. 

R. B. ad Hor. A. P. 441, pp. 705, 6. 

Ibid. n.*M 

P. 52. 1. 8. Catull. Lxxii, 3. sperabat £dd. et Faki. ad 
Rover, xviii. 

P. 57. 1- ^- Cicero Divinat. II. iii. 

P. 63 to note add, iton, X^P^ ^^^ ^ Xi/ouo'i. IIosT MS. 
Harl. Soph. £1. 623. '£70! vou oii{Ltpov Titrwf TCpiffurg^v 
aiiMpvyXJ^v irocJ. Lex. Sangerm. p. 362. GTTOMC6 in In« 
scrip. Gr. Vat. apud Schow. de Charta Papyracea, p. 66. — In 
tessera, quae in Museo Borgiano Velitris adservatur, scriptum 
est AftjUriO^o^ et 'EicUopos ex antiquiore orthograpbia pro Aa- 
fMOvpyif et 'ExiMupos. £tiam in antiqua ilia inscriptione, qus 
a CI. Cbandlero AthenU rcperta fiiit, TTpVTXMeYOCeC 
pro UpvravtuoiTi^f legitur. Idem ibid. pp. 1 15, I6. In the 
margin of a copy of his commentary on the Sigean Inscription 
Cbishull has directed pro l^'oii^o's reponendnm vetustum irincB. 

Ibid. 1. 17. Sandvktnse [p. 6.], 

2b2 P. 71. 


P. 71. 1. penult.; lee R. P. ad Moagrav. p. 325* 

P. 76- 1. 12. Dr. Clarke ttites the marbleii to have been touiid 
at CEOS. Travels, in. 651. 

P. 69* 1. 17. read " hniitirfif for mMroWf^** 

P. 95. 1. 11. Sbaktp. Hamlet, A i. Sc. r. 

P. 97. 1. ult. R. P. ad Or. 141. 

P. 96. D. to R. P. sofajoiD " apud E. M.** 

P* 106. 1. 5. r. enotare indioavent, 

P. 114 B. 1. 2. Johoion*! PREF. to Shaksp. P. x\x, 

P. 117. n. dele ' Hodibras.' 

P. 121. 1. 12» tuvos 

P. 144. n.f Deipoosoph. Tin. 352. A. 

P. 145. 1. nit. Aristoph. Lys. 987. mkeuip ya Laconice, pro 
itaX^if y%f siultui est. Knster. et Schol. voXto^* wXeowa^ei 

ri ¥« 19X10;, dXiOf, iraAfo;, r9irriari Xrif^f xa2 iMteuof, Sed 
lege propins ad reoeptam lectionem fcdkcuop /a. Hesychios 
^tcLkmutp, iMttpof, lege vel ex ipsa serie iraXaiop' p pro c termi- 
natio Laoonum. R. B. OMa, oiv hi lir) ro airi ij/ttfif /«.£» 
foji^y exXiipirftjs, 'EpttpuTf ^l aytXrjpirfip', Plato Cratylo, p. 66. 
edd. Bas. = 278. A. Laemar. ss 1, 434. C. H. St. 'EinlMug T 
Itf^ov ii^ ^HAi^o; a^* ou Ka) tuj ypof^/uart rtp P iroXX^ XF^^^' 
lUYOi OOK M rikii iLoyw rdSv ^fMrfwv, d\X.i xa2 h /mow xrxo;- 
IMiSrjrrai, Strabo, X. 448. Casaub. = 653. Oxon. 

Pp. 14a, 1.9. 147 J. 7. 149,1.3. Mox^ou 

P. 154. Nnrsery-song should have been placed before the 
letter to M. Mag. ; to " Chronide*' add, [13 Apr. 1796.] 

P. 155. 1.4. R. P. ad Orest. 306. 

P. 156. dele n.* 

P. 172. 1. 39* Blov fffpoia : rj iodaijjLovla xo) tirv^la, ^apdi 
ro xaXttf; puv rw filoy. Phr)'nicbu8 X. n. 29. 

P. 184. 1. 18. dfayvlffou Pbrynicbus X. IT. 26. Lex. San- 
germ. 468. 

P. 187* 1. 15. after "1.8.** insert, xpovoht^ n fM/A— Xaif 
lilaitdvref, m titvC dyo^ovfi^iv 'ip'^h cui. ex Snida R. B. ibid. 
1. 17. after R. B. add, ar. n luydKauvi ha'rarros oi titfC dya- 
Xou/Mv ^^1^ del. Lex. Sangerm. v. 'AyiyXcu p. 328. 

P. 190. 


P. igo. tVfter 1. alt. insert, vii. 1.25. sXam) B.B. 

P. 191. 1. penult, insert, xviii. 24. See Brit. Crit. April, 
1794, p. 363. 

P. 193. 1. 1. ex ipsis dramatis — After 1. 3. insert xsiv. 1. 2. 
" Xiav priore cbrrepta" (lege, producta)— Br. Ind. ad Soph. 

P. Iy4. after 1. 4. insert, oi^e h : oitw ;^ Xeynv, ou havK' 
XiZwi. Phrynichus I. 11. 53. 

Ibid. 1. 8. xxxviii, 1. Phrynichus apud Eastath. p. 1112. 38. 
*£CouAo/ti;y iv iiiui^ (iavBp xou tporoS. f. Eltnsley: the reference 
has escaped me. Afterwards add, xxxix, 1.20, I. *Arrtxiy 

xoi nravui^ts, BiaCdXXet Se airovs wf ipaaiif xa) holfAOUf ifpo- 
^jjAw^ slf TO a^ix«Ty. Schol. Cod. Leid. 

P. 195. 1. 8. De hoc versu subdubito. 

Ibid. n. 1. 1. lege "toy Aia subaudito;" adde Aristoph. 
Nub. 371* xoirof ^ijv al^plag ou^^ Stiy, rairas f difo^i^iJi^h, 
oiJffijs e MSS. et Suida. v. airo^ijfuB'. R. P, apud vjrnm doctit- 
simum et mihi amicissimum, E, MaUhy ad v. Ai9^/a, Morell.— 
1. penult, tune of 

Post " Suidas**. msere, Menander ex emend. R. B. p. 68. 
^ipB n^y AiCayo^^' vi ^ kiti^hf ro tvpy rp^fi, X. triura gene- 
rum commune fecisse videntur Attici, quanquam rarissime in 
neuiro usurparunt. 

P. igs. 1. 1. 20. Aj. — ibid, after 1. 20. insert, liv^ 17. Aivo* 
Xioilij ^arlv ' A^iaro^ai>rjs . Anti-Att. p. 9I. 

P. 199. i. 16. 613. a7yci6y=s607. rsSx^S edd. 1, 3. 20. in* 
sen, 41. 1. uU. " MSS.** [Codd. Vindobb. Chiggian. et Casanat. 
Schow. de charta papyr. p. 143 (2).] Ibid, ad v. 284s280. 
/wNoiis, 169. ed.3. EvpMtfS Iv r(p rr^s *£xa?ijf ^pdfuan ^1* 
airijg ^ijaiy — cS ifal, foii, UoXv^iyi^ ^igXoori, i^sXf, e^iXV 
otxtay. Cod. Leid. Scholion. ibid, ad v. 280. Alexis, vel potius 
Sotion ad Athen. viii, 336. F. ibid, add, 624s=6l8. " OSd.C." 
744.-788=782. p. 50 ed.3. *' Theateto p. 151.** E. paulo 
infira Plut. 35. 876=870. Adverss. pp. 108, 132. 

P. 200. 1. 4. after R. B. insert, 'AoKap^Ofunerl ipjuf : Lex. 

Sangerm. 452. Ibid. 1. 7. [217.— after 1. 10. insert 224. Ad- 

?ens. p. 303.] 

P. 201. 


P. 201. 1. 15. lead " in qaibus** 

P. 202. after 1.11. inaert 463. 'Aviim (L'Arvrffy): ^aro- 
vovTtv oi 'AiTixoi* xo} S^Xov ix rr^s avfaXoi^ff xeMp^vo-av ytif* 
Fhrynicbosp. 14. 'Ayvrtiv orArrmo) Lex.Sangerm.4ll. 'Av^ 
o-oi : iao'iats, ri crmvan xal avrtXicai Ibid. 'A^6r§a$eu : ovr 
TO) r Xi/ouo'i. xoEi 0(?x a^co-Oai. ITAaroiv Ne'ooi^ (1. c. io o.) : 

tSf 5 [ulv afiutc^uyog S^sv r§ ^i^ xo) Mvw xai irarf. Idem^ 
p. 448. Ibid. 1. \6 r.759. PR— ly 

P. 204. after 1. 12. insert 6, sv ruji oi^avwi^ev ryji y^i ani«. 
fonnlj in R.P.*t Letters to Travis. 1. 10 Lucretii.i. 18. to ** p. 
65.** add, — ''And bence it is tbat Christian, or ratber Pa|»l 
Rome, bas borrowed ber Rites, Notions, and Ceremoniea, in 
the most luxuriant abundance from Ancient and Heat ben Rome, 
and tbat mucb the greater number of tbose flaunting Externals, 
wbicb Infallibility bas adopted by way of Feathers to adorn 
ike triple Cap, have been stolen out of the wings of the dt/ing 
£a^/e.**'Brand*s pref to Popular Antiquities, 2 voll. 4*' 2d ed. 
1813 ; pp. xi, xii. Then insert, p 21 col. 1 1. 33=r22, 2, 26. 
^Axaro^ : pdXij, Sii to soixivai CT^oyyJXa; irXolw' oStw 0ffa- 
w^Mtof, Lex. Sangerm. p. 371. Those are mentioned by Me* 
Dander Mfo'oijyf a : ol f dpviaayres rouV xa'^ev^ rwf or^oyyo* 
Xou;. Ibid. p. 411. 

Pp.206, 7, 8. dele, ADDENDA, et 206. I. 13. arrange 
tbus, 2 In II. A. 
1.15. 1 Scbol.Ven. 

P. 208. 1. 2. R. P. informed me tliat a venerable Dean, " who 
lately shone a bright example** at Oxford, " as the warm friend 
of merit of every kind/' uas highly pleased with this restonu 
tion i the common reading, this great man observed, had al* 
ways appeared " deleterious** to him. And the late Dr. Raine 
anxiously wished to cancel the leaf in the Glasgow folio, in 
order that it might be complimented with a place in the text. 
Ibid. 1. ult. corr. 1794. and add. For Tratriv 1 ierson hits replaced 
vaSciv, ad Mcer. p. I94. col. 2. ; and in Eur. Suppl. 916. for 
Tif Valckenaer bas suggested vals, ad Ihopn. 1553. wbicb 
Mark land expressed in his version. Has has occasionally usurp* 
ed a place in the text without rhyme or reason ^ Gataker Adv. 



Misc. 1. c. I. p. 174. A. has quoted n^r iiwp fcdarrwv from Eur, 
Pb. 516. Ter. Eud. hi. ii. 46. Abi, pnBCorre, at sint domi 
parata omnia — \a% omnia nee in ullo l.t. legitur^ nee in Dona- 
te: FAERNUS. Distingue et lege, Abipne: cura at tint 
domi parata — Cura Talmerii correctio est, et quidero egregia. 
Add. II. i. 13. Omnia nusquam comparet in libris nostris. R. B. 
ad 1. Tbis word has not escaped rude treatment ; Atben. yii. 
293. D. Sotades : kf/LoXvv aXsipaj [Trdvra] roioira) riv). Ibid, 
p. 299. F. Antiphanes [«'ay] reKuJS Ibid. ix. 408. D. Eupolis: 
Nixa Tt I'fdrraf'} Xpyi*rros dv, otfx lori ^aipmicrpw. Adverts. 
PP* 9^* 7' 11^* Erasmus " quotes a sentence firom Theophy- 
lact (Wetstein Prol p. 124.) which, by leaving out 'giviv and 
writing TOii ayoijrou for roii iyoijrotf rw, he has tamed either 
into nonsense or impiety.** Letters to Travis, p. lOg. In Bp. 
Pearson on the Creed, which I have collated, p. -254. ed. PR* 
" in ALL the copies of the original language** — in Edd. 2— 
13. all omitted. P. 547. " We must therefore acknowledge and 
confesse against ALL the wild Heresies of old,'* — all dropped 
in edd 10, II . Ox. P. 559. " now after ALL the labours and 
sorrows of tbis world** — all absconded in edd. 10, 11, 12. 
P. 5Q7, " all rule and ALL authority** — all ejected edd. 2, 3, 
4, Oxon. P. 572. " under his feet we ALL shall be"— a// 
discarded, edd. 2—12. P. 588. " and again in ALL glory, to 
govern and judge** — ALL slipped out of edd. 5 — 12. These 
editions are of no authority except in proving that printers are 
not infallible. P. 766. *< We must ALL appear*'— a^ has 
eluded edd. 10, 1 1 . I could enumerate many passages in this 
ExposiiUm, where all has been buffeted about as if it had no 
local habitation, but 1 forbear. Once ALL does not appear in 
ED. PR. p. 702. but has been received into Edd. 2 — 13; and 
once its presence seems to be wanting in all the editions, p 565* 
" when Joshuah had [all] the five kings his prisoners,— In 
11. T, 307. its tenure is disputed, though Virgil JEn, iu\ Qf/, 
has been cited as fevourable evidence 5 II. X, 506. 'Aoruoyaf, 
h Tpwtf — the MS., which formerly belonged to Bp. More, 
has tirt9s in the text, but this is not decbive. 

P. 210. 


P. 210. Alptrm iro'^i|My if Ix^pav if ordf^y : ai4i toS avoM- 
'7^«i. Fhiynidrain. C.p.3. 1.2. fM^ 

P. 204. P. 33. col. 1. 1.25. *' Ran. 1234." Leg^ tirf 
hapfjLirrmv hi ^ nto^dpwv, ^ XijicotMr, ai'anu;^oi;, R. P. 

P. 209. after 1. ult. intert, 917. 'O^u du^m : ayti rar ogiw^ 
Anti-Atticifta^ p. 111. £diob. Rev. xxx, 320. Adverts. Ifll. 

P. 216. L 3. Ktui.i 1. 11. Ant. 2. ip hV correxit R.B.. 
P. 120. 1. 6. Kpof/Oy^g 

P. 217. n.* adde» et Mosgr. adl. 

P. 219. 1. 14. adde^ PRNHMATA Gen. xlu 34. Cod. 

P. 226. 1. penult. ** et 23." ad Ph. 141 9. P. 227. 1. d. 

P. 232. 1. 2a place " 8 " onder " 4 ** in the preceding line. 

P. 233. 1. 19. " P. 500. B." et ad Hesych. p 283. 

P. 236. 1. iB. read, " in. 117. F. 5." 

P. 239 1. 10. Inter. Sardanap. apiid Athen. xii. 530. C. Sv" 
4if , ifikt, ireuJif, oif mXXa rwrov cux i^ia, ibid. 1. 20. sub- 
join T. K. 

P. 252. 1. 13 249. Falto ait Burmannus pr«f. ad Pbileleuth. 
p. penolt. locum Athentei vi« 248. D. 2. omisiste Clericom. 

P. 253. 1. 7. cKui^os' 1. 22. and V. seq. [Advertt.— Sangerm. 
p 408. T. K.]. 

P. 254. 1. ult. subjoin T. K. 

P. 257. after 1. 6. insert, Ao Albxandrum .£tolum. 

P. 263. 1. 13. [CEd. Col. 284.—] 

P. 265. after 1. 15. insert. Idem v. UsiXiyaiptra, fnicrd, 
h^Xi^a, TO ivayriov icphs aJrri rf, aipiasi ttaOo; fpi/ifoiwyrx' 
anipMlvei ^6 xa} rd irdXiv oujtx iy Tif^aloj, irxXiyxiptra. ydp fT^a-t 
yryoyora vdrra xal hs^iappi^eya, Deieo hayTioy et lego, to 
W^ovarrh^ rff etc. Mox pro ra voi\]y awTd ty TifioiOf, legen- 
dum, ra rakaid h Ttju^aiu;. Quod cum SiBpiappJya pnlchre 
convenit. Toup in Tim. iv, 413, 4. Haiic emendationera 
magna cum laude cumulavit. R. P. 

P. 270. RI. BEktley in bis Answer to Middleton men* 



tioos ** die CMumcDtator Arethai about tlie IV or V century." 
p. 42. This mistake is owing to the great haste, with which 
the Reply was penned. See Montftucon*s Palxogn pp. 35, 
45. 275. 

P. 280, 1. 3. read V. 7* 389. inrei,[Mof %ai aXXwf xo) \iyov 
lAoXirra Xj^uov in rs If ioriaf ptortunf. 

P. 284. 1. ult. r. " 1237. 4— •• 

P. 285. 1. g. at the end annex, *Initium Balbi £p. ad Cic. 
lib. IX. ad Attic, ep. viii. '' Sub postea quam litteras communes 
cam Oppio ad te dedi — ** Sic in omnibus, qnos plurimos vidi, 
MSS. codicibus, itemqne in omnibus primi post artis typogra- 
phies exortnm saecuii editionibus. — Qaidam pro eo [j»^] ad*> 
modom fidenter Suhito subdidemnt, atque ita in Aldinis anno- 
rum 1540. 1548. 1554. 1559. ^^^' Verom jampridem ani* 
madversnm ab eruditis grammatids est, illo Afenuscriptonun 
5v£ totidem vocabola, qyot litteris constat, sign'ficarii neqoe 
in eo scribeodo aliud peccatum a I'brariis fuisne, nisi qood sin- 
gulis litleris pianctolum adscribere prsetermiserint, ita S,u.L hoc 
est &' vaks, bene sive henest: — Lagonuirsmi ad Pogiani Epist 
ly, 49. Ibid. 1. 16. " Sangerm.*' (p. 377. BehAer.) 

P. 287. 1. 12. read, 179. v. IT^oYixsy^after 1. 14. insert, 
250. V. *Pi^€ty — Cratinas in Deliasin : *Kp^^i fcpls np y^ 
h ^c (ntofi^ei ksl) 'fitopis. " ired longe rectius, meo quidexn 
jndicio, legetur; 5 ^ rjo^opi^s xa) wkroph" Piers, ad Moor, 
p. 36. — Metro consulit haec correctio ) sensui minus satisfacit : 
Photii Cod. Galean. xaXiieapiB. Lege igitnr, jgonmrapAi. R. P. 

P. 288. 1. 19. Ruhnkenium 

P. 295. 1. 9. dele, and 

P. 296. 1. 12— readings*'. Gent. Mag. Oct. l7S8,pp.875,6. 

P. 302. 1. ult. add. This is the language of children and 
idiots j ^* Who gives any thing to. poor Tom ? Do poor Tom 
tome charity." etc. King Lear, p. 297. In a dispute on this 
analysed method of speech, our unshaken friend to truth was 
irreconcileably di^sted with the perverse ingenuity of the 
wily grammarian of fFmbUd9n, who, he perceived, was ar« 
guing merely for victoiy.— However, in the second voinnoe of 



hb work Xbmt Tool* hit not failed to avaU himtelf of this 
leading hint io tracing opwaida the primaiy meaning of the 
participle it— hit— mat— hjbc^hacav — haitav— ffoamo- 
tuMf ii is said. For this bint« as well at for the anecdote npoo 
MiUon, 1 am indebted to a coovenation with the Re?. Clmer 
Banks. See Pref. to a short acooont of the late R. P. p. x. 

P. 303. 1. 5. add. If la signifying o«b could drop thefts why 
might not the matculine and neuter fbrmt divest themielvea of 


P. 306. 1«6. divinarat 

P. 30g. In converting one day in the Strand about emends* 
tioot, which cannot be easily traced to their rightful anthort, 
R. P. began to instance two rettorations of Horace, which, he 
observed, were well known at Eton j one by Snape, which is 
inserted here: our Profettor wat proceeding to specify the 
other by Dr. Gtwge, when a friend passing by suddenly inter- 
rupted him ! 

P. 312. 1.2. to "Muret.:{:" '^^ ^^ ^^^^i :( ^^^ loog 
and patient investigation R. P. was firmly perraaded that the 
esecnble imputation, under which this genuine critic laboared, 
wat unfounded. Ibid. 1. 6. '' prime*.'' *£roticorum prin* 
cepi ett Hdiodorus; sequitur longo intervallo Achilles Tathia 

P. 312. afker 1. 8. huert, 


R. P. ttrenuoutly vindicated that great scholar, H. Stepkmss, 
from the charge of plagiarism brought against him by J. F* 
Fischer in his preface to the republication of ComarH Eclog^ ; 
Lips. 1772. '* Fuit hie vir [H. St.] omnium idem et laborioait- 
sirous et efficacissimus et eruditissimus, qui plures auctores an- 
tiques tractavit et edidit^ quam isti reprehensores legerunt, plura 
scripsit quam isti fieindo audiverunt, roajorem doctrinam animo 
perceptam tenuit quam isti suspicione attingere potuerunt.*' 

P. 313. insert before Bbntlbi — 

. Milton. 

Milton was acquitted by R. P. of imitating Don BtUams in 



P. L. II, 879—- 883. IQ ^ fij^t edition of this romaDce, 
which preceded the P. L., there are no traces of the passage 
referred to | whereas in the second edition, which followed the 
P. L., there are unquestionable marks of imitation. — It was 
R. P.'s opinion that the writer of the pre&ce, postscript^ and 
letter of contrition for /#^ Lauder, was neither willingly unde- 
loded, nor forward in exposing the atrocUy of those hideous in- 
terpolations, by which it had been vainly Contrived to obscure 
the splendor of Milton's Pabadisb Lost. Whether R.P. ever 
stated to the lare learned and venerable Bishop of Salisbury, the 
candid and merciful detector of those impudent forgeries, his 
persuasion on this point, is nncertain. It is, however, well 
known that R. P. possessed the friendship of this truly great 
and good man, who never suffered R. P.'s fame to be depre- 
ciated in his hearing by unmanly reflections on what are termed 
R. P.'s oddities, or by unprovoked censures on his treatment of 
those who were not entitled to his pity. From this fact a me- 
lancholy corollary may be drawn, viz. that the political atmo- 
sphere of Great Britain is not ^vourable to morality and religion. 

P. 314. note, 1.3. r. Nicholson's ^ and 1. 12. after Freind, 
insert, and Mr. Pope, who was in the secret, told Bp. Warbur- 
ton that '* Dr. King of the Commons wrote the droll argument 
(pp. 184 — 201) to prove Dr. Bentley was not the author of the 
Dissertation on Phalaris, and the Index.*' This '' insipid ban- 
ter" is, improbably I think, given to Dr. Smallridge by Dr. Sal- 
ter ; see also Atterbury*s Corresp. i, pp. 306. 505. Mr. Cole 
of Magdalen College, Oxford, compared the Answer to Bent- 
ley to *' a Cheddar' cheese, made of all the milk of the parish." 
See Gibson's ed. of Camden*s Britannia. 

P. 315. after 1. ult. add, P. 245. 1. 8. = 176. 6. vsC/mT 
ff%iiy — is one of the few plausible alterations submitted by 
Dr. Edward Bernard in one of his letters to R. B. p. 186. : on 
which R. B. observes. Idem profecto mi hi in mentem venerat, 
merito vero repudiavi. Quis enim sensus et sententia? p. 156. 
The restoration of Manil. 1. 774. Persidis et victor, stravit ova, 
classibus spquor, which R. B. p. 14. pronounced happy, occu- 

880 miTA. AODBV0A. OOKftlOBWAA. 

piet a pitco io his ooie oa that paaiafd witboot doe acknow* 
ledgement t this miiit be aitriiiolad to mere foigetfblnen. 

P. 815. D.*. R. P. had corrected a mistake of Toup ariat^g 
from the same cause :— Qoomodo kxmtus est Gregor. Nazktos. 
apod Stobeum— -Cur. Nov. p. 1 1. 1. 14. Imo apod Antoninm 
et JVIaximum cum Stobseo sioml editos FkaockC 1581. App. 
p. 496. 

P. 816. after 1. 7. insert [P. 3848278. See Supplement to 
No. XVllI. of the Classical Journal, pp. A20--522.] 

P. 328 n. penult; adopted 

P.3dl.l.4— 7. <' What li^^atr«(( of finding, chance at last 
threw M My «m^/' Lett toT^vis, p. 14. 

P. 334. to note f sub)<^, " Let it be my humble office to 
collect the scattered sweets, till their united ?if toe tortures the 
sense.*' Junius' Let xli. 

P. 335. L 3. He wrote and flonnder'd 00, Dunciad, I. 12a 

P. 337. I.6.***** 

P. 345. 1. 5. Farce of /. Midat. 

P. 351. t 2. Lucius' Let *pp. 70, 71. 

P. 354. L 18. Junius' Let liv. 

P. 355. 1. 24. words, 

P. 391. 1. 13. ilU Shaksp. Heniy IV. P. IL A. 11. Sc. W. 




zxri, 12. Lynceus 

XXXVIII. 1. 9. ^xpijv 

XXXIX. 1. 9. exultation 


Ibid. U. Booffbn Franjais. Paris 1812, p. 83. 

XLix, 25-6. 

1. 2. Macbeth iv. i. 

1. 9, 10. Swift, L^ion-club, 101. 

L. 1. read, Cicero. Tusc. Disp. i. 17. 

P. 21, 1. 6. Aod what would he have said, had he known, 
that in his copy of Pbrtus*s edition, Kuster himself had noted 
from both his MSS. the true reading of the whole passage ? 
The book afterwards belonged to Hemsterhusius (se^ praef. ad 
P)ut. p. xxi. Corrigenda p. 482), and now forms part oi the 
Heoisterhusian collection in the public library at Leyden. I 
take this opportunity of thanking those two very learned men 
Professors Wtttbmbaoh and Ttobmav, for the kindness and 
liberality with which they have assisted my researches in that 
noble repository. 

P. 54, 1. 5. Moschus II. 105. ubi rouipoii, 

P. 169. Schol. ad Androm. Zgj et 405. Ti ^^f §\m\ (^y.) rot 
KOTcL rijv irarpi^a xol njy Ix froAs/Jou iteui^ntousLv, rl oUp^fjiai 
Xiyw ^rif rotirtay ri Ssufiv airals ii/an lepoidiwpriffa o'payd^ 
hr^pos, IXior wpvoXoujxsyoy r^v wtlpay rrjf a<;^/ttaXtt;0-ia(. rd 
ii itkrjclov Srra Kotti w iaxpito xa) ayoC^rw, Asyii $1 r^v iiri- 
CouXiJy fMyfXoou. apx^jy ^^ ncmhai rc5 fipi^ysTy. Ti ^' i/toi 

* CommodDm recordor loci Propert. xi. 94 SS, Tu mea campcne$, et 
dices, Ossa, Froperti, Htec tua sunt ; eheu ht miki certus eras. Ut de con- 
Knictione impedita nihil dtcam, nimquam l^tini compwere oHevjus ossa, 
9pd compnnere atifuem, Tibullui in. Si, 96. Sic ego cornponi versus in oua 
velim, Unde legonluip, 7|* nu compones, R. P. Nunc ex Vtri summi 
potis ineditis disco ita laudare Torrentium ad Horat.'Serm. i. 9. 38. 

3b'i AUCTAtlVM. 

ysfp TO a'roia>a79 if (^r roMU»ra «nror9viay. lu JuntiDa prio- 

ceps fbl. 289 a- I>cge« Ti TAlT 'OATPOMAl. ret nard r^r 
fr. (icil. Ten. 394.) x r. f. r. «tti^Mro</ay (?. 395) nl ^. Op> 
potitionem qascrit icholiastes inter i^vpojjMi 397* ef Kar§lSor 
400. et raS f jy iroolr—xaxfll pareDthesi indudit. Mox r^vrtuy ri 
hivoupov inepte interpolat Barnenus, et icholia ita dividit 3 tfoi- 
cirai roS tpijvciv. Ti ^* ffbo) (fr. Ta ir V09)y oJx l^iJCfM^Cv) 
rci vX. (plene distingoens pott (fv). Ab eo deoeptui Maigis- 
vint intelligtt quasi enet rovrwr tiofinpa et ^fn^vw ri, rl ^* 
ijxo) Cijy, et probatum it ope Schdiattc, versus Euripidia alio 
ordine ac vulgo dispooendos esse. £t quod ad rem iptam atti- 
net, optime quidem ille. Sed in tchdiit perspicue corrigen- 
dum, iCfiuTrrau rw ift^vtw. TA '£N nOSlN OTK '£BIK- 

MAZa. ri vX. «ip) ri tpi}rs7f . TI AHT 'EMOt ZHN. 

/3/Xrioy Nempe ifta ri lyr' Ijxo) (igv alieno acholic prsfisa 

sunt ob praoedens tpupuh. Eooe vero S. P. N. Moras, qui 
editionem a Beckio perfectam instituit, scholia ad 397. et 405, 
lectore non monito transponit. Idem Moms, ** cui motare 
qiiidquam aut omittere in Barnesii animadfersionibus profecto 
non licuit,** utpote ** qui quse oaortuis et vivis debentur, anna 
omnium optime nosset/* &c. &c. (vide Reckii prsf. ad Tom* 
III.) scholia mutavit ad 101. 365. 549. 728. 778. partim recte, 
pertim secus, sed tacite semper. 

P. 170. 1. 4. Egregiam iliam emendatiooem Wakefiddio 
tribuit V. D. (Elrosleius, ni fallor) in Censur. Edinburg. xxxvii. 
p. 78. sed Wakefieldius etsi parum diligens in emendatiooom 
auctoribus designandis, Snapium recte dtat. 

P. 185> 20. 439, 13. In Helena, 1019. legendum vel ob 
sensuroj iiiKohiv vw iv. impia estem in patrem, ni ■ In 


Ov^ Siiy iicoXXifitcria, xo) o'totsTiutv iv, 
Non, unde perimus, INDIDEM servabknur. Nil pervnlgi- 
tius quam hie uius particulse ; ut b Platonici Georgise initio ; 



XAI. Ouftr itpayfULf -w ^ooKparts, hyw yoLp xo} lci<r9(JMi. 
Ibid, p 494 B.H.St. (214. Routh.) ouxour ayayxi} y' ay iroXo 
hnfiphi, froAo xo) ro airiiv elyoi. 

P. 186, 1. 13. 460, 33. Saidas C.C.C. teste R. P. primo 
piaviourrof, deinde mutatum in ftayicrKmlorrof. 

P. 191^ 1. 9. yoKfov (i. e. rsx^ov) editionis prime per enorem 
potitum erat pro rdfoj quod babent .^E^hyli edd. 

P. 191, pen. PbilemoQ Stobsi CII. p. 423 Grot. 
oSr§ ydf larpis oi^e §1$, dv tS oxor^f . 

P. 193* 1. 9. ixii, ]. 24. Troad. 890=896. 

AlytS « MtviXa,* 1 1— 

P. 192» 1. 19. 1. coogmant )*' {Pr^Bkctio, Adverss. p. 9 ) 
'' quis dabitet, 

P. 193, 1.6. Too. 1311 = 1330. XinhjaoiLsy riv', wv XfiXum)- 
ftfrf ho, 

P. 193, 1. 10. xx?iii, 1. 8. Eoripid. Helen. 1390=1394. 
xdkXiffra 3^r | iviipitacrsy \ rsvp^ voVi^. 
Ita interpolavit Bamesios, teste Musgravio i dyrjpiraa'sy h rv^ 
certe Aldus et P. Stepbanos. Corruptelain manifestam non 

P. 195» 1. 9. Hinc in Aristophane Harpocrationis \/Arra, 


TlvM XfXi^M njyix* drra falyitou. 

Vulgo ;^iAi^C0y. 
P. 197, 15. xlvii. 1. 9. ipl^M Miltonus (Mus. Crit. Can- 
tab, p. 290). 

P. 198^ 1. 1. xlvlii. 1. 9. Hoc non referendus est Pbikmon 
Pollnds IX. 38. Bentl. Em. N. 268. 

Divide r^y irKartiay aci \Uyw 

rairrjy wsTeohjXMy 6 fiavi?iiiis i 
P. 199, 1. 20. 21. droXXvreu Eostatb. ad II. X. p. 1271, 62 
Rom. 1374, 6 Bas. fhistra dubitante Hejnio Tom. viii. p. 308. 
38. Jaliani lectionem volgatam defenderat Spanbemius apud 
Perizon. ad Sanctii Minervam iv. 10. 
150. Adde Aristophanii locomf Ach. 257, buc relatiuD ab 


384 ArCTAKIVlf. 

Klimleio. Homerani in aDiroo htlntee videtar Hippiat Aihe* 
Qflci ri. p. 259. D. ilxov tt {oiripawoi) lui xi^Mif ixixf!fMroif, 
ifi^S reus Tuyou^tV. 

323. PorsoD. ad PbccD. 1703. Advent, p. 42« Bnpolis Plv- 
Urch. II. p. 662. E. tive Macrob. Sat. vii. 4. aed alifiar consti* 
tuit Gaisford. ad Heph. p. 276. 

578. HXm pro hiku Aid. M8S. in Baceh. 475. 

748 In Ennto Wakefiddioa (Crit Ref. Nor. I80a pw 249) 
Viden «— *cadont ? 

870. Theopbilui Cocnicos apod Schol. inedit* Dionys. Thra« 
cis (Bast. Ep. Crit. p. 149. ed. Schaf.) 

ror tpofia, rw corrijpa, h* iv Mw yifJLOus 

^EXXi^yof Citat [Klmsleias] in Quarterly Rev. 

xiT. p. 447. ^ov§d$ ex Eurip. El. 276. et rpop§* pio rp^pdr 
legit ibid. 4O9. yovidf Anlipban. Stob. 79. Grot. p. 3S7. R.P. 
not mat. 

1 141. p. 69» c. 2, 1. 20. yiyovroi contra metrom MS. Donr. 
in Aristopb. Plot. 144. 

1141. p. 69, c. 2, L7. Mjrttloa (tive Eopolit. videtcbol. 
AriKtopb. Vetp. 57) apud Atpas. ad Aristot. Etb. tive Gkutf. ad 
HepbflMt. p>. 98. Ti cxtSfi^t.* dnXyls xol hUympiKS¥ no) vfi^pa, 
^up^r ytXiSf i^is ri ifcuKa, Malini y§\t3aiy, w{ 6pf§, rd 
'rai^ia, Arittopb. Nnb. 539. rtits 'fouKoig V ^ yikwf. 'X2f ipas 
ibid. 211. Sopboclet apud Scbol. ad Vetp. 1021. 

1161. p. 77, col. 2, 1. 17. Nub. 1230. k^lrtato. ^y iuoL' 
dcJv gl. in MS. Harl. 5725. 

1164. fycophttnia. Soil. Gilb. Wakefield, Diatrib. p. 36. Vide 
Monthly Rev, April, 1799. P- ^2* 

1 169* Suspectut Valckeiuerio Diatr. p. 259. B. 

P. 200» 1. 2. 800. neminem offendet nisi qui in Atlkts poetis 
haspes sit. Of&ndit Wakefieldium Diatr. p. 30. 

P. 200, 1. 6. 37. Ridet Eubulut Atben. vii. p. 300. C. 

45. Idem apod eundem iii. p. 108. B. n^^a, ^^ptm^tvoX^s 
(is dffo fyyod. (vulgo vifo) 

54. Ipb. T. 324. foy^ Xstalas Ij^jM^XajK^ yitfOf. 



206. yt servat Platarch. ii. 165« E. 

P. 200, 1. 10. 228. Hippocr. in^O^xo;. <e \m^ xri ^^* cxXa* 
Xitvicu s^w a-iyricrouMi, 

250. Mpas servat etiam Platarch. de Placit. Philos. p. gOO. F. 

P. 200, L 1 1. 262. Ovid. Amor. i. 7« 9, 10. 
£t vindex in matre patrit mains ultor Orestes 
Ausus 10 arcanas poscere tela Deas. 

P. 200, 1. 11. 288. sKTTijffa'tiy Hee. 177. intani etsei soUd- 
tare, Solicitat Wakefieldius Dialr. p. 16. 

P. 200. ult. Adde Markland. ad Suppl. 8^2 (882). 

P. 201, 1. 1. 346. In the Crit. Rev. Jan^ 1801. p.g. Mr. 
Wak^ld quoies cJ yiXiivaov rroXov ipfu^c-ag from Eostathius 
on the Iliad. If from //. B, p.338, 35, et ult (256, 21, et 29.) 
they are Eustathius* own words in allusion to Ljcophron, 210. 
Or he may have somewhere cited ar6\ov ;^f Aioya^ay from the 
Agamemnon of ^schylus, v. 45, Nor is it at all impossible, 
that Mr. Wakefield appeals to a passage which does not exist, 
in the same review he asserts that v. 1013-^. " is so quoted 
by that elegant writer Heraclides Ponticus,** 

Mvujv yQo-spOY icof *OpiTrw. 
Me was asked by a friend for a reference to this qnotatioDy 
which no one had been able to find. He answered, that he 
thought he recollected it at the time of writing the reviiew ! 

P. 201, 1. 16. 508. iirlfiw (sic) Grot. Exc. p. l6^. et ad 
Matth. V. 40. oo-iovy Valck. ad Hipp. 1043. 

545. Potius ab Anaxagora. Vide Valck. Diatr. p. 29. 

P. 201, 1. 20. 725. Cratinus Athen« i. p. 8. A. 

P. 201, 1. 20. 792. Demosthenes c. Pantasn. p. 569, n. 5/. 
s=978, 14. R. Ttw yip j 0T1 ^ixoioy ■ ■ ; Sophocl. El. 593 w 
yip xa\6v» Malim itw yip ; 

P. 201 » antep. 891. Hinc Platonis textum defendit Hein« 
dorf. Protag. p 343. fin. ed. Steph. 

P. 202, 1. 3 . 1 1 63 . irrayaXtivw pikv est Canteri emendatio* 

P. 202, 1. 9. 1279. kxx6KUf(pi}fuyo( Damascius Photii p. 107Q, 
10s570, 24.ed. pr. 

P. 202, 1. 1 1. 372^rif^os venim videtur, ut oonstroctio sit 

2 c f iV 

886 AvcTAinm. 

§U ripCH ^a^ ^' Bentfeioi Ep. n. ad Hctntterhcit. pt i08# 
ed« 1789. BUpmUr UM wkmfpi xo) xara pdxiv, hoc «fl» xmrd 
ffKwpi xo) pdxi^f quale illud AnacnotUis, *H NfiXoy ^ Vi Mi^ 
^. Vide Hecok 146. Phoeo. 291. Helen. 348— 35a 869. 
Sophod. CEd.T. 637 • Madk. Suppl. 317. ed. Staol. Miiigii« 
ynam ad Heradid. 227* ^ Wakefield, ad Bion. i. 81 • qui Bent* 
kiam cilat. 

P. 702, 1. 1 1. 466. Eoripidia firagmentum recte capil P. Jst* 
cobs. Exerdt. Crit Lips. 1796. T. i« p. 214. opticne oomparana 
Ovidii locttm inde doctum, Metam. it. 671*-673. Adde AchilL 
IVU. Erotic. III. p. 16^. ed. Saknat, ubi describiti^ Eoaothia 
tabula ADdromedani et Penea ezhibeni. opvipmirou fkkv oJr §if 
TO f/0ir^9f r^f X0pi}f 1) fcerpa, iiXu il ro SpuyiJiM Xe/w» iri fia) 
ng oM «Mioii)Xff x,*^f ^^^' '^^^^ airiyfiwY 1) ypetift^^ krpi^vim 
yip TOO Xiiou ro¥ ni\tw i ypoupwst cis Smctif airw if >> i{ ^i 
hlipvroi tf onhty, xa2 Ioikm re dfafMt» tl [ji»h iU ^0 xglXXof 
iiAhiip dr/dx^ti Kouvtp, tl Sh tU foi ha-fM xa) ro KSftof, aur^ 
v^My rdfof. Mendosa est vox y^a^« et a lequeati y^apsig 
orta Tidetar. Vide an legendam ntipof^, vd^ ut monet aniU 
cus» fto^. Ceterum e sophiste imitatione interpretare ovVo- 
liipfm Xaivw r9iy(Hriuitw¥ apod Euripidem^ speeu e NATIVO 

P. 202, 1. 13. 540# Sed in I^daai loco (Amor. ii. p. 426, 
32) longe mdiorem senaam dat ^fi{ai. Interpfetem agat Ovt- 
dioa A. A. 11. 675. Adde quod est illis opaauic pkudbhtia 
major; Solos et artifices qui fiidt, ususadest. 

P. 202, 1. 13, add, 560. Mdim cam Gilberto Wakefidd, in 
censora Enripidis Porsoniaoi, Crii. Bev, April, 1801. p. 335. 

xo) ftiy' ^yvjffal rih, 

it§p^^XJiticr9eu ; 

Androm. 37 !• [jkiyiXa yip xplfw rdis, 

Aip^ovf oripivieu. Vide Hemslerhus. ad An- 
stopb. Flat. 1151. 

P. 202, 1. 16. 849. yauCircao'ir Aid. Grot. 
1277. Schd. Demoitb. Phil. i. p. 31. n. 8. ed. Par. fbl. cc, 


AVCTASIUll. 387 

V6trso> 1. 24. ed. Aid. 1503. ita6x» A ov'x tSfiftm il fti^ &rac{ 
itap EipnriSri. Is autem Scholiastes, volgo dicCat Ulpianus, est 
ZosiiDus Ascalonita, de quo videFabricium B. G. T« vi. p. 6l2i 
et inprimis Tayloraro, Praef. ad Lytiain. Jam antes satis toto 
id conjici poterat ex its qose dissent Reiskius Onr. T. iv. ap- 
pend, pp. 143, 4. et ex oomparatione Vit» Demosthenis itud. 
p. 147* 1. 3. cum Chapmanni Observ. in Ulpian. § 15. siva 
scfaol. ad Demosth. c. Timoorat. p. 467. §213«ed«Far. vel 
fbl. NN. iii. verso Aid. 1508. Sed omne dabinm tollit MS. 
P^ris. 2935. scriptus a duobus quidem librariis, sed eodeoi fere 
tempore^ saecaio drciter undecimo, et nesdo an ejosdem homi* 
nis consilio. P^rs prior continebat 2iOsimi coUectanea, sed da* 
ficit post fol. 8. Pars posterior exhit)ens Orationes ?iginti octo 
et I^roGetnia« ipsa quoqne motila est ; if. scil. cirdter XVIII 
snppleta sunt io initio, a jnniore qoodam. En titultun priorii 
partis, ab ipso librario scriptnm. 


C oXvfBteoiis C 

y oXvviiaxis y 

i xari ^iXhncou a kc. 
(Recensentar illae Onr. qnas continet Pan altera MSti> torn in 
alia columna seqaantnr, 

^mirkpw Xoitoy kc, (vide Reisk. Orr. T. iv. append, p. 145) 

hipws 6 ifjfMC^iyovs fih^ :^— 

I irtp) ^ijft. &c. (vide Reisk. p. 152 nbi male ffgpof) 

• • • • 

ed v^oiia-nf kc. i. e. Libanii argumenta, in quo- 
ram fine clausula, AiCaviou uVoSiaiei^ :— Tom post qnosdam ca« 
lami ductus opusculorom distinguendoram causa positos^ 

ANn n. ^AN ^a A.A. ^bxor ^ Kol—^ i. e. scbolift Al- 

2g2 diaa 


dina (exoeptii primo et eo quod inciptt if xaro^xtuif too ir^#- 
oifdw Kori Jatovhiit.) usqae ad finem ejas quod incipit fMT^X- 
tif i^' iripeuf hvoiav, (fol. 5. b. 20. Aid.) Nempe tola Prole- 
gomena tant Ulpiam. Utram ea cum Libanit Argumentis at- 
saniBerit Zosimiif, an pnefixerit reoentior quidam, vel ipse Al- 
duSf equidem^^nescio ; ted postremam crediderim. Interea in 
ichol. prope Ink. (p. 2, 1. 24. ed. Par. f(A. AA. 6. vers. 1. 16. 
Aid.) lege, wf i|[^ h ro7f 'lo-OKpanruHs ilpij^eu vel tlpf^pcofuv. 
(oxtfxf arixo7f flp« MS. 2935). Confer Zofiimi Vitam Denaoath. 
prop. ink. 

P. 202, Lull. 1622. Antbolog. i. 4. 1. p. 4. H. St.sii. 
p. 231. Br. 'girra il xaa'i lU^a^t v'lx^^ vayroAfto; ayayxi}. 

P.203, 1. 12. Lad II92. 

P. 204, 1. 18. Gataker. A. M. P. xii. Ipse addo Heliodor. 
^tbiop. II. p. 123,30=5102. Coray. rtTi^ ifM^g, to rou \iyov, 
xar' Ijxou nixp^cu TftpoTg. 

139 § X. p. 22, c. 1. L 25. ed. 1812. Sopbocles Stobsi iv. 
p. 33. Grot. 

P. 204, 1. ult. 300. Sopbocles Atbensei x. p. 433. £. Fr. 
Inc. XLiv. ^^uhm yip roi virra irpQ^^i(ujv o'ofa Oox dtv 
irXffoy rep^nas if vieiy Motif. 

345. Scbol. Eurip. Androm. 529. hi r^s iteuias e<V Mra- 
furijo'iy ^iXooTop/iftf cEyii riv Ms yf Aaoy, jxoyoyou;^) jSoaJo'a xa} av 
'goMmv ftar^p f if wag. 

P. 205, 1. 2. 634 '' Mbittitus sum."—'' Id plane in fal- 
stssimis est habendum ; nam nos disertissime edidinius in Here. 
Fur. 194. ad hunc ipsum modum: 

•— — — fi.vpious oiarrovs afsif, 
Pene inducor* ut V. D. Homereis verbis alloquar^ te, lector ! 
ut putem, non improbante : 

Arpsi^rj, jxi} yifevh\ liCiTraiuByos a-afa eiftnv,** 

fVak^ld. Diatr. p. 7.' 
Casu nempe oiorouf ediderat, nisi id Bamesio surripuit. Vide 
Bumeium in praeclara Hecubse censura^ M, Rev. Jan. 1799. 
p. 84. 

Ibid. 461. ro croV 75 X. H. 1982. apud Valck. ad Ph. 476. 

476. prop. f. apud Piatanem, Tbeaet. p. 203. A. C. ut in 
scbedis nouverat R. P. P. 206, 


P. 206, 1. 10. 1008. Ear. loa. 275=286. Lege ri f ouJ rW ) 
ob sensum. 

1314. Opus ineditum, Ttmarion inscriptum, apud Bast. Ep. 
Crit. p. 184. a\ a\ ri raSra juvsts xayajxoxXsutif, xai fiptif 
y^fjAs iXidd^y (Odyss. I. 39.) xara rt^v ira^Oipoy ; 

1343. De MioVx fragmento omnino Tide Gataker. A. M. P. x. 
p. 522. sive Wyttenbach. ad Platarch. de aud. poetis p. 33. C. 

1379. ir^o'a^o/ X. £1. 967. apod Valck. 

P. 207, fin. Hesychius. "E^xo^. — ifg^^^ayfta, (is rw¥ oiov" 
rwv ri ;^ciAij. Vide scboliastas ad Iliad. A. 350. Eustath. ad 
S. p. 968, 61 =954, 10. PolluK II. 89. "Ofi^rjp^f is rd xs<Ai} 
£FKO£ OAONTHN xaAc7. Sed non dissimulandam est^ Cal- 
limachum de ipsis dentibos intellexisse, ut ex ejus imitatione 
patet ; Fragm. 136. eK\vi, twv y^tfih h^Loii ^t* o^orroLf oXio'Sjf. 
Pro genoinis babet Solunis versus Valckenaer. de Aristobulo 
pp. 103, 108. 

P. 209. 1. 4. Imo Porsoai nota (Adverss. p. 156) nou ad 
irAijSoucra 420 referenda erat, sed ad nAIONT ( HAI . GEN'T) 
416. ut ad Persas Blomfieldius. In Suida v. Muduirrss BPEX- 
0EN1 EC pro BPEXONTEC R. P. ad Toup. p. 46a 

P. 217, 1. 7. 670, 1. ^9' 

i A. et^ si memini, rovS* dpyijta R. P. 

P. 218, 3. Platu Gorg. p. 492. D. H. St.=210, 11. Routh. 

rats l^^y eitidufuas ^rff oJ xoAaoriov, idhrra M airdg wg /xs- 

y 'arras, leXy^pwviv airals ikXoiey y% irodsy rc^i\ijd^i%Tf \ Lego 
AM09EN e TimaBi iexico. Antiphan. Atbea. vi. p. 257- £• 
tews \ IdvoLs rdfud ydp 'Ef ijo'OfAai o*! roDro. Manifesto reponen- 
dum TAAAA. Quod Fr. Jacobs, fugisse miror ad Atben. 
p. 156. 

P. 226, 1. 14. 1. vide p. 241, 1. 4. et addenda. 

P. 230, L 19. Legenduro, ^ rdy jeoXeidwv -, ut babent Oionis 
editiones et ut ipse Porsonus descripsit in Adversariis ineditis 
penes Trin. Coll. Cantab, sine isto ro^ojy quod merae incogitan- 
tiae est tribuendum. 

P. 233, 1. 16. I. 28. E. 3. Post Yfh^iMvos ed. Scbw. addit e 
Schotti MStOj xai drriiorov xa) Hyx^^ Sdjiov, lee. Codex Se* 



daneniisi xoi dniiotw ti Bdenf jy%<i. Lege, xod Aptiforog 
a, sciL pi^o-i Antidoti comici nomen leviter oorroptom hibme 
apad Athensam aiebat Ponoous, si recte memini; forun hone 
iptom locom volebat 

P. 234^ 14. Nunc video lis ipsis Kosteri verbis Qsam ene 
Ernestum Prsf. ad Callimacb. fol. ** 4 b ; at scilicet facuii4i^ 
tern, quam iiU deesse sentiebai, argutando eUvareis qood veria- 
aimuni est judiciam viri unius doctissimi, Dan* Wyttenbaobij^ 
Vit Ruhnk. p. 82. 

P. 239, I* 7— B. 1. vide infra p. 2/8. 

P. 240, 1. g. i>iyoL y in Aristoph. Vesp. 5B. Aid. et Junt. 
1515. ixSy atra (sic) Junt. 1525. Nub. 992. tWayMiv pro 
tlo-irrnv i. e. Molrrnv MSS. pars. R. P. [Ran. g67. «^7' irr 
(sic) tres primae edd. voia y Barocc. 127* et Cantab. Nn. 3. 13 
(!)• In Herodot. i. 54 confunduntur arcAeiij et dyytXhfj, Ibid. 
VI. 60. irri, iryri, iy^. Vide infra p. 278. In Aristoph. Nob. 
1 135. pro jttir^ia rt MSS. Barocc. 43. Harlei. 5725. praebeDt 
/xir^i' Jra (sic). 61. in Harl. ox/ya rwoL. Lege igitur [i^pi 
ixtoL, Av. 1389* dipw xo) tmini yt xa) Kvavavyiet, Ita edd. 
(tres primsB certe) y§ cm. Rav. L^ cum irra. P. P. D.J 

P. 241. Eupolis AthensBi i. p. 17. £. tier rls flircy dfii^a 
itifMtfootos fiBra^i viVct/y ; Legendum> dfid^a itaX, vpwros ■ 
Vide Epicraten vi. 262. D. Hanc emendationem oocupavit 
aliqais, ni fallor 1 fieri potest ut a PorBono acoeperim. 

P. 241^ 5. In Antipbane Atbensi iii. p. 108. £. 8. vaTg pro 
«oJf recte MS. A. 

P. 253, 1. 22. Ih w et (rrp oCiyAo; Photios MS. 

P. 267^ 1. Xenopbon Memorab. iv. 3. 4. 
6 jX£K ^\io$ fwrsivof (Sv ■ 
iufS per furros et furn non fiectebant Graeci ante Macedonum 
imperiuoij ut neque ^orrciyo;, ^tt;ri (fty &c. dicebant. In Xe- 
nopbon te Ihoc sciL locol fwreiyis inrexeruot iibrarii. R. P. 
[T. K.] 

P. 285, 1. 4. Imo ra; or, oJo> roTg recte MS. et h ante ^^jcta- 
o'ly om. 
P. 286. 1. JO. h [i^uBof, non fwiots, MS. Porro fabolator 



Florentinus, cxxi. ed. Fr« de Furia^ htsiittf f ifto) dyatm 
itkyj^os km, avYBkd^, Koi ditoXouScrBif ifivrwv. Uode in beza- 
metro apud Saidam malim, *€AO' Iva /bboi fiiog Ittw /V^aoX- 
^&as Kspas cuyos, pro hV. 

P* 287, 1 1 ' Scbol. ad Nub. JSG. Arrixwg $1 rot) ipA^ ri 
mm ifiXa^i, Lege ri £. 

P. 287, 1* 13. 1. TtpHiMv. Turn MS. h^vi (sic) et f qood 
utnim sit pro rm an rf, vix deoemere est. 

P. 302, 1. 1 1 . Vide R. P. ad Med. 325. 

P. 302, 1. 12. R. P. ad Orest. g2. Med. 325. 

P. 303. Monoit me Porsonus apud Latinos Poetai (Virgi- 
lium certe) inter-nos, in-se, &c. junctim esa% efferenda; pro- 
inde £cl. iii. 28. Gtiorg. ii. 402. versus esse rotundissimos. 

P. 304, 1. 19. (J ^iXe ya/uif oti vypmwv icwXQV^kkvwv, Sal- 
masius apud Grot, ad Stob. lix. et Apollodoro comico tribuit. 
Mox Ui^iXos yoLiku &c. emendaverat Auratus apud Linden* 
brog. p. 629. 

P. 309, 1. 14. L xiii. 16. Gesner is right. The fifth part 
of all her nectar. Each god was supposed to have a given 
quantity at bis disposal ; and to bestow the fifths or the tenths 
part of this on any individual was a special favour. R. P. Cor- 
rect Gesner's (i. e. Marcilius') reference, Athen. ii. p. 39, B. 
Schol. Pind. Pyth. ix, 113. 

^.313. note. Read, the following notice; 

By F\rancis Atterhury, D, D. 
From tUU-pagt to p. 60. ^ 
Page 90—112 

and almost aU the Examvnaiion of the Dissertation upon the 
Fables of jEsop. [The leaf is now before me. The writing is 
very dd; perhaps nearly as old as the book. P.P. D.] '' In 
laying. the plan &c. 

P. 334. note f • Othello, iv. 2. Junius to Lord Mansfield 
(Letter xli. vd. ii. p. 114. ed. 177^*) Let it be my humble 


302 AUCTAlinM. 

office to cdlect the latterBd tweetSj till their united rirtue tor- 
tares the tense. 

P. 339, 1. Auctor incertos apod Said, in h^ffrvrix^ u 328. 
ed. Kast. 

P. 341. note(*) Shakesp. Wives of Windsor^ i. 3. 

P. 350, 16. In allasion to Hawkins Junior's title page. 
Igiwramui^ Comcadia ; — «^^» cum noiis historicis et criiicis •• 
quihus insuper presponkur viia auciori, et subjicUur glossarium 
tfocabula forensia dUndde expomens : accuranie Johanne Sidneio 
Hawims, Arm. Land. lysj. 

P. 361. note (*) Sbakesp. Henry IV. Fart 2. 11. 4. 

Coronidis loco apponatar Euripidis splendidum melos, qao 
in primis delectabatur Porsonus. £]khibctur prout typis exscrip- 
aerat vir sammas, occasione certaminis nescip cujus Acadcmici. 
(Hbrculbs Furbns^ 637^679. ed. Beck.) 

'A y$orras ftrO* flkov + cTp^- 

9of ro $h y^poLf is) 
fioLpunpoy Ahvag TMmiXwv 

M Kpari xs7rai, 640 

fiXifdpwf ciwrtiyiv 

fMj fCrOi jxijr* 'Acnjri^of 

rvpa¥vi$os Sx^os ii-t^, 

fMJ xf^crw ioifMira irXripiij, 645 

ras ^tas dmXa^ily 
i xakXlcra fuh h Sxtw, 

TO ^l Xuypov fovtoy rs 7^- 

pai lUGTui' ycari xuimxwv ^ 650 

t Nc ix^H cum nirMf jungatur, lept Murctiw, & nir»$ f^t ^Ixtnr ri 
ti yn^ iix^H liiJf quod metro nocct. Metro quidem convenienter et 
Icvi sane mutattone Musgravius, A^^tt Ji «•• yn^t dii Sed rationem 
redde, quare vulgata lectro potius servanda videatur. [Rationem reddit 
ipse vir summus Adverss. p. ^1]. 


AUCT4R1UII. 303 

tvattSv iciiMtta xai ifoXeig 
i) Tfs^oTo-t fopiMw, 

il$viMv iv {Cay ^fspov, 

foLVipoy ;^apaxTijp* 

ipsr^S Offoio'i 

{ukra' xatdayoWc^ 66O 

tU aiyoLs nAiy d\m 
hvcws otv /Cay SiavXous* 
a iiwyeyita f dtrXwv iv 

ilye fy)aii aroiitoy' 
xa) twS' ^y rows re xaKOVf dy 655 

yvuiyMf xa) rous iyaMs* 
1<roy ir h yt^iXaitny icr- 
rpwy yaircus dpiip^os irsKei, 
ytjy S" wisis !po$ ex $euiy 

aXA* Etkurtrofjisvos fis aU 
(oy trXouroy jUroVoy ai^si, 

Oi iteuiffoficu rdf Xapnag 
Moucauf ^uyxarojiiYyiif, 

d^lTTay £w5uy*ay 675 

/xj ^[oJijy [lit dfiAvvlas, 
de) f iy reB(pdy^ffiy slijy. 
iti roi yspujy doi^ig 
xtXaStl pi^yafMavvay. 

[640. xilo'ou Aldos. 6Q0, xa) 6yaro) U fo^S olu. Aid. £men- 
davit Reiskius. 664. /Siora'y /Ud. crdSioy Reisk. cujus oomen bis 
omtttit Beckias. 665* roiA tws — Aid. Emendavit Porsonus ad 
Med. \$7, &J6* 1} et witAvo-ias Aid. /xi^ — aft. Stobaeus.] 




Acta D. Apost. xxviii^ 26. p. 289. 
1. John (St.) T, 7. 354. 367/8. 
Paul (St.) 1. Ep. Tim. Hi, 16. ^69—291. 
i.Pteter(St.)i, 2. 289. 



AcBJBUs 242. Amphis 235 , 6» 7. 239. 

.figjrptiacos lapis p. 183. Aoaxandridctt 237- 249. 

^liao 72, 3, 4, 5, 6. Anthologia H. St. 51^ 257— 

^8CH YLU8> Vol. I . P. ii. ed. 259* 

Schutz. 4 — 10. Anti-Atticista^ 198^ 9* 250. 

Prom. Vinct. et Sol. 7, 8. 297. 

V.9. 208. Sol. 212. 216. Antipbanes 177, 8 (Walpole 

Septheb. 8, 9, 10. 209. Fr. Com. 178.). 233^ 234. 

Pens 191. 209. 288. 247. 

Supplices 209, 10. 218. Apnilodorus 239. 305. 

A^memn. 210, 11. ApdlMict tlhodiiu 44. 288. 

Choephone 211. Apaioes Timroo Looginus de 

Fragmenta212^ 13. jirte RheQ I69. 

Agatbias 259. Araros 250, sive EoboloB 242. 

Agatbias Hist. 287. Arcbestfatus 239. 

Agatbo 2 ] 9. Arcbilochus 232. 

AJcaeus240. 283. [jxefluVOi^y in Arcbippus 281. 

Cod. Ven., teste fiutmanno Aretbas 270. 

in Mus. Ant. V. I. fasc. 1. Aristides 177. 278. 

p. 145.] 295, 6. AaiSTOPHAMBs 268, 9. 

Alcman24l. Abistophambs ed. Bninck, 

Alexander ^tolus 257- pp. 1 1 — 37* 

Alexis 236. 242. ^6. 282. Epulones 37. 

Ammonias 252. Acbanictoiet 29. 32. 

* References to ** the Oatline " and <' the Prefoce** haye been omitted. 



Equitei 28. 31. 33^ 34, 35. as fiu: as I can recollect, re- 
152. 198. fer to this piece. 


Vespse 10. 33. Babrius 286. 

Fax 35. 198. 209. 

Aves 29. 32» 3, 5, 6. Caias 177. 

Tbesmophoriazosae 30. 34, Callimachus 100. 255. 278. 
35. 206. 282. Pseudo Callim. 100, 1. 

LysLstrata 22. 31. 36. 19I. Catullus 52. 

Ranae 28. 32. 195. 210. Cbionides 221. 

Ecclesiazusae 30. 36. Cbrysostomus (Dion.) 228, 9* 

Plutus 31, 32. 206. 287. Cicero 8. SJ. 83. 286. 804, 5. 

Gerytade8 36. 331. 

Hors 195. . Cleon 15. 

Thesmophoriazusse fi, 282. Comici incerti 176. 228-^23 !• 

Fragmenta 37 184. 236. 233.284,5. 

247. 282. 285. 287, ^88. Crates 200. 236. 

Aristoteles 33. 304. Cratinus 234, 5. 282. 287. 

Armendas 286. Cratinus jun. 251. 
Aspasius 232. 

Atubnjbus24.26.36. 39.42, Dtd3rmus310, 11. 

43. 75,6, 152. 177. 195. 204. Diodorus Sic. 29I. 

212. 221. 232—249. 256. IMogenes Laertius 23a 277. 

287. Dionysius 240. 

Athenton 247- Dioscurus 257. 

Attius 8. Dipbilus 241. 

Auctor Cbristi patientis 169. Dromo241. 

227. The Bhemensian Di- 
vines Annot. in Act. i, 14., Ennius 303. 

and Beliarmine de grat. et £pbippus 242. 246. 

lib. arbitr. Lib. v. xxt. de Epborus 243. 

Each. L. Ill, de monu- Epicharmus 236. 

mentoclaaso, have given this Epicrates 238. 

wretched drama to Gregory. Epigenes 315. 

Beliarmine, however, de Etyroologus Magnus 26. 240. 

Script. Eccles. ad ann. 37O. 288, 9. 

seems to hesitate; Posseui' Eubulus 233. stve Araros 242, 

nus in bis Appar. Greg. Naz. 243. 

rejects it as unworthy of Evenus Parius 259. 

Gregory; and Barcnuit at- Eugraphius 305. 

tributes it to Apollinans of Eupbanes 239. 

Laodicea. In hb notes to Euphro 232. 

the Expoutioo of the Creed Eupolis 35. 206, 7. 2 1 7. 233. 

Bp.PBARSOH does not once, 240. 247* 285. 






Hecaba 194. ; addenda ad 

Hecubam igg, 200. 
Orestes 33.— hmI Orestem 

200» 1,2. 
Pbcenissae 36. — ad Phceais- 

sa8 202. 
— ad Medeatn 203, 4, 5, 6. 
Hippolytus 223. 3 15. 
Andromache 1 94. 
IpbigeDia Aol. I92, 3, 4. 

197. 223, 4. 330. 
Iph. Taur. 224. 
Bacchae I90. 201. 224, b,Q. 

Helena 226. 
Ion. 193. 207. 225. 
Electra 190. 
Fragmenta 37. 177- 194. 

200. 227. 
Supplementa ad Beckium in 

Eur. 160, 170. 
Enstathias 9. 26. 212. 220. 

238. 256. 288. 
Eathymios 270. 

Fabalator inoertus 2^6. 

Galen 222. 
Geoponici 177- 
Gregorius Nazianz. 318. 

Harpocratio 281. 
Hedylus 42,3. 
Heliodorus 312. 
Ueniochus 240. 
Hephaestio 259. 281. 
Hermesianax 40—42. 245. 
Hermippus 248. 284. 
Herodotus 260. 325. 
Hesiod. 316. 

Hesychius 133. 142.201 .208,9. 
Hipparchos 248. 

HipparchuB I^thag. 277* 
Hippocrates 318. 

HOMRRUS 112—1 14.117.206. 

210. 256. 
Horatius, 309. 

In8criptiones44, 5. 59, 60. 62> 

3 — 83. emend. 83. 183. 
loo Chius 204. 
Josephus 140. 
Julianus 93. 
Juyenalis 305. 309^ 10. 

Laberias 205. 
Livius 294. 308. 
Lucian 1 69. 318. 
Lucilius 305. 
Lucretius 239. 305. 
Lynceus 238. 

Macho 152. 238. 243, 4. 276. 


Jlestmdrinus 289—292. 
[Cyrillusqui hodie Constan- 
tinopoli patriarchatum obti- 
net, vir pietate et eruditiooe 
insignis, ex Mgypio, cum 
sedem Alexandrinam relin- 
queret, magnaro librorom so- 
pellectilem secum advexit, 
inter quos codicem omnium 
vetustissimum, et longe pre- 
tiosissiroum (in quo veteris 
et novi fcederis iibri literis 
grandiortbus, manu Tbeclae 
nobilis foeminse Egyptiae, 
circa primi concilii Nicaeni 
tempora, bellissime exarati 
sunt) per Ornatissiroum et 
CI. virum Dominum Tho- 
mam Roe Equitem auratum, 
et apud Turcarum Imp. 
Sere mi Regis nostri Orato- 
rem, cam ex oriente rediret, 




doDO ad Seremum Regem dos- 
train transmisit/' Fahicius 
Junius benevolo lectori D. 
Clementis Ep. prions ad 
Cor.; Oxonii pridie Cal. 
Nov. 1632. Qui credat vt- 
ro justo et propositi teoaci — 
Patrick Young — in men tern 
nnqoam venisse, nt fugiiivas 
litteras in ilHs menabrants 
snbdole refingat, ne iste nie- 
com hand sentit. Animuro, 
queso, advertite quam reli- 
giose fragmentum situ corro- 
sum et lacunis^ quod maxi- 
me dolendum, passim inter- 
cisum ipse expresserit : 
-" Legisque Pytbagoricse non 
immemores (quse, ut Syne- 
sius in Dione autbor est^ 
oux karoti /StCXtof^ lir(iro(s7y, 
aXXd. fiovXerai fLsveiv airi 

nihil dementes, nihil de nos* 
tro addentes, non sjllabam, 
non literam, non apicem aut 
iota unum, fidelissime, quan- 
tum fieri potuit» evpressi- 
mus. Voces autem deper- 
ditas, et literas vetustate e' - 
esas, spatijs et interstitijs 
accuratissim^ diroensis, pro 
ingenioli nostri tenuitatesup- 
plevimus, et minio rubro 
(novo hoc et inusitato im- 
primendl genere) notavi- 
musj" — Hoccine credibile, 
ut suspicione nulla virtnte 
redempta codicem ilium vir 
optimus contaminarel ? Non 
dubium est quin manus male 
sedula in exteris oris delites- 
centem hac macula faedave- 

— olim BhuB, hodie Cania^ 

brigiensis 292—296. 
Ephrem 297. 
yiai, 298. 
f/R. StepbantsCantab. Kk. 

in Bibl. olim Regia Paris. 

Aromonii MS. Mus. Brit. 

Aristidis 278. 
Aristopbanis 16. 21. Rav. 

Cebetis 179, 180. 
Ciceronis 294, 5. 
Etymologi M. 288. 
Herodoti 260—262. 
Hesycbii 201. 234. 237, 8 

242. 244. 283. 
Juvenalis 309, ^O. 
Pausanise 279. 325. 
Photii 253. 285. 287. 
Platonis 206. 212.265. 267 

Prisciani 295, 6. 
Simplicii 1 7 1—1 74. 
Sophoclis 203. 21 6. 
Suidae 1 84. 203. 208. 286, 7. 
Terentii 296. 
Thucydidis 262, 3. 
Athenaei41. 185. 187 232. 
237,8. 242. 244,5,6,7. 
276 283. 
Folia in Mus. Brit. 292. 
Martialis 118. 305 
Medals 61. 137. 
Menandbr 93. 194,5. 200. 
236,7- 241.246 249 -254. 
Moschion 23 1 . 

Nicander 288, 9. 
Nicopbon 195. 




Orpbem [Pbeud-] 45. 

Parerculas 74. 

Pftusanias 60. 74. 137. V9» 80. 

287. 335> 6. 
Phavorinus 36. 306. 
Pherecrates 184. 255. 281. 
Pbilimo 244. 253. 282. 
Philetsras 245. 
Phtlipptdes 240. 
PhiloBtnitus 73. 
Phoenix 243. 
Photta8(S3. 201. 211. 253. 281. 

285^ 6, 7. 
Phfynicfaus 194. 
Phrynichus S. 11. 184. I94. 

204. 21a 212. 
Pindarus 245. 
Plato 12. 140. 145. 177. 212. 

232. 258. 263—266. 283. 

285. 287. 
PUtto comicas, 43^ 4. (conf. 

248.) 197* 232. 247. 
Plautus 252. 304» 305. 
Plntarch 33. 37. 93. 212. 224. 

252. 256. 
Plutarch (Ptendo-) 84, 5. 90, 

If 2. 
Poeta incertus 304, 5. 
Pbllux 28. 153. 281—283. 
Polysenos 253. 
Posidippus 235. 282. 
Pri8cianu8 233. 251. 295. 310, 

Pytbagoreoram fragm.qaaedam 


Rhesus 32. 

RosBTANA inscriptio 183. 

Sdiol. ad Horn. 252.312. 
Schol. MS. ad Pind. 21 K 
Schol. ad Plato. 250, 1. 
Scriptores in icholiis ad Sopbo* 

clem allegati 158—168. 
—* ad Platonem 270— 275. 
Senriua 205. 
Shnonidea 18. 42. 
SiiDpliGtusl71— 174.176.318. 
Solo (Pieudo*) 207. 


CE^Nii Tjnuunii 19 1 . 2 1 6. 

CEdipQsCokmeiia 194. 217, 

Antiflone 218. 

Tra<£inie 155. 218, 9. 

Ajaz 193, 194. 198. 220. 

PhUoctetes 5a 192. 194. 
197. 220. 

Electni22],2. 315. 

Iphigenia 243. 

Fiagmenta 193, 4. 212. 222. 

Sopplementa ad Indicem 

Soph. Br. so. 164—168. 

SCob«i8 211. 217. 222. 227. 

231. 251. 255. 305. 314« 5. 
Strabo 141. 145. 231. 
Strato 238. 
Strattis 153. 
Suetonius 68. 
Suidas 29. 30. 32. 34, 35. 139. 

177. 220. 232. 256. 258, 9. 

281.285—287. 29O. 
Synesius 203. 

Tatius (Achilles) 303. 
TeJeclides 287. 
Terentius ed. Liodenbr. 304, 5. 
Terentius 250. 253« ed. R. B. 
306, 7. 

Schd. ad Aristopb. 194. 256. Theoaistius 177. 
Schol. TowNL. ad Horn. 206, Theocritus 45. 256, 7« 9* 
7, 8. Theocritoa (Sophuta) 93. 




Tlieodecte8 231. 
Hieognis 332. 
Theophrastos 93. 276, 7* 

Tbeopompns 34* 
Thoqrdides 262, 3. 
Timodes 244. 
Hmotby (Blesaed) 297. 

Tragicas iocertus 176. 

Verrhis Flaccus, 68. 295. 
Virgil 308, 9. 

Xenarchus 234. 237. 244. 248. 
Xenopbon 47. 276. 



Abrbsch. — Suppleipenta ad 
Indicem, 213—215. 225. 

Acidalias 306, 7* 

Aldrich (Dean) 3 14. 

Anderson (Dr.) 326, 7. 

Apostolius 222. 

Askew 56. 26 1. 

Ashton (Dr.) 322. See Crit. 
Rev. of the Grenv. Homer, 
March 1804. pp. 316, 7. 
Dr. A. also assisted Reading 
in bis edition of Ori^n de 
Oratione j 4**. 1 728. Dr. A. 
died in 1760. 

Aston (Dr.G.H.); seePoRsoN. 

Atterbury (Bp.) 313, 4. — bom 
6Marcb,l662j ^iedl7Feb. 

Augustinus Ivi. 

Banks (Rev.C.) j seePoRsoN. 
Barnes 51. 176.224. 313. 
Barrow 186. See Crit. Rev. 

Jtine 1808. pp. 118, ip. 
Bartbelemi 134. 139. 220. 
Bastios 63. 266. 
Seattle 15. 
Becklus 169, 170. 

Bekker 34. 63. 184. 187* 20p. 
202. 204. 210. 212. 262. 
277. 285. 297. 

Bembo (Card.) 296. 

Benedictines 136. 292. 297. 

Bbntley (R.), 48. 56. 65. 
103,4. 116,7' 133. 139. 
145. 149. 184,5,6,7. 193. 
198, 9. 200. 202. 216. 218. 
221. 249,50, 1,2,3,4,5. 
4, 5, 6. 322, 3, 4. 345. 
R. B. was bom at Onlton, a 
hamlet between Rotbwell 
and Mitbley near Wakefield, 
Yorkshire, Jany 1 661-2 — 
R. B. was raised to the Ma- 
stership of Trtn, Coll Camh, 
1700, elected Regius Pro- 
fessor of Divinity, 17161 
died In the Lodge of Trin. 
Coll. July 14, at 1 1 o'clock 
at night, 1742, and was bu- 
ried on the 19th day of the 
same month in the Chapel. 
The funeral oration was pro- 
nounced by Dr. Yonge, Uien 
Public Orator, afterwards 




Bp. of Norwich. The late 
Doctor Glynn t the dilectus 
lapis of Cambridge, inform- 
ed roe that he was present 
when this Laudaiio was de- 

Bergler 19. 

Berriman (John) 312. 

Beza (see MSS.) 353. 

Blancbini 297, 8. 

Blomfield (Rev. C. J.) ; see 

Bos (L.) 33. 

Boyle (Honble. C.) 313, 4. 

Brand 204. 

Brown (Capt. 6.) 302. 

Bronck /. 8,9. 12. Id. 19—2(5. 
91. 164—168. 193. n. 28— 
37. 224. 250. 

Bronck (Master) 17, 8. 

Bucretius 306. 

Batler ( Hadibras-) 320. 

Barman 252. 

Bumey (Dr. C.) 209. 231. 

Bust(Matth.) 330. 

Casaubon 39. 89. 144. 242.3. 

J. C. bom Fobs' 1559 ; died 

July 1614. 
Caylus (Count) 136. 
Chandler (Dr.) 60 
Cbarterius (Renatos) 177* 
ChishuU 144. 
Clarke (Dr. S ) 130 133. 
Clarke (Dr. E. D.) 76. 
Cleaver (Bp.) 144,5,6. see Pr. 
Clericns 56. 255. 
Cole (Mr.) 314. 
Congreve 13. 

Corayus 242. 246. 248. 276. 
Cragius 141. 

Dacerios 176. 

Da]zel(A.)letterto, 191. I93. 
198. 205. 

Damm 13a 

Davies 23, 4. 295. 307. 

Davy (Dr.); see Poasoir. 

Dawbs 20. 24, 5. 28. 31. 50,,7.120.151. 
222. R. D. was bom in 
17O8, died 21 March 1766. 
R. D.*s critical reputation 
has survived the faint praise 
of Markland, and the unre- 
lenting rancour of Toup. 

Dawes (John Nic), 151—153. 

Dennis (John) 319, 20. 

Dotree (P P.D.) Ivii. I89. 260. 
281. 316; see Pobsov. 

D*Orville35. 61. 

Downes (Andreas) 184. 

Dbtdbn 326, 7. 

Duker 25. 

Duppa (Mr. H.); see Possow. 

Dupuy 18, 9. 

Edwards (Dr. T.) 84—102. 
Elobn (Ld.) 254. 
£lm8ley(Rev.P.) 194.3 11.328. 

Facias 279. 

Faemi 296. 

Fogginius (P. F) 68. 295. 

Fourmont 134, 5,6,7. 140, 1 . 

Fox (Honble. C. J.) 322. 

Freind (Dr.) 314. 

Gflw/br</ (Prof.) 230. 31 1.316. 
Gibbon 258. 
Giovenazzius 188. 
Glareanus 144. 146» 7* 
Goodall (Dr. J.) ; see Pobson. 
Griesbach 296. 356, 7> 8. 360, 

1, 2, 3. 
Gronoviu8(J.F.) 78. 306. 308. 




GrDTM>via8 (James) 144. 147* 

Grotius47 2Sg. 

Hancarville 135. 139. 141. 

Hardouin 81. 264. 

Hare (Bp.) 306. 

Hawkios V. Johnson 333—3.92. 

Haylev 307. 

Heath 226. 

Heinsius (D.) 295. 

Hbmstbrhusius 20. 130.277* 
280. The authority of T. H. 
with R. P. in prose-writers 
was nearly oracular. R. P. 
used to lament that T. H. 
had not, at an early period, 
taken np Piato or Thuct^cU' 
des instead of wasting his 
time on Lucian and Xeno- 
pho Epbesios. T. H. was 
bom 1 Pebx 1685, died 7 
April, 1766. 

Heringa39. 41. 138. 241. 

Herraannus Venema 29 1 • 

Herraannus (Godofir ) 201. 

Heyne6 103—106. 

Holstenius {Luke of) 174, 5. 

Horreus 153 

HuDtingford (fip.) 48—53. 

Hurd 32 1 . 

Hymnus ad Cererem 49. 101. 

Jacobs 152. 202. 204. 244. 

Jodrell 224. 

Johnson U4. 185. 

JoMBS (Rev.T.) 299. 

Jortin 46. 200. 310 

Junius (Patricius) 289. et In- 
dex^ yv. MS. Alezandr. 

Junius 208. 

King 151.314. 

Kipling 296. 

Knight (Mr.R.P.) 108—150. 

KoEN 63. 81. K. and bis 
schoolfellow and rival, /. 
Pier son ^ were highly valued 
by R. P. : their illustrious 
trainer seems to have prefer- 
red the latter : R. P. pro- 
nounced them Arcades am* 
bo ; had Pierson livedo he 
might have done any thing. 
If an edition of the firag- 
ments of the school of Ty* 
thagoras^ or a dissertation 
on the .Ak>li8m of Greece 
had been achieved by Koen ; 
and an edition of Euripides 
by Pierson, we should have 
seen brighter days. K. died 
April, 1767, aged 30 years. 

Koppiers 238. 

Kuhnius 279. 

Kuster xL I9. 21. 23. 26. 31. 
36. 258. 283. 

Lacrozius 257. 
Laoomarsini 285. 294. 
Lambinus 239. 266. 307. 
Larcher 139. 176. 
Le Long 355, 7, S, 9. 362. 

364. 366. 
Lennep40. 86. 94. g6, 101, 2. 

130. 152. 277. 
Leopardu8 29. 212. 
I^wis 317, 8. 
Lindenbruchius (Pr.) 304, 5. 

[Statii opera i—4«. Fr. Fi- 

liobroga, i. e. Lindenbruchi- 

us.]; Paris. 16OO. 
Lydiat 141. 

Maeus (Hieronymus) 174. 
Mappei 81,2. 

2 o Main- 




Mainwaring (Artbar) 327* 
Mahby (Dr. £.) j tee Poasoir. 
Markland 103. 120. M. was 

bom in Aug. 16^2., died 

7 July, 1776. 
Marsh (Prof.) 299, 300. 
Manbam 141. 
Martinus (Bern.) 10. 
MattbiB 202. 
Menagios 104. Died 23 July, 

MeursioB 138. 141, 2. 264. 

Middletcm (Dr. C) 321, 2, 3. 

Milner (Dean) 30a 

MlLTOH 224. 313. addend. 

Mitt 318, 9. 

Mobboddo 130. 133. 

Monk (Prof.) ; tee Preface. 

Montefalcon 288. 

Morad Bey 204. 

Morell 170. 

MuRBTut 85. 239. 294. 30d. 
312. M.A.M bom April, 
1526; died June, 1585. 

MutORAVB 169. 210. 216. 
324—326 S.M. died 5 Ju- 
ly, 178O, aged 47 yeart ! 

Norit (Card.) 295. 

Opiopaeus 258. 
Oudendorp 310. 

Parr (Dr. S.) Ixvi, vii. 323. 
What would be our gratitude 
to this Patriarch in literature 
and Religion, if be would 
favour us with a life of Dr. 
Conyers Middleton! See Dr. 
P.'s character of Barrow in 
Crit. Rev. June 1808, pp. 


FbhrboU 208. 219.312. Add, 

J. P. was bom at Snoring In 
Norfolk, 16I3; died at Ches- 
ter, 16 July, 1686. 

P^tit 25. 

PiBRSOM (J ) 28. 42, 6. 153. 
257. 266. 281, 2, 3. P. was 
bom 1 73 1 ; died of the sroall 
pox 29 Oct' 1759! 

Pope314. 318, 9. 323,4. 

PoRsoNus apud 
jision (Rev and Hon»»>« Dr. 

G.H.) 257—59. 
Banks (Rev. C.) 224. 
Davy (Rev. Dr. M.) 228 — 
23 1 . 247 bis. 276. 330- 
Dobree (Rev. P. P.) 185. 

187. 189,90. 193. J95. 

196,7. 200, 201, 2, 4, 
6. 7. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. 
216, 17, 18, 20. 21, 22, 
23,24,25, 26,27, S\, 32 
GO, 70, 78, 79f 80, 81— 
84„85— 89. 303,4, 5j 9, 
10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 
24— -26. And every atom 
of the AucTARiuiff,x pp. 

Duppa (Mr. H.) 327--9. 

GoooALL (Rev. Dr. J.) 256. 
309. see Pref. 

London Institution 171-175. 
—21. 326, 7. [I beg 
leave to return ray best 
thanks to the worthy li« 
brarian and friend of R. P., 
Mr. Malthy, for the fa- 
cilities afforded me in con* 
suiting that valuable CoU 
lection. I am alto under 
obligations to the Royal 
InsiUutum and its excel- 



lent librarian, Mr* Harris, 
who, ai various times, has 
allowed me to inspect 
works which are not to be 
found in any other public 

MaUby (hev. Dr. £.) gs. 
20, 26. 247. 277. 285. 
302,3, 12. 

Gent. Mag. 333—368. 

Maty's Rev. 4 — 50. 

Monih. Mag. 151 — 153. 

Month. Rev. 57 — 102. 108 

Morn.Chron. 164 — 157. see 
Pybus (C. S. Esq ) Pebf. 

Raphael 327—329. 

Reinesius bO. 

Reiske 2(j. 2 1 7. 220. 229. 
J. J. R. born 25 Dec. 1716. 
died 17 March, 1775. A 
friend observed to R. F. that 
R. was an indefatigable edi- 
tor; •* Yes,'* replied R. P. 
with great sharpness, ** AW- 

y05 'O BTP20naAH2, Of 
BKVxa Trjv '£AXa^a.** Reis- 
ke*s &ther was a tanner, 

Robertson (Mr ) 57 — »3. 

Roger (Abbe L.) 355. 

RuHNEKNius 32. 39, 40, 1. 
80. 101. 244. 259 265, 6. 
288, 321. D. R. was born 
2 Jany, 1723> died 14May^ 

Salmasius 145 225. C. S. 
bom about 1 592, died 3 Sept. 
1652. N.B. In 1606, S. 
tnuscribed the Heidelberg 

MS. of the Greek Antholo* 
gy, which was, in 1622, re- 
moved to the Vatican, and 
is now at Paris. 

Salter (Dr.) 314. 

Salvini 25. 

Sancroft (Gul. Archiep. Do» 
rob.) 260. 

ScALiGBR(J.) 144- 188. 193. 
202. J. J. S. was l>orn 
4 Aug. 1540; died 21 JanT, 

IScapukfi: R. P. was of opw 
nion that S. did not abridge 
his Lexicon so closely firom 
H. St.'s Thesaurus, as Valc- 
kenaer and others have sus- 
pected. There are words in 
a 4^ ed. of S.*s Lexicon 
which are not to be found in 
theTVies.Gr lothisR.P. 
alludes ad Med. 284 — R. P. 
wholly discredited the story 
that H. St. gave two edi- 
tions of this work which was 
principally compiled, collata 
plurium opera, and arranged 
by his illustrious father. Ho- 
bert Stephens.'] 

Scheidius 99. 

Schneider 90. 92, 3. 

Schow 63. 199 283. 

Schraderus308. 310. 

Schutz 5 — 9. 2i I. 

Schweighaeuser 174, 5, 6, /. 
180, 1,2.237. 244.248. 

Schweigbasuser junior 276. 

Selden 63. 78. 

Schaefer 288. 

Sharp (Granville) 301. 

Shaw 19. 

Simon 355. 

Simson 264. 

Smallridge (Bp.) 314. 




Snape (Dr.) I/O. SOg. 
SpaQheim 23 , 4. 
Sprat (Bp.) 314. 
Stephens (Rob.) 353—366. 

(Henry) Q, 26. 92. 

Stoart ( Athenian* j 136. 
Swift 316, 7. 
Sylburgius 92. 251. 279. 

Taylor 63. I. T. was bom 
1703; died 4 Apr. 1766. 

Toup 148. 184—188. 242. 
256, 7, 8. J. T. was bom 
1713; dtedig Jan7, 1785. 

Travis (Archd») 352—^68. 

Ttiwhitt 101. 104. 169. 
187,8,9.286. T. T. was 
bom 29 March, 1730; died 
15 Aug. 1786. 


Valckbnabr 22.51* 9I. 130. 

135. 145,6. 202. 212. 2! 7> 
8. 229. 231. 251. 256,7- 
262.280.313. L.C.V.died 
in March, 1785. 
Valesius 34, 5. 229. 

Vanbmgh 13. 
Vanvilliers 18, 9. 
Victortns (P.) 29O. 294. 
Vincent (Dean) 302. 
Voltaire 104. 
Vossius 74. 

Urginas 80. 

Wakefield 202, 3, 4. see Pebp. 
Walpole (The Rev. Rob;) 1 89. 

Warbarton (Bp.) 320, 1, 2. 
Westhosias 90. 
Weston (St.] 38—47. 
Wetstein 293. 355, 6, 7- 360« 

1,2, 3,4. 366, 7> 8. 
Wheeler 44. 
Wintertonus (R.) I90. 
WiTHOvius 309. 
Wolfius 176. 
Wy ttenbach 4 1 . 85. see Pbbf. 

Xjlander 90. [His name was 
HobsManm =s HilXay^po^]. 



dyeyijrifY 219. 

dycoy 2Q, 

"Axaros 204. 

'AAXa, sometimes omitted at 

the beginning of a verse, 

aXX' airohxrsa — aAX* diro' 

uria — aAAa ironjria 21 . 
iktS — dX'^itu 129. 

*Ay et S-^ MSS. saepissiroe cou- 
funduntiir 182. 

dyaysypdfjifj^tBa 247. 

*Avrjp, when joined with a sub- 
stantive, is not capable of 
the article, 34. 

'Avoxvay nusquam utitur Plato 

Avravras^savr^ air^f 277* 



Aleziades (Auna ComDena's) 

Alexis (ei^taph on) 2, 3. 

Aristarchus 11. O. passage ex- 
punged by 120, 1. 

Aristophanes not instraroental 
to Socrates* death, 12. see 
Brunck in Nubes, pp. 63>— 
66. An. Gr. I. 171. xi. A- 
listopbanes* Knights 15. It 
was R. P.*s favourite. Ly- 
sistrata ig, 20. Tbesmo- 
phoriazusae 23. 

Articulus ictum habel in Trag. 
et Comic. lambicis, Tro- 
chaicis,et fortasse Anapaesti- 
cis, nisi ubi versum inchoat 

yap in qua collocanda multum 
licentiae sumebant recentio* 
res Comici 249. 

Te 26, 7, 8, 9, 30. 

yXinujs 302. 

yga\(/djxa< 'yw- 10. 1. 10. ir«- 
paiffoiiou yuj Med. 722. AU 
pri<ro[MLi *yw Helen. 96 1. sU 
6i<rfji,ou 'x Iph. Aul. 726. y«- 
yi^o-Oftoi 'yoi 13 96. xd^iJMt 
'ycv Br. addend, ad Vesp. 
825. $iariSsfjMi *yuj Av.444. 
Herm. de metris p. 153. 

iouvifMvoi feasting 235. 
Aelxto 49* 
Auo 303. 

Autf-vparov alii Epicrati, alii 
Antiphani tribuebant 238. 

iyXi^vta vel -Xua penultima 

producta 282. 
tyciy 302. 
SI and I perpetually confound- 

ed 45. as well as ffi and m 

il'ita not used by Homer 98. 
sTvff gloss, ^ffi^ff text 40. as 

Xs^aiftijy — iij^adiMiy 222. 

els ro TTpoffis — (is ti ifpocris 26. 

!\ntov — lx«*oy 10. 


kmjvpu) — dtT^tSpw 9. 

s^VfjM 128. tpvpi^fOf, 

kpvffliftoXis 129. kpuvfUs 150. 


*ETl— 'EIITA 280. 

grv^ilAT^v aorist middle by ac- 
cident, p. g7. 

'E^gyyvos ^5. 

Editor (duties of) 87— >90. 

Epigrammatists, the authority 
of, 50. 

Erinnyes not addicted to swin* 
dling 221. 

as 58. 
ripnv 194. ^ 

Xierf 23, 4. 

In^yrittf/XrcSa 35. 
¥^p 241. 

Wilson (Capt») 204. 
Writers who succeeded the 

Macedonian conquest 1 23, 


Hiatus 151—153. 
ieaffaariou — isatrdou 35. 

ec— oc 289—291. ©EnN, 

OCON 244. 
Thomas Scholasticus, his au- 
thority 50. 

Ixjxa 251, 2. 
'IxrtJ 133. 




*Jya 802. 

7oi— Iti 284. 

IC K 238. 248. 283. 

WifiAipof eoextefiswe with 221. 

Kabei9 266. 

xoxov Bl^^Kaxof of— xaxoVoi 24. 


xBKpdyu) gg. 

xfxpii^aXoy leciiiidam proda- 

cant Attici 282. 
Xfw — xrli^w 129> 
KoXicrotMU' the Attics odIj 

use toe middle fbture of this 

verb. 33, 
Mvlas 29. 
Kuiog and its derivatives have 

the tf invariably long 50. 
Circumflex accent 97^ 8. 
Cyriacus Anoonitanus 80. 

A0, Ae, 253. 

AA et M, AI et N perpetno 

coofundontnr, p. 217. 
XvyiCoffcffySf 266. 
Lflicedflemonian decree 134.143 

— -148. emended 149. 
Lysander 228. 

Msy 303. 

Miop^— /3^<Xuf)£ 35. 
fcS— njdo; 129* 

t « 

0, Tfj, ro 302. 
ofo; nusquui corrtpitur prima 
^ 243. 

ojxoa idea Til,. 
.tmk xa) Dunquam junguntur 

r 58. 

Ili^iirarixoi 181. 
nOHXFN 63. 
iroToy 32. 

n^ HMf 8i£9r 30% 8. 

it^rrtw dicitor, qui vect^pd 
■ eriji^} irpdErrirSaiqiui pecQ- 

niam nram repetit 283. 
v^; my Sa»y 302. 
it^TM\\uLi — ttl rotf itpi^nmfMn 

XP^^^» 1^ ^ possess an/ 
ffood^ — 221. 

«rsf uya; yovioov, my Jbiierimg 
parents^ 221. 

Parian Mfurfole not engraved by 
public authority 65. 

Rirthenon 231. 

Peiresc JS, 9. 

Phidon 71. 325. 

Pig (the learned) 54, 5. 

Pnepositiones cognatsr ssepe 
confunduntur 28, 9. 181. 

Professio Fidei Afticana 29I, 2. 

Ptolemy Philadelphus-the com- 
mon method of writing in 
his reign was not on sicnes, 

Roe (Sir Thomas) 77, see In- 
dex, MS. Alexandr. 

£KT«Oi: — 2I2Y*02 243 
Hesjchius v. ^inrnog C:l- 

CY<i>^2 c MS. lectione 
CI<Y<PI^ extudit Schow; 

conf. Xenoph. Heilen. iii* 
282, 13. H. St. = 111. i. 6. 
Mori^ cujus examen vide 


vrpoyyiXof — yoyyiiXo^ 212. 
A late eminent architect^ 
whose loss will be deeply felt, 
" imagined them to be the 
covering- tiles placed over the 
meeting-joints of the flat 
tiles at the eves or gutters of 




the roof/' See Inscript. 
Athen, in the Brit. Museum, 
1. 22. ^iXa, crporyyiXa, un- 
dressed timber — Theophrast. 
Hist. Plant, v. 6. see Pkry- 
nichuit, S. n. p. 53. 
XvpaKOVffkv — Supaxoerlu; 35. 

riyof 139. 

reir^xuf gg. 

rdloy — iihv 10, 

rpi'Tel^a, i.e. rerpditsl!,^ 244. 

Tennis 312. 

Thesmophoria — third day a 
fast 24. 

Tragici nunquam vocero^ quae 
tribrachyn efiiciat, in quinto 
loco ponunt. 212. 
tragedians — 27. Ut histriohes 
Comici Kwjxw^oi, TpaytvM 
veteribus erant adores fira- 
gici} recentiores et ^lianus 
ipos Poetas sic dicere non 
dubitarunt. Falck. Diatr. 
p. 182. A. ad Ph. 1286. 
Conf. R. B. Millio, p. 39. 
This distinct ion, however, is 
not observed by Dr. Bentley 
and Valckenaer. 


Transposition 191. 

y^pis, a Racket 249. 

uiro yXuiTn\<nv — intvyXwrrWiv 

uVo=oA/yoy 285. 

4>avd; 34* 
^iXod^Ai 264. 

Fourmont*s Greek inscrip- 
tions forged 134— 143. 
Fourmont employed men to 
destroy ancient inscripti- 
ons already brought to 
light 136. 

XOpTaJ^OfjLsvot daily fare 235. 
;^ij never governs a genitive 

case in the Attic poets 33. 

XP^ and hi confounded ibid. 
Cheddar-cheese 314. 
Chlonthachontulus 314. 

^D.(nfB§ elxof — tStnrep sl^oy 47. 

*ncrrH prxcedente futuro con- 
struitur cum infinitivo prae- 
sentis vel aoristi, non item 
futuri 217. 






I n