Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

cealed the pretended defect altogether by her helmet; and that the two following passages of Lucian may contain an allusion to this circumstance: Dial. Deor. 8. Taux@TIS LÈV, άλλα κοσμεί και τούτο η κόρυς: ibid. 20. Τί ούν ουχί και συ, Αθηνά, την κόρυν αφελούσα, ψιλήν την κεφαλήν επιδεικνύεις; On the words yhauxòs and y auxõnis, M. Gail refers also to his Ed. of Xen. T. vii. p. 752. of Plutarch's Life of Demosthenes, p. 27, 14. to his notes on Theocritus Id. 25, 242. bis Philologue T. vii. p. 220. 227., and to Heyne's Hom. Il. 1, 12.

We thus take our leave of M. Gail, conscious that we have not done justice to the many useful remarks contained in this volume. The savans of his own country object to his theories, on the ground of “the danger of innovating on received opinions ;” (p. 282.) a species of caution which experience perhaps has taught them. M. Gail's acute perception of the beauties of the Greek language sometimes suggests niceties to him, which less ardent capacities will fail to appreciate. But if hypercriticism be his failing, it is amply compensated by his zealous and unremitted exertions for the diffusion of Greek literature.

SOPHOCLES ET THEOCRITUS

EMENDATI.

Inter loca Sophoclis difficiliora eminet Electr. v. 147. et 999.

αλλ' εμέ γα στονόεσσάραρε φρένας, ,
d"Ιτυν αιέν "Ιτυν όλοφύρεται

όρνις ατυζομένα Διός άγγελος. . Inprimis õpage in linguam et metrum peccat. Etenim non alibi exstat in sensu placuit ; neque, si exstitisset, aliud esse potuit quam amphibrachys; uti jam statuit Brunckius allegatis Prom. 'Med. at versus antistrophus hic postulat anapæstuin. Deinde quid sibi velit Aids ayyemos, nemo hominum satis bene definire potest. Exponitur quidem a Barkero in Cl. Jl. N. 53. p. 93. diei nuncia. At ne unus quidem testis citatur idoneus ad comprobandum vocem Zeùs per se positam significare diem ; neque, si talis citaretur, poterat inde comprobari luscipiam esse diei nunciam. Illa etenim avis adventum noctis

perque totam fere noctem canere solet; qui vero ad Auroræ ade ventum eam canere dicat, auctorem novi neminem. Hermanno exponenti nuncia ab Jove missa objici possunt verba Jacobii in Specim. Emend. p. 14. Verum Jovis nunciæ vocabantur eæ aves, quarum e volatu auguria captari solebant. Ita columba Dodonæa apud Cicer. de.LL. I, nuncia fulva Jovis, et cycnus in Eurip. Ιon. 158. Ζηνός κήρυξ. Luscinie vero in re augurali nullæ partes demandatæ erant.' Conjicit igitur õpris átugom év είαρος άγγελος: quod a Schol. non mediocriter firmari posse ait, Διός άγγελος, ότι το έαρ σημαίνει: "Ομηρος (Οδ. Τ. 519.) Ως δ' ότε Πανδαρέου κούρη χλωρηίς αηδων Καλών αείδησιν έαρος νέον ισταμένοιο-και Σαπφώ, 'Ηρος άγγελος μερόφωνος αηδών. Ιdem voluit et Pierson, teste Valck. in Not. Mss. penes me. Huic tamen conjecturæ eo nomine a Barkero objicitur, quod, scriptis primitus είαρος άγγελος non locus erat Scholiasta verbis aliquantisper de sententia hærentis. Illud etiam adjungo, quod čapos vix et ne vix quidem deflecti poterat in Suós. Ad Æsch. Suppl. 58. conjecturam feci, quam hodie, utpote non omnibus numeris abolutam, repudio , cujus vice substituere licet alteram præstantiorem:

αλλά μ' άγει στόνη αίσα παρά φρένας
α Ιτυν αινόν "Ιτυν όλοφύρεται,

όρνις άτ', άζομεν, είδεος άγγελοςChori verbis από των μετρίων επ' αμήχανον άλγος αεί στεναχούσα διόλλυσαι probe respondet Electra, (Anglice)

Me, Fate by sorrow leads o'er reason's bounds;
And, like the bird, that heralds warmer days,
Itys, poor Itys," all its lays,
Here

pour I out grief's saddest sounds. De literis mutatis nibil est, quod dicam. Ad tuendum vero αισα άγει, conferri debet θεός άγει in Orest. 1545. juxta scripturam Scholiastæ ; neque distat Eurip. El. 1310. Moipas avázκης ηγείτο χρεων ita corrigendus, Moίρα σ' ανάγκης ήγ' εις το

χρεών. Mox vice cièv dedi aivóv. Dicitur aivòv "Ituy ut aivó-llagos, αινόγαμος, αινολάμπης, αινόλεκτρος, αινόμορος, αίνοπάτης, αινότοκος. Deinde άτάζομεν είδεος erui ex άτυζομένα διός. Perpetuo άτε veluti sic usurpatur. Mox άζομεν est verbum Sophocleum, , teste Lex. Bekker. p. 348. "Αζειν" το στένειν: Σοφοκλής. Vid. mea ad Esch, Eum. 978. Ρostremo είδεος άγγελος amice convenit cum dicto Publii Syri, Avis exul hyemis, titulus tepidi temporis ;' etenim eldos vel idos est tempus æstivum, uti patet e Pseud. Hesiod. 'Ασπ. 397. "Ιδει εν αινοτάτω ότε τε χρόα Σείριος άζει et egl. Hesych. Είδεος ευδίοιο: καύματος μεσημβρινού. Νeque

hic locus est unicus, ubi vox infrequentior &ideos in Siòs frequentiorem corrumpitur. Nempe in Theocrit. Id. xu. 11. Os όχχ α λεύκιππος ανατρέχει ές Διός έως legi manifesto debet ελά τροχον είδεος αως; ubί τροχον είδεος aliquid commune habet cum dicto altero Theocriteo 14. ΧVΙ. 72. Πολλοί κινησεύντ' έτι τον τροχον άματος ίπποι, ita enini scripsit ipse auctor non έτι τροχών άματος ίπποι: quod nemo satis intelligere poterat; sed τροχών άματος bene reddit carmen apud Anglos venaticumBright Phæbus hath mounted the chariot of day.

G. B.

CRITICA SACRA
DE 1 Co RINTH. XI. 10.1

Δια τούτο οφείλει η γυνή εξουσίαν έχειν επί της κεφαλής διά τους

αγγέλους. Certe łgovolay ibi nullo modo stare potest. Argumenti tenor velaminis mentionem poscit. Quo minus vero è govo lav reddatur velamen, Græci sermonis ratio repugnat fortissime. Vide igitur anon in AΓΓEΛOrc lateat AΓΓΟΝΟΥC: de qua voce ita Atheneus IX. p. 410. D. Σαπφω δε, όταν λέγη εν τω πεμπτό των μελών προς την Αφροδίτης “χειρόμακτρα δε καγγόνων πορφυρά καγγόνων κόσμον λέγει κεφαλής τα χειρόμακτρα, ως και Εκαταίος δηλοί ή ο γεγραφώς τας Περιηγήσεις εν τη Ασία επιγραφομένη «Γυναίκες δε επί της κεφαλής έχουσι χειρόμακτραΗρόδοτος δε εν τη δευτέρα φησίν, « Μετά δε ταύτα έλεγον τούτον τον βασιλέα ζωων καταβήναι κάτω εις δν οι Ελληνες άδην νομίζουσι, κακεί δε συγκυβεύειν τη Δήμητρι και ταμεν νικάν αυτήν τα δε ήσσούσθαι υπ' αυτής, και μιν πάλιν ανεφικέσθαι παρ' αυτής δώρον έχοντα χειρόμακτρον χρύσεον.' Αtqui Sappho, ut opinor, scripsit χειρόμακτρα δε κ’ αγγόνων, et ipse Athenæus similiter áyyóvwv. Unde illico se prodit Apostoli scriptura

Δια τούτο οφείλει η γυνή έξιούσα ανέχειν επί της κεφαλής διώπους άγγόνους.

Quod ad literarum ductus SWTous vix et ne vix quidem a dice

! Our correspondent is learned and ingenious: but we must deprecate such alterations in the text of scripture. See the allusion co Tacitus in Cl. J. No. i. p. 100. EDIT. VOL. XXVII. Cl. J. NO. LΙV.

Z

TOUS distat. Quod ad sententiam, manifesto Paulus ad velamen illud spectabat, quod Asiaticæ induere solent, foras exituræ, ita comparatum, ut caput et vultus una tegantur, nec, nisi per foramina duo, quidquam mulier videre queat. Ejusmodi velamen Corinthias quoque induere voluit Apostolus, quibus fuit gratius nudo capite et vultu aperto foras exire, ut spectare simul et spectari possent. Quod ad dimnos de veste dictum, adi facetissimum Aristophanem in Ach. 435. ubi verba Dicaiopolidis, τα δάκη Euripidea induituri, 'Ω Ζεύ διόπτα και κατόπτα πανταχού, ita Schol. exponit, ταύτά φησιν έπει πολύτρητα ην τα ράκια, δι' có nv nárta étioxorñoau

. Unde conjici potest Comicum scripsisse 'N ZEű Esūta : cui similis fuit lusus alibi, uti patet ex Hesych. Πολύωπον-πολυόμματος και πολλάς όπάς έχον. G. B.

REMARKS ON
DR. CROMBIE'S GYMNASIUM.

I beg leave to send you a few remarks which lately cccurred to me on reading a work of essential assistance to the classical student, and of singularly luminous observation- Dr. Crombie's Gymnasium. In a publication embracing so many litigated points, it is impossible to expect a universal acquiescence: and it would perhaps be an improbable conjecture that a scholar, however eminent, should determine correctly on all of them. It is in reliance on this circumstance that I am induced to trouble your readers with the following observations.

In p. 43 of the 1st volume, Dr. C. disputes the propriety of a sentence, which, he informs us, was proposed as correct by an Edinburgh Reviewer. * Platæenses,' are the words of the Reviewer, .ad paludem olim habitasse, Noster affirmat: in locum autem meliorem translatos novæ urbi nomen priscum continuasse, situi licet ab aquis remoto haud diutius competisset.' Dr. C., I conceive, objects very correctly to 'competisset,' as being inconsistent with affirmat.' He then asserts, that 'nothing could justify .competisset,' but affirmavit. Then contimuasse' would be a preterpluperfect. And there are not wanting examples, which in this case would sanction competisset, ' though even then competeret’ would be more agreeable to general usage.' In one sense, indeed, continuasse' might be said to be a pluperfect. It would be so in relation to the present

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

moment. But it would be otherwise in relation to affirmavit.' This is an important distinction : and it is one, which Dr. C. has himself forcibly supported in another part of his work. In the sentence, · Dixit se studere,' studere' is present, and not preterite in relation to dixit.' In the sentence, · Dixit se studuisse,' studuisse' is preterite and not pluperfect in regard to

dixit. To adopt here the forbidden use of quod,' • Dixit se studere' is equivalent to · Dixit quod studet:' . Dixit se studuisse’ is equivalent to ‘Dixit quod studuit,' but not studuerat.' Hence then continuasse' cannot be considered as pluperfect. And hence 'competisset' is decidedly wrong. For Dr. C. is perfectly right, when he says, that the unsuitableness is to be here predicated as contemporaneous with the continuation.' If, then, continuasse' is preterite, the unsuitableness cannot be expressed by the pluperfect.

I am aware that our author uses very guarded language in regard to the legitimacy of competisset,' even when used with 'affirmavit. But he does not condemn it as it deserves. The expression I here support, would not only be more agreable to general usage, but, if I am not mistaken, is the expression which alone can be tolerated. It may be used by eminent writers: but surely Dr. C. forgot an admirable decision, which he lays down in the following nervous language, in regard to the ridiculous, yet not very uncommon, interchange of hic' for

ille,' and ille' for hic, when used together in opposition : "No authority,' he says, 'can sanction (observe this expression --for it is the very term used by the learned writer in the case under our previous inspection,] an expression, which is either ambiguous or obscure-much less an expression, by which the reader, if unacquainted with the subject, would unavoidably be led into error.' This decision is bold, but it is correct. Lindley Murray has pointed out constructions, which are undoubtedly erroneous, though used by the best English writers. What can such constructions evince but the melancholy truth that man is fallible—and that the most eminent men cannot fail to come under the influence of this general fallibility ?

In p. 39, Dr. C. gives the credit of greater correctness to the Latin idiom in these two sentences : Athenas ad scholam filium misit:' Capua ex agello in Sardiniam migravit. This is very disputable. For the English expression, 'He sent his son to a school at Athens,' is plainly elliptical, and intends, 'He sent his son to a school (which was] at Athens.'

And the other expression, 'He removed from his farm at Capua, into Sardinia,' intends, 'He removed from his farm (which was) at Capua

« ZurückWeiter »