ページの画像
PDF
ePub

con

An Inder Rerum et Auctorum præcipuorum is added.
We have an excellent Note by J. L. Mosheim the editor.

Sermo urbanus, peregrinus, rusticus : “ Distinguebant illi nimirum sermonem urbanum a sermone peregrino et rustico: urbanus is erat, quo cogitationes illi efferebant, qui Romæ degebant et aliquo erant numero : rusticus eorum erat, qui in agro degebant, qui, quum in urbe lingua paullatim expoliretur, ut fit, rudem et antiquum veterum Italiæ populorum sermonem magnam partem retinebant: peregrinum denique genus tribuebatur illis, qui provincias habitabant : eos etenim, quum Latinum adsciscerent sermonem, semper aliquid cum eo junxisse, quod vernaculo sermoni proprium erat, observatum fuit : testem eorum, quæ dixi, egregium Ciceronis locum dabo De Oratore, 1. iii. c. 12. p.m. 139. Quare quum sit quadam certa tor Romani generis, urbisque propria, in qua nihil offendi, nihil displicere, nihil animadverti possit-hunc sequamur: neque solum rusticam asperitatem, sed etiam peregrinam insolentiam fugere discamus.” “J. L. Moshemius in Not. ad D. G. Morhofii De pura Dictione Librum, Hanov. 1725.

We extract the following high character of Julius Cæsar Scaliger, and his profound work De Causis Linguæ Latina.

“ Inter recentiores primo loco nominari meretur J.C. Scaliger, qui opus

eruditissimum De Causis L.L. scripsit, quo multa complexus est, quæ ad interiorem artem grammaticam pertinent, plura daturus, si vastissimos Originum suarum libros (vid. Ægid. Menagius Dedic. ad Origines suas Ling. Gallica) in lucem edidisset : illi vero ob vastitatem edi pon potuerunt, et ipse quidem vivus de editione eorum desperavit, cum ultra centum et viginti libros de eo argumento compleverit: inter ávexồota igitur et desiderata illi debent reponi, ex quibus, si prodiissent, res grammatica multum accipere lucis potuisset ; erat enim ille in his studiis 12000$ixótutos, et quamquam plus diligentiæ operæque impendit in res philosophicas, tamen vel ex unico illo De Causis L. L. libro patet, eum secreta linguæ hujus ad fundum usque penetrasse ac filio suo Josepho longe in bis studiis accuratiorem fuisse, secus ac vulgo creditur : erat ipsi ingenium perspicacissimum, igneum, et summa judicii vi omnia perrumpens, quod, in quanicumque etiam partem illud versaret, eximium semper erat, et filii ingenio, meo quidem judicio, longe anteferendum : sed obstitit nescio quæ fatorum injuria viri hujus conatibus, laborque ejus partim temporum incuria suppressus, partim a dumesticis ei subreptus, intercidit: quod a filio ejus in hoc genere superest, id in Conjectaneis ejus super Varronem et Festum extat." D. G. Morhofii Liber de pura Dictione Latina, Flanov. 1793. p. 205.

Morhofius, and his editor J. L. Moshemius, on the paucity of the

In the 41st page

are the following remarks made by English writers, who have written with any elegance, fluency, or correctness

, in the Latin language. But they did not live to see the exquisite Latinity of Bishop Hare, Robert Sumner, and Samuel Parr, who have subsequently redeemed the character of our countrymen.

« In Anglis ne unus quidem succurrit, qui puræ Latinæ dictionis genium expresserit, infelices enim semper Angli fuere in eloquentia et natura sta feruntur in præcipitia, abditas et argutas sententias, quæ aures quidem titillant, aninos non implent: unus in illis fuit Rogerus Aschamus, Elisabethæ reginæ a secretis, qui aliquid scripsit auribus accuratioribus non indignum, exemplo potissinum Sturmii incitatus, quem ille virum magni fecit, et in cujus disciplinam se totum tradidit, libros ejus semper legendo et in usum transferendo : in Scota gente plures fuere qui linguæ Latinæ studiosiores fuere quam in Anglis : Buchananus onine fert punctum, tam in soluto, quam in ligato sermone, quod Scioppius, acerrimus alioquin censor, ipse fatetur et Barclaio longe illum præfert, qui plus ingenio suo tribuit, quam auctoritati antiquorum : phrases apud illum multæ confictæ sunt, metaphoræ audaces, sermo poeticus, etsi ingeniosus : plus quidem illi licuit ob argutum scriptionis genus, quod poeticum est: ita tamen etiam in illo genere scribere debuisset, ut a dictionis puritate non abiret.” J.L. Mosheim adds: “Sunt qui inter Anglos Jo. Miltonum in

primis a dictionis venustate et elegantia commendant, quibus ego non adsentior ; quamvis enim ingenii et acuminis plena sit Miltooi oratio, scatet tamen multis vocabulis obsoletis et minus Latinis, ut de barbarismis et solæcismis taceam, quorum copiam quum ille Sa!masio objecisset, extiterunt, qui nec ejus libros his maculis carere planum fecerunt: hodie quamquam pauci Anglorun Latinam curant eloquentiam, sunt tamen non

onnumquam inter eos, qui ipsos ad certamen veteres provocare possint: exemplo esto elegantissima Jo. Gagnierii' Carolina seu Ecloga in Luudem Principis Jallia, cui Theod. Hasæus merito Bibl. Brem. T. iv. p. 11. p. 976. locum dedit : de Buchanano et Barclaio, quoniam in omniuoi ore manibusque versantur, cur aliquid moneam, nihil est : de hoc tainen, Barclaio nempe, ejusque stylo, legisse juvabit, quæ Baylius collegit, Dictionnaire, T. 1. p. 415. Not. L.”

! If any of onr readers will have the goodness to favor us with a transcript of this composition, or lend us any work, in which it is contained, we sha!l not fail to republish it in a futare No. of the Classical Journal.

BIBLICAL CRITICISM.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CLASSICAL JOURNAL.

In the Classical Journal, VII. 125. occurred, under the signature of J. H. M. S., a query on the subject of the O'B' or our of Gen. xxxvi. 24.-in XI. 34. a considerable article was inserted by M. S. M. in reply—XIII. 140. furnished a second short inquiry by the first-named correspondent; and a further Criticism appeared, XV. 25., from the pen of J. M.

Dissatisfied as I am with this war of the Mules and Giants, in which, as in the fabled fatality of the Dog and the Fox, (the one never to be escaped, and the other never to be overtaken) neither will, I think, gain the victory-may I call the attention of your readers to Note (3) XII. 320., which, from its literæ minuscule, may very probably have hitherto been overlooked? It suggests, after Bryant, that the word in question should, correspondently with the Syriac and the Vulgate versions,' be translated waters'; reference being intended to the “ peculiar sagacity” of the ass here Sir W. Ď. will again attack me-in discovering springs of water, whether (as many animals are observed to be most delicate natural hygrometers) by snuffing up the air, and thence inhaling the moisture, or by discovering the little grassy oases 2 indicative of subterranean moisture, I affect not to decide. If Anah first remarked this valuable instinct-in the parched deserts of the East, invaluable---and taught its useful application, he has much more abundantly deserved honorable record than the establishers of tanks and the diggers of wells, as the inventor of a general theorem exceeds the author of one of its solitary applications, and his name, derived from 78," a fountain,” merely renders this conjecture not wholly improbable. A sense of utility was the great source of idolatry, whether lavished upon useful men, useful animals, or useful elements, by the erring gratitude of antiquity. But sat sit digitum ad fontem intendisse.

F. R. S.

[ocr errors]

1 So too fontem, Arab. 1. 2. as we learn from Dr. Holmes in loc.

• Thus Tacitus, Hist. V. 3. mingling with the fragments of true history a not unusual portion of legendary falsehood, observes, thai soses following a herd of wild asses, conjecturâ helui soli largas aquarum cenas aperit : and Acidalius, one of his commentators, upon we subsequent passagemquo monstrante errorem sitimque depulerant, suggests the substitution (perhaps, however, unnecessarily) of arorem or agrorem for errorem ; as pecus hoc, he adds, AQUÆ VELUT INDEX ILLIS, Brotier, indeed, as reinarked by J. H. M. S., in liis tirst paper, expressly refers to the Vulgate, Gen. xxxvi. 24.

EURIPIDIS SUPPLIces. Recensuit GODOFREDUS HERMAN

NUS. Lipsia, apud Gerhardum Fleischerum Jun. 1811. pp. xxviii. t 102. = 130. Small Svo.

NO. II.

V. 713. θάρσος δ' ενώρσε πάντι Κραναϊδών στρατώ. Libri Δαναΐδών. Musgravius satis conjecturam suam firmasse mihi videbatur, ut, etiam si deesset exemplum, ubi Cranaida vocarentur Athenienses, in textum recipi posset. HERMANN. This is not the most judicious of Mr. Hermann's notes on this play. The generality of our readers will probably consider it as a sufficient objection to Musgrave's emendation, that no passage has been found, in which the Athenians are called Kpavaidui. Instead of endeavouring to untie this knot, we are disposed to cut it at once, by reading Kexgoπιδών. The common reading Δαναΐδών is probably a slip of the pen of the transcriber, if not of the poet himself. The substitution of one proper name for another is extremely common. Markland refers to Dorville's notes on Charito (pp. 606. 607.) for examples of this kind of error, and proposes to read Taguriwr. Kexpomidov, however, is a better emendation, as well for other reasons, as because the mind would more easily stray to Javajoãy from Κεκροπιδών than from Παραλίων. In these cases, the intellectual process which causes the error can frequently be traced. To give the first example which occurs to us, a letter is inserted in the Gentleman's Magazine for 1798 (p. 839.) with the following title: An original Letter from Dr. Thomas Moore, of Norwich. This letter is signed Tho. Browne, and appears to have been written by the celebrated Sir Thomas Browne. There is no resemblance between Browne and Moore, but the transition from Sir Thomas Browne to Sir Thomas More is extremely easy. In the same manner, although the names of Cecrops and Danaus are perfectly dissimilar, there is so much resemblance between the expressions Κεκροπαδών στρατός and Δαναΐδών στρατός, that the latter, as being the more familiar of the two, might easily supplant the former in the mind of the writer. We have in this tragedy Aavajoãy otgaTYλάταν ν. 1150. Δαναϊδων ορμάν στρατόν ν. 1219. So also στράτευμα Δαναϊδων Phen. 469. στρατός Δαναΐδών ibid. 1404. Δαναΐδών στραTydáte Tro. 447. The reader must take care not to confound the Κεκροπιδών στρατός mentioned in this verse, with the παλαιάς Kexgorías oixýtoges mentioned in v. 658. The Cecropidæ, like the Erechthidæ, are the Athenians in general. See Phen. 862. Ion. 296. The Cecropians, who formed the right wing of Theseus's army, are the inhabitants of that particular district of Allica, in VOL. IX. Cl. N.

NO. XVII.

D

which Athens was situated. We mention this distinction, not be-
Cause it is curious and recondite, but because our emendation is
inadmissible, unless it is made.

V. 718. Μόλις δε πως έτρεψαν εις φυγήν πόδα. Vulgatum έτρεψεν
mutati in έτρεψαν. Αlia ratio est in Heraclidis o. 841. Μόλις δε,
πάντα δρώντες, ουκ άτερ πόνων Ετρεψάμεσθ' 'Aργείον εις φυγήν δόρυ.
HERMANN. We apprehend that Mr. Hermann does not intend to
assert, that τρέψαι πολεμίους is not as good Greek as τρέψασθαι
πολεμίους. See Thucydides, passim. Mr. Hermann probably means,
that τρέψαι εις φυγήν πόδα does not signify to put to fight, but to
run away. If this be constantly the case, Mr. Hermann's emen-
dation is absolutely necessary. At all events, we prefer it to the
common reading

V. 731. Νύν την αελπτον ημέραν ιδούσέγω, θεούς νομίζω, και δοκώ της συμφοράς "Εχειν έλασσον, τώνδε τισάντων δίκην. Ιta Scaliger, Heathius, Reiskius. Vulgo τας συμφοράς. Η ERMANN. Serrari poterat tas oupçogás. Comparari licet Hel. c. 662. [660. 'Ered δε δάκρυα χαρμονών πλέον έχει 1 χάριτος ή λύπας.] ADDEN DA. We do not see how this passage in the Helena, in which the commentators have confounded zágos with xagá, can be interpreted or corrected so as to confirm τας συμφοράς in the passage before us. We suspect that the true reading is, 'Eμά δε χαρμονών δάκρυα πλέον έχει, and that the genitive plural χαρμονών 1s not governed by πλέον έχει, but by χάριτος. Χαρμονών χάρις 1s an expression which may be compared with v. 79. of the tragedy before us, *Απληστος άδε μ' εξάγει χάρις γόων. The following passage in the Helena would have suited Mr. Hermann's purpose better than that to which he refers. V. 595. Μέθες με. λύπας άλις έχουν ελήλυθα. The true reading, however, seems to be λύπης άλις έχων. There is a passage in the Electra of Euripides, which we believe to stand in need of a similar alteration. V. 287. ΗΛ. Λόγον δε δή τιν' ήλθες έκ κείνου φέρων και ΟΡ. Ει ζής, όπου τε ζώσα συμφοράς έχεις, The latter verse is thus rendered by Barnes : Num vivas, et ubi vivens calamitates feras, quæsiturus. The real meaning is, To inquire whether you are alive, and, if you are alive, what your situation is. For this sense of ζώσα, see Soph. Ed. C. 999. Εurip. Phen. 1611. We suspect that Euripides wrote, Ει ζής, όπως τε, ζώσα, συμφοράς έχεις. Compare Ηel. 320. Πώς δ' ευμενείας τοισίδ' εν δόμοις έχεις και See Viger, &c.

V. 737. Ημίν γαρ ήν τότ(al. τότ') "Αργος ουχ υποστατών, Αυτοί τε πολλοί και νέοι βραχίοσιν, 'Ετεοκλέους τε σύμβασιν ποιουμένου, Μέτρια θέλοντος, ουκ έχρήζομεν λαβείν. In the present edition, the first of these verses is thus represented, Ημίν γιο "Αργος ήν τότ' ουχ υποστατόν. As Mr. Hermann takes no notice of this alteration of the order of the words, we suspect that it is an error of the kind mentioned in our remark on v. 328. The next line, Aúroi te moaroi xal véos βραχίοσιν, when compared with the grey hairs of the speaker (ν.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« 前へ次へ »