ページの画像
PDF
ePub

An Index 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 degebaut, qui, quum in urbe lingua paullatini 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 conjunxisse, 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 cor Romani generis, urbisque propria, in qua nihil offendi, nihil displicere, nihil animadverti possit-hanc 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 Lingua 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 non potuerunt, et ipse quidem vivus de editione eorum desperavit, cum ultra centum et viginti libros de eo argumento compleverit: inter avéndora igitur et desiderata illi debent reponi, ex quibus, si prodiissent, res grammatica multum accipere lucis potuisset ; erat enim ille in his studiis φιλοσοφικότατος, 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 his 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 domesticis ei subreptus, intercidit: quod a filio ejus in hoc genere superest, id in Conjectaneis ejus super Farronem et Festum extat.' D. G. Morhofii Liber de pura Dictione Latina, Hanov. 1725. p. 265.

:

In the 41st page are the following remarks made by Morhofius, and his editor J. L. Moshemius, on the paucity of the 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 sua feruntur in præcipitia, abditas et argutas sententias, quæ aures quidem titillant, animios non implent: unus in illis fuit Rogerus Aschamus, Elisabethæ reginæ a secretis, qui aliquid scripsit auribus accuratioribus non indignum, exemplo potissimum 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 omne 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 Miltoni oratio, scatet tamen multis vocabulis obsoletis et minus Latinis, ut de barbarismis et solæcismis taceam, quorum copiam quum ille Salmasio objecisset, extiterunt, qui nec ejus libros his maculis carere planum fecerunt: hodie quamquam pauci Anglorum Latinam curant eloquentiam, sunt tamen nonnumquam inter eos, qui ipsos ad certamen veteres provocare possint: exemplo esto elegantissima Jo. Gagnierii' Carolina seu Ecloga in Laudem Principis Walliæ, cui Theod. Hasæus merito Bibl. Brem. T. iv. p. 11. p. 376. locum dedit: de Buchanano et Barclaio, quoniam in omnium ore manibusque versantur, cur aliquid moneam, nihil est : de hoc tamen, Barclaio nempe, ejusque stylo, legisse juvabit, quæ Baylius collegit, Dictionnaire, T. 1. p. 445. Not. L."

'If any of our 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 shall not fail to republish it in a future 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 D'or 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. 322., which, from its literæ minusculæ, 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 asshere Sir W. D. 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 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 ", " 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.

,אין

2

F. R. S.

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, that Moses following a herd of wild asses, conjecturâ herbɩdi soli largas aquarum cenas aperit : and Acidalius, one of his commentators, upon the subsequent passage-quo 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 remarked by J. H. M. S., in his first paper, expressly refers to the Vulgate, Gen. xxxvi. 24.

EURIPIDIS SUPPLICES. Recensuit GODOFREDUS HERMANNUS. Lipsia, apud Gerhardum Fleischerum Jun. 1811. pp. xxviii. 102. 130. Small 8vo.

NO. II.

V. 713. Θάρσος δ' ἐνῶρσε πάντι Κραναϊδῶν στρατῷ. Libri Δαναϊδῶν. Musgravius satis conjecturam suam firmasse mihi videbatur, ut, etiam si deesset exemplum, ubi Cranaidæ 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 Kpavadai. Instead of endeavouring to untie this knot, we are disposed to cut it at once, by reading Kexgoπιδῶν. The common reading Δαναϊδῶν 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 Παραλίων. Κεκροπιδών, however, is a better emendation, as well for other reasons, as because the mind would more easily stray to Aavaïday 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 Κεκροπιδῶν στρατὸς and Δαναϊδῶν 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 Aavaïdav orgaTYλάταν ν. 1150. Δαναϊδῶν ὁρμᾶν στρατὸν ν. 1919. So also στράτευμα Δαναϊδών Phan. 469. στρατὸς Δαναϊδῶν ibid. 1404. Δαναϊδῶν στραTyλára Tro. 447. The reader must take care not to confound the Κεκροπιδών στρατὸς mentioned in this verse, with the παλαιάς Kexgorias oixnToges mentioned in v. 658. The Cecropida, like the Erechthidæ, are the Athenians in general. See Phoen. 862. Ion. 296. The Cecropians, who formed the right wing of Theseus's army, are the inhabitants of that particular district of Attica, in VOL. IX. NO. XVII.

Ct. J.

D

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

V. 718. Μόλις δέ πως ἔτρεψαν εἰς φυγὴν πόδα. Vulgatum ἔτρεψεν mutavi in ἔτρεψαν. Alia ratio est in Heraclidis v. 841. Μόλις δὲ, πάντα δρῶντες, οὐκ ἄτερ πόνων Ετρεψάμεσθ' ̓Αργεῖον εἰς φυγὴν 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 εἰς φυγὴν πόδα does not signify to put to fight, but ta run away. If this be constantly the case, Mr. Hermann's emendation is absolutely necessary. At all events, we prefer it to the common reading.

V. 731. Νῦν τήνδ' ἄελπτον ἡμέραν ἰδοῦσ ̓ ἐγώ, Θεοὺς νομίζω, καὶ δοκῷ τῆς συμφορᾶς ἔχειν ἔλασσον, τῶνδε τισάντων δίκην. Ita Scaliger, Heathius, Reiskius. Vulgo τὰς συμφοράς. ΗERMANN. Servari poterat τὰς συμφοράς. Comparari licet Hel. v. 662. [660. Εμὰ δὲ δάκρυα χαρμονὰν πλέον ἔχει | χάριτος ἢ λύπας.] ADDENDA. We do not see how this passage in the Helena, in which the commentators have confounded xágis with xaga, can be interpreted or corrected so as to confirm τὰς συμφοράς in the passage before us. We suspect that the true reading is, Εμὰ δὲ χαςμονῶν δάκρυα πλέον ἔχει, and that the genitive plural χαρμονᾶν is not governed by πλέον ἔχει, but by χάριτος. Χαρμονᾶν χάρις is an expression which may be compared with v. 79. of the tragedy before us, *Απληστος είδε μ' ἐξάγει 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 ἅλις ἔχουν ἐλήλυθα. The true reading, however, seems to be λύπης ἅλις ἔχων. There is a passage in the Electra of Euripides, which we believe to stand in need of a similar alteration. V. 237. ΗΛ. Λόγον δὲ δὴ τίν ̓ ἦλθες ἐκ κείνου φέρων; ΟΡ. Εἰ ζῆς, ὅπου τε ζώσα συμφορὰς ἔχεις. 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. Eurip. Phoen. 1611. We suspect that Euripides wrote, Εἰ ζῆς, ὅπως τε, ζώσα, συμφορᾶς ἔχεις. Compare Hel. 320. Πῶς δ ̓ εὐμενείας τοισίδ ̓ ἐν δόμοις ἔχεις; See Viger, &c.

V. 737. Ημῖν γὰρ ἦν τότ' (al. τότ') "Αργος οὐχ ὑποστατὸν, Αὐτοί τε πολλοὶ καὶ νέοι βραχίοσιν, Ετεοκλέους τε σύμβασιν ποιουμένου, Μέτρια θέλοντος, οὐκ ἐχρήζομεν λαβείν. In the present edition, the first of these verses is thus represented, Ημῖν γὰρ *Αργος ἦν τότ ̓ οὐχ ὑποστατόν. 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, Αὐτοί τε πολλοὶ καὶ νέοι βραχίοσιν, when compared with the grey hairs of the speaker (v.

« 前へ次へ »