Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

We suspect

φανώς ; 941. Ουκ έσθ' όγ' είπον. Εsch. Prometh. 254. 'Αφ' ουγε πολλά εκμαθήσονται τέχνας. En 1.. 25. 'Εξ ουγε Βάκχαις εστρατήγησεν θεός.

911. η φάος τόδε Ούπω χρόνον παλαιών εισεδέρκετο. We have little doubt but that the genuine reii. 111: 15 ή φάος τόδε.

920. "Ω πολλά μανθάνοντες άνθρωποι μάτην, Τι δή τέχνας μεν μυρίας διδάσXET: ; Valckenaer puts a comma aiter ärbution, and connects pétny with the following words. But, unless we mistake, Ti, followed by one or dñta, is always the tirst word in any member of a sentence. See vv. 806. 859. 1063. of this play. Ηec. 985. Plien. 746. 752. 941. 1631. Med. 67 2. 676. 925. Alc. 550. 688. Antron. 84. 397. Suppl. 734. 946. 1004. Ιph. Α. 1444. 1548. Heracl. 163. Ιon. 253. 27 5. (where δη is to be read for dal) Sophocl. Ajac. 109.

949 "Εκ του πέπληγμαι' σοι γας εκπλήσσουσί με Λόγοι, παραλλάσσοντες εξεδροι Φρενών. Corrigendum censet Blumtieldius žideosi? that this is a false print for iedcov, which we conceive to be the true reading. Heracl. 709. Τί χρημα μέλλεις, σών φρενων ουκ ένδον ών. Εsch. Choeph. 231. "Ενδον γενού, χαρα δε μη εκπλαγης Φρένας, where we would read φρενός.

957. Ορφέα τ' άνακτ' έχων Βάκχευε. No one of the commentators has perceived the full force of this passage. It appears, we think, from Theophrastus, Char. 25. p. 56. ed. Schneider. that the 'OpperterésTai were looked upon at Athens as a sort of conjurers, who imposed upon credulous and superstitious persons. The incantations of Orpheus are mentioned in the Cyclops, v. 642. Alcest. 907.

983. Ουδ' αι θαλάσσης ξύννομοι Σχειρωνίδες Φήσουσι πέτραι. Mr. Monk quotes from the Helena σύννομοι νεφέων. But we should prefer, in the verse before us, θαλάσση ξύννομοι. Escli. Clhoepli. 596. έρωτας άταισι συννόμους. Αristoph. Αν. 208. αγε, σύννομέ μοι.

993. The passage of Aristotle, referred to by Valckenaer and Mr. Monk, was pointed out by Hartungus, in the l'ax Critica of Gruter, Obs. Crit. 11. 9.

1093. "Apriçey, s toutev. Vr. Monk follows Brunck in adopting the Doric form a paper, and enumerates several Dorisms admitted by the Attic writers. "To these we will add two, which are not commonly known, Ries. 797. Πίπτω δε πρηνής. It should be written πρανής. See Pierson on Mæris, p. 318. Ruhnken on Tinaeus, p. 221.-- Esch. Choeph. 597. Ει δ' ούν αμείψω βήλον έρκειoν πυλών. It sliould be βάλον. Lex. Rhetor. 15. Βατήρ σημαίνει δε και τον της θύρας ουδόν, ον "Ομηρος βήλον, οι δέ Τραγικοί, βάλον. 11:sych. Βάλον. ουδόν.

1090, φευξόμεσθα δη. Mr. Monk prefers φευξούμεσθα. We apprehend that else Attics used φευξόμεσθα aud φευξούμεθα, but not φευξούμεσθα.

119. Ουκέτι γαρ καθαραν φρέν έχω. Mr. Monk supposes the metaphor to be taken from troubled waters, and cites an apposite passage from Sbakespeare, Troilus, and Cressida III. ii. We may add Eurip. Alcest. 167, Θολοι δε καρδίαν. Ρherecrates in the Etyngologicum, p. 750, 12. Υπό της ανίας ανεβολούθ' η καρδία.

1126. όθι κυνων 'Ωκυπόδων επέβα Θεας μέτα, θήρας εναίρων. Βrunck omits beãs. The professor incloses ivaipws in brackets. We should prefer bis zurwr 'Sexuródw péta bñpas čvarper. In this opinion we are confirm

ed

verses,

ed by the occurrence of mißáor in the next verse but one. Besides, επιβαίνειν is never used by Euripides in the sense of going against. We think, moreover, that it is very unlikely that ivaópwò should be the addition of a copyist. The augment is not always used in the choriç

1174. μυρία δ' οπισθόπους φίλων άμ' έστειχ ηλίκων ομήγυρις. We have little doubt but the professor is right in conjecturing ήλίκων θ' ομήγυρις. If the common reading be retained, girw must be taken as an adjective.

1212. Κρείσσον θέαμα δεργμάτων. Valckenaer proposes δειμάτων, Musgrave φθεγμάτων. The professor defends δεργμάτων. If any change is necessary, we should prefer θαυμάτων. Βacch. 666. Ω δεινά δρώσα, θαυμάτων τε κρείσσονα. Hecub. 705. "Αρρητο, ανωνόμαστα, θαυμάτων πέρα. Iph. Taur. 839. θαυμάτων πέρα.

1323. Κύπρις γαρ ήθελ' ώστε γίγνεσθαι τάδε. Amongst other instances of the pleonastn of ώστε, Mr. Monk and his illustrious predecessor notice ν. 581. of the Supplices, Ούτοι μ' επαίρεις, ώστε θυμώσαι φρένας ; in which passage, however, as it stands, ώστε does not abound. θυμώσαν is not to be angry, but to irritate. If we adopt Musgrave's correction, θυμούσθαι, the particle will be redundant, as in the verse before us.

1339. Mr. Monk gives us a very good note on the quantity of reagos, and

proposes that in Sophocles (Ed. Col. v. 475. for Oιος νεαρας νεοπόκω μαλλο βαλών, should be read Νεαρας απ' οιος ν. μ. β. We suspect Oιος νεόγνου.

1352. *Ω στυγνόν όχημίππειον, έμής Βόσκημα χερός. There are some passages in the tragedians where the metre requires the form iTTIOS ; we do not at present remember any other than the verse before us where it requires ίππειος. We would therefore read Ω στυγνόν όχημα ιππικόν, αμής Βόσκημα χερός.

1362. “Οδ' ο σωφροσύνη πάντας υπερέχων. Mr. Monk judiciously adopts υπερσχών, the correction of Valckenaer, which is also sanctioned by the approbation of Mr. Gaisford. We would read Távtos. Æsch. Pers. 708. *Ω βροτών πάντων υπερσχων όλβον ευτυχεί πότμα. Πe remarks with Mr. Gaisford, • Rarissime in legitimo systemate anapæstum dactylo subjeCerunt tragici. In Alcest. 80. “Οστις αν ενέπoι, πότερον φθιμένην, Corrigendum opinor “Οστις αν είποι. In Electr. 1328. Ιego Θάρσει' Παλλάδος ήξεις οσίαν Πόλιν" αλλ' ανέχου. pro νulg. οσίαν ήξεις.' These corrections, though probable, are not absolutely necessary. Troad. 101. Metaβαλλομένου δαίμονος ανέχου. 177. Τάσο Αγαμέμνονος επακουσαμένη. Ιon. 89. Σμύρνης δ' ανύδρου καπνός ες ορόφους. where of course should be read καπνός

1365. The Professor enumerates several instances of the indiscriminate use of the terminations in EIA and IA. We add iepía Iph. T. 34. 1399. αμελία Iph. Α. 850. ανδρία Herc. F. 47 5. ευγενίας ibid. 696. where tlie editions have ευγενείας. ευσεβία Ion 1094. where the editions have ευσεβεία, δυσσεβία ΑΕsch. Εumen. 531. αλαζονία Aristoxenus in Hephaest. p. 46. εταιρίας Soph. Ajac. 692. where Suidas has εταιρείας, which Porson prefers. sutuxía is the common form, but Sophocles in Etymol. M. p. 462, has ευτύχια. VOL. VIII. NO. XV.

138ι.

εις ορόφους.

1381. ģior job, to ow; Brunck has ý mos peor. We never could perceive whence this iota was subscribed. It should always, we think, be written δήμοι or ώ μοι.

1442. κατ' όσσων κιχάνει μ' ήδη σκότος. Mr. Monk restores κιγχάνει, the correction of Porson, who has applied the same medicine to v. 520 of the Choephori of Æschylus. Mr. Hermann, in his treatise on Greek Grammar, p. 59. escogitates another form, xoxxáow, according to the analogy of which, we should have ματθάνω for μανθάνω, πυτθάνομαι for πυνθάνομαι, τυγχάνω του τυγχάνω, which Mr. Herrmann probably is not prepared to acknowledge as legitimate forins. The Professor does not agree with the grammarians, who deduce these forms in arw from obsolete verbs: but derives parlével, haußenie, &c. from the aorists pabiñ, λαβείν. .

The note on v. 1458 gives an excellent account of the passive future tenses of verbs, which we transcribe, as a specimen of the Professor's style of philological illustration.

Notandum tironibus, quatuor esse apud Græcos formas futurorum passive significantium. Exempla rem apertam facient. Primi igitur generis esse ponatmus τιμήσομαι, στυγήσομαι, λέξoμαν: secundi, quod paulo post futuri nomine distinguunt grammatici, Belangouas, yiyceJopas tertii Bandhsopas, árannaxonoomar: quarti, quod apud tragicos rarius est, áranlaynoonat, parnoquar. Primæ formæ, cui futuri medii titulum dederunt Grammatici, usus passivus Atticis maxime placuit. Vide Hemsterhusium ad Thom. Mag. p. 852. Exempla horuin futurorum passive significantium, quæ inter tragicorum lectionem enotavi, exscribam. aitovan Hec. 901. Alc. 323. Iph. T. 1047. Here. F. 852. Soph.d. C. 1186. srpádouar Fragm. Eur. Erecthei I. 54. Soph. Antig. 210. Æsch. Ag. 590. oteghcoua. Eur. Electr. 310. Hipp. 1458. Soph. Electr. 1210. Antig. 890. angúžomas Phen. 1646. árásouar Andr. 190. Soph. (Ed. T. 576. Cd. C. 1064. Ant. 46. icoquar Iph. A. 331. ρυσήσομαι Τr. 663. Ιon. 623. στυγήσομαι Soph. Ed. Τ. 672. δηλώσομαι Soph. d. C. 581. Bovasúoopas Æsch. Theb. 204. éréstaOrest. 509. dig toan Asch. Pers. 591. didaltou as Helen. 1446. Soph. Ant. 726. érer sofonas Suppl. 521. Alia quædam hujusmodi in tragicorum reliquiis deprehendet lector Apud ceteros Atticos frequentissima sunt. vid. Pierson. ad Mær. pp. 13. 361. Præiverat Homerus in Odyss. A. 123. Χαίρε ξενε' παρ' αμμι φιλήσεαι. Iis, que descripsi, addi posset εξογκώσεται supra v. 942. Sed hujus futuri usus videtur a ceteris jam notatis nonnihil distare, et reciprocam potius quam passivam significationem capere.'

It will be perceived from the above remarks, that there are very few points of importance, about which we have occasion to ditter from the Professor. We think highly of the skill and learning which are displayed in his critical and philological notes; but are bound more particularly to commend the caution and judgment which have led him to defend, wherever it was possible, the common reading, rather than incur the charge of innovation. This he wes, iv part, to his iitiatiou into the school of Porson, one pecu

liar characteristic of which is, the not making any alteration in the received text, except on the strongest grounds. His selection from the voluminous commentary of Valckenaer is judicious, and his additional matter valuable. With regard to the style of Mr. Monk's notes, if we have any thing to object, it is that, now and then, it is somewhat redundant. In all critical annotations one great object to be aimed at is perspicuity, which is best attained by shortness and simplicity. We should prefer, in works of this nature, a style remarkably plain, or even jejune, to an ambitious and ornamented phraseology; it appears to us that the flowers of rhetoric are mis placed in discussions on the position of an accent, the luxatiou of a dochmiac, or the ballucination of some sinful copyist. We do not mean to insinuate that the Professor's style is either ambitious of highly ornamented; but still we think tbat it may, in some respects, be chastised with advantage.

We must not omit to remark, that Mr. Monk has considerably the advantage of bis predecessor, in the treatment which he gives to other critics; he writes, as every scholar should write, like a person whose principal object is, not the detection and exposure of other men's mistakes, but the promotion of sound learning. This is certaiply more than can be said of Mr. Porson; who, when he is commenting upon his author's text, is exceedivgly brief; but who can, upon occasion, write a note of seventeen columns to expose the er, rors of former critics. We could perhaps wish that Mr. Blonk had treated with rather more kindness a scholar, who has

unques. tionably rendered great service to the republic of letters; we mean Philip Brunck, who, although he was eminently deficient in labour and extent of research, had certainly a very acute perception of the niceties of the Greek language, and a very classical taste. Had Brunck read more and published less, he would better have consulted his reputation; but with all his blunders, and oversights, and inaccuracies, he must ever continue to hold a respectable rank amongst the illustrators of the Greek drama.

These are the principal points, in which Mr. Monk's plau strikes us as being capable of some improvement; and these we urge, not from a wish to find fault with what he has so ably done, but under an impression that he intends to add to the obligation which he has already conferred upon the literary public, by giving us useful and handsome editions of some of the remaining plays of Euripides.

An accidental delay in the printing of this article affords us an Opportunity of adding our δεύτεραι φροντίδες, which may perhaps merit the encomium bestowed by Phædra's nurse

ou second thoughts ; viz. that of being gocatspai. ? 2

V. 105.

128.

V. 105. Ουδείς μ' αρέσκει νυκτί θαυμαστός θεών. We would read νύκτιθαύμαστος. 124. “οθι μου τις ήν φίλα – τόθι D. E. Lasc. which is the true reading: πετρας

Εύαλίου κατεβαλλ'. όθεν μοι. The corresponding verse in the antistrophe is, Κρυπτώ τε πένθει θανατου θέλουσαν. which Mr. Monk alters to Κρυπτω πάθει. We would retain πένθει, omitting τε, and would read Tας ευείλου. In v. 685 of the Phenisse Musgrave has restored ευείλoισι for ευηλίοισι.

138. θέλουσαν Κέλσαι ποτέ τέρμα δύστανον. Read ποτε. The poets de not say Κέλσαι πρός τι, but κέλσαι τι.

167. αύτευ». Read αυτουν.

178. Τόδε σου φέγγος λαμπρόν, όδ' αιθήρ. We conceive the true reading to be, Τάδε σου φέγγος, λαμπρος όδ' αιθήρ. The words λαμπρός αιθήρ occur in the Orestes 1085. Med. 825. lon. 1445. The clearness of their atmosphere was a topic of frequent encomium with the Athenian poets.

267. Γύναι γεραιά, βασιλίδος πιστη τροφέ Φαίδρας, ορώ μεν τάσδε δυστήνους τύχας. Surely the following punctuation is better, Γυναι γεραιά, βασιλίδος πιστη τροφέ, Φαίδρας ορώ μεν τ. δ. τ.

289. και συ θ' ήδίων γενού, Στυγνήν οφρύν λύσασα, και γνώμης οδόν. Εγώ θ', όπη σου μη καλώς τοθ' ειπόμην, Μεθείσ', επ' άλλην είμι βελτίω λόγον. We have no doubt but that the above passage should stand thus; xaiova ήδίων γενού, Στυγνήν οφρυν λύσασα, και γνώμης οδόν "Εγωγ', όπη σου μη καλώς τόθ' εσπόμην, Μεθεϊσ', κ. τ. λ.

398. ΤΡ. Μείζον γαρ ή σου μη τυχεϊν, τί μοι κακόν ; 'Ολεϊ. ΦΑΙ. το μέντου πραγμ' εμοί τιμήν φέρει. The tragedians always finish of these reciprocating dialogues in single verses. We would therefore read ΦΑΙ. 'Ολείς. το μέντοι πραγμ' εμου τιμήν φέρει. These last words are said to herself; by το πραγμα she means the death which she is meditating ; cf. v. 331.

V. 343. εκείθεν is not ab ista re as Mr. Monk explains it, but rather ab isto tempore.

393. ώστε τούμπαλιν πεσείν φρενών. Read ώστ' εις τούμπαλιν. 666. τίνα νύν η τέχναν The metre requires νυν the enclitic. . 796. Λυπηρός ημϊν τούσδ' αν έκλίποι δόμους. Read εκλείπου.

808. Χαλάτε κλείθρα, πρόσπολοι, πυλωμάτων: 'Εκλύεθ' αρμούς. The color should be taken away after πυλωμάτων and placed after πρόσπολοι. .

876. πρός γαρ τινός Οιωνόν, ώστε μάντις, είσορώ κακόν. We read πρό γάς τινα Οιωνον κ. τ. λ.

1048. Ως άξιον τόδ' είπας" ούχ ούτω θανεϊ. We would read ουδ' ούτως Daver.

1181. λέγει. 1305. πίσοι. 1322, σοι και. 1354. κατά μ' έκτεινας. 1372. τον δυσδαίμονά μ' 1439. Λίπους δε μακραν.

APPENDIX.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »