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

verses.

1174. μυρία δ ̓ ὀπισθόπους φίλων ἅμ ̓ ἔστοιχ ̓ ἡλίκων ὁμήγυρις. We have little doubt but the professor is right in conjecturing ἡλίκων θ ̓ ὁμήγυρις. If the common reading be retained, φίλων must be taken as an adjective.

4.

1212. Κρεῖσσον θέαμα δεργμάτων. Valckenaer proposes δειμάτων, Musgrave φθεγμάτων. The professor defends δειγμάτων. If any change is necessary, we should prefer θαυμάτων. Bacch. 660. Ω δεινὰ δρῶσα, θαυμάτων τε κρείσσονα. Hecub. 705. "Αῤῥητ', ἀνωνόμαστα, θαυμάτων πέρα. Iph. Taur. 839. θαυμάτων πέρα.

1323. Κύπρις γὰρ ἤθελ ̓ ὥστε γίγνεσθαι τάδε. Amongst other instances of the pleonasm of ὥστε, Mr. Monk and his illustrious predecessor not tice v. 581. of the Supplices, Οὔτοι μ ̓ ἐπαίρεις, ὥστε θυμῶσαι φρένας ; in which passage, however, as it stands, ὥστε does not abound. θυμῶσαι is not to be angry, but to irritate. If we adopt Musgrave's correction, θυμοῦσθαι, the particle will be redundant, as in the verse before us.

1339. Mr. Monk gives us a very good note on the quantity of νεαρὸς, and proposes that in Sophocles Ed. Col. v. 475. for Οἰὸς νεαρᾶς νεοπόνῳ μαλλῷ βαλών, should be read Νεκράς απ' οιός ν. μ. β. We suspect Oἶός νεόγνου.

1352. Ω στυγνὸν ἔχημ ̓ ἵππειον, ἐμῆς Βόσκημα χερός. There are some passages in the tragedians where the metre requires the form ἵππιος ; we do not at present remember any other than the verse before us where it requires ἵππειος. We would therefore read Ὦ στυγνὸν ἔχημα ἱππικὸν, ἀμῆς Βόσκημα χερός.

6

1362. Οδ ̓ ὁ σωφροσύνῃ πάντας ὑπερέχων. Mr. Monk judiciously adopts υπερσχὼν, the correction of Valckenaer, which is also sanctioned by the approbation of Mr. Gaisford. We would read πάντος. Æsch. Pers. 708. Ὦ βροτῶν πάντων ὑπερσχὼν ἔλβον εὐτυχεῖ πότμῳ. He remarks with Mr. Gaisford, Rarissime in legitimo systemate anapæstum dactylo subjecerunt tragici. In Alcest. 80. Ὅστις ἂν ἐνέποι, πότερον φθιμένην, corri gendum opinor Ὅστις ἂν εἴποι. In Electr. 1328. lego Θάρσει· Παλλάδος ἥξεις ὁσίαν Πόλιν· ἀλλ ̓ ἀνέχου. pro vulg. ὁσίαν ἥξεις. These corrections, though probable, are not absolutely necessary. Troad. 101. Μεταβαλλομένου δαίμονος ἀνέχου. 177. Τᾶσδ ̓ Αγαμέμνονος ἐπακουσαμένη. Ion. 89. Σμύρνης δ' ἀνύδρου καπνὸς ἐς ὀρόφους. where of course should be read καπνὸς εἰς ὀρόφους.

1365. The Professor enumerates several instances of the indiscriminate use of the terminations in EIA and IA. We add ispía Iph. T. 34. 1399. ἀμελία Iph. Α. 850. ἀνδρία Herc. F. 475. εὐγενίας ibid. 696. where the editions have εὐγενείας. εὐσεβία Ion 1094. where the editions have εὐσεβεία, δυσσεβία Æsch. Eumen. 531. ἀλαζονία Aristoxenus in Hephaest. p. 46. ἑταιρίας Soph. Ajac. 692. where Suidas has εταιρείας, which Porson prefers. εὐτυχία is the common form, but Sophocles in Etymol. Μ. p. 462. has εὐτύχεια.

VOL. VIII. ΝΟ. XV.

1381.

1381. ᾤμοι μοι, τι φῶ; Brunck has ᾤ μοι μοι. We never could perceive whence this iota was subscribed. It should always, we think, be written οἴμοι or ὦ

μει.

1442. κατ ̓ ἴσσων κιχάνει με ἤδη 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. excogitates another form, xxxá, according to the analogy of which, we should have ματθάνω for μανθάνω, πυνθάνομαι for πυνθάνομαι, τυκχάνω for τυγχάνω, which Mr. Hermann probably is not prepared to acknowledge as legitimate forms. The Professor does not agree with the grammarians, who deduce these forms in a from obsolete verbs: but derives μανθάνειν, λαμβάνειν, &c. from the aorists μαθεῖν, λαβεῖν.

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 ponamus τιμήσομαι, στυγήσομαι, λέξομαι : secundi, quod paulo post futuri nomine distinguunt grammatici, βεβλήσομαι, γέγραψομαι : tertii βληθήσομαι, ἀπαλλαχθήσομαι : quarti, quod apud tragicos rarius est, ἀπαλλαγήσομαι, φανήσομαι. Primæ formæ, cui futuri medii titulum dederunt Grammatici, usus passivus Atticis maxime placuit. Vide Hemsterhusium ad Thom. Mag. p. 852. Exempla horum futurorum passive significantium, quæ inter tragicorum lectionem enotavi, exscribam. Aigua Hec. 901. Alc. 323. Iph. T. 1047. Herc. F. 852. Soph. Ed. C. 1186. Tipnooμas Fragm. Eur. Erecthei I. 54. Soph. Antig. 210. Esch. Ag. 590. orignoopas Eur. Electr. 310. Hipp. 1458. Soph. Electr. 1210. Antig. 890. angioma Phoen. 1646. aλooμas Andr. 190. Soph. (Ed. T. 576. Ed. C. 1064. Ant. 46. iácoμaι Iph. A. 331. μισήσομαι Τr. 663. Ion. 623. στυγήσομαι Soph. (Ed. Τ. 672. δηλώσομαι Soph. Ed. C. 581. Bovλsúcoμai Asch. Theb. 204. iviera Orest. 509. gua Esch. Pers. 591. didapat Helen. 1446. Soph. Ant. 726. iiTatouaι Suppl. 521. Alia quædam hujusmodi in tragicorum reliquiis deprehendet lector. Apud ceteros Atticos frequentissima sunt. vid. Pierson. ad Mor. pp. 13. 361. Præiverat Homerus in Odyss. A. 123. Χαῖρε ξεῖνε· παρ ̓ ἄμμι φιλήσεαι. Iis, quæ 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 differ 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 owes, in part, to his initiation 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 misplaced in discussions on the position of an accent, the luxation of a dochmiac, or the hallucination of some sinful copyist. We do not mean to insinuate that the Professor's style is either ambitious or highly ornamented; but still we think that it may, in some respects, be chastised with advantage.

We must not omit to remark, that Mr. Monk has considerably the advantage of his 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 cer tainly more than can be said of Mr. Porson; who, when he is commenting upon his author's text, is exceedingly 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. Monk had treated with rather more kindness a scholar, who has unquestionably 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 on second thoughts; viz. that of being copúтepai.

P 2

V. 105.

V. 105. Οὐδείς μ' ἀρέσκει νυκτὶ θαυμαστὸς θεῶν. θαύμαστος.

--

We would read νυκτι

124. Οθι τὶς ἦν φίλα μας τόθι D. E. Lasc. which is the true reading: 128. πετρας Εὐαλίου κατεβαλλ ̓. ὅθεν μονο The corresponding verse in the antistrophe is, Κρυπτῷ τε πένθει θανατου θέλουσαν. which Mr. Monk alters to Κρυπτῷ πάθει. We would retain πένθει, omitting τε, and would read Τᾶς εὐείλου. In v. 685 of the Phoenissa Musgrave has restored εὐείλοισι του εὐηλίοισι.

138. θέλουσαν Κέλσαι ποτὶ τέρμα δύστανον. Read πότε. not say Κέλσαι πρός τι, but κέλσαι τι.

167. αΰτευν. Read αύτουν.

The poets do

178. Τόδε σοι φέγγος λαμπρὸν, ὅδ ̓ αἰθήρ. We conceive the true reading to be, Τάδε σοι φέγγος, λαμπρὸς ὅδ ̓ αἰθήρ. The words λαμπρὸς αἰθὴς occur. in the Orestes 1085. Med. 825. Ion. 1445. The clearness of their atmosphere was a topic of frequent encomium with the Athenian poets.

267. Γύναι γεραιά, βασιλίδος πιστὴ τροφὲ Φαίδρας, ὁρῶ μὲν τάσδε δυστήνους τύχας. Surely the following punctuation is better, Γυναι γεραιά, βασιλία δος πιστὴ τροφὲ, Φαίδρας ὁρῶ μὲν τ. δ. τ.

289. καὶ σύ θ ̓ ἡδίων γενοῦ, Στυγνὴν ὀφρὺν λύσασα, καὶ γνώμης ὁδόν. Εγώ θ ̓, ὅπη σοι μὴ καλῶς τοθ ̓ εἰπόμην, Μεθεῖσ ̓, ἐπ' ἄλλην εἶμι βελτίω λόγον. We have no doubt but that the above passage should stand thus; καὶ σύ γ ἡδίων γενοῦ, Στυγνὴν ὀφρὺν λύσασα, καὶ γνώμης ὁδὸν Ἔγωγ ̓, ὅπη σοι μὴ καλῶς τόθ' ἑσπόμην, Μεθεῖσ', κ. τ. λ.

328. ΤΡ. Μεῖζον γὰρ ἢ σοῦ μὴ τυχεῖν, τί μοι κακόν; Ολεῖ. ΦΑΙ. τὸ μέντα πρᾶγμ ̓ ἐμοὶ τιμὴν φέρει. The tragedians always fuish off these reciprocating dialogues in single verses. We would therefore read ΦΑΙ. Ολεῖς. τὸ μέντοι πρᾶγμ ̓ ἐμοι τιμὴν φέρει. These last words are said to herself ; by τὸ πρᾶγμα she means the death which she is meditating; cf. v. 331. V. 343. ἐκεῖθεν is not ab ista re as Mr. Monk explains it, but rather ab isto tempore.

393. ὥστε τοἔμπαλιν πεσεῖν φρενῶν. Read ὥστ ̓ εἰς τοὔμπαλιν.

666. τίνα νῦν ἢ τέχναν The metre requires the enclitic. 796. Λυπηρὸς ἡμῖν τούσδ' ἂν ἐκλίποι δόμους. Read ἐκλείποι.

808. Χαλᾶτε κλεῖθρα, πρόσπολοι, πυλωμάτων· Εκλύεθ ̓ ἁρμούς. The colon should be taken away after πυλωμάτων and placed after πρόσπολοι.

876. πρὸς γὰρ τινὸς Οἰωνὸν, ὥστε μάντις, εἰσορῶ κακόν. We read πρὸ γάρ τινα Οἰωνὸν κ. τ. λ.

1048. Ὡς ἄξιον τόδ ̓ εἶπας· οὐχ οὕτω θανεῖ. We would read οὐ δ' οὕτως θανεῖ.

1181. λέγει. 1305. πίσοι. 1522. σοὶ καὶ. 1354. κατά μ ̓ ἔκτεινας, 1572. τὸν δυσδαίμονα μ'. 1439. Λίποις δὲ μακράν.

APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.

We also take this opportunity of submitting to the consideration of our readers à few additions to our remarks on the three tragedies of Euripides edited by Markland, and of correcting some errors which we have detected in the review of that publication which appeared in our last number.

SUPPLICES.

V. 21. So Phœn. 1692. Τώδ ̓ ἐκτάδην σοι κεῖσθον ἀλλήλοιν πέλας.

V. 87. We now prefer, Τίνων γόον τ ̓ ἤκουσα, both as nearer to the common reading, and as a better reading in other respects.

V. 120. Τούτους θανόντας ἦλθον ἐξαιτῶν πόλιν. Read, ἐξαιτῶν πάλιν. S Æsch. Suppl. 345. Αἰτοῦσι μὴ κδῷς (or μὴ κδοὺς) παισὶν Αἰγύπτου πάλιγο

V. 220. Our remark on this passage, although very just, is not original. The substance of it may be collected from Markland's commentary. The same observation applies to our remarks on vv. 258, 732, and perhaps on some other passages.

V. 273. Τέκνων τε θνατῶν κομίσαι δέμας, ὦ μελέα γώ. Τέκνων τεθνέωτων Marklandus, τεθναότων Musgravius. G. Euripides, to the best of our recollection, does not use either τεθνεώς or τεθναώς. In the present passage, we suspect that he wrote, Τέκνων δμαθέντων. Αμαθεὶς signifies killed or dead. See Alc. 125. Iph. T. 199, 229. Tro. 175.

V. 408. Τὸ πλεῖον. Compare v. 379. See also Porson ad Phan. 612. V. 453. Τερπνὰς τυράννοις ἡδονας, ὅταν θέλῃ, Δάκρυα δ ̓ ἑτοιμάζουσι. Idem ac si scripsisset, Δάκρυα δὲ τοῖς γονευσι, vel τοῖς τεκοῦσι. M. We read, Δάκρυα δὲ τοῖς διδοῦσι. Διδόναι is a very common word for giving daughters either in marriage or concubinage.

V. 642. Read with Markland, Τήν τ ̓ ἀμφὶ Θησέως πράξιν. So Æsch. Prom. 701. Τὸν ἀμφ' ἑαυτῆς ἆθλον ἐξηγουμένης.

V. 1077. Μετέλαχες τύχας Οἰδιπόδα, γέρον, Μέρος, καὶ σὺ [καὶ] πόλις ἐμα τλάμων. We have added a syllable on account of the metre.

V. 1097. Read: Η πρὸς μέλαθρα τοῦδε Καπανέως μόλω, Ἥδιστα πριν γι ἰδεῖν, ὅτ ̓ ἦν παῖς ἥδε μοι, ( ̓Αλλ ̓ οὐκέτ ̓ ἐστὶν ἡ γ ̓ ἐμὴν γενειάδα Προσήγετ ̓ ἀεὶ στόματι, και κάρα τόδε Κατείχε χειροῖν; Formerly delightful to behold.

V. 1148. Αλις ἀλγέων πάρεστί μοι. Pro πάρεστί μοι codd. Α. Β. μου. πάρεστι. Μ. This variety leads us to suppose, that μοι is an interpolation. Read, Αλις τῶνδ ̓ ἀλγέων πάρεστι. 5ο ν. 86. Θανοῦσα τῶνδ' ἀλγέων λαθοίμαν. Hippol. 366. Ω τάλαινα τῶνδ ̓ ἀλγέων. Add. Tro. 579.

.V. 1221. In our remark on this passage (p. 455, 1. 5) ἔφυσε is a slip of the pen for ἔσπειρε. In the same page read ὄφελε, ὤφελε and Ωφέλει

IPHIGENIA IN AULIDE.

V. 99. ἔπεμψα πρὸς δάμαρτα τὴν ἐμὴν, Πέμπειν ̓Αχιλλεῖ θυγατέρ ̓ ὡς γα μουμένην. Markland proposes στέλλειν instead of πέμπειν. The poet certainly wrote ἄγειν. The common reading was caused by ἔπεμψα in the preceding verse. A few examples will sufficiently elucidate this matter. - Soph. Αj. 330. Φίλων γὰρ οἱ τοιοίδε νικῶνται λόγοις. Every MS. of Sophocles, and every edition prior to that of Brunck, reads νικῶνται

φίλοι.