Page images
PDF
EPUB

plenum malis est, thoroughly wrong. ἐτὶ, τὸ δ ̓ οὐ βαρύ.

- .

aliud autem non plenum malis, which is The sense is, κακῶν γὰρ οὐ τὸ μέν σοι βαρύ Non enim aliud malum tibi grave est, aliud non grave. The quotation from Ovid is very facetious:s Femina tela tulit Lernais atra venenis,

Ferre gravem lana vix satis apta colum."

That the words βαθὺν λείμωνα have puzzled the interpreters is true: but explanation and not correction was required.βαθὺς λειμών means, a rich or fertile pasture. Ful. Pollux, I. 227. Περὶ γῆς ἀγαθῆς. Γῆ δὲ ἐρεῖς, εὔφορος, εὔπορος, εὔσπορος, εὐήρατος, βαθεῖα. Eurip. Androm. 637. ed. Beck.

πολλάκις δέ τοι

ξηρὰ βαλεῖαν γῆν ἐνίκησε σπορά.

(σπορᾷ Brunck. ex ed. Lasc. et membr.)

νειὸς βαθεῖα. Π. Κ. 353. Σ. 547.

λήϊον βαθὺ, 1. Β. 147. Odyss. Ι. 134.

ὕλη βαθεῖα, Π. Ε. 555. Ο. 606. Π. 766. Υ. 491. Od. P. 316. βαθος ύλας. Theocrit. VIII. 49.

ξύλοχος βαθεῖα, Ν. Λ. 415. Φ. 573.

ἄγκεα βαθέα, Π. Υ. 490.

Eurip. Hippol. 1137.

ἀστέφανοι δὲ κόρας ἀνάπαυλαι

Λατούς βαθεῖαν ἀνὰ χλόαν.

Homer II. I. 151. 293.

Φήρας τε ζαθέας, ήδ' Ανθείαν ΒΑΘΥΛΕΙΜΟΝ.

Pindar, Pyth. Χ. 23. has ΒΑΘΥΛΕΙΜΩΝ.

Etymol. Μ. p. 185, 35. Βαθύλειμος, ΒΑΘΕΙΣ [male vulgo
βαθείας] ΛΕΙΜΩΝΑΣ ἔχουσα.

Hesychius. Βαθύλιμον. βαθὺν λιμένα ἔχον. Alberti rightly corrects
Βαθύλειμον, BAΘῪΝ ΛΕΙΜΩΝΑ ἴχον, and quotes Homer,
Pindar, and the Etymologicum, in support of his correction.
Βάθος λιμένος, however, is mentioned by Pollux, ΙΧ. 28.
V. 676. ἧσσον πρὸς εὔποτόν τε Κερχνείας ῥέος,

Λέρνης ἄκρην τε.

Β. Κεγχρείας, and ἄκραν τε Κεγχρείας is in Aldus, four manuscripts, and the Scholiast.

ἄκροντε, Ald. Rob. Brunckii codex B. pro v. lect.

ἄκρην τε (vel τε) Turn, Steph. Canter. Stanl. Brunckii codex B. in textu.

ἄκραν τε Brunck. e codice A. Schutz.

Canter conjectures Λέρνης τε κρήνην. Brunch remarks: Facile cuivis in mentem venire potuit Λέρνης κράτην τε read Λέρνης τε κρήνην ]. Sed potuit etiam hic fluvius, seu rivus perennis aque e vicino

[ocr errors]

et cognomine monte delabi. Nescio an Geographus aut Historicus aliquis montis meminerit. Sed sic se rem habere neganti non credam, nisi qui locorum naturam et situm ipse inspexerit. Nipung Cabus xeμar [v. 652.] convallem designare videtur, cui mons im minere debuit."-The argument from v. 652. has been already considered.

This conjecture about the topography of Lerna is, however, confirmed by Pausanias, II. 36. p. 198. ed. Kuhn. quoted by Schutz. The position of Te seems to point out a corruption; and the words up тe are marked with an obelus, in Mr. Porson's edition. Canter's correction is supported by the Scholiast, whose paraphrase runs thus:ἧσσον, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἤἴσσον, ἄρμων καὶ ἐκινούμην, πρὸς τε τὸν ῥοῦν της Κεγχρης, ἥτις κρήνη ἐστὶν Αργους, καὶ πρὸς τὴν Λέρνην ΤῊΝ ΠΗΓΗΝ. 1 Λέρνης τε κρήνην was the original reading, the syllable nu may easily have been written once instead of twice; in which case Te pny, ä×ρny Tε, &c. will be the successive supplements of unskilful correctors. Let this, however, and every thing else respecting Eschylus, be left undecided till Mr. Porson's notes appear.

V. 788. "Οταν περάσης ῥεῖθρον ἠπείρων ὅρον,

πρὸς ἀντολὰς φλογωπος ηλιοστιθεῖς. * * *
πόντου περῶσα φλοῖστον, έστ ̓ ἂν ἐξίκῃ
πρὸς Γοργόνεια πεδία Κισθήνης, ἵνα
αἱ Φορκίδες ναίουσι.]

Β. Οταν, κ. τ. λο

ποντοπορέουσα φλοῖσβον, αἷστ ̓ ἂν ἐξι

ประ

πρὸς ἀντολὰς φλογώπας, αλλοιοστιβεῖς

πρὸς Γοργόνεια πεδα καὶ στενοῖς, ἵνα κ. τ. λ.

which is thus translated:- Tranans fluctus marinos qua via pervenire queas ad lucentes solis ortus, diverso itinere ibis versus Gorgonios campos angustiasque, ubi, &c.-I. TOVтопoрtovσa, an Ionic form, is most ignorantly introduced into Attic iambics. 2. ator' av itinn, qua via pervenire queas, is a solecism: v never governs the subjunctive. 3. 201OTTIES is a word fresh coined in M. BоTHE's inexhaustible mint. 4. στενοῖς is pro bably to be construed by some new syntax: for by the old systems it cannot belong to any thing in the sentence.

αν

V. 1084. στρόμβοι δὲ κόνιν

εἰλίσσουσι.]
κόνι

B.σμ' ειλίσσουσι.

-xóvioua, again, is a word of Bothian fabrication. This verse has given Brunck and Heath unnecessary trouble. Brunck imagines that siniscours was pronounced as if it had au Eolic digamma at its beginning. Heath uses his panacea, the particles, and reads vivy. Bentley, on Phalaris,

κόνιν

P. 135.

I

P 135. rightly observes that the Gnal syllable of κίνιν is long-
Æschyl. Suppl. 177..

ὁρῶ κόνιν, ἄναυδον ἄγγελον στρατού.

The icta is long in the nominative, V. 78o of the same play:
κίνις άτερθε πτερύγων ὀλοίμαν.

which answers to V. 788.

πρόπαρ θανούσας· δ' Αίδας ανάσσει.

Suppl. 310. Thus Stanley :

[ocr errors]

ΒΑ. Τ. οὖν ὁ διος πόρτις εύχεται βοός;
ΚΟ. Ἔπαφος ἀληθῶς ὁρυσίων ἐπώνυμος,

Λιβύη μέγιστον τῆσδε γῆς καρπουμένη.
ΒΑ. Τίν' οὖν ἔτ ̓ ἄλλον τῆσδε βλάστημον λέγεις ;
ΚΟ. Βῖλον δίπαιδα, πατέρα τοῦδ ̓ ἐμοῦ πατρίς.
ΒΑ. Τὸ πανοφιν νῦν ὄνομα τοῦτό μοι φράσον.
ΚΟ. Δαναὺς δ ̓ ἀδελφός ἐστι πεντηκοστοπαις.

καὶ τοῦ γε Δαναοῦ τοὔνομ ̓ εὐφωνῳ λόγῳ
Αἴγυπτος.

ν. 312. λιβύη μέγιστον γῆς καρπουμένη. Ald.
οὗ λιβύη μέγιστον γῆς καρπουμένη. Rob.
λιβύη μέγιστον τῆσδε γῆς καρπουμένη. Turn.

Steph. Canter.-In Aldus, the speeches are not divided: in
Robortellus, V. V. 311, 312. are given to Danaus, in the other
editions to the Chorus.-Stanley; " Versus hic deesse videtur, in
quo quasiverat Pelasgus quæ fuit Epaphi proles.” Schutz takes the
hint, and prints,

ΧΟΡΟΣ. Επαφος κ. τ. λ.
ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ. * **

ΧΟΡΟΣ. Λιβύη, μεγ. τῆσδε γῆς κα

Still all is not right: for, first, τῆσδε is the supplement of some
corrector; secondly, the verse will hardly construe; and lastly,
if it could, it would bring Libye, the daughter of Epaphus, to
Argos: which would be false as to fact.-From these diffi-
culties Mr. Porson has freed the text, by an emendation which
is very far above all praise:

ΒΑΣ * * * *

ΚΟ. Λιβύη, ΜΕΓΊΣΤΗΣ ὌΝΟΜΑ γῆς καρπουμένη.
The contraction for ὄνομα is dy, with or without an omicroR
written over; for us, a final sigma written over the preceding
letter :: so that, if we write Mr. Porson's correction in con-
tractions, it will be

Λιβύη μεγίστη αν για καρπουμένη ;

which differs from the reading of Aldus & Robortellus only
by the superscribed sigma.

[ocr errors]

.

M. BOTHE does indeed condescend to accept roua: but with his usual scorn of all compromise with the MSS. he thus re-writes the speech:-..

ند

ΧΟΡΟΣ, Επαφος αληθώς ουσίων επώνυμος,

Λιβυης μέγιστον όνομα της καρπούμενος.

This note is given :

[ocr errors]

V. abest ovopa sententia et metro mancis; addidit verbum, e codd. MSS. haud dubie petitum, Porsonus, itaque locum sanavit, non per. sanavit, vulgata quippe μεγίστης et καρπουμένη non tangens, όνομα periphrasi, ut passim inservit, neque igitur aliud sonant péysorov ovoμa yus quam μεγίστην γῆν, Egyptum.

The text and the note may very safely be trusted with their own refutation. Observe, however, the accuracy of the writer; vulgatum perioτns non tangens. The common reading was not μεγίστης but μέγιστον ;--which Mr. Porson has touched most effectually! How well is that man calculated for the office of an editor, who sets himself to correct a text without knowing what it is, and, like the Andabate, lays about him the most fiercely when he goes blindfolded! With regard to the fancy that voua is a MS. reading we shall briefly observe that M. BOTHE has clearly the advantage over our Greek Professor: no future editor will ever rob him of his conjectures, in order to give them to the MSS.-As for Schutz, he qualifies övqua with an optime in his first edition: in his second, he puts it into the text with this note:—μέγιστον τῆσδε γῆς] μεγίστης ὄνομα γῆς St. i.e. my text has péyorov Thode ys;-the very reverse of which is true, and might possibly be meant to be written:but Mr. Porson's name should have been mentioned.Throughout his second edition, Schutz unblushingly pillages the Glasgow text of its best readings. One instance, only, shall be given at present: but it is a decisive instance-Sept contra Theb. 803.

ΧΟΡ. Τί δ' ἐστὶ πρᾶγος νείκο τον πόλει παρόντ
ΑΓΓ. [Πόλις σίσωσται, βασιλέες δ' ομόσποροι
*Ανδρες τεθνᾶσιν ἐκ χερῶν αὐτοκτόνων.

XOP. Tives;-

V. 804 is thus bracketed, as spurious, in the Glasgow folio; on which Schutz, in his second edition, says "Func versiculum spurium esse, jam olim monueramus. ASSENSIT POREONUS,

versiculum uncis includendo."

An assertion so roundly made ought to be true:-but what' is the fact? Simply this; M. Schutz, in his first edition, says not one word of the spuriousness of the verse, but writes on it with every appearance of believing it to be as genuine as any verse in Eschylus.-His notes shall be transcribed, at full

length;

length; and the reader is requested to verify our quotation by looking into the book itself: for, without actual inspection, it is not easy to believe that a writer can be so infatuated with the love of falsehood, as to indulge in it at the price of certain detection.

"VARIETAS LECTIONIS. V. 8c6 (804 Pors.) Casinées] Ezzinsi Ald, Carines Rob. Mosqu. 1. 2. Guelf."

COMMENTARIUS. Clarius jam nuntius quod acciderat eloquitur : Urbs quidem servata est, reges autem fratres ipsi se invicem suis manibus occiderunt. Abreschius contulit Sophocli Antig. v. 177. ἐκεινοι πρὸς διπλῆς μοίρας μίαν

Καθ' ἡμέραν ὤλοντο, παίσαντες τε καὶ
Πληγέντες αὐτόχειρὶ σὺν μιάσματι.—

In the collation of the Glasgow folio, Schutz's Eschylus, III. p. 362. is this statement:

"V. 806. [804. Pors.] uncis inclusus, ut spurius.” [Not a word of ut ipsi monueramus.]

M. BOTHE'S note shall be also quoted, that we may secure an opportunity of giving him just and unqualified praise: 754 (803. Pors.) Post bunc versum v. legitur :

Πόλις σέσωσαι, βασιλέες δ ̓ ὁμόσποροι

ἄνδρες, etc.

que a dumbrata ex versu 822. (i. e. ed. Schutz. 820. Pors.) hec autem loco ineptissima sunt. Uncinis inclusit Porsonus?

To return to the Supplices.

V. 316. Δαναός. ἀδελφὸς δ ̓ ἐστὶ πο

Stanleius.

Scaliger apud Abresch.

317. καὶ τοῦ δαναοίγε, Ald. Rob. καὶ τοῦ γε Δαναού, Turn. Steph. Canter. dpwvw Ald. aptóry Rob. Euowry Turn. Steph. Canter. In all the editions, V.V. 316, 317. are given to the same speaker.- -Schutz very rightly publishes Stanley's and Scaliger's emendation: but still the passage is corrupt: for how can Danaus's name be Egyptus? Scaliger therefore farther corrects, καὶ τοῦ γ' ἀδελφοῦ, very well as to the sense :—Sed omnia præ FORSONIANA lectione sordent

Κ. Δαναός, αδελφὸς δ ̓ ἐστὶ πεντηκοστόπαις.

Β. Καὶ ΤΟὟΔ ̓ ΑΝΟΙΓΕ τοὔνομ ̓ ἐυφώνῳ λόγῳ.

Κ. Αἴγυπτος.

Savoys being once changed by a very common error into davaye, the a, which was written over the word or in the margin as a correction, was taken into the text as if it had been intended for an addition. This mixture of an error and its correction is not unfrequent: in the Choëphoroe, V.997, where Robortellus has δρύτης and Turnebus δροίτης, Aldus gives δρυοίτης,

i. e. putns, tacente, ut solet, Schutzio.

10

Schutz,

« PreviousContinue »