only (with those nations who wished to imitate them) esteemed that deity a female." Polen. Supplem. vol. iv. p. 294.

I

Now Strabo, as Casaubon well observes, when giving this Asiatic deity a Greek name, instead of coining a new word, Evos, prefers M, which is nìasculine, and is properly expressive of his character: and, as far as appears, even the Latin name LUNUS was not coined till long after Strabo's time.

But such inquiries, instead of indicating a classical taste and ardor, are pretty sure tests of a depraved appetite, which is incapable of relishing wholesome native flavors, and seeks its gratification in every thing that is fetid and disagreeable to an uncorrupted palate. Never can I believe this writer to have imbibed the generous love of ancient learning. His delight is not to launch his vessel on the broad current, and spread his sails to the wind; but to dabble in some muddy back-water, and fish up with ignoble pains a few filthy shreds and remnants, which might well have been allowed to perish where they sunk, in the dark silent pool of oblivion.

"The seventeen maps, with which the seventeen books are illustrated and adorned, are said, in the preface, to have been formed on the best authorities, and carefully adapted to the geography of Strabo. We have examined only that of the central states of Greece; and in that we find neither Erythræ in Bœotia, nor Egæ, Histiæa, or Orabia in Euboea-though they are all described as cities of importance in the text of the author-are duly placed in the map of M. D'Anville-and the three first, moreover, distinguished as independent states by their coins still extant." Rev. p. 440.

In this single paragraph there are three false propositions, one misrepresentation, and one blunder. The blunder is Orabiæ for Orobiæ. The misrepresentation is, that Histica is not in the map. Oreus, which in Strabo's time was the name of Histiæa, is in the map; and it is difficult to conceive that he did not know it, because in D'Anville's map it is called Oreus, prius Istiæa. As for the three false propositions: Erythræ in Boeotia had no coinage of its own : Egæ in Euboea had none of its own: and the maps are not said in the Preface to have been formed on the best authorities. All that is said of them is, that care was taken to adapt the last fourteen to the text of Strabo as closely as the three first. The adoption of the name Oreus instead of Histica is one proof of this.

Having now nearly disposed of the long string of false assertions, misrepresentations and blunders, which go to the composition of this article, it only remains to say a few words concerning the Edition itself of Strabo, which has been made the vehicle of so much coarse. invective. In the account given of it, the public are as much wronged as we are abused: for no view whatever is laid before them of its nature .or its merits. Neither can I afford much room for that purpose; it being my design not to vindicate the book, but to vindicate the University from false aspersions.

It contains, however, collations of almost all the known manuscripts. It has every thing that was valuable in Casaubon's edition: of which

1 Ad Spartiani Caracall. p. 88. Ed. Par. 1620.

edition numberless typographical errors are corrected. The excellence of Tyrwhitt's conjectural emendations is acknowledged by the Reviewer; although he asks, why they were not published in one small supplementary volume. The answer is, they have been printed in a small volume, as every pretender to exact Greek criticism ought to know, twice already: once at London in 1783, which edition is quoted by Schweighæuser in his notes to Polybius, and once by Harles in 1788, from which the French translators have taken his conjectures as far as they have gone, and in general adopted them with acknowledgments of their ingenuity..

The Reviewer praises these emendations highly, and, out of near two hundred, selects six, as being particularly ingenious, and as having been confirmed by manuscripts collated since his death. The first and the last of these six have had no confirmation whatever from manuscripts; the first is not so much a conjecture, as an adoption of the sense given in the old Latin translation: the third is only partially confirmed: and the second and fourth have no pretensions to superior sagacity, as I will leave it to any one conversant in these matters to determine. How unaccountable all this! when, in the imperfect reading which I have myself given to the notes, I have found above twelve very ingenious ones positively confirmed, as many partially confirmed, and at least twenty, far exceeding those selected by him in acuteness and ingenuity, not yet confirmed, but bearing the strongest marks of probability."

He goes on to say,

"Almost the whole of the Editor's own notes are historical and geographical commentaries; which may be of use to the reader, in saving him the trouble of reference."

And yet all this is called alloy, p. 449. 1. 32. Besides, what is meant by saving him the trouble of reference? Many of them, nay, most of them, will give him the trouble of reference, if he has an inquisitive turn for they point out the passages in ancient and modern books, which tend to throw any light upon the text, or which contain matter intimately connected with it. In many of them, disputed points of chronology and geography are discussed, and frequently explained by diagrams incidental elucidations of other authors are given-the ancient and modern names are appropriated, often beyond what D'Anville and other geographers have done-the etymology of many is traced to Oriental words-a concise history of remarkable towns is given the productions, natural history, trade, population, &c. are compared with the accounts of the best modern travellers-a vast

1 It may not be unacceptable to those who take an interest in this department of criticism, if I specify some of these out of a much longer list of each kind. The first number denotes the page, the second the line. 166, 4. 235, 37. 330, 20. 357, 5. 401, 19. 682, 21. 696, 32. 700, 10. 874, 19. 1054, 17. 1179, 22. entirely confirmed. 287, 10. 353, 31. 384, 15. 408, 22. 430, 33. 677, 43. 686, 1. 690, 31. 799, 35. partially confirmed. 166, 34. 290, 20. 308, 22. 354, 29. 378, 25. 425, 6. 459, 6. 493, 14. 602, 8. 732, 7. 733, 10. with a multitude besides, ingenious, although not com firmed.

variety of curious information is scattered through them, of a rambling and miscellaneous kind, but always connected with the text-and, notwithstanding the faulty Latin, sound sense and considerable force of reasoning are always perceptible.

The Reviewer indeed says, that,

"In History and Geography the Editor displays the same sort of accuracy as in Grammar:" and he supports his charge by ONE specimen. "Philip the son of Demetrius, and father of Perseus, is called repeatedly Philip the Second, though he was the fourth regularly acknowledged King of Macedonia of that name.”

This calumny has been completely refuted by Mr. Falconer. There is but one place in which the word secundus is applied to the son of Demetrius: and in that place it possibly meant not the second Philip but the next person who destroyed the cities Sciathus and Peparethus, after the war between Philip and the Athenians. I am myself inclined to think it a mistake of the Editor's: nor do I fear that this concession will raise any other feeling but that of contempt or indignation against the critic, who founds a sweeping charge of historical inaccuracy in the whole two folio volumes upon this single mistake.

CRITICAL NOTICE

OF PROFESSOR MONK'S HIPPOLYTUS.

NO. II.

V. 188. Xegory TS Tóvos. Ita M. e conjectura Porsoni: qui ad v. 182. emendat Aristoph. Thesm. 283. legendo digo rò már oinade. Hie vulgatur χερσίν.

V. 208. apud Sophoclem uno tantum loco extare Пas v optandi sensu, monuit Valck. nempe in Philoct. 794. Citat quidem M. Ed. T. 765. et Ajac. 388. sed in duobus hisce locis nihil impedit, quo minus ag av more Sophocleo legatur: in Philoctete vero versus est manifesto spurius; ut alio tempore docebitur.

V. 209. Ad h. v. M. longiorem Porsoni notam protulit: qua confirmatur canon de voce a non rópa Atticis usitata, et corriguntur Bacch. 279. (275 Br.) Hec. 392. (396.) Alexis apud Athen. I. p. 28. E. Emendantur quoque Nonnus in Gregor. Nazianzen. Stelit, p. 136. Eton. legendo xagiouas pro xagioquar, et Longus bis, scilicet, fib. II. p. 61. ed. Villoison. “ Τρίτος δὴ γέρων οὗτος (lege οὕτως ut supra οὕτως εὐσχημόνως ὠρχήσατο) εὐδοκιμήσας : et p. 33. ἀφίησι φωνὴν οἵαν κύκνος ὅμοιος ἐμοὶ γέρων γενόμενος : frustra cl. Editor ὅμοιον : legendum quoise quod cum dativo construitur Alcest. 1019. Erecthei Fragm. 1. Aristoph. Lysistr. 557. Demosth. II. Σrs. p. 582. Longin. II. 'Y. §. 10. Procop. Hist. Arcan. 7. Suid. v. 'Agyóv. Hierocl. p. 206. ed. Needham. Eustath. OA. A. p. 1397. 34.”

V. 216. Post h. v. inseri voluit Porsonus Keivav gauai xɛiðı yeroiuar servatum ab Aristophane: cujus Schol. in Vesp. 748. monuit eas voces esse ex Hippolyto desumtas. M. quidem credit illas in editione priori scripsisse Euripidem, postea rejecisse. Sed longe præstat sententia Valckenaerii: judice quo legi debent in v. 230. Keivwv igaμaı

κεῖθι γενοίμαν vice vulgata lectionis είθε γενοίμαν : ubi tamen vestigia prioris lectionis etiam nunc restant.

V. 219. Porsonus, teste M. emendavit Aristoph. Anagyro apud Athen. iv. p. 133. Β. Πρὸς θεῶν ἔραμαι τέτοιγα φαγεῖν. vice ἐρᾷς : sed MS. ibi ἐρα.

V, 224. Τί κυνηγεσίων καὶ σοὶ μελέτη. Ita M. ad Porsoni mentem. Vulgo μελέτης. Brunck. post Valck. μελέτη. Alter MS. Paris. teste Musgr. μελέτη et alter teste Valck. μελέτη. Vera lectio est Τί κυνηγε σίων μελέτη καὶ σοί· Anacreontea citat Valck. Τί γὰρ μάχαισι καμοί et Τί Πλειάδεσσι κἀμοί.

V. 227. Κλιτὺς ultimam corripit. Hoc monuit Brunck. et post eum M. cujus emendationem Hesychii VV. DD. dudum præripiunt. Utinam M. in nota sequenti vidisset Hesychii gl. Ενετίδας πώλους στεφανηφόρους ἀπὸ τῆς περὶ τὴν ̓Αδρίαν Ενετίδας διαφέρουσι γὰρ ἐκεῖ, sic legi deberet partim ope Codicis Marciani. Ενέτας πώλους. Εν Στεφανη Φόρω ἀπὸ τῆς περὶ τὴν ̓Αδρίαν Ενετίδος· διαφέρει γὰρ ἐκείνη. MS. habet Στέφαν ἐνιφόρω et διαφέρει. Ne quis dubitet de Στεφανηφόρῳ sine voce Εὐριπίδης, is adeat notam Alberti ad v. Αγνίσαι.

V. 232. Παράφρων olim ediderat Musgravius: postea cum Valck. repudiat, nec Brunckio nec Porsono probante.

Ita M. qui ἀκυμάντοις reddit fuctibus multum percussis : sed potior est sententia Blomfieldi interpretantis non agitatis fluctibus. Etenim gymnasiis equestribus melius convenit littus placidum quam vexatum procellis. Nobis tamen displicet ακύμαντος, vox apud Tragicos rarissima vel prorsus insolens. Præstat igitur huc referre gl. Hesy chianam 'Αγυμνάστοις, πολυγυμνάστοις, quæ vox ad arenam certantium apprime convenit: et extat, alio licet sensu, quater in Euripideis. Verum neque sic integer est locus. Collato v.1126. κυνῶν ὠκυπόδων ΕΠΕΒΑ μετὰ ΘΗΡΑΣ ἐναίρων hic legi debet ὄρος βάσ ̓ ἐπὶ θῆρας πόθεν ἐστέλλου: ut constructio sit ὄρος ἐστέλλου πόθεν (cf. Med. 668. ἔμφα λον—ἐστάλης) βᾶσ ̓ ἐπὶ θῆρας. Illud πόθεν servant MS. Flor. et Phot. non Suidas : nisi libri MSS. in eo dant diversum ab edit. Mediol. ubi legitur πόθι. Hesych. Πόθεν, ἀπό τινος μέρους. Ironiæ inservit πόθεν: Redde scilicet.

V. 266. Φαίδρας, ὁρῶ μὲν τάσδε δυστήνους τύχας. Ita M. Sed legi debet Φαίδρας, ὁρῶ μὲν τῆσδε δυστήνου τύχας cum Luzacio: et profecto τῆσδε vult Marklandus collato v. 283.

V. 273. Εἰς ταὐτὸν ἥκεις· πάντα γὰρ σιγᾷ τάδε. Ita M. qui cum Schol. et Valck. intelligit quasi Latine dictum "Convenit inter nos ut æque ignorem ac tu." Sed non intellexit V. D. pravam esse scripturam versus præeuntis, sic legendi, Οὐδ', ἥτις ἀρχὴ τῶνδε πημάτων, ἔφη; vice ἔφυ. quo bene perspecto, patet veritas lectionis, quam memorat Schol. et servat MS. unus, ἥκει. modo sic distinguas ἥκει, πάντα γὰρ σιγά, τάδε Eodem recidit hæc quoque quæstio: illa etenim cuncta silentio premit. V. 275. Πότερον ὑπ ̓ ἄτης ἢ θανεῖν πειρωμένη Sic M. qui bene monuit post Valck. vocem är apud Tragicos dici de calamitate qualibet sed præsertim de ea, quæ divinitus immissa est. At Chorus nullo jure Nutricem percontatur utrum Phædræ corpus macie extabuerit ex ira

deûm. Qui enim Nutrix hoc sciverit? Ad hoc, plane ab ingenio Euripidis abhorret ellipsis ista κατέξανται δέμας ante ὑπ ̓ ἄτης. Noli igitur dubitare quin versus sit mendosus, et, si fors faveat, e Codicibus, sin aliter, ex ingenio emendandus. Πότερον ὑπ' αὐτῆς σφ ̓ αὐανεῖν πειρω pevn; Nonnunquam óregov per se est interrogantis: vid. Pers. 237. In Philoct. 954. libri variant inter αὖ θανοῦμαι et αὐανοῦμαι: quod verbum aptissime huic loco convenit, cum modo præcesserat xareξανται δέμας. In aliam quoque conjecturam incidimus. Πότερον ὑπ' αὐτῆς οἶσθά νιν πειρωμένην cui respondet Nutrix Θανείν, orationem scilicet Chori intermissam ipsa plenam reddens.

V. 280. Statuit M. articulum præpositivum vel sine particulis. pèv, de et yag apud Tragicos occurrere loco demonstrativi, rarius quidem, sed in exemplis indubiæ fidei. At exempla ista rariora, si de Euripide loquitur M., frustra quæsierit, et quæsita frustra tuitus fuerit.

· V. 301. Τούσδε μοχθοῦμεν πόνους. "Sic Ion. 134. legendum est εὐφώμους πόνους μοχθεῖν οὐκ ἀποκάμνω : non εὐφάμοις πόνοις” R. P.

V. 304.

Αλλ', ἴσθι, μέντοι (πρὸς τάδ' αὐθαδεστέρα

γίγνου θαλάσσης) εἰ θανεῖ, προδοῦσα σοὺς
παῖδας πατρῴων μὴ μεθέξοντας δόμων

μὰ τὴν ἄνασσαν, κ. το λο

Hæc, tanquam expedita. omnia essent, VV. DD. sunt prætergressi. Atqui ex illa particula μè patet sententiam negativam esse debere: idem quoque patet ex vocibus πρὸς τάδ ̓ αὐθαδεστέρα γίγνου θαλάσσης : quæ magis sermoni aut negantis aut minantis quam suadentis conveniunt. Cf. omnino d. Τ. 343. Οὐκ ἂν πέρα φράσαιμι· πρὸς τάδ', εἰ θέλεις, Θυμοῦ δι ̓ ὀργῆς, ἥτις ἀγριωτάτη. Lege igitur Αλλ ̓, ἴσθ ̓, ἂν οὗτοι, πρὸς τάδ' αὐθαδεστέρα γίγνου θαλάσσης, οὐ φθάνοις προδοῦσα σοὺς κ. τ. λ. Constructio paulo intricatior librarios fefellit; etenim av oro cum où Qavos jungenda sunt, alterutra particula negativa abundante, vel, ut rectius dicam, sine qua Græcismus corruat necesse est, interposita parentheti zs sententia: vid. Hermann. Viger. p. 803. Mox av sæpe

sequitur et sæpe sequi debet: ex. gr. in 1327. pro cap' o Zvez μὴ φοβουμένη Οὐκ ἄν ποτ ̓ ἦλθον præbet Lasc. σάφ' οίσθα : lege σάφ' ἴσθ, ἂν: necnon in Prometh. 513. τις φήσειεν ἂν Οὐδεὶς, σάφ' οίδα, μὴ μάτην φλῦσαι θέλων bene restituit Brunckius σάφ' οἶδ', ἂν: nisi quis partim cum Blomfieldo v prætulerit; dein i et où permutantur in Troas. 364. juxta libros MSS. denique oux av Plávois πgodovσa est purus putus Atticismus (Vid. Pierson ad Herodian. p. 452. et H. Steph. V. Pláva) pro οὐκ ἂν προδοίης. In Soph. Αj. 110, φθάνη pro θάνη pulcherrime restituit Botheus.

V. 324. Οὐ δῆθ ̓ ἐκοῦσά γ ̓ ἐν δὲ σοι λελείψομαι. Ita M. cui sensus esse videtur, Vincar igitur si modo necesse est vincar, non volens sed tua opera. At nihil hic habet dè, quod Græce loquentibus omitti debuit. Scaliger et alii corrigunt ovde σo nenenoua. paulo rectius correxissent ds: etenim Phædra modo elocuta voces a e2 άμagtεïv Nutricem a se amovebat: ad hanc actionem vocula de referenda est; quâ dictâ, Nutrix manu Phædram prehendebat, ut patet e versu sequenti τί δρος ; βιάζει χειρὸς ἐξαρτωμένη.

V. 327. et sqq. Gravis in his inesse labes videtur, quam vel Codices Itali a Matthia mox conferendi, spero, diluent, vel sine Codicibus