CHAPTER IV. ANCIENT CLASSICS. THE publications of the late year in this department of literature, considerabi exceed, both in number and importance, those which we had occasion 1 notice in our last Review. The first place in the class of editors is due to M Northmore, who has published an edition of Tryphiodorus, with ample illustra tions, and with a text as correct as the means which we possess for ascertaining will allow. An edition of Thucydides has been printed in an elegant form Edinburgh, and is to be followed by a volume of annotations. The Memorabilia of Xenophon have appeared from the university-press at Oxford, in an editie: undertaken by Mr. Benwell, but left incomplete by his death. The remainder supplied from other sources. Mr. Taylor has at length accomplished the very laborious undertaking of a complete translation of the Works of Plato, illustrated with original notes, and copious extracts from the ancient scholia and commentaries, many of them hitherto unpublished. Mr. Bridgman, a disciple of the former, follows with humbler work, in the translation of a few obscure fragments of Greek philosophy and mysticism. A new translation of Juvenal is also laid before the public by Mr. Marsh. Dr. Hill, professor of humanity at Edinburgh, in his synonymes of the Lati tongue, has very ably illustrated an important and difficult subject in the doctrine of language. Mr. Gell has added to the pleasure with which we peruse the met splendid poem of antiquity, by an elegant work, in which the scenery of the Troy plain is delineated with beauty and accuracy, and the country shewn to correspord in a remarkable degree with the descriptions contained in the Iliad. Some useful school books also occur among the publications of the late year. EDITIONS. ART. I. Teupodrgou Ikicu adwais, versione Latina, plurimis Observationibus, duobu indicibus, et variis excursibus, illustrata, a THOMA NORTHMORE, &c. &'c. 8vo. pp. 2 AN edition of this work was published by Mr. Northmore, in the year 17 1, which met with a considerable share of public approbation, both at home and abroad. The present publication is en-larged by the addition of many new observations, and will doubtless add to the reputation gained by the editor's former work. The subject of this short poem of Tryphiodorus is the capture of Troy, and it therefore coincides, in a consider able degree, with the second book of Virgil's Eneid. That immortal work has however nothing to fear from the rivalry. Though Tryphiodorus writes in the noblest language which has ever been employed to express human ideas, and Greek, even in the mouth of Try phiodorus, (as Gibbon observes with re spect to one of the Byzantine writers), will often be beautiful, yet the power of the poet himself appear to us to be of a very inferior order. Like many other writers, he has been highly extolled by some, and as greatly depreciated by others. Mr. Northmore is inclined to take a middle station between these two opinions. Of the two, however, we are disposed to think that the severest sentence which has been passed respecting him, is nearer to the truth than the most favourable. This is a most noble picture, and has been admired in all ages. But in the hands of Tryphiodorus it becomes little better than a caricature. Aura&auoripsi voor Bovagov “1, 9029, Respecting the author himself little is Αργω δ' σιν τών επιών ώδιναν ανοιξες, known with certainty. A copious and Avo agortute was repons are tawryne, learned dissertation on the subject of a grupa uthiorayios vifitalo, this writer and his works, is prefixed to Mr. Merrick's English translation of his poem. We are told that he was an Egyptian, but in what age he flourished is doubtful. The titles of several of his 114. How is all the beauty of Homer's description lost in this tumid parody! What an absurd confusion of ideas does the works (though the present poem alone is now extant) have been transmitted to us, of which that ridiculous performance, the lipogrammatic Odyssey, will immediately recur to the memory of every reader of the Spectator. The accounts which have been given of this work are, however, not altogether con sistent; some stating that, from the twenty-four books of which the poem consisted, each of the letters was banished in its turn; and others, at least Eustathius, that the letter Sigma alone was banished from all the books. Either of these accounts leaves the work charged with a sufficient degree of absur-ous, habituates the mind to the exercise dity. last line present, "a torrent of honeydropping snow!" Yet with this opinion respecting the merits of Tryphiodorus, we are very far from thinking that Mr. Northmeie has undertaken an office unserviceable to the cause of literature, in becoming his editor. The meanest of the Greek poets have their use. They afford an instructive school of criticism, and they may serve to illustrate better writers. Though the precise æra at which this poet flourished is unknown, yet it is evi dent from his style, if there were no other evidence, that he wrote in the lowest ages of Greek poetry. His diction resembles that of Musaus, Coluthus, Quintus Calaber, and particularly Nonnus, writers who form the last, and, in every tense, the lowest school of the Grecian heroic song, and with whom it cannot be doubted that Tryphiodorus is to be classed. We have stated our opinion respecting the merits of this writer. We think that it cannot be better justified, than by contrasting a passage of the poet, as the ancients emphatically used the term, with one in which Tryphiodorus has chosen to imitate him, and thereby to expose the meanness of his own genius. Αλλ' ότε πολύμητις αναίξεις Οδυσσεύς, It has been the fate of several of these writers to be transmitted to us in a very corrupt state. The correction of their numerous errors, frequently very obvi of criticism, an art which, like all others, is to be attained by practice. Quintus Calaber affords a good iliustration of this observation. Five successive verses seldom occur in this author, which are free from corruption. These errors must in different places be naturally produc tive of every degree of difliculty from the lowest to the highest, and the correction of them, though not a very pleasing task, cannot fail of proving a very useful one to the student of Greek literature. Every classical scholar is acquainted with the skill which Rhodomannus has displayed in this province. The writers of the lower ages of Greece are also very often useful for the illustration or emendation of better au 66 thors. This is true with respect to the writers both of prose and petry; and no critic has perhaps so well understood, or so ably illustrated, this fact, as Rhunkenius. Vix quisquam post heroica illa tempora ad scribendum accessit, quin se totum ad aliquem antiquiorum, qui omnium consensu ingenii ac doc trinæ principatum tenerent, exprimendum imitandumque daret. Quemcunque vero sibi delegisset, ejus non solum voces, formulas, complexionesque verborum, sed sententias etiam et bene dicta acerrimo consectabatur studio, in succumque, quod aiunt, et sanguinem vertebant.' Pref. Lex. Tim. xx. Thus Nonnus has also, by the same great critic, been frequently applied to the illustration of Callimachus. Ep. crit. ii. Mr. Northmore appears to have had two objects in view, in the publication of this work to present as .complete and accurate an edition as possible of Tryphiodorus, and to make his book a repository for many useful and curious remarks on the subject of Greek poetry and grammar. We shall proceed to give an account of his edition in both these points cf view. The manuscripts of Tryphiodorus are not numerous, nor do we know that any are existing in this country. The earliest edition is that published by Aldus, without date, along with Quintus Calaber and Coluthus. This edition has been assigned to the year 1521; but Renaudot argues, on probable grounds, that it existed so early as 1504. It was succeeded, during the sixteenth century, by editions published at Basle, Leipsic, and Paris; but the most important edition, previous to Merrick's, appears to be that of Frischlinus, printed at Frankfort in 1588. Merrick's edition appeared in 1741, and is enriched with valuable notes by the editor, and some important corrections of the text, supplied by a manuscript formerly in possession of the celebrated. Fabricius, and afterwards in that of his son-in-law, H. S. Reimarus. By means of this manuscript some whole lines were restored, which were wanting in the preceding editions. A still more important service was conferred on Tryphiodorus by an Italian scholar, Bandini, who in the year 1765 published an edition of this author at Florence, materially improved by the assistance of two valuable manuscripts, preserved in the Medicean library of that city. These MSS. he distinguished by the signatures A and B. This last edition is the principal basis of that of Mr. Northmore, who has enjoyed no opportunity of collating any fresh manuscripts. As the Tryphiodorus of Merrick is in common circulation in this country, and that of Bandini very rare, we shall endeavour, by a comparison of Mr. Northmore's edition with the former of these works, to give our readers some idea of the restorations of the text which have been effected since the labours of the last English editor. Several entire verses are now added, which do not appear even in Merrick's edition. These amount to ten in the course of the poem, and are the following: Αιματι δακρύσας εχύθη πατρωνος Ανθής be inserted after 27 in Merrick. verse 28 in Mr. Northmore's edition, to In place of the corrupt and monstrous verse in Merrick's edition, Α νθεσι πορφυρέοισι λυκοισιν αναγκαίσιο χαλινα, 96, 97. ed. North. 176 North. post. 173, Merr. Πικρα δε πεινάοντες, οίζυξης υπ' αναγκης 156 North. p. 192 Merr. Οφθαλμώ ποθέοντες ελάνθανον εκτός εάν τας 203, p. 198, Merr. Φύγειν αγγελεουσα, και έλκεμεν εις άλα κοιλη 212, p. 205, Merr. Όρμον ες αντιπεραιον ενστεφανου Τενέδοσα 217, p. 210, Merr. Αμμι δ' Αθηναι η ερυσίπτολις ηγεμονεύσι, Δαιδαλέον σπεύδουσα λαβειν ανάθημα και αυτή 302, 3, p. 294, Merr. Ηραιστῳ δ' ὑποιικεν ατυζόμενος χόλος Ηρης. 685, p. 675. Mert. The insertion of these verses is authenticated by the valuable Florence ma. nuscript, A. much the best of those which have been hitherto collated. We see no reason to suspect the genuineness of any of these verses, and they are in several instances necessary to the com pletion of the sense. The last of them is perhaps the least wanted. We are inclined to think the word oor, 205, corrupt. Independently on these additions, the various readings of the two English editions are very numerous. Of 691 verses of which the poem consists, upwards ot an hundred appear in the present edition differently read from that of Mr. Merrick, and in many the variations are very important. Our limits will not allow cs to enumerate the whole of them, and this is the less necessary, as they do not now appear before the public for the first time. Some of those which most deserve notice will occur in the course ! the following observations. v. 23. This verse is among the addi et ab Eclog. VII. 60, Jupiter et læto descendet plurimus imbri. * Jam vero πατρώϊος Αιθήρ est father, pater ejus Sarpedonis scilicet) qui lacrymas sanguineas “ Ως ἔφατ' ουδ' απίθησε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε Sil. Crit. IV. p. 111. Ipse meas ther accipe summe preces. Mr. r pression seems to be borrowed. V. 221. Κρυπτον επί Τρώεσσι δόλον και πηματα κεύθων. Mr. Northmore offers a very probable conjectural emendation of this passage: "vix aliud mihi frigidius esse videtur quam tautologia illa κρυπτον xwv, et non possum quin locum emendem, reponendo Tx. This conjecture is well supported by Mr. Cogan, from Theocr. i, 50, Ap. Rhod. iii. 578, with the scholiast upon the former of these passages. V. 413.-Mr. Northmore mentions a conjecture of Mr. Cogan, μαινομενον πως for papravo, an emendation to which we accede, as adding spirit to the passage. The verb up seems always to imply the idea of combat in terms somewhat approaching to equality, not that of triumphant uncontested victory. The expression para a, quoted by Mr. Northmore, is right, the warring winds, contending with each other; but that of fighting fire is scarcely correct. The "bickering flame" of Milton is almost equivalent to coruscus, though With some accession of force, and this is probably the original signification of the term. V. 505. The distinctions between φανου πνει and φανών πνεί, expressions which V. 59. The word xxтeßave may be are certainly not perfectly synonymous, translated in its usual signification, by we rather think to be these: That which considering douez as the nominative, Toro gives indications of a murderTo as the passive, and by supposing the sentence to be parenthetical. We do not however consider this as necessary, as very many instances occur in the Greek authors, of verbs, usually neuter, assuming a transitive signification. Markland, in a passage referred to by Mr. Northmore, ad Iph. Taur. 742, mentions the future now, there used in a transitive sense, as an exemplification of this observation. We believe, however, that this future, and the aorist derived from it, very rarely have any other than a transitive signification. The word XATZ appears to be used transitively by Pindar, Pyth. viii. 111. V. 119.-To xvuz, the common reading in this passage, and authorized by the manuscripts, we prefer zuz, the conjecture of Merrick, supported by Ruhnkenius, both as in itself a better reading, and as deriving much probability from the verse of Callimachus (Hym. ad Jov. 32), from which the ex ous tendency, or of murder committed, which the spectator may discover; that which pois proceeding with a di rect tendency, whether discoverable or not, to an act of murder; the former seeming along with the agent to imply the obscure notice of an observer, the latter simply to respect the agent him self; the former is applicable either to the general tendency, or to a past or future act, the latter only to an approaching act. V. 547.-We are not satisfied with the reading oval. From alcool (MS. A.) Mr. Northmore formerly conjectur ed, in the Attic form, aveai Or accocai. Should we read awovoa? V. 638,-affords a curious specimen of a corrupt reading in the common edi. tions, corrected by the inspection of valuable MSS. (A et B.) Yet several ancient editions, long ago presented near ly the same reading with that of these From this short account it will appear that much has been done by late editors, for the restoration of the text of Tryphiodorus; we are of opinion, however, that several passages still remain cor rupt. Mr. Northmore has often successfully illustrated his author by comparison with the poets of his own school, in whose writings he appears to be well versed. In the remainder of this article our limits will permit us to notice only a few of the grammatical disquisitions, which are introduced in the course of this work. Observations of this nature frequently occur in the notes; a few, which required to be treated at greater length, have been reserved for five excursus, which form an appendix to the annotations. The first excursus relates to the term zahaßço↓ or xxhzugod, an old word, one of the amas your of Homer, Il. xxiii. $45. This word does not occur in Tryphiodorus. We cannot help thinking the etymology of it, which is proposed with diffidence by Mr. Northmore, too forced and remote to be depended upon. The second excursus is a disquisition on the measure of the words ans, Arps, &c. These and similar words are considered by Dawes as quadrisyllabic, with the insertion of the Digamma, Inda Fions, Arge Fions, &c. Misc. crit. 172. The analogy of the formation of the cases in Greek substantives renders this observation not altogether destitute of probability; it appears however to us too uncertain to be insisted on. In further confirmation of this remark, it is alleged by Dawes, that the position of these words in Homer always admits of their scansion as quadrisyllables, though the laws of the verse would permit them to be placed in situations, in which they could only be considered as trisyllabic. This argument, however, is of little force, since it will be found on examination that Homer, in most instances, disposes any word, consisting of three long syllables, in such a manner as to begin a foot. There is no doubt that in all subsequent ages these words were pronounced as trisyllables, as appears by the practice of the tragic writers, and by some express testimonies. Mr. North more coincides with the opinion of Dawes respecting the pronunciation of these words. In a note on this excursus, he remarks that the Digamma, even in the time of Homer, was in some words becoming obsolete. The third excursus is employed in the consideration of the final N. With respect to the Attic writers, Mr. Northmore's opinion coincides with the rule, which is explained by professor Porson (ad Orest. 64) so clearly as scarcely to admit of controversy. With the Homeric writers he supposes the case to be different. The letter N, he observes, appears to have been of very frequent use in the easier periods of the Greek language. Into the question, whether this peculiarity was derived from the Chinese tongue, we shall not attempt to enter, as we are ignorant of that language, and know not from history of any connection which the two nations can be supposed to have had with each other. The progress of refinement in the Ionic dialect Mr. Northmore supposes, in many instances, to have tended to the exclusion of this letter; that it is therefore to be banished in Homer, wherever it is unnecessary to the construction of the verse; and the power of the casura is so great, as not to require the assistance of this fulcrum for the purpose of sustaining a short syllable which falls in that position. In support of this observation it might be added. that in the Ionic dialect, in the time of Herodotus (if credit may be paid to the manuscripts), the paragogic N appears to have become so obsolete, as scarcely to have been employed even so avoid a hiatus. We are, however, on this subject disposed to adhere to the common doctrine. There appears to us as much solicitude in the prosody of Homer to avoid throwing too much weight on the cæsural pause, as there is to avoid the hiatus. The final N was confessedly employed to avoid the latter of these faults, we believe it therefore to have been em ployed to prevent the former. Whether the cæsural pause is capable, without any other aid, of sustaining a short final vowel, is a matter of experiment; and we believe that the decisive instances of this power in Homer are very few. It is to be observed on this subject that consonants, which easily admit of reduplication or prolongation of sound, (the liquids for instance, and the letter ), are capable of exerting some force in lengthening the preceding vowel. The next excursus is occupied in the discussion of the rule laid down by Dawes |