και

commended, and Mr. B. has printed, ouvexa, v. 355, for Porson first read 'a, which is evidently correct. V: 356. We disagree with Mr. B. in reading pos iσπPov TOTOUS; and, notwithstanding the defence of Brunck, should have preferred Valkenaer's more general usage of the dative, έσπεροις τόποις.

γ. 362. Τυφωνα θούρον, στις αντεςη θεόις.

So Gaisford of Oxford published the line; and Porson gives his suffrage. Stanley and Brunck most absurdly would read as is. The cannot suffer an elision. We regret that we cannot find room to copy a long and satisfactory note, including one of Porson's; and can only add that Burges foolishly conjectured

Τυφώνα θηρ ̓ ὁς πασιν

We purposely omit the scanning of the Chorusses, till. we review Burney's Tentamen; when we shall bring both Butler and Blomfield to book. The former had not the advantage of Burney as a guide: the latter seldom enters a different path from him.

V. 457. σθενος κραταιον. Herman conjectures κραδαίνων, and cites v. 965, in support of his reading, from the Acharnenses of Aristophanes.

κραδαίνων τρεις κατασκιους λόφους.
ubi maximus atlas

Axem humero torquet. Vir. Æn. IV.

But, as Mr. B. well remarks, xpadav, does not signify torquere, but vehementer agitare, or vibrare.

V. 447. ПpoσελUMEVOV. On this confessedly the hardest word in the Prometheus, we have no explanation in the Glossary; but the following to us unintelligible and confused annotation in the notes.

· προσελούμενον Ald. Rob. προσσιλλούμενον Turn. Veram lectionem restituit Porsonus ex Etym. M. p. 690, II. Пpoσεληνου, προυσέλλειν λεγουσι το ύβριζειν και οι Αρκάδες, επειδή λοιδορητιχοι εισιν όντως εν ὑπομνημασι Προμηθεως Δεσμων. Legendum videtur Προσεληνοι. ύβριςικοι. et, in fine, Δεσμωτου, Schol. Α. βλεπων εμαυτον όντως ὑβριζομενον, τουτο γαρ δηλοι το προσελούμενον, ὅθεν και οι Αρκάδες προσελοι η προσέληνοι In margine exemplaris Askeviani scribitur " προυσελ-vide Hesych.” Aristoph. Ran. 7. Προσελουμεν. τοῖς δε χαλκοις και Eεvois Xaι muggiai. MS. Stobæi, qui locum citat, p. 250. 168. teste Grotio, рovyλouμ exhibet: unde facilis correctio

προσελούμεν. Hesychius eadem medela indiget. προσγελεῖν. προπηλακίζειν. Corrige προυσελειν.

This is the worst and most unsatisfactory note through. out the whole of this volume. Why will Mr. B. not deign to inform us of the meaning of προσέληνοι As for Porson's restoring the true reading from the Etymologus Magnus; the passage, ages ago, was quoted by Stanley, with the orthography of poveλλ De Pauw's note on the passage, is literally ideotical. He proposes a strange word of his own coinage, poosnλouμevov, for which he ought προσδηλούσθαι, himself, ωδε γε προσελουμενον οι adε ye πрoonλwμEvo, says Heath. Dawes would have recourse to the digamma; and Butler makes three very strange conjectures, προξενουμενον. προξενωμενον. προηγε Aoppsvov. We wish for a satisfactory explanation of the etymology of porλ. We once conceived, but scarcely dare to hazard the conjecture, that porno might be a term of reproach among the Arcadians, against the pride of high extraction,

• Orta prior luná, si de se creditur ipsi,

A magno tellus Arcade nomen habet.

Of the remainder we despair.

1

V. 461. αεισύροι οι αιεισυροι. Valckenaer in his notes to Theocritus, approved the latter reading, and we think with great propriety, instead of aneupos, which Mr. B. admits. Stanley, in confirmation of asσupos,

ore trahit quodcunque potest.

V.480. awarray. This passage may be added to those examples by which Porson refutes the canon of Valcke naer, who denies that the second aorist of anaλdarow is ever used by the Greek tragedians. Phoen. 979.

Γ. 181. πεπονθας αεικες πημα, is given inadmissibly by Aldus, Robortellus, and Turnebus, with an anapest in the second foot.

xes. Dawes. Misc. Cr. p. 311. aixes. Pors, quæ forma in Sophoclis Electrå, 206. 216 videtur reponenda. in Eurip. Androm. 131. optimè dedit Gaisfordius dapas aixeλov. Schol. Ven. ad Il. X. 336. απο του αικεως, ὁ δηλοι αικιτικώς γίνεται φικος και αίκως.

V. 486. Aldus, Turnebus, Stanley, and Porson, prefer dehous; we are inclined to agree with most of the MSS. and Brunck, in favour of wopous; and so Mr. B. gives it.

542.Пxtavov Ald. Rob. sed utavolo,' and so Mr. B. prints it. 'Hesych. vid. Salmas. Plin. Exerc. p. 431. b. D.'Porson. Herman, however, in his notes to the Orphica, prefers Nxtavou; because genetivus in rarior apud tragicos est.' Now Dr. Burney says, Genetivos in oso in melicis non respuunt tragici. Hinc supra 108. ευρυπρώροιο. Eurip. Plen. 834. φοινικόλοφοιο. Troades, 814. Πριαμοιο. Orest. 812. αελίοιο. Æschylus quoque, Prometh. 531. Ωκεανοιο.

This accumulation of evidence is made on the passage Αλυος ποταμοιο in the Persa, where Burney convicts Por son of error in the reading of Toraμou. And in v. 565, Burney would read aλN AAANE г'; because a tri- ́ syllable is deficient to make this line of the Strophe cor respond with the Antistrophe.

• ιοτατι γάμων, ότε ταν ομοπατ

Γ. 580. αλεν', Ω Δᾶ. We were anxious to see what' observation Mr. B. would make on this strange combina tion; but confess ourselves dissatisfied with the following

note:

Ita edd. primæ, quibuscum consentiunt plerique Codd. et Schol. A. et B. MSS. nonnulli, teste Turnebo, aλEv', a so atque ita N. quod probat Valcken. ad Phoeniss. 1304 et defen dere videtur Etymol. Μ. p. 60. 8. Αλευδα, είρηται ὡς τὸ Ψευδα. Οι γαρ Δωριείς την γην δαν λεγουσι, ubi Arnaldus animadv. p. 181 corrigit aλsuda; male; male etiam cum ety mologo scribit una ruda: divisim enim scribendum qɛv, dz. Aristoph. Lysistr. v. 198, peu, da тov opxov."

αλευε. φυλάσσε. Hesych.

6

V.591, Porson says, Laudat Plutarchus de irá cohibenda,' &c. The passage in this tract on reference to Plutarch (Ed. Reiske, p. 788, T. vii.) we find to be ώσπερ ὁ των βουκολων κηροπλασος οττοβει αχετας υπνοδόταν νομον επιθέλγων, και καθίσας την όργην του Ρητορος. In Xylander's edition it stands vrvodrav, which he derives from vervos and dew.

V. 650. A learned friend of Mr. Blomfield's not inelegantly conjectures n x' apoi yλuxu for the vulgar 5 μ Yuxu. Porson marked as with an obelus. Mr. B. says that the common reading may be defended, and he translates it thus, ne de me amplius solicitus sis, siquidem

་

1

mihi lubet audire.' This too is the interpretation of the Scholiast; but it is very harsh.

V. 668 εvdase is the reading of all the editors but Robortellus; Mr. B. receives his reading evdaspor. This fondness for unnecessary alteration deserves animadversion. In the line 680, we again disagree with Robortellus, and prefer arnuws in contradiction to Mr. B.

V. 701. He prints, with the approbation of Porson, αιφνίδιος αυτον μορος. We are inclined to side with Gaisford, who prefers in his Hephæstion, p. 242, autov αιφνης μορος.

V. 719. Aldus, and all the ancient editions, except Ro bortellus's, repeat μospa twice. This should not be the case, because it otherwise forms a trochaick monometer. hypercatalectick, of which nature are the preceding verses, 710, 711, 712.

V. 734. πλεκτας σεγας

πλαγκτας σεγας suspicatur Dacierus, quod putat Horatium hunc poetæ nostri versum expressisse in ode 24, L. iii. 20.

Quorum plaustra vagas rite trahunt domos. Sed neuter Scholiastes ingeniosæ suspicioni favet.' L. Theobald. - It is certainly an ingenious and elegant conjecture. We much wish that a little geographical lore had been intermingled, in this part of the play, with minute criticism. Mr. B. never loses sight of Hesychius. We should have felt ourselves more pleased in this most intricate portion of the Prometheus with a new theory of the unaccountable wanderings of Io. Herodotus, Arrian, and Strabo, are worth all the grammarians and lexicographers, in arranging this portion of the text. In the word Zapudnota, Brunck has shewn the most disingenuous deceit; for he defends this orthography from the Scholiast on the Antigone of Sophocles on v. 981, which he had himself altered to this very orthography. In fact the word stands Eaλudnoca, in the Editio Princeps of the Scholia; and so it is printed in v. 751 by Mr. B. Hesychius indeed has Eaλuudncos, but Strabo, Stephanus Byzantinus, and Scymnus Chius have Eaλuudnoros. Analogy seems to require also the double ro, thus Axapunσσos, Ταρτησσος, Λυκαβησσος, Λυρνησσος, Μυκαλησσος, Τελμησ σος. We think that Σαλμυδησσος is also read in the Scho liast on Apollonius Rhodius.

V. 783. ndospe' av.-Nonsense.

Dawes altered this to

ndo' av; and Mr. B. has, in course, received it. So Markland altered the corrupt δυναιμ' αν into δύναι αν in the Phiceniss. v. 418-yv. 791-795. The notes on these verses are valuable: we have not room to extract their contents; and we regret that the same circumstance prevents us from discussing at length, and attempting still farther to establish Mr. B.'s canon in favour of o, vice ε, in such words as due duoiv. oixel dikor, &c.

V. 816. Brunck and Mr. B. conceive that there is an hiatus between this and the succeeding, line: and Mr. B. gives a line of asterisks, like those in Tristram Shandy; perhaps with as little reason or sense. Stanley makes no remark, either in his published notes, or his cura posteriores. De Pauw would read sou Bers: which, though half approved by Heath, is nonsense. Not a word of explanation does Mr. B. deign to give us; and here is the great error of the Porsonian school: the situation of a

or a ye will at times occupy a page, and call forth all the bitterness of animadversion. But the situation of a town, river, or even a continent, will not produce the sober discussion of a single line. In these, and similar instances, we have been obliged, throughout our critique, to examine other volumes than that before us. To proceed then, Schütz conjectures that ten, or more verses have disappeared either after this verse, or after v. 806, (ed. Sch.) Herman, Vossius, Porson, and Butler, are alĺ of opinion that there is an hiatus; and surely in a volume which was intended as a text-book in the universities and chief schools, if truth cannot be altogether elicited, the hest opinions of annotators should be consulted and reported, from which there may at least be an approximation to probability.

V. 818. Kions. Stanley and Pauw left a spondee in the fourth foot, by admitting Exubins. Herman conjectures Σινδίκης.

V. 875. yevinμarw. We prefer Scaliger's conjecture of bynatur, in which Valckenaer coincides: it is indeed only a conjecture, but it is preferable to some other obtrusions on the text by Mr. Blomfield. Hesychius explains ΘΙΓΗΜΑΤΩΝ. μιασμάτων, εκ της επαφήσεως say both the arguments.

·880.

ὁι δ' επλοημενοι φρενας κιρκοι πελειών ου μακραν λελειμένοι, CRIT. REV. Vol. 1, January, 1812.

D