Imágenes de páginas

bi teneta decimam ut oppor

tions in the Inscriptiones Atticæ of Corsini. The Athenian citizens, when they had finished their 18th year, were enrolled under the general name of Ephebi; who again were divided into the Adscripcitii in their 'Igch year, and the Ephebi in their 2oth. Vehemens certe suspicio mihi suboritur Adscriptitios ipfos, Epheborum inftar, in Athenienfium civium numero habendos effe : nec alio prorsus discrimine, Ephebos ab Adscriptiis distingui polle, quam quod illi, secundum inter Ephebos annum agebant; hi vero, inter Ephebos nuper relati, primum, in hoc' militiæ genere, annum agerent. Etenim, ut opportunius alibi demonftravi, ii, qui o&avum decimum annum ætatis impleverunt, Ephebis inscribi tenebantur, donec vicefimum ætatis annum egresli in militum albo recenserentur. After reasoning upon this subject very ably, he thus concludes: Ephebi nomine in nostro Marmore, aliisque pluribus, cives illos indicatos existimo, qui fecundum hujus militiæ annum agerent; Adlectos vero, vel Adseriptitios vocari censeo, qui nuper ejus Archontis anno labente Ephebis aliis adjecti, recensque ad scripti forent; proximoque demum anno nobiliori Epheborum nomine appellandi, adjectaque tribuum serie recensendi fuerant, p. 14. and 15.

P. 181. I. 1. pupíwv oixiūv.] Dr. E. tells us, that the number of Athenians was 20,000, and refers us to Demofth. adv. Aril. togit. and the Velpæ of Aristoph. I. 705. Before the Perfic war, it was 30,000, tefte Herodoto, lib. s. The information given by this note is trifling. They who would understand the subject more fully, Tould consult Meursius de Fortuna Athen. cap. 4. Hume's Essay on the Populousness of ancient Nations, p. 458, &c. and above all, Wallis on the Numbers of Mankind, p. 54.

P. 191. 1. 1. Dr. Edwards would lop off the conclusion of the eighth chapter, from ypxqxi to pociév&o-pæcedentibus enim,' says he, non cohærent.' The transition, we confels, has not the usual perfpicuity of Xenophon; but as the passage is quoted by Stobæus, and found in all the Manuscripts, we cannot venture on the desperate measure proposed by our Editor. From ypapai to nepéxzou might be (pared; but we cannot part with the opinion of Socrates, on the best fire of temples.

Ρ. 192. 1. 12. τα μεν καλά τε και αγαθα γιγνώσκονlα χρηθαι aulõis. ] The iwo last words Dr. E. ihinks, • sensum perturbant;' which, if they be rejeéted, becomes role meridiano clarior. “ Omnes virtutes in scienria posicas esse asseruit Socrates ;” repugnante quidem Aristotele, apud quem vircus moralis iv guwisis área på Eos.' This reasoning is specious, but not decilive, or well-placed; for Socrates, as Ernestus observes, does not enquire, in what virtue, abstractedly considered, may confift, but describes a virtuous man. Xpñlzi 'uTois, as opposed 10 TON TÄ cicxpci &idOTX &una Beefai, is good sense; and as to the construcsion, Xprobar obviously and properly depends on ürte understood. Rev. Dec, 1786.


P. 107.

[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

P. 197. 1. ult. Ta X107 äv ä moné .) Dr. E. proposes to read ' ue x670.- opponitur enim, tu ws É TUXE,' Surely, certain and immediaie deftruction is sufficienily opposed.

P. 211. 1.9. for approprias in the middle voice, he would read Dr. E. does not tell us, that tpoopépon is the old reading, which S:ephens changed into pos pépilas, and which Zeunius has replaced in the text of his very correct edition. We take this opportunity of saying, that we do not approve of the censorious and contemptuous fpirit, with which the Durch Reviewer treats the criticisms of Zeunius upon the Memorabilia of Xenophon. Sie Part 6. p. 116. In his Examination of the Cya ropædia and the Opufcula Politica, Equestria, et Venetica, published by the same editor, he has thewn more juítice and candour. Vid. Part 5. p. 128. and 130.

P. 212. 1. 6. Triv vintage ] Dr. E. contents himself with quote ing a well-known line from the second Idyllion of Theocritus. He would have obliged his readers more effeštualiy, by supporting or confusing the very learned and judicious note of Erneflus; who confirms the interpretasion of Suidas, where the ing & is said to be put for the shombus used in incaniations, with the bowels, probably, of this bird fakened to it, and rolled round with it.

P. 218.1. 6. Oxy MENOS,] Dr. Edwards would read axcéuevos, in which he follows, but without acknowledgment, Leunclaviusa We follow Stephens, and many other respectable critics, in lupposing oxueros to be the name of a celebrated physician.

P.224. 1. 10. To {wwxãoet zo.] Hoc verbum, quod iis qui bene et frugaliter veícuntur, tribuit Socrates, Div. Petrus, 2 Epift. j. 12. ad epuiones voluptuarios tradux.r.' Sr. Peter used the word in a general and lax lense; Socrates in a more limited lignification, accommodated to bis own derivation, which we will confirm by quoting at length a passage from Athenæus, which is partially cited by Zeunius, Tas de ľuwxías énárovy 3% OTÒ ti's οχης, ή εςι τροφή, αλλ' από τα καλά ταυτα εύ έχειν, εις ας δν συνίοντες, οι το θειον τιμωντες, και εις ευφροσύνην και άνεσιν αυτους prelievles, TCU LEV TTO TOU HÉTV, TOV SE TOTO dupa odmevov grov, NisQuuvõrov yog warov, xj Ercov, vy oniov a poong opevov. p. 363. Arif. tophanes, in the Lifirate, applies the word to the temperate meals of the Lacedemonians

όπως αν οι Λάκωνες ένδοθεν . xaf'rouxia url wou euwx nuévol. I. 1225. But in the Depe, he uses it in the lax and general sense of feafting

ώσπερ καχρύων ονιδιον ευωχημένον. 1297, And in the Plutus, Bleptidemus says,

Díaw TROUT EVV ευωχείθαι μεία των παιδων TÍS TE Z UVOIXos. 1. 604.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

· We would observe by the way, that realuw is used by St. John,

. 10. for those who drink freely, though not to any great degree of intoxication ; and thus Lucian, when he would express exceffive drunkenness, adds [I oporvcs to discuros, as if the latter word were not einphatical enough. See vol. i. p. 171. Ed. Reitz.

P. 226. I. 8. j to rev.) Kato Tò peep Go in prioribus libris dictum est; in hoc dicitur XQ TOC TO Özov, univerfim, i. 2. in gemeri. Hinc mihi videtur, quod

Imus Liher continet officium hominis erga numen et seipsum.
II dus Erga familiares, Scil. piplov tå oina.
IIItius--Erga Cives : popior tñs Wonews.

IV tus Liber erga omnes univerfim-leu omnium hominis of. ficiorum repetitionem fummariam.' E.

P. 235. i. ult. xj xxl tau Boordixeń.] Ita et Div. Jacobus Epiß. 11. 8. 'vóue or TENGITE B2012xcv. E. There is a similar image in Varro de lingua Latina. Quartus (explicandi gradus) ubi est aditus et initia regis. Lib. 4. p 7. edit. Scal. B20111xóv TI 70 x 22a iivx. Xen. Symp. cap 1. But on the word vopeous (for so we should read) joined with Baco 25, T6265. Vid. Arift. Rhet. cap. 2. lib. 3. with a lensible nore in the Oxford edition · P. 236. 1. 6. Tov oix cessiv poriv éppol, GTER TWY TEXTÓvwv.] Eoliv xv xpyou ao fpw TX, %. T.A. 'Opus igitur hominis eft functio muneris animi rationi consentanea, aut certe ratione non carens. Arisl. Eth. N. lib. 1.6.7.' The most curious interpretation we have seen of the word Beyou is in a note of Perizonius on Sanctius, de Vocibus Homonymis. . Perizonius there she ws, that in Greek is often emphatically denotes quotidianum alicujus hominis opus.' This criticism, though not immediately applicable to the paflige in Xenophon, deferves to be pointed out and recommended to the learned reader. On the rhetorical sense of épp acích, fee Capperon : Quintilian, p. 239.

P. 244. 1. 10. xj OITE </20101 ) Mea quidem sententia ós fy0108 denotant επιτυχάνονται, et contrariantur τοις απολυγχάνεσι in hac ipfà periodo. Legendum forsan xj s pešu éj10.---Onde dubosus xóvoutes. Oi Honot fæpe apud noftrum, videntur elle nobiles,' viri dignitate, virtute, et prudentiâ clari. Xen. Hellenic. ii. 3. Do Republ. Athen. 1. 6.' This note, we suspect, was fuggefied by the following observation of Zeunius. Sed 04.0166, apud nota trum omnino dicuntur, qui funt ejufdem conditionis dignitatis, muneris. Conf. Ind. Cyrop. et Opufc. politic! Thus in the book De Republ. Laced. 6oC1 QV CugXNUCO WTI TW opciw. But the interpretation is not original even in Zeunius. We therefore shall illustrate and confirm it by two quotations from the Exercitationes Jacobi Palmerii. The first occurs in his observations on the 4th book of Xenophon's Hellenica, Steph. edit. 289. Outos de que xj το ειδα νεανίσκο και την ψυχην έυρωστο, και μέν τοι των ομοιων. - Ff 2


De Republn is not origi' it by twoce

To duoiwv videtur hic fumi in raro significatu, nimium, pro nos bili et aliis nobilibus Spartiacis æquo vel pari. Ea vox, ut puto, fuit Laconibus peculiaris, certe alibi (credo) non occurrit in eo agnificatu, saltem non meinini me legifle. Sic inter Gallos, ordo quidam sublimioris dignitatis dicuntur les pairs, pares, ouõios, ea tamen voce in eo fignificatu videtur uti Demofth. contra Leptinem. The second occurs in his criticisms on this speech of Demosthenes contra Leptinem, edit. Pr. p. 323. Poft 375. MET TWv oposwv.-Motot apud Lacedæmonios aliud fignifcabat, quam apud alios Græcos. Sic enim vocabunt nobiles suos, ex quibus Senatus, si gepxola, constituebatur. We say in English, the Peers.

P. 245. 1. 3. xxi a toma ópteros.] • Post verba adótor xataγέλασοι, et καταφρονόμενοι, frigidum eft ατιμαζόμενοι et curiola Xenophontis felicitate prorsus indignum. Insignem aliquam depravationem, quam nemo criticorum, quantum scio, suspicatus eft, huic verbo subesse nullus dubito; et felici conje&turâ usus, textum in genuinam puritatem reftituere posse confido. He then ascribes the common reading to the ignorance of the Librarians, and, with great probability, would substitute átouuevos. In fupport of this reading, he quotes the following words from Taylor's Notes on the speech of Demofthenes, Tepi tapan perberes. “ 'Atinaw ad privatam infamiam, ad contumeliam fignificandum eafque ignominias, quæ homini ab homine, non a lege, ine Aiguntur. 'Arijów elt vox ritualis et tota forenfis.” In addition to the criticism of Taylor, which is supported by numerous authorities from the prose writers, we would remind our Readers, that the same exaélness is observed by the Alric poets.

Τους φέυγονίας καζαπαθωνίας και τυπ7ομένους επίτηδες
'Egnaces á top.woas TWTG Arifoph. in Pac. v. 741.

Ұйфо» 30+ ] alıий

Gaules špos guvaixūv. Æschylus in Supp. p. 652. We know a learned friend, who in the 22d line of the Antigone of Sophocles would read ατιμώσας for ατιμάσας.

P. 252. I. 5. štjatev.)'• Obiter hic emendandus locus vexa. tiffimus Div. Petri 2 Epif. i. 20. Pro voce é idúosas quæ vehementer torsit theologos, lege mesursus, et plana fiunt omnia, et fibi maxime congruentia.--The passage in St. Peter is extremely difficult, and we presume not to decide upon the true reading, or the true sense; but we refuse to Dr. E, the merit of originality; for ETTENUTEWS had been proposed by Grotius, by Calvin, by Alexander More, and by Curcellæus. We refer our Readers to a long and elaborate note in the Cura Philologicæ of Wolfius, p. 169. vol. 5. On the word été barv, Valckenaer has some acute and ingenious remarks, in the 464ch page of his Notes on the Phæniffa.

P. 263. 1. 2. ίππον και βεν τω βελομενα δικαίος ποιήσαθαι.] 'Aixżics dicitur vel do re vel de perfona, quæ muneri suo par eft.


Ita Lucianus, de Hift. confcrib. § 39. Xenophontem vocat dixãoor ougfedpex, i. c. idoneum et historiæ conscribendæ parem auctorem. Ad eam normam scriptum reperimus apud Longinum, $ 44. mare doua Iris õivas dehér ces dixcres is videmur a pueritia imbuti esse jufta vel absolutâ fervitute.” Latini multa cum liberalitate, voce, juftus, ad eam rem utuntur: ut volumen, prælium, exercitus dicuntur, justi. Quicquid scil. functionem suam recipit ; quicquid fuo muneri refpondet, et omnibus numeris est absolutum ; id apud eos scriptores justum dicitur.' We confirm Dr. Edwards's criticism by juftum poema' in the 4th Sat. of Horace, lib. 1.

P. 290. 1. 12. Autíxe.] Exempli gratia, Vide Xen. Cyropæd. lib. v. p. 319. Ed. Hutch. de Republ. Laced. cap. 1. $ 3. The Leipfic editor had translated this word primum, and then substituted exempli gratiâ ; which explanation he also affixed to the word in the Oeconomics of Xenophon, publidhed in 1782. Vid. cap. 19. p. 121. Dr. E. perhaps had seen one or both of these explanaa tions. He acknowledges neither!

P. 293. 1. 3. éxzsvos gap aéywv, &c.] 'Hæc omnia usque ad sectionis finem, cujusdam Scioli efe additamenta puto. Uncis ea inclusi, prorsus rejicere non ausus.' We applaud Dr. E.'s sagacity in suspecting the genuineness of these ten lines, and we approve of his diffidence in not excluding them from the text.

P. 296. 1. 3. Annua.]' • Omnia Athenienfium fefta neutro genere efferuntur, absque ulla exceptione, nisi me fallat memoria.' This perhaps is not entirely true. We have selected the following names of feasts from Meurfius in his Græcia Feriata, Garanlès-Gopezoui - dwdexárn - ebdóun — Pedro's - these were Athenian feaits.' Those of other nations were generally in the neuter ; but there are exceptions-darais, a feast among the Argives-maris, among the Milesians-X16 Cotópos, among the Phlia afians-Xapuarlis, and diancolízwois, among the Lacedæmonians.

From the notes which we have produced, our Readers, pro. bably, may be inclined to agree with us, in considering Dr. E. as a good scholar, rather than as a sagacious crisic. His erudition, certainly, was not very extensive, nor very deep; and for many of his observations he is indebted to his friend Dr. Taylor. He seems, indeed, ambitious of acknowledging his obligations to the illustrious editor of Demofthenes; and we with that he had been equally attentive in mentioning some other sources, from which his criticisms are evidently derived. We cannot follow him in his favourite opinion, that the Memorabilia of Xenophon contain a complete and regular system of ethics; but we readily allow his taste and judgment in the explanation of some particular parts. As to the Ityle of his Notes, we think it neither remarkably elegant, nor uniformly correct; but we are happy in finding is not deformed by any affectation of uncouth and unusual phraseology: we are yet more happy, in being aile to in


[ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinuar »