Imágenes de páginas

In following Lachmann then I am sure that I have authority on my side; I believe that I have reason as well. In those cases indeed to which I have already alluded, where the universal testimony of inscriptions and of MSS. beyond a certain age prove that there is only one right way and about which the best scholars are all now agreed, there cannot be any doubt what course should be taken: we must write querella loquella luella sollers sollemnis sollicito Iuppiter littera quattuor stuppa lammina bracchium; on the other hand, milia conecto conexus coniti conixus coniveo conubium belua baca sucus litus and the like; condicio solacium, setius artus (adj.) autumnus suboles: in many of them an important principle is involved: obeying the almost unanimous testimony of our own and other good MSS., we cannot but give

direct or indirect. Thus the question was not foreclosed; nor were we left to vague generalities, but a firm historical groundwork was gained upon which future improvements might be built, If betterevidence hereafter offered itself. Lachmann then in this, as in so many other departments of philology, seems at once to have produced conviction in the minds of the majority of the most thoughtful scholars, in Germany I mean; for in our own country most seem to scout the question, as unworthy of serious attention: a great mistake; for Latin orthography is a most interesting and valuable study to those who care to examine it, and touches in a thousand points the history grammar and pronunciation of the language. Let me give two examples of the effect at once produced by Lachmann. Otto Jahn, in 1843, published his elaborate edition of Persius, in whichumerus umor and the like; also hiemps. I have he adopted throughout the spelling then in com- heard it asked, What then is the genitive of hiemps: mon use, though he had so many excellent MSS. to which the best reply perhaps would be what is to guide him to a better course: in 1851, the year the perfect of sumo or supine of emo. The Latins after Lachmann's work came out, he published wrote hiemps, as they wrote emptum sumpsi sumpthe text of his Juvenal and followed in it most tum and a hundred such forms, because they disminutely the principles of Lachmann; and fortu- liked m and s or t to come together without the nately he had a most excellent authority in the intervention of ap sound; and our MSS. all attest codex Pithoeanus; so that the spelling is probably this: tempto likewise is the only true form, which not very far removed from the author's own. In the Italians in the 15th century replaced by tento. the years just preceding Lachmann, Halm pub- Then MSS. and inscriptions prove that d took an lished several orations of Cicero with elaboraten before it, tandem quendam eundem and the like, critical Latin notes; and yet, though his spelling was somewhat better than that of Jahn's Persius, it is still essentially "conventional" and arbitrary: in the years following Lachmann he published a series of school editions of Cicero's orations, with brief German notes, and yet in these the spelling was wholly modelled on the system pursued by Lachmann. The same system too he has carried out in those volumes of the elaborate edition of Cicero edited by him and Baiter, which came out after Lachmann's Lucretius. Stimulated by the examples of Madvig Ritschl and Lachmann, the rising generation of German scholars has pursued the critical study of Latin with eminent success; and nearly all of them follow in orthography the guidance of Lachmann. This system then may fairly, I think, be now regarded as the true "conventional" system; for surely the school of Lachmann and Ritschl in the nineteenth century has a better right to dictate to us in the present day what shall be accepted as "conventional" than the Poggios and Vallas of the fifteenth. Ribbeck in his Virgil shews himself a most devoted pupil of Lachmann, and generally he takes the same direction; though some defect of taste and judgment makes him not unfrequently misuse his glorious opportunities and push the matter to the verge of caricature.

with the sole exception of circumdo, in which the MSS. both of Lucr. and Virgil always retain the m : and generally, though not invariably, m on the other hand remained before q: quemquam tamquam and so on. Then always quicque quicquam quicquid (indef.), but generally quidquid (relative); always peremo interemo &c., &c. Above all we must scout such barbarisms as coelum moestus sylva caetera nequicquam. In these points Wagner is as good a guide as Lachmann; but in regard to the cases in which ancient usage varied, shall we follow the former, who deserts the paths for preconceived general rules, or Lachmann, who here also is content to obey the best evidence he can get? I have unhesitatingly come over to the views of the latter: "hypotheses non fingo" should be the rule in this as in other matters. As said above, all these uncertain spellings fall under a very few general heads. One of these is the assimilation or non-assimilation of prepositions: inpero represents the etymology, impero the pronunciation of the word. From the most ancient period of which we have any record, centuries before Cicero or Lucretius, a compromise was made between these opposing interests: words in common use soon began to change the consonant, those in less common use retained it longer.


In the new "corpus inscriptionum Latinarum," the most recent of which are as old as the age of Lucretius, most of them much older, imperator occurs twenty-six times, and is always spelt with m, proving that in a word, which must daily have been in everybody's mouth, etymology in remote times yielded as was natural to sound: imperium again occurs three, inperium six times, being doubtless in somewhat less common use. Now in Lucretius imperium impero or imperito occurs six times, and the MSS. always spell it with m, and so Lucretius spelt it I have no doubt: indeed many of these common words the silver age I believe more frequently wrote with n, than did that of Cicero. Then Virgil uses imperium forty times; and Ribbeck's capital MSS. have m in every instance, except M which twice has inp., though one even of these two cases is doubtful for Æn. viii. 381, Fogginius prints imperiis. Yet in defiance of all this evidence Wagner gives us inperium, surely without reason on any view of the case; for the foundation on which we must build is thus withdrawn from under our feet. To take another common instance, commuto occurs nine times in the corpus inscr. and always with m; twelve times in Lucretius, and always with m. Other words are more uncertain: we find in the MSS. impius and inpius, immortalis and inmortalis, conligere and colligere, compleo and conpleo; and so with other prepositions ab, ob, sub, ad; all tending to prove that usage was in most words uncertain Again we have exsto exto, exsolvo, exulto expiro expecto cet., s being generally omitted; and this agrees with Quintilian, i. 74, who implies that it was a learned affectation of some to write exspecto in order to distinguish ex and specto from ex and pecto; it agrees too with all other good evidence: the MSS. of Virgil furnish precisely the same testimony as those of Lucretius; yet Wagner in all such cases writes exs; surely we should keep ex where the MSS. keep it, exs where they have exs; and so with supter or subter, supilis or subtilis. ab- or ap-, ob- or op-, sub- or sup-, succ- or susc and the like: we find haud and haut, and sometimes aliut aliquit quicquit, and the like, sound and etymology carrying on an undecided battle in the MSS. of Lucretius, as in inscriptions and elsewhere adque is sometimes but rarely found, sound having here as might be expected gained the victory: Wagner cannot be right in always forcing adque on Virgil. Lucretius seems to have recognised only sed; he once has elabsa, and once praescribta: see notes 2 to vi. 92. In such forms sound must have at an early period prevailed, and b d g gave way to p t c before s and t: lapsus for labsus is the same principle as rex (recs)

rexi (recs) written sometimes recxi, rectum from rego: to judge from the best MSS., labsus and the like became again much more common in the silver age.

Another question involving a multitude of details is the use of is or -es in the accus. plur. of participles and adjectives and substantives whose gen. plur. ends in ium, as well as of some other classes, doloris or dolores, maioris or maiores: here too Wagner involves himself in inextricable perplexities by his eclectic system, when his MSS. were admirable guides, had he chosen to follow them. The MSS. of Lucretius are no less admirable and probably represent very fairly the author's own usage: they offer is five times out of six; and -es is somewhat more common in substantives in very general use, as ignes vires aures. Inscriptions quite bear out our MSS.; and the sole relic of Latin yet disinterred from Herculaneum contains this v. Utraque sollemnis iterum revocaverat orbes. Pertz recently printed in the Berlin transactions the few remaining leaves of a MS. of Virgil, which he assigns to the age of Augustus, and which may really be of the second or third century: we there find the acc. plur. of adjectives and participles ending eighteen times in -is, three times in -es, pares felices amantes; of substantives we find sonoris, but four times vires, and artes messes crates classes aves, quite bearing out the testimony of our A and B. Varro de ling. Lat. VIII. 67, says quid potest similius esse quam gens mens dens? quom horum casus patricus et accusativus in multitudine sint disparilis; nam a primo fit gentium et gentis, utrobique ut sit i; ab secundo mentium et mentes, ut in priore solo sit i; ab tertio dentum et dentes, ut in neutro sit i; well our MSS. six times have the acc. gentis, never gentes ; dentes four times, never dentis; mentes five times, once only, II. 620, mentis. As for the nomin. plur. of such words, Varro 1. 1. 66, says sine reprehensione vulgo alii dicunt in singulari hac ovi et avi, alii hac ove et ave, in multitudinis hae puppis restis et hae puppes restes: the fragment of Virgil just cited has the nomin. plur. putris and messis, though we saw it had messes in the accus.: in accordance then with these high authorities the MSS. of Lucr. not unfrequently retain this nomin. in -is, which it would be monstrous to extirpate: I have always therefore kept it. We see from the corpus inscr. that -eis -is -es were all in use: it is probable that Lucr. occasionally employed the termination -eis intermediate in sound between -es and is; but, if so, his manuscripts have left few or no traces, and it would be most perverse to follow Avancius Wakefield and others | in thrusting it into his verses in season and out of

season. His MSS. have however left not a few traces expressed or implied of the ending -ei: see n. to iii 97 oculei: these traces have of course been carefully preserved.

On another question, comprehending a multitude of particular instances, I have followed Lachmann and our MSS., which here too are on the whole excellent guides: I speak of the vowel or consonant u followed by another u. The old Latins appear to have been unable to pronounce uu; and therefore the ancient o long kept its place after u; or for qu c or q was used: quom qum or cum, never quum; linquont linqunt or lincunt, sequontur, sequntur or secuntur, equos (nom.) equs or ecus; volgus divos divom aevom, and so on. They appear to have begun soonest to tolerate un in terminations, when both were vowels, suus tuus and the like. Now the MSS. of Lucretius have retained in very many instances divom volnus volgo vivont cet.; equos (nom.) and ecus ecum, accum; relinquont relinqunt or relincunt oftener than relinquunt, so sequontur secuntur secutus locuntur locutus; but with Lachmann I retain the uu, when the MSS. offer it, in order not to get lost on a sea of conjectural uncertainty like Wagner and some others. The MSS. of Lucretius are also very pertinacious in retaining the genuine old forms reicit eicit or eiecit cet. and never offering reiicit eiicit and the like: Grai Grais, not Graii Graiis. But further details on the most interesting points of the ancient orthography will be found in various parts of our notes. Again, in those many cases where the sound was intermediate between u and i, and the spelling

therefore uncertain, such as the termination of participles and words like lubet or libet, dissipat or dissupat, quadrupes or quadripes and many others, I have of course submitted to the guidance of our MSS. as well as in the adoption of e or o in vertere or vortere and the like e is naturally the more common, yet vorti vorsum divorsi vortitur convortere vortex are all found. The MSS. too I have always followed in reading reddunda gignundis dicundum cernundi faciundum agundis cet. or the more usual agendum quaerendum cet. Do I then claim in all these doubtful cases to reproduce the spelling of Lucretius or his first editor? Certainly not; but in most of these cases Lucretius and his contemporaries undoubtedly allowed themselves much latitude; and I have not intentionally permitted anything to remain which might not have been found in one or other MS. before the death of Virgil. By adhering tenaciously to the MSS. where not demonstrably wrong, one gains a firm resting-place from which to make further advances, if better evidence offer itself. However that may be, I cannot bring myself to accept the arbitrary and eclectic system of a Wagner, much less the hideous barbarisms of a Wakefield; nor on the other hand, after feasting on the generous cereals of a Lachmann and a Ritschl can I stomach the "conventional" husks and acorns of the Italians of the 15th century. At the same time it will be seen that my spelling differs less from this system, than does that of Wagner in his standard text of 1841, or even his subsequent modification of that text for common use which Prof. Conington has adopted in his Virgil.


E will unquestionably do good service in the cause of education who will set forth the body in its proper light, and shew the important part which it plays in the animal economy. Not a few of the pernicious errors that prevail in the present day on the subject of education are to be traced to mistaken ideas which are entertained regarding the nature of the body. The time is now probably gone by when the body and mind of man were viewed as two antagonistic principles, whose interests were diametrically opposed the one to the other, and when he was considered to be doing the greatest service to his mental nature who was most directly sinning against his physical constitution. Still, however, they are

but too often regarded as separate and distinct in their nature and interests, the one having ascribed to it whatever is low, and grovelling, and vicious, while the other is credited with all that is true, and pure, and holy. In education, the one is considered as demanding and worthy of our highest care and attention, the other, it is believed, may be left to nature or chance, or if any attention be bestowed upon it, it is to be directed mainly to checking and curbing its native energies. And yet with all our efforts at educating man's higher nature, we cease not to regard it as mysterious and incomprehensible in its character, subject to laws, and directed by influences, of which we can form no conception, and to which we are but too ready to ascribe the errors and defects that arise

from our own ignorance and carelessness. People talk a great deal about the depravity of human nature, but human nature, if we may be allowed the expression, is not half so depraved as men make it by their own neglect and folly. "The depravity of human nature," says a distinguished divine," may be too easily assumed to be incorrigible by those who do not look for its causes in the deficiency of moral education."

Man is a compound being, having a body material and corruptible, and a soul immaterial and incorruptible; the one subject to the laws of matter, the other endowed with the properties of spirit. To the educator, to him that sets himself to the development of the human powers and faculties, it is of importance to know what position each of these occupies in the animal economy, when he is dealing with the one or with the other, or whether either of them is ever to be met with by itself apart from the other. In body, has he anything but matter; in mind, anything but spirit? In the one, does he ever meet with matter alone; in the other, with spirit by itself? The body is that part of man's nature that brings him into connection with the material world. It is by means of the senses that the mind or spirit of man obtains its knowledge of the material universe. It sees, hears, tastes, &c., only what and so far as the senses give it the power of seeing, hearing, tasting, &c. Wherever we find a human being that has never possessed one or more of these senses, we find his mind to be entirely destitute of all those classes of ideas that are connected therewith; and if we could suppose one who has never had any avenue of communication opened up between his mind and the external world, the mind of such a person must of necessity be a perfect blank. Hence our very ideas are at first only material. The mind must begin with the concrete before it rises to the abstract; it must first have the individual before it can reach the general. In other words, it must ever have the material before it can attain the spiritual. Our ideas of hardness, softness, colour, motion, beauty, virtue, &c., are first of all awakened by the contemplation of particular objects and instances. "The child has not formed to itself a refined idea of moral good, but contemplating a given action, it proclaims it to be good or evil." (M'Cosh's "Intuitions of the Human Mind.")

But not only are the earliest materials upon which the mind acts material, supplied to it through the senses, but it also acts upon them through a material organ, the brain. This is evident from a variety of considerations. A certain

[ocr errors]

correspondence is ever found to exist between the character of the mind and the state of the brain. They grow together, and decay together; whatever affects the one exerts an influence upon the other. The mind is weak in childhood, strong in mature years, and decays with the decline of life; a certain amount of brain is necessary to sound mental action; whatever directly affects the brain, as a blow, pressure, &c., manifestly affects the mind, to the extent sometimes of producing unconsciousness or insanity; whatever affects the body, and consequently the brain, by way of elevating or depressing its natural powers, exercises a corresponding effect upon the mental powers. "I have examined, after death," says an eminent surgeon, the heads of many insane persons, and have hardly seen a single brain which did not exhibit obvious marks of disease; in recent cases, loaded vessels, increased serous secretions; in all instances of longer duration, unequivocal signs of present or past increased action; blood vessels apparently more numerous, membranes more thickened and opaque, depositions of coagulable lymph, forming adhesions or adventitious membranes, watery effusions, even abscesses; add to this that the insane often become paralytic, or are suddenly cut off by apoplexy." If the authority of a metaphysician is required, “The mind,” says J. D. Morell, "we know by experience depends for the manifestation of all its activities upon a material organism. Consciousness, moreover, reveals to us the fact, that our mental phenomena keep pace in every stage of their growth with the material counterpart, the one becoming more mature as the other becomes more perfect " (Elements of Psychology).*

Farther, we learn from physiology, that every thought that passes through the mind causes the destruction of a certain portion of the nerve matter of the brain; that human thought, like fire, cannot subsist without fuel, and, like fire too, only exists by the destruction of that from which it derives its subsistence. Even more than this, some physiologists, among whom is Dr Carpenter,

"The mind,' says Descartes, is so intimately dependent upon the condition and relation of the organs of the body, that if any means can ever be found to render men wiser and more ingenious than hitherto, I believe it is in medicine (or an improved condition of body) they must be sought. As bearing sensible men, who are carried away with particular theories,

upon this point, and also as shewing the ridiculous errors that

and yet cannot shut their eyes to facts, sometimes fall into in their attempts to reconcile the two.' Satan does take advantage

from the ill humours and diseases which are in the bodies of men, greatly to molest their spirits; and when bodily diseases are removed by the use of natural means, the matter upon

which the evil spirit was wont to operate being gone, he does no more disturb and disquiet the minds of men as before he did!"-Dr Increase Mather's "Special Providences.”

are of opinion "that some change must be effected a material being at the mercy of a spirit moving in the nervous centres by every impression of about in another sphere of intelligence, and which we become conscious, whereby that im- directed and guided by laws and influences which pression is organically perpetrated in such a he could neither control nor comprehend, has, as manner as to allow of its presenting itself anew it were, sheathed this spirit in a material covering, to the cognizance of the mind at any future in order that all its movements may be observed time" (Human Physiology). And who can say and reckoned upon. To an intelligent being for certain that it is not so? Who can tell what whose welfare is committed to himself it is of the even the minutest particle of matter may not con- utmost importance that the laws and operations tain? We will hear him who shall analyse the of nature are regular and determined, otherwise brain of one of those minute animals, of which his every provision might be thwarted, his every multitudes exist in a drop of water, and shall give purpose deranged. It is ever the material side of us the exact proportions of albuminous matter, our nature that is towards us, for this only can we and fat, and phosphorous contained therein. The comprehend. Indeed, we question if there be any humiliating fact is, that of the essential elements element in nature of which we are cognizant that or properties of matter, we are about as ignorant is not material, or known to us only from its conas we are of spirit.* nection with matter.

As regards the nature of spirit in itself, and apart from matter, we know nothing directly. We can only speak of it negatively, as being in its nature and properties entirely distinct from those of matter. Matter is changeable, spirit is unchangeable; matter is divisible, is destructible, spirit is indivisible, indestructible; matter is limited as to time and space, spirit is unlimited as to either; matter is subject to law and order, spirit, as belonging to another sphere of intelligence, is not amenable to any laws, or subject to any influences known to us. The soul or spirit of man cannot by itself take cognizance of or acquire a knowledge of the properties of matter, at least in any sense that we know of. Without eyes to see, ears to hear, and the other senses, by means of which we acquire a knowledge of the nature and conditions of matter, pure spirit cannot, at least in the same way as we do, perceive material objects. Nor can it be subject to those material laws and influences to which our bodies are subjected. Not only so, but, as already shewn, our very thoughts, feelings, and emotions are dependent upon our physical constitution for their existence.†

The natural conclusion from all this is, that the immaterial is enveloped in every direction by the material; that the Deity, in place of leaving man * "The constitution of the elements in the material world is inscrutable; the gravitating force, and the principles of chemical affinity, and the nature of light, and the principle of vegetative life, these things are utterly inscrutable; so also is the principle of animal life; and so in like manner, but not more so is mind."-Taylor's " World of Mind."

"Die Seele ist ein einfaches Wesen; nichts blosz ohne Theile sondern auch ohne irgend eine Vielheit in ihrer Quaität." "Sie hat ursprünglich weder Gefühle noch Begierden; sie weisz nichts von sich selbst und nichts von andern Dingen; es liegen auch in ihr keine Formen des Anschauens und Denkens keine Gesetze des Wollens und Handelns; auch keinerlei wie immer entfernte Vorbereitungen zu dem allen."-Herbart Psychologie."

Lehrbuch zur "

If we may seem to set too high a value upon the material side of our nature, we might refer to various passages of Scripture where the like doctrines are taught, and where we are admonished not to sin against our bodies, which are temples for God's Holy Spirit to dwell in. Such a high value does the Scripture set upon these bodies of ours, that one of the most distinctly taught doctrines of the New Testament is, that they will be again raised up at the last day, and endure throughout eternity. They will indeed be perfect and free from infirmities, but they will be the same bodies that we possess now, and they will bear about with them the impressions received in this present state of existence. This is very clearly expressed by Dr Candlish in his "Life in a Risen Saviour." "I am apt," says he, "to feel as if with reference to this or that small instance of sloth or of self-indulgence, it cannot really matter much how I act. It is but an affair of the body after all." "My spiritual walk with God in Christ is safe. Oh, my friends, beware of the first approach of this most subtle and insidious temptation, and that you may beware of it, hold fast your faith in the doctrine of the resurrection." "Then (in that future life) you live again in the body; in the very body, as to all essential properties, and to all practical intents and purposes, in which you live now." "Let me never at any time, in any circumstances, lose sight of this solemn thought, that the deed which I am now doing in the body, the thought I am thinking now, the word I am speaking now, the work I am working now in the body must follow me. I may perhaps lay it down at death, but I must take it up at the resurrection. This deed of mine must follow me into that future and eternal life." "I am to live not a ghost, a spectre, a spirit, I am to live then as I live now, in the body."

« AnteriorContinuar »