صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

Ego aliud prorsus hic voluiffe Poetam existimo, et pro, an! fuwe onWV, Et'éuwe ótaw reponendum, ut sensus sit, non vi manyum arma mea alata occupans, sed, &c. ic XW EV OTTAWY est ETO Xuv óthwv, armis manus injiciens. Ita Ed. Colon. v. 903. ETIOXES aulou Eeve, in eum manus injice, O Horpes. Cum ισχων autem fubaudiri debet εκράτησε μου, vel ώλεσε με, quod ex altero quidem sententiæ membro repetendum erit. Ut constructio enim integra sit, scribi illic oportuit pro ÚTEDY, ÚTroduulos-expalno a p.cu, sed Poeta orationem deflexit, et ea quæ pofteriori fententiæ membro necessaria erant posuisse contentus, quæ ad prius membrum accommodari debebant, subaudienda reliquit. Ponenda autem est commatis nota poft ολουμαι in v. II 34. Periodi nota poft προσφερων ad finem V, 1136, et commatis denique, non Coli nota poft soxwv in v. 1139. Ibid. 1199, &c.

Παλιν παλιν παλαιον • • Αλγημ υπήμνασας με * '. . Ω λωσε των πριν εντοπων.

Thus we conftrue the above verses, agreeably to Dr. Heath.

Iterum, iteruin veterem injuriam in memoriam revocafti, o optime, ab iis mihi factum qui huc olim appulerunt. That is, by the Greeks, and particularly Agamemnon, Menelaus, and Ulyfies. But, in v. 1200, the word we should be oniitted, which is not in the edition of Alduz.

We have now arrived with our Commentator at the end af his annotations on Sophocles; and we own that, without either weariness or disgust, we are ready to travel with him through the far more extensive field of Euripides.

This amiable Poet employed his Muse in the noblest province of virtue, to correct the manners and humanize the temper of his fellow citizens. This great work he attempted in conjunction with the divine Socrates ; and Poetry and Philosophy united their powers in accomplishing their original purpose, the establishment of Truth and HARMONY in the Society of Mankind. Euripides possessed not the fire and force of Æschylus, nor the glowing fancy of Sophocies; but he knew better than either of them how to address himself to the heart. He was content to draw his images and sentiments from the simplicity of nature, and thus to present them to the conceptions of his audience. Hence he became the favourite Poet of the people; who, while they

admired admired the towering genius of Sophocles, gave up all their affections to the more tender, more natural Euripides.

In Hecuba, Orestes, and Phenija, Dr. Heath has made use of King's Edition. On the firit of these Plays we find no very important or remarkable Annotations in our Author. We cannot agree with him that Διαδοκος, κακων κακoις, v. 586, should be read Arcoomov XXMOV XXXOIS ; nor do we think the verse, as it stands at present, is either unintelligible or difficult. We must also take the liberty to differ from him in the interpretation of the following lines : Hecub. v. 1056-7-8..

Πα βω; πα πω και τα κελσι,
Τειρα ποδος βασιν 9ηρο, όρεξερου

Tidimiras étı X**px, xał izerosa Barnes and King, by rendering τιθεμενος βασιν επι χειρα figens gressum super manus, or super mani.in, have indeed made strange confusion; but our Commentator, by correcting them, has totally perverted the sense of the passage. Nothing more is necessary than to place to before Brow in the construction, and not before Xespee; i. e. Til eje evos xeopol {Too Bacov. Dreftes, v. 128--9.

Ειδ7: παρ' άκρας ως απεθρισεν τριχας,

Ew cucu radac;' és vv ý munca yum. Upon this passage we have a curious instance of the strenua Inertia, the laborious and infignificant trifiing of Commentators. Nothing can be more plain or clear than the passage itself. Helena fends her daughter Hermione to sacrifice to manes of Clytemnestra ; her own hair is to make a part of the offering, for which purpose she cuts off as much as is thought sufficient, upon which Electra makes an observation truly female: " See, says she, how carefully she cuts off the very ends of her hair; this is all to save her beauty; she's the fame woman fill.” Such is the literal rendering of the verses above quoted; and could you, Reader, have inagined that they should have given birth to niany grave disquisitions and remarks ? Our Author's Note on this passage is as follows :

“ Victorius, in his Epistle to John Cafam, which is extant among his Epistles, B. lil. p. 59, infifts that by expas Tpixas is not meant the extreme parts of the hair, but that part which joins to the head; and by the words isov a gradas porn, is fignified that so great was the beauty of Helen, that

even

Author birth to , Reader, and

even when this was done, when her hair was cut up by the very roots, a thing which of all others should have spoiled her beauty, it had not suffered in the least. The same Writer, in his various readings, B. XXXII. c. 6. attempts to support and confirm this interpretation by new and specious arguments; though, to own the truth, I am far from being persuaded that his opinion is right. For this interpretation, which explains the words εςιν η παλαι γυνη of the body and not of the mind, seems inconsistent with those philosophical observations on the force of nature, which Ele&tra had been making in the verses immediately preceding. As to the rest, I prefer the reading which the Scholiaft has given us in Æschyl. Agam. v. 545. that is id:ls, not érdéle; and instead of map', which preposition is here unnecessary, I am of Duport's opinion that we should read yap."

Now, good Reader, what do you think? Do you apprehend that this absurd and ridiculous cavilling of Victorius, about a passage which is as clear as the day, should or should not have been brought before us ? O Doctor! happy had it been for us had you remembered that excellent axiom of Hefiod, πλεον ημισυ πανloς, and happy would it be for your future Readers, would you yet attend to it, and reduce your book to one fourth of its present size! It is really not without reason we recommend this to you, for, consider the thing in 4 moral light, how many precious moments may be saved by that means, in the life of man who is born to die ! !

We have certainly in this case a right to complain, for the fwelling and spinning out of useless Comments is an iniquity to be punished by the judges. One fingle Note of Dr. Heath on a pallage in the Phænisfæ, v. 218-222- Were we to transcribe it, would fill five pages of our Review.

With respect to the speech of Medea, in the beginning of the second Act, the opening of which our Author declares to be Interpretationis difficillimæ, et variis variorum Criticorum, Politiani, Vittorii, Mureti, Manutii, Columne, Disputationilus vexatiffinius,—that it has been vexed and puzzled by Critics and Commentators, we can readily believe ; but should never have suspected that there was any difficulty in it, had not Dr. Heath told us fo. From this we take occasion to advise every Reader sufficiently to examine the sense and connection of the text, before he consults any Scholiaft, as he may otherwise be puzzled with difficulties that the text itself would never have suggested to him. If we may be allowed to add one

axiom

axion more to the wisdom of nations, it shall be this, that
Common Senjė is the best Commentator.
Hippol. v. 405-6-7.

Το δ έργον ήδη, την νοσον 7ε δυσκλέα,
Ium TE TT pos Tossa os', iyoyewoxoy xawso. . . .

Moeniece mais Neither Barnes, Markland, Musgrave, nor even our Dace tor, have hit upon the right construction of this passage. It was reserved for the Authors of the Monthly Review to develope that meaning which has lain hid through revolving ages, and to bear away the palm of profound criticism. Here, gentle Reader, is the interpretation; and, with a decent com. placency, we congratulate thee thereupon. " I knew (fays Phædra) that my passion for Hippolytus was an infamous thing; and, particularly, as I was a wife, I was well convinced that it would be deteftable to all.” Barnes, like all his brother Scholiasts, has dreamed over this passage; Markland has blundered, Dr. Heath has been in the dark, but Musgrave has been pleasant : for he has made out from it, by what means we do not know that women are creatures universally hated! Upon which our Doctor has made the following grave remark - " That women are creatures universally hated (says he) which is Musgrave's opinion, I cannot suppose that even Euripides himself would have had the hardiness to affert, though he has sometimes spoken disrespectfully of the Ladies, by which means he has got the surname of Mio-gunes.

Nothing can be more just and pertinent than our Author's observation in this place. It is impossible that Euripides could have so little politeness as to make any such assertion, which has no foundation in truth or nature. Mn dieu ! quelle Idee fauvage! Surely this Dr. Musgrave must have been some antiquated Fellow of a College, in whom every gentle sensation had been long worn out by academic rust! Ibid. 1268–9.

Συ Ιαν θεων ακαμπτον Φρεια

Kco Bj wiwo cyeos. We cannot but observe with some surprize that the learned. Father Brumoy, whose Dissertations on the Greek Theatre have been read and received with universal approbation, has been very unsuccessful in his Interpretation of Euripides. Belide a hundred more passages that have occurred to us, his

it Jam enim to have bore autem fructi

Interpretation of the above verses is false and absurd. aynis axa uplov, he renders reddis immifericordem; whereas nothing can be more clear than that it ihould be ducis inflexibilem, as it is in Barnes, and as Dr. Heath understands it. Alcestis. v. 202.

Παρειμενη δε, χιρος αθλιον βαρος. · Dr. Heath has rightly observed that this verse has not been understood by any of the Interpreters. Barnes has rendered it Jam enim folutæ funt miferæ Vires manuum. Our Commentator seems to have hit upon the right construction ;- thus he translates it, Corpore autem refoluta, miserum scilicet onus manus Admeti. Thus the construction is easier, there being no ellipfis, as χειρος αθλιον βαρος is fubjoined by appofition to traplopeern, and the sense is more natural and obvious. . We have frequently had occasion to mention the peculiar tenderness and pathetic powers of Euripides; we shall therefore lay before our Readers a proof of it in the following passage, quoted from that affecting scene in Alcestis, where, when dying to save her husband, Admetus, according to the decree of the Fates, she is supported by him in her last agonies; and, while the unhappy husband is conjuring her to live, takes leave of her children.

: AAKHETI.
Mi9ile, ps2.le rinon.
Κλινατε μ. σθενω
Ποσι, πλησιον αδας.
Exoluce. ' donlot veg spasi.
TEXrc, "texicủx što drie
Oux 17 on walimp cowo ésiv.
Χαιρούλες, ώ τεκνα τοδε φαος ορτον.

A AMHTOE.
se pose Too śros aumpov xow,
Και παλος εμοι θανατο μείζον.
Mn for two bewe thing que apods wees,
'Αμ' ανατολμα.
Zö you Gojerns, ex iteriin.
'Ev cos d'iousy xau Env, xou pas.

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

Alcestis.

Withdraw, withdraw thy dear supporting arm,
And lay me down in death : my feeble limbs
Refuse their office: life is on the wing,
And night, dark night fwims o'er my clouded eye.

[ocr errors]
« السابقةمتابعة »