the room. Pugh! says Mr. B. (or I suppose would say, if he read Shakspeare) "He talks to me that never had a son." But to be serious: What right has any man to publish a work of this kind in a hurry? Mr. B. I believe, is not in that unfortunate situation, which some learned men have experienced, to be obliged to publish as fast as the avarice or tyranny of booksellers required. There have too been some writers who, in publishing a book, have had a provident eye to the future, and taken care to reserve a quantity of additions to adorn the second impression. But this gentleman's character and circumstances will not suffer us to entertain the slightest suspicion, that he will ever change from Mr. Brunck into Simonides. (Vid. Aristoph. Pac. 697.)-— Mr. Brunck, in his notes, is frequently engaged with the Parisian Professor, and the flower of the French critics, as he calls them, (to wit) Messrs. Vauvilliers and Dupuy, the former of whom lately published an edition of Sophocles, the latter has passed some censures upon Mr. Brunck's critical works. Thus far, perhaps, he may be readily excused, 'Is ovx vñáрxwv, ἀλλὰ τιμωρούμενος: but I am at a loss to account for the asperity with which he treats Kuster and Bergler, to the latter of whom he is scarcely more merciful than he was to Mr. Shaw in his edition of Apollonius. Bergler with him is fungus, stipes, bardus, and what not. If Mr. B. is better qualified than Kuster and Bergler to publish Aristophanes (as doubtless he is by far,) "let him give God thanks, and make no boast of it;" but why triumph over men who are not in a condition to return the attack? Πανε, παῦ ̓, ὦ δέσποθ ̓ Ἑρμῆ, μὴ λέγε· Ἀλλ ̓ ἔα τὸν ἄνδρ' ἐκεῖνον, οὗπερ ἔστ ̓ εἶναι κάτω. I now proceed to give some instances of the improvements made in this edition. The plan of the Lysistrata is as follows: the women, grieved at the long continuance of the war, seize the Acropolis, where the public money was kept, and resolve to keep the men at a distance till a peace shall be concluded. Upon this a dialogue ensues between Lysistrata and Probulus, the heroine and hero of the play. V. 487. Ὅτι βουλόμεναι τὴν ἀκρόπολιν ἡμῶν ἀπεκλείσατε μοχλοις. In some other editions it is printed τὴν πόλιν ἡμῶν ἀπεκλείσατε τοῖς μοχλοῖς. Mr. Brunck has inserted very justly Dawes's emendation in the text, Ότι βουλόμεναι τὴν πόλιν ἡμῶν ἀπεκλείσατε τοῖσι μοχλοῖσιν. The corruption no doubt arose from the explanation of the scholiast being written above the text: ἡ πόλις of itself signifies the Acropolis. I cannot help submitting it to Mr. Brunck's judgment, whether in Plutus 772. instead of the vulgar reading κλεινὸν πέδον, we should not read κλεινὴν πόλιν from Stephanus Byzant. v. Ἀθῆναι. But perhaps Hemsterhuis has sufficiently defended the other reading; for I must own, though with the utmost fear of incurring Mr. Brunck's displeasure (vid. not. in Plut. 397.) that I am not possessed of Hemsterhuis's edition. ν. 498. Ἡμεῖς ὑμᾶς σώσομεν. ΠΡ. ὑμεῖς; Λ. ἡμεῖς μέντοι. Π. σχέτλιόν γε. Λ. Ἀλλ ̓ ἀποδεκτέα ταῦτ ̓ ἐστὶν ὅμως. Π. νὴ τὴν Ἀλλ ̓ ἀποδεκτέα is a conjectural emendation, first inserted in the Venetian edition; ingenious enough, but wrong. The first edition has Ἀλλ ̓ ἀποκτέα which comes nearer the true reading, restored by Mr. B. from two MSS. Ἀλλὰ ποιητέαBut the MS. not only amends but supplies the text: for Mr. B. has inserted the following verse upon the authority of the MS. after verse 498. Λ. Ὡς σωθήσει κἂν μὴ βούλῃ. Π. δεινόν γε λέγεις. Λ. αγανακτεῖς· Ἀλλὰ ποιητέα, &c. Mr. Brunck is not in general very gracious to Kuster, when he finds him negligent in smaller matters. But what would he have said had he known, that in the very manuscript which Kuster used, not only the true reading of the 3d verse was preserved, but the second verse fairly and plainly written?-Though he might have guessed something of the kind from the scholiast, to whose words a part of the verse in question is prefixed. V. 519. Ὁ δέ μ' εὐθὺς ὑποβλέψας ἔφασκεν κ ̓ εἰ μὴ τὸν στήμονα νήσω.Mr. Brunck rightly observes, that the copula has no business before εἰ; he therefore reads, Ὁ δ ̓ ἔμ ̓ εὐθὺς ὑποβλέψας φάσκεν ἂν Εἰ μὴ τὸν στήμονα νήσεις (νήσεις from a MS.) i should rather read, Ὁ δ ̓ ἔμ ̓ εὐθὺς ὑποβλέψας ἂν ἔφασκ ̓· Εἰ μὴ, &c. v. 529. seq. Λ. σιώπα. Σίγ ̓ ὦ κατάρατε. Π. σιωπῶ 'γώ; Λ. καὶ ταῦτα καλύμματα φέρε Περὶ τὴν κεφαλήν μὴ νῦν ζῴην. ἀλλ ̓ εἰ τοῦτ ̓ ἐμπόδιόν σοι, Παρ ̓ ἐμοῦ τουτὶ τὸ κάλυμμα λαβὼν, ̓́Εχε, καὶ περίθου περὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν, Κατα σιώπα. To enter into an examination of the tautology, the absurdity, metrical defects, and the want of syntax in this sentence, as it now stands, would waste too much time and paper. Suffice it to say, that the editor has happily restored the genuine text by the aid of MSS. Λ. σιώπα. Π. Σοί γ ̓, ὦ κατάρατε, σιωπῶ γώ; καὶ ταῦτα κάλυμμα φορούσῃ Περὶ τὴν κεφαλήν; μὴ νῦν ζῴην. Λ. ἄλλ ̓ εἰ τοῦτ ̓ ἐμπόδιόν σοι, &c. In the Nubes, after v. 969. Mr. B. has inserted a verse, which Mr. Valckenaer first discovered to belong to this place (from Suidas v. χιάζειν). Εἰ δέ τις αὐτῶν βωμολοχεύσαιτ', ἡ κάμψειέν τινα καμπὴν, [Αὐτὸς δείξας, ἔν θ ̓ ἁρμονίαις Χιάζων ἢ Σιφνιάζων.] &c. The Eccles. v. 621, 622. stand thus in the common editions: Π. Οὐχὶ μαχοῦνται. Β. περὶ σοῦ. Π. τοῦ μὴ ξυγκαταδαρθεῖν. Β. Καί σοι τοιοῦτον ὑπάρξει. Instead of this latter fragment, Kuster's edition has, Καί σοι τὸ περὶ τούτων δὴ μάχεσθαι. These Mr. Brunck has restored to sense and metre by slightly altering the reading of the MS. Π. Οὐχὶ μαχοῦνται. Β. περὶ τοῦ; Π. θάρρει, μὴ δείσῃς, οὐχὶ μαχοῦνται. Β. Περὶ τοῦ; Π. τοῦ μὴ ξυγκαταδαρθεῖν· καί σοι τοιοῦτον ὑπάρχει. In the Thesmophoriazusæ, the women are gathered together to consult about some method of punishment for Euripides, who had so grossly traduced and scandalized them on the stage. When the assembly is met, the herald speaks to this effect, (v. 372.) "Hear every one; the female senate decreed (Timoclea was president, Lysicla clerk, Sostrata speaker) to hold an assembly early in the morning, on the middle day of the Thesmophoria : ̓Εκκλησίαν ποιεῖν ἕωθεν τῇ μέσῃ Τῶν Θεσμοφορίων, ἦν ἅλις ἔσθ ̓ ἡμῖν σχολή. So Kuster's edition. Davies (on Cicero De Legg. I. 10.) and Spanheim (on Callimach. H. in Jov. 84.) quotes the latter verse to prove that aλis may be joined with a nominative. Dawes (Misc. Crit. p. 235.) perceiving a solecism in this reading, tacitly altered it to εἴγ' άλις.—But the sense of the passage is not at all assisted by this alteration. “The senate decreed to hold a meeting-if there is leisure ;” rather, " if there should be leisure.” Neither could the herald be ignorant, when he proclaimed this, whether they had sufficient leisure or not. The first edition (by Junta) has v ' v oxoλn. which approaches very near the true reading restored to the text from the MS. ᾗ μάλισθ' ἡμῖν σχολή : “ on which day The third day of the Thesmophoria we are most at leisure." was a fast. (vid. Athenæum VII. p. 307. F.) In the Pax, when Trygæus and the chorus are drawing the goddess Irene out of the well, the chorus exclaims, v. 496. s κακὸν εἴ τινες εἰσὶν ἐν ἡμῖν. Mr. B.'s MS. had Ὡς κακὸν οἵ τινες εἰσὶν ἐν ἡμῖν. of which, he says he could make nothing for a long time, till he luckily found the true reading in Suidas, ν. κακόνοι· Ὡς κακόνοι τινές εἰσιν ἐν ἡμῖν. “ There are certainly some disaffected people among us." And so the scholiast seems to have read in his copy, as one may conjecture from his explanation. In the Equites, v. 1300, &c. the triremes are in great agitation, upon hearing that Hyperbolus is going to petition for a fleet, they vow that he shall never command them. But, says one, who had never come near man," if the Athenians consent to this motion.— καθῆσθαί μοι δοκώ Εἰς τὸ Θησεῖον πλεούσαις, ἡ ̓πὶ τῶν σεμνῶν θεῶν. Whoever has a mind to see what the critics have written about it, may consult Petit (Leg. Attic. p. 79.) D'Orville and Salvini (Miscell. Observat. Vol. III. p. 401, 2.) Dawes (Misc. Crit. p. 252.) Mr. Brunck has restored from conjecture, dokЄî— Tλcovσas. referring to Vesp. 270. "I advise that we sail either to the Theseum, or the temple of the Eumenides, and take refuge there." The emendation is ingenious and certain, nor does it the less honour to Mr. Brunck's sagacity, that Reiske had already proposed the same in the Acta Lipsiensia for July 1750. p. 419. Eq. 751. Οὐκ ἂν καθιζοίμην ἐν ἄλλῳ χωρίῳ. Ἀλλ ̓ εἰς τὸ πρόσθε χρῆν παρεῖναι ἐς τὴν Πνύκα. This Demus says to Agoracritus, who had requested him not to hear the cause in Pnyx. The commentators have been led into gross errors by a slight corruption in the text. Mr. B. has elegantly restored, ws To πρóσle, "as formerly." τὸ πρόσθε, Nub. 339. Κεστρᾶν τεμάχη μεγάλαν ἀγαθῶν, κρέα τ' όρvioia Kixλav. The metre is defective by half a foot. In Kuster's edition : κρέα τ' ορνίθειά γε κιχλᾶν. Mr. Brunck has thrown out ye, and replaced the true reading upon the authority of Athenæus and Eustathius, kxnλav. It doubtless escaped his notice, that H. Stephens had made this emendation in his Ap. to Greek Thes. p. 1228. To the authorities mentioned, he might have added the testimony of the Etymologus M. whom Phavorinus has transcribed p. 1060. ed. Basil. 1541. Having quoted at random these few instances, in which the text of the author is improved; I now pass to the invidious and unpleasant task of marking some of those places where the learned editor has either made the text worse, or left it faulty. One great defect I cannot help remarking in Mr. B. which is, his being in general too sparing of his explanations. As he has most unaccountably, and to the full success of his work fatally, omitted to publish the scholia together with the text, he ought to have made some amends for this defect in his notes, and also to have been more curious in noting the parodies of the tragedians and other authors in which Aristophanes so much indulges himself. These will appear to some grave omissions-but the oversights I am going to mention, Mr. B. would, without question, have entirely supplied or corrected, if he had allowed himself a little leisure for another revisal. He has publicly testified that he has a great dislike to the particle ye, and accordingly has, with great justice, frequently expunged it; but he should have done it much oftener, and I will give a few examples where it ought to be thrown out, as perfectly useless both to the metre and sense. Nub. 869. Καὶ τῶν κρεμαθρῶν οὐ τρίβων τῶν ἐνθάδε. Mr. B. inserts ye here after Tŵv; to make the verse agree with Dawes's canon. I had rather read крeμаσтρŵv on the authority of Pollux X. 157. and so perhaps the scholiast read. v. Peirson on Maris, p. 242. 1216. Απερυθριάσαι γε μᾶλλον, ἢ σχεῖν πράγματα. As the penultima of ἀπερυθριάσαι is long, the γε ought to be expunged. Ran. 1055. Εστι διδάσκαλος, ὅστις φράζει τοῖς δ ̓ ἡβῶσίν γε ποιηταί. The particle is interpolated by some later editor. Read Toîow dßwo-Equit. 508. 'Hváyкaζεν ἔπη λέξοντας γ ̓ ἐς τὸ θέατρον παραβῆναι. Read Ηνάγκαδεν λέξοντας ἔπη πρὸς τὸ θέατρον, as it is quoted by the author of the argument to the Nubes. Acharn. 629. Ойπш πаρÉВη πρоs τὸ θέατρον λέξων. Pac. 735. Αὐτὸν ἐπήνει πρὸς τὸ θέατρον |
