Ante Chaos, jacuitque soporo pondere bruta Naturæ sed enim tractus amor ille per omnes Durities, solidusque minuto in pulvere finis. Inde tenax tamen Orbis, et inde elementa cohærent Lubrica panditur unda super fluitantibus undis ; Sol itaque assiduâ æstatem vortigine volvit, 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Inter utramque viam lævi declivia flexu Et præceps rota vergit, eo magis impetis auctu Perpetuos igitur genitrix Natura reflexus Acre dehinc jubar, et magni via vertitur axis: 65 70 75 80 85 Dein propiore rotâ rutilantia limina radit Cyllene in gelidâ dictus sacer. Interea spatia ipsa perenni percita pulsu Visa simul fluere, et cœli positura malignam Serpere tarda viam, quamvis intactilis, una, 100 Continuata, capax rerum, regione profundâ : In latus-Inde pati senium vaga fabrica mundi, Ille 105 110 115 120 R. S. Coll. Regal. et Univ. Schol. In Comitiis Prioribus, 1792. ON THE LANGUAGE OF THE PELASGI. HERODOTUS and Thucydides describe the Pelasgi as having used a language which they term yλwooa ßápßapos i. e. a dialect essentially different from that which was used by the Hellenic tribes. It has been observed, that "to enumerate the barbarisms (i. e. the admixture of foreign words and phrases) of the Laconic dialect, would be to transcribe whole pages of Hesychius; and whoever considers the specimens of it in the Lysistrata of Aristophanes, must recognise the traces of the γλῶσσα βάρβαρος (the foreign dialect) which Herodotus and Thucydides ascribe to the Pelasgi." This is saying in other words, that in the Greek of the Laconians there were many traces of the Pelasgic of their ancestors; or that the Laconic dialect was a mixture of the γλῶσσα Ελληνική with the γλώσσα βάρβαρος. It is therefore entirely without foundation, that an able and acute writer has objected to the above hypothesis, that it supposes the γλώσσα βάρβαρος to mean "barbarous Greek ;' whereas in point of fact it most clearly distinguishes between them, when it asserts that the traces of the γλῶσσα βάρβαρος are visible in one of the impurer dialects of the γλῶσσα Ελληvik; as if we were to say, that whoever is acquainted with the particular dialect of English spoken in Suffolk and Norfolk, must recognise the traces of the Saxon tongue; an assertion which surely does not go to imply that Saxon means bad English. The writer above alluded to observes, that "this is the first time that any man, who calls himself a scholar, would construe γλῶσσα βάρβαρος by barbarous Greek.” Now the opinion before stated conveys no such implication; but, even if it did, is there no defence to be set up for it? let us see. Homer calls the Carians Bapßapópwvo, (Iliad. B. 872.) which Strabo (XIV. p. 663.) explains thus: Outws ouv Kai To Bapßapopwνεῖν καὶ τοὺς βαρβαροφώνους δεκτέον, ΤΟΥΣ ΚΑΚΩΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΖΟΝΤΑΣ. When Agamemnon (Sophocl. Ajac. 1251.) reproaches Teucer in these words, τὴν βάρβαρον γὰρ γλῶσσαν βαρβαρόφωνοι, OVK Taiw, he certainly does not mean to say, that Teucer did not speak Greek, but that he spoke very bad Greek, Greek mixed with the Cretan of his Mother; so the ancient critics explain Homer's epithet of Bapßapówvos by saying that the Carians Κρητῶν ἄποικοι ὄντες, ἐκρήτωσαν τὴν Ἑλληνικὴν γλῶσ σαν. But still it may be said no scholar has construed this phrase by "barbarous Greek." The following remark occurs in Dr. Clarke's' very learned work on the connexion of the Roman, Saxon, and English Coins, p. 74. "If ẞapßapopwvovs, βαρβαροφώνους, in Homer, signifies people that spoke Greek ill, as both Strabo and the Scholiasts observe, ßápßapov yλwoσav, in Herodotus, must be understood in the same sense, that the Pelasgi spoke very bad Greek. This natural explication brings both these authors, (Herodotus and Strabo) to a perfect agreement." Dr. Clarke's opinion is, that the Greeks were originally called ПeXarryol, and that from the Peloponnesus to the Euxine, there was originally but one people. about 1430 B. C. The notion of Herodotus (I. 58.) is, that the Hellenic tribe, being separated (aroσxibèr) from the Pelasgic body, was small and insignificant at first, but gradually increased in size and importance by the successive addition of several barbarous tribes. By degrees it became of such importance, as to give its name to the greater part of Greece, but this did not happen till after Homer's time, that is about 900 years B. C. Now Xuthus the son of Hellen fled from Thessaly to Attica and long before that time we may reasonably suppose, that the ancient language of the Pelasgic tribes was ameliorating and perfecting itself; so that before it arrived at that state which was afterwards called Hellenic, a period of nearly 1000 years may be supposed to have elapsed. The inhabitants of Attica adopted (not the name or title) but the usages and dialect of the "EXλnves by degrees. They were, says Herodotus (VIII. 44.) called at first Κραναοί, afterwards Κεκροπίδαι, then Αθηναῖοι, and fourthly "Iwves. So that there was not "necessarily any determinate period when the Athenians first assumed the title of "EXXnves." They became Enves by slow degrees, and might be so in fact, long before they were called so. One feature of this gradual 1. The Grandfather of our present learned and amiable Professor of Mineralogy. |