εκδιδοντα, κ. τ. λ. Here, for καλουμενον, which my Ms. also has, Werfer substitutes from conjecture κληρούμενον, and the Professor says, “ ad sensum bene.” The true reading, however, is προκαλούμενον, a word much used by Proclus, and in this place peculiarly apposite. "For Venus calls forth the prolific power of her father Saturn, and imparts it to the intellectual orders." In p. 117. 1. 3. Proclus, speaking of the supermundane Venus, the offspring of Heaven, and of the mundane, the offspring of Dione, says: Η μεν γαρ εκ του Ουρανου υπερκοσμιος εστιν, και αναγωγος επι το νοητον καλλος, και αχραντου ζωής χορηγός, και γενέσεως χωρίζει η δε διαιώνια επιτροπευει πασας τας εν τῷ ουρανιῳ κοσμῳ και γη συστοιχειας, κ. τ. λ. In a note on this passage, the Professor observes : “ Creuzer. legendum monet Διωναία. And this is doubtless the true reading: for Proclus, in the latter part of this extract, is speaking of the Venus who is the offspring of Dione. My Ms. has erroneously διαιώνια, as well as that of the Professor; but in the Notes to my Pausanias, published in 1794, I substituted Διωναία for διαιωνια, in the translation which I have there given of all that is said by Proclus in this place concerning Venus. P. 118. 1. 4 from the bottom: μεμικται γαρ Φησιν ο Τίμαιος το παν εκ νου και αναγκης, πειθομένης τῷ νῷ της αναγκης, και των ενυλων παντων αιτίων υπεσταλμένων προς την βουλησιν του πατρος. In a Note on the word Timaus, in this passage, the Professor refers the reader to "Timæus de An. Mundi, l. 1.” But Proclus, in this extract, quotes the Timæus of Plato, and not the book of Timæus, the Locrian de Anima Mundi. For the following are the words of Plato, to which Proclus alludes: μεμιγμενη γαρ ουν η τουδε του κοσμου γενεσις εξ αναγκης τε και νου συστάσεως εγενηθη. νου δε αναγκης άρχοντος τῷ πείθειν αυτην των γιγνομένων τα πλειστα επι το βελτιστον άγειν, κ. τ. λ. Ρ. 119. 1. 10. Proclus, speaking of Minerva, says: διο και Νίκη προσηγορεύεται και Υγιεια, τον μεν νουν κρατειν ποιουσα της ανάγκης, και το είδος της υλης, ολον δ' αει και τελειον και αγηρων και ανοσον διαφυλαττουσα το κον. οικειον ουν της θεου ταυτης και το αναγειν και μερίζειν, και δια της νοερας χορείας συναπτειν τοις θειοτε ροις, και ενιδρύειν και φρούρειν εν * * * *. In this passage, for το κον, which is evidently defective, my Ms. has το κακον; but the true reading is undoubtedly τον κόσμον. For Proclus, in what he here says, alludes to the following words of Plato in the Timæus, respecting the fabrication of the world: δια δε την αιτίαν και τον λογισμον τον δε, εν ολον εξ απάντων τελέον και αγήρων και ανοσον αυτ τον [i. e. τον κοσμον] εκτηνατο. In all the editions of Plato's works, however, there is a very erroneous omission in this passage. For from the text of Proclus (in Tim.), and also from what Plato previously says, instead of εν όλων εξ απάντων, it is necessary to read εν ολον εξ όλων απαντων. And then the passage will be, in English: "Through this cause, and from this reasoning process, he [i. e. the Demiurgus] fashioned the world one perfect whole, consisting of all wholes, exempt from age, and free from disease. In the latter part of the above passage also, after the word pepe, it is necessary either to add, or conceive to be implied, τα δευτερα. And after the words φρουρείν εν ****, my Ms. has autos, which renders the sense of the whole passage complete, and terminates the Scholia. T. NOTICE OF BAGSTER'S SCRIPTURE HARMONY. THE value of Concordances, of either kind, is universally ac knowleged of those to the language of Scripture, Cruden's is the foundation, and the most copious, and Bellamy's the most defective of those to parallel passages there is none better than the one before us, which combines several important particulars. 1. The chronology of Scripture, in which Blaney is followed, his being deemed the best for general use. 2. The Various Readings, in which a judicious method is used; the words of the text are printed at length, and the Various Readings follow in a different type, so that the unlearned reader may satisfy himself as to the sense of difficult passages, 3. The References are selected from the most approved authors, (Canne, Brown, Scott, &c.) and amount to half a million: "the verse of the chapter under illustration is first marked; then follow the parallel passages in the book itself in which the chapter stands; afterwards, the References are placed regularly in the order of the books of Scripture. Perhaps this comprehensive plan may occasionally admit the introduction of a text not strictly appropriate: but the intentions of authors are so varied in their choice of texts, that none should be rejected without first allowing it to dwell a moment on the mind, and per haps even to read a verse or two beyond that which is quoted: and with this attention, it is hoped the reader will not be often disappointed. References are used by authors for different purposes; such as, similarity of sentiment, or expression-prophecy and its fulfilment-parallel of virtues or of vices-connexion or continuation of history-similar or opposite facts-exhibition of examples, precepts, and admonitions; to which may be added, illustration by contrast; and some are introduced merely because the same word is found in the ver, either in the original language, or one of the versions." It is therefore a Concordance to the entire Polyglott published by Bagster, and embraces the Hebrew, Samaritan, Syriac, Greek, Latin, Italian, Spanish, French, and German versions. The Porteusian Society has adopted the plan of a late excellent prelate, to point out the Scriptural distinctions to unlearned readers: "Those chapters which are of a more spiritual and practical nature are distinguished throughout, by the figure (1) being printed at the head of each chapter-the leading historical chapters are distinguished by the figure (2), and are important to be read in their course, in order to connect the historical chain of Divine Revelation-our Lord's discourses, doctrines, parables, and other chapters of a more peculiar interest, are distinguished by a star." Whether this arrangement be actually required, we humbly doubt: the contents prefixed to each chapter sufficiently indicate its subject, and the plan in being affords room for many arbitrary distinctions. We do not think, then, that it offers any important addition to the Bible, even in the hands of the poor, for whose use it is professedly adapted. Mr. Townshend's Chronological Bible is of another description; the several chapters are arranged in historical order (on the basis of Lightfoot's Chronicle) in such a manner, that the law, psalms, prophesies, epistles, &c. may be read as one connected narrative, in the very words of the authorised translation. This, of course, is only adapted for domestic use, as it will not serve This observation, says the Editor, applies peculiarly to those references, taken from the Latin Vulgate edition of the Scriptures: it will sometimes happen, that as the reference therein was only to some parallel word or phrase, or mode of expression, the fitness and the propriety of the reference itself, when applied to an English Version, is thereby lost. 2 Thus, few of the historical chapters in the Pentateuch or prophecies, and none of the historical psalms, are distinguished by the proper mark, to accompany the lessons with, during divine service. The notes are few, but judicious. It is to be hoped that editions in various sizes will appear. At this opportunity, it may not be improper to suggest the compilation of a Harmony of Sacred and Profane Literature, each verse in the Scripture referring to passages in the Classics, on the same plan as Bagster's Concordance. Blackwell, in his Introduction, has given a few parallels, and Dr. Gray has effected something towards it, or rather has shown what remains to be done. The Harmony, we may add, should be not only historical, but doctrinal; and, if executed with judgment, will show the real state of Natural Theology among the Pagans. The lexicons of Parkhurst and Schleusner will supply many similarities of expression, and a careful examination of the Classics will lead to many more. No passage, it may be observed, written after our Saviour's birth, should be admitted, except the testimonies of adversaries, so that the labor will be comprised within a small extent. CLASSICAL CRITICISM. Professor Porson's Derivation of 'Eyw refuted. "Eyw, Ionice ywv, i. e. λéywv, 'The speaker."" Porson's Tracts and Miscellaneous Criticisms, p. 302. The learned Mr. Kidd apparently confirms this conjecture by the following quo tations: "In the infancy of speech there might have been no occasion for the first person, or any such word: the verb was always used in the third person, as we call it; for the nominative case was always expressed, although the speaker was talking of himself." Capt. G. Brown, (Hermes Unmasked) 32, 3. "This is the case in the language of New Holland. One of the natives, when he was in England, was asked, Do you eat fish? The answer in his own language was, Banneelong eats fish." Dr. Vincent, p. 19. But I confidently pronounce Professor Porson's opinion to be erroneous. It may be true that "in the infancy of speech," before a language has assumed any polish, the first person is not to be found, and the third person is always used in the place of it. But it is equally true that the first person exists in every known language, which has attained any degree of perfection, more particularly in the Oriental tongues; and as it so exists in so many languages, independently of any connexion with the Greek word Aéywv, The speaker,' whose root does not appear in them, it is not and cannot be true that yw, Ionice yov, is q. Xéywv, The speaker.' i. "The preceding examples prove," says Professor Hamilton, "that the termination of the first person, both singular and plural, in Sanscrit and Persic, is characterised by the letter m, as it is in most tenses in Latin,-thus amabam, amabamus; that the second person singular is distinguished, in Sanscrit and Latin, by s, which is omitted in Persic; that the third person has t, in the two first languages, which is changed to din Persic; that tha, tis, and id, distinguish the second person plural in the three languages; and anti, ant, and and, form the terminations of the third person plural. Their analogies and their differences equally suggest some curious observations. It is obvious that in all the three tongues, the letter m distinguishes me, the person, who speaks. A language so refined as the Sanscrit, must have undergone many changes in advancing from rudeness to a state of such metaphysical perfection; and many words have probably been altered, which remain unchanged in the vernacular dialects. Thus in Bengalese, ami, I, represents the Sanscrit aham; and this word, subjoined to the root of the verb, accordingly gives the first person singular, jiv-ami, ‹ 1 live.' In Latin it is formed by elision from the same words, viv-(eg-)o, 'vivo,' In Persic, this person is formed by adding am. Hence purs-am, I ask,' the termination being obviously a contraction of ami." Notice of Wilkins's Sanscrit Grammar, in the Edin. Rev. No. 26. Jan. 1809. p. 379. Thetford, 1824. E. H. BARKER. |