« PreviousContinue »
ἢ δίσκον ἄρας, ἢ γνάθον παίσας καλῶς, πόλει πατρῴᾳ στέφανον ἤρκεσεν λαβών ; γνάθον παίσας καλῶς corresponds very well with the expression in vogue amongst the brethren of the fancy, "having made a pretty hit." In his notes on this passage, Mr. Willet perpetrates the following stupendous anachronism. "Ceterum de athletis non honorificentior erat sententia Solonis, qui, teste Diog. Laërt. I. 2. 8. eosdem Euripidis versus in Athletas jactare solebat." Now Diogenes Laertius testifies as follows; "Athletes, when old, are like a thread-bare coat, as Euripides says; which Solon being sensible of, assigned to them only moderate rewards." A similar anachronism occurs in Baxter's notes on Horace. Od. III. 6. 46. Etas parentum pejor avis tulit Nos nequiores, &c. upon which passage he remarks, "Ista sententia est apud Aratum, ex Horatio, puto, tracta." The verses of Aratus to which he alludes occur in Phænom. 123. Οἵην χρυσείην πατέρες γενεὴν ἐλίποντο Χειροτέρην, ὑμεῖς δὲ κακώτερά τ ̓ ἐξείεσθε.
We should not have pointed out these faults, had not Mr. Willet expressed an intention of publishing some more of Galen's works. Before he puts this threat into execution, we would have him submit his lucubrations, if not to the molesti homines, at least to some of the prudentiores of whom he speaks in his preface.
ΕΥΡΙΠΙΔΟΥ ΑΛΚΗΣΤΙΣ. EURIPIDIS ALCESTIs. Ad fi
dem Manuscriptorum ac Veterum Editionum emendavit et Annotationibus instruxit JACOBUS HENRICUS MONK, A. M. Collegii SS. Trinitatis Socius, et Græcarum Literarum apud Cantabrigienses Professor Regius. Accedit CLAUDII BUCHANANI Versio Metrica. Cantabrigia: Typis ac Sumptibus Academicis. MDCCCXVI.
As this publication appears from the Cambridge Press, and under the auspices of the University, it is entitled, upon the score of etiquette, to a notice in our pages. Having thus announced it, we have little further to say. The text is corrected and illustrated nearly upon the plan which was pursued by Professor Monk in his edition of the Hippolytus. Besides the collations of the texts of Lascaris and Aldus given in the notes,
the other ancient editions have been carefully consulted, in order to determine where the different varieties originated, and in what edition the reading of the Aldine was first changed. Anxious care has also been taken to refer each emendation and remark to its first authority, a matter of no small trouble, owing to the general neglect of this particular by the preceding editors.
The notes are printed under the text, as in the Hippolytus: an index of their contents is subjoined. The Notarum Explicatio, which is prefixed to the book, should have contained the two following articles:
Markl. Jer. Marklandi Emendationes quædam MStæ a Viro doctissimo Car. Burneio cum editore communicatæ.
Tyrwh. Th. Tyrwhitti Emendationes MStæ in Museo Britannico conservatæ.
The following words are unnoticed in the Corrigenda: v. 990. Φοῖβος. v. 1176. μεθηρμόσμεσθα. and in the note on v. 198. 1. 11. corruperit.
Respecting the execution of this work, there is only oue particular of which it is permitted to us to speak; and this is the typography, which is singularly and strikingly beautiful : for his share in the work, Mr. Smith has received the approbation of the Syndics of the Press, which we are inclined to think that the public will sanction. When speaking of the beauty and clearness of the Porsonian types, we may be suspected to be rather partial. We will therefore adduce a judgment in their favour from a quarter where certainly no suspicion of partiality can attach: it is that of Professor Hermann, who concludes a critique of Mr. Blomfield's Eschylus in the Leipsic Literary Journal, in the following manner:
"This Edition of Æschylus is printed in the letters of what is called the Porsonian Type, which receives its name from the extremely elegant hand-writing of the celebrated man which it represents and we must allow, that this type far exceeds all attempts made in modern times to improve the beauty of Greek writing; and that, in completely satisfying the eye, while at the same time it approaches to the models of the ancient manuscripts, it deserves the praise of bearing a real Greek appearance; from which all other modern types are more or less distant."
VOL. II. NO. 6.
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS.-Except the Alcestis, which has been already mentioned, no new classical publication has issued from our press, since our last. The concluding volumes of Dr. Butler's Eschylus, containing the Persa, the Fragments, different indexes, and a general preface, may be expected to appear very shortly. Mr. Kidd's enlarged and improved edition of Dawes's Miscellanea Critica is in considerable forwardness.
The volume of Professor Porson's Adversaria has been reprinted from the Cambridge edition, at Leipsic. The motive alleged for this publication, is to circulate on the Continent these admirable treasures of criticism in a cheaper form than the original. This was no more than might have been expected: especially as the singular meanness of the paper on which Leipsic books are printed, must always enable them to undersell others. Any thing which gives a more extensive circulation to the Adversaria, must undoubtedly be gratifying to the editors, as well as to all lovers of Greek Literature. There is however something in this republication which calls for exposure and reprobation. In order, if possible, to supplant the original, this is entitled, Editio Nova emendatior et auctior. Of Porson's notes and emendations it contains not an additional word. Whence then does it derive the epithet auctior? Why, from an Appendix containing fifty pages of heavy German commentary upon Lucian, Achilles Tatius, Libanius, &c. from the pen of Frederic Jacobs. And this is the new companion to the remains of Porson!!! This is the improvement of a book of which the German preface admits, tantum liber eximius thesaurum rerum optimarum tenet—. Never did we know such an instance of the living and the dead bound together, as this volume presents.
The claim of this edition to the title of emendatior, we will give in its own words correcta enim sunt quæ in archetypo sat
spissa occurrunt vitia typothetica: nonnulla etiam in Latinis Porsoni, ubi calamus viri præstantissimi a recta norma aberraverat. Respecting the errors of Porson's Latinity, till we know the instances, we must be allowed to suspend our belief. To the charge against the original edition of Vitia typothetica sat spissa, we reply that it is untrue and calumnious; it is a disgraceful and sordid attempt to procure a sale for the pirated, by discrediting the genuine edition. We have the authority of impartial scholars who have carefully examined it, for saying, that the volume of Adversaria is remarkably free from errors of the press. The few trivial ones which were detected before its publication, were noticed in the Corrigenda, and of these some are owing to accents having dropped out during the operation of printing, an accident for which neither the editors nor the compositors were to blame, but the type-founder. Let not the reader however imagine, that the Leipsic edition is immaculate. It has corrected to be sure the errors pointed out in the Corrigenda: but it has introduced new and worse errors of it's own, and gives no list of errata. In merely opening the volume at random, we remark these blunders of the press : Præf. p. xi. nobiscam. p. 64. (74.) Sic Fr. Bacon's. p. 96. (110.) iu editionibus. p. 149. (170.) Totius versum for Totius versus. p. 240. (272.) διαπάναισι an error for δαπάναισι. p. 217. (246.) Ex Sopholis Ajace.Whoever will take the trouble of cutting open the pages, will, we doubt not, find abundance of other errors of the same kind and these, it is to be observed, are committed in a book taken not from transcribed papers, as the original was, but from a printed copy of extraordinary clearness and distinctness. Such oversights, we allow, are in themselves venial: but we can find no excuse for the editor who while he commits them, can attempt to depreciate another's property by an unjust charge of similar inaccuracies. When this learned person, in the course of his philological writings, has occasion to illustrate the words σUKOpavтíα συκοφαντία and Barkavia, he can hardly discover a more apt instance, than his own conduct supplies.
We are sorry to say that this is by no means a solitary instance of such conduct among his countrymen. Wyttenbach's Plutarch was reprinted at Leipsic with a similar charge of typographical inaccuracies in the original. We will transcribe
an extract from the Preface to his Annotations, (p. 20.) in which this transaction is mentioned; we do this because the case is exactly similar to the present, and because our sentiments will thus have a better chance of reaching the eye of the Leipsic Editor.
Bibliopola librum recudit, ne verbo quidem mutato; quo in genere est Lipsiensis, qui hanc nostram editionem reddere instituit forma octava, inficetum prorsus et sordidum negotium cum charta, tum literarum formulis; et gloriatur etiam se plurima nostræ editionis typographica menda correxisse; quod quale sit, postea videbimus.-Quod ad menda typographica nostræ editionis attinet, hoc totum non tam ex re et veritate, quam astutia et cupiditate hominis Lipsiensis fertur, qui hac reprehensione in titulo posita, suis exemplis auctores quæsivit. Horum unum casu in meas manus incidit: vidi pauca vitia correcta vidi etiam nova : et plura, opinor, nova vidissem, si nauseam ferre potuissem in legendo tam spurco immundoque exemplo operis, quod inde a longo tempore in nitidioribus et nuper in nitidissimis illis Oxoniensibus exemplis legere assueveram. Satis dictum de Bibliopolis, quos ne attigissemus quidem, nisi eorum caussa conjuncta esset cum hominibus literatis alieni laboris interceptoribus."
A great deal too much has been said of the accuracy of the Leipsic Classics; and we may take this opportunity of noticing that their pretensions to superiority in this particular have no other foundation than their own boasting :-in fact, some of the Leipsic publications are the most shamefully incorrect books that we ever beheld. Of one play of Euripides, two editions have been printed at Leipsic, in both of which almost every sentence of text and notes abounds with the worst typographical errors; and in which a single page contains more faults, than will be found in a whole volume of Mr. Pote's. The republisher of the Adversaria is an able and distinguished scholar, whom we blush to see lending himself to such proceedings of the trade at Leipsic. He may aspire with justice to praise of a higher description; but for his vaunted superiority as a corrector of the press we see no ground whatever. The German edition of Porson's four plays, and Matthia's Euripides were printed under his revision; each of which has a reasonable allowance of typo