Elmsl. ουριοδρομῶν. Since the Roman MS. has οριοδρόμων, we strongly suspect the true reading to be δριοδρόμων. Hesychius, Δρία: τόποι σύνδενδροι. Homer Od. Ξ. 353. δριὸς ἦν πολυανθέος ὕλης. Cf. Theocr. XXV. 48. Eurip. Hel. 1324. ρίπτει δ' ἐν πένθει | πέτρινα κατὰ δρία πολυνιφέα. Sophocl. Trach. 1014. πολλὰ μὲν ἐν πόντῳ, κατὰ δὲ δρία πάντα καθαίρων.

986. οὐ γὰρ ἐξ αἵματος | γυναικῶν ἔφυ.

Should we not read, in one verse, οὐ γὰρ ἀφ ̓ αἵματος γυναικῶν ἔφυ? Orest. 193. ἀπὸ δ ̓ ὤλεσας | πατέρα τέκνα τε τάδε σέθεν ἀφ' αἵματος. Alc. 525. Περσέως ἀφ ̓ αἵματος and passim. Not but what the phrase ἐξ αἵματος is equally good. Cf. Οrest. 345. Æschyl. Theb. 130.

990. ἴτω δίκα φανερός, | ἴτω ξιφηφόρος | φονεύουσα δαίμων διαμπαξ | τὸν ἄθεον—

Dr. E. has adopted Tyrwhitt's correction, λαιμῶν διαμπαξ.

996. περὶ τὰ Βακχι' ὄργια, ματρός τε σᾶς.

Mr. Hermann thinks that opyta is to be read opyya in two syllables, as καρδίας in Eschylus Theb. 994, &c. from which opinion Dr. Elmsley, very rightly, dissents, and observes that the instances adduced by Mr. Hermann are not true examples of synizesis. Mr. Charles Reisig, who is a very learned and ingenious, but rather a hasty writer, in the epistle to Mr. Hermann prefixed to his Conjectanea in Aristophanem, scans the following verses from the Edipus Tyrannus, thus,

εἴθε σ ̓ εἴθε μη

ποτ ̓ εἰδόμαν· ὀδύρομαι

γὰρ ὡς πέριαλλ ̓ ταχέων,

making περίαλλ' an iambus and ἰαχέων a choriambus, and says, περίαλλ' elegantius iambus pronuntiatur.” We cannot believe that Mr. Hermann approves of this. He proceeds to extinguish the independence of Iota in divers instances, e. g. πολιούχε Aristoph. Lys. 945, is an amphibrach, Διός, Eurip. Ion. 457, is one syllable, (Djos as in Djezzar Pacha).

· 1049. ἦν δ ̓ ἄγκος ἀμφίκρημνον ὕδασι διάβροχον.

Mr. E. remarks, that this is the only passage in the Attic poets, where aykos occurs; and that Porson was inclined to think ἄγκος ἄγγος the true reading. Mr. E. himself prefers ἄγκος, and quotes Herodotus VI. 34. ὕδωρ ὀλίγον φαινόμενον, ἐκ πέτρης στάζει ἐς ἄγκος. τὸ δὲ ἄγκος αἱμασιῆς τις περιθέει κύκλος. Theocrit. VIII. 33. (if the passage be Theocritus's) ἄγκεα καὶ ποταμοὶ, θεῖον γένος. 2 MSS. have ἄγγεα. Xenoph. Anab. IV. 1. 7. ἐν τοῖς ἄγκεσι τε καὶ μυχοῖς τῶν ὀρέων.

1057. ὦ ξέν', οὗ μὲν ἔσταμεν, Οὐκ ἐξικνοῦμαι Μαινάδων ὅσοι νόθων. Ald. The later editions have μόθων. Canter reads ὄσσοις μόθων. Heath. όσσοις μόθον. Musgrav. ὅποι μόθων. i. e. ubi indecora saltatio. Mr. E. proposes ὅσον ποθῶ.

1153. τὰν τοῦ δράκοντος εκγενέτα τοῦ Πενθέως.

Mr. Hermann expunges Toû, and makes the verse consist of an iambic monometer hypercatalectic and a dochmius. Mr. Burges thinks that Пevéws should also be rejected; with whom Mr. Elmsley agrees. Mr. Reisig. (Conject. p. 57.) treats the verse as a trimeter iambic, and says that the tragedians indulged themselves with an occasional anapæst in iambic verses, when introduced in the choric parts. Mr. Reisig also thinks that Nicostratus ap. Athen. p. 111. D. intended to represent the thickness of a cheesecake by the length of a proceleusmatic; and that Aristophanes in the Acharneans, v. 78, οἱ βάρβαροι γὰρ ἄνδρας ἡγοῦνται μόνους Τοὺς πλεῖστα δυναμένους καταφαγεῖν τε καὶ πιεῖν employed “ metri quoddam artificium ut immensam hominum ventri deditorum ingluviem, atque insatiabilem edendi potandique libidinem apta moderatione pedum describeret!

1966. λαμπρότερος ἢ πρὶν καὶ διιπετέστερος.

Mr. E. would write διειπετέστερος, as Διειτρέφης, which he has produced from an inscription in his note on the Medea, p. 139. (not 131, as in the reference). διιπετέστερος is quoted by the Venetian Scholiast on Iliad π. 174. Erotian, Διϊπετής ὁ γόνος: ἀντὶ τοῦ διαυγὴς καὶ καθαρός. ὡς καὶ Εὐριπίδης ἐν Φοίνικι, λέγων, Δμωσὶ δ ̓ ἐμοῖσι εἶπον ὡς ταυτηρίαις πυρίδες

καὶ διηπέτη κτείναι. Which Valckenaer, Diatr. p. 274, corrects thus, Δμωσὶν δ ̓ ἐμοῖσιν εἶπον, ὡς καυτήρια Ες πῦρ ἔδει καὶ [ταῦτα] δὴ διϊπετῆ Θεῖναι. Hesychius, Διειπετέος χειμάρρου : πληροῦντος διὰ τοῦ Διὸς ὄμβρον. I am disposed to think that διηπετής may be a correct form. We have άσπιδοφόρος and ἀσπιδηφόρος. This is a distinct word from διοπετής fallen from the air, and seems to be formed from an old form of the dative, ΔΙΕΙ, which occurs in an ancient inscription in the possession of Mr. R. P. Knight, (unless it be AIFI.)

1279. ἔα, τί λεύσσω; τί φέρομαι τόδ' ἐν χεροῖν.

“ Media forma φέρομαι vereor ut hic sententia conveniat. Quæ suspicio si vera est, reponendum φέρομεν.” E. I see no impropriety in the middle voice, as Agave was carrying the head, not to a third person, but in token of her own prowess.

1313. ὁ Κάδμος ὁ μέγας, ὃς τὸ Θηβαίων γένος Εσπειρα, καζήμησα κάλλιστον θέρος.

Mr. Burges, in his recent edition of the Supplices of schylus, reads ὅς γε σαρκήρη στάχυν "Εσπειρα, from a Glossary of Hesychius, Σαρκήρη στάχυν. τὸν ἐκ σαρκῶν συνηρμοσμένον καὶ οὐκ ἐκ κριθῶν συνεστῶτα, οἷον ἄνθρωπον, and says, " quomodo Cadmus dici possit ὁ τῶν Θηβαῖον γένος σπείρας, exputare nequeo.' Did Mr. B. forget that Euripides speaks of the Thebans in general as being sprung from the serpent's teeth? (Compare Phoeniss. 802. 808.) and that Καδμογενής and Κάδ μειος are equivalent to Θηβαῖος? and for a good reason; viz. that Thebes was not founded till after the production of the Σπαρτοί, by whom it was peopled.

1365. χαῖρ ̓, ὦ μέλαθρον, χαῖρ ̓ ὦ πατρώα | πόλις.

“ Aut delendum ὦ, aut legendum πατρία.” Ε. Hermann is of opinion that the middle syllable of πατρῷος may be made short, as well as those γεραιός and δειλαιός : and says that " πατρία sunt, quæ sunt patris; πατρῷα, quæ veniunt a patre; πατρικά, qualia sunt patris.” Hujus discriminis,” says Mr. Elmsley, "ne minimum quidem vestigium apud tragicos reperiri posse credo. Neque apud eos legitur πατρικός.” That the

middle syllable in Tarρos cannot be made short, appears from considering that the diphthong is compounded, not of two short vowels, but of a long w and a short .

1368. στειχέ νυν, ὦ παῖ, τὸν Ἀρισταίου.

"Oikov subaudio. BRODEUS. Vera videtur Brodæi interpretatio, quam tamen exemplis confirmatam vellem. Nihil de hac ellipsi dixerunt scriptores ad Bosium, satis superque de vulgari illa eis Taidoτpißov." E. This is a mistake. Schaefer, in his remarks on Bos. p. 214. ed. Oxon. in answer to Valckenaer, who had observed that in this kind of phrase the article was not understood, refers to Aristoph. Ach. 1222. Oúpalé μ' éževéykat ἐς τὸν Πιττάλου. where Mr. Elmsley reads τὰ Πιττάλου, and remarks, "ades Atticis sunt oikia. Oikos conclave est in quo cœnabant veteres." which remark, if true, holds good against Brodæus's explanation of this verse.

1569. στέρομαι σε, πάτερ. ΚΔ. κἀγὼ σὲ, τέκνον. Burges, στενομέν σε. Elmsl. στένομαί σε.

1371. aikiav. Elms. aikeiav, which he pointed out as the true orthography, some years ago, in a review of the last edition of the Prometheus of Eschylus. As from eiein's is formed ἐπιείκεια, so from ἀεικὴς αἰκής, αἴκεια, Iliad. ω. 19. πᾶσαν delkeinv. See Maltby's Thesaurus, Obs. p. lxxx.

1371. δεινῶς, δεινῶς τήνδ' αἰκείαν | Διόνυσος ἄναξ | τοὺς σοὺς εἰς οἴκους ἔφερεν.

"Deesse videtur syllaba, puta Touod inter eis et olkovs." E. It appears to me that a more probable correction is, Tous σovs, πάτερ, εἰς οἴκους ἔφερεν. So v. 1360. ὦ πάτερ, ἐγὼ δέ σου στερεῖσα φεύξομαι. 1369. στένομαί σε, πάτερ. 1977. χαῖρε, TάтEр, μo. And I now find that this is also Mr. Hermann's πάτερ, μοι.

correction.

At the conclusion of the book Mr. Elmsley gives a life of Euripides from a MS. in the Ambrosian library, which, he says, had not before seen the light. An extract, however, from a MS. at Vienna, containing the same life, is given by Boeckh. de Trag. Græc. p. 232. one of whose corrections is confirmed by the Ambrosian MS.

MEMOIR

OF

DR. JAMES DUPORT,

REGIUS PROFESSOR Of greek,

AND

DEAN OF PETERBOROUGH.

IN the Preface to the MUSEUM CRITICUM, it was announced as our intention occasionally to give Biographical Memoirs of distinguished Scholars: as an useful method of tracing the history and progress of literature. This promise, it must be acknowledged, has been but sparingly fulfilled: the fact is, that the lives of Scholars are for the most part, destitute of such incidents as can greatly arrest the attention of their contemporaries or of posterity. Their memoirs are generally comprised in a few dates, and in some history of their publications. An attempt to obtain more minute information respecting their history, their habits, and their characters from public depositaries, or from private sources, costs the enquirer much time and labour, which are not always repaid by his

success.

The reasons which have led me to collect some account of Professor Duport are these-He appears to have been the main instrument by which literature was upheld in this University during the civil disturbances in the 17th century; and though seldom named and little known at present, he enjoyed an almost transcendant reputation for a great length of time among his contemporaries, as well as in the generation which immediately succeeded.