PA 442 .E78 Copy 1 6^ LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. Chap. Shelf ' i \i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. •S T> Aristarchns Anti-Blomfieldianm : OR, A REPLY « t " ' * TO THE NOTICE OF THE NEW GREEK THESAURUS, INSERTED IN THE 44th NUMBER OF %ty <&uarterl£ &e\rieto* . BY E. H BARKER, O.T.N. rwrn ^iix^dus tyt y out vo cuQentT*. Aesch. Acam. 1434=1398. Blomf. ; / PART THE FIRST. TO WHICH ARE ADDED THE JENA-REVIEWS OF MR. BLOMFIELD'S EDITION OF CALLI- MACHUS, AND AESCH YLI PERS.E. Translated from the German, JLonUon: PRINTED FOR J. H. BOHTE, YORK-STREET, CO VENT-GARDEN, AND SOLD BY SIMPKIN AND MARSHALL, STATIONERS' COURT ; AND THE PRINCIPAL BOOKSELLERS IN OXFORD, CAMBRIDGE, DUBLIN, LEIPSIG, PARIS, &C. 1820. • E7S Printed by R. and A. Taylor, Shot-Lant t London. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE EARL SPENCER, K. G. THIS REPLY TO THE QUARTERLY REVIEW OF THE NEW GREEK THESAURUS IS, IN PROFOUND ADMIRATION OF HIS LORDSIlir'S MORAL AND LITERARY CHARACTER, DEDICATED BY HIS OBEDIENT HUMBLE SERVANT, EDMUND HENRY BARKER. PREFACE. J. he following Book derives its title, Aristarchus Anti- Blonifteldianus, from a celebrated work published by Richard Johnson, the Master of Nottingham School, in I717-8. called:— M Aristarchus Anti-Ben tleianus Quadraginta sex Bentleii Errores super Q. Horatii Flacci Odarum Libro primo spissos nonnullos, et erubescendos : Item per Notas universas in Latinitate Lapsus foedissimos Nonaginta ostendens." And before the reader has finished the perusal of it, he will in all probability be satisfied that, if he has to deal with a person of genius and erudition infinitely inferior in every respect to Dr. Bentley, he has to behold errours as gross and as numerous, as those pointed out by Richard Johnson, and he will find matter for deep reflec- tion in observing that the errours are not merely slips of the pen, but aberrations of the heart. The fact of the Quarterly Review of the New Greek Thesaurus having been written by the Rev. C. J. Blom- field is so notorious, and the internal evidence of his com- position, which the Review itself supplies, is so powerful, that it would be a mere waste of words to attempt a for- mal proof of it ; and it would be equally idle to shew that the Reviewer could only have had an improper mo- tive for writing the Review. He is the avowed personal enemy of the Editors of the New Greek Thesaurus, and could VI PREFACE. could not undertake the anonymous review of their work without the grossest violation of common decorum and without the strongest suspicions of private malignity, and yet he has the unparalleled effrontery, "the egregious and disgusting hypocrisy, to talk of " the impartiality of his criticism," (p. 348.)f But it is urged by the friends of Mr. Blomfield in vin- dication -f- With equal justice he has elsewhere talked of his own modesty and (proh Deum hominumque fidern !) his own polite and gentlemanly spirit." Such is the deceitfulness of the human heart ! " Occasione libelli retractandi oblata, morem libenter gessi viris doctis- simis, qui mihi errores, in priorem editionem per inscitiam aut incuriam admissos, indicarant. Hodie tamen video horum nonnullos, nescio quo casu, silentio praetermissos esse; quod ut nox tam arrog antia quam ne- gligentia factum esse arbitrentur, viros humanissimos impense rogo. Quippe censoris honesti animadversiones, ego, si quis alius, aequi bo- nique consulo, qui id semper in animo atqueore habeam, cujusvis hominis esse errare; v nullius, nisi insipientis, perseverare in errore. Quaedam ta- men objecta vidi, quae brevi responsione egeant, quum a consilio nostro minus intellecto profecta esse videantur. Noscant igitur lectores, me Co- dicum MSS. opem eo adhibuisse, non ut inde omnes literarum et apicum varietates exacte descriptas enotarem, sed eas tantum,quafc notatu digniores viderentur. Quare glossas manifestas, et apertos scribarum errores ple-r rumque tacendos duxi. Idem de priorum interpretum atque editorum hallucinationibus dicendum est, quas iterum in medium proferre, atque argumentis refellere, frivola esset atque inanis jactantia. Quod si hujus- modi errores bis terve mihi refutandos sumserim, id non quasi major IPSE REPRENSis feci, verum ne quis forte lectorum magni nominis au- ctoritate induceretur. Si quid De quoquam malebice uspiam aut CONTUMELIOSE DIXI, ID OMNE INDICTUM VELIM, INDICTUMQUE esto. Hoc enim in primis mihi providendum puto, dum veteribus ni- torem suum restituere conor, ut inter recentiores, imminutam esse a me dignitatem suam, nemo conqueri possit. Hujus laudis exempla sem- per mihi proposui Marklandum nostrum et Tvrwhittum, in quibus ne- scias utrum magis admirabile eluceat ingenii acumen, an pulcra humani- tatis cum eruditione conjunctio. Quapropter, ut egomet vineta c&- dam mea, pudet pigetque me in Glossario ad Prom. 248. Valckenaerium vocasse virum longe eruditissimum, sed qui in etymologia parum vidcbat. Quan- quam enim mihi persuasissimum sit, Hemsterh. Valck. Lennep. a vero aberrare, quum ad simplicissimas verborum formas, quas binis tribusve li- teris constent, omnia fere Graeciae vocabula referunt, verumtamen minime conveniebat tantum virum verbis gravioribus excipere, cujus quidem eruditionis decimam partem attingere nunquam speravi." Praef. ad Aeseh. Sept. c, Th. p. vii. ' This PREFACE. Vll dication of his conduct, that he has received a sufficient provocation from the Editors of the New Greek The- saurus, because one of them has written articles against Mr. Blomfield's compositions, and the other has inserted them in the periodical work, of which he has the ma- nagement. Now to give any weight to this argument, Mr. Blomfield and the partisans of Mr. Blomfield must prove, and Mr. Barker challenges them to prove, that there This passage loudly calls for two or three remarks from the writer of the Reply. 1. Mr. Blomfield indirectly admits, what indeed without his admission is palpable enough, his own arrogance : " Quod ut non tam arrogantia quam negligentia factum esse arbitrentur, viros humanissimos impense rogo." Then the omissions originated partly in his arrogance and partly in his negligence, and Mr. Barker would ask " the most partial admirer" (Re- viewer, p. 838.) of this holy-minded man whether this " confession " be not quite as " extraordinary," as the one made by the Editors of the New Gr. Thes. in which the Reviewer, p. 340. expatiates with such delight, — a delight, which will be somewhat disturbed, when that part of the Reply, which discusses this question, is published ? 2. But, though he has in the sentence just dismissed, indirectly admitted his own arrogance in rejecting the notices of his errours as pointed out by different scholars, yet in the sentence which follows, he has falsely described himself to be one, who will candidly receive and gratefully employ the ob- servations of any fair critic — and one, who has always in his mind and in his mouth the admirable maxim that any man may err, but that none but a fool will persevere in his errour. That this maxim may be often in his mouth is, for aught Mr. Barker knows, true ; but certain it is that he, si quis alius, has violated it in practice. " 111 does it become this Editor, at his time of life, to make these attacks upon such men. One would have thought that discretion at least, if not the sense of decorum, would have put some guard upon his pen. And yet this is the man, who, in his preface to the Seven against Thebes, writes thus: — 'Hoc in primis mihi providendum puto, dum veteribus nitorem suum restituere conor, ut inter recentiores, imminutam esse a me digni- tatem suam, nemo conqueri possit : hujus laudis exempla semper mihi proposui Marklandum nostrum et Tyrwhittum, in quibus nescias utrum magis admirabile eluceat ingenii acumen, an pulcra humanitatis cum eru- ditione conjunctio/ Mr. Blomfield has clearly lost sight of his intention in his practice. What mercy can he expect to be shown to his errours and failings, when he is disposed to shew none to others ? He will be but justly treated, and therefore cannot complain, if, when scholars detect in his compositions the conjectures, which have been previously made by others, they should charge them to the account of plagiarism, and not to acciden- tal Vlll PREFACE. there is in the articles alluded to any thing, which affords any just ground of offence to Mr. Blomfield. Almost every article written by Mr. Barker on the compositions of Mr. Blomfield is signed with his name, and any article written by him, which is anonymous, Mr. Barker is both perfectly ready to avow, and perfectly prepared to defend against any such insinuations. Mr. Barker's offence, it should seem, lies not in having said so and so, but in having said any thing — Mr. Biomfield's majesty ought not to have been prophaned by so vulgar a touch. — Mr. tal coincidences. He will by these means be erecting his own scaffold. In the preface to the Seven against Thebes, when he is speaking of having corrected some errours in the second edition of the Prometheus, he adds :— - * Hodie tamen video horum nonnullos, nescio quo casu, silentio praeter- missos esse, quod ut non tarn arrogantia, quam negligentia factum esse arbitrentur, viros humanissimos impense rogo.' Does Mr. Blomfield then mean this as an apology for having, in his second edition, passed in total silence the strictures, which we published upon his first edition of the Prometheus, and having altogether neglected every thing, which Mr. Barker has written upon this Play in the Classical Journal and in the Classical Recreations ? We are inclined to think that this total neglect of those remarks proceeded non tarn negligentia, quam arrogantia. It would have cost his dignity too much to have noticed the compositions of au undergraduate younger than himself, and it was worthy of his policy to add the above apparent apology. The passages, which we have quoted, most incontestable* prove that he is not a little liable to that suspicion." lleview of the Museum Criticum No. 1., inserted in the Brit. Crit. for Nov. 1813. Let the reader consult the 7 1st page of this Reply, and he will there find Mr. Blomfield, in a private letter to Mr. Barker, speaking of the Classical Recreations in very high terms, and yet from either " ar- rogance" or " negligence," (and the reader knows which,) he has not in the second edition of his Prometheus taken the smallest notice of any thing contained in that book, 3. While Mr. Blomfield is in the passage above cited rhodomontading about his own gentlemanly, candid, liberal, and modest spirit, he actually within the compass of a few lines furnishes his readers with a proof of his own consummate arrogance, and impertinence, and inflicts punishment on himself: — " Quapropter, ut egomet vineta ccedam mea, pudct pigetque me in Gloss, ad Prom. v. 248. Valckenaerium vocasse virum longe eruditissimutn, sed qui in etymologia parum videbat. Quanquam enim mini persuasissimum sit, Hemsterh. Valck. Lennepium a vero aberrare, quum ad simplicissimas verborum forrnas, quae binis tribusve literis constent, omnia fere GraeciaB vocabula referunt, verumtamen minime conveniebat tantum virum verbis gravioribus excipere, cujus quidem cruditionis decimam partem attingere nunquam speravi." Biomfield's PREFACE. IX Blomfield's age, which exceeds Mr. Barker's by two or three years at the utmost, ought not to have been vio- lated by Mr. Barker's presumption in calling into ques^ tion Mr. Blomfield's high " decrees." But Mr. Barker has not sworn the same blind allegiance to Mr. Blom- field's resolves, which the latter has sworn to Porson's dicta, (see p. 46.) and Mr. Barker has as great a right to publish any strictures on Mr. Blomfield's compositions, as Mr. Blomfield has to publish those compositions themselves, and Mr. Barker's motives in publishing the strictures on them may be and are quite as honourable and just in themselves, as the motives, by which Mr. Blomfield is actuated in publishing the compositions themselves. Mr. Barker's object was and is to advance his own reputation and to promote the cause of Greek literature, and what other ends does Mr. Blomfield pro- pose to himself? Mr. Blomfield and his friends take for granted that Mr. Barker had a malicious motive for writ- ing those strictures. But he disclaims any such motive, does not and cannot ever repent of any thing, which he has published respecting Mr. Blomfield, and he again calls on Mr. Blomfield to support his accusations by the proper proofs, and till he has done so, he must take the liberty of calling him a calumniator. But, while Mr. Blomfield cannot support such an ac- cusation against Mr. Barker, the latter has proofs, and proofs as strong as Holy Writ, that Mr. Blomfield has, in his conduct towards Mr. Barker, been governed by the foulest malice. Mr. Blomfield has in his compositions uniformly avoided every favourable mention of Mr. Bar- ker's name, even in cases where common justice f, com- f " It must always be unpleasant to the candid critic, to detect instances of literary dishonesty, and to detract from long-established, and, in many respects, well-earned fame. But justice, whose laws should be as strictly ob- served in cases of literary , (is of personal property, requires that it should be done. A charge of plagiarism, however, is not to be considered as esta- blished, unless a very strong case is made out : and in questions like the present, we may be permitted to say, that not many persons are qualified to judo-e." Edinburgh Review of the Cambridge Aeschylus,, No. 33. p. 495. mon X PREFACE. mon decency, and common sense required the introduc- tion of it, and he has as uniformly, but anonymously intro- duced it into any articles, which by a certain dexterous management afforded to him an opportunity of stabbing Mr. Barker's reputation, without having any nice regard to candour, truth, and justice. The Reply here presented to the reader affords the clearest evidence of this fact. Now, so far is Mr. Barker from being actuated by any malicious motives, that he has in very many instances given high commendation to Mr. Blomfield's opinions, and in Mr. Blomfield's own gentlemanly language " defies " him to point out any instance, where he has wilfully sup- pressed the mention of Mr. Blomfield's name, or mali- ciously introduced it. Mr. Blomfield in the Letter, which is published in this Reply p. 71 ., speaks of the Classical Recitations in very flattering terms, and even addresses to their author the language of affection, dear Sir ; and Professor Monk, who now makes the same complaint, as Mr. Blomfield does, of Mr. Barker's malice, and with equal justice, personally thanked Mr. Barker for his courteous treatment of him in that book. Nay, Mr. Blomfield as the Quarterly Reviewer of the New Greek Thesaurus, has in p. 347. been constrained to admit, that " the Editors manifest a commendable impartiality in their quotations from contemporary scholars." Mr. Blomfield's continued course of injustice towards Mr. Barker will never induce Mr. Barker to deviate from that bold and honest path, which he has hitherto evenly pursued in regard to Mr. Blomfield — he will ever,in proud defiance of all misrepresentation and obloquy, persist in praising Mr. Blomfield, where he believes him to be right, and censuring him, whenever he thinks him mistaken ; and if Mr. Blomfield can prove Mr. Barker to be mis- taken in any passage, which is contained in this first part of the Reply, Mr. Barker will with the greatest promp- titude acknowledge the errour and correct it in the second part. But to afford to Mr. Blomfield and to the public a satis- factory PREFACE. XI factory proof that Mr. Barker neither was nor is actuated by any malice towards Mr. Blomfield, he here publicly expresses his readiness to take Mr. Blomfield's hand, whenever Mr. Blomfield is disposed to take his, and Mr. Barker imposes no other condition on Mr. Blomfield than one, which Mr. Blomfield, if an honest man, xvotild voluntarily practise — to act fairly towards Mr. Barker in matters of authorship, neither basely suppressing the mention of his name, where justice demands its insertion, nor anonymously stepping aside to introduce it for pur- poses of malignant ridicule and undeserved abuse. " Like a certain animal in the eastern part of the world, who [which] is reported to be extremely fond of climbing a tree for that purpose, he merely pelts the author with his own produce." Rob. Hall's Essential Difference be- twixt Christian Baptism and the Baptism of John more fully stated and confirmed, p. 65. Mr. Blomfield appears to have derived the black blood in his veins from that blood of Prometheus, which flowed to the ground, as the vulture preyed upon his liver, and from which sprang the herba promethea, described to be capable of producing antipathy and hatred. Invidiam fuimus. Num me deus obruit? an qua? Secta Prometheis dividit herba jugis? Propert. 1, 12,9. See the Classical Recreations, p. 260 — 1. ere nqo[XYjQsv$ "Eis'kavz, xa» thjAou [iyj *£ hsgov ysyovotg. Callimach. Fr. 135. Mr. Blomfield with that utter disregard to truth, which pervades his Review, and that unblushing impertinence, which attends him on every such occasion, has in p. 340. observed that " Mr. Hermann (in his Critique on the New Greek Thesaurus) has intermixed a few trivial ob- jections, extorted from him by a sense of decency, amongst several pages of the most fulsome and unsupported, al- though, he doubts not, unbought panegyric," meaning to XII PREFACE. to insinuate that such a high eulogy must have been bought at a stipulated price. But he quite forgot that he was supposing Hermann's mind to have the same mercenary and base views, as till his own, and the public not to know that the Reviewer was himself the hireling of Mr. Gifford. The reader will be surprised to hear •that the writer of the passage just quoted, who intimates his shrewd suspicion that Hermann's "panegyric" of. the New Gr. Thes. was bought, has actually received the enormous sum of one hundred guineas for his abuse of the same work. Half that sum would have been the wages for any ordinary writer ; but Mr. Gifford was so, well pleased with this ." most extraordinary'' writer, that he paid him as much more. It would have been curious, to know in what way Mr. Gifford expressed himself ta the Reviewer on this interesting occasion. Did he expa- tiate in the borrowed learning, which graces the Review, or in the desperate malignity, which pervades it, or in the contemptible witf, which animates it, or in the vulgar and coarse abuse, which disgraces it, or in the egregious blunders, which run through every page of it? Since the appearance of the Review Mr. Blomfield has been preferred by the Bishop of London and the Earl of Liverpool to the Living of St. Botolph, Bishopsgate, re- ported to be worth ^2000 a year; and Mr. Barker sin- cerely congratulates Mr. Blomfield on this preferment, not; only because he beholds in it the deserved reward of scho- f As in smooth oil the razor best is whet, So wit is by politeness sharpest set : Their want of edge from their offence is seen ; Both pain us least, when exquisitely keen. Pr, Young. Oh ! if venerable Time, Slain at the foot of Pleasure, be no crime, Then with his silver beard and magic wand, Let Comus (Momus) rise Archbishop of the land m x Let him your Rubric and your Feasts prescribe, Grand Metropolitan of all the tribe. Cowi'Eit's Progress of Errour, larship, IPREPACfc. xiii larship, but because it will relieve him from the disgraceful necessity of being any longer the hireling of Mr. Gifford, of being employed to write a fair Critique on a Work, and then abusingthe confidence reposed in him by writing a most unfair one, and sacrificing the credit of the Quar- terly Review and the reputation of its Editor, to the gra- tification of his own low-minded spite against the Editors of the New Greek Thesaurus. To inform Mr. Blomfield of " the disastrous lustre," which has been thrown on his character by the writing of that article, which is an im- perishable record of his own turpitude, would be as un- pleasanttohis ears, as it would be disgusting to the public. He has had two proofs of the serious impressions pro- duced by the perusal of that precious composition in the two Papers, which appeared in the last No. of the Clas- sical Journal; and he may have a third proof in the Monthly Magazine for April 1820. p. 195. Professor Monk, in the Preface to his Edition of the Hippolytus, p. viii. makes the following acknowledg- ment : — " Libello nostro multum ornamenti et subsidii adjecerunt observationes quoedam,suis iniocis memoratae, •quas ab amico accepimus, ingenii, doctrina?, ac virtu- tis fama clarissimo, Carolo Jacoho Blomfield'' Perhaps the learned Professor in the 7th No. of the Mus. Crit. will, like his illustrious master, Porson, favour tis with a " Supplement to the Preface" for the purpose of explaining in what sense Mr. Barker is to understand that Mr. Blomfield is most renowned for his virtue? In the mean time he will allow Mr. Barker to reason from what he knows respecting Mr. Blomfield, and to inquire whether the Professor saw in the spirit of prophecy the public display of virtue, which would be made by Mr. Blomfield at a certain Anniversary Dinner of the Noble- men and Gentlemen educated in that College, of which Mr. Barker had himself the happiness of being a mem- ber, when Judge Graham was in the chair, and when Mr. Blomfield, to speak classically with the late Mr.lGaches, unsuccessfully attempted " to lengthen the monosyllables" of XIV PHEI-ACE. of the jovial party ? though it is evident from Mr, Bloui- iield's Glossary on Aeseh. Agam. 236\ that he has some secret relish for such matters : — " Recte Hemsius notavit virginem sic vocari, quia- jeevgog est otlloiGv dvlpcg. Paginam exemplis polluere su- persedeo. Valck. Anim. ad Amnion. 40. facet am dili- gentia3 suai in hac re illustranda excusationem profert." Or does the Professor consider Mr. Blomfield's claim to the epithet, virtutis fama clarissimus, to rest on the unjust suppression, or the unfair mention of Mr. Barker's name in Mr. Blomfield's compositions r or on the effort, which he made in conjunction with the Professor himself to establish, in opposition to the Classical Journal, the Museum Criticum, (which, however, only lived till the publication of the sixth No., notwithstanding the grea.t advantage, which it had enjoyed of having the first No> twice reviewed in the British Critic, once during the reign of the enlightened Dr. Nares, and once during the admi- nistration of the learned Mr. Rennell,) because the three B.s were said to sting them in the Classical Journal (viz. J. Bailey, E. H. Barker, and G. Burges,) and to visit the supposed sins of those Scholars pn Mr. Valpy, the proprietor of that Work, who would have most readily inserted in it any further replies to the articles alluded to, if Professor Monk and Mr. Blomfield had continued to write any? Or does Professor Monk erect Mr, Blom- field's title, to be considered as a man most celebrated for his virtue, on the unproved and unproveable charge of plagiarism against the modest Stanley for pirating J. Casaubon's Notes on the Agamemno of Aeschylus, or on the charge of dishonourable conduct against Dr. Askew, which Mr. Barker will in the second part of this Reply demonstrate to be absolutely false ? Or finally, on the foul libel against the Editors of the New Gr. Thes. " in the abused shape of the vilest of" Reviews? Mr. Blomfield has in that Review asserted a gross falshood respecting the I}elphin and Variorum Classics,, which are in the course of publication by Mr. Valpy; and PREFACE. XV and, as Mr. Gifford has been unintentionally betrayed into the circulation of this calumny, he will, no doubt, as a man of honour, make a suitable apology for it at the end of the next No. of the Quarterly Review, Extract from a Letter addressed by W. Gifford, Esq. to Mr. E. H. Barker, dated Dec. 1, 1811. 'I As for the great work, which you meditate, and it is indeed a great and noble one, I doubt not that you will ponder deeply, before you deliver any part of it out of your hands. A re-publication merely, (though even that might be useful,) would be discreditable to yourselves, and disgraceful to your country. In the course of three centuries, during which critical learning has so much im- proved, there must be a thousand opportunities of per- fecting a new Edition. You know, I presume, that two or three Greek Scholars on the Continent have been em- ployed many years in collecting materials for such a work as you meditate ; and though the magnitude and expence of the undertaking, and the miserable situation of the presses abroad, have checked their designs, yet it is pretty certain that their papers may be procured for a few hundred pounds. You should not take a step till this is fully ascertained and arranged, and your intentions made fully known in Germany. " To a work so matured and full, as a national honour, I should wish all imaginable success. If your coming Prospectus, which I beg you to ponder well, announces any thing of this kind, I shall be most happy not merely to give my name — that is an inconsiderable trifle — but to use all my influence in every possible way for its pro- motion and service. But I earnestly deprecate a mere republication, which will subject us to the scorn and an- ger of Europe, as it will interfere with better projected Editions." Mr. Barker considers the publication of a Review of the New Gr. Thes., so overflowing with malignity to its Editors, as that which appeared in the 44th No. of the Quarterly XVI PREFACE. Quarterly Review, to be but an awkward mode for Mr. Gifford to shew his good will to the work and his zeal in the cause of Greek literature ; and Mr. Barker cannot regard as any great proof of Mr. GirTord's personal good will the conduct of Mr. G., which he has detailed in p. 73. of this Reply, in having allowed Mr. Blomfield in the Quarterly Review of Monk's Hippolytus to make an unjust attack on, and to point ungenerous sneers at, Mr. Barker's Classical Recreations. The estimation, in which Mr. Blomfield's conduct to- wards Scholars in general, is held by impartial foreigners, will be sufficiently apparent from the Jena-Review of his Callimachus, of which Mr. Barker has appended a trans- lation executed by a gentleman, in whose acquaintance with the German language and whose accuracy he places great reliance. The Jena-Review of Mr. Blomfield's Edition of the Persae of Aeschylus will also be subjoined and that this article is the composition of a most eminent scholar, is evident from the remark of Hermann ad Elem. Doctr. Metr. 809. :— " Caeterum aliquanto verecundius loquuturum spero virurn optimum (Blomfieldium,) ubi reputaverit, quo quisque doctior sit, i. e. quo magis didicerit, quantum sit, quod nesciat, eo solere modestiorem esse. Profuerit au- tem inspexisse censuram Aeschyli Persarum in Diariis Ienensibus m. Iunio h. a. (1816.) fol. 105. 106. A TALI VIRO SCRIPTAM, CUI NON FACILE QUIS SUPERBIUS RESPONDEAT." To the Jena-Reviewer of his Callimachus, p. 79- of this Reply, Mr. Blomfield probably alluded, when in the Notice of the New Gr. Thes. p. 340. he writes with his usual flippancy : — " Mr. Hermann and his School never miss an opportunity of lavishing their censure on Porson and on those English Scholars, whom they facetiously enough term Porson's disciples, while, on the other hand, it is a sufficient title to their esteem to flatter the German critics at the expense of the English." Eor the Jena- Reviewer terms Mr. Blomfield the too credulous Scholar of PREFACE. xvii of Porson; and as Mr. Blomfield on Aesch. Prom. 277. says, " Magni viri rationes minus perspectas habeo, in ejus licet verba modo non jurare sim addictus," there can be no great wonder at the expression. Mr. Barker's vindication of Hermann (p. 56~6o. of this Reply) from the charge, brought by Mr. Blomfield in the Edinburgh Review of Photii Lexicon, that Mr. Her- mann's reason for publishing an uncorrected text of that Lexicographer was to be sought in his anxiety to anticipate the expected publication of Porson's transcript of the Galean MS. — is rendered complete by the following ex- tracts : — " Feci autem in Tzetza, pariterque in Dracone, quod mea sententia faciendum in omnibus est, quae primum eduntur, ut ipsam Codicis scripturam, quantumvis vitio- sam, exhiberem, quo ne, quod in Hesychio, Etymologo, aliisque muitis scriptoribus factum dolemus, de ipsa Co- clicum lectione dubitatio moveri posset. In Tzetza qui- dem nihil nisi interpunctionem et quaedam eorum errato- rum correxi, quae ipse librarius, si iterum adspexisset, fuisset correcturus, veluti syllabas bis scriptas, quag se- mel scribi debebant. Interpunctio vero talis est in Co- dice isto, ut, quum nunc omissa, nunc addita, nunc ante earn vocem, post quam debebat, nunc post sequentem posita sit, ubique sensum perturbet. Caetera vitia in- tacta reliqui : quorum pleraque quivis paullo exercita- tior toll ere poterit ; pars etiam hanc utilitatem habebit, ut eos, quibus non contigit scriptos Codices inspicere, de modo, quo in libris MSS. peccarisolet, admoneant. Ita- que neque iota subscriptum, nisi ubi in Codice est, ad- didi, nee, quae multa inveniuntur errata librarii, qui com- pendia Codicis, quern descripsit, male legerat, correxi : quod quum aliis in rebus, turn frequentissime in confu- sione particularum napa et 7rs$ factum est. Interdum, sed raro, et in Dracone et Tzetza de vitiosa Codicis scriptura diserte monui lectorem. Hie semel dictum volo, quamvis quid vitiosum videatur, earn non typo- thetae, sed Codicum culpam esse. Nihil deprehendi, b quod XV1U PREFACE. quod operas errarint, nisi in Tzetza p. 1 14. ubi pro l%g restituendum est efof" Hermann. Praef. ad Drac. Strat. vii. M In hac Arcadii Editione accurate expressum est Apographum Gregorii Georgiadae Zalykii, quale ante biennium - prsestantissimus Barkerus Lipsiam transmisit. Plurima in eo insunt vitia, non illata, ut putamus, Zalykii negligentia, sed errore librarii, qui Codicem Parisinum scripsit : sic tamen comparata ilia maximam partem, ut nullonegotio corrigi possint, inprimis si adhibeas diver- sitatem scriptural ex altero Codice excerptam notatam- que in imo margine paginarum. Hcec prczmoneri opor- tere visum fuit, ne forte operce talibus cavillationibus premerentur, quales in Photium Lipsiensem iactas com- meminimus, quum illius Lexicon, consulto cogitatoque non abstersis libri MS. vitiis, prodiisset" Schaefer. Praef. ad librum, qui nuper Lipsise prodiit cum hoc titulo : 'ApKtxSiw Tlsfi Tqvoqv. E Codd. Par. primum edidit E. H. Barker. Addita est Editoris Epistola Critica ad Io. Fr. Boissonade. It may be remarked that, if Mr. Blomfield in pub- lishing a Greek MS. would really deviate from that plan, which Hermann on such occasions deliberately fol- lows, viz. the plan of publishing uncorrected the work as it is found in the MS., Mr. Barker fervently hopes that Mr. Blomfield will never have the opportunity of acting in such a heterodox manner. To the instances of adjectives terminating in aKsog being wrongly accented on the ante-penultima, instead of the penultima, cited in p. 8. of this Reply, may be added hccTivOctXsog from H. Steph. Thes. Ind., for which Schneider in his Greek and German Dictionary rightly gives liotrivQuXeog. But the same learned Scholar had no occasion to admit into his Dictionary the barbarous word * yovvukyog, o, q, even with an intimation of doubt as to its genuineness. For there can be no question that it is a mere misprint in some of the Editions of Hederic for # yowofayvig. The genius of the Greek language in- contestably PREFACE. XIX contestably requires that all adjectives formed from such nouns as ccXyog, to, should end in y\g. Mr. Blomfield in the Gloss, ad Aesch. Ag. 357*. has erroneously written YiXog, FatuiiSy for qhog, and appears to have been drawn into the mistake by confounding it with vjtog, Clavus. Mr. Barker has in p. 65-8. of this Reply intimated that such is the strict impartiality observed by the Editors of the New Gr. Thes., that they are as ready to acknow- ledge and correct their own errours, as to point out the mistakes of other critics, and as one proof of the fact the following passage may be cited : — " Aristoph. Pac. 73. Eit07r£Xc*jv 67n xgari u^Tca, BXz(pccpccv (tkotsivov (pci^og s7riKaXi\ljccv : atque ex eo Cic. de Se- nect. 2. Quae plerisque senibus sic odiosa est, ut onus se Aetna gravius dicant sustinere, quod proverbium mi- nus recte interpretatus est E. H Barker, tanquam degi- gantibus dictum, quos Aetna premere dicebatur. Vide Muret. Var. Lect. 7, 15. p. 158. Ruhnk." Nov. Thes. Gr. p. 1687. c. The Reviewer, ajc£/6>?Y o^^crt Avyxsvg, Theocr. 22, 194. can rind in the New Gr. Thes. nothing useful or valuable, and he brings to Mr. Barker's recollection a passage, which he has read in an amusing little book : — " Not to recur to those venerable tomes of antiquity, which have been delivered down to us from the peaceful ages of monkish darkness, modern examples present themselves in great abundance to our choice. What is contained in all the Treatises of Mr. Wm. Wh n on the Trinity ? Nothing. What is contained in the mighty and voluminous Epic Poems of Sir Rd. Black more, Knight ? Absolute nothing. What again can be col- lected from that universal maze of words, called the Uni- versal History of all Nations, Languages, Customs, Manners, Empires, Governments, Men, Monsters, Land- Fights, Sea-Fights, and a million more of inexhaustible topics ? XX PREFACE, topics ? What, I say, can be comprehended in the te- dious pages of that ostentatious history? Every reader will be ready to answer, Nothing. The works of Den- nis, Des Cartes, Lord Sh — f— - — ry, and the mighty Mr. W — rb n, all treat of the same immortal subject, however the ingenious Authors, out of pure modesty, may have been contented to let them pass under the fic- titious names of Plays, Systems of Philosophy, Miscel- laneous Reflections, and Divine Legations," Dissertation upon Nothing, in Pompey the Little, Bk. 2. c. 1. Lest the Reviewer should imagine that this first part of the Reply has been the elaborate production of many weeks, it will be proper to observe that the whole MS. was forwarded to the publisher on the 24th of April ex- cept the concluding part, which was despatched to him two or three days afterwards. The Greek words, to which an asterisk is prefixed, are not to be found in the Thes. of H. Stephens. Thetford, June 10, 1820. ARISTARCHUSANTI-BLOMFIELDIANUS: OR ' A REPLY TO THE NOTICE OF THE NEW GREEK THESAURUS, Inserted in the 44th No. of The Quarterly Review. " /"\UANQUAM et scriptores, dum alienos errores detegunt, *w cautos multum esse oportet. Quod quidem non in earn sententiam accipi volo, ut quiseorum consilia a nobis improbari putet, qui ea in re operam navarunt suam, ut studiosa juventus non ineptire condisceret, sed, errore enunliato, arceretur alapsu. Verum fines quosdam esse novimus, quos ultra nequit verecundia consistere ; et nisi parous fueris in reprehendendo, invidia te laborare facile suadebis, cum incertum sit judicare, an veritatis amor impellat, sive inanis gloriae cupido, quae rationis hunc lembum transversum agat. Triumphant enim nonnulli, si quid frivolum offendant, et leve, quod cum alios lateat, ipsi proferant in apricum, quodque intolerabilius est, non maledictis abstinent et conviciis; nulla in eos reverentia, pudore nullo, quorum praeceptis et eloquentiae, si quid sapiunt, hocunum saltern debent, quod sapiunt. Insaniunt enim ipsi, et alios docent insanire; et sicuti Seoecae volumina si quis lectione percurrat, nectareum adbibit laticem, quo mores inspergantur, reddanturque meliores; ita dentatas chartae furoris quoddam virus juvenilibus animis afflare solent. Et quamvis, qui ejusmodi in scripto versantur, non, qua laborant, invidiam, sed asmulationem esse praesumserint, a suspicione tamen alieni esse non possunt ; semulationem enim dixerunt pei turbationem animi, ob bona mentis honorata, quae pares aut similes assecuti videantur, non quod ea aliis adsint, sed quia nos iis careamus." Benedictus Menzinus Florentinus de Literatorum Hominum Invidia, Florentiae, 1 675. 12. pp. 17 — 20. IT may be right to premise that the notice of the Greek The- saurus, in the 44th No. of the Quarterly Review, instead of ex- pressing, as it professes to do, by using the plural we, the opi- nions and sentiments of an enlightened junta, in truth expresses the opinions and sentiments of the Reviewer alone ; and that this Reviewer is as well known to the Editors of the Gr. Thes. and to the public, as the Rev. C. J. Blomfield. B * You 2 Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianus. " You are now about to enter on a profession which has the means of doing much good to society, and scarcely any tempta- tion to do harm. You may encourage genius — you may chas- tise superficial arrogance, expose falshood, correct errour, and guide the taste and opinions of the age in no small degree by the books you praise and recommend. All this too may be done without running the risk of making any enemies, or subjecting yourself to be called to account for your criticism, however severe. While your name is unknown, your person is invul- nerable : at the same time your own aim is sure ; for you may take it at your leisure, and your blows fall heavier than those of any writer, whose name is given, or who is simply anonymous. There is a mysterious authority in the plural we, which no single name, whatever may be its reputation, can acquire ; and under the sanction of this imposing style, your strictures, your praises, and your dogmas, will command universal attention, and be received as the fruit of united talents, acting on one common principle*, as the judgements of a tribunal, who decide only on mature deli- beration, and who protect the interests of literature with un- ceasing vigilance." Dr. Copleston's Advice to a young Re- viewer, p. 1. The Editors " came to the reading of it " (the Review) " with great expectations of finding somewhat answerable to the nobler nesse of the attempt. But they quickly discovered that they were like to be much disappointed in that hope, and that, be- sides a torrent of affected insignificant tautologies, with some peevish unworthy reflections, and the repetitions of some old and trite cavills, together with severall bundles of grosse mistaks, there was litle else to be expected from this Author." Vin- dicias Academiarum'f, containing some brief e Animadversions upon Mr. Webster's Book, stiledthe Examination of Academies, Oxford, 1 654, 4to. p. 1. If the writer of the Review had not been as well known to the Editors as the Rev. C. J. Blomfield, they "should have been apt to have conjectured him to be some obscure person, whose peevish malecontented humour had brought him into the gang of vulgar levellers, amongst whom his ability to talke of some things out of the common road hath raised him to the reputa- tion of being t)$ \hkyaq, some extraordinary person ; and by that meanes hath blowne him up to such a selfe-confidence, as to f The work is anonymous, but is known to be the composition of Dr. SethWard, Savilian Professor in the University of Oxford. " Whilst he continued in the chair, he writ this in a jocose stile." Dr. Pope, in his Life, p. 26. This curious pamphlet might have been cited with advantage by the learned and judicious Dr. Copleston, in his Reply to the Calumnies of the Edinburgh Review against Oxford. think Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianm. 3 think himselfe fit to reforme the Universityes" {Vindicicz Acade- miarum, p. 6.), to direct the literature of the age, and, as he himself says, p. 304, to be the " literary censor and protector general of the reading world." Reviewers may, however, be more fitly styled the scavengers of literature, who fling their dirt on all around them. " And though the booke" (Review) " will appear unto all judicious" (and impartial) "men but slight and contemptible, yet because it may light into the hands of some weaker persons, who may be apt to take accusations for con- victions, it would not be amisse, if for their sakes somebody would vouchsafe more particularly to examine this examiner, and to disabuse such as may be seduced by him. It is part of that scholastick imprudence, which men of our profession are subject unto, to sit downe and satisfie ourselves in our owne knowledge of the weakenesse of such adversaries, without tak- ing any paines to satisfie others, who are not so well able to judge." Find. Acad. p. 6. " Nor do we find much fault with the inconstancy, which is observable in the abbreviations of proper names ; it is, however, a blemish to the work. Thus the same man is at one time Ku- ster,, and at another Kust..; Xenophon, Xenoph. and Xen.; Hem- ster. and Hemst.; Plutarch and Plat.; Hesi/ch. and lies. This, we suppose, is attributable to the different MSS. from which the numerous additions are taken ; but it indicates precipitancy on the part of the publishers." Reviewer, p. 336. The Editors admit the fact to be as the Reviewer states, but deny that " the inconstancy" alluded to is any " blemish to the work ;" " indicates " any " precipitancy on their part ;" or " is attributable to the different MSS. from which the numerous additions are taken," because the same " inconstancy " appears, where the matter is not taken from any MS. The truth is, that the discrepancy results rather from intention than from accident. Whether the Editors employ Easterns, Kuster., or Kust., de- pends on a variety of circumstances. For instance, suppose an abbreviated proper name to end one sentence, such as, confer ibi Hemsterh., and suppose the next sentence to begin with Kust., who but the Reviewer, " mousing for faults," does not see that Kust., which was designed to be the first word of the second sentence, might easily be supposed to belong to confer in the pre- ceding ? Kust er us, in such a case, would make all perfectly in- telligible ; and so the Editors would generally write, though in some few instances they may not have done so. Again, Xenopho is generally employed at full length when it begins a sentence ; but if the Lexicon Xenophonteum be cited, it is sufficient for the Editors to say, Lex. Xenoph. Sometimes, for the sake of bre- B 2 vity, 4 Aristarchiis Anti-Blomjieldianus. vity, Xen. may be used ; but the Editors rather avoid that, be- cause it would not be always clear to the reader whether Xen. stood for Xenopho, or for Xenocrates, whose book, Ilsg) rr\s emo Tuiv'Evvtigmv TgoQw, was in 1814 edited by the learned and the ingenious Dr. Coray. Hes. might mean Hesiod, and is never em- ployed when any person might chance to mistake the one for the other. It will generally be found in company with Suidas, JEtym. M. etc. or used as in this instance, Interprr, ad Hes., when it means the great Lexicographer ; and it is never used for Hesiod, except in conjunction with Homer's name, or after the quotation of a verse from Hesiod. So far, then, is this " in- constancy observable in the abbreviations of proper names," from " indicating precipitancy," that the Editors have delibe- rately employed it ; and so far is it from being any peculiarity in their work, that it is equally " observable" in the original work of H. Stephens, as the reader may see by turning over a few pages at random: but this " observant" Reviewer is like the mole, — he works under ground, can see a very little way, Critias in Elegiis, ap. Athen. 432.) just enough to scratch up a little dirt for a time, and erect a petty mound, which he fancies to be a splendid monument of his ta- lents, but which proves to be " a striking monument of ill-directed labour," p. 347. For by raising the earth he has left room for a trap to catch him ; and soon like Satan exalted sits, by merit rais'd To that bad eminence. " We have before remarked one species of inconsistency, of which the Editors are guilty, in their abbreviations of authors* names ; another fault, of greater importance, is the manner in which they quote the titles of works ; for instance, in p. 96 we find one of the imperfect Lexicons, published by Mr. Bekker, mentioned with its title at full length, ' Xwctyayri Ae^icav •/grpipM ex. Sicttpogwv Hotp&v rs kou 'P^roqoDV 7roXXcov in Bekkeri Anecd. Gr. T. 1. p. 334./ while in another place we find the same Lexicon quoted without any title, except 'Bekkeri Anecd. Gr. T. 1. p. 335 ;' and in a third place it is called ' Grammaticus S. Germ, f in p. 119 it is twice quoted within five lines, with its full-length title; but in p. 137 we rind ' Svmy, Ae%. x^ ""' ^ n P* 14 ^ ^ appears again at full length; and in p. 145, * Xvmyooyt) Aegeoov Xgw'wwS All this bespeaks great haste and inattention." Re- viewer, p. 342/f The -{-The Reviewer here twice uses \i'£iav for *.i%t&>v ; so in p. 307, and again in p. 308. But in p. 305, n. he has more rightly used h'^uv. It is a curious coincidence be- tween Aristarckus Anti-Blomfieldianus. 5 The Editors admit the facts stated by the Reviewer, but deny the correctness of the inference deduced from them. The hu- mane laws of the country do not allow a man to be tried twice for the same offence ; but the Reviewer was not on this account, or from " a sense of decency," (p. 340,) restrained from indict- ing the Editors on that very charge, which Professor Hermann had previously brought against them, and for which, if they did not fully reply, they had at least offered in extenuation a satis- factory apology. Professor Hermann : — " Prseterea vero etiam alia quasdam, quae minoris momenti sunt, aliquid compendii quum libro ipsi, turn operae Editorum afferre poterant. Cujus est, quas toties citatur, Huvaywyrj Ae%swv xgYi Schneider too presents us with sgsvQdXsog for egsuQot\so$. The adjectives in uXeo$ are exceedingly numerous, and all of; them, with these few exceptions, are ac- cented on the penult. .Itmay therefore be rightly inferred that the exceptions are but so many "corruptions. The same "inconstancy in the abbreviation of authors' names,". which is charged on the Editors of the New Gr. Thes. as some- thing blameable, quite peculiar to them, and " indicating great haste and inattention," occurs in the notes of the excellent Pro- fessor Boissonade ad Pseudo- Herodian. Partitt. 294., " Vide nunc omnino Thesauri H. Stephani Editionem Londinensem, p. 512. extr." and p. 295. " Deloco Porphyrii vide omnino Thesaurum II. Stephani Londinensis Editionis T. I. p. 519." And even in Schneider's Lex. : thus in v. ' AvdgsUsXov it is Xeno., but in v. Aia3-/)fj,u it is Xenoph. So in v. * 'AcL, y), i. q. yevereiga, Genetrix, vox dubia." Well might this eminent Scholar doubt about this word; for its very composition shews it to be a vox nihili. The right word is yevvotioreigot, which Schneider has in its place, where he refers to Orpheus, whose words are Hymn 55 = 54, 12. rswoSorsigu, In 'PopSog Schneider's Lexicon, 2d and 3d Editions, thus cites a passage from Archytas, H. Steph. Excerpt, p. 84. Kcti roic popGois, to1$ ev ruis rsKsTa1$ Kivou^evoag to uuto (rv^aivst. In the f An "extraordinary" mistake of H. Stephen?, copied from the Bulgaria Lexica, (occasioned partly by a faulty reading, and partly by a faulty punctuation of a passage in the Editions of Arrian,) occurs p. 144 = 1464. Ed. nov.: — " Kivccilos, in V V. LL. Gemma, quae et i^uD^uloi \i6os, et \l$e$ 'hhxle, et pa^ya-glnis, Gallice Perle, Margarita, Unio ; Bacca conchea, Virgilio in Culice ; Grauum Rubri Ma- ris, Hieronymo. Erythraeus etiam lapillus appellatur. Arrian. 'HoxxXta, Xtyovo-t xivctthov t£sf£s~v u tJj §a.Xuo , o"n xifffiou yuvouxn'iov, ovriva. xa) j/j revro 'in at ri t£ 'lvs*uiv t^j X,a>ga-S Ta xyuytfta, iru.^ ilfAiag uyiviovn; v/rovon wnopivot inxoft't^ovtriy rov fAu^ya^i- tw *q 'lv}a» yXutrtry xccXt'oftivov." The passage referred to may be found in lad. 8,8. p. 565. Raphel. whence it will appear that it is most inaccurately and imper- fectly cited : Kx) raht (*.zri%irav, xa) xa0aoxvrx o, rt Tig x&xov, xivuilc; \\ivsuv Is ry S-xXoio-ff'f Koott$ to. aywyivu s I Aiovvtros, Tet^a, 18 Aristdrchus Anti-Blomjieldianus. cumque, et ultra quod fcrri potest, superbientem, frangendum judicavi, atque illi soli uegata in reliquos danda venia, suo sibi telo, conviciis nempe, quando adhuc mollioribus insanabile se praebuit, pruriginosum maledicendi ingenium impetendum. Nempe ut sciat, quoties de se tarn insolenter glorietur, alios autem contemptui habeat, non defuturum alicunde vindicem, et quod in aliorum fecerit, id in sua etiam scripta eventurum." K. Johnson. Praef. ad Aristarchum Anti-Ben tleianum p. viii. The serious charges, here made in the most unqualified man- ner against Prof. H ermann, are six in number. 1 . That the praises, which he has in his Review liberally bestowed on the New Gr. Thes., are " most fulsome and un- supported, although, the Reviewer doubts not, unbought panegyric :" £. That " he has intermixed a few trivial objections :" 3. That those " objections were extorted from him by a sense of decency :" 4. That " he and his School never miss an opportunity of lavishing their censure on Porson" and on his English followers : 5. That those followers u are facetiously enough termed by him and his School Porson's disciples :" 6. That " it is a sufficient title to their esteem to flatter the German critics at the expense of the English." 1. As to the first charge against Prof. Hermann, that he has in his Notice of the New Gr. Thes., which was inserted in the 35th No. of the Classical Journal, employed "several pages" to heap on the Editors " most fulsome and unsupported, al- though, as the Reviewer thinks, unbought panegyric," the Editors will first adduce all the matter of that " panegyric," and then compare it with the praises bestowed on the Editors by the Reviewer himself: — • " Ac de eo quidem inter omnes convenire putamus, Editores doctissimos Thesauri Stephaniani tantam et in locupletando hoc libro industriam, et in expoliendo diligentiam adhibere, ut inde non possit non summa ad studia Grascarum litterarum utilitas redundare, Cujus meriti quo insignior est magnitudo, quoque plus laboris in ilia opera exantlandum est, tanto certius confidi- mus, neminem fore, quin ex animo gratias, quanta? maxima? sint, agendas his viris censeat. Quam infiniti enim laboris sit, exempla ab H. Stephano citata exquirere, copias a compluribus hominibus doctis congestas disponere, scriptores omnis generis eorumque interpretes inspicere, in singulis locis vocabulisque, quae dubia atque ambigua sunt,ponderare, postremo ex his omni- bus vera eruere, id is demum recte aestimaverit, qui non dicam ipse similis opera? periculum fecerit, sed vel unam alteramve paginam Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianus. 19 paginam hujus Novi Thesauri ita pertractaverit, ut, quae ibi ex- posita sunt, omnia accurate pervestigaret. Et haec quidem tarn laboriosa opera quemadmodum Editoribus Thesauri non potest non summae laudi esse, ita nobis excusationi erit, si in sententia de hoc libro dicenda tantum hie illic aliquid delibabimus." u Quum ad laudandum infinita suppetat materia, ut comme- morandis, quae nobis probantur, finem non essemus inventuri : malumus, quod et utilius et gratius fore lectoribus speramus, ea tantum aflferre, in quibus nonnihil ab Editoribus doctissimis dis- sentimus." " Debebat autem ad ha3c prohodierno statu philologiae hoc quintum accedere, utin singulis vocabulis etiam viri docti, qui passim in scriptis suis ea explicuissent, vel aliquid, quod operse pretium esset, de iis protulissent, diligenter commemorarentur, quo, quae in ipso Lexico locum non invenirent, lectores, unde pe- tere deberent, possent cognoscere. Et hac quidem in re Editores doctissimi non sunt passi diligentiam suam desiderari." " Sed dicendum iam est de ipsis incrementis, quibus locuple- tari hie Thesaurus coeptus est. Quorum tarn infinita copia est, eaque tam accurate tractata, ut incredibilem Editorum indu- striam ac diligentiam non solum gratissimo animo agnoscamus, sed maxime etiam admiremur. Et primo praeter ea, quae Edi- tores ipsi congesserant, opibus eos usos esse ex schedula tertio Fasciculo adjecta cognoscimus Schaeferi,nostratis, cujus immen- sas copias ipsi vidimus ; deinde Boissonadii, Schweighaeuseri, Coraii, Kallii ; turn adnotationibus ad Scapulam MSS. Ruhn- kenii, Valckenarii, Brunckii, et ad Hederici Lexicon Wakefieldii, et Routhii ; denique non exiguis collectaneis Seageri, aliorum- que Britannorum." " Videamus nunc de eo, quod caput est, de incrementis ip- sis, quibus in nova Editione auctus est Thesaurus. Ac quid faciendum hac in parte merit Editoribus, non potest ambiguum esse ; indicandum erat,exempla a Stephano citata quibus libro- rum capitibus, paginis, versibus exstarent ; corrigendum, quod ille minus recte dixisset ; explicandum uberius, ubi ille pro rei conditione justo brevior fuisset ; supplendum, quidquid vocabu- lorum vel fugisset Stephanum vel latuisset • adnotandum deni- que, qui viri docti de quibusque verbis hie illic disputavissent. Haec vero omnia facta sunt ab Editoribus egregie, et sic, ut dif- ficilius omissum ab iis quidquam, quam allata multa, quae po- tuerint omitti, reperias." " Raro, quamvis in summa Editorum diligentia, aliquid omis- sum videas." "Tertium supra illud commemoravimus, quod multa aliis locis servanda fuerint. Hoc vero est, in quo omnino nobis vi~ C 2 demus 20 Arhtarchus AtUi-Blomfieldianus. demus a dpctissimorum Editorum sententia discedendum esse. Nam etsi gratissimi agnoscimus incredibilem operam, qua tara immensam utilissimarum rcrum copiam congesserunt, tamen, quamvis ilia bona, immo haud raro egregia sint, permagnam partem adnotationum ab his, in quibus leguntur locis, alienissi- mam esse contendimus." "Nonhasc sic diximus, quasi vitio verteremus Editoribus praestantissimis, quod versus illos non emendaverint. Nam quis adco iniquus, ac potius insanus sit, utin libro, qui totus refertus est citationibus scriptorum, locos omnes, qui afferuntur, etiam emendari postulet? Imrao emendationi veterum scriptorum in hac Thesauri editione abunde et multo magis, quam exspectari licebat, satisfactum esse gaudemus, meritoque maximas agimus Editoribus gratias, quod plerumque non in afferendis testimoniis acquieverunt, sed ea accuratius etiam expendenda putarunt. Quo fieri non potest, quin, qui utentur hoc Thesauro, plurimis in rebus mirifice se adiuvari sentiant. Quod si hie illic aliquid est emendationis, quod fugerit viros egregios, tantum abest, ut id mirum in tanta rerum et copia et varietate et difficultate vi- deri possit, ut ilia potius admirari debeamus, qua& summa cura, summoque studio ab iis congesta, disputata, explanata, ad liqui- dum perdocta sunt. Et quis nescit, ssepissime accidere, ut emen- dationes, in quas quemvis putes incidere debere, sero demum uni in mentem veniant ? " Sed decet iam finem facere scribendi. Et quern admodum non dubitamus, quin Editores prsestantissimi, maximeque, cuius prascipuam in edendo hoc Thesauro operam esse accepimus, doctissimus Barkerus, et gratiam ab omnibus, qui litteras Gra3- cas tractant, summam inierint, et seternam tam egregio opere condendo laudem sibi parituri sint, ita optamus ex animo, ut et valetudo ac vires iis ad sustinendos tantoslabores suppetant, et quasvis alias obtingant ad perflciendam hanc utilissimi libri edi- tionem commoditates atque opportunitates." Here is the sum total of that "most fulsome and unsupported panegyric," of which the Reviewer speaks. The statement of the Reviewer, that it consists of " several pages," is a direct false- hood. The Review of the New Gr. Thes. by Prof. Hermann fills just 24 pages in the Classical Journal, and that part of it, which chaunts the praises of the Thes., in point of fact would not occupy three pages of the Class. Journ., if it were all. col- lected together. The reader will observe not only that the Re- viewer's statement is absolutely untrue, but that it must have been designedly made so, for the purposes of his malignity to~ wards the Thesaurus and its Editors. It was in vain for the Re- viewer to attack the Thes., to start objection after objection to Aristarchus Anti-Blomfteldianus. 21 its plan, to its execution, to all its parts, and to heap Pelion upon Ossa, unless he could destroy the value of Professor Hermann's praises by representing them to be " most fulsome and unsup- ported," and by furnishing an apparent proof of the fact in the assertion that those praises were made to extend through " se- veral pages." Whether those praises are " most fulsome," is a question, which must be decided by more impartial judges and more ho- nourable men, than the Reviewer. Such judges and such men have delivered their testimony, which may be seen in the Adver- tisement, prefixed by the Editors to the 9th Number of their Work. In addition to those testimonials, the Editors produce the following :- — " Li brum, qui nunc tibi traditur in manus, ab editore multo doctiore ipse teolim expectare jusseram, humanissime lector; a Barkero, nempe, viro eruditissimo et in Grammaticoi um Graeco- rum lectione exercitatissimo, qui ilium egregia sane opera illu- stravisset, si, quod primum destinaverat, potuisset perfieere. Ete- nim Herodiani, ut videtur quidem, nOmine ac fama captus, hos 'EmpsgKrpovs e Codd. Reg. Par. describi sibi curaverat, quos a tenebns ac situ vindicaret, et doctis hominibus proponeret. Sed cum Thesauri Gr. Stephaniani nova Editio, opus immensum, ingens, nihil Barkero fere relinquat otii, jacebat Herodianus expectans, si quis forsan ilium tolleret." Boissonadii Prsef. ad Pseudo-Herodiani Partitt. It is worthy of remark, that, while the Reviewer can see in the Gr. Thes. nothing useful, (" those optics are but dim, " That tell you so," Cow iter's Table Talk.) Prof. Boissonade, in the work just cited, has found much for his purpose : (see p. 126. twice : p. 143. " De h. v., quam vulgo scribunt per i, ^iX^njs, cf. Barkerus, vir doctiss. in Lexico Vo- cum peregr. ante Steph. Thes. Nov. Ed. Lond. p. CCCLXVI. et in Classica EphemerideT. 15. p. 216.": pp. 240. 283.-285.: p. 294. " Vide nunc omnino Thesauri H. Stephani Editionem Londinensem p. 512. extr.": p. 295. " De loco Porphyrii vide omnino Thesaurum H. Stephani Londinensis Editionis T. 1 . p. 519" : and p. 298.) and that, while Mr. Blomfield has never on any occasion found any thing in Mr. Barker's compo- sitions worth his notice, this learned and candid foreigner has had frequent occasion to quote them in this book : see pp. 88. 126. 134. : p. 254. " T« $su, adtulit Barkerus in Amoenitati- bus Criticis amoenissimis, Ephemeridi Classical T. 16. p. 109- insertis, adverbium «§«as illustraturus, quern vide:" p. 298. " Restitutio 22 Aristarchus Anti-Blomjieldianus. " Restitutio vocis otyysiw$ov$ pro ayysAjwSouj, venit in menteni et Barkero, viro doctissimo et amicissimo." While Mr. Blom- field could perceive, in what Mr, Barker has written on the sub- ject of Aeschylus, nothing but worthless weeds, Professor Her- mann, who is labouring in the same field with Mr. Blomfield, but who is actuated by no spirit of party, has found good fruit : " E. H. Barkero Viro clarissimo S. P. D. G. Hermannus. " Diarii Classici copiam mihi facit amicus, qui eum librum pos- sidet. In quo quag a te, eruditissime Barkere, ad Aeschylum collatasunt, ita mihi placuerunt, ut ad ea nolim ilia comparari, qu33 alii in eodemlibro protulerunt, in quibus, (perlustravi autem hue usque octo prima volumina,) perpauca me invenisse fateor, quae aliquid momenti habere viderentur. Vellem mehercule omnes ita sentirent, uti te sentire video, interpretandos prius, quam corrigendos esse scriptores ; quo ne sana corrigerentur, intacta autem relinquerentur, qua3 male affecta sunt. " Caeterum ita existima, metui studiosissimum esse, tequeex animo diligere. Vale. D. Lipsias d. ix. Martii 1817." The Editors have in the testimonials principally confined themselves to foreign scholars, because the scholars of their own country might be considered as " partial friends." But they could appeal to many learned and excellent men in this country, who have passed their general approbation on the work, though they may not have approved of every part. The celebrated Richard Johnson, in the Preface to his Ari- starchus Anti-Bentleianus, charges the celebrated Richard Bentley with publishing some epistolary encomiums, which he had received from his friends, (" Cum amicorum litems, quibus ipse laudatur, publicare sustineat,") and the Reviewer may, if he pleases, charge the Editors with the same offence. But self- praise is universally allowed to be then perfectly proper, when it; is employed for the purpose of refuting calumny. The Editors ask with what grace the Reviewer can call Her- mann's praises of the New Gr. Thes. " most fulsome," when Mr. Blomfield has on several occasions, which will be hereafter spe- cified, scattered the most profuse praise on Dr, Maltby's Thes. Gr. Poes. ? But, says the Reviewer, Hermann's praises of the New Gr. Thes. are " unsupported ;" and should the Editors even admit this to be true, still they charge the Reviewer with an evil in- tention in saying so, because, while he knew that Hermann has assigned Aristarchus Anti-~Blomfieldianus. 23 assigned a satisfactory reason for not stating at length the grounds for his praises -f, (" Etenim, quum ad laudandum infinita sup- petat materia, ut commemorandis, quae nobis probantur, finem non essemus inventuri, maltjmus, quod et utilius et gratius FORE LECTORI BUS SPERAMUS, EA TANTUM AFFERRE, IN QUIBUS nonnihil ab Editoribus doctissimjs dissentimus,") he knew that his readers must interpret the word " unsupported " to mean, that the Professor had praised the work beyond its deserts — that he neither had supported, nor could support his praise by adequate quotations from it. If the Reviewer will take the trouble of applying to a learned friend of his in the University of Cambridge, he will have the same satisfaction, which one of the Editors, during a short conversation, himself enjoyed, of hearing that distinguished scholar say, that in his judgment Hermann's Review of the New Gr, Thes. was perfectly fair. It now remains for the Editors to collect those praises of them- selves and their Work, which are contained in the Review, that the curious reader may contrast them with the above recited praises from the pen of Hermann, and notice " the most extra- ordinary " fact, that the eulogium of the Reviewer, as far it goes, perfectly tallies with the " panegyric " of Hermann, which the Re- viewer pronounces to be " most fulsome and unsupported : " — ■ P. 324. " Another defect of the Thesaurus, and it is only sur- prising that it did not exist in a still greater degree, is the absence of a vast number of words, which are found in various writers, in the Tragedians, in the Fragments of the Poets, the Antholo- gia, the Platonists, the Erotic Writers, the Scholiasts, the Gram- marians, and other Neoteric Authors. For this defect a remedy has been in part provided by the labours of Scott, Suicer, Jen- sius, and others ; and amongst later Scholars by Bast, Schaefer, Schweighaeuser, Boissonade, and many more, whose Papers the present publishers have procured at a considerable expence, besides the voluntary contributions of several laborious scholars. In this respect, indeed, it is probable that the present republica- tion will leave little to be desired. In fact, we are not sure that the deluge of new words will not be quite overwhelming." P. 326. " A still further accession of utility was to be ob- tained by referring, under particular words, to the writings of modern critics and philologists, who have illustrated their mean- ings or properties. In this respect the present Editors have been •f* Hermann has acted precisely in the same way in the Review of Elmsley's Medea. ** Afferemus autem talia potissimum, in quibus dissentimus ab Editoie clarissimo, non quo reprehendere virum, quem maximi facimus, sed quia census ram, quae nihil aliud quam liber iste, cuius ea censura est, contineat; inutilem esse existimamus." Classical Journal 38, 210. eminently 24 Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianus. eminently diligent, and leave little to be desired. It is but jus- tice to them to observe, that they have displayed a most extensive reading, and much Curious research. Scarcely any sources of information are open, to zohich they have not had recourse ; and we are therefore the more inclined to regret, that they have al- lowed themselves so little time for the thorough digestion and ju- dicious arrangement of their materials." P. 328. " We are far, however, from being disposed to judge the conductors of the present work with severity [!!!]. The task, which they have undertaken, is a most difficult one, requiring a union of learning, sagacity, and judgment, which is of very rare occurrence. To their multifarious reading, and diligence in re- search, we are most ready to do justice ; audjreely acknowledge, that in point of quantity very little, which is requisite to the il- lustration of the Greek language, is omitted in the present Edi- tion of the Thesaurus" P. 346. " All this is the more to be regretted, because the Editors are by no means wanting in erudition, nor deficient in materials for this great undertaking ; these, indeed, they possess in such abundance, that with an ordinary share of discretion and judgment and patience, they might have constructed a Thesau- rus, which should [would] have been, what the present never can be, a complete and systematic body of philology, a well-fur- nished storehouse of sound criticism, and of valuable informa- tion upon every subject connected with Greek literature." P. 347- " The present editors have spared no expense; their research has been indefatigable ; but they should have taken time and advice." P. 348. " The execution of the work, in point of typography, is upon the whole deserving of praise ; and does credit to Mr. Valpy's accuracy, and to the care of the corrector. The printing from so many different MSS. and scraps of paper must be very trying to the patience and skill of the compositor and reviser." P. 348. " In taking leave of the Editors of this enlarged The- saurus, we once more assure them, that we have great respect for their zeal, perseverance and research, but little or none for their judgment, or taste." The Editors will elsewhere point out the coincidence between -the Reviewer and Hermann, in respect to what the former tamely calls " a commendable impartiality (of the Editors) in their quotations from contemporary scholars." The Editors now proceed to discuss the second and third arges, which the Reviewer has brought against Hermann : — 2, 3. That " he has intermixed a few trivial objections, ex- torted FROM HIM BY A SENSE OF DECENCY." On Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianus. 25 On the " decency" of this assertion, which is not and cannot be supported by fact, the Editors need make no comment. But the falshood and the malignity of the assertion are points, which the Editors will now determine, by producing the " objections" themselves, by thus showing that they are not " trivial," by proving that they are the very "objections" urged by the Re- viewer himself, and by demonstrating that those "objections" cannot be "trivial" in the case of Hermann, and the reverse in the case of the Reviewer himself. " Ac non nihil mirati sumus, quid fuerit> quod Editores, quum in Epistola ad Lectorem, quam interim Prsefationis loco esse vo- luerunt, de multis aliis rebus dicerent, de ea, quae primaria erat, nihil plane dixerint, nisi hoc, noluisse se in ipso Stephani libro quidquam mutare. Neque alibi quidquam de ea ratione, qua edituri essent nunc Thesaurum, ab iis scriptum accepimus, nisi, quod a viris inter populares suos et ap. exteros litterarum Grse- carum scientia claris, ut communicarent secum, si quid habe- rent, quod esset augendo illi libro, petierunt. Ex quo aliquid dubitationis nobis subnatum esse fatemur, an iis cupiditas dc- ctorum,maturari Editionem flagitantium,tempus praeciderit, quo opus erat ad tantum opus ita et instituendum et perficiendum, ut illud ex omni parte consummatissimum iudicari posset. Ac vellemus quidem fecissent viri prasstantissimi, quod fieri par erat in paranda Editione operis immortalis, quae ipsa aeternum huius aevi monumentum extitura esset : exposuissent prius accurate de universa ratione, quam sibi sequendam putarent, omnesque ha- rum litterarum peritos invitassent, ut suam quisque de ea sen- tentiam in medium afferret, quo deinde id, quod optimum visum esset, et, si non omnium, certe plerorumque assensu comproba- tum, adscisceretur atque effectum daretur." Hermann. " It seems not a little surprizing, that, before entering upon a work of such magnitude and importance, the Editors did not submit to the learned world a tolerably exact outline of the plan, which they intended to pursue, together with a specimen of its execution. Had that been done, we venture to say that such advice would have been given them from various quarters, as would have prevented their embarking upon an ocean, which seems to be without a shore, and themselves Like Whiston, wanting pyx or stars." Reviewer, p. 332. - " To this end it was undoubtedly their duty to mark out for themselves a well defined and intelligible plan of proceeding ; to submit it to the learned world for their approbation or correc- tion, $6 Aristarchus Anti-Blomjieldianus. tion, with a specimen of the execution ; to collect their mate- rials beforehand." Ibid. 346. " The present Editors have spared no expense ; their research has been indefatigable, and their own reading very extensive ; but they should have taken time and advice." Ibid. 347. The plan, which at the very outset of the undertaking the Editors adopted, was this. A private letter was sent by Mr. Valpy to all the scholars in England, with whose names he was acquainted, informing them that he intended to reprint in Num- bers the Greek Thesaurus of H. Stephens, soliciting their sub- scription, their advice, and their assistance. Some few remarks were made by several of those persons, to whom the letter was sent, but nothing very material was elicited from them. After the lapse of some time, one of the Editors was invited to Dr. Parr's house at Hatton, for the purpose of conferring with him on the subject, went thither, met Dr. Butler, the Head- Mas- ter of Shrewsbury-School ; and Dr. Parr, in conjunction with Dr. Butler, dictated to the Editor a variety of observations, which were committed to paper, and laid before all the princi- pal scholars in England. But no comments of any great im- portance were made on those observations by the persons, to whose inspection they were submitted. Among the persons consulted were Mr. Elmsley, who sent a complimentary letter, and authorised the Editors to insert his name in the subscrip- tion list; the late Dr. Burney, who did the same; Professor Monk, who merely said in the course of conversation to one of the Editors, that such a work was what all scholars wanted, but that he feared that it was quite impracticable to accomplish it; and the Reviewer himself, or Mr. Blomneldf, who returned the papers with a letter ; 1 . remarking that the Editors seemed to be aware of all u the sources, from which a Lexicographer may f It will be as satisfactory to the public, as to Mr. Blomfield himself, to be pre- sented with a copy of the letter alluded to, which was addressed to Mr. Barker, and dated Chesterford, March 10, J8l2.:— '< I beg leave to return you my thanks, for a sight of the hints, which you have drawn up for a Prospectus of the projected republication of Stephens. You seem to be aware of all the sources, from which a Lexicographer may profit j permit me, however, to recommend, that great caution should be used in incorporating the Appendix of Scott, who has favoured us with some hundreds of words, which never Existed any where but in his own cerebellum. I believe that there is no Index Verborum to Galen, nor indeed am 1 aware of any Index. I know not how far Foesius may supply the place of it in his notes on Hippocrates, not having his CEconomia by me." The amiable and the learned Mr. George Dyer has recently informed the Edi- tors, that the library of Caius College, Cambridge, contains a MS. Index to Galen. Some of the errors in Scott's Appendix have been pointed out by Ernesti, in his preface to Hedcric's Lexicon. profit;" Aristarchus Anti-Blomfiddianus. 27 profit;" and 2. " recommending great caution in incorporating the Appendix of Scott," and with a few notes, which corrected some orthographical mistakes of the person, who had transcribed the papers, and contained a sneer at Lennep's Analogia Linguae Graecae, as edited by Everard Scheide, who " has gambolled in etymology at a most surprising rate," who has " danced after the ignis fatuus of etymology," who has written " a worthless far- rago of etymological nonsense :" see Reviewer, pp. 304. 308. 322. In their printed Prospectus, the Editors invited all the learned men in Europe to assist them in their arduous undertak- ing; but still no further assistance was obtained than what has been mentioned. In these circumstances the public will see with what " sense of decency " or justice the Reviewer can now come forward and charge them with not having asked " advice." Either the Reviewer had at that time no " advice " to give, or he suppressed it from a disreputable motive. " Et illud quidem, quod postremum nominavimus, mensuram syllabarum, neglexisse Editores videntur." Hermann. " The utility and value of the Thesaurus might further have received a very important addition, if the quantities had been marked over all the doubtful syllables, as is the case in the best Latin Lexicons. We are surprised that this obvious and desir- able improvement did not suggest itself to the present Editors." Reviewer, p. 326. Here again the Editors have reason to complain of the most unfair conduct of the Reviewer, who repeats the objection of Hermann, and has wilfully suppressed their reply to it, which, as the reader will see by turning to Class. Journ. XXXVI,, was this : — (i The Editors need only observe, that it is their pre- sent intention to mark the quantity of the syllables in the Gene- ral Index." The reasons which have weighed with the Editors in making this determination, are these : 1 . agreat fear that " much valuable time" would be consumed in discussing the more knotty points of prosody, while the Subscribers would be impatient for the appearance of the work, 2. a conviction that the attention of the Editors would be thus drawn too much from the main object of unfolding the various meanings of the Greek words, 3. that the prosodiacal discussions would fill too much space in the body of the work, 4. that the science of prosody is at pre- sent in a very imperfect state, but is advancing towards perfec- tion, 5. that by waiting till the appearance of the General Index, the work would be more perfect in this respect, 6. that in the mean time, according to the Reviewer, p. 326. " the student, who possesses Dr. Maltby's elaborate and accurate Thes, Gr* Poes., will Aristarchus Anti-Blonifieldianus. w ill need no other source of information on questions relating to the prosody of the language." " Neque illi in nominibus propriis qua ratione usi sint, dixe- runt, quorum perpauca commemoravit Stephanus. At, ut nos quidem arbitramur, hasc minime omnium negligenda sunt, non solum propter formas, quas vel ipsa, vel etiam quae ab iis deri- vantur, valde memorabiles habent, sed etiam quia magna pars horum nominum longe antiquissima sunt veteris Grsecorum lin- guae monumenta." Hermann. " P. 365. 'AyysXiog is given as a Greek word, on the autho- rity of Hesiod : 'AyyiXly 7ra>Ae7rai hit eugea, vcutu SaAaa-j 7r«Aa» ex tguv Koovq-txvtivov %q6mv, twv 'ExxA>}jtov : 5, 10. So too Sozomeni H. E. 6, 9. 7> 12. and Hofmanni Lexicon Universale 1, 107. But they agree with Tittmann and the Re- viewer in reading 'AysXXiog, which is defended by the name of a Latin w T riter, Agellius, sometimes used by scholars for Aulus Gellius. Petrus Scriverius, in a letter to Joannes Meursius, (Meursii Opp. 11,6.) " JVledicinam, quam adtulisti Agellio olim Medico, profecto bona est, et delicata." " Aulus Gellius, non Agellius, uti Codd. nonnulli habent." Noltenii Lex. Antibar- barum, p. 2004. " Agellius. Lipsius se hujus scriptoris nomen nunquam, nisi dubitantem et haesitantem ponere scribit, 1 An- tiq. Lect.X. cf.Tilem.p.295." Tobiae Magiri Eponymologium Criticum, 1644. 4. p. 8. " Gellius, vel Agellius ; nam utravis forma scribatur, in ea re salutem GraeciEe non versari scitissime censet C. Barth. xxxv, 7. qui tamen pro Gellio pronuntiat. Vide sis argumenta argutissima." Ibid. 86. Gellius was pre- ferred by the great Salmasius : Plin. Exerc. 23. b. 31. a. 34. b. " Etym. M. **Ayehxio§ 9 ovopct xvgiov, 7rg07rugo%vvsToti . Suid. et Zonar. *'Ays\ao$' ovo/x-a xvgiov, leg. AysXouo$. Suid. *'AyvXoao$* ovofxu xvqiov, f. 1. *AykK" Nov. Thes. G. L. 643. c. But the Editors have here been mistaken ; for 'AyeXuos arid 'AyvXaiog are Greek names, most assuredly the first : see Hofmann 1. c. et 1 1 7« If the Reviewer had examined the New Gr. Thes. more closely, he would have found that *Evxygio$ is mentioned in it, p. 718. d. : — "*EvoLygiu$, propr. nom. Zonar. Evdygiu$' xvgiov. Ovto$ eygottye halogen, xu) 1 Tt:o\kvyi\lcitol elg toL$ nugoipias 2o\op,wv- to$ 9 pro quibus verbis Suid. habet : Evdygio^. Ovto$ eygatye hitx$ogu 9 xoti 'TnofAVYifJirX, el$ roi$ noLpoipicis tov 2o\oix,wvto$" The Reviewer argues too acutely, when he says that " by the same process of reasoning," (viz. that 'AyyeXiog is a true Greek word, because there was a Bishop of that name in the reign of Valens,) " we might be led to admit into the Thes. all proper names ; and yet we do not find that the Editors have noticed Evdygiog, or JlvQayysXog, or many others. For ourselves we should be disposed to give all proper names : we only notice the present instance as a proof of that want of consistency, of which we com- plain.' 7 The Editors have not professed either to give or to omit all proper names, and whether they insert proper names occa- sionally, or omit them occasionally, there is " no want of con- sistency." They are guided by circumstances or by accident, and so was H. Stephens hiniself, who more often omits than in- serts SO Aristarc/tus Anti-B/omfic/dianus. serts them, and who was in this respect just as consistent of in- consistent as themselves. The Editors have frequently introduced proper names, more especially when any adjectives are formed from them, and this is the sole or the principal reason, which in- duced H. Stephens occasionally to admit them. Thus the Edi- tors, p. 699- d. have introduced *^ # i7u0ayo££*O£, et vyrOKogia-riTtw^ *27u0a- yogiog, et cetera derivata: p. 1530. *Aivy)o-io$, *'AgiJ°"'S t% iroLgolino§.' In the new edition it stands thus : — ' '4y- yekixr), r)$, rj, Saltatio quaedam, quae inter pocula exercebatur. Hesych. 'AyyeklY)' ogxytrls rig %agoivio;. 7 And then the quotation from Athenaeus is given as a part of the Editors' additional re- marks. But this is not reprinting Stephens, nor is it doing miss justice. If any alterations were to be made in his disposition of the* words and in his own observations, it would surely have been better to new-model the whole Thes., and to desert Ste- phens at once. ' As it is, we are ready to allow that these inno- vations are to be attributed to the plan, which the Editors have followed, rather than to carelessness on their part. It was hardly possible to fulfil their own notions, and yet adhere to Stephens." Reviewer, 1. c. This notable discovery of the Reviewer deserved the Scriptu- ral slaughter of the fatted calf, or the more generous sacrifice of a Pythagorean hecatomb, Diog> L. 8, 1. The articles '"AyysXog pro ayy? Ap*,' and * 'AyyeXixyj, Saltatio quaedam,' were transposed for a reason, which will be both obvious and satisfactory to the reader, if he will turn to the Thes. itself. The order in the ori- ginal of H . Stephens js : — 1. "AyysXosy pro Nuntio Dei xotr e^o^v, Angelus. 2. 'AyyeXixbs, y, bv, Angelicus, Ad angelum pertinens. 3. "AyysXog pro ccyyeXpcc. « 4. 'AyysXixY), Saltatio quaedam. 5. "AyysXog, a Syracusanis dicta Diana. 6. Composita ex*AyyeXo$, Nuntius. 7. ' AvdyysXo$> ov, 6 9 y, Nuntio carens. Now the order, adopted by the Editors, is more nattfral, al- phabetical and logical, than the order of Stephens :«— 1. *AyysXo$, pro Nuntio Dei. 2. 'AyyeXixbs, Angelicus. 3. 'AyyeXixY), Saltatio quaedam. 4. \*'AyyzXiKY), Herba. 5. [*'AyyskmY) pr](ns. 6. \*AvToayysXi>to$. 7. [*'AyyeXixa>$. 8. "AyyeXo$ pro ayygA/x-a. 9. — Diana. 10. Composita ex "AyysXos, Nuntius. * 11.. 'AvdyyeXog, ov, 6, ^ Nuntio carens. This is not the only instance, in which the Editors have trans-. posed Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianus. 33 posed articles in Stephens' work for the sake of alphabetical or- der. He has placed Alohofagpog after Alohodcogov : 'Ae§vlot$) 'Agr&pifog ogxyvlg rig ecrriv "ihog xa\ av^Yja-ig' y]v 8s' rig xot) 'Ioqvixy) ogxyvig nagolviog' xcd tyjv ayys\ixr)v 8e irupowov i)xgl£ovv ogxyriv*]" The Reviewer will say that there would have been no occa- sion for the Editors to re-quote, and at greater length, the passage of Athenaeus, and that this is another instance of an article " pre- posterously amplified." But the truth is that Stephens' quota- tion is imperfect, that essential part being omitted, which shews that this kind of Saltatio was peculiar to Syracuse ; and here the Editors may by the way observe how much more advantageous to the reader a full quotation is than half a one. He who cites only half a sentence, as Mr. Blomfield frequently does in his pub- lications, very often deceives himself as to its meaning, and then misleads his readers; He who cites the passage entire* will in- deed make what the Reviewer calls " more bulky literature ;" but, though he may deceive himself, he cannot mislead his read- ers. The Editors need not comment on the absurdity of the Re- p viewer?* 34 Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianm. viewer's remark, that making alterations, such as those pointed out above, " is not reprinting Stephens, nor is it doing him jus- tice." In a preceding part of this Reply, the reader has seen the Reviewer with his "most extraordinary" acuteness, arguing, that because the Editors have in one instance employed a proper name to vindicate a disputed word "as a true Greek word," they ought " by the same process of reasoning to have admitted all proper names into the Thes.," and have shewn " a want of consistency" in not having done so. Here the Reviewer has used " the same process of reasoning." Because the Editors have for the sake of order transposed two articles in Stephens, and for the purposes of saving room, and adapting the new to the old matter, have in one of those articles made a trifling " alteration :" ("Et textum quidem non sumus ita morosi, ut totidem ubique litteris, quot a Stephano, exhibendum fuisse censeamus," Her- mann.) the Reviewer says : " If any alterations were to be made inhis disposition of the words, and in his own observations upon them, it would surely have been better to new-model the whole Thes., and to desert Stephens at once." The reader has heard of the /3a&>£ in poetry and oratory ; here he sees the fiubos in logic, and the sole merit of this discovery belongs to this " most extraordinary" son of Aristotle, the learned Reviewer! " Majus vero incommodum ex eo ortum videmus, quod, quae ab ipsis Editoribus textui inserta sunt, saepe ab iis, qua? Stepha- nus scripserat, $istingui nequeunt. Praeter haec illud quoque valde incommodum est, quod, quae ex aliorum scriptis depromta sunt, etsi fere uncinulis ad primum ultimumque verbum appi- ctis " " distinguuntur, tamen propter multitudinem horum unci- nulorum ssepe diu quaerendum est, usque dum, cujus ea verba sint, reperias." Hermann. " The present Editors, professing to preserve the whole of the original Thesaurus with the most scrupulous reverence, have di- spersed it here and there amidst a vast mass of omnifarious matter, so that we never know who it is that is instructing us, whether Stephens, or Schaefer, or Schweighaeuser, or Mr. Barker.— In a publication, which professes to be a new edition of Stephens' Thesaurus, we may reasonably expect to find the labours of that Lexicographer so distinctly separated from the recent additions to his work, that we shall have no difficulty in determining what is Stephens's, and what is not. But so little is this just and ne- cessary assignment of property attended to in the present work, that it is extremely difficult for the student to ascertain what portion of an article belongs to the original edition, and what is peculiar to the new. Parenthesis within parenthesis, and brack- etted Aristarchm Anti-Blomfieldianus. 35 etted brackets confuse us in our enquiry, and demand more time than we can afford to bestow upon the parentage of each re- mark." Reviewer, p. 332. " One great advantage will result from the adoption of the plan, on which the Editors henceforth propose to act, that the Subscribers will have no difficulty in distinguishing the matter of H. Stephens from that furnished by the Editors themselves, be- cause the former will always be given intire, and the latter always subjoined in brackets." ^Advertisement to the 9th No. of the New Gr. Thes. "Nunc dicatur de iis, quse omitti potuisse videantur. Atque horum quadruplex genus est. Alia enim plane omnino super- vacanea erant ; alia brevius et contractus dici poterant ; alia rectius aliis locis servata fuissent ; alia denique, quamvis prse- clara, a Thesauro hoc alieniora erant." Hermann. " But least of all can it be tolerated, that in a work, which cannot possibly be made too compendious, (so that nothing im- portant be omitted,) the compiler should indulge in discussions and observations quite foreign from the subject in hand, and oftentimes having nothing to do with the word under considera- tion." Reviewer, p. 327. " The word kywtr\ f is dismissed with the following brief and insufficient notice : — ' 'Ayx.^, rj$, yi 9 Di- lectio, Caritas [Amor, Bene volenti a.] Plut. Sympos. vii. (6. T. 8. p. 835.) "Atottov Se xaj to vrpbg ocyvcorot xop&Yj xa» «o-«v^>j /3a8/£siv, uv fir} rig y 8»av agsTJj, xaSonrsg siq^rui, xa) touto xyctncbvTs$.~] Hesych. tamen oty.$ ayamih, [Etym. M. p* 88* 33.~\ praepositione a/*o$, uvtq$ eAxe Xajowra&j. Apoll. R, 4, 66. #Ao£ 8' afyoet povYi[^ct toO S/xvovTog ou lapo^ei JJvgog jU-aAeea yvaftog. Insignis est Phrynichi locus, e Fabula IlKsvpwvluig de- sumptus, ap. Tzetz. in Lycophr. 433. Kgurog nor' e\g yyv t^vS* eirs, Voro." " All" which " is more than this, is superfluous, and therefore hurtful, because it increases the bulk and expensiveness of the work, and needlessly distracts the attention of the student. A" Glossary " is not the place for critical discussions." " Of what consequence is it to the student, who looks into" the Glossary for the meaning of " Sa7rrw to know " how Tzetzes and Pausa- nias are to be corrected, " or to be pestered with all the nonsense which" has been " written, not upon" tionrroo, " but upon a pas- sage, in which" xarslaia-aro " occurs?" See Reviewer, p. 33Q. " Nusquam hoc magis conspicuum est, quam in iis, quae de nomine clyuXfjux. allata sunt. De quo quum e:\poni coeptum esset p. 181., nondum finitaest ilia disputatio p. 320., qua? ultimaest hujus fasciculi. At quis ducentas et quadraginta paginas unius vocabuli caussa perlegere sustineat ? Aut quis hie speret se Ion- gas dissertationes de Hecate, de nepivTloig, aliisque huiusmodi rebus permultis inventurum esse, quae etiam eo lectorem mo- rantur, quod difficulter, ubi incipiant et ubi desinant, invenitur ? Denique quis expectct, magna diligentia hie enumerari, ubi otyctXpec Iluvbg, A\og> 'AgTipifog, et sic caeterorum numinum ap. ve teres Aristarchus Jnti-Blomfieldiamis* 39 veteres dicatur? Atque ut habeat aliquid utilitatis haec enume- ratio, quis non deos illos secundum litterarum ordinem comrae- moratos volet, non autem, quod hie factum, sine certo ordine ? qua? res mirum quantum auget quaerendi laborem. Omnino, si usquam, in his, quae de ista voce dicta sunt, mira regnat confu- sio ac perturbatio. Sic quum p. 197. allatus esset locus Eusta- thii de discrimine inter olyuXfj,a et^a^a, sequuntur Ilotvos oiyaK- pa. isto significant et 'Exa-njf ayaAjaaf, cum tota ilia Disserta- tione de Hecate, ac turn demum p. 257. in viamreversi pergunt Edi tores : — '"AyctXpoc passim a Poetis sumitur pro Decus, Or- namentum, Deliciae/ w Hermann. After these remarks, one would have thought that the Re- viewer from " a sense of decency" would not have renewed this subject, and from a feeling of generosity, would not have struck a prostrate foe. " It will scarcely be credited, that 139 columns are occupied by the single word "AyuXfia, or rather by a series of dissertations upon every thing relating to ornaments, images, and decorations of all kinds, with occasional episodes upon matters altogether foreign, which happen to cross the Editor, as he is hunting the word uyotXpu through all the mazes of philology. It is curious to observe how frequently he loses the scent, and goes oft' upon a new track, if some curious expression or custom thwarts his path. For instance, the word ayuXpoL occurs in the last line of an Epigram, which the Editor transcribes at full length as usual, (for it is no uncommon thing with him to give us half a page of an author at a time,) and in which Epigram mention is made of the custom, which hunters had, of suspending some part of the game to a tree, as an offering to some Deity ; a custom known to every fourth-form boy J. Accordingly off goes the Editor, in a note upon this practice, not containing one word about &yu\- jw,«. In the next page but one, because 'Exar^ uyotXpa is used by Aristophanes to signify ' a dog ', he actually begins a disser- tation, which is continued through 55 columns, upon the saeri- •f- "Cujusmodi est fragmentum Aristpphanis ex TayttvurraTs ap. Schol. ad Ran, 295. %6ovta,s 'E**rns tu^x, tttfym l&Xiga^svn, cuius quamvis facillima esset emenda- tio, tameri quid mirerriur, non esse earn factam ab Editoribus Thesauri p. 231. d., quum ne Bi unckius quideno, qui de industria hoc agere debebat, quidquam adno- taverit ? Servatum hoc erat Seidlero, qui in brevi Disputatione de Fragmentis Ari- stophanis, quae nuper edita est, p. 21. ita scribendum esse vidit : XHo/ta, tr 'Exu>r^ ctuyti lp oo* XxiXfoftfii*? 1 Hermann. But the Editors prefer the correction of Per- son ap. Kidd. ad Dawes. Misc. Crit. 584. XSmm'a $' *E*4r«, ^s« On 'Er.«r»j ayaX^asee Osann. Anal. Crit. 127. X " Where, if Abresch and Bos bad not long ago restored igii*, any fourth'form boy would." Mr. Blomfield, in the Edinburgh Review of Dr. Butler's Aeschylus, Ko. 38, p. 504. fices 40 Aristarchus Anti-Blomjieldianus* fices offered to Hecate and other Gods, and the different titles of Hecate, and notes on the Tgl§a\\oi, and Sophron, and oLppa^ ri^co, and Mercury, and the ancient Chemists, and what not ? — but not a word of, or relating to ccyuK^oc in the whole of this enormous excrescence. Again, we have a careful enumeration of all the passages, which contain any mention of oiyotk^u Ails, TJavo^ 'A7t6x\cjovo$ etc. and so on through the whole Pantheon ; which kind of obscura diligentia is much the same, as would be that of an English Lexicographer, who, under the word Church f, should proceed to enumerate St. Paul's Church ; St. James's Church; St. Pancras ; St. Botolph; St. Benet Fink; Alhal- lows, Balking ; and Christ-Church, which of course would fur- nish a good opportunity for several dissertatory columns upon Oxford, Cardinal Wolsey, etc-^r-The Editors are aware of the censure, which they have deservedly incurred in this respect, and have offered the following apology in a recent number of the Class. Journ. : — ' Should any of the Subscribers, from a cursory view of the work, be disposed to infer that, as so much space is employed in the explanations of some words, there is but little chance of the undertaking ever being completed within the prescribed li- mits ; the Editors would add, that much of the matter, both in the text and in the notes, relates to words, which will come un- der discussion, as they proceed. The quotations, for instance, introduced from the Greek writers and the Greek grammarians to illustrate the various significations of the word "AyaXpct, are equally applicable to the illustrations of the synonymes '^va'flv^a, ^Avlqius, Bgirag, Fqu^y], £ooivov,etc, (synonymes % forsooth !) and thus the work is in reality advanced in proportion to the extent of such matter/ " But this defence, although plausible, is not true [for satis- factory i forsooth ! ']. The question is, not whether every word is to be illustrated at equal length; but whether a proportion- able number of words> throughout the alphabet, are to serve as pegs for notes and dissertations ; and we do not hesitate to af- firm, that, if the Editors preserve any degree of consistency or plan, and illustrate other classes of words in the same manner, . f The reader wilj observe how all this Church-learning designates the Domestic Chaplain of the Bishop of London. | The Reviewer may be startled at this sound of synonymes. But the words are nevertheless synonymes. If ayuXfiee, and avufaftet were not occasionally sy- nonymous, the one word would not in the works of the Greek Grammarians be interpreted by the other, see the New Gr. Thes. p. 192. c. j and the same may be said of the other words mentioned above as synonymous. as. Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldiamis. 41 "as 'they have elucidated ayatyca, and some others, the magnitude of the intire work will even exceed that, which we have assigned to it." Reviewer, p. 333—5. The Editors have not a sufficiently "microscopic" eye to see clearly what is meant by " every word," and " a proportionable number of words," and the inquiry may "demand more time than they can afford to bestow." But they are prepared to main- tain that their " defence," so far as it goes, is as satisfactory and " true," as it is " plausible." The synonymous words discussed under uyuX^u will not be re-discussed in any other part of the Thesaurus ; and the words incidentally discussed in the text or the notes will not be re-discussed elsewhere. But, if they had not been discussed here, they would have been discussed else- where. The real length, therefore, of the article on ayuK^ct is what it contains independently of those discussions of synony- mous terms, and independently of those words incidentally dis- cussed. The Reviewer says that " the article on * Ayu.Xyi.cL occupies )39 columns" — granted. He also says that in them are included "fifty-five columns on Hecate" etc. — granted also. " Their number last he sums. And now his heart Intends with pride, and hard'ning in his strength Glories." Milton's Paradise Lost, l, 571. But then the actual length of the article on "AyotXpa is 1 39 — 55 = 84 columns only. Then from the 84 columns considerable deductions are to be made for the synonymous terms discussed and for words incidentally discussed, and thus the famous story of ayuK^u, (his delight,) like the monkey's tail, becomes less and less, till all the wonder ceases. " Remove perturbationes, maxi- meque iracundiam : jam videbuntur mons tra dicere" Cic.Tu;SC. 4, 24. The Reviewer here admits "the defence" set up to be " plausible," though not satisfactory or " true." But in another place he has indirectly admitted the validity of this "defence ;" for jn. p f 3£8. he says : — " The Editors, in a paper drawn up for the purpose of obviating some objections of Prof. Hermann, have endeavoured to defend themselves by stating, that ' it has been their great object, as far as it is practicable, without dis- . turbing the arrangement of H. Stephens, to bring into one and the same article all the various synonymes, because by their juxta-position they mutually reflect light upon each other/ But this defence is totally inapplicable to a great proportion of the .discussions, of which we complain." Let the reader observe that the Reviewer here only denies the applicability 42 Aristarchus Anti-Blomjieldianus. applicability of " the defence" " to a. great proportion of the dis- cussions, of which he complains," but does not deny its applica- bility to the remainder of them, whereas in the other passage he roundly asserts that " the defence, although plausible, is not true." a Such reasoning falls like an inverted cone, Wanting its proper base to stand upon." Cowper's Table-Talk. The Editors will allow him all the aids of his own ratiocina- tion and all the benefit of his Aristotelian logic, and in his own gentlemanly language (p. 341.) "defy" him to reconcile the contradiction between these two passages. He found it conve- nient to take no notice of these observations of the Editors, which immediately follow the words cited by him : — " But this plan, excellent in itself, is accompanied with the disadvan- tage of extending the discussion of some articles to a length, which astonishes the reader, who does not consider that a great part of them properly belongs to other letters of the alphabet, and that the real length of each article is to be estimated with- out taking into the account the space occupied by the discussion of synonymous terms. Stephens himself sometimes explains one word under another. The Reviewer, as a lover of order, would expect Stephens to put pa$avj^^v denotes ' A hand not formed to sustain the assaults of war' : rsl^sot aSxyxgd, O. 178. ' Walls unfit to withstand the impetuosity of Hector'; and Samros a§\Yixph$, Od. A. 134. i The dissolution of a person not experi- encing the agonizing pains of premature departure/ but ripe in years and virtue, dropping into the grave like a shock of corn in his season, Animam senilem mollis exsolvens sopor. See par- ticularly Cic. de Senect. 19- and Schol. A. ad II. 6. 178. So would I live, such gradual death to find, Like timely fruit, not shaken by the wind, But ripely dropping from the sapless bough ; And dying, nothing to myself would owe. — Dryden. In Soph. Tr. 106. a$ccxg6Tc,ov denotes, 'Incessantly streaming with tears;' and Ant. 88. wjpov c&dxqvrov, i A fate exciting tears never to be exhausted/ II, A. 155. 'A^6\ca uKy atf $$ oy- M$ IfuXiWro, Schol. A.\ Callim. H. in Cer. 26. T)v h' oaiTot. xaAov aKj(raVTO HeXouryoi Jevfyee svm addictus," Blomfield. ad Aescb. Pr. 277. " Now as the pro- babilitiei are infinitely greater, that Erfurdt mistuok the construction, than that Por- son's memcry failed him, we may safely adopt the former alternative, and consider Tvyxjint not as equivalent to vvy%oim av t but as signifying contingit, in which sense it is properly used with a dative." Monk on the Electra of Sophocles, in Mus. Crit. I, 65. But Person is admitted by Mr. Elmsley, Mus. Crit. 3, 351., to have been mistaken about this very point, and Professor Hermann agrees with Mr. Elmsley in thinking so. J ** And though wedo very much honour Aristotlefor his profound judgement and universal learning, yet are we so farre from being tyed up to his opinions, that per- sons of all conditions amongst us take liberty to discent from him, and to declare against him, according as any contrary evidence doth engage them, being ready to follow the banner of truth by whomsoever it shall be lifted up." Vindic. Acad. 2. "Aucsoritas Ruhnkenii metuo ne plus, quam- pond us argumentorum, quibus est usus, ad plurimorum assensionem valeat. Quamquam quum omnino nulliuc homrnis apvd eos, qui liberali sunt indole praditi, tanta debet esse veneratio, ut eius in verba wrare^ quam ipsi rem cognoscere malint, turn in Ruhnkenio, quamvis egre- .tfiae sagaeitatis critico, duo alia, eaque valde illustria exstant exempla, quae, ne quis temere indicium eius in tali re sequatur, admoneant." Hermann. Diss.de Aetate Scriptoris Argonauticorum p. 680. Editors. $ T. Hemsferhusius ad Lucian. 1, 330.: — " Omnes, ut fieri vulgo solet, loca quaedam veterumindicassecontenti, propius investigare, quid indecolligideberet, atque ad moris antiqui rationem explicandam conferri, neglexerunt.V Editors. attulisse. Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianm. 47 attulissef. Verumtamen quum ille Porsoni quosdam errores notavisset, contumeliis abhujus secta et conviciis, extremo iner- mium perfugio, exceptus est : qualia quis non aequo animo ferat, quando neque a quovis, neque quavis conditione laudari iucun- dum est ?" Praf. ad Elementa Doctrinae Metricae, p. xv— vii. u Praeclare animadvertit Thomas Tyrwhitt, vir excellentis in* genii." Elem. Doctr. Metr. 741. "Egregiaest observatio Bentleii ad Lucan. 1,231. merito repetita a Gaisfordio ad Hephasst. 270. — Omninoque ob- scurior est ratio, qua explicare vir summus et hoc et duas istas monosyllabas voces conatur, more suo ad arcanam musicae ratio- nem provocans : quam si ipse satis explicatam habuisset, neque arcanam, opinor, appellavisset, et exponere, quam digitum ad earn intendere maluisset. Nimirum vir eximius acute sentire, quid recte, quid secus fieret, solebat, sed explicare nunc nolebat, nunc alia, quam debebat, via aggrediebatur." Ibid. 340. " Auxerant autem disserendi materiam adnotationes viri docti, quern non dubium est P. Elmsleium esse, insertae Musei Critici Cantab. Pt. 3. et 4. Praeterea usus sum iis, quae nupera The- sawri Morelliani Editio suppeditabat, qui liber multa utilia continet : nondum eum videram, quum Elementa Doctrinae Metricae edidi." Praef. ad Soph. Ajac. p. vii. " Elmsleiiis, Atticae dictionis observator diligentissimus." Praef. ad Soph. Electr. p. xiv. " Ad quam opinionem etiam inclinat Maltby ad Morell. Thes. 405." Ad Soph. Electr. 19. " P. Elmsleius, vir ingenii doctrineeque laude florentissimus." Censura Medeae Elmsleianae J, in Class. Journ. 38, 267. " Afferemus autem talia potissimum, in quibus dissentimus ab Editore clarissimo, non quo reprehendere velimus virum, quern maximi facimus, sed quia censuram, quae nihilaliud quam liber ipse, cuius ea censura est, contineat, inutilem esse existimamus." Ibid. 270. " Ex- cessimus vel sic modum paginarum, qui nobis praefinitus erat : sed etiam haec sufficere poterunt ad confirm andum nostrum de P. Elmsleii opera iudicium : quern virum eo esse ingenio vide- mus, ut, si se illo regularum servitio§ liberaverit, ante multos alio? f " Mr. Knight may deserve, at least, this praise, that the errors in his research are sometimes more to the purpose, than the successful inquiries of others." Porson's Review of Mr. Knight's Essay on the Greek Alphabet, in Mus. Crit. 4, 509. Editors. X Mr. Elmsley's observations on the Medea v. 1023. #?%« V eit ha Bentleium pra3 caeteris duceni commendem, verumtamen ita id facere consuevi, ut simul eos moneam, ne, si viam inveniendi veri rectam ab eo sibi monstrari videant, continuo etiam, quae invenerit ille hac via, vera esse credant, sed potius, conservata libertate iudicandi, eadem via, an ille aberraverit a vero, perspicere studeant. De qua re operas pretiuin putavi paucis exponere, praesertim quum videam Fr. Aug. Wolfium, qui in Analectis Literariis Vol. 1. egregie de Bentleio t disseruit,illud, quod in primis a tali viro exspectabatuiv non fecisse, ut quid laudandum in Bentleio atque imitandum, quid autem reprehendendum et vitandum esset, ostenderet. Et quamvis putem caussas ilium quasdam habuisse, quare haec non attingeret, tamen quod p. 54. de Terentii Editione iudicium posuit, eiusmodi est, ut tanto magis^ quid mihi videatur,- dicen- dum ducam, quo maior huius viri apud omnes auctoritas est. Aristophanes, be is much too apt to conclude that it never ought to occur, and to alter the exceptions to his rule of exclusion. It happens, of course, that some of these altera! ions are violent, and consequently improbable. An attention to in- stances of rare usage is highly useful and important to the critic : the circum- stance of an expression, a construction, or a metrical arrangement, being seldom used, is sufficient to decide a controverted reading, and to prevent the introduc- tion of any thing similar in an emendation. But before we alter the authorized reading in such cases, we should reflect, that of the writings of those poets only a small proportion has descended to our times; and that, if three or four lines occur, containing an unusual, though legitimate, form either of metre, or of syn- tax, it is agreeable to all just reasoning upon probabilities to believe, that the lost writings, could they be restored, would prevent many other lines corroborative of those instances." Blomfield's Review of Elmsley's HeraclidaS, in MuS. Crit. i, 135. f In this excellent life of Dr. Bentley the Editors find no mention of the life written by the late Dr. Burney in a periodical work, which has long ceased to exist, and has almost dropped from the remembrance of men. The Editors will, there- fore, deserve the thanks of Dr. Bentley's admirers by directing their attention to this little piece of biography, which is to be found in the London Magazine for Oct. 3783. p. 310—20. Nov. 1783, p. 402- 17. Dec. 1783. p. 526— 34, and Jan. 1784. Ait Aristarchus Anli-Blomfieldianns. 49 Ait autem etiam iu huius scriptoris Editione Bentleiurn aliquot audaces et tcmerarias coniecturas more illo parum sane laudando intextumintulisse,sed tamen qui posthac ad Terentii emendatio- nera accessuri sint, multo pauciora inventuros esse, qua? reiicere debeant, quam in ullo alio, quem ille ediderit, scriptore. Ducem et auctorem huius sentential ut opinor, habuit vir sumrnus Reizium, quem ssepe memini dicere, multo cequius viros doctos de Terentio Bentleii iudicaturos esse, si ille, quas fecit adnota- tiones ad eum scriptorem, eadem cura ac diligentia, qua ad Horatium, perscripsisset. Ego quidem aliter sentio, et, licet numquam non dicturus sim, quod semper professus sum, unicum Terentii sospitatorem esse Bentleium, tamen vix paucas in to to eo libro paginas esse arbitror, in qui bus non inveniatur, quod aut non satis recte, aut minus considerate dictum sit. Quae tamen res etiam augere debet admirationem viri, qui quamvis in tanta errorum copiaimmortale ac plane divinum opus condi- derit. Sed priusquam exempli s, qua3 dixi, comprobem, paucis de ingenio viri dicendum est, ut appareat, quomodo summa? eius virtutes seepe non potuerint non in vitium vertere. . " Erat Bentleius vir infinite doctrinae, acutissimi sensus, acerri- mi iudicii. Et his tribus rebus omnis laus et virtus continetur cri- tic! . Ex quibus scientia antiquitatis idonea ordine primum tenet locum, ut quae et sensum nutriat atque excolat, et iudicio mate- riam prsebeat iudicandi. Ad earn sensus accedat necesse est, qui positus est in naturali quadam facilitate statim animadver- tendi, quid quaque in re verum, aptum, decorum, venustum sit : cui etsi, ut dixi, nutrimenta et cultum preebet antiquitatis per- vestigatio, tamen procreare eum, si cui non est a natura datus, non potest. Est autem hasc tarn prasclara atque eximia facul- tas, ut sola sit illud, quod ingenii nomine appellare consuevimus. Qua qui prsediti sunt, etiam si careant ilia, quam statim dice- mus, iudicii subtilitate, tamen soepe felicissime exercent artem criticam, quatenus ea quidem in coniectancli facilitate consistit: sed si res demonstratione indiget, neque ipsi sibi rationes reddere possunt, neque alios quo ad suam sententiamperducant,habent. Quamobrem tertia accedere debet iudicii vis et subtilitas, quas caussis rerum investigandis, explicandisque rationibus, et do- ctrinaa et sensui lumen afferat. Atque huius demum accessio facit, ut quis vere dignus appellatione critici censeri possit, non secus ac militem neque arma faciunt, nee fortitudo, si disciplina atque exercitatio absit. Est autem haec uti prasstantissima in critico virtus, ita eadem etiam periculosissima, non quod quis nimium habere iudicii queat, sed quod abuti eo proclive est. Qiium enim qui acri iudicii sunt, plerumque severiore soleant et fen idiore ingenio prasditi esse, facile eo abripiuntur, ut sola E iudicii 00 AristdirJius Anti-BIonifieldiunus. iudicii vi omnia perfici posse existiment, atque ita modo ea, qua? discendo cognosci debent, negligant, modo sensum admonitorem non audiant. Non est autem obscurum, pro rerum, quas quis tractet, diversitate, plus minus cum abuti iudicio posse. Sunt enim, quae unice iudicio opus habeant : in quibus nullus est abusus iudicii. Aliud est enim, perperam iudicare, quod potest accidere etiam non abutenti iudicio; aliud, abuti iudicio, quod facere potest etiam qui recte iudicat. Sunt vero etiam, qua3 moderatorem iudicii sensum ilium, quern diximus, recmirant : in quo genere proprius est iudicii abusus, si quis, ubi sensum consuli oportebat, ab iudicio auxilium petat. Ex illo genere, quod primum posui, res sunt historical : in quibus pervestigan- dis, si materia omnis congesta est, nulla re nisi iudicio opus est. Quare has, qui omnia ad iudicandi severitatem revocant, recte tractabunt. ldque Bentleium in DissertatiombusWWsPkalarideis et Epistola ad lo. Millium sic fecisse videmus, ut vix ullum per- fectius cogitari artis criticse monumentum possit. Ad alterum genus scriptorum veterum interpretatio atque emendatio per- tinet. Ea vero inprimis sensu illo indiget, qui ex obscuris est notionibus compositus, quas attenta operis cuiusque lectione et contemplatione coliigimus. Qui sensus quum bl> id ipsum, quod obscuris notionibus continetur, quasi inermis sit, si ad iu- dicii strenuita tern comparetur : facile obmutescat nece'sse est, si quis, ubi examinareeumpotius atque explicare debebat, st'atim rem ad rationis subtilitatem traducat, eoque disputationem non ad id, ad quod conveniebat, sed ad aliud quid conferat. ldque omnium facillime in poetis fieri potest : quorum quum omnis oratio ad sensum magis, quam ad severas quasdam cogitandi regulas composita sit, non recte interpretabitur eos, qui verba eorum, tamquam si mathematici aut philosophi essent, ad amus- sim exigat, et non potius quid senserint, quam quid argutando ex singulis verbis elici possit, consideret. Quod si hoc in genere qualem se prsebuerit Bentleius, dicendum est, nullus est scriptor, quern ille adnotationibus instruxerit, quin innumerabilia exhibeat exempla disputationum, in quibus etsi subtilitatem iu- dicii admirari debeamus, tamen non possimus non abusum eius reprehendere. Etenim quum ille fervidius omnia atque baud raro etiam cupidius attrectaret, sscpenumero elabi sibi p; est ea, quae si animadvertisset, longe aliter fuisset iudicaturus. Nam etsi sensu illo, quem diximus, minime carebat Bentleius, tamen saepe, fervidioris naturas impetu abreptus, dum explicare eum vel negligebat, vel ob rei difficultatem defugiebat, in iis re- tinebatur, quae ad primum adspectum non satis commode dicta videbantur, eaque tarn cupide emendabat, ut suis ipse dispu- tindi artificiis captus, non videret ilia, ex quibus nullam esse emendandi Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldianus. 5 1 emendandi necessitatem intelligere potuisset. Ita factum est, ut hie tarn eximius vir minime eamdem in poetarum emenda- tione, quam in explicandis rebus historicis laudem meruerit. Verum tamen ut ille plurimos poetarum locos, si verum fateri volumus, corruperit magis, quam emendaverit, tamen ratio, qua in his disputationibus usus est, tam est egregia, ut nihilominus exemplum haberi debeat,quod imitentur,qui diligenter, accurate, et perspicue de his rebus disceptare volant. Qui ut et hoc discant$ et simul temeritatem, quam in Bentleio multi notarunt, declinare adsuescant, mea sententia illud [sic] potiasimum ope- ram dare debent, ut has Bentleii disputationes, quibus ille locos sanos vexavit, aut affectos non recte restituit, eadem, qua ipse uti solebat, diligentia ac strenuitate refellant, quaeque neglecta sunt ab eo, ea in luce collocent, ut errasse eum iam dubitari amplius nequeat. Nam illud quidem facillimum est, sensu rao- nente improbare ac reiicere eius emendationes : idque permulti, immo plerique fecerunt Editores Horatii Terentiique, quorum tamen null us fuit, qui comparari cum Bentleio posset. Hoc vero, refiitare eum, uti saepe difficillimum est, ita, si recte et plene fiat, simul et debitam tanto viro reverentiam prodit, et operam scriptoribus illis vere salutarem prasstat, et exercitatio- nem affert artis criticae utilissimam. " Sed non est praetereunda una res, in qua Bentleius singulari cum fructu litterarum sensui omnia, iudicio prope nihil tribuit. Dico autem rem metricam, in qua luculentissime apparet divi- num viri ingenium, qui non alio duce, quam sensu suo, spretis inanibus magistrorum commentis, nova nullique tentata via ad veritatem perruperit. Nam quum omnis numerorum scientia a sensu originem ducat, naturam eorum autem rationesque expli- care difficillimum sit : non est mirum, Bentleium, quae vera esse sentiret, quum ea explicare non posset, audacter ut certa in me- dium attulisse; quorum explanatione ut supersedere posset, arcanam rationem musices memorabat, bene gnarus, opinor, aliis eanrnon magis, quam sibi ipsi notam esse. Ita evenit, ut, quum iudicium ab his rebus proculhaberet, solumque sensum sequeretur, non incideret in errores illos, a quibus aliter vereor ut immunis mansisset. Quod si in singulis quibusdam locis aut versibus Terentii ab recta metrorum ratione aberravit, haec non est eius metricae scientiae quaedam perversitas, sed de verbis ad metra accommodandis pravum iudicium. " Itaque, ut paucis comprehendam, siciudicabimus de Bent- leio, in rebus historicis criticum eum esse perfectissimum ; in scriptorum autem veterum, poetarum. maxime, emendatione saspissime abusum esse iudicio suo, ita tamen, ut etiam ubi er- rat, in demonstranda defendendaque sententia sua admirabilis. E 2 sit, o L Z Aristarchus Anti-Blonifieldianus, sit, denique; ubi eum rei natura ac nccessitas quaxlam ad solum sensum veri redegerat, nulla iudicio abutendi copia relicta, ex- imium conspici." DeR. Bentleio eiusque Editione Terentii Dissertatiop. v — vii. " Chorum Eumenidum, aliaque nonnulla, quce cum hacquae- stione coniuncta sunt, attigit nuper etiam Blomfieldius in Praef. ad Aeschyli Persas : qua? omnia si vellem persequi, facile tertia? alicui Dissertationi materiam invenirem. Verum quoniam non- nulla horum ex iis, quae a nobis disputata sunt, facile a quovis iudicari "poterunt, illud tantum paucis commemorabo, quod praetermitti res ipsa vetat. Putat enim vir doctissimus, Aeschyli aevo numerum personarum chori arbitrarium fuisse." .De Choro Eumenidum Aeschyli Dissertatio prima p. iii. From the above quotations it is irrefragably true that the charge brought against Hermann by the Reviewer, that " he never misses an opportunity of lavishing his censure on Porson," and on Porson's English followers, is totally without foundation* Writing as Hermann frequently does on the same subjects, as occupied the mind and exercised the pen of Porson, he must ne- cessarily mention his name; and this mention of his name is some- times expressive of approbation, and sometimes of disapproba- tion, according to the views, which he takes of those subjects. Porson's English followers experience from Hermann precisely the same fair and honourable treatment, which Porson himself has received t» But, while it is admitted that Porson handled Hermann f The Editors know only one individual of their own country, who has been treated with any apparent harshness by the Professor, (ad Soph. Ajac. 510. Elecf.r. 21. 45. 57. et 144-3.) they mean Mr. Kidd, to whose general learning and accuracy they bear a willing testimony. The Professor has given the reasons for his opi- nion ; and the public can decide on their injustice or their injustice. He has, however, made more honourable mention of him in his Elena, Doctr. Metr. p. 155. But let the reader dispassionately consider whether the Professor did not receive some provocation from Mr. Kidd. " At length a German critic of great acuteness and metrical subtlety extorted from him I hat portion of the Supplement, which in ex- actness of research, nice perception of wrong, and clearness of induction, is almost without a parallel. The generous Hermann was wont to do njustice'm his Lecture- room j it has been hinte a that this inds/ah gable Editor had in contemplation a defcnte of the anapest in the third place. 'Homo neque meo judicio stultus, et suo valde sapiens,' Cic. de Orat. 1, 39. Indeed Et. P, had no great opinion of the metrical science of the German Editors. He once closed an interesting conversa- tion about them with the line of Cratinus, which he recited with particular em- phasis: Ouroi V »Wn 'ZuoGoicoro), Kt>outfiZ,o(po£M yivos a»^6/i." Tracts and Miscellaneous Criticisms of Porson p. i,xxm. " R. Porsoni Adversaria — thisvolume has been lately reprinted at Amsterdam for the booksellers at Leipsig, Leyden, Rome, Florence, Hamburgh, Vienna, and Paris. The Appendix and Propempticum are of little or no value, the paper is wretched, and the whole transaction is t*uly German." Ibid, i.xxxi. The book was reprinted not at Amsterdam, but at Leipsic. "The Appendix/' which Mr. Kidd most un- justly Aristarchus Anti-Blomfieldiamis. ' 53 Hermann very roughly, (Mus. Crit. 3, 326 — 37.) it is contended by the party of the Reviewer that the first example of severity or injustice was set by Hermann himself. How far this is true or false, the Editors have not the means of ascertaining, nor is it very important for them or the public to know. Certain, however, it is that Hermann has done ample justice to the learn- ing, the sagacity, the judgment, and the accuracy of Porson in those works, which he has published since the death of Porson; and it is for the Reviewer and his party to explain why the per- sonalities between these modern Goliahs were not suffered to die with Porson. Mr. Blomfield may justly claim to him- self the merit of having with the spirit of an Indian barbarian conceived the right of revenge to devolve to him as the literary representative of the deceased, and of having presented the red hatchet of war instead of bearing before him the sacred calumet of peace. (Travels of Lewis and Clarke from St. Louis by way of the Missouri and Columbia Rivers to the Pacific Ocean pp. 28, 54. 94.) " Had the publication of such a multitude of critical dainties been intrusted to any of our GERMAN brethren, they would probably have been diffused through many full-grown volumes to the great delight of all lovers of bulky literature." Blomfield in Mus. Crit. 1, 119- " The Meletemata Critica (of Schaefer) contain the readings • i __ justly describes " to be of little or no value," will nevertheless be found very- valuable to all tbose Scholars, who are interested in ascertaining the genuine text of the Greek Authors, to whom it relates, viz. Lucian, Achilles Tatius, Aelian, Themistius, Alciphro,Antimachus, Libanius, and others. As to the "Pvopempticum" de Agro Trojano in Carminibus Homericis descripto, surely Mr. Kidd will not deny that this is sufficiently interesting to those, who are engaged in tracing the geo- graphy of Homer. How then could he describe it " to be of little or no value ?" The " value" of books is not yet to be determined by the relation, which they bear to the Greek writers of Tragedy and Comedy, and Learning does not yet mark for her own those only, who have confined their studies to the Greek Drama. Jacobs in the Appendix p. 319. thus corrects Alciphro 2, 4. *AcoifL7tss uyxtoTgw xa) hvvoiKot, fovXi%Qsvrci. Vocalem ante (vx corripi posse conten- dit Jacobs, post Toup. et Musgr., quibus, qui vult, fidem ha- beat. Versum Leonidae difficilem emendatu vocat Seidler. de Vers. Dochm. 25. n. Itane vero? Utinam nihil inter poetarum Graecorum reliquias difficilius sanatu esset. Quid enim ? Unum- ne tantum hamum, quern consecraret, possidebat 6 ygmevs Ato- $a.vTo$? Non hoc isti putabunt, qui mecum rei piscatoriae ope- randi navarint. Lege clyxio-rg evxa^Trrj k. 8. &.' Et mox, quum quinque exempla, in quibus pluralis est, attulisset, ita pergit: — * Ceterum Seidler. iste ; qui tam facilem correctionem praatervidit, de Aristarchus Anti-Blomfteldianus. 55 de Porsoni, si diis placet, erroribus, a se castigatis, magnifice loquitur. Nempe leoni mortuo vel asinus calcibus frontem ex- terit.' Qui sciunt, quae leges sint artis criticse, etiam laudabunt Seidlerum, quod se praatervidenda hac correctione criticum, quam facienda piscatorem piaebere voluerit. Rationes afferre in re plana supervacaneum puto. Sed ii, quibus exempla pro ratione sunt, viderint, quid faciant Archiaa Epigrammate 10. Ilium vero ego non ineptum dixerim, qui ex isto Epigr. Archiaa ap. Leonidam scribendum conjiciat, yuptyov r ayKKrrqov. Cas- terum aliquanto verecundius loquuturum spero virum optimum, ubi reputaverit, quo quisque doctior sit, i. e. quo magis didice- rit, quantum sit, quod nesciat, eo solere modestiorem e se. Pro- fuerit autem inspexisse censuram Aeschyli Persarum in Diariis lenensibus m. Iunio h. a. (1816.) fol. 105. 106. a tali viro scri- ptam, cui non facile quis superbius respondeat." Hermann. Elem. Doctr. Metr. 809- But notwithstanding this well-merited rebuke, Mr. Blomfield. has persevered in the same line of conduct towards Seidler, and it is really amusing to hear him read a lecture to Seidler about the supposed bitterness of his remarks on critics : — " Nectgoi 4 Aristarchus Anti-Blomfkldianus. differs from any other school of true criticism. The peculiar characteristics of the style of annotation adopted by its founder are I. a reluctance to make innovations in the received text without strong reasons and sufficient authority ; 2. the frequent and effectual use of analogical reasoning ; 3. a brief and perspi- cuous method of stating the arguments for and against any read- ing. Iivthe first of these points the practice oi' Porson differed widely from that of Scaliger, Bentley, Reiske, Brunck, and even Hemstcrhuis and Ruhnken. In the second point he pushed to its full extent a mode of criticism, first effectually exercised upon the dramatic writers by Richard Dawes f. In the third his practice is original, and forms a singular contrast to that of Valckenaer. If, therefore, his style of criticism differs from that of other scholars, it differs with an excellence, as the gramma- rians say ; and unless forbearance from innovation, accuracy of reference, brevity, and perspicuity of language be accounted faults, we are justified in saying that 'the Porsonian School' is but another term for the best school of Greek criticism." Blom- field's Review of Monk's Hippolytus, in the Quarterly Review, No. 15, p. 216. for Sept. 1812. Whether the Porsonians be denominated " followers, of Por- son," or " his Disciples," or " his Sect," or " his School," or " his Church," is a matter of little moment, provided that it be clearly understood who are the persons thus designated, and provided that the terms are not used as terms of reproach. It is evident that the Porsonians have marked out themselves as " a peculiar people," For Mr. Blomfield, in his Review of Elmsley's Heraclidae, in Mils'. Grit. 1, 134. says that "Mr. Elmsley is in his mode of criticism a decided follower of Dawes and Porson," and p. 135. that, "if the Porsonian style of criti- cism be exerted by others with the same success as by Mr. Elmsley," and in the Preface to the same No. p. vi. : — " Where from the frequency of literary or social intercourse, a bond of union has been established among a certain number of those, w T ho are engaged in the same pursuits, it cannot reasonably be expected that the faults and deficiencies of their several works should be mutually exposed to public censure, nor in regard to the best feelings of human nature ought it to be desired." The Reviewer, after having observed, that " Mr. Hermann f "The Rev. Dr. Davies, late Provost of Eton, when Head-Master, presented, R. P. with a copy of Toup's Longinus as a mark of his regard for a ' good' exer- cise. This book, R. P. was wont to say, first biassed his mind to critical researches, and Bentley and Dawes cherished and confirmed that strong propensity: the rest he gave himself." Kidd's Outline of the Life of R. P. p. xi. See too p. xxi. — Editors. (in Arutarchus Anti-Blomfieldianus. 65 (in his Review of the New Gr. Thes.) has intermixed a few trivial objections, extorted from him by a sense of decency, amongst several pages of the most fulsome and unsupported, though, the Reviewer doubts not, unbought panegyric," and that " Mr. Hermann and his School never miss an opportunity of lavishing their censure on Porson, and on those English Scho- lars, whom they facetiously enough term For son's disciples" adds with the same temerity, that " it is, on the other hand, a sufficient title to their esteem to flatter the German critics at the expense of the English." The plain English of this con- cluding remark is that the secret clue to the history of those praises is to be found in the gross flattery, with which the Edi- tors have sprinkled "the German critics at the expense of the English." The absurdity of this insinuation is too great to re- quire any formal and elaborate refutation, particularly as Her- mann has said : — " Multo plura sunt, quae brevius dici et po- tuisse, et vero debuisse putemus. Eo referimus ilia potissimum, quae Editores praeter necessitatem ipsis verbis virorum docto- rum, quos auctores adhibent, adscripserunt. Nam etsi in uni- versum illud valde probamus, quod verba illorum potius, quam mentem exhibendam duxerunt, quo certius lectoribus de quaque re constaret, neque erroris aliqua suspicio subnasceretur : ta- men multo hoc cum delectu faciendum fuisse censemus, ne etiam ea aflferrentur, quibus haud aegre carituri essent lectores. Eiusmodi sunt verbosae quaedam adnotationes Schweighaeuseri, quas hie repeti, ut p. 55, atque alibi, profecto inutile erat. Atque omnino laudanda quidem magnopere est asquitas ilia, quae in lit— teris non quis aliquid, sed quid quisque dixerit, spectandum pu- tat : sed ob hanc ipsam tamen caussam vellemus aliquot locis non esse promiscue quorumcunque hominum verba allata." And the Reviewer himself says in p. 347. : — " We must not omit to remark that the Editors manifest a commendable, impartiality in their quotations from contemporary Scholars, al- though they are disposed to speak in somewhat exalted terms of their own decrees. Mr. E. H. Barker is generally understood to be the chief, if not the sole, conductor of the present work ; and we could therefore have dispensed with such expressions, as, * vide omnino nos in Classical Recreations* — ' Recte E. H. Barker in Epist. Crit. ad Th. Gaisford' — * Errasse virum do- ctissimum ostendit E. H. Barker/ — ' Porsoni errorem notavit E. H. Barker.' " The same principle of " commendable impartiality," which has been exercised " in their quotations from contemporary Scholars," would actuate the Editors in citing their own publi- cations; and a more careful perusal of the New Gr. Thes. will F satisfy 66 Arist archus Anti-Blomfleldianus. satisfy the Reviewer and the public, that in point of fact the Edi- tors have been as impartial in the one case, as in the other + . If the Editors were really persons, who thought and spoke as highly " of their own decrees," as the Reviewer on insufficient testimony asserts, and as the Editors themselves could more truly assert that Mr. Blomfield is in the habit of doing with re- gard to himself and his friends, is it to be supposed that, in re- plying to Hermann's Notice of their Work, they would have con- ceded to him so many strong points, and have been entitled to the praises, which are bestowed on them in the following Letters? " E. II. Barkero S. D. G. Hermannus. " Tu vero ne demitte animum. Nam ego quidem, nequeego solus, sed multi meorum popularium ita statuimus, etiam si nemo nunc apud inimicos tuos defensionem tui suscipiat, tamen eos- dem illos, qui nunc tibi male volunt, paullatrm eo adductum iri, ut et gratias tibi agant, et laudare potius merita tua, quam iis officere velint. Uteris, mihi crede, multo meliori sorte, quam qua usus est Porsonus. Non est enim invidenda ilia felicitas, aliquamdiu deum haberi, quern deinde tamen omnes mortalem fuisse fateantur. Multo melius est, per invidiam et obtrectatio- nem eo eniti, ut, cessante paullatim malevolentia, tanto magis splendeas, quanto magis antea obscurata? fuerint laudes tuas. Id, sat scio, tu maxime experiere. Me vero scito in iis esse, qui id non modo cupiant, sed etiam, quantum possint, efficere conaturi sint. " Quod scribis, te, ubi dissentias a me in iis, qua? in Censura Thesauri dixi, libere et ingenue protulisse, id laudo et gaudeo. Nunquam ego in illis fui, qui contradici sibi segre ferunt. Qui vitam vero inveniendo impendunt, discere debent quotidie ; et qui sapit, veritate reperta gaudet, sive ipse repererit, sive alius. Eamque ob caussam te valde amo, prasstantissime Barkere, f The Editors will favour the Reviewer with a sample of their candour. In the Lex. Voce, peregr. ccctiii. the Editors have admitted the word *Alyv- *rtoyivns* as well as * Alyu*roytvb$y and Schneider in the 3d Ed. of his Dictionary has acknowledged both. But there can be no doubt that A\yvie*uyiwis is a vox nihili, and the Editors would with pleasure have cited the following observations of Mr. Blomfield, if they had recollected them, while they were writing the arti- cle in question :— " As a similar instance, is adduced Alywxrnoyivvn from the Persa? 35. where Brunck, as Schutz remarks, '■ acutely observes that Atyvrnoytviis is a word of five syllables, as in Eur. Phcen. 684. tvnX'moi is so to be pronounced, that kiem shall form a Trochee.' This latter passage Musgrave has corrected by reading zuiiXetot, and it is surprising that Brunck, Schutz, and Mr. Butler, with the reading of the Cod. Mosq. and Turnebus before their eyes, viz. AtyuTrreytvht, as it is printed also by Porson, should have persisted in retaining a word, which, independently of its false metre, is an anomalous compound ; for we do not find KctSpuoyiw;, Kv*£io- yivhs, Jiovcnoyiwt, but * Kabpoytvbs, *K.ux£oyivtif i *2ovnymf" Edinburgh Review of Dr. Butler's Aeschylus, No. 29. p. 158. quod Aristarchus Anti-BlomJieldianu$. 67 quod video te a partium studio alienissimum esse, et non minus aequo animo ferre dissentientes, quam ipsum libere sententiam dicere. Qui sic sentiunt, tutissima via ad veram laudem con- tendunt. Nunquam enim scientes errorem defendunt, quod est turpissimum, sed illud potius agunt, ut errorem, quantum pos- sint, ab se segregent. Tanto tu certius confide, Thesaurum tuum si non statim, at in dies magis iustos iudices habiturum. " Vale, mi Barkere, meque amare perge, ut ego te. " D. Lipsia d. xii. Jan. 1819" " E. H. Barkero S. P. D. G. Hermannus. " Non solum litteras tuas, amicissime Barkere, datas d. xv. Martii, sed etiam Responsionem tuam ad Censuram Thesauri accepi. Laudo, quod et defendisti te bene, et id ea cum huma- nitate fecisti, quam in te maximi facio. Quodque scripsisse me tibi memini, non modo me non asgre laturum, sed grato animo accepturum, quidquid tu contra me dicturus esses, id repeto nunc, quum legi, confirmoque etiam atque etiam. " Vale, carissime Barkere, meque, ut ego te, amare perge." That such expressions, as the Reviewer has cited, and others of a similar nature, do occur in their work, (and in whose work do not such expressions occur ?) the Editors admit, but are pre- pared to contend that the Reviewer's inference from them is most unfair. When the Editors have in a separate publication fully or largely discussed, (whether rightly or wrongly discussed, it is for the world to judge,) any controverted point, of which they are speaking in the Thes., they sometimes may have said, " vide omnino nos in Classical Journal ;" and when the question is of a less doubtful nature, or has been determined on proper evi- dence, they may sometimes have said, " Recte E. H. Barker in Epist. Crit. ad Th. Gaisford," " Errasse virum dpctissimum ostendit E. H. Barker," "Porsoni errorem notavit E. H. Bar- ker." While the Editors are by the Reviewer himself admitted to be impartial towards all " contemporary Scholars," no reason can be assigned why they should be unjust towards themselves alone. He, who, like the Editors, is impartial equally towards friends and towards enemies, will generally be found to be im- partial even towards himself; and he, who would cite a book, if its title-page had borne any other name, may without any violation of modesty cite it, though bearing his own. Every book, which has been published, will more or less prove the justice and the truth of these remarks. Surely the Reviewer will not censure Schaefer as "speaking in somewhat exalted terms of his own decrees/ ' because in the third Edition of Schneider's Lexicon v. *Z7ai- iotgruoo, unde *Z70H$agn) Svh&KM conspergerem." Elomfield Piief. ad Aesch. S. c. Th. p. ix. anticipated Ti Aristarchus Anti-Blomjieldianus. anticipated me, (or nearly so, for he with his usual metrical skill reads Ak^vvfi uxtyiv re,) and I am obliged to you for the infor- mation. 1 have been guilty of a much worse fault of the same sort in the Glossary v. 721. in my fancied correction of some verses of Archilochus, which had been restored long before f by D. Heinsius Lect. Theocr. 223. Hemsterh. on Hesych. 1, 959- It is extraordinary that Brunck did not know this. You have clearly knocked on the head my hasty conjecture of i7n£*jtxej/of, but are as clearly wrong in giving a middle force to efagTYjpevoi. My explanation is quite right, I belie,ve. Laro suspensi loculos tabulamque lacerio is nearly similar. I have no doubt but that in my forthcoming Play you will discover many more errors and omissions, as I cannot now have immediate re- course to every book, of which I stand in need. I shall be very well pleased to have the former corrected and the latter supplied, as my object is to contribute in any way to the understanding [of] the Greek language, and to the promotion of classical studies, to which I am happy to see that you have devoted yourself with so much effect. " I remain, dear Sir, your faithful servant, " Chesterford, June 29th 1812. C. J. Blomfield." After this very handsome and kind Letter, (Antoni gladios potuit contemnere, si sic Omnia dixisset,) the Editors should have imagined that Mr. Blomfield not only would not travel out of his way to make an indirect attack on this very book, while reviewing Mr. Monk's Hippolytus, but would even studiously take occasion to notice it, sometimes praising and sometimes blaming it in the second Edition of his Prometheus, in the course of his Notes on the other Plays of Aeschylus, and in any other productions of his pen. But this has not been the case, though it is evident from his Letter that Mr. Blomfield could not have and in point of fact had not any just ground of offence at anything, which was said in the Classical Recreations respecting his Prometheus. 5. Mr. Blomfield in the Letter just cited exhibits a perfect knowledge of the contents of the Classical Recreations, and there- fore it was a matter of astonishment to Mr. Barker to find Mr. Blomfield as the Quarterly Reviewer of Monk's Hippolytus (p. 228.) writing thus, " V. 393. r 'fljv rou otvuTrsitiopevov \!>y%>jj/ SiapMgs*. Vulgatum tamen quodammodo tueri videatur Eurip. Hippol. 39 1. Ova I'cr0' 07ro/w 6(riv Sie^flgig', aXKu x§>]otoV ear as'r, Cf. Med. 105 1 . V erum tamen puto §i*q>fo- gov(r, quia?o-0< cum participio ad eum, qui compellatur, plerumque refertur. Vide Vaick. et Monk, ad Eurip. Hippol. 304. et ilium in Schol. ad D. Luc. 19, 18." See the New Gr. Thes. where the passage from the Agamemno is 74 Aristarchus Anti-Blomjieldianus. is cited. Mr. Blomlleld in the Glossary says : " 905. dict, the expression and the meaning equally unpoetical. Ernesti has briefly and truly remarked, " in emphasi est ctvrovg, ut in ipsejftos apud Cicero- nem" At v. 83. IQuveiv M ctkqXiyis is changed into Itu crx., with- out any reason, and even contrary to the meaning of the word: At v. 94. utysvog must make way for ufyzvov ; and why ? because an the second verse after comes a)* ? ^avTifxot^Krrvg he corrupts into %6\ig dvri(jt.etxiu\l\lwtov ox^ov already is there, and thinks be- sides that in Rhesus v. 58, there can be no doubt that jv. At v. 6l, %JIm 'Ao-iriTi$ — irolkp vriv-Tou [uiXsgwy we find the following remark : " Karior est vox media verbi vTivopau, Theb« 8/0, xXaco, aTevopai. Equidem li- benter reponerem illic o-T^va^w, hie creva^e*." Any body else would not hesitate to prefer -(rreveTxi, although VTzvuyjci should be found in some MSS., particularly in Aeschylus, Moreover, Hesychius explains at least the prolonged form orTeivopai by o&u- vcufww, (ttsvco, V. 149. Blomfield edits irS>s.»§ei irgdovei Beg?,Yt$ } @oijAa y*g y he remarks, " Malim 7rs7rhY)y[x=(f, oV grjAa y«£. N antique euStjAof nescio an alibi apud auctores bonae notas reperiatur." If Mr. Blomfield will only look into Plato and Xenophon, he will find instances of this word in dozens. Even Aristophanes uses it, but in truth Brunck has forgotten to insert it in the Index. Just as rashly he says upon the words povudu tie Bsgfav, v. 740, " Movug. — JNusquam alibi pro adjectivo usurpatum vidi. Inter philqeophos et theologos est unitas" Has he never read in the Phcenissa? of Euripides, v. 1537. pva&' a\mu^ and in the Bacchac v. 609, Mr. Blomfield' s Aeschyli Persa. 9 1 v. 609, i^ovolV sgypluv ? The word dg^eXoLog also, v. 302, is not only used by Aeschylus, but by Herodotus, and the form dgyk- Xx$ by Aristophanes, as others have remarked already. At verse 521, w dva-vovYjre §ouy.ov, Blomfield is inclined to be- lieve that the old lection was, w SwaWxaiffrs tctipov, and for this reason, because the word §vx yj-^/ov 6[xou /3oa£o7$. We read also in the Hours of Aristo- phanes, as quoted by Athenaeus p. 372. xoXoxuvrag opov roCig yoyyvXiaw. It may here be observed by the bye, that Porson in his Adversaria p. 108, has gone to work with this fragment very arbitrarily, and that many of his emendations are very improbable. At verse 709, aXX* eve) Uog vaXaiov ' dfxfi 'AQyvctg nag xare^ugroLi o-rgcuTog. First, the lection ?. Eumen. 499? TroAAa 8* STVfiOL ^TTMWTpODTOL, Ho&zOL. 649, KOXXyj [AYl%(X.VY) X'JTYjglOg. Slippl. 459, XgYi5|*2 8* l^oKris 'E\\y}viXT} v/xvg, xccKoQqoLvsi mcara jv S' aKKog 'iQvvev logv. he would read W uKKov to make all right. Appositions of an unusual kind he cannot bear. V. 71, KoXvyopyov *ofaj- $ijS opiXog otnuoov. Here the words to Klo-aiov n:o\i(T\La. are more clearly deter- mined by the apposition ywvaixowAijflijs oiuXog. Blomfield first adopts Burney's conjecture aosrai instead of ea-b$ Zvj£s instead of 8i>jxs. " Interpretes sumsere," he says, " quasi esset a o^xw, quod verbum dubito an alia habeat tempora quam praesens ac futurum." We must here again ask why he doubts ? as the imperfect is in use not only of the simple verb tjxco, but also of the compounds TrgooSjxa), I^xco, |w,efl^xa>, &c. But even Si>jxs is found in Xenophon, Hist. Graec. IT. 2. 3 : >) olfuayY) ex. rou IleigoLitbs o\a twv paxqw reiywv eg &jt*)£ and p>o^rig be formed from fZootco just as well, — to take one example only, — as 7t\j{?>) $ also, v. 1057, is called in question as a sin against analogy, and kevxuy^ proposed for it. We will now show a few of Blomfield's numerous conjecture? on other authors, as well as Aeschylus. In the Preface, p. vii. he touches upon the following fragment of the comic poet Plato, in Athenseus viii. p. 344. d. o&» \x.sv 'Amyv§a.g 6g/*', uKXot, MvviAo$ are shown there, and moreover, a passage is cited from Oppian, where it is com- monly explained by helluo. In addition to this, it must be evi- dent to every impartial reader tliat J acobs has hit upon the truth, at least in his emendation of ehW in place of gj /ii£ej,— -ev ra7$ Ae£eoQiaty$. B. «AA' OU UopOtl, 7TUVMTQV g%WV TOV 7Tf>0QXT0V. Phavor. has already the article rov before xuiirqrriqu. Instead of nuvixrov Mr. Blomfleld would read thji/jxtoi/, and translates it by vermiculatus, Anglice " embroidered." We could well have wished that he had a little more distinctly explained what he means by this 7T£coxtos, vermiculatus or "embroidered," as we on the Continent are not acquainted with these secret occupations of ■i Mr. Blomjield' s Aeschyh Persx. 101 of sailors. In the mean time we are of opinion that naviKTov may remain as the Doric dialect in place of tpjvjxto'v : for why may not the sailor have replied in the Doric dialect ? We know not who he is, or whence he comes. Leonidas, the Ta- rentine, uses iruvtot, instead of mjv/a, in Br. Analecta I. p. 222. viii. We understand ttyivikto; (which, as Tnjv/xrj, false hair, comes from tdjv/^co,) in the sense of curled, and find the joke thus. One sailor advises the other to take with him a pillow (7rpoj£. has not understood the changed construction, and says " rw- yr$ libri tarn scripti quam impressi, quod in accusativum tu%«j reformavi." Fortunately, however, through an error of the press, or through the carelessness of the Editor, the right reading Tuyyis has been suffered to stand in the text. In the same note he cites from the Choephorse v. 313, and changes here quite silently txeiQsv ovglcrug instead of exscflcv ovplcrag. Immediately after in our Piece we read spoi yag rj$vj volvtol /xsv }T« yevo$ to Ilspo-civ, and without any authority. In regard to SucnroTpov, he supports himself entirely upon the Scholiast, who says " luo-7roXs^ov ugoc xct) xolkotw/Is xot) ctQXiov to yevog rciov Jlegcrwv," and who conse- quently must have read ^6o-7ror^ov. He ought not either to have departed from the MSS. on account of the very usual metre, particularly at the end of the Strophe ; theStrophic verse should rather have been made to suit it ; but of this the Editor has hardly thought, and indeed he does not seem to possess much knowledge of the choric metres : he makes it a rule to avoid distinctly declaring himself upon metrical points, but some- times he breaks through it, and then almost always shows that he had better have been silent. Thus at v. 700 he writes viSo^OU fJLSV 7TpOO-$£0~Qui } (Te^O^OU V UVTIU \s%jv, in place of rponovTo x. V. 422, volktQsvt eQgavov, instead of icouqvt eQgotuov. v. 464, exvxXovvro, instead of kvxKovvto. V. 496, irKsia-roi 'Qtxvov, instead of 7rA£ijw?dj Aoy^rj, in opposition to tne Persians, as in v. 187 we find >) j&ev weVAoKn Ilepcruiols vitni^fxivr}, rj §' avre doopixoijv&' eftwpctvev tu\ol$ ; to which Atossa answers, afiQoTepw Znrhovv phmov %v luoiv )§a Awnjpa instead of xa*a, as that, (which is the truth,) they inserted after xuxa, Auwijga Ay^a ? Hence our readers will see how little useful even in this respect is the Blomfieldian edition of Aeschylus. In conclusion, one other oversight of the Editor of a different kind. In the Gl. p. 101, we read as follows : " Regum Persa- rum tov jtteyaAov /3i/Xxe$. But Schneider admits the doubtful word *XivevXxoi for XtvevX- xoi, used by Ion ap. Athen. 451. So H^^vouXxos, *ro%ouXxos f (and even Mr. Blomf. ad Aesch. Pers. 243. has ro%ovXxos 0,1%/**),) and so too we should say *xwovXxcs, Athen. 4. 116. e. Nic. Damasc. 240. Cor., (in CoraiiCollectioneFabularum p. 258) for which, however, Schneider's Lex. exhibits xvvovXxes. Again, in Pers. 87. Mr. Blomfield" presents us with another accentual blunder, hu^ixXvreis ocv-A^do-i, for lov^ixkvreis. But for this he may be pardoned, because other Editors of Aeschylus have accented the word in the same way. P. 92. Aix