Sivut kuvina
[ocr errors]


Trojæ qui primus ab oris. Æn. i. 1.

cadit ipse Tolumnius augur,
Primus, in adversos, qui telum torserat hostes. £o. xii. 460.
The reader may perhaps have heard of a Professor of rhetoric
qui toties Ciceronem Allobroga dixit ; but probably never either
read or heard of a Professor of Poetry passing a similar sentence
upon Virgil; and to prevent any thing so disgraceful, let us
shortly state the principle of distinction in these two modes
of construction. Where the predicate in a statement or pro-
position is the priority of a person or thing, the emphasis will
be on the superlative; and consequently the first mode will be
proper : but, where such priority is merely incidental, the secondo
Even in this last case, however, should any circumstance require
an emphasis on the superlative, it will stand first in the order of
collocation, though not of construction.—“puerum, primus
Priamo qui foret post illa natus, temperaret tollere.” apud Cic.
de Div. i. 21.

All the genealogical, chronological, and mythological disquisitions of the Roman writers being lost, it is not probable that many occasions should remain for the first, as applicable to per.

The Examiner, indeed, says that there are more than twenty in Cicero's book “ De Claris Oratoribus ;" in all which he avoids it, and employs “ primus," « qui primus," or the adverb “ primo.” This assertion is of a character, Cui non invenit ipsa Nomen, et a nullo posuit natura metallo. There is only one occasion for it in the whole book, and there he does employ it. "Quem vero extet, et de quo sit memoriæ proditum, eloquentem fuisse, et ita habitum esse, primus est M. C. Cethegus.” c. 15. The order of collocation is indeed here inverted, to compress and adapt it to the succeeding member of the period; but the order of construction is the same-primus est, quem eloquentem fuisse, et ita habitum esse, extet, &c.

The same distinct usage, guided by the same analogy, prevails in other superlatives. “ Dignissimus, qui et patrem Corvinum habuisset,” &c. Paterc. ii. 112. “ Quod indignissimum," &c. Cic. de Inv. i. 53. “Illud homini longe optimum esse, quod ipsum sit optandum per se.” id de fin. i. 20. « Quod optimum, sit quæ. ritur." de o. g. Or. 1. Nay, the principle applies itself to positives also, both adjective and substantive ; omnes qui," and "qui omnes ; " " locus qui,” and “ qui locus,” being respectively employed by the same rule; and it is only by such general views of the principles of construction, that the student can acquire that kind of knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages, which may render them really useful to him, by making them the means of substituting the permanent analogy of universal grammar to the fluctuating caprice of vulgar usage in his own.

The other á gross barbariem," of which the Critic stands accused, is, “eundem, qui ;” « idem,” it seems, according to another article

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

qui dicat?”

in the Examiner's code, being only to be used with a relative pronoun, to signify, figuratively, contingent identity, or continuity of quality or character - never physical identity of person or substance; so that, though “idem qui fuit” he Latin, “idem qui fecit" is barbarous.

Instances, however, of the violation of this modern law, are so abundant in all the best ancient writers, that it is insulting the learning of the reader to quote them, though by a strange oversight they have been omitted by the Lexicographers, whose ponderous folios, he duly informs us, have been searched without success. Let us, therefore, select a few instances by way of supplement, in most of which the expression is so far from signifying moral identity merely, that it signifies physical in opposition to moral. « Quid enim tam repugnans, quam cundem dicere Cic. de fin. iv. 28. “ Neglige, inquit, dolorem. Quis hoc dicit ? idem qui dolorem summum malum : vix satis constanter.” id. Tusc. ii. 19. « Idem facillime destruit, qui construxit.” id. de senect. 20. « Quis eum nuntium miserit ? nonne perspicuum est, eundem, qui Ameriam ?” id. pro Rosc. Amer. 37. “ Cum idem possit judicare qui dixerit.”. de leg. Agr. ad pop. 15. Iidem, qui hæc appetunt, queri nonnunquam solent,” &c. ib. 17. But to multiply quotations is only to waste paper, it being the constant mode of expression, when the pronoun is used emphatically, as in the note; so that to call it a gross barbarism, is a blunder surpassing all that pride ingrafted on ignorance has hitherto committed. Here is, however, one other instance from the same authority, and that of the identical verb which he cites as an illustrative specimen of such barbarism. " lidem bustum in foro facerent, qui illam insepultam sepulturam effecerant.Phil. i. 2.

It were easy here to retort the charges of falsehood, misrepresentation, malice, &c.; but the accused will be so far charitable to him as to allow the busy pride of ignorance to account for all ; leaving the candid reader to decide, who shows most of such ignorance, — he, who, in the irksome labor of exposing a long series of the grossest errors, made one hasty objection to the application of the single epithet “ majorem,” — or, he who thus deliberately tries and condemns, as gross barbarisms, expressions sanctioned alike by general analogy, and the authority of the best writers of the best ages of Latinity.

To follow him any further, may, perhaps, seem superfluous; but, nevertheless, having gone so far, the Critic will shortly meet his other objections.

“ Persona,” whatever he may think of it, is repeatedly used by Cicero for natural, as well as assumed, character, and even as we use the word “person.” “ Hujus Staleni persona, populo jam nota atque perspecta, ab nulla turpi suspicione abhorrebat,"

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

pro A. Cluent, 29. « Tibi certe confitendum est, causam perniciosissimi belli in persona tua constitisse.” Phil. ii. 22. see also Off. 1. 28. 30. 34. de Inv. i. 16. & 24. ad Att, viii. 11. & ix, 11. Sub persona is likewise used, exactly as he has used it, by Paterculus, i. 3.

“ Straboni” is an error of the press, for " a Strabone :" but “ potuerit,” subjoined as it is to a causal member in the sentence, is an elegance. “Non habet defensionem : qua sublata, omnis quoque controversia sublata sit.Cic. de Iny. i. 13.

«« Publicatæ enim pudicitiæ nulla venia : non forma, non ætate, non opibus maritum invenerit.Tac. de. M. G. 19.

“ Competo" is the proper verb-“ Villæ situs competit.” Colum. ix. 5.; and the form of expression, « haud diutius," “ no longer," with which it is used, common in the best writers, and one which Cicero has used more frequently perhaps than any other; how bald soever it might appear to this critic, who could not find it in his Nizolius. « Tui te diutius non ferent ;" “ thine own people will no longer bear thee.Phil. ii. 44. « Diutius non morabor ;” I will delay no longer.” pro A. Cluent, 60. “ Nec diutius vixit quam locuta est;" “ she lived no longer than she spoke.” ib. 10. But to multiply instances is to insult the reader, there less than five directly in point in this single oration for Cluentius. We say directly in point, though not joined to the same verb; since, if such adverbs as “diutius, “potius," “ melius,” &c. are not to be joined to a verb by the analogy of sense, without specific authority, all modern Latin must be a mere repetition of ancient thoughts, as well as words; for new combinations of ideas will require new combinations of expression in dead, as well as in living, languages. But if the words be sanctioned by use, and their connexion by analogy, the result will be that which distinguishes the scholar from the pedant; and a learned man of taste, parts, and discernment, from the mechanic drudge of memory. In the small remains of authoritative Latin extant, not amounting altogether to so much as the lost works of Livy, and Varro, many cases in particular nouns, as well as persons in particular moods and tenses of particular verbs, are not to be found, merely because there happens to have been no occasion for them; which, nevertheless, the scholar, who would express his meaning clearly, must use, when there is occasion for them. Such, among many others, is the third case of the word “ situs," over which the Examiner so loudly triumphs, and to this triumph he is welcome.

But there is, it seems, a gross fabrication, in applying “ in his” to what went immediately before in the note, and not to a passage in the text above.

Could it be applied otherwise on any principle of sense or grammar ? and is there any fabrication but of the accuser ? If the accused has erred, it has been in supposing grammatical connexion in such compositions.

[ocr errors]

Lastly, this acute detector is pleased to discover one blun. der, and three false propositions, in the remarks on the central map of Greece.

The blunder is an a for the second o in Oropiæ; a very natural and common error of the press; which, were it not so, would only be on a par with his Stagyrite for Stagirite.

The first false proposition is, that Histiæa, the only name under which that place ever existed as a state or free city, is not in the map; and it is not.

The other two are, that Erythræ in Bæotia, and Ægæ in Euboea, are distinguished by coins still extant; which this bold asserter of negatives says, that neither of them ever struck. Had he, however, condescended to inquire among, any persons conversant with such studies, he would have discovered that undoubted coins of both states, together with those of several other cities of Bæotia and Euboea, not noticed in Mr. Pinkerton's Index, are to be found in collections in London; and had he been actuated by any of those moral sentiments, to which he pretends, he would have made the inquiry before the assertion ; for though, in the heat of controversy, hasty and inconsiderate charges of ignorance and error may have been sanctioned by use, no man, who had himself a regard for truth, ever charged another with the violation of it, but on the result of the fullest inquiry that the case would allow.

It is common for a very angry person to become so confused with passion, as to believe the object of his wrath, though per: fectly cool, to be still more angry than himself; and thuis is remarkably the case with the Examiner. On the most careful review of the article, to which so much malice, virulence, and scurrility is imputed, there has not appeared a single epithet, ur expression, that implies any thing like anger or violence; while the imputer scatters them with no small volubility. So far from having merited them from the University, the author holds himself intitled to its gratitude for pointing out the abuses of a most valuable establishment, which, if properly administered, may be of equal honor to its members, and advantage to the community at large ; nor is any thing wanting, but a few such publications as Mr. Gaisford's Hephæstion, to wipe away the disgrace, and make him feel gratitude in return.

The Examiner, however, in the midst of his wrath, is pleased to warn his adversary (whether in the form of menace or advice matters not) of the danger of exposing himself to public opinion in the same line; and, in return, we beg to warn him, as he cannot increase the danger, to be cautious how he acts the censor; since that writer is possessed of a large collection of critie traps, of which neither Stephanus nor Nizolius- neither Gesner nor Facciolati, nor any similar oracle, will afford him any inti


mation ; and, though not quite so malignant as represented, he ,owns himself sufficiently so, to find considerable amusement in seeing a sciolist amazed at the discovery that his academical disa tinctions have not been able to change his nature, or reverse the metamorphosis of Lucian and Apuleius.

It was not our intention to provoke a controversy. Anxious to vindicate, the credit of illustrious Establishments, with which we are connected, we had of our own accord inserted the Defence, and the Account, of the Studies pursued in Oxford. As for the accidental errors, that may be found in an edition of a Classic printed there, we thought that, like spots on the disk of the Sun, they only tended to produce discussions on their nature, but not to obscure the vivifying brightness of the luminury. Here we meant that the subject should stop ; but un appeal was made to our cundor and imparliulity fronna most respectable quarters to insert some observations on the critical part of the article. A sense of public duty made us comply; but while we earnestly invite the critical sagacity, we strongly deprecate the illiberal asperity of a Brunek, and various other Commentators. A good cause is injured; a bad cause can never be assisted, by personal invective.---Edit.


[ocr errors]

As I was the other day reading a very amusing work, of which my
host, Dr. Parr, informed me that Dr. S. Johnson was very fond, I
was surprised to find the word dyysdos used by two classical writers in
the same sense, in which it is used by Christian writers. It is a possible
circumstance that some of your readers may not be aware of the fact,
and I have therefore transcribed the passage for your use.
Hatton, Jan. 13. 1813.

“ De illo Senecæ loco Ep. xx. ubi, si vera lectio est, se Epicuri
ärysdoy vocat, possum ego et aliquid dicere : allusum videlicet puto
ad Tragedias et Comedias veterum, in quibus fere plerumque évoyeros
inter personas est, qua metaphora usus est Seneca, quasi diceret, At
ego, qui non minus Epicuri sensa possum exponere, quam ényrenos
aliquis in Tragedia pro iis respondet, qui longe absunt, &c.; sed an
eo possit referri is locus Maximi Tyrii

, quem indicas, id vero est, quod nequeo decernere, qui librum amissum doleam : dicam obiter aliquid de voce žvyzdos (quanquam nil ad Senecam), quod ab H. Stephano in Thes. Ling. Gr. notatum non est, et vulgo pro minus vero habetur, þanc vocem sc. apud scriptores ethnicos in ea etiam significatione occurrere, qua apud Christianos usurpatur ; primum enim afferre possim locum Platonis in iv. de Legg. p. DC. 1 ed. Læmarianæ : ait ibi Plato, Levium volatiliumque verborum gravissima imminet poena ; nane. omnibus præposita est Nemesis, äyrynos Justitiæ, seu Alxns : Græca sunt, Διότι κούφων και πτηνών (ex Homero) λόγων βαρυτάτη ζημία πάσι γας επίσκοπος τοϊς σερί τα τοιαύτα ετάχθη Δίκης Νέμεσις άγγελος : dein, si quis VOL. VII. NO. XIII.


« EdellinenJatka »