"By force, and at our heels all hell should rise
"With blackest insurrection, to confound
"Heav'n's purest light, yet our great enemy,
“All incorruptible, would on his throne
"Sit unpolluted, and th' athereal mould
"Incapable of stain, would soon expel
"Her mischief, and purge of the baser fire
"Victorious."

Paradise Lost, Bk. n. v. 129.

Who but Milton ever applied the word impregnable to the noun access? and Milton himself would never have done it, if he had not been thinking of towers. The other example is too obvious to make it necessary for me to dwell upon it. The following note, written more particularly for the Germany of Tacitus, is added here, because it contains some remarks upon a very obscure passage in the Chocphora of Eschylus.

C. 23. Potui humor ex ordeo, aut frumento, in quandam similitudinem vini corruptus. This is the celebrated ale of the Goths, the zythum of the Egyptians, the Calia and Ceria of the Hispani, the Cervisia of Gaul, agreeably to the words of Pliny L. II. cited by Pichena upon this passage. The reader, who is disposed to enter fully into this question, which I shall discuss in another place, will find some excellent materials for reflection in the commentators upon this passage of Tacitus, in a very learned note of Dr. Butler upon the Supplices of Eschylus v. 960., in the Observationes critica D. W. Trilleri p. 197-9., in the Adversaria C. Barthii L. xI. c. 32., and in the Animadversa Hadriani Junii L. 1. c. 12. Roterodami 1708. p. 126-34. Corruptus is here changed, brought by fermentation into a resemblance of wine, like the diapesigs of the Greeks: upon the words φθείρειν, φθοραί, διαφθείρειν, διαφθορά, συμφθείρειν, ἀφθαρτός, in this sense, the reader may, if he pleases, consult the Classical Recrea tions pp. 254-9, 486-8., as well as the Classical Journal, No. XII., where, in the Strictures on Professor Monk's Hippolytus, I have produced additional instances: I shall here add one or two other passages, which have subsequently fallen under my eye. Themistius Orat. XXII. de Amicitia, Ed. Harduin, Parisiis, 1684. p. 272. says elegantly, δραστικώτατόν γε μην προς θήραν φίλου φάρμακον ἡγητέον τὸν ἔπαινον· εἰ καὶ σφόδρα ὕποπτον αὐτὸν οἱ κόλακες πεποιήκασιν, ὡς καὶ τοὔλαιον οἱ μυροποιοί· ἐπιβουλῇ γὰς τῶν πέλας οὗτοι μὲν τοὔλαιον, οἱ δὲ [πέλας] τὸν iration diafle gouri. Thus too, we have in the Choephora of Eschyἔπαινον διαφέρουσιν. lus, v. 1012.

φόνου δὲ κηκίς ξὺν χρόνω συμβάλλεται,

πολλὰς βαφὰς φθείρουσα τοῦ ποικίλματος.

Stanley translates these words by Cadis vero tinctura post tempus diuturnum conjicitur, varios colores vestis corrumpens; Heath by Cadis vero tinctura cum tempore concurrit; Schutz says pórov xnxis est sanguinis ex vulneribus scaturigo, de qua etiam post longum tempus Bicent conjecturam facere ex maculis, quæ vestis colorem multis locis villaverint. The Scholiast, however, dees not understand by has Sapa multis locis with Schutz: his words are, shurikoûs arres

τοῦ ἱματίου καὶ ἠφανισμένου τῷ αἵματι, and he is right: a rich garment,
because it had been dipped many times in purple; for, as I have
shown in the Classical Recreations p. 413., the dress of royal women
was silk, or cotton in its finest state, stained with purple: I under-
stand povou xxxis with Dr. Butler to mean the stain of blood, and
I understand with Heath, συμβάλλεται ξὺν χρόνῳ to mean, agrees w
the time the circumstance of this stain of blood, which besmears
the rich garment, so exactly corresponds with the time of the murder,
as to bring the fact home to the perpetrator: di is here equivalent to
yag, and thus we have a very simple interpretation, which connects
the whole passage together. I strongly suspect that BaQès àààs
was suggested to the mind of the poet by the previous mention of
a stain, φόνου κηκίς, and that this use of φθείρουσα, here in its proper
sense, originated in the double meaning of Coros, slaughter, and bloed,
which instantly occurred to the poet. What an influence this doc-
trine of the association of ideas has upon the choice of words, is
shown by me in the Classical Recreations pp. 318-31, 185, 204, 255,
370, 372, 391., and the inquiry has been pursued in the Review
of Mr. Blomfield's Prometheus Desmotes, and of the Edition of Cicero's
two Treatises in the British Critic. I shall here give one or two
additional instances, and mark in Italics the words, in the choice of
which the principle has operated insensibly:

"High on a throne of royal state, which far
"Outshone the wealth of Ormus and of Ind,
"Or where the gorgeous East with richest hand
"Show'rs on her kings barbaric pearl and gold,
"Satan eralted sat, by merit rais'd

"To that bad eminence; and, from despair,
"Thus high uplifted beyond hope, aspires

Beyond thus high."

Milton's Paradise Lost, 13. v. 1.

"For, while they sit contriving, shall the rest,

"Millious that stand in arms, sit ling'ring here,
"Heav'n's fugitives?"

We have in the Theban Edipus v. 166.

Bh. 11. v. 54.

Mr. Elmsley (Oxonii 1811,) reads well ovde for od: it is pretty enough in the Scholiast, and Suidas, who follows him, to say, ἔγχος, ἀλληγορικῶς ἡ βοήθεια, but I would ask whether in the whole range of Greek literature a single passage can be produced from any other writer to justify the use of yxos for Bonba? But till such a passage is produced, I shall be satisfied with my own idea, which is that s was suggested to the mind of the poet by the previous word rides. We have another instance in the 30th verse of the same play,

· Αΐδης στεναγμοῖς καὶ γόοις πλουτίζεται.

Who does not immediately see that hourier was suggested by the instantaneous recollection of Пλouтos, or Pluto? Yet the sensible Spanheim, in the Observationes in Callimachum, Ultrajecti 1697. p. 749., gravely, (risum teneatis, amici?) says, when he is speaking of the term Pluto, "Neque vero id ob latentes in terræ visceribus opes, sed ob aliam ejusdem appellationis causam, juxta Sophoclem Ed. Tyr. v. 30." But to return to Eschylus, and his perigoura. This occasional sense of the word in the Tragic writers, which I have supported by indisputable examples, had escaped the observation of a scholar so profound as Valckenaer, for he says in the Diatribe in Euripidis Dramatum Reliquias, p. 75.: "J. Piersonus Præfat. in Marid. Attic. ex Philostrati aliorumque Locis suspicabatur p. XLIV. sic expleri posse senarios Euripide

φθείρεις δὲ ψυχῆς ὧδε γενναίαν φύσιν

γυναικομίμῳ διαπρεπής μορφώματι,

aut etiam putabat dingin legi posse: qui corrumpunt indolem suam, recte quidem dicuntur τὴν φύσιν διαφθείρειν, ut Luciano in âne Somnii, φύσιν οὐκ ἀγενῆ διαφθείρων, et significatum voluit Zethus Euripidis, Quid-necas [wrong, he should have said, corrumpis] rectam indolem? sive præclaram ingenii indolem: sed neque illud orig sic, ut puto, adhibetur apud Tragicos, neque adeo liquet quo nitatur.” The πολλὰς βαφὰς τοῦ ποικίλματος of Æschylus is equivalent to the ἱματίων βαπτών ποικιλομόρφων of Aristophanes Plut. v. 530., where L. Kuster has a most admirable note upon the words of the Scholiast, βαπτὰ γὰρ ἱμάτια φοροῦσιν οἱ νυμφίοι, πρὸς τὸ φαίνεσθαι οἶμαι Tūs plogas, a note which is omitted in Beck's continuation of Invernizzio's Edition. E. H. BARKER.

Hatton, April 5th, 1813.

Critical and Explanatory Remarks on ÆSCHYLUS'S SEVEN AGAINST THEBES, with Strictures on the Notes and the Glossary to Mr. BLOMFIELD'S Edition.

NO. I.

V. 18. Tardonojoa. Mr. Blomfield says on this passage, σε πανδο Eùç est diversorii magister:" Again in p. 171. on v. 858. Távdoxos, Mr. B. says, "Sophocli in Inacho diversorium vocatur Távdonos evóσTATIS.” Mr. B. seems to have studied Greek orthography with considerable attention, and I hope that he will pay similar attention to Latin orthography. "Parci Lex. Crit. p. 345. ex Libr. Dausquii testatur veteres ita locutos, nempe deverti, devertere, deversari, deversorium, non diversorium: cf. simul Gell. L. 12. c. 11." C. Falster's Suppl. Lat. Ling. sive Obss. ad Lex. Fabro-Cellarianum, Flensburgi, 1717. "Devertere,

Verr. 1.6. ad hospites meos ac necessarios deverti potius: sic utrumque verbum e MSS. scribitur: male vulgo diversari, diverti, ut diversorium pro deversorium: v. Heinsius ad Ovid. Am. 11. 6. 9. et præterea quos laudat Burm. ad Petron. 10. Sc.: deverti est aliquo se convertere, in quo tamen etiam respicitur ad locum unde veneris, sed diverti dicitur de duobus, qui diversam viam instituunt, unde ipsum diversum est, et illud diversi abiere, divortium, &c." J. A. Ernesti's Clavis Cic. πόλει κατασκαφάς

V. 46.

θέντες.

All the instances of the words κατασκαφή, and κατασκάπτειν, cited in Mr. B.'s Glossary, represent them as used in their proper sense, which is the destruction of towns and buildings by sapping their foundations; but they are also used metaphorically, as in the following passages:

ν. 222. τῶν αὐθομαίμων συγκατασκάπτην, i. e. cognatorum eversorem, comparatione a mœniorum subversione sumta, qua metaphora usus est etiam Euripides Orest. v. 733.

συγκατασκάπτοις ἂν ἡμᾶς, κοινὰ γὰρ τὰ τῶν φίλων, ubi Schol. τὸ κατασκάπτειν, κυρίως ἐπὶ πόλεως, ἐνταῦθα δὲ καταχρησ TINES EGYTOI." J. Potter's Comment. in Lycoph. Cassand., Oxon. 1702, 2d Ed. p. 136. V. 361.

ὥστ ̓

ἐλπίς ἐστι νύκτερον τέ

λος μολεῖν, πολυκλαύ

των ἀχέων ἐπίῤῥοθον,

66

where Mr. B. says: "368. Emppotos, interpretes vertunt adjatrix, ut in 11. A. 390. ¥. 770. malim obruens, velut aqua, vide supra 7." The word, I may observe by the way, occurs not in v. 368, but in v. 364. 1 The Gloss on v. 7., to which Mr. B. refers, is this: "meλúppolos, multiloquax, a jódos, ô áпò Tây nvμárov Vipos: Hesych. (vid. Gloss. in Prom. 1084.) quæ vox de clamore adhibetur Pers. 406. composita ex ea amat Noster: inf. 271. λόγους ταχυῤῥόθους, 364. ἐπίῤῥοθον. Pers. 367. πόρους αλιρρόθους. Agam. 191. παλιῤῥοθος. Choeph. 425. 456. ἐπιρ ῥοθέω: inf. 176. διαῤῥοθέω : Sophocl. Trachin. 263. πολλὰ μὲν λόγοις Επεῤῥόθησε, conviciatus est. Antig. 413. ἐπεῤῥόθοις κακοῖσιν.” The scholiast B. says on the passage, which we are discussing, wippolov, autó: Stanley translates it by liberatorem, and says in a bracketed addition, "ippofov, adjutricem, auxiliatorem, Hesych. ¿wippolos, isxugès, adjutor auxilium ferens cum magna animi alacritate, vox Homerica ;" and I have little doubt that this is the true meaning of the word in this place. Alberti says on the passage of Hesych. "émippólois, ixρὸς, ἐπίκουρος, βοηθός, confirmat Etymol. et ex eo Phavor. ἐπίῤῥοθος, ἐπί xouços, Bontis, &c.: similiter Suid. Emippolos, Bor,fès, ut et Schol. Hom. Il. A. 390." We have in Toup's Emend. in Hesych. Vol. 111. p. 261. Ed. 1790.: “ ἐπιτάῤῥοθος, ἰσχυρὸς, βοηθὸς, σύμμαχος: sic Q. Calaber, L. v. v. 254.

λέξατο μ' ἐκ πάντων ἐπιτάῤῥοθον, sic quoque mox usurpat ἐπίῤῥοθον, ν. 257. ἤγαγον 'Ατρείδησιν ἐπίβῥοθον :

vide Hesych. v. ἐπίῤῥοθος, et nos inf. ad h. v. p. 1., ubi corrigendum monuimus:" Again in p. 335. Toup cites Apollon. Rhod. 11. 225. ἴσχω δ' οὔτινα μήτιν ἐπίῤῥοθον,

and adds, “ auxiliatricem, interpres ibi ineptit." Homer Il. A. says, εἴ που τις καὶ ἐμοί γε θεῶν ἐπιτάῤῥοθός ἐστι,

where Eustathius, p. 849. Ed. Rome, has the following remark: T δὲ Ἐπιτάῤῥεθος, ὅτι πλεονασμὸν ἔχει τῆς Τας συλλαβῆς· ἐπὶῤῥοθος γὰρ ὁ σπουδαίος ἐπίκουρος καὶ μετὰ ῥόλου βοηθῶν· καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ δηλοῦται: Again in p. 1329, Il. ¥.

κλύθι θεὰ, ἀγαθή μοι ἐπίῤῥοθος ἐλθὲ ποδοῖιν,

where Eustathius says, Τὸ δὲ Ἐπίῤῥοθος, πρωτότυπόν ἐστι τοῦ ἐπιτάῤῥοθος. V. 367. σπουδῇ διώκων πομπίμους χνόας ποδῶν.

On the word χνία Mr. B. refers us to his Gloss. on v. 141., where we find these words: " χνόα, aris extremitas, Hesych. χνόαι, αἱ χοινικίδες, αἱ τῶν ἀξένων σύριγγες (v. infra 169.) atque ita Schol. Soph. Elec. 717.: idem in v. κνοῦς, χνόην δὲ μέρος τοῦ ἄξονος, ἡ χοινικίς, ubi legendum videtur partim ex Hesychii sensu, partim ex collatione Schowiana, κνόην δὲ, μέρος τοῦ ἄξονος, περὶ ὃ ἡ χοινικές : nota adjicias ” [the note is this: σε χρόαι, nescio annon rectius scriberetur και, Ηesych. κνοῦς, ὁ τοῦ ἄξονος ἦχος, λέγεται δὲ καὶ κνίη, καὶ ὁ τῶν ποδῶν ψόφος, ὡς Αἰσχύλος Σφιγγί : sc. a κνέω, rado, duxere νοῦς et κνόα, ut a ῥέω, ῥους, et ῥόα, 2 χέω, χους, οι χρα: in Sophocle editur χνόz :] " Photii Lex. κνους, τὸ πρὸς τῷ ἀκρῷ ἄξονι τοῦ τρόχου : auctor Rhesi 118. αντύγων χνόας. The Schol. A. says on the passage in the Seven at Thebes, χνόας ποδῶν, μεταφορικῶς εἶπε τὰ ἄκρα τῶν ποδῶν, ἄλλως, τὸ συνεχὲς κίνημα των ποδών παραβόλως χνόας εἶπεν, τὸ γὰρ ἄκρον τὸ ἐντιθέμενον τῇ χοινικίδι, χνόη καλεῖται. The Schol. B. says, χνόας, τὰ ἄκρα, ἤτοι τοὺς πόδας : Stanley translates the phrase by missorios ares pedum, but says in a note, " χνίας ποδῶν, Hesych. Κνόην, τὸν τῶν ποδῶν ψόφον.” Neither Dr. Butler, nur Mr. Blomfield, seem to have noticed the following im portant and most satisfactory passage of E. Spanheim in the Obss. in Hymn. in Apoll v. 37. p. 101. V. 1. Ed. Ernesti Lug. Bat. 1761.: "Bene autem hic Scholiasta glossam, quamquam alienam omnino ab h. 1. χνόος, ψόφος, ξυσμός, ex Hesych. interpretatus est idem Vulcanius, ac sicut eidem glossa', duo priora illius verba quod adtinet, præclara lux accedit ex Eschylo Sept. Theb. ν. 379.

σπουδῇ διώκων πομπίμους χνόας ποδῶν,

festino gradu accelerans missos strepitus pedum : non ut ibi χνίας ποδῶν absurde per ares pedum reddit interpres: χvόη nempe ibi idem quod χνέος στο ψόφος, sicut utraque vox eo sensu ap. Hesych. etiam legitur, χνίην, τὸν ποδῶν ψόφον, quæ glossa est hujus Æschyli loci; item, χνόος, ξυσμός, ψόφος, φθόγγος : ita alibi in codem bujus Tragici Dramate v. 115. occurrunt αξόνων χνόαι, quæ nihil aliud ibi quam rotarum strepitus, ut ca de re pluribus quandoque ad ipsum Eschylum." We are decidedly with Spanheim in this interpretation, the knowledge of which would probably have deterred Schutz from writing the following note: “ Hanc locutionem, praesertim extra canticum, justo nimis turgi dam et catachresticam esse non diffiteor, quanquam ea fortasse pro diverso linguarum ingenio mollius ad Græcorum quam ad nostrorum