Τὴν ἀπαγγελίαν This is very obscure, if not corrupted; απαγγελία may mean the conclusion or moral, which should be ἀλλότρια different from the language of the fable; or the remaining part γλυκύτητος ἐγγὺς may refer to the pleasure arising from the application. Διήγημα, As one of the προγυμνάσματα, is described as the narrative of the fact, nicely distinguished from διήγησις ; as ποίημα from ποίησις. Πολιτικός is here opposed to ιδιωτικός. So history records the actions of communities, or bodies, and those of individuals. Ρ. 397. Γυμνάσια. read γύμνασμα - the divisions are 1. ὀρθὸν ἀποφαντικὸν, a charge direct. 9. ὀςθ. ἐγκλινόμενον, charge by implication. 3. γύμν. ἐλεγκτικὸν, charge by reproof, or apostrophe. 4. γύμν. συγκριτικὸν charge by comparison of the fact with other facts. 5. γύμν. ἀσύνδετον ? Ρ. 398. Τὸ δὲ ἀσύνδετον. This is not enumerated in its proper place; and, as its name implies, is unconnected with the others, being only introduced (ἐν τοῖς ἐπιλόγοις) after the oration is finished; as an after-charge resembling the Peroratio of the Romans. Ὄρος χρείας. The definition of χρεία. The use or application (χρεία) is divided into 1. χρ.λογική proved from some maxim, or wise saying (λόγος) 2. χρ.πρακτική, practical; evidenced by some action. 3. χρ.μικτή compounded of both. 1 Τῷ μέτρῳ. The commentator supposes this passage corrupted, as conceiving perços to refer to the measure of syllables, as in prosody; but the subsequent lines show that it refers to the length of the discourse. Ερωτηματικαί, αἱ δὲ πυσματικαί. read ή πυσματικαί. Εργασία: This is described as the τὸ σύνεχον τῆς χρείας, νίκ. Ρ. 399. Ἐστί δ' ἐκ κρίσεως-read συγκρίσεως, see p. 397. 1. 25. Ἡ Εργασία παραπλήσια-read ἡ ἐιγ τῆς γνωμης-παραπλ. Ἐπὶ τὸ ἁπλοῦν. MS. B reads κατὰ τὸ ἀπ. it is synonymous with ἁπλῶς. Κατα τὸ ἐνθύμημα. Another blunder of an ignorant amanuensis. The divisions of you are affirmed to be similar to those of χρεία. See above 1. 27. Probably κατὰ τὸ ἐνθύμημα was put for κατὰ τὸ ἐναντίον. It must however be confessed that the ar rangement of the divisions of χρεία οι γνωμὴ are not clearly discriminated. Ρ. 400. Ἐπὶ τὸ παρατράσαι. This must be corrupt, as no such word occurs. It may be παρατηρῆσαι τὴν γνωμην. Ιδιώτην οὐδέν. MSS. Α. Β. read οὐ δὲν δεινόν· perhaps with a slight alteration it may be read οὐ δεῖ. Τόπος, ὁ κατὰ κρίσιν, see ἐπιχείρημα ἐκ κρίσεως. p. 399. 1. 8. N. B. The Commentator observes, p. 410, that the order of arrangement has likewise here been transgressed. Ανασκευή. One of the προγυμνάσματα, Is the repelling a charge, or refutation. Τύπος κοινος. A theme, or head of discourse ; a common place. Καθαρῶς ἐν τόπῳ. read ἐν τόπῳ: but what means μεχρὶ τοῦτον σωθήσεται ? I suspect a transposition, and that we should read πρ. οὐκ ἔσται ἐν τόπῳ· ἀλλὰ μεχρὶ τούτου σωθήσεται καθαρῶς. Πονηρὸν ποιεῖν. read τὸ πονηρὸν, οι πονηρά. Τὰς πρὸς τὸ ἔλαττον. read Εἶτα τὰς π. τὶ ἔλαττον. Ρ. 402. Στενωποί. This is an unusual word and synonymous with village: probably στενοτόπους ? Πῶς ἤχθη. How he was reared. Ν.Β. ἄγω, ἀγωγὴ of the early part of life; as παίδευσις of the subsequent stage. Καὶ μὲν καὶ φύσις. read καὶ μὲν ἡ φύσις. ... Ρ. 403. Κατὰ τὸ ἐγχωροῦν κατὰ τὸ ἐγχώριον: locus natalis. Θηρῶντες. The text is corrupted. This word, which should be written θεωρῶντες, should be placed in the line above, after σκοπεῖν: thus θεωρώντες ὁποῖοι τινές εἰσι τὰς ψυχὰς καὶ τὰ σώματα· οἷον εἰ ανδρείοι κ.τ.λ. Τὰ εἰς τοὺς Θεοὺς ὕμνους κλητέον. This seems corrupt unless τὰ εἰς τοὺς Θεοὺς may be rendered, every thing respecting the Gods, the praises of them are immediately preceding. Θαυμάσεις. You will remark with admiration, and delight. Αναδρομή. A botanical term. Habit; Height of Growth. See Theophr. Lex. Εἰ τὸ χρήσιμον. Εἶτα τὸ χρήσιμον. P. 404. Φυτὰ συγκρίνων read φῶτας. Δεῖξαι — δείξεις Γοργότης. Quickness of discernment. Ηθοποιία. The appropriating the language and sentiments in a Dialogue to the Characters introduced; wherein it differs from Προσωποιΐα which personifes inanimate objects. Ρ. 405. Πλάτωνα ὑπὲρ τῶν τεσσάρων. Does this treatise exist? the Τετρακτυς ? Οἷόν τινας αν λόγους εἴποι πρὸς τὸ σρατόπεδον ...The Commentator rightly observes the first part of the example has been omitted; it may be thus restored, τινὰς ἂν εἴποι λόγους πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ὁ στρατη γὸς μετὰ τὴν νίκην· τινὰς πρὸς τὸ σρατόπεδον. Εκφρασις — Constitutes the ninth προγύμνασμα. It is noted as a vivid and impassioned description; an appeal to the passions. P. 406. Καὶ ἐν αὐτοῖς γινομένων—καὶ τῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς γ. Τῶν δὲ τὰ δάκρυα τῶν δὲ νικωμένων τ. δ. ̓Ανθηρόν. It is difficult to understand how this can be applied to a fact: probably it is an error of the text. ἀνδρεῖον is used for a brilliant, not a florid, action. Ως προειλημένην. a Grecismn. It being before included in Θέσις. 'The 10th Progymnasma: It is defined επίσκεψις τινὸς πράγματος θεωρουμένου. The reconsideration of a fact, independent of incidental circumstances. In the accuracy of Greek language θέσις. may differ from θέμα, as ποίησις from ποίημα. Ρ.407. Υπόθεσις. read θέσις: see above, as MS.A.: probably the Com. p. 411. is right. Πολιτικαί. See p. 397. Κατὰ τὸ πρὸς τί. read κατὰ τόν πρός τι' or ή προς τι. Τὸν αὐτὸν ἔρανον εἰσφέρειν τὸν αὐτοῦ ἔρανον. Το contribute bis share. Ερανος collatitia cana, Hed. a Pic-nic. Ἐκ τῶν ὁμοίων γαμεῖν δύνατον. This must be corrupt: it may be omitted'or read εἰ δύνατον, but then there is an objection: probably ἐκ. τ. ο. μη. γ. δεινότατον. Λύσεις τὰς εὐρισκομένας ἀντιθέσεις. Ἐπὶ δὲ τελευτῆς, the meaning of λύω is to solve, reconcile. Νόμου εισφορά the bringing in, or reciting the law on the subject treated of, the final head of discourse. For this practice of the Greeks, see the Orations of Demosthenes passim. Καὶ λέγε τὸν νόμον. p. 408. ἐν πραγματική Εν πραγματική νόμων θέσεις. read θέσει ? (θέσει) but this is obscure. P. 408. Γράφει τούς. read γράφει τις. Οὐδὲ δύναται---Οὐ δύνατον λέγεις. Φυγ -φυλή. Διατριβή . ἐν τῇ διατριβή. The school of Rhetoricians. Ηλικίας δεόμενος. under the age allowed for public pleading. Ο Τύραννος . κατ' εξοχήν. The Schoolmaster, or Preceptor ? Πλεονέκτημα. The superiority over others. Αἱ γὰρ εἰ ἀκρόν. ἐπ' ἀκρόν. Καθ ̓ ὑποκράτην. This is perfectly unintelligible. read καθ ̓ ὑκοκριτήν. respectu ludii---istius---(Gloss. vel ap. Hed.) sc. ὁ Τύραννος, supr. J. S. BIBLICAL CRITICISM. TO THE EDITOR OF THE CLASSICAL JOURNAL. YOUR correspondent, Mr. Calm, does me the honor to say, that he shall be happy to find that his last paper on the Phænician Inscription gives me any satisfaction. I can have no hesitation in assuring him, that, as far as my humble opinion goes, he has considerably improved his version. I must, however, still object to his TT JON, for which he contends with ingenuity, but, as I think, without success. If the letters in dispute between us be really a mem and a daleth, I would propose to read the three last words of the first line, 77) ON 13. The sense then would be as follows: To our Lord Melkarthus tutelar Divinity of the metropolitan city of Tyre, one that hath wandered, his servant Obedassar, &c. Mr. Calm tells us, that he has seen a variety of Tyrian medals; and consequently he will remember the Phoenician characters which answer to the Chaldaic ON upon several of them. ON-Tsur Metropolis. By TT, Qbedassar seems to describe himself as one that had erred, or wandered, in is his course; and this agrees with the concluding part of the sentence, where he intimates that he has been saved (we may suppose from shipwreck) a second time. Nominatives absolute are certainly unusual in Hebrew; but so, says Mr. Calm, justly enough, are lapidary inscriptions in that language. In all events, I think credit is due to Mr. Calm for adhering to the exact number of letters contained in the original, without finding it necessary in his Chaldaic version to introduce any additional charac ters. I shall now, sir, proceed to make a few observations on the letter of your correspondent, Mr. S. of Norwich. I beg leave to assure your correspondent, that I am as sensible as he can be, that argumentations about what he said, and I said, are generally tiresome to readers; and if I misunderstood and misrepresented him, when I said he had misunderstood and misrepresented me, I can only lament, that we should both unintentionally have given each other so much unnecessary trouble. But while human nature continues liable to error, and while the republic of letters continues to exist, it must be expected that literary crimination will be followed by recrimination. I had observed, that in the Coptic word OTPO rex, the OY was the indefinite article adhering to the word PO, which opinion I advanced upon the authority of Woide. Mr. S. denied that I had Woide's authority. In answer to him I cited Woide's words; but as he is now pleased to say that I have misunderstood Woide's meaning in another place, (which we shall examine presently) I must ask him, how he came himself so completely to misunderstand Woide's meaning, as to deny that I had that writer's authority for saying, that OT in OYPO was the indefinite article, NO. XV. VOL. VIII. CI. JI. L which had coalesced with the original word PO rex? Woide's words are, interdum articulus indeterminatus cum nomine coalescit. Ab antiquo (et inusitato) PQ rex, fit OYPO, et hinc cum articulo ПOTРO. et OTOTPO, rex, &c. I think Mr. S. might have had the candor to acknowledge, while he went ou with imputing mistakes to me, that he himself had fallen into a mistake upon this point. Again, he asserted that the Royal Shepherds were to be found no-where but in my Essay (or words to that purpose) when without going farther, he might have found a whole chapter on the Royal Shepherds in Mr. Bryant's Analysis of ancient mythology. But, sir, there is one sentence in the last letter of Mr. S. of which I feel the full force: "it is a very unpleasant task,” says he, "although a necessary one, to be thus obliged to notice the mistakes of others, and to be puzzling ourselves about words, instead of the more engaging pursuit after truths, if haply we may be able to discover them." No man is exempt from mistakes. Mr. S., in charging me with mistakes, has fallen, as I have shown above, into mistakes himself. Let us quit this useless war of words; and follow "the more engaging pursuit after truths," I shall proceed to answer Mr. S., and where he has pointed out any error on my part, I trust that I shall candidly acknowledge it. 1. Concerning the word Paaneah, I can add little more to what I have already stated. It must, however, be allowed, that if I erred in endeavouring to explain it by the Hebrew, I have erred with some of the most learned men in Europe. 2. I still remain of opinion, that in the time of the Patriarchs the Egyptian and Hebrew were coguate dialects. I request Mr. S. to examine my paper on that subject in No. XIII. of the Classical Journal. 3. Mr. S. observes, that according to Scripture, the native Israelites and Egyptians could not understand each other without an interpreter. He alludes to Gen. xlii. 23. And they knew not that Joseph understood them; for he spake unto them by an interpreter. If this version were correct, I should be much induced to abandon my hypothesis; but I cannot help thinking that the meaning of the original is altogether misrepresented in the translation. Before I cite the verse in the original, however, I must observe that the word melits, which is rendered interpreter, is of very doubtful import, and seems to have been employed in various senses. Its proper meaning is a derider, if we trust to Buxtorf, who brings it from ; but it also bears significations very remote from that which I have just given. " is translated Ambassadors (2 Chron. xxxii. 31.) The same word is translated teachers, (Isaiah xliii. 27.) In the verse under consideration, I am inclined to think, that melits signifies au interlocutor rather than an interpreter. It is the custom to this day in the East, when a man of exalted rank receives a stranger and an inferior into his presence, that the great man sits in a corner of the room, and that, whether the stranger understand the language, or not, he speaks to him by an in |