It is clear that the evil of lengthy and discursive notes, which, as a matter of fact, schoolboys wont read, and university men, in general, are apt only to skim, has been long recognized by the best educators; and we believe that at Rugby, in Arnold's day, Bekker's texts were wont to be read, in some forms at least, without note or comment. This was a fault doubtless on the opposite side-for to this day we know that more than one alumnus of that famous seat of learning, whose range of classical reading was bounded by one or two Greek Plays, stoutly maintains that there is no sense, that, in fact, no sense is intended to be discovered, in any of the choruses. Now the truth is, here as in other subjects "Medio tutissimus ibis." The extremes to be avoided are Long Notes, and No Notes: the happy mean is supplied in the Short Notes of Mr. J. H. Parker's cheap and widely used series. It is not however to be supposed that no other series has attempted, sometimes with considerable success, to supply the like desideratum. For Latin literature as applicable to schools the Messrs. Chambers have done no mean service. Their Virgil, Horace, and Cicero are very creditable specimens of the work which was being achieved even before Mr. Parker, we believe, entered the field. But as the subject of these remarks is the series of classical texts with short notes, of that publisher, we shall not be supposed to undervalue other laudable efforts at brief and concise illustration of given authors, issued of late from the press of this country, if we confine ourselves to the neat little " "brochures which stand as a heading to this notice. It is to be understood, too, that in speaking of this series, as sufficient for the school boy or general scholar, we do not mean that any who aim at a first class in either of our Universities would content themselves with these editions solely; though even to such they would doubtless be of considerable use, as being the work of men, who have gone over high ground themselves, and have, as the bee from the flowers, extracted from the best authorities the best and most suitable matter.

We proceed to give a few specimens of the value of these notes, with observations here and there on passages aptly illustrated, and on one or two, though these are really of very rare occurrence, where it seems to us that either too much, or not enough has been given, in the way of elucidation.

Prom. v. 49. ἅπαντ ̓ ἐπράχθη πλὴν θεοῖσι κοιρανεῖν. At this passage, respecting which much has been written, the best interpretations are carefully weighed, and incidental notice given of Stanley's conjecture έπaxon. We incline however with Linwood to govern θεοῖσι by κοιρανεῖν. things are practicable, save to rule the Gods," or as Grotius wrote, "Cuncta assequaris, præter imperium in Deos."

All

Prom. v. 135. Here the illustrations of ἀπέδιλος and ὄχῳ πτερωτῷ are apposite. Perhaps to the former might be added a reference to Tibullus 1. iii. 92. Obvia nudato, Delia, curre pede:-and to the latter, Virgil's phrase, "Remigio alarum."

Prom. v. 429. Here the editor judiciously points out, after Wellanex, the Hendiadys for σθένος οὐρανίου πόλου, and reads rightly υποστενάζει.

A little below, v. 438, at the difficult word poveλouμevov the reader is simply referred to Buttmann's Lexilogus, s. v. eiλw. 5, and to Liddell and Scott, s. v. πporεléw. This is well, for it is always an injustice to Buttmann to attempt to condense his remarks, and the book should be in every student's

hands. Perhaps, to the two references given, we might suggest the addition of Linwood's Lexicon, s. v. πрovσελεïv.

s. c. Theb. 103. Here кTÚTOν dédopкa is carefully paralleled by other similar metaphors from the Greek Tragic Poets. The editor's accompanying remark "that the keenest sense, sight, apprehends more swiftly than any other the objects presented to it," seems hardly to give the full account of this usage. The occurrence of such phrases as, in Prom. v. 115, ödμa åpeyyǹs and in Virgil, Æneid II. 705. Per moenia clarior ignis auditur. Æneid, X. 895. Člamore incendunt cœlum Troesque Latinique, as well as in a fragment of Bacchylides παιδικοι θ ̓ ὕμνοι φλέγονται, seems to indicate that a poetic liberty of expression blended the office of one sense with another, with no special limitation to the sight.

Sept. c. Theb. 365. There seems no necessity here for adopting Paley's explanation, if we understand ɛvvàv to be governed by the adjective rλpoves (as in Prom. V. 903, S. c. Theb. 346, Agam. 1061, 1090, Supplices 591, and Matthiæ Gr. Gr. 346, obs. 3. Construe "And young female slaves become newly acquainted with woe, suffering the embrace, the captive's fate, of a man who has the luck, inasmuch as the enemy has got the mastery."

Just below, at v. 374, Linwood's explanation of åπaprílε is wisely adopted. At v. 378, Sir W. Gell is aptly quoted as to the topography; and at 402, τάχ' ἀν γένοιτο μάντις ήννοῖα τινι, the short notes contain the gist of all the observations of Blomfield, Wellauer, Linwood, &c. on this passage.

Agamemnon, v. 105—7. ἔτι γὰρ θεόθεν κ. τ. λ. Here the readings and explanations of various commentators are discussed and weighed with much judgment. That of Linwood is adopted, with aλàv governed by πvéε supplied from v. 105.

Agam. 181-182. δαιμόνων δε που χάρις. κ. τ. λ. The editor adopts Bialos, the reading of Blomfield and Scholefield, and quotes the English versions of Sewell and Blackie. We prefer to retain Biãíws construing, "And it (wisdom) is doubtless a blessing from the Gods, sitting with violence in their awful seats:" i.e. teaching wisdom per force.

Agam. 212. πws Xiπóvavs k. 7. A. The editor at this passage rightly explodes Hermann's passive interpretation.

Agam. 231-45. At this beautiful passage, describing the sacrifice of Iphigenia, the editor of "Short Notes" has availed himself mainly of Professor Conington's remarks and explanation, with appropriate references, for construction, to Jelf's Grammar. We would suggest, however, that φθόγγον is the accusative in apposition with στόμα καλλίπρωρον, which would have been the natural case after φυλάσσειν, the equivalent of φυλακὰν κατασχεῖν. Nor should we hesitate to take παντί θυμῷ, as its position seems to indicate, with πроvшñ.

Agam. 412-15. The editor rightly supposes Menelaus, not Helen, to be the subject of rápeσri. Construe "There she stands in silence, dishonored, yet not reproachful, sweetest of the lost to look upon." This is defended by Conington: though Linwood, a most weighty authority in Eschylean criticism, gives preference to Scholefield's reading

πάρεστι σιγ' ατιμος, αλλ ἀλοιδορος

ἅπιστος ἀφεμέναν ἰδεῖν

We have hardly space for dwelling, as we would fain have done, on one or two other passages of the Agamemnon, and on several in the Choephorœ, in the Short Notes to which Play the editor has availed himself of the suggestions of Scholefield, Paley, and Linwood with much tact and judgment. We cannot help venturing a suggestion that, in case of another edition, mention should be made at Choeph. v. 129, of a very probable emendation, where the text πws ȧváčoμev dóμous seems wholly out of place, and has puzzled more than one editor. A writer in the Classical Museum, (Philologus) 1. 267. suggests pūs r' áváþov év dóμois, quoting for the metaphorical use of pus, Eurip. Hecuba, 820, and Iphig. Taur. 849. The alteration is so slight, and the sense of the passage flows so much more easily thus, that this new reading claims strong notice, if not reception.

The Short Notes to the Plays of Sophocles appear to be of the same useful and practical cast as those of Eschylus. In testing them, in the case of one or two choruses of the Antigone, with the received editions of Wunder, Erdfurt, Linwood, &c. we have found almost every difficult passage explained, and much light thrown upon the text by a judicious selection of parallel passages.

At Antigone, 597. oud' exei voi, the editor suggests τà ýμаra or perhaps rò yévos as the subject of the verb; we much prefer the latter.

Antig. 600. Here the use of pάos, which is explained carefully in the Short Notes, may serve as a parallel use to that of pws in the emendation of Choephora 129, above mentioned.

Antig. 619. ɛidótɩ d' ovdèv épteɩ. The passage is neatly construed and fully explained. We would suggest however at Tрooάupy a reference to Buttmann's Lexilogus, 157.

Antig. 797. Here, Dindorf, for metrical reasons, has altered the old reading τῶν μεγάλων παρεδρος ἐν ἀρχαῖς θεσμῶν

θεσμῶν

which he says is confirmed by line 801, νῦν δ 'ἤδη 'γω. κ. τ. λ. This reading is adopted and explained in the Short Notes. It is however a question, whether the text as it stood was not sound and intelligible, being taken to mean that "Love's power over men is of equal force with that of laws and ordinances." We would construe "And the clear light from the eyes of the beauteous bride gains the victory, Love in its sway (èv apxaïs) sitting beside, (i. e. ranking near, or equal to) the mighty ordinances.

Antig. 712. Here the editor justly observes that έv кrýμaσi tittels can hardly be strained to mean, as Hermann suggests, "opulentos invadis."

In the Notes to the Trachiniæ, one of the most difficult plays of Sophocles, there is greater brevity than in those to any other play of this series which we have seen. At one or two passages more might have been said, e. g. at v. 520 we should like to have seen the Schema Sicelicum explained and illustrated, as it might have been, by references to Matth. Gr. Gr. 216 (4) Ion. Eurip. 1146, and Hesiod Theog. 321. Still, there is, even in this play, evidence of careful examination, due weighing of authorities, and of discriminating references to the sources whence grammatical accuracy must be derived.

A hasty survey of the Short Notes to the Philoctetes of Sophocles, and the Hippolytus of Euripides, will confirm what has been before stated of the notes to plays above mentioned, namely that for ordinary students, this series will be found amply sufficient, and calculated to be of essential service. They evince the fruits of careful investigation, sensibly compressed and condensed, and any reader who shall have mastered them thoroughly, will have acquired a very creditable knowledge of the great masterpieces of ancient literature; while if he is induced to dive into the more important and lengthy editions, which have been put forth by Wellauer, Bothe, Scholefield, Linwood, Paley, Wunder, and others, he will approach the task, we are confident, with a better knowledge of his way, and with less likelihood of hindrance by encounter with minor difficulties.

Passing from poetry to prose, it remains that we should say a word or two of the Oration of Eschines against Ctesiphon as a specimen of the "Short Notes" to Greek Prose Authors in course of publication in this series. The text is that of Bekker's Oxford Edition, (1822.) The notes are mainly selected from Bremi, Taylor, Reiske, and others. The introduction is all that can be required, and there is a very useful and well arranged summary, which by help of the sections carefully numbered, cannot fail to be a very great boon to the young scholar, as enabling him to keep in his mind the sequence and thread, as it were, of the orator's remarks. Throughout the notes, there are copious references to Grote, Thirlwall, Cramer's Ancient Greece, and Smith's Dictionaries of Greek and Roman Antiquities and Biography, which suggest the thought, how precious would have been these little volumes, if they, (and indeed several of the authorities to which they refer) had existed in the days, when there was no such royal road to scholarship-our own schooldays. As far as we have tested them, these references are extremely accurate.

With a view to examining the execution of the explanatory and critical notes to this oration, we have turned, amongst other passages, to the well known place, where Eschines holds up to scorn and ridicule the somewhat turgid and extravagant language of Demosthenes αμπελουργοῦι τινες τὴν πόλιν—ὥσπερ τὰς βελόνας διείρουσι. The whole passage is very neatly and faithfully rendered into English, and the satisfactory remarks of Bremi are judiciously brought to bear. It may not be uninteresting to some readers, to learn that the interpretation of φορμοῤῥαφούμεθα ἐπὶ τὰ στενὰ given by Bremi agrees very much, as we have found on reference, with that which Budous in his Commentary, pp. 688-9, [Ed. Paris, 1529] an invaluable work to the student of the Greek and Latin orators, had already given.popμoppapɛiv, he says, is equivalent to "tegetes cousuere." "pσрμoppapoúμεla igitur ἐπὶ τὰ στενα significare mihi videtur ἠμεῖς οὕτως στενοχωρούμεθα ὠσπὲρ ἂν εἴ φορμίσι τισι συῤῥαπτόμενοι.” Such is the interpretation of Budaeus.

At section 178. KATаTÉTλVTαi. there need, we think, have been no introduction of Reiske's feeble explanation. That of Taylor is exceedingly simple, and entirely satisfactory. The sense is that "the article, rewards of merit, has become, through indiscriminate abuse in awarding, as common, vile, and worthless as any washed out garment."

The whole passage however is quite worthy of a reperusal; for it cannot fail to lead thoughtful observers of the prominent weaknesses of the present day to find an easy parellel in our own times and country, to the prodigal and injudicious system of "testimonials" of merit against which Eschines inveighs, as being so rife at Athens.

In taking leave of the subject, so far as the Greek Authors are concerned, of these extremely useful texts with short notes,' which carry with them far and wide their own recommendation, we would venture to prefer a request to the Publisher, that he would add to the specimens of Greek Orators already issued, similar editions of the "Leptines" and "Midias” of Demosthenes-both of which are interesting orations, very fit for higher school reading, and affording an ample field for sensible annotation and illustration. If equal to the specimens which have already appeared from Mr. Parker's press, they will be very welcome and valuable additions to our pocket library.

Prayer Book Difficulties Explained: Plain Protestant Explanations of certain Prayer Book Difficulties, confirmed by Eminent Dissenters' Admissions. A Manual for Theological Students, Candidates for Orders, Schoolmasters, Plain Laymen, &c. By the Rev. C. H. Davis, M.A., of Wadham College, Oxford. London: Seeley and Jackson.

THE object of this able little work is to prove that the supposed (or alleged) "Popish" portions of the Prayer-book (wherein the strength of the Romanizing party of the Church has been popularly presumed to lie) are in verbal harmony with the statements of the most eminent Protestant Dissenters from the Church

The Nonconformist testimonies cited in defence and illustration of the English Prayer-book are-The "Westminster Confession" and "Directory" on the Communion and Baptismal Services, Catechism, and Absolution by "Church Officers"; Dr. Cumming on the Apocrypha, Surplice, and the Baptismal and Burial Services; Rd. Baxter on the Athanasian Creed; Wesley on Saints' Days; Jacob Abbot on the Communion Service, and Church Government; the Scottish Presbyterian "British and Foreign Evangelical Review" on the Communion and Baptismal Services, Catechism, and Confirmation, &c.; Matthew Henry on the Baptismal Service; Rev. J. A. James on the Ministry of Angels and Private Confession of Feelings to Ministers; Bucer, &o., on the Commination, &c. &c. &c.

Inscription of Tiglath Pileser I. King of Assyria, B.C. 1150, as translated by Sir Henry Rawlinson, Fox Talbot Esq. Dr. Hincks, and Dr. Oppert. Published by the Royal Asiatic Society. 8vo. Pp. 78. London: J. W. Parker. 1857.

WHAT antiquary, even the most sanguine, ever dreamed of reading an autobiography of Tiglath Pileser? Here it is, however, at least a very fierce instalment of it, and one which even in its necesarily imperfect state, cannot fail to interest every student of ancient history. It may, perhaps, be some time before we see arrow-headed inscriptions set in competitive examinations, but this small pamphlet is a great step towards it. It has completely settled the question which led to its publication. Its history is briefly this as we learn from an introductory note by Professor H. H. Wilson, the President of the Society. About half a year ago the Society received from Mr. Fox Talbot, a sealed packet containing a translation of a cuneiform inscription, the original of which had been lithographed under