Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

XIX. Ecl. x. 69. Omnia vincit Amor; et nos cedamus Amori. "Nexus sententiæ est paullo durior. Nihil est, quod ab amoris curis solvat animum, vincit ille omnia remedia; ergo mihi succumbendum est." Heyne. This would be rather, nos et cedamus Amori. Perhaps et is here emphatic: Evdoтéov xai iv. "Love conquers all; why then should I alone attempt resistance?" Omnia, all beings; as Ov. Met. Cereris sumus omnia munus, &c. We suggest this interpretation with diffidence, as the context appears to favor the common rendering: Non illum nostri possunt mutare labores;

Nec, si frigoribus mediis Hebrumque bibamus, Sithoniasque nives hyemis subeanius aquosæ ; Nec si, cum moriens alta liber aret in ulmo, Ethiopum versemus.oves sub sidere Cancri. Omnia vincit Amor; et nos cedamus Amori. Compare, too, Georg. i. 145. Labor omnia vicit Improbus, XX. Georg. iv. 415. Hæc ait, et liquidum ambrosiæ diffundit odorem, Quo totum nati corpus perduxit: at illi Dulcis compositis spiravit crinibus aura, Atque habilis membris venit vigor. "Hic vero cum Homerica simplicitate et veritate contendit Virgilii elegantia et ingenium: nam in Odyssea [iv.] v. 444 sqq. ambrosia odor iis, qui sub phocarum pellibus laterent, quam maxime erat quidem utilis, rei tamen ipsius parum jucunda narratio; at in nostro &c." Heyne. We confess that the present appears to be one of the many instances in which Virgil, by transferring to his own context an incident of Homer's, detached from the circumstances which in the original constituted its propriety, has rendered it altogether unmeaning. Why should Aristæus, any more than Ulysses, be endued with supernatural strength for the purpose of contending with Proteus? or, if this were necessary, why should it be done. through the medium of anointing with oil, rather than by simple contact? besides, that the intention is obscurely expressed. In Homer the circumstance is significant; in Virgil it appears to be introduced merely for its own sake.

XXI. lb. 559-566. Hæc super arvorum cultu, &c. It is remarkable that Heyne, who gives it as his opinion" versus illos Georg. iv. subjectos a poeta vix profectos esse," (Prolegg. p. cc.) should have omitted to notice the supposition (of the truth of which we have no doubt) that the four last lines, and these only, are spurious. It is impossible that these four lines should have been written by Virgil; it is equally impossible that they should have been written by the author of the prece

ding four; and it is scarcely possible that the latter should have been written by any but Virgil.

XXII. Æn. v. 23. Nec littora longe Fida reor fraterna Erycis, portusque Sicanos. The word fraterna is certainly corrupt. Either of the two adjectives, standing by itself, would be elegant, and Virgilian; but the union of the two produces an awkwardness, of which there is no other example in Virgil, Read, fraterni Erycis; an emendation which had before suggested itself to Nicolas Heinsius, and which is indeed sufficiently obvious; yet we are pleased to find our opinions supported, even in trifles, by the authority of the excellent "sospitator poëtarum Latinorum."

XXIII. Æn. vii. 33. Quin protinus omnia Perlegerent oculis." Omnia Grammaticorum et optimorum codd.-est lectio, ut per synizesin scilicet efferendum sit omnja. Librariorum inscitia mutavit in omne, quod ipse Romanus habet, omnem, omnes, omne -." Heyne. We are not quite certain that omne (rò mãν) may not be the true reading. There is at least no other instance in Virgil of two short syllables at the end of a line coalescing into one; unless Orphea, Ecl. vi. 30. may be considered as parallel.

XXIV. Æn. vi. 566. Gnossius hæc Rhadamanthus habet durissima regna; Castigatque auditque dolos. This procedure of the infernal judge has been made matter of ridicule, as reversing the equitable order of things. A satirical commonplace is too convenient a thing to be lost, or it might have been recollected that there is such a figure as ὕστερον πρότερον, and that castigatque auditque might fairly be understood to mean castigat auditos, тiμæρеi ȧxоúσαç. The truth is, however, that neither in this nor in any other passage of Virgil is castigare used in the sense of to punish. Its proper meaning is to correct, to reprove, or to reproach. Castigatque auditque, he charges them with the crimes they have committed, and hears their confessions. The punishment follows, v. 570. Continuo sontes ultrix accincta flagello Tisiphone quatit insultans -.

XXV. Heyne Prolegg. ad Virg. p. ccviii. "Fuit tamen Guyeti acumen, quod quatuor extremos Æneidos libros Virgilio abjudicaret." Even in the wildest errors there is some mixture of truth. The opinion above mentioned is undoubtedly much too absurd to need confutation; yet that there is a difference in point of style between the last four books and the eight preceding a difference less palpable, indeed, but of the same

kind as that which subsists between the latter six books and the former-we have long been persuaded.

XXVI. Æn. ix. 2. Irim de cœlo misit Saturnia Juno Audacem ad Turnum. Luco tum forte parentis Pilumni Turnus sacrata valle sedebat. We have here three verses in succession, each containing no more than one dactyl. The Latin language runs naturally into spondees, as the Greek of Homer's time does into dactyls; a tendency of which Virgil appears to have been aware, and which he took some pains to counteract. He struggled with the cumbrousness of his own language, as Milton with the roughness of his. The difference between Latin and Greek in this respect will be evident from a comparison of the passages in which Virgil has imitated Homer with the originals, especially where the matter is such as to demand a peculiarly slow, or rapid, march of verse.

[ocr errors]

XXVII. Æn. xii. 142. Nympha, decus fluviorum, animo gratissima nostro, Scis ut te cunctis unam, quæcunque Latinæ Magnanimi Jovis ingratum ascendere cubile, Prætulerim, cœlique lubens in parte locarim. Disce tuum, ne me incuses, Juturna, dolorem. Perhaps: Nympha nostro, (Scis-locarim) Disce dolorem: according to the form of address so frequent in similar cases, where the speaker begins with stating the reasons which induced him to make a particular communication or request, and then proceeds with the communication or request itself; and all within the compass of one sentence; as i. 65. Æole, (namque tibi divûm pater atque hominum rex Et mulcere dedit fluctus, et tollere vento,) Gens inimica mihi Tyrrhenum navigat æquor, &c. vi. 56. Phoebe, graves Troja semper miserate labores, Dardana qui Paridis direxti tela manusque Corpus in acidæ; magnas obeuntia terras Tot maria intravi, &c.

XXVIII. Æn. xii. 298. Obvius ambustum torrem Corynæus ab ara Corripit, et venienti Ebuso, plagamque ferenti, Occupat os flammis ; &c. Heyne thinks that the Corynæus here mentioned cannot be the same with the one in Æn. vi. 228, on account of ix. 571. Emathiona Liger, Corynæum sternit Asylas. It is more probable that his re-appearance is owing to an oversight of the poet's, as happens sometimes in Homer and Ariosto. Dryden transforms Corynæus into a priest militant, perhaps from a recollection of the part sustained by him in Æn. vi. and seizes the opportunity of indulging in one of his usual sneers at that body. Cæterum (as commentators say) the redoubted warrior before us appears to have bequeathed his

name to a still more formidable personage, namely, Corineus the companion of Trojan Brute, the conqueror of Cornwall, and slayer of the giant Goëmagog. Such adaptations of Trojan names are not uncommon in the fabulous history of Britain; e. g. Capis (i. e. Capys) an ancient king of the island, and Androgeus, nephew to Cassibelan.

The following specimen of erudition, from the article Polybius in the Edinburgh Encyclopædia, is too good to be lost.

"When Perseus was conquered, he [Polybius] was carried prisoner to Rome, &c.-His history of the Punic war, in thirtyeight books, comprehending a space of fifty-three years, is a valuable work. He likewise wrote an Epitome of Roman History, from the taking of Rome by the Gauls, five books of which only have been preserved entire, together with fragments of twelve more.'

[ocr errors]

Apollonius Rhod. iv. 977. πᾶσαι δὲ γάλακτι Εἰδόμεναι, χρυσέοις κεράεσσιν κυδιάασκον. " Vera et legitima hæc est scriptura. In D. χρυσείοις κεράεσσιν. In E. χρυσέοις κεράεσσι. Cas. etiam et Medic. habent κεράεσσι. Vulgo χρυσέοισι κεράεσι. Poetica forma est xɛpάeσ, in qua semper corripitur a, quod in alia ejusdem nominis forma xepάaos producitur." Brunck. In correcting a false quantity, Brunck has introduced a violation of rhythm equally offensive. The spirit and tenor of epic versification require that we should read χρυσέοισι κεράασι. The same observation may be applied to Brunck's unfortunate emendation, ν. 895, τὰς μὲν ἄρ ̓ εὐειδὴς Αχελώω εὐνηθεῖσα, for ̓Αχελωΐω, (κρείων 'Axeλwïos, Il. Þ.) and perhaps to some other verses of Apollonius, to which we are not able at present to refer.

[ocr errors]

Ib. 1077. ἡ δέ νυ (?) κούρη Αἰνοπαθὴς κατά μοι νόον ἔκλασεν ἀντιόωσα. Μή μιν, ἄναξ, Κόλχοισι πόροις ἐς πατρὸς ἄγεσθαι. Correct κατά μοι νόον ἔκλασεν, ἀντιόωσα Μή μιν ἄγεσθαι.

Milton, Paradise Lost, iii. 35. And Tiresias and Phineus, prophets old. Some of the commentators propose to expunge this line, others to transpose the names, alleging for a reason the harshness of its construction. But does the fault imputed really exist? or is the line unmetrical, merely because none such occur in Thomson, or Young, or Akenside ? We once imagined that it must have been written in recollection of

Homer's hexameters-Onßalou Teigeríao, &c. But the fact is, that verses so formed are not unfrequent in Milton: Shoots invisible virtue ev'n to the deep, iii. 586. Through the infinite host, v. 874. In the visions of God, xi. 357. But to vanquish by wisdom hellish wiles, Paradise Regained, i. They are common in Italian poetry, from which it is probable that Milton adopted them. The remark is trifling, but we make it, because it gives us an opportunity of noticing the imperfect manner in which Milton's versification, as indeed every thing pertaining to his poems, (to say nothing of his prose works,) has been hitherto treated, owing to his having fallen into the hands of editors incapacitated, through prejudice, ignorance, or natural inability, to perform their office in a manner worthy of the subject.

ΒΟΙΩΤΟΣ.

BIBLICAL CRITICISM.

In observing on some statements of Professor Porson in his controversy with Archdeacon Travis, relative to 1 John v. 7, I beg not to be reckoned among the number of those whom Dr. Jortin rather unceremoniously characterises as " stubborn and perverse people, who pretend to deny, after so full a discussion of the subject, that the heavenly witnesses are an interpolation." For I am inclined to think they are; and perhaps no arguments have tended more to create such a propensity, than those of Porson himself. It may, however, not be amiss, nor prejudicial to the cause which the Professor has advocated, and would be, no doubt, in accordance with his own wish, were he alive, (as we may gather from the conclusion of his preface,)— to point out a few slight inaccuracies of statement and illfounded inferences, not at all affecting the main question, into which he seems to have fallen, perhaps through inadvertence, too much haste, or too short an examination.

At the commencement of the preface to his "Letters," respecting the authenticity of the verse in question, he mentions, as a circumstance well known, "that Colinæus, in 1534, omitted the disputed verse, on the faith of Mss." Of the truth of the latter part of this assertion, on its first perusal, I entertained some doubts, owing to a faint recollection I had of

« AnteriorContinuar »