ledge. To imagine that small things should be neglected is now an error too vulgar to be supported. Sir Thomas Browne could meet with it in 1646, but it is now an alien here. Let me give to the reader the remarks of Hoogeveen on this point—“Tales (i. e. otiosas particulas) apud antiquos scriptores dicere audeo nullas esse. Si fiat, ut adjectarum nullam rationem dare possimus, id nostræ potius ignorantiæ imputandum opinor, quàm linguæ vitio.” -De Part. Græc. p. xvi. And with him also, “ Sed hac sufficiant de particulis quae dicuntur παραπληρωματικαί, , quas à puriori Græcitate prorsùs exulare jubeo.”—p. ix. This branch of study then I would particularly recommend to the reader, and when I recommend it, I am sure the classical student will meet with a reward proportionate to his exertions-μάλλον γάρ έκαστα κρίνουσι και εξακριβούσιν οι μεθ' ηδονής ενεργούντες. No references are given to Hoogeveen, Viger, and Bos's Elips. because they are supposed to be in every reader's hands, and they are all fortunate in having good indexes. As to the quotations in general, the Author has to observe that they have been made with a scrupulous regard to accuracy. As editions vary, there will be necessarily a variation in the references to the Poets; it will therefore be requisite for the reader to cast his eyes on the lines immediately preceding or following, if the words are not found in the line exactly noted down. It may be thought needless to have made this remark, but there are many whose voices are first in the cry of "Damnant, quod non intelligunt." It was a melancholy experience which drew forth in his day the following remark upon Aristotle: ὡς γὰρ ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ ἀδικοῦσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, ὅταν δύνωνται.—Rhet. lib. ii. v. § 8. It was experience also which suggested the above. The pages of Athenæus have been read through for additional assistance in elucidating various passages. And here let me remark that Athenæus is as valuable a work for the explanation of Aristophanes, as Martial, Statius, and Persius, are for that of Juvenal. I am not aware that any difficulties have, as is not unusual, been passed over without notice. If it should in any instance appear that such is the case, the Translator meets the objection by confessing that no difficulty occurred to him. His sentiments are an echo to Cicero's-" Quàm bellum erat, Vellei, confiteri potiùs, nescire, quod nescires, quàm ista effutientem nauseare, atque ipsum tibi displicere?"-De Nat. Deor. lib. i. xxx. At the same time let no one acquiesce in any interpretation he does not approve of, if he can suggest a better, for the following observation of the same author is peculiarly applicable to many writers of the present day-" Obest plerumque iis, qui discere volunt, auctoritas eorum, qui se docere profitentur: desinunt enim suum judicium adhibere id habent ratum, quod ab eo, quem probant, judicatum vident.”—De Nat. Deor. lib. i. v. It is on these grounds that parts of that most valuable work, Hume's History of England, are objectionable. One remark more is requisite. The notes given by the Translator have been drawn up nearly three years. This it is necessary to observe, because in the farrago of notes appended to Priestley's edition of Bekker's Aristophanes, lately published, numerous references coinciding with his own, will unavoidably be found, particularly in the case of Porson, Elmsley, and other scholars of the first water. January 20th, 1830. DRAMATIS PERSONÆ. DICÆOPOLIS. Scene.-- At first the General Assembly, at the Pnyx ; afterwards the house of Dicæopolis, in the country. |