that of arms. The Athenians decreed honours to his memory; and authors who defign to dedicate their genius to the theatre, have more than once been seen to go to make libations, and recite their works, at on the merit of this poet, because almost all the novelties he introduced were difcoveries; and because it was more difficult, with the models which he had before his eyes, to raise tragedy to the elevation at which he left it, than, after him, to bring it to perfection." ENQUIRY with RESPECT to the SINGING and DECLAMATION of the ANCIENT TRAGEDY. 66 "1. The actors declaimed in the fcenes. Ariftole, fpeaking of the means employed by certain kinds of poetry to produce imitation, fays, that the dithyrambics, the nomi, tragedy, and comedy, made ufe of rhythm, melody, and verfe;, with this difference, that the dithyrambics and the nomi employed all the three together, and tragedy and comedy made ufe of them feparately: and afterwards he fays that, in the fame piece, tragedy fometimes employs metre alone, and fometimes metre accompanied with melody. "It is well known that the fcenes were ufually compofed in iambic verfe, because this kind of metre is moft proper for the dialogue. But Plutarch, fpeaking of the mufical execution of the iambic verfes, fays while the inftruments played, and that others were fung. Declamation was then admitted in the scenes. 2. The actors frequently fang in the fcenes. To the proof afforded by the preceding paffage in Plutarch, I fhall add the following others. Ariftotle affures us that the hypodorian and hypophrygian modes or keys were ufed in the fcenes, though they were not in the choruses. 66 4. The chorus fometimes fang in the course of a scene. This is proved from the paffage in Pollux: “When, "inftead of a fourth actor, fome one "of the chorus is made to fing," &c. And likewife by the precept in Horace: Let the chorus fing no. thing between the interludes which is not closely connected with the action" as alfo by a number of examples. It will be fufficient to refer to the Agamemnon of Afhylus, from verfe 1099 to verfe 1186; the Hyppolytus of Euripides, from v. 58 to v. 72; the Oreftes of the fame poet, from v. 140 to v. 207, &c. &c. "5. The chorus, or rather its coryphæus, fometimes entered into dialogue with the actors, and this dialogue was only declaimed. This was efpecially done when the chorus was afked for any explanations, or when itself requefted them from one of the perfons of the drama; in a word, as often as it immediately participated in the action. See, in the Medea of Euripides, verfe 811; in the fupplicants of the fame poet, v. 634; in the Iphigenia in Aulis of the fame, v. 917, &c. "The firft fcenes of the Ajax of Sophocles will fuffice, if I am not miftaken, to fhew the manner in which declamation and finging were employed fucceffively. "Scene the first, Minerva and Ulyffes; fcene the fcecond, the fame and Ajax; fcene the third, Minerva and Ulyffes. These three fcenes form the expofition of the fubject. Minerva relates to Ulyffes that Ajax, in a fit of frenzy, had killed the Thepherds and flaughtered the flocks, imagining that he had facrificed to his vengeance the chiefs of the army. This is a fact, and is narrated in iambic verfes; whence I conclude that the three scenes were declaimed. "Minerva and Ulyffes go off, and the chorus enters: it is compofed of Salaminians, who deplore the miffortune of their fovereign, of whofe frantic actions they have been in formed. The chorus entertains doubts, which it feeks to fatisfy. It 1791. does not employ the iambic verfe ; its ftyle is figurative. It is alone; it expreffes itfelf in a ftrophe and an antiftrophe, both containing the fame number of verfes of the fame metre. This, therefore, is what Aristotle calls the firft fpeech of the whole chorus; and, by confequence, the first interlude, which was always fung by all the voices of the chorus. "After the interlude, fcene the first, Tecmefa and the chorus. This fcene, which continues from verfe co to verfe 307, is, as it were, divided into two parts. In the first, which contains 62 verfes, Tecmeffa confirms the accounts of the frenzy of Ajax; her lamentations and thofe of the chorus follow. The verfes are anapefts. In the part of the chorus is a ftrophe, with its corref ponding antiftrophe, perfectly refembling it in the number and meafure of the verses. I fuppofe all this to have been fang. The fecond part of the fcene, was no doubt, declaimed; it only confifts of iambic verfes. The chorus interrogates Tecmefla, who enters into a circumstantial account of the action of Ajax. The exclamations of Ajax are heard, the door of his tent is opened, and he appears. "Scene the fecond, Ajax, Tecmeffa, and the chorus. This fcene, like the preceding, was partly fung and partly declaimed. Ajax (v. 38) fings four ftrophes, with their correfponding antiftrophes. Tecmoffa and the chorus reply by two or three iambic verfes, which must have been fong, as I fhall prefently fhew. After the laft antiftophe and the anfwer of the chorus, begin, át verfe 430, the iambics, which continue to veife 60, or rather 9. In thefe the prince, recovered from his delirium, fignifies to Tecmefla and the chorus his refolution to put an end to his life: they entreat him to abandon fuch a defign. He a to fe his fon, takes him in his arms and addreffes to him an affecting fpeech. All this is declaimed, Tecmela goes out with her child; Ajax remains on the stage; but he obferves a profound filence, while the chorus executes the fecond interlude. "From this examination, which I might carry farther, it is manifeft that the chorus was confidered under two different points of view, according as it was employed in either of the two distinct functions allotted to it. In the interludes, or intervals between the acts, the whole chorus fang together; in the fcenes in which it participated in the action, it was reprefented by its coryphæus; which explains the expreffion of Ariftotle and Horace, that the chorus fometimes performed the part of an actor. 6. By what marks may the parts of a drama which were jung be difting bed from theje avhich were only recited? I am not able to lay down rules for this diftinction which will apply in every cafe; 1 can only fay that it appears to me, that declamation had place as often as the interlocutors, following the thread of the action, without the intervention of the chorus, expreffed themfelves in a long feries of iambics, at the head of which the fcholiafts have written the word Iamboi. I incline to believe, but I will not poffitively affert, that all the other verfes were fung. We may, how ever, in general, affirm that the earlier authors applied themfelves more to the melopecia than their fucceffors; the reafon of which is evident. The dramatic poems deriving their origin from those companies of buffoons who traversed Attica, it was natural for the chant, or finging, to be regarded as the principal part of tragedy in its infancy; and hence, no doubt, it is that it prevails more in the pieces of fchylus, and Fhrynichus his contemporary, than in those of Euripides and Sophocles. "I have faid above, on the authority of Plutarch, the iambic verfes were fometimes tung when the chorus performed the part of an actor, We in fact find this kind of verse in irregular ftanzas adapted to be fung. Efchylus has often used it in modu lated frenes; as, for example, that of the king of Argos and the chorus in the fupplicants, verse 352: the chorus fings ftrophes and their corresponding antistrophes ; the king replies. five times, and each time by five iambic verfes; a proof, unless I am miftaken, that all these refponfes were to the fame air. See fimilar examples in the pieces of the fame author; in the feven chiefs, v. 29 and 691; in the Perfians, v. 256; in Agammenon, v. 1099; and in the fupplicants, v. 747 and 883. On the PROPER MODE of PRONOUNCING the GREEK VOWELS. [From an Analytical Eflay on the Greek Alphabet, by Richard Payne Knight.] THE HE proper mode of pronouncing the Greek vowels has been a fubject of much controverly ever fince the revival of learning in the weft; it having been foon difcovered that the Byzantine Greeks, the only teachers of the language, had long loft the art of Ipeaking it, though they continued to write it with purity, and even elegance. Erafmus first compofed a whimsical dialogue upon the fubject; and foon after Cheke, profeffor of Greek in the University of Cambridge, undertook to examine it; but his work was anticipated by an edict, published in the year 1542 by Stephen Gardener, bishop of Winchester, and chancellor of the University, ftrictly commanding that the mode of pronunciation eftab. lifhed by the modern Greeks fhould be continued: by which the vowels H, I, and Y, were considered merely as different fins for one found, the dipthongs QI and EI for another, and Al and E for another. Cheke and his friends found no diff. culty in coufuting thefe abfurdities; but neither he, nor those who have followed him in the enquiry, have afforded us much real information, except that which was before given by Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus. "The A," fays that critic, "when extended, is the most fonorous of the long vowels. It is pronounced by the mouth being very much opened, and the breath forced up wards. Next is the long E; to pronounce which the mouth is moderately opened, and the found, following the breath, preffed down about the root of the tongue. Then 8 In the mouth to be circular, and the comes the long O, which requires lips contracted round, against the outward edges of which the breath must be ftrongly impelled. The r is lefs fonorous; for, the breath being constrained by a confidera ble contraction of the lips, the found produced is flender. ferior to all is the I; for, the mouth being but little opened, there is a collifion of the breath with the teeth, and the lips are not employed in elevating the found." This paffage intirely fubverts the authority of the Byzantine Greeks, none of which teach the true proas well as that of our own fchools, nounciation of the vowels, except perhaps the Scotch. The critic has confidered the long ones rather than the fhort ones, not because there was any difference in the mode of tone can be better illuftrated and pronouncing them, but because afcertained in a long found than a fhort one. It appears, from what he fays, that the A was pronounced as the italians now pronounce it, or as past, c. The E was alto as the we pronounce it in the words vaft, Italians now pronounce it, or as we pronounce the A when followed by a confonant and mute vowel, as in Italians have alfo the true pronounthe words mate, plate, c. The ciation of the C, which we have followed by miferably corrupted, except when' vowels, as in the words mode, loaf, followed by a confonant and mute whether any modern nation pro&. As for the Y, I am in doubt the italians follow the Latins, nounces it exactly as the Greeks did G 2 whofe : whofe U correfponded to the or dipthong of the Greeks, the true pronounciation of which is retained by the French in their own ou. We pronounce it as the dipthong Er in fome inftances (as in TAP), and in others, as the French pronounce the fame dipthong (as in Y:), a barbarous found unknown to antiquity. Perhaps the nearest letter to it in modern alphabets is the French accented U; the found of which is, indeed, poor and flender; but fuch Dionyfius informs us that of the Greek Y was. "The vowels have varied but little in their forms, except that the Upfilon was antiently written like the Latin V, and the Iota by an indented line, thus, to diftinguish it from the Gamma, which reprefented by the ftraight perpendicular line. The confufion between these two forms probably produced the I confonant; which feems, in the Roman alphabet, to have had that affinity with the G which it still retains in most modern languages." OBSERVATIONS on the LANGUAGE of BOTANY, by the Reverend THOMAS MARTYN, B. D. F. R. S. Professor of Botany in the University of Cambridge, and Fellow of the Linnean Society. In a Letter to the President. [From the first Volume of the Transactions of the Linnean Society.] "I "SIR, HAVE little doubt of your agreeing with me in opinion, that nothing has contributed more to the rapid progrefs which the fcience of botany has made within the laft thirty or forty years, than the excel lent language which Linneus invented, and which has been by common confent adopted, not only by those who follow the fyftematic arrangement of the illuftrious Swede, but by all who study botany as a fcience. Without pretending to any peculiar forefight, we may venture to affirm, that the Linnean language will continue to be in ufe, even though his fyftem fhould in after ages be neglected; and that it will be received into every country where the science of botany is ftudied, with certain modifications adapting it refpectively to each vernacular tongue. "So long as botany was confined to the learned few, there was no difficulty in ufing the terms of the Linnean language, exactly as the author had delivered it but now that it is become a general pursuit, not only of the fcholar, but of fuch as have not had what is called a learned education; and fince the fair fex have adopted it as a favourite amufement; it is become neceflary to have a language that shall be fuitable to every rank and condition, a language that may be incorporated into the general fund, and carry with it the proper marks of the mother tongue, into which it is to be received. "In order to attain this defirable end, I beg leave, fir, to fubmit to your confideration, and to that of the fociety over which you prefide, thefe two fundamental principles: First, that we fhould adhere as clofely |