Si quod sit vitium, non fastidire: strabonem 45 50 55 60 65 Qui minimis urguetur. Amicus dulcis, ut aequum est, 70 Si modo plura mihi bona sunt, inclinet. Amari Si volet hac lege, in trutina ponetur eadem. VARIOUS READINGS. 48. Cuningan and Sanadon read talis fultum ven. Most editions have Simplicior quis et est, male parvis. 51. Markland conjectures postulet. servat. 57. Bentley omits est, and in this and the following line reads, multum demissus homo ille: Tardo ac cognomen pingui damus. Other editions have in the 58th line Tardo, cognomen pingui da mus. 59. Markland conjectures dolo for malo. 60. The common reading is versetur, which Bentley alters to versemur on the authority of a very ancient MS. of Cruquius's. We have given this emendation along with Hunter and Kidd. 63. The punctuation of this line is variously gi but that which we have adopted is preferable. Lambinus, from some of his MSS., reads quis at est? qualem. 65. The common reading is impellat, which is found in fourteen of Valart's MSS. Muretus gives impellam, which Valart finds in some of his MSS. Lambinus and Cuningam have adpellet, and Bentley impediat. We have retained the common reading as sufficiently expressive, although Acron would seem, from his scholium on this passage, to have adopted adpellet previous to Lambinus. Acron's explanation is, "Si quis libere et sjne observatione temporis appellaverit amicum suum, hunc dicunt stultum et molestum." Postulat, ignoscet verrucis illius; aequum est, Denique, quatenus excidi penitus vitium irae, 75 80 85 90 95 Queis paria esse fere placuit peccata, laborant, Quum ventum ad verum est: sensus moresque repugnant : Quum prorepserunt primis animalia terris, Mutum et turpe pecus, glandem atque cubilia propter 100 VARIOUS READINGS. 74. We have given with Bentley ignoscet, which is found in many MSS., in the Milan edition of 1477, in that of Florence 1482, in the Venice edifion of 1490, and in Locher's. After this period it seems to have been dropped, and ignoscat substi tuted Bentley first restored it to the text, and it has been received by Cuningam, Sanadon, Gesner, Valart, Oberlinus, Wakefield, Döring, Fea, &c. Bentley well remarks in its defence, "Civile magis est, futuris quam imperativis praecipere, idque Horatio solemne." 81. Some MSS. give trepidumque, which Fea, who thinks tepidum an unmeaning epithet in this passage, adopts in his text: but vid. Explanatory notes. 86. The best MSS. and all the early editions previous to that of Aldus, have Rusonem. Aldus first gave Drusonem from some MSS., which many subsequent editions have adopted. 91. Bentley, on the authority of a single MS., has tortum in the sense of tornatum, or coelatum: "fashioned," "carved." Cuningam receives the emendation. 94. Cuningam has furtum si 99. The Venice edition of 1509 has glebis for terris. 101. Cuningam has Unguibus, hinc pugnis, Fea remarks of this reading; "Et optime conjungit ungues et pugnos adeo sibi immediatos: hinc dissociat." Donec verba, quibus voces sensusque notarent, 105 110 Nec natura potest justo secernere iniquum, Dividit ut bona diversis, fugienda petendis : Nec vincet ratio hoc, tantundem ut peccet idemque, 115 Qui teneros caules alieni fregerit horti, Et qui nocturnus sacra divûm legerit. Adsit 120 VARIOUS READINGS. 107. Markland considers the whole passage from Nam fuit to taurus parenthetical; and in the 107th line reads mulier, to which he adds the remark, "haec vox de nupta proprie dici videtur." Sanadon also has mulier. 117. Nearly all the MSS. and early editions have sacra divům. Some of the old editions, however, give divùm sacra, which Lambinus, Cruquius, Muretus, D. Heinsius, Dacier, Oberlinus, and others adopt. Bentley first restored the older and more genuine reading, in which he has been followed by Sanadon, Valart, Fea, Bothe, Döring, Kidd, &c. Cuningam gives on conjecture, sacra Dis sublegerit; which same reading has been subsequently found by Valart in one of his MSS. 120. The common text has Nam ut ferula caedas The Latinity of this reading, however, appears exceedingly questionable, and we insert with pleasure the very able criticism of Mr. Liston on this subject. (Class. Journal, vol. 27. p. 202.) "This use of vereor ut caedas for ne caedas (as it is generally explained) is contrary to the universal usage of the Latin language: nor does the solution of the difficulty given by Dr. Clarke (ad. Caes. B. G. 5. 47.) and generally acquiesced in, appear to me at all satisfactory. Nam ut ferula caedas meritum majora subire verbera, id equidem non vereor.' This appears to me to leave the matter where it found it-id non vereor, quid non verearis?-ut ferula caedas. He adds vel, id ne facias non vereor.' If this did produce the meaning wished for (which yet I doubt), it would make the author mean yes when he says no: and, by a similar process, in every instance vereor ut might be made equivalent to vereor ne: and any thing night be made of any thing. In other instances Horace has expressed himself as other Latin authors do. 'Opuer ut sis vitalis metuo; et majorum ne quis amicus frigore te feriat. Sedit, qui timuit ne non succederet; equivalent to ut succederet. Sed vereor ne cui de te plus quam tibi das;' where, if we should put ut for ne, we should reverse the sense; but which by Dr. Clarke's process might be made to bear Horace's meaning. If Horace really wrote the passage as it stands, I would explain it thus: Ut caedas ferula, (h. e. ne non caedas vel ferula) non vereor. I am not afraid that you will not even punish with the rod him who deserves severer chastisement; that is, I am not afraid, lest you Stoics draw from your doctrine that all crimes are equal, this consequence, that no crime should be punished at all, which may as justly be drawn from it, as that all crimes ought to be punished with equal severity. If sacrilege be no greater crime than heedlessly breaking down a few coleworts (v. 115. seqq.) it ought not to be punished even with the ferula: you will not reason in this manner, for you say, &c.' This explanation gives the Latin phrase its true meaning, and is quite in the author's argument. But after all, it is not so easy and natu ral as Ne ferula caedas would be; which therefore I suspect he wrote." Mr. Liston does not stand unsupported in his objections to the common text. Döring also acknowledges that correct Latinity requires ne in this passage and not ut. He considers it as an anacoluthon, and supposes that Horace, in place of non vereor, had intended to Verbera, non vereor, quum dicas esse pares res 125 130 135 140 VARIOUS READINGS. have subjoined vix adduci poteris, or some equivalent phrase. We have deemed it the most ad visable plan to remove this blot from the text of Horace, by reading Ne ferula caedas at once. One of Fea's MSS. gives merely Nam ferula caedas, omitting ut, and the change from Ne to Nam might very easily have occurred through a mistake of the copyists. At all events, we obtain correct Latin by this emendation, as well as a meaning free from any serious objection: That you will punish indeed merely with the rod, one who deserves to undergo severer chastisement, I am not at all afraid' On the usage of vereor, and other Terbs of fearing when connected with ut or ne, compare Perizonius, ad Sanct. Minerv. lib. 4. c. 14. vol. 2. p. 514. ed. Bauer.) Ruddiman, Instit. Gram Lat. (vol. 2. p. 237. ed. Stalbaum) Zumpt's L. G. p. 334. (Kenrick's transl. ed. 2d.) Scheller. Praecept. Styl. (vol. 1. p. 163.) 128. Bentley, on the authority of one of his MSS., reads Qui? which we have adopted with Cuningam, Sanadon, Wakefield, Valart, Fea, and others. The same reading occurs in three of Valart's MSS. The common text has Quo? 132. The common reading is Sutor, which Bentley, on the authority of two MSS., one of them a MS. copy of Acron, changes to Tonsor. His emendation is adopted by Cuningam, Sanadon, Oberlinus, Wakefield, Fea, and others. It is certainly preferable to the old reading, especially as it prevents the same line of business from being aukwardly mentioned twice.-In this same line, Cuningam and Sanadon, on the authority of a MS., give protinus for optimus. 153. Some of Lambinus's MSS. have Vellent. 140. Some read peccavero. Bentley first restored peccaro to the text, and it has been since followed in the best editions. SATIRA IV. IN OBTRECTATORES SUOS. Eupolis atque Cratinus Aristophanesque, poëtae, 2 Scribendi recte: nam ut multum ; nil moror. Ecce, Crispinus minimo me provocat. — Accipe, si vis, Accipiam tabulas; detur nobis locus, hora, Beatus Fannius, ultro Delatis capsis et imagine! quum mea nemo VARIOUS READINGS. SATIRE 4. S. Some editions have ac fur, but aut fur is preferable, since malus is the generic term, and fur a specific designation. 14. Bentley ingeniously conjectures nummo for minimo. Gesner praises the emendation, although he does not adopt it in the text. The common reading is sufficiently forcible, and as such we have retained it. 15. Accipiam is sanctioned by numerous MSS., and most of the early editions. Landinus, however, Aldus (1509), Muretus, Torrentius, Dacier, Bentley, Sanadon, Cuningam, Wakefield, and others prefer accipe jam, on the authority of other MSS. 15. Some MSS. have dentur, contrary to the usual style of Horace. 18. Lambinus objects to the expression animi loquentis, and conjectures loquentem, of which Bentley approves." But in truth," observes Francis, "it is the mind, especially in writing, that speaks, and the pen is only a kind of interpreter. It is an expression like that in the twelfth line, garrulus." To the same effect is the remark of Döring; "animus loqui dicitur, cum ea, quae meditatus est, profert et edisserit." 20. Bentley conjectures emolliat, as affording better sound after ferrum than the common reading molliat. We have followed his authority. |