« ForrigeFortsæt »
author, has exhibited a very distinct view of this “ molesta periodus.”
63. 8. kai kvappayeioai, k. T...) Notwithstanding the information conveyed in this note, and in several others of a similar structure (vide p. 68. n. 4, 5, 6), we must express our opinion that it is not sufficiently accommodated to the junior student. In the first place, he cannot turn to p. 221. Annot. 14. of Hudson's edition. Nor is it to be supposed that he has at command such works on military affairs as Schæffer's. The Professor might have shortened his note considerably, and rendered it at the same time equally useful, if he had merely referred to the explanation of mapeželpeoia, énwrides, &c. given in Potter's “Grecian Antiquities," a book in the hands of every Greek student, but to which not a single reference is made in the course of all these notes, although technical terms are constantly recurring, and the last edition of Potter was superintended by the learned Professor himself.
65. 6. στερίφοις, κ. τ. λ.) παρέχοντες in this passage has baffled the ingenuity of all the commentators. Duker, one of the most judicious and learned of them, honestly confesses his ignorance; nor indeed may any one be ashamed to do so, as the text is evidently corrupted. Professor D. conjectures ápoon lévres to be the proper reading, which, if not the word originally given by Thucydides, is at least as good a substitute as bas hitherto been proposed.
73. 8. tá te alla, k. t. 1.) This passage Duker translates, “ Præterea quod de ceteris hostium rebus in suam potestatem redigendis nulla spes amplius ipsis ostenderetur.” In our opinion this translation is quite erroneous. Thucydides does not mean to represent the Athenians as any longer aspiring to conquest. Their generals were now assembled to deliberate on the state of their army, and adopt measures for future safety. This was gloomy enough. Unsuccessful, the soldiers were tired with the siege and wasted with sickness, arising as well from the season of the year as from the marshy soil of their encampment. Not only were they dispirited with all these misfortunes, but even when “ they looked to other things," tá te alla sc. eúspwr, " they also appeared hopeless,” ávé Tlota aurois épaivero. Such is Professor D.'s view of the passage,
and it seems correct. 78. 5. δυοίν δεούσας είκοσιν ας, κ. τ. λ.) “ Quæ sit constructio verborum δυοϊν δεούσας είκοσιν nescio, nisi δεούσας ad τάς ναύς supra referas, ut ordo είt, τάς ναύς, τας μεν, κ. τ. λ.-δεούσας δυοϊν είκοσιν. Quæ constructio vix proba videtur. Post rås pèy expectandum erat Nostrum scripturum fuisse δυοϊν δε δεούσας είκοσιν απώλεσαν, , ås oi Eupakóoli, k. 7.d.” Such is the Professor's note. It occurs to us, however, that the following construction of the sentence is not far from the truth ;-και οπλίτας τε πολλούς απέκτειναν, και (κατά) τας ναύς, τας μεν πολλές διέσωσάν τε και ξυνήγαγον κατά το
στρατόπεδον, (κατ) είκοσιν (δε ναύς) δεούσας δυοϊν, as to the twenty wanting two, h. e. eighteen, ås (raúras) oi Eupakbolol, K. 7.d. These the Syracusians, &c. With respect to the phrase, dvoiv deouoas €koow, we refer to p. 61, n. 6, and to Hoogeveen for examples of the omission of dé. Art. pèv et dé.
80. 3. This sentence, evidently vitiated, Professor D. has restored in the following manner: ως εκάσταις (τι) της ξυντυχίας, ή (τι) Karà rò Evupépov, ū (TI) áváykns doxev. The sagacity of the Scholiast struck out the correct meaning, but he, as well as Duker, has failed in bringing the text under the strict rules of syntax.
88. 2. és åróvolav kabeotýkaow, K. 7...) In this note the Professor appears eminently successful in eliciting the true sense of his author, and restoring a passage which former editors had tried in vain. In order to escape the difficulty, Duker has invented the substantive átokivduvevous, and inserted in the text its dative, which, by an analogy correct enough, he makes árokuvduvevoel. This he employs to govern rúxns, and translates both by “temeritate fortunæ.”—Professor D. gives átokivduvevoovtes, a reading not only in strict conformity with the author's style, but which at the same time brings out a most correct meaning. His words are, " et constructio et temporis ratio postulare videntur átokuvduveúgovtes, quod dedi ;” and he immediately adds: “ Libenter oŰtws, quod e participii terminatione natum esse judico, ejecissem si licuisset.” This remark, with submission to the learned Professor, might, we think, have been spared; at least some reason should have been assigned for this hostility to ourws: certain it is that oŰTWS onws are used in a similar collocation by the best authors; thus Plato in Phed. p. 228. νυν ήδη ποιείν εμοί ως αληθώς πολύ κράτιστόν έστιν ούτως, όπως δύναμαι λέγειν, and again, p. 236, ρητέον σοι παντός μάλλον ούτως όπως οίος τε ει. In his emendation, Duker seems to have been misled by the translation of Valla,“ nec tam apparatui suo confidunt, quam (id quod possent) temeritate fortunæ, ut aut,"&c.; but of this translation Hudson in his preface thus writes : “ Sed incuriam et negligentiam (graviori enim verbo uti non libet) summam ubique prodit,” sc. Laurentius Valla.
88. 5. kai voulowjev, k. 7. 1.) With respect to the latter clause, which the Professor has rendered differently from any other translator, we see no pressing necessity for the change, since the sense generally given to it agrees sufficiently with the syntax of the words, as well as the sentiments of the speaker. Tð deyópevov, every one knows, is usually taken for GoTEp Néyerai.
91. 8. nodù còy ảywva, K. 7. A.) Duker, whose penetration led bim to the correct sense of this passage, had not yet firmness enough to substitute σύντασιν for ξύστασιν. Considering the obvious impropriety of this latter term, Professor D, has done well to prefer in his text what no doubt Thucydides gave. “ Scholiastes," ait
Duk., 6. etiam in ipso Thucydide tuvraou non Ecotqol videtur legisse.”
95. 9. čxovoa tiva, K. 7. d.). This passage, more than usually obscure, Professor D. has explained with much accuracy and perspicuity.-Of the references at the close of the note, the first is erroneous, and the other is unsuitable.
Before taking leave of the notes on the extract from Thucydides, we beg to state in a few words our opinion of it as a whole. With regard to the text of the seventh book, the Professor has exhibited it to his students in the most amended and chastised style that has yet appeared; whilst his notes display throughout talent and learning, patient research and useful illustration. He has grappled with every difficulty, and has seldom failed, either by some happy conjecture or correct reasoning, to remove it. At times we have differed from him; but, when excellencies predominated so much, we directed our efforts rather to find occasions of blame than otherwise.
FABLES OF BIDPAI.
It is reported that a Satrap, celebrated for his power, distinguished by his nobility and excellent qualities, had a wife, whose beauty was the loss of the heart, and whose charms excited trour ble in the world.
Her lips gave life still more than the water of the stream of existence, and her mouth was sweeter than the purest sugar.
Verses. “ Her countenance had the splendor of fire, her cheeks the brilliancy of the silvered wave, her eyelids were arches, the glances of her eyes, arrows, and by means of these arches and of these arrows, she had made slaves of a thousand hearts."
To this degree of high approbation and of charms she united the beauty of modesty and of virtue: she had adorned with the freckle of abstinence and piety her cheeks, which excited disturbance in the heart.
Verses. “ Her eyes, closed to all things in the world, were concealed
bebind the veil of chastity; never had a mirror seen, even from a distance, her ravishing attractions. What did I say? She feared the society of her shadow!”
This Satrap had a page from the country of Balkh, who performed for him the functions of falconer; he had neither manners nor reticence, and did not guarantee the atmosphere of his heart from libertinage and corruption.
One day this young man came to look at this virtuous lady, and instantly the bird of his heart was caught in the net of love.
Distracted in himself, he moved the ring' of union in vain; the gate of meeting opened not to him; in vain did he employ stratagem and address; it was all to no purpose. When the page saw that his hopes were frustrated, he sought (as is the custom with perverse souls) to invent some stratagem against this virtuous lady, and had recourse to an imposture to cover her with shame.
He bought of a sportsman two parrots, and began to teach one of them, in the language of Balkb, to say, " I saw the porter lie with the mistress of the house ;” and to the other,
“ but as for me I say nothing."
In a week these parrots had learned their respective phrases.
One day when the Satrap, was in the banqueting hall, seated upon the couch of conversation, with his heart disengaged from all care, the falconer entered, and offered him the parrots as a present.
The parrots began to talk with mildness, repeating these two phrases as they had been instructed.
The Satrap was not acquainted with the language of Balkh, but he was delighted to hear the flexibility of their voices and the charming words which they pronounced, and after having familiarised himself with these sounds, be transferred the birds to his wife, that she might take care of them. The poor woman, who also did not understand the language of these birds, brought them up, and thus caressed enemies who bore the appearance
of friends. The Satrap, at length, took so much pleasure in the prating of these parrots, that he abandoned the inebriating sound of the lute and the voluptuous quavering of the guitar, to lend bis ear to this vivifying harmony.
One day the people of Balkh came to visit him: the Satrap bastened to have the parrots brought into the apartment of hospitality.” These birds, according to their custom, began to articulate the two
· That is to say, the knocker of the door : in the East the doors have a riog to knock with, instead of a knocker or a bell.
? The Arabs, who are generally considered one of the most ancient nations of the East, have a separate apartment in their houses appropriated exclusively to strangers, travellers, &c. which is called Beet-deef, or the guest-room, or hospitality-room.
phrases which they had been respectively taught; but they had scarcely uttered these words when the strangers, confounded with what they bad just heard, looked upon one another, and finally bowed their heads with shame. The Satrap seeing that the flame of rejoicing among bis friends was extinct, and that the intoxication of contentment among his hosts was changed into stupor and reflection, wished to know the cause, and strongly insisted in his demand; it was to no purpose that the guests excused themselves, he would not admit their excuses.
The most courageous amongst them then addressed him thus : “ Without doubt you know not what these birds utter.” replied the Satrap, “I do not comprehend what they say, but I love and take pleasure in hearing their words, which appear to win 80 many hearts; tell me then the meaning of these words."
Verses. “I have not seen Solomon' even in my dreams, how then should I understand the language of birds ?"
Then the guests, after baving repeated the words which the parrots had uttered, explained the meaning of them to the Satrap.
The latter immediately quitting his glass : “My dear friends, said he, excuse me, I did not understand what ihese birds said, but now that I kuow their meaning it would be impossible to excuse myself. It is not the custom in our town to eat in a house where the wife is dissolute or ill-mannered." Then the
falconer exclaimed, “ I have often seen what these birds speak of, I bear witness to it.”
At these words the Satrap ordered his wife to be put to death; but the latter, who had been informed of the order, sent a messenger to him, charging him to say to the Satrap, “ My lord and my powerful master.
Verses. « Whether my death be agreeable to you, or my life, whatever you order I submit to it with resignation, but think seriously on this matter, and be not too precipitate; do not basten to put me to death because I am in your power, for the wise think that in all matters, but above all, when there is a shedding of blood, it is indispensable to reflect seriously; for if capital punishment becomes necessary, it can be inflicted at any time; but, if by precipitation death be inflicted on the innocent, and it should afterwards be discovered that the punishment was not merited, the reparation of
· The Orientals assert that Solomon understood the language of birds.
Expression in the East to show obedience and entire submission.