be discovered which differ widely from those which are already known, and that the true readings of some passages may lie concealed in those citations of ancient authors which have eluded the vigilance of Porson and other critics. It is probable that the printed and unprinted remains of the ancient grammarians would repay to an editor of these plays the labour of a minutely attentive examination. In the mean time, much may be done in a small way by a careful and reiterated perusal of the text. Although most of the observations contained in the following pages are of very little consequence when separately considered, perhaps they may derive some value from their number. Nothing but want of room has prevented us from enlarging the number very considerably. We request the reader, before he lays aside this article, to compare the following corrections with the received text. Suppl. 92. καινῶν. V. 303. σφάλλει. V. 393. ἑκουσά γ'. V. 408. τὸ πλεῖον. V. 455. νυμφεύσεται. V. 543. κρυφήσονται. V. 726. τοιόνδε τοι. V. 745. Οι τόξ ̓ ἐπεντείνοντες. V. 767. Δεινὸν μὲν οὖν. V. 782. ἐμοὶ δὲ δὴ παίδων. V. 797. κοίν' εἰς Αἴδου. V. 842. εἰπὲ δ'. V. 1022. Φερσεφόνας (Φερσεφονείας Aldus). Iph. Aul. 141. ἀλσώδεις ἔζη. Γ. 193. τὸν Οἰλέως. V. 194. τᾶς Σαλαμῖνος. V.675. ἑστήξεις. Vv. 873, 880, 1131. κτενεῖν. V. 1358. μαχεῖ. V. 1438. μήτ' οὖν σὺ V. 1450. ἔπος τι. V. 1458. δόλῳ γ', ἀγεννῶς τ'. V. 1484. ᾗ χρεών. Iph. Taur. 4. τοῦ δ'. V. 105. θεοῦ τε. V. 311. ἀπέψη. V. 375. ἰοῦσα Πηλέως. V. 400. δονακο χλόαν. V. 489. τάς τ' ἐμὰς. V. 658. ταυτά. V. 848. δόμοισιν. V. 856. ὦ ξύγγον. V. 932. ἠγγέλθης. V. 950. παρέχον, οἴκων ὄντες. V. 961, 2. εἰς δίκην | ἔστην. V. 904. εἰπὼν δ'. V. 1014. πόλισμα Παλλάδος. V. 1064. καλόν τοι γλῶσσ'. V. 1206. κακκομιζόντων γε. V. 1210. ξυναντῶσιν. V. 1235. Δηλίοις. V. 1435. ποῖ δὴ διωγμὸν.

SUPPLICES.

V. 21. "Αδραστος, ὄμμα δάκρυσιν τέγγων ὅδε, Κεῖται. The comma after de ought to be expunged. The words de zira are to be translated Lies here. So in the Hecuba, v. 486. Aürn wiλuç ooũ, võt′ixovo' izì χθονι, Ταλθύβιε, κεῖται. In English, Here she lies. Iph. Τaur. 267. Έλεξε δ· οὐχ ὁρᾶτε; δαίμονές τινες Θάσσουσιν οἵδε. Some gods are sitting here. It is proper to admonish learners, that the pronouns de and ouros are frequently to be rendered Here, and still more frequently Hither. In the Heraclide, the Chorus says to Iolaus, v. 81. O ix Tíros yñs ŵ yípor τετράπτολιν Ξύνοικον ἦλθες λαόν; So the passage is pointed in the two ear liest editions. In the third edition, that is to say, the Basil edition of 1544, is followed by a note of interrogation, as if the meaning were, Is this the man? The ancient punctuation has never been restored. The nominative plural ide, when joined to a verb which signifies motion to a place, is often corrupted into . See Soph. Oed. Col. 111. where Brunck ought to have adopted the reading of his Membrana, and

of

of the old editions: Σίγα. πορεύονται γὰρ οἵδε δή τινες Χρόνῳ παλαιοί, σῆς ἕδρας ἐπισκόποι. So Eurip. Or. 348. Καὶ μὴν βασιλεὺς ὅδε δὴ στείχο Μενέλαος ἄναξ. Here also most of the editions read ὧδε.

V. 37. Κήρυξ πρὸς ἄστυ, δεῦρο Θησέα καλῶν. Markland and Mr. Gaisford, in their notes on this line, point out several verses, in which the last syllable of the accusative singular of nouns ending in EYE is made short, contrary to the ordinary practice of the Attic poets. To these instances we are inclined to add Eurip. Εl. 409. Ελθ ̓ ὡς παλαιὸν τροφέ ἐμοῦ φίλου πατρός. The common reading is παλαιὸν τροφὸν, which we apprehend not to be better Greek than παλαιὸν παρθένον. Compare v. 16. Τὸν μὲν πατρὸς γεραιὸς ἐκκλέπτει τροφεύς. In v. 276. of the same play, the last syllable of the accusative plural is made short: Ελθὼν δὲ δὴ πῶς Φονέας ἂν κτάνοι πατρός;

V. 50. Ρυσὰ δὲ σαρκῶν πολιῶν καταδρύματα χειρῶν. Read καταδρύμματα χειροῖν. So v. 774 many editions, including that now before us, read λελειμένος with a single M.

V. 87. Τίνων γόων ἤκουσα, καὶ στέρνων κτύπον, Νεκρῶν τε θρήνους, τῶνδ' ἀνακτόρων ἄπο Ἠχους ιούσης; Read, Τίνων γόους ἤκουσα. In order to establish this alteration, we will subjoin the Aldine reading of a few passages of our poet, in which the termination of a substantive has been improperly assimilated to that of an adjoining word. Some examples of the same depravation of the termination of an adjective will be given in a subsequent page. Phan. 739. Τί δ ̓ εἰ καθιππεύσαιμεν ̓Αργείων στρατῶν (στρατόν); Suppl. 16. νεκροὺς δὲ τοὺς ὀλωλότας δορὶ Θάψαι θέλουσι τῶνδε μητέρων (μητέρες), χθονί. Ibid. 25. Νεκρὸν (νεκρῶν) κομιστὴν, ἢ λόγοισιν, ἢ δορὸς Ρώμη γενέσθαι. Ibid. 1151. Χαλκέοισιν ὅπλοις Δαναιδῶν στρατηλατῶν (στρατηλάταν). In this verse, the common reading is two degrees removed from the true reading, Δαναιδαν στρατηλάταν. Τro. 685. Ὁ μὲν, παρ' οἴαχ, ὁ δ ̓ ὅδ Aldus) ἐπὶ λαίφεσιν βεβὼς, Ὁ δ ̓ ἄντλων (ἄντλον) εἴργων ναός. Hel. 454. "Αγγελον εἴσω δεσπότοισι (δεσπόταισι) τοῖσι σοῖς. Ion. 1181. Ἦν δὴ φερόντων μόχθους (μόχθος) ἀργυρηλάτους Χρυσέας τε φιάλας.

V. 116. Οἶσθ ̓ ἣν στρατείαν ἐστράτευσ ̓ ὀλεθρίαν; Eferri potest sine interrogatione. M. Perhaps we may say, Efferri debet sine interrogaLone. So Iph. Taur. 517. Τροίαν ἴσως οἶσθ', ἧς ἁπανταχοῦ λόγος. Androm. 564. Ἔριν δὲ τὴν κατ ̓ οἶκον οἶσθά που κλύων. Bacch. 462. Τὸν ἀνθεμώδη Τμῶλον οἶσθα που κλύων. Heracl. 89. Τὸν Ἡράκλειον ἴστε που παραστάτην Ιόλαον. οὐ γὰρ σῶμ ̓ ἀκήρυκτον τόδε. The enclitic που has not prevented the two last examples from being printed with the mark of interrogation. Mr. Porson has retained the interrogation in Hec. 239. Οἶσθ ̓ ἡνίκ ̓ ἦλθες Ιλίου κατάσκοπος, and has omitted it in v. 994. Οἶσθ ̓ οὖν ̓Αθάνας Ιλίας ἵνα στέγαι.

V. 133. Τῷ δ ̓ ἐξέδωκας παῖδας ̓Αργείων σέθεν; Τοῖς pro τῷ optime conveniret, si quemadmodum τῷ pro τίν, ita τοῖς pro τίσι ponerent Tragici. Quod non factum puto. M. Soph. Trach. 986. Παρὰ τοῖσι βροτῶν κείμαι;

V. 149. Ο δ' Οἰδίπου παῖς, τίνι τρόπῳ Θήβας λιπών. Παῖς, quod ab omnibus exemplaribus aberat, inserendum putavi metri gratia. G. Mr. Gaisford's emendation is confirmed by the authority of Mr. Porson, who has collected several instances of the same omission.*

A person who is not familiarly acquainted with the rude and inartificial economy of the Greek drama, can hardly read this verse without exclaiming, in the words of Mr. GG 3 V. 158.

V. 158. Τί δὲ πλέον; ἦλθον ̓Αμφιάρεω γε πρὸς βίαν. Instead of τί δὲ πλέον, Mr. Porson (Praef. ad Hec. p. 40.) silently reads í λor, which reading Mr. Gaisford has admitted into the text. It is certain, that in tragic iambics, a monosyllable which is incapable of beginning a verse, as av, yap, de, μèv, TE, TI, is very rarely employed as the second syllable of a tribrach or dactyl. To the best of our knowledge, Eschylus affords no example of this license, and Sophocles only two: Phil. 999. Οὐδέποτέ γ' οὐδ ̓ ἣν χρῇ με πᾶν παθεῖν κακόν. Ibid. 1392. Οὐδέποθ' ἑκόντα γ' ὥστε την Τροίαν ἰδεῖν. Perhaps, however, in these verses οὐδέποτε is to be considered as one word, as it is commonly represented. In the remains of Euripides, we have observed the following examples: I. Or. 2. Ovdè πάθος, οὐδὲ συμφορὰ θεήλατος. It is obvious that οὐδὲ may be considered as one word, as well as oudénors. We shall hereafter endeavour to shew, that the rhythm of the verse is not much improved by considering d as a disyllable. II. Phan. 541. Ξυνδεῖ. τὸ γὰρ ἴσον, νόμιμον ἀνθρώποις ἔφυ. III. Suppl. 368. Εἰ γὰρ ἐπὶ τέρμα, καὶ τὸ πλέον ἐμῶν κακῶν. IV. Iph. Αul. · 308. Οὐδὲ σὲ φέρειν γ ̓ ἅπασιν Ἕλλησιν κακά. The common reading is, Οὐδέ σε φέρειν δεῖ πᾶσιν. V. Ibid. 498. Εἰ δέ τι κόρης σῆς θεσφάτων μέτεστι σοι. VI. Bacch. 192. 'Anx' ovx öμośws âr à Beds Tiμèr exo. The true reading seems to be, 'Αλλ ̓ οὐχ ὁμοίαν ὁ θεὸς ἂν τιμὴν ἔχοι. VII. Ibid. 285. Ὥστε διὰ τοῦτον τἀγαθ ἀνθρώπους ἔχειν. Perhaps Διὰ τοῦτον ὥστε.* It may be observed, that in five of these seven verses, as well as in the verse now under consideration, the foot which we consider as licentious, is the first foot of the verse.†

Sneer, Pray, Mr. Puff, how came Sir Christopher Hatton never to ask that question before? The ignorance of Theseus is more surprising, because it appears from the beginning of the play, that his mother Aethra, for an old lady, was reasonably well versed in the history of Thebes. There is, however, a greater defect in the character of Theseus than his inattention to foreign affairs :---we mean, the total absence of courtesy and delicacy in his conduct towards a great prince in distress. In one passage, (v. 513,) Adrastus, who very naturally wishes to ease his mind by railing at the representative of his enemy, is roughly interrupted by Theseus before he has time to pronounce three words. In another place, (v. 590,) be is desired to keep out of the way, that he may not do mischief by his unlucky presence. It must be confessed, that this is very different from the stile of Racine, and, to say the truth, from the stile of Racing's master, in his conversations with James the Second. Markland is sensible of the incivility of Theseus, but attributes it, in his second edition, to the poet's dislike of the Argives. See his note on v. 127.

* Quam ex emendatione addidisti, says Mr. Porson, (Praef. ad Hec. p. 17.) particula TE (vel ye) si in MSS. omnibus reperiretur, ejicienda esset: quippe quae nunquam secunda pedis trisyllabi syllaba esse possit. Mr. Porson notices, as exceptions to his rule, Aristoph. Plut. 345, 403. He passes over in silence v. 421 of the same play: Ori θεὸς, οὔτ ̓ ἄνθρωπος· ὥστ ̓ ἀπολώλατον. So also Ran. 807, Οὔτε γὰρ Αθηναίοις ξυνέβαινεν Alexúhos. Among the fragments of Alexis preserved by Athenæus, we find three verses beginning with οὔτε. Ρ. 93, Ο. Οὔτε γὰρ ὕπνος δήπουθεν οὐδέν ̓ ἂν λάβοι. Ρ. 195, F. Οἴτε φιάλη. μετεῖχε δ ̓ ἀμφοῖν τοῖν ῥυθμοῖν. Ρ. 562, Γ. Οὔτε θεὸς, οὔτ ̓ ἄνθρωπος, οὔτ ̓ ἀβέλτερος. Mr. Porson has not noticed the following fragment of Menander (apud Athen. p. 364, Ε.): Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν, ὧν γε θεὸς, οὐκ εἴασα τὴν Ὀσφὸν ἂν ἐπὶ τὸν βωμὸν ἐπιθεῖναί ποτε, Εἰ μὴ καθίγιζέν τις ἅμα τὴν ἔγχελυν.

discover only thirteen Of these at least tour The particle is omitted

+ In Brunck's edition of Aristophane's we have been able to instances of the license in question in any foot except the first. are corrupt. I. Ach. 392. Ως σκέψιν ἂν ἀγὼν οὗτος οὐκ ἐσδέξεται. by Suidas v. Zícupos. The true reading, iç oxñļiv ày, is pointed out by Mr. Porson

V. 220.

Γ. 220. Οστις κόρας μὲν, θεσφάτοις Φοίβου ζυγείς, Ξένοισιν ὧδ ̓ ἔδωκας, ὡς ζώντων θεῶν. The δὲ which answers to this μὲν occurs in v. 229. Εἰς δὲ στρατείαν πάντας ̓Αργείους ἄγων. We must read λαμπρόν τε ν. 222, and εὐδαιμονοῦντάς τ' ν. 225. The words χρῆν γὰρ οὔτε σώματα, v. 223, toge ther with the five following verses, form a parenthesis.

V. 258. "Αγ', ὦ γεραιαὶ, στείχετε, γλαυκὴν χλόην Αὐτοῦ λιποῦσαι φυλλά δος καταστροφή. Read, ̓Αλλ', ώ γεραιαί, as in v. 359. ̓Αλλ', ὦ γεραιαὶ, σέμν' ἀφαιρεῖτε στέφη Μητρὸς, πρὸς οἴκους ὣς νιν Αἰγέως ἄγω.*

V. 290. Αἰσχρόν γ' ἔλεξας, χρήστ ̓ ἐπικρύπτειν φίλους. Mr. Hermann's emendation, χρήστ ̓ ἔπη κρύπτειν φίλους, is specious. See Erfurdt ad Oed. Tyr. 635, which verse may perhaps be read as follows: Δρᾶσαι δικαιοῖ, τοῖνδέ γ' ἀποκρίνας κακοῖν.

V. 340. Δράσων τάδ' εἶμι, καὶ νεκροὺς ἐκλύσομαι, Λόγοισι πείσων. Read, Λόγοισι πείσας. So Iph. Taur. 1048. OP. Λάθρα δ ̓ ἄνακτος, ἢ εἰδότος,

in Maty's Review, Vol. IV, p. 65. II. Ibid. 1209. Τί με σὺ κυνεῖς; τί με σὺ δάκνεις. Read τί σύ με. III. Eq. 20. 'Αλλ ̓ εὐρέ τιν' ἀπόκινον ἀπὸ τοῦ δεσπότου. Perhaps we ought to read τὴν ἀπόκινον. IV. Vesp. 767. Περὶ τοῦ; τι ληρεῖς; ταῦθ ̓ ἅπερ ἐκεῖ πράττετε. V. Αν. 1043. Σὺ δέ γ' οἶσί περ Οτοτύξιοι χρήσει τάχα. VI. Αν. 1614, ΝΑ τὸν Ποσειδῶ, ταῦτά γε σύ (ταῦτά γε τοι Rav.) καλῶς λέγεις. Mr. Porson (ad > reads ταυταγι καλῶς λέγεις. VII. Ibid. 1364. Τὸν μὲν πατέρα μὴ τύπτε· ταύτην δέ γε λαβών. The true reading is undoubtedly ταυτηνδι λαβών. VIII. Thesm. 8. Οὐδ ̓ ἄρ ὁρᾶν δεῖ μ'; οὐχ, ἅ γ ̓ ἂν ἀκούειν δέῃ. IX. Ibid. 554. ̓Αλλ ̓ οὐκέτ ̓ ἂν ἔχοις. ὅσα γαρ ἤδης, ἐξέχεας ἅπαντα. X. Ran. 1436. Περὶ τῆς πόλεως ἥντιν ̓ ἔχετον σωτηρίαν. XI. Eccl. 1087. Ελκοντε τοὺς πλωτῆρας ἂν ἀπεκναίετε. XII. Plut. 227. Καὶ δὴ βαδίζω. τοῦτο δὲ τὸ κρεᾴδιον. The Ravenna MS. reads τοῦτο δὲ τὸ κρεᾴδιον. We read τουτοδι κρεᾴδιον. XIII. Ibid. 813. Χαλκή γέγονε. τοὺς δὲ πινακισκοὺς τοὺς σαπρούς. The same eleven comedies contain near fifty instances of this licence in the first foot of an iambic verse.

* Theseus, however, does not conduct his mother to the mansion of Aegeus, but takes her behind the scenes, where she changes her dress, and soon afterwards returns in the habit and character of the Theban herald. The competitors for the prize of tragedy at Athens, like the competitors for the prize of equine velocity at Newmarket, were compelled to observe several regulations, which were instituted for the purpose of preserving some degree of equality in their performances. The actors were not only assigned by lot to the several competitors, but the number which each competitor was allowed to employ was limited to three. See Hesychius, v. Νέμεσις ὑποκριτῶν. In consequence of this regulation, when three characters were already on the stage, a fourth could not be introduced without allowing one of the three actors sufficient time to retire and change his dress. As the actors were not allowed to edge away at the top, like the confidant of Tilburina, it was always necessary to furnish the performer, whose services were required in a new capacity, with a decent reason for retiring. Thus, in the Edipus Coloneus of Sophocles, Ismene goes away to offer sacrifice at v. 509, and returns in the character of Theseus, after about forty lines, during which interval ŒEdipus and Antigone remain on the stage. Soon afterwards, (v. 847,) while (dipus, Creon, and Antigone, are on the stage, Antigone is violently carried off by Creon's attendants, and returns as Theseus after about the same interval as before. It may be observed that, in this play, as in seve ral others, it is impossible to distribute the parts to the three actors so as to give the whole of each part to the same actor. Theseus, at his second appearance, cannot chuse but be a different individual from his first representative. In the same play, Cipus, Antigone, Ismene, and Polynices, are on the stage together from v. 1249 to v. 1446. But it is to be observed that Ismene is not only mute during the presence of Polynices, but that, in this part of the play, she does not speak a word from her entrance to her exit. The poet was at liberty to employ as many mutes as he thought proper. Perhaps this note may appear somewhat loug, and rather irrelevant. We can only say, that the type is small, and that the French critics, in their interpretation of the Nec quarta loqui persona laboret of Horace, have omitted to point out the origin of that rule.

In the old edi

δράσεις τάδε; ΙΦ. Πείσασα μύθοις. οὐ γὰρ ἂν λάθοιμί γε. tions of the Supplices, the contrary fault to that which we have just corrected, occurs in v. 542. Καμοὶ μὲν ἦλθες δείν ̓ ἀπειλήσας ἔπη. land reads ἀπειλήσων on the authority of all the MSS.

σων.

Mark

V. 469. Εἰ δ ̓ ἔστιν ἐν τῇ, πρὶν θεοῦ δῦναι σέλας, Λύσαντα σέμνα στεμμάτων μυστήρια, Τῆσδ ̓ ἐξελαύνειν. Although the common reading is defended by Musgrave, we do not hesitate to read with Markland, Εἰ δ' ἔστιν ἐν γη. We also read, Iph. Taur. 1454. Επώνυμον γῆς Ταυρικῆς, πόνων τε In v. 481 of the Helena, Aldus reads: Λακεδαίμονος τῆς δεῦρο νοστήσασ' ἄπο. Mr. Porson refers to a similar error in 1902. (1193 Barnes.) of the Phœnissæ.* Markland makes no observation on the expression τησδ ̓ ἐξελαύνειν, which occurs twice in the Andromache: v. 651. Ἣν χρῆν σ' ἐλαύνειν τήνδ ̓ ὑπὲρ Νείλου ῥοὰς, Ὑπές τε Φᾶσιν. v. 710. Καὶ παῖς ἄτεκνος, ἣν ὅδ ̓ ἐξ ἡμῶν γεγὼς, Ἑλᾷ δὲ οἴκων τῆσδ' (τηνδ' MSS.) ἐπισπάσας κόμης. If τήνδ' is the true reading in these two passages, it probably ought to be adopted in the Supplices. We do not understand the expression.

V. 494. Σὺ δ' ἄνδρας ἐχθροὺς, καὶ θανόντας ὠφελεῖς, Θάστων, κομίζων θ ̓ οὓς ὕβρις ἀπώλεσεν. This is the reading of Markland's own editions, as well as of all the preceding editions. In the present edition, M. Gaisford has admitted into the text two emendations proposed by Markland. In the first line, Mr. Gaisford reads, Σὺ δ ̓ ἄνδρας ἐχθροὺς θεοῖς, θανόντας ὠφελεῖς. With this reading, the truth of which seems to admit of no doubt, may be compared the Aldine lection of Androm. 1259. Τολοιπὸν ἤδη καὶ θεὸς συνοικήσεις θεῷ. In the following verse, Mr. Gaisford reads, οὓς ὕβρεις ἀπώλεσαν. Mr. Porson and the Quarterly Reviewers prefer Musgrave's emendation, οὓς ὕβρισμ' ἀπώλεσεν. We believe that the plural ὕβρεις occurs only three times in the tragedies: Bacch. 247, Heracl. 924, Herc. 741. In the first of these passages, we prefer ὕβρισμ ̓ ὑβρίζειν, and ὕβρισμ' ὑβρίζων in the third. In the Heraclidæ, Heath and Musgrave read Be on account of the metre. Perhaps, however, the true reading is, Ἔσχον δ' ὕβρις ἀνδρὸς, in which ἔσχεν must be interpreted ἐπαύσατο. In v. 1296 of the Bacchæ, where the common reading is ὕβριν ὑβρισθεὶς, we read ὕβριν γ' υβρισθείς.

V. 500. Φιλεῖν μὲν οὖν χρὴ τοὺς σοφοὺς πρῶτον τέκνα, Ἔπειτα τοκέας, πατρίδα θ ̓· ἣν αὔξειν χρεών, Καὶ μὴ κατάξαι. As ἄγω has no other aorist than ἤγαγον, κατάξαι must be the aorist of καταγνύναι, to break. Notwithstanding the authority of Markland, who retains the version of Portus, Et non frangere, we do not believe that καταγνύναι πατρίδα is Greek. Read, Καὶ μὴ ταράξαι. All the editions of Aristophanes before that of Brunck read κατάρξω for ταράξω, Ach. 621. Instead of κατάρξω, Reiske proposes to read κατάξω, confringam. Ταράξαι πατρίδα is good Greek, as To disturb one's country is good English. So Herc. 604. πόλιν τε σὴν Μὴ πρὶν ταράξης (f. μὴ ξυνταράξης), πρὶν τάδ ̓ εὖ θέσθαι, τέκνον. See also a passage on the Heraclidæ, which we shall produce in our observation on Suppl. 732.

Heracl. 163. Τί δῆτα φήσεις; ποῖα πεδί ἀφαιρεθείς, Τιρυνθίοις θῆς πόλεμον 'Αργείοις ἔχων; Read, ποῖα πεδί ἀφαιρεθεὶς Τιρυνθίας γῆς.

V. 511.