derable perfection by alternate dreffings and bleachings before they were dyed. Notwithstanding this improvement, the dyers found fufficient fcope for their invention, in the variety of patterns they were encouraged to produce for pattern-cards, which now began to be circulated, not only through thefe kingdoms, but all over Europe; and the printing of many articles in the fuftian branch gave a greater variety to thefe pattern-cards, while it afforded full employment for invention in dying grounds preparatory to them, and following the prints with other fhades. Thus the art of printing here came to rival that of London, and that branch has, in great measure, been tranfferred from thence to the town and neighbourhood of Manchester." P. 162. This excellent account of the principal branch of trade at Manchester, we fhall conclude with one extract more, concerning the general state of its trade. "Manchester, we may, without hefitation, pronounce, to be that of the modern trading towns of this kingdom, which has obtained the greatest acceflion of wealth and population. The fortunes which have been raifed by the fpirit and ingenuity of its inhabitants, from fmall capitals, have probably exceeded thofe acquired in any other manufacturing place; and it is but juftice to fay, that in no town has opulence been more honourably and refpectably enjoyed. Upon all occafions, public or private, the purfes of Ma chetter have been open to the calls of charity and patriotifin; and, whatever difference may have prevailed as to the mode of promoting the good of the community, the ardent defire of doing it has pervaded all parties." P. 206. (To be concluded in our next.) Illuftrabat et ART. Ι. ΒΙΩΝΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΜΟΣΧΟΥ ΤΑ ΛΕΙΨΑΝΑ. emendabat Gilbertus Wakefield. Londini, typis T. Bentley. Anno, 1795. 12mo. 3s. 6d. Payne. SCHW CHWEBELIUS, who publifhed an edition of thefe poets in 1746, was fo little fatisfied with the account which our critical brethren at Leipfig* gave of his labours, that he attacked them with a violence rather favouring of a poet + than an editor. If any apprehenfions of this fort could deter us from the performance of our duty, ftill we should have no reluctance to enter upon the examination of this edition, fince we are enabled to pronounce it highly worthy the attention of * Nov. Act. Erudit. 1751. Decemb. p. 699. + Genus irritabile vatum. Hor. fcholars, fcholars, from the ingenuity of the conjectures, the aptnefs of the illuftrations, and the spirit of candour, as well as of erudition, which pervades it. It is indeed a finall volume, but it is Πίδακος ἐξ ἱεξῆς ὀλίγη λιβὰς, ἄκρον ἄλλον. We confefs with pleasure that Mr. Wakefield appears to us to improve very much in his progrefs through claflic ground. We have obferved on fome former occafions, an eagerness for unneceffary change, and a difregard of the opinions of others, by no means confiftent with the candour of a scholar, or compatible with the interefts of literature; but, if he will allow us to alter a line in his favourite author, we may fay of him as a critic, Lenior et melior fit, decedente juventâ. We shall not however detain our readers by any general character of the work; the fpecimens we fhall produce will speak fufficiently in its praise. Bion. Id. 1. v. 22. Πενθαλέα, νήπεκτος, ἀσάνδαλος· &ι δὲ βάτοι κιν αι Σπερχομένων κείροντι, και ἱερὸν ἄιμα δρέπονται. Νόπελος is very properly preferred by the editor to νήπλεκτος, and it is well illuftrated in the addenda by a paffage from Tacitus, Ann. xvi. 10. "Impexa luctu continuo: fic ut ante me rectè viderat Petavius reponendum pro implexa, infcitiffimè obftante Brotiero." In the next line exula, a conjecture of Ruhnken is properly admitted into the text for exquivav. This emendation receives fuch light from the paffages brought by Mr. W. in fupport of it, that we fhall tranfcribe them as a fpecimen of his learning, and an additional proof of Ruhnken's acuteness. Περὶ δ ̓ ἀνεμώνην πεσεῖν τὸν ̓Αδωνιν ἔτυχεν. Αφροδίτη δὲ, τὸ πάθος μαθέσα, γυμνοις ΠΕΡΙΤΡΕΧΟΥΣΑ τοῖς ποσὶν, ἐλεεινον ὀλοφύρετο· ἀκάνθαις δὲ ἀυτὴ ῥοδωνίας ἐμπαγεισα τῷ καταῤῥευσαντι ἄιματι τὸ ῥόδον ἔρυθρον απειργάσατο, Anec. Græc. Villoif. i. p. 24. et Aphthonius in hac fabulâ: xai ΚΑΤΑ ΣΠΟΥΔΗΝ ἐμβαλέσα τῷ ῥόδῳ, ταῖς ακάνθαις προσέπταισε. 25. Ασσύριον γοόωσα πόσιν, καὶ παῖδα καλέυσα. There is great probability in this conjecture of our editor, for Bowra, quod nimium nimium frigebat in codem verfu βοόωσα, οι cum xaλivca, Homerus, Od. T. 264. Τῆκε, πόσιν γοόωσα. Videas etiam Οd. Δ. 800. The change is further defended in the addenda. 31. Κύπριδι μὲν καλὸν εἶδος, ὅτε ζώεσκεν Αδωνις, The The editor fufpects to be the true reading for xanov. "Floruit forma, dum viveret Adonis; periit, illo mortuo. Sic omnia conveniunt." This alteration is, in our opinion, unneceffary as the prefent reading fuggefts the fame fenfe. : 32. There is much more fpirit in the punctuation proposed by Mr. W. than in that which is adopted by the other editions. We therefore fubmit it to our readers: Κάτθανε δ ̓ ἡ μορφὰ σὺν ̓Αδώνιδι Κύπριδος. Αι Αι 34. "Pro xxxioti, quod fluviis minùs congruit, reponendum putem, parva literarum mutatione κλάζοντι vel λαλέοντι.” This opinion is again urged ftrongly in the addenda. "Rectè quidem flere dicuntur fontes, guttatim è ficcæ telluris foraminibus, ut ex oculis lacrymæ, bullientes; non item fluvii, plenis alveis decurrentes." This is fpecious, but we apprehend, if we can produce a paffage in a writer of a fimilar caft and the fame age, who exprefsly fays of a river, that it dangue, the question of propriety will be at an end, and the text rendered at least very capable of defence. Such a paffage we can produce from the book before us. Mofchus, in an addrefs to the river Melas, upon the death of Bion, fays: Νῦν παλιν ἄλλον “Τίτα δακεύεις, κοινῳ δ ̓ ἐπὶ πένθει τάκη. ν. 16. We must not analyze and fift too finely these high-wrought images and poetic expreffions. 37. Πάντας ἀνὰ κναμὼς, ἀνὰ πᾶν νάπος, οἰκτρὸν ἀείδει. We confider this as indifputably the genuine reading, restored by the fagacity of the editor. We thall give his own account of it, and doubt not but our readers will allow it carries conviction with it. 66 Vulgo fic vitiofiffime legitur hic verfi culus: Πάντας ἀνὰ κναμὼς, καὶ ἀνὰ πόλιν, οἰκτρὸν ἀείδει. Ed. Aldina, referente Valckenæro, ita legitur: unde nos, ne literæ quidem unius mutato ductu, veram lectionem expifcati nobifmet videmur: Theo. 20. 39. Λάτμιον ἂν νάπος ἤλθε. 51. Φευγεις μακρὸν, "Αδωνι, και οι χαι εἰς ̓Αχέροντα. Mr. W. here adopts with Brunck the emendation of Pierfon for xa. But in the addenda he gives the preference to XaTixa. The point is not of great importance, as both emen dations dations are good. But he defends his opinion well, remarking that " Multus eft Bion in his ἀσυνδέτοις, quæ fanè vehementiores affectus lugentium potenter exhibent. 57. Και κλάιω τὸν Αδωνιν, ὅ μοι θάνει και σε φοβέμαι. In Brunck's Analelta we read και σε φοβείται. Mr. W. however has adopted the text of Hefkinus, not because he esteems it found, but becaufe it paves the way for his emendation. His conj (ture, as fated in the Silva Critica, was κ εις σε πορεύθη. But, juftly diffatisfied with that, in the prefent edition he propofes to alter the paffage thus: Και κλαίω τὸν ̓́Αδωνιν ὅ μοι θάνε. Ναι, συ φονέυθεις Θνάσκεις, ὦ τριπόθατε, κ. τ. λ. This is certainly ingenious, but perhaps και σε φοβείται requires not to be altered. 70. Λέκτρον ἔχει, Κυθέρεια, τὸ σὸν τόδε νεκρὸς ̓́Αδωνις Και νέκυς ὢν καλὸς ἐσί. κ. Το λο There are few readers of discernment who will not admire the taste and ingenuity of the following conjecture; though they may think it, as we do, far too bold. Θέλκτρον ἔχει, Κυθέρει”, ὅσον ἔποτε νεκρός, "Αδωνις. Illecebras habet Adonis, quales nemo unquam mortuus. Quibus pulcre concinunt fequentia. But Mr. W. candidly adds: Nec tamen non tuebuntur locum vulgatæ lectiones; et potillimum fi hic verfus poftponatur v. 74. 75. Βάλλε δέ νιν σεφάνοισι και άνθεσι πάντα σὺν αὐτῷ The propriety of reading, with our editor, Βάλλε δέ νιν for βάλλε δ' ἐνὶ, will not be doubted by any fcholar. The conjectures which occur in the note will, probably, be a fubject of hefitation to many. σε βάλλε δέ νιν σεφάνοισι, και άνθεσι πάσσε· σὺν αὐτῷ, κ. το λο vel fic aliter Βάλλε δε νιν σεφέεσσι και ἄνθεσι· ταυτα σὺν αὐτῷ, Ως τῆνος, τέθνακε, και Τι ταυτα τέθνακε viciffim referatur ad σεφέεσσι. vel, denique : καὶ ἄνθεα τάδε μαράνθη. ecdem modo marcefcant etiam fires: ut ftatim ὀλλύσθω μύρα.” 77. 'Ραΐνε δέ νιν Συρίοισιν ἀλέφασι, ῥᾶινε μύροισιν. Mr. W. propofed the emendation of Συρίοισιν for μύρτοισιν fome time ago, not knowing that Ruhnkenuis had started the fame fame conjecture before. This is a circumftance which, fo far from diminishing, increases the merit of both these learned men, fince it adds additional probability to their conjecture. "Cum duo fcriptores," obferves one of the profoundeft fcho-. lars of this or any age, "idem tradunt, mihi non alteruter ab altero ideo fumpfiffe, fed uterque rem rectè reputantes, veritatis vi coa&ti, in eandem fententiam deveniffe videntur. Omnes enim, inquit Bentleius, in multa incidiinus, nefcientes illa jam ab aliis elle occupata*." Thefe are the principal emendations which we have obferved in the most popular poem of the book before us. Our limits will not allow us to remark fo minutely upon the rest of the work, nor indeed do we think it neceffary, as we have faid enough, we truft, to excite in our readers a defire to poffefs a volume replete with fo much erudition and good criticism. We shall however briefly note a few paffages, where we think the editor has been more than ufually happy in his conjec tures. Idyll. 3. v. 1. for ', we have no ipfum limen juventutis attingenti. Mr. W. however fairly allows all the merit of this emendation to belong to Herelius, who fuggefted ἐθ ̓ ἡδοντι. Id. 4. 3. We have a very learned and fatisfactory note upon the phrafe ἔρωτι δονεῦμενος. Id. 6. (which in other editt. is 7.) v. 10. For pa, Mr. W. propofes spa, which is well fupported by Hefychius. Id. 7. 3. "Αεισε Πολύφαμος ἐπ ̓ αίον Γαλατέια. μονι Brunck reads ἐπ' τον τῇ Γαλατέια. Wakefield thinks αloνος to be the true reading, "poft Theocritum xi. 14 quem et refpicit. et imitatur nofter. ὁ δὲ, τὰν Γαλάτειαν ἀείδων Αυτῶ ἐπ ̓ αίονας κατετάκετο φυκιοέσσας.” v. 8. The MSS. exhibit this and the fucceeding verse in a manner which is neither Greek nor fenfe. Χώπως εν χώραις Λυκομήδισιν απαλεγοισα Brunck's emendation is the refource of a man who was determined to cut the knot he could not untie. Χύπως ἐν κώραις Λυκομηδίσιν ἀμφαγαπάζει ̓Αειδῆ καὶ ἀπυςον Αχιλλέα Δηιδάμεια. Vid. Not. Brev. ad Toupii Emendat.-Tom. 4. P. 434. |