χρόνοις αἰτίας καὶ σκώμματα καὶ λοιδορίας συμφορήσας ὑποκρίνεται· εἶτα κατηγορεῖ μὲν ἐμοῦ, κρίνει δὲ τουτονί. (Κτησιφῶνται) καὶ τοῦ μὲν ἀγῶνος ὅλου τὴν πρὸς ἐμέ πως ἔχθραν προΐσταται· οὐδαμοῦ δ ̓ ἐπὶ ταύτην απηντηκὼς ἐμοὶ, τὴν ἑτέρου ζητῶν ἐπιτιμίαν ἀφελέσθαι φαίνεται. « Προΐσταμαι, Prætendo, praetexo” Η. Steph. in Thes. hoc loco citato. "Susceptæ omnino causæ nostras inimicitias prætendit." P. Foulkes et J. Freind. Atqui schines non obtentu in Demosthenem odii accusabat Ctesiphontem; sed contra, accusationis hujus obtentu Demosthenem petebat; ut, ulciscendi inimici causa, (inquit Cicero De opt. gen. Or.) nomine Ctesiphontis, judicium fieret de factis famaque Demosthenis. Mihi igitur videtur προΐσταται significare, Ducere agmen facit: Locum præcipuum dat. Multo enim plura in Demosthenem quam in Ctesiphontem dixerat Æschines.

Nihil veritati magis contrarium quam Reiskii interpretatio in Indice Graec. Demosth. “ Causatur, quamquam id falso quidem et mendaciter, cur hac me actione impeteret, aliam sibi nullam fuisse causam, quam suam mecum simultatem, aut suum mei odium."

Pro Corona. p. 239. 1. 17. τοιγαροῦν ἐκ τούτων ᾤχετο (Philippus) ἐκείνους (Thebanos Thessalosque) λαβων, εἰς τὸ μηδοτιοῦν τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα προορᾷν, μηδ' αἰσθάνεσθαι, ἀλλ ̓ ἐᾶσαι πάντα τὰ πράγματα ἔκεινον ὑφ ̓ ἑαυτῷ ποιήσασθαι.

Forsitan-ᾤχετο ἐκείνους λαβὼν, ὭΣΤΕ μηδοτιοῦν τῶν μετὰ ταῦτ τα προοράνκ. τ. λ.

Pro Corona. p. 245. 1. 7. ἃ μὲν οὖν πρὸ τοῦ πολιτεύεσθαι καὶ δημηγορεῖν ἐμὲ προύλαβε καὶ κατέσχε Φίλιππος, ἐάσω· οὐδὲν γὰρ ἡγοῦμαι τούτων πρὸς ἐμέ. κ. τ. λ.

Duorum temporum ex iis, quæ designaverat Eschines, (p. 442. In Ctesiph.) defensione defunctus Demosthenes, jam tertium aggreditur, rationem suam in bello renovando judicibus probaturus.

Pro Corona. p. 247. 1. 8. συνήδειν—ἀεὶ περὶ πρωτείων, καὶ τιμῆς, καὶ δόξης ἀγωνιζωμένην τὴν πατρίδα, καὶ πλείω σώματα καὶ χρήματα ἀναλωκυῖαν ὑπὲρ φιλοτιμίας, καὶ τῶν ἅπασι τοῖς Ἕλλησι συμφερόντων, ἢ τῶν ἄλλων ̔Ελλήνων ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἀναλώκασιν ἕκαστοι.

Vulgata lectio (ή τῶν ἄλλων Ελλήνων οἳ τὰ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἀναλώσ κασιν ἕκαστοι) ad veram ducat: viz. ἢ τῶν ἄλλων Ελλήνων ΟΣΑ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἀναλώκασιν ἕκαστοι,

Constructio,ἀναλωκυῖαν πλείω σώματα καὶ χρήματαἢ ὅσα (σώματα καὶ χρήματα) ἕκαστοι τῶν ἄλλων Ελλήνων ἀναλώκασιν ὑπὲρ αὑτῶν.

Pro Corona. p. 263. 1. 20. Τῶν μὲν οὖν λόγων, οὓς οὗτος ἄνω καὶ κάτω διακυκῶν ἔλεγε περὶ τῶν παραγεγραμμένων νόμων, οὔτε, μὰ

τοὺς θεοὺς, οἶμαι ὑμᾶς μανθάνειν, οὔτ ̓ αὐτὸς ἠδυνάμην συνεῖναι τοὺς πόλ λους.

οἱ παραγεγραμμένοι νόμοι sunt leges, quas legis alicujus vel psephismatis accusator ex adverso legi accusata sen psephismati in eadem tabula exarandas curabat; ut contra quas leges, lege nova vel psephismate lato, commisisset reus, judicibus manifestius appareret.—οὐ τοίνυν τούτους μόνον τοὺς νόμους, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, παραβέβηκεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἄλλους πολλοὺς, οὓς οὐ παραγεγράμμεθα διὰ τὸ πλῆθος. Demosth. In Aristocrat. p. 640. 1. 20. Aristocratem psephismatis legibus contrarii postulat Orator.

Pro Corona. p. 267. 1. 27. Νόμος. "Οσους στεφανοῦσί τινες τῶν δήμων, τὰς ἀναγορεύσεις τῶν στεφάνων ποιεῖσθαι ἐν αὐτοῖς ἑκάστ τους τοῖς ἰδίοις δήμοις, ἐὰν μή τινας ὁ δῆμος ὁ τῶν ̓Αθηναίων, ἢ ἡ βουλὴ στεφανοῖ· τούτους δ' ἐξεῖναι ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ Διονυσίοις ἀναγορεύεσθαι.

Hujusce legis ultima ad ἀλλοτρίους στεφάνους, ad coronas ab exteris solum civitatibus donatas, pertinere interpretatur Æschines: καὶ διὰ τοῦτο προσέθηκεν ὁ νομοθέτης μὴ κηρύττεσθαι τὸν ἀλλότ ριον στέφανον ἐν τῷ θεάτρω “Ἐὰν μὴ ψηφίσηται ὁ δῆμος,” ἵν ̓ ἡ πόλις ἡ βουλομένη τινὰ τῶν ἡμετέρων στεφανοῦν, πρέσβεις πέμψασα, δεηθῇ τοῦ δήμου· ἵν ̓ ὁ κηρυττόμενος μείζω χάριν εἰδῇ τῶν στεφάνων ὑμῖν, ἢ τοῖς στεφανοῦσιν, ὅτι κηρύξαι ἐπετρέψατε. In Ctesiphontem. p. 437.

Pro Corona. p. 269. 1. 11. ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν ἡ μὲν εὐσεβὴς καὶ δικαία ψῆφος ἅπασι δέδεικται· δεῖ δέ με, ὡς ἔοικε, καίπερ οὐ φιλολοίδορον ὄντα φύσει, διὰ τὰς ὑπὸ τούτου βλασφημίας εἰρημένας, ἀντὶ πολλῶν καὶ ψευδῶν αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγκαιότατ ̓ εἰπεῖν περὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ δεῖξαι, τίς ὢν καὶ τίνων, ραδίως οὕτως ἄρχει τοῦ κακῶς λέγειν, καὶ λόγους τινὰς διασύρει, αὐτὸς εἰρηκὼς ἃ τὶς οὐκ ἂν ἄκνησε τῶν μετρίων ἀνθρώπων φθέγξασθαι ; Leg. δεῖ ΔΗ με, ὡς ἔοικε-κ. τ. λ.

καὶ λόγους τινὰς διασύρει et quæ seq. ita interpretantur boni viri Foulkes et Freind: "Atque ista verba exagitat quæ ipse effutiit; quæ quidem nemo modestus proferre non dubitaverit."

Sensus est: Et dictiones quasdam, si diis placet, calumniatur: cum ea ipse dixerit, quæ quis paulo modestior ausus esset efferre? vid. Eschin. In Ctesiph. p. 554. 1. 9.

Pro Corona. p. 273. 1. 17. Μυρία τοίνυν ἕτερ ̓ εἰπεῖν ἔχων περὶ αὐτοῦ, παραλείπω. καὶ γὰρ οὕτω πως ἔχει· πολλὰ ἂν ἐγὼ νῦν ἔτι τούτων ἔχοιμι δεῖξαι ὧν οὗτος κατ ̓ ἐκείνους τοὺς χρόνους τοῖς μὲν ἐχθροῖς ὑπηρετῶν, ἐμοὶ δ ̓ ἐπηρεάζων εὑρέθη· ἀλλ ̓ οὐ τίθεται ταῦτα παρ ̓ ὑμῖν εἰς ἀκριβῆ μνήμην, οὐδ ̓ ἣν προσῆκεν ὀργήν.

Legendum τοῖς μὲν ἐχθροῖς ὑπηρετῶν, ὑμῖν δ ̓ ἐπηρεάζων εὑρέθη. Pro Corona. p. 274. 1. 14. ἆρ ̓ οὖν οὐδ ̓ ἔλεγεν, ὥσπερ οὐδ ̓ ἔγρα φεν, ἡνίκα ἐργάσασθαί τι δέοι κακὸν ὑμᾶς; οὔμενουν ἦν εἰπεῖν ἑτέρῳ. Hæc ita verterunt homines minime niali P. Foulkes et J.

Freind: "Nihilne igitur tunc dicebat, nihilne decernebat, quando infortunii aliquid vobis erat eventurum? At sane neminem alterum loqui oportebat.”

Ab H. Stephano, qui in Thesaur. tom. 11. col. 1532. c. recte verterat οὔμενουν ἦν εἰπεῖν ἑτέρῳ, “ Atqui tum nulli alii dicendi locus vacuus erat; nulli certe tum dicendi locum iste non præripiebat," illorum saltem verborum sensum discere potuissent.Totius loci vera interpretatio e notis et indice Reiskii petatur: "Num, quemadmodum sententiæ nullius scriptæ auctor factus est, tum, cum honestam rem atque salutarem essetis suscepturi; ita rursus quoque tacuit, cum agitarentur turpia et damnosa? imo vero, nemini alii dicendi copiam faciebat.'

Pro Corona. p. 274. 1. 20. ἓν δ' ἐπεξειργάσατο, ὦ ἄνδρες Αθηναῖοι, τοιοῦτον, ὁ πᾶσι τοῖς προτέροις ἐπέθηκε τέλος· περὶ οὗ τοὺς πολλοὺς ἀνάλωσε λόγους, τὰ τῶν ̓Αμφισσέων τῶν Λοκρών διεξιών δόγματα.

Decreta non Amphissæorum Locrorum erant, sed Amphictyonum. vid. Eschin. In Ctesiphont. p. 515. lin. penult. p. 519. 1. 1. Legendum igitur τὰ ΠΕΡΙ τῶν ̓Αμφισσέων τῶν Λοκρῶν διεξιων δόγματα.

Pro Corona. p. 277. 1. 11. οὗτος δὲ τῆς ἱερᾶς χώρας ᾐτιᾶτο εἶναι, οὐδεμίαν δίκην τῶν Λοκρῶν ἐπαγόντων ἡμῖν, οὐδ ̓ ἃ νῦν προφασί ζεται οὗτος, λέγων οὐκ ἀληθῆ.

ovdeμíav Sixny] Vid. Eschin. in Ctesiphont. p. 507 1.6.

NOTICE OF

The Classical Collector's Vade-Mecum: being an Introduction to the Knowledge of the best Editions of the Greek and Roman Classics. 12mo. London: 1822. pp. 174.

SING

INCE the publication of that " rarissimum" and "famigeratissimum opus," the "Bibliomania," the study of bibliography has become rather popular; while the superb and constantly entertaining volumes of the same writer have conduced to keep up and extend the impulse thus given to that delightful study. No one seems to have attained better the art of uniting the "utile" with the "dulce." He brings a mind full fraught to all the subjects of which he treats, and pours forth his information with the most delightful exuberance. But few readers, and still fewer bibliographers, will ever regret that some of his works trausgressed the proposed limits.

It is to this first of bibliographers that the present elegant little volume owes much of its information, in conjunction with Dr. A. Clarke, Mr. Horne, &c. &c. It is almost impossible to speak otherwise than favorably of it, so often does its author deprecate harshness in the criticisms on a work so liable from its nature to be far from faultless. The book seems to divide itself into two portions, the first containing lists of Polyglotts, Bibles and Testaments in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin; and collections of Greek and Latin classics, twenty-eight in number: the second containing the "editiones optimæ," on most of which some remarks are offered in the form of Extracts from Fabricius, Dibdin, and Clarke. As the present volume, however, is but the precursor of some larger, (see p. 162.) we wish the Editor, following the example of Cave, who in his Cartophylax Ecclesiasticus gave the article "Eusebius" as a specimen of his forthcoming greater work the Historia Literaria, had also given us a foretaste of his "magnum opus."

We proceed to offer some observations, though necessarily few, on the former portion, the lists being a mere collection of size, dates, &c. After enumerating the Quarto Variorum classics it is observed, and, we think, with but little foundation, that "the difficulty of attaining the series complete will be readily conceived to require the labor of years." Any of the large London booksellers would, with a few exceptions perhaps among the miscellaneous articles, supply the whole; it must nevertheless be admitted that if it did not require time, it would require a "crumena" in any other state than that of "deficiens."

The "Editiones optima" occupy from p. 125 to 160, and are accompanied with short observations, which contain sometimes more of the" dulce" than the "utile," we mean general observations about excellent, valuable, admirable edition, erudite production, &c., and not enough said respecting the notes which each edition contains, and whether in whole or in part, whether they are critical or philological,' and whether the matter is conveniently arranged; not having the text in one volume, scholia in a second, and the notes or Latin version in a third, as is the state of some editions, for instance, Heyne's Pindar, both in the original and reprint.

At page 129 we are told that Kuster's Aristophanes, fol.

Our readers will find the difference between philological and critical editions clearly pointed out in vol. 2. pp. 775-6. of Sm. J. G. Schelleri præcepta stili bene Latini in primis Ciceroniani, &c. 2 vol. 8vo. Lipsia 1797.

Amst. 1710. is the edit. opt., and in the next line or two that Brunck's is the very best; utrum harum must I have? says the Reader. Perhaps one is the senior opt. and the other junior opt.: but, joking apart, Kuster's would, as far as we can judge, suit common readers best, and Brunck's would suit critics. They are each best in their own way. Again we are told that Brunck's edition "contains the Latin version, notes and emendations of Brunck :" whose should it contain but his ? we might have expected this observation if Brunck had not been the Editor; as it is, the remark seems useless; besides, what is meant by containing "emendations?"

T At page 137 the Editor mentions the Glasgow Euripides with merited applause, and justly pronounces it "ed. opt." We rejoice the more in noticing this, as the observations are not inclosed with the marks of quotation, and the Editor has noticed with much discrimination the peculiar excellencies which render it worthy of the above appellation.

Page 139, Heyne's Homer is said to contain at present only the Iliad; will it ever contain any thing else? the Editor doubtless knows that Heyne has been long dead he will find in the Classical Journal, No. 37-9, an interesting and copious life of him, the most circumstantial, in fact, that we have. We wish the Editor had, together with the correction at the bottom of page 150, imparted to us some account of the newly added volumes.

. But we must cease from regretting omissions, or correcting rather trivial mistakes, and having thanked the author for what he has done, we must look forward to his proposed volume. meeting with liberal support, and then hope to regale ourselves with copious, satisfactory, and entertaining information.

ON THE LIBERTY OF PROPHESYING.

In his life of J.Taylor, D. D. Chaplain to Charles I. and Lord Bishop of Down aud Connor, and Dromore, the Rev. H. T. Bonney says, p. 65-"Taylor closes this treatise, of the Liberty of Prophesying, with the following passage, which is inserted in the folio edition of the Σύμβολον Ηθικο-Πολεμικόν, but is unfairly