Obrázky na stránke


graphy, &c. It is certainly the most difficult part of a lexicon, and one that requires more varied kinds of knowledge than Greek scholars generally possess: indeed, the complete interpretation of the technical terms used by the Greek writers on surgery, natural history, &c. properly belongs to a Lexicon for those particular authors, and is beyond the province of a school Dictionary. Schneider's lexicon is excellent in the explanation of many difficult words of this class; but Professor Dunbar's has most amply fulfilled the promise of the title-page in giving a variety of critical, philological, and scientific matter not hitherto found in any Greek dictionary.' Very frequently, instead of clear and short explanations, we find, under such words as τίφη, τῖφος, σύρμα, πτύχη, πτέρυξ, ὑπώ TOV, sometimes one full closely-printed column of Latin extract from Schneider's Index to Theophrastus, from Salmasius, or some other critic, occasionally lengthened out with a discussion in English, long enough for the Classical Journal. Under the word Tipu there are nearly one hundred closelyprinted lines in Latin; but under xɛpnis there is a Latin extract of more than one hundred and thirty lines. There are many objections to this; first, nobody will read such extracts, particularly young students, and they will do quite right, because, if they read, they will not understand; secondly, such extracts, being in Latin, are contrary to the very principle of the book, and there is no evidence that the Editors have either read them, or understood a large part of them. The only proof they could have given of this, would have been a systematic condensation and arrangement of all that is useful in these long quotations, and in English. When we say they probably did not understand a large part of the substance of their Latin extracts, we mean to make no further charge against them, than all Greek scholars feel they must submit to; but a lexicographer should consult his friends on such difficult matters, and briefly express in English the result of their opinions and his own study. Again, we have most prodigiously long dissertations in English in Professor Dunbar's lexicon. They are occasionally exceedingly learned, but in our opinion out of place. The word 'Avdpeinɛλov is discussed in nearly two columns of the same lexicon, and its various significations are traced with great diligence. Donnegan's article avdpeixeλov is very deficient. The only

* A considerable number of words, such as ßavaròs, wxsavòs, &c., are found in an appendix to Dunbar's Lexicon, having been got ready too late for the main body of the work. They are in general explained in the same way, by Latin extracts from various writers. We think it would be a great improvement if all the more difficult words of this kind were reserved for an appendix, in which a little more latitude could be fairly allowed.

OCT.-JAN. 1832.


question with us is, whether such dissertations, however good in themselves, are properly admitted into a lexicon, especially when the word discussed is one that a student may not meet with during years of Greek study. If we admit the principle of introducing such dissertations, we can have no objection to the advertisement with which that on dvdpeixeλov is wound up: in no dictionary has this word dvdpeínsov been fully developed; its various meanings diligently collected, methodically traced, and philosophically defined.' This appears to belong to the title-page, and to have been transposed here by some blunder of the compositor. Under the head nádapois we have again a long discussion, entirely unsuitable to any place except a commentary on Aristotle's Poetics. Various writers are referred to under this word, Mr. E. H. Barker, Milton, Thomas Taylor, and Dr. Copleston.


'Aorpayaλos, the vertebra; the anclejoint; also a die or bone to play with, &c:


'Aorgayaños, a vertebre, one of the small bones of the neck or back, &c., the bone in the foot on which the tibia rests, &c.

Dr. Donnegan has correctly defined the true anatomical signification of dorpayaλos. In the passage of Herod. iii. 129., probably the word is not used in its strictest sense, since it is most likely that the accident that befel Darius was a simple dislocation of the ancle. If it really was the dorpyaλos of Darius, that had slipped from its place, (which sometimes happens,) the Egyptian doctors had a more doubtful kind of case to deal with, and the king had reason to be grateful to Doctor Demokedes of Croton, for setting him on his legs again.


agrngia, an artery, the windpipe. From aga Tngs, to hold air, because it was once supposed that the arteries were filled with air.

Donnegan. agrngía, the windpipe. Hippoc. an artery; a blood-vessel, Soph. Tr. 1056. Th. άiga rngev, to preserve air.

Dr. Donnegan's definition of windpipe* is perhaps better placed first than the word artery: air-tube, however, or airpassage, would be a more correct general explanation of the sense in which this word was used, though we believe it was sometimes applied to the veins also. But in the passage of the Trachiniæ referred to, it does not, in our opinion, mean a blood-vessel. The ridiculous etymology of apropia is not worth notice. Donnegan, after giving the wrong one, gives the right one too— like ἀορτὴ from ἀείρω.

* See Foesius, 'Agrngin. In Hippocrates it seems to have only the meaning of windpipe.


oininúngiov, an Egyptian tree, from the fruit of which oil was extracted. Herod. ii. 94. The Palma Christi.


σinalnuæpiov, a shrub, Palma Christi : Ricinus communis. From its fruit, the medicinal oil, castor oil, is obtained.

There is more information in these two short articles than ordinary lexicons have been accustomed to give; and we think there is all that is necessary. We prefer, however, the word 'shrub,' to 'tree,' for the same reason that we would rather call peas and beans, shrubs than trees; but it is easy to find a better name than either trees or shrubs, for an annual plant produced from seed.

The mode in which the two lexicographers treat the word oinqov is a good specimen of the general mode of explaining similar words in these two lexicons. Donnegan gives the usual explanation of this word in about ten lines of English, with its botanical name. Dunbar gives near forty lines of Latin explanation, which is in a form so repulsive, from being mixed up with references such as, Hippocr. Morb. Mul. 2,626, &c. Nat. Mul. &c., &c., that it is absolutely impossible that any young student can ever be induced to look at it.

Exún is well explained in the lexicons as one of the gourd' family, to which Donnegan adds the signification of a 6 cupping instrument,' the Latin cucurbita. Dunbar has omitted this signification.


KPOKOAEIAOZ, the crocodile: Lacerta
Stellio-a certain form of syllogism.



ΚΡΟΚΟΔΕΙΛΟΣ, a crocodile, so called because κρόκον δειλίᾳ, it is afraid of saffron; also, a kind of subtle or sophistical question. Dunbar has altogether omitted the primary meaning of this word, which, it is clear from Herod. ii. 69., is properly a lizard. When the Ionian Greeks went to Egypt, and saw the great monster of the Nile, they called him the lizard,' or the big lizard.' But we learn from Herodotus also, that the Egyptian name for the animal was xua, if the word be written right in our present editions. Captain Light, in his Travels in Egypt, (p. 47.) tells us, that the native people still call the animal Timsah*. We say nothing about the etymology of the word xpoxódeλos, because, though it has the appearance of a compound, we are unable to assign its origin.


The "Ißis, according to Dunbar, is the ibis, an Egyptian bird which devours serpents.' This is very incomplete. Dr. Donnegan, referring to Herod. ii. 76. says there were two kinds of ibis, and he adds some other information. Two species at least, and we believe more, are known in Egypt:

* Timsah, the common name among the Arabs for a 'crocodile,' is a Coptic word, emsah or hamsa, with the Coptic feminine article (†) prefixed,

the one is the Ibis religiosa, which is the second ibis of Herodotus. The other, the Ibis ardea, is the scarlet ibis, and therefore not the first ibis of Herodotus, which is completely black. As to their eating serpents, we rather doubt that fact, for if Herodotus is the only authority for this we must recollect it was no common snake, but his winged serpent of Arabia, that his first ibis was accustomed to devour.


Togvos, a lathe; a turner's wheel, Eurip. Bacch. 1056. Herod. iv. 36. a graving tool; an instrument with which any thing is hollowed out.


rógvos, a turner's instrument; a lathe for turning wood, &c. &c.; an instrument for describing a circle, serving the purpose of compasses. Mathem. Vett. p. 53, interpret. Weiske.

The explanation of this word in Schneider is so complete, that we give a translation of it at full length, as a specimen. Dunbar, it will be observed, has omitted that signification of the word, which probably is the primary one.

Tópvos, o, a carpenter's instrument for forming a circle or semicircle and rounding a piece of wood, corresponding to our compasses; probably, a peg fixed fast with a string attached to it, which, by being kept stretched and carried round, would form a circle. See Lat. tornus.-Theogn. 803. Herod. iv. 36. 2. A turner's chisel, by which wood and other suitable materials are rounded, hollowed, and smoothed. 3. A chisel, graving-tool, for the purpose of working in relief, or smoothing and polishing, scalprum, cælum.--Voss. Virg. Ecl. 3, 38. 4. That which is produced by the instruments described, a circle, rounding, bending, curved line, hollow.'

We consider this explanation of Schneider's to be in every respect very much preferable to the two just given. Neither in the passage of the Bacchæ, nor in that of Herodotus, as referred to by Dunbar, does the word mean either a turner's wheel, or a graving-tool.' In both cases it has the sense which Schneider gives under 1, with which the reader may compare a passage in Xenophon, Пop. i. 6.


Coavov, an image or statue, a piece of carved work. Hesych. Zoava, ayakμαTα, sidaha. No etym. given.


avov, a work performed by carving or polishing, &c.; a carved image of stone or metal. Th. św.

In Pausanias this word has a particular meaning,—a statue of wood. As far as we recollect, we think that, in Pausanias, the word is restricted to this signification :-see Pausan. 8. 17, 2. where he enumerates the different kinds of woods of which goava were originally made.

The word Toxos is briefly and insufficiently explained by Donnegan. In Dunbar we have near two columns, a little more than is necessary, but still the article is a very good one. The various uses of the word róxos in connexion with

the rate of interest certainly require some explanation, and we are surprised there is nothing about them in Schneider.

Under the word exǹ, Donnegan, Dunbar, and Schneider omit the signification of the end of a rope (Herod. iv. 60); and, what is a still greater omission, they do not notice the signification of ropes or cords, which occurs in Acts x. 11. Diodor. i. 35, apxas oтUnivas. Neither is this sense given in Stephens, 1572. The common version of the passage in the Acts appears to us not quite correct.


xnvaλán, vulpanser, a brent goose. Herod. ii. 72, &c.


χηναλώπηξ, α bird of the goose or duck kind, &c. Egyptian goose, according to Geoffroy.

We do not understand Professor Dunbar's explanation. In the passage of Herodotus referred to, undoubtedly the Egyptian goose, or swan, as some call it, is meant, which is sculptured on some of the temples, and may be seen on one of the small obelisks in the British Museum.

The word Kapuarides, an architectural term signifying 'female figures that support an entablature,' is omitted in both lexicons: also the architectural signification of reλauaves, male figures supporting an entablature,' is omitted both by Dunbar and Donnegan. Both significations are to be found in Schneider. The word "Arλas is also used in the same architectural sense as Teλaμav, and it is rightly explained by Donnegan; who, it is only fair to remark, says, under the head of "Arλas, that TEλauv also has the same architectural signification. Professor Dunbar defines "Arλas thus- a statue supporting any thing on its head: this is not sufficiently precise. As an example of another architectural term, we may add that diorulos is omitted by Dunbar, but briefly and correctly explained by Donnegan.

Under the head of opios Dunbar has entirely omitted its military signification in conjunction with λóxos, which is correctly given in Donnegan as the column or narrow front,' opposed to the paλay or line. The word paλay itself is explained in Dunbar to be a phalanx, or large body of men. Xen. Cyr. iii. 3, 27, &c.' Our readers must be well aware that to explain phalanx by phalanx is not very satisfactory; and as to what follows immediately under this head, it is entirely wrong.


When discussing the gold coin called a Daric, Professor Dunbar quotes Rees' Cyclopædia, and gives the value of this coin both in English shillings and dollars; then he gives another valuation which makes it less by one half than that found in Rees; and finally he quotes Gosselin's valuation, of 28 French francs. It is a pity the editor could not believe

« PredošláPokračovať »