« PredošláPokračovať »
Clastidium. We do not complain of this last battle being referred by Nepos to the Padus, for Mr. Cramer, we think, is clearly wrong in placing the site of the engagement so far up the Ticinus. Indeed, Polybius himself, in one passage (x. 3.) calls it the battle of the Padus. The actual position was most probably near the confluence of the two rivers.
Moreover, the blunders of Nepos are aggravated by the Latin titles of the chapters inserted by the modern editors. In the same life of Hannibal, the summary of the third chapter concludes with-H. Alpes in Italiam transit; and the next begins-H. apud Rhodanum vincit. Of course, the pupil looks for the Rhodanus in Italy. Summaries are very useful; but they should be correct, and in English. The title to Phoc. c. 2. contains-Phocion in invidiam incurrit— Proditum Piraum. Why not proditur Piraeus, rather than a helpless accusative?
But we must speak more particularly of this edition. We were pleased to find, on opening the book, that the quantity of the syllables was marked in it; for a correct pronunciation depends upon early habit, more than upon knowledge; and a good habit is thus very easily secured, notwithstanding the ignorance of both master and pupil. The principle by which the editor has been guided in marking, or not marking syllables, we do not perceive; but having marked so many, we think he would have done better in marking all that are not determined by position; the more so, as in many schools it is now the practice to distinguish every long vowel by the pronunciation. In casting our eye along the pages, we have observed a few errors in the marked quantities. Some of them are most probably to be referred to the printer, as aliquoties, p. 126, contrăque, p. 95, communivit, p. 47, impedimentum, p. 246. Others are systematically wrong: as, postridie, p. 275, quotidie, p. 284. That these syllables are long, is too well known to require any reference to Latin poets. Indeed, the forms postri, quoti, are only datives of the o declension, like uni, ulli, Mileti, &c. Suspicio again occurs in pp. 28, 29, 30, 89, 94, 140, 161, 297; but the syllable in question is long, as we had occasion to observe in some remarks upon Terence in our last number. The same work which has established this error in our schools, we mean the Gradus ad Parnassum, is also responsible for recuperandum, as our editor marks it, p. 127. For the long syllable, the Gradus quotes what it pleases to call an iambic line:
Tāntūm studēns ŭtī nātūm rěcūpĕrět. Of course, no authority is given for the line. The exist
ence of the two forms recuperare and reciperare is alone almost sufficient evidence that the vowels are short. The long u and i were not thus convertible. But the question may be decided by the Rudens of Plautus, 5, 1, 2. where the metre corresponds to
A cáptain bold of Halifax,
I who lived in country quarters, Quem ad réc'peratorés modo | damnávit Pleusidippus. Another instance occurs in an iambic trimeter of the same author.-Bacchid. 2, 3, 36. where the reader should recollect what we stated in our last number, that quidem is often a monosyllable in the comic writers:
Postquám qui'm prætor réc'peratorés dedit.
Utrobique, pp. 147, 303, (and we have seen the same error in other books) is at variance with the usage of both Horace and Plautus. There is ground indeed for a suspicion that the word was pronounced as of three syllables, the letters obi, by the silence of the b, becoming nothing more than one long syllable. From uter (which, like puer, was of the o declension) utrōbi would be the legitimate form for the dative, leading in the end to utroi, utri. But the timid, who may refuse assent to this opinion, must of course hold the vowel before b to be short, as in nullibi, &c. Lastly, we prefer posteaquam to posteăquam, as it is given in pp. 10, 41, 57, 142. The former corresponds to anteā, intereă, proptereā, quāpropter, posthac, &c. Those passages which appear to favour the short a, are to be explained by a trisyllabic form postyāquam. The derivation given in the vocabulary from the neuter plural of the pronoun is at variance with posthac, postquam, &c., which have the form of the singular feminine. Plural forms indeed seldom enter into the composition of particles.
The text is said to be ad fidem opt. cod. castig.; but Mr. Stewart does not specify in his notes any single alteration he has made, nor does he state the edition which he has chiefly followed. On comparison, we find he has not adopted the text of Fischer. In Cim. c. 3., Mr. Stewart gives us post annum quintum quo expulsus erat, the latinity of which we strongly suspect, and Fischer, we find, substitutes quam for quo, with the authority of the two best MSS., just as in Dion. c. 5, we have post diem tertium quam, &c.
Again, in the life of Themistocles, c. 7., a speech of the Athenian is reported in the third person, and concludes (in Mr. Stewart's edition) thus: Quare si suos legatos recipere vellent, se remitterent: aliter illos nunquam in patriam essent recepturi. Now the idiom of the language, as Tzschucke, Staveren, Fischer, &c. have observed, requires either esse recepturos, or, by a slighter change of the text,
recepturi without essent, the participle being attached to remitterent. On the whole, however, Mr. S.'s text is good, and accurately printed.
The notes consist of short translations and explanations of customs, and occasionally the pupil is favoured with an ordo verborum, and directions to supply certain words. Thus, p. 15, on the phrase, et in terra dimicari magis placebat, the following note appears: Et magis placebat (supp. illis) dimicari (supp. ab illis) in terra, and they wished rather that the contest should be maintained on land.' In the first place, it is absolutely unnecessary (we might say wrong) to supply any thing; but if a pronoun must be supplied, it should be, not illis, but iis. Secondly, dimicare means, not to maintain a contest, but to decide one. Lastly, by altering the order of the words, the emphasis thrown upon terra by its position, is destroyed. The only difficulty in the sentence arises from the passive impersonal dimicari, and the attention of the student should have been directed to this alone. In most schools nocetur, resistitur, &c. are incorrectly translated, it is hurt, it is resisted. But all such errors will be avoided by teaching a boy, in the translation of those active verbs which do not admit an accusative, to give the meaning, if possible, by attaching some noun to some English verb, thus: nocere, to do damage; resistere, to make resistance, &c. With these translations he will require no syntactical rule for connecting the dative with these verbs, whether in the active or passive voice. He will see that noceor, resistor, are absurdities, and the impersonal forms nocetur, resistitur, will be translated strictly as impersonals, damage is done, resistance is made, without any necessity for supplying ab illis, &c. Thus, again, dimicare, to decide a contest; dimicatur, the contest is being decided; dimicari, that the contest should be decided.
We have pointed out how the change in the position of terra affected the power of that word. A still clearer instance is afforded in the opening passage of the Miltiades, which is thus mangled by Mr. Stewart's ordo. Quum M. unus floreret maxime omnium et gloria majorum et sua modestia, et esset ea ætate, ut sui cives jam possent non solum sperare bene de eo, sed etiam confidere (supp. eum) futurum (supp. esse) talem (supp. virum), qualem judicarunt (supp. eum) cognitum.' Thus unus and omnium, which the Latin idiom necessarily throws into immediate contact, are barbarously divorced; ea loses the intensive power, which Nepos gives it in ea esset ætate ut &c. In the text the emphatic sua modestia (opposed to the gloria majorum)
is well contrasted with the weak power of the same pronoun in cives sui. But Mr. Stewart gives sui also the strong position, and thus teaches his pupil to disregard one of the first principles of Latin emphasis. Talem also loses its power by the change. Indeed the latter part of the sentence is not well represented even in the text, at least we think it would be improved by the following reading: talem eum futurum esse qualem cognitum judicarent. The insertion of eum and esse has good manuscript authority, particularly the former; and, with regard to judicarent, the imperfect tense and subjunctive mood are both required, we think, by the form of the sentence. The value of the notes, we must also observe, is much impaired by the want of connexion between them. In p. 11 a translation is given of quum jam in eo esset ut oppido potiretur. This was right, but in p. 31 we have precisely the same idiom-quum j. i. e. e. ut comprehenderetur; and the sentence is again translated. A reference to the first passage would have been a more profitable aid to the student. In these two passages, by the bye, we see no reason why jam should be forgotten in the translation. Similarly the phrase, usu venire, occurs in Alcib. c. 4 and c. 6; Hann. c. 12; Att. c. 16. In three of these the notes present a translation, but no reference is given from one to another. In the third passage, indeed, our editor has evenire; but we have little doubt that the simple verb given in two of the best MSS. is the right reading. We should also state, that the translation of the first passage,
id quod usu venerat, as had been usual,' appears to us incorrect. The phrase, we think, always signifies, to come practically, actually to occur; and such is Mr. Stewart's translation in the two other passages. In the same way we have translations of Atheniensium rebus studere, in Lys. c. 1, and of Laconum rebus studere, in Pel. 1; of eo usus est familiarissime, in Ages. c. 1; and illo usus erat familiariter, in Eum. c. 4. So convenire, in the sense of to be agreed upon,' is three times translated: in Paus. c. 4; Ages. c. 2; and Hann. c. 6. A reference is, we repeat, much more profitable to the learner, and requires less space.
It would have been better also if the style had been less ambitious than the following: cum quo ei hospitium fuerat, with whom he had a friendship originating in mutual hospitality;' or again, from the same page, quo majore religione se receptum tueretur, that he might make his reception more secure by adding the obligations of religion to those of hospitality.' The latter, indeed, is also objectionable on the score of being incorrect. The opposition between the obli
gations of religion and hospitality is at variance with the passage itself, and with the general notions of the ancients, who always looked upon the relation of the hospitium as something sacred. The following are other specimens of inaccuracy, p. 17. The armies of the Greeks were divided into regiments, or battalions, called moræ, &c.'-p. 292. Sestertius, a Roman silver coin, equivalent to two pounds and a half of brass, supposed to have been worth of our money about one penny, three farthings, and three quarters of a farthing.p. 357. Sulla, a Roman nobleman of the same family as the Scipios. p. 320. Clastidium, a town of Liguria, or Genoa. p. 317. Caria extends from the Meander to the Scamander in the Troas.p. 345. Octavianus, the nephew of Julius Cæsar.
At the end of the text we find a tolerably copious chronological table of the events spoken of by Nepos in reference to the Olympic, the Roman, and the Christian eras. We believe the editor has taken this table from one of the editions by Tzschucke; but in adapting it to the Varronian era of Rome, for the German editor has employed that of Cato, Mr. Stewart appears to have been led into an error affecting nearly the whole table. Tzschucke's table commences—
‹ Ol. 7, 2; A. U. C. 1; B. C. 751, Rome founded.' And this Mr. Stewart, preferring the Varronian era, correctly changes into
'Ol. 6, 4; A. U. C. 1; B. C. 753, Rome founded.'
From this step he appears to have inferred, that the sole alteration was to deduct two from all the Olympic dates of Mr. Tzschucke, and to add two to the third column. Thus we find in the German edition
'Ol. 75, 1; A. U. C. 272; B. C. 480; Battle of Salamis; 'Ol. 179, 2; A. U. C. 689; B. C. 63, Cicero Consul.'
From which Mr. Stewart deduces
'Ol. 74, 3; A. U. C. 272; B. C. 482, battle of Salamis;] · Ol. 178, 4; A. U. C, 689; B. C. 65, Cicero Consul.'
As if any question about the date of Rome could alter the number of years that elapsed, on the one hand, between the battle of Salamis and the victory of Corcbus, or, on the other, between the consulship of Cicero and the birth of Christ.
A short but complete vocabulary attached to this book will be found a very great relief to beginners. Yet there are errors in the etymological observations, which require correction. Thus aliubi is compounded, we are told, of alius, ubi, and ibi. This class of errors will only be extirpated when we agree to refer words to their stems. Thus the stem of the pronoun forms the nominatives, is, id, &c., with the adverbs, as they