small, we conceive, to account for the In page 32, of vol. xxvii, of this Maazine, we gave the average temperature for the seven years preceding, as it was taken at Caniden-town, a village two mils from the metropolis, which was 500-48; the average of the last year is therefore rather more than a degree stort of this. At the same place, and for the same period, the average height of the barometer was 29-786: for the present year, at Highgate, the mean height is 99-522: this difference is too Account of the Quantity of Rain fallen in each Month, since the Year 1802, as ascertained by a correct Rain-gauge., By Dr. Pole, Bristol. It is stated, from the register kept at the Royal Society, that the south-west wind blows more upon an average in each month of the year than any other, particularly in July and August: that the north-east prevails during January, March, April, May, and June; and is most unfrequent in February, July, September, and December: the north-west occurring more frequently from November to March; and less so in September and October than in any other months. Our observations for the last year, do not correspond with this statement; and the difference may perhaps account for the quantity of rain fallen; for the few hot days, and in short, for that small share of summer weather, which was open to every person's notice. Highgate, Your's, &c. Jan. 3, 1810. J. J. For the Monthly Magazine. MANUSCRIPT of ESCHYLUS'S TRAGEDIES, entitled, the SEVEN at THEBES," and "PROMETHEUS." HE learned French Mons. Vauvilliers, as discovered in the hibrary at Paris, formerly called the Bibliotheque du Roi, a MŠ. copy of the Seven at Thebes, and Prometheus, by Eschylus (No. 2785) on which he has offered the following remarks: In verse 13, of the "Seven at Thebes," the particle is suppressed— Ωραν τ ̓ ἔχονθ' έκαςον, ὥς τι συμπεπες, and in the manuscript ὥραν εχονθ ̓ ἕκαστον; but the omission of this letter gives some order to a phrase, which before had Bone; and M. Brunk has found the same, reading in other MSS. and adopted it. At verse 250, a fault occurs, it must be owned, yet it points out a good reading; Τατο γαρ Αρης βόσκεται φθόνῳ βροτῶν. Our editions have pi; it is not, however, with fright, but with carnage, that Mars is glutting himself; and this consideration induces us to prefer the reading p, which another MS. pre sents. This reading may be easily recognized in the word gear, as found in the MS. before us, and the faults of different copies often yield this advantage to attentive readers. M. Brunk also has found gov in some MSS. and has printed it accordingly. But the reading of nav, in verse 253, does not here appear. One edition has Στένει πόλισμα δήθεν, ὡς κακλαμενών. The Latin translators have rendered this passage as follows: "Gemit civitas a terra tanquam circumclusu;" as if they had found the word yes. It appears, indeed, that the scholiast read the word so: T, (says he,) & ńustipg . The word he does not seem to have any meaning: ynde, on the contrary, expresses very well that dead sound occasioned by the trampling of a multitude of men on the earth, and which is prolonged to a greater or lesser distance; but instead of translating it, "Tanquam circumclusa;" it should rather be, "utpote sub pedibus circumsese-fundentuim; for the poet did not mean to describe the grief of an afflicted people, but the actual noise which announces the approach of enemies towards the ramparts. Verse 487 offers an interesting variation. In our editions we read, Επευχομαι δὴ τῳδε μεν ευτυχεῖν των προμαχ' εμών δόμων. Opto quidem huic succedere defensor mearum domorum."-This dative Tude, which is of the third person, cannot accord with the vocative, poμaxe. The manuscript before us read sex, which forms a very perfect sense-“ Opto quidem in hoc certamine;"—and it subjoins, at the end of the verse, σs, which renders the phrase complete, Επευχομαι δὴ τάδε μεν ευτυχείν σε. As to the measure of the verse, it de pends on too many combinations to become the object of these coucise remarks. It must, however, be observed, that in verse 619, Eteocles speaks of Amphiarais, who, notwithstanding his piety, was, for having associated with the wicked, to perish along with them : ̓Ανοσιοισι συμμιγείς So it is found in our editions. What can was signify? Those words are translated by reverti, and that is cerof Argos did not make any criminal ef tainly the sense of war. But the army forts for returning-the crime with which Eteocles reproaches them is, that of having come to attack unjustly the city of Thebes. In fact, the manuscript reads Toir. M. Brunk very properly condemns, as ridiculous, the interpretawords by the great journey towards the tion of the scholiast, who explains these infernal regions; but, in applying them to the city of Thebes itself, nothing can be more clear than the meaning.-"Con sociatus sociatus kominibus impiis qui audaci pervicucitate animarum contendunt magno hoc itinere in urbem irrumpere, Jovis voluntale pessum dabitur simul."-We learn from M. Brunk's remarks, that his manuscripts presented the same reading, which is allowed by the second Scholia. At verse 632, naier Araç is found instead of axalas. It is difficult to find any example of the adjective datos employed with a feminine substantive, even among the Attic writers. In verse 178, the poet calls those prayers of the chorus, ardiz Ars; and although ardins, as found in another manuscript (No. 2781), may be right, yet wardinol does not appear less correct. In our editions, verse 732 is not in metre: Παιδολότοφ δ' ερίς ταδ' οτρύνει. Filiorum perditrix contentio ista urget. The manuscript has d'arpin, and M. Brank Iras judiciously preferred this reading. In our editions we read, on the subject of Edipus's incest: Οτε μητρός αγναν ῥίζαν αἱματισσαν It is difficult to understand, in this place, the object of the epithet ayrar parum, or custum sulcum matris seminans, sus sanguinis radicem, ausus est tangere: nor can one easily discover the utility of in izpids, after having said sulcum mu tra. The manuscript before us, reads like those of M. Brunk, μù mpào àpvàs esigns perper, and the subsequent page is the reason which rendered non pura, in respect to Edipus, the sulcum matris in which he had been formed. This reading is, therefore, decidedly the best. In verses 212 and 213. of the Prometheus, speaking of the war of the Titans againe the Gods, Prometheus says, be had learned from his mother, that victory was to be obtained, not by force, but by cunning or stratagem: Ως & κατ ̓ ἰσχὺν, ἐδὲ πρὸς τὸ καρτερὸν Χρὶ ἡ δολῳ δὲ τὰς ὑπερέχοντας κρατεῖν. Euch was the ancient reading; but it has degenerated, whether after MSS. or after conjectures, into this, Xp; that is to say, xpia, opus sit, necesse sit. M. Dawes, being justly dissatisfied with this form, has substituted, conjecturally, ip his Critical Miscellanies, Xpéin, an optative, very commonly employed after the particles as, Iva, öri, &e. to express the past time, necesse esset. But all the MSS. which M. Vauvilliers had seen, are in favour of the ancient reading, and only differ in the particle or after dow, and this form is, in fact, very good. Thucydides prefers the use of p to that of xpin. As to the ellipsis of the comparative μão, before the particle, there is not any Greek writer, who does not furnish examples of it. The phrase thus taken, signifies therefore, "Oportere, in fatis esse non vi aut robore, magis quam dolo victores vincere; and every one understands, that this grammatical figure amounts to the same as "dolo magis quam vi aut robore." On the subject of the participle present, impexortacyTM instead of which many editions have anipsovrac, it is well known, that the future is not by any means necessary in such a circumstance; as in Latin,“ misit senatus legatos vetantes," is the same as vctaturos, or qui vetarent. The manu script under our immediate consideration, reads, χρὴ ἢ δόλῳ τε τὰς ὑπερέχοντας χρατεῖν. At verse 215, the printed editions have as follows: Χραπιςα δή μοι των παρεςώτων τοτε εφαίνετ ̓ εἶναι, προσλαβόντι μητέρα εκινθ ̓ ἑκοντι Ζηνὶ συμπαραςατείν. visum est, ut assumens matrem, volens vo"Optimum mihi in præsenti ex omnibus lenti Jovi assisterem." In this passage, the pookaborts is good in itself, as re lating to : but then, what are we to make of the Exord' EXORTS Znvi? It does not appear credible, that schylus wrote BROVTI, Jupiter, the other to Prometheus. If he EROT; one having a reference to side of the other, two adjectives relating wrote ixivra, can we admit, one at the to the same person; one to the dative, pohabat, the other to the accusative, xorta? No such example is to be found among the Greek authors. Our manuscript, therefore, is right in having poo Aaboura, the two adjectives then joining, not to the pot, but to the infinitive, wa garar, a mode of construction com monly found. At verse 618, Paw's edition reads, Διγ ̓ ὄντων αὐτῷ· παν γαρ έκπυθοιό μου. "Dic quid postules? nam quidvis a ma doceberis." But to give it this sense, the phrase has occasion of the particle &, without which the optative never assumes the power of a future; this may be supplied in the MS. by conjecture; for we only find do in it, which leaves a verse detec tive by one syllable. My Brunk has printed av yap av øvdu pun, after a ings nuscript. In our editions, after verse 756, and seg. we road,. H γαρ ποτ' ἐςὶν εκπεσεῖν αρχῆς Δία ; δαιμ' άν, οἶμαι, τα δ' ιδουσα συμφοράν. Πῶς δ ̓ ἐκ ἄν, ἥτις εκ Διος πασχω κακῶς: 66 Numquid est ut Jupiter aliquando excidat è principatu! gauderem puto, istum conspicata cladem : quidni vero! que. a jove malis afficior." Thus are generally rendered thosewordswinch to pronounces; but noot is a verb active, signifying deLecturem, and not delecturer. M. Dawes, in his Miscellanies, assigns the second of these verses to Prometheus, writing £o av, that is, v: thus, too, has M. Brunk printed it; and this enables us to find the meaning of Tuai, gauderes, puto; whilst the third verse is the answer or lo; quidni? The particle & becomes no longer necessary, and our manuscript, which suppresses it, favours the conjecture of those two learned critics. It suppresses also, and properly, as appears, the particle in verse 830. Iva μαντεῖα θῶνος ἐσί Θεσπρωτό Δίος Ubi est sedes prophetica Jovis Threspoti et It is evident that the particle is not necessary to the sense and measure of the first verse; and I can scarcely believe, that the poet, without any necessty, would seek this cacophony, Martela Samas +856 Gecompare, wherein the same. consonant is repeated six times in four words. On the same account that we reject the sportas, and adopt the reading of our Ms. vпegexortas, (i verse 215,) we are induced to prcier also, in verse 857, Η ξεσι θηρεύοντες ο θηρασίμοις γάμος. ne "Ibunt venantes non venundas nuptias."-Paw's edition, without any cessity, Iras JugevGurres in the future. It is to be remarked, also,that, in verse 1011, Αυθαδεία την φρονῦντι μὴ καλός ; our editors read, Αυθαδία γαρ τω φρονῦντι, δς. The here is of no service to the sense of the phrase, but with aid it is recessary to the measure of the verse, In reading aualla, it would be useless for this object. It is certain, that when ever the poets employ the dieresis, or dissalution of the diphthong e or d, in two vowels aï, of, the continues long: from the same analogy should proceed the Same result, in respect to the diphthong EL. This observation would be of impor tance to the knowledge of prosody, if confirmed by a suflicient number of ex-, amples.-After verse 810, there follows," μνημόνευμα της της πλάνης, Which is, in as if a line by Eschylus, vos amo sou fact, only an explanation of verse 839. SIR, TH To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. E tremendous mischiefs brought, upon the study of English grammar,. by the persevering and pedantic, or ignoraut exertions, to mould it on the structure of the learned languages, will be-, come strikingly obvious to any one who can consider the matter without prejudice; but these mischief's must infallibly continue in some degree, till a second Priestley (with equal penetration and, courage, but greater good fortune) shall arise, to confine both declension and conjugation within the hounds of mere infection. That it is a point of dispute with our modern Priscians (or rather of no dispute, for they seem to decide in the negative), whether a noun, or a pronoun without the accusative variation, may be made both the subject of one verb and the object of another; in other words, both a nominative and an accusative, as we should call it in Latin; in such an example as this: "the things which liked, and were equally agreeable to my friend;" which being here the object of liked and · the subject of were. It is true, this con-. struction sounds rather awkwardly: butI think, only to those who know something of the syntax of the learned fanguages, or have received their notions on this particular point from others who do; or solely on account of its infrequency (which infrequency, by the by, is also imputable to the same causes.) There is a wellknown passage of Horace, which has often struck me as an exact case in point on this question: I will therefore only-mention it,and trouble you no further. It is this: 'Quod magis ad nos Pertinet, et nescire malum est:" where quod is the nominative to pertinet and the accusative to nescire. So in a line of Pope: Abuse on all he loved, or loved him, spread: where there evidently is only one relative word intended to be understood, and' this, on the above-mentioned consider-, ation, should be the relative that; "abuse that being the object (or accusative) to on all that he loved, or [that] loved him:" the first loved, and the subject (or nominative) of the second. Your's, &c. Σ. For For the Monthly Magazine. LYCEUM OF ANCIENT LITERATURE-No. XXVI. W HORACE. HERE so many have concurred to point out the ments, and to perpetuate the fame, of Horace; upon a subject, which has already exhausted all that criticisio could offer, or ingenuity suggest, the classical reader will be prepared to expect here only those general observations, which may confirm the opinion he has already formed; but which will add little to the materials, upon which that opinion is grounded. Most willingly, indeed, would we have omitted this article altogether; not so much from any difficulty likely to occur in a poet, who has been so repeatedly revised by commentators, ancient and modern, as from the impossibility of offering remarks sumciently striking, or new, to excite attention. But the necessity of conform ing to the regular plan which we from the first adopted, compels us to proceed. The odes of Horace are, of course, the only part of his works which we propose to consider at present. It may, perhaps, form no idle disqui sition to attempt to ascertain the differ ent periods, at which were written the several poems of Horace. This we shall do, taking Bentley for our guide. The internal evidence of the poems them selves may, indeed, lead us to form a to. lerable conclusion as to their respective dates. Thus, the first book of the odes may be ascertained from the prologue; the second and third from the epilogues; the epodes from these lines of the 14th epod: Inceptos, olim promissum carmen, Iambos The date of the first book of Satires may be collected from the last line of the 10th: 1, puer, atq. meo citus hæc subscribe libello; the last from the prologue. The first book, also, of the epistles may be traced from the prologue and epilogue. That the. fourth book of the odes, and the second of the epistles, were published after a considerable lapse of time from the rest, is evident from the authority of Suetonius; a testimony which, as Bentley observes, is so decisive, that it would be an useless task in any one to attempt to refute it. Supposing, then, this internal evidence to be sufficiently clear, the ar Vide Bentley, de Temporious Librorum Horatii. MONTHLY MAG. No. 194. rangement will be as follows:-The first book of Saures, the earliest work of Horace, was written between the twentysixth and twenty-eighth year of his he the second, between his thirty-second and thirty-fourth; the Epodes, in the tub following years; the first book of the Odes, was composed between his thirtysixth and thirty-eighth; the second, in his fortieth and forty-first; the third, in the course of the two succeeding years: the first book of Episties, in his fortysix.h and forty-seventh years; then the fourth of the Odes, and the Carinen Secare, in the course of his forty-ninth, fiftieth, and fifty-first years. The Art of Poetry, and the fourth of the Epistles, are not so well ascertained; probably, they were written only a year or two be fore he died. This arrangement will appear to be judicious, and not loosely hazarded, if the reader will carefully at tend to the evidence of the poems them selves. In the first place, it is observable, that, in the Satires, the Epodes, and the first of the Odes, the name of Casar is always used, never that of Augustus, which was not assumed till about the thirty-ninth year of Horace; after which it is frequently adopted. Then again, in the Safires and Epodes, the poet describes himself as a young man, and asserts, that he owed all his fame to the publication of his Satires. He no where mentions his lyric compositions as having contibuted to his reputation. His progressive advance in life may be collected from a close examination of the sentiments of each successive poem. The free, and often vicious, tendency of his early poems, denotes his youthful years; but we see him afterwards engaged on more decorous subjects, and assuming a graver and chaster style. It is by this internal evidence alone, that we can properly ascertain the different periods at which Horace wrote. Those who have not condescended to follow this unerring guide, have lost themselves in the wildest conjectures, and have seldom failed to obscure, rather than illustrate, the subject. Let us now consider Horace as a writer' of odes, a species of poetry, which, of all others, requires the greatest strength and elevation of genius, and a sort of enthus asin, that must diffuse itself through the whole. Judgment, too, must have its share, in tempering the flights of too wild an imagination; and the greatest art must be used, without the appearance of any, that the compo position B |