« AnteriorContinuar »
ANNOTATIONS on the GREEK TEXT.
Verse 41. 'Ayit T560070s.
THE Poet under the imagery of this word paints the Sun riding in his chariot, and performing his diurnal revo. lution : As the expression in regard to time is indefinite, it may equally relate to the early rising of the Sun, and to the elevation in his meridian altitude: Dr. Musgrave is therefore mistaken in referring it to the latter, rather than the former, and in fuppofing that any amendment is neceffary : Brodæus explains it, Sole in orbe cursum fuum conficiente, ac hemisphærium nostrum ascendente. (In. Eurip. Annot. p. 100.)
Verse 83. 'HA_05 non adéumrel.
The construction, says Heath', requires us to read yaís: I see no neceffity for it, for if acute may not be used in an active sense, as explained by Brodæus, Facit ut currus ejus fulgeat, I would point the first line with a comma, and render the version of the passage in the following manner ;
Ecce currus splendidi quadrigarum,
* Not. in-Trag, Græc. p. 135.
* Id. p. 101.
Verse 'Huépcev 88. 'Afida.
The αψίδες are defined by Hefychius τα κύκλα των τρόχων, or the circumference of the wheels: And ifide is here used by Euripides to express the circular orb of the sun's chariot : Thus in his Hippolytus he says,
Afida mérpad Topor Edwr oxímolós. (V. 1233.) And in a fragment of our Poet, preserved by Longinus", Apollo in his address to Phaeton applies it to his chariot as here, 'A:Lida ovo nátw diýtal. In regard to the word viuépar Reiske interprets it as an adjective, mortalibus cupitum, instead of the substantive viuépor diem: This sense will save the necessity of those emendations, mentioned both in the Notes of Barnes and Musgrave.
Verse go. TéT&TO.
Here Dr. Musgrave, calling mét]@1 a word of no autho: rity, proposes to alter it into mété]c.; but I find the former word in a finilar sense of volat, twice used by Aristophanes in his Birds 3 : It also occurs in the Anthologia ,
| Huf 3 g Terer: TTO To Taiòaptor. And it is regularly derived from métamol, which is to be found in the Lexicon of H. Stephens. (Vol. I. p. 1723.)
i De Subi, fe:7. 15. 3 Aves. V. ;* Sc 575.
2 Animad. ad Eurip. p. 145.
Verse 98. Eróucí ? fu@nuov.
The solemnity of this expression among the Greeks, corresponds to the favete linguis among the Romans: It implies a facred regard in the language of Antient Devotion : The Græcians were remarkably attentive to this important circumstance, that no inauspicious ill-omened word should escape the unguarded lips of the votary on any folemn act: Thus Callimachus awfully proclaims in his hymn to Apollo,
Euonuçit” cív]es ’Anóniwvos aordñ. (V.17.) And when Horace assumes the majestick charecter of the consecrated Priest of the Muses, he exclaims
Favete linguis. (Carm. l. 3. Od. 1. V2.)
Linguis animisque favete,
Verse 101. 'Idías.
Instead of this word Dr. Musgräve conjectures, that we ought to read ošios propitious ; because he afferts, that it would be extraordinary, if the ministers, here addressed by Ion, did not speak to those, who came to confult the Oracle, propriâ linguâ, in their own native tongue: But the term idías emphatically alludes to the act of the subordinate priests expounding and decyphering into their proper acceptation the equivocal responses of the Pythian Priestess: Thus Brodæus? observes, Datum eniin oraculum, quod et plurimum obscurum ancepsque erat, explicabant facerdotes.
Verse 120. Mupoisas espacio CóCav.
The word (66oy is here governed by té//801 ; so that there is no necessity for the emendation of Heath into pód, who afferts it is necessary for the sake of the construction. (Not. in Trag. Græc. p. 135.)
Verse 138. Tèvdo cpéhepov.
The alteration proposed by Dr. Musgrave into tè 8 Wonde pov, and his translation of the passage, appears to me far inferior to the obvious acceptation, which implies, that Ion considers his Benefactor Apollo as his Father: And as Dól be may refer to 7 Tépos, I see no absolute necessity for the emendation of Heath into Doilov. (Id. p. 135.) . "Ia Eurip. Annot. p. 101. See also my Preliminary Effay, p. 24.
Verse 166. Tlapce te tréguyas.
This paffage is undoubtedly corrupt, since the sentence obviously requires a verb instead of the preposition papa. It was corrected by Scaliger into Trdépays répuyos in the sense of prætervolare ; but Dr. Mufgrave questions (and I think with reason) whether this expreffion would be Greek: He therefore proposes another alteration into topaog agita, which he builds on the authority of the words oñ' rõ in Aristophanes, applied to a Bird ; but this I apprehend is not sufficient to establish the compound word Tapasów, which is no where to be found : The Editor in his Supplement ? seems himself to abandon it, for he fuggests another emendation, "Ą a patte 77écuyas, ah, ah, alas plaude: This appears to me equally exceptionable as the former, since neither the word or phrase is proved to admit of this interpretation: The natural reading appears to be Aipe te léguyas tolle pennas, which I offer as my conjecture.
The common interpretation of this passage translates suuccions nidum, as a substantive, and naponpois as an adjective, implying ex festucis factum, or a neft made of pieces of straw. But ļuvalas, as synonymous with łuvi, has no authority to fupport it; and it is used, as an adjective, not as a substan