ignorance have influenced them. Those causes are now happily removed. We obey not now the edicts of the Pope. We are allowed to think, and want nothing but manly learning and study to think right. But while we recommend verbal knowledge, we do not mean that all men Tould waste their strength in poring over words and szllables; for the part of discovery and investigation happens but to few. It will be sufficient for the purposes of general study, if they store up what others have delivered; and let them remember that they enjoy, in a few hours, the fruits of many painful days and many sleepless nights ; nor refuse the tribute of gratitude and reverence, when they consider (what must of necesity happen from the limited faculties of man) that their knowledge can be purchased at no less a price than the sacrifice of a whole life wasted in their service. We have detained our Readers, perhaps, too long on this subject; yet we would remind them that it is the chief object of our plan recommend as well as to give an account of what relates to learning.–We therefore were willing to obviate certain objections against a study highly rational, and which deserves the most attentive consideration in the present improved state of letters. We were led into these remarks upon a review of the work now before us, in which we have an excellent fpecimeni of verbal criticism, for which the learned world is indebted to the labour and accuracy of Mr. Toup, who has given us a full proof of his great erudition, by restoring the true reading of Longinus. This rhetorician, as every body knows, is full of corruptions and defects; and it is no small addition to the glory of Longinus that he has, at last, met with a critic who will do all for him which learning and fagacity can do: Si Pergama dextra defendi possent, &c. &c. He has been affisted with new copies and manuscripts, of which his own abilities have made good use. He has, very properly, likewise called to his aid writers which Longinus seems to have studied with peculiar care, QuintilianDionyfius of Halicarnassus-Plutarch. We have Pearce's translation unaltered; not that Mr. Toup was fully satisfied with any translation, but he complied with the general custom, which, in all cases, is fupreme. Where Dr. Pearce seems to have gone widely from the sense of the Author, he has remarked it in his notes. There is prefixed to this edition a Dissertation on the Life and Writings of Longinus, compiled with great care and intelligence by the learned Sihardam. We will not trouble our Readers with any extracts from this the work, as the life of Longinus is well known; and our Au. thor has rather confirmed received facts, by many new authori. ties, than added to the number. To make this work still more complete the celebrated Ruhnkenius has adorned it with notes REV. May, 1779.



part of

and emendations ; which display that extent of reading in the Greek language for which he is so juftly famed.

It would be endless, and indeed it is inconsistent with our plan to produce passages in which Longinus has either been restored or elucidated : we cannot, however, refrain from gratifying the learned reader with an instance or two.-The famous remains of some old tragedian, in the second section of Longinus, which has been the subject of so much conjecture, is, at laft, discovered to be a fragment of Æschylus, from a manuscript of Johannes Siceliota on Hermogenes. It is a speech which Boreas is supposed to roar out when refused Orythia. The Reader ought not to wonder if the language of such a bluftering lover, painted in rage by Æschylus, be uncommonly inflated; and if it should swell into what Longinus calls “ Tapa Tpaywda,” or into the absurd. We think no single commentator has given fully the true sense, but that all have supplied useful hints. Take the whole passage, as, in our opinion, it ought to be read :

Και καμινά σχωσι μακισον σελαρ. .
Ει γαρ τιν' εςιεψον οψομαι μονον,
Μιαν παρειρας πλεκανην χειμαρροου
Στεγην πυρωσω και κατανθρακωσομαι.

Νυν δε κεκραγα πω τογενναιον μελG; The translation of which is : « Let them repress the spiry beams of the chimney : for if I should spy but å spark, I will wind this single curl into a torrent of flame.--I will fire the house, and burn it to alhes ! Have not I roar'd out now a lofty

Ridiculous as this may seem to an English ear, it is the sense, , and, as we think, the very spirit of the original, which perhaps might appear equally abfurd to the Grecian taste.-We read Kai xopite with Pearce, who follows all the editions and manuscripts. We read povov, not forov, as Musgrave. · Eslov is applied to fire or Sparks, for the reason which Ruhnkenius gives. Plutarch has“ Tlup 851xfor." Mr. Toup indeed understands by it the person appointed to watch Orythia ; but this sense is quite fo. reign to the sentiment of the passage. Upon the word usav, Ruhnkenius asks, “ Cur unam potius quam plures ? Lege Blan" The reason is plain from our translation. It adds much to the spirit to make an interrogation at the last line. It is highly natural that fuch a character as Boreas should exult in his own founding pompous language, and in the wantonness of boasting rage demand the applauses of others. But this we offer to the consideration of the learned, declaring with Mr. Toup, “ De his quisquiliis nihil certi.”-We shall propose an emendation of our own on a paffage in the 30th section, which Mr. Toup,

strain ?

if he thinks it deserving, may insert in his next edition. Longinus, fpeaking of the great importance of fignificant words, fays, « Οι μεν, τονον η Ίων κυριων και μεγαλοπρεπων ονοματων εκλογη θαυμασως αγει και καθακηλει θες ακαονίας, και ως πασι Tous palopol, '&c. &c&c.

The intelligent reader will perceive that it is very difficult, if not absolutely absurd, to apply the words usysI6, xana, EUTIVElav, Bapo', &c. to arauari. We would, therefore, by a light tranίpofition, read, " και οιον ει ψυχην τινα τους πραγμασι, ώσπερ αγαλμασι καλλισοις φωνήλικην επιθεισα.Every one mut see the propriety of the emendation. Who is ignorant that good poets, like good sculptors, give life and speech to their subje&is ?-One more remark, and we have done.

Longinus, speaking of the force of sublimity, says beautifully, « Υψω δε πε καιριως εξενεχθεντα τα πραγματα δικην σκηπίε πανία διεφορησεν και την τη ρήτορG ευθυσαθροαν ενεδειξαίο δυναμιν. ."

Upon this place Dr. Pearce makes a very ingenious remark, according to the opinion of that “ true priest of the Muses, Smith. That our Readers may be more sensible of the ingenuity of the remark, they shall have it through the improved medium of Smith's translation : “ It is not easy to determine whether the precepts of Longinus, or his example, be most to be observed and followed in the course of this work, since hin style is poffessed of all the fublimity of his subject. Accordingly, in this paffage, to express the power of the sublime, he has made use of his words with all the art and propriety imaginable. Another writer would have said dicepopsi and Evdesxyulai, but this had been too dull and languid. Our Author uses the preterperfect tense, the better to express the power and rapidity with which sublimity of discourse strikes the minds of its hearers. It is like lightning, says our Author, because you can no more look upon this, when present, than you can upon the fall of that. Besides, the structure of the words in the close of the sentence is admirable. They run along, and are hurried in the celerity of short vowels: they represent to the life the rapid ·motion either of lightning or the sublime.”—To the criticism of Pearce, and commendation of Smith, we shall oppose the opinion of a scholar, and “ a ripe and good one” too: it ought to be translated, says Mr. Toup, with Petrus Paganus, “ Res omnes fulminis inftar disjicere, & universam ftatim oratoris vim patefacere folet.Here we see all the ingenuity of the remark vanishes at once. Can any one who even affects learning, be ignorant

that the first aorist ought frequently to be tranflated by soleo ? The sense of Pearce is quite foreign from the nature of the Greek language. It is from observations of this kind, ignorant and trifling as they are, that a commentator is ranked



among the number of elegant editors; while the manly criticisms of a fcholar, who endeavours to inform his readers, are despised as the: tasteless Jabours of plodding dulness. We would have men elegant, but first let them be learned.

We cannot dismiss this edition of Longinus, without congratúlating the world on lo valuable an acquisition, recommending, at the same time, verbal knowledge, as the fureft defence sagainst the incursions of barbarism, and the absurdities of priests.

We will conclude this Article with a few remarks on the style and sentiments of Longinus. His diction, like that of other rhetoricians, who flourished in the later ages, is loaded, and consequently obfcure. The Greek language is better adapted than any other to express the ideas of the mind with richness and fulness.

This excellence has been abused by the rhetoricians, and they have laboured, by strained and unnatural combinations, to add ftrength to strength, and to accumulate abundance on abundance. The consequence is, that all the nerve and natural vigour of the language has been crushed under a weight of incumbrances, as the might of ancient warriors under coats of mail. The:language of Longinus is full of metaphors, and those are generally broken and disjointed. But here Tould be offered an excuse, which may, with peculiar propriety, be applied to the writers in the decline of learning, that metaphors, when they become common, cease to be considered as metaphors, and that the strange confusion of style, which we fo much wonder at in Longinus, is nothing but the ordinary language of his own times, heightened by a studied imitation of the sublimity of the more ancient writers. Of the sentiment and matter of Longinus, we may observe, that he makes but few general remarks, and those commonly borrowed from writers before him, as Mr. T.oup has sufficiently shewn. His aim is not to inform the judgment, to lead us into the penetralia, as Quintilian terms:it, of his art; neither is it to engage our admiration in favour of his authors, but of himself. He seems to praise many passages, only because they will admit fome quaint fancy of his own, or some higher improvement, tacitly displaying, at the same time, the greatness of his own powers, which are able to paint the lily, and throw a perfume on the violet.' He takes notice that Homer has said. fublimely of Dircord, that her “ head is fixed in the heaven, and her feet upon the earth; " only because he himself can, as he imagines, improve the thought, and more sublimely apply it to the genius of Homer:

Longinus is not more reprehensible for the quaintness of his panegyric than for the severity of his censure. Throughout his whole performance the admired name of Euripides is treated 5.


with too little respect; and his opinion on this subject is opo, posed by the general voice of antiquity. In the brightest period of Grecian literature, Euripides carried off the palm of dramatic compofition; nor was the fame of his inimitable productions confined to his own age, or to his native country. At a very distant period the grave sober-minded Plutarch warms at the flame of this divine poet, and breaks out in the exact numbers, and with all the vigour of iambic,

Τις γαρ ειρηκε της εαυτο πατριδος

Εγκωμιoν τoιετον οιον Ευριπιδης. The well known treatment of the Athenian prisoners in Sicily, is a monument to the glory of Euripides, of which no other poet can boast. In the cruel war carried on between the Athenians and Syracufans, the resentment of the contending parties was embittered by every circumstance that can exasperate hostility, and renderit incurable. The Athenian fleet suffered a fatal disaster in the harbour of Syracuse, by which the greatest part of their seamen fell into the hands of the enemy. The public assembly of the Syracusans immediately condemned these unfortunate prisoners to a cruel and ignominious death: but from this general doom they excepted those, and those only, who could repeat any verses of Euripides. These they kindly received into their houses, treated with all the honourable disa tinctions of ancient hospitality, and, after learning from them the most admired passages of their favourite poet, they restored them to their native city in triumph. Yet to Longinus, Euripides appears a man of an ordinary genius, and a poet rather in found than in sense *.

Longinus affects great indignation at a phrase in Herodotus, which we think not only unexceptionable, but very natural and expressive. In the beginning of his fifth book, the Father of History gives an account of a Persian embassy into Macedon. The ambassadors were treated with every mark of attention, and invited to a magnificent entertainment, at which the greatest beauties of the court of Amyntas were present. Such, however, was the rude severity of Macedonian manners, that the ladies were not blended promiscuously with the other guests, but placed at a great distance, and in a separate body. This was not agreeable either to the customs or to the taste of the Perfians. They could not get a full view of the Macedonian women after straining their fight; and the faint glimpse, which the remote distance afforded, tended rather to excite than 'to gratify curiosity.' The Persian ambassadors therefore requested Amyntas that his fair subjects might be brought nearer, observa

• Long. sect. 40.

Сс 3


« VorigeDoorgaan »