In his elegant addrefs to them he will not be offended with our objecting to the mixed metaphor of luminibus litam*, notwithstanding the refpectable authority which he has to produce for its ufage. The work is printed with uncommon elegance of type, paper, and arrangement-and does credit to the tafte of the author. The typographical errors are few in number, excepting (as is too often the cafe in modern Greek publications) in the accents, where with pain we obferve a variety of σφαλματα, fume of which we have noted at the bottom of our page+. * In the paffage of Cicero, here alluded to, an ancient copy reads, non ita for lita: ad Qu. Fr. ii. 11. Ernettus fays, lita verum effe non poteft, adeo abhorret a luminibus. He prints it « ut fcribis, ita funt: non multis," &c. after Jenfius. We ftill doubt of the reading. Why should non be inferted, which is not in the original text, and only ferves to degrade Lucretius? We would read, Lucretii poe mata, ut fcribis, ita funt; multis luminibus ingenii, multa tamen artis."--Gellius fays he was" ingenio et facundia præcellens." Cicero is faid by St. Jerom to have revifed the poem of Lucretius. + For οίκονδε, read είκόνδε, § i. 3. —εί, ii. 3. iii. 1. καλαμος έξεις-καλαμοςεφέος, 2. ἄςατος-άςατος, vii. 4. ä-ä, ix. 2. πλυτος-πλυτός, ib. ἄφυκτον άφυκτον, 3ο οὐάτα οἴατα, 4. ἔνθαδ ̓ ἐνθάδ', xii. 1. ὄλβόντε όλβον τε, xvi. 3. ἄξιον ἄξιον, 4. ὄρισμον ορισμόν, xvii. 2. ἀπόσβεσαι αποσβέσαι, xviii. 2. Μέσα γ’—Μεσά γ', xxi. 1. οὔνομαοίκμα, 2. μάθημανής 40 τεύχεν—τεῖχεν, xxii. 2. λέιψενλειψεν, ib. όφθαλμος ὀφθαλμός, xxiii. 2. φυσέως φύσεως, 3. xiii. 4. ἐλίσσετ ̓ἑλίσσετ', xxvi.2. παλαιας-παλαίας, 4. άμμοξος άμμορος, ΧΧΧ, 2. The words proaemium and incaepti, in the prefatory addrefs, are printed for prooemium and incœpti. We cannot help taking this opportunity of recommending to all Latin writers of the prefent day, the ftrictest attention to etymological accuracy in the cafe of the fifter diphthongs. At the opening, and at the clofe, of Mr. Wefton's poem, he ufes the abbreviation of x. T. a. (probably for καὶ τὰ ἄλλα) in preference to the more ufual formula x. T. 2. For this deviation from general practice, we are at a lofs to account. Si. 1. runs thus: *Ημαλος οἶχομένοιο βοᾷ χαλκός βαρυηχής. This introduction, though not unmelodious or ungrammatical, we think liable to fome objections. The genitive abfolute, at the commencement of the poem, gives an air of embarraffment and perplexity to the conftruction, which might have been avoided, had Mr. Wefton adopted the bold style of Euripides, and exchanged the neuter So into a tranfitive verb, with an accufative cafe. Μήδεια δ ̓ ἡ δύστηνος ἠτιμασμένη ท ΒΟΑ, μὲν ΟΡΚΟΥΣ, ἀνακαλει δὲ δεξιὰν, κ.τ.λ. fi. 3. Moyiwr gorng oinorde Badise. The labour of the plowΜογέων οἰκόνδε βαδίζει. man is ended for the day, and μογήσας, not μογέων, mhould be the word applied to him; and, on the contrary, as he is in the act of departing homeward, the word in, in the fourth line, fhould not be expreffed in the aorift, but in the prefent tense. ii. 4. Kadares-here certainly ufed with more propriety than, by fome of Mr. Wefton's learned competitors, in the introductory line of the poem. If the ancients had any ufe of bells, according to the fenfe we affix to the word, it was as an appendage to the necks of cattle, either in pastoral life, or in facrifical folemnities, or for pomp of equipage.t+ Plutarch alfo defcribes it as an ornament to the feftive drefs; and the fcholiaft on Ariftophanes de Pace obferves, that fentinels doing duty on the ramparts, carried one of thefe xdwas in their hands, and delivered them from one to another in fucceffion. Thus, when Brafidas attempted the fiege of Potidea (Thucyd. 1. 4.) το κώδωνος παρενεχθέντος εἰς τὸ διάκενον ἡ πρόσθεσις ἐγένετο. Vide Suidam in voce κωδωνοφόρος. To Homer and to Theocritus the word xowy feems to have been unknown; while the LXX. (contemporaries of the latter at the court of Ptolemy) feem to have been well acquainted with the word. In the Ajax of Sophocles it is well known to fignify a trumpet; and, by a peculiarity of the Attic dialect, which Dr. Norbury might without hazard have adopted, it is ufed in the feminine gender: We cannot recommend the tran Χαλκος όμι κώδωνος ως Τυρσηνικής, § ii. 4. Ὑπνᾶσι τὰ πώεα. fitive ufe of the word v. more confonant to our ideas. Dr. Coote's mysowy Radéws, is much iii. 1. The word ivy-mantled is here most happily rendered by its legitimate parent oxiray. We could have wished that the word unregos had been a little lefs diftant from its correfponding fubftantive ya, for which might not impro perly have been fubftituted. Καξ ὀρέων τοι ΣΚΩΠΕΣ ἀήδοσι γαξύονται. Theoc. Id. i. 136. § iii. 1. 4. Κακὸς ἐξετάραξε. Quidni ποσὶν ἐξετάραξε ? Κακός 15 feeble and an unneceffary expletive, § iv. 2. Navius. To a modern writer of Greek, we cannot recommend the ufe of the penultimate of this word long. No poetic licence is admiffible here. No rules of analogy whatever justify it. Many accurate editors of Homer, where the metre makes it neceffary, exhibit the word with the infertion of, and write it vavives. Dr. Clarke, though he does not adopt this reading in his text, fuggests the idea, that in Ionia the word was written (geminato). Homer frequently ufes it fhort, as οὐδέ τι λίην Οὕτω νώνυμος ἐςιν. ὅπως ἀπὸ φῦλον ὅληται Νώνυμον ἐξ Ιθάκης ̓Αρκεισιν ἀντιθέσιο. Od. xiii. 238. Od. xiv. 188. § ν. 1. 2. Οξέρε καλαμοςεφέος κελάδωσα χελιδών. The prepofi tion, or ano, ought to have been inferted here. Dr. Coote and Mr. Sparke are of our opinion. We applaud Mr. Weston for ufing gope in the mafculine gender. 1. 4. The contracted fecond future active avery, in this line, is, we fear, not to be defended by any precedent. To ἀνέγξομαι for ἀνεγειρομαι, we are not unaccuftomed. vi. 1. 2. Aina. The propriety of the circumflex on the penultimate diphthong of fome words ending in §, has occafioned a difference of opinion among scholars. We take this opportunity of exprefling our regret, that a custom so di rectly rectly militating against the regular canons of accentuation, fhould have been received at all. Where the genitive cafe is long, as in the inftances of xngu, poi, &c. we are clear that the practice (originating probably in the conceit of fome early tranfcriber) hould be difcontinued. These are our fentiments, and they are not unfupported by high authority. (See Dr. Clarke's obfervations on the word oud, Il. ii. 267.) ` If xüλxğ is admiffible, ha fhould alfo have been circumflexed. §iv. 1. Ib. 1. 3. s yaioules-nyor. "How jocund did they drive!" Is not the English here too literally followed for the beauty of Greek idiom? S viii. 1, 2. Μή τις ἐξῶν ἀρχῆς ἀθερίζοι. To the ufe of the prohibitory adverb, with an optative mood, in this inftance, we decidedly object; and we believe the rule to be without exception, that when un relates to prefent tranfactions, it is invariably joined with the imperative mood; when to future, with the fubjunctive; when to paft, only with that which the grammarians, not very happily, call optative. Ισχεσθ', Αργείοι· μὴ βάλλετε, κἔροι Αχαιών. Il. iii. 82. Μή σε, γέρον, κοίλῃσιν ἐγὼ παρὰ νηυσὶ κιχέιω. Μή νύ τοι ἐ χράισμῃ σκῆπῖρον καὶ σέμμα θειο. Il. i. 26. Left they should have wanted food. Δέισας δ ̓ ἐκ θρόνε ἄλτο, καὶ ἴαχε· μή οἱ ὕπερθε II. v. 202, Il. xx. 62. Left Neptune Should have riven the earth above him, and his manfions fhould have been laid open to men and gods. Six. 4. ados, diffyllable, is clearly inadmiffible, as denoting the grave. It can only be understood as the neuter noun, ufed fometimes inftead of aidùs, pudor, and is in that cafe always written with a circumflex. In § xi. 4. the word 'Aidéos is ufed with less impropriety; but we fear Mr. Weston has no authority for altering the of the poetic and mythological 'Aïdwveus, into, or (except a very dubious analogy) for ufing the firft fyllable long. ய Sx. 1. 4. Toy Oss. The infertion of the article is not Τὸν Θεὸν ὕψισον. only elegant, but abfolutely neceffary. § xii. 1. ἐρημαίῳ ἐνὶ χώρῃ. The word εξημαιος has a feminine inflection; and Mr. W. in his next edition, will not err in pling the dative ἐξημαίᾳ, Through the whole of this ftanza we regret the abfence of the conditional particle. Line 3 might stand thus: *Ος σκήπτρῳ λαδισι δυνήσατ ̓ ἂν ἐμβασιλέυειν. § xiii. 2. ἀιώνων ἐνάροισι κεκασμένον. Is the word back ever ufcd, except when it denotes the spoil of those flain in battle?. Its derivation from ivάigw, occido, gives confiderable weight to this remark. § χν. Ωδ' Αμήν τις κείται, &c. The introduion of the . names of Hampden, Milton, and Cromwell, in the Greek, whether with or without inflection, is uncouth and barbarous in the extreme; and the stanza, in its original form, cannot be tranflated. The anonymous Latin writer already mentioned, feems to have been aware of this infuperable diffi culty. Rufticus hic forfan Cato, Virgiliufve quiefcat: Difcolor at fatum, mens licèt una, fuit. Λόγοι Επιτάφιοι xvii. 1. Tois &g' mindwa. Why is the negative particle connected with the following word? We fufpect a fimilar erratum in § xxi. 2; but the equivoque between op ', and the plural nominative, creates a degree of perplexity to the reader. The fingular number, as coupled with iv, is certainly preferable. Ib. 2. ̓Αλλὰ κ' ατασθαλίησι, The elifion of καὶ, cannot take place before the fhort fyllable with which the word arαodariyor The two fyllables must coalefce; and then xτασθαλίησι will be neceflarily long. commences. xviii. xv andis. The infertion of the article is here abfolutely neceffary, to make the word andès substantive. § xix. 4. Ἡσυχίε βιότοιο— ἄγκος ἔρημον. fortunate than the application of go to vale of life." Let us fuggeft a fmall but pofition, and read the line Nothing can be lefs the cool fequeftered very important tranf Ησυχία βιότοιο κατ' ἥξιμον ἄγκος ἰόντες. Sxxiii. 3, 4. We quote the two following lines as eminently beautiful; and we by no means object to the attic accufative. Τῆς φύσεως φωνὴν ἔτ ̓ ἀκέομεν ἐξ ἀΐδας ; Ζώει ἔτι, φλέγεταί τε καὶ ἐν σποδῷ ἀκάματον πῦρο Ev'n from the tomb the voice of nature cries, |