nefti pronounces to be the true lection. The Author of the life of Homer, however, whom Gale, Clark and others, fuppose to have been Dionyfius Halicarnaffenfis, cites the former of these paffages, P. 340. Ed. Galei, Amft. 1688, and reads τασης for ɛaas, which, as Clark has remarked, must be pronounced ons. This seems to be the genuine reading; and might readily be admitted into the text, if it is fupported by manufcripts. Euftathius alfo, as Ernefti obferves, habuiffe says videtur.

It should be

ΠΕΡΙ

EI, instead of EI KE, with a SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. Iliad A. 81. El περ γαρ τε χολον- -ΚΑΤΑΠΕΨΗΙ. -So in Iliad A. 261. KE. yag ΕΙ περ γας τ' αλλοι -ПINQEIN, and in Iliad M. 245. ΕΙ περ γαρ τ' αλλοι ΚΤΕΙΝΩΜΕΘΑ-the reading fould be E1 πες γας Κ' αλλος. A Subjunctive properly follows Eep yap xe, in Iliad A. 580. M. 302. Odyff. B. 246. . 355.

Here is a manifeft blunder. AE is unneceffary, but the frequent occurrence of ♪aule, in the Iliad and Odyssey, might eafily occafion its admiffion. Homer alfo, (ni fallor) would have written: δε ποτ' αυτε, and not ει ποτε δ' αυτε . After the Canons, which have been laid down, the mode of correction is obvious: EI TOTE K* As Exε and E. xev, CUTE. however, are frequently in juxtapofition, the reading might have been: Ei XE TOT CUTE, ➡KEJ AUTE or xaurs may be found in Iliad Z. 73. ☺. 26. I. 135. 277. P. 319, and N. 619.

Iliad E. 258.

- ΕΙ γεν ἑτερος γε ΦΥΓΗΣΙΝ.

Read EI K' & Quynow. In Villoifon's Edition of the Venice Homer and Scholiafts, the lection is a ytepos ye. It might be EIKE Quynow, which would obviate the double yɛ.

EL

Iliad O. 16.- - Ε1 αυτε κακογραφίης αλεγεινής
Πρωτη ΕΠΑΥΡΗΑΙ.

Read K' ATTE, which indeed affifts the metre.

Odyf. Π. 138. ΕΙ και Λαέρτη αυτην όδον αγγελος ΕΛΘΩ

Put a fuller ftop at the end of the preceding verfe, and read H afa for E xa, which is given as a various lection in Clark's note, in whose Edition, it is remarkable, that the true readings are not uncommonly the rejected readings.

b Vol. III. p. 1675. 9. Edit. Rom.

No validity can be allowed to Odyff. I. 311. and 344.

Συν δ' όγε δ' αυτε ένα μαρίας ἁπλισσατο δείπνο,

Which the Commentators allow to be wrong. Ernefti's fuppofition, that the repetition of de, biatus vitandi caufa fieri potuit, merits no attention.

Iliad Φ. 576. ΕΙ περ γαρ φθαμενος μιν η ΟΥΤΑΣΗΙ, ΜΕ ΒΑΛΗΙΣΙΝ.

Read EI

yap

KEN

Iliad X. 86. ΕΙ περ γαρ σε ΚΑΤΑΚΤΑΝΗΙ,

The Harl. MS. rightly gives, κατακτενει. Ου σε τ' εγωγε Κλαυσο par-follows; where OUTE σ'εywye feems preferable.-There appear to be many paffages of Homer, in which TE" locum non fuum occupat," as the learned Annotator on Toup in Suid. Vol. 1v. p. 489. observes, on a fragment of Callimachus.

Iliad X. 191. El περ τε ΛΑΘΗΙΣΙ

Here, and in Odyss. A. 188. EI #ep тe yeport' EIPHAI, for tɛ read KE.

In this lift must not be included Odyff. E. 221. El d'autis PAIHIEI-for Pao is not only Subjunctive, but also Indicative, according to the Mos fectendi Indicativi poetis ufitatus ; qui dicitur a Grammaticis Rheginorum fuiffe dialecti, to ufe the words of Valckenaer, whofe note on μņot for μένει well merits perusal, Adnot. in Adoniazuf. Theocrit. p. 254.-Nor muft Iliad г. 288.

ΕΙ δ' αν εμοι τιμην Πριαμος, Πριαμοιο τε παίδες,

Τινειν εκ ΕΘΕΛΩΣΙΝ,

for Homer uses E. av or Ei Tep av, in the fame way, as Exɛ, with a fubjunctive Mood. So in Iliad 2. 273.

ΕΙ δ' ΑΝ εμοις επέεσσι ΠΙΘΩΜΕΘΑ,

where the Harleian MS. reads Jopeda, though as, with an Optative, does not occur in Homer.-E. Tep av with a Subjunctive is to be found in Iliad r. 25. E. 224. 232.

χημα

-muft

Many examples of the Praf. Ind. Rheginorum may be found in Homer.- Thus, Odyf. A. 204. Ε1 περ δεσματ' ΕΧΗΙΣΙ· not be folicited.- -In Iliad K. 225. μενος δ', είπερ τε νοησι inftead of νοηση-feems preferable to είπερ με νόηση, as εχησε for έχει, and for νοησι voel, are produced as examples of the Ιβύκειον, ΟΓ. 'Paywww, in the Etym. M. V. Пaμ¤amos. Nono is also mentioned by Euftathius, in Odys. H. p. 1176. 61. Ed. Rom. which passage is cited, from the Commentary on Iliad H. by Valckenaer, Adon. loc.cit. This is a typographical error, as the reference is rightly given, in his notes on Lesbonax, p. 179.—Orpuvņow occurs, in the Indicative, after i μn, Od. E. 373.

d

To evince the propriety of correcting these few paffages, it need only be obferved, that E. x is used by Homer, with a Subjunctive Mood, in above forty different places. E ne however, is fometimes joined to a future Indicative, apparently for want of a future Subjunctive. Iliad B. 258. Ei x2eti xxnoquar. K. 449. E με απολύσομεν, Odyff. r. 216. Ει κε αποτίσεται.-Ε. 417. Ει κ

As thefe inftances of E. with a fubjunctive are fo rare in Homer, Milton probably fuppofed, that the corrupt paffages in the Tragedies, in which fuch a conftruction may be found, would defend his Et ones.

e This ufage of the Indicative is termed oxua Kopivion by Lefbonax, p. 178and by the Etym. M. V. E¡μi, p. 301. In the Sch. on Iliad B. 72. Should not the reading be Κορινθίων συζολη for Ιωνων

ότι παρανήξομαι-Π. 238. Ει κεν-δυνησομεθ Χ. 76. Ε. κε απωσομεν.

254. ει κεν αλλήσομεν.

Tov evromov.] O Evvouos, qui eft intra legem, of course does not occur in Homer.-The word Enouos, however, may be found in the Tragic Writers; but they do not apply it to perfons.

Efchylus, Suppl. 389.

Δικας 8 τυγχάνεσιν εννομα,

whence Euripides, Phan. 1645. Ed. Valck. appears to have derived his Evropov dienv.-In the fame play alfo, 408.

Αδικα μεν κακοίς, ὅσια δ' εννομοις.

And again 574, where the Scholiaft explains Evopos by OxTopes, -~Вgotos d', oi yas TOT' ησαν εννομοι.

In the Chaph. 481. likewife:

Ούτω γαρ αν σοι δαιτες εννομοι βροτών.

In Sophocles, Oedip. Tyrann. 330.
Ουκ εννομ. ειπες,

The application of Evvopos to Perfons appears to be peculiar to the later Writers.-St. Paul to the Corinth. 1. ix. 21. fays, εvvo→ Mos Xps:-Lucian, Jupit. Trag. Vol. II. p. 671, evropos el daunyogos, and Libanius, in a very laconic Epiftle, 'O xporns evropos. Epift. DC. p. 288. Ed. Wolf.

Evropos, however, is applied to objects without life, by the ancient Greeks, and, indeed, by the Recentiores :-Eschines, xala Tiμαρχ. vol. v. p. 31, Ed. Reifk. Την ίσην και την εννομον πολιτείαν. and κατα Κτησιφ. Vol. vi. p. 415. κηρύξαι το πατριον και εννομον κήρυγμα τετο. Xenophon, K. II. p. 651. Ed. Hutchins. waha και ειθισμένα, και εννομα λέγοντος εμε. Diodorus Sic. Vol. 1. p. 117. δεναι την παρθενον εις γάμον εννομον.-Several other inftances may be found in Dio. Caffius; to which may be added Lucian, de Salta. Vol. II. p. 267. ubi variant interpretes.-Thucydides, iv. p. 272. VI. p. 403.-Pollux v111. 92.-But to accumulate authorities is unneceffary. Evropos is not an Epic word, in the fignification of a juft and irreproachable man.

Ουδε τιν ανδρών δεινον όλως δράσαντα.] Ολως, which appears of lit tle fervice in this paffage, is not in Homer, and very rarely, if ever, in the Tragedies. In RHESUS, 737. for ' & σε yby wonw y Aws, Mufgrave has rightly from a manufcript edited ropes, which occurs in two other paffages of this play, and once in a Chorus of the ION, 695. and fometimes in Efchylus.

Aga is not used in the Iliad. In the Odyff. O. 323. mapadęwwσr, or vaga dewwo, and 332. odpwwow may be found.-The formula, Spar Tiva Sevov, may be termed Homeric, as Homer fays in II. r. 354. Ξεινοδόκον κακα ῥεξαι but Apar, with a double accusative,

f To these paffages must not be added a defective correction of Canter, Suppl. 945.

8 Pindar's ZUYTERE SELV Evopov must not be omitted; where ewquor is used adverbialiter, in the fenfe of Legitime.

is perfectly in the ftyle of the dramatic Writers. Euripides alone will afford a fufficiency of examples. HECUB. 253. Agas d'oude pas EU. OREST. 581. τι μ' αν έδρασ ̓ ὁ καθανων. ΗIPPOL. 178. τι σ' εγω δρασω. IPH. AvL. 371. · δραν τι κεδνον βαρβαρους. ION. 1267. Aparaι Ti nanov тous weλas. From these two laft paffages, it appears, that Milton fhould have written: The ardowy TI δεινον δράσαντα, which is more manifeft from MED. 56ο: Ου τι δρα G; devov for after day, the Adjective in the fingular number is accompanied by T, but in the plural it is ufed alone, as in. Oreft. 570. deacas d' syw deva. Iph. Taur. 1177.-deiva yap deδρακετον. Bacch. 667. Ως δεινα δρωσι. Ele&tr. 992. Και δεινα δράσω.

Thus

2. σοφωτατον-καρηνον-] It fhould be σοφωτατε κάρηνον. Homer has napnva Tpwwv, in Iliad A. 158. for Tpwes. -napava ardour, in the fame Book, v. 500. for avopes, and ανεκύων αμενηνα κάρηνα, for vexvas aμerves, in Odyff. K. 521. to which paffage Ariftophanes alludes, in a fragment of his Aaraλes, preserved by Galen, in the preface to his των Ιπποκρατες γλώσσων εξηγησις. -Neither καρήνον, xapn, nor xparos are used fimply in the fenfe of ArSpwоs by Homer.

Ισθι ρηιδίως αφελοιο. ] With refpect to the expreflions, Ρηϊδίως αφεAsodai, or Phidias apa, they are ftrictly Homeric. Iliad П. 689. —apeiketo vienv Pnidas, which is repeated in II. P. 177. In Odyss. 1. 3 13. is Ρηϊδίως αφελων θυρεον μεγαν.

Iodi apeλoo is, however, utterly indefenfible, for it is neither Homeric nor Attic Greek: it is the language neither of verse, nor of profe. Milton should have written o apeλqueros, which would have but an awkward appearance in an Hexameter verse, or rather, perhaps, apaipnooutros, in the future.

1

Should it be afferted, that is proposed to be parenthetical, which does not feem natural, nor to have been the Author's intention, ftill after Ολεσης the reader would rather expect a Subjunctive mood.

This ufage of the Participle in the Nominative Cafe after verba γνωρισικα has been ably illustrated by Valckenaer in his notes on Herodotus, III. p. 194, and on the HIPPOLYTUS of Euripides, 304. p. 196.h

To the examples, which he produces in these notes, from the Tragedies, may be added Euripides in Hippol. 524. Tarr' av QoEndo-Helen. 460. Oxangos 109' wv.So alfo is ισω ufed. Euripides in Alceft. 148. Ιστω νυν, ευκλεης γε κατθανεμενη, γένη Τ in Melanipp. apud Stob. LXXIV. p. 451.-Grot. LXXVI. p. 331. Έστω δ' αφρών ων which words are allo found in a fragment of the Alcmena, ap. Stob. XLIII. p. 302. Grot. XLV. p. 175. In the fame way alfo Is. Euripides, Androm. 727. T'aλλ'” OUTES 158 μn-. DEVOS BEATIONES.-Sed de his fatis fuperque.

The reader may also confult Henry Stephens's Index to his Thefaurus, P. 1094.

In Homer Io9. is twice used in the Odyffey, B. 356. A. 223. Is occurs much more frequently, and Ira, in Iliad B. 485. ¥. 276. Odyff. H. 211. . 110; but in all these paffages, the construction of the fentence is fuch, as not to require a Participle in the Nominative Cafe, after the Verb.

Milton appears to have had the common idiom of the Tragedies, with regard to thefe yapisa verba, floating on his mind, though he has failed in expreffing his ideas. That he was not unacquainted with the proper ufage of od with a Participle, may furely not unfairly be concluded from a paffage in his Paradife Loft, IX. 791.

Greedily fhe ingorg'd, without restraint,

And KNEW not EATING death.

Richardfon, in his notes, has obferved, that this is a Greek phrase, and used often by the Latins. He then quotes Oppian, Halieut. II. 106. It is, however, very remarkable, that Milton fhould adopt this Grecifm in his English poetry, and neglect it in a Greek compofition.

Apo, if, in other refpects, it were right, might be used fe ar, nec in optandi fenfu, according to the practice of Homer, if the prefent copies are correct.-It is fcarcely neceffary to observe, that, in the Tragedies, an Optative without an always expreffes a wish, but when av is added, potentialem habet fignificationem.

-vsepov audi] If Aul. be an Adverb of time, as well as of place, after rapor it feems unneceffary. In Homer, Iliad r. 127. indeed, Juno fays of Achilles, that in the prefent day's conflict, he thall be preferved from danger, but that

- ύσερον αυτε τα πείσεται, άσσα οἱ αισα

Γεινομένω επένησε λινῳ·

-for

In this paffage, however, aurs feems improperly added to ¿seper; for in all the other places, in which vsepov and aute or autis,————— sepor av is not to be found-occur united in Homer, the repetition of an action, which has already happened, or the fequel or continuation of one commenced, but not yet finished, is implied.* Thus in II. A. 26. Agamemnon fays to Chryfes :

Μη σε, γερον, κοίλησιν εγω παρα νηυσι κιχείων

Η νυν δηθύνοντό, η ΥΣΤΕΡΟΝ ΑΥΤΙΣ LOUTO,

i The adoption of this conftruction by the Latins, in verfe and profe, has been pointed out by Davies, in his notes on Cicero's Tufculan questions, IV. 15. p. 294. Ed. 4to. 1738. and by others.

k It may, perhaps, he urged in defence of this paffage, that, though Achilles had not yet fuffered, what he was to fuffer, yet as his deftiny was fixed, Homer might confider his death as the certain fequel of an action commenced, but not yet finished; at leaft fufficiently to vindicate the ufage of aure, in the sense of conti nuation, though not of repetition.

1 Euftathius reads Audi,-Ernefti, Villoison and others, AUTIs, which also appears in the rare Edition of Luc. Ant. Junta, 12mo. 1537. celebrated by DorvilleCrit. Vann. 390. depreciated by Ernefti, Præf. Hom. X. and defended by Villoifon, Prolegom. in Hom. ex Cod, Venet, XLIV. Not, 1.—Autiç is furely right; and the Edi

tors