not having noticed it, I am no more culpable than Ernesti, who is just as ignorant, or as careless, as myself. "P. 201. Diogenes, the Laertian: we do not deny that there are critics, who suppose (for there is no evidence to the fact) that Agrios means born at Laerta; but, as the point is yet sub judice, we do not admire the assumption." However much "the point" may be " yet sub judice," I conceive that, without entering into any discussion upon the matter, I may express my opinion by using the words "the Laertian," and must beg the Reviewer for the future, not to consume his ink and his oil in presuming that I assume such "assumptions" without any reason. I do not know what the Reviewer means by saying "that there is no evidence to the fact, that Aaέgrios means born at Laerta:" I certainly am not able to procure the parish register, if any happened to be kept in Cilicia, to authenticate the fact; but for my own part, I deem the following evidence to be sufficient for my purpose. Stephanus περὶ ἐθνῶν καὶ πολέων has the following passage, Λαέρτης, Κιλικίας χωρίον, Στράβων ιδ. ̓Αλέξανδρος δὲ καὶ ὄρος, καὶ πόλιν φησί· τὸ ἐθνικὸν, Λαερτίνος, ἄμεινον δὲ Λαέρτιος, where Thomas De Pinedo observes, " Ex hoc oppido fuisse Diogenem Laertium, cujus circumferuntur De Vitis Philosophorum Libri X. εικοτολογοῦσι criticorum filii:” again under Χολλίδαι, Δῆμος τῆς Λεοντίδος φυλῆς, ὁ δημότης, Χολλίδης Διογένης δ' ὁ Λαερτιεὺς ἐν δευτέρω φιλοσόφου Ιστορίας, Χολλιδεύς φησι. Lucas Holstenius in his Note et Castigationes, says upon the first passage, Diogenes Λαέρτιος, qui tamen Λαερτιοὺς dicitur infra ν. Χολλίδαι.” Abraham Berkelius's note upon the same passage is this: "Deducit Noster ab h. v. Λαερτίνος, et Λαέρτιος, sed miror eum tertium Ausgrùs non addidisse, quod habet in v. Xoxλidas." 1. A. Fabricius in the Bibliotheca Græca, 1. 1v, Hamburgi, 1708. p. 600, has the following remarks: "Diogenes, a patria Laerte, Cilicia oppido, Laertius, sive, ut Vossius in Arte Grammatica, p. 11. et alibi appellat, Laertiensis: sunt qui a patre Laerte vocatum contendunt, ut H. Valesius ad Excerpta Peiresc. p. 41. Diogenes Laertii filius scribit &c., quo sensu Ulysses possit dici Laertius, qui Homero Aagriάons, Laertæ filius, Διογενές Λαερτιάδη πολυμήχαν' Οδυσσεύ, "Hinc at apud Pindarum De Bello Trojano Laertes ipse, Ulyssis pater, Laertius appellatur Eello Laertius atrox: vicissim Diogenes noster Eustathio ad Iliad. p. p. 854. dicitur AugTs alterius Q. Laertii, sub Augusto Imperatore clari, mentio in veteri Inscriptione apud Gruterum p. 299., sive legendum Lartius ut p. 99. et 191. quod idem nomen est: C. Laertius VOL. I. NO. II. 2 H* Sabinianus in alia vet. Inscriptione apud Fabrettum p. 251.: porro Agrios pro Patronymico, a Laerta Cilicia usurpatum (non minus quam Agrixòs apud Galenum VII. De Simplic. Medicin. T. 2. ed. Basil. p. 89. vel Ausgrins, ut in Eustathii loco jam laudato rescribebat, præter mentem Eustathii, ut existimo, Tan. Faber, vel AαɛptisÙs), quin elegantius etiam dici, quam Aasgrivos, quod solum isto in loco memorat, testatur Stephanus Byz. in Λαέρτης: eidem in Χολλίδας laudatur Diogenes noster ὁ Λαερτιεὺς ἐν δευτέρῳ φιλοσόφου Ιστορίας, qui locus ni sit corruptus, Laertium a patria sic dictum esse, cum viris doctissimis mihi persuadeo." P. 281. It is, as we have demonstrated, a great fault with Mr. Barker, that he avoids considering the context of the passages, which he quotes: so he says: The primary meaning of mactare is augere: the word occurs much more frequently in its primary meaning than many scholars may be disposed to think: thus, Virgil En. 3. v. 118. says, Meritos aris mactavit honores :' if Mr. B. would have taken the trouble to read the two succeeding lines, he would have discovered that mactavit is not in his (f. 1. its) primary sense for auxit, Sic fatus, meritos aris mactavit honores, Taurum Neptuno, taurum tibi, pulcher Apollo, where Heyne properly says, "Honores, docte pro victimis, quæ in "It is, as we have demonstrated, a great fault with Mr. B. that A be adopted, shows the necessity of validi, which includes both the sexes. In the 80th page, upon another passage of Tacitus, I observe that "my interpretation is supported by the context." In p. 112, upon another passage of Tacitus (Literarum secreta viri pariter ac feminæ ignorant, c. 19.) of which the meaning has been the subject of much dispute among the critics, because they have overlooked the context, I say, "that this passage relates to clandestine correspondence is evident from the words, which immediately follow, paucissima in tam numerosa gente ADUL-. TERIA." In p. 239, I again appeal, upon another passage of Tacitus, to the context. In p. 199, upon a passage of the Prometheus, I observe that "the interpretation of the second Schol. is the proper one, as the whole context of this chorus, which turns upon the opposition of Prometheus to Jupiter, proves." In p. 218, upon another passage of the Prometheus, by attending to the context, I have overthrown the interpretation, which Mr. Blomfield prefers. In p. 341, upon another passage of the Prometheus, I have, by appealing to the context, again overthrown the interpretation, which Mr. Blomfield puts upon the word ons. These few instances are sufficient to enable the reader to decide upon the propriety of the censure, which the Reviewer has passed upon me in this respect. The Reviewer says that, "if Mr. B. would have taken the trouble to read the two succeeding lines" [in the passage of Virgil En. 3. v. 118.], "he would have discovered that mactavit is not in his (f. 1. its) primary sense for auxit, Sic fatus, meritos aris mactavit honores, Taurum Neptuno, taurum tibi, pulcher Apollo, Nigram Hiemi pecudem, Zephyris felicibus albam, where Heyne properly says, Honores docte pro victimis, quæ in Deorum honorem mactantur." Mr. Barker "has taken the trouble to read the two succeeding lines," and he "has not discovered that mactavit is not used in his (its) primary sense for auxit ;" for the context is decidedly in the favor of my idea. If mactavit is not used here in its primary, it must be used in its metaphorical sense, that is, it means he slew the due honors upon the altars, and I shall be content to receive this, the common interpretation, more favorably, when analogous passages have been produced from any writer to vindicate this use of these words, "mactare honores,” to slay honors: it is to no purpose that Heyne says "Honores docte pro victimis, quæ in Deorum honorem mactantur;" for this language is to take for granted what I should wish to be proved, and Heyne's authority will go no farther with me than his arguments carry him, though I have the highest possible opinion of his learning, his taste, and his judgment. Now my interpretation recommends itself by its own propriety, and is defended by the strict meaning of the word, "He heaped the due honors upon the altars, (which were) a bull for Neptune," &c. The Reviewer concludes this paragraph with these words, "But our patience is nearly exhausted with correcting such school-boy absurdities" Yes; they are "such school-boy absurdities," as I shall be always glad to offer to the notice of the real scholar. The matter, which is contained in this very article, upon this word mactare, was unknown to scholars like Muretus, A. Schottus, and Ernesti, as the reader will see by turning to the Varia Lectiones of the first, to the Nodi Ciceroniani aliorumque Libri IV. of the second, and to the Clavis Ciceroniana of the third. It is information, which is not given with sufficient lexico graphical accuracy in Gesner's Thesaurus Lingua Latina. P. 261. The following morceau, whether we consider Mr. B.'s proficiency in sense, or metre, is possibly without a rival: Propertius talks of a potent herb, which he calls Promethea, the effect of which was to produce antipathy and hatred, Invidia SUMUS; num me Deus obruit? an quæ Secta Prometheis dividit herba jugis? sumus, Mr. B. most unblushingly gives us with the su long, and the ablative case Prometheis he absolutely changes into a Greek nominative, and applies it to herba-a potent Promethean herb indeed! The reviewer, who has not condescended to inform us that fuimus occurs in the original, and not noticed the error of secta for lecta, has artfully concealed the fact, just as in the case of the quotation from Horace, (which occurs in a note of Spanheim) that these lines of Propertius are cited in the quotation, which is there made from Preston's Notes and Observations on the Argonautics of Apollonius Rhodius, subjoined to his Translation, a book, which the reviewer has never seen: else he would have known that the passage is actually so quoted in it. I perceived the error at the time, but I did not happen to have a Propertius at hand, and my memory did not readily suggest to me the very words of the author, but the meaning of the passage was obvious. The reviewer says that "the ablative case Prometheis I absolutely change into a Greek nominative, and apply it to herba." Here the reviewer seems to have reached an inaccessible covert, and must have congratulated himself upon his security. 1. I admit that my language is inaccurate, when I say that Propertius calls this herb Promethea; he does not call it so, he merely alludes to the herba Promethea. 2. But I deny that "the ablative case Prometheis, I absolutely change into a nominative, and apply it to herba ;" for, if I had so applied it, I should have said not that "Propertius talks of a potent herb, which he calls Promethea," but that "Propertius talks of a potent herb, which he calls Prometheis." P. 384. We are obliged to Mr. Barker for the information that Tè épou is very analogous to our expression of over the hills, and far away, which is proverbial, and a parallel passage is cited from Campbell's Gertrude of Wyoming, But who is he, that yet a dearer land The passage does not occur in p. 584, but in p. 365. : so extraordinarily inaccurate is the reviewer! We ought certainly to be obliged to Mr. B. for the information; for I durst venture to swear that the reviewer did not know that use of the preposition úng. The manner, in which I introduce the quotation, is this: "The spirit of the passage (which I am discussing) depends upon the meaning of rep, which the commentators have not understood: ὑπὲρ occasionally denotes a great distance, and ὑπὲρ χέρσου is equivalent to our very analogous expression over the hills, and far away, which is proverbial, and which has been well introduced by the very beautiful poet, Campbell, into his second poem, But who is he, that yet a dearer land the scene of this tender and elegant poem is laid in America, and the dearer land,' of which he speaks, is Scotland, or, in his own language, Albyn, and the one passage forms a comment upon the other." I cite a passage from Salmasius's Pliniana Exercitationes in C. J. Solini Polyhistora, to illustrate by examples this use of up, and then remark that "this interpretation removes the difficulty, with which every other interpretation must be incumbered, of connecting πελάγους είναισιν νοτίας ἄλμας with διὰ λίμνας, to which these words refer, and which they ought else to have immediately followed, while it gives an uncommon spirit to the passage;" and I call upon Professor Monk either to adopt this interpretation, or to produce a better interpretation. On another passage of the Hippolytus Mr. Barker authoritatively affirms, I cannot assent to this interpretation of the Professor, and conceive that my own is much more satisfactory.' This passage occurs in p. 374. The reviewer has artfully avoided all mention of the quotation, which immediately follows, and which destroys the supposed authoritativeness of the affirmation; the quotation is this, "Nescio quo pacto suum cuique pulcrum est: sic se res habet, te tua, me mea delectant." Why does any critic propose a new interpretatlon of, or a new conjecture upon, a passage? it may, indeed, be intended to exhibit a specimen of his own ingenuity, but will the reviewer be prepared to say that the critic, whose judgment is dissatisfied with the opinions of other critics, may not, without any outrage upon modesty, express his dissent from every other interpretation or conjecture, and may |