ὁ δ ̓ αὐτὸς μνημονεύει καὶ πλακίτα τινὸς ἄρτου, ἐν Γυναικείοις. Εἰς νύκτα μ ̓ αἰτιᾷ σὺν ἄρτῳ πλακίτᾳ. In ultimo fragmento με αἰτιᾷ habent Edd. primæ et MS. A. quod Casaubonus in μ' ἑστιᾷ mutavit, satis bene : sed melius, credo, reposuerim, μ' ἐσίτισεν ἄρτῳ πλακίτα. Præpositio σὺν plane aliena est ; mutatio autem, quam fieri velim, levissima est. Pene autem suspicor μ' ἐσιτίασεν, cujus tamen verbi exemplum in promtu non habeo. 7. Apollodorus ap. Stob. Εcl. Phys. p. 129, 33. Γοργύραν τοῦ ̓Αχέ ροντος γυναῖκα προσανέπλασαν, ἀπὸ τοῦ γοργῶς φαίνεσθαι τοῖς πολλοῖς τὰ ἐν Αίδου· καθὸ δὴ καὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου τιθηνὴν ὁ Σώφρων ὠνόμασεν. Μορμολύκαν Quæ huc retuli, quia in hoc Mimo plures inferiorum deorum nominati fuisse videntur. De ipsa voce μορμολύκαν præter Valckenaer. in Adoniaz. p. 347. et Ruhnken. ad Timæi Lex. p. 181. adjici potest Baccherius in Flaviss. Poet. p. 605. Unum addam exemplum ex Theodori Hyrtaceni Epistolis, MSS. Biblioth. Reg. Paris. Tom. v. p. 732. δάκνει καθὰ μορμῶ, λύκιον τι θηρίον, ubi legen dum esse censeo μορμολύκειον τί θηρίον. 8. Etymol. Μ. p. 717, ult. Σκιρωθῆναι, ἐπὶ τοῦ ῥύπου τοῦ σφόδρα ἐμμέ νοντος καὶ δυσεκπλύτου. Σώφρων ἐν τοῖς γυναικείοις τροπαίοις. πρὶν αὐτὰν τὴν νόσον εἰς τὸν μυελὸν σκιρωθῆναι. Sophronis τροπαΐοι nusquam alibi, quod sciam, citantur, neque unquam citaverat Etymologus. Repone, Σώφρων δ ̓ ἐν τοῖς γυναικείοις, τροπικῶς· metaphorice. Ex hoc mimo esse arbitror verba, quibus concepta fuisse videtur veneficæ exsecratio, amatorem devoventis; quale illud sage Theocriter, Οὕτω τοι καὶ Δέλφις ἐνὶ φλογὶ σάρκ ̓ ἀμαθύ In Heliodor. #thiop. vi. p. 379. ex venenata potione mulier quædam σπασμοῖς τε καὶ σφακελισμοῖς ὀξυτάτοις ἐπιέζετο. σφακελισμὸς autem est μυελού σῆψις. Comparari meretur Eurip. Hippol. 255. πρὸς ἀκρὸν μυελὸν ψυχῆς. Virgil. An. iv. 66. est mollis flamma medullas. Seneca Herc. Æt. 1220. cancer infirus meas Urit medullas. Petron. p. 573. exurit flamma medullas. idem propius p. 564. tabes tacitis concepta medullis. Vocem autem, quæ e rarioribus est, σκιρωθῆναι, non male reddideris, to be fired in grain. 9. Schol. in Nicandri Theriac. 862. καὶ Εὐφορίων ἀλεξίκακον φίς ῥάμνον. καὶ Σώφρων ὁμοίως ἀεὶ δὲ πρὸς φύλλοις ῥάμνου κρατιζόμεθα. quæ verba nihil dubito, quin ad hujusce Mimi veneficas referenda Porro verissime, ni fallor, emendo, ἀκρατιζόμεθα, vel potius ἀκρατισδόμεθα, jentamur. τὸ δὲ ἀκρατιεῖσθε, inquit Schol. ad Aristoph. Plut. 495. ubi vox occurrit, ἀντὶ τοῦ φαγεῖτε· ἀκρατισμὸς γὰρ λέγεται * Alciphron I. 23. p. 92. ὁ κρυμὸς δὲ εἰσεδύετο μέχρι μυελῶν αὐτῶν καὶ ὀστέων. To Tewivor Quysły. Plura exempla congerere, cum facile possem, tamen supersedeo. Emendationem autem nostram egregie confirmat Photius in Lex. Ράμνος, φυτὸν, ὃ ἐν τοῖς χοῦσιν ὡς ἀλεξιφάρμακον EMAZONTO ENOEN. quæ glossa, credo, rem ad liquidum perducit. ΙΙΙ. ΤΑΙ ΘΕΩΜΕΝΑΙ ΤΑ ΙΣΘΜΙΑ. seu potius ΤΑΙ ΙΣΘΜΙΑΣ ΔΩΣΑΙ. Hic Mimus semel tantum, quod sciam, apud scriptores, editos nominatim citatur. Auctor argumenti Adoniazantium Theocriti, quod in membrana Biblioth. Reg. Paris. invenerat Ruhnkenius, vulgavit Valckenaerius p. 188. inquit, wagenλace to wonμátiov EX TŴY παρὰ Σώφρονι θεμίνων τὰ Ἴσθμια. Pro θεμένων Valckenaerius reponit θεω pav. Atqui si Grammaticus Mimi titulum dederat, scripserat opinor, non bewμevæv, sed OAMENON, quæ forma Doriensis erat. Theocr. 23. Βάμες τῷ βασιλῆος ἐς ἀφνειῶ Πτολεμαίω, ΘΑΣΟΜΕΝΑΙ τὸν Αδωνιν. Ipse Sophron ap. Athen. III. p. 106. D. OAZAI MAN. et ap. Apollon. Dyscol. Exc. p. 425. Toúty láμela. hic spectatum sedeamus; quod ex hoc mimo desumtum est. Plura dabit Koen. ad Gregor. p. 100. Verum mihi quidem dubio vacat, Mimi titulum fuisse ΤΑΙ ΙΣΘΜΙΑΣAQZAI, unde Theocritus suum ΑΙ ΑΔΩΝΙΑΖΟΥΣΑΙ desumsit. Forsan etiam Mimus fuit ex ἀνδρείων, et nuncupatus est ΤΟΙ ΙΣΘΜΙAZTAI; sed hoc parum refert. Mimi personæ, sive mares sive feminæ fuerint, e Syracusis videntur Corinthum, Syracusarum, metropolin, commeasse, vicinos ludos spectatum. 2. Apud Apollon. Dyscol. Exc. p. 429. A. ὕμες δ' ἐπεγγυάμενοι θωκεῖτε. Nullus Mimi titulus citatur; sed ad 'Icurès manifesto pertinet. Atque hinc forsan colligamus, ludorum spectatores, quos repræsentaverat Sophron, viros fuisse, non feminas. Huic fragmento proxime præivit id quod supra citavi, Touro psa. this will be a good place for us to see from. cui respondit ywvoerns, the box-keeper, ὕμες δ' ἐπεγγυάμενοι θακεῖτε. Gentlemen, you must pay for your seats. Sed hæc mera est conjectura, quam tamen viris doctis arrisuram esse confido. Nescio an operæ pretium fuerit monuisse, iyyváμενοι Doricam formam esse pro ἐπεγγυώμενοι, uti ἀσάμενοι in Alco pro dovo, et pauca quædam ejusdem generis. 3. Etymol. Μ. p. 287, 50. Δρίφος Συρακούσιοι Φέρ' ὦ τὸν δρίφον. quæ verba Sophronis esse recte judicat Valckenaer. in Adon. P. 211. B. unde Theocritus "Ogn gov, Evvia, aura. Herodot. . 144. τῶν Περσέων οἱ πλείστου ἄξιοι, θρόνους θέμενοι—ἐκατέατο. having caused chairs to be brought. Eosdem Persas mox vocat Toùs diPgoPogsupévous: vid. Coraii not. ap. Larcher. Tom. III. p. 405.1 Atque hæc in præsens sufficiant. 1 Forsan vero legendum, φές ̓, ὦ τὰν δρίφον. OXFORD PRIZE ESSAY. « FUNERAL AND SEPULCHRAL HONORS" Οὐ γάρ τι νῦν γε καχθες, ἀλλ ̓ ἀεί ποτε SOPH. Ant. 456. Quisquis honos tumuli-quicquid solamen humandi. VIRG. ARGUMENT. Antiquity and universality of the custom-its apparent inconsistency—its origin— not from positive institution, but the natural feelings of mankind-Principles on which men wish for honors after death-Early and habitual associations-Men unable to despise, under any circumstances, what they have long been accustomed to prize highly-Tokens of honor-of love-and of remembrance from othersRegard for our bodies-Tendency of the mind to wander into futurity-Principles on which men confer honors on the dead-State of mind accompanying the loss of friends-Sympathy for the condition of the dead-Moderated grief not destitute of pleasure-Awe accompanying the contemplation of death-Causes co-operating partially-The impulse of nature a sufficient spring of action—and not opposed to reason, but distinct from it-Public honors-probably originating in the same causes-but continued from policy-Advantages flowing from mortuary honors-Monuments of illustrious men excite emulation among the few-and generous sentiment among the many-Monuments of private merit lead to universal imitation-Local attachment strengthened-Advantages involved in the practice itself-Refinement of sentiment-Alleviation of grief-Absurdities which having mingled with the funeral rites have given a color to the objections against them-The custom not degraded in itself—and, even thus incumbered, beneficial on the whole-divested of these absurdities by the introduction of ChristianityImperfections still attending it-Its honors capable of a more equal distribution. -Conclusion. THE manners and customs of mankind partake very largely of the nature of the basis on which they are founded; and exhibit among different nations, and in different periods, a variety, corresponding at once with the diversities and the inconstancy of human character. Numberless institutions, founded on local peculiarities, can florish only in particular countries: many others, being suited to the habits and prejudices of a particular age, prevail for a time, and then, with those that framed them, are buried in oblivion; while the usages of earlier times in general, from the imperfections inseparably attached to them, and the progressive improvement of society, are either newmodelled, or wholly abandoned in the lapse of centuries. The few, therefore, which have prevailed more generally among mankind, and have passed unaltered from age to age, may be supposed to have their root in the fixed principles of human nature; and receive a strong testimony to their fitness and expediency from the united voice of successive generations. The sanction thus derived from long-continued and universal observance belongs, in its fullest extent, to the custom of showing respect to the dead, by funeral solemnities and sepulchral honors. It is the growth of no particular country, confined to no age: it has prevailed as far as the human race has extended, and may be traced Vol. IV. No. VIIL I through every succeeding period in the history of man. If it had its origin in the simplicity and rudeness of primitive times, it is dignified in its maturity by the practice of the most polished nations. Nor has it been admitted only, as an inoffensive relic of antient superstition; but has long been avowedly sanctioned by the legislative power, and adopted as the most suitable medium for the expression of public gratitude. It is remarkable, however, that the honors assigned to the departed have not always found the same unqualified deference in the speculative judgments of men. As there is no nation which has dared to neglect them, so there is perhaps none in which they have been wholly unassailed by ridicule or censure. Their emptiness and vanity are in most languages pointed out by appropriated epithets. The profusion, the pomp, and the magnificence, which usually accompany their celebration, in themselves perhaps not wholly unexceptionable, appear, at first view, to gain a fresh accession of folly from a consideration of their objects. These being now retired beyond the reach of obloquy or applause, the honors bestowed on them at this period scem, at the best, to be ill-timed and misplaced; and have therefore, by the superficial, and the unfeeling, been regarded as an idle pageantry, unworthy of an improved and cultivated age, and suited rather to the childish sensibility of uncivilised life. The inference is at least plausible. It will therefore be no uninteresting speculation, to inquire what causes may have concurred to spread this practice through every age and country; and then to estimate its probable effects either on individuals or on society. And, first, we may safely determine, that it had not its origin in positive institution. Political science owes much to the observation of nature, and rarely builds but on the groundwork which she has laid. In the common feelings of the human race, there is a manifest tendency towards the introduction of this custom; and their immediate operation, as well as their remoter consequences, must have unfolded themselves to the view long before they could have been made the instruments of legislative wisdom. These feelings therefore will naturally engage our earliest attention. It might indeed be expected that the various objects which are pursued or avoided by men would be divested altogether of their hold on the passions, when viewed in reference to a period in which desire and aversion are alike extinguished. But human conduct receives impulse and direction from other principles beside the convictions of the understanding. Many are the impressions and modes of thought founded on long experience and rooted habits, which possess an influence equally strong, and far more widely diffused. They are not, like the maxims of reason, established among the few by slow and gradual advances; but date their origin in every breast from its earliest perceptions of pleasure and pain: and, being thus engrafted on the first feelings of the heart, acquire an ascendant which no subsequent efforts of reason can subdue. Few indeed of the objects of human pursuit please from a steady persuasion of their real importance. We desire them because they have once been accounted valuable; because we have been used to re gard them with pleasure; and their idea is blended in our minds with the agreeable impressions they before excited. Those who have been long devoted to the love of wealth, display their usual eagerness in amassing it after they have lost all relish for the enjoyments which it commands. It is by a similar illusion that we are pleased with the prospect of honors, which can then only be conferred when we shall be incapable of enjoying them. Having ever annexed the highest pleasure to the thought of distinction, we can never afterwards regard it without emotion. At every period, and under all circumstances, it still bears the pleasing character with which our fancy has invested it. The tumult of joy which it excites, anticipates and supersedes the exercise of reason; and ambition thus seeks to extend its authority over a period which lies beyond its proper limits. Closely allied to the thirst of honor is that other kindred feeling, by which we desire to plant our name and memory in the lasting love and regret of our friends. As to live without enjoying their regard and sympathy, is to want one of the most endearing bonds of life; so to quit the world without some hope that our loss will be lamented by them, and to leave behind us, among other memorials of past friendship, no claim upon their sorrow, would be perhaps even more afflictive to the sensibilities of our nature. Their regret after our death is retrospective affection; and if we have taken pleasure in the signs and expressions of their kindness during life, it is but a part of the same sentiment, to view in prospect with similar feelings their tokens of grief offered over our grave. The sense of their affection, when we could feel its presence, has taught us to set a value upon it. Let absence and temporary separation withdraw them from us, we desire (who is there that does not own this desire?) to hold the same place of affectionate esteem and remembrance in their heart. And in that long absence and wide separation caused by death, instead of relinquishing our title to the treasure that has been so dear to us, we crave to bequeath it, with all its rights and duties, in full possession to our memory. But if drawn from the hope of posthumous regard, there is still one ground upon which nature will make her last stand-the solicitude of holding a place in the remembrance, at least, of others. Our acquired habits of thinking cause us to recoil from the prospect of oblivion, which is annihilation in one of its most dreary and degrading forms. To be totally forgotten, to have our remains blended indiscriminately with the dust, without a record or a place, is so intolerable even to the minds of the lowest order, that the desire to avoid it has been able to wring from want some portion of its scanty supplies, and extort a provision from the rapacious habits of vice. To provide a coffin or a tomb-stone, the poor man will deny his need, and the prodigal his usual indulgence. Such sentiments, fanciful as they may appear, (are the genuine offspring of the social propensities of our nature. The illusion by which we feel concerned for the future disposal of our persons, is perhaps of a less generous complexion; though sometimes ennobled by an union with those more amiable affections which link man to society. The desire of being united in death with the objects of our |