« PreviousContinue »
The Professor informs us that he has included the word árs within brackets, because he conceives that it has intruded itself into its present seat from the conclusion of the preceding verse. We should prefer
--------- οινον γαρ πιείν
ψυχόμενον εν τω φρεατι, χιόνι συμμεμιγμένον. " The Professor has converted these Trochaic verses into Iambic, with no other alteration than the permutation of the second and third words. The common reading of the third verse is fessesguérov. He scans the whole verse in the following manner :
volo.l.oiluuuluuolue P. 131. A. Amphis :
καν ταύτα ποιής, ώσπερ Φράζω,
βύβακας αυτά γενέθαι. Instead of this word Búsaxes, which Professor S. has inserted from the Venetian manufcript, fome copies have βυβακάλους, and the editions read φιλοκαλως. We do not pretend to interpret it. In the following lines, Profeifor S. introduces αλουργή, without citing any authority for the ufe of it. The Venetian manufcript reads φασιν, inftead of φάσ', τα thefe verfes :
δειπνείν δ' άνδρας βούτυρον φασ',
αυχμεροκόμας, μυριoπληθείς. The true reading is probably βουτυροφάγους, In the fame fragment we read:
πίνναι, λεπάδες, μύες, όσχεο,
κτίνες, όρκυνες, &c. Professor S. endeavours to restore the metre hy reading hebés r', ősesa ; in which three words there are five faults. In the firit place, the first syllable of revis is short: secondly, an Attic comic poet would write püs, in the contracted form : thirdly, the conjunctive particle is improper in this place : fourthly, the last fyllable of ospea is long by polition, as coming before xtéves: fifthly, the Attic writers generally, if not always, write oresc. All these errors may be avoided by reading μυς, όςρεια. Ρ. 161. A. Antiphanes :
των Πυθαγορικών δ' ενέτυχον άθλιοι τινες, &c. This elegant lambic is the production of Professor S. The common reading is dè tugor. We presume that the whole verfe should appear as follows: " των Πυθαγορικών δ' άτυχον άθλιοι τινές, &c.
P. 165. B. Phrynichus :
έσιν δ' αυτούς γε φυλάττεθαι των νυν χαλεπώτατον έργον.
γελώσι. We give these tetrameter Anapæltics as they are written in the Venetian manuscript, without pretending to correct them. Profefior S. has arranged them in another manner, with some interpolations. In his dispofition, not one of them, except the first, can be scanned. Ρ. 166. C. Axionicus :
--...-. ο Πυθόδηλος ούτος [read oύτoσι]
αποτυμπανισχας κωτά πόδας πορεύεται In thefe corrupt lines, we conceive ασωτότατος to be a glofs on ισοβαλλιον. Profeffor S. reads ασωτέστατος, which is certainly wrong. For αποτυμπανισχας he fubftitutes από τυμπάνου 'Ισχας, conceiving the latus to be as legitimate in lambic as in Hexameter verses. P. 224. D. Amphis :
λαβείν τ' απόκρισιν αν επερωτά τις, και
προς τους, &c. As the first of these verses wants a syllable, Profeffor S. inserts to after är. We believe that a much neater correction has been offered :
λαβείν τ' απόκρισιν ών άν επερωτα, &c. P. 226. A. Alexis :
ου γέγονε κρείττων νομοθέτης του πλουσίου
ης είπε τιμής, &c. We presume that it is sufficiently evident that we may read rür Tiêcs. γας νόμον. Profeffor S. reads τίθεται, which has a different meaning. osat at vóuoy means to make a law by one's own authority : dīvai vóuor is to propose the making of a law in the legislative assembly. It is in this latter sense only, that Aristonicus, who was probably some demagogue of that age, could be called a lawgiver. Perhaps, however, the whole passage is to be differently arranged :
ου γέγονε κρείττων νομοθέτης του πλουσίου
ιχθύν υποτιμησας, &c. The gys in the third line is wanting in the manuscripts, and perhaps the other words which we have omitted were added to supply the deficiency which we have indicated by afterisks.
P. 243. D. The following Trochaics of Anaxandrides have been converted by Grotius, not without considerable omissions and alterations, into what that eminent man possibly conceived to be Iambics. Professor S. has faithfully retained the arrangement of his predeceffor. We give them entire, because the Venetian manuscript exhibits them with some various readings of confequence. We do not pretend to una derstand all the local wit which is contained in them:
υμείς γαρ αλλήλους αει χλευάζετ', οιδ' ακριβώς
εαν δε κριόν Φρίξος: έαν δε κωδάριον, Ιάσων. P. 247. C. Diphilus :
--------- ουκ αν ποτέ
Ευριπιδης γυναίκα σώσει'. ουχ οράς, &c. In the common editions, cárci' being written without the apostrophus; is miitaken by Profeffor S. for the future. He reads σώσειεν, without informing us in what manner the verse is to be divided into feet. P. 258. C. Alexis :
ίσως τριάκοντ' αφ' ενός εργαστηρίου. Profeifor S., who does not fufpect that the fecond fyllable of τριακοντα is long, proposes the introduction of ye after iows. P. 269. F. Metagenes :
ο μιν ποταμός ο Κραθις ήμεϊν καταφέρει
ποταμος, ωθεί κύμα ναστών και κρεών, &c. The Professor observes that the two latter verses of this pñors are corrupted, but he does not attempt to emend them. Probably several of the words are a gloss, and the whole is to be read in one verse :
οδ ετερος ωθεί κύμα ναστων και κρεών. In the same fragment we obferve pis at the end of a verse, and tevdions επταίς at the beginning of the next. Correct ρει τευθείσιν οπταις in one
In the cursory survey which we have taken of Professor Schweighäuser's emendations, we have seldom endeavoured to refute them, except when a preferable reading suggested itself το us. We have obferved, with a confiderable degree of furprise, a very large number of pafiges, which had been restored by the fagacity of different critics, but which, in this edition, remain in the same state in which they were left by Cafaubon. Το1.. 111. NO. 5.
We have to lament that Professor Schweighäuser has not devoted a larger thare of his attention to that kind of criticism, from which alone a correct edition of Athenæus can be expected. Unquestionably the present publication is valuable in some respects: the epitome of the two first books, in particular, will be found considerably more entire than in the former editions. The collation of the Venetian manuscript has disappointed us. We expected that the editor would have derived much more advantage from it than he appears to have done. Much depends on the tidelity of the collation, of which it is impossible for us to judge. We hope that a future editor will not consider the fura ther infpeclion of it as necessary.
On Profetlor Schweighäuser's commentary, we have little to remark. By far the larger portion of it conlists of extracts from Casaubon, whose animadversions, as we have before observed, ought to have been republished entire. Profeffor Schweighäuser has made no inconsiderable addition to the mass of information. The least commendable part of the work is the critical observations. The Profeffor's ignorance of metre continually exposes him to mistakes of the most ridiculous kind. We recollect, in one place, a differtation on the quantity of the latter syllable of the particle ours. The Profeffor, after mature deliberation, determines it to be long, but is half inclined to believe that the Attic poets occasionally transgress the rule, and make it Ihort!
The Professor promises very copious and correct indexes. In that respect, at least, we hope that he will assume, as he may very eally, a decided superiority over the preceding editors.
Art. XV. An Account of the late Improvements in Galvanism, with
a Series of Curious and Interesting Experiments, performed before the Commissioners of the French National Institute, and repeated lately in the Anatomical Theatres of London. By John Aldini, Professor of Experimental Philofphy in the University of Bologna, &c. &c.
4to. pp. 222. London. Cuthell & Martin. 1803. TN general, every new light thrown upon natural knowledge, at I first dazzles and confuses: the understanding slowly becomes accustomed to its brightness; and it is only by degrees that the just appearances of the objects of discovery are perceived, and their true relations ascertained. The researches lately made in Galvanic electricity, have afforded to the scientific world many brilliant and interesting results; but the truths that have yet been
discovered discovered by means of them, are few, and, for the most part, insulared. We have already witnesled several attempts to account for the phænomena, and to extend their theoretical applications to phyfiology and chemistry; but they have appeared to us, for the most part, founded on unsatisfactory suppositions: And the pages we are now examining, afford many new proofs of the vanity of Sitematizing upon an imperfcct series of experiments.
The account of the late improvements in Galvanism, 'is divided into three parts. The first part is entitled, “On the Nature and general Properties of Galvanism :' the second relates to the influence of Galvanism on the vital powers: and the third to its medical application. No portion of the work is devoted to historical details concerning the origin and progress of the science; and little notice is taken of the most important discoveries that have been made by means of the electrical pile. M. Aldini, indeed, treats chiefly of his own experiments and opinions. • The celebrated Galvani, who is the author's uncle, in establithing his important discovery, had observed, that muscular contractions were produced, in certain cafes, in the limbs of frogs that had been apparently deprived of life, without the aid of metals, merely by bringing certain parts of the animal in contact. His procefies were repeated, under new circumstances, by Volta and by Humboldt * : And one of the most simple methods of exhibiting the fact, was found to be the application of the sciatic nerre to the muscles of the leg. M. Aldini has filled the first part of his work with the description of different conditions of this experiment. He has increased the effect, by connecting the nerve and muscle with the parts of warm-blooded animals; and i by moistening them with saline solutions. And he infers from the phænomenon, that a peculiar ethereal fluid is continually generated in the animal ceconomy; that it is connected with the functions of life, and that, as there is a metallic pile, composed of metals and fluids, so there is likewise ad animal pile, consisting of living animal substances.
Whilst we admit, that the production of muscular contractions, by the combinations of animal organs, to all appearance dead, is a very curious circumstance, we cannot allow that it affords any proof of the presence of a peculiar electricity in living bodies, or that it tends, in the lightelt degree, to explain the fensations and contractions in the animal machine.' It appears capable of peing referred to the general law of the production of electricity, by the agency of conducting bodies on eich other; and it may be cxplained, either by the ingenious hypothesis of Volta concerning
* Sec Humboldt sur le Galvanisme, PiS: 30.