To proceed: Mr. Wakefield's censures arise, first, from Mr. Porson's not having ended V. 1168 with "Espɛ xan" as it stands in Aldus and Stobæus: for, observes Mr. W. Ad ingenium redit hic quoque V. D. offam putidam, N finalem dico, lectoribus ingerens :-secondly, from Mr. Porson's having taken in V. 1169. ἡ νῦν λέγει τις, ἢ πάλιν μέλλει λέξειν, with a comma after it, from Stobaeus, instead of altering the Aldine, λéyav ἐστι τις ἢ μέλλει into “ ΛΕΓΩΝ ΕΣΤ', η παλιν μέλλει λεγειν.” with a full stop, as Mr. W. would give it ;-and thirdly, for not having ppow. with a full point after it, instead of pearw In the first place, pnne xans either gives a Trochaus in the fifth place, or a Dactylus in the fifth, and a long syllable in the sixth. In the second, éya Tis is far preferable to yw 37, as it is more suited to the language of Tragedy, and as it forms. a part of Stobaeus's lection, from which Mr. W. himself is obliged to take πάλιν In the third, a full stop is more than the sense of the pas sage can admit after φράσω. 1172. Ὁ δ ̓ εἶσει ξυνουχων ALDUS. R. P. 'A Stobæus. Recte hujus vocis penultimam communem esse statuit Piersonus ad Merin, p. 231.' Mr. Porson had observed before in his Preface, p. iv. 'A', Piersono jubente, Brunckio non nolente, semper sine diphthongo scripsi; idem facturus in al 5, xxiw, et niw.' On Mr. P.'s note, these sentiments are delivered by Mr. W. A Certe, illa vox syllabam penultimam habere nequit: hoc autem humanitus admissum egregio viro condonemus; uti nos multa similia habemus condonanda, atque condonari cupimus: at Piersono tamen, vel alii cuilibet, ita statuenti, credat, qui volet :- εγω δε τις 8 ταχυπ ίξης. Longe similius vero videtur existimare, quoties priorem syllabam porrigerent Atticos scripsisse a vela quum corriperent rursus,art, possuisse. Sed libera sint hominum judicia.' As to the word penultima, its supposed impropriety, in a great measure, rests with Pierson, to whom Mr. Porson refers: but we must beg leave to observe that neither the writers in the Attic, nor in any other dialect, could possibly have written E, (that is, a word formed of alpha with an iota subscribed, epsilon, and icta,) instead of : for an iota can only be placed under a long vowel; and it is sufficiently clear that this alpha is not long invariably. This is the quantity, however, of the alpha in nλaw, ass, and in such other vocables as lose the ίδια 'Αττικῶς, and have it subscribed, Ελληνικῶς. It has long been our opinion that the antient Attics always wrote AEI. We owe it to Dorville and Pierson, and observe with pleasure its confirmation by the note of Mr. Porson. The The uniformity with which at was printed in the Glasgow edition of Eschylus did not escape our notice; and to those who may have any doubts on this subject, we beg leave to recommend a careful perusal of the Great Etymologist's account of now, with Dorville's note on Chariton, p. 288. and Pierson on Maris, 231. 126ο. Θανῖυσα δ' ἡ ζῶσ' ενθαδ ̓ ἐκπλήσω βίον ; a verse, in which Brunck and Ammonius change Bíov into μépou, which, as Mr. P. justly observes, signifies mors, in the Tragedies; and Musgrave proposes Téτμov, which our new Editor approves, as the same varietas lectionis is found in Sophocles, Antig. 83. Mr. W. defends the old reading, and gives an explanation; and he adds some words from the Scholiast, of which he says: Qua SELEXI, [meaning selegi;] for these Scholia, I think, are the works of different Grammarians, in different ages.' П1.7μov undoubtedly renders the verse intelligible. As it stands, our comprehension cannot reach it; nor in our opinion, can Mr. Wakefield's interpretation be allowed. As for his selection from the note of the Scholiast, such an abridgment is completely unjustifiable. With this remark concludes the Diatribe on Mr. Porson's Hecuba. We have attempted to examine every single criticism, separately and distinctly; and it has been our wish to perform this duty with firmness, but without asperity. How far this desire has been accomplished must be left to the decision of our readers. Since these observations were written, as we accidentally were turning over a copy of Mr. Wakefield's Diatribe belonging to a friend, we observed that some pages had been cancelled. To prevent misrepresentation, we shall lay the alterations before our readers: P. .16. In the note on the word itinaas in V. 181 of the Hecuba, which has been quoted, this concluding passage is wholly changed: Nimirum vel capiendum est pro enlacas, a • εξεπλασας, πταω πτημι, υolo ; vel scribendum εξεπλασας, ο ποεω, terreo. Utrum mavis accipe. Instead of these explanations, or whatever they are to be called, we found this question: Nam vox, quiescentis statum significans, unde possit describere moventem?" As we made no remarks on the old paragraph, we shall now leave the new one to the unbiassed observation of the reader. In p. 24. we stated that an alteration with a pen had been made, in order to remove the Spondeus in quarta sede in V. 508. The leaf has been changed, and the whole line is thus published: Σ' Αγαμεμνονος πεμψαντος, ω γυναι, μέλα. and this conclusion of the note is left out: Quis enim ovyo Tiopo in Euripide saltem damnet?" In the note on V. 565. p. 25. the name of Captain Cook is changed into that of Wallis, Mr. Wakefield having mentioned the former by mistake. Page 37 has also been cancelled. In line 25 we find, quæ selegi, instead of quæ selexi, as it stands in our copy; and in the following page, 38, inter eruditos-non-obtrectatores, sed laborum is rightly corrected socii participesque -; as in p. 39. 1. 21. we observe into inter - socios : ad hoc autem inhumanitatis scopulum altered properly into ad bunc scopulum. There may be other alterations, but these are all which we observed. In another Article we hope to conclude. Critical investigations, if intended to examine any questions thoroughly, do not From the nature of Mr. Wakereadily admit curtailment. field's pamphlet on the New Hecuba, it was impossible to satisfy our readers, or ourselves, with mere assertive contradictions. It was necessary to search deeply into every remark, in order to prove the solid and unshaken excellencies of Mr. Porson's edition of Euripides. [To be continued.] ART. XIII. An Introduction to Arithmetic and Algebra. Vol. II. By Thomas Manning. 8vo. pp. 218. 4s. Boards. Rivingtons, &c. 1798. THE HE first part of this work was noticed in our Review for February 1797.-The contents of the present volume are, Proportion of variable Quantities, Rule of Three, Reduction, Arithmetical and Geometrical Series, Incommensurables, Application of Algebra to Rectilinear Geometry, Surds, Greatest Common Measure of Algebraic Expressions, Properties of Numbers, Logarithms. The chapter on Incommensurables is drawn up with much neatness and perspicuity *; and, in a scholium, the author sums up forcibly, and with precision, the arguments diffused over the two lectures of Dr. Barrow, in which that great Geometrician defends Euclid's definition of Proportionality. We give a short extract: The 95th article, however, appears to us imperfect in its enunciation and proof; for 9 must be the same multiple of b that p is of a. ૧ Various Various objections have been urged by different writers against Euclid's definition of proportionality. Some have censured it as obscure and difficult to be understood; but that fault, if it exists at all. is in the subtil nature of incommensurable magnitudes, and not in Euclid's definition. Others have complained that they cannot, without a demonstration, discern whether quantities, that agree with the definition, are proportional or not; as if proportionality was something independent of definition. Others again, defining numbers to be proportional, when the quotient of the first divided by the second is equal to the quotient of the third divided by the fourth, have en deavoured to obviate the necessity for Euclid's, by extending this their definition to all magnitudes whatsoever; thereby endeavouring: to confound the distinct natures of commensurable and incommen surable quantities; for what is the import of the expression, when A and B are incommensurable with each other? A logical answer to this question would distinguish again what they thus endeavour tô confound and blend together, and would satisfy the enquirer, that if he would have an accurate knowledge of the real nature of magnitudes, he must take the trouble of examining into the doctrine of Incommensurables, and at the same time shew him, that in point of conciseness nothing is gained by thus endeavouring to clude Euclid's distinctions, and in point of perspicuity much lost; the enquiry being of that nicety and subtilty, which cannot be easily dispatched in few words.' A.. B The chapter on the Application of Algebra to Rectilinear Geometry is a valuable one: but we wish that the author had expressed differently the addition, subtraction, &c. of ratios. We are, indeed, previously informed what the symbols denote: but the ideas annexed to them, in their common signification, so frequently recur and intervene, that the mental progress is considerably impeded. The explanation of logarithms is intelligible and satisfactory. The logarithmic series is, demonstrated by a process purely algebraical. If 1+a be the base of the system, then y is the logarithm of the number i+a. If I +al be assumed 1+by+ cy2+ dy3 &c. then b may easily be shewn equal to a - + &c. and by a very` a* a 3 ingenious method (for which the author acknowleges himself in some degree indebted to a work of M, de la Grange *, Books from France, however unconnected with politics and religion, make their way into this country with so much difficulty, that it was not till very lately that we could procure this work, although printed in 1797. We hope, however, to notice it in our next APPENDIX: which will be published at the same time with our Re view for May. Hh3 Théorie Théorie des Fonctions Analytiques) the law of the dependence of c, d, &c. on b is strictly determined; whereas Mr. Bonnycastle is obliged to prove by actual involution that 2c, 2 X 3.d, 2X 3X 4. &c. are the square, cube, biquadrate, &c. of the a2 a3 quantity a- + 2 - 3 &c. * The Appendix contains observations on Impossible Quantities, and on the use of the negative sign. Of the first volume, we have already expressed our favourable opinion; and the, second is not less entitled to commendation. The whole work. is valuable for the evidence of its principles, the precision of its language, and the rigour of its proofs, ART. XIV. Flora Londinensis. By William Curtis. Folio. Vol. II. 41. 10s. in Sheets, plain; coloured 91. White. AT length this great and scientific work is closed: not from the subject being exhausted ;-very far from it:-but from the ill state of the author's health. Mr. Curtis has, with much difficulty, conducted it to the end of the sixth fasciculus, which concludes the second volume: but there is no striving against debilitated nerves, and a shattered constitution. It can proceed no farther!-The Botanist will naturally lament on receiving this intelligence, and in vain he will endeavour to repair the loss which the science must sustain. We gave a very ample account of the first volume of this splendid and valuable publication in our seventieth vol. p. 1.On a review of that article, there seems to be nothing which we could wish unsaid. The work has to boast of unrivalled excellence, undiminished splendor, unabated accuracy, and is still patronised by the learned and the munificent. There is scarcely a name of any consequence in the botanical world, which is not recorded as a contributor, or a friend, to the richness of the observations contained in it. The specimens, from which the figures are draws, are uniformly well chosen, and remarkable for their characteristic significance; the colours are vivid and expressive; and the dissections of the flowers are uncommonly well executed, and will prove more didactic than the very lectures of any but superior teachers. To carry science to perfection, the life of man should be doubly lengthened.-The ordinary allotment of time enables an individual to form a general outline of much, but to work *See his method for determining Logarithmic Series, in Addenda. to Hutton's Dictionary, or in Monthly Review for April 1798, page 379. out |