trix,” for 135. read 11. 135. At'« Mys Europæus," &c. there should be a reference to the note to viii. 133.

“The fourth vol. contains, besides the notes, the 16&us 'Hpodóτου, and an Index Vocum et Dictionum Græcarum, de quibus in adnotationibus Wesselingii et Valckenærii tractatur; also an Index Latinus in Notas; and lastly, an Index Veterum Scriptorum, qui in notis corriguntur et illustrantur.”

To the above notice of Mr. GAISPORD's edition of Herodotus, which is translated from the Sena Literary Gazette' for October 1828, No. 186, we will only add a few remarks on some points which appear to us worthy of observation.

Mr. G. has very properly begun to wage war with the lonicisnis of the grammarians, of which the text of Herodotus contains so ample and curious a collection. In many places be bas restored μία, τούτοισι, αυτοίσι, &c. for μίη, αυτεοίσι, τουτέοισι, &c. : forms which we are convinced never existed in

any real spoken dialect of Greece. The grammarians observed that Herodotuş said ’Anyéw, ToléeIV, apñrua, &c. for the common ’Anvūv, Foliv, ngãyud, &c. On this induction they rashly generalized; and with a total contempt of all analogy, thought that it was Ionic to say μίη, τουτέοισι, άρδέεσκε (ΙΙ. 13.) ουδαμέας (1ν. 114.) χιλιαδέων (v1. 28.), with other similar barbarisms; which have about the same resemblance to Greek as Fourmont's Hebrew variations, 'Αρισετανδερ, Σεκολας, for 'Αρίστανδρος, Σκύλλας, &c. In like manner they found that the early writers said Ιπποκράτεα, Κλεισθένεα, for 'Inpoxgátny, Kleno dévny. Such a discovery, however, was not to be passed over without turning it to some account; and therefore they argued, as Κλεισθένεα is to Κλεισθένην, 80 18 Ξέρξεα to Bápěny. Accordingly we find, in direct contradiction to the evident analogy and invariable rules of the Greek language, 'Apáged, Ξέρξεα, Ευρυβιάδεα, Λεοτυχίδεα, and such like accusatives ;" for

An instance of a contrary change occurs in the third book, where the transcribers have in some places reduced a noun of the third to the second declension. The nominative Ipněcorns is found in 111. 63. 66. 75. The accusative lipnědonea, ib. 30. 34, 35-twice, 62. 74. 76 twice. The vocative Ilpútones, ib. 35. 62, 63. In the genitive, however, the following varieties appear: Įpněcoreos, ib. 62, 63. Ilpngdonew, ib. 74.

which, as we are convinced, we are indebted solely to the transcribers and grammarians. There are very few places in which some, generally the best Mss., do not afford the common termination. We will give another example of this insertion of letters contrary to analogy. It is, we believe, generally agreed, that the name of the Spartav bond-slaves EINE is an ancient participial form derived from EAN or EIAN, making the penult of the oblique cases long; as in éxyeyWTOs, MEMÓWTOS, &c. in Homer. See Müller's Dorier, vol. II. p. 33. Prolegomena zur Mythologie, p. 428. At any rate, even if it is contended that the word is an šovixòy from "Enos, it will bardly be denied that the nominative is είλως, and not ειλώτης. We will now give the varieties of this word as it occurs in Herodotus. vi. 58. 75. 80. ix. 28. ciawtów. But in vs. 81. IX. 80. i. Awtas. VII. 229. tÒN elawtA. IX. 10. eiactwv (omitted in some Mss.). In none of these places is there any various reading. We sbould, without the least hesitation, in the four passages first cited, read eiactwv; believing that ciawtów is not better Greek than τετταρέων οι πατερέων. We confess too, si nostri res fuerit arbitrii, that we should be inclined to restore the final v, and the s of oŰtws &c., before vowels; to write opos, "Olujetos, Eupan κόσιος &c., not ουρος, Ούλυμπος, Συρηκούσιος ;' and we have great doubts as to the use of the lene consonants before an aspirated vowel, such as oỦx ÚTÓ, &c. We know from the Heraclean tables that the Greeks did not, as in our printed books, repeat the aspirate; i. e. they wrote not orx Hrno, but Orx rio. Now it is pretty certain that Herodotus would not have used the H in writing; and hence we infer that the aspirates were inserted by grammarians who knew the pronunciation in the common Attic dialect, but did not alter any letter. If the

where four Mss. give Ilpněcones. Ilpnědonew, ib. 75. without variety. Ipnědonew, ib. 78. where two Mss. have Ipnědoneos. In the single instance wbere no variety occurs, we should without hesitation read Πρηξάσπεος.

11. 56. novutaávntov. Thus Mr. Gaisford from the Aldine edition. TOAVAAdentov F. The only other instance of mour's is ni. 38. (see note) where he bas printed woù for moviù from F.S. This does not seem quite consistent.

Ionians pronounced the aspirate of Onò, it is nearly certain that Herodotus would have written not OTK TNIO, but Orx r110. It would, we grant, produce much perplexity and needless ambiguity to softe: all the aspirated vowels in Herodotus; but the inconsistency of the present mode of writing should at least be stated.

Having said thus much generally, we will only make two or three remarks on single passages, in which Mr. G.'s text seems to us susceptible of improvement.

1. 100. 'ErenbuteTXOv. We believe this to be a solecism. When the augment is added at the end of the verb, it is always, as far as we are aware, omitted in the begioning. The E seems to be owing merely to the love of the grammarians for superfluous letters.

Ι. 120. 9. Εωρώμεν. We would read εορώμεν with F.

11. 16. Eί μή τι γέ εστι της 'Ασίης μήτε της Λιβύης. If this reading is to be preferred to uýte yé érti, we conceive that it entails the necessity of writing μηδε της Λιβύης. .

11. 45. Χωρίς οίων και μόσχων και χηνέων. Χηνέων, says Schweighauser in v., is the genitive plural for xnuov; which form occurs in two Mss., and should in our opinion be restored. There seems to be no more reason why the genitive plural should be χηνέων, than the genitive singular should be χήνεος; a form which would on all hands be admitted to be barbarous. . 37. κρέων βοέων και χηνέων πλήθος. 11. 68. τα μεν γαρ ωα χηνέων ού πολλώ μεζονα τίκτει. Of the former of these two passages Schweighæuser in v. says, “ Xyvéwv poterat quidem ad adjectivum zýveos, (Ion. i. q. xívelos) anserinus, referri; sed ex altero loco (11. 45.) intelligitur esse genit. plural. substantivi xv.”. It seems to us probable that in these two passages xóveos is not the Ionic, but the ancient form of xúveros; that form which, for example, would have been used in writing by an Athenian of the age of Pericles; and that it has never been altered by the copyists into the common mode of spelling. We would, therefore, read xpéwv Boeiwy xui xnuelw in the first, and Xuvelw in the second passage. Breos likewise occurs in 11. 168.

ν. 77. των ίππους, δεκάτην Παλλάδι τάσδ' έθεσαν. ανέθεσαν S. Perhaps ävedey. See Blomfield ad Æsch. Pers. 994.

vi. 137. 4. It seems to us that the reasons mentioned in the note, and the authority of the Sancroft Ms., are sufficient to condemn the words te xaÌ Toùs taidas. Compare also II. Z. 457.

vii. 140. almace némel. Blomfield ad Æsch. Prom. 146. Gloss. proposes arenda.

viii. 26. des. Five Mss. have wne. We conceive that the other word is merely owing to the predilection of the grammarians for redundant syllables. 'OP210 xávw has for its second aorist wprov; but we do not remember ever to have met with such a verb as opaéw or paéw.

G. C. L.

CAMBRIDGE PRIZE POEMS,

FOR 1829.

TIMBUCTOO.
Deep in that lion-haunted inland lies

A mystic city, goal of high emprise.-CHAPMAN.
I
STOOD upon

the mountain which o'erlooks
The narrow seas, whose rapid interval
Parts Afric from green Europe, when the sun
Had fallen below the Atlantic, and above
The silent heavens were blench'd with faery light,
Uncertain whether faery light or cloud,
Flowing southward, and the chasms of deep, deep blue
Slumber'd unfathomable, and the stars
Were flooded over with clear glory and pale.
I gazed upon the sheeny coast beyond,
There where the giant of old time infix'd
The limits of his prowess, pillars high
Long time erased from earth: even as the sea,
When weary of wild inroad, buildeth up
Huge mounds whereby to stay his yeasty waves :
And much I mused on legends quaint and old
Which whilome won the hearts of all on earth

Toward their brightness, even as flame draws air;
VOL. XL.

Cl. JI. NO. LXXIX. G

But had their being in the heart of man
As air is the life of flame : and thou wert then
A centred glory-circled memory,
Divinest Atalantis, whom the waves
Have buried deep; and thou of later name,
Imperial El-dorado, roof'd with gold:
Shadows to which, despite all shocks of change,
All on-set of capricious accident,
Men clung with yearning hope which would not die.
As when in some great city where the walls
Shake, and the streets with ghastly faces throng'd
Do utter forth a subterranean voice;
Among the inner columns far retired,
At midnight, in the lone Acropolis,
Before the awful Genius of the place
Kneels the pale priestess in deep faith, the while
Above her head the weak lamp dips and winks
Unto the fearful summoning without:
Nathless she ever clasps the marble knees,
Bathes the cold hand with tears, and gazeth on
Those

eyes which wear no light but that wherewith Her phantasy informs them.

Where are ye,
Thrones of the western wave, fair islands green?
Where are your moonlight halls, your cedarn glooms,
The blossoming abysses of your hills,
Your flowering capes, and your gold-sanded bays
Blown round with happy airs of odorous winds ?
Where are the infinite ways, which, seraph-trod,
Wound through your great Elysian solitudes,
Whose lowest deeps were, as with visible love,
Fill'd with divine effulgence, circumfused,
Flowing between the clear and polish'd stems,
And ever circling round their emerald cones
In coronals and glories, such as gird
The unfading foreheads of the saints in heaven?
For notbing visible, they say, had birth
In that blest ground but it was play'd about
With its peculiar glory. Then I raised
My voice, and cried, “ Wide Afric, doth thy sun
Lighten, thy hills enfold a city as fair
As those which starr'd the night of the elder world?
Or is the rumor of thy Timbuctoo
A dream as frail as those of ancient time?"