He who should so express himself, would evidently betray, that his mind fluctuated between the two opinions 2.

2 There is another passage which may require vindication : v. 815. we have τῆς μωρίας ! ΤΟΝ ΔΙΑ νομίζειν, spoken by Strepsiades. Ernesti felt some doubt respecting TON in this place, and Hermann has substituted Tó, contending that the Greeks said νομίζειν, ἡγεῖσθαι ΘΕΟΥΣ, never ΤΟΥΣ Θεούς the former is, unquestionably, the prevailing usage, but the latter form sometimes occurs, as Hermann (ad Eurip. Hec. 781.) has since admitted. The reason of this variation, however, seems to be somewhat different from that, which he adduces. The original expression is evidently vouíÇew Оeov's EINAI, where the Article would be superfluous. So Herod. Β. v. p. 159. ἄλλον θεὸν νομίζοντες EINAI. but in after times the origin of the phrase was gradually disregarded, and είναι no longer being expressed, νομίζειν θεούς, came to be used in a looser signification, meaning, not so much to believe in the existence of gods, as to reverence the gods, supposing them to exist; and in this sense of the phrase the Article was not improperly admitted. The passage, which Hermann quotes in illustration, Soph. Antig. 190.

τοὺς φίλους ποιούμεθα,

is not entirely apposite, though it has an apparent difficulty, which deserves to be noticed: for if Tous pilovs mean friends, whose existence is assumed, how can we be said Toetodai, to make them? The meaning is, "the friends, whom we make, we make in the manner specified." So Homer, Il. A. 399. (which Heyne, after objecting to the Article, thinks similar to Il. A. 11.)

66

ἀλλὰ ΤΟΝ υἱὸν

Γείνατο εἷο χέρεια μάχη,

the son whom Tydeus begat, he begat inferior to himself, &c.Aristoph. Αν. 820. καλὸν σύ γ' ἀτεχνῶς καὶ μέγ' εὗρες Τ'ΟΝΟΜΑ· the name which you have invented, you have invented (or is) fine and sounding. See also Acharn. 1095. THN Topyóva. In like manner, Plat. Gorg. vol. iv. p. 87. ei Xpvonν EXWV ÉτVyXavov THN vxv, &c. Similar instances abound.

On the whole, the irregularity observable with respect to Proper Names does not in the least affect the general doctrine of the Article; and it was partly with a view to this conclusion, that I have entered so fully into the subject.

CHAP. V.

ABSTRACT NOUNS.

SECT. I.

INSERTIONS.

I COME now to the consideration of the use of the Article before Abstract Nouns, or the Names of Attributes and Qualities; a subject of greater difficulty, than any other which belongs to this Preliminary Inquiry. On its first appearance, indeed, it presents a degree of perplexity, which seems to defy arrangement: but on a nearer view we shall discover, that certain laws are for the most part observed, though some licence be allowed; and that those laws are explicable from the nature of the Article, as it has already been illustrated.

It is to be premised, that Nouns of this class are capable of being employed in two different ways: though they always express abstract ideas, they may be used either in a more or in a less abstract sense. Aduía, for example, will signify injustice generally, whatever be its kind or degree: but it will also express every particular act of injustice, by the contemplation of which we form the more abstract idea: and in this latter use these Nouns in Greek admit

the Plural Number, or, which is equivalent, they are in the Singular capable of being joined with words indicating their possible plurality. Thus in Aristot. de Mor. Nic. lib. v. c. 10. we have 'EKAΣTHN adikia and plurally in the same work, lib. vi. c. 7. πολλαὶ ἔσονται ΣΟΦΙΑΙ. Demosth. vol. II. p. 1099. KOAAKEIAIZ. Ibid. p. 1452. 'ANAPIAI καὶ ΘΡΑΣΥΤΗΤΕΣ, &c. Ibid. p. 875. ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑΙΣ. It is true that instances of this kind do not very frequently occur: but their occurrence, however rare, sufficiently proves, that the Names of Attributes and Qualities may be of particular, as well as of general application; and consequently that an expedient, by which they may be known to be employed in their most general meaning, is not without its use. This, if I mistake not, is the force of the Article in very many passages, in which a superficial observer might regard it as being merely an expletive: and we shall further perceive, that where the sense of these Nouns is meant to be limited, the Article is invariably omitted. This remark may be of use to the reader, before we proceed to deduce rules from the practice of the best writers.

It will be expected that we begin, as in former instances, with Homer: but the assistance to be derived from this quarter is here of little or no value. It is a remarkable fact, that Homer rarely makes use of abstract terms, and still more rarely, if ever, does he employ them in their most abstract and general sense. Some persons, perhaps, who have read the Iliad, will be surprised to learn, that ópy, αἰσχύνη, φύσις, ἐλευθερία, παιδεία, εὐδαιμονία, δικαιοσύνη,

ὑγίεια, ἐπιστημή, and many others of the same kind, are words, which do not once occur in the whole Poem'. Σιγῇ, σιωπῇ, τύχῃ, δίκῃ, τέχνη, &c. are found only in the Dative, indicating merely the manner in which some some act is performed: this may be denominated the adverbial use of Abstract Nouns, and in this use of them, they are always, as we shall afterwards have occasion to remark, anarthrous. In the passage, Z. 339. (which, indeed, is elsewhere repeated, and was probably a proverbial saying at the time) νίκη δ' έπαμείβεται ἄνδρας, I think we may consider vikn as a personification: but whether we so understand it, or chuse to regard it as used in the most abstract sense, it is without the Article, and so are these Nouns elsewhere in Homer, whatever be the manner in which they are employed.

Since, then, the Article is often found in later writers prefixed to the Names of Attributes, it is in these writers only that we can investigate the rules of its insertion; and these rules are reducible to four the Article is inserted,

1. When the Noun is used in its most abstract

sense.

2. When the Attribute, &c. is personified.

I have observed that Nouns of this description are more common in the Odyssey than in the Iliad.

2 We find, indeed, in the Odyssey, B. 206. Eïveka TĤs аpetĤs èpidaívoμev, which Damm, the excellent Lexicographer, renders by "propter talem præstantiam," explaining Tns by TaÚTηs or Toins. Yet Apollonius, p. 112. classes this example with s pippa béovoa his interpretation, therefore, supposes Tns to be, not in concord with apers, but dependent on it: and this is conformable with the context. Οη τῆς ἀρετῆς in the Iliad, A. 762. Bentley has conjectured is with the Digamma.