Among other wife and falutary maxims of this Chilo, who was the occafion of the arguments here introduced, this which follows is of experienced usefulness, as reftraining within due limits the ungovernable paffions of love and hatred." So love*, (fays'he) as if you would one day hate, and fo hate as if hereafter you may love." Concerning this Chilo, Plutarch the philofopher thus writes, in his treatise on the Soul: The fage Chilo hearing one fay that he had no enemy, afked him if he had then no friend; thinking that friendships and enmities neceffarily followed, and were dependent on each other." P. 17. Our readers have probably wondered at the morality of the Ancients; they would doubtlefs be as much furprised at the want of politenefs evinced in the 6th chapter. We will not hazard the tranfcribing it for fear of offending our fair readers. But we truft we can depend upon their indulging a fmile at the following story of Papirius Prætextatus. B. 1. c. 23. It was formerly ufual for the fenators of Rome to enter the fenatehoufe, accompanied by their fons, who had taken the prætexta. When fomething of fuperior importance was difcuffed in the fenate, and the farther confideration adjourned to the day following, it was refolved that no one fhould divulge the fubject of their debates till it fhould be formally decreed. The mother of the young Papirius, who had accompanied his father to the fenate-houfe, enquired of her fon what the fenators had been doing. The youth replied, that he had been enjoined filence, and was not at liberty to fay. The woman became more anxious to know; the fecretnefs of the thing, and the filence of the youth, did but inflame her curiofity. She therefore urged him with more vehement earnestnefs. The young man, on the importunity of his mother, determined on an humourous and pleafant fallacy he faid, it was difcuffed in the fenate, which would be moft beneficial to the state, for one man to have two wives, or for one woman to have two husbands. As foon as he heard this, fhe was much agitated, and leaving her houfe in great trepidation, went to tell the other matrons what fhe had learned. The next day a troop of matrons went to the fenate-houfe; and with tears and intreaties implored that one woman This fingular fentiment, here afcribed to Chilo, is, by Aristotle and Cicero, given to Bias. In Cicero's tract on friendship, Lalius affirms it to have been the opinion of Scipio Africanus, that no fenti. ment could be adduced more hoftile to true friendship; which, in deed, if the fentence be understood literally, is natural and juft. To reftrain the impulse of the focial affections, from the idea that we may one day hate thofe whom now we love, tends to poifon the fources of the nobleft virtues, to excite univerfally the unamiable spirit of dif-truft, and, like Rochefaucault's Maxims, to prefent us only with the moit unfavourable picture of human nature. But perhaps no more was intended, than generally to teach us moderation in the indulgence of all our paffions.' "Tranflator. might be fuffered to have two husbands, rather than one man to have two wives. The fenators, on entering the house, were astonished, and wondered what this intemperate proceeding of the women, and their petition, could mean. The young Papirius, advancing to the midft of the fenate, explained the preffing importunity of his mother, his anfwer, and the matter as it was. The fenate, delighted with the honour and ingenuity of the youth, made a decree, that from that time no youth fhould be fuffered to enter the fenate with his father, this Papirius alone excepted. He was afterwards honourably distinguished by the cognomen of Prætextatus, on account of his difcretion, both with refpect to fpeaking and holding his tongue, at fuch an age." P. 87. The length of this quotation obliges us to refer our reader to the book for Mr. B's note on this paffage. Phi B. II. c. 23. We have in this chapter caufe to lament the depredations of time upon a fragment of Menander, which, though it has exercifed the learning of Gronovius, Jof. Scaliger, and Cafaubon, still bids defiance to metre and sense. leleutherus Lipfienfis, whofe acutenefs has been difplayed to great advantage upon many fragments of Menander and Philemon, declined the attempt of reftoring the paffage in queftion. Mr. B. has undoubtedly given at leaft as confiftent an interpretation of it as any fcholar before him: yet we confefs we are more pleased with Scaliger's correction of the last line, than what he has adopted: we mean as to fenfe, for the metre we confefs is doubtful. Τάχιον Comparativa in exeuntia, fays Dawes, in fermone Attico penultimam femper producunt, p. 251. Mifcellan. Crit. Edit. Burgess.— The learned editor, in his notes, p. 469, fuppofes Dawes to be miftaken, and refers us to Markland's note on the 1101 line of the Suppl. Mulier. Euripides, where no clofes the verfe. We fufpect the reading, though Mufgrave has without oppofition admitted it. That the three Greek tragic writers, and Ariftophanes, uniformly make the penultimate fhort, we admit, though we have doubts as to the practice of later Attic writers. Markland in loc. cit. quotes from the eighth book of Athenæus de dio. The verfe was written by Sotion. p. 336. Athen. Bentley, where he leaves untouched the lines quoted by Gellius, because the old editions of that writer were not then at hand, writes thus, "Verfus ultimos primæ phoews fic finxerat Grotius, Παιδισκάριον θεραπευτικὸν τάχιον λόγε Hæc ut vera non effe ultro fateor, fenarii funt. Though he rejects the emendation made by Grotius, he is not offended at finding the penultimate fhort in ráxov. Vid. p. 64, Emen dat. Τάχιον ἀπάγχεσθω δέ τις, ἡ γεᾶυν εισάγοι. i, e. "A man fhould fooner hang himself than marry an old woman. We cannot but express a with that Mr. B. had confulted in this paffage the great names mentioned in his preface. Under whatever difficulty this paffage is buried, we doubt not but it might have been extricated by the profound learning of Parr, or the exquifite acumen of Porfon*. Chap. 11. Book 4. Gellius fets out in this chapter with oppofing the common opinion that Pythagoras abftained from beans. He enters into the fubject very fully, quotes from various authors, and then touches upon fome other articles of food, from which Pythagoras was thought to enjoin an abftinence. He here introduces, and lays great refs upon, the authority of Plutarch. From thefe circumdances a probable argument arifes to our mind, that Plutarch was not the author of the treatife commonly afcribed to him Περί παίδων Αγωγής, For in that treatife Plutarch is made to fay, tha Pythagoras. by enjoining an abstinence from beans, intended to diffuate his pupils from any interference in political matters. We fubjoin his words. Κυάμων ἀπέχεσθαι· ὅτι ἐ δεῖ πολιτένεσθαι· κυαμεσιὰν γὰρ ἦσαν ἔμπροσθεν αι ψηφοφορίαι, δι' ὧν πέξας ἐπετίθεσαν ταῖς ἀρχαῖς. Now we confefs this always appeared to us a vay puerile conceit, and unwortny the philofopher of Cheronea. The argument we would deduce from this chapter, relpecting the authenticity of the treatise in queftion, amounts to this. It is not likely that Plutarch would have countenanced a notion which Gellius pofitively pronounces falfe. If he did countenance it, it is not likely that our author, who feems to have taken great pains with the queftion, was converfant with Plutarch's works, and has paid great deference to his opinion on a fubject intimately connected with it, would have been ignorant of itt. In addition to the arguments against the genuineness dat. in Menand. But further, in another paffage of Menander, corrected by himself, he makes the penultimate in Brio short, *Αν πρῶτος ἐξέλθης, καταλύσεις βελτίον. See p. 78. Reviewer. * Among the communications with which Mr. Beloe was favoured on the subject of Gellius, we understand that he mentions with respect a paper received from Mr. Wakefield, of which he availed himself to correct the quotation from Favorinus, vol. 2. p. 151. To the fame learned gentleman he is indebted for the emendation of " febri rapida," vol. 2. p. 338, and for the note on the Lion, vol. 3. p. 19. Rev. + Rualdus thought this treatise fpurious. Fabricius diffents from Rualdus ; ineness of this treatise, drawn from its matter and style, what we have here faid may perhaps be not altogether unworthy of notice. Book V. chap. 8. "Ipfe Quirinali lituo parvâque fedebat Succinctus trabeâ, lævaque ancile gerebat." "Higinus affirms, that in the above verfes Virgil has erred, as if he did not perceive that fomething was wanting to thefe words— "Ipfe Quirinali lituo." "For if," fays he, "we allow that nothing is wanting, it would appear as if it were to be understood lituo trabeá fuccinctus, which is most abfurd: for as lituus is a fhort rod, bent at the ftronger end, fuch as the augurs ufe, how can he be faid to be fuccinctus 1.tuo ?** Gellius has quoted many criticisms of Higinus upon Virgil: many of which, equally petulant and taftelefs with the prefent, he has fuccefsfully repelled. But here we think he has failed. The force of Higinus's objection evidently refts upon the two expreffions lituus and trabea being fo connected, that they depend upon the fame word fuccinctus. Now this, in our opinion, is not fufficiently fupported by the elliptical phrafes which Gellius brings to the aid of Virgil: bm magná eloquentia, &c. It would have been more to his purpose to have remarked, that two words are fometimes coupled together by the Poets in fuch a manner as to depend upon a third word, which is adapted to one of the foregoing expreffions, but not to the other; which word however fupplies to the mind of the reader, an appropriate term for the word to which it is not adapted. An inftance wilt illuftrate our meaning, and juftify Virgil. Tencer fpeaking of the fatal gifts of Hector and Ajax to each other, says, Αρ ̓ ἐκ Έριννυς τότ' ἐχάλκευσε ξίφος, Sop. Aj. 1034. Rualdus; fee Bibliotheca Græca, vol. 4. p. 348. We differ from Fabricius, and when the learned notes of Wyttenbach come forth from the Clarendon Prefs, the queftion we doubt not will be fully decided. It may not be improper to obferve, that Corradus feems to doubt whether the life of Cicero was really written by Plutarch. See Quehura, p. 378. On the other hand, a fragment de Ånima which, in Stobæus, Sergio 119, is afcribed to Libanius, has lately been proved by Wyttenbach to be the work of Plutarch. It is fubjoined to Wyttenbach's animadverfiones in Librum Plutarchi de fera Numinis Vindictâ. Reviewer. 1 *Εκεινον (fc. ζώσηςα) is coupled with ξίφος, and depends upon ExAxEVE. But this is an improper term applied to a belt, and therefore it fupplies ἔπλεξε, or κατεσκευασε In the paffage before us, inftructus or infignis inay be fupplied before litus. Book VI. The fecond volume, at its outfet, furnishes us with a fingular inftance of the advantages derived to an ancient writer, when a real fcholar undertakes to tranflate him. The beginning of the fixth book has hitherto been confidered as irrevocably loft. Every MS. that has yet been collated is without it, and confequently every printed copy. Mr. B's extenfive reading, and indefatigable attention to every circumftance connected with A. Gellius, have enabled him to reftore it from Lactantius's Epitome of Divine Institutions. "It is a whimsical circumftance," Mr. B. obferves, "that the greater part of this very Epitome fhould have lain hid till the prefent century. In the year 1712, Profeffor Pfaffius found a MS. at Turin, that had been complete, but by accident had fince loft five chapters." From the profeffor's publication, Mr. B. has made an addition to his author, for which every fcholar is bound to thank him. We cannot help expreffing our wishes, that he had given the text of this long loft paffage in a note. B. XI. chap. 2. Our readers will thank us for some obfervations which Gellius has introduced from Cato's Carmen de Moribus t. *This ufage has been incidentally obferved by many commentators upon ancient authors, but the fulleft proofs are to be found in D'Orville's notes on Chariton, p. 395. In cap. 6. lib. 2. Gellius vindicates to our fatisfaction, Virgil in his ufe of vexaffe,-Dulichias vexaffe rates. But we will not withhold from our readers the opinion of Corradus. He fuppofes Virgil ad nomen, verbum accommodaffe: hoc fummus poeta fecit, qui, quod Scylla, quod a verbo Græco σnλaw, latine, vexo, dicta videatur ita ludit-Quid loquar aut Scyllam Nifi, quam fama fecuta eft Candida fuccinctam latrantibus inguina monftris Dulichias vexaffe rates-Pierius, one of the interlocutors, fays, non vidit hoc Gellius; Corradus anfwers, with pleafantry, non eft de eo mirum qui de noctibus fcripfert; praterea vim ille verbi tantum quæfivit. See p. 376 of the Quæftura. We do not affent to the interpretation given by Corradus, but are content with the explanation which we find in Gellius. Reviewer. + So it ftands in Mr. B.'s text. Would it not have been better to have rendered this title into English? We meet alfo with " the oration of Demofthenes megi Elepara" (vol. III. p. 3.) Mr. B. will excufe us for hinting, that he'fhould have Englished his book as much as poffible Reviewer. |