401 ON THE ELEAN INSCRIPTION. In one of your late numbers, I perceive that a correspondent has given another interpretation of my Olympian inscription, miscalled, as I now understand, the Elean. It may perhaps give some satisfaction to your readers to know its history, and that it was found at Olympia by a Greek, to whom I had given a commission to enquire for such treasures among the peasants and laborers of Antilalla. One of these, after a flood, found several articles of bronze, a helmet, a cauldron, and some inscribed plates. The former were brought to me, and the latter, supposed to be useless, as exhibiting characters which nobody could read, were left behind to be sold to a brazier. I dispatched a messenger immediately to the spot, who traced the bronzes up the valley of the Alpheius, to the shop of the brazier at Karitěna. The other pieces, which the owner would not believe could interest me, were described as broken and corroded, but they were inscribed, and may remain there yet, as I had not the means of sending again. On my return to England I endeavoured, in vain, to persuade several gentlemen to undertake an excavation at Olympia, where doubtless an invaluable treasure has been preserved by the deposit of the rivers Cladeus and Alpheius, and I had secured the friendship of the Agas of Lalla, who were then the independent lords of the country. The scheme was treated as visionary, and even my inscription, except with a few, was for some time in danger of passing for a forgery. In the mean time the revolution has put an end to all future hopes of discovery; for if the Greeks triumph, no government of theirs would ever permit an excavation by the Franks.-I shall conclude by expressing my astonishment that it has never occurred to any of the interpreters of this inscription, to look at any common map of the Peloponnesus for the state or city which was most likely to have entered into a treaty with Elis. They would surely have found that the assistance of the ETFAOIOI would have been of as little consequence to the Eleans as that of the Hivites, while they must have seen that the very next city on the bank of the river was Heræa, to the ruins of which the bronze returned in the hands of the brazier of Karitěna. They might then have been induced to look at the original, an impression of which I have now before me, where they would have found their T to have been a P, leaning it is true to the right, but exactly like the second letter in line 4, and forming, with its adjuncts, the word EPFAOIOIZ. This is so like the "Heræans," particularly when the digamma is pronounced in the English fashion, that I have never been able to account for the necessity of hunting up into existence an obscure and distant village in order to create a fresh difficulty. Possibly some learned doctor will discover that there is no instance of the F in such a situation; but these fancies, which may pass in regard to printed books, are contradicted by inscriptions every day, and this would not be the only word in the present inscription which appears in a new shape, should such an objection be offered. Naples, Nov. 20, 1821. WILLIAM GELL. On the confessed Plagiarisms and convicted Falsehoods of CHARLES JAMES BLOMFIELD, by George Burges. AFTER the lapse of more than five years from the publication of the 6th, the 7th Number of the "Museum Criticum, or Cambridge Classical Researches," has at length appeared. Parturiunt montes; nascetur ridiculus mus: which the Reviewer, in that Journal, of Bland's Anthology, would perhaps thus translate, -- The mountains groan with more than usual throes; It were well, however, for the character of the author of the article facetiously headed, "Supposed Plagiarisms. Mr. George Burges," (as if, truly, G. B. were the supposed plagiarist) should C. J. B., the confessed plagiarist, excite no worse feelings than that of contempt for his talents in penning the weakest defence, that ever disgraced a hopeless cause; where, to bolster up a falling reputation, recourse has been had to deliberate falsehoods. The charge of plagiarism, acknowledged in some instances, and effectually disproved in two alone, is nothing when compared with that now boldly thrown in the teeth of C. J. B., and to which I dare him to reply, if he can. Nor let him deceive himself, with more success than he can deceive others, by his threatened silence. It is true that, like Friar Bacon's brazen head, he has spoken once, to speak no more; yet speak again he shall, unless he is willing to have it said of him, that debilitatus atque abjectus conscientia convictus conticuit. To those who are not conversant with the facts, it will be necessary, and to those who are, amusing, to read a recapitulation of the points alleged against the unfortunate culprit. Be it known, then, that, on various occasions, I kindly cautioned C. J. B. against the indulgence of the habit, to which he was terribly addicted, of plagiarism. But finding all gentle and delicate admonitions useless, I deemed it necessary to expose at full length a portion of his numerous pilferings. And as the offender had, on every possible occasion, expressed his abhorrence of similar iniquity, in words equally strong, applied either to the living or the dead, I felt I was only following his own steps by adopting similar language towards himself. It seems, however, that C. J. Β. ἄλλων ἰατρὸς, αὐτὸς ἕλκεσιν βρύων, a quack to others, though himself one sore, has, like some maniacs, seen in the person of his best, though severest physician, his deadliest enemy. For to an aberration only of intellect, can one in charity attribute the egregious folly of compromising his character for at least a common share of veracity. Before entering on his defence of particular instances of plagiarisms, C. J. B. thus expresses himself: "Where plagiarism is laid to the charge of a scholar, the only thing he can do is, to deny the accusation; and if the number or nature of the instances alleged be such as to preponderate against his assertion, he must submit to his fate. I wish to premise, that where I am compelled to have recourse to simple asseveration, I make it upon the honor and good faith of a scholar and gentleman; and, having done so, its reception must be such as my readers think fit to give it." Although an objection might fairly be taken to the justice of that course of defence, which relies upon a flat denial, as the only means of repelling an accusation, supported by circumstantial evidence of an unexceptionable nature, yet, unwilling to press C. J. B. too hard, I will give him the benefit of his own rule, and consent that the whole question shall turn upon the quantity of credence due to his naked assertions. But unfortunately this boasted pledge of honor and good faith will not stand the test of a strict scrutiny; and C. J. B. must be content to find in the sink of dishonor In the lowest deep a lower deep. In one of the counts of the indictment, C. J. B. is accused of putting forth as his own, in the Mus. Crit., No. II. p. 189, an emendation of Eurip. Iph. A. 1242, which I had long before published in my Appendix to the Troades, p. 129. To this C. J. B. replies, "I am not ashamed to meet this charge by stating the real fact. But I am afraid I shall not 'mend matters by confessing, that I had never read the Appendix. I never could get beyond the two first pages of it, as the present state of my copy, unviolated by the paper-knife, sufficiently testifies." What the real fact is, which C. J. B. is not ashamed to state, unless it be the confession of wilful plagiarism, I leave to his ingenuity to explain; although, I fear, eum ingenium propter vim sceleris manifesti atque deprehensi deficiet. Is, then, C. J. B. so greedy of disgrace, that, to the confessed guilt of plagiarism, he will gratuitously heap upon himself the ignominy of falsehood? And does he really so soon forget his own writings, in his hot haste to transcribe those of others? or, carried away by his love of sneers, is he so little studious of truth as not to know, that, while he thus professes even his present ignorance of the contents of my Appendix beyond the 2d page, he has actually quoted that very Appendix beyond that luckless 2d page, twice in his notes on the S. c. Th. p. 187. and 188. ed. 1. and once in the Edinburgh Rev. No. XLII. p. 337? Had C. J. B. been but moderately read in Euripides, he could never have exposed himself to the application of a bitter sarcasm, in thus appealing to his paper-knife for the truth of his assertions. But, accustomed as he is to use editions like those of the present occupier of Barnes's professorial chair, it is no wonder that he found not the words of the Tragedian, and, unassisted by the published or Mss. notes of others, caught not the sentiment so forcibly depicted in the sneer of Theseus, who, to the exculpatory language of Hippolytus, replies, Would that the walls could speak, that they might tell, Εἰς τοὺς ἀφώνους μάρτυρας φεύγεις σοφῶς! Τὸ δ ̓ ἔργον εὖ λέγον σε μηνύει κακόν. Wisely thou fleest to tongueless witnesses; The deed, too plainly speaking, proves thee base. With such a proof of a total disregard to veracity, C. J. B. may pledge his honor upon any point he pleases, without gaining the least credence, except from his coadjutor, who, deceived by the evidence of the uncut copy, has, in the Quarterly Rev. No. XLVIII. valorously stepped forward the witless knight of plagiarists in distress. But to the last-named Theban a separate article will be devoted; unless, like Bentley in the controversy about Æsop's Fables, hostem acriorem profligare contentus, ab impari prælio recedam indignabundus. To return then to C. J. B. He next asserts that, "previously to October, 1810, the date of the publication of his first edition of the Prometheus, he never saw one of the Porson papers." Now in the preface to that very edition C. J. B. states that he not only saw, but actually extracted from the Porson papers whatever related to Æschylus. His words are: "In notis quadam sunt e Porsoni manu, cujus schedas ex hæredibus ejus redemptas Collegium nostrum mihi excutiendas concessit; ut, si quid in illis repertum esset ad Eschylum pertinens, id omne ad hanc editionem locupletandam et augendam decerperem."-" Et ne diutius aliquis, quam vellet, notis immoretur, dum Porsoni observationes quærit, has omnes-literis R. P. distinxi." That these very scheda are one and the same with the Porson papers, is put beyond all doubt by an inspection of the Porsoni Adversaria, p. 149-153, where are found all the notes marked R. P. in the edition of C. J. B. With what face, then, dares C. J. B. say, that he never saw one of the Porson papers till after the publication of his Prometheus? But, perhaps, he means that, as the notes of Porson VOL. XXIV. CI. JI. NO. XLVIII. 2 D |