Page images
PDF
EPUB

P. 359. Synodica Epistola Concilii Caesariensis. Snλouμev de ὑμῖν, ὅτι τῇ αὐτῇ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἐν ̓Αλεξανδρείᾳ ἄγουσιν, ᾗπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς. 'Habet MS. Norfolc. xal oi èv 'Aλ. quod potest esse verum; id tamen ex unius codicis auctoritate recipere nolebam.' Routh. In cases of this sort, one MS. is as good as twenty. The article of is rendered absolutely necessary by what follows: παρ' ἡμῶν γὰρ τὰ γράμματα κομίζεται ΑΥΤΟΙΣ, καὶ ἡμῖν παρ' αὐτῶν.

[ocr errors]

P. 370. Polycratis Epistola. καὶ πάντοτε τὴν ἡμέραν ἤγαγον οἱ συγγενεῖς μου, ὅταν ὁ λαὸς ἤρνυε τὴν ζύμην. We are surprised that Dr. Routh should retain this barbarous word "pve, which is destitute of all authority, when one MS. of good note, gives pe. And we are still more surprised at the following remark. Hesychius "Harvey, xußíora interpretatus est. Vet. Gloss. Kußiotiã, cernulat. Anglice, turns topsy-turvy. In the first place, the gloss of Hesychius is manifestly faulty, and should be thus corrected: "Hgvever, Exußiora, from ágyúew, to tumble, whence agveuTng, a tumbler, Iliad. M. 385. ἀρνευτήρσι ἐοικώς. Secondly, in the Latin gloss for Κυβιστιᾷ, cernulat, an obvious and certain correction is, Kußiora, cernuat. Lastly, this word never means to turn topsy-turvy, but to fall headlong, to tumble. Ὦ ποποὶ, ἡ μάλ' ἐλαφρὸς ἀνὴρ, ὡς ῥεῖα κυβιστᾷ, in Homer, whence xußionτng, a tumbler, in Euripides.

P. 472. Anonymi Presbyteri apud Clem. Alexandr. fragm. Michaelis supposes the elder here referred to, to be Pantaenus, the instructor of Clement; an opinion rendered probable by the expression, ὁ μακάριος Πρεσβύτερος. The later Greek writers give to μακάριος the same sense which those of an earlier age attach to μαxagiτns, a person not long since deceased. So in a fragment of Dionysius, p. 167, ὁ μακάριος ὑμῶν ἐπίσκοπος Σωτὴς, your late bishop, Soter. Sometimes, however, it is applied to a living person, as in the epistle of Alexander, vol. ii. p. 39 : ταῦτα τὰ γράμματα ἀπέστειλα διὰ Κλήμεντος τοῦ μακαρίου πρεσβυτέρου,—ὃν ἴστε καὶ ὑμεῖς καὶ ἐπιγνώσεσθε. Valesius renders ἐπιγνώσεσθε amplius cognoscetis, and Dr. Routh does not correct him. It should be salutabitis. Tywσxe, in the ecclesiastical writers, signifies to recognize and salute. See Valesius, in Euseb. p. 220.

V. II. p. 78. An anonymous writer against the Montanists, after mentioning the common report, that Montanus and Maximilla hanged themselves, and that Theodotus, having committed himself to the devil, was rewarded by a broken neck, observes, with more caution than is common amongst the ecclesiastical writers, άλλà μnj ἄνευ τοῦ ἰδεῖν ἡμᾶς, ἐπίστασθαί τι τῶν τοιούτων νομίζομεν, ὦ μακάριε, which words, if we adopt vóμige, the reading of one MS. afford very excellent sense: But do not consider us, my worthy friend, as sure of the truth of such stories, seeing that we have not been eye-witnesses. We are therefore surprised to find the learned editor overlooking so obvious a correction, and proposing the following read

ing:

ing : ἀλλὰ μὴν ἄνευ τοῦ ἰδεῖν, δεῖν ἡμᾶς ἐπίστασθαι περὶ τῶν τοιούτων vougoue, which he translates, sed profecto, nisi ipsi viderimus, de rebus hujusmodi assensionem nobis inhibendam putamus, giving to ἐπίστασθαι a sense which belongs only to ἐφίστασθαι, a perfectly different word.

P. 111. Julii Africani Epist. ad Origenem. Xaïge xúgié pov xai υἱὲ, καὶ πάντα τιμιώτατε Ωρίγενες, παρὰ Ἀφρικανοῦ. This is surely a very strange beginning, my lord and son. We suspect it should be read, xúgié μov viè, sir, my son. So in the epistle of Alexander, p. 89. xúgioí μou depoì, gentlemen, my brethren. In the next place, the true reading is unquestionably κατὰ πάντα τιμιώτατε. The words καὶ and κατὰ are frequently confounded. Alexander, p. 41, τὸν κατὰ πάντα ἄριστον καὶ κύριόν μου (καὶ) ἀδελφόν.

Ρ. 112. Καὶ παραδοξότατα πως αὐτοὺς ἀπελέγχει, ὡς οὐδὲ Φιλιστίωνος μiuos. Dr. Routh proposes ou ó Þiλiotíwvos μîμos, an alteration which does not please us. The sense is, in such a manner as not even one of Philistion's mimes would have done. Martial, Mimos ridiculi Philistionis. But since it is probable that Philistio acted his own mimes, as Laberius did, we had rather read as oudè ÞiλioTivi pipos. Concerning this Philistio, the reader may consult Scaliger on Eusebius, p. 179, and the Variae Lectiones of Janus Rutgersius, IV. 12.

These fragments of Julius Africanus, now for the first time collected into one view, to the number of fifty-six, form a most valuable portion of the book. The second volume concludes with a learned dissertation upon the word ouoooos, which was invented by some unlucky controvertist to plague and perplex the church for all time to come, and to set men together by the ears about an inexplicable phrase, intended to express that which, in the nature of things, cannot be expressed at all by human language.

We have noticed only two typographical errors of importance. Vol. ii. p. 174, 2. διιῤῥάγη σιδηρὰ for διεῤῥάγη σιδηρᾶ, and p. 374,9, ἀντίστατο for ἀνθίστατο. It is impossible to speak too highly of the learning and judgment, as well as the piety, displayed in the notes of Dr. Routh, who has spent the greater part of his leisure hours for the last five and twenty years in bringing to perfection the work before us: and he has spent them well; not in that inactive ease, into which the presidency of a collegiate establishment is so apt to lull its possessor; but in labouring to promote the cause of truth and orthodoxy, by bringing, as it were, into one focus the scattered rays of those luminaries of the church, which are still conveyed to us by reflexion, long after their orbs have set. When the work shall be completed by the addition of two more volumes, it will be a xτμа és del to the church; and whatever reception it may meet with in these half-learned and cavilling times, the author is sure of his reward.

ART.

ART. XI. Historical Memoirs of My Own Time, from 1772 to 1784. By Sir Nathaniel William Wraxall, Bart. 2 vols. 8vo. London: Cadell. 1815.

IT is said somewhere, that there is no man the events of whose life, candidly and simply written, would not afford an amusing volume; and we so far agree in the truth of this general proposition, as to believe that if Sir Nathaniel Wraxall had candidly and simply set down every considerable passage of his own time, he might have made an entertaining register of that species of small facts, which, though interesting as connected with the manners or politics of the day, are of a nature so minute and fugitive as to escape the notice of the graver historian.

But Sir Nathaniel is too much an historian by profession to condescend to such an humble style, and he accordingly assumes in his Memoirs a far higher tone, and affects to consider morals and politics, men and measures, more after the manner of a philosopher than of an honest chronicler.'

6

Now it is with great concern we feel ourselves obliged to say, that we think the worthy Baronet has most egregiously mistaken the amount both of his resources in the way of historical information, and of his ability to give interest and consistency to the facts with which he has happened to have some acquaintance. He has little to tell, and that little he tells badly, What he advances on his own evidence is generally not worth knowing, and what he gives on the authority of others he generally contrives to render suspicious either by his manner of relating, or by not quoting his authority when he might, or by quoting authority which is notoriously incredible.

We have not the pleasure of knowing Sir Nathaniel personally, but we perceive that he is one of those good-natured people who have a very vigorous appetite for, and a good digestion of the marvellous, and whose belief, in any fact, is strong in the inverse ratio of the evidence. Any thing supernatural, or even highly improbable, he swallows with great alacrity; but a trite and ordinary event is altogether suspicious in his eyes, if he has not some strange, little, out-of-the-way and insufficient cause to assign for it. We have no doubt that he is one of those who believe that the treaty of Utrecht was brought about by the spilling of a cup of tea on Queen Anne's brocade petticoat.

As a politician, (a character of which he seems in no small degree ambitious,) Sir Nathaniel's self-importance not unfrequently reminds us of the 'Memoirs of P. P. Clerk of this Parish,' who, with Robert Jenkins the farrier, and Amos Turner the collar-maker, 'held weekly councils, whereof the minister of the parish spake

VOL. XIII. NO. XXV.

N

to

to a multitude of other ministers at the visitation, and they spake there of unto the ministers at London, so that even the bishops heard and marvelled thereat.-Moreover, Sir Thomas, member of parliament, spake of the same unto other members of parliament, who spake of the same to peers of the realm. Lo! thus did our counsels enter into the hearts of our generals and our lawgivers, and from henceforth even as we devised thus did they.'

[ocr errors]

The Amos Turner of Sir Nathaniel appears to have been Sir John Macpherson, also a baronet, sometime governor-general of India, and since known in London by the flattering appellation of the Gentle Giant,' who, with Sir Nathaniel, appears to have devised of public matters, of which they spake to other members of parliament, and they again to peers of the realm, and lo! thus their counsels, &c. &c. Q. E. D.

We should, however, be wanting in justice to Sir Nathaniel if we did not confess that we find in the outset of his work, a very fair and modest avowal of his total unfitness for the office which he undertakes.

'I may further add, that never having held any employment, under any minister, at any period of my life, I neither can be accused of divulging official secrets; nor am I linked, in however humble a degree, with any of those ephemeral administrations, which took place with such rapidity between 1782 and 1784. I relate the events that I either witnessed, or of which I received the accounts from respectable testimony. How imperfect a light these sources of information enable me to throw on the period of time that I attempt to elucidate, I am fully aware: but, unfortunately, those individuals who, from their rank and situation, know most of the secrets of affairs, will generally divulge least; and éven imperfect light is preferable to darkness.'-pp. 3, 4.

On the other hand, against this self-pronounced sentence of abasement it is proper to set the intimation which Sir Nathaniel gives us of his resemblance to Tacitus.-Tacitus was contemporary with, and had obligations to Vespasian, Titus and Domitian; Sir Nathaniel is in the same category with regard to George III, Lord North, and Lord George Germaine; and, moreover, both Tacitus and Sir Nathaniel have written the history of their own times.— 'There is a river in Macedon, there is also, moreover, a river at Monmouth. It is called Wye at Monmouth, but it is out of my prains what is the name of the other, but 'tis all one; 'tis so like as my fingers is to my fingers, and there is salmons in both.' But to our British Tacitus.

In 1772, soon after Sir Nathaniel had completed his twenty-first year, he passed over to Portugal, where he seems greatly struck with the outlandish complexion of the king, Don Joseph, which was so very peculiar, that whoever looked at his majesty, immediately, and in spite of himself, took a lesson in geography. • One

could

could not look at him without involuntarily recollecting how near are the shores, and how similar are the climates of Portugal and Africa:'-p. 11-circumstances which, however legible in his majesty's countenance, are not to be read, we believe, in any other geographical work.

It is not a little amusing to find Sir Nathaniel, in 1815, still boastful of the pedantry for which he was so justly celebrated in the Probationary Odes thirty years ago, in one of which he is introduced as apostrophizing

[ocr errors]

Geography, terraqueous maid,

Descend from globes to statesmen's aid;

Again to heedless crowds unfold

Truths unheard, but not untold,

Come, and once more unlock this vasty world,

Nations attend! the Map of Earth's unfurl'd!'

Sir Nathaniel's description of Her Majesty the Queen is amusing, and shews that she was not an unworthy partner for the monarch of the topographical visage.

The Queen of Portugal, though at this time she was considerably advanced towards her 60th year, yet watched every motion of her husband, with all the vigilant anxiety of a young woman.'

'Whether the diversion was hunting, or shooting, or falconing, she was constantly at his side. No woman in Europe, indeed, rode bolder, or with more skill. Her figure almost defied the powers of description, on these occasions. She sat astride, as was the universal custom in Portugal, and wore English leather breeches; frequently black; over which she threw a petticoat, which did not always conceal her legs. A jacket of cloth, or stuff, and a cocked hat, sometimes laced, at other times without ornament, completed the masculine singularity of her appearance.' She was admitted to be an excellent shot, seldom missing the bird at which she fired, even when flying: but this diversion had nearly produced a most tragical result; as, a few years before I visited Portugal, she very narrowly missed killing the King with a ball, which actually grazed his temple.'—pp. 14, 15, 16.

[ocr errors]

We shall not follow Sir Nathaniel through a trite and tedious history of the royal house of Portugal, and of the conspiracy of the Tavora family, in which, according to his custom, he weaves in a wonderful little story of a young lady, who, for being suspected of having overheard a few words between the old Marchioness Tavora and her son, relative to the plot, was assassinated in their palace, and whose body, scarce cold and still oozing blood, was next day found in the streets of Lisbon. Except this story, the whole of Sir Nathaniel's account of Portugal, which fills nearly fourscore pages, may be read with equal profit and pleasure in the Annual Register, and the Gentleman's Magazine.

From the same sources might be obtained almost every syllable

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »