reft in Scotland. We use the term evangelical, to show the nature of this gentleman's ideas of Chriftianity, which corresponds with what, in this country, is termed evangelical, or methodiftical. He affifted in the establishment of meetings or tabernacles, and of Sunday fchools; and the vulgar language here frequently indulged against methodifim accompanied his exertions in Scotland. It was faid that his Sunday schools were schools of fedition, and his tabernacles were fapping the foundation of the Scotch establishment. Both of thefe calumnies he refutes by found argument, and with a Christian spirit; and fome may think that on the accusation of sedition he goes too far, as he inculcates implicit obedience to the powers that be, and denies to the Chriftian every fort of interference with political government. On the whole we must acquit Mr. Haldane of any ill defigns against either church or state. He exerts himfelf with ardour in the caufe of religion, for which he is to be highly commended; an ardour, indeed, that is feldom to be found in the higher claffes of fociety. The necessary effect of an establishment in all countries is a relaxation, in courfe of time, from its first principles; this will excite men of warm tempers to endeavour to recal it to its original inftitution-hence, a ftruggle will arife between the two parties, which, if conducted on Christian principles, would tend to the advantage of both. The exceffive zeal of the one would be moderated, the coldness of the other would be animated. The caufe which this author has undertaken is increafing very rapidly both in England and Scotland, and, fince the established churches in both countries regard it with an unfavourable eye, it becomes a more interesting fubject to enquire into its merits and demerits. For the credit of the church of England it has not used fuch violent and intemperate language as we have feen, with afton fhment, iffuing from high authority in the northern parts of the island, and we shall hope that the conteft in this country will be conducted upon better principles: that the clergy here will examine minutely into the pretenfions of their brethren the evangelical preachers, compare them with the word of truth, and, by an active and zealous infpection of their flock, fecure it from every real contamination and difeafe. The rules of the fociety for propagating religion at honie, given at the clofe of this work, are of a fimilar tendency with those adopted by the evangelical minifters in England. ERRATA. IN OUR LAST VOLUME, P. 410, 1. 4, for particular read practical. P. 412, 1. 3, for tout-dominant read fous dominant. IN OUR PRESENT VOLUME, P. 70, lines 9 and 11 from the bottom, dele Dr. CRITICAL REVIEW. NOVEMBER, 1800. EXPINIAOT 'EKABH. Euripidis Hecuba, ad Fidem Mannfcriptorum emendata, et brevibus Notis Emendationum potiffi mum Rationes reddentibus inftructa. In Ufum fiudiofæ Juviututis. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Wilkie. THE publication before us is generally understood, and as generally acknowledged, to be the production of Mr. Porfon, late fellow of Trinity college, and now Greek profeffor in the university of Cambridge. What motive of wifdom or prudence, of modefty or magnanimity, has induced the author either to with-hold the communication of his name altogether, as in the prefent inftance, or to deliver his name, as on a former occafion, without thofe difcriminations of degree and college and office, which are ufually fubjoined to their works by ordinary men not athamed of academical connections, fince he has not condefcended to inform his readers, we profess ourfelves unable to divine. This we know at leaft; such performances as have iffued from the pen of this profeffor would confer celebrity and honour on any name, however fignalifed by literature, of any age or country. At the end of his preface, our editor has fignified his intention of publishing feparately, in the vulgar order of their arrangement, the remaining plays of Euripides, if this first specimen thould be favourably received by the public. But his labours, we truft, in this interefting province, which is peculiarly his own, will not terminate with Euripides. The lovers of Greek literature will experience a moft grievous difappointment, if Sophocles and fchylus fhould not profit in their turn by the critical cares of fo accomplished a mafter in his art; a mafter, qualified in many refpects to do that juftice to thefe illuftrious tragedians, which they can expect from no other artist: and we are mistaken, if Áriftophanes, and the copious fragments of other comic writers, have not ftill higher CRIT. REV. VOL. XXX. November, 1800. S claims upon our professor for a restoration to as much accuracy and correctness as can poffibly be conferred upon them by ingenuity and learning, in conjunction with all the fubtleties and dexterities of modern criticism. The number of readers, in this day of fuperficial study and intellectual diffipation, that are calculated to apprehend, and relish, and appreciate the profeffor's fylteimatic labours, we believe to be extremely few. Claffic literature, however, in general, whofe folid foundation is ftrict and elaborate criticifm, will be bound by the strongest obligations of gratitude to his exertions for reftoring and rectifying the text of fuch valuable writers to that purity, which can alone refult from the finest talents in cooperation with every poffible opportunity of information, and every acceffible affiftance from MSS. and the best editions. The profeffor's knowledge of his fubject is at once extenfive, accurate, and profound: his judgement cool, cautious, and fevere: his decifions always peremptory, but frequently dogmatical: his illuftrations, and obfervations in general, referved, unornamental, and concife, unless when he occafionally expatiates in a fuperfluity of words to flagellate an antagonist, or banter a fellow-labourer, lefs gifted than himself; he is then farcaftical, indeed illiberal, to an extent, which cannot fail to excite aftonishment in affociation with fuch extraordinary endowments of learning and fagacity. Of this, and of all our other remarks, to his praife or difpraife, we shall furnish fome proofs in the courfe of our attention to his publications. We think we perceive alfo at times too much appearance of deliberate oppofition to an explanation and emendation, right or wrong, which has never been promulgated by himself or the tribunal of his critical friends: fo that a correction or conjecture feems, on fome occafions, to be rejected merely becaufe it had previously efcaped their fagacity, or not yet received the fanction of their mandamus. Violations moreover of metrical propriety, which are feverely profecuted when obferved in others, are readily committed by the profeffor himself, even in contradiction to his own unexceptionable rules. Jura negat fibi nata, nihil non arrogat armis. Notwithstanding thefe culpable irregularities, these immoralities of criticifm, we feel no hetitation in affirming, that fuch fpecimens of rigorous, exact, judicious and learned emendation, from a juft eftimate of MSS. variations, have never yet been exhibited in fo fmall a compafs; and the university of Cambridge will blush to the latest day of her existence at the mufelets Syndics of her prefs, who deprived her of thofe honours which pofterity would have accumulated on her name, if the had been fufficiently fenfible of her poffeffion to patronife this unrivaled ornament of her difcipline in his editions of Æfchylus and the other dramatic writers of Greece from her public prefs. Centuries may not place a fimilar opportunity within her power. We fhall now proceed to a particular review of the profeffor's exertions in the work before us, in corroboration of thefe preliminary remarks. Our editor's preface is brief, if confidered as the introduction to fo laborious and voluminous an undertaking; but, if contemplated in its contents, it is pregnant with accurate learning, and with original, as well as highly important, information. We fhall indulge ourselves but little in quotations, as every reader, who is engaged in claffical occupations, will deem the poffeffion of the book abfolutely neceffary to his purfuits; and to readers unexercised and uninterested in these ftudies, fuch quotations would prove, not merely wearifome, but impertinent and useless. • In Hecuba, ut a me edita eft, neque omiffi verborum augmen ti, neque admiffi in paribus fenariorum locis anapafti exemplum occurrit. Locus unicus, qui priori licentiæ in hoc dramate favet, ab ipfo Brunckio, acerrimo alias hujus licentiæ vindice, emendatus eft. Et cum rariffima omnino fint talia exempla, quorum tria in Bacchis, corruptiffima pene omnium fabula, reperiantur, plane perfuafum habeo, non licuiffe in Attico fermone augmentum abjicere.' P. iv. The profeffor, for the information of thofe ftudious youth, ftudiofæ juventutis, whofe exigencies he declares himself to have particularly confidered in this edition, thould not have forgotten one exception to this rule, xp frequently used for x in the imperfect tenfe, when no vowel or diphthong has preceded to occafion an elifion. What our editor next delivers, refpecting the inadmiffibility of anapæsts in any foot of the tragic iambic beyond the first, is new and important; one refult of his deep infight into the ancient rythmus; and, we make no difficulty in adding, incontrovertibly juft and true. Let the profeffor fpeak for himfelf on this article. 'Altera quæftio, quod ad Hecubam attinet, non minus faciles explicatus habet. In neutro enim duorum exemplorum, ubi anapæftum admifit aut retinuit Brunckius, omnes confentiunt MSS. In altero, v. 788, lectio ejus uno tantum codice nititur. In altero, 385, (rodvoua pro čvuz) fatis auctoritatis pro vua, fi auctoritas in re tantilla defideraretur. Brunckius, qui anapaftos in fecundo et quarto fenarii loco fubinde defendit, fatetur tamen tragicos hanc licentiam, quantum poterant, vitaffe. Quidni igitur femper vitarint? An volebant, et tamen nequibant? An cafu et incuria cos has maculas fudiffe arbi trabimur? Adde quod MSS. auctoritate, fcriptorum citationibus, et criticis argumentis exemplorum, quæ in hanc partem laudari folebant, numerus jam valde imminutus eft. Aliam ipfe rationem adjicio, quæ fi vera eft, omnes, opinor, anapaftum paribus fenarii locis femper excludendum effe ultro agnofcent. Hanc rationem, non plane quidem novam, plerisque tamen ignotam, quam breviffime explicabo. Tantum fcilicet abeft, mea fententia, ut anapæftus pro fecundo aut quarto pede ponatur, ut ne pro tertio quidem aut quinto fubftitui poffit. Hoc de tertio pede fi quis verum effe concedet, concedet a fortiori, ut logici dicunt, de quinto etiam verum effe. Dactylus enim, qui in tertia fede creberrime ufurpatur, in quinto numquam apparet. Anapæftus igitur, fi illa excluditur, hanc intrare non poteft. Jam loca, quæ huic doctrinæ adverfantur, tam pauca funt, tam facilia emendatu pleraque, ut fi unus et akter forte fuperfint, quibus nos mederi nequeamus, non idcirco fana judicanda fint. Equidem omnia, quæ regulæ noftræ contraria obfervavi, aut fanare, aut adverfariis eripere poffe videor. Ea quæ Euripideæ fabulæ fuppeditant, fingula, ubi occafio poftulabit, examinabo.' P. vi.. After thefe indifputable pofitions, we were much furprised to find the following note at ver. 273 of the profeffor's Oreftes; and the more fo as the fidelity of his memory feems no lefs confpicuous than his other extraordinary accomplishments of critical erudition. • Cæterum veriffime obfervat Reifkius, Euripidem facile potuiffe folcciimum et fibila comicorum effugere, verfum fic concinnando :' Εκ κυμάτων ΓΑΡ ΟΡΩ γαληνην αυθις αυ. Where behold, in oppofition to his own flatutes, an anapræft, fanctioned by our metrical lawgiver, in the third toot! • Quæ nemora, aut qui vos faltus habuere, puellæ Picrides!' that ye thould abandon the profeffor to this dereliction of his own rules and fuch failure of recollection? Befides, the inadvertency of the tragedian thould be called, in ftrictness of fpeech, an ambiguity; and is denominated a folæcifm, we ap prehend, with inaccuracy not pardonable in an inftructor of fuch eminence. After all, however, this may be no more than a piece of refined jocularity in the profeffor to entrap the uninitiated in the myfteries of his witticifins. The profeffor then proceeds to fpecify fix examples from fchylus, and four from Sophocles, of deviations from this canon, which be rectifies with a neatness, and facility, and acuteness, that characterife his criticifms, and are commenfurate |