Selections from the Attic Orators Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, Edited with Notes by R
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR Additional services for The Classical Review: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Selections from the Attic Orators Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, edited with notes by R. C. Jebb, Litt. D., Camb., [late] Professor of Greek in the University of Glasgow. Second Edition. London: Macmillan. 1888. J. E. Sandys The Classical Review / Volume 3 / Issue 09 / November 1889, pp 406 - 408 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00195940, Published online: 27 October 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00195940 How to cite this article: J. E. Sandys (1889). The Classical Review, 3, pp 406-408 doi:10.1017/S0009840X00195940 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 128.122.253.228 on 29 Apr 2015 406 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. his conclusions, and it will repay any reader torical style, alien to that of Xenophon, (2) its to study them for himself. The fifth chapter affected and poetical diction, (3) its false discusses the Memorabilia. Here Dr. Hart- statements, (4) direct borrowing from the mann is a thorough-going follower of Schenkl HeUenica of passages which the writer has and Krohn, who used the knife with such either tried to make more definite and astonishing freedom. True he controverts particular, «r has spoilt by failing to under- in nine cases the excisions .or objections stand, or has deliberately changed in order of Schenkl, but he makes up for that to do greater honour to Agesilaus, (5) state- by many more of his own. He believes ments and observations not suited to the in an interpolator impudentissimus, who, time at which Xenophon must have com- editing the treatise after Xenophon's death, posed the piece, if he had done so. To this foisted in the parts which he condemns array of historical arguments are added as foolish or ill-written or false. This certain critical difficulties, and the use of was rendered all the more easy as the certain verba locutionesque insolentiora aut treatise, even as Xenophon wrote it, was suspecta. The upshot of it all is to show not consecutive, but had been continually that the Agesilaus is by a young declaimer added to during the author's life. The of the School of Isocrates. Dr. Hartmann sixth chapter contains emendations on the however feels that the very number of the text of the Memorabilia left after these arguments makes it the less certain that a excisions. The seventh chapter discusses reader will be convinced, for the detection the Oeconomicus. He rejects the suggestion of a weak point in any one shakes his confi- that it ever formed, or was intended to form, dence in all He appeals therefore finally to part of the Memorabilia, and defends his the finer sense of readers... qui enim non position at great length and with full SENTIT Agesilaum a Xenophonte non esse illustration. The eight chapter (pp. 188- scriptvm, eum nullis convinces argumentis. 213) again contains emendations on particu- The twelfth and last chapter (pp. 276-405) lar passages of the Oeconomicus. The ninth is devoted to criticisms and emendations of chapter discusses the old question of the the HeUenica. They are full both of the connexion between the Convivium of Xeno- strength and weakness of the critic; and, phon and that of Plato. He confesses that while they will often carry conviction, they the arguments which he here uses are not will also sometimes call forth opposition, new; and it will be enough to say that his and occasionally provoke a smile. It may position is that Plato's Convivium was pub- be safely said, however, that the book as a lished after that of Xenophon and was in- whole contains a mass of criticism on tended to refute and ridicule the presentment Xenophon of first-rate value. It certainly of Socrates contained in the latter's work. is entertaining, and has scarcely a dull page The tenth chapter follows (pp. 235-246) from end to end. And whether a reader with emendations on the text of the Conviv- agrees or disagrees with the author, he will ium. In the eleventh chapter—which has undoubtedly close the book with awakened the motto rts OXKTI TOV Oavovr airutTaveiv,—he interest in and a fuller knowledge of Xeno- restates the case against the genuineness of phon. the Agesilaus. This he rests on (1) its rhe- E. S. SHUCKBUEGH. SELECTIONS FROM THE ATTIC ORATORS. Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos, has Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, edited now been reprinted in a handy form that will with notes by R. C. JEBB, Litt. D., Camb., make it readily accessible to a still larger [late] Professor of Greek in the University number of students. It is superfluous at of Glasgow. Second Edition. London : the present date to praise the taste and Macmillan. 1888. judgment which have here been applied to the difficult task of selecting adequately TEACHERS of Greek have good reason for representative specimens of the earlier Attic rejoicing that a book, which has been Orators, or to dwell on the scrupulous pains before the public for the last nine years as a which have been bestowed on the explanatory companion volume ranging in size with the as well as the critical notes. In the new editor's brilliant and attractive work on the edition the latter, instead of being placed THE CLASSICAL .REVIEW. 407 apart before the text, are far more con- Oavovrmv. Vide Thuc. ii. 52.' In Dob- veniently printed at the foot of the page, spn's Oratores Attici, the same emendation is while the explanatory notes remain as ascribed to the French editor, Auger; but, before at the end of the book. as I have shown, it was an English scholar The few suggestions here offered for the who was the first to suggest it in a timid and removal of some misprints and other trifling tentative way, leaving Professor Jebb to inaccuracies will be almost entirely confined propose it afresh and to print it with confi- to the speech of Lysias on behalf of Manti- dence as part of the text.—In the explana- theus (Or. 16), that of Isaeus on the estate tory note on § 13, the Athenian expedition of Dicaeogenes (Or. 5), and the Aegineticus for the relief of Haliartus is by a misprint of Isocrates (Or. 19). attributed to B.C. 325, instead of 395 which In the explanatory note on Lysias 16§7, ovre is correctly printed in the former edition. Karaaraxnv irapa\a./36vTa, Prof. Jebb rightlAgainy , in the note on § 19 the apt quotation states that 'Bake reads Kara^aXovra, which iiri<j>6ov6s eort Kal Tct^«<os /3a8l£ei Kal fteya could hardly = refunded '; but it ought to <j>6(yytTai has accidentally been assigned to be added that this proposal, though Dem. adv. Gcdlippum, instead of adv. Pan- approved by Sauppe, was afterwards taenetum. retracted by Bake himself in favour of On Isaeus, Or. 5 § 17, ^ex/Zofw-pTvpuav is in XafiovTa, in his Scholica Hypomnemata, both editions misprinted ilrevSo/Mprvpiov, the V 162-3, published in 1862:—'re iterum modern compositor having thus made a simi- iterumque considerata, dubitare coepi an lar slip to that of the ancient copyist in the vere dixerim.' The work just quoted is well-known passage of Aristotle's Politics ii. little known in England, but English 12, as emended in Bentley's Phala/ris : ~Kap- scholars may turn with interest to the utvhov iSiov fief oiStv icrnv, irXr/v al Sticai rS>v preface of its second volume, published in \ffevSofiapTvpiS>v, K.T.X. In the next note (on 1839. They will there find an account i£aipe6euru>v rtav \j/~fj(jiiav), Dobree's emendation of the pleasant impression produced at is in both editions printed i^epaurOeuruiv, in- Leyden by the visit (in 1816) of Gaisford, stead of i£epa0£ur£>v. In the note on § 23, Professor of Greek at Oxford, and (in 1815) of the reference for av irpo<rx<i>prj<reiv should be Dobree, one of Professor Jebb's predecessors Thuc. ii. 80 (not ii. 8). in the Chair of Greek at Cambridge. Turning to some pages of greater literary In the text of § 15 of the same speech, interest in another part of the volume, I fxAXurra Ttjs rj/jLeripas <j>v\fjs &v<TTV)(r]<r(i<rr]s Kal notice in passing that, in the remarks on the irXaoTwv ivOavovrwv, the last word is influence of Isocrates on the Latin style of rightly altered into kvairoOavovrmv. In theCicero, Professor Jebb appeals, as before, to critical note, the editor says: ' hairoOavovrmv the passage of Cicero, ad Att. ii. 1, where he is my correction of ivOavovrmv,' adding that speaks of himself as ' using all the fragrant ' Markland conjectured evOa or hnaWa Oavov-essences of Isocrates and all the little stores T(i>v.' The authority for this statement, of his disciples'; but, to quote the courteous which unintentionally does a slight injustice criticism of Professor Wilkins, ' it ought not to Markland, is apparently the preface to to have been overlooked that in the words so Scheibe's second edition (the true date of admirably rendered Cicero is speaking of a which, by the way, is 1862 and not 1876, work written in Greek' (Introd. to De which is only the date of a reprint with a Oratore, p. 36 of first ed., 1879). On Iso- fresh title-page).