abbreviation of aveu, I should give some other instances of this change of ev into ή. In this manner we have from εὔανδρος, evander, from evάyyeλos, evangelus, and from evo evoë, the digamma being inserted between the first and second syllables, as in novus from véos. We have a farther instance of the conversion of us into 5 in the proper names Achilles, Ulysses, &c., ̓Αχιλλεὺς, Οδυσσεύς. Perhaps too the imperfect ἐτίθην is regularly contracted from ἐτίθεον, ἐτίθουν, ἐτίθευν, ἐτίθην.

I will just add, that if Dr. Blomfield had banished v instead of v from the Greek language, he should have had my full consent, and the more so because I believe it is this spurious particle vw that has bred the suspicion of being also spurious. It is evident, that νώνυμος and ἀνώνυμος, νώδυνος and ἀνώδυνος, are precisely the same words, with the difference only of an apharesis, and it would be absurd therefore to assign to the same words a different etymology, to make avavuμos a compound of ἂν and ὄνομα, and νώνυμος a compound of va and ὄνομα. It is equally evident too, that νηλεής and ἀνηλεής, νήκεστος aud ἀνήκεστος, differ only in respect of an aphæresis, and therefore it was concluded by analogy, that if avλen's was compounded of av and λen's, vnλen's could not be otherwise compounded. But the analogy fails in this, that the supposed v never is found but as a prefix to some word beginning with a vowel, and that vowel ō; whereas is found not only before the vowels ñ, ē, and ā, but also before consonants, as vnxepon's, výλevotos, &c. It is certain, therefore, that exists, as an inseparable particle, before many words beginning with a consonant, and it is probable, that it exists too as such wherever it is found before words beginning with a short vowel. Thus νήκεστος, νηλεής, νήνεμος, νήγρετος, &c. are quasi νη-άκεστος, νη-ελεὴς, νη-άνεμος, νη-έγρετος, and the full words without an aphæresis would be ἀνη-άκεστος, ἀνη-ελεής, &c. In all these instances, according to the common rule, brevis initialis vocalis tollitur ante finalem longam. Whenever the principal word begins with an 7, I will surrender to the exterminating zeal of Dr. Blomfield, and spite of the respect I have for Hederick, Patrick, and my old masters, I must agree in thinking, that ἀνήλιπος and νήλιπος are better formed from av and ἤλιψ, than from avy or vi and ἤλιψ.

One word now at parting to Professor Dunbar. He remarks that ἀνήκεστος is improperly written for ἀνάκεστος, being compounded of a privative and axéoua. The very same doubt was a source of perplexity to a grammarian quoted in Schaffer's edition of Gregorius Corinthius, p. 880. His words are these: ̓Ανηλεής ἄνθρωπος λέγεται μετὰ τοῦ ἤ, οὐκ ἀνελεής, καίτοι δοκεῖ

ἀκόλουθον εἶναι μᾶλλον τὸ δεύτερον. But if I am right in my preceding conjecture, that av is the privative particle, and that a, av, and vǹ are only abbreviations of the full form av, then both ávýxeσtos and ávλns are very properly written, and as much so as ανάκεστος aud ἀνελεής would be, as both the rule of grammar and the law of pronunciation teach that the short vowel should give way to the long, rather than the long to the short vowel. If the Greeks had chosen to pronounce and write άvnoτpos, or νήστρος, quasi ἀνη-στρος, as they did μή 'στι for μή ἐστι, instead of ἄναστρος, i. e. ἄν-αστρος, where would be the offence either against analogy or against reason? If the former mode of composition has prevailed in άvn-λens åvý-xeσTOS, &c., and the latter mode has been preferred in åv-άotpos, äv-eλTIS, &c., it is chance and use that have determined this matter, and not design and ratiocination. Every language abounds in instances of this want of uniformity, and we are indebted to the irregularities of every language for one of its principal graces, that of variety.

I have now endeavored to make good my promise, and to prove that in Greek is as genuine a particle as ne in Latin, and that both are of the same origin, and perform the same office in compounds. If I have succeeded in defending, and in maintaining its right to a place in every Greek vocabulary, I have the satisfaction also of having defended from unmerited censure Valckenaer, and all the host of my good and dear friends, the ancient lexicographers and grammarians.

Oct. 1822.

J. B. M.

GREEK INSCRIPTIONS.

THE accompanying letter, which I have lately received from Mr. Charles Otfried Müller, Professor of Antiquities at Gottingen, relates to an inscription in the Æolic dialect, which I copied at Turnavo in Thessaly, and which I published in the second volume of Mr. Walpole's collection of Travels in the East, p. 506. For the better understanding of Mr. Müller's letter, I here subjoin the inscription.

ΑΠΛΟΥΝΙΚΕΡΔ.ΙΟΥΣΟΥΣΙΠΑΤΡΟΣ
ΠΟΛΕΜΑΡΧΙΔΑΙΟΣΟΘΥΤΑΣ

ΟΝΕΘΕΙΚΕΙΕΡΟΜΝΑΜΟΝΕΙ

ΣΑΣΚΑΙ ΑΡΧΙΔΑΥΧΝΑΦΟΡΕΙΣΑΣ

If Mr. Müller is right in his interpretation of the last word, the inscription in common Greek will be as follows.

Απόλλωνι Κερδώς Σωσίπατρος
Πολεμαρχίδου ἱεροθύτης
ἀνέθηκε ἱερομνημονή

σας καὶ ἀρχιδαφνηφορήσας.

The other inscription from the same part of the country, alluded to by Mr. Müller, is as follows:

ΑΠΛΟΥΝΙΤΕΠΕΙΤΑ

ΑΙΣΧΥΛΙΣΣΑΤΥΡΟΙ
ΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΙΑ

*Απόλλωνι Τεμπείτῃ Αἰσχυλὶς Σατύρου ἐλευθέρια.

W. M. LEAKE.

MEMINISTI fortasse, vir præstantissime, quo die mihi tecum monumenta itinerum tuorum percurrere contigerat, sermonem inter nos incidisse in titulos illos Thessalicos, quorum alter inter Tempe et Larissam a te detectus a muliere quadam Απλοννι Τεμπειτα, alter, quem in finibus Atracis reperisti, a viro αρχιδανχν φορεισαντι et ιερομναμονείσαντι Απλούνι obscure cognominato dedicatus est: atque, cum tu sententiam promeres, virum hunc, non quod Vv. Cl. Walpole et Dobree protulerunt, λυχνηφόρον, sed δαφνηφόρον fuisse, me pedibus in eam sententiam cucurrisse, quod ea mutatio non solum ad dialectum multo melius quadrare videretur, sed etiam ad sacra Græciæ, inprimisque Thessaliæ, cum nunquam fere lychnophoriarum in Apollinis religionibus mentio fieret, daphnephoriarum autem in ea regione magna fuerit celebritas; tum te ex me Parisios jam abeunte petiisse, ut litteris datis tibi quod ad manus haberem de Apolline Tempita et daphnephoriis hisce perscriberem, quod nunc eo libentius facio, quo magis eruditionis tuæ copia et sermonis suavitas animum meum admiratione et caritate devinxerunt. Jam igitur, si placet, oculos convertas in aram illam, in convallibus Tempeon ad Peneum albicantem Apollini antiquitus dedicatam, (v. Ælian. V. H. iii, 1.) cultoribus, puto, Doriensibus, quos olim has regiones tenuisse constat, et sacra Apollinaria per totam Græciam disseminasse, demonstrari potest. Hæc ea est, unde deus in marmore tuo Teμmeiras audit. Haud longe distabat Pythium, templum et oppidulum in jugis Olympi, plus quam sexies mille sedes supra æquor situm (v. Plutarch. Æmilio), quod ego quidem omnium per Græciam Pythiorum facile antiquissimum puto. Aræ autem illi proxima erat laurus quædam vetustate nobilis, nomine obscuro (vel corrupto) Avapeía dicta, (Hesychius s. v.) unde theoria Delphis nono quoque aimo buc missa ramum decerptum reportabat. Sed de hac theoria permitte ut sermonem altius repetam. Satis constat, totam fere Apollinis fabulam apud Delphos dramate quodam sacro propositam esse, de quo

multa docet Plutarchus de def. orac. xiv. 21. quæst. gr. viii. 12. Puer patrimus et matrimus, e nobilibus Delphorum lectus, deum agebat cum Pythone pugnantem, de eoque triumphantem. Quibus peractis victorem cæde pollutum, ut ipsum olim Apollinem, extorrem fieri fas erat. Evadit igitur abitque via, quæ iepà sive Пvoiàs dicitur, quam ex Æliano aliisque definire in promptu est. Descripta erat per fines Locrorum, Ozolarum, Doriensium, Ænianum, Œtæorum, Maliensium. Deinde via ad Pagasas deflectit, atque lucum Apollinis Pagasitæ tangit, quod ex fragmenti Eœarum, quod vulgo Hesiodi Scutum dicunt, ultimis versibus intelligi potest. Tum ad Pheras tendit, ubi puer pullatus et sordidus servitutem imitabatur, quam ipse quondam Apollo ex antiquo jure de homicidiis, ut sanguinem effusum expiaret, subierat. (Fabulæ antiquissimam formam refert Auexandrides Delphus apud Schol. Eurip. Alc. pr. et Plutarchus.) Post hæc Tempe devenit theoria, ubi in cœtu totius Thessaliæ (v. Ælian. 1. 1. et Plutarch. de def. or. 14. τοὺς ἔξω Πυλῶν πάντας Ἕλληνας ἡ πόλις κατοργιάζουσα μέχρι Τεμπῶν λýλake) lustrationis cæremoniis quibusdam ad aram illam peractis puer Apollinem agens, ramo de lauro decerpto, virginum choro jam lætiora Parthenia accinente, Aapunpópos redibat. At cibum capere non ante licebat, quam Deipniade, in vico ad Larissam, quem inde patet situm fuisse ad viam Пlv0iáda (Stephan. Byz. s. v. Aeiπviás). Hane, quam definivimus, viam theoria peragebat intra mensis spatium; septimo enim die mensis Bysii, qui Atticis est Munychion, pugna cum Pythone pugnata dicitur; at septimum Thargelionis, sicut Athenis et Deli, ita ad Tempe, diem lustrationis sanctissimum fuisse, probabile puto. Mittebant autem Delphi eam theoriam, ut dixi, nono quoque anno. Hæc inde periodus, quam Græci ennaëterida dicunt, magna in sacris Græciæ auctoritate celebrata est. Pythiadas antiquiores cum ludis musicis, quos bello Amphictyonum contra Cirrham multo priores esse constat, ennaëtericas fuisse, docet Demetrius Phalereus (ap. Eust. ad Odyss. iii. p. 1466. Rom. Schol. Odyss. iii. v. 267. Maji). Ad eundem calculum Ismenia Thebanorum instituta erant, ut relatum habemus a Proclo apud Photium, eandemque periodum, quam olim Censorino teste Græci plerique annum magnum habebant, etiam aliis feriarum cyclis fundamento fuisse, nuper demonstravit Bockhius in Commentario ad Pindari Olympia. Cum autem præcipue et a principio ad religiones Delphicas pertineat, atque ab iisdem fere omnis lustrandi disciplina originem duxerit, intelligitur, qui factum sit, ut eadem ennaeteris olim homicidis lustrari cupientibus, ut tempus pœnæ, exilii, servitutis definiretur, quod Apollodorus, qui eam car' éoxùv éviavròv dictam affirmat, et de Hercule et de Cadmo agens prodit. Sed hæc materiam satis largam amplioris disputationis præbent; bic tantum posui, quæ ostendere possint, quam antiqua, quam celebris, quam veneranda fuerit en daphnephoria ad aram Απλούνος Τεμπειτα. Atque omnem fere

Thessaliam in ea partes egisse, jam dixi, nec non cum cœtibus sacris publicam quandam civitatum dupukтvovíav junctam fuisse, Pylaicæ fortasse haud dissimilem, quanquam multo ignobiliorem, vestigia quædam monstrant ad tempora Romanorum usque servata (Livius xxxix, 24). Quam opinionem magnopere affirmari puto inscriptione tua, quæ eundem hominem Thessalum et ȧpxidaørnpópov et iepoμvýpova fuisse ostendit, quod nomen in amphictyonia Pylarum satis celebre, et jam nullus dubito quin utrumque ejus munus ad sacra Téμлешv pertineat.

ADVERSARIA LITERARIA.

No. XXXI.

Classical Criticism.

THE following emendation of a passage in Horace has little to recommend it on the score of elegance; but as it proceeds from no ordinary source, and appears to have been hitherto unnoticed, I have been induced to transcribe it. It is cursorily introduced by H. Stephens in his Thesaurus, under the word Κεφαλή: « Sed et illud ipsum φίλη κεφαλή ad verbum expresserunt (Latini) Carum caput: ut Horat. 1. Carm. 14. Queis desiderio sit pudor aut modus Tam cari capitis, præcipe lugubres, etc. ita enim locum illum lego, non autem interrogative Quis desiderio sit pudor aut modus Tam cari capitis? præcipe, etc. et intelligo Præcipe lugubres cantus queis, i. e. per quos, sit modus desiderio: qua de re obiter admoneri, non ingratum lectori fore putavi." Besides the extreme flatness of this commencement, there seems little propriety in applying to Melpomene for a remedy against excessive grief, and less probability that the remedy sought (lugubres cantus) would prove efficacious.

Under the same article on Kedah, the following amusing digression deserves notice. Having discussed the expression μagà xepaλn, H. Stephens proceeds thus: "Hic vero mihi a risu temperare nequeo quum recordor Joachimi Perionii Benedictini Cormoriaceni, (viri monachice docti,) qui quum se Ciceronianæ eloquentiæ vicarium in vertendis celeberrimorum Græciæ Oratorum adversariis orationibus appellare non dubitasset, nactus mendosum exemplar (ut fit) orationis Eschinis in quo μικρὰ κεφαλὴ legebatur pro μιαρὰ κεφαλὴ, minime illius exempla ris fidem suspectam habuit, (quum alioqui interpres alius vel