« ElőzőTovább »
Καὶ καθεύδει τις, καὶ ἄλλος ὑποπίνει, 1. ἀγρυπνεῖ.
— 6. Επεί τοι καὶ ἐκεῖνα οἱ αὐτοὶ ὑμνοῦσι, Ι. ἐκεῖνοι ταῦτα ὑμνοῦσι λύγγαις.
7. Θεῖ μὲν γὰρ εἰς κύκλον, ἀλλ ̓ ἐξωτέρω περιθέουσα, 1, οὐκ εἰς κ. ἀλλ ̓ ἐξ. vel οὐδ ̓ ἐξωτέρω.
– 9. Λέοντα θαλάττιον ἐοικέναι καράβῳ ἀμηγέπη καὶ ἡμεῖς ἴσμεν. Pro ἀμηγέπη 1. εὐμεγέθει.
– 11. Καὶ πῆξαι γάλα παρέξει ἀπὸν δούς. Vox δοὺς redundat. 13. Αἱροῦσι, 1. πείθουσι.
14. Υπολαπάττει, 1. ὑπολαπάττεται.
– 16. Τὸν κρυμὸν οὐ πελάζει, Ι. τ. κ. ἐξελάσει. [“ Hæc corrupta sunt, An ἀποστέγει, ut supra x. 4? an potius ἀπελαύνει!” Schneider.]
— 20. Καὶ ὁρᾷν διψῶσιν αὐτὸ, καὶ ἀκούειν λειβομένου, 1. καὶ ὅταν διψῶσιν, ἀκούειν αὐτοὺς ὕδατος λειβομένου. Error mentis ? [“ Καὶ ὁρᾶν διψῶσιν αὐτὸ, καὶ ἀκούειν λειβομένου, ita cum Gyllio Gesnerus. Vulgo, διψῶσιν ἀκούειν αὐτοὺς, καὶ ἀκούειν.” Schneider.]
Ροκκαίας, Ι. 'Ραυκίας.
21. Ἢ ἔχειν ὕδατι καὶ ὄξει ἀνεμιχθέντι, 1. ἀναμιχθέντα.
Καὶ χοῖροί τε, καὶ ἥσυχοι ἰδεῖν λευκοί, 1. χλωροί τε, καὶ ἥσυχοι, ἔστι δ' ἰδεῖν λευκοί.
– 24. Παγκύνικον. Fors. φαγκόνικον, a φάω, Occido.
29. ̓Ενετράφη, Ι. ἐνετράπη, Mutatum est. [“'Ενετράφη, ita Mediceus et alter Gesneri Codex pro ἀνετράφη.” Schneider.]
xv. 1. Ταῖς καλουμέναις ἡμέρεσι, 1. ἐφημερίσι. Musca Ephemeris dicta. [" Pro ἡμερέσι Cod. alter Gesneri ἡμέραις habet, Gesnerus ἀνθηδόσιν e seqq. legit. An τοῖς μονημέροις, vel ἐφημέροις legendum: Schneider.]
Εχουσι δέ τινα τῶν προειρημένων ἑκάστου μοῖραν ἰδίαν. L. ἑκάσται
11. "Αρει φίλῳ, 1. Αρειοπάγῳ.
12. Κατώλισθόν τε, 1. κατολίσθονται.
13. Αὐχένος, 1. ὄμματος.
— 23. Εν τοῖς ἄνω τοῦ χρόνου, 1. ἄνω χρόνοις.
xvi. 3. Μουσωθέν, 1. μιμώσαν.
- 9. Δυσλόφους δὲ καὶ γαργαλεῖς ἄλλως, 1. ἀργαλέας. [Vide Schneideri not. ED.]
18. Εκ τούτου τὰ δένδρα, 1. τοῦ δένδρου.
Οἵαις, 1. καὶ ὡς, vel, ὡς ἄν.
27. Προσπελάσῃ τι, 1. τις.
Εστ ̓ ἂν παραδράμῃ ἄνθρωπος ἐντὸς, 1. ἐκτὸς, Procul.
28. Αὐτῷ τοῦ στόματος, 1. αὐτῷ τῷ τοῦ στ.
xvii. 9. Στέρνα εἰς ὀξὺν, Ι. ἕτερα. Vox στέρνα occurrit linea priore. [“ Voc. στέρνα corruptam puto cum Pawio ad Philen. Carm. 94. qui ἕτερα εἰς ὀξὺν legit.” Schneider.]
21. Οϊστοὺς βαρεῖς ῥοίζω βιαιοτάτῳ, καὶ νευρᾶς ἐντάσει σφοδρά ισχυρᾶς. Transpone, δϊστοὺς, καὶ νευρὰς σφοδρα ἰσχυρὰς σὺν ἐντάσει καὶ ῥοίζῳ βαιαιοτάτῳ.
23. Ινδοὶ δὲ ἄρα καὶ τὴν ἐξ ὀρνίθων τροφὴν εἶχον, 1. τρυφὴν, Aves erant in deliciis. ["Triller legendum putat Tpupy, non male." Schneider.]
30. Ζηνόθεμις λέγει περὶ Παιονίδα λίμνην τινὰς φέρειν ἰχθύς, 1.
- 33. Ὑποτεῖναν τῷ τραχήλῳ τὰ σκέλη, rectius τὸν τράχηλον καὶ Tà xéλn, de actione inter volandum.
37. Ερμασιν, 1. ὡς ἕρμασιν. [“ In versione est, Spiris illius ceu laqueis, sed vocem puto equidem corruptam." Schneider.] 44. Υποπεσόντος, 1. ὑπὸ πεσόντος. [" Verb. ὑποπεσ. absolute dicitur, intellecto Exépavтos." Schneider.]
LEAKE'S REMARKS ON THE TROJAN CONTROVERSY.
As the topography of Homer's Iliad cannot fail to command a certain degree of interest, until the poem itself ceases to please, there are few subjects to which our Journal more willingly recurs, although it has so frequently been discussed. A former Number contained some strictures upon Major RENNELL'S work, on what has now assumed the name of the Trojan Controversy. As the following remarks on the same subject, by Colonel LEAKE,' may not be much known, and as they strongly advise a mode of elucidating the subject, which yet remains unexecuted, we have thought, that an insertion of them in the present Number, might help to recoinmend to the notice of future travellers, what now appears to be the only desideratum on the subject.
As all the authorities upon the Trojan Controversy have already been brought before the public, in the able works of Chevalier Bryant, Mr. Morritt, and Sir William Gell, and in the History of
They are extracted from the Researches in Greece, with a few Emendations by the Author.
Ilium, by Chandler, I shall proceed to offer a few remarks, upon the supposition that all these works are well known to the reader.
In this question there seems to have been some error, in expecting from a poet the accuracy required in a naturalist or a surveyor. The ancients were seldom very correct reckoners, or attentive to that precision of description and of details, which the exact sciences have made so common among the moderns. It is likely that none of the authors, who speak of the Troad, had themselves visited the place, except Homer himself, and perhaps Straboand as to the latter, those who have travelled over much of the ground described by him, must have noticed how careless an observer he generally is, how much he depends upon the information of others, and how little his loose (though elegant) style, and his philosophical reflections, are adapted to the mathematical correctness required in a geographer.' It is not surprising, therefore, that Strabo's description of the Troad appears in many instances defective or inaccurate, when applied to the district around Kúm-Kale; and it is still less extraordinary, that a poet, however consistent he always is with himself, and with truth and nature; however personally acquainted he appears to have been with his scenes of action, and accurately descriptive in his general characteristics of places, should yet have disdained to hurt the effect of any particular action of his story, by rigidly confining himself to the bounds of possibility. The important inquiry is, whether Homer had this region in view for the scene of his poem, and if the chief landmarks agree, the fact cannot well be disputed, because we may fail in adjusting every allusion that is made in the Iliad to its topography.
The historians and geographers, who lived about midway between the Trojan war and our own times, can only be allowed to assist in ascertaining the opinions and traditions of that age, as to the position of the Troad of Homer. They prove that all antiquity. assented to the claims of the inhabitants of the region itself, in regarding the plain of the Méinder, as the Troad of the poet, and' they point out some remarkable changes which had taken place in' those features, which are found liable to change in other places under similar circumstances. So far their evidence may be of use; but I should no more think of referring to the Greek inhabitants
It is a misfortune that we are so often in doubt, whether Strabo is describing from personal knowledge, or merely compiling from others. There are some regions, which we know, from his own declaration, that he had visited, and others, where his accuracy equally proves it. But there is strong internal evidence that he never travelled over the greater part of the countries which he describes.
of the Troad in the time of Alexander the Great or of the Roman emperors, for every position and scene of action in the Iliad, than to the monks of Jerusalem for those in the history of Our Saviour. We possess the same Iliad which they did; and there seems no reason, why our judgments should not be as sound as theirs, and our opinions as correct.
After all that has been said upon the subject, the chief, and perhaps the only requisite is still wanting-an accurate survey of the country. In such an undertaking, particular care would be required in inquiring and noting the names of places, mountains, rivers, &c. both in Greek and Turkish; it ought to include all the region of Ida and the whole tract to the westward of Adramyttium and Priapus; to be accompanied by a diligent search for ancient inscriptions, and by a notice of all the existing remains of antiquity.
The work, however, would require more time and labor and perseverance than travellers are usually disposed to bestow upon such an object. The numerous obstacles to which geodetical expeditions are subject in winter from the atmosphere and state of the country, from fogs, marshes and inundations, and the danger to which health is exposed from the heat and mal-aria of the sum mer season, are well known to those who have been engaged in such operations in these or similar climates: nor after these difficulties are surmounted, is it very agreeable to submit to the personal inconveniences, and that total want of comfort and accom modation, which attend the traveller in almost every part of Asia Minor; or to have to contend with the ignorance and absurd prejudices of a Turk, or to sit for the greater part of a day on the top of a snowy mountain, measuring the angles or filling up the outlines of a plan, or to remain for two or three hours decyphering and copying the half-obliterated letters of some inscription, accidentally discovered, while the traveller's hungry attendants are urging his departure, and his nearest lodging is at several hours? distance. On the other hand, the political state of this district has been for a long time, and I believe still continues to be, very favorable to such an undertaking.
It can hardly be doubted that a survey of the Troad, correctly executed and well delineated, would be more useful and satisfactory to the admirers of the Iliad, than all that has been written upon the topography of Troy. Every reader might then refer to Homer and judge for himself, without the necessity of consulting
1 The interesting inscriptions, which Dr. Clarke and other travellers have found in the parts of this region which have been visited, give reason to hope for equal success in the others.
either the opinions of modern travellers, or of the Greek and Latin writers of a middle age. In the mean time, as the opponents of Le Chevalier have lately had the advantage of numbers, it may be fair to cast a few arguments into the opposite balance, without pretending to give any decided opinion upon the subject, until more exact information on the topography has been acquired.
Upon this side of the question then it may be said, that taking it for granted that the war of Troy was a real event, having a reference to real topography, no place has yet been shown that will combine even a few of the requisite features of the plain of Troy, except the district which lies between Kúm-Kale and Bunár-bashi; whereas in that district, and in the surrounding region by land and water, we find the seas and mountains and islands in the positions which the poet indicates, and some of them with the same names. The features which do not accord so well with his description, are those which are the most liable to change in the lapse of ages, namely, the course and size of the rivers, the tem perature and other peculiarities of the springs of water, and the extent and direction of the low coast where these waters join the sea. Instead of a river with two large branches, we meet with a broad torrent, reduced in the dry season to a slender brook, and a few stagnant pools, and we find a small perennial stream, which, instead of joining the former, is diverted into an artificial canal, and is thus carried to another part of the coast. But the diminutive size of some of the most celebrated streams of antiquity is well known to those who have travelled in Greece, and it must be remembered that in this instance it is a poet, who writes of a real scene, and is therefore obliged to magnify all those objects, which, without exaggeration, would be beneath the dignity of his verse. In regard to these changeable features, therefore, it seems sufficient for a reasonable person still to find, at the end of three thousand years, two streams, which, if they do not now join, evidently did so in former times: to find the first of these streams, (which the poet describes as springing under the walls of Troy, from two sources, one tepid and smoking, and the other in summer cold as ice,') rising at the foot of a hill commanding the plain, from two places, at one of which the water is at the temperature of 60° of Fahrenheit, and emits much vapor in winter, and in the other is of a
1 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ θ ̓ ὕδατι λιαρῷ ῥέει, ἀμφὶ δὲ καπνὸς
Il. X. v. 149.