Page:The Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology, Volume 1, 1854.djvu/132

 122 Jownal of Philology. Col. 28, 1. 2. tout' tl ptv vnfXdp&avts aXrjdes thai. B. The MS. has dkT)6t), but the 17 is erased and is written over. S. restores ar)0q, which he defends in Philologus (ss. 346, 347). He makes a distinction, which we give in the original German : " tovt dXrjBfj eo-rt'v heisst, diess ist in wahrheit so ; dXrjdes iartv, es ist ein wahres, die wahrheit." He has not adduced any analogous passages for an expression which seems not to be Greek ; the Platonic phrase tovto dXijdij Xcyety, which he does cite, is plainly inapplicable, for dXrjdq eycis = aAq&weiy, and dXrjdfj has no syntactic connection with TOVTO. Col. 29, 1. 28. 7roirjaai. Cobet TTopiacu. Col. 31, 1. 8. TeTadaivai. MS. The syllable 6ai being in smaller character, and reaching beyond the end of the line. C. proposes Tacpfjvai. vrj At'a, deim yap ciroiTjo-c : the words inserted however do not help to explain the MS. reading. Kayser, Tf6d<p6ai ' pal' 8eivd yap. But the MS. reading appears to be merely a con- fusion of the two words, Tt6d<p6at and ratyvai, and S. is probably right in adopting Taqbfjpat. Col. 31, 1. 15. (avT&. Cobet, aavra. Col. 34, 1. 1. avrol. Cobet, ovtoi " hi judices." But it is not easy to see why the judges should be presumed, as a matter of course, to be in the secret. It would certainly be no compliment to them. Retain avrol. The orator seems to insinuate that Polyeuctus* own hands were not clean of dealings with Mace- donia. This appears to be Schneidewin's meaning also. (Philol. s. 349). Col. 34, 1. 14. TTpoo-taxriv. Which S. explains orav irpovtao-iv wpbs tov b^p.ov. Unless irpoo-luo-i can refer to their entry into the town, which is not very likely, we must read npoianri, with Patakis and Cobet. Col. 36, 1. 2. Koo-p,T)<rdptvoi. Patakis Kopio-dntvoi, which S. accepts. Col. 36, 1. 20. 1; MoXoa-a-ia. Cobet would reject these words as a gloss on account of the form with <r<r, and S. assents. It is highly probable, though not certain, that Hyperides would have written Moorria. At all events usage is very arbitrary, especially in the case of proper names. (See Hemsterhuis on Lucian, Jud. Voc. p. 312). In the Oration c. Alcibiadem, attributed to Ando- cides, (ad fin.), the form MoXoa-a-la occurs ; but the value of this testimony for our purpose, whether the oration be genuine or not, is derived from the fact that GerraXta is found in the same