coat. Among the plates dedicated to the department of Costume, the most singular is that which represents a Peasant in a strawWe are told that the shepherds and labouring peasants in most provinces of the peninsula protect themselves from the periodical heavy rains by a straw covering; this species of cloathing is matted together, and is made sufficiently large to cover the whole person. By thus, as it were, thatching themselves in, the peasants pursue their out-of-doors-occupation without any inconvenience from the weather.' Why cannot our peasants thatch themselves in likewise? Straw is cheap, and such a covering may often be more useful than a great coat, because through the thatched envelope the water would not so easily find its way as through a woven garment. It is necessary, however, in the former dress, that an erect posture be preserved. We are informed in the short account of Salamanca that its celebrated university, established in the beginning of the 13th century, had so much declined, at the time when Mr. B. visited it, that the number of students did not exceed one or two hundred; and that, even before the troubles, they did not amount to more than three hundred. How different this statement from that of M. Laborde! (see p. 121. of this number.) The plate representing a Doctor of Salamanca is intended to be a portrait, or to convey some idea, of the person of Dr. Curtis, the celebrated president of the Irish college in that city. This gentleman, who is upwards of seventy years of age, is mentioned as an enlightened scholar, and his services. to the English army are gratefully recorded. What was his fate, after the retreat of the British from Salamanca, Mr. B. has not been able to ascertain. In the letter-press accompanying the plate which exhibits Shepherds of Leon in their vinter cloathing, the Mesta is mentioned as a chartered company, or society of great flock-owners, to which the law has granted considerable privileges of pasturage; and we believe that this statement is more correct than that which is given by M. Laborde*. Mr. B. agrees with most enlightened men in reprobating the system of the Mesta. It has been urged, (says he,) by some who profit by this un-, equal law, that the delicate quality of the Spanish wool is acquired. by the change of food and climate, [which the migratory flocks enjoy under the regulation of the Mesta,] an opinion wholly refuted by well attested experiments, which prove that the wool of the stationary flocks of Etråmadura is in no degree inferior.' * See our present No. p. 118. REV. OCT. 1810. The The supplement to Mr. Bradford's sketches gives no views of scenery, but merely exhibits the military costume of Spain and Portugal, or the dress of Artillery-men, Cavalry, Infantry, Engineers, and Marines, in 14 plates, with two of French Infantry and Dragoons. These are preceded by an account of the military and naval force of the peninsula, and also of the Spanish colonies: but, as this part of the work is anonymous, we know not the authority on which it rests, and therefore shall not copy its statements. We cannot close this volume without a cordial acknowlegement of the pleasure which it has afforded us, nor without recommending its truly beautiful engravings to those who wish to have a peep into Spain and Portugal without crossing the Bay of Biscay. ART. VII. Eschyli Tragedie que supersunt Deperditarum Fabularum Fragmenta et Scholia Græcu ex Editione Thoma Stanleii, cum versione Latina ab ipso emendatâ, et commentario longe quam antea fuit aucliori, ex manuscriptis ejus nunc demum Edito. Accedunt Varia lectiones, et Note VV. DD. Critice ac Philologica; quibus suas passim intertexuit Samuel Butler, A M. Regia Schola Salopiensis Archididascalus, Col. Div. Joann. apud Cantalr. nuper Socius. - Tom. I. ci Tom. II. 8vo. (Tom. I. 4to.) Cantabrigiæ; Typis ac Sumptibus Academicis. 1809. Londini, apud Lunn. Price 16s. WE E have long wanted a variorum edition of Æschylus; and we congratulate the learned world, and our countrymen in particular, on the appearance of a work which is amply calculated to supply the deficiency, if we may augur, as we have every reason to do, of the completion of the plan from the execution of the present portion of it.-That a judicious selection from the notes of preceding editors, intermixed with original remarks, must be the fairest and best apparatus for any classical publication, is self-evident. Such an edition is conceived in the true literary spirit; in the spirit of utility, and not of ostentation. We may fairly presume that an editor of this description will not indulge himself in that sarcasm and that virulence against his precursors, which have formed the disgrace of our own and of the continental scholars; that he will not flatter his own fancied superiority, by exposing the mistakes of others, but on the contrary will search for all that is valuable in their annotations; and that, rendering praise where it is due by quoting those annotations, he will deserve praise himself for candour at least, if not for higher qualifications. By much higher qualifications, however, we think that Mr.Butler has sufficiently shewn himself to be distinguished; by by industry, by accurate learning, and by ingenuity of no common degree. Selected out of the University of Cambridge for the important task of editing Eschylus, after that task had been declined by Professor Porson*, (“Cui nihil viviť” simile aut secundum : Proximos illi tamen,occupavit he has begun his undertaking with that vigour and that becoming spirit which authorize us in anticipating the happiest results. Of the large mass of materials which he has collected, arranged, and sifted, we shall presently give a detailed account, for the information of our classical readers: but we must previously state his own reasons, as they are assigned in the "Letter" mentioned in the note below, for acquiescing in the restriction imposed by the University, as to the republication of Stanley's text. These are the words of Mr. Butler: "It was originally my own wish to have been released from Stanley's text, and though I was not very well contented with the determination of the Syndics when they insisted on my adopting it, I have found reason since to be fully satisfic with their decision. Without Stanley's text, Stanley's notes both edited and unedited, would be absolutely unintelligible. Stanley was the greatest scholar of his age in this country; the greatest ornament of his time to the University of Cambridge; he was a liberal, a candid, and an upright scholar; yet wholly free from vanity, from envy, and from self-im * In a "Letter" which we regret that Mr Butler felt it necessary to address to the Rev. C. Blomfield, (we say we regret, because the com monwealth of literature is not benefited by the contentions of its magistrates,) we read that, if Mr. Batler mistakes not, the foundation of Professor Porson's refusal to undertake the edition of Eschylus was a wish, on the part of the Professor, that the Syndics of the University press should send him to Venice to collate the famous Venetian manuscript; to which proposal the Syndics did not feel themselves authorized to accede." Of the fate of this manuscript, Mr Butler adds a story on the authority of the Abbé Morelli, which renders it unlikely that we shall ever hear more on the subject: but as to the Professor's refusal, it has been more generally assigned to the deter mination of the Syndics to retain Stanley's text. On this matter, we speak above. It is at all events much to be lamented that we have no complete edition of the works of any one of the Greek tragedians from the hands of Porson. Of his remains indeed we may say, as of all the golden remains of antiquity, that the fragments of the wreck shew the magnitude of the vessel which has gone to pieces. + For "alter," were it admissible, we would substitute an English name. M z portance. portance. I venerate the memory of such a man; and it would have been an act of injustice to his merits and disgraceful to the Univer sity, not to have brought forward his notes in the clearest, the fullest, and most intelligible form. I consider my edition as a monument to his honour, his learned notes form the most prominent and most important part of it, and I am glad that I did not garble and disfigure them by accommodation to a text altered according to my own fancy. No references could have been made with any degree of accuracy had the text been changed, and as I take care invariably to point out any necessary alteration in my notes, a person may easily find what I consider to be the true text by consulting them. Had I proposed to publish a small edition of Eschylus with my own notes only, I should undoubtedly have given my own text: but when I had Stanley's notes to publish, I am persuaded I could not have done justice but by adopting his text; and I am heartily glad that I did not suffer any foolish motives of vanity or ostentation to occupy my mind one moment on the subject. My own text is given in my own notes. It was my duty to let Stanley occupy the prominent situation." All this is very honourable to the diffidence and the liberal feeling of Mr. Butler; yet we cannot say that it is perfectly satisfactory to our minds. "A person may easily find what I consider to be the true text by consulting my notes !" is an unpromising declaration for any editor to make; and, avowing as we do our decided preference of a correct text to any notes whatever, we cannot help also expressing a wish that Mr. Butler had been enabled to steal a little ("the wise, convey, it call") from Porson's emendations, as well as from the amendments of several other illustrious scholars since the days of Stanley, for the improvement of Stanley's highly favoured text. Still it is clear that, whatever blame may fall on the present editor in this respect, it is primarily if not exclusively due to the Syndics of the Cambridge press; and we admire the genuine literary spirit of Mr. Butler, which disdained to shrink from his task because some difficulties were thrown in his way, as to the manner in which he would originally have chosen to accomplish it. He was contented to do as much as he could, although he could not effect all that he wished; and we openly declare our preference of this sort of Ciceronian continuance under the standard of literature, even when its interests do not seem to us to be best managed by their governors, to the Cato-like sullenness and secession from the post of duty, which disdains all co-operation with the government whose plans it cannot absolutely controul. We come now to the catalogue of Mr. Butler's materials. In his address to the reader, he observes that he is compelled to defer to the end of his edition of Eschylus his general preface, : preface, which may easily be transferred to the beginning of the work. This preface, he says, will contain a review of the manuscripts as well as of the editions of his author, with other matters of a similar nature. In the mean time, he has subjoined to every play an explanation of the abbreviated marks which occur in the notes on that play thus sufficiently indicating the sources of the illustrations which he has adopted, both in the critical and in the philological commentaries. To enumerate these would be to name all the editors, and all the most distinguished scholars, who have commented on schylus, from the Aldine edition to the present: but, while we decline this unnecessary transcript, we cannot avoid praising in this place the modesty with which Mr. B. has introduced his own opinions, and his total freedom from ostentation in laying claim to his original remarks. The contracted names of Scaliger, Bentley, and Casaubon, (not mentioned in the explanation to which we have above alluded,) will be familiar to every scholar; and that of Pearson requires as little explanation. This learned man specified, on the margin of his copy of Henry Stephens's edition, (which, Mr. B. tells us, had been used before by Casaubon, as his hand-writing amply testifies,) some various readings; these of course are noticed in the critical commentary; and in the philological commentary some notes are introduced from the pen of a late continental scholar, Professor Muller, the superintendant of the imperial library at Vienna, and the historian of Swisserland. To the commentary of Stanley, printed with his edition, is added in the present an increased commentary from Stanley's MSS., never before printed, but prepared by himself for a second edition of his Eschylus. The addition thus made is more than as much again as the original commentary. Here is also all that Askew had collected for his edition. In reality, however, all those readings of Auratus, Jacobus, Joseph Scaliger, Bourdelot, Pearson, and Isaac Vossius, which Askew records, or the larger part of them, had been pre-occupied by Stanley in his preparations for a second impression. Moreover, the Codex Rawlinsoniensis, which Askew so often praises, was according to his own account only the edition of Henry Stephens, on the margin of which some conjectures were written chiefly from the hand Henrici Jacobi, fellow of Merton College, Oxford, and from that of the illustrious Pearson. This Book Rawlinson lent to Askew. It formerly belonged to Stanley. Mr. Butler has also presented us with a collection of various readings, formed not only from a collation of many manuscripts, (of which four are now first collated, viz. two Cam |