94 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



187. Even the commonest Greek word or phrase is at times a 

 stumbling-block ; e. gr. at [27 ^ 2] : 



teo* gar natsown tu non sei nascosta 



mpbal mpnwte alV occhio di Dio, 



ete mefobs che nulla ignora. 



Here he has erred in every line, for the words mean: "thou art 

 ignorant of the eye of God (that it is one) which is not wont to sleep'' \ 

 for obs is 'to sleep', but Prof. Rossi has confounded it with the 

 reflexive use obs -f e , "to forget oneself over, to overlook, neglect" 

 &c., [cf. 1 Reg. xxiii. 9; Job vi. 4; xi. 11 ; xxxi. 19; Ps. ix. 22; 

 liv. 2; Ixxvii. 59; Eccl. xii. 14; Isai. Iviii. 7; Zech. i. 12; and for 

 obs, "to sleep", cf. Job iii. 11 ; Ps. iii. 5 ; Ixxvii. 5 ; Ixxvii. 65 ; 

 Eccl. V. 11 ; Jerem. xiv. 9]. And if he did not know the Coptic word, 

 there was the Greek with its ayvoeis and its dKOLjj.r]Tov 6(^6aXfx6v ! 



Then his rendering of swsw mmow ejn by " to be jealous of " 

 [27/3 10], is hardly equal to the Kauxw)U.eVots of the original; the 

 Coptic means "to hoast of". In the succeeding lines, he seems to 

 have no notion, — at least he has given no note of any kind, that the 

 Coptic is wrong, for the phrase : wn wer naggelos nau eron, is 

 repeated instead of the second clause referring to the {xaprvcn of the 

 text. 



188. The last sentence in the Homily is ludicrously misunder- 

 stood, in the teeth of both Greek and Coptic : "but since it is good 

 to let you go away thirsty for the word of instruction, lest ye become 

 (over-)full so that ye vomit the things ye have heard, therefore we 

 shall put o& the story of Susanna to another day". The Greek text 

 has Koi fJLT] Tovs KopeaOivra? kol a iSe^avTO iKTrTvcrai, of which the 

 Coptic, as translated above, is a pretty exact equivalent [29 (3 z\. 

 And how has Prof. Rossi rendered it ? 



mepote iitetii sei accioeche non vi saziate 



ntetn ta ebol di andar ruminando 



nnentatnsotiuw le cose che avete udito. 



i. e. " that ye may not be satiated with going ruminating the things ye 

 have heard" (!!) 



The Homily on Susanna follows, in a very fragmentary condition. 

 The translation exhibits the same deficiencies. 



189. It begins by a wrong emendation [30 a 18]: ntn6[sk] 

 pet eron an, ^' per non ritardar {a -pag&ve) il nostra dehito\ But osk 

 was not the word here : it was " to fail in", and not " to delay", that 

 the writer intended to express, viz. ojn. He renders the irapaKa- 



