y 
1801.] 
be added ; but to avoid prolixity, I  thall 
clofe my letter with a remark or two, on 
another requifite in fine finging 
{carcely lefs confequence than that of ex- 
prefion, and on which, indeed, expreffion 
in a great meafure feems to depend—I 
mean articulation. pt 
5 a Wigs 
Senfe and found, when united, accom- 
plifh all the effects of mufic: it is then 
that we underftand. what we hear; and 
that while the auditory organ is delight- 
ed, the mind is employed and gratified : 
the poetry and mufic lend reciprocally 
their aid, and we become fenfible of im- 
preflions not to be derived from either 
of thefe divine arts alone.’ The neceffity 
of an early and uoremttted atténtion to 
this great requifite, without. which the 
expreffion mult be faint and imperfed, 
will therefore, I truft, be as manifeft to 
every one aS is the too general neglect of 
its practice: a neglect which cannot be 
too much deprecated, and which cannot 
fail to render every other vocal ‘acquifi- 
tion vain and ineffeciual. ‘I-am, Sir, 
Vauxhall Read, Your's, &c. 
OG. 20, ¥841- : T. Bussy. 
<— : 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, } 
SHALL be happy to receive the opi- 
}, nion of any of your learned Corre- 
{pondents upon the following paffage in 
Lucian’s Dialogue between Terpfio and 
Pluto. Is the Amfterdam edition of Be- 
nedict, 1687, page 271, it runs thus: 
H 75 rercvratoy eevar Evpiv, more x redvnZe- 
wet THY yepivTay Enacog, ive pen podtny ay evieg 
E@EPATIEYQN. 
I with to be informed, whether the w 
in the laft word be not an error of the 
prefs, and whether it ought not to have 
been printed with an ¢ iaftead ; 9epénevoy, 
thus becoming the third per#on plural of 
the imperfeét tenfe; the conjunftion tz 
frequently preceding the indicative, as 
well as fubjun&tive and optative, moods ; 
and Zeunius upon Vigerus obferves (de 
conjunctione #s, cum adjunétis particulis, 
p- 557) edit. Lipfiz, 1728), that “Tzpiflime 
conftruitur cum imperfecta. Nec hoc mi- 
rum videri debet, cum et ice n tempus 
aliis particulis, quz vel conjunctivum vel 
optativum pofcunt, fubindé jungi toleat ; 
quare. probabile videtur, Gracos, et in 
primis Atticos, per,imperfeétum non mo-, 
dd indicativum, fed et optativum conjunc- 
tivumque exprefiiffe.”” - Sic Pluto. Svmp. 
Cap X. Xpiv 82 was vopeoy Elves pan epay gratdwy, 
bye yar, e1g an dey TIAA CHDY ANHAIZKETO, 
Query on a Paffage in Lucian—Perfic Coin, 
of £ 
285 
Dem. Phil. i. p. 4.7. OD yao Exphy iar- 
Tdpyed UWeap nuby apyovlac omeiusg ervor, iy HN 
wo arnlas Tig abrswes n Nvapete. 
_Id. pro Phorm. p. 958. ba vaiira a 
eUrynuoverata EDAYNETO, 
“A. learned friend, whofe affiftance. I 
fought for the folution of my doubt, pro- 
poled to read ive pm prdluy dy évieg n Ofpacrevwy, 
thus converting the « into 1, rendering it 
the fubjunctive of i, and making Gepa= 
srevav a participle, analogous to the fre- 
‘quent ufe of the fubftantive-verb with the 
participle inflead of the other moods, 
as drs EIH-Nixodyuoy ATEKTONQZ (Becaule 
he had killed Nicodemus). Xdgid warty 
E'STEN 4 TIKTOYZA aie. Sophocl., (One fa~ 
vour always begets another). Ov ZSIQUH- 
AZ ESH; Sophocl. (Will younot hold your 
tongue?) Port Royal Grammar, fecond 
edition, 1759, p- 328. Annotation. 
Fijih Mile-ftoney - 
Highsate, 
Sept. 13) 1801. 
I am, 
Sir, your’s, &c. 
SAMUEL WESLEY. 
P.S. Ifeither e0epdarevoy or 7 Oesamevay be 
right, it fill feems neceflary to fubftitute tivég 
in the formercafe, and 7}, or the like, in the 
latter, as a nominative underftood : but ] hum- 
bly fubmit the whole to the fentente +# 
Toudime. 
; 40% a 
To the Editor of the Mouthly Magaxines 
Bes. 35 
Have juft perufed, with no common 
degree of fatisfaction, a work con- 
taining fome preliminary obfervaticns on 
certain medals and gems bearing inferip- 
tions in the Pahlavi or ancient Pertic cha- 
racters. In this interefting publication, 
which proceeds from the pen of thatlearn-’ 
ed Orientali?, and accomplithed fcholar, 
Sir William Oufeley, fome remarks ona 
gold-coin of Baharam the sth are con- 
cluded’ in the following candid. terms ¢ 
«¢ I cannot, however, proceed to the next 
fection, without remarking, that a gold- 
medal of the Saffanidz is in itfelf anumi(ma- 
tick treafure of uncommon value; becaufe, 
according to Procopius, © it was not law- 
ful ‘for the Perfian Kings, or any orher 
monarch of the Barbarians, to ftamp their 
images on pieces of gold, whatever quan- 
tities of that metal they. might poffets ; 
fince, money. of fuch a defeription was not 
ufed in the commercial dealings even of 
the Barbarians themfelyes.’ 
mu determine, whether the difc overy of 
a-fingle medal fhould invalidate the evi- 
dence of Procopius. I know not of any 
other exception to the general rule; and 
even this may perhaps have been ttricken 
as a proof-piece, and never intended for 
Oo2z general 
The reader ~ 
