i 
r 
_ vert.it into Tigris. 
208 
forme, and fhall ccrreét that, and fuch 
farther errors as may be deteéted, in an 
appendix to the laft volume. - 
Iam yours, &c. 
James Epw. SMITH. 
Norwich, March 2, 1801. 
. —aa 
« To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
} SER, 
Capnot refrain from a {mile, on obferv- 
_ ing what a mighty buftle and turmoil 
has been excited among critics, commenta- 
tors, and editors, by the bare orniffion of 
one poor tiny dot, which either fome an- 
cient copyift had neglected in tran{cribing, 
or they had themfelves overlooked ‘in ex- 
amining the old MSS. The paffage that has 
given fo much uneafinefs to fo many learned 
{fcholars is a verfe in Ovid, Heroid. x, 86, 
which thofe gentlemen found, or fancied 
they found, written as follows— 
Quis fcit an hee favas infula tigres habet ? 
Here was, no doubt, a glaring error— 
the final fyllable of the accufative Tigres 
made fhort,-in open violation of the rules 
of Latin profody. To remedy the evil, 
the following conjeGiural emendations, and 
God knows how many more, have at dif- 
ferent times been offered by different 
hands— : 
Quis fcit an hee fevas tigridas infula habet ? 
Quis {cit an hac tigres infula feva forat ? 
Quis fcit an hec feevas fort quogue terra tigres ? 
Quis fit an et fevd tigride Dia vacet ? 
Quis {cit an et [evam tigrida Naxus habet ? 
Quis {cit an et fevis tigrifin illa vacet ? 
Such have been the laborious efforts of 
ingenious men to reftore the corrupted 
paflage to its original purity: but, Mr. 
Editor, 
Hi motus animorum, atgque hec certamina 
tanta, 
Stigmaios exigui tau comprefia quiefcent. 
L only propefe—a very modeft propofal, 
furely—to place a little dot over the latter 
vowel of the word Tigres, and thus con- 
But here [ am inter- 
rupted by fome erudite profodian, who ex- 
claims that the -JS, equally with -ES, is 
long in the accufative. plural, as Urbis, 
Oznis, which ave merely contractions, by 
crafis or fynerefis, from Urbezs, Omueis.— 
I am ready to acknowledge that the Latin 
-IS of the accufacive plural is long, but 
fot quite fo ready to admit that the Greek 
-I= tiands in the fame predicament. If 
any {cholar entertain a doubt on the fub- 
I ‘sw 
Mr. Carey on Ti jgresy ‘Ovid. the Ae 
je&t, let him turn to the Asthologia, book i, 
ch. vi, epig. 3, which—befides furnifhing 
a moft notable inftance of alliteration in 
KOP feven times introduced into a fingle 
difticli—will prove that the--1© of the 
nominative and accufative plural, formed 
by /yucope from -YEX and -IA®, is fhort. 
To fave the trouble of reference, 1 here 
quote the epigram— 
Oi KOPIS apt xopou xopecavro meus aAd? 
expec suv 
Axpt Kopou xauTog Tous KOPIZ exxopirag. 
Agreeably to thefe examples, finee Trypig 
forms the genitive fingular in -IO¥ as well 
as -IACZ, the nominative and accufative 
plural will be Tiypsec, Tiypis, and Teypscccs 
Teypig, with the -1E in both cafes fhort. 
And, as the Romans, in adopting Greek 
terminations, generally retained the origi- 
nal quantity, we may to a certainty.con- 
clude that they made the final fyllable 
fhort. in the nominative and accufative 
plural Zigris, and other words fimilarly 
declined; although this Graeco- Roman ter- 
mination, with its quantity, feems to have 
been wholly forgotten by the Latin grams 
marians ever fince the Auguftan age, or at 
leaft fince the Latin ceafed to be a living 
national language. 
Upon the whole, then, I muft, for my 
own part, fay that I perceive not the 
{malleft occafion either for the adoption of 
Tigridas or Tigride or Tigrida or Tigrifin, 
or for the intrufion of Dia or Naxus or 
Vacet or Ferat, on the fcore of profody 
alone. But there is another objection, viz. 
to the indicative Hadet after Quis fit Qn. 
Thofe who feel a fcruple on that. head, 
may perhaps be inclined to remove it, by 
obliging Alat of the preceeding line to 
change place with Hadet of the line in 
queftion, and reading the entire diftich 
thus— 
Forfitan et fulvos tellus habet ifta leones: 
Quis {cit an ET fevas infula tigris alat 2 
Had thefe ideas occurred to me in time, 
I thould certainly not have quoted Tigrifiz 
from this paflage, when treating of the 
Latin profody*: and I fhall not hefitate 
to expunge it from an abridgement of my 
reatife, which I am now preparing for 
the ufe of f{chools, and intend foon ta 
publith from my own prefs. 
Iam, Sir, yours, &c. 
dlp J. Carey. 
Claffical Printing. Office, 
Merlin’s Place, 
Clerkenwell, March 20. 
% 6 Lat, Prof. made cay,” page 71. 
i Me Apriby. 
ee 
