1801.] 
Agreeably to the intention of the writer 
who compofed thefe lines, tlre ietters of the 
firft diftich, fummed together as numerals, 
. fhould produce the fame total as thofe of 
_ the fecond. But,,as we now find the lines 
written, that is not the cafe: for, while 
the fum of the former is only 5953, that 
of the latter is 6018. ‘To a certainty, 
therefore, the epigram has not been hand- 
éd down to us correét, as originally given 
by the author. To detect where the error 
lies, we muft call in the aid of conjecture, 
guided, however, by the numbers, which 
will ferve as a clue to direct us on our 
way. 
In examining which of the words appear 
moft likely to nave been altered by the of- 
ficious ignorance of the copyilts, we natu- . 
rally look firt to Exedev, which might have 
been written with or without the paragogic 
N, according to circumftances. Perhaps 
I may be told that Eucde, without the N, 
is not found in Stephanus or Hederic, I 
grant it: but at the fame time I hope eve- 
ry fcholar will agree with me, that EyeGéy is 
nothing more than Ewede with the addition 
of the paragogic N, as Evep0e, EvepOev, Ipocde, 
Tipocbev, &c. &e. 
By expunging the N.(=50) from 
Euedey, we reduce the number 6018 to 
5968, which exceeds that of the firft diftich 
by only 15 ; and of the redundant 15 we 
can eafily rid-ourfelves by two very flight 
and obyious emendations. 
As well as the poetic Ave, we likewife 
find a;:y: and this acy is nothing more 
than ave, with the addition of the parago- 
gicN ; As: itfelf being formed by metathe- 
fis from Aes. Although Icannot elfewhere 
find an example of ase in its feparate fate, 
I find it in compofition, in the word 
_ Aceyacyre, given as*a Various reading—and, 
notwith{tanding the brand of reprobation 
ftamped on it in Ernefti’s edition, I cannot 
confider it as a bad reading—in Odyfley 
N, 109— 
Ey Sddaz’ alEvaore 
But, whether asevaovra be the better or 
the worfe reading in this paflage, if your 
readers will only admit that there was fuch 
a word as ase, I am fatisfied: for I am 
fure nobody can doubt of the readine(s 
with which the tranfcribers would have al- 
tered it tothe more common aie. By ex- 
punging the interpolated ita (—10), we 
further reduce the number of the corrupt- 
ed diftich to 5958, leaving only the trifling 
error of 5, which lurks in the word Migever, 
but which tay eafily be removed by read- 
ing MEuwva. The yerb Meuya, which 
would naturally be altered by an ignorant 
-_ 
Mr. Carey’s Rejoinder to Mr. Dyer, 
¥ 
483 
{cribe to the more ufual Miya, is found im 
Stephanus, quoted from the old lexicogra- 
pher. If,however,any of yourreaders choofe 
to confider Meuya: as a fyncope for Mzwove, 
I am not di!poled to quarrel with him on 
that account ; though, for my own part, E 
am fatisfied with the verb Meuyo. In 
either cafe, let the latter lines be read ' 
thus— 
AWW EMEGE 3:21 [LOUTWY OF OY, OSTES 
e¢ ALE r 
MEMNOI xat Qiding cna, uab eva 
poceQens— 
and both diftichs will be found perfectly 
parinumeral, as the author intended them 
to be, viz. . 
Firft Diftich. Second. 
times. times. 
Bey Bae Thy) OCCU Sn) | iment 7 (We= 7 
¥—>3- 1 ierea ty aed hd Gaia pas 
Ochs ee Aare 00 p se 7. 
Bye Vi G2) BOA a Ae 
cs UES Tes oy by Gea eA. 
desma atce) Pomel See ae 
hee LO 623j.'60 | 1o==. r0o 
Sean aXe. h Pesca 5 0) 22S 48 
ALE YO Fee GO Sey Oo 
f= 40 Dies} 40 6=——= 240 
y= 50 Se VASO 3—= 350 
€ 52/65 Sh vas Hae 6 
yresthty (oe: LO=za FOO) FATE ARO 
% — $0 NIG OUR aye ace 
p 100 Bea wOOO is) ys He 
Gi 2200 51000 |. 8==1600 
t= 2 BOO 2—= 600 2—= 600 
J) == 400. Br 800i)" 2a Boe 
$ —500 re aes $== 500 
x, = 600 wk daz I= 600 
® —=8c0 2—=160 LAO 
§ ones 
hie 5953 
es 
If my conjeCtural emendations be ad- 
mitted as reftorative of the true readings, 
it feems to follow that the author of the 
verfes under confideration did not conceive 
the paragogic N neceflary to lengthen a 
fort fyllable in the cefura. That point, 
however, I leave to be canvaffed by thofe 
gentlemen who have taken a more active 
part in the difcufficn of the queftion than 
I am difpofed to take, and who will find, 
among the nick-nack trifles of the -Aptho- 
logia, other pieces which may be made to 
furnifh grounds of argument. og the fube- 
jet. Dam, Sir, 
Yours, &c. 
May 1, 1801. J. CaREy. 
P.S. 1 have this moment feen, in page 
343 of your lait Number, ‘* Adr. Dyer’s Re- 
os a 1 ry 
