108 Journa I of Philology. (8) f's aiparTjpbv reC^of ov btxoppdrrots y^T](j>OtS (6(VTO- TG> 5* V aVTlCp KVTfl
- Etts Trpotft elpas.
() dXX ft 8ok(7 a oi ravff, vrt* dpftvXas voi Ta^iord poi bova>v tis tp.(3ao~iv irobos. vv ralabc p.r) 'pfialvoip.' aXovpytaiv. (f) e<ro> <ppepa>i> piovai Treiderai yois. (tA irtpifidkovTes oi 7TTcpo<p6pov btpas Scot 6eo~av ykvKvv y' alava nr]p.aT(ov artp. (0) ap7rpbs 8' eoiKcv rjXios tis dvroXas (pXcyav (o-qo-aeiv, wore Kvparos biKtjv /SXuetJ/ irpos avyas Tovbe irrjpA p.oi irov (t) Kai paprvpu) aoi Trpovp.6a-a.o~ a prj rfbevat. (*c) Toidvbe roX/iav, 0fjvs apatvos (povfvs, Topa. (X) ov p.ot p.ia6pov tms ip-rarcly vkotov. (jx) bs 7roXXa ras e yvvainos, /3t'o/ irpbs yvvaucbs direfpOiaev. These are all attempts on passages where the reading may be considered to be more or less settled. Of Hartung's con- tributions to the restoration of the more corrupt parts of the play the following may be taken as specimens : rrfcpavrai 8' eKTivovaa roKpt] Tav "Apq ttv(6vtg>v (v. 342) : Trdptan aiy&a arip.a>s aKOiropoiv abiaros tlicdiHov Ibclv (v. 374) : vt av to Kvpiov p.6jj p.tap<pais vkotos (v. 701) : irpvpinjaiav vvcpfi6ovs ^/appids dicrds TrapfKbovp.(vos Trpbs "ikiov utpro vavfidras arpdros (v. 911): vvv be rtkciov t68 fTTibptyaaa iroXvpvaoTov o~a>p.a Ka dvdfpiaaaa rob* alp.* avurrov ij tis ap ev bopois raff "Epts, bap,vdris dvbpbs Ol(vs (v. 1377). The editor's peculiarities are not confined to his views of the sense or language of his author : they also extend to points of grammar and metre. irpv ycVoiro, x al P* Ta> * which we just quoted, is surely very questionable syntax. His doctrine of the iambic trimeter is that of the pre-Porsonian school, which appears still to have a few adherents in Germany : thus he writes, dXX' &pnvs' fj ^vvevvos ?<rrai 8* alria (v. 1037), ovra> rbu avrov 6vp,bv appatv kankm (v. 1310). Similarly his theory of ana- paestic verse is pre-Bentleian, as is shewn by his correction of VV. 725 Sqq. ovk fori adriv oppara (paros, *A, boKovvr tvqbpovos oc biavolas, 'Ybapd aaivei (piKoTTjTi. In another passage (v. 48) he ignores the ordinary rule against an anapaest following a dactyl
