1 The dog's mistress. XV 2 Leg. ‘hic' with w, supported by Munro (ap. Mayor), who compares 3 12. If the reading of Phinc' be retained, it would seem better to take it as 'ex hac parte,' rather than with Mayor "hereupon," owing to the hasty flight.' 3 The sense seems to be: If you have any doubts as to whether the first liked his taste (which would naturally be the choicest titbit), I can tell you the last liked it sufficiently to scoop a spoonful of the blood off the very ground.' 'Nam' (v. 89) refers to the remark that they liked it, for I can tell you,' etc. 'Sed' (v. 87) is either (1) merely resumptive after digression, d' ovv or dé, or (2) it contrasts the feelings of the cannibals with your feelings and mine, Volusius. 4 Leg. 'ventribus' H. Valesius, followed by Jahn, Ribbeck, and Hermann; 'urbibus' Ps accepted by Bücheler and Mayor. 5 Leg. nec enim omnia, quaedam' with Jahn and Hermann. Bücheler, followed by Mayor, reads, 'nec enim omnia quidam.' 6 I.e. by a more terrible sacrifice even than this. XVI 1 Mayor, however, takes 'relictum' to mean 'given over, abandoned'! 2 Spartianus, referred to by Lewis, says of Hadrian ‘nulli vitem nisi robusto et bonae famae daret.' In v. 14 it seems to be ironically suggested that the burly legs are made or chosen to match the huge subsellia: for somewhat analogous uses of ‘ad' see Hand, Tursell. vol. i. pp. 112-122. Add Hor. Sat. 1 6 95. Printed by R. & R. CLARK, Edinburgh. REVIEWS OF FIRST EDITION "This is a welcome addition to the number of scholarly and faithful translations of Classical Poets into English prose. A version which is well worthy to stand by the side of such masterpieces of faithful rendering as Munro's Lucretius, Lang's Theocritus, and Butcher and Lang's Odyssey. . . . The rendering is both close and vigorous; and it would be easy to quote many happy turns from this excellent piece of work."-Academy, London, 17th June 1882. "On the whole, the translation is very efficiently performed."-Educational Times, London, August 1882. "So far as English Prose can represent Latin Poetry, the translators have succeeded in what they have aimed at, and have produced a work of real and permanent value.”—London Quarterly Review, October 1882. "The translators, both holding places of distinction in the University of Melbourne, have done their work well. . . . It is no easy task which Messrs. Strong and Leeper have proposed to themselves, to give a rendering of Juvenal which should combine accuracy with some elegance of style. . . We cannot pretend to have found ourselves always in agreement with them, but their version strikes us as vigorous, while it is certainly faithful. . . . We may give as a specimen of the translators' style their excellent rendering of the fine passage, viii. 245-258."-Spectator, London, 15th July 1882. |