« ПретходнаНастави »
We now give the version of Major Vallancey, from the 8th Number of the Collectanea Hibernica, p. 310; 1781: omitting his verbal translation, his annotations and authorities. This Irish version has been, in substance, authenticated by O'Connor, in his Chronicles of Erin, vol. 1, p. ccxli. 1822, but with such variations as induce us to give both of these Irish translations: when we have so done, the reader will have before bim all that is necessary, in our opinion, to satisfy his own mind upon this curious question; and, so far as we know, a füller view of the subject than can be found elsewhere.
Major Vallancey's Version.
PLAUTUS. 1. Nyth al o nim ua lonuth sicorathissi me com syth 2. Chim lach chunyth mum ys tyal mycthi barii im schi.
IRISH. 1. N'iaith all o nimh uath lonnaithe! socruidhse me com sith
Omnipotent, much dreaded Deity of this country! assuage my troubled mind. 2. Chimi lach chuinigh! muini is toil, miocht beiridh iar mo scith Support of feeble captives! being now exhausted with fatigue, of thy free will guide me to my children.
PLAUTUS. 3. Lipho can ethyth by mithii ad ædan binuthii 4. Byr nar ob syllo homal o nim! ubymis isyrthoho.
IRISH. 3. Liomhtha can ati bi mitche ad éadan beannaithe
O let my prayers be perfectly acceptable in thy sight. 4. Biar nar ob siladh umhal; o nimh ! ibhim a frotha An inexhaustible fountain to the humble, 0 Deity let me drink of its streams.
PLAUTUS. 5. Byth lym mo thym noctothii nel ech an ti daisch machon 6. Ys i de lebrim thyfe lyth chy lys chon temlyph ula.
IRISH. 5. Beith liom! mo thaime noctaithe, niel ach an ti daisic mach coinne Forsake me not! my earnest desire is now disclosed, which is only that of recovering
my daughters. 6. Is i de leabhraim tafach leith chi lis con teampluibh ulla This was my fervent prayer, lamenting their misfortunes in thy sacred temples.
PLAUTUS. 7. Uth bynim ys diburt hynn o cuthnu Agorastocles 8. Ythe man eth ihychirsae lycoth sith nasa.
IRISH. 7. Uch bin nim i is de beart inn a ccomnuithe Agorastocles !
Oh bounteous Deity! it is reported here dwelleth Agorastocles ! 8. Itche mana ith a chithirsi; leicceath sith nosa Should my request appear just, here let my disquietudes cease!
PLAUTUS. 9. Buini id chillu ily gubi lim la si bithym 20. Bo dyalyther aynnym mysly mono chetl us im.
IRISH. 9. Buaine na iad cheile ile : gabh liom an la so bithim?!
Let them be no longer concealed; O that I may this day find my daughters ! 10. Bo dileachtach nionath n' isle,
mon cothoil us in They will be fatherless, and preys to the worst of men, unless it be thy pieasure 1
should find them.
Here follow the six lines untranslated by Bochart. From Mocinegus' edition :
PLAUTUS. 11. Ec anolim uolanus succur ratim misti atticum esse 12. Concubitu mabel lo cutin bean tla cant chona enuses 13. Huic esi lec pan esse, athi dm as con alem in dubart felo no buthe ume 14. Celt um co mu cio lueni! ateni mano suber r benthyach Agorastoclem. 15. Ex te se ane chc na soctalia eli cos alem as dubert ar mi comps, 16. Vesptis Aod ernec lic tor bo desiussum lim nim co lus.
IRISH. 11. Ece al o nim uath lonnaithe! socair-ratai mitche aiticimse 12. Con cuibet mea bail le cuta bean tlait le caint con inisis, 13. Huch! caisi leice piano esse athi dam, as con ailim in dubart felo no buthe ume 14. Celt uaim c'a mocro luani! athini me, an subha ar beannuath Agorastocles. 15. Ece te a neach no soichle uile cos ailim as dubairt ar me compais, 16. Is bidés Aodh eineach lic Tor, ba desiughim le mo nimh co lus.
ENGLISH 11. But mighty and terrible Deity, look down upon me! fulfil the prayers I now offer
unto Thee, 12. Without effeminate deceit or rage, but with the utmost humility I have represented
my unfortunate situation. 13. Oh! the neglect of this petition will be death to me; let no secret disappointment
befall me. 14. Hide not from me the children of my loins, and grant me the pleasure of recovering
Agarstocles. 15. Behold, o Deity, these are the joys I earnestly pray for, take compassion on me, 16. And grateful fires on stone towers, will I ordain to blaze to Heaven.
The reading of these six lines, adopted by Bellerman and Bothe, is so different from the above, that I am tempted to give them, with the translation from Bothe. Plaut. vol. iii. p. 74.
11. Yth elonim velonoth siccorathi motsim atticym meese
0 spes huc venias! Haud invitus ego perferam molestias, modo vos Dii negotium
meum adjuvetis curetisque id quod precor maternalem domum. Quisque probus exsurgat et precetur: utinam Dii exaudiant lamentationem patris
innocentiæ, dignoscantque nepotem ope Agorastoclis. Inclinamini ad querelam miseriæ hujus, Dii mei auxilii, cumulantes beneficium
vestrum! Euge, larga tunc afferam sacrificia de frumento horrei in laudem!
Under these circumstances of discrepancy, we have no hesitation in preferring the reading and the version of Mocinegus and Vallancey, as being far more in harmony with the subject matter.
The following translation of the first five lines of the Punic of Plautus, by O'Connor, in bis Chronicles of Erip, 1822, vol. 1, p. ccxli. contains some variations from Vallancey, but none of any moment. However, that the reader may have before him, under one view, the substance of all that is known concerning this Monologue, we have thought fit to add O'Connor's version : his authority, (none better) corroborates Vallancey, who, from 1781 to the present day, has never been contradicted, so far as we know, by any of his own countrymen, to whom his specimen of their native language has been so long publicly submitted.
According to O'Connor's computation of chronology, which we neither believe to be sufficiently well authenticated, nor are we inclined formally to dispute, Carthage was founded 883 years before Christ. The colony of Iberians had emigrated from Gallicia to Eri, (Ireland,) 123 years before the building of Carthage : the people of Sidon and of Carthage had no communication with Ireland from 1006 before Christ. To us, all this is very apocryphal : but as to the similarity or rather the sameness of the Punic of Plautus and the Bearla-Feni of Ireland, we hold it impossible to doubt.
In the following version, the first line is the Punic of Plautus ; the second line is the Irish of O'Connor; the third line is his English translation.
1. Pl. Nith al o nim ua lonuth sicorathissi ma com syth O'C. An iath al a nim uaillonnac socruidd se me com sit. Eng. O mighty splendor of the land, renowned, powerful; let him quiet me with repuse.
2. Pl. Chim lach chunyth mumys tyal mycthii imi schi O'C. Cim laig cungan muin is toil mo iocd bearad iar mo sgit. Eng. Help of the weary captive, instruct me, according to thy will, to recover my children after my fatigue.
3. Pl. Lipho can etyth by mythii ad ædin binuthi, O'C. Libh a cain atac be mitis, ad eaden beannuigte, Eng. With thee, O let a pure hope be, in due season, in thy blessed presence.
4. Pl. Byr nar ob sillo homal o nym ubym I sirthoho, O'C. Bir nar ob sillad uimal a nim, ibim a srota Eng. Deny not a drop of the fountain to the humble, O splendor, I drink at the streams.
5. Pl. Byth-lym, mo thime nocto, thii ne lech antı dias ma chon, O'C. Bi tu le me, mo time nocta, ni leg tu onta dis mo coine. Eng. Be propitious, my fear being respectfully revealed, suffer not my miserable
daughters to be stained with pollution.
The Irish Bearla-Feni, and the Punic or Carthaginian are either the same language, or these manifest similarities are merely accidental coincidences, or two of the most learned and respectable of the Irish nation have appealed, uncontradicted, to their countrymen in favour of a gross imposture, which thousands could have detected. The two last of the alternatives are too wild to be admitted; and the first must be the acknowledged conclusion from the facts above exposed. When, and how the Punic or Fenic, was first introduced in Ireland, we have, at present, no satisfactory authority to rest upon; we therefore decline giving an opinion. Having thus furnished the reader with the facts that tend to prove an affinity between the Punic and the Irish, and between these and the impure Hebrew of Bochart, and enabled him to decide for himself of the resemblances between the Punic, the correct Hebrew, the pure Chaldee, and the Samaritan, we submit this disquisition to his better judgment, without further remark.
Art. II.- Legal Outlines, being the Substance of a Course of Lec
tures now delivering in the University of Maryland, by DAVID HOFFMAN. In three volumes. Vol. i. Baltimore. Edward J. Coale, 1829.
We could not help exclaiming as we opened this book, and cast our eyes hastily over some of its pages, Dii immortales ! quàm tu longe juris principia repetis. But if the objection presented itself to us at the first glance, it has only been confirmed, and sanctioned by a deliberate perusal of the whole work. We doubt, very much, whether Atticus himself who was good enough to waive this objection in the Dialogue de Legibus, in consideration of what he is pleased to regard as the very interesting character of Tully's adscititious or subsidiary speculations, would have digested the enormous mass of irrelevant matter which has been huddled together in the volume before us. We regret, exceedingly, that this first part of Mr. Hoffman's work is so grievously obnoxious to this criticism, as (we fear) not a little to endanger its reputation for usefulness and “cast ominous conjecture on the whole success." We regret it, because we can say, with perfect candour, that-grave as this objection undoubtedly is to the of the book as a book-we have conceived, even from this faulty performance, the highest respect for the learn- v ing and ability of the author, and been led to entertain no inconsiderable expectations in regard to the forthcoming volumes. Wherever he has touched, in the course of these pages, upon any strictly legal question, he has shown himself thoroughly versed in all the learning connected with it. We shall take occasion to exemplify this remark in the sequel. Indeed, we make no scruple of predicting that-should the remaining titles of the works be executed as well as from the specimens alluded to, we are induced to hope they will be, Mr. Hoffman's contribution to the fund of elementary education in the law, will be preferable to any thing of the kind that has yet seen the light on this side of the Atlantic. His views are distinguished by a comprehensive philosophy, and his analysis conducted with a logical and scientific method, rarely to be met with in works of this class. Even in the discussion of those topics which seem to us out of place here, or unworthy of a place any where, he has done as much as is generally expected of elementary writers. Our objection is not so much to the manner or the guise in which they appear as to their appearing at all. We think it a fatal