You are right I see, nearly everywhere, if not quite everywhere in the
criticisms--but of course I have not looked very closely--that is, I
have read your papers but not in connection with a _my_ side of the
argument--but I shall lose the post after all.
[Footnote 1: Aeschylus, _Prometheus_ II.: 'trick of loving men,' see
note 3, on p. 39 above.]
_R.B. to E.B.B._
Saturday Morning,
[Post-mark, June 7, 1845.]
I ventured to hope this morning might bring me news of you--First
East-winds on you, then myself, then those criticisms!--I do assure
you I am properly apprehensive. How are you? May I go on Wednesday
without too much [Greek: anthadia].
Pray remember what I said and wrote, to the effect that my exceptions
were, in almost every case, to the 'reading'--not to your version of
it: but I have not specified the particular ones--not written down the
Greek, of my suggested translations--have I? And if you do not find
them in the margin of your copy, how you must wonder! Thus, in the
last speech but one, of Hermes, I prefer Porson and Blomfield's
[Greek: ei mêd' atychôn ti chala maniôn];--to the old combinations
that include [Greek: eutychê]--though there is no MS. authority for
emendation, it seems. But in what respect does Prometheus 'fare
_well_,' or 'better' even, since the beginning? And is it not the old
argument over again, that when a man _fails_ he should repent of his
ways?--And while thinking of Hermes, let me say that '[Greek: mêde moi
diplas odous prosbalês]' is surely--'Don't subject me to the trouble
of a second journey ... by paying no attention to the first.' So says
Scholiast A, and so backs him Scholiast B, especially created, it
should appear, to show there could be _in rerum naturâ_ such another
as his predecessor. A few other remarks occur to me, which I will tell
you if you please; _now_, I really want to know how you are, and write
for that.
Ever yours,