action mixed with passion, and thus, in respect to its meaning, lying, as it were, in the middle between the active and the passive.

On the other hand, it cannot be denied that some of the ancient grammarians were not sufficiently acquainted with this proper import, but considered it as only implying sometimes mere action, and sometimes mere passion, but not action mixed with passion. Looking at the term middle in this improper point of view, they traced its origin to the circumstance of its being applied to verbs neither purely active, nor purely passive, but denoting, under one and the same termination in pa, sometimes action without passion, and sometimes passion without action, and, in respect to this double power, so differing in sense from verbs active with the termination, w, and verbs passive with the termination pa, as to lie, as it were, in the middle between the active and the passive. In this sense we are to understand the words, which Fischer 1. c. has produced from the Etym. M. p. 754, 16. :

Τέτηκα· μέσος παρακείμενος, καὶ διάθεσις μέση. Καὶ τί ἐστι μέση διάθεσις; ἡ ποτὲ μὲν ἐνέργειαν, ποτὲ δὲ πάθος, παριστῶσα. Καὶ τί παριστᾷ, ἐπειδὴ ὁ τῶν μέσων τύπος ἐπ ̓ ἀμφοτέρας φθάνει τὰς διαθέσεις, εἰς ὧν ἡ ἑρμηνεία, ὁ τῶν μέσων τύπος φθάνει, καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐνεργητικοῦ χαρακτῆ ρος, καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ παθητικοῦ· καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ παθητικοῦ μὲν, διὰ τὸ ἠκροασάμην, καὶ κατηρξάμην· παθητικοῦ γὰρ τύπου ταῦτα· ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ ἐνεργητικοῦ, ὡς τὸ κέκοπα, καὶ πέπνιγα. "Αλλως· τὸ λέλογα, καὶ πέφραδα, ἐνεργητικὴν ἔχει σημασίαν· τὸ δὲ τέθηκα, καὶ διέφθορα, παθητικήν· οἱ αὐτοὶ γὰρ σχηματισμοὶ, καὶ ἐπὶ ἐνεργητικοῦ λαμβάνονται, καὶ ἐπὶ παθητικοῦ.

After having cited these words, Fischer subjoins by way of explanation :-" Grammatici enim quidam tradidisse videntur, verba media, nunc reciprocam passionem, nunc reciprocam actionem, indicare, ita quidem, ut aoristus haberet vim passionis sui, perfectum actionem in agentem redeuntem, alii hoc ipsum tempus esse indicem, et actionis, et passionis, reciproca."

If this paraphrase of the words be correct, Fischer has, without doubt, contradicted himself, when he, three pages afterwards, asserts, that the ancient grammarians were not sufficiently acquainted with the true import of the middle verb, as denoting action mixed with passion. But the attentive reader will soon discover, that Fischer has misinterpreted the words of the Etym. The writer has used no word corresponding to "reciprocam," which Fischer employs. He describes the μέση διάθεσις, or “ me

dium genus verborum," as denoting, not nunc passionem reciprosam, nunc actionem reciprocam, but sometimes mere action, and sometimes mere passion, without any notion of reciprocity: Kai Ti ἐστι μέση διάθεσις; ἡ ποτὲ μὲν ἐνέργειαν, ποτὲ δὲ πάθος, παριστῶσα. He says, that the "perfectum" implies not actionem in agentem redeuntem, nor hoc ipsum tempus esse indicem et actionis et passionis reciproca, as Fischer erroneously explains the words, but a signification, sometimes merely active, and sometimes merely passive.

Macrobius,' in his tract, "de Differentiis et Societatibus Gr. Latinique Verbi," has the very same notion about the application of the term péra to Middle Verbs, as implying both action and passion, but not action mixed with passion, which we have seen in the passage cited from the Etym. When treating "de Generibus Verborum," p. 597. ed. 1628, he writes thus:

"Quod Græci dáleσ énμáτav vocant, hoc Latini appellant genera verborum. Affectus enim Græco nomine diάleσis nuncupatur. Græci igitur diabéres hac distinctione definiunt. Quæ in w exeunt activam vim significantia, et junguntur casibus vel genitivo, vel dativo, vel accusativo, et accepta pa syllaba transeunt in passiva; hæc activa dixerunt: ut ἄρχω σου, κελεύω σοι, τιμῶ σε. Hæc assumta pa passiva fiunt. Contra Tarixà dixerunt quæ in pai desinentia significant passionem, et necesse habent jungi genitivo cum præpositione unò, ac possunt amissa a syllaba in activum redire, ἄρχομαι ὑπό σου, κελεύομαι ὑπό σου, τιμῶμαι ὑπό σου. Cui ex supra scriptis definitionibus una defuerit, nec vepynτixò, nec παθητικόν dicitur. Sed si in @ exit, οὐδέτερον vel ἀπολελυμένον vocatur; ut est ζῶ, πλουτῶ, ὑπάρχω, ἑορτάζω. In his invenies aliqua aperte et absolute actum, aliqua designare passionem. Nam τρέχω, ἀριστῶ, περιπατῶ, de agente dicuntur: νοσῶ autem et ὀφθαλ

sine dubio passionem sonant. Sed neque activa illa dicuntur, quia et nulli de supradictis casibus jungi possunt, nec μas recipiunt. Nam nec τρέχω σε, nec ἀριστῶ σε, nec περιπατῶ σε dicitur: nec potest transire in τρέχομαι ὑπό σου, ἀριστῶμαι ὑπό σου, περιπατοῦμαι ὑπό σου. Sed nec νοσῶ et ὀφθαλμῶ quamvis verba sint passionis, dici nabŋtixa possunt, quia nec in a desinunt, nec quisquam significatur passionis auctor, nec subjungitur illis nó σov, quod proprium passivorum est: nam et in activo et in passivo

See what is said about the genuineness of this tract, in the New Greek Thesaurus, No. iv. p. 341. n. 3.

VOL. XVIII.

CI. JI.

NO. XXXV.

L

debent omnimodo duæ, et administrantis et sustinentis, subesse persona. Hæc igitur quia utroque nomine carent, apud illos ouéτερα vel ἀπολελυμένα dicuntur; sicut apud Latinos volo, τίτο, valeo. Sed sicut aliqua apud Græcos in exeuntia significant passionem, ita multa reperies in a desinentia,' et activam tantum habent significationem : ut κίδομαι (1. κήδ.) σου, φέδομαί (φείδ.) σου, ἐπιμέλομαί σου, ἱππάζομαί σου, μάχομαί σοι, διαλέγομαί σοι, δωροῦμαι σοι, χαρίζομαί σοι, εὔχομαί σοι, ἄγαμαί σε, περιβλέπομαί σε. Sunt apud Græcos communia quæ ab illis péra vocantur, quæ dum in pai desinant, et actum et passionem una eademque forma designant ; ut βιάζομαί σε, καὶ βιάζομαι ὑπό σου, ἀνδραποδίζομαί σε, καὶ ἀνδραποδίζομαι ὑπό σου. Sola quoque passiva hoc nomine, id est μέσα vocantur, ut ἠλειψάμην, ἡσάμην, ἐλουσάμην : hæc enim licet τῆς μέσης διαθέσεως dicant, nihil tamen aliud significant nisi πάθος. Nam hoc est ήλειψάμην quod ἠλείφθην, hoc est ησάμην quod ἦσθην. Item ἐγραψάμην, ἐφάμην, ἐδόμην, μέσα appellant, cum nihil significent præter actum: hoc est enim ἐγραψάμην quod ἔγραψα, nec unquam dicitur * προεγραψάμην, et hoc ἐφάμην quod ἔφην. Hoc est ἐδόμην quod ἔδων. Ergo et illa quæ superius diximus, φίλομαί (1. φείδ.) σου, κήδομαί σου, ἱππάζομαι, μάχομαι, διαλέγομαι, περιβλέπομαι, δωροῦμαι, χαρίζομαι, ἔρχομαι, ἄγαμαι, cum actum solum significent, μέσα tamen appellantur: licet his similia Latini non communia, sed deponentia nominent. Est et hæc Græcorum a Latinitate dissensio, quod cum Latini nunquam verbum commune dicant, nisi quod sit simile passivo: Græci tamen quædam et activis similia μέσα dixerunt, ut πέπηγα quod μέσον dicitur, et sub activo sono solam significat passionem. Hoc est enim πέπηγα quod πέπηγμαι. πέπληγα vero, ἀφ ̓ οὗ τὸ πεπληγὼς ἀγορητήν· καὶ κέκοπα, ἀφ ̓ οὗ τὸ ἀμφοτέρω κεκοπώς, tam de actu, quam de passione dicuntur. Lectum est enim et πεπληγώς σε, et πεπληγὼς ὑπό σου, πεπληγὼς ἀγορητὴν, καὶ ῥάβδῳ πεπληγία. Similiter apud Latinos quædam modo neutra, modo fiunt deponentia, ut labo labor, fabrico fabricor, ructo et ructor: quod etiam Græci non ignorant, βουλεύομαι βουλεύω, που λιτεύομαι πολιτεύω.”

This passage of Macrobius deserves particular notice. We see that, while he was aware that some Middle Verbs, called by Kuster activo-media, have an active, and others called by Kuster passivomedia, have a passive signification, he was quite ignorant of what Kuster terms the vere media, i. e. such as denote, in all the best Attic writers, action mired with passion; for he considers ήλειψάμην and ἐλουσάμην as signifying “ nihil aliud nisi πάθος :” whereas

66

* « Videtur deesse membrum hoc, Quæ casibus junguntur." Opsopæus.

Kuster has demonstrated that they express action mixed with passion. And here I should notice the fact, that Kuster is wholly silent about the passage of Macrobius, which must have been well known to him.

The passages from the Etym. and Macrob. are quite decisive against the hypothesis of Wolle, "uéowv denominationem a positione petiisse Grammaticos." His words are these:

"Esse in Gr. literis quoddam genus verborum, quæ antiqui Græci Artis Grammaticæ doctores μéra s. xoà, Latini vero Media s. Communia dixerunt, res est adeo clara, testata ac pervulgata, ut non amplius in lite vertatur. Th. Gaza et Petr. Ramus, ut alios tacitus præteream, his, qui plura desiderant, facient satis. Ratio appellationis ejusmodi est, ut a positione petita esse videatur. Hoc etenim sensu Tò μérov in Græco adhibetur sermone,, ut id, quod in medio ponitur loco, designet. Sic Aristot. nomen medii termini in syllogismis usitati enodaturus, hanc accuratam, a paucis licet intellectam, illius reddit rationem, Kaλ dè μéσov μèv, ὁ καὶ αὐτὸ ἐν ἄλλῳ, καὶ ἄλλο ἐν τούτῳ ἐστὶν, ὃ καὶ τῇ θέσει γίνεται μérov, Voco autem medium, quod et ipsum in alio, et aliud in ipso est, quod et positione medium, Prior. Anal. i, 2. p. 195. Oporin. Id sibi vult Philosophus, terminum medium ideo dici medium, quod intra genus ad speciem medium occupet locum. Viri mentem acuti, quam obscurius declaratam, in Alexandri M. conclavi haud dubie clarius proposuit, operæ pretium erit evidentissime interpretari. Exempli loco hæc mihi sit propositio, Omnis stultus est pertinax. In hac, terminum stultus pérov s. Medium esse, hæc ipsa declarabit collocatio, ad ratiocinandi artem accommodata:

Ex hac tabula quivis, etiam me tacente, solo oculo duce, perspicit, terminum stultus in medio positum esse loco. Non ergo terminus

μéros inde dicitur, quod medium concludendi sit, quæ umbratilium quondam doctorum erat opinio; verum a sola eos vera nominis causa ducitur, si quidem Stagiritam audias. Cumque adeo medius terminus intra genera et species loco collocetur medio, non potest ille non propinqua hæc contingere cognatione. Circumspectis nimirum omnibus, hæc inde consectaria ducere licebit: E. omnis stultus est homo, item, animal, ens, res creata; sed homo est genus proximum. E. o. stultus affectibus est deditus. E. o. stultus est vel avarus, vel voluptati serviens, vel honoris auceps. E. quidam avarus, et reliqua, est stultus. Oppositum vero, quod modo, ut conclusiones augerem, adjeci, negantem efficit consecutionem : E. nullus sapiens est affectibus deditus. Verum nihil attinet plures connectere ratiocinationes, cum philosophi sententia luce jam splendeat clarissima. His jactis fundamentis, in proclivi erit ostendere, verborum μéowv s. xovv, Mediorum atque Communium, denominationem a positione petiisse Grammaticos, evadet clarior hoc usuro ordine :

Activum
Medium

Passivum.

Res

Omnia verba, quæ re quidem vera media sunt, cum activis et passivis, si temporum jam excitatorum terminationem consideres, nullo non tempore convenire debent. Sunt, quæ cum activis, sunt etiam, quæ cum passivis communia habent tempora, inque his adeo medium tenent locum." P. 281.

The passages from the Etym. and Macrob., while they destroy the hypothesis of Wolle, are equally decisive against the opinion of Kuster, who, at the beginning of the first section, says :"Verba Media ap. Græcos sic appellata sunt, non tam quod terminationem partim activam, partim passivam habeant; neque quod interdum active, et interdum passive significent; quæ est communis Grammaticorum opinio, vel potius error; sed quod actionem cum passione mixtam denotent, et sic inter verba activa et passiva revera medie se habeant, et utrique formæ ita affinia sunt, ut tamen ab utroque discrepent."

But in no passage, which I have read, is the term μéoa applied, as Kuster thinks, to verbs denoting action mixed with passion. Eustath., Etym. and Macrob. II. cc. understand by μca, not verbs denoting action mixed with passion, not a termination.