of Euripides in turn disgusts us with outrageous cruelty, and depresses us
with the most painful demands upon our compassion.

In the lyric portions of his dramas, our poet has been far more successful.
The description of the capture of Troy by night,[5] is a splendid specimen
of animation blended with true pathos. But taken as a whole. Euripides is a
most unequal author. We may commence a play with pleasure (but O for the
prologues!), we may proceed with satisfaction, but the feeling rarely lasts
to the end. If I may venture an opinion upon so uncertain a subject, I
should name the Hippolytus, Ion, Troades, Bacchæ, and Iphigenia in Aulis as
his best plays, placing the Phœnissæ, Alcestis, Medea, Hecuba, and Orestes
in a lower rank. The Helena is an amusing heap of absurdities, and reads
much better in the burlesque of Aristophanes; the Electra is utterly
beneath criticism; the Cyclops a weak, but humorous imitation of Homer. The
other plays appear to be neither bad nor good.

The style of Euripides is, generally speaking, easy; and I can mention no
author from whom a taste for elegant Greek and a facility in composition
can more easily be derived. Some of his plays have suffered severely from
the ravages of time, the ignorance of copyists, and the more dangerous
officiousness of grammarians. Some passages of the Bacchæ, Rhesus, Troades,
and the two Iphigenias, despite the ingenuity and erudition of such
scholars as Porson, Elmsley, Monk, Burges, and a host of others, must still
remain mere matter for guessing. Hermann's Euripides is, as a whole, sadly
unworthy the abilities of the Humboldt of Greek literature.

The present volume contains the most popular of our author's works,
according to present usage. But the spirit which is gradually infusing
itself into the minds of those who are most actively engaged in the
educational system of England, fully warrants a hope that Porson's "four