viating from the primitive purity of the Christian faith, and consequently could never afford the slightest authority for the conduct of the church in after ages of the world. The argument derived from ancient manuscripts, versions, and quotations in the writings of the Fathers, is not even pretended to be defective; and these determined controvertists are therefore compelled to resort to their accustomed plan of pointing out inconsistencies which are easily reconciled, and of supposing difficul ties where none are to be found. Such is the frequent result of that restless love of novelty, by which many are induced to reject the well-founded opinions of those around them, and to substitute in their place the bold and unauthorised conjectures of their own distorted imaginations! And such is the close alliance which too often subsists between scepticism and cre dulity! Leaving the follies, the prejudices, and the infatuation which too often characterise the various sects and parties of religion, to their own fate, it is the imperious duty of the sober and dis passionate inquirer after truth, patiently to scrutinise the testi mony relating to these controverted chapters of St. Matthew, unmindful of their connexion with any system of belief, and without any reference to the consequences which the investiga tion may produce. If after a deliberate and fair examination the united proofs in their support shall be found, as I am persuaded they will be, to outweigh every objection which ingenuity can devise, or animosity suggest; if the latter shall be discovered to be altogether trifling and insignificant when compared with the former; then must the authenticity of this Lardner, tained much matter in common with it. Bell's Argum. p. 64.; vol. ix. p. 359, 8vo.; Marsh's Michaelis, vol. i. p. 37. and vol. iv. p. 159. But the objection chiefly insisted on by the later Unitarian writers is derived from Luke iii. 23, by which they attempt to show that Herod died two or even three years before our Saviour's birth. This has been fully confuted in a former note; and whoever has read the admirable remarks of Dr. Paley on the discrepancies of the different gospels, will know how to estimate the skill and the intentions of those persons who regard an inconsistency in chronology as sufficient to discredit the whole narrative in which it is found. It is also deserving of observation that the Unitarians themselves differ on this point. Neither Williams, nor Priestley, nor Evanson, though they decidedly reject the introductory chapters both of St. Matthew's and St. Luke's gospels, make the faintest allusion to this chronological difficulty; and if its importance unduly magnified by the Unitarians of the present day, it probably arises from their distrusting the soundness of the arguments employed by their predecessors. is thus portion of Scripture be admitted without reserve, and the doctrines which are there unfolded be cordially embraced. To pursue any other mode of conduct, would be at once to violate the laws of sound criticism, to annihilate one of the primary sources of rational conviction, and to countenance the introduction of principles, which, if universally received, would speedily effect the subversion of that sacred citadel in which are deposited the standard of our faith, and the charter of our hopes. NOTICE OF FLAVII MEROBAUDIS CARMINUM Orationisque Reliquiæ, ex Membranis Sangallensibus edita a B. G. NIEBUHRIO, C. F. St. Gallen, 1824. COUNSELLOR of State Niebuhr, long since celebrated in the republic of letters, continues gathering laurels in a field, which, since his edition of Fronto, he never entered on without increasing his celebrity. He has lately enriched Latin literature with a new Anecdoton, containing fragments of poems, and of a discourse, composed, to all appearance, by Flavius Merobaudes -worthy of attention in more than one respect. It is a codex rescriptus, from a German library, whose treasures of monuments from antiquity are for the most part yet unknown. Mr. V. Arx, the worthy director of the Seminary at St. Gallen, excited by the interesting results of the researches in several Italian libraries, had reviewed the numerous codices formerly belonging to the Chapter, and pointed out among them several codices rescriptos, which he tried to examine and appreciate according to their contents. Mr. Niebuhr, at that time on his return to Germany, inquired after resources for his intended new edition of Charisius. Mr. V. Arx not only satisfied him in this respect, but also communicated to him his discoveries. At last, prevented, by the increasing weakness of his sight, from completing the investigation, he left the whole business to the more experienced scholar. The Ms. No. 908 had, among those which were reviewed, been marked out, as undoubtedly containing something new and interesting. It belongs to the ninth century, and forms part of a considerable volume, for the materials of which old codices had been indiscriminately made use of. For the whole Ms., with the exception of a few leaves, is made up of parts, or rather fragments of old codices, to which necessity and accident have given the present shape. Over the original characters, which the ordinary means were employed to efface, or at least to render illegible, we read now a Latin glossarium, of a very subordinate value, although an ineditum one, which it might not be altogether uninteresting to examine more closely. The vestiges of the older characters exhibit, as far as it is possible to decipher them, subjects partly liturgical, partly medicinal, and partly also theological. Amidst them there are those leaves from which the fragments above-mentioned are taken, and to which Mr. Niebuhr has, in preference, devoted his attention. These leaves amount to no more than eight; of which four at least may have belonged to the saine section (ad octavum libri discerpti quaternionem), as the contents, though not regularly continued, are yet of a nature nearly related. Even these, however, are not preserved entire, but curtailed on two sides, in order to give them the present form; a circumstance, by which the extent even of the small part which has been saved is considerably diminished. The parchment is of the most delicate kind; the letters uncial, reminding us of the celebrated Veronese codex of Cajus; and the whole codex, to all appearance, originating in the fifth century. The preserved fragments, which have been published by Mr. N., amount to seven; five poetical, and two in prose, the latter undoubtedly parts of one and the same rhetorical composition. Carmen 1, of twenty-three lines, in the elegiac metre; Carmen 2, of fourteen lines, the commencement of which is mutilated, both addressed to the Emperor Valentinian III.; Carmen 3, of seven lines, likewise fragmentary.; Carmen 4, of forty-six lines. Then follow orationis de laudibus Aetii fragmentum 1 et 2. At last Carmen 5, superscribed Epii Pato, of 197 hexameters. The text has been accurately printed after the Ms., the peculiarities of which are carefully noticed; notes have been added, sufficient to illustrate the text, though perhaps to a less extent than may be desirable. (Mr. N. apologises for this from the want of the requisite resources.) This short commentary also, no less than his other writings, exhibits the extensive learning of Mr. N., and in particular, his eminent attainments in historical criticism. The sad condition of the leaves, which have furnished these fragments, has frequently placed Mr. N. under the necessity of supplying by conjecture partly the commencement, partly the end of the verses and lines. This has been done, especially in the first fragment, and even to a greater extent in Carm. 5, from v. 50-97, and likewise from 144 to the end. About these supplementa hypercritical readers only, we think, will quarrel with the editor. All these pieces or fragments may be rightly said to constitute a whole, on account of their having for their object one person, Flavius Aëtius, whose biography they enrich with some new and very interesting traits. By this circumstance the time, when the author of these compositions lived, is pretty exactly fixed; namely, in the early part of the fifth century. The name of the author is not mentioned either in the poems or the panegyric, (for as such this discourse appears even in the form of fragments ;) but a remarkable parallel, occurring in the latter, may lead to discover it. Mr. N. follows this vestige, and attempts, by a conjecture, which cannot be otherwise called than very ingenious, to find out the true name of the author. There is a passage in the fragments of the speech, which occurs, almost in the same words, in a table of marble, discovered about ten years ago, by digging on the Foro Ulpio at Rome. It is an inscription on the base of a statue erected in honor of Flavius Merobaudes. This inscription, which has been illustrated by Mr. Fea, and of which Mr. Niebuhr gives an exact copy in the commentary of the announced book, not only mentions the name, but gives also a detailed account of the merits of Flavius Merobaudes. The words, dedicata III. Kal. Aug. Conss. DD. NN. Theodosio XV. et Valentiniano IIII., point out the year 435, at which time, in all probability, the panegyric also was pronounced. As to the discourse, therefore, every doubt might be considered as removed; but as to the poems, there is still some matter of just scruple. For the manner in which the learned counsellor of state has attempted to clear it, we refer our readers to the book itself. We conclude this announcement with the following remarks: A Merobaudes is mentioned in Fabricii Biblioth. Lat. Med. et Inf. Ætat. tom. 5. pag. 212. (of the German editor), as a Spanish scholar, to whom Fabricius ascribes a poem, beginning with the words, Proles vera Dei antiquior omnibus annis. The author of the Bibliotheca considers this Merobaudes, and one mentioned by Idacius ad a. 427., to be the same person. The words of Idacius are: Merobaudes, natu nobilis et eloquentiæ merito vel maxime in poëmatis studio veteribus comparandus (comp. Niebur, p. Præf. ix), TESTIMONIO ETIAM PROVECTUS STATUARUM. These words admit of no other reference than to our Flavius Merobaudes, author of the announced compositions, of whom Boëthius also speaks several times with great respect vide Comment. in Topica Cicer. IV. p. 807, and v. p. 835, of the Basil edition of 1570. NOTICE OF BALTHASSARIS CASTILIONII, Patricii Mantuani, Carmina, et alia Opuscula, aucta, emendata, et illustrata. In Padova, 1733. THERI [Concluded from No. LXV.] HERE is, lastly, another sort of poetry, which does not, or at least ought not to rank so high as those we have before attempted to point out. It is not diversified or ennobled by luxuriant imagery, sublimity of thought, or powerful language, but acquires all its attractions from the total absence of all meretricious ornament, a certain "curiosa felicitas" of expression, simplicity, sensibility, and pathos. It is best adapted for amatory poetry, and is in fact the very style which the greatest masters of that art have adopted. The most perfect specimens of this department of poetry are, we think, the Epistles of Ovid, the Eloise of Pope; and, though last, not least, the Elegies of the eloquent and impassioned Tibullus. It is a species of writing which speaks more to the heart than the imagination,-which awakens our sympathies, instead of our energies, and which elicits no emotions of wonder, rapture, or admiration, but only the kindly and gentle overflowings of a susceptible heart. How exquisitely beautiful and simple is the exclamation of Zelika in Lalla Rookh, when she is urged by her lover to fly from the snares of the tyrant, who had first deceived, and then betrayed and ruined her! "What! take the lost one with thee?-let her rove By thy dear side, as in those days of love, |