Admiscuerunt, impari tamen loco. Pedes frequentant, lege servata tamen. Nam nullus alius ponitur, tantum solet Ovid, indeed, calls the Iambic celer in contradistinction to the scazon. But Horace uses citus of the pure Iambic verse, as distinguished from the more slow verses, which the tragic writers adopted, and into which spondees were admitted in the 1st, 3d, and 5th places. It is somewhat remarkable, that, according to the schema trimetrorum Senecæ, drawn up by Avantius, the iambic in the fifth place occurs only nine times, and the tribrach thrice. The spondee, generally, and sometimes an anapæst, are used in that part of the verse. By an error, we suppose, of the press, a dactyl is put in the Metrical Table, for the anapæst. Mr. W. p. 124. of the Geor. corrects a word in line 113. 6th Sat. B. 1. Fallacem circum vespertinumque pererro See Mattaire, Corp. Poet. vol II. p. 1261. For vespertinum he reads vespertinus: we think this correction far more probable than that of Markland, on the 16th Epode, where he proposes vespertinum for vespertinus, and quotes the very line which Wakefield here would alter. As to the position of que, no objection can be drawn from it against Mr. W.; for Horace writes, Ore pedes tetigitque crura. parvi me quodque pusilli To the learned reader no apology is necessary for the introduction of the conjectures which we have found in Mr. Wakefield's third part of the Silva Critica, and in his edition of the Georgics. Dr. C. does not profess to have consulted them, and therefore he is not to be blamed for omitting what is contained in them. But the good wishes we have for the Var. Ed. induce us to say that we should have been happy to find this labour anticipated. The Georgics were published in 1788, and of course the observations contained in them might have been somewhere inserted in the Var. edit. The third part of the Silva Critica appeared in 1792, and as the Var. edit. was then far advanced, Dr. C. might have thrown together Mr. W.'s conjectures at the end of his edition, which came out in the winter of 1793. Dr. C. does not mention in his catalogue the conjectures upon Horace, which are to be found in Mr. Markland's edition of the Silva of Statius. But in conformity to our principle of bringing forward supplemental matter to the Variorum edition, we shall lay before our readers the substance of what Mr. Markland has written about Horace, in the work above mentioned. B. iii. Od. xxiii. v. 7. Markland, in his aut dulces alumni Pomifero grave tempus anno. Statius, p. 35, reads, pomi feri anni. Tempus pomiferi anni, says he, ut tem pus teneri anni seu veris, apud Martialem, Epig. xiv. 1. 19. de Earino. Nomen habes teneri quod tempora nuncupat anni. Epod. i. v. 29. Nec ut superni villa candens Tusculi, M. prefers in p. 50. superbi to superni. Epist. i. Lib. ii. v. 207. Lana Tarentino violas imitata veneno. M. p. 101. would read Læna, shortly adding, that he had made the same emendations, p. 87. of the Epist. Crit. This epistle was published at Cambridge, 1723, and the Statius in London, 1728. It is always of importance to mark the interval between the different appearances of the same criticism, for we ought to presume, that a critic, after reconsideration, acquiesces in his first opinion. Lib. i. Od. 31. v. 3. non opimas Sardiniæ segetes feracis, The common reading is opimæ, and so we find it in Cuningham, Bentley, Torrentius, and Lambin. Mr. M. p. 225. in his Statius, would read opimas, and so it is printed in Gesner, the Delphin edition, and the Variorum. Ars Poet. v. 40. cui lecta potenter erit res. Markland, p. 232, would read pudenter, and this reading is, in the Variorum, produced from a note of Bishop Hurd, who introduces it from the learned editor of Statius. The Bishop says, a similar passage in the Epistle to Augustus adds some weight to this conjecture. Nec meus audet Rem tentare pudor, quam vires ferre recusent. But in justice to Mr. Markland, we must add, that he has himself quoted this very passage, and yet the words of the Bishop might lead his readers to suppose, that they were indebted to him only for the quotation. We do not mean to insinuate that the Bishop intended to misguide us. We observe by the way, Dr. Combe, in translating the words of the Bishop, seems to have made an unnecessary and incorrect addition. The Bishop says plainly," the learned Editor* of Statius:" but the Variorum Editor says, "Editor doctissimus Papilii Statii." With submission to the Doctor, we remembered, and we have since found, that Markland, Veenhusen, and Cruquius, write Papinius, not Papilius; and we would remark, that our poet, invested with the triple dignity of names, was called Publius Papinius Statius. In Gruter's inscriptions we find Papinius and Papirius, but not Papilius. Again, in the Tabulæ Coss. and Triumph of Verrius Flaccus, we find Popilius, and Papirius, but not Papilius. Lib. ii. Od. iv. v. 13. Nescias an te generum beati. Markland, p. 247. would read, quî scis an te, &c. and quotes from the Ars Poet. 462. Qui scis an prudens. * We quote from the Cambridge edition of 1757, but we believe that a more enlarged edition has since been published, in which, however, it is not very probable that the Bishop has inserted the word Papilius. We wish Dr. C. had told his readers the particular work of Statius, for though the Bishop mentions it not, yet in p. 460. vol. i. of the Variorum, we have a note, wherein Klotzius expressly speaks of Markland as confirming, in p. 192 of his notes ad Statii Silvam. lib. iv. i. the opinion which Klotzius holds about Dux bone, lib. iv. Od. 5. v. 37. where he defends Dux in opposition to Bentley, who would read Rex, and adds, that Dux is not confined to the signification of military glory; referring for the justness of this remark to Horace, lib. iii. Od. xiv. v. 7. and to the note of Markland above mentioned. Epist. i. B. ii. v. 110. Fronde comas vincti cœnant. Markland, p. 247. would read certant, quia Horatius hic agit de studio scribendi : sed quid ad rem utrum cœnent vel non cœnent? Od. xv. B. i. v. 35. M. in Post certas hyemes. p. 247. would read denas for certas. Sat. iii. B. ii. V. 234. In nive Lucana dormis ocreatus. M. in p. 248. would read duras for dormis. He prints tu for in before nive, and so does Cuningham in his text, but with this note, "Tu nive," ita citat. H. Johnson, ad Gratium, p. 20. et ita R. B. In nive MSS. edd. We have now laid before our readers a series of emendations, many of which we should have been more happy to see in the Variorum edition, than to insert in our Review; and if any excuse be required for the length of this article, we shall find one in the spirit of Markland's words, Leve est quod dicturus sum, nisi quòd ad Horatium pertinet; et ideo non est leve. Markland's Epist. Crit. p. 164. At the close of this critique, we return to the Var. Editor. In the catalogue, he says, Lævinii Torrentii edit. Horatii, 4to. 1608. But it would have been useful to add, cum Commentario Petri Nannii Alcmariani in Hor. de Art. Poet. Nannius is first introduced by Dr. C. to his readers in a note upon line 34. de Art. Poet. and he is quoted in the same work of Horace on no less than thirty passages. We must therefore state, what Dr. C. ought to have explained for the information of such persons as may purchase the Variorum, but are not in possession of Torrentius's edition. The notes of |