"So iriga zɛio, is the left hand, in Plato de Repub. p. 439. edit. Η. Steph. ̓́Αλλη μὲν ἡ ἀπωθοῦσα χεὶρ, ἑτέρα δὲ ἡ προσαγοun. The picture of this wicked hag is the picture of Occasion in Phædrus, which has likewise been noticed by the author of remarks on Spenser.

'Cursu ille volucri pendens in novacula,
Calvus, comosa fronte, nudo corpore,
Quem si occuparis, teneas; elapsum semel
Non ipse possit Jupiter reprehendere,
Occasionem rerum significat brevem.
Effectus impediret ne segnis mora,

Finxere antiqui talem effigiem Temporis.'"-Upton.

Many readers would perhaps have been superficial enough to be satisfied with being informed, that "other," as here used, is borrowed from classical expressions, signifying "left."

In the eighth canto of Book Second, Spenser describes a battle between Prince Arthur and the two sons of Acrates, who, having found Sir Guyon in a swoon, were robbing him of his armour. The sword of the prince has been stolen. some time before, and he has no weapon but his spear, which at length breaks. The Palmer, who was watching the conflict by the side of his master, Sir Guyon, seeing the danger of the prince, runs to him with the sword of the swooned knight, by the help of which Arthur easily conquers his foes. The story, as related by our poet, appears perfectly natural, and it seems no great stretch of fancy to provide this hero with a weapon, in the manner described. Not so thinks Upton; common sense has nothing to do with it; it was classical to arm a warrior in this way, otherwise, Spenser never would have dreamed of it. We have the following note. "Which when the Palmer saw.' Spenser here plainly had Homer in view, where Minerva gives Achilles his spear. Λάθε δ' Εκτορα. Ιλ. %. 276. She gave him his sword so lightly that Hector knew not of it. So Juturna gives Turnus his sword, who had broken his former sword on the Vulcanian arms of Æneas." Upton.

So we must imagine Spenser, in the course of composition, having arrived at the point where the prince's spear breaks, and then rummaging over his Greek and Latin books. to find out how to extricate the hero from his embarrassing situation.

Warton is thrown into great confusion by the poet's speaking of ordnance, and thinks it an error for which no excuse can possibly be found. His speculations are highly edifying. The passage which so much disturbs him is this;

"And evermore their hideous ordinaunce

Upon the bulwarkes cruelly did play."

On this he says, "Chaucer, in his description of the battle of Anthony and Cleopatra, mentions guns. Leg. of Cleop. ver. 58. Salvator Rosa has painted a cannon at the entrance of the tent of Holofernes. But these examples will not acquit Spenser. Ariosto was somewhat more cautious in this particular; for though he supposes the use of firearms on a certain occasion in the age of Charlemagne, yet he prudently suggests that they were soon afterwards abolished, and that the use of them continued unknown for many years. He attributes the revival, no less than the invention, of these infernal engines, to the devil. C. xi. St. 22."

Upton, however, finds an apology for his favorite in that never-failing magazine, his classical attainments. "Their ordinaunce," he observes, "means battering engines; such as are described in Lipsius; these he calls huge artillery. Spenser poetically uses the word in its larger sense. Tormenta inter ordines militares collocata'; so called from ordinare, being placed in rows. We now confine its signification

to cannon.

This appears a tolerably satisfactory explanation. Todd, however, cannot resist the temptation to fire a shot out of these same cannon. He adds; "In Barret's Dict. 1580, Ordinance signifies generally, instruments of war. But the word

appears to have been particularly applied to cannon in Spenser's time. Thus Sir J. Harrington in his remarks on Ariosto's guns; Virgil hath a verse in the sixth Æneados, which myself have wondered at many times, to see how plainly it expresseth the quality of a piece of ordenance. Dum flammas Jovis et sonitus imitatur Olympi.'”

There has been a vulgar idea, that poets are observers of nature; and Spenser gives occasional reason to suspect that he had a taste for such beauty. It is possible, that living on the banks of the Mulla, he might have noticed the effect of moonlight on the water. If so, we should not be surprised at his writing,

"Upon the waves to spread her trembling light. Not at all; Upton informs us how he thought of using the expression in this note. “Il tremolante lume.' Ariost. Orl. Fur. C. 8. 71. Tremulum lumen.' Virg. Æn. 8. 22. "Splendet tremulo sub lumine pontus.'-En. 7. 9. Virgil took this expression from Ennius;

'Lumine sic tremulo terra et cava cærula candent.'"

But it is not enough, that Spenser had no ideas but those he borrowed from the ancients. Where he varies from classical forms, we are informed that he could not possibly have meant what he said; there must be some mistake about it. Upon the line,

"The power to rule the billowes, and the waves to tame," Upton has the following remarks. "To rule the billowes and to tame the waves, is the same thing. I believe here is a false print, and that our poet wrote as the opposition requires, The power to raise the billowes and the waves to tame." Spenser is classical in his expressions; see Hor. Od. 3. l. i.

Quo non Arbiter Adriæ,

Major tollere seu ponere vult freta."

And Virg. Æn. 1. 70;

"Et mulcere dedit fluctus, et tollere vento."

And Homer, Od. x. 22;

“ ̔Η μὲν ΠΑΤΕΜΕΝΑΙ ἠδ ̓ ΟΡΝΥΜΕΝ ὃν κ ̓ ἐθέλῃσι.”

So above, St. 11;

"That rules the seas and makes them rise and fall.” And below, St. 52;

"To rule his tides, and surges to up-rere. We shall have room for but one more extract, which, being a learned discussion upon the color of Cupid's dress, we hope will prove as interesting to our readers as it evidently was to that grave commentator, Thomas Warton. The importance of the subject well deserves the formidable array of learning which he brings forward to elucidate it.

In Canto Seventh of the "Legend of Constancie," are these lines;

"But life was like a faire young lusty boy,

Such as they faine Dan Cupid to have beene,

Full of delightfull health and lively joy,

Deckt all with floures and wings of gold fit to employ." These lines elicit the following remarks from Warton. "Chaucer thus represents Cupid, Rom. R. v. 890;

"But of his robe to devise

I dread encumbered for to be;
For not yclad in silk was he,

But all in floures and flourettes.'

But the ancients have left us no authority for such a representation of Cupid. Our author, St. 34, above, gives him a green vest, which is equally unwarrantable, though Catullus has given him a yellow vest. - Ad Manlium. —

"Quam circumcursans hinc illinc sæpe Cupido,
Fulgebat crocina candidus in tunica,'-

where Scaliger remarks, from Julius Pollux, that Sappho attributes a purple vest to this deity; but, according to the general sense in which rooquosos is sometimes used, she may probably mean a rich mantle."

We have cited these comments from the variorum edition for several purposes. In the first place, our object was to show the importance of a new and more judicious edition of Spenser, if the work is ever destined to be popular. Hitherto, the choice for readers has been between such an edition as that of Todd, (for the various labors of Church, Hughes, and Upton partake of the same character,) and an edition like Pickering's, with no other explanations than a glossary attached to the last volume, which is but little better than no glossary at all. With such means for reading Spenser, it amounted almost to a moral impossibility, that he should be generally relished or even understood.

The Boston edition supplies this want. It is learned without being pedantic, and concise without being obscure. The introduction, by the editor, is an extremely attractive essay. Without any parade of learning, it gives evidence of an acquaintance with all that has been written on the subject. The writer does not, like the older commentators, lay bare to us all the foundations of his knowledge. He simply rears his superstructure before our eyes; but the work stands so firmly, and its proportions are so complete, that we perceive at once that it is built upon a solid rock of learning, and that

the plan and elevation were deliberately and carefully devised and matured before the structure was raised.

As a critique upon Spenser, the Introduction seems to us extremely just. Though it is written by an evident admirer of the poet, it is discriminating, cool, and impartial; the literary faults of the author are not glossed over or palliated, and the beauties of the style and sentiment are brought out in a strong light, with taste and eloquence. As a composition, the Introduction is entitled to high praise. The style is flowing, harmonious, and impressive; and no man of taste or talent can rise from its perusal without an increased relish for the poet, and a stronger desire to enjoy his beauties.

The notes occupy no more space than is absolutely necessary for explaining the text, excepting that, in a few places, the poem seems to extort from the editor a burst of admiration, in which he cannot forbear calling upon his readers to sympathize with him. The glossary is printed at the bottom of each page in such a manner, that a single glance will explain to the reader the signification of the word in question. This will be found a very great improvement upon the plan usually adopted, of printing the glossary at the close of the

work.

It is not going too far, we believe, to assert, that any reader of common intelligence will understand Spenser quite as well, and enjoy his reading infinitely more, in this edition than in any which has appeared before it.

Our object, in the second place, in quoting the remarks of various commentators which are collected in the variorum edition, has been, to present to our readers a specimen of the best criticism upon Spenser, during the greater portion of the eighteenth century. With regard to this poet, Todd's edition may be considered as closing one epoch of criticism; it is the exponent of a class of commentators. His own remarks differ little in character from those of Church, Upton, Hughes, or Warton. As a commentator he belongs to the last century rather than the present. If his language were only a little less modern, he might easily be mistaken for a contemporary of Colman or Thornton. And his edition of Spenser belongs essentially to the class of literature which seems to have been his model.

A new era of criticism has already commenced. The style is changed; more enlarged views are entertained; a different