sition, though strictly regular, may retain an air of rapture and disorder. Gods, heroes, and princes, were, ai.. ng the ancients, the objects of the lyric Muse. They had also another kind of Ode, of a more humble nature, which delighted in softer themes; where beauty, and the pains and joys of love, were described, or the praise of Bacchus sung. The want of the sublime was supplied by delicacy and sprightliness. If Pindar excelled in the former, Anacreon was unrivalled in the later. The happy genius of Horace could sing the triumphs of Augustus, and the coyness of Chloe, with equal success; uniting the qualities of both the Grecian bards, he has occasion ally the rapture of the one, and the softness of the other. He has all the enthusiasm and elevation of the Theban poet; he is as rich in similes and imagery: but his transitions are not so abrupt; and his diction is more uniformly soft and flexible. The subjects of Pindar's odes are generally the same, and his style partakes of the uniformity. But it is the peculiar characteristic of Horace, that his style continually varies with his subject. Wherever his poetical imagination may lead him-whether he fancy him pelf in Olympus, announcing the decrees of the gods; or moralizing upon the ruins of Troy-whether scaling the Alps, or at the feet of Glycera; it is always adapted to the objects before him. He can, with equal case, pourtray, in the sublimest strains, the characters of Cato and of Regulus; and yet, with playful vivacity, describe the caresses of Lycime hia, and the inconstancy of Pyrrha, Like Anacreon, the devoted son of pleasure, he has all the graces of the Teian bard, with infinitely more wit and philoSophy; and while he possesses the brilliant imagination of Pindar, he surpasses in in the solidity of his judgment. In a word, if attention be paid to the soundness of his sense, the precision of his style, the harmony of his verse, and the variety of his subjects; if it be recollected, that the same man has composed satires, replete with keenness, sense, and gaiety; epistles, which contain the best directions for our conduct in life, and an Art of Poetry, which will always be the standard of true taste; it will be adinitted, that Horace was one of the greatest and best-informed poets that ever existed.

His thoughts are the genuine offspring of nature. They are dictated by truth and reason. Unwilling to deck lis style

with frivolous ornaments, which can amuse only superficial minds, he com pensates for the want of these by the grandeur of his ideas and figures, in the Odes; and by the chasteness of his elocution, and the propriety of his images, in his Satires and Epistles. Grace every where flows from his pen, and pleases the more because natural and unstudied. His poetry is not a barren soil; the useful and the agreeable spring up together: we are at once amused and instructed. The mind finds itself enriched by fables, history, and geography, which are sprinkled through the whole work with judgment, and without affectation. The heart is improved by a variety of wise reflections on the manners of his age, and by lively representations of vice and virtue. In word, the taste is formed by a composi tion just and correct, without constraint; full of grace and beauty, without varnish; easy, and yet not negligent; always seasoned with so much wit and learning, as to leave no room for disgust.

It has been sometimes said, that elegance, not sublimity, is the characteristic of Horace. That the former qualifi. cation is unquestionably his due, no one will attempt to deny. But, surely, he offers as many instances of the sublime in his odes, as any of the ancient lyric writers. Let the admirer of Horace turn to the following Odes: the 15th, 35th, 37th, of the first book; the 1st, 13th, perhaps, the best of all, and 19th, of the second book; and, especially, the 1st, 3d, and 4th, the character of Regulus in the 5th, and the 25th, of the third book; Odes the 4th, 9th, and 14th, of the 4th book. It would be easy to fill these columns, by numerous quotations that would sufficiently prove the truth of our assertion. It is true, that he himself disclaims all pretensions to sublimity; and often says in his odes, that his Muse was not suited to subjects of grandeur, but rather chose to sing

Convivia, et prælia Virginum

Sectis in Juvenes unguibus acrium,
Non præter solitum levis.

But this is a specimen of that modesty,
which makes him say in another place,
Pindarum quisquis studet æmularis
Ceratis ope Dædalea
Nititur pennis, vitreo daturus
Nonnina ponto.

We shall allow ourselves one quotation more, to prove, once for all, that the ge nius of Horace was highly susceptible of that grandeur of sentiment which is

called

called sublimity in Pindar, Observe with what magnificence, and pomp of expression, he describes a lyric poet, and a favourite of the Muses, in the 3d Ode of book 4:

Quem tu, Melpomene, semel

Nascentem placido lumine videris,
Illum non labor Isthmius

Clarabit pugilem; non eques impiger
Curru ducet Achaïco

Vicrorem: neque res bellica Deliis
Ornatum foliis ducem,

Quod regum tumidas contuderit minas,
Ostendet Capitolio:

Sed, que Tibur aquæ fertile perfluunt, Et spissæ nemorum comæ,

Fingent Æolio carmine nobilem. The truth is, that the splendour of Horace, not having the glare and extra vagance of Pindar, does not so immediately strike the eye, but is generally more agreeable to the understanding of the reader. He is more correct in his expressions, less extravagant in his metaphors, less bold in his transitions. Though he sometimes swells, and rises high, he never exceeds those limits which a clear judgment prescribed to a warm imagination. His transitions, even where they are the boldest, will be found adapted to the design of the Ode; and to arise more from the nature of that kind of poetry, than from any unreason able indulgence granted to his Muse. That which occurs in the third Ode of book iii. has been considered most liable to objection; but even this will vanish, when the reader accurately studies the design of the Ode, and upon what occasion it was composed. Before the death of Julius Cæsar, there was a report, that he intended to remove the seat of empire to Troy, from which the Romans derived their origin; and it was feared, that Augustus might carry into execution what his uncle and adopted father had proposed to effect. Horace is thought to have composed this Ode, in order to prevent it. He therefore intro duces Juno in the council of the Gods, as consenting to favour the Romans, provided they never think of re-building Troy, or of transferring to that city the seat of government. The design of the poem thus anticipated, it may be supposed that he would only gradually con vey the hint to Augustus, and not abroptly discover his intention in writing: and the manner in which it is executed will be found equally admirable. The Ode begins with the praises of a just and courageous man: it proceeds to exem

plify this character in some heroes, who, by the exercise of virtue, had been deified. Here was an occasion to mention Romulus, who was worshipped by the Romans as a God under the name of Quirinus. Upon his reception into hea ven, Juno, as the well-known enemy of the Trojans, declares to the assembled Gods the conditions upon which she con sents to his apotheosis, and to the future grandeur of the Roman state. Thus, what, at first sight, may appear to be a wild and rapturous transition, is found, upon examination, to have been the result of deep and judicious reflection. As a poet, he prophetically delivers the divine decrees; and when the purpose is answered, as if the God, who had inspired his imagination, had left him, he checks

the forward Muse:

Quo Musa tendis? desine pervicax
Referre sermones Deorum.

"et nonnun

Sublimity, then, is an essential featurṇ in the poetical character of orace. That he is not always sublime is a proof of that surprising versatility, that curiosa felicitas, which pervades every thing he undertakes." In Odis sublimi charac, tere usus est," says Baxter, quam florido et amœno; in Epodis hu mili; et in Sermonibus, comico et civili; nisi quod in epistolis, accedente jam senectute, omisso, ut plurimum, ludo et joco, ad philosophicum vultum, uti decuit, sese composuerit."-It rarely hap pens, that au author succeeds in different kinds of composition; but Horace is equally happy in the most opposite spe cies of writing. In lyrics, he has not only united the beauties of Pindar, Al cæus, Anacreon, and Sappho, but bas found the means of tracing a new path, and of substituting himself us a model. It will be seen, hereafter, that he has the same superiority in satire.

As to his morality, though in early youth he had imbibed the principles of Epicurus, yet he acknowledges one Supreme Power, superior to all created beings, who will not suffer crimes to be committed with impunity; to whom even kings are accountable for their conduct, and who ought to be the source and end of all their actions. He teaches us, that happiness consists in the right use of our reason, and in curbing the tumultuous sallies of our passions; that we cannot too soon devote ourselves to the study of wis

*Baxter, judicium de Horat. in Zeunius Edit. of Gesner, p. 32.

dom

dom; that nothing but virtue deserves our admiration, and that, without it, there can be no true or rational freedom. He has proved himself a master in the most difficult part of human conduct, that of advising others, which he always does with great sincerity, but without the ap. pearance of premeditation. By this method, the advice had a better effect upon the person who received it, because there was no affectation of superiority in him who gave it. Had this been vi sible, it would only have offended that inherent pride in our nature, which makes every man so unwilling to acknowledge, or be told of, his faults. For instance, when writing in praise of mode, ration, he addresses himself to an bitious man, shows him the danger of his darling passion, and the charms of contentment. Thus, without touching his foible, by descending to particulars, he demonstrates to the person addressed the danger of the measures he pursues. The 10th Ode of lib. 2, to Licinius Muræna; is a fine example of this. Muræna was brother-in-law to Mecænas, and, through his interest, could have little doubt of being promoted. But this would not satisfy his restless ambition; nor could the seasonable advice of Horace prevent him from entering into a conspiracy with Fannins and others, which cost him his life-In the 15th of lib. 1, where he represents Nereus as declaring to Paris the deplorable fate of Troy, which will attend his rape of Helen, he warns Antony not to give himself up to the charms of Cleopatra, which must inevitably end in his ruin; and in the preceding Ode, he, by a beautiful alle gory, exhibits to the Romans all the calamities of their civil wars, and exhorts them to peace. Having inclined, as we observed at the close o: our last Number, to the Stoic philosophy, towards the latter part of his life, he consequently armed himself with their principles against the fear of death. Thus he describes his wise man as braving adver sity, and expecting mortality to put an end to any misfortunes that may befal him. This is done allegorically, under the characters of Pentheus and Bacchus; that is, the wise nun will then display the same courage which Bacchus did in his auswer to Penthcus, in a tragedy of Euripides.

We shall close this general account-by A few remarks upon the dinculty of translating this interesting poet. Ha

race, in his Odes, is the only author who has shown the compass of the Latin language, in all the variety of composi tion. This renders it a task of considerable difficulty to imitate him, with any degrce of case or elegance. He has a mode of expression peculiar to himself, which sometimes balles every attempt to convey his meaning into the idiom of any modern language There are few poets of whom versions have been more frequently attempted: no one, perhaps, has had less justice done to him; and it is the more extraordinary, that his lesser Odes, I mean those that treat of humbler subjects, have been uniformly found the most difficult; witness the 9th of hb. 3, the favourite Ode of Scaliger. Those who will be at the pains to examine it, will find its peculiar merit to consist in the delicacy, brevity, and simplicity, of the expressions; the beautiful order of the words, and the harmonious sweetness of the numbers. This little Ode, though of all others, perhaps, the most laboured at, has been the worst executed. Its beautiful and unaffected brevity sets translation at defiance; and is a model of that perfection of style, which La Bruyere admired, the art of using the one proper expression, which can alone be right.

Creech, who had done ample justice to the philosophic verse of Lucretius, lost all his laurels by his attempt upon Horace. He has also been fatal to the reputation of some others. The version of Francis.is, upon the whole, the best executed in some parts of the Odes, he is highly Horatian; moral, without be ing dull; gay and spirited, with propriety; and tender, without being languid. Some of the imitations of Duncombe are spirited and elegant; but, in general, he is inferior to Francis,

Quinctilian has said, indeed, that he would not have the whole of Horace interpreted; and be alludes to the Odes, rather than to the Satires. This caution will appear singular, and would, at least, have seemed to be equally applicable to the rest of his works. Creech gives this reason, "which," he says, "must be taken from the design and subject matter of the poems. To describe and reform a vicious man, necessarily requires some expressions which an ode cannot want. The paint which an artist uses must be agreeable to the piece which he designs. Satire is to instruct, and that supposes a knowledge and discovery of the crime

while

the roses; those of Shiraz, Kirman, and Cashmere, are particularly celebrated, as the following quotations will prove. The learned Kampfer, (in his Amani. Rates Exotica, page 374,) inforins us, hat "the roses of Shiraz yield on disgillation, a thick substance, resembling butter, called attar gul; and this oil is purchased for its weight in gold, and is Bnequalled in sweetness and fragrance; which shows, that the roses of the teritory of Persepolis, are of the hottest nature." The same traveller adds, "that sandal-wood gives additional strength to the perfume;" and this observation is confirmed by Colonel Polier, who remarks, however, at the same time, that this addition reduces the value of the essence. The use of sandal-wood succeeds better in the composition of simple rosewater, which according to the ingenious Anquetil du Perron (see his Zendavesta, vol. i. 525, &c.) is styled Sandali gulub, or, if we may so translate it, rose-water of sandal. In the first volume of Linschoten's Voyages, (pp. 125-126) we read, that the sandal-wood itself produces an odoriferous oil,

The roses of Kirman are described, by Olearius, and other travellers, as wonderfully abundant, and a very delightful water is said to be distilled from them, which forms a considerable branch of comunerce in that country; but those writers have not made any mention of the essence.

The most exquisite roses of Asia, appear to be those of Cashmere; and Mr. Forster, (in Journey from India to Petersburgh, vol. ii. page 15, quarto edition,) says, "I may venture to class in the first rank of vegetable produce, the Jose of Cashmere, which, for its brilliancy and delicacy of odour, has long been proverbial in the East; and its essential oil, or otter, is held in universal estimasion." Indeed, long before the publication of Mr. Forster's Travels, we had learned from Monsieur Anquetil du Perron, that the best species of rose was produced in Cashmere.

Roses are found in great abundance also in Syria, Faiume, and the different provinces of the Barbary states; and an essence is extracted from them, but much inferior to that of Persia, and of Cashmere. One would scarcely imagine that a process, at once so simple, and so universally known throughout the East, and even on the coasts of Western Africa, and which is the result of another process in use, from time immemorial,

cannot be traced back two hundred years.

In this opinion, I dissent very much from many ingenious uen; and amongst others from Mr. Weston, who, (in his Specimen of the Conformity of Languages, &c. page 113,) expresses his belief that the ottar, or essence of roses, is the oil with which the Psalmist desires to be anointed, because he styles the oil green.-Psalm xcji. 10.

בלתי בשמן רענן

Delibutus sum in oleo viridi. Nothing can be more vague than this epithet; since many kinds of oil are of that colour, and since the ottar is not always green: besides, it is not certain that the Hebrew epithet p should be understood as expressing any particular colour; and the Septuagint have rendered it by the Greek word ion, fat; (the English version says, "I shall be anointed with fresh oil.") I shall not here detain my readers by a long digres sion, in which it might be proved that the Hebrews, as well as the Christians, employed only common oil, and nat per fumes, in the consecration of their kings.

But, in support of my opinion on the recent discovery of the ottar, I shall adduce both negative and positive proofs; and I hope to demonstrate, that it was not known before the year 1021 of the Mohamedan, or 1612 of the Christian, æra; my negative proofs are derived from the silence of Eastern, and of European writers, prior to the epoch above, mentioned.

In the works of Hafiz, and of Sadi, we find frequent mention of the gulab, or rose-water; none of the oltar, or essence. Sherifaddin Ali Yezdi, who wrote a His tory of Tamerlane, often describes the perfumes lavishly expended in the entertainments given by that Tartar con queror, and his children; but the histo rian is silent on the subject of the ottar.

The Ayeen Akbery, or Commentary of the Grand Mogul Akber, translated by Mr. Gladwin, of Calcutta, contains a chapter on the regulation of the Imperial Perfumery, in which various preparations of roses are noticed, without any mention of the essence. This work, the Aycen Akbery, was composed in the year of our æra, 1569; and consequently, forty-two years before the date that I have assigned to the discovery of the ottar.

As to European travellers, I can venture to affirm, that of those who visited Persia and Hindoostan, and whose marratives prior to the seventeenth century