140

145

Ver. 140. But fome, &c.]" The author in this paffage, fays Spanheim, beautifully fatyrizes dilatory procraftinating princes, to whom, according to Homer - Βρασσων τε νοος, λεπτη δε τε μnts." This seems to be rather an over-ftretched meaning, and what the words don't at all convey. The author in the former part told us, "That the favour of the God was unequally diftributed amongst his vicegerents, to fome more, fome lefs: that Ptolemy was an illuftrious proof of his fuperior and diftinguishing regard; while others, though protected and regarded by him, were fo in a lefs degree, and though powerful, had not the eminence wherewith his particular favorite was bleft." Nevertheless I fhould be glad to find the fenfe of this ingenious commentator approved, as it gives his author no fmall credit; and would be willing to impute it to myself, that I cannot fee this beauty, rather than deprive Callimachus of an honour Spanheim thinks worthy of him. The fame excellent perfon obferves moreover; that in the laft line of this paffage, the poet nobly hints to us the inftability and weakness of even the greatest monarchs without the affiftance of the Gods, and the vanity of every purpose, without their aid, from whom defcends all power and glory. We have numerous expreffions in fcripture to the fame effect where we are told, that the Lord bringeth to nought the counfel of the heathen,

The

and maketh the decrees of the people of none effect, Pfal. xxxiii. 10. The reader, upon a diligent perufal of this Pfalm, will find many things in it fimilar to what hath gone before in Callimachus, particularly ver. 13. where we read-The Lord looketh from heaven, he beholdeth all the fons of men. From the place of his habitation, he looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth. See line 125. Again, ver. 18. Behold the eye of the Lord is upon them that fear him, upon them that hope in his mercy.— Ver. 22. Let thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us as we hope in thee. See line 151, &c.—Many other paffages, no less ftriking, will, I doubt not, occur to the attentive reader.

Ver. 146. What man, &c.] The very learned Mr. Dawes in his Mifcellanea Critica, is too fevere upon our author, where he confiders the prefent. paffage; and he muft pardon me, if I think his alteration renders the paffage, as he expreffes it, really jejune and idle. To fet his criticism in a true light I find it neceffary to give you his own words, which, though long, I doubt not the reader will very readily excufe, as coming from a man fo justly eminent.

"That Callimachus probably wrote ado, as in the preceding verfe. The particle x is certainly improperly joined with an indicative mood; and therefore I fhould chofe either ados or ason. But as (which fome one perhaps may be for reading) I entirely difapprove." Whether you read τις κεν αεισεί, τις κεν αείσῃ, Οι τις κεν αείσοι, you read a folecifm. The firft expreffion the learned commentator obferves is faulty, on account of x being joined with an indicative mood. But not accurately enough; for the fault dos not lie in that it is joined with an indicative mood, but that it is joined with a future indicative; fince the past tenfes of that mood, as well imperfect as perfect, as alfo both aorifts often have that particle joined with them. That the fecond expreffion is abfolutely contrary to the genius of the Greek language-nos primi monemus.-The third Stephens entirely difapproves, but is filent, for what reafons. We muft obferve (what, indeed, feems to have mifled many very learned men) that verbs of that form (of which is aσ) are never ufed in an optative fenfe, or joined with the particle x or av; but ufed in the past tenfes in a future fignification. * Aristophanes.

Εγω γαρ ως μειραικιον ΗΠΕΙΛΗΣ στι
Εις τες Δικαίως καὶ σοφες και κοσμιας
Μονας Βαιδοίμην.

And again,

Hail,

like it can fcarce be found. They must neceffarily fill it up thus: "Non fuit quifquam qui celebrare potuiffet, non erit qui celebrare poterit." We are not fo difficult, as to condemin this: Permit it then: But fince by this, a moft full anfwer is given to the queftion—τεα δ' ερίμαία Tiç xev asidos — tua vero opera quifnam celebret? Who can endure a repetition of the fame queftion immediately after it has been answered? for my part I never met with any thing fo jejune, abfurd and idle. That of Ovid concerning Callimachus every one knows.

Battiades toto femper cantabitur orbe

Quamvis ingenio non valet, arte valet. What induced Ovid to write this, I leave to the difcretion of others. But be that as it will, one thing I know, that Callimachus never would have wrote this paffage, if he had not wanted art as well as genius. Lucretius has a paffage much of the fame kind.

Quis potis eft dictum pollenti pectore carmen Condere pro rerum majeftate, hifque repertis ? Quis ve valet verbis tantum, qui fundere laudes Pro meritis ejus poffit, qui talia nobis Pectore parta fuo, quæfitaq; præmia liquit ? Nemo ut opinor erit mortali corpore cr.tus. This indeed is elliptical, but nothing like Callimachus. If you fill up this Nemo erit, qui dignum carmen condere poffit, &c. you fufficiently anfwer the queftions found in the foregoing lines: But if immediately after the 6th you was to repeat the 5th foregoing, I need not fay how abfurd and ridiculous you would render the paffage. But this very abfurdity, except that the words repeated are fewer, is the very fame in ftore fo embaraffed and incurable a paffage.". Callimachus.“ Will you then attempt to reYes-and that I think may be done without great difficulty. Thus I would understand it.

Hail, father.

150

Wealth

Tua vero opera quis tandem celebraverit? non natus eft, non erit quifquam, qui Jovis opera celebrare poterit." —I believe the criticism, severe as it feems, to an impartial enquirer, is almost its own answer. As to the ellipticalnefs of the expreffion, few in every part of study and of life, but meet with many of the fame kind.. For how is it poffible for the author to have expreft himself otherwife? How jejune indeed would it have been had he faid, Who could fing thy praife, there never was a man who could, there never will be a man who can, &c. How much more noble-Who can fing thy praise? The man is not born nor ever will, for what man can ever fing the praife of Jupiter? There I imagine the ftrefs and emphafis is to be layed on AIO gara, which Mr. Dawes feems not aware of, when he fays the very fame queftion is repeated. There is peculiar beauty in that noble repetition. For who can fing the praife of a Jupiter? and had the ingenious critic been much converfant in the works of antient and modern poets, he would have found emphatical repetitions of this kind extremely frequent. The poet in the first question is fpeaking to the God Tea egyμara: raptured as it were, he elegantly and very properly burfts out into the great impoffibility of worthily praising his fupreme. There never was nor 'ever will be a man born fufficient to praife him;" for, recollecting and speaking to himself, perhaps, or elfe to the hearers he cries out, "How is it poffible they fhould? for, who can fing the praise of Jupiter, the great fon of Saturn, the fupreme and fovereign of all the Gods? whom he had juft honoured with the moft exalted epithet wavunigrare exfuperantiffime."

Ver. 151. Virtue, wealth.] Callimachus here proves himself a very excellent mor.lift, and plainly hints at the principle of the Stoics, who maintained that virtue was aurapens, entirely fufficient to a happy life: He knew better, and found each one, virtue and riches, abfolutely neceifary for the obtaining true happinefs. Virtue

without fome fupport needlefs, poor, despised, and in rags is unequal to the shock

*Few can bear the whips and fcorns of time, Th' oppreffor's wrong, the proud man contumely,

The infolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th' unworthy takes:-

Without finking beneath the burden; but if wealth and power is united with virtue, what a field is there to act in, to diffuse good and happiness to ourselves and all mankind? There never was a more wife petition from a heathen. Riches without virtue are a firebrand in the hand of a mad-man; given only, as a great writer expreffes himself, "As a confpicuous proof and example of how fmall eftimation exorbitant wealth is in the fight of God, when he bestows it on the most worthlefs of mankind." The celebrated prayer of the wife Agur is nearly of the fame import with this of our poets: "Give me neither poverty nor riches, feed me with food convenient for me; left I be full, and deny thee, and fay, who is the Lord? or, left I be poor and steal, and take the name of my God in vain." Proverbs xxx. 8. But in the 7th chapter of Ecclefiaftes, ver. 11. we have the immediate obfervation" Wifdom is good with an inheritance, and by it there is profit to them that fee the Sun. For wifdom is a defence, and money is a defence: but the excellency of knowledge is, that wisdom giveth life to them that have it." The conclufion of this hymn is moft noble; the elegance and fweetnefs of the poetry, joined with the intrinfic grandeur and beauty of the thought, prefent us with the molt elevated ideas. -1 muft obferve, Homer concludes two of his fhort hymns with the fame petition as our poet. That to Vulcan — with

Αλλ' καθ' Ηραιτε, διδάαρετην τε καὶ ολβον

* Haniet.

That

That to Herculus, with

Χαίρε αναξ Διος υιε· διδιαρετήν τε και ολβον.

whence it is obvious to remark, that this was a very favorite petition amongst the heathens.

Horace has a very good fentiment to the fame purpose with our author

Et genus et virtus, nifi cum re vilior alga. and for this reafon, fays Menander,

Μαμαρίν, στις εσίαν καὶ ταν έχει Χρηται γας ετοσ εισαδει, ταυτη καλως. Theocritus having before celebrated Ptolemy's wealth and power, of which he could not even wifh encrease, they were fo large, concludes his hymn with

155

great and material ingredient, fince fame and merit alone are not able to feed a man:

So prayfen babes the peacock's fpotted traine And wondren at bright Argus blazing eye; But who rewards him ere the more for thy? Or feedes him once the fuller by a graine? Sike praife is fmoke, that fheddeth in the fkye, Sike wordes beene winde and waften foon in vaine.

SPENSER'S Calendar, 10th ECLOGUE. They have, I fay, conceived his cafe fomething like this of poor complaining Spenfer's, who felt too truly, what he hath fo beautifully expreft: but with regard to Callimachus it may be hard to fay any thing certain of this matter, as we are ignorant of his fituation with respect to his great benefactor at the time of writing this hymn; but fince it is moft probable that he was then high in favour, and in the mufæum, he had certainly no occafion to hint any thing of this kind. Such far-fetched and over-ftrained conjectures should not be indulged, when the whole tenor of an author's thoughts feems too nobly elevated to be capable of mean infinuations like thefe.