scatter the spirits of life of the patient, as may make him on the one part, for faintnesse, to sweat out the humour of his bodie, and on the other part, for the not concurrence of these spirits, which causes his digestion, so debilitate his stomacke, that this humour radicall, continually sweating out on the one part, and no new good sucke being put in the place thereof, for lacke of digestion on the other, he at last shall vanish away, even as his picture will doe at the fire? And that knavish and cunning workeman, by troubling him, onely at sometimes, makes a proportion, so neere betwixt the working of the one and the other, that both shall end as it were at one time. However, notwithstanding the reasonings of this learned monarch, I believe few are now afraid of this, or any other power of witchcraft, except the most illiterate of the people."

Polwhele notes, " Though in the piece before us, in the Pharmaceutria of Virgil, and a similar performance by Sannazarius, we may see the principal ceremonies we must have recourse to other authors for the horrors of incantation. The Canidia of Horace, and the Thessalian sorceress, Erichtho, in the sixth book of Lucan, will furnish us with no inadequate ideas of ancient necromancy. We may remark, by the way, that Lucan had, probably, the incident of Saul and the Witch of Endor in view, while his Erichtho was raising up a dead body to satisfy the inquiries of Sextus, concerning the event of the civil war. Apollonius Rhodius hath also exhibited enchantment in all its terrors.

"The practices of witchcraft have been remarkably similar in all ages and nations of the world. The magical use of amulets and charms was, doubtless, of very high antiquity; though Dr. Warburton hath referred its original to the age of the Ptolemies. Long before the times of Moses, the art of divination was practised in Egypt and the land of Canaan. Pharoah sent for all the magicians of Egypt to interpret his dream. The teraphim that Rachel stole from her father, Laban, were, most likely, little magical images. The earrings which Jacob buried under the oak at Shechem were no other than amulets. Abraham's servant (who was sent to look for a wife for his son Isaac), as soon as he found Rebecca, took a golden earring (or jewel for the forehead) of half a shekel weight, and put it on her face: this was probably a frontlet, with magical words engraved on it, like the Arabian talisman. See Clogher's Chronicle of the Hebrew Bible vindicated,' p. 157.

"As the world grew older its superstitions increased. Egypt no longer preserved her superior pretensions to magic, while Pontus, Assyria (see conclusion of this Idyl), and many other nations, became equally celebrated for their enchanters; to whom the power was attributed of reversing the order of nature, on the most trivial occasions. The Romans were subjected to perpetual alarms through the infernal rituals of Hecate; and some thousands at a time have been convicted of sorcery, in the imagination of this credulous people. Nor was it the uninformed mind alone that gave way to such fanciful superstitions. The wise Cicero, and the no less philosophic Aurelius, were, in this point, as undiscerning as the vulgar. And, in after times, the Apostate Julian, who rejected Christianity, became a dupe to magical imposture. We are not to wonder, then, at the triumphs of sorcery at a subsequent period, when ignorance and error had involved in darkness the European nations. In the fifth and sixth centuries

N

it was a darkness, indeed, that might be felt. The crusades were, afterwards, the means of introducing into Europe a species of necromancy, whose aspect was peculiarly captivating to poetic imagination. Asia had been long, indeed, the seat of enchantment. The Magi of Persia and the Brahmins of India have many ages been famed for their deep researches in the occult sciences, and their reputed intercourse with the invisible world." Polwhele.

A lost drama of Sophocles, called 'Pioróμot, is supposed by Boettiger (in a work entitled Vasengemälde, t. 1. 2, p. 175), to have been the general source from which materials for pieces of this description were derived. For further information on the practice of witchcraft among the ancients, cf. Plin. Hist. Nat. XXVIII. 2. Wachsmuth. de arte Magica apud veteres in Athenæo, tom. II, Fascic. 2, p. 209, sqq. Hor. 1. Sat. VIII. and Epod. XVII., &c.

This charge of a want of taste on the part of Theocritus has excited the indignation of commentators, the more, perhaps, because it was found impossible, in consequence of the loss of the Mimes of Sophron, to ascertain precisely against what it was directed. Casaubon, Lect. Theocr. c. III., observes: "Mirum vero ecquam hic censor åπɛɩpokaλíav in elegantissimo poeta, notare voluerit. Equidem quorsum ille id scripserit, non satis assequi conjectura possum. Fortasse illi parum visus servare Decorum Theocritus, dum imitatione Sophronis, ancillam Simæthæ tribuit; quod urbanæ potius quam rusticæ conveniat personæ. Sed profecto Simætha ista meretrix fuit urbicaria, non mu

lier rusticana."

Heins. Lect. Theocr. c. v. remarks: "Quo magis admirari libet Græculi cujusdam Scholastici argutam curiositatem, quam jam antea quoque viri magni attigerunt, qui poetæ άπερокаλías culpam intendit, quia videlicet Thestylidos personam e Mimis desumpsit. Cujus nomen, cum ex antiqua comœdia depromptum sit, cui, illius belli, quo ea nata est, inter Megarenses et Athenienses, causa ascribitur, non video quantum inter hanc et illam intersit: aut, cur potius a Thestylide, quam a Simætha, abstinere debuerit."

Perhaps in Sophron's Mimes Thestylis was not a кwò̟ò̟ν πρóσwπov as she is in our author. If a dialogue, in which she bore a part, was remembered with pleasure by the Schol. he might have considered the imitation in this respect inferior to the original, or have thought it injudicious on the part of Theocritus to employ a name for the purpose he had in view, which was identified with more interesting associations. It occurs in Virg. Ecl. II. 10.

This Idyl opens with dramatic animation, and our attention, arrested by the abrupt exordium, accompanies the poem to its close, obeying, without an effort, the fascination of its varied interest. From the beginning to v. 64, there are two characters upon the mimic stage, the sorceress and her attendant. The rest of the poem is a soliloquy. The first part exhibits a series of magic rites performed with the view of recovering the affections of Simætha's lover: the second narrates the tale of her amour. The introduction of the latter as subservient to the action of the piece, and posterior to it, is in accordance with the most judicious rules of poetic criticism. Cf. Hor. A. P. v. 148. Moreover, the change in the intercalary verse, and the appropriateness of both to the respective circumstances in which each occurs, and its omission when the history of

this unbridled passion has passed its climax, and the rest of the poem assumes in some degree the air of an epilogue, all exhibit the nice management of an accomplished master of his craft.

With reference to the scene of the poem Wuest. observes: "Ubi terrarum illa pompa acta esse sit putanda vix erui poterit; mera est coniectura Schol., qui eam Athenis ductam esse dicit. Pro certo hoc solum poni potest, sacra magica, quae Simaetha instituit, facta esse in trivio inter urbem aliquam et mare sito; v. 35. enim canes in urbe latrantes audit, et v. 38. maris malaciam subito factam sentit. Urbem vero inter nobiliores et ditiores fuisse ex pompae splendore colligas, in qua leaena ducte esse dicitur."

There does not appear to be any ground of objection to the supposition that the scene is laid in the suburb of Syracuse.

Virgil has imitated this Idyl, or rather the first part of it, in his eighth Eclogue, v. 64, to the end, with but indifferent success. The former part of that composition is entirely unconnected with the latter, and the address to his patrón, v. 6 to v. 14, ensures that the reader shall not forget the poet in the poem It must not, however, be dissembled, that the close of the Eclogue is graceful and agreeable.

"Bonum sit!

Nescio quid certe est; et Hylax in limine latrat.
Credimus? an qui amant, ipsi sibi somnia fingunt ?
Parcite, ab urbe venit, jam parcite, carmina, Daphnis.

ΦΑΡΜΑΚΕΥΤΡΙΑ.

ΕΙΔΥΛΛΙΟΝ β'.

Πᾷ μοι ταὶ δάφναι ; φέρε, Θέστυλι πᾷ δὲ τὰ φίλτρα; στέψον τὰν κελέβαν φοινικέῳ οἰὸς ἀώτῳ,

ὡς τὸν ἐμὸν βαρυνεῦντα φίλον καταθύσομαι ἄνδρα, ὅς μοι δωδεκαταῖος ἀφ ̓ ᾧ τάλας οὐδέποθ' ἥκει,

3. Bapuvεuvтa. The majority of the critics have adopted Henry Stephens' emendation, ròv ¿μoì ßapùv evvτa. Valcken. and Brunck. would further change poi into the Doric uiv, from the corruption of which Kiessl. conceives the reading pov to have arisen. Now it would appear, that Bapvvevvra alone has MSS. authority, for none is adduced in favour of the other, except, indeed, that Lambert Bos writes, "Divisim enim legendum est, ut quidam Codices habent," to which observation Jacobs has justly added a note of interrogation: while sixteen MSS. and the Med. Ald. Call., and Junt. editions, are stated by Gaisf., to exhibit ẞapvvɛvvra; and similar testimony is also supplied by Reiske and Valcken.

Moreover, the writers of the Scholia were unacquainted with any other reading. The unanimity of so many critics in adopting Henry Stephens' emendation, seems attributable, in some degree, to the erroneous explanation of the reading in the text given in the Scholia, viz., βαρυνεῦντα, ἀντὶ τοῦ βαρύνοντα, μέλλων ἀντὶ ἐνεστῶτος. οὕτω γὰρ συνεφώνει τῷ μέτρῳ βραχὺ ἔχον τὸ ρυ. τὰ γὰρ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὑνω ῥήματα ἐπὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος ἀεὶ βραχὺ τὸ δίχρονον ἔχουσιν· οἷον κρίνω, κρινῶ· εὐρύνω· εὐρυνῶ· πλατύνω, πλατυνῶ. to which it was easy to answer: "Futurum tempus, quale esset Sapvvevra, prorsus hinc alienum est," and to the no less objectionable defence of it which was advanced by Reiske, who conceived that the epithets βαρύς and φίλος were inconsistent, and would have βαρυνεῦντα taken in the sense of ẞpaduvovra, "cunctantem." To this the reply of the ready Toup was no less appropriate than convincing: “ Nimirum τὸ γλυκύπικρον amoris nescivit vir doctissimus;" while Dahl adds, "præterea ßpadóvev est sane nil nisi ẞapov elva." The following is Meineke's vindication of the ancient reading: Quod inde ab H. Stephano in omnes, ni fallor, editiones propagatum est βαρὺν εὖντα, vel propter barbarum illud εὖντα, quod pro ἐόντα dictum volunt, rejiciendum erat. Revocavi igitur ßapvveuvra, quod damnatum nuper etiam a Bernhardio ad Dionys. Perieg. p. 820, etsi hoc uno loco legitur, non repugnat tamen analogiæ. Ut enim vduvo dicitur et vdvvéw, Herod. III. 98, πορφύρω et πορφυρέω, Dionys. Perieg. 1192, Arat. 157, μελαίνω et μελανέω, Lobeck. ad Ajac. p. 383, 7, ad eandem legem a ẞapúvo formatum est Bapvvéw. Neque offensioni esse posse, quod in ẞapvvéw littera v corripitur, quæ in ßapúvo

66

3. The Schol. observes: iva kaταθύσομαι· ὁριστικὸν ἀντὶ ὑποτακτικοῦ, ὡς ἐν τῷ “ ἵνα εἴδομεν ἄμφω.” But the construction of wg with the Fut. Indic. instead of the conjunctive, is fully established. Cf. Jelf. Gr. Gr. § 811, where it is noticed, that The sense of this future is nearly allied to the conjunctive, and only differs therefrom in that it definitely expresses the possible realization of the proposed end." It approaches, perhaps, rather to our "since I will, &c.," than to "in order that I may, &c." This construction was termed by grammarians the Κορίνθιον σχῆμα.

Ib. píkov. Heinsius conceives this to

be equivalent to ideov, but this does not seem to be the usage of our author. He more correctly observes, that iμòv φίλον ἄνδρα is an instance of that species of ἀδολεσχία which is always pleasing when it is not out of place.

Virgil imitates the line: Ecl. vIII. 66. "Conjugis ut magicis sanos avertere sacris

Experiar sensus.

Theocritus may here have had in view a passage in Sophron, of which a fragment is found in the Etymol. M. p. 443, 52:

φέρε τὸ θαύμακτρον, κἀπιθυσιῶμες.

4. δωδεκαταῖος ἀφ ̓ ὦ. Fully stated, this phrase appears to be ὅς ἐστι δωδεκ.