1827.] 



Domestic and Foreign. 



527 



muses the ** roses of Pieria." Now all 

 this is little, or surely nothing to the pur- 

 pose, if the purpose be to explain Ana- 

 creon, and not merely swell the pages. 

 From the contents of this little ode, Dr. 

 Roche next infers, but not without the aid 

 of some odes of Horace, that it was t( cus- 

 tomary for persons of a refined or volup- 

 tuous taste, among the ancients, to intro- 

 duce OINTMENTS (a most disagreeable 

 image, as the doctor, or one of his autho- 

 rities, says, somewhere else), PERFUMES, 

 and crowns at their entertainments." This 

 was an inference of too much value to be 

 lost being quite original, too and there- 

 fore, as Sappho's fragment was the mat- 

 ter before him, it was obliged to be 

 thrown in parenthetically. Now Sappho's 

 fragment from Achilles Tatius, having 

 alluded to the rose, and called it the " eye 

 of flowers," ocular proof must be thrust 

 upon the reader ; and accordingly here 

 we find the original, probably, in Achillcs's 

 own fustian prose ; but this takes up only 

 six or seven lines, and, therefore, to fill up 

 a little more space to shew the Doctor's 

 universal reading, and excite his patient's 

 we mean his reader's wonderment, we 

 are next favoured with one Stirling's ham- 

 mered translation in rhyme, followed by 

 another, of course a gayer and more trip- 

 ping one, by Mr. Thomas Moore. But 

 why Dr. Roche should stop here we can- 

 not imagine for, surely, with a very 

 little more research among the commen- 

 tators, or a very little inquiry among the 

 lady botanists, he might have found lots of 

 other allusions to the rose quite as much 

 to his purpose. 



But some critics, Brunck for instance, 

 think this beautiful little scrap of sixteen 

 short lines is altogether spurious ; and 

 Brossius believes the first five lines are 

 not genuine; and others think the ode, 

 short as it is, is not one, but two odes. 

 Again, it is not quite settled among the 

 said critics, what, after all, is the subject of 

 this ode,'be it one, or two, or more. Born 

 is decided in his belief, the poet meant 

 only to commemorate the glories of the 

 rose; while Mcebius differs toto ccelo ; 

 according to him, the poet was in 

 high spirits at the return of spring, and 

 being resolved to get jovially drunk on 

 the occasion, invites his friends to join 

 him, and, among other things, to bring 

 some roses with them for chaplcts, and 

 dance a reel or two ; and so confident 

 is Mcebius that he has hit the right nail 

 on the head, he discards the old heading 

 f poov, and substitutes agreeing in this 

 withPauw and Gail u$ a-v^oa-tov. 



Now then, leaving all farther prelu- 

 sions the Doctor comes to the verses, 

 taking them, one by one, and sometimes 

 two by two ; but really we must cut the 

 matter comparatively very short. 



1.2. " Let us blend with Bacchus the 

 rose, the flower of the. loves," or rather 

 probably, "that of the loves" specifically 

 " Loves' rose." The rose, observes the 

 Doctor here, the rose is sacred to Love 

 and Venus, and also to Bacchus and the 

 muses, as we shall see, he farther tells us, 

 in the fifty-third ode but that we have 

 not got yet. Dr. Roche would also have 

 referred to two passages in Horace, had 

 not Longepierre anticipated him ; but 

 though Longepierre has anticipated him 

 in the reference, that is no reason on earth, 

 why he should be precluded from quoting 

 the same two passages. Accordingly 

 " Mitte sectari," &c. ; and " Hue vina," 

 &c., both follow; and both are accom- 

 panied by a rhymed translation, by whom 

 done and executed is not stated, nor is it 

 material perhaps by Dr. Roche himself. 

 But obvious to every man of common- 

 sense, as is the sense of the latter piece, 

 Fischer has one opinion on the purpose of 

 the poet, and Born has two, both differing 

 from Fischer's; and all three Dr. Roche 

 mercilessly inflicts upon his unsuspecting 

 reader. By the way, we overlooked in 

 its place, though Dr. Roche would have 

 reminded us again, that Plutarch says the 

 odour of flowers prevented ebriety. 



3. 4. " Fitting to our temples the beau- 

 tiful-leaved rose." Does this require a 

 commentary ? Yes for what purpose are 

 they so fitted ? Plutarch has already hinted 

 to prevent ebriety. Aye, but what say 

 the moderns ? Why one Younge is this 

 one of the score of physicians of this name, 

 or the Scotch Grecian ? says very pro- 

 foundly, and we suppose professionally . 

 " It was imagined that partly by flowers, 

 and partly by the constriction made by 

 the chaplet, drunkenness might be pre- 

 vented, or the disagreeable consequences 

 much allayed. I do not conceive that, 

 used in this manner, the bare effluvia 

 could have any effect, though some of 

 them were of a medicinal nature. Hip- 

 pocrates, indeed, prescribes rose-leaves 

 (but first made into a poultice with vine- 

 gar) as a good topical application for the 

 head-ache. That may be rational; yet the 

 strong scent of flowers in general hurts 

 the nerves." Dr. Younge's authority, 

 great as it doubtless is, is not, it seems, 

 conclusive for Dr. Roche now brings up 

 Gail's reference to two passages both to 

 account for the use of chaplets of flowers 

 generally in Athenseus, who was himself 

 a most indefatigable quoter. These two 

 passages belong respectively to Sappho 

 again, and one Philonides, another phy- 

 sician ; and Gail follows them up with 

 some profound argumentation which we 

 spare our readers though Fischer and 

 Born come again upon the stage, and Plu- 

 tarch again, and the old story and in 

 addition Festus. 



