1807.} 
limity and force, but greater irregularities 
aud neglivenciesin composition. Homer 
is admired, and with reason, for the va- 
riety of his numbers: Virgil ‘deser ves the 
eae praise ina very Meh: though notin 
an equal, degree. Besides a superior ge- 
nius, the Grebian possessed an infinite ad- 
Vantage tohiadanguage, which was not 
only niorely) dys and sounding, but al- 
lowed an alfiitst infinite variation, from 
its dialects. In comparing the two, the 
glories of Homer do not always eclipse 
the beauties of his follower. Ifinvention 
was the talent of Homer, Virgil assuredly 
excels in judgment. Homer’s imagia- 
tion is more rich and copious, Virgil’s 
amore chaste and correct. The style of 
the one is simple and animated, the other 
uniform and elegant. There are more 
Instances of the ‘Sublime in Homer, but 
Virgil maintains a degree of Epic dignity, 
from which be never descends. Many of 
those things which Homer suffered, and 
which have been applauded by critics, 
would not have been admitted under the 
severer scrutiny of Virgil: and it is pro- 
bable that the Roman poet suppressed 
what might have added to the reputation 
ot his own work. Homer is greater than 
Virgil; but the sedateness of Virgil has 
ws majesty, which by some, and those 
not unenlightened judges, may be pre~ 
ferred to all the impettosity of the Greek. 
After all, though they have written upon 
the same plan, their excelleucies are dil= 
ferent, and the applause which is paid to 
the one, need not interfere with the 
praises so justly due to the other. 
The editions of Virgil are very nume- 
rous. The following are among the 
best :— 
Virgil. Editio princeps, apud Vindeli- 
nam Spirain, fol. Venet. 1470. 
Virgilii Opera, 12mo. ap. Ald. 1504, 
1505. 
Virgil Opera, ap. Ald. 1514. 
Virgilii Opera,cum Comment, Servi et 
alior, Paris. R. Stephan, 1532 
Virgilii_ Opera, Taubmanni, 
edition, 4 to. Francof, 1618. 
Virgil Opera, in usum Delphini, 4to. 
Paris, 1675, 1682, 1723, 1726. 
Virgilii Opera, Heinsii, 12mo, a very 
correct edit. Amst. 1676. 
Virgil Opera, notis variorum, 
Bat. very beautiful and correct. 
Virgilii Opera, Cambridge edit, 4to. 
1701, 
Virgil Opera, Masvicil, 2 vols. Ato. 
Leovardiz, 1717. ‘This is one of the 
most magnificent of the Dutch clas- 
sics. j 
Montuty Mae. No, 160. 
a good 
L. 
Fnstiiution for the Cure of Inpediment&of Speech. 
41 
Virgilii Opera, Burmanni, 4 vols. Ato. 
Amste!. 1746. 
Baskerville’s Virgil, 4to. Birm. 173%, 
admirably printed, 
Wartoi’s Virgil, 4 vol, 8vo. Lat. and 
Eng: Lond. 1753; beautifully printed, 
but t® Latin text is often incorrect. 
P, Virgil Maronis, Bucolica, Geor- 
gica et Aneis,2 vols 8vo. Edinb 17553 
a beautiful book, and one of the most 
correct editions ever published. 
P. Virgilit Opera, a C. G. Heyne, 
4 vols. 8vo. Lips. 1767 ; reprinted 1788. 
This is a most valuable book, abd infi- 
nitely superior to any preceding edition 
of Virgil. 
Bec SN 
For the Monthly Magazine. 
Further panticutars of the PUBLIG 
EXHIBITION Of PUPILS at MR. THEL- 
WALL’S INSTITUTION for the CURB o 
IMPEDIMENTS Of SPEECH.™ 
S the exhibition did not take place eit 
the 19th of June, and the matter for 
the Original Correspondence of this Mis- 
cellany is always necessarily made up by 
the 20th of the month, nothing more than a 
short notice of’ this occurrence, among 
the articles of ee arid Philosophical 
Intelligence, could be inserted in the last 
number. But the following particulars 
will, perhaps, not be unacceptable’ to 
those readers especially who have any 
particular reasons for being interested in 
the subject. 
The pupils exhibited did not consist of 
a selection of the most interesting and 
favourable cases; but of the whole of the 
house-pupils, for the time being, and of. 
house-pupils only: the private pupils 
having, of course, their motives for not 
being brought forward on such an occa 
sion; and those who had already beem 
sufliciently relieved, and had therefore 
left the seminary, being too widely scate 
tered to be collected together for the’ 
purpose. 
Mr. Thelwall introduced his prpils by 
claiming the induleence of the audience, 
not only on account of the particular cir- 
cumstances of the defects they had to’ 
contend with, bat also from-the conside< 
ration of none of therm having before at- 
tempted to spean in the presence of any 
public or numerous company. He furs 
ther ohserved, that they were not brought 
forward as accomplished speakers, capa~ 
ble of giving all the appropriate graces of 
harmony and eEpi en to the passages 
* See Literary Varieties in D ae A098 of the 
Monthly Mag. 
G that 
