1807.] 
spicuity and order not to be found in 
Lucan or Statius. His characters are 
stately, and his sentiments are just and 
pleasing. His descriptions are sometimes 
bold, and the images are poetical; but 
the expression, the colouring is weak, 
and often gpiritless. He has none of 
that enthusiastic fire, which animates 
every line of Homer. He had before 
him the elegance, the richness, and the 
rapidity of style so conspicuous in Livy. 
He had only, therefore, to give a poetical 
colouring to the language of the histo- 
rian; but it frequently happens, that in 
endeavouring te escape the imputation 
of following too closely the narrative of 
Livy, he substitutes obscurity for brevity, 
profusion fur richness, and tameness for 
elegance. He possessed many of the 
qualifications necessary to form a poet; 
but in aiming at the correctness of Virgil, 
he is cold and declamatory; his figures 
are without life, and his style vapid and 
flat. But as he also sometimes displays 
a degree of eloquence and elegance, wor- 
thy of the Augustan age, it may be said 
of him as of Statius, that he has not me- 
rited the absolute neglect which has at- 
tended his poem. The student may 
peruse him with pleasure and advantage, 
if he be under the guidance of a saga- 
cious master, who will teach him to dis- 
criminate between the good and the bad. 
The poem lay for many ages unknown 
and unsuspected. It is generally agreed 
that Poggio, the Florentine, discovered a 
copy in the monastery of St. Gall, near 
Constance, at the time of. the great 
council held in that city in the fourteenth 
century. To him we are also indebted 
for the discovery of Lucretius, Quintilian, 
Manilius, Valerius Flaccus, and many 
others who had so long been mouldering 
in their neglected repositories. Poggio, 
writing to his friend Guarini, of Verona, 
says, “‘The monastery of St. Gall is about 
twenty miles from Constance. Some of 
us being disposed to relax our minds from 
the cares of business, we proceeded ‘to 
the abbey, where we understood the li- 
brary contained a great number of books 
and manuscripts. We soon discovered a 
copy of Quintilian, entire and unhurt, 
though greatlydisfigured by the dust. There 
we likewise found Silius Italicus, &c. &c. 
and a Treatise on the eight Orations of 
Cicero, by Q. Asconius Pedianus, a most 
eloquent writer, mentioned by Quinti- 
lian.”* ‘This letter (dated the 17th 
— rr rr re 
* See Drakenborch’s Preface. 
Montury Mac. No, 164. 
Lyceum of Ancient Literature—Silius Itahecus. 
459 
of January, 1417) is undoubtedly ge- 
nuine, and corroborated by other letters, 
which passed among the many contempo-: 
rary andillustrious nen, who contributed 
so much to the revival of letters in Italy. 
Petrarch, who it is well known wrote a 
Poem, entitled, Africa, which embraces 
the same events celebrated by Silius, 
died in 1374, more than forty years be- 
fore the date of Poggio’s letter. Weare 
at a loss therefore to account for the po- 
sitive terms in which Lefebvre de Villa- 
brune* declares his conviction, from the 
perusal of the Africa, that Petrarch was 
in possession of a copy of Silius; and not- 
withstanding the contrary opinions of 
Lyl.. Gyraldus, Drakenborch, and the 
Baron dela Bastie,t asserts that Petrarch, 
thus possessing a copy which he consi~ 
dered as unique, availed himself of it in 
the composition of hisown poem, and was 
willing to conceal it in order to preserve 
his own reputation; but this opinion can- 
not be maintained consistently with facts 
so well ascertained, nor with the charac- 
ter of Petrarch. Tis genius did not re- 
quire help from the magination or la- 
bours of another. And did the circum- 
stances of the case admit of the supposi- 
tion, that he could be guilty of so disin- 
genuous a proceeding, he has been 
severely punished by the judgment of 
posterity, which, while it has bestowed 
everlasting fame on his Sonnets, and tri-+ 
umphs, has disregarded the Africa, t and 
his other Latin compositions. We have 
neither time nor space to enter into a 
comparison of the two poems of Silius 
and Petrarch, so as to trace their coin- 
cidence, but we recommend it to our 
readers as a curious circumstance in the 
annals of literature. 
The series of the early editions will be 
found regularly deduced in the preface 
of Drakenborch, and a correct and chro- 
nological list.in that of Ernesti. ‘The 
following are among the most valuable 
curious. 
Silius [talicus, de bello Punico, Rome, 
1471, curis Andree Aleriensis et Pom- 
ponu Lati. 
Silius Italicus, Romana princeps edit. 
fol. 1471, cum Calpurnio et Hesiodo; per 
Conr.Schweynheim et Arnold. Pannartz. 
There were three other editions printed 
* In his Preface to the Paris edit. of Sil. 
Ital. 1781. - pae 
+ Mem. de l’Acad. des Inscript. tom. 15. 
¢ Yet it was-for the composition of the ° 
Africa, that Petrarch received the honours 
ef the Capitol. ne Ap 
+0 4 ae at. 
- 
