124 
as a curious instance of coincidence, to 
gay nothing more. 
The Works and Days, and the Theo- 
gony are the only works now extant, that 
can with any certainty be ascribed to 
Hesiod. The Aca; Heoxrees, OF Shield 
of Hercules, is always printed with them, 
but has not one convincing argument 
that can decide it to be by the same 
poet. ‘There is great reason to believe, 
that the two first’ only were remaining in 
the time of Augustus. Manilius,* whom 
Bentley has proved to have been a peet 
of that fertile age, does not mention any 
other. Lyl. Gyraldus, and Fabricius, 
bring all the evidence they can of its 
having been written by Hesiod, but ad- 
vance nothing that amounts to a positive 
proof. Le Fevre, in a bolder style of 
pedantic criticism, has asserted that 
those whe deny it to be Hesiod’s, can have’ 
little knowledge of Greek. Those, how- 
ever, who are disposed to form an opi- 
nion of their own, in defiance of this au- 
thoritative decision, will find in it little 
similarity to the other works of our poet. 
Among such who consider it as spurious, 
some have supposed it to be an imita- 
tion of the Shield of Achilles in. Homer, 
but after a strict examination, this op 
nion does not appear to us to be much 
better founded. The whele poem con- 
sists of four hundred and eighty lines, of 
which one hundred and eighty only con- 
tain the description of the shield. 
Among these, there are some few  pas- 
sages similar to that of Achilles, but the 
other parts have no affinity to any book 
in the two poems of Homer, 
Suidas mentions a poem, called the 
* Catalogue of Pleroic Women,’ in five 
books. ‘That Hesiod composed such a 
work is probable, from the two last verses 
of the 'Thogony, and its bemg men- 
tioned by other ancient writers. Fabri- 
cius enumerates a variety of ather works, 
supposed to’ have been written by him ; 
but as their existence, and more particu- 
‘larly the propriety of ascribing them to 
Hesiod, are founded entireiy on conjec- 
ture, it is unnecessary to mention them 
here. Of all the supposed labours of 
this poet, except thuse which we have 
already named, we have only the titles 
remaining; and some fragments preserved 
by Pausanias, Plutarch, and Polybius, 
who gloried as much in rescuing a verse 
from the ruins of time, as a prince ina 
victory over a powerful enemy. Others 
are also preserved in Strabo and Eusta- 
4 
* Man, Astronom. lib, ii. 
tA 
Lyceum of Ancient Interature—Hesiod. 
[March I, 
thius, and in the Scholia of ‘Abeta: 
Pindar, Lycophron, Sophocles, and. 
Zeschylus. 
Tn a short and general recapitulation 
of what we have already advanced on 
the merit of this ancient poet, we shall 
notice the various opinions that have hi- 
therto been entertained by former cri- 
tics. Le Fevre, in ailusion to some parts 
of the ‘ Works and Days,’ compares him 
toa maker of almanacks, who pretends 
to distinguish between fortunate and ‘un- 
jortanate days, and asserts that this 
piece, upon the whole, is not much to be 
valued. Vives, speaking of the The- 
ogony, says, it may be of some use for 
the understanding of the poets, but that 
in other respects itis good for nothing. 
But notwithstanding the severity of these 
censures, Hesiod appears to have the_ 
current of learned and judicious criticism 
in his favour. Heinsius, Borrichius, and 
Robinson, speak of him with just and 
impartial praise. _Borrichius, in parti- 
cular, remarks that the poem of the 
‘Works and Days,’ is written with so 
much knowledge of nature and life, that, 
even at this day, the reading of it’ may 
be of great use to those who apply them- 
selves to moral philosophy, to policy, to 
ceconomy, to marine affairs; and to hus- 
handry; and that the Theogony contains 
more than the title seems to import, 
many natural truths, under the cover of 
fables, and the most essential maxims 
drawn frem the deepest philosophy. 
Robinson, whose dissertation on Hesiod 
we recommend as one of the best disqui- 
sitions we have on the merit of a classic, 
has successfully labuured to refute the 
objections that have usually been urged 
against him. The truth is, that our opi- 
nion of Hesiod must be formed froma - 
due consideration of the two poems, and 
not from the occasional beauties er de- 
fects of either. In both, we shall find — 
him a pleasing and original poet, a mild 
and sensible phi losopher, perfectly ac- 
guainted with the manners and customs 
of his age, and possessing a purity of dic- 
tion, and agravity of numbers, more uni- 
formly preserved perhaps than in any 
other Greek. It has been too much the 
custom to compare him with Homer, 
without considering that most of the ob- 
jects which Hesiod has celebrated, dig 
not require that dignity of style, 
elevation of sentiment, which the 
jects of Homer demanded and 
The venerable simplicity of 
may sufficiently gratify those’ 
always seck in poetry fol 
