ol4 
he. lived to revise his work. By the ear- 
“lier critics. he is considered again as too 
obscure ; but. they probably hazarded this. 
remark fram their having been acquaint 
ed only with the very faulty copies, which 
had’ been given’ before the ume of Sca- 
liger. Now that we have the learned 
disquisitions and researches of Scaliger, 
Bentley, and Pingré, to assist us In our 
perusal of the poem, we shill find it in~ 
finitely more clear and intelligible. Ii: 
the genuine autography of the poet could 
be discovered, of which, however, there. 
is now no hope, the little obscurity which 
yemains concerning hun would be dissi- 
pated. ei 
In considering the Astronomicon mere- 
ly.as a poem, it must be reviewed with 
the indulgence due to an unfinished work. 
-If we reflect upon the subject which Ma- 
nilius had to discuss, and that he was the 
first, among the Latins, who undertook 
to bend it to the laws of poetry, we may * 
safely admire the variety, the learning. 
and ‘even the facility with which he has 
illustrated a science as new as 1t was dil- 
ficult. Of this difficulty he appears, to 
have been. fully aware, and urges the m- 
possibility of writing well on so. ardnous 
a subject, at the same tine artfully bint- 
ing at the facility with which he could 
have written on one more popular and in- 
teresting :-— 
———Facile est ventis dare vela secundis, 
Fecundumaue solam varias agiture per artes § 
“Aurogue atque ebori decus addere, cum ru- 
dis ipsa : 
Materies niteat. , Spceciosis condere rebus 
Carmina vulgatum est opus & componereé 
simplex. i '3? 
“To those whe may ‘object that he 
might have selected a subject more pleas- 
ing, and less dificult, he himself answers, 
that every other had been already anu- © 
cipated. Perhaps the desire of going 
out of the common road, and performing 
something new, might be one ot the prin- 
cipal matives of his undertaking. the As- 
tronemicon; and it must be recollected, 
that, im his days, astrology was as much 
estecmed, as it is justly despised in ours, 
His general style is strong, pounted, 
and manly; his fancy vigorous and bold; 
his genius rapid and fervid. He has a 
fire and a spirit’not inferior to Lucan or 
Statins; but his judgment seems unable 
‘to resist the impetuosity of his ideas. 
He is, therefore, incorrect and slovenly ; 
often harsh and inelegant; generally un- 
equal. It would be dangerous to recom- 
Lyceum of Ancient Lriergiure—Manilius. 
[July 1, 
not yet established; but to others, the 
very faults ot Manilius may have their 
use. They will perceive the errors, the 
great errors, into which unrestramed ge= 
nius may fall; errors, indeed, of which 
genius only can be guilty; but, when - 
they see the effect of licentious freedom 
and ‘unbounded imagination, they -will 
_perceive ‘that such are their dangers, and 
such thelr consequences. When he ts 
compelléd to. give rules, and is ted to a 
certain forin of words, heyappears to 
struggle against these necessary fetters’; 
he attempts ‘the boldest metaphors; he 
uses‘the strongest latachreses; and, in 
defiance of all the rules of poetry, he m+ 
dulges a sort of *obscure sublane, when he 
should .be plain, intelligible, and easy. 
When he finds himself at liberty, he is li- 
centious rather than'free; lax, rather 
than easy. Scaliger; with his usual ‘ex. 
travagance Hf praise, thus speaks of Mla 
nilius:—* Poeta ingenfosissimus, mitidiss 
sinus seriptof, qui obscuras res tam las’ - 
culento. sermoné, materiam morosissi= 
maim tam jucundo charactere, exornare 
potuit: Ovidio suavitate par, majestatée ~ 
superior: . .%'.'. nihil ad perfectio.’ 
nem absoiuti operis in hoe auetore’ re. 
{iy priniis ommia eyus proemia et — 
maecneacis Extra omnem, aleam posita 
quiras.» 
sunt, Nuifilillis divimius, nihil copiosius, 
grayius et jucundius dici potest.” It is 
unfortunate fur the memory.of Maniiius, 
that, of all the ancient writers, his poem- 
has descended to usin the most corrupt 
and defective state; the number of the 
various readings almost equalling that of 
the aeknowledyed verses. But, upon the 
whole, he deserves a place ‘among the 
writers of the Augustan ages) © 7) | 
Manilii, Bonon, fol, 1474.—Editio princeps 
Manilii, . “Ital... Secunda Editio. - 
date. According to Bentley. In Harwood 
they are thus marked. . Nuremb. 4to. 147: 
Ed. priceps. Sec. edit: | Banop. fol. 1484. © 
t 
f 
Manilii, edit.» Roman. eum not.’ Bonin- 
} ree 3 &X. yi , 
-contril.” 1454. hal) St 
Manilu, Neap. 4to. P. Jodocum Hoensteyn, f 
A vety scarce edit, Bi uhues 
Manilii Astronomicon, a Scaligero, 
1579,:8yo. L. Bat. 4600, 4.) real aM 
-Manilil, In usum Delphini, 4to. Par. 16795. 
Par, 
SF. 
by Fayet, one of the worst executed of alt — 
the Delph. edit. Maire 
Manilii, Bentley, 4to. London, 1739, pers 
haps the best that was presented to the world. 
by ‘this great critic. "Phe text has, been 9 
model’ for all subsequent-editors.; + — rg te 
 Manilii, Stoeberi,’ Svo. “Argent. 4767. 
Harwood calls this an excellent edition, bu 
mend this author to one whose taste is,Pingré gives a very difiezent character of it! 
ae &. 
ETT | See an ee es 
| ‘ 
Nq 
