1809.] 
Without resorting to the fabulous era of 
Linus and Orpheus, the enlightened age 
of the Pisistratide, of ‘which Anacreon 
Was sO conspicuous an ornament, im- 
plies such an improvement in_ literature 
and the arts, that we may reasonably as- 
sign it a date, considerably anterior to 
him, ‘That he was accustomed to sing 
bis own compositions to the lyre,-is more 
*probabie. In his time, music and poetry 
weie i.separable, As most of his odes 
are short and simple in their coastruc- 
tion, they were easily adapted to the 
simple melodies of the Greeks. Or, per- 
haps, 1t was little more than a sort of 
musical recitation, which varied accord- 
ing to the passiins or feeling cf the mo- 
ment. Weare’ informed by Aulus 
Gellius,* that; even in his time, ‘the 
poems of Anacreon were sung at ban- 
quets, and other entertainments.f 
The odes of Anacreon were not dis- 
covered till about the middle of the 16th 
century, when Henry Stephen, in 1554, 
gave them to the worid, accompanied with 
anvotations, and a Latin version of the 
hextiT 
Ode on the cover of an old book; but 
‘we are not correctly informed, by what 
means he was so fortunate as to discover 
the remainder. When, therefore, they 
made their appearance with all this pa- 
rade of editorship, they were received 
by thelearned of that time, with consi- 
erable suspicion and doubt; and as 
Tienry Stephen was then young, many 
scrupled not to consider the whole as a 
literary imposition. They refused to ac- 
knowledge them as relics of the Teian 
- bard, and suspected them of being the 
fabrication of monks. Robertellus, an 
acute and sagacious critic of that age, 
-expressly denied their authenticity. 
When the suspicious circumstances un- 
der which these odes first appeared are 
fairly considered, this hesitation, on the 
part of the then literati, appears te us 
natural and justifiable. The Vatican 
manuscript had not then been consulted. 
The most laborious researches into the 
* Lib. xix. cap. 9. He particularly men- 
tions the 4th ode, “Tov apyugov topevav, fb. 
t+ It appears, by Gail’s edit. that attempts 
were made to set four of the original odes of 
Anacreon to music, by Le Sueur, Gossec, 
Mehul, and Cherubini. “But the chromatic 
skill of these gentlemen is very unlike the 
ancient simplicity of the Greeks; and they 
‘have all mistaken che accentuation of the 
words. ya 
{ The Latin. version was supposed to :be 
she performance of Dorat. ; 
Montuty Mac, No. 19]. 
Lyceum of Ancient Literature.—No. XXIV. 
‘odes now supposed to be his. 
[ie is said to havefound the 7th” 
Bentley. 
Grecists. 
oSl 
writings of the ancients, tended but little 
to prove their being genuine, at least to 
the extent maintained by Stephen and 
his friends ; or rather they appeared to 
favour the contrary opinions. For 
though the ancient grammarians, such as _ 
Maximus Tyrius, Athenzeus, Hephzstio, 
Stobeeus, Pollux, Hesychius, and EKue« 
tathius, frequently allude to, and re- 
peatedly praise, the works of Anacreon, 
vet of the fiity-five odes, published o¥ 
Stephen, only the 17th, which we have 
mentioned before, and the 42d, [oe 
wey Avovues, can be found in either of 
them. {tis remarkable, too, that Ho- 
race, who professes to imitate the Gre= 
cian poet, no where alludes te any of the 
It was 
thought, too, that, in some of them, ideas 
and words occurred, which could not be- 
long to the age of Anacreon. Nor were 
‘these doubts confined to the period, whem 
the poems made their first appearance 3 
they werd enfertained by many writers ' 
of the last century. Hemsterhuisius and 
De Pauw, in particular, have pronounced 
most of them to be spurious. Baxter and 
Barnes have, on the other hand, maine 
tained their integrity. Others have 
steered a middle course, and have only 
supposed, that many cf them ‘are not 
the work of Anacreon, but that some, 
from internal evidence, may be presumed 
to be his: of this opinion are Faber and 
Fischer, in an excellent disser= 
tation prefixed to his edition of ‘nae 
creon,* ina great measure coincides with 
them; but is disposed to think, that, 
though several of them cannot be cone 
sidered as the genuine remains of Ana- 
creon, yet that the whole may be referred 
to the pure ages of Greece; that they — 
are not, according to the expression of 
Robertellus, the triflings of some insipid 
The Vatican MS. consulted, 
by Scaliger and Salmasias, confirmed the 
antiquity of most of the poems. At 
length this question appears to have been 
set at rest, by the ‘industry of the Abate 
Spaletti, who, in 1781, published at 
Rome, a fac-simile of the pages of the 
Vatican MS. which contained the odes 
of Anacreon. sae 
It will not be necessary to enter intoany 
length of discussion upon the merits of a 
writer, whose poems, eitber in the orie 
ginal, or by innumerable translations, are 
in the hands of almost every class of read< 
ers. A few observations, therefore, upon 
their character and style will close our 
* Vide Edit. 2d, 1776, 
ac a 
oe 
account 
