spoken of; and in Eurip. Temen. Fragm. Απασα Πελοπόννησος εὐτυχεῖ πόλις.

With regard to the whole question of the Periplus, it is manifestly, as Letronne observes, a compilation from different authors of different ages; but to which the name of the oldest geographer Scylax, who supplied the greatest part of the materials, was given as the most taking title; at least, by such an hypothesis alone can we account for its discrepancies and inaccuracies, and which, in despite of his contempt for French scholars, J. C. H. will eventually adopt, as may be inferred from his confession, that "Niebuhr has demonstratively settled the age to which the main and most detailed part of the Periplus belongs;" and from whence therefore it appears that some parts must be referred to another age and author.

ON MR. TATE'S HORACE.

On looking over Mr. Tate's very amusing Preliminary Dissertation, prefixed to his edition of Horace, I find that he ridicules Sanadon for his ignorance of the word Epodus, although it had been clearly defined by the Scholiast; who observes that in a distich, consisting of two unequal lines, the first and longer is called the προῳδός, and the second and shorter the endós. But if this were the correct definition, such verses as the following ought not to be found in a book of Epodes,

Petti nihil me sicut antea juvat
Scribere versiculos

Amore perculsum gravi; nor such as

Horrida tempestas cœlum contraxit, et imbres

Nivesque deducunt Jovem ;

Nunc mare nunc siluæ

for in both cases the verses are eviIdently written in stanzas of three lines; and still less ought we to meet with verses, such as

Jam jam efficaci do manus scientiæ, Supplex et oro regna per Proserpinæ, &c. for there all the lines are of the same length.

It appears, therefore, that Sanadon was quite right in rejecting the definition of the Scholiast; whose knowledge of Greek must have been next to nothing, or else he would have known that Επῳδὸς always means an additional ode, as seen in the 'Endoi

Ut semper-udum, &c.

But though it may seem the height of presumption in an unknown critic, for even in Classical literature names are every thing, to call in question an emendation which Bentley, Markland, and Parr, have approved of; yet, till I can meet with a passage to defend the strange compound semper-udum, I must protest against the correctness of the emendation.. I am well aware that Mr. Kidd has compared it with the Greek áévaos, semper-fluens. But the two cases are by no means parallel. The word semper cannot be united, except to an adjective derived from a verb. Hence, though semperamabilis is perfectly correct, semperudus is not at all so. Besides the confusion of ut and ne is at variance with all we know of Latin Paleography; although it is true that ut and nc (i. e. nunc), might be easily confounded. The restoration, therefore, of the passage must still be left for other scholars; unless we adopt the emendation proposed, if I remember rightly, in a defunct periodical; eripe te moræ ;

Messe i per udum Tibur— where Messe, literally harvest, must be taken for harvest-time, as Toà and aporos, literally herb and ploughing, are taken in Greek for herb-time and ploughing-time, as shown by the commentators on Hesych. Αρότους· ἐνιαύτους Σοφοκλῆς: and from whence the same scholar corrected another passage of Horace, by reading

Romæ Tibur amem nive, at æstu Tibure Romam,

instead of amem ventosus Tibure; an emendation that Markland would pro

bably have adopted, as it will get rid of all the difficulty he found in the unintelligible ventosus; while nive, literally snow (i. e. snow-time, or winter), and æstu, literally heat (i.e. heattime, or summer), would be properly opposed to each other.

In p. xlvi. Mr. Tate quotes the very beautiful passage descriptive of Horace's marvellous childhood, where, to show that he was Non sine Diis animosus infans, the poet tells us how when he was a little boy he wandered from home, till weary with play and sleep, he laid down in a wood, and how "The little robin red-breasts

Did cover him with leaves."

But surely it requires little penetration to discover that this is all a fiction, even without the poet's own hint, an me ludit amabilis Insania, to say nothing of the expression,

Ut tuto ab atris corpore viperis
Dormirem et ursis,

as if, forsooth, bears were ever found in Italy.

That Bentley's arrangement of the dates, when Horace published his respective works, is correct in the main, it were useless to deny; yet I should be glad to have a satisfactory answer given to the arguments brought against it, from the anachronisms relating to the deaths of Virgil and of Quintilius Varius, and the recovery of the standards lost by Crassus; for to suppose with Gesner, that, after Horace had finished his great work, as he calls the third book, he threw into the fourth a few odes, written previously, or to assert with Mr. Tate, that Horace would speak of future and unknown events, as if they had actually happened, is to confess at once that the book itself can give no conclusive evidence of the time when it was really published.

ON THE WORDS Θεαγγελεύς, Εισαγγελεύς, and Σουαγελεύς.

A question has been started by some Scholars in England and elsewhere, whether Philip ὁ Θεαγγελεὺς, mentioned by Athenæus, vi. p. 271, is or is not the same person as Philip o eloayyeleùs mentioned by Plutarch Vit. Alexandr. c. 46. Hardouin on Plin. N. H. v. 29, contends that they are; and therefore proposes to read in both the passages εισαγγελεύς. Sainte-Croux, on the other hand, in

Examen Critique des Historiens d'Alexandre le Grand, p. 39, would give to Athenæus the word found in Plutarch. I conceive, however, that in both those authors we ought to read Σουαγελεύς : for we learn from Strabo that there was a Philip ὁ τὰ Καρικὰ γράψας : while from Steph. Byz. we also learn that Συνάγελα was πόλις Καρίας, ἔνθα ὁ τάφος ἦν τοῦ Κᾶρος, ὡς δηλοῖ καὶ τὸ ὄνομα· καλοῦσι γὰρ οἱ Κάρες σοῦαν τὸν τάφον, γέλαν δὲ τὸν βασιλέα· ὁ πολίτης de Eovayeλeús: where, however, it is probable that for yeλay we must read dyéλav: for dyéλas, derived from ay-ewV, to lead, and as people, is evidently of the same form and meaning as 'Apxé-λas and 'Ayeoí-λas: the former of which has been lately restored to Eurip. Heracl. 748, by Dobree in Adversar. p. 104; and the latter long since to an old inscription by Bentley on Callimach. Lavacr. Pall. 130, and to Esch. Pers. 922, by G. Burges in Class. Journ. N. 43, p. 161, in place of the barbarous ȧydaßara, justly obelized by Porson.

With regard to the Χάρις ὁ εἰσαγγεXeus, mentioned by Plutarch in the very same chapter, it is probable that he performed the same office as the dor. Sic. xvi. 47. hv eloayyEXEÙS TOÛ Persian Aristazanes; who, says Dioβασίλεως καὶ πιστότατος τῶν φίλων μετὰ Βαγώαν.

Mr. URBAN,

ΤΙΣ.

SOME discussion about the localities of Horace having been lately excited by the publication of Horatius Restitutus, from our University press, naturally led to inquiry after copies of tive of the villa and Life of Horace), The Subine Farm, &c. (chiefly descripby R. Bradstreet, Esq. A. M. 1810. mated, that the book was out of print. The reply given some months ago inti

Allow me to inform your Classical readers, Mr. Urban, that the book is unquestionably now on sale at Mr. Fellowes's, successor to Mr. Mawman, the original publisher.

"

That Excursion from Rome to Licenza (the Digentia of Horace), in which the Sabine Farm" had its origin, was undertaken by Mr. Bradstreet, a Suffolk gentleman, and of St. John's College, Cambridge, in the year 1795; and the Villa Horatiana has been described by him with very great exactness and fidelity. Yours, &c.

PHILO-FLACCUS.

The History and Antiquities of the Parish and Church of St. Michael, Crooked-lane, London. [By William Herbert, Author of the History of Lambeth Palace.] 8vo.

THE commencement of this work has already been briefly noticed in our pages. It may now be fairly subjected to a general review.

Every thing relative to the history, customs, and localities of the mighty heart of the British Empire possesses much interest; and the late parish of St. Michael afforded numerous and interesting vestiges of the population of London in the earliest and succeeding ages. Every day almost is disclosing fresh evidence of Roman London; any one who has the leisure, and will take the pains, to examine the earth thrown out from the numerous adyts to sewer works, which by a sort of mining process are daily prosecuted under the highways of London, may satisfy himself on this point. Numerous were the discoveries of Roman pottery and foundations about the site of St. Michael's Church, and in Great Eastcheap, in 1831; but that displayed in carrying a grand sewer across Great Eastcheap to Gracechurch-street, "may be looked upon as the most important of all." This was an ancient highway of gravel, which the author calls, somewhat vaguely and inappropriately we think, the Watling-street, and which he describes in the following manner:

"This most ancient thoroughfare did not lay above three feet below the present pavement," ""a circumstance that would

seem unaccountable did we not know that

Fish-street Hill was abated" (i. e. lowered)" at Eastcheap, nearly five feet, by Act of Parliament, after the fire of London. This portion of the Roman road, and the pavement discovered at Crooked-lane, must therefore originally have been on the same level, allowing for the declivity.

"It was seven feet six inches deep, and sixteen feet wide, being nine feet narrower than the modern street. The sides were each supported by a wall about 17 inches thick, of the height of the bed. The walls tapered a little upwards, and were formed of rough courses of Kentish rag stone, separated by layers of Roman tile; the latter being in two - course breaking joints, and bonding throughout the whole. The average dimensions of these tiles were 16 by 11 inches, and two inches thick."

One of these tiles is represented in Archæologia, vol. xxiv. plate 45. The disposition of the layers may be seen in Mr. Knight's plan, in p. 422.

"The agger, as it is called, or substance of the road between the walls, was a concrete of gravel found on the spot, close and well rammed."......" It rested on a bed of loam one foot thick, and apthe direction of Little Eastcheap.” parently tended from Cannon-street, in

Here is some little discrepancy with our own notes, which make the course of the way inclining north-east of Little Eastcheap, towards Aldgate.

"Below the layer of loam, on which the Roman road rested, the soil to the depth of twenty feet was found to be hard native gravel, which forms the rise of the land here, and along the whole shore of the Thames. Under this was the same species of blue or London clay, which partly constitutes the bed of the river, and which, it has been seen, is found on both sides of the shore, and on sinking wells in many parts of Surrey."—p. 23.

This agger, however, was certainly not the Watling-street, as the author has termed it; for that most ancient way ran from Dover with little deviation, except for a few miles between Rochester and Dartford, from the present line of road; crossed the Thames west of St. Saviour's Church, taking a north-west direction; made its exit at Newgate, and pursued its course to St. Alban's.

We shall ourselves quote old Holinshed's account of it.*

"Watling-street beginneth at Dover in Kent, and so stretcheth through the middest of Kent into London, and so foorth (peradventure by the middest of the city), unto Verolamium or Verlamcester, now St. Alban's, where in the thirty and one, it was found by a man yeare of grace one thousand five hundred that digged for gravel wherewith to mend the high waie. It was in this place eighteene foot broad, and about ten foot deepe, and stoned in the bottome, and peradventure also on the top, but these are gone, and the rest remaine equall in most places, and levell with the fields; the yelow gravell also that was brought thither in carts two thousand yeeres passed, remained there so fresh and strong, as if it had been digged out of the natural place where it grew not manie yeeres before."

* Descript. of Brit. p. 118.