Tyndaris paffes with the interpreters, they do not tell us upon what grounds, for a daughter of Gratidia. But this is unlikely; because Gratidia is a Roman name; whereas Tyndaris was a foreigner; and fo was her furly confort Cyrus, a foreigner. Tyndaris was a Thracian; fhe was by condition a liberta; but of fubftance; and came to Rome in the retinue, I fuppofe, one of the train of Rhametalces King of Thrace. She probably staid in Rome, and refided there; and was known at the palace there; the certainly received a diftinguishing mark of favour from thence; and we fee, fhe is addreft by Horace. These particulars, opening by degrees, are not altogether, and quite, imaginary; as will appear immediately. About fix years ago, an infcription, from Fabretti, was republished at Rome; and its genuineness defended against Moffei; which infcription runs in these words; IVLIA. TYNDARIS C. IVLI. REGIS RHOE METALCAES. L. FECIT. SIBI. ET. SVIS. ET IN. FR. P. XII. IN. AGRO. P. XII. • Why should not this be the Tyndaris of Horace? let us fee. Rhametalces, I mean the elder, was a public ally of Rome; was once a friend of Brutus; and after that, a dependant on Auguftus. Rhemetalces was probably often at Rome, like other princes upon bufinefs; particularly to folicit the march of the troops under Lollius in 738. Rhametalces ftruck a fine Greek coin in honour of Auguftus; prefenting their heads on each fide; and the Emperor's known, favourite, fymbol, The Capricorn, upon it: and he accepted from Auguftus an adoption into the Julian family; for we see him called CAIVS IVLIVS RHOEMetalCES on the marble. Now it is not unlikely, that fome of his train partook, on that occafion, the fame honour and privilege; and in particular, as appears by her name, IVLIA TYNDARIS ; his Thracian minstrel; who had followed his court from the borders of the Strymon, to the banks of the Tiber. Further, a fine Greek Saphic is come down to us, to be feen in the collections, particularly that of Bifhop Lowth, in 59; and in Lipfius; which begins thus, Χαιρε μοι Ρώμη θυγάτηρ Αργος. This ode pleafed Lipfius fo much, that he has given us a fpirited verfion of it in his first book, towards the beginning, De magnitudine Romanâ. He afcribes it, like others, to Erinna. But But he fees clearly its fubject; which others leave doubtful. He cites it in course, as addreft to the city of Rome; and he judges it, by the style, to have been written, in Pompey's time, or thereabout. Now we have no Erinna of that age, according to the elder Voffius. Urfinus did not receive this ode among the pieces of Erinna, as Fabricius has particularly obferved. What then, if we fhould agree with Urfinus; and fuppofe there had been some miftake as to the writer? and, fince there were feveral Erinnas, what if this ode has been given haftily to one of them, while it really belonged to fome other perfon? All this is poffible. And then who fo fit to put in her claim, after long difpoffeffion, as Horace's Tyndaris? The time, affigned by Lipfius, agrees fufficiently; Tyndaris had many calls to celebrate Rome; fhe was a denizen of Rome; refided, and was fettled in Rome; was engrafted into the first family of that city; and admitted to the friendship of its very fineft writer; who then fo likely as Tyndaris to break out Χαίρε μοι Ρώμη And if she was alfo Horace's Threffa Chloe, Dulces detta modos, et citharæ fciens ; which is highly probable; and his Chloe Sithonia, of another piece; and likewife his Venus Marina, his lovely voyager, to whom, with huge complaifance, he confecrates his harp? And if the lively Le Fevre bad been visited with thefe vifions would they have paffed before him without one fprightly fally?—perhaps of this fort, Surge poft longam recidiva noclem! Cyrrha quam fovit, vigilemque fæpe Hofpes ab Hamo! Te die faufto, ac citharam fonantem Te fuam fixit Tiberis, nec Hebro Invidet Orpheum ! And now let us look back, once again, to the infeription. It is Roman, and fo a fign of Tyndaris's attachment; it is fepulchral, and fo fome proof of family refidence; it is one fcriptions that give the caft in favour of the marbles, against coins. -For where, on a medal, fhould we have met the name of Tyndaris? but here it furvives, on this marble; which ftill fheds a light upon this mufe of Thrace, and her old fweet-heart of Tivoli. *See his Epistle to Borelli, upon reftoring the loft etes, the Colchian King, to life; how mainly he triumphs! Scilicet ex imo redivivum fiftimus orco. T3 -But -But I exceed,-all I meant was to fhew, fomething is yet Perhaps our Readers may be better pleased with our Author's Of fome fair Greek-who doats and dies How Prætus' confort pufh'd him on Whofe fuit the fober youth abhor'd, In vain-regardless as a stone He hears and ftill is all your own. To guide his courfer o'er the green; And, twenty times though call'd a prude, Mr. Whitfeld, in his poftfcript, offers the following extraor dinary reafon for this publication; which was, he fays, to give him an opportunity of reminding the Public, but with great deference, that of all the works of our days, and upon all accounts, The Death of Abel, the Meffiah and Noah, with Pamela, Clariffa, and Sir Charles Grandifon, beft deferve the Public's attention and highest esteem.' Alas! what has Horace to expect from fuch a critic! E. ART. ART. IV. The Orations of Lyfias and Ifocrates, tranflated from the T HE nature of the governments which prevailed in Greece, the importance of the people, the rivalfhip of the great men, and, above all, that of the celebrated fpeakers, carried eloquence to perfection. Among the orators whofe fame was higheft, and whofe merits were moft confiderable, it is known that Lyfias and Ifocrates diftinguished themselves; and that Cicero, Quintilian, and Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus, have written their eulogium. The graceful elegance, the chafte propriety, the happy fimplicity of the firft, could not escape admiration; the attractions of oratory, and the political wifdom fo remarkable in the laft, were worthy of the greateft panegyric. . Amidst the advantages of eminent and unfufpected praise from ancient authors of reputation, and under the certain knowledge of the fuccefs they had obtained in their own times, Lyfias and Ifocrates have, nevertheless, in modern ages, been treated with neglect. This fact may create furprize, and, at first sight, may seem to be inexplicable; but it is not impoffible to account for it. When Christianity was advancing toward an establishment, the philofophers whom the new religion difpleafed, and who wrote against it, affumed the manner and ftyle of the Greek fophifts;-and among the Greek fophifts, the Fathers of the Church, whofe abilities and penetration, were, by no means, equal to their zeal, were pleafed to rank Lyfias and Ifocrates. Nothing more was neceffary to excite an odium against these authors. Superftition ufurping the chair of criticism, they were abufed as foppifh and puerile; and they funk under the attacks of religious folly, and imputed imperfection. In the dawn of learning, in ages unrefined by tafte, men could not judge of literary excellence; and the Fathers were believed, because their affertions were ftrong, and their piety ardent. It is an humiliating reflection that prejudices of all kinds, though ill founded, are lafting. The general indolence of man renders him the flave of cuftom, and of authority; and the modefty, the timidity, too often connected with fuperior capacity, withholds the efforts of the able: who fear to disturb their eafe by refifting the torrent of opinion, and by expofing themfelves to the obloquy of the vulgar. The popular fafhions, as well as the popular religion of every country, are ever at enmity with innovators. + It is thus, we conceive, that a due refpect has been fo long withheld from the writings of Lyfias and Ifocrates. The French critics, who copy one another, have profcribed them with an undiftinguishing rage: even the truly refpectable Archbishop of Cambray has been infected with this weakness. In our own nation, the neglect of them has been no less disgraceful They have been abandoned to the trifling induftry of mere fcholars; and till the prefent publication appeared, there has been no proper attempt to make them fpeak our language. But, while the compofitions of Lyfias and Ifocrates are admired as pieces of eloquence, it is to be confidered that they are not lefs to be valued for the light which they throw on the history and the manners of Greece. Under thefe heads the prefent undertaking, accordingly, ranges itself. The Tranflator faw, and well underftood, the propriety of each of these divifions, and he has laboured, with a fortunate affiduity, to do juftice to both. The orations of Ifocrates,' fays Dr. G. furnish us with a general account of the hiftory and political interests of the Greeks the pleadings of Lyfias contain a curious detail of their domeftic manners and internal economy. The works of the two orators together, exhibit an interefting picture, not only of the foreign wars and negociations, but of the private lives and behaviour of this celebrated nation. Taken feparately, their writings are imperfect; when combined, they afford a fyftem of information equally extenfive and fatiffactory.' From this peculiarity, the Tranflator prefents his authors under a new arrangement, which appears to be both philofophical and elegant. Difregarding the order of time in which the feveral orations were delivered, and paying no attention to the claffes into which the critics have divided them, he places them in a feries correfponding to the chain of the Grecian hiftory. But left the colouring of eloquence should obfcure the truth, he has prefixed to the orations which he has tranflated, the descriptions which were neceffary to authenticate the public tranfactions, and to caft a juft light on the interior government and manners of the Greeks. For the fake, alfo, of greater perfpicuity, and that the story of the Greeks might appear in a full and inftructive picture, fo far as he is folicitous to defcribe their affairs, he has furnished a preliminary differtation. As the objects of this discourse are We have had a tranflation, but not a very fuccefsful one, of the Orations and Epiftles of Ifocrates, by Mr. Joshua Dimfdale: it was published in 1751. See Review, vol. v. p. 424. of |