year seven hundred and twenty-one. This is proved by a contemporary historian, the friend of Cicero and of Catullus; + I mean Cornelius Nepos. In his life of Atticus, speaking of a certain Julius Calidius, to whom Atticus had rendered very important services, he distinguishes him," as the most elegant poet of that age since the death of Lucretius and Catullus." The latter, therefore, was dead before Nepos wrote this passage; of which it is not difficult to fix the date. Nepos' Life of Atticus consists of twenty-two chapters; the first eighteen of which were, as he tells us, written while the subject of them still lived. The passage mentioning the death of Catullus is in the twelfth chapter; from whence it follows, that Atticus survived Catullus. But Atticus died during the consulship of Cn. Domitius and C. Socius. § Did we wish to ascertain still more accurately the precise year of Catullus' death, we should not be much mistaken in fixing it at the middle term between the years of Rome seven hundred and six, and seven hundred and twenty-one ; which will give us the year seven hundred and fourteen; which very well agrees with all other particulars known concerning him. The only argument adduced by Scaliger, that can occasion any difficulty, is, that Catullus composed a secular poem. Vossius' conjecture, that the secular games were celebrated at the commencement of the seventh century of Rome, is altogether unwarranted: that of Bayle, I fear, rests not on much better authority. The beginning of that century was deformed by so many disorders, and by such a marked neglect of ancient ceremonies, that there is not any probability that such games should then have been either exhibited or expected. But it is not necessary to suppose that Catullus' poem was written for the secular games. It might have been intended merely for Diana's festival, which was celebrated yearly in the month of August, as Bentley conjectured. ** This is confirmed by comparing this poem with Horace's Carmen Seculare. In the former, both the boys and girls form but one chorus, which addresses itself to Diana: ++ "Dianæ sumus in fide Puellæ et pueri integri." In Horace, the boys address themselves to Apollo, and the girls to Diana: ++ "Supplices audi pueros Apollo, Siderum Regina bicornis audi, This distinction had been established by the oracle who commanded. the celebration of the games. §§ But I have done. This is enough for one letter. Your time is precious, and I would not offend you by carrying too far the liberty I have taken in writing to you. I have the honour to be, with much respect, yours, &c. *Sueton. L. i. c. 55; Voss. de Hist. Latin. L. i. c. 24. Cornel. Nepos, in Vit. Attici, c. 12. Sueton. L. ii. c. 37. § Idem, c. 18. EDWARD GIBBON. † Catull. Carm. i. Idem, c. 21. ** Bentl. in Præfat. Edit. Horatian. VII.-MR. GESNER TO MR. GIBBON. 1. You inquire who were the Pisos, of whom Horace speaks in such honourable terms in his Art of Poetry. Dacier and Sanadon would probably, most learned sir, have obtained more credit with you, had they cited the authority on which their opinion rests; independently of which, it seems no better than a guess, which a slight argument is sufficient to overturn. This authority is that of Porphyrio, an ancient writer, who treats of the names mentioned in Horace, and who here perhaps copies from some author more ancient than himself. In his corrected edition, Porphyrio says, "Horace's work, entitled the Art of Poetry, is addressed to L. Piso, who was afterwards governor of Rome; for Piso was himself a poet, and a patron of literary pursuits." But chronology, you say, does not warrant this explanation. It does; for Tacitus tells us, in his Annals, (lib. vi. c. 10,) that Piso died U. C. 785, at the age of eighty. He held his office twenty years; and therefore entered on it U. C. 765; before which period Horace must have sent to him. the Art of Poetry, (which I suspect once stood at the third epistle of the second book,) because Porphyrio says, "who was afterwards governor of Rome." Let us suppose that Piso's son was born when the father was thirty years old; and that the son was sixteen when Horace addressed him, "O major juvenum;" the Art of Poetry will then have been written in the fifty-second year of Horace's age: which well agrees with Bentley's computation; a subject which I remember to have examined and approved when about the same time of life I published my edition of Horace. If we think sixteen years too young for the praises bestowed by the poet, we may add to them five, or even ten years more. But to this mode of reckoning it is objected, that Virgil was alive when Horace wrote his Art of Poetry; and as the latter died in the year of Rome seven hundred and thirtyfive, Piso, who was then but thirty years old himself, could not have a son above ten or twelve at the utmost. But some critics do not disapprove of the application of "juvenis" to a boy of ten years, and of a forward genius: Grotius and others were poets at that age; and the Roman courtiers would naturally, I think, be prodigal in using the term "juvenis," after Cicero gave so much offence by applying the term "puer" to Augustus. But I see not any convincing argument to prove that Virgil was alive when the Art of Poetry was written. For, in the passage alluded to, Horace does not contrast living poets with those that were dead, but ancient poets with the modern; and, according to the critics whom he mentions, not death alone, but the being dead a certain number of years, was necessary for the attainment of poetical fame. "Est vetus atque probus, centum qui perficit annos." See the first epistle of the second book. 2. Concerning the third ode of the third book, I formerly gave my opinion in the observations accompanying my edition, which, as you have not seen them, I shall here repeat and explain. Augustus sometimes represented in sport the suppers of the gods. We know from Suetonius, lib. ii. c. 70, that he was blamed for his imitation of the supper of the twelve gods, which used to take place in the Capitol, where pallets were spread for them; of which we see an example in Livy, lib. xxii. c. 10. Is it not possible that Horace, either with or without the orders of Augustus, might think proper to write verses adapted to such a representation? Might he not endeavour to remove the blame attached to it, by exhibiting an example in which it was not only innocent, but conformable with the institutions and inclinations of the Romans? At the same time his ode would be a compliment to the Julian family, which had long boasted its descent from Æneas and Iülus. For entering on this subject, the poet ingeniously prepares the way, by showing that men had attained divinity through justice and fortitude. Augustus is entitled to our admiration and praise; and, as he sung another ode, written nearly about the same time," presens divus habebitur," being not less worthy of divinity than Bacchus and Romulus; the latter of whom was not without difficulty admitted to that honour, "till Juno made her most pleasing and acceptable speech in the council of the gods." This speech is of the same purport with that in the Æneid, lib. xii. v. 791, et seq. and might have been pronounced with propriety, without supposing that Augustus ever seriously thought of changing the seat of his empire. That prince also must have been pleased with an attempt to persuade the people that he condemned a design, said to have been entertained by Julius Cæsar, but which was so much detested by the Romans, and would, if carried into execution, have been so calamitous to Rome. The speech indeed is longer, and more pathetic than might be expected from the beginning of the ode; but he must be ignorant of the nature of lyric poetry, as illustrated in the writings of the ancients, who finds fault with the length of this real or apparent digression. 3. The knot must be hard indeed, which not only baffles the exertions of a learned and ingenious youth, but resists the strength of Breitinger, a veteran in the literary field, whose name I never pronounce but with the highest respect. How could Roman ambassadors require that the cities taken by Antiochus in Asia should be restored, according to the law of war, to Rome, when the senate shortly before had declared those cities to belong to its pupil Ptolemy? Or how could the Romans claim those cities by the law of war, when Scipio, a few years afterwards, was the first Roman general that passed into Asia with an army? Livy, lib. xxxvii. The knot, however, may be untied, without having recourse to Alexander's sword, provided we follow the series of those transactions, as related by Justin and Livy. The latter historian, lib. xxxi. c. 14, relates,that Philip's courage was increased by his league with Antiochus, King of Syria, with whom, as soon as he learned Ptolemy's death, he proposed, according to the tenor of that agreement, dividing the spoils of Egypt." Justin, again, lib. xxx. c. 2, tells us, "that the Alexandrians sent ambassadors to Rome, requesting the senate P to defend the cause of their pupil, threatened with the partition of his dominions, in consequence of a treaty for that purpose between Philip and Antiochus." This treaty indeed soon began to be carried into effect; for, according to Livy, lib. xxxii. c. 19, "Antiochus, while his ally was occupied in the war with Rome, conquered all the cities belonging to Ptolemy in Cole-Syria; purposing next to invade the coast of Caria and Cilicia, and at the same time to assist Philip with a fleet and army." Meanwhile Philip is conquered by the Roman consul Quintius; who then openly declared to Antiochus' ambassadors, "that their master must evacuate (supply, according to the law of war,') all those cities to which either Philip or Ptolemy had any claims."-Livy, lib. xxxiii. c. 34. Justin's narrative, therefore, though obscured by brevity, is yet consistent with truth. 6 Do you not repent, learned sir, the having written to an indolent old man, who could delay two months sending an answer to a letter so obliging, and so honourable to himself? I will not throw the blame on my advanced age, though I begin to feel my former powers of exertion somewhat slacken and abate under the weight of sixtyseven years. At this time of life most old men are indulged with a diminution of labour; whereas I, on the contrary, am continually burdened with an increase of operations and cares. I belong to several academies, particularly that of Berlin, and this here of Gottingen; which last I am appointed to direct six months in the year; I also preside weekly in the German society of this place, and frequently correspond with the Latin society of Jena. I am entrusted with the care of the public library, consisting at least of fifty thousand volumes; with the inspection of the colleges in his Majesty's German dominions; and with the superintendence of about twenty youths, who are educated at the public expense. The task also falls on me of writing whatever is inserted in the archives of the university, in the name of the rector and senate and it is my duty to give daily three, four, and sometimes more prelections. To these public offices must be added the avocations of private company, and of a very extensive correspondence. Besides, I have always some work in hand, which requires nicer attention to render it worthy of the public eye. At present I am employed about an edition of Claudian; which, God willing! shall be published in the course of this summer. Thus circumstanced, I confess that I laid aside your letter, which seemed as if it would require more pains to answer than were afterwards found necessary, until I should enjoy a few hours of uninterrupted leisure. This.opportunity occurred only yesterday, of which, you see, I made use. to It remains that I request you to receive favourably this attempt; and if it does not fully answer your expectation, to ascribe the failure any other cause rather than my want of inclination to oblige you. Brevity was my aim, because it seemed unnecessary to repeat what you had so well said on the subject. I write in Latin, a language familiar to me, lest I should commit a mistake similar to that of which you, though well skilled in French, are guilty, when you say, Un différent que Scaliger et Is. Vossius ont eu ensemble. From the words it might be concluded, that a difference had subsisted between these learned men, of which the one died nine years before the other was born. I remain sincerely, with much consideration, &c. MATTHEW GESNER. Gottingen, 12th February, 1758. 4. As to the question concerning the age of Catullus, I am entirely of your opinion; and lest you should think that I agree with you merely because, through laziness, I am unwilling to enter into an argument, I shall transcribe the words of a thesis, which I defended in my youth forty years ago, (p. 43, Weimar, 1717,) concerning the secular years and games of the Romans. "There is nothing in the poem which might not have been said, had it been written for any other festival in honour of Diana," &c. I assure you, that within this hour I have compared what is said in your learned dissertation, with Is. Vossius' remarks on Catullus, (edit. 1684, 4to. p. 81, et seq.) and those of Jos. Scaliger, whom he refutes. I also examined the passage of Cicero concerning Mamurra, with Middleton's observations on it; and having examined and well weighed the whole matter, I pronounce sentence, most excellent Gibbon, clearly in your favour. P. S.-Your letters will find me without any farther direction than that of my name and place of abode, or addressed to Mr. Professor Gesner, Counsellor of the Court of his Britannic Majesty, Gottingen. But if you wish to see my titles expanded at full length after the German fashion, here they are, copied from the French and German Title-book, printed at Nordhausen, 1752, 8vo. fifth edition, p. 164. "To M. Gesner, Counsellor of the Court of his Britannic Majesty, Professor in the University of Gottingen, Inspector-General of the Schools of the Electorate of Hanover, Librarian of the University, Director of the Philological Seminary, President of the Royal Society of German Eloquence, Member of the Royal Society of Sciences at Gottingen," &c. There is not one of these titles but deprives me of some part of my time; the only reason for which I here subjoin them; which I shall think you believe, if your letter to me has as short a direction as possible. VIII. MR. GIBBON TO MR. GESNER. Sir,-The multitude of your employments affords at once a proof of your own merit, of the justice done to it by the public, of my presumption, and of your goodness. How enviable is the lot of that small number of superior minds whose talents are equally adapted to promote the purposes either of pleasure or utility! The discernment surely of those princes is worthy of much applause, who having ventured to dissipate the clouds of envy, calumny, and frivolity, that usually surround thrones, render to the truly great men among their subjects, a justice which had been long done to them by the impartial public, and reward their talents, by affording them new |