6 Adventus foliis seu virides rubum Dimovere lacertae, Et corde et genibus tremit. circumstances is sufficient reason for re- 10 'vitis.' Bentley's alteration had been previously made in one or two quarters, but not with his knowledge. See his note, and Cunningham, Animadv. p. 47. 12. Tempestiva - viro.] Aen. vii. 3:— "Jam matura viro, jam plenis nubilis annis." CARMEN XXIV. Jerome, in his edition of the Chronicles of Eusebius, places the death of Quinctilius Varus, the subject of this ode, in the first year of the 189th Olympiad, that is a.u.c. 730 (Clinton, F. H.). This therefore fixes the date of the ode. Quinctilius was born at Cremona, and was a neighbour and friend of Virgil, through whom it is probable Horace made his acquaintance. He is referred to (according to the Scholiast who is probably right) in the Epistle to the Pisos, v. 438, sqq., as a discerning critic; and the language there used shows that he was dead when it was written. The Scholiast Acron says, that some supposed he was Virgil's brother, which notion arose plainly from the language Horace uses in this ode. Servius also, on Virg., Ec. v. 20 (in which he supposed Daphnis to be meant for this Quinctilius, whereas that eclogue was written about seventeen years before his death, and Daphnis plainly is intended for Caesar), calls him ' cognatum Virgilii.’ But for this there is no warrant. The opinions that identify him with C. iii. and xviii. of this book and Epode v. are noticed in the introductions to those odes. ARGUMENT. What bounds shall be set to our grief for one so dear? Teach us a mournful strain, Melpomene. Can it be that Quinctilius, whose like Modesty, Justice, Fidelity, and Truth shall not behold again, is gone to his everlasting rest? Many is the good man that mourns him, but none more truly than thou, Virgil. 'Twas not for this thou didst commit him to the care of Heaven. But in vain thou dost ask him back. The lyre of Orpheus could not bring back the blood to the shadowy form which Mercury hath gathered into hell. "Tis hard to bear: but patience makes that lighter which no power can change. QUIS desiderio sit pudor aut modus Ergo Quinctilium perpetuus sopor Quando ullum inveniet parem? 3. Melpomene,] See C. i. 12. 2, n. 8. inveniet] Most of the older editions have 'invenient;' but nearly all the MSS. appear to have inveniet,' and Bentley has shown, by a large number of instances, that it is Horace's usual practice to have the verb in the singular number after several substantives as here. He says that it is never otherwise except in corrupt passages, which is his usual way of begging the question. In C. iii. 16. 7 all the MSS. have 'risissent.' 11. Tu frustra pius heu non ita creditum] 'It is vain, alas! that with pious prayers thou dost ask the gods to restore Quinctilius, whom thou didst entrust to their keeping, but not on these terms' (i. e. that they should take him away). Such is Porphyrion's explanation. Lambinus and Graevius understood non ita creditum' to mean that he was not entrusted to Virgil on such terms as that he was never to part with him. I prefer the first; but it is not easy to say which is right. 13. Quodsi] All the Berne MSS., and Cruquius', and some others, have quid si,' which some editors adopt, with the usual 5 10 15 20 note of interrogation after 'quid.' (See Long's note on Čic. Verr. Act. ii. 1. 2. c. 7.) But quodsi' is supported by good authority, and most of the editors have adopted it. I have no doubt it is right. Horace never uses 'sin,' which Virgil uses as often and in the same way as Horace uses quodsi.' 15. imagini,] Imago' was that unsubstantial body in which the soul was supposed to dwell after death, called by the Greeks tidwλov. Such were the forms that Aeneas saw and thought them substantial:— "Et ni docta comes tenues sine corpore vitas Admoneat volitare cava sub imagine formae, 17. Non lenis precibus fata recludere] This Greek construction has been noticed before (i. 18). The expression 'fata recludere' seems to mean to open the door of hell when Fate has closed it.' 18. Nigro compulerit—gregi.] 'Has gathered to the dark crowd.' The dative is only admissible in poetry. S. ii. 5. 49: "Si quis casus puerum egerit Orco," for 'ad Orcum.' 19. Durum: sed levius] Donatus says that Virgil was much in the habit of commending this virtue of patience, saying that the hardest fortunes might be overcome by a wise endurance of them. Therefore, says Fabricius, Horace consoles Virgil with his own philosophy. CARMEN XXV. Besides this there are two other odes (iii. 15. iv. 13), the subject of which is the wantonness of faded beauties, a subject probably handled with still greater pungency by Archilochus, for it was one his sarcasm would find scope in and would be likely to fasten upon. It is impossible to say whether Horace had any individual in his mind when he wrote any one of these odes. If he had, we need not go farther and suppose that he wrote as a disappointed lover. For instance, Jani's indignation at the virulence with which Horace can find it in his heart to attack (in C. iv. 13) the woman he was so fond of (in C. iii. 10), seems to be unnecessary. But it is a fair specimen of that matter-of-fact school of interpretation. I have before had occasion to remark, how the same principle is applied to Lydia and how many new lights she appears in (C. 13. Introduction). ARGUMENT. Thy windows are no longer assailed and thy slumbers broken by saucy youths; thy door turns no more on its hinges; the serenade is silent. Now 'tis thy turn, in some lone alley on a dark night, with the winter wind blowing and thy heart on fire with lust, to cry for lovers, and complain that young blood goes after the tender plant and bids the old leaves go float upon the Hebrus. PARCIUS junctas quatiunt fenestras Nec tibi somnos adimunt, amatque Invicem moechos anus arrogantes Thracio bacchante magis sub inter- Cum tibi flagrans amor et libido 2. Ictibus] The Blandinian MSS. and the three oldest Berne and some others give jactibus,' which reading is probably a gloss, to explain the nature of the 'ictus,' which meant, it would seem, the throwing of stones. Lambinus likes that word, but nobody adopts it. Rutgersius proposed 'tac. tibus,' but it has justly met with no favour. 3. amat] So 'littus ama' (Aen. v. 163), 'it cleaves to.' Multum' in this sense is rather a favourite expression with Horace, 5 10 15 as multum demissus homo,' S. i. 3. 57. Multum celer,' S. ii. 3. 147. Such a serenade as that which follows is C. iii. 10. 7. Me tuo] The possessive pronoun is used thus abruptly once before (i. 15. 32), "non hoc pollicitus tuae;" and Ov. Remed. Am. 492: "Frigidior glacie fac videare tuae." Bentley reads, proprio motu vel invitis codicibus,' “longam noctem." 14. furiare] This word we do not meet with before Horace. ་ Laeta quod pubes hedera virente Dedicet Hebro. 18. pulla] This Porphyrion interprets 'subcrescenti,' as from a root 'pul-,' from which pullulo' is formed. Rutgersius gives it the same meaning in Epod. xvi. 46. But there is no authority or reason for departing from the usual meaning, which is dark.' The etymology I am not acquainted with. 20. Dedicet Hebro.] There is not much more difficulty in accepting this expression than that with which the next ode opens :"Tradam protervis in mare Creticum Portare ventis." But critics have found it a stumbling-block, and Euro has been substituted for 'Hebro' by Bentley and some other editors, the way having been led by Rutgersius. The same substitution, against all authority as in this case, has been made in Aen. i. 317, praevertitur Hebrum;' where Heyne and Wagner have defended the common reading very well. But why should young men at Rome dedicate the dry leaves or any thing else to the Hebrus, a river of Thrace? why not to the Tiber? What have we to do with that? If Horace wrote 'Hebro' as all the MSS. say he did, he had some inducement to do so. There is no reason to suppose he was asleep, as Steiner in compassion suggests; it is more likely that he got the idea, and so the word, from the Greek. The distance of the river and the extravagance of the notion seem to suit the general scope of the sentence very well. And the coldness of the stream has probably something to do with it. CARMEN XXVI. At the time this ode was written it would appear that the affairs of the Parthians were occupying a good deal of attention at Rome, since Horace speaks of himself as the only one who gave no heed to them. The circumstances that may be supposed to be referred to are to be gathered from the following account. In the year A.U.c. 724, Phraates (see Dict. Biog. Arsaces XV.) being on the Parthian throne, and having by his cruelties made himself obnoxious to his subjects, Tiridates, likewise one of the family of Arsacidae, was set up as a rival to Phraates, but was defeated in his attempt to dethrone him, and fled for protection that same year to Augustus, who was then in Syria, after the death of M. Antonius. (Dion Cass. li. 18.) Shortly afterwards, however, the Parthians succeeded in getting rid of their king, and Tiridates was called to the throne. In A.U c. 729, Phraates, having obtained assistance from the Scythians, returned and recovered his kingdom; and Tiridates fled to Augustus once more for protection. He was then in Spain. The following is Justin's account (though professing to give a particular history of Parthian affairs he does not refer to Tiridates' former ill success): Phraates, he says, elated with his success against M. Antonius, grew more cruel than ever, and in consequence "in exilium a populo suo pellitur. Itaque cum magno tempore finitimas civitates ad postremum. Scythas precibus fatigasset, Scytharum maximo auxilio in regnum restituitur. Hoc absente regem Parthi Tiridatem quendam constituerant; qui audito adventu Scytharum cum magna amicorum manu ad Caesarem in Hispaniam bellum tunc temporis gerentem profugit obsidem Caesari minimum filium Phraatis ferens quem negligentius custoditum rapuerat. Quo cognito Phraates legatos statim ad Caesarem mittit, servum suum Tiridatem et filium remitti sibi postulat. Caesar et legatione Phraatis audita et Tiridatis postulatis cognitis-neque Tiridatem dediturum se Parthis dixit neque adversus Parthos Tiridati auxilia daturum. Ne tamen per omnia nihil a Caesare obtentum videretur Phraati filium sine pretio remisit, et Tiridati quoad manere apud Romanos vellet opulen tum sumptum praeberi jussit. Post haec finito Hispaniensi bello cum in Syriam ad componendum Orientis statum venisset, metum Phraati incussit ne bellum Parthiae vellet inferre. Itaque tota Parthia captivi ex Crassiano sive Antonii exercitu recollecti signaque cum his militaria Augusto remissa. Sed et filii nepotesque Phraatis obsides Augusto dati, plusque Caesar magnitudine nominis sui fecit quam armis alius imperator facere potuisset" (Justin, Hist. xlii. 5). I have given the whole of this account, as it contains in brief, and with sufficient accuracy for the purpose of this commentary, most of the events of Parthian history which Horace alludes to, and will serve for reference hereafter. The assembling of the Scythian force and the alarm of Tiridates are evidently referred to here, and the two seem to be associated. It is natural to infer therefore that it was just before Tiridates fled from his kingdom, in a.u.c. 729, that the ode was composed. Some, however, have referred it to the period when Phraates' ambassadors were in treaty with Augustus, and when the fate of Tiridates was undecided, which would put the date a year later. Others again have assumed that the whole of the transactions described by Justin are to be referred to the year 724, and that Tiridates never fled to Augustus in Spain at all. This is the judgment of Lachmann (Let. to Franke, p. 239), but it is rather an unwarrantable judgment. Justin had before his eyes the history of Trogus, which he abridged, and must have known better than Lachmann what it contained. His reason, moreover for wishing to place the date of the ode further back is nothing more than an objection to the rhythm of the 7th and 11th verses, which is a very fallacious argument. In favour of the earlier date is quoted, by Orelli, Virg. Georg. ii. 495: "Illum non populi fasces non purpura regum Flexit et infidos agitans discordia fratres; where the brethren are Phraates and Tiridates. The Georgics having been written in 724, it is assumed that the events above referred to must have taken place before that year. But the earlier and unsuccessful designs of Tiridates are more probably referred to by Virgil. Against the earlier date there is an argument of much weight in the age of Lamia. He died A.U.C. 786 (Tac. Ann. vi. 27), and the year before he had held the office of praefect of the city. If he was only twenty when this ode was written, he must have been eighty-two when he died, and eighty-one when he held the above post, which was made one of considerable importance by Augustus, and continued to be so under his successor. He is described as being 'vivida senectute' at the close of his life, and it is just possible he may have held the above post at that advanced age, but it is not probable, and I think it a fair argument, as far as it goes, for putting the date of the ode as late as we can. For further particulars respecting Lamia see C. iii. 17. The attempt to deduce from this ode any evidence of his being of a melancholy temperament is ridiculous. ARGUMENT. As the friend of the Muses should, I toss care to the winds, and mind not as every one else does the alarms of Tiridates. Sweet Muse, weave a garland for my Lamia. All my honours without thee are nought, him shouldst thou with thy sisters consecrate with the lyre. MUSIS amicus tristitiam et metus 1. Musis amicus] See C. iii. 4. 25:"Vestris amicum fontibus et choris." The following image is common in the Greek poets. It occurs two or three times in the Anacreontic poems : τὸ δ ̓ ἄχος πέφευγε μιχθὲν ὅτ' ἐγὼ πίω τὸν οἶνον |