fulness, unless they be referred to the following Words. 3. How can any body approve, that Evebit hould be ufed in that Place like an Impersonal Verb? 4. Why fhould the Poet fay, That a Man who has a vast Quantity of Corn in his Granaries, is like the Immortal Gods? How comes he to place here among the Gods those rich Perfons, whom be hardly reckons among Men in his Satyrs? But if Palma nobilis be referred to Evebit, it will be very natural to compare to the Gods those, who carry'd the Prizes at the Olym pick Games, as it is frequently done by the Ancient Authors. Dr. Bentley infers from what has been said, that the Paffage wants to be mended, and reads it thus: Sunt quos curriculo pulverem Olympicum Terrarum dominos EvEHERE ad Deose Certat tergeminis tollere honoribus; Illum, fi propria condidit borreo 1 Our Author does not doubt of the Certainty of his Emendation. For my own part, I am fully perfuaded that he has found out the true Reading; and I look upon this Correction as a noble Inftance of his great Sagacity. It removes all the Difficulties, and makes the Senfe plain and eafy. NOBILIS EVEHERÉ is a Grecifm: the Tranfcribers, who did not underftand it, changed Evehere into Evebit. Dr. Bentley alledges a great Number of like Grecisms, and these among others. Horat. Carm. I. 2. Dicam & Alciden, puerofque Lede, Silius - Propert. IV. 10. v. 42. NOBILIS è rectis fundere gafa rotis. Our Author obferves, that SUNT-QUOS ought to make but one Word, and is to be understood, as if the Poet had faid QUOSDAM, ALIQUOs: Thus the Greeks fay, Eloiv s, eisiv ois. Thus we read in Horace, Serm. I. 4. v. 24. Quod funt-quos genus boc mimine juvat, ut pote 'Arte Poet. 361. [ plures Ut pictura, poefis: erit-quæ, fi prepius ftes, es To conclude, I fhall fet down the Order and the Senfe of the whole Paffage in the Author's own Words. "Diverfa, O Mæcenas, funt hominum ftu "dia: SUNT-QUOS (that is QUOSDAM) juvat palma Olympiaca, quæ nobilis eft vel ad Deos immor"tales victorem evehere: HUNC juvat, hono res confequitur, ILLUM fi divitias. AGRICO LE nunquam perfuaferis, ut MERCATOR fiat, "neque rurfus MERCATORI, ut rure degat: Est66 QUI vitam voluptariam fequitur; MULTOS militia juvat, QUOSDAM venatio: Mr, fi nomen &sfa mam poetæ Lyrici nancifci poffum, zod 26 Lib. I. Carm. III. Illis robur & as triplex stol Circa pectus erat, qui fragilem_truci voluÀ_nja Commifit pelago ratem Primus I Quem mortis timuit gradum, anca di > Qui ficcis oculis monftra natantia, Qui vidit mare turbidum & Infames fcopulous Acroceraunia? According to the common Reading, fays our Au thor Horace expreffes himself thus. How great was the Intrepidity of that Man, what fort of Death "could he be afraid of, who firft ventured upon "the Sea, and beheld monftrous Animals, raging "Waves, and dreadful Rocks, without fhedding "Tears, ficcis oculis"? But (continues the Author) the most timorous People, and even the most fear ful Women, will forbear fhedding Tears at the Sight of fuch frightful Objects. Compaffion, and Love, the Prefence of a flight Danger, or the Remembrance of a great one, that has been avoided, may indeed excite Tears: But every Body knows by his own Experience, that a great Fear, a great Confternation, like that mentioned by the Poet, is never attended with Tears. What a Wonder can it be therefore, that a courageous and fearless Man fhould fee without Weeping, what the most timorous cannot fee otherwife? Accordingly, when Horace defcribes the Fear of Europa at the Sight of the Waves and Sea Monsters, he does not represent her Weeping, but growing Pale... 3 1. Did ever any Body fhed Tears being in Danger of perifhing in the Flames, of finking into a River, or at the Sight of a Sword drawn against him ? The Author infers from all thefe Confiderations, that ficcis occulis is a Corruption, and that the true Reading is RECTIS ocul. He confirms his Emendation by a great many Paffages out of Greek and La tin Authors, to which I refer the Readers. Those Paffages are well chofen, and deferve to be read. I think it cannot be denied, that if Horace faid ficcis, oculis, he made ufe of an improper Word upon this Occafion, and that he fhould have faid, Redis oculis. Dr. Bently concludes his Remark with these Words: "Satis jam, opinor, & abunde pervicimus, "aut fcripfiffe RECTIS OCULIS Flaccum, aut "faltem fcribere debuiffe: Quorum alterum modo "fi negas; qui Horatius fit, omnino nefcis : Sin utrumque; vereor ne, qui ru fis, optime fcia 46 " mus Dr. Bentley's Performance upon the XIIth Ode of the Ift Book, which begins thus; Miferarum eft neque amori dare ludum, &c. cannot be fufficiently admired. He has difpofed the Verfes in a different Order from all the Printed Copies, and restored the following Verfe to its proper Place: Simul unitos Tiberinis humeros lavit in undis. By which means this Ode runs fmoothly, and the Difficulties, that were in it, vanifh away. I fhall not give a particular Account of the excellent Ob fervations of the Author upon this Ode, for fear of being too prolix; and I refer the Readers to the Book itself. Carm. Sæcul. Rite maturos aperire partus The Interpreters, fays our Author, have not been able to prove, that Diana or Lucina was ever Sur named Genitalis by the Romans. Whereupon Dr Bentley makes feveral Learned Obfervations upon the Gods called Dii Genitales, and maintains that they were the great Gods, Dei majorum Gentium, Thofe Gods Gods, fays he, were called Genitales, becaufe they were born Gods, in Oppofition to those who had been Men. He adds, That Diana could not be furnamed Genitalis, in a peculiar manner, fince all the great Gods were called Genitales: And were it true that the Indigetes went by that Name; Diana, being none of them, could not have fuch a Surname be ftowed upon her. Our Author infers from thence that the Word is corrupted, and reads the Paffage thus: Diana was Surnamed Genetyllis by the Greeks, from the Word yéves, because the prefided over the Birth of Children. The Author proves his Correcti on by Two Paffages in Suidas and Hefychim, and alledges fome other Reasons to confirm it. This Learned and Judicious Remark muft needs be very accepta ble to the Readers. I fhall infert here another Emendation upon a Paffage in the Odes. Lib. I. Carm. XXIII. Nam feu mobilibus veris inborruit Et corde & genibus tremis. The Abfurdity of this Reading is fo evident, that I need not enlarge upon it. Muretus found in his Ma nufcripts, Nam feu mobilibus vitis inborruit Our Author reads with a fmall Alteration Nam |