V. 114. This controverted line he thus prints, and in a note defends the reading: Intererit multum, Davufne loquatur, herufne. V. 253. He affixes a full ftop to Iambüis, and refers to his note on the 147 line of the third Georgic. In our Review of the Variorum edition of Horace we gave our reasons for diffenting from Mr. W. in this point. V. 336. He leans to Bentley's opinion, by whom the verse is rejected as fpurious-if it be retained, he would have a comma only at fideles: hæc exoritur fententia," fays he: "ut animi cito dicta percipiant dociles, et teneant, ita, omne nimium folet effluere.-Sæpe omittitur ita in apodofi.—Thatita is often omitted we allow-but furely, in the fenfe which this interpretation affigns to ut, it fhould be followed by percipiunt and tenent; and then the metre would be deftroyed. Line 384. Vitioque remotus ab omni. Mr. W. thinks, that vinc lo fhould be substituted for vitio. Line 395. He puts a comma between prece and blanda, and fuppofes that the latter words depend upon ducere quo vellet, in line 396. He produces in fupport of this conjecture: Blandum et auritas fidibus canoris ducere quercus. Od. XII. Lib. I. Line 413, He admits Bentley's emendation, artis, for atris, and here, as elsewhere, afferts his own claim to conjectures, which, after having made them, he found in the writings of other scholars. V. 440. He prints according to the punctuation recommended by Markland : Melius te poffe negares, Bis, terque expertum? fruftra: The intereft which every fcholar takes in the purity of Horace's text, has induced us thus particularly to notice all the proposed alterations of this cdition, whether we approved them or not and we fhall conclude the fubject next month by a few additional remarks. (To be concluded in our next.) ART. ART. XVII. The 109th, commonly called the Imprecating Pfalm, confidered, on a Principle by which the Pfalm explains itfelf: a Sermon preached in Chelfea College Chapel, April 6, 1794, by the Rev. William Keate, M. A. Rector of Laverton, in the County of Somerfet, and Prebendary of Wells. 4to. 38 pp. 1s. 6d. Rivingtons. 1794. THE object of this ufeful and fenfible difcourfe is to in troduce to general notice an interpretation of the 109th Pfalm hitherto latent in the works of a few commentators; but undoubtedly of great importance. It is that the imprecations there introduced, are not the imprecations of David against his enemies, but of his enemies against him, which he recites to fhow their malice. In our Review for September laft (p. 262.) we noticed this interpretation, with very ftrong approbation, as adopted by Mr. Green in his Tranflation of the Pfalms, from Dr. Sykes's introduction to his Paraphrafe on the Hebrews; and added that, in our opinion, the obfervations of that author would fcarcely leave a doubt in the mind of any reader. Mr. Keate feems to have ftruck out the fame interpretation of the Pfalm by his own confideration of the text, and afterwards to have found his opinion confirmed by other authors and commentators. He deals; however, with perfect openness upon the fubject, and cites at large all the writers by whom his notion was anticipated, and from whom it might be fuppofed to have been borrowed. Mr. Keate's obfervations on Mr. Green's expofition affign a very fufficient reafon for his own publication. "Mr. Green might reafonably expect, from this obvious interpretation of Dr. Sykes, a general reception of it among the learned, or, what is of much greater importance, among the unlearned. But how unfortunately his hopes have been disappointed, may be seen by the various expofitions of this Pfalm fince his time, in which many a different, and even the very contrary opinion still continues to be maintained. The expediency therefore, even if Dr. Sykes's interpretation had been feen by the author of this expofition, of reviving it, and of endeavouring to render it familiar to all kinds of readers, becomes every day more apparent." P. 35. But the most curious circumftance is that, while our Divines were thus removing from David the odium of those tremendous imprecations, a foreigner of very confiderable learning and first rate genius, Saverio Mattei, an advocate at Naples, was illuftrating it by his annotations, and giving grace and currency to it, by admitting it into the moft elegant verfion that any modern language has yet produced. Here was, what is always a strong corroboration, a perfect coincidence of opinions opinions between able men, without any kind of intercourfe or communication. Mr. K. declares, and there can be no reafon to doubt his word, that he knew nothing of Mattei's opinion till his own fermon was written; and Mattei is not likely to have seen or confulted the English commentators. He cites only a countryman of his own, Marco Marino, as having thrown out any thing tending to that opinion *. According to the explanation thus adopted at once in Italy and in England, the whole difficulty of the Pfalm is removed; by fuppofing merely, what is abundantly common in all poetical compofitions, a tacit tranfition from the narrative to the dramatic form; from the speech of the author, to one that he recites as fpoken by another. "Hold not thy peace O God of my praise: 2. For the mouth of the wicked, and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me; they have spoken against me with a lying tongue. 3. They compaffed me about also with words of hatred, and fought against me without a cause. 4. For my love they are adverfaries: but I give myself unto prayer. 5. And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love. 6. Set thou a wicked man over him" (fay they) &c. It is evident here, that if David is fuppofed to continue fpeaking, the transition from they in ver. 5. and the preceding, to him in ver. 6, and those that follow, is perfectly unnatural, while, on the other fuppofition, it is eafy and intelligible. Befides, if David was about to curfe fo bitterly, it is very strange that he should introduce his imprecations by fpeaking twice of his love. As Mattei's verfion is not eafily procured, and is very beautiful, we shall here infert, as a fpecimen of it, the opening of the Pfalın introducing the Imprecations. (1) Signor, parla per me; tu fai ch'io fempre Cantai tue lodi: or l'innocenza mia Tu approva, e manifefta. I labbri infami Il peccator contro al fervo tuo aprio. *The words of Marino are these : " Ego poft omnes prior omnium arbitror verba effe hoftium Davidis, et omnium deinde nominis Chrifti proditorum, qui maledicta bæc in eum conferant, licet his dein à Spiritu Sancto in eos contortis, fuis (ut aiunt) gladiis jugulati funt: et hoc pluribus adducti rationibus afferimus." (2) La favola fon io D'ogni ridotto, e ovunque giro il piede, (3) Che feci Che aguzza ognun fol contro a me. Ed al mio amor sì barbara mercede Rendon gl'ingrati. Ed io non parlo, e io foffro, (4) Mentre gl'indegni, i rei (5) Compenfan con bestemmie i benefici, "Un tiranno l'opprima, e fempre allato Che a difenderfi adduce. (7) Il fil s'accorci De' giorni fuoi venga a feder un altro Nel pofto, ond'ei cadrà: (8) Muoja, e il penfiero E orfani i figli, aggiunga all'ultime ore Nuovo tormento al tormentato core." In this ftyle Mattei proceeds to the end of the imprecations, and then fubjoins; (19) Queste fon le calunnie indegne, e questi Sono i voti crudeli. (20) O Dio! non mertano Che gli efaudifchi! or che trionfi è In me la tua pieta. tempo We fhould have been glad to infert the whole Pfalm; but are prevented by its length. What we have produced will difplay fufficiently the fpirit of the author, and the turn of the verfion. Mr. Keate very ably and very ufefully fets forth the merit of this interpretation in his Sermon; and most amply illuftrates it, and does juftice to the claims of other commentators, in his notes. He alfo difcuffes the objections, the principal of which is the application of fome of the imprecations to Judas by St. Peter, Acts i. ver, 8. which however feems to us by no means formidable. What Mr. K. fays in answer to it is well worthy of attention, as indeed is the whole of his difcourfe; and we hope that it will anfwer the purpose intended by its author, that of making generally known and approved, an interpretation which carries with it many advantages. ART. ART. XVIII. An Effay on the Pictur fque, as compared with the Sublime and the beautiful, and on the Ufe of ftudying Pictures, for the Purpose of improving real Landscape. By Uvedale Price, Efq. 8vo. 288. pp. 5s. Robson. 1794. THE author's defign in this work is clearly expreffed in the title; at firft fight it might be fuppofed that there were two diftinct effays, but both fubjects are connected fo as to form one whole, and both tend to what, perhaps, may be confidered as the main defign-that of correcting the errors in modern gardening. As the firft fubject, the diftinct character of the picturefque, is entirely new, and the other has not yet been made the topic of a regular difcuffion, a short analysis of the whole may not be unacceptable. Mr. P. begins by an enquiry (certainly a very material one) how far the prefent fyftem of improvement, as it gives a new and peculiar character to the general face of the country, gives alfo a natural and a beautiful one. and whether it is founded on just principles. To this he adds another enquiry, no less material, namely, whether there is any ftandard, to which the works of improvers can be referred, of higher authority than thofe works themfelves. Such an authority he thinks there exifts in the works of eminent painters; not that they are abfolute standards, but the best that can be had. He obferves that from the changes produced by vegetation and decay, the fcenes created by an improver, however excellent, muft effentially differ from the original defign, and therefore the only unchanging felections from the works of nature united with those of art, must be fought for in the pictures and drawings of the most eminent malters. Thefe may be confidered as a fet of experiments of the different ways in which objects may be difpofed, in the most striking manner, and in every ftyle. Whatever exceptions may be made in particular inftances, ftill the great leading principles of the art of painting are equally applicable to that of improving. To fhow in the moft ftriking point of view, how much the prefent fyftem is at war with thofe principles, Mr. P. has fuppofed an enthufiaftic admirer of that fyftem to improve a picture of Claude in the fame ftyle Mr. Brown might be fuppofed to improve a scene in nature. He himself indeed feems aware that the fuppofition may be thought extravagant, but it must be owned that if it be once admitted, nothing is done to the picture that has not repeatedly been done to real fcenes, and the effect is what may eafily be imagined. After having fully defcribed this effect, Mr. Price ends the firft chapter with the following queftion. |