Scanned text contains errors.
yet tie hypothesis, taken as a whole, is so fanciful and so destitute of all external support, that it has been adopted by few scholars, while Franke has written two elaborate pamphlets for the purpose of demonstrating that the whole tale of the banishment to Egypt is a mere figment of the grammarians; that the ignorance of topography displayed in the 15th satire, by placing Ornbi in the immediate vicinity of Tentyra, is such as to render. it highly improbable that the author had at any time visited the country of which he speaks, and that the whole paragraph containing the words " quantum ipse notavi," is palpably a gross interpolation.
Without pretending to embrace the views of this or of any previous critic to their full extent, we may safely assume a sceptical position, and doubt every point which has been usually assumed as true. The narratives contained in the different ancient bio-.graphies are so vague and indistinct that they could scarcely have proceeded from a contemporary or from any one who drew his knowledge from a clear or copious source, while the contradictory character of many of the statements and the manifest blun-.ders involved in others, prevent us from reposing any confidence in those particulars in which they agree, or are not confuted by external testimony. The only facts with regard to Juvenal upon wWch we can implicitly rely are, that he flourished towards the close of the first century, that Aquinum, if not the place of his nativity, was at least his chosen residence (Sat. iii. 319), and that he is in all probability the friend whom Martial addresses in three epigrams.
There is, perhaps, yet another circumstance which we may admit without suspicion. We are told that he occupied himself for many years of his life in declaiming; and assuredly every page in his writings bears evidence to the accuracy of this assertion. Each piece is a finished rhetorical essay, energetic, glowing and sonorous; the successive attacks upon vice are all planned with systematic skill; the arguments are marshalled in imposing array; they advance supported by a heavy artillery of powerful and well-aimed illustrations, and sweeping impetuously onward, carry by assault each position as in turn assailed. But although the impression produced at first is overwhelming, the results are not permanent. The different poems are too obviously formal works of art; and .while the figures in each picture are selected with anxious care, grouped with all attention to effect, and rich with the most brilliant colouring, the composition as a whole is deficient in the graceful ease and reality which impart such a matchless .charm to the less regular and less elaborate sketches of Horace. The means by which the two great satirists seek to achieve their object are as widely different as the tempers and habits of the men. It is impossible to imagine a contrast more striking than is presented by the playful, good-humoured gaiety with which the one would laugh his hearers out of their follies and their guilt, and by the uncompromising sternness with which the other seeks to scare them, calling to his aid frightful images and terrific denunciations. In the one case, however, we are fully convinced of the absolute sincerity of our monitor; we feel that his precepts are the fruit of long experience, proceeding from one who, having mingled much with the world, and encountered its perils, is filled with kindly sympathy, for the difficulties and dangers of
those whom he warns to avoid the rocks and shoals on which he had himself well nigh been wrecked , while the stately well-measured indignation of the other belongs to the eloquence of the head rather than of the heart ; and the obvious tone of exag-? geration which pervades all his thundering invectives leaves us in doubt how far this sustained passion is real, and how far assumed for show. But while the austere and misanthropic gloom of Juvenal touches less deeply than the warm-hearted social spirit of his rival, we must not forget the difference of their position. Horace might look with admiration, upon the high intellect of his prince, and the generous protection extended by him to literature; and he might feel grateful to the prudent firmness which had restored peace after long years of civil bloodshed, while a decent show of freedom was still left. But the lapse of half a century had wrought a fearful change. Galling to the proud spirit filled with recollections of ancestral glory, must have been the chains with which the coarse tyranny of Nero and Domitian ostentatiously loaded their dependents ; deep must have been the humiliation of the moralist who beheld the utter degradation and corruption of his countrymen : the cariker was perchance too deeply-seated even for the keenest knife, but delicate and gentle pallia* tives would have been worse than mockery.
The extant works of Juvenal consist of sixteen satires, the last being a fragment of very doubtful authenticity, all composed in heroic hexameters^ and divided, in several MSS., into five books, an arrangement which, although as old as the time of Priscian, is altogether arbitrary and unmeaning^ According to this distribution, the first book comprehends Sat. i. ii. iii, iv. v. ; the second Sat. vi. ; the third Sat. vii.'yiii. ix. ; the fourth Sat. x. xi. xii.; and the fifth the remainder.
Not less than six very early impressions of Juvenal have been described by bibliographers, each of which may claim the distinction of being the Editio Princeps, but the honour would seem to be divided between the three following: —
1. A folio, in Roman characters, containing 68 sheets, with 32 lines in each page, without date and without name of place or of printer. See Maittaire, Annal. Typog. vol. i. p. 296.
2. A quarto, in Roman characters, containing 80 sheets, with 25 lines in each page, without date and without name of place, but bearing the name of Ulric Han, and therefore printed at Rome.
3. A quarto, in Roman characters, containing 71 sheets, with 30 lines in each page, without name of place or of printer, but bearing the date 1470* and supposed to be the work of Vindelin de Spira.
The text, as first exhibited, underwent a gradual but slow improvement in the editions of Jac. de Rubeis, fol. Venet. 1475; of G. Valla, fol. Venet. 1486 ; of Mancinellus, fol. Venet. 1492 ; of Aldus, 8vo. Venet. 1501,1535, and another without date; of Junta, 8vo. Florent. 1513 ; of Colinaeus, 8vo. Paris, 1528, 1535, 1542; of Gryphius, 8vo. Lugd. 1534, 1535, 1538, 1545, 1560, 1576; of R. Ste-phanus, 8vo. Paris, 1544, 1549 ; of Pulmannus, 8vo. Antv. 1565, 24mo. 1585; and was at length reduced to a satisfactory form by P. Pithoeus, 8vo. Paris, 1585, Heidelb. 1590; and above all, by Nic. Rigaltius, 12mo. Paris, 1613, 8vo. 1616, whose readings were adopted almost implicitly for nearly two centuries, until the labours of Ruperti,