Hermione. said, iv. 53, sqq., when speaking of family fate in the case of Phaedra.

Forsitan hunc generis fato reddamus amorem

Et Venus ex tota gente tributa petat.
Iuppiter Europen, prima est ea gentis origo,
Dilexit tauro dissimulante deam:
Pasiphae mater decepto subdita tauro
Enixa est utero crimen onusque suo.
En ego nunc ne forte parum Minoia credar
In socias leges ultima gentis eo.

What the poet should have said in the corres-
ponding passage in the eighth epistle ought to
be then something like this:

Num generis fato quod nostros errat in annos
Tantalides matres apta rapina sumus ?

Non ego fluminei referam mendacia cygni
Nec querar in plumis delituisse Iovem.
Qua duo porrectus longe freta distinet Isthmos,
Vecta peregrinis Hippodamia rotis.

Taenaris Idaeo trans aequora ab hospite rapta
Argolicas pro se vertit in arma manus.
Ipsa ego nunc ne forte parum Pelopeïa credar
Ecce Neoptolemo praeda parata fui.

If the absurdities and incongruities of the pas-
sage are excised, the metrical solecisms are
excised along with them. The passages obe-
lised have all the appearance of interpolations,
as they are introduced in a manner peculiarly
appropriate to interpolations, the first two verses
repeating the mention of Helen, and the latter
lines introducing an unseemly digression.

I have no great disposition to defend the authenticity of the Hermione, as it treats of

an uninteresting subject in an uninteresting Hermione. I am, however, convinced that it is

manner.

from the pen of Ovid, for the following reason.
One of the most remarkable features in this
poet's compositions is the manner in which his
imitated compositions reflected the conception
of the sources from which they were taken: a
feature by which he is distinguished from his
contemporaries, and indeed from most poets,
except Shakspeare. Thus his Phaedra is Euri-
pides' Phaedra repeated over again, contending
between passion and shame: his Jason is the
smooth-tongued, ungrateful Jason of Euripides:
his Dido is Virgil's Dido, a little softened. But
no idea was realised mcre exactly by Ovid
than that which dominates in so many Greek
tragedies - namely, the idea of a certain fate
attaching itself to some unhappy family or
race. Ovid, as a true poet, embraced this
truly poetical idea, and constantly recurs to it.
So we find poor Phaedra sullenly exclaiming-

Forsitan hunc generis fato reddamus amorem,
Et Venus ex tota gente tributa petat.

So Deianira :

Heu! devota domus! solio sedet Agrius alto,
Oenea desertum nuda senecta premit;
Exulat ignotis Tydeus germanus in oris:
Alter fatali vivus in igne fuit:

Exegit ferrum sua per praecordia mater :
Impia quid dubitas Deianira mori!

Ovid alone of the Roman poets entered

thoroughly into this conception; and in the

Hermione. eighth epistle, which I am now discussing, it appears brought forward in the most forcible

Deianira.

manner:

Num generis fato quod nostros ERRAT in annos
Tantalides matres apta rapina sumus?

No other poet but Ovid could have written the first line, with the remarkable word 'errat.' I will repeat here what I have said in my note, ad loc: that, by 'errat,' Ovid, more than probably, intended to represent the word ἐξορίζεται, which occurs in the Hippolytus of Euripides, a word by which the Greek poet forcibly emphasises his conception of a curse arising from ancestral crime descending to remote generations.

Lachmann's objections to the ninth epistle are also based on metrical grounds. He objects to insani Alcidae in vs. 133, on the ground that a hiatus of this sort is only allowed by Ovid where either the fourth or fifth foot is a dactyl. But the reading insani has long been condemned as corrupt, and Aonii has been, with great probability, restored by Merkel. Lachmann impugns vs. 131, 141.

Forsitan et pulsa Aetolide Deianira.

Semivir occubuit in letifero Eveno.

He asserts that Ovid only admitted hiatus of this sort (that is, in the middle of the verse), in two cases: (1) where the same vowel begins the second word which ends the

first; (2) where the second word is either of Deianira. the conjunctions et or aut. The second line is objectionable, according to Lachmann, on account of the lengthening of the last syllable of occubuit. Lachmann lays down that Ovid only lengthens a final short syllable in the middle of the line in two cases: (1) where either of the conjunctions et or aut follows a caesura in third foot of the hexameter: (2) where a Greek word follows. Now, both these rules would demand a very large induction to establish that there cannot be any exception to them, and the instances quoted by Lachmann, chiefly from the Metamorphoses, certainly do not suffice to sustain such apparently unreasonable canons. We may well acquiesce in the conclusion of Merkel, that Ovid, in these instances, allowed himself the license, if license it is to be called, common enough among other poets; but that when writing his epic poem, the Metamorphoses, he bound himself by stricter rule, according to Greek custom. I do not think the authenticity of the ninth epistle has ever been questioned by any scholar of real eminence except Lachmann'; and, for my part, I would

Of course it has been attacked by some of the nu merous band of remodellers, revisers, and would-be Bentleys which the German land, rich in impostors, pro

duces.

But as their criti

cisms generally do more
harm to themselves than
the objects of their attack,
there is no reason why they
should not be allowed to
continue them. Thus L.
Müller, attacking the four-

Deianira.

Medea.

as soon think of questioning the existence of the poet himself.

The next epistle cavilled at by Lachmann is the twelfth. He does not reject it, and the only reason for questioning it is, that it possesses molestam quandam et exuberantem orationis abundantiam.' This being the only fault Lachmann's microscopic eye has been able to detect in it, we may leave this epistle to speak for itself. I doubt if many readers will say of its vigorous, abrupt opening, for instance, which is thoroughly in Ovid's manner

At tibi Colchorum, memini, regina, vacavi,

that it possesses any offensive superfluity or. prolixity. The poem is a very beautiful one, and contains one line that is worthy of being quoted :

Hoc ipsum ingratus quod potes esse meum est. And that word ingratus recalls one argument of a positive kind that this epistle is from the pen of Ovid. In his enumeration he includes quod male gratus Iason legat.' Now, Hypsipyle says nothing about Jason's ingratitude. The word 'ingratus' is not to be found in the sixth epistle. But ingratitude is the head and front of Jason's offending against Medea. It is her theme from first to last; and naturally

teenth epistle, has exposed
an amount of careless in-
competence almost incre-

dible in a person possessed of his reputation.