and in the circumstance of their being performed separately, and not in connexion with tragedies [in which they were unlike the tragicosatyric, Vid. supra]. "The Latin Atellane fable (says Diomedes) differs from the Greek Satyric, in that generally the characters of Satyrs are introduced into the latter, or whatever other characters were of an amusing nature, like the Satyrs, as Autolycus, Busiris; in the Atellane they were Oscan characters that were represented, as Maccus, for instance." Now in these words of Diomedes two things are observable; 1st. The introduction of the Satyrs he judges to be foreign from the nature of the Atellanæ fabulæ ; and 2dly. It is not without limitation that he allows their introduction into the satyric fables of the Greeks. However, as there was no exception in the case of the tragico-satyric, it is probable that Diomedes took in the comico-satyric, into his description, and that as he had assigned the satyrs to the tragic writers, so also to these he ascribed Autolycus and Busīris.

The Romans, though late, yet did at length employ iambics also in abusive effusions, after the example of the Greeks. Catullus, Bibaculus and others, adopted them before Horace's era, though the latter lays claims to the introduction "Parios ego primus Iambos Ostendi Latio," Epis. 1. 19, 23. (alluding to some Epodes and Odes of his). "The Iambus," says Quintilian, was not much dealt in by the Romans, as though their proper composition. It was brought in by some; and its severity of style is exhibited in the compositions of Catullus, Bibaculus, and Horace; though in Catullus the Epōdos is not found."*

In addition to the species of Roman satire called δραματικὴ and διαλογική, which was the most ancient, and flourished before the time of Livius Andronicus, and after, under the name of Exodia, the satire didaxrınǹ and dınynμatıxǹ arose, which was of a two-fold character, Ennian and Lucilian. The Varronian may be referred to the former. Quintus Ennius was born at Rudii in Calabria near the Tarentine gulf; and lived from A. U. c. 515 to 585. He enjoyed the friendship of Scipio Africanus the elder. Not only was this great poet the founder of the epic poetry of the Romans, but was also "rudis et Græcis intacti carminis (scil. didactic satire) auctor" for Sat. 1. 10, 66. The number of satires which he wrote is a point still unsettled. Porphyrion speaks of Book 4th; Donatus, Book 6th (if it be not a mistake of the copyists); and each book seems to have contained but one satire, for which reason the former, and not the satires are spoken of. From the very few fragments which we have of these, we may infer with probability that his compositions were of a varied nature, remarkable for diversity of metref and subject, sometimes in the form of dialogue, and treating of matters to them from common life; keeping in view the general advantage and the morals of mankind.

Caius Lucilius, a Roman knight, the great maternal uncle of Pompey the great, was born at Suessa Aurunca, a town of Campania (hence called "Magnus Auruncæ Alumnus" by Juv. 1. 20), and lived from A. U. C. 606 to 651. He wrote thirty books of satires, or perhaps 30 satires, only a few fragments of which remain to us. His satire differed from the Ennian in being composed for the most part in heroic metre, iambic or trochaic being rarely employed; he also possessed more

*According to Gesner's interpretation the Epōdos is a shorter verse following a long, as a dimeter following a trimeter, &c.

+ He employed dactylic, iambic, and trochaic, as in the Margites of Homer.

elegance, humour, and polish, (facetior et urbanior tum limatior fuit) than Ennius and the older poets. Lastly, his satire differed from the Ennian in matter and in form; that is, in its subject, and in his style of handling the same. For (unlike Ennius) on every occasion he censured the morals of his countrymen severely, and lashed, not their crimes only, but the individuals themselves by name with the greatest freedom, and without paying any regard to loftiness of station; and as he had formed his mind by the study of the old Greek comedy, he not only rivalled its almost prosaic style of language, but also its delicate and keen irony. This is the "libertas verborum," which Cicero and others assigned him. Diomedes, with reference to the subject before us, says, "the modern Roman satire is an abusive composition directed against the vices of individuals, and possessing the character of the old Greek comedy. Lucilius, Horace, and Persius wrote compositions of this kind. But the original satire, such as Pacuvius and Ennius wrote, consisted in a VARIETY of subjects, whence also its appellation, satire, is derived." Quintilian says, "the satire is entirely of our own invention; Lucilius was the first that won especial distinction thereby." Evanthius tells us that upon the passing of the law alluded to above, (page 14,) "another kind of fable, namely satire arose," (i. e. says Ruperti, the Fescennine verses were succeeded on the stage by the old dramatic satire ;) this satire (called also Exodia) contained harsh and rude jests, and treated of the vices of the age, without however giving the real name of individuals. After this had degenerated in the hands of the poets, Lucilius began to write it after a novel fashion; for of it he composed a poēsis, (a kind of poem which was only to be read, not acted; didactic, not dramatic,) that is, several books of one kind of composition.

The satire thus invented by Lucilius, and cultivated in their respective styles by Horace, Persius, and Juvenal, may be defined as a species of composition which aims at portraying the existing manners of men in lively colours and figures, and not only recommends virtue by moral precepts the gravity which is generally seasoned by a graceful lightness and gaiety of expression-but also by the force of striking examples; and at one time by humorous, at another by cutting raillery; holds up either to laughter or odium the errors and vices of mankind; handles subjects drawn from daily life by the varied art of dramatic poetry, particularly; and so has for its objects the instruction, amusement, and correction of the reader. Horace (Sat. 1. 4, 39.) and others allege it to be a matter of dispute whether satire be a regular poem or not.

We now come to a point which has long been the subject of warm critical disputation, namely, whether the name satire, and the composition itself, or either of the two, was indigenous to Rome, or, like everything else they possessed which had reference to the arts and sciences, was borrowed from the Greeks, and was allied to their satiric poetry. Joseph Justus Scaliger, Casaubon, Spanheim, Rambach, Rigalt, Dacier, Manso, Koenig and Ruperti, maintain the former; Julius Cæsar Scaliger, Dan. Heinsius, Vulpius, Flogels, Blankenburg, and Cour, the latter. By the former critics the word is spelt satira, or satura (as opti

*Julius Cæsar Scaliger says in his art of poetry:-"The satire was originated and brought to perfection by the Greeks first, and then was adopted by the Romans, and cultivated by them, in a way unconnected with the stage." He imagines the word Satura to be taken from the Satyrs, because they used to carry platters and canisters full of fruit whereby they might elude the Nymphs. [Satyr is derived commonly from an "lasciviousness," but Bochart derives it from Heb. sair "a devil under the shape of a goat."]

mus or optumus, &c.,) by the latter satyra. Some think that it was from saturitas, alluding to the abundance of matter.* Others derive it from satur in the sense of "sated, inebriated," as in this composition there is freedom and severity of expression, such as indulgence in wine produces. Others deduce it from the Satyri, because the character of the subject, and of the language, is such as is befitting to those petulant and rude beings. Others from lex satura, i. e., a law which contained many and different subjects. Others from lanx satura, a charger or tray on which it was customary to offer the gods of the first-fruits of the produce-πάγκαρπος θυσία, οι πανσπερμία. Thus the etymology of the word arises from the application of the word saturat to whatever contained a variety of things, and in its composition this variety was either in the subject, metres, or in a union of poetic and prosaic language. The three most ancient species of satire correspond with this last derivation, which Juvenal's words seem also to confirm, "Quidquid agunt homines, votum, timor, ira, voluptas, gaudia, discursus, nostri est farrago libelli ;" Sat. 1. 85, 86.

Casaubon and those others who define satire to be a composition whose subject is set forth in a medley or mixture of different vices and general matters, seem to have looked more to the force and etymology of the word than to the mixture of the poem itself. Julius Cæsar Scaliger, Heinsius, &c. have given too much weight to the resemblance between the words Satyrice, Satyri, and Satyra; for, even though the term were exclusively of the Greek origin, yet satura would be the correct orthography, and not Satyra or Satira; for the ancient Romans pronounced the Greek ú like the short u of the French. The grammarians substituted the letter y for , and for y persons of inferior learning substituted i, thus inclytus, and inclitus, lacrymæ and lacrimæ are for inclútus and lacrumæ. But it is more probable that not only the composition itself, but also its title, or at least the application of the latter, took its rise among the Romans, than among the Greeks. The testimony of Horace and Quintilian are direct upon this point; the former calls Ennius (as we said above) "rudis et intacti Græcis carminis auctor," Sat. 1. 10, 93; the latter says (as before quoted)" satira TOTA est NOSTRA," Inst. Or. 10. 1, 93. Now the testimony of these men of antiquity is far more worthy of credit than the uncertain conjectures of moderns (as Jul. Scaliger) however learned; further, the Greeks had no word derived from the Satyrs, which expressed the name of any composition like the Roman satires, the word carugis meaning to act with wantonness, conduct in which the Satyrs were represented as often engaging; and indeed there was never any single species of poem or verses among the Greeks, to which the characteristics of the Ennian, and, above all, the Lucilian satire belonged; but on the contrary, a great difference would be discovered on comparison.‡

* Saturitas comes for the Greek σároges or carrogos, which, according to Hesychius is used by the Lacedæmonians to signify exaga Borguay, "vessels full of grapes."

The ancients, when they were offering to Ceres, Bacchus, or the other deities of the country, annual thanksgivings for favourable harvests, used to present firstfruits of different kinds, all heaped on a dish, to each divinity according to the method of his worship. Such a medley of offerings was called by the Greeks πάγκαρπος θυσία and πανσπερμία, also πυανία or πυανεψία, when it consisted of pulse. The Latins called dishes thus filled with various things lances saturæ, or simply saturæ; for they employed satur to designate that which was full, and had no deficiency, thus color satur is a perfect colour.

Koenig's remarks on this subject are as follows-"There was among the Greeks no definite name which marked that species of composition in which the

The satiric fables of the Greeks, particularly of the comic poets, it is certain, had some affinity to the Roman satire, but the Silli had greater; however, the matter and form of the satiric fable were unlike the Roman* compositions referred to. The Silli were didactic poems,

vices of mankind were ridiculed aud censured; but at one time it assumed an epic, at another a lyric, at another a dramatic and didactic dress, and its raillery was always directed against specified individuals, and not against vice in the abstract;" p. 23.

"Even granting that the name be taken from the Greeks, yet all agree that the latter never employed it to designate any kind of poem, of the satiric class especially, therefore the use to which the Romans transferred it was entirely original in their case;" p. 24. "The Greeks did not use any word derived from the Satyrs to signify such carping at men and manners, and such cutting irony; but to designtae this they used the terms σκώπτειν, διασύρειν, κωμώδειν, ἰαμβίζειν, ἐφυβρίζειν ; while σατυρίζειν meant to act with froward wantonness,” and not to ridicule. The word at which is properly applied to the Satyrs, alludes to their wanton dancing rather than to raillery against others. The Satyrs indeed were lustful, bold and saltatory; but I do not recollect to have read anywhere among the Greek authors, that the Satyrs assailed persons with taunts or ridicule, at least not as far as the period in which the satiric drama flourished, nor do I think that that custom prevailed in the representation of that drama on the stage;" P. 25. "The name satire properly belonged to the compositions of Ennius, and Pacuvius, in which it was first exhibited, but not to the single poems of Horace, Persius, and Juvenal. For Ennius and Pacuvius called their entire books satires, as appears from the terms used by Aulus Gellius in speaking of the works of Varro who imitated those poets. Perhaps Lucilius also termed his books satires, and not single or isolated portions of those books. In the progress of time it is probable that the word lost its primitive signification, and was transferred to the Lucilian style of composition. Cruquius tells us that in the most ancient MSS. Horace's satires are called Ecloga, which in my mind is conclusive proof that Horace himself did not call his single poems satires. It appears from Sat. 1. 4, 73, that his single pieces were sent first to friends, and read to very few, so that subsequently either the author himself or some admirer of his works (rather, the grammarians,) collected the fugitive writings, and arranged them into books, giving them the title Ecloga. Among them there are pieces to which the name satire is by no means suitable, whether we consider it as employed in its old or new meaning; but perhaps Horace allowed those nondescripts, which could not be arranged under a definite class of compositions, to be included under the term satire, notwithstanding the manifest unsuitability of the term. In the same way it cannot be proved that the titles Sermones and Epistolæ were given by Horace, though he may have given rise to such an idea by Sat. 1. 4, 39. seqq. Epist. 1. 4, 1-2. 1, 250; (he calls the satires libelli in Epist. 1. 13, 4.) But Sidonius Apollinaris [B. A. D. 430] proves that these titles are ancient. The grammarians also use them in quoting Horace. We do not know for certain what name Persius gave either to his books or individual poems. Pithæus asserts that in some old MS. he found these words "Thebaidorum Persii Satyra," and at the conclusion "Explicuit Theb. P. Satyra Feliciter." The grammarians always speak of the "books" in Juvenal.-But because Horace, Juvenal, and Persius, imitated Lucilius' style, each, however, in his own method, they are justly to be ranked among the writers of satire, which title was given both to their books and individual poems, not by the authors, but by their copyists.

* Eichstædt writes as follows on the subject before us, -There are in the tragic satires of the Greek very many points of difference from the Roman satires; but on a comparison of the latter with the Greek comic satire, we find a much closer connexion. For, to pass over the choruses of Satyrs which the comic satire and Roman satire either very sparingly introduced or totally abolished, we find that both took their arguments from every-day life; both held up to view, and often to infamy, private villany, and both assailed their contemporaries with violent ridicule.

In the tragic there is nothing of these. Yet I would not, on account of the points of similarity above mentioned, venture to side with those who judge the Greek Satyre to be the parent of Latin Satire. Horace and Quintilian, both authorities of

indeed, but they differed in subject, and in the style of handling it; for they satirized the errors of the philosophers and poets only; they did not aim at reforming the manners of every-day life, and we may feel sure that if we had any of the Silli left us entire, we should see that their style was very different from that met with in the Roman satires, but very few fragments remain, which do not admit of an accurate comparison. We shall not combat with the assertion that Lucilius in particular, and his imitators, drew some of their colours, and pungency, from the old Greek comedy. (Vid. Hor. Sat. 1. 4. 1-10, 14; and Pers. 1. 123), from the Iambi, the Silli, and Satyric fables; but the Greeks are not on that account to be considered as having written satires, nor the Romans as having exhibited what they had received from the others. Moreover, that the origin of satire was Roman, not Grecian, can be proved from history, and from the very form of the name. At an early period, when neither Satyri, and the Satyric dramas, nor any species of Greek poetry was known to the Romans, the Satire succeeded to the Saturnian and Fescennine verses on the stage as we saw above, and the term (satire), from some resemblance consisting chiefly in the variety of argument, was transferred by the authors and grammarians, great weight, explicitly declare that the latter was the invention of the Romans; and it seems not at all unlikely that it sprung from the rude jests, and witty raillery, which the Roman youth used wantonly to utter on the stage at remote periods. Further, not only in the argument and method with which it was handled, but also in the style itself, we discover great dissimilarity; for, in the first place, if we look at the argument, which lay in various kinds of ridicule, the Horatian satire cannot in any way be compared with the comico-satyric fables of the Greeks; the Lucilian can, in some measure, for it presented some traces of their sarcastic facetiousness. For the satire which Horace's charming and polished wit adorned, which Persius' gravity pointed, and Juvenal's unbending severity armed, as it were with poison, was the result of uncompromising moral rectitude, and depended upon an enlightened and liberal judgment of human affairs, and on the becoming indignation of a noble mind; it therefore took its materials from those more weighty vices which were visible in men's lives and characters, and which possibly might be checked by the lash of satiric reproof to the advantage of the community at large. The Greek Satyre, on the other hand, rather possessed a spirit of censure, than a desire to effect a correction of abuses; it assailed now the condition, now the personal deformities of individuals, so that it did not exhibit even decency or a sense of shame, from the disgusting character of its subjects and expressions. Now this species of wit so called was far surpassed in worth by the gentlemanly and elegant humour of the Roman poets before mentioned, which did not lie in quickness, or a solitary bon mot; but in a continuative series of expressions. However, Lucilius' satires seem to have come rather nearer to the former, as they employ the same subject for their ridicule, have a similar design, show the same disregard to modesty, and possess the same degree of boldness. In the second place, with respect to the method of handling the argument, [i. e. style of writing], the dispute will doubtless be carried to certain forms of satyric poetry, in which even from their outward aspect, or from the law and structure of their composition, traces of resemblance may be discovered. But it is now clear that the satyric dramas of the Greeks cannot be compared with the didactic satire of Lucilius and the rest, with sufficient aptness and distinctness. Yet although the Romans in writing satires were sometimes remote from the dramatic species, which takes a wide range, and imparts to the style the variety of dialogue, and sudden vehemence, yet these embellishments of dramatic composition were resorted to by those who applied "the file" for the polishing of their satires; and a species of Roman comedy became general,— confined by a closer bond of dramatic action than the Greek fables. Who is not reminded of the Fabella Atellana, which were said by the ancients universally to be most closely allied to the Greek Satyres? However, we must limit this opinion of the ancients to a more certain ground; namely that the comic satyre of the Greeks bears comparison with the satires of the Romans.