pastoral part, Virgil is very evidently superiour. He wrote when there
had been a larger influx of knowledge into the world than when
Theocritus lived. Theocritus does not abound in description, though
living in a beautiful country: the manners painted are coarse and gross.
Virgil has much more description, more sentiment, more of Nature, and
more of art. Some of the most excellent parts of Theocritus are, where
Castor and Pollux, going with the other Argonauts, land on the Bebrycian
coast, and there fall into a dispute with Amycus, the King of that
country; which is as well conducted as Euripides could have done it; and
the battle is well related. Afterwards they carry off a woman, whose two
brothers come to recover her, and expostulate with Castor and Pollux on
their injustice; but they pay no regard to the brothers, and a battle
ensues, where Castor and his brother are triumphant. Theocritus seems
not to have seen that the brothers have the advantage in their argument
over his Argonaut heroes. _The Sicilian Gossips_ is a piece of merit.'

'Callimachus is a writer of little excellence. The chief thing to be
learned from him is his account of Rites and Mythology; which, though
desirable to be known for the sake of understanding other parts of
ancient authours, is the least pleasing or valuable part of their
writings.'

'Mattaire's account of the Stephani[3] is a heavy book. He seems to have
been a puzzle-headed man, with a large share of scholarship, but with
little geometry or logick in his head, without method, and possessed of
little genius. He wrote Latin verses from time to time, and published a
set in his old age, which he called '_Senilia_;' in which he shews so
little learning or taste in writing, as to make _Carteret_ a dactyl[4].
In matters of genealogy it is necessary to give the bare names as they
are; but in poetry, and in prose of any elegance in the writing, they