testimony of Hephaestion, besides what I must consider the surer guidance of analogy to this effect, exopiaußixòv pèv oùv τὸ Σαπφικὸν καλούμενον ἑνδεκασύλλαβον, οἷον

Ποικολόθρον, ἀθάνατ' Αφροδίτα.

Herman quoting this passage, I own, says Male; but as he assigns no reason, I must let his disapprobation go for nothing. As we have it, it is Epi-choriambic; but that most probably arose from the successful practice of Sappho and the other early versifiers, who assumed licenses in the first foot of every species of Choriambic metre. If the third syllable of the line be short, it is only two Choriambi prefixed to a Bacchius; just one more than in

and one less than in

Lydia dic per omnes

Omne nemus cum fluviis omne canat | profundum to which, if we alter Horace's line into

Jam satis orbi nivis atque diræ,

it will bear the same relation as the Asclepiad does to the Glyconic and Choriambic Pentameter (Tu ne quæsieris, &c.)

But as practice had made the metre Epi-choriambic, its first and last foot were figured as in the first species: the first being an Epitrite, the last Bacchius; and verses on this principle were as in the first species. The former by interpolating Choriambi (- -|********1 &c.

So from Grandinis milsit pater et rubenti, you by putting in another Choriambus, thus

Grandinis milsit pater et | terribilis | rubenti make such a line exactly, as Te Deos oro, &c.: in the same way as by interpolating

Sic te Diva potens Cypri

with another Choriambus-thus,

Sic te Virginum Diva potens Cypri

you form such a line exactly as

Sic fratres Helenæ.

And we might by analogy expand Te Deos oro, &c. by the insertion of another Choriambus in this way,

Te deos ofro Sybarin | cur properas | perfida sic | amando, in the same manner as in the other species.

This metre does not appear to have succeeded. Horace tried it but once, and then gave it up. The later grammarians disapprove of the experiment altogether; in fact, it is a deviation from the regular Choriambic movement, for which only long practice obtained favor in the Sapphic, and which had no chance of being tolerated in a new attempt.

W. M.

RARE PERSIAN ROMANCES.

FROM a late Number of the Literary Gazette, (July 15, 1826.) we learn that Sir William Ouseley was engaged in preparing for publication his "Anecdotes of Eastern Bibliography," which appear to be chiefly founded on a descriptive catalogue of many hundred Manuscripts, Arabic, Persian and Turkish, in his own collection; and other rare works preserved in different libraries, public and private, or examined by himself during his travels in various countries of the East, more particularly Persia. It is also stated that Sir William designed to give notices of such ancient works as are supposed to be lost, or known only through occasional references and quotations. Whatever may be expected from the "Anecdotes" thus announced, on the subjects of History, Geography, Antiquities and Philology, it would c very highly gratify so enthusiastic a lover of Eastern Romance › as myself, were Sir William to sketch the principal incidents of two stories, formerly, we may believe, extremely popular among the Persians, but respecting which I bave hitherto been unable to procure any satisfactory information, either from my researches among books, or from inquiries among eminent orientalists.

The first to which I allude is the Tale of " Wamek (or Vamek) and Ozra." The brief account which D'Herbelot has given of it in his Bibliothèque Orientale, might lead a reader into error: for he describes amek o' Adra as being the title of a Turkish Romance, on the loves of Vamek and Adra; and there are, says he, two compositions bearing the same title one by Mahmoud Ben Othman, surnamed Lamâi-the other by Mould, a native of Tarkhan. The original Romance, how) ever, was not Turkish, but Persian, and of considerable antiquity; for it is recorded by Dowlet Shah (in his Biography of the Persian Poets) that a man of Nishapúr (early in the ninth century of the Christian era) presented to Abdullah Ben Taher, who then governed Khorasan, a manuscript which was reputed extremely valuable. Having inquired the title and subject of this work, Abdullah learned that it was the tale of Wamek and Ozra, written under the auspices of Nushirvan (who had reigned about three hundred years before). The Mohammedan governor, like Omar with respect to the Alexandrian library, observed, that true Musulmans had no occasion for any book besides the Koran; and that this Romance, "being the composition of idolaters, was particularly detestable: he therefore

not only declined accepting it, but directed it to be destroyed in his presence; and, not satisfied with this demonstration of his barbarous zeal, he issued a proclamation, ordering all Persian manuscripts that should be found within the circle of his government to be burned." (See Introd. to the Hist. of Persian Poets, by Capt. Kirkpatrick, New Asiat. Miscell. vol. i. p. 21.) Whether any copies escaped, or whether tradition supplied the place of writing, it appears difficult to ascertain; but we find that some centuries after the circumstance above recorded, a poet named Fassihi or Fessihhi, adopted for his subject the story of those celebrated lovers: and among various rare works procured by Sir William Ouseley at Shiraz, Isfahan and Tehran, (as he informs us in his Travels, vol. iii. p. 557.) was Wamek and Ozra. "The title of this Persian Ms. (says he) induced me to believe that a literary treasure of considerable value had fallen into my hands; for such might be esteemed not only the original Pahlavi romance so styled, but the poem founded on it by Fessihhi: a work so rare between three and four hundred years ago, that the ingenious and inquisitive Dowlet Shah, as he acknowleges, had only seen it in a mutilated state. Of my copy no date occurs; but I have reason to apprehend that it is modern: probably composed during the last century by a person named Mirza Sádek; and resembling only. in its title the poem of Fessihhi before mentioned, or the more ancient romance of which a copy offered (in the ninth century of our era) as a most valuable present to the Governor of Khúrásán was, by order of that Mohammedan bigot, immediately destroyed, as the composition of Pagans: those who had unfortunately existed before the Koran was revealed. Of the modern poem, two copies agreeing in every respect, and evi-, dently written by the same hand, came into my possession: one is now in the collection of Sir Gore Ouseley.'

ویس و

The second work respecting which I would solicit information from those conversant with the manuscript literature of Asia, is entitled “Veis and Ramín," (m) said to be a highly romantic love story, like the former; and composed, as an eminent orientalist several years ago informed me, by the poet Fakhraddín, a native of the province called Jurján, or Gurgán. For some further particulars on the subject of Veis and Ramín, mentioned by the same orientalist, I cannot refer to memory: but Mons. D'Herbelot notices a prince Ramin, who, with another named Mouiad, governed in Khorasan; and he describes them as contemporaries of Narsi Ben Gudarz, a Persian monarch of the Arsacidan dynasty, who began to reign about the

year of Christ 130. (See the " Bibliot. Orient." articles Narsi, Mouiad, and Ramin.) It does not, however, appear, from any passage in D'Herbelot's great work, although I strongly suspect, that Prince Ramín of Khorasan was the lover of Veis, and the hero of our romance,

Here might be mentioned some other Persian compositions, which though probably inferior in antiquity to Wamek and Ozra, and Veis and Ramín, seem nevertheless objects of research highly interesting to the admirers of Eastern

romance.

story of Dilsúz, or the "Heart-inflaming."

The Sarvu

the دلسوز (نامه Such is the Dilsaz Nameh

(سرو و كل) Gul

(بوستان خیال) Khayal

or "the Cypress and Rose." The Bustán i or "Garden of Imagination." The loves of Selma and Lilai, (a) the story of the king of

the loves of Ba شاه شروان و شمایل Shirvan and Shamail

haram and Gulendám, (plait, ph.) and others slightly noticed by Sir W. Ouseley, (in his Travels, vol. iii. p. 558.) but of which we may expect a more particular account in his intended descriptive catalogue of Eastern Manuscripts.

ودور

The romances here enumerated, are, there is reason to believe, extremely rare even in the East; but several others, of which we may hope soon to obtain a better knowlege from the number of copies brought to Europe, would probably furnish much interesting matter. The works of Jami, Nizami, and other eminent writers, abound in our libraries, and offer to Orientalists many admirable subjects for translation: such as the ઢ "loves of Joseph and Zelikha" (celebrated by Sir William Jones); the story of Leila and Majnun-of Khosru and Shirin, &c. Of these, though originally composed in very flowery verse, I should not by any means recommend a poetical translation, nor an attempt to render literally the high-flown expressions of the Persian authors: for the general reader who seeks merely amusement, a simple but correct outline of the story would be sufficient, and this could be given best in prose; while notes might be subjoined for the gratification of Örientalists, or of those interested in critical, historical or philological discussions.

A. Y.

HAVING lately obtained a sight of a very scarce edition of Martin Luther's Letters, it may not be unacceptable to some of your readers, if I give the title with some additional remarks; especially as Dr. Isaac Milner, in his preface to the last volume of the "Church History," has not imparted any bibliographical memoranda of the edition he obtained, and which he says he sought for a long time in vain, both at home and on the continent, but which was probably the one about to be mentioned. Some persons despise these, it may be, lesser matters; but he, who would join with Mr. Fox in complaining of the difficulty of tracing the assertions of historians to their authorities, should have given more facilities in his own references. On this point it may be desirable to quote the words of Jo. Laur. Mosheim, in his Dissertationum ad historiam ecclesiasticam pertinentium, 2 vols. 8vo, Altonaviæ 1733, from the preface to M. Geddesii Martyrologium Protestantium Hispanorum, pp. 669-70." Ut enim fidem ejus nemo facile in dubium vocaverit, illi tamen, qui solida student eruditioni, fontes rerum sibi merito cupiunt diligenter monstrari, quos, si res ita ferat, consulere queant ad omnem animis tam suis, quam aliorum dubitationem eximendam. In hoc ipso MARTYROLOGIO nostro hæc levis apparet macula. Nam generatim tantum scriptores quidam nominantur, omissis librorum locis, verisque inscriptionibus, ex quibus multum tamen utilitatis capere solent, qui veri cognoscendi sunt cupidi.'

"

The title of the edition of the great Reformer's letters before alluded to, is Tomus primus (secundus) Epistolarum Doct. Mart. Lutheri scriptarum, ab anno MDVII usque ad 22. (ab anno MDXXII usque ad 28.) Anno 1566. a Johanne Aurifabro collectus et editus nunc vero in usum ecclesiarum Marchiacarum et vicinarum comparatus, et triplici indice locupletatus, studio, sumptibus et impensis Georgii Celestini Doct. 2 vols. 4to. Berlini 1579.

This, excepting the words included in brackets and belonging to the second volume, is the title of the work, and it must have been a very handsome book when first published. Celestinus does not appear to have improved it much, by placing the letters in a more chronological order than Aurifaber had been enabled to give them. He speaks in his dedications and prefaces more than once of publishing many additional letters, but he does not seem to have fulfilled his intention; non pauca