oets of Greece, the pure iambic trimeter, as in iv.--

"Phaselus ille quem videtis hospites,"

the scazon iambic, employed in viii. and xxxi.--

"Paeninsularum, Sirmio, insularumque,"

and the phalecian hendecasyllabic, a slight modification of the Sapphic
line, which is his favourite metre for the expression of his more joyful
moods, and of his lighter satiric vein. The Latin language never flowed
with such ease, freshness and purity as in these poems. Their perfection
consists in the entire absence of all appearance of effort or
reflection, and in the fulness of life and feeling, which gives a
lasting interest and charm to the most trivial incident of the passing
hour. In reference to these poems Munro has said with truth and force:
"A generation had yet to pass before the heroic attained to its
perfection; while he (Catullus) had already produced glyconics,
phalecians and iambics, each 'one entire and perfect chrysolite,'
'cunningest patterns' of excellence, such as Latium never saw before or
after,--Alcaeus, Sappho, and the rest then and only then having met
their match."

The work of Catullus has not come down to us intact, as is shown by
lacunae and quotations in ancient writers which cannot now be found in
his poems. Out of the MSS. only three have claims to intrinsic
importance. The oldest and best appears to be the Bodleian (Canon.
30). But little inferior is the _Sangermanensis_ (Par. 14137). Of the
third, the _Romanus_, we shall be better able to judge when its
discoverer, Prof. W.G. Hale, has published his collation. None of
these MSS. are older than the 14th century. One poem, 62, is, however,
preserved in a MS. of the 9th century (the _Thuaneus_, Par. 8071).
Prof. R. Ellis's discovery of the Bodleian MS. and E. Baehrens's
recognition of its value opened a new chapter in the history of the
text. Ellis's contributions comprise an indispensable commentary (ed.
2, 1889), an elaborate critical edition (ed. 2, 1878) and an English
translation (1871) in the metres of the original. The text in the
Oxford series, published in 1905, is inferior to those specified
below. Baehrens's edition, 2 volumes (text 1876, the second edition by
K.P. Schulze is a misnomer; and Latin commentary 1885) is still of
value. Amongst other editions with critical or explanatory notes or
both may be mentioned those of A. Riese (1884), L. Schwabe (1886, with
_index verborum_), B. Schmidt (18