gfi Differtation on the Life and Writings of

mentions this Romulus, and gives him the fame title. After hav- ing remarked, with how much advantage learned men might oc- cupy themfelves in extracting from the works of the ancient philo- fophers, proverbs, fables, and the morals they contained, for the pur- pofe of inftructing men, and training them to virtuous actions, Ihe adds that the emperor had very fuccefsfully purfucd this plan in order to teach his fon how to conduct himfelf with propriety through life [t]. Vincent de Beauvais, a contemporary of Mary, fpeaks like- wife of this Romulus and his fables [k] ; and laftly, Fabricius informs us that this author has very much imitated Phredrus, and often pre- ferved even his expreflions [/]. But, after all, who is this Romulus that is thus inverted with the title of emperor ? Is it the laft Roman emperor of this name who is like wife called Auguflulus ; or is it Romulus the grammarian, of whom ibme writers have made mention ? Let us difpenfe with this difcuffion as at once idle and ufelefs, inafmuch as all inquiry into the fubject can only terminate in vague conjecture. If amidft this impenetrable obfcurity, I were compelled to form an opinion, I mould contend that thefe fables were the work of fome monk of the i"ith or isth century, and mould endeavour to prove it by the rites of the Roman catholic wormip which he feveral times alludes to, and by entire paflages of the Vulgate which he very frequently inferts. According, however, to the odd tafte of his time, he was defirous of giving greater vogue to his work by afcribing it to a real character, but who, neverthelefs, had never thought about it. As to what remains, it is enough to know that in the time of Mary there actually did exift a collection of fables called yEfopian, and publiihed under the name of Romulus ; that this author, whether real or [z] Preface to the Fables of Mary. [k] Vincent Bellovac. Lib. IV. c. 2. [/] Fabric, loco citato. imaginary,