Chapter I: Introduction

John Oldmixon's _Essay on Criticism_, like his _Reflections on Dr. Swift's Letter to the Earl of Oxford, about the English Tongue_,[1] provides evidence to support Dr. Johnson's description of its author as a "scribbler for a party," and indicates that Oldmixon must have been devoted to gathering examples of what appeared to him to be the good and bad in literature.

The story of the appearance of the _Essay on Criticism_ in 1728 should begin in 1724, when Oldmixon published in one volume his _Critical History of England, Ecclesiastical and Civil_. Dr. Zachary Grey's criticism of this book was answered by Oldmixon in 1725 in _A Review of Dr. Zachary Grey's Defence of our Ancient and Modern Historians_. In 1726 a two-volume edition of the _Critical History of England_ appeared with the 1725 edition of the _Review of Dr. Zachary Grey's Defence_ appended to the first volume. In the preface to the second volume of the _Critical History_ Oldmixon referred to the _Essay on Criticism_, stating that it was ready for the press, but that since it would have made the second volume too large, it would be published at a later date. The _Essay_, he stated, was to prepare the public for his translation of Abbe Bouhours' _La Manière De Bien Penser_. It was not, however, until 1728 that the _Essay_ reached the public. Besides appearing separately, it was appended, in place of the now removed answer to Dr. Grey, to the "third" edition of the _Critical History_.[2] There is no reference to the addition of the _Essay_ in the preface to the first volume, but its appearance and addition is referred to in the preface to the second volume.

Oldmixon seems to have had more than one purpose for writing the _Essay_; one of them is made quite clear in the second paragraph:

I shall not, in this _Essay_, enter into the philosophical Part
of Criticism which _Corneille_ complains of, and that
_Aristotle_ and his Commentators have treated of Poetry, rather
as _Philosophers_ than Poets. I shall not attempt to give
Reasons why Thoughts are _sublime_, _noble_, _delicate_,
_agreeable_, and the like, but content my self with producing
Examples of every Kind of right Thinking, and leave it to
Authors of more Capacity and Leisure, to treat the Matter _à
Fond_, and teach us to imitate our selves what we admire in
others.

The remarks concerning the English need for guidance in "right thinking" are obviously intended to prepare a public for Oldmixon's translation of Bouhours' _La Manière De Bien Penser_. Following the method of Bouhours, who was in turn following Longinus, Oldmixon gives examples from English literature of the various divisions of "right thinking" and, also like Bouhours, he includes specimens of failures in this art. The bad examples he presents provide ample evidence that the Essay was also serving a Whig polemical purpose, for they are drawn from such writers as Clarendon, Pope and, in particular, Laurence Echard. The tone and nature of Oldmixon's remarks on Echard, whose History he had already criticized at length in the second volume of the _Critical History_, can be seen in this explanation of his general treatment of that author:

I must sincerely acknowledge, that it was not for Want of Will,
that I did not mention what is beautiful in our Historian, but
for Want of Opportunity.

Oldmixon's remarks on Pope's _Homer_ are sometimes laudatory, but more often patronizing; the criticism of Pope's _Essay on Criticism_ is quite pointed:

I dare not say any Thing of the last _Essay on Criticism_ in
Verse, but that if any more curious Reader has discovered
in it something new, which is not in Dryden's _Prefaces_,
_Dedications_, and his _Essay on Dramatick Poetry_, not to
mention the _French_ Criticks, I should be very glad to have
the Benefit of the Discovery.

The rift between Pope and Oldmixon can perhaps be dated from the publication by the latter in 1714 of the "Receipt to make a cuckold" with great apologies for its indecency. Oldmixon continued to tempt satiric fate in the ensuing years, and one wonders if, when seeking a substitute for the _Dunciad_ in the "last" _Miscellany_ of 1728, Pope may not have remembered Oldmixon's announcement in 1726 of his intention to publish an _Essay on Criticism_ which was to be written after the manner of Bouhours. It is not impossible that this was one of many influences acting upon Pope to organize the "high flights of poetry" he had been collecting over the years for a Scriblerian project. Oldmixon appears, with Gildon and Dennis, among the porpoises in Chapter VI of _Peri Bathous_, and the presentation of some of the material in the _Bathous_, although more directly indebted to Longinus, does bring Oldmixon's _Essay_ to mind.

It would seem that Oldmixon felt that more than the porpoises referred to him, for in his translation and adaptation of Bouhours' _La Manière De Bien Penser_, which he published under the title of _The Arts of Logic and Rhetorick_ later in 1728, the references to Pope are much harsher, and Swift also comes under more pointed attack. _Gulliver's Travels_, _A Tale of A Tub_ (already censured by Oldmixon in his _Reflections on Dr. Swift's Letter_), the _Essay on Criticism_, _Windsor Forest_ and the _Homer_ are the objects of bitter criticism. In the concluding pages of _The Arts of Logic and Rhetorick_ Oldmixon wrote:

This delicate Author [Pope] has written a _rhiming Essay on
Criticism_, and made himself merry with his Brethren in a
notable Treatise call'd the _Art of Sinking_, to which he and
his Partner S----t, have contributed, more than all the rest of
their contemporary writers, if _Trifling_ and _Grimace_ are not
in the high Parts of Writing.... What a Precipice is it from
Locke's Human Understanding to Swift's Lilliput and
Profundity!... there might have been Hopes of rising again; but
we sink now like Ships laden with Lead, and must despair of
ever recovering the Height from which we have fallen.[3]

As we move from Oldmixon's _Essay on Criticism_ to Pope's _Peri Bathous_ and on to _The Arts of Logic and Rhetorick_, we perhaps hear the stretching of the spring on a trap, that snapped in the 1735 edition of the _Dunciad_, in which Oldmixon replaced Dennis as the "Senior" diver "Who but to sink the deeper, rose the higher."[4]

The _Essay on Criticism_ is, however, more than an example of the inter-relation of literature and politics in the eighteenth century; and it is more than a step on the way to its author's immortalizing in lead. It presents, albeit not very imaginatively, a statement of many of the literary theories and attitudes of the Augustan period. However brief and incomplete, the remarks about the language of poetry and upon the effects of certain literary passages are of interest as imperfect exercises in a type of practical criticism. The material used by Oldmixon and the literary references he makes indicate, as do many of his other writings, that, although he was a "scribbler for a party," he was a man of some literary sense, taste and intelligence.

Robert Madden, C.S.B.
St. Michael's College
University of Toronto

NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION

1. The _Reflections on Dr. Swift's Letter_ was reprinted with an introduction by Louis Landa by the Augustan Reprint Society, no. 15 (1948).

2. The issue which appeared separately is the same as that which was appended to the first volume of the _Critical History_, save for the price, 1s. 6d, printed on the title page.

3. John Oldmixon, _The Arts of Logic and Rhetorick_ (London, 1728), pp. 416-17.

4. Cf. _Dunciad_ A, II, ll. 271-78, and _Dunciad_ B, II, ll. 283-90, in James Sutherland, ed., _The Dunciad_ in _The Poems of Alexander Pope_, Vol. V, 2nd ed. (London, 1953). Oldmixon was less prominent in the 1728 edition (Dunciad A, II, ll. 199-202); when he was elevated to a higher level of dullness he was succeeded in his original place by Leonard Welstead (Dunciad B, II, ll. 207-10).

AN
ESSAY
ON
_CRITICISM_

As it regards

Design, Thought, and Expression,

In PROSE and VERSE.

_By the AUTHOR of the Critical History of_ ENGLAND.

_LONDON:_
Printed for J. PEMBERTON, at the _Golden-Buck_ in _Fleet-Street_.
MDCCXXVIII.

1_s._ 6_d._

AN
ESSAY
ON
CRITICISM;

As it regards

_Design, Thought, and Expression,
in Prose and Verse._

I am very far from any Conceit of my own Ability, to treat of so nice a Subject as this, in a Manner worthy of it; but having frequently observed what Errors have been committed by both Writers and Readers for want of a right Judgement, I could not help collecting some loose Hints I had by me, and putting them into a little Form, to shew rather what I would do than what I can do; and to excite some happier Genius, to give us better Lights than we have hitherto been led by, which is said with great Sincerity, and without the least Mixture of Vanity or Affectation.

I shall not, in this _Essay_, enter into the philosophical Part of Criticism which _Corneille_ complains of, and that _Aristotle_ and his Commentators have treated of Poetry, rather as _Philosophers_ than _Poets_. I shall not attempt to give Reasons why Thoughts are _sublime_, _noble_, _delicate_, _agreeable_, and the like, but content my self with producing Examples of every Kind of right Thinking, and leave it to Authors of more Capacity and Leisure, to treat the Matter a _Fond_, and teach us to imitate our selves what we admire in others.

_Aristotle_, _Horace_, _Bossu_, _Boileau_, _Dacier_, and several other Criticks, have directed us right in the Rules of Epick and Dramatick Poetry, and _Rapin_ has done the same as to _History_, and other Parts of polite Learning. Several Attempts have been made in _England_ to instruct us, as well as the _French_ have been instructed; but far from striking out any new Lights, our _Essays_ are infinitely short of the Criticisms of our Neighbours. They teach us nothing which is not to be found there, and give us what they take thence curtailed and imperfect. 'Tis true, they have drest up their Rules in Verse, and have succeeded in it very well. There is something so just and beautiful in my Lord _Roscommon_'s Essay and Translation of _Horace_'s _Ars Poetica_, as excels any Thing in _French_ within the like Compass. I have read the late Duke of _Buckingham_'s Essay very often, but I don't think it such a perfect Piece as _Dryden_ represents it, in his long and tedious Dedication to that noble Lord before the _Æneis_. There are many Things very well thought in it, and they do not seem to be much the better for the Poetry; which is so prosaick, that if the Rhimes were pared away, it would be reduced to downright Prose. Indeed _Horace_'s Epistle to the _Piso's_ is not much more poetick; and I do not think, that the modern Criticks, like the Oracles of Old, give the greater Sanction to their Rules, for that they are put into Rhime.

I dare not say any Thing of the last _Essay_ on _Criticism_ in Verse, but that if any more curious Reader has discovered in it something new, which is not in _Dryden_'s _Prefaces_, _Dedications_, and his _Essay_ on _Dramatick Poetry_, not to mention the _French_ Criticks, I should be very glad to have the Benefit of the Discovery.

I was strangely surprised to meet with such a Passage, as what follows, in the Writings of so good an Author as Sir _Robert Howard_. _Preface_ to Duke of _Lerma_: "In the Difference of Tragedy and Comedy, there can be no Determination but by the _Taste_; and whoever would endeavour to like or dislike by the Rules of others, he will be as unsuccessful as if he should try to be perswaded into a Power of believing, not what he must, but what others direct him to believe."

Thus are _Aristotle_, _Horace_, and all that have commented on them; thus are _Boileau_, the Lord _Roscommon_, the Duke of _Bucks_, and all the modern Criticks, confounded with a Word or two, and the Rules of Writing rendered useless and ridiculous.

The Rules laid down by those great Criticks are not to be valu'd, because they are given by _Aristotle_, _Horace_, &c. but because they are in Nature and in Truth. _Homer_, _Sophocles_, and _Euripides_, wrote before _Aristotle_, and the Observations he made upon their Poems, were to shew us how they succeeded by a happy Imitation of Nature, and without such Imitation there can be no Poetry; but according to Sir _Robert Howard_'s Assertion, that only which a Man likes is good; and if you are pleas'd with seeing or hearing any Thing unnatural or even monstruous,

_A Woman's Head joyn'd to a Fishes Tail;_

it is preferable to what is just and true, to the _Venus_ of _Medicis_, or the most perfect _Madonna_ in _Italy_. Thus a wrong Taste is as good as a right one, and the Smell of a Pole-cat to be preferr'd to that of a _Civet_, if a Man's Nose is so irregular. After this Rate, there never was a Poet who could write up to the _Frenchman_'s Ladder-dance, or _Rich_'s Harlequin; and whereas Sir _Robert_ says, we may as well believe, because others do, as judge, because _Aristotle_, _Horace_, &c. do, there is no Agreement in the Proposition, or it is not rightly stated; for we do not judge so because _Aristotle_ and _Horace_ did so judge; but because it is in Nature and in Truth, and they first shew'd us the Way to find it out.

Criticism is so far from being well understood by us _Englishmen_, that it is generally mistaken to be an Effect of Envy, Jealousy, and Spleen; an invidious Desire to find Faults only to discredit the Author, and build a Reputation on the Ruin of his.

One has great Reason to think so, when the Critick looks only on one Side; when he hunts after little Slips and Negligences, and will not, or cannot see, what is beautiful and praise-worthy. If an historical or poetical Performance can no sooner acquire Applause, than he falls upon it without Mercy, neglects every Thing commendable in it, and skims off the Filth that rises on the Top of it; one may be sure his Jealousy is piqu'd, and he is alarm'd for fear every Encrease of Honour to another should be a Diminution of his own Glory; such Sort of Criticism is easily learnt. A Wen or Mole in the Face is sooner perceiv'd than the Harmony of Features, and the fine Proportion of Beauty; or, as _Dryden_ says,

_Errours like Straws upon the Surface flow,
He who would search for Pearls must dive below._

This Thought is borrow'd from the Lord _Bacon_; who, speaking of Notions and Inferences what may be applied to Families, says, _Time is like a River in which Metals and solid Substances sink, while Chaff and Straw swim on the Surface_. Such borrowing as _Dryden_'s is highly commendable; he has paid back what he borrowed with Interest, and it can by no Means deserve the Scandal of _Plagiarism_. I cannot doubt, but Mr. _Addison_ in the sublime Thought, where he represents the Duke of _Marlborough_ in the Heat of the War:

_Rides in the Whirlwind, and directs the Storm;_

did nor forget these two Lines of _Boileau_ to the King:

_Serene himself the stormy War he guides,
And o'er the Battle like a God presides._

I shall all along, through this Discourse, take the Liberty to pass from one Subject to another as the Hint offers, without any Method, according to the Freedom of _Essays_. Mr. _Dryden_ excuses this Freedom, by the Example of _Horace_'s Epistle to the _Piso's_, which is immethodical and I must excuse my self by Mr. _Dryden_'s--

The Taste and Appetite of these straw Criticks, may justly be compar'd to Ravens and Crows, who neglecting clean Food, are always searching after Carrion.

_Horace_'s Rule is very well worth observing, when we are about to give Judgement on a Poem or History, where the _Will_ is not concern'd:

Ubi plura nitent in Carmine non ego paucis
Offendor maculis, quas aut incuria fudit,
Aut humana parum cavit natura.

_When in a Poem most are shining Thoughts,
I'm not offended if I find some Fau'ts;
Such as are Slips of Negligence, or where
The Poet may through humane Frailty erre._

As it is much easier to discern Blemishes than Beauties, so is it to censure than to commend, as the Duke of _Buckingham_ tells us:

_Yet whatsoe'er is by vain Criticks thought,
Praising is harder much than finding Fau't:
In homely Pieces ev'n the_ Dutch _excel_,
Italians _only can draw Beauty well_.

Such Criticks need not be in Pain, if a Poem or History makes its Way in the World a little; if it is not good, it will lose Ground of it self faster than it got it. If imperfect Pieces have gain'd Credit, and kept it for some Time, it was not for what was bad in them, but what, if not really good, was at least agreeable. _Dryden_'s Translation of _Virgil_ was generally liked for the Diction and Versification, though it was dislik'd on Account of Equality and Truth; and to have made a _Critick_ upon it, as _Milbourn_ did, without doing justice to his Numbers and Language, shew'd the Spirit of the Man was more engaged in it than his Judgement. All Criticisms on _Dryden_'s Language and Numbers are in Defiance of _Horace_'s Rule above-mention'd, because there is no Body but knows that it was impossible for _Dryden_ to make an ill Verse, or to want an apt and musical Word, if he took the least Care about it. I could very easily mark out a thousand Slips and Negligences of that Kind in his _Virgil_; yet for all that, there are more good Verses in that Translation than in any other, if Mr. _Pope_'s _Homer_ is not to be excepted.

It has been often said by very good Judges, that _Cato_ was no proper Subject for a Dramatick Poem: That the Character of a Cynick Philosopher, is very inconsistent with the Hurry and Tumult of Action and Passion, which are the Soul of Tragedy. That the ingenious Author miscarried in the Plan of his Work, but supported it by the Dignity, the Purity, the Beauty, and the Justness of the Sentiments and the Diction.

This was so much the Opinion of Mr. _Maynwaring_, who was generally allow'd to be the best Critick of our Time, that he was against bringing the Play upon the Stage, and it lay by unfinish'd many Years. Mr. _Maynwaring_ highly approv'd of the Sentiments and the Diction, but did not fall in with the Design. That it was play'd at last was owing to Mr. _Hughes_, who wrote the _Siege of Damascus_, a Tragedy. He had read the Four Acts, which were finished, and rightly thought it would be of Service to the Publick, to have it represented at the latter End of Queen _Ann_'s Reign, when the old _English_ Spirit of Liberty was as likely to be lost as it had ever been since the Conquest. He endeavour'd to bring Mr. _Addison_ into his Opinion, which he did so far as to procure his Consent, that it should be acted if Mr. _Hughes_ would write the last Act, and he offer'd him the Scenary for his Assistance, excusing his not finishing it himself on Account of some other Avocations. He prest Mr. _Hughes_ to do it so earnestly, that he was prevail'd upon and set about it. But a Week after, seeing Mr. _Addison_ again with an Intention to communicate to him what he had thought of it, he was agreeably surpris'd at his producing some Papers, where near half of the Act was written by the Author himself, who took Fire at the Hint that it would be serviceable, and upon a second Reflection went thorough with the Fifth Act: Not that he was diffident of Mr. _Hughes_'s Ability, but knowing that no Man could have so perfect a Notion of his Design as himself, who had been so long and so carefully thinking of it. I was told this by Mr. _Hughes_, and I tell it to shew that it was not for the _Love_ Scenes, that Mr. _Addison_ consented to have his Tragedy acted, but to support the old _Roman_ and _English_ Publick Spirit, which was then so near being suppressed by Faction and Bigotry. The most cunning of their Leaders were sensible of it, and therefore very dexterously stole away the Merit of the Poem, by applauding the Poet, and patronizing the Action and Actors. It is therefore obvious, that a severe Critick may find a Colour for his Severity, with Respect to the _Design_ of the Play, but that will not hinder its captivating every one that sees or reads it. The Graces and Excellencies, both of Thought and Expression, do much more deserve our Admiration and Applause, than the Deficiency in the Fable deserves Censure. However, as to _Dryden_'s _Virgil_ and _Cato_, ask those that admire the one or the other what it is that pleases them? And I doubt it will be found to be the very Places, which should have most displeased, where _Dryden_ offended most against the Character of Epick Poetry by imitating _Ovid_'s Softness, and an eternal _Jeu des Mots_, _Playing upon Words_, and where _Cato_ suspends the Action and Passion of the Scene to teach the Audience, Philosophy and Morality.

It is common for the most discreet and delicate Authors to take Care of themselves, when they are treating of any of the Sciences. You will always find the Divine, the Lawyer, the Mathematician, the Astrologer, the Chymist, the Mechanick, _&c._ reserving to themselves the Merit of their particular Sciences when they are discoursing of the Arts in general. A merry Instance of this in the _Astrologer_ is mention'd by the very learned _Gregory_ out of _Albumazer_, who asserted, that all Religions were govern'd by the Planets; the _Mahometan_ by _Venus_, the _Jewish_ by _Saturn_, and the _Christian_ by the _Sun_: Nay, he adds, that one _Guido Bonatus_ a _Gymnosophist_ affirms in his Parallells, that _Christ himself was an Astrologer, and made use of Elections_. The _Spectator_, with all his Modesty, has discover'd something of this Self-love in that of the Sciences, and could not help giving into this Infirmity. Every one knows what a fine Talent he had for Writing, and particularly how beautiful his Imagination was, and how polite his Language. Himself was not a Stranger to it; and we therefore read in the _Spectator_, Nº 291; _I might further observe, that there is not a_ Greek _or_ Latin _Critick, who has not shewn, even in the Stile of his Criticisms, that he was Master of all the Elegance and Delicacy of his native Language_. Here does this excellent Author forbid any one's Claim to the Character of a Critick, who is not like himself Master of the Delicacy and Elegance of his native Tongue; though I am apt to believe, that as a Man may be a very good Judge of Painting without being himself a Painter, so he may make very good Criticisms in Poetry and Eloquence, without being a Poet or an Orator. What would have become of our famous Critick _Rymer_, whom Mr. _Dryden_ has so much commended, and so much abused, if his Criticisms must not pass, on Account of his not being Master of the Elegance and Delicacy of our Language, as it does not appear he was by his Translation of OVID's Epistle from _Penelope_ to _Ulysses_.

_Here skulk'd_ Ulysses.
_Your Sword how_ Dolon _no nor_ Rhesus _'scap'd,
Banter'd the One, this taken as he napp'd.
Whatever Skippers hither come ashore,
For thee I ask and ask them o'er and o'er.
Perhaps to her your dowdy Wife define
Who cares no more, so that her Cupboard shine:
Who revel in your House without Controul,
And eat and waste your Means our Blood and Soul._

The _Bantring_ and _Napping_, the _Skipper_, the _Dowdy Wife_, the _Cupboard_, the _Means_, and the _Blood_ and _Soul_, agree admirably with the Royal Characters of King _Ulysses_ and Queen _Penelope_, and the courtly Manner of _Ovid_. _Radcliff_'s Letter, from the Skipper's Wife of _Newcastle_ to her Husband at _St. Catherine_'s, can hardly have more of the Burlesque in it.

The Truth is, Mr. _Addison_, in the above Quotation, has a Fling upon the Author of the Critick upon his _Cato_. _A few general Rules extracted out of the_ French _Authors, with a certain Cant of Words, have sometimes set up an illiterate heavy Writer, for a most judicious and formidable Critick._ I know no Instance wherein that Gentleman loses his Temper so much as in this. There were but three Authors in our Time who were _Criticks_ by Profession, _Rymer_, _Dennis_, and _Gildon_. _Rymer_ is own'd by himself to be a masterly Critick: He himself knew Mr. _Dennis_ did not want Learning; and as to Fire, he has perhaps rather too much of it, than too little. I can't help thinking, that the Ode he writ on _Dryden_'s Translation of the 3d Book of the _Georgicks_, in _Tonson_'s Fourth Miscellany, deserv'd a kinder Word than illiterate or heavy.

STANZA II.

_Sometimes of humble rural Things
My Muse, which keeps great_ Maro _still in sight,
In middle Air with varied Numbers sings;
And sometimes her sonorous Flight
To Heaven sublimely wings.
But first takes Time with Majesty to rise
Then, without Pride, divinely great
She mounts her native Skies;
And Goddess-like retains her State
When down again she flies._

The Passage, taken out of the _Spectator_, could not relate to _Gildon_, because of the _French_ Cant, which he did not affect, nor understand. It is plain therefore, it must refer to the Critick upon _Cato_; which shews us, that as conscious as the most modest Man may be of his own Insufficiency; yet, when it is in Dispute, he cannot always preserve his Insensibility. _Cato_ is a very good _Dramatick_ Poem, and so was the _Cid_; yet the best _Critick_ that ever was written in _French_, was that upon the _Cid_, as _La Bruyere_ observes.

In another of the _Spectators_, we meet with something which proves to us, that a Man may have as much Modesty as Mr. _Addison_; and yet be very jealous of losing any Part of the Glory which is due to him. Every one knows, that though he was a Master of Eloquence, he never attempted to speak in Parliament, but it was with some Confusion; and what he said, did not answer the Expectation which had been raised by the Character of his Writings. Himself takes notice of this, not as an Infirmity, but as the Effect of Caution and Art. _Spectator_, Nº 231, Cicero tells us, that he never liked an Orator, _who did not appear in some little Confusion at the Beginning of his Speech; and confesses, that he himself never entered upon an Oration without Trembling and Concern. It is indeed a Kind of Deference which is due to a great Assembly. The bravest Man often appears timorous upon these Occasions, as we may observe that there is generally no Creature more impudent than a Coward._ I hope I shall not be thought invidious, or to endeavour to lessen the Veneration, which all, who love polite Learning, owe to the Memory of the _Spectator_; yet I could not but take notice, how sensible the most Discreet are in Point of Rivalship in Fame. What else can one think of the _Spectator_'s Saying in the Dedication of the Eighth Volume: _I need not tell you, that the free and disengaged Behaviour of a fine Gentleman, makes as many aukward_ Beaux, _as the Easiness of your Favourite_ Waller _hath made insipid Poets._ Though the _fine Gentleman_ may be applied to Mr. _Waller_, and the _aukward Beaux_ to the insipid Poets; yet the Comparison cannot hold, without doing an Injury to Mr. _Waller_'s Merit. The _Beaux_ may be aukward, by imitating what you call a _fine Gentleman_, who is generally distinguish'd by some Affectation; but no Poet can be insipid by imitating Mr. _Waller_'s Easiness, if he has any Portion of his Wit and Gallantry. The _Spectator_'s Manner was not very different from Mr. _Waller_'s, as to Easiness; and I have as often heard it wished, that there was more Fire in his own Poetry, as that there was more in Mr. _Waller_'s. Two of the politest Authors in _Europe_, of the last Age, St. _Evremont_ and _La Fontaine_, had such an Esteem for Mr. _Waller_, that it is strange he meets with no better Quarter at Home. Those two famous _French_ Wits us'd to call him another _Anacreon_; and the Criticks have not yet complained, that ever _Anacreon_ taught any Poet to be insipid. Mr. _Addison_ is so far from thinking that _Waller_ had any such Infection about him, that he wishes he had lived to have sung in Praise of King _William_, the sublimest Subject that ever was offered to a Muse, by how much the Deliverer of Nations from Slavery is a more godlike Character, than to have subjected and enslaved them, as did _Alexander_ and _Cæsar_.

_The Courtly_ Waller _next commands my Lays,
Muse, tune thy Verse with Art to_ Waller_'s Praise.
While tender Airs, and lovely Dames inspire
Soft melting Thoughts, and propagate Desire;
So long shall_ Waller_'s Strains our Passion move,
And_ Sacharissa_'s Beauties kindle Love.
Thy Verse, harmonious Bard, and flatt'ring Song,
Can make the Vanquish'd great, the Coward strong:
Thy Verse can shew ev'n_ Cromwell_'s Innocence,
And complement the Storms that bore him hence.
Oh! had thy Muse not come an Age too soon,
But seen great_ Nassau _on the_ British _Throne,
How had his Triumphs glitter'd in thy Page,
And warm'd thee to a more exalted Rage.
What Scenes of Death,_ &c.

So little Danger is there of learning to be insipid by imitating _Waller_, that he is praised by the Editor of St. _Evremond_'s Works, for the Elevation of his Genius, Mr. _Edmond Waller; s'est generallement fait admirer par l'Elevation de son Esprit_.

I do not in this _Essay_ aim at any Thing more, than, as I have said before, to put several critical Hints, which I had collected, together, and not to form a regular Discourse, but take them as they come in my way.

If the _Spectator_, by the Passage above-mentioned, insinuates that a Man must be able to perform himself in an Art, to be a good Judge of the Performances of others; consequently, that I ought to be a masterly Historian, to make Remarks on Mr. _Echard_'s History, he divests me at once of the Right I pretend to in the following Treatise. Let us therefore enquire into the Reason of this Reflection.

_Horace_, whom no _English_ Author could understand better than the _Spectator_, as appears by his admirable Translation, teaches us otherwise,

_Munus & Officium, nil scribens ipse, docebo._
Yet without writing, I may teach to write.
[_Rosc._

_Dacier_'s Notes upon _Hippocrates_, as I have been informed by my worthy Friend Dr. _Allen_, are much better than any others, though made by Men of the _Faculty_, which _Dacier_ did not profess. Monsieur _Corneille_, the greatest Genius in _France_ for Tragedy, wrote _Examens_ of his Pieces, which, like _Dryden_'s Prefaces, were adapted to the several Tragedies, and very often clashed with one another, as the Subject required: but because he would prevent as much as possible any Attack of Criticism, he declares in one of his Discourses, _That the Knowledge which is acquired by Study and Speculation, is of little or no Use without Experience_. Thus an Author must produce a Tragedy himself, before he presumes to criticise on another's. If it be the same Thing in History too, I began at the wrong End, and should have written three or four Folio Histories, before I had presum'd to make Remarks on Archdeacon _Echard_'s, this would bear very hard upon me, and I must beg Leave to enquire a little whether the Case be really so or not.

Monsieur _Dacier_ is so far from being of _Corneille_'s Opinion, that he thinks a Man who never did write a Tragedy, may criticise on another's Poem the better for that he never wrote himself. _Nay, I do not know_, says he in his Preface to _Aristotle_, _whether he who has written Dramatick poems, is so proper to explain the Rules of the Art, as he, who never wrote any: For it would be a Miracle if the former were not seduced by Self-love; whereas the latter is disinterested, and the more likely to be an impartial Judge._ Again, _if it was necessary to be a good poet to make Criticisms on Poetry, we should never have had any Critick at all; for I do not know one Critick upon Poetry, that was himself a Poet._ By this one would think, that he did not look upon _Rapin_ as a Critick in Poetry, for he wrote a Poem on _Gardening_. _Menage_ makes as little of him as _Dacier_; yet _Dryden_ says, were all the Writings of other Criticks lost, _Rapin_'s Works alone would be sufficient to teach us the whole Art of Criticism. We all know _Aristotle_ and _Horace_ wrote upon Epick Poetry and Tragedy, yet neither of them ever wrote a Tragedy or Epick Poem; and perhaps neither of them would have succeeded if he had. _Rymer_ made one poor Attempt that Way in his _Edgar_: But, as if it had been written only to prove that a Man may judge well of an Art, without being a Performer, like an ill-built Ship, it sunk in the very launching, and seem'd to be written only to be damned.

The _Guardian_ seconds the _Spectator_, and forbids any one to criticise, that cannot write to Perfection. _If I find by his own Manner of Writing, that he is heavy and tasteless, I throw aside his Criticisms with a secret Indignation, to see a Man without Genius or Politeness, dictating to the World on Subjects which I find are above his Reach._ Thus Mr. _Rymer_, the best Critick we had till then, and all his Rules, are void and of no Effect; He has cancelled them with a Dash of his Pen. If a Man must not only have Politeness, but a Genius, what will become of _Aristotle_ and _Longinus_, _Bossu_ and _Dacier_? They were all polite Writers, but have not discover'd that they had Genius. I ever had as little Opinion of heavy tasteless Criticks as the _Spectator_ or _Guardian_, yet I never could endure an arbitrary Judgement; for, what else is _tasteless_ and _heavy_ without Proof? But then, that Proof could not be produced without the _Criticisms_, which, let them be ever so poor, are often more easily despis'd than answer'd.

I was always convinced by Example, that a Critick may have a just Taste, without being a Poet; and that the Indignation the _Guardian_ speaks of, is never provoked, unless a weak Place is hit upon: As, in the low Phrase, _A galled Horse winces when you touch the Sore_. In three or four Lines, we have _tasteless_, _heavy_, _dogmatical_, _stupid_ Macer _and_ Mundungus all of the poor Criticks. Had they been really such stupid Creatures, they could not have given such Offence. Hard Words shew Anger more than Indignation, and we are apt to conjecture, that the Poets would not be so angry with the Criticks, if they were not afraid of them. The Concern of the former is wonderfully generous; they are not in Pain for what the Criticks say of their Errours and Failings, but for the Heaviness and Stupidity of their Criticisms. Thus in the lowest Life, we shall often hear one angry Woman cry out of another, _I do not matter what she said of me, but to see the Impudence of the Slut_. _Macer_ and _Mundungus_ are taken from Mr. _Congreve_'s Epistle to Sir _Richard Temple_;

_So_ Macer _and_ Mundungus _school the Times,
And write in rugged Verse the softer Rules of Rhimes_.

If the _Guardian_ had the Critick upon _Cato_ in his Thoughts, when he quoted those Verses, which I suppose he had, why does he mention rhiming Criticisms? That Author wrote his Rules and Remarks always in Prose, so did _Rymer_; what then do they all mean by _rugged Verse_? The Lord _Roscommon_'s Poetry is Harmony it self. The last Essay upon Criticism in Verse was not then written. There remains only the late Duke of _Buckingham_'s Poetical Essay, of Note enough to be remembered by Mr. _Congreve_: That could not be named, without offending _good Breeding_, a Term very often made use of by two elegant Authors; who, I much question, had never the Education of a Dancing-Master. However, Poetry and Criticism are perfect Levellers, and no Man can plead Privilege in the Court of _Parnassus_; what then is the Meaning of the next Lines after _Mundungus_?

_Well do they play the careful Critick's Part,
Instructing doubly by their matchless Art:
Rules for good Verse they first with Pains indite,
Then shew us what are bad by what they write._

The _Guardian_ and _Spectator_ would not do the Poets the Honour to name them; but we know who are the Criticks which are _thrown aside_ by them; for no Body but Mr. _D----_ and Mr. _G----_ made Remarks upon their Writings, and both of them did. I do not say with that Politeness and Elegance, which the _Spectator_ and _Guardian_ have laid down, as the sole Characteristicks of good Talk and Judgement; though one may almost as well say, that a Man cannot have good Sense and Wit, without good Cloaths and a genteel Air. I must needs own, that I think most of their Criticisms very just, though had they been still juster than they are, I would not nave been the Author of them, without taking Notice of Beauties, as well as finding of Faults, there being much more Room for the former than the latter.

It is very plain, the _Spectator_ highly stomached the Remarks which were made on his Writings, and is not very candid in his Reasoning, to render his Opponents contemptible, which was the surest Way of disarming them. _These Criticks fall upon a Play, not because it is ill written, but because it takes_: This is not the whole Truth. It is not because it _takes_, but because it takes for those very Things which should have damned it _Durfey_'s _Boarding-School_, and his _Marriage-Hater match'd_, took with a Vengeance, though the two greatest Pieces of Wit in them, were _Miss's Bread and Butter_, and _Mynheer's Muff_. _Settle_'s Tragedies took for the Noise, the Show, and the Rhime. No Play, that was not supported by poetical or political Party, which most _taking_ Plays have been, ever took more than _Settle_'s _Heir of Morocco_, in which there is not one good Thought or Expression. Again, _several of these Criticks have laid it down as a Maxim, that whatever Dramatick Poem has a long Run, must of Necessity be good for nothing_, which is a Misrepresentation. The _Orphan_, _Venice Preserv'd_, _Tamerlane_, _&c._ had _long Runs_, and _run_ still; yet no Critick has dared to say they did not deserve it: But whoever will owe his Reputation to _taking_ only, must be contented to roll with _Settle_, _Durfey_, and many other Poets, that _took_ in their Turn. Could any thing be more monstrous, than to determine the Merit of _Nixon's Prophecy_, and the _Spectator_, by the Run of the Papers. The former, a Maggot given to the Rabble, bore more Editions in Ten Weeks, than the latter has done in Ten Years.

I would not be understood in this, or any thing else, to endeavour to lessen the Opinion the People have generally and justly of the _Spectator_'s Perfections: I verily believe, there is no Production of the Mind, ancient or modern, where are to be found more Wit, Politeness, fine Raillery, good Sense, Learning, and Eloquence; but what I have said, is to shew, that great Wits as well as little have their Passions, their Piques and Prejudices, when the least Blemish is discovered in their Glory. In the same _Spectator_, we have another Hint, that no Body ought to criticise on that Author's Writings, unless he could write as elegantly as himself, which effectually cuts off all _Criticism_. These _professed Criticks cannot put ten Words together with Elegance, or common Propriety_. What an arbitrary Way of arguing is this? These Criticks are Smatterers; _They vilify only the Productions that gain Applause; the Blemishes they descry are imaginary; their Arguments are far fetched; Their Works are like those of the Sophists, they are thought deep, because unintelligible; they instruct the People in Absurdities_. Would the _Spectator_ allow this positive Air in any other Writer? How does it appear that one Word of all this is true? _Ipse dixit._ That must satisfy, though he is in this Case too much a Party, to be a Judge. _These_ Criticks _are led themselves into Absurdities, by not considering, That there is sometimes a greater Judgement shewn in deviating from the Rules of Art, than adhering to them_. The Word _sometimes_ here would make every right Argument wrong, and every Truth Falsehood, because _sometimes_ there may be an Exception to a general Rule. Why, does he not tell us, wherein himself, or any one else shewed his Judgement in deviating from the Rules of Art? The _Critical Smatterers_ do not charge him in those Places where Judgement was shewn in such deviating, but where the Want of Judgement appeared in it. I shall have occasion to touch this Subject a little elsewhere; though I hope what I have said here, is enough to prove that just _Criticisms_ are not the Productions of Ignorance and Envy, as the _Spectator_ intimates; but that they are, on the contrary, useful and necessary to be a Check on the greatest Genius's, who want the Rein much more than the Spur; and what, in a few Years, would become of all good Writing, if those great Genius's could impose their very Blemishes on the World for the most shining Beauties?

The _Spectator_ gives us another Mark, by which we may discover a Critick, who has neither Taste nor Learning, and that is, _He seldom ventures to praise any Passage in an Author, which has not been before received and applauded by the Publick_. If this Remark had been infallible and universal, it must have deprived the _Spectator_ himself of the two greatest Beauties in all his Quotations out of _Milton_ which are in every one's Mouth. The One in the sublime Kind in the Speech to the _Sun_.

_Oh then, that with surpassing Glory crown'd,
Look'st from thy sole Dominion like the God
Of this new World._--

The Other in the tender Kind. _Adam_ to _Eve_.

_Her Hand soft touching whisper'd thus, Awake
My Fairest, my espous'd, my best belov'd,
Heavens last, best Gift, my ever new Delight;
Awake._

which had before been a thousand Times repeated as the Perfection of _English_ Poetry, in their several Kinds. And the Author, who shall have occasion to quote them as such after the _Spectator_, will not discover his Want of Taste or Learning by it. Very just is his Observation, _A true Critick ought to dwell rather upon Excellencies than Imperfections, &c._ But as this has Relation chiefly to those Compositions which require Genius, Judgement and Eloquence; and consequently, cannot relate to Mr. _Echard_'s History of _England_, we shall now say no more of it.

That I may not be guilty of the Fault I blame in others, the neglecting of Beauties, and falling unmercifully upon the Blemishes of Authors. I must sincerely acknowledge, that it was not for Want of Will, that I did not mention what is beautiful in our Historian, but for Want of Opportunity. What Part of his Performance should I have applauded! Is it the _Design_! The Author does not himself pretend, that it is regular, if by _Design_ in _History_, we are to understand the _Plan_ as in _Poetry_: He will not deny, but that his Method is too much diversified, and too confused; sometimes it is _General History_, sometimes _Annals_, sometimes a _Diary_, sometimes _Biography_; all which he seems to think he has sufficiently provided against, by dividing the whole Work into _Sections_, and putting Pales between his Paragraphs. This Confusion will be easily pardoned by his Readers, there being hardly one in a Thousand that knows the Difference between _Biography_ and _History_, or between an _Annalist_ and an _Historian_; or who does not take _Buck_'s _Richard_ III, or _Cambden_'s Queen _Elizabeth_, to be as much of the historical Kind, as _Samuel Daniel_'s History of _England_, which is the only _English_ History that has the least Appearance of Uniformity and Regularity of Design.

_Ne Sutor ultra Crepidam_, is in nothing a more necessary Maxim, than in the Productions of the Mind. It is not because a Man can write a Sonnet, an Elegy, nay, an Ode, or a Dramatick Poem, that therefore he can succeed in Epick; though we in _England_ are apt to confound all Sorts of Poetry and Poets, and to think that there is but one and the same Genius necessary for all of them. Thus it is, that you often hear the Question in Company, which is the best Poet, _Virgil_ or _Horace_, _Milton_ or _Waller_, _Dryden_ or _Wycherley_, _Congreve_ or _Row_. It is the same Thing in History: If a Man is able to abridge a Dictionary, to collect and compile Memoirs; in a Word, if he can put a Tale together, he is immediately an Historian, though Story-telling and History are as different as a _Madrigal_ and a Pindarick _Ode_.

History is designed to instruct Mankind by Example, to shew what Men were by what they did, and from particular Instances to form general Lessons in all the various Stations of Life; and our Historian has so far a just Conception of its Dignity and Use, that he speaks of his own Performance as if he had formed a regular noble Design, with a regular and noble View, and executed it with equal Beauty and Perfection. Very great Talents are requisite to succeed in it, especially that of Judgement, to relate only what is worth relating, and to make proper Reflections upon Events for the Instruction of the Reader. _Nothing is more necessary for an Historian_, says _Pere Rapin_, _than Judgement: Nothing requires so much Sense, so much Reason, so much Wit, so much Wisdom, and other good Qualities, as History, to succeed in writing it; and above all,_ Un Heureux Naturel, _a happy Genius, which endowed with all these Qualifications, will not do without,_ Un Grand Commerce du Monde, _a great Knowledge of the World_. _Pere Bouhours_, whom Mr. _Addison_ thought the most judicious and penetrating of all the _French_ Criticks, has an admirable Remark on the Reflections of Historians, in his _Maniere de bien penser_. The _Historian ought to shine most in his Reflections: Nothing is so irregular as to reflect falsely on Events that are true_. He mentions a pleasant Instance of a _French_ Priest, who said in a Sermon, _The Heart of Man being of a triangular Figure, and the World of a round one; It is plain, that all worldly Greatness cannot fill the Heart of Man_. We have been told a thousand Times, that the _Presbyterians_ had a Quarrel with King _Charles_ the First, and that those who had a Quarrel with him, took him and cut off his Head. The Fact is true as to the Quarrel, but nothing can be more false, than that the _Presbyterians_ beheaded him. The Fact is true, that the Act of Toleration put a Stop to the Persecuting of Dissenters; but the Reflection from it, _That the Church was in Danger_, is false. If I would rifle the _Grand Rebellion_, and Mr. _Echard_'s History, I might have the Honour of being Author of a Folio too, by taking from them Examples of this Kind; and I cannot but think, if the Archdeacon had duely weighed the Difficulties inseparable from his Undertaking, the indispensable Duty of Sincerity and Truth, and the great Talents necessary for an Historian, he would have transferred the Work to another, not a Dealer in Records only, from whom one can expect nothing but the naked Facts without Form or Order, without Ornament, or even cloathing; very proper for Evidence in Tryals at Law, but too rude and unpolished for the Beauty and Elegance of History: Yet I am satisfied, there is not one Man in a Thousand in _England_, but thinks there are no Writers so fit to make Historians as your Record Keepers and Library Keepers, who are just as necessary in such Work as Masons and Carpenters are in Architecture, and no more in Comparison with the Architect, than the _Axe_ or the _Chissel_ are in Comparison with them. _An excellent Historian_, says Mons. _Pellisson_, Pref. to _Sar._ _ought to have a general Knowledge of the World and of Affairs, and a subtle and penetrating Wit, to distinguish the true Causes of humane Actions, from the Pretexts and Colours which are given them_. Thus our Historian should have distinguish'd Archbishop _Laud_'s natural Pride and Severity, from that Piety and Zeal which are the _Pretexts and Colours_ that are given them. He should also have distinguish'd the Pique and Partiality in the Grand Rebellion from Truth and Sincerity, which are the Pretexts and Colours. Again,

_Tacitus_, said he, wrote _Sine studio Partium & Ira_; if the same may be said of the two Historians in Question, I have done them much Wrong. The late Earl of _Shaftsbury_, in his Letter of _Enthusiasm_, has this Expression: _We have few modern Writers, who, like_ Xenophon _or_ Cicero, _can write their own Commentaries, and the raw Memoir Writings, and uninformed Pieces of modern Statesmen full of their own interested and private Views, will, in another Age, be of little Service to support their Memory or Name, since already the World begins to sicken with them_.

It is somewhat strange, that Mr. _Echard_ should not be so well acquainted with the Weakness of the vulgar Humour in _England_, as a Foreigner; who was so sensible of the Peoples Fondness to hear Stories, that he excuses those of a better Taste amongst them, who cannot relish such as relate to Ghosts, Devils, Prophecies, and the like, with which the Archdeacon's History abounds. The Author of the _Paris Journal des Sçavans_, speaking of _English_ History Writers, and their bringing in Prophecies and strange Stories, says, _Granting it to be true, it is not so much to be attributed to their Want of Skill, as to their Compliance with the Humour of the People, that attend too much to Prophecies, and are too much affected with Tales_; which Humour our Historian has rather indulged than discountenanced, and it must surely be for Want of Judgement, after the indulging them in it, had been so much exploded. The _French_ Historian _Maimbourg_ participates of the same Character, and his Zeal for the Church, could not procure him a better one abroad, than what was given him in _Italy_, that he was among Historians, what _Momus_ is among the Gods, _only to tell Tales_; with which the Vulgar are as well contented, as with Relations that are truly historical. But we should be as cautious of reading such Histories, as _Menage_ tells us he was of reading _Morreri_'s, for Fear we should remember them. _Collier_ knew better than _Menage_, and therefore translated _Morreri_'s three Folio's into _English_, as a rich Store for the Memories of his Countrymen.

Having so little Reason to commend the Historian for his _Design_, I should make him amends in the Sentiments, if there was the least Room for it. It is true, in History, if the Facts are fairly related, the Sentiments must be brought along with them, and the Author is not accountable for them as in Poetry: But if the Sentiments do not correspond with the Facts; if Meekness and Holiness are seated to give Judgement in the _High Commission_ and _Star Chamber_ Courts; if Piety is mounted on Horseback with the Lord High Treasurer's Staff in her Hand; if the most noble Characters are ascribed to Persons engaged in the most unjustifiable Actions, we may depend upon it, these Persons, either did not think, or did not act as they are represented, and consequently that the History is false and vicious: The Historians Reflections upon Events are entirely his own, and we shall see in the following Pages, how wise and how weighty they are: But as they bear all on one Side, like an ill ballasted Ship, it is much, if in the Course of a few Years, it does not overset the History.

There is no greater Vice in Historians, than poor and common Reflections. The Poverty of the Archdeacon's appears in the _After Wit_, which makes a good Part of them; and the _Vulgarisms_, which will be further explain'd as Occasions often.

Indeed we do not enough acquaint ourselves in _England_, with what Father _Bouhours_ calls the _Manner of Right Thinking_, in his Treatise before mentioned; which _Fontenelle_ recommends as one of the most agreeable and useful Books in the _French_ Tongue: We have nothing like it in _English_, or in any other Language antient or modern, Wit and Humour, Wit and good Sense, Wit and Wisdom, Wit and Reason, Wit and Craft; nay, Wit and Philosophy, are with us almost the same things. How often have I heard it said, there is a great Deal of Wit in _Homer_, a great Deal of Humour in _Virgil_. We take all Thoughts in the Gross; the Sublime, the Grand, the Noble, the Pretty, the Agreeable, the Fine, the Delicate, are all alike witty with us; and the Vulgar are ignorant of all other Distinction, but that of a _Jest_ and a _Bull_. Sir _Samuel Garth_, who was extreamly fond of Father _Bouhours_'s Treatise, did often wish that it was translated, and the Examples the _French_ Critick takes from _Greek_, _Latin_, _Italian_, _Spanish_ and _French_ Authors, not to be turned into _English_, but _English_ Examples to be put instead of them. I am satisfied nothing would be of more Advantage towards the Refinement of our Manner, both of Thinking and Writing. I know the Undertaking would be very difficult, and the greatest Part of the Difficulty be to preserve the Spirit and Turn of Thought in the _English_ Examples, to make it answer Father _Bouhours_'s Remarks. Who is there, that does not take a sublime Thought, a noble Thought, a grand Thought, to be synonymous Terms, though they differ from one another, almost as much as from the Agreeable and the Delicate. I am my self afraid to attempt any Thing like Examples of Kinds, and probably my Conceptions of them may be wrong; what they are I shall offer them to the Reader, with the Caution and Submission which becomes me in a Matter so intricate and nice.

The first Example of the _Sublime_ is so well known, that if there was any other so good in any other Author, I should not have made use of it. It is in the 7th Chapter of _Longinus_. We will not borrow it from _Boileau_, because we are forbidden by the _Spectator_ to make Use of a Quotation which has been made Use of before. Dr. _Gregory_, in the Preface to his Works, printed about sixty Years ago, at what Time _Boileau_ had not thought of translating _Longinus_, writes thus: Dionysius Longinus, _one that knew what belonged to Expression_; having first of all cast a Scorn upon his _Homer_. The Translator does not dwell much upon this, _says_ [Greek: Tôn Ioudaiôn thesmothetês] _that the Law-givers of the Jews_, [Greek: Oych ho tychôn anêr], _no ordinary Man, was in the Right when he brought in his God_, saying, [Greek: Genesthô phôs, kai egeneto]

_Let there be Light,
And there was Light._

But least it may be said, the _Spectator_ has entered a Caveat against my using any Quotation, which he or any one else had used, I shall add another Instance of the Sublime taken out of the same divine Book the Bible, that has not been blown upon:

_He spake,
And it was:
He commanded,
And it stood firm._

The whole _Psalm_ xxxiiid is full of the _Sublime_:

_By the Word of the Lord were the Mountains made,
And all the Host of them by the Breath of his Mouth._

What in all profane Learning comes up to the _Sublime_ in the xxxviiith Chapter of _Job_, where the Almighty is introduced speaking to him out of the Whirlwind:

_Gird up thy Loins like a Man, for I will demand of thee.
Where wast thou when I laid the Foundations of the Earth?
Declare, If thou hast Understanding.
Who laid the Measures thereof?
Who hath stretched the Line upon it?
Whereupon are the Foundations thereof fastened?_ or,
_Who laid the Corner Stone?
When the Morning Stars sang, and the Sons of God shouted for Joy!_

Happily imitated by _Milton_.

--------_Up he rode,
Follow'd with Acclamations, and the Sound
Symphonious of ten thousand Harps, that tuned
Angelick Harmonies, the Earth, the Air
Resounding. Thou rememberest; for thou heardest
The Heavens, and all the Constellations ring:
The Planets in their Stations listening stood,
While the bright Pomp ascended jubilant.
Open ye everlasting Gates: They sung,
Open ye Heavens, your living Doors; Let in
The great Creator from his Work returned
Magnificent, his Six Days Work, a World._

Of the sublime Kind is the Ode in the _Spectator_, Nº 465; being a Paraphrase on that of the _Psalmist_. _The Heavens declare_:

_The spacious Firmament on high,
With all the blue Ethereal Sky;
And spangled Heavens, a shining Frame,
Their great Original proclaim._

Some very scrupulous Persons may be apt to object against the third Line as an Anteclimax, the _spangled Heavens_ having much more Lustre than _shining Frame_. The following _Stanza_ is extreamly sublime:

_What tho' in solemn Silence all
Move round the dark terrestrial Ball;
What tho', nor real Voice, nor Sound
Amid their radiant Orbs be found,
In Reason's Ear they all rejoice,
And utter forth a glorious Voice;
For ever singing as they shine,
The Hand that made me is divine._

I cannot omit here some Lines of Mr. _Waller_'s upon the Holy Scriptures, where there is more of the Sublime than in all other Books whatsoever.

_The_ Græcian _Muse has all their gods surviv'd,
Nor_ Jove _at us, nor_ Phoebus _is arriv'd;
Frail Deities, which first the Poets made,
And then invok'd to give their Fancies Aid.
Yet, if they still divert us with their Rage,
What may be hop'd for in a better Age,
When not from_ Helicon_'s imagin'd Spring,
But sacred Writ we borrow what we sing?
This with the Fabrick of the World begun
Elder than Light, and shall out-last the Sun._

There are not ten finer Verses together in Mr. _Waller_'s Poems, yet he wrote them when he was above fourscore Years old.

Are not these two Verses of a Manuscript Poem in the sublime Kind? the young Author, a Lad at _Eaton_ School, wrote it on the Birth of his Royal Highness the Duke of _Cumberland_:

_Gods how he springs like Whirlwinds charg'd with Fire,
He lays War waste, and Makes the World retire._

And these Verses out of _Tamerlane_:

_The dreadful Business of the War is over,
And Slaughter, that from yester Morn till Even,
With Gyant Steps past striding o'er the Field
Besmear'd, and horrid with the Blood of Nations,
Now weary sits among the mangled Heaps,
And slumbers o'er her Prey._

I cou'd easily fill many Volumes of Quotations out of the Antients and Moderns, in all the Kinds of Thinking; but as I am doubtful of the Success of my Attempt, so the Fewer I insert, the Less I shall offend.

The _French_ perhaps have been a little too scrupulous and exact in dividing the _Noble_ and the _Grand_ in the Manner of Thinking. However, as to the Noble, let us see whether this Passage borrow'd of Scripture by _Milton_, will not serve for an Instance:

_All Night he will pursue, but his Approach,
Darkness defends between till Morning Watch,
Then thro' the fiery Pillar and the Cloud,
God looking forth will trouble all his Host,
And craze their Chariot Wheels; when, by Command,_
Moses _once more, his potent Rod erects
Over the Sea: The Sea his Rod obeys
On their embattled Ranks, the Waves return,
And overwhelm their War._

There would be no End of it, if one should go about to enumerate such Instances as these out of _Milton_. His Poem of _Paradise lost_ is so full of them, that almost out of one Book one might collect as many such noble Passages, as out of all the _Æneis_; and I would add the _Ilias_ too, if I understood _Greek_ half so well as the Translator.

Among the many Sketches of the glorious Character of King _William_ in that of _Tamerlane_, Mr. _Row_ has this, which I take to be a very noble Image:

_No Lust of Rule, the common Vice of Kings;
No furious Zeal inspir'd by hot-brain'd Priests:
Ill hid beneath Religions specious Name,
E'er drew his temp'rate Courage to the Field.
But to redress an injur'd Peoples Wrongs,
To save the weak One from the strong Oppressour
Is all his End of War; and when he draws
The Sword to punish, like relenting Heav'n,
He seems unwilling to deface Mankind._

The Opposition in the following Passage, carries with it its own Application:

--------_As oft regardless
Of plighted Faith, with most unkingly Baseness
Without a War proclaim'd, or Cause pretended,
He has t'ane Advantage of their absent Arms
To waste with Sword and Fire their fruitful Fields,
Like some accursed Fiend, who 'scap'd from Hell,
Poisons the balmy Air thro' which he flies,
He blasts the bearded Corn, and loaded Branches,
The lab'ring Hind's best Hopes, and marks his Way with Ruin._

Is there not something noble in what Mr. _Waller_ says to the Duke of _Monmouth_, at his Return from suppressing a Rebellion in _Scotland_:

_But seeing Envy like the Sun does beat,
With scorching Rays, on all that's high and great,
This, ill requited_ Monmouth, _is the Bough
The Muses send to shade thy conqu'ring Brow;
Lampoons like Squibs may make a present Blaze,
But Time and Thunder pay Respect to Bays._

I hope I may make Use of Part of Mr. _Addison_'s Translation of the _Justum & Tenacem_ of _Horace_. The Translator having done me the Honour to render it in _English_ at my Request:

_The Man resolv'd and steady to his Trust,
Inflexible to Ill, and obstinately just;
May the rude Rabble's Insolence despise
Their senseless Clamours, and tumultuous Cries.
The Tyrant's Fierceness he beguiles.
And the stern Brow, and the harsh Voice defies,
And with superiour Greatness smiles._

Again,

_Should the whole Frame of Nature round him break
In Ruin and Confusion hurl'd,
He unconcern'd would hear the mighty Crack,
And stand secure amidst a falling World._

Si fractus illabatur Orbis,
Impavidum ferient Ruinæ.

Is not this noble Thought the Original of that which ends the noted _Siloloquy_ of _Cato_:

_The Soul secure in his Resistance smiles
At the drawn Dagger, and defies its Point:
The Stars shall fade away, the Sun himself
Grow dim with Age, and Nature sink in Years?
But thou shalt flourish in immortal Youth,
Unhurt amidst the War of Elements,
The Wrecks of Matter, and the Crush of Worlds._

The two Verses quoted out of _Horace_:

Si fractus, _&c._

are not so well imitated by the Gentleman that turned _Cato_'s _Siloloquy_ into _Latin_, as to defy a Comparison;

Orbesque fractis ingerentur orbibus
Illæsa tu sedebis extra fragmina

But not to be always running back to the Antients, let us have Recourse to the Moderns, particularly _Quillet_, and we shall find something in this Kind of Thinking. _Tons. Callip._ p. 72.

_As far as thou may'st Nature's Depths explore
Still inexhaustible, thou find'st the Store;
Thee let the Order she observes suffice,
What Laws controul our Earth, and what the Skies.
Mark how a thousand starry Orbs on high
Around the Void with equal Motion fly;
Mark how the huge Machine one Order keeps,
And how the Sun th' Etherial Champian sweeps.
Both Earth and Air with genial Heat he warms,
Gives ev'ry Grace, and every Beauty forms;
Whether around the lazy Globe he rolls.
Or Earth is whirl'd about him on her Poles;
God is the Mover, God the living Soul,
That made, that acts, that animates the Whole.
Hence with thy Atoms, Epicurus; hence:
Was all this wond'rous Frame the Sport of Chance!
Of Solids, they, 'tis true, the Matter make,
Can Matter from itself its Figure take!
Can the bright Order in the World we see,
The blind Effect of wanton Fortune be!
Did jumbling Atoms form the various Kind
Of Beings, or did one Almighty Mind?
Guess what you will, you must at last resort
To a first Cause, and not to Chance's Sport.
This Cause is God--------_

I must not omit this _Noble_ Thought of _Milton_'s:

_Then crown'd, again their golden Harps, they took
Harps ever tun'd, that glitt'ring by their Side
Like Quivers hung, and with Preamble sweet
Of charming Symphony, they introduce
The sacred Song, and waken Raptures high:
No one exempt, no Voice but well cou'd joyn
Melodious Part, such Concord is in Heav'n._

Having mention'd so many noble Thoughts in Verse, I shall conclude this Article, with a very plain but very noble one in Prose, the Saying of _Leonidas_ to _Xerxes_: _If you had not been too powerful and too happy, you might have been an honest Man._

Tho' it is a very hard Matter to distinguish the _Grand_ from the _Noble_ in the Manner of Thinking, yet we shall endeavour it by the following Examples; and sure nothing can be more _Grand_, than the Saying of _Alexander the Great_, to the Greatest of his Captains _Parmenio_, _Darius_, King of _Persia_, having offer'd the _Macedonian_ Monarch half _Asia_ in Marriage with his Daughter _Statira_. _As for me_, says _Parmenio_, _if I were_ Alexander, _I would accept of these Offers_: _And so would I_, reply'd that Prince, _If I were_ Parmenio. But why should we be always dealing in _Heroicks_, and running back into Antiquity to borrow Example from the Conquerors of the World. Why may not we propose one in the lowest Life, which will at the same Time prove, that the Excellencies of both Thought and Expression are in Nature, and not in the Rules of Art only. A Sergeant of the Guards, _What a terrible Fall is this, from_ Alexander the Great, _to a Sergeant of the Guards!_ who was in the last Attack upon the Castle of _Namur_ in King _William_'s War, after he had fir'd his Grenades at the Enemy behind the Palisadoes, leapt over them, and had been slaughter'd, had not a _French_ Officer prevented it. The Sergeant being a Prisoner in the Castle was sent for by the Governour Count _Guiscard_, and the Mareschal _de Boufflers_. The Latter demanding how he durst attempt to leap the Palisadoes with the Enemy behind them, when he could hardly have done it had there been none? _Perhaps, Sir, I might not,_ reply'd the brave _English_ Soldier, _but there is nothing too difficult for me to come at my Enemy._ A Saying worthy of _Alexander_ or _Cæsar_, of _Marlborough_ or _Eugene_.

I have seen something like these Verses of Mr. _Waller_'s, quoted as in the grand Way of Thinking:

_Great_ Maro _could no greater Tempest feign,
When the loud Winds usurping on the Main,
For angry_ Juno _labour'd to destroy
The hated Relicks of confounded_ Troy.

But the Image, as grand as it is, does not seem to be so noble as the Instances before-mentioned; there is too much Terrour in it to participate of that Kind of Thought, which is not confident with what is terrible.

I cannot help thinking there is something _Grand_ in this _Epitaph_:

_Underneath this Marble Hearse,
Lies the Subject of all Verse;_
Sidney_'s Sister,_ Pembroke_'s Mother,
Death 'ere thou hast kill'd another,
Fair and learn'd, and good as she,
Time shall throw a Dart at thee._

To descend to the lower Kinds, we meet with what Father _Bouhours_ calls _Pensées Jolliées_ pretty Thoughts; and we have of that Kind too in _English_, perhaps to a greater Degree of Excellence, than is to be found in any other Language; especially those Verses in the _Spectator_, which are said there to be Originals, as indeed they are, and inimitable. I question whether a Poet might not as easily imitate _Milton_ or _Butler_. There are ten _Stanza_'s, and they all of a like pretty, and natural Turn with the

IIId STANZA.

_The Fountain that wont to run sweetly along,
And dance to soft Murmurs the Pebbles among;
Thou know'st little Cupid, if_ Phoebe _was there,
'Twere Pleasure to look at, 'twere Musick to hear:
But now she is absent I walk by its Side,
And still as it murmurs do nothing but chide;
Must you be so chearful, while I go in Pain,
Peace there with your Bubbling, and hear me complain._

How the _French_ may compare with us, as to this _pretty_ Manner, let us see by a Comparison. _Menage_ says, that this _Triolet_, as he calls it, a Sort of low Poetry where one or two Verses are repeated three Times, was the King of _Triolet_'s, and written by the famous Mons. _Ranchin_:

Le premier Jour de May
Fut le plus Heureux de ma Vie,
Le beau Design que je formay
Le premier Jour de May.

_The first Day of the Month of_ May
_Was the Happiest of my Life,
Ah the fair Design I form'd
The first Day if the Month of_ May.
_Then saw you, then I lov'd,
If you like this fair Design,
The first Day of the Month of_ May
_Was the Happiest of my Life._

Now let us see what an _English_ Poet has said on the First of _May_; and tho' there is in it hardly any Thing but Words, and those Words rustick to Affectation; yet they are _Prettiness_ itself compared to Mons. _Ranchin_'s Guardian, Nº 124: