Part 2

But among all the Species, or Kinds of Poetry; That which is distinguished by the Name of Epic, or Heroic, is beyond comparison the Noblest, and most Excellent. _An Heroic Poem, truly such, is undoubtedly the greatest Work which the Soul of Man is capable to perform._ These are the first Words of Mr. _Dryden_'s admirable Dedication of his _English Æneis_ to the present Duke of _Buckingham_: They are translated indeed from Monsieur _Rapin_; and are likewise the first Words of his Comparison between _Homer_ and _Virgil_.[3] "The Design of it (continues Mr. _Dryden_) is to form the Mind to Heroic Virtue by Example; 'Tis convey'd in Verse, that it may delight, while it instructs; The Action of it is always One, Entire, and Great. The least, and most trivial Episodes, or Under-Actions, which are interwoven in it, are Parts either necessary, or convenient; that no others can be imagined more suitable to the place in which they are. There is Nothing to be left void in a firm Building; even the Cavities ought not to be filled with Rubbish, which is of a perishable Kind, destructive of the Strength: But with Brick, or Stone, tho' of less pieces, yet of the same Nature, and fitted to the Cranies. Even the least Portions of them must be of the Epic kind; All Things must be Grave, Majestical, and Sublime: Nothing of a foreign Nature, like the trifling Novels, which _Ariosto_,[4] and others have inserted in their Poems. By which the Reader is misled into another sort of Pleasure, opposite to That which is designed in an Epic Poem. One raises the Soul, and hardens it to Virtue; the other softens it again, and unbends it into Vice." But what makes this Kind of Poem preferable to all others, is, that it virtually contains and involves them: I mean their Excellencies and Perfections, besides That which is proper, and peculiar to it self. This likewise is observed by Mr. _Rapin_ in the place above-cited: And by this Assertion I do not contradict what I have cited from Mr. _Dryden_; which I am supposed to approve, while I transcribe it. For besides that he does not speak, as I do, of the different _Turns_, and _Modifications_ of _Thinking_, and _Writing_, but of _trifling Episodes_, or _Under-Actions_, which he says are improper for this sort of Poetry, and in which I entirely agree with him; I say, besides This, I do not affirm that an Ode, or an Elegy, for example, can with propriety be _actually_, and _formally_ inserted in an Heroic Poem; But only that the regular Luxuriancy, and noble Excursions of _That_, and the pathetical and tender Complainings of _This_, are not always forreign to the Nature of an Epic Subject, but are sometimes very properly introduced to adorn it. The same may be said of the Poignancy of Satyr; and the natural Images of ordinary Life in Comedy. It is one Thing to say, that an Heroic Poem virtually includes These; and another, that it actually puts them into Practice, or shews them at large in their proper Forms, and Dresses. I do not mention Tragedy; because That is so nearly ally'd to Heroic Poetry, that there is no Dispute or Question concerning it. An Epic Poem then is the same to all the other Kinds of Poetry, as the _Primum Mobile_ is to the System of the Universe, according to the Scheme of the ancient Astronomy: That great Orb including all the heavenly Bodies in it's Circumference, and whirling them round with it's own Motion. And then the Soul of the Poet, or rather of Poetry, informing this mighty, and regular Machine, and diffusing Life and Spirit thro' the whole Frame, resembles that _Anima Mundi_, that Soul of the World, according to the _Platonic_, and _Pythagorean_ Philosophy, thus admirably represented in the Sixth _Æneid_:

_Principio cœlum, ac terras, camposque liquentes, Lucentemque globum Lunæ, Titaniaque astra Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus Mens agitat molem, & magno se corpore miscet._

Here we have at once the Soul of Poetry, and the Soul of the World: The one _exerted_, while the other is _described_. Whether there be any such Thing as the Last or not, we certainly perceive the First; and however That be, Nothing, in reality, can give us a justly resembling Idea of the Fabrick of an Heroic Poem; but That, which alone is superiour to it, the Fabrick of the Universe.

I speak of an Heroic Poem, properly so called; for I know of but Three, or Four, which deserve the Glory of That Title. And it's transcendent Excellence is doubtless the Reason, why so few have attempted a Work of this Nature; and fewer have succeeded in such their Attempts. _Homer_ arose like Light at the Creation; and shone upon the World, which (at least so far as we know) was, with respect to that kind of Light, in total Darkness, before his Appearing. Such was the Fire, and Vivacity of his Spirit; the Vastness, and Fecundity of his Invention; the Majesty, and Sublimity of his Thoughts, and Expressions; that, notwithstanding his Errours and Defects, which must be acknowledged, his controuling, and over-bearing Genius demanded those prodigious Honours, which in all Ages have been justly paid him. I say, notwithstanding his Errours and Defects: for it would have been strange indeed, had he been chargeable with None; or had he left no room to be refined, and improved upon by any Successour.

This was abundantly performed by _Virgil_; whose _Æneis_ is therefore only not perfect, because it did not receive his last Hand. Tho', even as it now is, it comes the nearest to Perfection of any Heroic Poem; and indeed of any Poem whatsoever, except another of his Own: I mean his _Georgicks_; which I look upon to be the most Consummate of all human Compositions: It's Author for Genius and Judgment, for Nature and Art, joined together, and taken one with another, being the greatest, and best of all human Writers. How little Truth soever there may be in the Prodigies which are said to have attended his Birth; certain it is, that a Prodigy was then born; for He himself was such: And when God made That Man, He seems to have design'd to shew the World how far the Powers of mere human Nature can go, and how much they are capable of performing. The Bent of his Mind was turned to Thought, and Learning in general; and to Poetry, and Philosophy in particular. Which we are assured of not only from the Spirit and Genius of his Works; but from the express Account which he gives of himself, in Those sweet Lines of the second _Georgick_:

_Me vero primum dulces ante omnia Musæ (Quarum sacra fero, ingenti perculsus amore) Accipiant, cœlique vias, & sydera monstrent. Defectus solis varios, lunæque labores; Unde tremor Terris, quâ vi maria alta tumescant Objicibus ruptis, rursusque in seipsa residant. Quid tantum oceano properent se tingere soles Hyberni, vel quæ tardis mora noctibus obstet._

It is true, he here only tells us of his Inclination to Natural Philosophy; but then he tells it us in Poetry: As few Things are more nearly related.

For his Temper, and Constitution; if We will believe Mr. _Dryden_[5], it was Phlegmatick, and Melancholick: As _Homer_'s was Sanguine, and Cholerick, and This, he says, is the Reason of the different Spirit, which appears in the Writings of those two great Authors. I make no doubt, but that _Virgil_, in his _natural Disposition, as a Man_, was rather Melancholick; as, I believe, most learned, and contemplative Men ever were, and ever will be. And therefore how does he breath the very Soul of a Poet, and of a Philosopher; when in the Verses immediately following Those above-cited, he thus expresses the Thoughtfulness of both those Tempers, as well as the peculiar Modesty of his Own!

_Sin has nè possim naturæ accedere partes Frigidus obstiterit circum præcordia sanguis; Rura mihi, & rigui placeant in vallibus amnes, Flumina amem, silvasque inglorius.----_

Methinks, I _see_ him, while I read Those Verses; I am sure I _feel_ him. How delightful must it be, to enjoy so sweet a Retirement! What a Glory, to be so inglorious! This, I say, is generally the Natural Make of learned, and ingenious Men; and _Homer_ himself, notwithstanding his Poetical Fire, was in all probability of the same Complexion. But if we consider _Virgil as a Poet_; I hope to make it appear, before I have finished This Preface, that, _as such_, he wanted neither the Sanguine, nor the Cholerick; tho' at the same time I acknowledge a Man's _natural Temper_ will _very much incline_ him to one way of Thinking, and Writing, more than to another.

But tho' his _Genius_ was thus perfect; yet I take his _most distinguishing_ Character to be the incomparable _Accuracy_ of his _Judgment_; and particularly his elegant, and exquisite _Brevity_. He is never luxuriant, never says any thing in vain: _We admire Others_ (says Monsieur _Rapin_) _for what they say; but we admire_ Virgil, _for what he does not say_: And indeed his very Silence is expressive, and even his Omissions are Beauties. Yet is his Brevity neither _dry_, nor _obscure_; so far otherwise, that he is both the _fullest_, and the _clearest_ Writer in the World. He always, says enough, but never too much: And This is to be observed in him, as well when he insists upon a Thing, as when he slightly passes it over, when his Stile is long, and flowing, as when it is short, and concise; in This Sense, he is brief, even where he enlarges; and while he rolls like a Torrent, he has nothing frothy, or redundant. So that to Him, of all Mankind, are Those famous Verses of Sir _John Denham_ most particularly applicable:

_Tho' deep, yet clear; tho' gentle, yet not dull; Strong, without Rage; without O'erflowing, full._

Meaning _Rage_ properly so called; not the _Poetical Fury_: For That He was very far from wanting; as will be seen in it's proper Place. His avoiding Redundancy therefore proceeded neither from Poverty, nor Parsimony; but from Elegancy, and Exactness. So correct is he in Those Parts of his Writings which are allowed to be finished; that I have often thought what a Treasure That Man would be possessed of (were such a Thing possible) who could procure the Filings of his Poems; and shew the World what _Virgil_ would _not_ shew it. The very Chippings of Those Diamonds would be more valuable than the richest Jewel of the _Indies_.

I have already said enough to involve my self in the now unavoidable Comparison between _Homer_, and _Virgil_; which has so much employ'd the Speculations of the Learned. Because it will be justly expected that I should endeavour at least to give some Reasons for my Assertions; or rather for my _Opinion_: For I desire that my _Assertions_ may all along be understood to imply no more. As to _Homer_, nothing can be farther from my Thoughts than to defraud that prodigious Man of his due Praise. I have before said a little of it; and (would the Limits of this Discourse permit) could with Pleasure enlarge upon that Subject. Many of his Faults, as they are called, are indeed no Faults; but only charged upon him by ignorant Pretenders to Criticism: Others, if they are really so, are not His, but are entirely to be imputed to the Manners and Customs of the Age in which he writ: And even those which are least justifiable are to be excused upon this single Consideration, that he was the first of his Species. No Science starts into Perfection at it's Birth: And it is amazing that the Works of this great Poet come so near it as they do. Thus as to himself: Then as to others; his Glory in Point of Precedency is uncontestable; he is the Father of Poets, and of Poetry; and _Virgil_ particularly has copy'd from him in a multitude of Instances. But after all, the Question is; Whether upon the whole, _Homer_'s or _Virgil_'s be the best Poems_, as we have them now; setting aside all _external Considerations_, relating to Times, and Customs; Inventing, and Borrowing; Precedency, and Succession; Master, and Scholar; and regarding only the _internal Advantages_, and _Disadvantages_, Beauties, and Faults of both; upon the Foundations of Nature, and Art, of Truth, and Reason. _Homer_'s Faults are to be excused: I am very glad of it; for I have an exceeding Honour, and Love for him. But still _They are Faults_: Has _Virgil_ so many? I mean too in Proportion, and allowing for the unequal Length of their Writings. _Virgil_ imitated _Homer_, and borrowed from him: But did he not _improve_, as well as _imitate_; and by borrowing, and adding to his own vast Fund what the other never parted with, grow richer than him from whom he so borrowed? In a word, did he not out of two very good Poems make a better than either of them, or than both of them put together? I am sensible it may be said on the other hand, that _Homer_ had the _Disadvantage_, as well as _Glory_ of being the First: He had no body to rely upon, but himself; whereas _Virgil_ had _Homer_'s Materials, besides his own. All this I acknowledge; nay at present, and for Argument's sake, let _Homer_'s be the _greater Glory_: Still is not _Virgil_'s the _best Poem_? For I agree that in these Comparisons we ought to make a Distinction between the _Man_, and the _Work_. Or if we must make the Comparison in the former respect; _Homer_ was _Virgil_'s Master, Father, what you please: But nothing is more common, than for the Scholar to excel the Master, and the Son the Father. I think we ought to lay aside the Prejudices of an undue Veneration for the _greatest Antiquity_, and argue only from _Reason_; and that not only in the Comparison of the Ancients with one another; but even in That of the Ancients with the Moderns. I have a very great Honour for the _Greeks_ and _Romans_; but 'tis because their Writings are generally _good_, not because they are _ancient_: And when we think they are otherwise than good, I cannot imagine why we should not say so; provided it be with Modesty, and with a due Deference to the Opinions of Those who differ from us, whether they be dead or living. The famous Dispute about Ancient and Modern Learning would, I believe, be soon determined; were it not for unreasonable Prejudices to each of Those Names respectively. The Ancients, _as such_, have the Advantage in This, that they ought to be honoured as the Inventers of most Arts and Sciences; but then the Moderns, _as such_, have the Advantage in This, that besides their own Strength and Sagacity, they have the Models of the Ancients to improve upon: And very strange it would be, if they should not improve in some things, as well as lose in others.

I shall give the particular Reasons for my Opinion of these two great Poets, before I finish: In the mean time, I hope the Reader will excuse my Rambling. I am very sensible that I shall not only differ in judgment from many Criticks of great Name, both Ancient and Modern; but that I am like to fall under the ready, and natural Censure of being prejudiced my self, while I warn against it in others. All I can say, is, that I have endeavoured to divest my self of it as much as possible; but cannot be positive that I am entirely free from it; being well aware that nothing in the World is more difficult. For I am sure I have followed _One_ Precept of my Lord _Roscommon_, in his excellent Essay on Translated Verse:

_Examine how your Humour is inclin'd, And which the ruling Passion of your Mind; Then seek a Poet who that way does bend, And chuse an Author, as you chuse a Friend._

And as this is _One_ Circumstance, which is like to make a Man succeed, as a _Translator_; so it is like to make him err, as a _Judge_. For this Sort of Friendship (like all others) will certainly incline us to be partial in favour of the Person whom we praise, or defend. It is in This, as in every thing else; the Affections will be apt to biass the Understanding; and doubtless a Man in a great measure judges This, or That way of Writing to be best, because it is most agreeable to his own natural Temper. Thus, for Example; One Man judges (as he calls it) _Horace_'s Satyrs to be the best; Another is for _Juvenal_'s: When, all this while, strictly speaking, they may not so much differ in _Judgment_, as _Inclination_: For each of them perhaps will allow Both to be best _in their Kind_; but the one is chiefly _delighted_ with this Kind, and the other with that; and _there_ is all the real Difference between them. And tho' this does not exactly parallel the present Case; the Poems of _Homer_ and _Virgil_ being more of the same Species, than the Satyrs of _Horace_ and _Juvenal_; yet it comes very near it: and the Word _Species_ will admit of more Distinction than is commonly imagined: These two Heroic Poets being very different in their _Turn_, and _Manner_ of Thinking, and Writing. But after all, there are in Nature and Reason certain Rules by which we are to judge in these Matters, as well as in others; and there are still such things as Truth and Falshood, notwithstanding Partiality and Prepossession. And this I can assure my Reader, I am not prejudiced in Behalf of my Author, by attempting to be his Translator; for I was of the same Opinion, before I had the least Thought of this daring Enterprize. However, I do not pretend to decide as a Judge, but only to argue as an Advocate; and a Man may be allowed to plead with Prejudice, tho' he always ought to determine without it: For it may do no Mischief at the Bar, tho it be intolerable upon the Bench. But that my Reader may not be misguided by it, upon a Supposition that I am; I desire him to consider, that as I differ from some great Criticks, so I have the Authority of others to support my Opinion. I need not insist upon _Scaliger_, _Rapin_, and the incomparable Earl of _Roscommon_, whose Judgments upon this Point are very well known; but I will produce the Words of _Macrobius_, as collected by _la Cerda_[6], because he is commonly supposed to be in the other Interest. It is true, in the Comparison of particular Passages, he generally prefers _Homer_; yet he says, _Virgilius Homero ditior, locupletior, cultior, purior, clarior, fortior vi argumentorum, diligentior, observantior, uberior, pulchrior_. "_Virgil_ is richer, and fuller than _Homer_, neater, purer, clearer, stronger in the Force of his Arguments, more diligent, more observing, more copious, more beautiful." Thus, I say, he speaks, as he is represented by the above-mentioned Commentator; who only pretends to have picked up those Words from several scattered Passages in his Writings: Whether they are faithfully collected, or no (for he does not quote the particular Places) I have not had the Patience to examine, nor am I at all solicitous to know. It would be endless to cite _Scaliger_ upon this Subject; and besides, when I agree with him, it is rather in his Praise of _Virgil_, than in his Dispraise of _Homer_. I am far from being of his Opinion in some Particulars, and farther from approving of his Way and Manner of Proceeding. He inveighs against _Homer_ with as much Bitterness, as if he had a personal Quarrel with him; prosecutes him with all the Malice of Criticism, and that too sometimes false Criticism; and is upon the whole highly injurious to the Character of that wonderful Poet. Yet I cannot on the other side agree with Madam _Dacier_, who is at least even with _Scaliger_, by calling him the worst Critick in the World: _Le plus mechant Critique du Monde_, are the very Words she uses. On the contrary, I think, he is generally upon these Occasions rather Hyperbolical in his Expressions, than Erroneous in his Judgment. I am indeed amazed at the Confidence of Monsieur _de la Motte_, who treats _Homer_ with the greatest Freedom, and almost with Contempt, when at the same time he acknowledges he does not understand one Word of his Language. For my self, I have nothing to say, but that I have a Right to deliver my Sentiments, as well as another; and, to use the Words of that noble Poet and Critick above-mentioned,

_I speak my private, but impartial Sense, With Freedom, and I hope without Offence._

And here I cannot but observe, that tho' I am charmed with that fine Turn of his, after having remarked upon some supposed Faults in _Homer_;

_But I offend_; Virgil _begins to frown, And_ Horace _looks with Indignation down; My blushing Muse with conscious Fear retires, And whom they like implicitly admires:_

Tho', I say, I am charmed with the Elegancy of the Poet, the Modesty of the Critick, and the courtly Politeness of the Nobleman; and tho', as I shall observe hereafter, I am not of his Opinion, as to the Particulars he takes notice of, in the Verses preceding: yet I do not understand why, for disapproving of some things in _Homer_, he should apprehend either the Frowns of _Virgil_, or the Indignation of _Horace_. As _Virgil_ saw the Beauties of _Homer_, while he imitated them; he no less saw his Errours, while he avoided them. And as to _Horace_, that _Nil molitur inepte_, in one Place, and----_Quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus_, in another, must be regarded as Hyperboles; the one as an Auxesis, the other as a Meiôsis. Not but that upon the whole, he certainly admired _Homer_; nor would he have been the good Judge he was, if he had not. But as he was acquainted with the _Iliad_, and the _Odyssee_, so had he lived to have been as well acquainted with the _Æneis_; would he not have preferred the last, before both the first? Those who differ from me will say he _would not_; and 'tis altogether as easy for me to say he _would_. The same, and more, may be remarked of _Aristotle_; who was perfectly acquainted with _Homer_, but not at all with _Virgil_.

Invention, Fire, and Judgment, will, I think, include all the Requisites of an Epic Poem. The Action, the Fable, the Manners, the Compass, and Variety of Matter, seem to be properly comprehended under the First of these; yet not so as to exclude the Two last. For the particular Disposition of them all is an Act of the Judgment, as the first Creating of them is an Act of Invention; and Fire, tho' distinct from Invention, and Judgment, has a near Relation to them Both, as it assists the one, and is to be regulated by the other.