_SIR,_
By what I have shewn in the preceding Letters, it sufficiently appears
that _Virgil_ and _Milton_ had good reason to begin with _Hinc canere
incipiam_. _Nunc te Bacche canam._ _Arma Virumque cano._ _Sing
Heavenly Muse._ Their Verse is all _Musick_, and that is the reason
why their Poems please, though ever so often read: And all Poetry that
is not attended with Harmony, is properly speaking no Poetry at all.
Let the Sense be ever so fine, if the _Verse_ is not _melodious_, the
Reader will undoubtedly find himself soon overtaken with Drowsiness.
But what I chiefly hope I have made out, is, that _Rhyme_ does not owe
its Original to _Druids_, or to _dreaming Monks_, since it is certain
there is more _Rhyme_ in _Virgil_, than there can be in any _English_
Translation of his Works. _English_ Verse never admits but of two
Syllables that Rhyme in two Lines. But in _Virgil_, it is not easy to
tell how many Rhymes there are in a single Line; as for Example,
"_O nimium Coelo, & pelago confise sereno,_
"_Et sola in siccâ secum spatiatur arenâ._
And the like. But what would you say, if I was to observe to you all
that _Erythræus_ has writ of the Rhyme _Cum intervallo, & sine
intervallo_ in _Virgil_? Of the Rhyme _sine intervallo_ there are four
Examples in the two first Lines of the _Æneid_, namely, in the first,
_no_--_tro_, and _qui_--_pri_. In the second, _to_--_pro_, and _que_--
_ve_.
"_Arma virumque can[=o], tr[=o]jæ qu[=i] pr[=i]mus ab oris Italiam,
fat[=o] pr[=o]fugus, Lavinaqu[=e] v[=e]nit._--
But for this particular, and the other just mentioned, I refer you to
_Erythræus_ himself, if you would be fully instructed on this Subject.
The Conclusion of this whole Matter is this: Rhyme is certainly one of
the chief Ornaments of _Latin_ Verse, even of _Virgil_'s Verse: Most
of his wonderful, harmonious Paragraphs are concluded with a full,
strong, plain Rhyme: And if this is the Case; if _Virgil_'s Verse
would lose one of its chief Ornaments by being stript of Rhyme, What
would _English_ Verse do without it? Those learned Persons who in
their Writings have treated Rhyme only as a needless _Gingle_, had not
fully considered all that could be said on this Subject: _Rhyme_, as I
have observed once before, has many Enemies because of its Difficulty,
when accompanied with all the other necessary Arts of Versification.
It is a particular Talent which very few are blessed with, and ought
to be esteemed accordingly: But if we give way to the Disuse of it,
and even suffer Blank Verse to be brought in Competition with it,
Poetry will in a short time be lost in _England_, as it has been long
since in _Italy_, and, if I mistake not, from this very Cause. They
have Blank-vers'd _Homer_, _Virgil_, and _Milton_, and I believe all
the _Classick Poets_: And if we follow their Example in giving
Applause to this kind of Verse, we must expect the same Consequences.
We should be the more to blame in this respect, because we have lately
had so many excellent Writers of proper Verse amongst us, as
_Addison_, _Rowe_, _Prior_, and many others; and have now Mr. _Pope_,
Mr. _Pit_, and some whom I do not just now recollect.
_Milton_, as I observ'd already, is never to be mention'd as an
Example in favour of Blank-Verse: To supply the Want of _Rhyme_ in
him, there are so many Arts of Verse, such Variety of Melody, that it
would require no small Volume to point them out.
I have nothing more to add, but that it is a very surprizing thing,
that _Milton_ ever undertook to write in such a _Stile_ as he has made
use of, and yet more surprizing that he should be read by all sorts of
People, considering that the _Stile_ is more properly _Latin_ or
_Greek_ than _English_.
I believe both these Things arise from the same Cause, which to me
seems to be the _English Bible_; at least, as to the latter, it cannot
be from any thing else. That _Milton_ acquir'd his _Stile_ from the
_Common Bible_, is not at all improbable, though he understood the
Original. It is certain he was entirely conversant with the _Bible_,
and, in all Probability frequently made use of the _English_
Translation. Now this Translation is, by Great Providence, (give me
leave to call it so) adapted to the _Latin and Greek Collocation_, or
Arrangement of Words; that is, the Words are placed in the _English_
as they stand in those Languages, which, perhaps, you may not have so
much attended to but that you may be glad to see some Examples of what
I am speaking of.
Psalm v. 3. _My Voice shalt thou hear in the Morning, O Lord; in the
Morning will I direct Prayer unto thee, and will look up._
Matthew xiii. 1. _The same Day went Jesus out of the House, and sat
by the Sea-side._
Matthew xxvii. 32. _And as they came out, they found a Man of_
Cyrene, Simon _by Name_: Him _they compelled to bear his Cross_.
John ii. 11. _This Beginning of Miracles did_ Jesus _in_ Cana _of_
Galilee.
John xii. 16. _These things understood not his Disciples at the
first._
John viii. 44. _Ye are of your Father the Devil, and the Lusts of
your Father will ye do._
"_Verbo sensum cludere, multo, si compositio patiatur, optimum est.
In Verbis enim Sermonis vis inest._"
Quintil.
By these Passages, and innumerable others that might be produc'd, it
appears that the _English Bible_ is translated in such a manner as I
have mentioned above: And as we see many Places in the _Paradise
Lost_, which are exactly taken from this Translation, Why may we not
conclude _Milton_ acquir'd much of his Stile from this Book? I can
give an Instance of another very learned Person, who certainly learnt
his way of Writing from it. I mean the late Dr. _Clarke_. Nothing can
be more clear than his _Stile_, and yet nothing can be more like the
_Greek_ or _Latin_, agreeably to the _English Bible_. I beg leave to
produce one Instance from his _Exposition of the Church Catechism_.
"_Next after the Creed are in natural Order plac'd the Ten
Commandments._
Is there any thing in _Demosthenes_ or _Tully_ more inverted than this
Passage? And yet the meanest Persons understand it, and are not at all
shock'd at it; and this cannot possibly, with respect to them, proceed
from any thing else, but their having been from their Childhood
accustomed to this Language in the _Bible_, and their still continuing
frequently to hear it in the publick Offices of the Church, and
elsewhere: From whence I am apt to think Mr. _Pope_'s Opinion is not
to be subscrib'd to, when he says,
"_And what now_ Chaucer _is, shall_ Dryden _be_."
It did not occur to that ingenious Writer, that the State of the
_English_ Language is very different at this time from what it was in
_Chaucer_'s Days: It was then in its Infancy: And even _the publick
Worship of God was in a foreign Tongue_, a thing as fatal to the
_Language_ of any Country, as to _Religion_ itself. But now we have
all that Service in the vernacular Tongue; and besides that, the
_Bible_ in _English_, which may be properly called the _Standard_ of
our Language: For this Book contains a Variety of every kind of
_Stile_, the _Poetick_, the _Historick_, the _Narrative_, and all
framed after the manner of the most learned Tongues. So that whilst
this _Book_ continues to be as publickly used among us as it is at
present, the _English_ Language cannot receive any great Alteration;
but all sorts of learned Men may write, either in Verse or Prose, in
the most learned manner in their native Tongue, and at the same time
be perfectly understood by the common People. Indeed, if ever we
should be so unhappy as to be depriv'd of the _publick Use_ of that
_Book_, all that came with it, must go with it; and then Farewel the
_English Language_, Farewel _Milton_, Farewel _Learning_, and Farewel
all that distinguishes Man from Beasts.
Decemb. 9. 1736.
_I am_, SIR, _&c._
_FINIS._
[Transcriber's Notes:
Several sequential lines of poetry had opening quotes; these have been
removed for clarity.
Several lines have no closing quotes. These have not been corrected.