_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_: