It is an observation, no doubt, familiar to your Lordship, that Genius
is the offspring of Reason and Imagination properly moderated, and
co-operating with united influence to promote the discovery, or the
illustration of truth. Though it is certain that a separate province is
assigned to each of these faculties, yet it often becomes a matter of
the greatest difficulty to prevent them from making mutual
encroachments, and from leading to extremes which are the more
dangerous, because they are brought on by an imperceptible progression.
--Reason in every mind is an uniform power, and its appearance is
regular, and invariably permanent. When this Faculty therefore
predominates in the sphere of composition, sentiments will follow each
other in connected succession, the arguments employed to prove any point
will be just and forcible; the stability of a work will be principally
considered, and little regard will be payed to its exterior ornament.
Such a work however, though it may be valued by a few for its intrinsic
excellence, yet can never be productive of general improvement, as
attention can only be fixed by entertainment, and entertainment is
incompatible with unvaried uniformity[1].
[Footnote 1: Neque ipsa Ratio (says the elegant and sensible
Quintilian speaking of Eloquence) tam nos juvaret, nisi quæ
concepissemus mente, promere etiam loquendo possemus,--ita, ut non
modo orare, sed quod Pericli contigit fulgerare, ac tonare
videamur. Institut. Orat. Lib. XI. c. 16.]
On the contrary, when Imagination is permitted to bestow the graces of
ornament indiscriminately, we either find in the general that sentiments
are superficial, and thinly scattered through a work, or we are obliged
to search for them beneath a load of superfluous colouring. Such, my
Lord, is the appearance of the superior Faculties of the mind when they
are disunited from each other, or when either of them seems to be
remarkably predominant.
Your Lordship is too well acquainted with this subject not to have
observed, that in composition, as in common life, extremes, however
pernicious, are not always so distant from each other, as upon
superficial inspection we may be apt to conclude. Thus in the latter,
an obstinate adherence to particular opinions is contracted by observing
the consequences of volatility; indifference ariseth from despising the
softer feelings of tenderness; pride takes its origin from the disdain
of compliance; and the first step to avarice is the desire of avoiding
profusion. Inconveniencies similar to these are the consequences of
temerity in canvassing the subjects of speculation. The mind of an
Author receives an early bias from prepossession, and the dislike which
he conceives to a particular fault precipitates him at once to the
opposite extreme. For this reason perhaps it is, that young authors who
possess some degree of Genius, affect on all occasions a florid
manner[2], and clothe their sentiments in the dress of imagery. To them
nothing appears so disgusting as dry and lifeless uniformity; and
instead of pursuing a middle course betwixt the extremes of profusion
and sterility, they are only solicitous to shun that error of which
Prejudice hath shown the most distorted resemblance. It is indeed but
seldom, that Nature adjusts the intellectual balance so accurately as
not to throw an _unequal weight_ into either of the scales. Such
likewise is the situation of man, that in the first stage of life the
predominant Faculty engrosseth _his attention_, as the predominant
Passion influenceth _his actions_. Instead therefore of strengthening
the weaker power by assisting its exertions, and by supplying its
defects, he is adding force to that which was originally too strong; and
the same reflection which discovers _his error_, shows him likewise the
difficulty of correcting it. Even in those minds, in which the
distribution was primarily equal, education, habit, or some early bias
is ready to break _that perfect poise_ which is necessary to constitute
consummate excellence.
[Footnote 2: This is the manner which Quintilian appropriates
particularly to young persons. --In juvenibus etiam uberiora paulo
& pene periclitantia feruntur. At in iisdem siccum, & contractum
dicendi propositum plerunque affectatione ipsa severitatis invisum
est: quando etiam morum senilis autoritas immatura in
adolescentibus creditur. Lib. II. c. 1.]
From this account of the different manners, in which the faculties of
the mind exert themselves in the sphere of competition, your Lordship
will immediately observe, that the Poet who attempts to combine distant
ideas, to catch remote allusions, to form vivid and agreeable pictures;
is more apt from the very nature of his profession to set up a _false
standard_ of _excellence_, than the cool and dispassionate Philosopher
who proceeds deliberately from position to argument, and who employs
Imagination only as the Handmaid of a superior faculty. Having gone thus
far, like persons who have got into a track from which they cannot
recede, we may venture to proceed a step farther; and affirm that the
_Lyric Poet_ is exposed to this hazard more nearly than any other, and
that to prevent him from falling into the extreme we have mentioned,
will require the exercise of the closest attention.
That I may illustrate this observation as fully as the nature of the
subject will permit, it will be expedient to enquire into the end which
Lyric Poetry proposeth to obtain, and to examine the original standards
from which the rules of this art are deduced.
Aristotle, who has treated of poetry at great length, assigns two causes
of its origin,--_Imitation_ and Harmony; both of which are natural to
the human mind[3]. By Imitation he understands, “whatever employs means
to represent any subject in a natural manner, whether it hath a real or
imaginary existence[4].” The desire of imitating is originally stamped
on the mind, and is a source of perpetual pleasure. “Thus” (says the
great Critic) “though the figures of wild beasts, or of dead men, cannot
be viewed as they naturally are without horror and reluctance; yet the
Imitation of these in painting is highly agreeable, and our pleasure is
augmented in proportion to that degree of resemblance which we conceive
to subsist betwixt the Original and the Copy[5].” By Harmony he
understands not the numbers or measures of poetry only, but that music
of language, which when it is justly adapted to variety of sentiment or
description, contributes most effectually to unite the pleasing with the
instructive[6]. This indeed seems to be the opinion of all the Ancients
who have written on this subject. Thus Plato says expressly, that those
Authors who employ numbers and images without music have no other merit
than that of throwing prose into measure[7].
[Footnote 3: Εοικασι δε γεννησαι μεν ὁλως την Ποιητικην, αιτιαι
δυο και αυται φυσικαι. Το μιμεισθαι συμφυτον τοις ανθρωποις, &c.
Και Ἁρμονια και ρυθμος εξ αρχης οἱ πεφυκοτες προς αυτα μαλιστα
κατα μικρον προαγοντες εγεινησαν την Ποιησιν‧ Arist. Poet. c. 4.]
[Footnote 4: The Reader of curiosity may see this subject
particularly discussed in Dacier’s Remarks on the Poeticks of
Aristotle, c. 4.]
[Footnote 5: Ἁ γαρ αυτα λυπηρως ὁρωμεν, τουτων τας εικωνας τας
μαλιστα ηκριβωμενας, χαιρομεν θεωρουντες, οἱτινες θηρεων τε μορφας
των αγριοτατων και νεκρων, &c. Poet. c. 4.]
[Footnote 6: Τα γαρ μετρα ὁτι μοιρον των ρυθμων εστι, φανερον. Ub.
sup.]
[Footnote 7: Ρυθμον μεν και σχηματα μελους χωρις λογους ψιλους εις
μετρα τιθεντες. The persons who do this, he compares to Musicians.
Μελος δε αυ και ρυθμους ανευ ρημα{των} ψιλη κιθαριξει τε και
αυλησει προσχρωμενοι. Plat. de Legib. Lib. XI.]
You will no doubt be of opinion, my Lord, upon reflecting on this
subject, that Poetry was originally of an earlier date than Philosophy,
and that its different species were brought to a certain pitch of
perfection before that Science had been cultivated in an equal degree.
Experience informs us on every occasion, that Imagination shoots forward
to its full growth, and even becomes wild and luxuriant, when the
reasoning Faculty is only beginning to open, and is wholly unfit to
connect the series of accurate deduction. The information of the senses
(from which Fancy generally borrows her images) always obtains the
earliest credit, and makes for that reason the most lasting impressions.
The sallies of this irregular Faculty are likewise abrupt and
instantaneous, as they are generally the effects of a sudden impulse
which reason is not permitted to restrain. As therefore we have already
seen, that the desire of imitating is _innate_ to the mind (if your
Lordship will permit me to make use of an unphilosophical epithet) and
as the first inhabitants of the world were employed in the culture of
the field, and in surveying the scenery of external Nature, it is
probable that the first rude draughts of Poetry were extemporary
effusions, either descriptive of the scenes of pastoral life, or
extolling the attributes of the Supreme Being. On this account Plato
says that Poetry was originally Ενθεος Μιμησις[8], or an inspired
imitation of those objects which produced either pleasure or admiration.
To paint those objects which produced pleasure was the business of the
pastoral, and to display those which raise admiration was the task
consigned to the Lyric Poet. --To excite this passion, no method was so
effectual as that of celebrating the perfections of the Powers who were
supposed to preside over Nature. The Ode therefore in its first
formation was a song in honour of these Powers[9], either sung at solemn
festivals or after the days of Amphion who was the inventor of the Lyre,
accompanied with the musick of that instrument. Thus Horace tells us,
_Musa dedit fidibus Divos, puerosque Divorum_[10],
The Muse to nobler subjects tun’d her lyre,
Gods, and the sons of Gods her song inspire. FRANCIS.
[Footnote 8: Plat. Io.]
[Footnote 9: Nec prima illa post secula per ætates sane complures
alio Lyrici spectarunt, quam ut Deorum laudes ac decora, aut
virorum fortium res preclare gestas Hymnis ac Pæanibus, ad templa
& aras complecterentur;--ut ad emulationem captos admiratione
mortales invitarent. Strad. Prolus. 4 Poet.]
[Footnote 10: Hor. de Art. Poet.]
In this infancy of the arts, when it was the business of the Muse,
as the same Poet informs us,
_Publica privatis secernere, sacra prophanis;
Concubitu prohibere vago, dare jura maritis,
Oppida moliri, leges includere ligno[11]._
Poetic Wisdom mark’d with happy mean,
Public and private, sacred and profane,
The wandering joys of lawless love supprest,
With equal rites the wedded couple blest,
Plann’d future towns, and instituted laws, &c. FRANCIS.
your Lordship will immediately conclude that the species of Poetry which
was first cultivated (especially when its end was to excite admiration)
must for that reason have been the _loosest_ and the most
_undetermined_. There are indeed particular circumstances, by the
concurrence of which one branch of an Art may be rendered perfect, when
it is first introduced; and these circumstances were favourable to the
Authors of the Eclogue. But whatever some readers may think, your
Lordship will not look upon it as a paradox, to affirm that the same
causes which produced this advantage to pastoral poetry, contributed in
an equal degree to make the first Lyric Poems the most vague, uncertain,
and disproportioncd standards.
[Footnote 11: Id. ibid.]
In general it may be observed, that the difficulty of establishing rules
is always augmented in proportion to the variety of objects which an Art
includes. Pastoral Poetry is defined by an ingenious Author, to be an
imitation of what may be supposed to pass among Shepherds[12]. This was
accomplished the more easily by the first performers in this art,
because they were themselves employed in the occupation which they
describe, and the subjects which fell within their sphere must have been
confined to a very narrow circle. They contented themfelves with
painting in the simplest language the external beauties of nature, and
with conveying an image of that age in which men generally lived on the
footing of equality, and followed the dictates of an understanding
uncultivated by Art. In succeeding ages, when manners became more
polished, and the refinements of luxury were substituted in place of the
simplicity of Nature, men were still fond of retaining an idea of this
happy period (which perhaps originally existed in its full extent, only
in the imagination of Poets) and the character of a perfect pastoral was
justly drawen from the writings of those Authors who first attempted to
excel in it[13].
[Footnote 12: Toute Poesie est une imitation. La Poesie Bucolique
a pour but d’imiter ce qui a passe et ce qui ce dit entre les
Bergers. Mem. de Lit. V. III. p. 158.]
[Footnote 13: Elle ne doit pas s’en tenir a la simple
representation du vrai reel, qui rarement seroit agreable; elle
doit s’elever jusqu’au _vrai ideal_, qui tend’ a embellir le vrai,
tel qu’il est dans la nature, et qui produit dans la Poesie comme
dans la Peinture, le derniere point de perfeftion, &c. Mem. de
Lit. ub. sup.]
Though we must acknowledge, that the poetic representations of a _golden
age_ are chimerical, and that descriptions of this kind were not always
measured by the standard of truth; yet it must be allowed at the same
time, that at a period when Manners were uniform and natural, the
Eclogue, whose principal excellence lies in exhibiting simple and lively
pictures of common objects and common characters, was brought at once to
a state of greater perfection by the persons who introduced it, than it
could have arrived at in a more improved and enlightned aera.
You will observe, my Lord, that these circumstances were all of them
unfavourable to Lyric Poetry. The Poet in this branch of his Art
proposed as his principal aim to excite Admiration, and his mind without
the assistance of critical skill was left to the unequal task of
presenting succeeding ages with the rudiments of Science. He was at
liberty indeed to range through the ideal world, and to collect images
from every quarter; but in this research he proceeded without a guide,
and his imagination like a fiery courser with loose reins was left to
pursue that path into which it deviated by accident, or was enticed by
temptation. In short, Pastoral Poetry takes in only a few objects, and
is characterized by that simplicity, tenderness, and delicacy which were
happily and easily united in the work of an ancient Shepherd. He had
little use for the rules of criticism, because he was not much exposed
to the danger of infringing them. The Lyric Poet on the other hand took
a more diversified and extensive range, and his imagination required a
strong and steady rein to correct its vehemence, and restrain its
rapidity. Though therefore we can conceive without difficulty, that the
Shepherd in his poetic effusions might contemplate only the _external
objects_ which were presented to him, yet we cannot so readily believe
that the mind in framing a Theogony, or in assigning distinct provinces
to the Powers who were supposed to preside over Nature, could in its
first Essays proceed with so calm and deliberate a pace through the
fields of invention, as that its work should be the perfect pattern of
just and corrected composition.
From these observations laid together, your Lordship will judge of the
state of Lyric Poetry, when it was first introduced, and will perhaps be
inclined to assent to a part of the proposition laid down in the
beginning, “that as Poets in general are more apt to set up a false
standard of excellence than Philosophers are, so the Lyric Poet was
exposed to this danger more immediately than any other member of the
same profession.” Whether or not the preceding Theory can be justly
applied to the works of the first Lyric Poets, and how far the Ode
continued to be characterised by it in the more improved state of
ancient Learning, are questions which can only be answered by taking a
short view of both.
It is indeed, my Lord, much to be regretted, that we have no _certain
guide_ to lead us through that labyrinth in which we _grope for the
discovery_ of Truth, and are so often _entangled in the maze_ of Error
when we attempt to explain the origin of Science, or to trace the
manners of remote antiquity. I should be at a loss to enter upon this
perplexed and intricate subject, if I did not know, that History has
already familiarized to your Lordship the principal objects which occur
in this research, and that it is the effect of extensive knowledge and
superior penetration to invigorate the effort of Diffidence, and to
repress the surmises of undistinguishing Censure.
The Inhabitants of Greece who make so eminent a figure in the records of
Science, as well as in the History of the progression of Empire, were
originally a savage and lawless people, who lived in a state of war with
one another, and possessed a desolate country, from which they expected
to be driven by the invasion of a foreign enemy[14]. Even after they had
begun to emerge from this state of absolute barbarity, and had built a
kind of cities to restrain the encroachments of the neighbouring
nations, the inland country continued to be laid waste by the
depredations of robbers, and the maritime towns were exposed to the
incursions of pirates[15]. Ingenious as this people naturally were, the
terror and suspence in which they lived for a considerable time, kept
them unacquainted with the Arts and Sciences which were flourishing in
other countries. When therefore a Genius capable of civilizing them
started up, it is no wonder that they held him in the highest
estimation, and concluded that he was either descended from, or inspired
by some of those Divinities whose praises he was employed in rehearsing.
[Footnote 14: Thucyd. Lib. I.]
[Footnote 15: Id. ibid.]
Such was the situation of Greece, when Linus, Orpheus, and Museus, the
first Poets whose names have reached posterity, made their appearance on
the theatre of life. These writers undertook the difficult task of
reforming their countrymen, and of laying down a theological and
philosophical system[16]. --We are informed by Diogenes Laertius, that
Linus, the Father of Grecian Poetry, was the son of Mercury and the Muse
Urania, and that he sung of the Generation of the world, of the course
of the sun and moon, of the origin of animals, and of the principles of
vegetation[17]. He taught, says the same Author, that all things were
formed at one time, and that they were jumbled together in a Chaos, till
the operation of a Mind introduced regularity.
[Footnote 16: Authors are not agreed as to the Persons who
introduced into Greece the principles of philosophy. Tatian will
have it that the Greek Philosophy came originally from Ægypt.
Orat. con. Graec. While Laertius (who certainly might have been
better informed) will allow Foreigners to have had no share in it.
He ascribes its origin to Linus, and says expressly, Αφ’ Ἑλληνων
ηρξε φιλοσοφια ἡς και αυτο το ονομα την Βαρβαρον απεστραπτε
προσηγοριαν. Laer. in Prœm.]
[Footnote 17: This account of the subjects on which Linus wrote,
suggests a further prejudice in favour of Laertius’s opinion as to
the origin of Greek Philosophy. He has preserved the first line of
his Poem.