We remember Samuel Wesley (1662-1735), if at all, as the father of a great
religious leader. In his own time he was known to many as a poet and a
writer of controversial prose. His poetic career began in 1685 with the
publication of _Maggots_, a collection of juvenile verses on trivial
subjects, the preface to which, a frothy concoction, apologizes to the
reader because the book is neither grave nor gay. The first poem, "On a
Maggot," is composed in hudibrastics, with a diction obviously Butlerian,
and it is followed by facetious poetic dialogues and by Pindarics of the
Cowleian sort but on such subjects as "On the Grunting of a Hog." In 1688
Wesley took his B.A. at Exeter College, Oxford, following which he became
a naval chaplain and, in 1690, rector of South Ormsby; he became rector of
Epworth in 1695. During the run of the _Athenian Gazette_ (1691-1697)
he joined with Richard Sault and John Norris in assisting John Dunton, the
promoter of the undertaking. His second venture in poetry, the _Life of
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour_, an epic largely in heroic couplets with
a prefatory discourse on heroic poetry, appeared in 1693, was reissued in
1694, and was honored with a second edition in 1697. In 1695 he dutifully
came forward with _Elegies_, lamenting the deaths of Queen Mary and
Archbishop Tillotson. _An Epistle to a Friend concerning Poetry_
(1700) was followed by at least four other volumes of verse, the last of
which was issued in 1717. His poetry appears to have had readers on a
certain level, but it stirred up little pleasure among wits, writers, or
critics. Judith Drake confessed that she was lulled to sleep by
Blackmore's _Prince Arthur_ and by Wesley's "heroics" (_Essay in
Defence of the Female Sex_, 1696, p. 50). And he was satirized as a
mare poetaster in Garth's _Dispensary_, in Swift's _The Battle of
the Books_, and in the earliest issues of the _Dunciad_. Nobody
today would care to defend his poetry for its esthetic merits.
For a few years in the early eighteenth century Wesley found himself in
the vortex of controversy. Brought up in the dissenting tradition, he had
swerved into conformity at some point during the 1680's, possibly under
the influence of Tillotson, whom he greatly admired (cf. _Epistle to a
Friend_, pp. 5-6). In 1702 there appeared his _Letter from a Country
Divine to his friend in London concerning the education of dissenters in
their private academies_, apparently written about 1693. This attack
upon dissenting academies was published at an unfortunate time, when the
public mind was inflamed by the intolerance of overzealous churchmen.
Wesley was furiously answered; he replied in _A Defence of a Letter_
(1704), and again in _A Reply to Mr. Palmer's Vindication_ (1707). It
is scarcely to Wesley's credit that in this quarrel he stood shoulder to
shoulder with that most hot-headed of all contemporary bigots, Henry
Sacheverell. His prominence in the controversy earned him the ironic
compliments of Defoe, who recalled that our "Mighty Champion of this very
High-Church Cause" had once written a poem to satirize frenzied Tories
(_Review_, II, no. 87, Sept. 22, 1705). About a week later Defoe,
having got wind of a collection being taken up for Wesley--who in
consequence of a series of misfortunes was badly in debt--intimated that
High-Church pamphleteering had turned out very profitably for both Lesley
and Wesley (Oct. 2, 1705). But in such snarling and bickering Wesley was
out of his element, and he seems to have avoided future quarrels.
His literary criticism is small in bulk. But though it is neither
brilliant nor well written (Wesley apparently composed at a break-neck
clip), it is not without interest. Pope observed in 1730 that he was a
"learned" man (letter to Swift, in _Works_, ed. Elwin-Courthope, VII,
184). The observation was correct, but it should be added that Wesley
matured at the end of an age famous for its great learning, an age whose
most distinguished poet was so much the scholar that he appeared more the
pedant than the gentleman to critics of the succeeding era; Wesley was not
singular for erudition among his seventeenth-century contemporaries.
The "Essay on Heroic Poetry," serving as Preface to _The Life of Our
Blessed Lord and Saviour_, reveals something of its author's erudition.
Among the critics, he was familiar with Aristotle, Horace, Longinus,
Dionysius of Halicarnasseus, Heinsius, Bochart, Balzac, Rapin, Le Bossu,
and Boileau. But this barely hints at the extent of his learning. In the
notes on the poem itself the author displays an interest in classical
scholarship, Biblical commentary, ecclesiastical history, scientific
inquiry, linguistics and philology, British antiquities, and research into
the history, customs, architecture, and geography of the Holy Land; he
shows, an intimate acquaintance with Grotius, Henry Hammond, Joseph Mede,
Spanheim, Sherlock, Lightfoot, and Gregory, with Philo, Josephus, Fuller,
Walker, Camden, and Kircher; and he shows an equal readiness to draw upon
Cudworth's _True Intellectual System_ and Boyle's new theories concerning
the nature of light. In view of such a breadth of knowledge it is somewhat
surprising to find him quoting as extensively as he does in the "Essay"
from Le Bossu and Rapin, and apparently leaning heavily upon them.
The "Essay" was composed at a time when the prestige of Rymer and
neo-Aristotelianism in England was already declining, and though Wesley
expressed some admiration for Rapin and Le Bossu, he is by no means docile
under their authority. Whatever the weight of authority, he says, "I see
no cause why Poetry should not be brought to the Test [of reason], as well
as Divinity...." As to the sacred example of Homer, who based his great
epic on mythology, Wesley remarks, "But this [mythology] being now
antiquated, I cannot think we are oblig'd superstitiously to follow his
Example, any more than to make Horses speak, as he does that of Achilles."
To the question of the formidable Boileau, "What Pleasure can it be to
hear the howlings of repining Lucifer?" our critic responds flippantly, "I
think 'tis easier to answer than to find out what shew of Reason he had
for asking it, or why Lucifer mayn't howl as pleasantly as either
Cerberus, or Enceladus." Without hesitation or apology he takes issue with
Rapin's conception of Decorum in the epic. But Wesley is empiricist as
well as rationalist, and the judgment of authority can be upset by appeal
to the court of experience. To Balzac's suggestion that, to avoid
difficult and local proper names in poetry, generalized terms be used,
such as _Ill-luck_ for the _Fates_ and the _Foul Fiend_ for _Lucifer_, our
critic replies with jaunty irony, "... and whether this wou'd not sound
extreamly Heroical, I leave any Man to judge," and thus he dismisses the
matter. Similarly, when Rapin objects to Tasso's mingling of lyric
softness in the majesty of the epic, Wesley points out sharply that no man
of taste will part with the fine scenes of tender love in Tasso, Dryden,
Ovid, Ariosto, and Spenser "for the sake of a fancied Regularity." He had
set out to defend the Biblical epic, the Christian epic, and the propriety
of Christian machines in epic, and no rules or authority could deter him.
As good an example as any of his independence of mind can be seen in a
note on Bk. I, apropos of the poet's use of obsolete words (_Life of Our
Blessed Lord_, 1697, p. 27): it may be in vicious imitation of Milton and
Spenser, he says in effect, but I have a fondness for old words, they
please my ear, and that is all the reason I can give for employing them.
Wesley's resistance to a strict application of authority and the rules
grew partly out of the rationalistic and empirical temper of Englishmen in
his age, but it also sprang from his learning. From various sources he
drew the theory that Greek and Latin were but corrupted forms of ancient
Phoenician, and that the degeneracy of Greek and Latin in turn had
produced all, or most, of the present European tongues (_ibid._, p. 354).
In addition, he believed that the Greeks had derived some of their
thought from older civilizations, and specifically that Plato had received
many of his notions from the Jews (_ibid._, p. 230)--an idea which recalls
the argument that Dryden in _Religio Laici_ had employed against the
deists. Furthermore, he had, like many of his learned contemporaries, a
profound respect for Hebrew culture and the sublimity of the Hebrew
scriptures, going so far as to remark in the "Essay on Heroic Poetry" that
"most, even of [the heathen poets'] best Fancies and Images, as well as
Names, were borrow'd from the Antient Hebrew Poetry and Divinity." In
short, however faulty his particular conclusions, he had arrived at an
historical viewpoint, from which it was no longer possible to regard the
classical standards--much less the standards of French critics--as having
the holy sanction of Nature herself.
Some light is shed on the literary tastes of his period by Wesley's two
essays here reproduced, which with a few exceptions were in accord with
the prevailing current. _The Life of Our Blessed Lord_ shows strongly
the influence of Cowley's _Davideis_. Wesley's great admiration
persisted after the tide had turned away from Cowley; and his liking for
the "divine Herbert" and for Crashaw represented the tastes of sober and
unfashionable readers. In spite of the fact that he professed unbounded
admiration for Homer as the greatest genius in nature, in practise he
seemed more inclined to follow the lead of Cowley, Virgil, and Vida.
Although there was much in Ariosto that he enjoyed, he preferred Tasso;
the irregularities in both, however, he felt bound to deplore. To
Spenser's _Faerie Queene_ he allowed extraordinary merit. If the plan
of it was noble, he thought, and the mark of a comprehensive genius, yet
the action of the poem seemed confused. Nevertheless, like Prior later,
Wesley was inclined to suspend judgment on this point because the poem had
been left incomplete. To Spenser's "thoughts" he paid the highest tribute,
and to his "Expressions flowing natural and easie, with such a prodigious
Poetical Copia as never any other must expect to enjoy." Like most of the
Augustans Wesley did not care greatly for _Paradise Regained_, but he
partly atoned by his praise for _Paradise Lost_, which was an
"original" and therefore "above the common Rules." Though defective in its
action, it was resplendent with sublime thoughts perhaps superior to any
in Virgil or Homer, and full of incomparable and exquisitely moving
passages. In spite of his belief that Milton's blank verse was a mistake,
making for looseness and incorrectness, he borrowed lines and images from
it, and in Bk. IV of _The Life of Our Blessed Lord_ he incorporated a
whole passage of Milton's blank verse in the midst of his heroic couplets.
Wesley's attitude toward Dryden deserves a moment's pause. In the "Essay
on Heroic Poetry" he observed that a speech of Satan's in _Paradise
Lost_ is nearly equalled in Dryden's _State of Innocence_. Later
in the same essay he credited a passage in Dryden's _King Arthur_
with showing an improvement upon Tasso. There is no doubt as to his vast
respect for the greatest living poet, but his remarks do not indicate that
he ranked Dryden with Virgil, Tasso, or Milton; for he recognized as well
as we that the power to embellish and to imitate successfully does not
constitute the highest excellence in poetry. In the _Epistle to a
Friend_ he affirmed his admiration for Dryden's matchless style, his
harmony, his lofty strains, his youthful fire, and even his wit--in the
main, qualities of style and expression. But by 1700 Wesley had absorbed
enough of the new puritanism that was rising in England to qualify his
praise; now he deprecated the looseness and indecency of the poetry, and
called upon the poet to repent. One other point calls for comment.
Wesley's scheme for Christian machinery in the epic, as described in the
"Essay on Heroic Poetry," is remarkably similar to Dryden's. Dryden's had
appeared in the essay on satire prefaced to his translation of Juvenal,
published late in October, 1692; Wesley's scheme appeared soon after June,
1693.
The _Epistle to a Friend concerning Poetry_ is neither startling nor
contemptible; it has, in fact, much more to say than the rhymed treatises
on verse by Roscommon and Buckinghamshire. Its remarks on Genius are
fresh, though tantalizing in their brevity, and it defends the Moderns
with both neatness and energy. Much of its advice is cautious and
commonplace--but such was the tradition of the poetical treatise on verse.
Appearing within two years of Collier's first attack upon the stage, it
reinforces some of that worthy's contentions, but we are not aware of its
having had much effect.
The _Epistle to a Friend concerning Poetry_ is here reproduced, with
permission, from the copy at Harvard. The "Essay on Heroic Poetry" is
reproduced, with permission, from a copy of the 1697 edition of _The
Life of Our Blessed Lord_ owned by the Henry E. Huntington Library, at
San Marino, California. Our reproduction of the second item was made from
a typescript because the printing of the original lacks the size and
clarity which are necessary for satisfactory results In lithoprinting. The
typescript follows the original accurately except that italics (crazily
profuse in the 1697 edition) are omitted, the use of quotation marks is
normalized, and three obvious typographical errors are silently emended.