_In Westminster Abbey, 1732._
Of manners gentle, of affections mild;
In wit, a man; simpicity, a child;
With native humour temp'ring virtuous rage,
Form'd to delight at once and lash the age;
Above temptation, in a low estate;
And uncorrupted e'en among the great:
A safe companion and an easy friend,
Unblam'd through life, lamented in thy end;
These are thy honours! not that here thy bust
Is mix'd with heroes, or with kings thy dust;
But that the worthy and the good shall say,
Striking their pensive bosoms--Here lies Gay!
As Gay was the favourite of our author, this epitaph was probably
written with an uncommon degree of attention; yet it is not more
successfully executed than the rest, for it will not always happen that
the success of a poet is proportionate to his labour. The same
observation may be extended to all works of imagination, which are often
influenced by causes wholly out of the performer's power, by hints of
which he perceives not the origin, by sudden elevations of mind which he
cannot produce in himself, and which sometimes rise when he expects them
least.
The two parts of the first line are only echoes of each other; _gentle
manners_ and _mild affections_, if they mean any thing, must mean the
same.
That Gay was a _man in wit_ is a very frigid commendation; to have the
wit of a man, is not much for a poet. The _wit of a man_[157], and the
_simplicity of a child_, make a poor and vulgar contrast, and raise no
ideas of excellence, either intellectual or moral.
In the next couplet _rage_ is less properly introduced after the mention
of _mildness_ and _gentleness_ which are made the constituents of his
character; for a man so _mild_ and _gentle_ to _temper_ his _rage_, was
not difficult.
The next line is inharmonious in its sound, and mean in its conception;
the opposition is obvious, and the word _lash_ used absolutely, and
without any modification, is gross and improper.
To be _above temptation_ in poverty, and _free from corruption among
the great_, is, indeed, such a peculiarity as deserved notice. But to be
a _safe companion_ is praise merely negative, arising not from the
possession of virtue, but the absence of vice, and one of the most
odious.
As little can be added to his character, by asserting that he was
_lamented in his end_. Every man that dies is, at least, by the writer
of his epitaph, supposed to be lamented; and, therefore, this general
lamentation does no honour to Gay.
The first eight lines have no grammar; the adjectives are without any
substantive, and the epithets without a subject.
The thought in the last line, that Gay is buried in the bosoms of the
_worthy_ and the _good_, who are distinguished only to lengthen the
line, is so dark that few understand it; and so harsh, when it is
explained, that still fewer approve[158].