way of expressing, and applying them, not his invention of them, is what we are chiefly to admire. 'Longinus, in his Reflections, has given us the same kind of sublime, which he observes in the several passages that occasioned them: I cannot but take notice that our English author has, after the same manner, exemplified several of the precepts in the very precepts themselves." He then produces some instances of a particular beauty in the numbers, and concludes with saying, that 'there are three poems in our tongue of the same nature, and each a masterpiece in its kind! the Essay on Translated Verse; the Essay on the Art of Poetry; and the Essay on Criti cism.' Of Windsor Forest, positive is the judgment of the affirmative Mr. John Dennis, That it is a wretched rhapsody, impudently writ in emulation of the Cooper's Hill of sir John Denham : the author of it is obscure, is ambiguous, is affected, is temerarious, is barbarous !2 But the author of the Dispensary,3 Dr. Garth, in the preface to his poem of Claremont, differs from this opinion: Those who have seen these two excellent poems of Cooper's Hill, and Windsor Forest, the one written by sir John Denham, the other by Mr. Pope, will show a great deal of candour if they approve of this.' Of the Epistle of Eloïsa, we are told by the obscure writer of a poem called Sawney, 'That because Prior's Henry and Emma charmed the finest tastes, our author writ his Eloïsa in opposition to it; but forgot innocence and virtue. If you take away her ten 1 Spectator, No. 253. 2 Letter to B. B. at the end of the Remarks, on Pope's Homer, 1717. 3 Printed 1728, p. 12. der thoughts, and her fierce desires, all the rest is of no value.' In which, methinks, his judgment resem bleth that of a French tailor on a villa and garden by the Thames: All this is very fine; but take away the river, and it is good for nothing.' But very contrary hereunto was the opinion of Mr. Prior, himself, saying in his Alma.1 'O Abelard! ill-fated youth, Dan Pope, for thy misfortune grieved, A silken web; and ne'er shall fade And Venus shall the texture bless,' &c. Come we now to his translation of the Iliad, cele brated by numerous pens; yet shall it suffice to mention the indefatigable Sir Richard Blackmore, Knt. who (though otherwise a severe censurer of our author) yet styleth this a 'laudable translation.' That2 ready writer Mr. Oldmixon, in his forementioned Essay, frequently commends the same. And the painful Mr. Lewis Theobald thus extols it,3 The spirit of Homer breathes all through this translation.-I am in doubt, whether I should most admire the justness to the original, or the force and beauty of the language, or the sounding 1 Alma, Cant. 2. 2 In his Essays, vol. i. printed for E. Curll. 3 Censor, vol. ii. n. 33. variety of the numbers: but when I find all these meet, it puts me in mind of what the poet says of one of his heroes, 'That he alone raised and flung with ease a weighty stone, that two common men could not lift from the ground; just so, one single person has performed in this translation, what I once despaired to have seen done by the force of several masterly hands.' Indeed the same gentleman appears to have changed his sentiment in his Essay on the Art of Sinking in Reputation, (printed in Mist's Journal, March 30, 1728,) where he says thus: 'In order to sink in reputation, let him take it into his head to descend into Homer (let the world wonder, as it will, how the devil he got there,) and pretend to do him into English, so his version denote his neglect of the manner how.' Strange variation! We are told in Mist's Journal, (June 8,) "That this translation of the Iliad was not in all respects conformable to the fine taste of his friend Mr Addison; insomuch that he employed a younger muse in an undertaking of this kind, which he supervised himself.' Whether Mr. Addison did find it conform able to his taste, or not, best appears from his own testimony the year following its publication, in these words: Mr. Addison's Freeholder, No. 40. "When I consider myself a British freeholder, I am in a particular manner pleased with the labours of those who have improved our language with the translations of old Greek and Latin authors.We have already most of their historians in our own tongue, and, what is more for the honour of our lan guage, it has been taught to express with elegance the greatest of their poets in each nation. The il literate among our own countrymen may learn t judge from Dryden's Virgil, of the most perfect epi performance. And those parts of Homer which have been published already by Mr. Pope, gives us reason to think that the Iliad will appear in English with as little disadvantage to that immortal poem.' As to the rest, there is a slight mistake; for this younger muse was an elder; nor was the gentleman (who is a friend of our author) employed by Mr Ad dison to translate it after him, since he saith himself that he did it before. Contrariwise, that Mr. Addison engaged our author in this work appeareth by declaration thereof in the preface to the Iliad, printed some time before his death, and by his own letters of October 26, and November 2, 1713, where he declares it is his opinion that no other person was equal to it. Next comes his Shakspeare on the stage: 'Let him (quoth one, whom I take to be Mr. Theobald, Mist's Journal, June 8, 1728,) publish such an author as he has least studied, and forget to discharge even the dull duty of an editor. In this project let him lend the bookseller his name (for a competent sum of money) to promote the credit of an exorbitant subscription.' Gentle reader, be pleased to cast thine eye on the proposal below quoted, and on what follows (some months after the former assertion) in the same Journalist of June 8: "The book seller proposed the book by subscription, and raised some thousands of pounds for the same: I believe the gentleman did not share in the profits of this extravagant subscription.' 'After the Iliad, he undertook (saith Mist's Journal, June 8, 1728,) the sequel of that work, the Odyssey; and having secured the success by a numerous subscription, he employed some underlings to perform what, according to his proposals, should come from his own hands.' 1 Vid. Pref. to Mr. Tickell's translation of the first book of the Iliad, 4to. To which heavy charge we can in truth oppose nothing but the words of Mr. Pope's Proposal for the Odyssey, (printed by J. Watts, Jan. 10, 1724 :) 'I take this occasion to declare that the subscription for Shakspeare belongs wholly to Mr. Tonson: and that the benefit of this proposal is not solely for my own use, but for that of two of my friends, who have assisted me in this work.' But these very gen. tlemen are extolled above our poet himself in another of Mist's Journals, March 30, 1728, saying, “That he would not advise Mr. Pope to try the experiment again of getting a great part of a book done by assistants, lest those extraneous parts should unhappily ascend to the sublime, and retard the declension of the whole.' Behold! these underlings are become good writers! If any say, that before the said Proposals were printed, the subscription was begun without declaration of such assistance; verily those who set it on foot, or (as the term is) secured it, to wit, the right honourable the lord viscount Harcourt, were he living, would testify, and the right honourable the lord Bathurst, now living, doth testify, the same is a falsehood. Sorry I am, that persons professing to be learned, or of whatever rank of authors, should either falsely tax, or be falsely taxed. Yet let us, who are only reporters, be impartial in our citations, and proceed. Mist's Journal, June 8, 1728. 'Mr. Addison raised this author from obscurity, obtained him the acquaintance and friendship of the whole body of our nobility, and transferred his powerful interests with those great men to this rising bard, who frequently levied by that means unusual contributions on the public.' Which surely cannot be, if, as the author of the Dunciad Dissected reportVOL. II. 11 |